EPA-600/9-76-014
July 1976
AREAWIDE ASSESSMENT
PROCEDURES MANUAL
VOLUME II
MUNICIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
APPENDIX A
MODEL APPLICABILITY SUMMARY
A.1 Introduction
Computer-based mathematical tools form an important and integral part of
the arsenal of tools at the disposal of the 208 planner. They are,
however, nothing more than tools. Like the calculator or handbook or slide
rule, the user must know how they work, what they do, and most importantly
what they do not do. Any model is at best only an approximation of
reality, and a clear understanding of both the real situation and the
approximations made by the model developer is vital to effective model use.
For the first time through the 208 program large-scale integrated
wastewater management plans are being developed. It will be difficult to
adequately analyze the complex sets of alternatives without having a model
available on which to "try-out" these alternatives.
This appendix, then, is a brief summary of some of the models and
techniques most likely to be used by the 208 planner. The list is not
exhaustive, however the selected models represent a set of tools that
others have demonstrated to be of value. They are not new or "research"
ideas.
Several factors are worth mentioning:
1. All of these models are in use and undergoing continual change and
updating. The descriptions, therefore, may not be up to date.
2. Most of the models have one or more derivatives, which may or may
not be of equal utility.
A-l
-------
3. This appendix is basically an assemblage of previously published
information, edited for inclusion here. Prospective model users
should refer to model documentation for complete descriptions.
Two reports (1, 2) have been recently published by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency which provide much more comprehensive model analyses.
They are:
1. "Evaluation of Water Quality Models: A Management Guide for
Planners," by Systems Control, Inc. (SCI).
2. "Assessment of Mathematical Models for Storm and Combined Sewer
Management," by Battelle Northwest.
These reports are the best of their type available, and should be used as
references throughout the 208 planning process. The SCI report contains an
excellent chapter on contracting for modeling services which is applicable
to any modeling activity. They are available from the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development (RD-682), Washington,
D.C. 20460 (Attn: Harry Torno), or from the EPA Water Planning Division.
A.2 Model Selection and Evaluation
The key criterion in the evaluation and selection of models is the problem
under study. There are numerous cases on record where a model has been
selected first, and then the rest of the study structured around the model.
The reason for this is the failure on the part of study personnel to
recognize that the model is simply a tool to assist in the conduct of the
study. Initially, the following questions should be addressed in model
selection:
1. What is the problem to be solved;
2. What temporal resolution is required? Depending on the type of
water quality problem and receiving water, seasonal or even annual
calculations may be enough;
A-2
-------
3. Is a model needed, and if so, what approach (computer, nomogram,
hand calculations, etc.) is necessary? In the early stages of,
say, a 208 study, one is interested in a gross assessment of
relative loads and impacts on water quality of various sources,
and a simple model or analytical method may suffice;
4. What input, calibration and verification data are available? The
model selected must be calibrated, and adequate input data must be
collected. If data is not there, or if adequate funds for data
collection are not provided, the use of a complicated model may be
ruled out.
If, after preliminary analysis, it seems that a model is needed, several
further factors should be considered:
1. Availability of qualified personnel to do water quality studies.
Regardless of the method selected, someone skilled in water
quality analysis should be available. Any model, simple or
complicated, requires a considerable amount of expert judgement in
its application, and without this expertise, model application is
highly likely to be a failure.
2. Availability of models that have already been calibrated and
applied locally. The major costs in applying any computer-based
model are in becoming familiar with the model and how it works, in
collecting basic data for model application (most of these data
remain the same, regardless of how many times the model is used),
and in setting the model up on the local computer system. The
economics therefore warrant a considerable effort in locating
available tools.
A.2.1 Model Selection
When the decision has been made to use models, a careful and systematic
examination of the available tools is warranted. The SCI study previously
referenced (1) provides an excellent methodology for model evaluation and
A-3
-------
selection, particularly for water quality models, and should be referred to
by any potential model user. The following is a brief summary of questions
to be considered in determining if the model is suitable for the problem
under study:
1. What water quality constituents are to be modeled (if any) and can
the model accomodate them? It may be enough at the outset simply
to have a good feel what is going on hydraulically, without giving
too much attention to pollutants;
2. Is the problem dynamic or steady-state? There seems little
justification given the present state-of-the-art to do completely
steady-state modeling of hydrologic phenomena. However, steady-
state water quality models may be entirely satisfactory,
particularly if design conditions for the plan are for steady-
state flow (such as 7-day, 10-year low flow) and effluent
loadings;
3. What are the spatial considerations? For streams, a one-
dimensional model is adequate if homogeneous mixing across the
river cross-section is an adequate assumption. For an estuary, on
the other hand, a two- or even three-dimensional model may be
required;
4. Has a model under consideration been used and tested, and is good,
user-oriented documentation available? This is probably the most
critical element to be considered;
5. If a proprietary model is considered, how will continuity in
planning be accomodated? The planning process is an on-going one,
and models are most economical when used repeatedly;
6. What are the costs of model application? It is important to note
here that computer costs are relatively insignificant, and that
A-4
-------
the major costs of model use are personnel costs. In general,
however, simpler models are cheaper to use than complex ones.
A.2.2 Model Evaluation
At the end of the selection process, the user should have a number of
possible models which seem acceptable. A more systematic evaluation
process should be undertaken at this point, along the lines of that
described in the SCI report (1). While this report is directed primarily
at water quality models, the same general methodology could be effectively
applied to drainage models as well. The primary emphasis at this stage is
in determining the relative resources required, and the data necessary for
an effective modeling application. As a minimum, some formal comparative
analysis should be conducted, even if only in simple tabular form. The
analysis should be as objective as possible, using consistent evaluation
criteria and weighting factors for all models.
If modeling work is to be conducted by a consultant, this same evaluation
should be conducted, even though the consultant may have a "preferred"
model that he normally uses.
A.3 Urban/Non-Urban Drainage Models
Drainage models form a key part of any areawide wastewater management
assessment, whether they are simple hand calculations or the more complex
computer-based models described here (see Table A-l). This group of models
was arbitrarily selected based on the following criteria:
1. Generally available
2. Well documented
3. Tested and applied in several locations
Other models may meet the same criteria, and would be equally valid for the
user, particularly if he were experienced in applying some other specific
model.
-------
TABLE A-l URBAN/NON-URBAN DRAINAGE MODELS
MODEL
ORIGIN
MODEL
ACRONYM
Catchment Hydrology
Mu
Ca
Input of S
Hyetograph
From
ious Areas
Runoff From
Pervious Areas
Water Balance
Between Storm
Sewer Hydraulics
g"
SB
an
on
rcharging and
essure Flow
Pumpi
Wastewater Quality
Sedimentat
and Scour
ance
rms
Qual
Betw
vin
Sim
Receiving Water
Quality Simulat
Miscellaneous
inuous
lation
Applied t
Problems
able
Compute
Program
Corps of
Engineers
Env Protection
Agency
SWMM
Hydrocomp
Massachussetts
lust of Technology
Dorsch
Consult
HVM-QQS
Metcalf S
Eddy
Water Resources
Engineers
111. State
Water Survey
1LLUDAS
ACRUN Is an alternative "Runoff" block for use with SWMM, and these features are available In the SWMM
-------
The shortcomings of the rational method or its derivatives are well
documented, however it bears mentioning again that given the ease of
application of some of the models herein described, particularly to the
rainfall-runoff relationships, there appears to be no justification for
using the rational method in any areawide management study, except as a
part of a very preliminary screening analysis as described in Chapter 2.
This is doubly true if storage or retention phenomena are to be examined.
All of the models described have demonstrated the ability to predict runoff
quantity with sufficient accuracy, and with relatively little calibration
required. This is not true of water quality. The models are very
sensitive to pollutant accumulation and washoff functions, and most of the
model calibration effort needs to be directed here. Runoff quantity can be
roughly calibrated using streamflow data, or more detailed local flow
measurements may be made. Runoff quality should be calibrated using
current local information. One technique is to use a detailed model (SWMM)
on one or more small subcatchments, then to extrapolate these results to
the larger study area. It must be pointed out here that models frequently
have "default" values for some or all of the calibration parameters. These
are values which have been selected by the model developer as
representative values. Default values may or may not, however, be
appropriate for the local situation in which a model is used, and each
calibration parameter should be carefully examined when a model is applied
to determine if a default value is appropriate.
A.3.1 Drainage Models
A.3.1.1 STORM (Corps of Engineers)
The Storage, Treatment and Overflow Model (STORM) (3) of the Corps of
Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center is intended primarily for
evaluating the stormwater storage and treatment capacity required to reduce
untreated overflows below specified values. The model can simulate hourly
stormwater runoff and quality for a single catchment for several years.
A-7
-------
Five water quality constituents are computed for different land uses:
suspended and settleable solids, biochemical oxygen demand, nitrogen, and
phosphorus.
The model does not route flows and quality through a sewer network and does
not have real-time and design capability. Its main purpose is the
assessment of alternatives for treatment and storage of stormwater under
varying land use conditions. Dry-weather flows and quality are not
simulated; consequently the model is not applicable to combined sewerage
systems (The Corps of Engineers is presently modifying STORM to include
dry-weather flow). The STORM model includes the following features:
1. Rainfall, snowfall, air temperature, and evaporation at one
weather station;
2. Evapotranspiration;
3. Snow accumulation and melt;
4. Stormwater quality for different land uses;
5. Suspended and settleable solids, biochemical oxygen demand,
nitrogen, and phosphorus;
6. Stormwater runoff and quality from pervious and impervious areas
of a single catchment;
7. Catchment moisture accounting during periods of no precipitation;
8. Capacity of storage facilities;
9. Hydraulic capacity of treatment facilities; and
10. Volume and quality of overflows.
A-8
-------
The model does not include the following features:
1. Dry-weather flow and quality;
2. Consideration of nonuniform catchment and precipitation
distribution;
3. Stormwater runoff and quality from more than one catchment;
4. Flow and quality routing in gutters, sewers and open channels;
5. Wastewater quality decay, reactions and interactions;
6. Wastewater quality improvement by treatment;
7. Real-time control;
8. Design; and
9. Costs.
Hourly stprmwater runoff is defined as the product of a runoff coefficient
and hourly rainfall excess. Only one precipitation record can be used.
The runoff coefficient is the weighted average of empirical runoff
coefficients for the pervious and impervious areas and represents the
fraction of rainfall excess lost to infiltration. The rainfall excess is
*.
defined as the difference between hourly rainfall and losses to depression
storage. The depression storage at the beginning of a rainstorm is defined
as the available depression storage at the end of the previous rainstorm
plus a linear recovery to account for evaporation during the period of no
precipitation. A different evaporation rate can be specified for each
month of the year. Snowmelt is computed by the degree-day method which
requires mean daily air temperature as input data.
A-9
-------
The runoff coefficients, available depression storage, and depression
storage recovery factor have to be derived by calibration with observed
data. Default values are given in the program but no instructions are
provided for estimating adequate values for ungaged catchments. Dry-
weather flow is not simulated.
The computations for the stormwater runoff quality are based on
formulations first used in the EPA Stormwater Management Model, which
simulated only suspended solids, biochemical oxygen demand, and coliform
bacteria. The STORM model has been expanded to simulate suspended and
settleable solids, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), nitrogen (N), and
phosphorus (P). Empirical equations considering land use, street sweeping
practices, and days between rainstorms define the amount of each pollutant
on the ground at the beginning of a rainstorm. An exponential function of
the runoff rate determines the rate of each pollutant being washed off the
catchment during each hour. The rates of runoff of BOD, N, and P are
assumed to be dependent on the rate of runoff of suspended and settleable
solids.
The runoff quality formulations depend on a large number of empirical
coefficients which have been derived from very limited urban stormwater
runoff and quality data. The coefficients are internal to the program and
do not account for variations in land use and catchment characteristics.
Application of the model in different areas may therefore require
programming changes to modify the coefficients. Input data which may be
difficult to obtain include daily rate of dust and dirt accumulation and
the percent of each pollutant contained in the dust and dirt for different
land uses (in addition to model documentation, user may refer to Chapter 3
and other-EPA guidance (20) for guidance in determining accumulations).
Default values are provided by the program. Dry-weather quality is not
considered by the model.
Computations of treatment, storage and overflow proceed on an hourly basis
by simple runoff volume and pollutant mass balance. If the hourly runoff
exceeds the treatment capacity, the excess runoff is put into storage. If
A.10
-------
the storage capacity is also exceeded, the excess runoff becomes untreated
overflow. If the runoff is less than the treatment capacity and water is
in storage, then the excess treatment capacity is utilized to diminish the
storage volume. '
Plug flow is assumed for the routing of pollutants through storage. The
water quality is not modified in storage. For treatment, only the
hydraulic capacity of treatment facilities is considered. Stormwater
quality improvement by treatment is not modeled.
The computer program, written in Fortran IV for the UNIVAC 1108 computer is
available from the Hydrologic Engineerinng Center of the Corps of
Engineers. The simulations require 1-hour time steps and a minimum of 24
hours of simulation. Several years of data can be simulated in a single
run; the maximum duration depends only on computer running costs and the
objective of the analysis.
Program output includes hourly precipitation for a single raingage and
various summaries of the stormwater runoff and quality analysis for
selected storm events. These include the duration and amount of rainfall,
the time and amount of treatment, the amount of runoff, the utilization and
age of storage, the amount of overflow to receiving waters, and averages
for all selected events. Runoff amounts are defined in inches and
pollutant quantity in pounds. In addition, tables and line printer plots
are available indicating the utilization of storage (see Appendix H for
additional cost information).
A.3.1.1.1 STORM Input Data
STORM requires the following input data:
1. Area of drainage basin;
2. Percent of total area in each of 5 land use groups;
A-ll
-------
3. Average per cent imperviousness of each land use group;
4. Runoff coefficients for pervious and impervious areas;
5. Feet of gutter per acre for each land use group.
6. Depression storage available on impervious areas;
7. Treatment rate;
8. Hourly rainfall;
9. Daily rate of dust and dirt accumulation per 100 feet of gutter
for each land use group;
10. Pounds of pollutants per 100 pounds of dust and dirt;
11. Street sweeping frequency and efficiency.
A.3.1.1.2 Evaluation of STORM
The model is suitable for the continuous simulation of stormwater runoff
and quality from a single urban catchment. A significant weakness of the
model is its inability to simulate dry-weather flow and quality.
Limitations on accuracy of the runoff computations are imposed by the
simplified rainfall-runoff formulation, particularly the assumptions of a
constant infiltration loss rate during rainstorms, a constant evaporation
rate between rainstorms, and immediate runoff of the hourly rainfall
excess. The last approximation would reduce model accuracy as the
catchment size increases and the time of concentration of the runoff
becomes longer than one hour.
The stormwater quality relationships are based on empirical formulations
which have been tested on very limited data and whose accuracy has not been
A-12
-------
sufficiently established. It is therefore not possible to estimate their
accuracy for application to areas where no records of concurrent urban
stonnwater runoff and quality are available for calibration purposes.
The model appears to be useful, however, for analysis of rainfall records
to determine critical runoff-producing events and for general planning
purposes to estimate the relative magnitudes of required storage and ,
treatment capacities to reduce stonnwater overflows below desired levels.
The model computes only the quality of the overflows to the receiving
waters.) Addition of the computation of the quality of the treatment plant
effluents would be desirable to obtain the total pollutant load on the
receiving water.
A.3.1.2 SWMM (EPA)
The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency's Stormwater Management Model
(SWMM) (4, 5) is one of the most comprehensive mathematical models
available for the simulation of storm and combined sewerage systems. It
computes the combined storm and sanitary runoff from several catchments and
routes the flows through a converging branch sewer network. Flow diversion
structures can be modeled and storage can be simulated for both inline and
overflow retention basins. An additional feature is a receiving water
model which includes nonsteady formulations of hydrodynamics and mass
transport for two-dimensional (vertically mixed) water bodies receiving
sewerage system effluents. Both dry-weather and stormwater quality for
suspended and settleable solids, biochemical and chemical oxygen demand,
coliform bacteria, phosphorus, nitrogen, and oil and grease are computed
for each modeled catchment and routed through the sewerage system.
Mathematical formulations which simulate various combinations of overflow
treatment processes for one treatment facility are included to evaluate the
effectiveness of overflow treatment. The model does not include realtime
control features. The model is limited to the simulation of single runoff
events and inline treatment cannot be simulated. Cost functions are built
into the program to compute the cost of overflow storage and treatment.
The SWMM is organized into an executive block (MAIN) and four computational
A-13
-------
blocks (RUNOFF, TRANSPORT, STORAGE, RECEIVE) which may be used separately
or in any combination to simulate the entire urban drainage area.
The Stormwater Management Model includes the following features:
1. Dry-weather flow and quality of several catchments from land use;
2. Several rainfall records;
3. Stormwater runoff and quality for pervious and impervious areas of
catchments with several land uses;
4. Eight water quality constituents: suspended and settleable
solids, biochemical and chemical oxygen demand, coliform bacteria,
phosphorus, nitrogen, oil and grease;
5. Flow routing in gutters;
6. Routing of combined wastewater flow and quality in a converging
branch network;
7. Twelve specified closed conduit cross sections, a trapezoidal
section, and two arbitrary shapes;
8. Backwater, surcharging and pressure flow;
9. Two types of diversion structures;
10. Pumping stations;
11. One overflow and two inline storage facilities with four types of
outlet facilities;
12. Sedimentation and scour of suspended solids;
A-14
-------
13. First-order water quality decay of BOD;
14. Removal of coliform dependent on suspended solids removal;
15. One overflow treatment plant with arbitrary combinations of nine
unit treatment processes;
16. Costs of storage and treatment;
17. Receiving water flow and quality; and
18. Sizing of circular pipes.
The model does not include the following features:
1. Evapotranspiration;
2. Snow accumluation and melt;
3. Catchment moisture accounting during periods of no precipitation;
4. Sewer flow and quality routing in loops and diverging branches;
5. Downstream flow control and flow reversal;
6. Water quality reactions and interactions in the sewers and in
storage; and
7. Real-time control.
Dry-weather flow and quality of eight constituents can either be provided
as average values or computed from land use characteristics such as total
population, population density, land use, residential income and home
valuation of each subcatchment. Adjustment factors can be read in for
Arl5
-------
diurnal (hourly) variations in flow and quality. Weekday adjustment
factors can be read in for all but coliform bacteria. Industrial or
commercial process flows and quality can be input separately.
Rainfall intensities of several raingages can be provided as input data to
compute storm runoff from several catchments. Only one raingage record can
be assigned to a particular subcatchment.
Losses are subtracted separately from the rainfall falling on pervious and
impervious areas. Runoff occurs only when all depression storage is
filled. No other losses are computed for impervious areas. Evaporative
losses are not computed.
For pervious areas, the potential infiltration is computed with Horton's
equation and the actual infiltration depends on the available overland flow
depth. This is a more accurate computation than basing the infiltration
losses on the amount of rainfall. Horton's equation, on the other hand,
computes the potential infiltration as a function of time only and does not
account for the change in potential infiltration with changes in soil
moisture. The equation is satisfactory as long as the available moisture
is greater than the potential infiltration, but errors are introduced
during low intensity and intermittent storms when the available moisture is
less than the computed potential infiltration. As a consequence, the
infiltration coefficients of the equation have to be adjusted for different
storms (theoretically they should be based on catchment soil
characteristics only, independent of the storm patterns). This makes it
difficult to use one set of coefficients with confidence for prediction
purposes.
Overland flow is computed separately for pervious and impervious areas
using a kinematic wave formulation with Manning's equation. A similar
formulation is used for the gutter flow routing. The model formulation
assumes that overland flow length and catchment length are equal. This
assumption is satisfactory for small catchments, such as individual lots
and possibly city blocks, but errors are introduced if the difference
A-16
-------
between overland flow and catchment length increases (as occurs when
several city blocks are lumped into a single subcatchment). The model
assumes that infiltration occurs throughout the time required for the
overland flow to run the entire length of the catchment. Actual
infiltration, however, may occur only during the time it takes the overland
flow to run the length of a single lot. As a consequence, the computed
infiltration would be greater than the actual infiltration and the computed
runoff hydrograph would be underestimated. Users of the model can
compensate for this error by reducing the infiltration coefficients.
Infiltration from the ground into the sewers accounts for dry-weather
infiltration, wet-weather infiltration, melting residual ice and snow
infiltration, and groundwater infiltration. Average infiltration values
for the entire modeled drainage basin have to be provided as input data.
The entire catchment infiltration is then apportioned to individual sewers
on the basis of the conduit perimeter and number of joints in each conduit.
A degree-day method is used to compute the infiltration from snowmelt, but
the accumulation of snow and surface runoff from snowmelt is not modeled.
The effect of the infiltrating water on the quality of the sewage is
considered negligible and not modeled.
Flow routing in the sewers is accomplished using the kinematic wave
equation with Manning's equation. The basic formulation neglects
downstream flow control, backwater, surcharging, pressure flow and flow
reversal. Special formulations are incorporated in the model, however, to
approximate backwater, surcharging and pressure flow. General downstream
control and flow reversal are not modeled.
An optional transport block has recently been added. The primary
differences may be summarized in three categories:
1. Conceptual representation of the transport system. WRE Transport
Block uses a node-link idealization totally unlike the original
SWMM Transport Block.
A-17
-------
2. Basic flow equation. The WRE Transport Block includes the
inertial terms of the Navier-Stokes equations in the solution,
whereas original SWMM Transport Block is based on a kinematic wave
assumption.
3. Special effects and flow control devices. The WRE Transport Block
includes the effects of pipe surcharge, looped sewers, weirs,
pumps and orifices plus some related features.
Backwater is modeled by formulating a special backwater element with an
inline storage element of fixed length and simulating it with a storage
routing technique. This requires input data on flow depth versus storage
volume which is difficult to compute for special sewer shapes (such as
horseshoe shapes, etc.) with a nonzero invert slope. Also, the assumption
of a constant backwater length appears to make the formulation highly
approximate. Since the program permits only two inline storage elements,
backwater can be considered at only two locations in the entire sewerage
system. Also definition of a backwater element reduces the number of
actual storage facilities that can be modeled.
If surcharging occurs, the model assumes that all water in excess of full
pipe flow capacity is stored in the next upstream manhole. The formulation
neglects the storage volume of the manhole and the actual propagation of
the surcharging farther upstream. The formulation consequently serves only
to conserve volume and to warn the user that surcharging conditions exist,
without adequately computing the phenomenon. Conduits can be sized by the
program to advoid surcharging.
The flow routing scheme is formulated for 12 specified closed conduit cross
sections and a trapezoidal section. In addition, two arbitrary conduit
shapes can be specified by providing input data relating the dimensions of
each shape to flow area, hydraulic radius, and discharge.
Two types of flow diversion structures can be modeled. The first type
assumes that all inflow exceeding a maximum value is overflowed. No data
A-18
-------
are needed to describe the geometry of this type. The second type assumes
that no overflow occurs until the inflow exceeds a specified value. In
this case, the depth of flow is found from a linear relationship between
flow and depth and the overflow computed from this depth with a weir
discharge equation. A more accurate formulation would be possible based on
the weir and orifice equations.
Pumping stations can also be modeled. The model assumes that the pumps
begin to operate at a constant pumping rate when the volume in the wet well
reaches a maximum value and continue to pump until the wet well is pumped
dry.
The model can simulate the performance of one overflow and up to two inline
storage facilities. The model computes depth and volume of storage as a
function of the inflow and outflow. The outflow is computed based on the
hydraulic performance of the following four options of outflow conditions:
gravity with orifice centerline at zero storage tank depth; gravity with
fixed weir; gravity with both weir and orifice; and fixed rate pumps.
Either regularly or irregularly shaped reservoirs can be specified by
different input data. If a reservoir overflows, program execution
terminates.
Stormwater quality is computed as a nonlinear function of stormwater runoff
rate (which includes an exponential decay with time to account for the
higher rates of pollutants being washed off during the beginning of a
storm). Coefficients in equations for each of the three modeled pollutants
account for different land uses. The equations consider street sweeping
practices and days between rainstorms in defining the amount of each
pollutant on the ground at the beginning of a rainstorm. The formulations
account also for the contribution of accumulated BOD in catch basins. Many
of the coefficients in the formulations are internal to the program and
have been derived from very limited data of measured stormwater runoff and
quality. Programming changes may therefore be required to apply the model
to different areas and land use characteristics.
-------
Stormwater and dry-weather qualities are combined at inlet manholes and
routed through the sewers according to the flow velocity of the sewage.
Dispersion is not modeled directly, but by averaging qualities between
successive time steps. The equations consider first-order decay of BOD and
sedimentation and scour of suspended solids. Reactions and interactions
between the pollutants during the routing are not considered.
Nine overflow treatment processes can be modeled and arranged by the user
in any series or combination. The modeled unit processes are: bar racks,
fine screens, sedimentation, dissolved air flotation, dissolved air
flotation preceded by fine screens, microstrainers, high-rate filters,
effluent screens, and chlorination. Mathematical formulations for each
process relate hydraulic capacity to removal efficiency. The user does not
have the option of varying the_process efficiencies without changing
coefficients internal to the program. For some processes, however, the
amount of chemicals used is read in to account for their effect on
treatment performance.
BOD removal and suspended solids removal are considered independently.
Coliform removal, however, is defined as a function of suspended solids
removal.
Cost functions are built into the model which compute the cost of overflow
treatment. Separate functions are defined for each unit treatment process
and for storage and pumping if part of the treatment facility. Annual
capital costs, land costs, and operation and maintenance costs are related
to hydraulic capacity by power functions. The shapes of the cost functions
are defined internally by the program. Costs can be adjusted by reading in
the Engineering News Record Index for regional adjustments and future
expected changes.
The Stormwater Management Model includes also a receiving water flow and
quality segment which is based on the original EPA dynamic estuary model.
It gives the model the capability not only of modeling flow and quality in
A-20
-------
sewerage systems, but of assessing the impact of the sewerage system
effluents on the receiving water quality.
The flow computations of the receiving water models are based on a
simplified explicit finite difference solution of the one-dimensional flow
fields represented by an irregular grid of links and nodes. The continuity
equation is solved at the nodes (junctions of the links) and the momentum
equation is solved along the links (channels between the nodes). The model
is very costly to use since very short time steps are required for
numerical stability. The formulation becomes unstable if the discarges in
adjacent channels and storage volumes of adjacent nodes are not of the same
order of magnitude.
The model includes the transport of several conservative and
nonconservative water quality constituents, considering first-order decay.
Transport is modeled by convection only and chemical and biological
interactions between different water quality constituents are not
considered.
The computer program, which is available from the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, is written in FORTRAN IV for an IBM 360/370 computer and
is also compatible with UNIVAC and CDC computers. There are five main
programs which, depending on computer core storage capacity, can be either
loaded together or in sequence depending on the user's needs.
Fairly complete documentation of the model is published by the EPA, in-
cluding a summary report and user's manual. Unfortunately, no one of these
reports presents a complete description of the theoretical bases and
mathematical formulations of the model.
The equations for some modeled phenomena are described in the user's manu-
al, and some are not described at all. The reader must compare the two
reports to obtain a fair understanding of the capabilities and limitations
of the complete model and the meaning of the input data. Also, the user's
A-21
-------
manual includes much disscussion of model verification and testing which
adds to the report's bulkiness and makes it more difficult to find
essential information for the preparation of input data.
Program output includes tables and line printer plots of rainfall inten-
sities for each raingage, combined runoff and quality for each
subcatchment, and routed discharges and water quality at selected points of
the sewerage system. Summaries of treatment effectiveness and costs are
also available. Water levels and flow velocities in the sewers are not
computed.
A.3.1.2.1 SWMM Input Data
The input data requirements for SWMM are extensive, and include:
1. Rainfall data, antecedent dry days;
2. Subcatchment descriptions including area, overland flow width,
slope, roughness coefficients, infiltration rates, percent
imperviousness;
3. Land use, population data;
4. Street sweeping frequency and number of passes;
5. Soil erosion data;
6. Pollutant loading and generation factors;
7. Sewer layout, shapes, dimensions, slope, roughness;
8. Specifications of flow control devices;
9. Infiltration data;
A-22
-------
10. Dry-weather flows;
11. Catch basin data;
12. Treatment and storage facility data;
13. Tidal variations, water surface elevations and areas, water depths
and roughness coefficients for receiving waters; and
14. Receiving water boundary conditions.
A.3.1.2.2 Evaluation of SWMM
The EPA Stormwater Management Model is one of the most complete and widely
used mathematical models available for the assessment and planning of storm
and combined sewerage systems. Consideration of both wastewater flows and
qualities is an important aspect of evaluating needed treatment facilities
and the impact of sewage effluents on receiving waters. This is also one
of the few models which include cost computations. Although the model does
not consider costs in the sizing of sewers, the computation of the costs of
overflow storage and treatment should be a valuable aid to the engineer.
Program limitations which may restrict the model's general applicability
include the neglect of downstream hydraulic controls (with the exception of
very rough approximations of backwater and surcharging conditions) and the
absence of formulations for inline treatment and main treatment plants.
The model can be used only for the simulation of individual runoff events
since it does not include provisions for either catchment moisture or water
quality accounting between rainstorms.
The new version of the program includes an option to suppress the water
quality computations and perform the flow simulations alone. This can save
considerable computer time if water quality computations are not needed.
A-23
-------
The model is very complex and a major effort is required to implement it.
The poorly organized documentation makes it difficult for the user to
implement the model resulting from misinterpretations of the theoretical
bases of the model and the meaning of some input data.
The model has been tested extensively on urban hydrologic data. Numerical
testing of the flow computations with data from catchments ranging in size
between 5 and 2200 ha (13 and 5400 acres) showed satisfactory accuracy.
The accuracy of water quality predictions can be expected to be only of the
right order of magnitude. Considerable model improvement, particularly of
the formulations relating water quality with land use, are needed before
the water quality model can be used with confidence.
Improvements are needed in the output formats. The arrangement of the
catchment runoff table makes it difficult to abstract the hydrograph of a
particular subcatchment. Complete output of routed flow and quality can be
obtained at only twenty selected locations. This is adequate for the
evaluation of a few important locations, such as major outfalls. It is a
serious limitation, however, for the evaluation of an entire sewerage
system since repeated runs of the same data are required to obtain
sufficient information on the adequacy, performance, and utilization of all
modeled sewer system elements.
Model improvements are in progress at the University of Florida under an
EPA contract to add snowmelt, to include more accurate flow and water
quality routing schemes, to add new water quality parameters and unit
treatment processes, and to simulate inline (main) treatment processes. A
new and improved user's manual (5) has been prepared. The model is also
being revised to add continuous simulation capability for planning
purposes. The model is being used by many consulting firms, and is
available for users on several commercial time-sharing computer systems.
A.3.1.3 HSP (Hydrocomp)
The Hydrocomp Simulation Program (6) is one of the most comprehensive
mathematical models for the simulation of both rural and urban catchments.
A-24
-------
The water flow computations are based on the Stanford Watershed Model which
was the first comprehensive mathematical model of catchment hydrology. The
Hydrocomp Simulation Program, however, is a considerable improvement over
the original Stanford Watershed Model, both with respect to mathematical
formulations and data handling capability. Recently, a separate program
was developed for the simulation of water quality in river basins which can
be interfaced with the hydrologic and flow routing program (see A.4.1.7).
The Hydrocomp Simulation Program is formulated for the continuous simu-
lation of water flow and quality from several catchments and routing in
converging branch sewer and open channel networks. Catchment moisture and
water quality are accounted for during periods of no precipitation, so the
model can be used for continuous simulation of several years. Special
features are included for the simulation of impoundments and diversions,
including the flow of water over spillways and through hydroelectric
turbines. Real-time control and design and cost features are not included.
The Hydrocomp Simulation Program includes the following features:
1. Dry-weather flow and quality of several catchments;
2. Rainfall, snowfall, pan evaporation, air temperature, dew point,
solar radiation, and wind velocity of several weather stations;
3. Evapotranspiration;
4. Snow accumulation and melt;
5. Stormwater runoff and quality from pervious and impervious areas
of catchments with several land uses;
6. Catchment moisture and water quality accounting during periods of
no precipitation;
7. Groundwater infiltration into sewers and open channels;
-------
8. Seventeen water quality constituents with reactions and inter-
actions in natural (receiving) water bodies;
9. Routing of combined wastewater flow and quality in a converging
branch network;
10. Circular closed conduits and trapezoidal open channels with
trapezoidal flood plains;
11. Upstream and downstream flow control and backwater;
12. Diversion hydrographs;
13. In-line storage reservoirs with rule curve operation; and
14. Water quality decay, reactions, and interactions in natural
(receiving) water bodies.
The model does not include the following features:
1. Dry-weather flow and quality from land use;
2. Flow reversal, surcharging and pressure flow;
3. Sedimentation and scour;
4. Water quality decay, reactions and interactions in sewers;
5. Flow and quality routing in loops and diverging branches;
6. Noncircular closed conduits;
7. Sewer flow control and diversion structures;
8. Pumping stations;
A-26
-------
9. Wastewater treatment;
10. Real-time control; and
11. Design and costs.
The Hydrocomp Simulation Program includes the most complete formulation of
catchment hydrology of all the models listed. The model computes runoff
from pervious and impervious areas separately and considers
evapotranspiration, snowmelt, and soil moisture accounting.
Precipitation (rain or snow) data is input at constant time intervals for
one or more raingages. Other meteorological data needed for the
evapotranspiration and snovraielt computations are provided on a daily basis.
Not more than one precipitation record can be assigned to a single
subcatchment.
Snow accumulation and melt are computed by a method developed by the U.S.
Corps of Engineers. The equations require data on precipitation, air
temperature, dew point, solar radiation, and wind velocity. Programming
defaults are used if some of these data are unavailable. Only
precipitation and air temperature are essential.
Dry-weather flow and quality data are input at constant time intervals.
Dry-weather quality can also be defined by a power function of dry-weather
flow.
The potential infiltration rate is computed from an empirical function of
soil moisture. The actual infiltration depends on the rainfall excess
after subtracting interception losses rather than on the overland flow
depth. The infiltrated moisture is divided into upper zone and lower zone
storage. Upper zone storage includes depression storage. Part of the
upper zone storage percolates into the lower zone storage and the rest is
divided into overland flow and interflow, which become channel (or sewer)
inflow. The lower zone storage is divided into a channel inflow
A-27
-------
contribution and into deep groundwater storage which does not contribute to
surface runoff.
Interception, upper zone, lower zone, and groundwater storage are depleted
by evaporation or evapotranspiration computed as functions of potential
evapotranspiration and available moisture.
Overland flow is routed with a modified kinematic wave formulation using
Manning's equation. Several empirical coefficients internal to the program
relate surface detention storage to overland flow discharge.
Although the model's representation of infiltration, groundwater perco-
lation and storage, overland flow, groundwater contribution to surface
flow, and evaporation from all moisture sources is based on physical
concepts, the mathematical formulations are based largely on empirical
relationships. They require several empirical coefficients, some of which
are defined as soil moisture capacities. The model appears sufficiently
complex that its use for prediction purposes without initial calibration
with measured data may not be very reliable. Simpler models with fewer
empirical coefficients seem adequate to model infiltration and surface flow
contributions in urban catchments.
Flow routing in sewers and open channels is also accomplished using the
kinematic wave equation with Manning's equation. The solution considers
the geometry of circular pipes and of trapezoidal open channels with trap-
ezoidal flood plains. A diffusion term in the kinematic wave equations
approximates downstream flow control and backwater conditions. Surcharging
and pressure flow in sewers is not modeled but a warning is printed if it
occurs. The time step for the routing computations is computed internally
to maintain numerical stability.
Reservoirs and channels can be simulated in the channel network. Storage
capacity has to be defined as a function of depth and reservoir discharge
has to be defined by rule curves relating discharge with time. Diversions
are modeled by requiring diversion hydrographs as input data.
Ar-28
-------
The computation of stormwater quality; is based on formulations first used
by the EPA Stormwater Management Model and then expanded in the Corps of
Engineers' STORM Model and Water Resources Engineers' Stormwater Management
Model. The concentration of each pollutant washed off a catchment is
computed as a nonlinear funtion of runoff. Special empirical functions are
built in for water quality balance between runoff events to account for
dirt and dust accumulation, natural decay, street cleaning practices, and
different land uses. The pollutant accumultion betwen runoff events can
vary with the calendar month. Different values can be specified for
pervious and impervious areas. The equations and coefficients have not
been sufficiently tested for reliable predictions without calibration with
measured data.
Pure advection is used to route pollutants through the sewer and open chan-
nel network. Dispersion is approximated by a weighted average of
concentration values at successive time steps. For receiving water bodies,
chemical and biological reactions and interactions among the seventeen
modeled water quality constituents are computed. Only one-dimensional flow
and water quality routing is formulated. Vertical water quality
interchange can be approximated among three horizontal layers in
impoundments by providing empirical mixing coefficients. The model
documentation does not indicate whether reactions are computed for sewage.
The model does not include formulations for wastewater treatment, real-time
control, or design and cost computations.
The Hydrocomp Simulation Program is a proprietary model developed by
Hydrocomp International, Inc., of Palo Alto, California. Separate user's
manuals are available for the flow and water quality computations of the
model. These contain sufficient detail covering the mathematical bases of
the modeled phenomena and the required input data. The user must
contract with Hydrocomp for routine application of the program. The firm
conducts periodic workshops to instruct potential users in hydrologic
simulation methods and application of the Hydrocomp Simulation Program.
-------
The computer program consists of four main programs and is compatible with
IBM 360 and 370 computers with a minimum of 240K bytes of core memory. In-
formation is not published which would allow estimates of computer
execution times as a function of problem size.
Computer output includes precipitation; soil moisture status; water stages,
velocities, discharges, and water quality concentrations for all channels
and storage; and volume of storage. Data input and output can be in metric
or British units.
A.3.1.3.1 HSP Input Data
Input requirements are extensive and include:
1. Precipitation data;
2. Potential evapotranspiration;
3. Temperature;
4. Streamflow; and
5. HSP calibration parameters (includes such things as
infiltration, depression storage, soil moisture storage, snow
parameters, channel characteristics, watershed segments and
channel reaches) . Determination of these parameters
requires considerable user skill and experience, since not
all are measured directly.
HSP has extensive data handling capability, which simplifies the problem of
assembling and managing the data required. This is a very attractive feat-
ure of this program.
-------
A.3.1.3.2 Evaluation of HSP
The Hydrocomp Simulation Program can be applied for the continuous
simulation of both water flow and quality in urban and rural watersheds and
channel networks. It was originally developed for the hydrologic
simulation of rural catchments, and recently water quality computations for
natural rivers and impoundments were added. The Stanford Watershed Model,
upon which it is based, is perhaps the most detailed and complete, as well
as the most used, rainfall/runoff model.
Modifications for urban applications include the addition of separate run-
off computations for pervious and impervious areas and flow and water
quality routing in circular closed conduits. Other model additions,
however, would make the model more generally applicable to urban sewerage
systems: for instance, geometries of different closed conduit cross-
sections, hydraulic equations for different flow control and diversion
structures, formulations for surcharging and pressure flow, and simulation
of treatment processes.
KSP has been tested and applied extensively in many non-urban watersheds in
the United States and abroad. Comparisons between measured and computed
runoff for selected storm events have produced generally good agreement,
with some exceptions attributed to potentially unreliable measured data.
HSP is most suited for runoff modeling of urban and non-urban catchments
where detailed continuous simulations are required. It is not suited for
systems where treatment processes must be simulated or where pressure flow
and surcharging are significant factors. Hydrocomp is developing several
versions of the basic HSP program for EPA. One of these, the Agricultural
Runoff Model (ARM) has been documented (21) and has received limited
testing. It may be obtained from U.S. EPA, Environmental Research Lab-
oratory, Athens, Georgia, 30601.
-------
A.3.1.4 MITCAT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
The MIT Catchment Model, MITCAT (7), simulates the time-varying runoff of
several catchments and a sewer and open channel network including loops and
converging and diverging branches. The model is limited to the simulation
of single runoff events. Water quality and real-time control features are
not included. The MITCAT may be applied to urban or non-urban areas.
The original model was developed at MIT for the U.S. Office of Water Re-
sources Research, but the model has been modified by Resource Analysis,
Inc., for routine application.
The MIT urban watershed model includes the following features:
1. Dry-weather flow of several catchments;
2. Air temperature at one weather station;
3. Several rainfall records;
4. Special statisical analyses to compute design hyetographs
(separate program);
5. Evapotranspiration;
6. Snow accumulation and melt;
7. Option to choose one of four different infiltration equations;
8. Stormwater runoff from pervious and impervious areas of several
catchments;
9. Catchment moisture accouting during periods of no precipitation;
10. Flow routing in gutters;
-------
11. Routing of combined wastewater flow in a converging network of
loops and converging and diverging branches;
12. Various standard closed conduits and open channel cross-sections
and arbitrary shapes;
13. Downstream flow control, backwater, surcharging and pressure flow;
14. Flow control and diversion structures;
15. Storage facilities;
16. Hydraulic capacities of treatment facilities; and
17. Least-cost sizes of sewers, overflow storage and treatment plants
meeting constraints on surcharging and untreated effluent volume
(separate program).
The model does not include the following features:
1. Dry-weather flow from land use characteristics;
2. Catchment moisture accounting during periods of no precipitation;
3. Flow reversal;
4. Water quality; and
5. Real-time control.
Dry-weather flow data for each inlet is input in the form of hydrograph
values at constant time intervals. The model does not include provisions
to compute dry-weather flow from land use.
A-33
-------
Several rainfall intensity records can be provided as input data. Not more
than one rainfall record can be used to compute runoff from a subcatchment.
Special provisions are built into the model to move a rainstorm across a
catchment by specifying its direction and velocity of movement. A separate
model is available which computes design hyetographs of specified
frequencies from measured rainfall data.
Initial losses to fill depression storage on pervious and impervious areas
are subtracted before surface runoff begins. The Resource Analysis version
has four options to compute infiltration on the pervious areas: Horton's
equation, Holtan's equation, a U.S. Soil Conservation Service method, and a
runoff coefficient method. Infiltration is subtracted from rainfall if the
last two methods are used, but computed from overland flow depth if
Horton's or Holtan's equation is used. A method based on filter theory can
be used to estimate the infiltration parameters from measured rainfall and
runoff. Snowmelt is computed by the Corps of Engineers degree-day method
which requires mean daily air temperature as input data. The Penman
equation is programmed to compute evaporation but generally not used for
single runoff event simulation.
Flow routing is accomplished with the kinematic wave equation. The
equations are solved by a finite difference scheme for overland flow, flow
in gutters, and flow in open channels (for various standard cross-sections
and arbitrarily shaped closed conduits). Downstream flow control and
backwater can be considered if the stage-discharge relationship is known.
Surcharging and pressure flow is computed separately for each pipe reach.
Flow reversal is not modeled. Weir and orifice flow control and diversion
structures can be modeled by their hydraulic equations.
The design model computes the sizes and costs of circular sewers, the
volumes of overflow storage facilities, and the hydraulic capacities of
treatment plants needed to reduce undesirable flooding and surcharging and
to eliminate untreated overflows. Linear programming is used to determine
the least-cost combination of these facilities for a selected design storm
A-34
-------
event. The optimization is based on needed hydraulic capacities alone and
does not consider water quality. It requires catchment runoff hydrographs
as input data and uses a simplified flow routing scheme.
MITCAT was developed under a series of projects for the U.S. Office of
Water Resources Research. Each project covered a different aspect of the
overall model development. The computer programs were written for an IBM
360/67 in FORTRAN IV. The design program utilizes the linear programming
package of the 1971 IBM Mathematical Programming System Extended (MPSX).
The model's core storage requirement is not documented. The potential user
has to contract with Resource Analysis, Inc., of Cambridge, Massachusetts,
for routine applications of the model.
Computer output of the model includes tables of rainfall intensities and
overland, catchment and channel depth, velocity and discharge. Samples of
program output are not included in the documentation for the design option
but output for this option includes the volume and duration of flooding for
each sewer and the required sizes and costs of sewer overflow storage
facilities and treatment plants.
A.3.1.4.1 MITCAT Input Data
1. Rainfall data, including velocity and direction of movement;
2. Catchment data, including length, slope, roughness coefficient,
infiltration coefficients, detention storage and land use
parameters;
3. Stream data, including length, slope, cross-section shape,
width/diameter, roughness coefficient, critical conditions;
4. Inflow data;
5. Soil erosion parameters;
Ar35
-------
6. Storage reservoir data; and
7. Evaporation data.
A.3.1.4.2 Evaluation of MITCAT
The MITCAT is a useful and efficient tool for the simulation of urban and
non-urban catchments, including both sewer and natural stream networks
where backwater, downstream flow control and surcharging are not important.
It is particularly suited where single-event runoff quantity is to be
examined. Testing of the model on catchments with drainage areas up to 120
2 2
km (46 mi ) shows good agreement between computed and measured runoff. The
model is being used extensively for practical engineering assessments. A
major weakness is its lack of water quality calculations, though these are
likely to be added at some future date.
A.3.1.5 HVM-QQS (Dorsch Consult)
HVM-QQS, the Quantity-Quality Simulation Program (8) is intended for single
event or continuous simulation of the time-varying runoff and water quality
in combined sewerage systems consisting of several catchments and a closed
conduit and open channel network including loops and converging and
diverging branches. Runoff from catchment areas is calculated by a unit
hydrograph method, considering different land uses including residential,
commercial, industrial, and mixed. The flow routing through the sewerage
network is based on the dynamic wave equations. Statistical analyses are
incorporated to provide monthly and annual flow and pollutant duration
curves for any node in the network. Four conservative water quality
constituents can be routed.
HVM-QQS includes the following features:
1. Continuous simulation or single event simulation;
2. Dry-weather flow and quality of several catchments;
A-36
-------
3. Three rain records;
4. Stormwater runoff (including quality) from pervious and
impervious areas of several catchments;
5. Routing of combined wastewater flow and quality in a network of
loops and converging and diverging branches;
6. Various closed conduit and open channel cross sections, (with
linearized partial filling curves);
7. Backwater, upstream and downstream flow and quality control,
surcharging and pressure flow;
8. Weirs and diversion structures considering both upstream and
downstream flow conditions;
9. Pumping stations;
10. Retention storage basins;
11. Wastewater quality improvement at treatment plants and overflow
treatment facilities; and
12. Statistical analysis of results.
The model does not include the following features:
1. Snow accumulation and melt;
2. flow reversal;
3. Detailed flow and quality routing in gutters;
4. real-time control;
A-37
-------
5. Sedimentation and scour in channels;
6. Wastewater quality decay, reactions and interactions in sewers and
receiving waters; and
7. Design and costs.
The surface runoff from small catchment areas including the flow in street
sewers and laterals is obtained by means of a unit hydrograph method which
is modified, however, for water quality calculations. The combined
consideration of surface runoff and flow in small sewers and the use of a
systemized network, each segment of which can be composed of several sewer
elements totaling a length of up to 500 m (547 yds), result in a reduction
of network nodes. The assumption of linearity of the runoff process, being
sufficiently valid for small catchment areas, is not employed for the flow
routing through the system of trunk and interceptor sewers, the flow
behaviour of which may be influenced by backwater effects and interaction
of branching points, retention facilities and overflow structures. Thus,
flow routing is based on the dynamic wave equations, which provides the
necessary accuracy and still allows for continuous long-time simulation.
The hydrographs and flow velocities obtained by the hydraulic calculations
form the basis for the pollutant transport within the network. The model
is generally applicable to any urban drainage basin and to any pollutant.
Presently areas of up to 40,000 ha (100,000 acres) in size can be studied
in one run.
Catchment runoff quality formulations currently include biochemical oxygen
demand and settleable solids. Formulations are also planned for
carbonaceous oxygen demand, suspended solids, coliform bacteria, chloride,
and nutrients. The model does not include real-time control, design and
cost computations.
HVM-QQS evaluates the quantitative and qualitative loading of up to two re-
ceiving waters arbitrarily connected within an urban area. In one run up
to four conservative water quality parameters can be taken into
Ar38
-------
consideration. Three different precipitation records of up to 20 years can
enter the calculation, each of which again could be the weighted average of
several raingages.
For single event simulation, program output includes both tables and plots
of discharges and water quality (mass rates) for any nodal point of the
sewerage system and receiving water network. Flow velocities are not
printed. For continuous simulation principal output is tables of statis-
tical analysis and graphs of frequency and duration curves.
The computer program consists of a data validation program, a main program
and a statistics program which are run sequentially. Model documentation
does not describe details of the computer program. This is a proprietary
model developed by the engineering consulting firm Dorsch Consult
Ingenieurgesellschaft mbH of Munich, Germany (a North American office is
maintained in Toronto, Ontario). The model may be released under certain
use and distribution restrictions. A user's manual is available upon
request.
The complete program package is written in Fortran IV and consists of
nearly 30,000 statements. Usable core storage of 400k bytes and a
configuration with fast external mass storage are required. The package is
presently installed in a Univac 1108 computer. The program, however, can
be used on all batch processing systems with Fortran IV compilers.
A.3.1.5.1 HVM-QQS Input Data
Input data requirements for HVM-QQS are extensive, and include:
1. Sewer network data (quite detailed);
2. Precipitation data;
3. Hydrologic data;
-------
4. Dry-weather flow;
5. Input hydrographs;
6. Receiving water geometry and flows;
7. Pollutant accumulation and decay functions; and
8. Storage and treatment facility data.
HVM-QQS has an excellent data validation program which simplifies data
management.
A.3.1.5.2 Evaluation of HVM-QQS
HVM-QQS is one of the most complete models for the computation of runoff
from urban catchments and the routing of flows in sewer networks. It is
potentially the most accurate model for routing flow in sewers,
particularly under conditions of surcharge or backwater. Extreme detail
with respect to subcatchment discretization is required, however, to
calculate accurate overland flow from rainfall. Simplifications are
probably possible to allow larger subcatchment areas without significant
loss in accuracy.
The implicit solution of the Saint-Venant equations provides an accurate
means of computing the flow routing in the sewers coupled with routing
through diversion structures and retention basins. The consideration of
both upstream and downstream boundary conditions and the computation of
backwater is part of the basic equations and does not have to rely on
approximate methods such as those included in some kinematic wave or
storage routing techniques. The implicit solution of the Saint-Venant
equations coupled with diversion equations is complicated, however, and
time consuming on the computer as compared to more approximate methods. To
simplify the solution somewhat an iterative scheme is used which cannot
consider flow reversal (although it is contained in the basic equations).
A-40
-------
Although the model formulations are considerably more precise than most
tested models, the increased accuracy demands a sacrifice in computer time.
The model would be needed primarily where backwater, downstream flow con-
trol, diversion structures, retention basins, and surcharging are important
features of the sewerage system assessment. If these features are not
present or are considered insignificant, simpler models requiring less com-
puter time can be used.
The model has been applied extensively in Germany and Switzerland, and
moderately in Canada, the U.S.A. and other countries. Model comparisons
with measured runoff data are limited.
HVM-QQS has been verified checking quality against measurements taken in
Augsburg, Munich and Stuttgart, Germany, and quantity against the Dorsch
Consult HVM-Method and measurements. The model presently is applied to
Augsburg, Germany (360,000 inhabitants), and to Rochester, New York.
Documentation of the model is not generally available.
A.3.1.6 Metcalf and Eddy Model
The Metcalf and Eddy Model (9) is the simplest of the models evaluated, and
is intended as a planning tool to gain some insight into the system under
study and to aid in the initial screening of alternatives. It provides a
very easy, direct methodology, divided into three subsystems. The first,
rainfall characterization, is a sorting and analysis of rainfall data from
local records. Operating directly from Weather Bureau tapes or published
summaries, long periods of record can be easily analyzed, and the arrayed
output allows historical classification of rainfall. The second, storage-
treatment balance, uses historical rainfall data, converted to runoff by
coefficient which is stored in a special volume which is emptied at a
specified rate. When runoff exceeds the combined storage-treatment rates,
changes in overflow occurrence and duration can be examined. The third,
discharge-receiving water response, applies pollutant concentrations to
overflow volumes to determine pollutant mass loadings. Several methods for
arriving at pollutant concentrations are suggested. Receiving water
A-41
-------
response is analyzed separately.
The Metcalf and Eddy Model includes the following features:
1. Analysis of long-term records;
2. Simple, direct calculations;
3. Quality and quantity calculations;
4. Modular, to allow user to select only components he needs; and
5. Allows incorporation of probability in a simple fashions.
The model does not include:
1. Dry-weather flow;
2. Conduit flows; and
3. Costs or design capability.
The computer program, or rather programs, are written in FORTRAN IV, and
can be run on virtually any size computer with a FORTRAN IV compiler.
Computer program is available from EPA along with the documentation.
A.3.1.6.1 Input Data for Metcalf and Eddy Model
1. Rainfall-program will process Weather Bureau hourly or daily
summaries;
2. Sewer system schematic (while not required by the program, es-
sential to understanding system) including overflows and their
associated drainage areas and pertinent interceptor capacities;
A-42
-------
3. Runoff coefficient;
4. Pollutant concentrations; and
5. Storage capacity and treatment rate.
A.3.1.6.2 Evaluation of Metcalf and Eddy Model
This simple model is an invaluable tool for preliminary analysis. It is
particularly useful for rainfall-runoff probability determination, and to
get rough first-cut evaluations of storage-treatment alternatives. It is
straightforward and inexpensive, and will allow engineers and planners to
quickly gain an insight into their local problems, and to determine where
more detailed models are required. The model has been applied extensively
by Metcalf and Eddy, and is presently being used on an EPA project in
Rochester, New York (See Chapter 3 for additional details of this model
application in preliminary screening applications).
A.3.1.7 AGRUN (Water Resources Engineers)
AGRUN (10) is a revised version of the RUNOFF block of the Stormwater Man-
agement Model (SWMM) which can be used to estimate runoff quantity and
quality from agricultural lands. It is included in this list as an example
of a model that is useful in rural or semi-rural portions of the 208 area.
AGRUN has not been extensively tested, and potential users are cautioned
accordingly.
The changes made in the SWMM RUNOFF block to create AGRUN include:
1. The capability to route pollutants through as many as 200
tributary channels. The tributary system must be dendritic.
Channel cross sections may be triangular, trapezoidal or
rectangular;
-------
2. The capability to model up to 22 quality constituents (only total
suspended solids, BOD and fecal coliforms have been verified).
The Universal Soil Loss equation is used to compute suspended
solids sources loading rates. Source loading rates of other
pollutants is assumed directly proportional to the solids loading
rate, the proportionality constant being a function of land use
type; and
3. The capability to simulate interflow contributions to runoff. Up
to five layers of soils are handled on each subarea. Each layer
is assumed to be of uniform thickness and parallel to the surface.
A planar, impermeable boundary exists at the bottom of the lowest
layer.
The computer program is written in FORTRAN V, the program and associated
documentation are available from EPA, Office of Water and Hazardous
Materials, Washington, D. C. 20460.
A.3.1.7.1 Input Data for AGRUN
In addition to the data required by the normal RUNOFF block, AGRUN
requires:
1. Channel specifications;
2. Land use hydrodynamics data;
3. Crop types; and
4. Baseflow data.
A.3.1.7.2 Evaluation of AGRUN
This model, though relatively untested, should prove useful for detailed
examination of rural or semi-rural runoff. It may be linked to the SWMM to
A-44
-------
evaluate such things as storage-treatment options or impacts on receiving
water quality. Use of this model should be undertaken by personnel
familiar with the basic SWMM.
A.3.1.8 ILLUDAS (Illinois State V/ater Survey)
The Illinois State Water Survey Urban Drainage Area Simulator (ILLUDAS)
(11) was developed by the Illinois State Water Survey for single-event
simulation of time-varying runoff in combined sewerage systems consisting
of several catchments and a converging sewer and open channel network. The
model is based on a computer version of the British Road Research
Laboratory Model, but computes also the runoff from pervious areas and
includes the option to size either circular sewers or retention basins.
The design option is based on hydraulic considerations alone and does not
consider costs. Water quality is not modeled.
ILLUDAS will accept a specified storm, or will distribute, according to
user specified parameters, a given total rainfall volume. Equal time
increments of rainfall are applied to sub-basin of the total urban basin.
A computation is made of the travel time required for each increment of
runoff to reach the inlets at the downstream end of the sub-basin. In this
way a surface hydrograph is provided for each sub-basin. These surface
hydrographs from each sub-basin are accumulated in downstream order through
the basin. This accumlation of inflow hydrographs is routed through each
section of pipe to account for the temporary storage within each pipe
section. The result is a computed outflow hydrograph from each section of
pipe, and ultimately a hydrograph at the outlet of the total basin.
Infiltration is calculated using Holtan's method and provision is made for
satisfying depression storage before infiltration takes place. Detention
storage may be handled in two ways. If the user specifies a detention
volume at some point in the basin, ILLUDAS will utilize that storage and
report the resulting decrease in peak flow. If on the other hand the user
wishes to limit the peak flow at some point, ILLUDAS will report the
storage volume required to reduce the peak flow to the desired rate.
A-45
-------
IILUDAS is available from the Illinois State Water Survey in the form of a
Fortran IV deck of some 800 cards. About 150 K bytes of core are required.
The program was developed for use on an IBM 360-75 and is available only in
that form. The output format is presently best suited to a 130 space line
but work is underway to develop a 72 space format for use on remote
terminals. ILLUDAS is available commercially on the McDonnell Douglas
Automation Company (MCAUTO) system in St. Louis.
A.3.1.8.1 Input Data for ILLUDAS
1. Precipitation data
2. Paved and grassed areas and their slopes
3. Hydrologic soil groups
4. Paved and grassed area abstractions.
5. Sewer length, slope, shape, Manning's "n".
6. Available storage.
A.3.1.8.2 Evaluation of ILLUDAS
ILLUDAS has been extensively tested and used, and the program is well
documented. It has some sewer design capability and should be useful in
the analysis of runoff-storage analyses. The Illinois State Water Survey
provides training courses in application of the model. It is most useful
where single rainfall events are to be simulated and water quality is not a
consideration.
A.4 Water Quality Models
Water quality models are the most important, and in many ways least
understood, link in the chain of models for environmental assessment. The
A-46
-------
physical, chemical and biological phenomena represented by the models are
very complex, and many simplifying assumptions must be made by the user in
the course of model development and application. More specialized
technical skill is required in the use of water quality models than of any
other type. In fact, it is essential that a person skilled in the water
!
quality area be available for input preparation and interpretation of
results. The comments regarding default values outlined in section A.3 are
equally applicable here.
The models listed in this section (see Table A-2) meet the criteria of
being generally available, we11-documented and have been tested and
applied. They also demonstrate a range of models available to the user.
Previously (A.2) it was indicated that a careful investigation should be
undertaken to identify models in local use. This is particularly true with
water quality models. While the user will have to assure himself that the
model has been correctly formulated and properly verified, a water quality
model, even a relatively simple one, that is in use in the local area and
for which data have been gathered will prove invaluable and may make it the
overriding model of choice, particularly where resources are limited.
In general, it is better to examine a limited number of quality
constituents in a water quality modeling exercise, even though the model
may be formulated to accomodate a broad spectrum. This will simplify the
problem of data acquisition, make the model easier and cheaper to use and
simplify the analysis of results.
A.4.1 Water Quality Models
A.4.1.1 DOSAG-I (EPA)
DOSAG-I (12), developed originally by a predecessor agency of EPA and
modified by the Texas Water Development Board, and now disseminated by EPA,
Office of Water and Hazardous Materials, uses the classical Streeter-Phelps
DO sag equation, modified to include nitrogenous biochemical oxygen demand
to simulate DO and BOD variations. It is a steady-state model, suitable
Ar.47
-------
TABLE A-2 WATER QUALITY MODELS
Model
Origin
Acronym
Water
Bodies
Modeled1
Time
Variability
Spatial
Discretization
Miscellaneous
Documenta
Available
Computer Program
Available
Applied to
Real Probl
Constituents
Modeled
Environmental
Prot. Agency
DOSAG-I
DO, BOD (Carbonaceous and nitrogenous)
EPA
QUAL-II
BOD, DO, temperature, NHj, N03, N02,
algae, phosphorus, ben thic demand, coli-
forms, radioactive materials, 3 conser-
vative constituents.
EPA
RECEIV
-fc*
00
Any six constituents, including DO,
BOD, conservative constituents and non-
conservative constituents with first
order decay.
Raytheon (EPA)
RECEIV-II
BOD, DO, coliforms, nutrients, salinity,
conservative constituents, non-conser-
vative constituents with first order
decay, chlorophyll a.
Systems Control
Inc.
SRMSCI
BOD, DO, coliforms, excess temperature,
NH3, N03, N02, OP04, Cu, Pb, and two
conservatives.
Water Resources
Engineers (EPA)
WRECEV
BOD-DO (linked) , any four conservative
or first order non-conservative.
Hydrocomp , Inc .
HWQM
BOD, DO, coliforms, temperature, algae,
zooplankton, sediment, organic nitrogen,
nutrients and conservative constituents.
Office of Water
Resources Research
LAKECO
Zooplankton, benthic animals, fish, pH,
nutrients, conservative constituents,
non-conservative constituents with first
order decay.
1. Stream models can simulate shallow, well-mixed impoundments.
2. Weather inputs may be dynamic.
3. Available for a fee.
-------
for modeling non-estuarine streams with no reservoirs. The model is
constrained in that no more than than 10 headwaters, 20 junctions, 20
stretches (sections between junctions) and 50 reaches may be modeled.
DOSAG-I is capable of calculating flow augmentations needed to maintain DO
at a prescribed level, and of determining dissolved oxygen distribution for
varying levels of treatment (waste treatment plants) in the simulated river
basin. Computations are performed on a reach-by-reach basis. DOSAG-I
calculates the time required for a particle of water to travel downstream
to the first lateral inflow (tributary, outfall, etc.) to the stream. The
changes in the concentration of constituents which would occur during the
travel time are computed and the concentrations of constituents adjusted
accordingly. These adjusted concentrations represent the stream quality
just above the lateral inflow. The inflowing water quantity and wasteload
are then added to those of the stream, resulting in a new stream flow and a
new value for the concentration of constituents in the stream at the point
of inflow. The program then calculates how long it would take a particle
of water to travel downstream from that point to the next lateral inflow,
and the whole process is repeated. All temperature-dependent parameters
are adjusted on a reach-by-reach basis during the computations.
The computational procedure is repeated on each headwater stretch
downstream to the first junction, and then proceeds downstream throughout
the system until the water quality constituent concentrations are
determined for the entire stream system. No diffusion or stratification is
modeled and at any point the stream is assumed to be uniformly mixed.
All inflow rates and all constituent concentrations in the inflows are
specified by the user. The temperature of each reach is also user
specified. Withdrawal of water from the stream system is modeled by
specifying a negative inflow at that point.
A-49
-------
A.4.1.1.1 DOSAG-I Input Data
Input data required for DOSAG-I is relatively simple and straightforward.
It includes:
1. Flow rates for system inputs and withdrawals;
2. Information on reaches, junctions, stretches, headwater reaches;
3. Reaction coefficients;
4. Concentrations of inflows; and
5. Stream temperature.
A.4.1.1.2 Evaluation of DOSAG-I
DOSAG-I is a simple, well-tested, frequently used model which can predict
stream DO concentrations with relative accuracy. The model has been
modified by others (13), and has good documentation. The computer program
is simple enough that repeated program runs may be made at low cost once
initial set-up has been done. It is most useful where DO considerations
control water quality, and where steady-state conditions apply.
A.4.1.2 QUAL-II (EPA)
QUAL-II (14), developed by Water Resources Engineers as a modification to
QUAL-I (15), is a quasi-dynamic stream model. It will simulate both
steady-state stream flow and the steady-state and dynamic behavior of the
fo11owing const ituent s:
1. Chlorophyll-a;
2. Nitrogen;
A-50
-------
Ammonia
Nitrite
Nitrate
3. Phosphorus;
4. Carbonaceous BOD;
5. Benthic oxygen demand;
6. DO;
7. Coliforms; and
8. Conservative substances.
QUAL-II is constrained in that no more than 15 headwaters, 15 junctions, 45
reaches and a total of not more than 45 input/withdrawal elements can be
modeled.
QUAL-II numerically integrates, using a wholly implicit numerical scheme,
the advection-dispersion mass transport equation for all water quality
constituents to be modeled. The equations include the effects of
constituent reactions and interactions, and a source term.
QUAL-II is applied by subdividing the stream system into reaches (stretches
of stream with uniform hydraulic characteristics). Each reach is then
divided into computational elements of equal length, so that all
computational elements in all reaches are the same length (Max. of 20
computational elements per reach).
The computer program is written in Fortran IV for the IBM 360/370 series
computers. It is structured as one main program supported by 20
A-51
-------
subroutines. This allows changes in parameters or modification of
parameter relationships with a minimum of model restructuring.
A.4.1.2.1 QUAL-II Input Data
The input data required by QUAL-II include:
1. Identification and description of stream reaches.
2. Initial conditions.
3. Hydraulic coefficients for determining velocity and depth.
4. Reaction coefficients.
5. Junction data.
6. Headwater data.
7. Waste loadings and runoff conditions.
8. If temperature is to be modeled, also requires sky cover, wet
bulb/dry bulb air temperature, atmospheric pressure, wind speed,
evaporation coefficient, and basin elevation.
A.4.1.2.2 Evaluation of QUAL-II
QUAL-II is a simple model, which has been extensively tested and used.
Application of QUAL-II requires less resource expenditure than any of the
computer models listed herein except DOSAG-I. QUAL-II is disseminated
without cost by EPA, Office of Water and Hazardous Materials, Washington,
D.C. The model, given valid input data, will reliably predict water
quality with a relatively high degree of accuracy. QUAL-II is most suited
to situations where several water quality constituents are to be modeled
and where steady-state streamflow calculations are appropriate.
-------
A.4.1.3 RECEIV (EPA)
RECEIV, originally developed as a part of the EPA Stormwater Management
Model (SWMM) (4,5), is suitable for modeling estuaries and streams, and may
be also used to model lakes if one can assume they are relatively shallow
and well-mixed. RECEIV represents the water body with a network of nodal
points connected by channels. The nodal points and channels are idealized
hydraulic elements which are characterized by parameters such as surface
area, cross-sectional area, length and friction coefficient. The equations
of motion and continuity are applied to each element and solved
simultaneously to produce a true histrory of stage, velocity and flow at
the various points of the receiving water system. The model is not suited.
for modeling highly stratified water bodies. RECEIV has the capability of
simulating tidal flats (surface area need not be constant) and will handle
tidal boundary conditions at multiple seaward boundary locations. RECEIV
will accept transient inputs, such as storm water inflow, and is useful in
examining the effects of various upstream treatment schemes with different
removal rates in that several water quality simulations may be performed
for a given quantity simulation. Water quantity simulations may be
performed separately from, or together with, quality simulations. The
model will accomodate up to six conservative quality parameters and non-
conservative parameters with first-order decay. When BOD is modeled, its
influence on DO is calculated and resulting DO levels are determined
simultaneously. The model assumes an advective transport mechanism, and
does not accomodate diffusion transport. RECEIV computes concentrations of
pollutants on incoming tides using a seaward exchange coefficient, and
models these concentrations as a constant value during the tidal cycle.
RECEIV is programmed in FORTRAN IV.
A.4.1.3.1 RECEIV Input Data
RECEIV requires fairly extensive input data, which includes:
1. Tidal variations
A-53
-------
2. Water surface elevations, area and depth
3. Bottom roughness coefficients
4. Meteorological data, including rainfall, evaporation, wind
velocity and direction
5. Downstream boundary conditions
6. Junction and channel data
7. Water temperature
8. Initial pollutant concentrations
9. Inflow data
10. Oxygen saturation and reaeration coefficients
A.4.1.3.2 Evaluation of RECEIV
RECEIV is a relatively complex model which is most applicable to estuaries
and which has been extensively used. Considerable skill is required to
apply it effectively, and the documentation, while adequate, is not as good
as documentation for the rest of the SWMM. There are many variants of
RECEIV, several of which will be subsequently described. The program and
its documentation are available without charge from EPA, Office of Research
and Development (RD-682). RECEIV is most applicable when SWMM is being
used, and its main strength, as with SWMM lies in the continuing
maintenance, improvement and documentation that is taking place.
A.4.1.4 RECEIV-II (RAYTHEON/EPA)
RECEIV-II (16) was developed by Raytheon, under contract to the Water
Planning Division, EPA, and is a modification and expansion of the RECEIV
-------
model in SWMM. RECEIV-II preserves the compatibility with the original
SWMM coding through a new subroutine called SETUP. The other major
differences between RECEIV-II and RECEIV are in the water quality con-
stituents modeled and the relationships describing the behavior of those
constituents. RECEIV-II simulates eleven (11) water quality constituents,
including the nitrogen cycle, phosphororus, chlorophyll-a_ and salinity, in
addition to BOD, DO and coliforms. Included are representations of the
biological and chemical linkages between constituents. An important
feature is the ability to compute constituent concentrations downstream of
a dam, by adjusting DO reaeration due to spillage over the dam. RECEIV-II
is programmed in ANSI Standard FORTRAN for both IBM and CDC computers.
A.4.1.4.1 RECEIV-II Input Data
Input data requirements for RECEIV-II are essentially the same as those for
RECEIV, except in the SETUP block, which requires more detailed
specification of boundary conditions, and in specifying initial pollutant
concentrations and reaction coefficients because of the larger number of
pollutants modeled.
A.4.1.4.2 Evaluation of RECEIV-II
RECEIV-II has been extensively tested, and has been applied to a number of
receiving waters. The documentation is excellent. In fact, it is
desirable for a user of RECEIV or any of its variants to have a copy of
this documentation, since it gives a much better description of the theory
and application than is provided in SWMM documentation. It is only
slightly less convenient to use with the SWMM than RECEIV, and will
probably give better results, since a number of errors in RECEIV were
corrected in the development of RECEIV-II. The program and documentation
are available without charge from EPA, Office of Water and Hazardous
Materials, or at nominal cost from Raytheon Corporation.
A-55
-------
A.4.1.5 SRMSCI (Systems Control Inc.)
SRMSCI, developed by Systems Control, Inc. (13), is another variant of the
RECEIV block of SWMM. The principal modification is the addition of the
capability to model excess temperature, the nitrogen cycle, phosphorus,
lead, and copper. The nutrient-algae cycle and second-order decay of
nitrogen or phosphorus are accomodated. In other respects, SRMSCI is the
same as RECEIV.
A.4.1.5.1 SRMSCI Input Data
Input data requirirements for SRMSCI are the same as for RECEIV, except
that more pollutant data (intial concentrations, decay rates) are required,
A.4.1.5.2 Evaluation of SRMSCI
SRMSCI is well-tested and documented, but has not been as extensively used
as RECEIV or RECEIV-II. It should provide results comparable to either
model. The program and documentation are available at nominal cost from
the Snohomish County Planning Department, Everett, Washington, or Systems
Control, Inc.
A.4.1.6 WRECEV (Water RESOURCES Engineers)
WRECEV (17) is yet another modification to the RECEIV block in SWMM, and,
like its predecessor has a hydrodynamic module and a quality module. It
was developed to increase the applicability of the basic RECEIV to streams.
The following revisions were made in the hydrodynamic module:
1. Modify geometric specifications of channel and junctions;
2. Solve the finite difference form of the equation of motion for
flow rate;
A-56
-------
3. Allow constant inflows, constant withdrawals and variable flow
hydrographs to occur simultaneously at any junction;
4. Use logical variables in the computer code where possible;
5. Reduce core requirements for model execution;
6. Permit execution with no interface units if desired; and
7. Restructure input data requirements.
The following revisions were made in the water quality module:
1. Allow constant inflows, constant withdrawals and variable flow
hydrographs to occur simultaneously at any junction.
2. Allow time-variant inflow concentrations of all simulated
constituents.
3. Input temperature to allow internal temperature correction for any
input reaction rates and internal computation of DO saturation
concentration.
4. Include five-day BOD as an optional constituent.
5. Allow spatial variation of any input reaction rates.
6. Compute the reaeration coefficient at each time step.
7. Include the effects of dispersion in the computations.
8. Revise advection computations.
9. Insert warning messages to indicate that the advection ratio
criterion has been violated.
A-57
-------
10. Restructure input data requirements.
These changes have resulted in making the model easier to use and requiring
less computer time for execution. WRECEV has been designed for use either
as a stand-alone module or with a direct linkage to SWMM. WRECEV is
programmed in FORTRAN IV.
A.4.1.6.1 WRECEV Input Data
Input data requirements for WRECEV are essentially the same as those for
RECEIV. The documentation, however, provides a much clearer description of
input formats and the data input process.
A.4.1.6.2 Evaluation of WRECEV
WRECEV is relatively new and untried, but is based on considerable
experience with RECEIV and should hence perform at least as well. The
documentation is excellent, and the reader would, as with RECEIV-II, be
well advised to obtain a copy if he plans to use any variant of RECEIV.
WRECEV is available without cost from EPA, Office of Water and Hazardous
Materials.
A.4.1.7 HWQM (Hydrocomp, Inc.)
The Hydrocomp Water Quality Model (18) is applicable to non-tidal receiving
waters. It is a dynamic model simulating a number of water quality
indices, including temperature, total dissolved solids (TDS), DO, BOD,
coliforms, algae-chlorophyll-a, zooplankton, nitrogen, ortho-phosphate and
condensed phosphate, and conservative constituents such as metals and
chlorides.
In HWQM a stream system is divided into reaches, assuming complete mixing
in each reach. During each time step, the transfer of water into and out
of each reach, is determined and the chemical and biological processes
computedi. Impoundments are considered similarly to stream reaches, except
A-58
-------
that stratification may be analyzed by assuming the impoundment consists of
three layers and that mixing occurs between layers. The mixing coefficient
(fraction of one layer mixed with another layer) is a function of time of
year to approximate various mixing phenomena that occur. Diffusion is not
modeled. HWQM is set up for direct linkage to HSP (see A.3.1.3) which will
provide surface runoff inputs to the receiving water. HWQM is programmed
in PL1.
A.4.1.7.1 HWQM Input Data
The input data requirements for HWQM are extensive, but a Library program
module is available (as in HSP) which considerably simplifies the
management of this data. Input data includes:
1. Watershed data, including descriptions of reaches and lakes;
2. Reaction coefficients;
3. Initial conditions of flow and pollutant concentrations;
4. Temperature data; and
5. Data on quantity and quality of inflows.
A.4.1.7.2 Evaluation of HWQM
HWQM has not been extensively tested or applied, however it may be expected
to give good results. It is a proprietary model, available only from
Hydrocomp on several fee bases. Training courses in its application are
conducted by Hydrocomp. It is the most complex of the water quality models
reviewed here and requires considerable expertise in the water quality
area. The documentation is adequate, and available from Hydrocomp for a
fee.
A-59
-------
A.4.1.8 LAKECO (OWRR)
The Lake Ecologic Model (LAKECO)(19) developed by Water Resources Engineers
for the Office of Water Resources Research (OWRR) is a dynamic model for
simulating water quality and biological populations in stratified lakes.
LAKECO is primarily a tool to aid the user in determing the effects on the
water quality and temperature of a lake due to meteorological changes or to
changes in the flow rate, temperature, and/or concentrations of the lake
inflows or the flow rate and/or positions of the lake outflows. The model
may also be used to predict conditions in lakes yet to be formed and to aid
designers of impoundments.
It has substantially greater capability than the Deep Reservoir Model from
which it was derived. LAKECO carries out most of its hydrodynamic cal-
culations simultaneously with its water quality calculations. LAKECO
models TDS, the DO budget, nutrient cycles, coliform and algal life
processes, benthal demands and releases, temperature, pH, the detritus
cycle, and zooplankton and fish cycles. A total of nineteen non-con-
servatives and two conservatives may be modeled. The lake being modeled
must be represented by less than 100 horizontal layers. A maximum of ten
inflows and ten outlets are permitted.
Computations performed by LAKECO include consideration of stratification,
dilution, diffusion, advection, settling, mass addition, decay, growth,
benthal releases, internal coupling between constituents, reaeration, res-
piration, mortality, photosynthesis, short wave radiation, wet and dry bulb
air temperature and wind.
LAKECO calculates the concentration profiles of the lake being modeled in
the following manner: The lake is considered to be divided into a number of
horizontal layers. The lake inflow is distributed into the appropriate
layers from consideration of temperatures, flow rate, and layer volumes.
The lake outflow is withdrawn from the appropriate layers fron?
consideration of outlet location(s), flow rate, and layer volumes.
Transports between layers are computed.
A-60
-------
The concentration and/or temperature changes in each layer due to factors
listed above are then calculated and the concentrations are updated. The
temperature and concentrations of the outflows are also calculated for the
time step. The procedure is continued until the end of the simulation
period is reached, at which time a complete history of the temperature and
concentrations in each lake layer and in the lake outflows have been
generated. All temperature-dependent parameters are adjusted on a layer by
layer basis during the computations. LAKECO is written in FORTRAN IV.
A.4.1.8.1 LAKECO Input Data
Input data requirements for LAKECO are fairly extensive, and include:
1. Meteorologic data, including sky cover, wet/dry-bulb temperature,
wind speed and direction, atmospheric pressure;
2. Lake latitude and longitude;
3. Flow rate of lake inflows (steady-state or time varying) during
the simulation period;
4. Table defining surface area and volume as functions of depth;
5. Outlet locations;
6. Concentrations (steady-state or time varying) in the lake inflows
of all quality constituents (including temperature) being modeled
for the simulated time period;
7. All reaction and decay rate constants for each lake layer,
including growth rates, mortality rates, respiration rates and
settling velocities;
8. Extinction coefficient;
A-61
-------
9. Diffusion coefficients;
10. Temperature stability coefficient; and
11. Initial concentrations for the simulation period of all
constituents (including temperature) for each layer.
A.4.1.8.2 Evaluation of LAKECO
LAKECO has been extensively tested and applied, and can be expected to give
good results, though it is rather complex. Application of LAKECO would
provide an adequate picture of an annual lake cycle, but not long-term
trends toward eutrophication. The program and documentation are available
at nominal cost from OWRR.
A.5 Typical Model Selection Approach
In the application of models in a typical 208 study, the following sequence
is suggested.
1. Define the objective - have a clear statement of what the study
objectives are. This is, unquestionably, the single most im-
portant step in the process, and probably the most difficult.
Time spent here, however, will be compensated by the fact that a
clear objective will make all subsequent tasks simpler. The
objective should be specific, and describe clearly what the study
is to accomplish. A study objective such as "develop a 208 plan
to satisfy PL 92-500" is vague and subject to a variety of
interpretations. If it were refined to read "determine the
relative impacts of nonpoint discharges and combined sewer
overflows in the 208 area to other point sources in that area with
respect to 7-day, 10-year low flow standards, assuming that
A-62
-------
upstream loadings will not change," it is much more likely that
all parties will have the same understanding. The selection of an
appropriate methodology will be much easier, and the study results
are more likely to address the real problems.
2. Gather and assess available information - at this stage the
requirement is to identify what already exists and where it is
located. Data on land use, population, precipitation, streamflow,
point discharges, the local sewerage system, etc. should be
gathered. The results of any previous studies or on-going work
(201 plans, university research projects, 303 (e) plans) should be
analyzed to get a feel for the local situation and a better idea
of what direction the study should take. Almost every area has
had some work done, and time spent locating and evaluating
available information can reduce duration and costs of current
work. Local expertise familiar with the area under study may be
identified, and can become an important part of the study team.
3. Apply some simple model (may or may not be a computer model) to
get some idea of how the areawide system you now have behaves, and
the relative influence of various pollutant sources - large
systems are complex, and intuitive judgements about their behavior
may be totally inadequate. By using a simple model, the planner
can "play" with his system easily and cheaply and get some feel
for the response of the system to various alternatives. This step
can also point up shortcomings in the existing data base, and
provide valuable insight into more detailed analyses that may be
required. Chapters 2 and 3 provide more discussion on this
subject.
4. Determine if more detailed modeling is necessary, and if so, where
- remember the study objectives, and use only the tools needed to
achieve those objectives. The models described herein cover a
broad range of capabilities, and in general, the more complex the
model, the more resources required for its application. Do not,
A-63
-------
however, assume that increased sophistication and resolution
necessarily imply increased accuracy or utility. Many 208
planning studies have started with the assumption that a specific
model would be applied, and then the rest of the planning was done
to fit that assumption. Models are not simple to apply, and the
pre-selection of a model without a feel for the problem to be
investigated is sure to result in wasted time and effort. The
only possible exception is where there is a model already
installed and calibrated for an area.
5. Gather data and apply selected models - it is at this point that
data for model calibration and verification is collected, if it is
not already available. Again, the study objectives must be kept
firmly in mind, and only that data gathered which is necessary.
Model application should follow procedures outlined in pertinent
model documentation. Models applied at this stage will probably
be utilized during subsequent studies or in on-going planning, so
thorough documentation of the model application should be
prepared. If this is not done, continuity is easily lost, and a
costly tool will be wasted.
6. Evaluate results and determine future requirements - the results
of the modeling should be reviewed to see if study objectives have
been met. If further data is required, or if other alternatives
are to be analyzed, step 5 may need to be repeated.
A.6 Sources of Assistance:
There are often many sources of assistance available locally to the user.
These include:
1. Universities - They may be doing modeling or data-gathering which
would be useful, and may even have an operating model which would
serve for planning pruposes. Departments of Biology, Ecology,
A-64
-------
Water Resources, etc., may be involved as well as engineering
departments.
2. Agencies - State and Federal agencies have sponsored a great deal
of work, and some of it may be useful in your area. Federal
agencies which do environmentally-related modeling or have
sponsored such work include:
a. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Office of
Research and Development, (RD-682) and the Water
Planning Division (WH-554).
b. U.S. Geological Survey - They also have a data-gathering
program.
c. Soil Conservation Service (USDA).
d. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering
Center.
e. Office of Water Resources Research.
3. Consultants - There are a number of consultants specialized in
urban drainage and/or water quality modeling. Even though they
may not be your primary consultant, they are very useful for
review of your program for model application and calibration, or
of results obtained.
4. Service Bureaus - Most of the models listed are available on some
regional or national service bureau, such as McDonnell Automation,
CDC, Service Bureau Corp., University City Science Center, etc.
If not, a service bureau will often accept the responsibility for
model setup in return for using their system. Some even have
personnel familiar with model applications to offer assistance.
A-65
-------
5. Training Courses - A number of training courses are offered which
are useful to model users. They include:
a. Short courses in storm water model application offered by
U.S. EPA and by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment,
Canada.
b. 208 seminars conducted nation-wide, and sponsored by EPA's
Water Planning Division and the Regional offices.
c. ILLUDAS training course offered by the Illinois State Water
Survey.
d. Urban runoff seminars sponsored by the American Public Works
Association (AAWA).
e. HSP seminars presented by Hydrocomp, Inc.
6. 201 Planning/Design - In many areas wastewater treatment fac-
ilities are being or have been analyzed or designed, and much in-
formation is available from these studies. Regrettably, there are
instances when jurisdictional problems or a lack of communication
have resulted in a failure to pool information.
A. 7 References
1. Grimsrud, G. Paul, E.J. Finnemore and H. J. Owen. Evaluation of Water
Quality Models: A Management Guide for Planners. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Report EPA 600/5-76-004, July 1976.
2. Brandstetter, A.. Assessment of Mathematical Models for Storm and
Combined Sewer Management. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Report EPA 600/2-76-175a, July 1976.
A-66
-------
3. U.S. Corps of Engineers. Urban Runoff: Storage, Treatment and
Overflow Model "STORM". U.S. Army, Davis, California, Hydrologic
Engineering Center Computer Program 723-S8-L2520, May 1974.
4. Metcalf £ Eddy, Inc., University of Florida and Water Resources
Engineers, Inc.. Storm Water Management Model. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Report 11024 DOC 07/71, Volume I, July 1971.
5. Huber, W.C., et. al.. Storm Water Management Model User's Manual,
Version II. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report EPA-670/2-75-
017, March 1975.
6. Hydrocomp International, Inc.. Hydrocomp Simulation Programming--
Operations Manual. Palo Alto, California, February 1972.
7. Resource Analysis, Inc.. Analysis of Hypothetical Catchments and Pipes
with the M.I.T. Catchment Model. Resource Analysis, Inc., Cambridge,
Massachusetts, for Battelle-Pacific Northwest Laboratories, 2 Volumes,
October 1974.
8. Geiger, F. W.. Urban Runoff Pollution Derived from Long-Time
Simulation. Paper Presented at the National Symposium on Urban
Hydrology and Sediment Control, Lexington, Kentucky, July 28-31, 1975.
9. Lager, J. A., T. Didriksson and G. B. Otte. Development and
Application of a Simplified Stormwater Management Model. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Report EPA - 600/2-76-218, August 1976.
10. Roesner, L. A. et al.. Agricultural Watershed Runoff Model for the
Iowa-Cedar River Basins. Report for U.S. Environmental Protection,
Agency, Systems Development Branch. November 1975.
11. Terstriep, M. L. and J. B. Stall. The Illinois Urban Drainage Area
Simulator, ILLUDAS. Illinois State Water Survey Bulletin 58, 1974.
-------
12. Texas Water Development Board. DOSAG-I, Simulation of Water Quality in
Streams and Canals: Program Documentation and User's Manual. NTIS,
Springfield, Virginia (PB 202 974), September 1970.
13. Systems Control, Inc., and Snohomish County Planning Department. Water
Quality Management Plan for the Snohomish River Basin and the
Stillaguamish River Basin, Volume IV - Computer Program Documentation,
Part A: Steady-state Stream Model (SNOSCI), and Part B: Dynamic
Estuary Model (SRMSCI). Snohomish County Planning Dept., Everett,
Washington, 1974.
14. Roesner, L. A., J. R. Monser and D. E. Evenson. Computer Program
Documentation for the Stream Water Quality Model, QUAL-II. Water
Resources Engineers, Inc., Walnut Creek, California, May 1973.
15. Texas Water Development Board. QUAL-I, Simulation of Water Quality in
Streams and Canals: Program Documentation and User's Manual. Texas
Water Development Board, Austin, Texas, September 1970.
16. Raytheon Co.. Documentation Report - New England River Basins Modeling
Project, Volume I. Report for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Systems Development Branch, December 1974.
17. Johnson, A. E. and J. H. Duke, Jr.. Computer and Water Quality Model
WRECEV. Report for U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Planning
Asssistance Branch, March 1976.
18. Hydrocomp International, Inc.. Hydrocomp Simulation Programming -
Mathematical Modeling of Water Quality Indices in Rivers and
Impoundments. Palo Alto, California, 1972.
19. Chen, C. W. and G. T. Orlob. Ecologic Simulation for Aquatic
Environments. Water Resources Engineers. Report for Office of Water
Resources Research, December 1972.
-------
20. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Water Quality Management
Planning for Urban Runoff. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report
EPA-440/9-75-004, December 1974.
21. Donigian, A.S., Jr., and N. H. Crawford. Modeling Pesticides and
Nutrients on Agricultural Lands. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Report EPA-600/2-76-043, February 1976.
A-69
-------
APPENDIX C
LAND USE DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
C.I Introduction
As mentioned in Chapter 2 of this Areawide Assessment Procedures Manual, land
use considerations are extremely important in the development of areawide
water quality management programs. Land use projections relate directly to
the projection of future waste loads generated by both point and nonpoint
sources. In this regard, the physical characteristics of the land surface,
e.g., soils, slope, vegetative cover, etc., are reflected in the waste loads
that may be anticipated to originate from different land use categories such
as cropland, forests, etc. Similarly, activities associated with the land
surface also are directly related to the potential waste loads generated.
Thus a heavily industralized parcel will likely be associated with a dif-
ferent set of water quality problems than a residential area or an area
under intensive cultivation.
Although the state-of-the-art in precisely identifying the relationship be-
tween land use and water quality is not highly developed, this Appendix is
designed to provide a description of a range of land use and demographic
data collection, management, and analysis techniques. It is hoped that the
"menu" of alternatives summarized herein will be of practical use to 208
planners confronting land use/water quality-related issues in the formulation
and evaluation of alternative water quality management plans.
C.I.I Objectives and Scope
The overall objective of Appendix C is to describe a range of specific
techniques and qualitative considerations for land use data collection,
management, and analysis in areawide water quality management planning.
More specifically, this Appendix is designed to provide 208 planners with a
C-l
-------
description of:
1. The range of potential land use data needs for 208 planning
2. The available sources of potentially useful land use data
(Federal, state, and local)
3. The potentially applicable techniques for land use data
collection
4. The alternative approaches to land use data management
5. The potentially applicable techniques for demographic and
land use data analysis and projection.
In the discussion of each of the above topics, the objective is to provide
the planner with a descriptive survey of alternative approaches to the land
use element of the 208 planning process, from relatively simple techniques
to complex ones. It should be emphasized that this Appendix is not meant to
be prescriptive, but rather an inventory of alternative approaches that
will assist the practitioner in selecting appropriate methods to meet his
or her specific needs and objectives relative to the land use element of 208.
It should be noted that this Appendix does not address the issue of po-
tentially applicable land use controls that might be considered in the 208
program. Instead, it focuses on the definition of water quality problems
relative to land use, and how alternative projected land use configurations
and waste loads might be evaluated. In this respect, the land use material
discussed here must be utilized in conjunction with the other 208-related
areawide assessment procedures outlined in other sections of this Manual,
particularly the approaches to regional water quality assessment.
C.I.2 Relationship of Appendix C to Other Portions of
the Areawide Assessment Procedures Manual
As the title of Appendix C suggests, it is designed to provide the 208
planner with information concerning alternative approaches to completing
the land use element of the 208 program. In order to be effective, however,
the land use element must be prepared in a manner that facilitates its use
for point and nonpoint source evaluation and control in both urban and non-
urban settings. Thus, the material on land use data collection and analysis
C-2
-------
contained in Appendix C is a key input to several other portions of the 208
planning process. More specifically, the land use element is related to the
following important aspects of areawide water quality management planning:
1. Identification of existing point and nonpoint source
loads (including those associated with agriculture,
silviculture, construction and mining activities, etc.)
2. Projection and quantification of future pollutant loadings
from both point and nonpoint sources.
Thus the land use data collected are an important input to the water quality
analysis portion of the 208 planning process, which commonly includes a
modeling effort. The alternative land use data collection and analysis
techniques outlined in this Appendix must be adapted to the specific pro-
cedures chosen for the assessment of pollutant sources and loadings for both
urban and non-urban areas. This requires a sensitivity on the part of the
practitioner to the need for consistency between the land use information that
results from the various analytical approaches, and the input data required
to apply to the particular water quality assessment approach chosen. This
Appendix presents various land use evaluation techniques that can provide
different levels of sophistication in terms of analytical input for the
various levels and methods of pollutant loading estimation presented in
Chapters 2 through 4 of this Manual.
C.2 Identification of Land Use Data Needs
This section summarizes the types of land use data that 208 planners need to
consider as they relate land use issues to water quality management. Since
most 208 planning regions have had experience with land use programs of
other sorts, the first subsection outlines some data requirements of more
traditional land use planning efforts. Next the range of land use data needs
for the 208 program is identified. Finally, the more traditional land use
planning program data needs are compared and contrasted with those of the
208 program. This comparison is designed to put into perspective the land
use element of 208 in terms of more traditional land use programs from
which designated 208 agencies will want to extract as much relevant data as
possible. Information on the wide range of potentially relevant Federal
C-3
-------
and EPA programs is found in the information matrices entitled "Selected
Federal Programs Related to Regional Planning", and "EPA Programs Related
to State, Regional, and Local Planning". These matrices are included in
the pocket at the end of this Appendix.
C.2.1 Traditional Land Use Planning Data Needs
Traditional land use planning or comprehensive planning has dealt with a
broad range of development issues at the regional level - all of which relate
to some extent to the scope of the 208 planning program. The scope of
regional comprehensive planning commonly encompasses the following topics:
1. Physical land characteristics, e.g., soils, slope, vegetation,
available minerals, etc.
2. Demographic trends translated into demand for housing, employ-
ment, and various services, e.g., power, water, sewer, police
and fire protection, etc.
3. Future land use configurations in the context of meeting
anticipated demands while avoiding nonconforming uses,
inefficient development patterns in terms of the provision
of needed services, etc.
4. Transportation considerations that influence, and are
influenced by, potential land use development trends
5. Recreation demand, and the provision of sufficient
facilities, and open space to meet anticipated demands.
Each of the above topics involves the collection and analysis of various
types of data in the traditional land use planning program. These data
need categories are summarized as follows:
1. Soils information including soil type, development class
limitations, bearing capacity, etc.
2. Vegetation classes including cropland, forest associations,
barren land, etc.
3. Population growth trends by political subdivisions
4. Baseline data on housing availability by type, employment
categories, etc.
5. Identification of existing land uses by land use category,
C-4
-------
e.g., single family residential, multi-family residential,
industrial (light and heavy), commercial, transportation,
etc.
6. Inventory of existing and projected service areas for
water and sewer services, etc.
7. Inventory of major existing transportation routes, traffic
estimates and bottlenecks, as well as projected transportation
projects in the region.
8. Identification of existing and projected recreation facilities
and open space
9. Inventory of flood prone land in the region
10. Identification of regional zoning maps, and summary of land
use controls employed in the region
11. Location of lands which cannot or should not be developed,
e.g., steep slopes, wetlands, critical fish and/or wildlife
habitat.
It should be noted that the data categories listed above may or may not be
utilized for specific regional land use planning efforts. In addition, the
data may be aggregated and displayed in many different formats. Where such
data are available, they should be reviewed for use in the 208 program. The
land use data needs for areawide water quality management are outlined in
the next subsection.
C.2.2 208 Land Use Data Needs
Despite the fact that some data compiled for traditional comprehensive land
use planning efforts may be directly useful in 208 planning, there are likely
to be certain deficiencies in those data when it comes to applying them in
the specific context of water quality management planning. These deficiencies
are attributable to the lack of emphasis given to water quality concerns in
many traditional comprehensive land use programs. This lack of emphasis will
result in the need to seek out other sources of information to fill data
gaps in a manner that facilitates the development of alternative 208 plans,
and the evaluation of those plans. Subsequent sections of this Appendix
provide suggestions for the collection of such data. This subsection
C-5
-------
identifies a range of land use-related data needs that might be considered
by the 208 planner in data collection efforts.
The range of 208 specific land use data needs is summarized in the following
list:
1. The size and location of each major drainage area in the
planning region in square miles or acres
2. The percentage of various existing land uses in each
drainage area, e.g., forest land, cropland, residential
land (by density), industrial land, etc.
3. The physical land characteristics of each drainage area
including soil types and soil characteristics (drainage,
erodibility, etc.), slope, vegetation, and estimated gross
percentage of impermeable cover (due to roofs, roads,
parking lots, etc.)
4. The geology of the region as it relates to the presence of
confined and unconfined aquifers, aquifer recharge areas,
depth to groundwater, and known areas of groundwater con-
tamination, e.g., salt water intrusion etc.
5. The location of critical regional environments including
key fish and wildlife habitat, wetlands, shorelands, flood
prone areas etc.
6. The delineation for each drainage area of water distribution
and sewerage systems (including the location of water
treatment and wastewater treatment facilities), and the
identification of those areas served by wells and septic
tanks or package treatment plants
7. The projection of trends in regional development as it might
affect changes in land use configuration (and thus runoff
characteristics), the need for additional water and sewer
service, and the physical character of the land surface
8. The identification and location on maps of major point sources
and significant nonpoint sources by drainage area, along with
the location of residual waste disposal sites in the planning
region
C-6
-------
9. Identification of present and projected areas of mining
activity, along with major construction sites, e.g.,
large subdivisions, industrial parks, dam sites etc.
Some of the above data will be extractable from existing local data sources
in one form or another. The format and/or the revel of aggregation of the
data will often require standardization on drainage area maps to optimize
the utility of the information for the 208 planner.
C.2.3 Notable Similarities and Differences Between Data Needs for
Traditional Land Use Planning Efforts and Those of the 208
Program
Data required for traditional land use planning programs commonly will pro-
vide the basic context for the land use element of 208. Portions of the
existing land use data base will be applicable to the data needs of the 208
program, and maximum use should be made of existing data and previous land
use analyses. This subsection is designed to compare and contrast the data
needs of these two kinds of land use planning programs. The intent is to
provide the 208 practitioner with some assistance in identifying potentially
useful data that may be found in local data bases, as well as in pinpointing
where additional data collection efforts may be necessary. The discussion
that follows must necessarily be general in nature, since the available
land use data bases at the regional level may vary considerably from one
designated area to another. Table C-l summarizes the comparative analysis
of land use data needs, and may be consulted to supplement the discussion
that follows.
The similarities between data commonly available from traditional land use
planning efforts, and the needs of the 208 program are significant. For
example, the physical characteristics of the land surface, as outlined
previously, are often detailed in traditional land use programs. This infor-
mation is also commonly displayed on regional maps to facilitate the
effective utilization of the data. These maps and their supporting docu-
mentation, e.g., aerial photography and land use plan narrative, are likely
to be useful inputs to the 208 planning process relative to the identification
C-7
-------
TABLE C-l
COMPARISON OF TRADITIONAL AND 208-SPECIFIC LAND USE DATA NEEDS
Data Type
1. Physiographic data
2. Demographic data
n
i
00
Traditional Land Use Program
208 Land Use Element
Soils, slope, and vegetation data
etc. are commonly used to identify
physical development constraints
and critical regional environments,
e.g., important wildlife habitat.
Soils, slope, vegetation, clima-
tological, and geological data are
used to estimate anticipated surface
runoff characteristics and thus non-
point pollution loads.
Population projections by various
time increments, e.g., by 10-year
intervals, are used to estimate
the future need or demand for
various land uses in the region,
e.g., residential, commercial,
etc. (Commonly done by political
subdivision.)
Population projections in 5-year
increments for 20 years to estimate
the need or demand for various land
uses, as well as the demand for
water and sewer services. (Most
useful by hydrologic unit or water/
sewer service area.)
3. Additional land use data
Using population projections, and
information on land use controls,
e.g., zoning maps, transportation
plans, etc., the future regional
land use configuration is
estimated within physical and
institutional constraints.
(Commonly done by political sub-
division.)
The same information is used to
project one or more future land use
configurations, but the projections
are taken further to estimate changes
in land surface characteristics and
activities that would geographically
affect water quality, and the demand
for water and sewer services.
(Best done by drainage area or
hydrologic unit.)
-------
of key land surface characteristics, such as slope and soil types, necessary
to implement various water quality modeling techniques. Likewise, demo-
graphic projections are important inputs to the traditional land use planning
process. EPA 208 Guidelines require the use of OBERS Series E (Office of
Business and Economic Research Statistics) projections, except where more
reliable demographic information is available from other sources at the state
and/or regional level. In this case, the designated 208 agency should
substantiate the reasoning for their variance before proceeding with the use
of projections other than those of OBERS. In either case, the projections
will likely be aggregated in different geographic units than would be optimal
for the 208 program, e.g., population by traffic zone instead of by drainage
area. This will necessitate the interpolation of the existing projections to
translate the information to the appropriate unit of analysis, in this case
the hydrologic unit.
There are several other similarities in data needs between these two types
of land use programs that the 208 planner should be aware of. Traditional
land use planning efforts usually recognize the importance of the provision
of water and sewer services to regional development, and thus may have the
water and sewer service areas mapped, along with projected extensions of
these service areas. This information is of direct use to the 208 program.
The existing land use maps generated by traditional comprehensive planning
programs, and the projected future land use configuration of the planning
region for some future base year, e.g., 1985 or 2000, also provide important
information to the 208 planner. Here again, the existing and projected land
use data will, in all likelihood, have to be reassembled by drainage area to
be of use in the water quality evaluation/modeling element of 208. In
addition, available land use projections may have to be interpolated to
allow the 208 planner to describe changes by 5-year intervals over a 20-
year planning horizon for the land use/water quality analyses. Existing
zoning maps should be collected and consulted as the above interpolations
are made, since those maps will be significant in shaping the future con-
figuration in the urbanizing areas of the region. Any major transportation
projects that are likely to significantly modify regional drainage patterns
should also be identified from existing comprehensive plans or transportation
C-9
-------
plans. This information will be of importance to the 208 planner from both
a land use and water quality standpoint.
The differences between the data needs of traditional land use planning
programs and the needs of the 208 programs may be attributed primarily to
a difference in program focus. The 208 program concentrates on developing
solutions to water quality problems in a comprehensive fashion dealing with
both point and nonpoint sources, as well as with structural and nonstructural
control techniques. In contrast, traditional comprehensive planning efforts
address water quality considerations in a relatively superficial fashion in
most cases. This explains why the land use element of 208 has some data
needs that are not likely to be met from data collected in traditional land
use planning programs. This also helps explain why the data needs of 208
may require a reaggregation or manipulation of the data available from
traditional land use planning programs.
C.3 Identification of Existing Data Sources and Characteristics
Due to the significant constraints of time and budget, 208 planning agencies
should utilize existing land use data sources within the 208 region in order
to avoid the unnecessary expenditure of resources in land use collection
efforts which duplicate already existing data. Identifying, locating, and
obtaining existing land use data from primary and secondary sources is the
initial basic step in a land use planning effort.
A significant amount of land use information is often required in order to
understand and document past development trends, current status, and possible
future directions of land use patterns within the 208 region, especially as
all this relates to water quality. Although numerous land use data sources
normally exist for any region, the information is often scattered through-
out the files, libraries, and information systems of many Federal, state,
and local public agencies, and even some private sources. Often the land
use information from such sources is in a format which is not directly
useable by 208 agencies. The 208 program like other emergent Federal
and state programs (see below) related to land use, has created demands for
C-10
-------
specific types of land use information related to air and water quality, and
environmental protection not previously collected or routinely available to
public agencies.
This section of Appendix C provides a general listing of the types of land
use data applicable to 208 planning that are normally available from various
Federal, state, regional, and local sources. The objective is to provide
the 208 planner with some assistance in locating appropriate land use data
sources.
C.3.1 Federal Data Sources
Although many Federal programs (such as those under the Coastal Zone
Management Act, the Clean Air Act, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
and the Flood Insurance Act) have substantial primary and/or secondary
impacts on the use of public and private land, no comprehensive catalog or
directory of Federal land use data sources exists. While such a compilation
has been proposed, efforts to date have stopped short of listing data series
items in a "shopping list" format preferred by planners. However, several
Federal departments have compiled directories of data and information systems
within their agencies. Unfortunately, knowledge of how land is currently
being used across the United States is incomplete for major portions of the
country. Nonetheless, the paragraphs that follow outline the principal
Federal agency repositories of land use data of potential value to the 208
planner and a foldout matrix of Selected Federal Programs Related to Regional
Planning is attached at the end of this Appendix.
Six Federal agencies are likely sources of relative land use materials
relevant to 208 land use planning. These agencies are as follows:
1. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
2. U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC)
3. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
4. U.S. Department of Interior (DOI)
5. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (CoE)
6. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
C-ll
-------
Land use information from these agencies commonly exists in descriptive,
inventory, statistical, and/or map formats, and is often available or
obtainable through local or regional offices of these agencies. Agency
headquarters addresses and telephone numbers are provided in Table C-2 for
each of these agencies. Reference to local offices may be subsequently
obtained from the respective headquarters operations.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture sponsors several continuing programs
which provide data on the acreage and condition of the nation's total
2
natural resources base. The National Cooperative Soil Survey program of
the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) has completed detailed maps of soil
classifications and interpretations at scales of 1:15,840 to 1:24,000 for
about 55 percent of the total U.S. land area. Reconnaissance soil maps at
1:250,000 and smaller scales are available for most parts of the country.
Information contained in the detailed county soil survey reports can be used
to appraise the effects of alternative land uses on the environment, and on
the net productivity of the land resource; and to evaluate soil hazards and
suitability for:
1. Farm and rural uses such as selection of kinds and varieties
of crops, management practices, and yield predictions
2. Non-farm uses including location, design, and expected
performance of local roads, streets, low buildings,
septic tanks, sanitary landfills, and reservoirs
3. Forestry, recreation, and wildlife uses
4. Location of mineral deposits etc., e.g., gravel, sand,
topsoil, and roadfill, and
5. Miscellaneous uses such as shopping centers, housing
subdivisions, and industrial parks.
Watershed surveys, e.g., the P.L. 566 Small Watershed Program of the SCS,
and cooperative river basin studies, commonly include map and tabular data
of current and projected land uses (up to 50 years in the future) for such
2
land use categories as cropland, pasture, forest, urban, and others.
Specialized areas such as flood plains and wetlands are also usually ident-
ified in such studies. This type of information can provide important input
to the evaluation of alternative land use configurations for meeting present
C-12
-------
TABLE C-2
ADDRESSES AND Tni.F.PIIONH NUMBERS OF KEY FEDERAL
AGENCIES POSSESSING LAND USE INFORMATION
n
I
Federal Agency
Headquarters Address
Telephone
Number
Land Use
Information
Available
U.S. Department of Agriculture
14th St. and Independence Ave., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20250
Office of Communication
Rural Development Service
Agricultural Stabilization and
Conservation Service (ASCS)
Extension Service
Forest Service
Soil Conservation Service
Economic Research Service
(same)
(same)
(same)
(same)
(same)
(same)
(same)
(202) 447-2791
447-7595
447-5237
447-6283
447-3760
447-4543
447-3050
Information Sources
Rural Data
Conservation Programs
Extension Programs
Forestry Programs
Soils Data and Maps
Agricultural Production
U.S. Department of Commerce
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration Office of Coastal
Zone Management
Social and Economic Statistics
Administration
6010 Executive Boulevard
Rockville, Maryland 20852
Bureau of the Census
Washington, D.C. 20230
(301) 656-4060
(301) 763-5557
Coastal Zone Management
Programs
Population/Economic Data
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development
451 Seventh Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20410
(202) 655-4000
701 and Block Grant Programs
6 Flood Plain Programs
U.S. Department of the Interior
National Park Service
Bureau of Land Management
Bureau of Outdoor Recreation
Bureau of Reclamation
Bureau of Mines
Geological Survey
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Washington, D.C. 20240
(same)
(same)
(same)
2401 E Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20241
12201 Sunrise Valley Drive
Reston, Virginia 22092
1951 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20245
(202) 634-1001 Parks and Recreation
343-5717 Public Land Management
343-4805 Recreation
343-4662 Western Water Resource
Development
(202) 634-1001 Resource Inventories
Land Use 5 Resource Maps 5
(301) S60-7000 statistics, Aerial Photography
(202) 343-7435 Indian Reservation Information
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Office
Chief of Engineers
Department of the Army
Washington, D.C. 20314
(202) 693-6456
Public Works, Dredginj & Flood
Plain Management Information
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Land Use Coordination
Water Planning Division
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
(same)
(202) 755-2933 EPA Land Use Policy
(202) 755-2217 EPA 208 Program Activities
-------
and projected land use needs in the 208 program.
The Census of Agriculture and Forest Service Statistical Reporting Service
programs provide annual statistical tabulations of land areas in crops,
2
forest, and other agricultural uses on a county basis for most of the U.S.
The USDA Soil and Water Conservation Needs Inventory provides a land use
inventory of over 19,000 watersheds and indicates those watersheds that are
potentially feasible for development under the Watershed Protection and
Flood Prevention Act (P.L. 566). County totals of data collected during
this inventory are published for each state in tabular format according to
a seven-category land capability classification scheme which relates to the
capability or suitability of the landscape for agricultural purposes. This
information is commonly available at state SCS offices. Aerial photography
at scales of 1:24,000 and smaller is used in several USDA agricultural
programs. This photography is available for nearly every county in the
United States and may include several years of photography that documents
historical land use change in the region. Information about available USDA
photography may be obtained from county SCS and/or ASCS offices. The
photography may be purchased in print and index sheet formats from the USDA
Data Center at the following address:
U.S. Department of Agriculture
2505 Parley's Way
Salt Lake City, Utah 84109
(801) 524-5856.
The U.S. Department of Interior, whose responsibilities include the manage-
ment of over 500 million acres of Federal land, has several programs which
generate land use data. The National Cartographic Information Center (NCIC)
has been established to provide users with one-stop access for acquiring
information about maps, charts, geodetic control, aerial and space imagery,
and related cartographic data generated by Federal and ultimately state,
local, and private sources. The NCIC usually does not hold the data for
which it provides information and access, but it manages a system that
provides a link between the user and the data. The center enables customers
to find out what cartographic information and materials are available, to
C-14
-------
place an order, to pay or submit a purchase order, and to receive copies of
the information or materials in a reasonable time. The NCIC is both an
active information office and the management center of a network of linked
data repositories, including those not administratively part of NCIC. The
address of the National Cartographic Information Center is:
U.S. Geological Survey, Stop #507
National Center
Reston, Virginia 22092.
The Resource and Land Investigations (RALI) program of the Land Information
Analysis Office (LIA) within USGS, and the Divisions of Topography and Geology
provide several maps and related land use data bases applicable to 208 plan-
ning. Through the Land Use Data and Analysis (LUDA) program begun in 1974,
the USGS is undertaking the first comprehensive land use inventory of the
4
United States using the same land use classification system. High altitude
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) photography and other
supplementary data are being analyzed with a sophisticated machine-aided
analysis system to perform this inventory. The land use classification
system is comprised of seven generalized Level I land use categories which
are subsequently broken down into more detailed land use classifications.
The seven Level I categories are:
1. Urban and Built-up Land
2. Agricultural Land
3. Rangeland
4. Forest Land
5. Water
6. Wetland
7. Barren Land.
The LUDA program was expected to provide 1:250,000 land use and land cover
maps for the entire U.S. by 1980. However, this target date may not be
reached because of funding problems. The minimum areal unit to be mapped is
10 acres for urban and built-up uses, water areas, confined feeding opera-
tions, other agricultural land, and strip mines, quarries, and gravel pits.
All other land use/land cover categories, including Federal land holdings,
are being delineated with a mimimum unit of 40 acres. For each land use and
C-15
-------
land cover map being produced, overlays also are being compiled which show
Federal land ownership, hydrologic units, counties, and political subdivisions,
Computerized graphic displays and statistical data on current land use and
land cover will also become available through the program. However, LUDA
land use information and products for specific 208 regions may not be com-
pleted in time to be useful to 208 programs and the level of detail may not
be sufficient to fill specified land use data needs. To determine the status
of the LUDA program for a specific region contact:
Dr. James R. Anderson
Chief Geographer
U.S. Geological Survey
12201 Sunrise Valley Drive
Reston, Virginia 22092
(703) 860-6344.
The National Topographic Map Series of the U.S. is complete only at 1:250,000
but topographic maps are most commonly used by local and regional organiza-
tions at a scale of 1:24,000 and 1:62,500 for mapping of land use, geological
and topographic features, and many other purposes since such maps include
relief (by contour lines), water bodies, vegetation, and cultural features,
Orthophotoquad maps, which are vertical aerial photographs in quadrangle
format and which combine the metric qualities of a line and symbol map with
the visual qualities of a photograph, and other planimetric base maps are
being prepared by USGS in a 3-year program to provide, by 1977, 1:24,000
base maps for all areas not currently covered at that scale. Also, the
National Topographic Map Series is the only nationally available base map
series tied to the geodetic control network, and therefore the only one that
can provide the positional accuracy needed for computer data handling. An
extremely handy reference available from NCIC is a pamphlet entitled, "Types
of Maps Published by Government Agencies". The pamphlet gives a listing of
types of maps, their publishers, and addresses where more information may
be obtained about ordering procedures. Topographic maps are also available
from state Geological Surveys.
Geological and mineral resource maps are generally available at small scale
C-16
-------
(mostly 1:250,000) from the Geological Survey. The Bureau of Mines also
collects, compiles, analyzes, and publishes statistical and economic infor-
mation on all phases of mineral resource development, including the
exploration, extraction, processing, and use of mineral resources, and the
reclamation of lands disturbed by mineral extraction and processing. Other
agencies within the Department of Interior such as the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM), Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, Bureau of Reclamation,
National Park Service, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs may also have
selected land use information on specific areas under their jurisdiction
which may be located within or adjacent to the boundaries of a 208 region.
BLM and EPA have established a cooperative agreement to share data and
planning efforts in regions where BLM administered lands are significantly
involved in the 208 program.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) maintains some
regional land use data, e.g., maps of flood hazard areas. However, the
focus of HUD's land use activities is on providing block grants to assist
state and local governments in dealing with community development planning
efforts. HUD also administers the 701 comprehensive planning program whose
regulations now require that each recipient state formulate a land use
policy by August, 1977. The land use outputs of the 701 program at the
state and regional level will include:
1. Long- and short-term policies, and where appropriate,
administrative procedures and legislative proposals,
with regard to where growth should and should not
take place
2. The type, intensity, and timing of growth
3. Studies, criteria, standards, and implementing procedures
necessary for effectively guiding and controlling major
decisions as to where growth shall and shall not take
place
4. Policies, procedures, and mechanisms necessary for
coordinating local, areawide, and state land use policies
with functional planning systems (e.g., coastal zone
management, air and water quality, transportation, solid
C-17
-------
waste etc.) and with capital investment strategies, when
available, and improvements in governmental structures,
systems and procedures that will facilitate the achieve-
ment of land use objectives
5. Consistent land use and housing policies.
The availability of specific land use information, e.g., from 701 programs,
can be acquired from regional planning agencies (often the 208 agency also),
and from HUD district offices.
An interagency agreement between HUD and EPA has also been established to
insure consistency between the 701 land use element and the land user-related
provisions of the water quality management plan. The agreement also states
that performance criteria will include the land use outputs for both
programs.
Within the Department of Commerce, the Bureau of the Census serves as a
center for collecting, compiling, analyzing, and publishing a broad range
of general purpose statistics dealing with economic, social, and demographic
data which may be indicative of land use characteristics in a 208 area.
However, rather than being based on standard map series or linked to precise
geographically referenced points, the socioeconomic data series is referenced
to street addresses, city blocks, or census tracts, or they are aggregated
to even larger units such as minor level divisions, cities, urbanized areas,
counties, SMSA's, states, or water resource regions. The water resource
regions approximate hydrologic units in that they are defined by_ county
within major river basins. It should be noted that data disaggregation
will likely be necessary since the designated 208 region will seldom coincide
directly with the units used to aggregate land use information for other
purposes. Many of these units are also shifting spatial areas in the sense
that their boundaries are subject to changes over time which may require
interpolation of the data for trend analysis studies. Census data are
generally available in published tabular formats at local public libraries,
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) also located
within the Department of Commerce administers the Coastal Zone Management
Program in which 30 participating states are required to prepare land use
C-18
-------
plans as part of their coastal zone programs. However, NOAA itself is not a
source of land use data. The 208 planner should make full use of any land
use information available from a Coastal Zone Management agency whose program
includes all or part of the 208 study area.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers may have specific map and statistical land
use information available from the river basin inventories and-flood plain
studies they commonly undertake. Urban Study and Environmental Reconnaissance
Inventory Programs that are currently under way at some of the Corps Districts
may generate land use data useful in 208 planning efforts.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maintains a small Office of Land Use
Coordination but does not collect or disseminate land use data. However, EPA
does maintain computer files of air quality (SAROAD) and water quality
(STORET) data which may be of primary value in 208 land use planning
programs. EPA also has a Remote Sensing Laboratory in Las Vegas, Nevada,
and an Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) in Warrenton,
Virginia. In addition, EPA has sponsored considerable land use research
of direct relevance to the 208 program. The reports from some of these
studies are cited in the annotated bibliography section of Appendix G.
C.3.2 State Data Sources
The availability of state land use data varies considerably from state to
state. Few states have undertaken a general indexing of land use data
sources, and only nine states have adopted a major state land use program:
Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Maryland, Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, Vermont,
and Wyoming. Less than half of the 50 states have land use maps covering
the state at any scale, and less than a dozen have detailed information.
The maps that do exist range widely in scale, resolution, classification
categories, sources, age, and purpose. Most state maps are overlays of the
National Topographic Map Service at scales of 1:500,000 or 1:250,000, which
consequently may not provide detailed information required for 208 land use
planning programs. Usually, the most current land use information available
at the state level has been assembled as part of a specific Federal program
C-19
-------
such as the HUD 701 Comprehensive Planning Program or the NOAA Coastal Zone
Management Program. The major type of state agencies from which land use data
can most likely be obtained include the departments/agencies of Agriculture,
Natural Resources, Development, Transportation, Geological Survey, and Aerial
Engineering.
C.3.3 Regional/Local Data Sources
Probably the land use information most relevant (in terms of useful format and
availability) to 208 programs is likely to be available from regional/local
sources. As previously mentioned, certain Federal and state offices located
in the general area are likely to be good sources of state or Federal land use
information for that region. In addition to maintaining local historical
information, public libraries are also repositories for many state and Federal
documents. Libraries may also have copies of general environmental informa-
tion, and environmental impact statements which may contain pertinent land
use information. Land ownership records (if required) are commonly available
at the office of the county recorder. Regional planning agencies (which may
be the designated 208 agency) maintain libraries of published and unpublished
land use data and maps, as well as topographic base maps, that have been com-
piled during HUD 701 or EPA 201 planning programs. These agencies also are
normally responsible for preparing growth projections and maintaining land use
control maps such as zoning maps. County and/or city public service depart-
ments and special district organizations, e.g., sanitary districts or
drainage districts, maintain transportation base maps, water and sewer service
maps, and park and recreation maps. Private utility companies (electricity,
gas, and telephone) also normally maintain utility corridor maps and frequently
conduct land use inventories and prepare land use projections for business
planning purposes. Local Chambers of Commerce may also have relevant land .
use information, and sometimes compile demographic data for the half interval
between national census dates.
C.4 Matching Land Use Data Needs with Available Data Sources
Now that potential land use data needs have been identified and compared
with the data needs of more traditional land use planning programs, and
C-20
-------
the Federal, state, and local data sources have been characterized, this
section will briefly discuss the matching of the perceived data needs with
the available data sources.
Since data availability is likely to be one of the most significant con-
straints in selecting techniques for the land use and the water quality
analyses, it is often best to do a preliminary data collection survey in
order to identify any major data gaps that could preclude the use of certain
techniques. This preliminary survey of data availability from Federal, state,
the local sources should help give the 208 planner a reasonable indication of
the quality of the existing land use data base for the study area. When this
information is compared with the data requirements of the various land use
analysis techniques available for use, deficiencies in the data base will
emerge as well as the presence of extraneous data that are not necessary to
accomplish subsequent land use and water quality analyses. The data gaps
identified will require the development of plans for primary and/or additional
secondary data collection efforts. These plans should include estimates of
the costs anticipated for additional data collection, since the constraints
of budget may necessitate the use of a less sophisticated land use analysis
technique, more fitted to the existing data base, where the costs of
acquiring the data necessary to employ a more sophisticated technique are
prohibitive.
The objectives of the preliminary data survey may be summarized as follows:
1. To assure that the data requirements of the selected land
use and water quality analysis techniques are met by the
existing land use data base, or can be met with additional
secondary, and if necessary, primary data collection efforts,
e.g., new aerial photography, at reasonable cost
2. To eliminate early in the evaluation process those data
that are extraneous to the specific needs of subsequent
analyses.
Meeting the above objectives will help minimize the time and money spent on
C-21
-------
subsequent data collection and analysis.
Thus, the selection of land use data management and analysis techniques con-
sistent with the results of a preliminary survey of data availability is a
very important step in the land use element of the 208 planning process. If
relatively simple, manual land use evaluation techniques will be employed,
the data needs will not be as demanding, and the data sources will likely be
more easily accessible. The more demanding the data requirements of the
selected technique, the more rigorous the search of data sources is likely to
have to be in order to meet those requirements.
With respect to filling identified data gaps a more thorough search of data
from the same kinds of data sources previously identified is a logical first
step. Where additional secondary data cannot be found to fill data gaps,
primary data collection efforts may be required. Such efforts might include
having the planning area flown to acquire current aerial photography supple-
mented by selected field surveys, for example.
Section C.7 discusses the data input requirements and product outputs of a
range of land use and demographic analysis techniques in more detail. This
section should be of some assistance to the 208 planner in matching the data
requirements of desired techniques with the quality of the existing land use
data base as identified in a preliminary survey of data sources.
The next three sections provide more detailed information on the subjects of
land use data collection, data management, and data analysis, respectively.
Each section discusses the range of potentially applicable approaches to each
topic, from simple to complex.
C.5 Land Use Data Collection Techniques
The land use element of the 208 program must initially describe the existing
land uses within the designated study area. The 208 agency can complete
this requirement in two ways:
1. Existing secondary land use data commonly available within
C-22
-------
the 208 agency and from other relevant sources can be
utilized with little to no primary data collection
efforts, or
2. Inventory programs can be established for the collection
of primary land use data.
Factors which should be considered before initiating a land use data survey
include:
1. Costs
2. Availability of trained professional personnel
3. Constraints of the time frame imposed
4. Utility of the data in subsequent analyses
5. Reliability of the data in terms of quality
6. Ease of data base updating
7. Versatility in displaying and extracting information from
the data useful in other agency programs.
ERA 208 Planning .Guidelines state that the process of incorporating land use
considerations into the 208 plan should rely primarily on utilizing existing
land use plans, projections, and controls. However, in some 208 regions,
the necessary land use information available from secondary data sources is
inadequate to support the desired level of analysis. Existing regional land
use statistics and maps available from secondary sources are often prepared
for other purposes. Thus, they may not provide comprehensive coverage of the
designated 208 region. Land use map and statistical information acquired
from various secondary sources generally vary in format. The age and
accuracy of data may also vary.
In general, when any new source and/or method of data acquisition is being
considered, it is necessary to assess whether it is more efficient (cost-
effective in terms of time, money, and manpower) to collect new data directly
or to collect, collate, and possibly reorganize or reformat existing data
bases and fill existing data gaps. Governmental programs and/or funds for
collecting specific land use data required for a 208 plan generally are
limited. Care must be exercised so that the land use data collection
C-23
-------
activities do not become an enormous "sink" for both manpower and funds,
which can easily occur, particularly if the ultimate use of the land use
information is not kept in view at all times.
In the following sections, a range of simple to sophisticated alternative
land use data collection techniques is described to aid the 208 planner in
the collection of new data and in the filling of identified data gaps.
C.5.1 Relatively Simple, Low-Cost Land Use Data Collection Techniques
This subsection will describe some land use data collection techniques that
are relatively elementary in design and that do not require expensive or
sophisticated equipment, extended allotments of time, and significant formal
prior training, but result in reliable land use information for filling
land use data requirements. The four specific techniques presented below
include extraction of land use information from:
1. Census data and Water Resources Council OBERS (Office of
Business and Economic Research Statistics) regional
economic activity projections in the United States
2. Existing land use projections and supporting documents
such as zoning maps and water/sewer service area maps
3. Aerial photography.
More sophisticated and expensive land use information collection techniques
are discussed in subsection C.5.2.
C.5.1.1 Census and OBERS Data
Bureau of the Census data include several series of publications, data files,
and special tabulations. Unpublished nonstatistical materials such as maps
and computer programs can be made available from the Bureau of the Census
(subject to restrictions on disclosure of confidential information), for the
cost of reproducing, transcribing, or tabulating the material. Census data
generally available in local libraries may include the general statistical
compendia and special publications covering the subjects of Agriculture, Con-
struction and Housing, Foreign Trade, Geography, Governments, Manufacturing
C-24
-------
and Mineral Industries, Population, Retail Trade, Wholesale Trade, and
Selected Service Industries, and Transportation. The Census Bureau's County
and City Data Book is also a good summary source of census information by
county. Additional information is available from the Bureau of the Census
(including a description of surveys and computer products), and can be
found in two publications:
1. Bureau of the Census Catalog, and
2. Bureau of the Census Guide to Programs and Publications.
The catalog is issued quarterly, while the guide reviews Bureau of the Census
programs and publications in the 1960's and 1970's. If these two documents
are not already in the library of the designated 208 agency, they are commonly
available at public and university libraries, or they can be ordered from
the U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 20402. The most
important publication from the Bureau of the Census relative to population
projections is entitled Population Estimates and Projections. This series
of documents is published annually, and includes population estimates by
county and by Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA). These popu-
lation estimates are also disaggregated to the township level for the census
year, e.g., 1970, and a more current year, e.g., 1973.
OBERS projections are a planning tool prepared in response to a need for
basic demographic and economic information by public agencies engaged in
comprehensive planning for the use, management, and development of the
nation's water and related resources. Various series of the projections
have been published which correspond to the series of projected United
States population estimates published by the Bureau of Census. OBERS
reports include projections of economic activity for the nation; the 173
functional economic areas delineated by the Bureau of Economic Analysis for
economic analysis; the 20 water resources regions and the 205 subareas,
delineated by the Water Resources Council; the 50 states and the District of
Columbia; 253 Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas fSMSA's); the 173 non-
SMSA portions of economic areas; and, the 204 non-SMSA portions of water
subareas. Included are projections of population, personal income, employ-
ment, and earnings of persons, by industry for various years from 1980 to
2020. Also included are projections of land use by broad categories for the
C-25
-------
same 50-year period but with fewer intervening years covered. However, the
amount of detail included in the OBERS projections varies by type of area,
primarily because of the differences in the availability of historical data.
The latest Series E OBERS Projections, and those which the EPA 208 Guidelines
require for use, are based upon the Series E projected national population
(1972). The data are available in seven volumes outlined as follows:
1. Volume I. Concepts, Methodology, and Summary Data
2. Volume II. BEA Economic Areas
3. Volume III. Water Resources Regions and Subareas
4. Volume IV. States
5. Volume V. Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas
6. Volume VI. Non-SMSA Portions of BEA Economic Areas, and
7. Volume VII. Non-SMSA Portions of Water Resources Subareas.
Census and OBERS data must first be aggregated as accurately as possible for
the designated boundaries of the 208 region. If appropriate, the OBERS data
can be utilized for baseline and future population projections within the 208
study area. However, care must be exercised in using the OBERS projections,
or any projections, in that the assumptions postulated and methods used to
derive the projections must be consistent with the anticipated use of the
data. Nevertheless, such projections provide an approximate indication of
future conditions and may be further used as a benchmark framework for eval-
uation purposes.
If the existing land use and demographic baseline data and/or projections
cannot be utilized or are not available, then available historical data may
be used to provide a reasonably accurate indication of future population
growth. Several approaches may be employed to produce such projections.
However, there is np_ method which will yield results with 100 percent
accuracy. Simple mathematical extrapolations of historical data based on
some linear or curvilinear function are the easiest methods to apply. More
complex methods include separate analysis of the individual socio-economic
components (such as economic base activity) that impact population change,
under various assumptions.
C-26
-------
In general, population projections are based on techniques which analyze
changes in birth, death, and migration components of population change. The
three demographic methodologies most frequently used are the component, cohort-
survival, and ratio methods. Each of the three methods commonly utilize
census data. The component method uses total population data to derive
separate projections for births, deaths, and net migration. Those projected
components can then be summed algebraically and added to the existing base
population to derive the projected population at a future date. The cohort-
survival method is the same as the component method except age-specific
detail is used to derive all of the component projections. The ratio method
is a projection of local area population based on the ratio of the local area
population to the population of some larger area for which accepted projections
are available.
C.5.1.2 Existing Land Use Data
As discussed in Section C.3., the most comprehensive sources of relevant land
use information available to the 208 agency will probably be city/county and
regional planning agencies located within the designated 208 region. Addi-
tionally, state and Federal offices located within the region may be sources
of relevant information. All of the data available at these agencies may
not be published, and original data from surveys may exist. Where this is
the case, the data might be loaned to the 208 agency for analysis.
Planning documents and maps generally depict existing land use conditions and
project future land use based on a set of development assumptions. A com-
munity planning document generally contains the following five elements:
1. A historical perspective of regional development
2. Inventories of existing environmental, population, land use,
housing and transportation, and social conditions in the
community
3. A discussion of the major development issues and community
development goals
4. A projection of future conditions within the community and
region, and
C-27
-------
5. Recommended implementation policies, standards, and controls.
Such documents should be carefully reviewed to extract relevant water
quality/land use information.
Cursory examination of other various secondary data sources may identify
interrelationships among the factors that affect land use within the region.
For example, it may be determined from census data that the population of a
city has increased by an average of 150,000 residents per decade since 1940.
From tax assessment records it might be established that acres of residential
land use have increased an average of 50,000 acres per decade over the same
time period. Therefore, if a relatively stable relationship between popula-
tion growth and residential land use expansion exists, the future increase in
residential acreage may be estimated. This, of course, assumes that the
historical trend will continue into the future.
Various large scale map and supporting statistical data available from
sources within the 208 region generally will contain information useful for
updating existing land use information and for estimating future land use
patterns. Generalized slope maps can be derived from existing topographic
maps by measuring the linear distance between contour intervals and deter-
mining the ratio of the linear distance to the distance between contour
intervals. Street maps, subdivision plat maps, and records of building
permits are frequently used to update existing land use map and statistical
information. Zoning maps and other land use control documents, and existing
and proposed public water and sewer lines can serve as guides in projecting
the location of future growth. Sanborn maps, which are prepared by fire
insurance underwriters, also provide very detailed land use information for
updating maps. Features included on these maps include streets, railroad
tracks, building dimensions, and uses of buildings in commercial areas of
cities. If available for a given region, these Sanborn maps can be obtained
from major insurance companies operating in the study area.
The above land use data collection techniques utilizing existing land use
materials are best suited for urbanized areas of the region. Land use infor-
mation for nonurbanized areas is generally not as abundant. This information
C-28
-------
generally relates to resource utilization and production rather than to land
development. Probably the best sources of land use information for rural
areas are compilations of township tax maps and data. Depending upon the
jurisdiction, breakdowns of agriculture land use acreages may be provided for
various tax rates by lands in cultivation, pasture, forest, built-up areas,
and water bodies. Tax records also commonly indicate acreages of commercial,
residential, and industrial land on a parcel-by-parcel basis. Location and
production volumes of extractive industries are potentially available from
state or county offices which issue permits for resource extraction. Agri-
cultural production statistics and soil maps of the area are usually obtain-
able from the local county office of the Soil Conservation Service (SCS), the
local cooperative extension service agent, and other agricultural organiza-
tions. Rural zoning legislation (if existing) may also provide an indication
of future land use and water quality conditions within the rural area.
Regional offices of the U.S. Forest Service may also have useful data on the
renewable resources and land use patterns of a given region.
C.5.1.3 Aerial Photographic Data
Conventional aerial photography (panchromatic, color, and color infrared
imagery) from low to medium altitudes (5,000 to 30,000 feet) is generally
available or readily obtainable at relatively large scales in print or trans-
parency format from local aerial survey companies. Aerial photographs
acquired at these altitudes possess sufficient resolution from which a
considerable amount of data on existing land use and natural resources can
be extracted. The expense of acquiring new aerial photography may not be
economically justifiable if the intended use of the data is for supplemental
208 land use information, unless the photography can be acquired as part of
another governmental program and/or can be flown by a governmental agency.
A photographic scale of 1:24,000 (1" = 2,000 ft.) is very appropriate for
208 planning purposes since USGS topographic maps and other reference data
are often mapped at that scale or multiples thereof (1:12,000 or 1:48,000).
Another optimum scale is 1:63,360 (1" = 1 mile). The 9" x 9" black-and-
o
white prints can be duplicated for approximately $2 each. Index sheets
C-29
-------
and a controlled mosaic of aerial photography in print format at 1:24,000
can be readily used for data analysis purposes and as a communication medium
for public participation purposes. These aerial photographic products should
be prepared by professionals. Enlargements of high altitude National Aero-
nautics and Space Administration (NASA) or Department of Interior color or
color infrared photography can be similarly used.
A 208 agency staff member with photo-interpretation experience, or an aerial
survey company familiar with the landmarks and characteristics of the 208
region, can use a mosaic of aerial photographs, transparent overlay material,
and perhaps a stereoscope or a small magnifying glass to identify, delineate,
and construct map overlays of the major land use features (such as industrial
complexes, water bodies, parking lots, large feed lots, and other features)
of direct concern in 208 planning. Different levels of accuracy and resolu-
tion may be required for varying levels of pollutant load analysis, depend-
ing upon the criticality of a particular area. For example, it may be much
more important to highlight cattle feedlots than wheat fields on maps of rural
portions of the study area. If multidate photography flown a decade or
earlier is available, urban/rural interfaces can be delineated; and, with a
hand planimeter the urban areas measured to determine the extent, direction,
9
and rate of urbanization. The costs of obtaining a general land use classi-
fication map by purchasing and analyzing recent black and white aerial photo-
Q
graphy range from $4 to $15 per square mile. While the accuracy of product
will depend to a large extent upon the accuracy of the mosaic, the interpre-
tation skills of the photo-interpreter, and the mapping techniques employed,
the procedure can inexpensively satisfy certain 208 land use data require-
ments. However, depending on the detail of the land information required
and the size of the 208 designated area, manual interpretation of aerial
photographs may be impractical in terms of cost and time. Time constraints
are significant because the 208 program is only a two year effort, and the
land use inventory is an input required very early in the program. If time
is judged to be a critical factor and the 208 agency wishes to maintain the
same detail of data analysis, consultant firms possessing more sophisticated
data analysis facilities may be used to provide the required analysis on a
more timely basis (See Section C.5.2.).
C-30
-------
C.5.2 Relatively Sophisticated and Expensive Techniques
This subsection will describe field survey and remote sensing techniques for
collecting land use data applicable to 208 planning. These techniques gene-
rally are more expensive and often require sophisticated equipment and
specially trained personnel to provide reliable land use data compared to
those techniques discussed previously in subsection C.5.1.
C.5.2.1 Field Survey Techniques
Field surveys can be made to collect land use data for a variety of reasons
including to:
1. Determine the accuracy of existing land use information
2. Fill identified data gaps
3. Update and supplement existing land use data, and
4. Provide land use data for statistical field plots for
extrapolation to other areas in the region via remote
sensing analysis techniques.
In preparing for a field survey, existing data sources should be reviewed
prior to the survey. Routes should be selected which include all areas
to be visited as appropriate. Field surveys are usually accom-
plished by a pair of staff members traveling by auto along existing roads
in the region. Two people are required as one serves as navigator and data
collector while the other drives the vehicle. Visual inspection of the area
can similarly be conducted by aerial reconnaissance flights flown at low
altitude over the region. Such flights may provide members of the planning
staff with a quick and synoptic overview of existing land use patterns of
the region and is a simple way to survey remote areas that are difficult to
access by other modes. Clipboards, notebooks, and existing aerial photo-
graphs and maps of the area, folded or cut to the appropriate size, on which
data voids have been delineated, are required for a field survey. During the
survey it may be necessary to question local residents about land uses of
hard-to-access areas. Photographs of representative land uses can be taken
during the field survey for subsequent inclusion in reports or for slides
C-31
-------
for use in public presentations. Upon completion of the survey, the data
should be transferred from working maps and notes into a more refined format.
The costs of obtaining general land use information via windshield survey
analysis are approximately $5.00/square mile.
More elaborate and costly field survey methods may be required to obtain land
use data on a parcel-by-parcel basis if no other sources of land use informa-
tion exist. Detailed planning prior to field work is required and training
sessions for participating staff are necessary to insure uniformity and to
eliminate ambiguity in data classification and data collection tech-
niques. Coding sheets with specific formats and instructions are required
as well as large-scale base maps for land use data mapping purposes. How-
ever, such detailed surveys will probably not be required to obtain land use
data for most 208 land use planning programs. Other data collection tech-
niques, such as interpretation of aerial photography, generally provide
comparable levels of land use information quicker and less expensively.
C.5.2.2 Remote Sensing Techniques
Remote sensing (which includes satellite imagery and aerial photography) is
an outgrowth of aerial photographic interpretation and involves the collection
of data by systems which are not in direct contact with the objects or phen-
omena under investigation. The technological development of remote sensing
systems (sensors and platforms) has generally outstripped corresponding
development of interpretation methodologies and techniques, which are needed
to convert remotely sensed data into usable information. However, interpre-
tative and analytical procedures have been developed and demonstrated which
208 agencies can purchase from private firms to acquire land use information.
The major advantage that sophisticated remote sensing land use data acqui-
sition and machine-aided or computerized analysis techniques provide is a
timely and comprehensive analysis of the entire designated 208 area using
the same data base and data evaluation scheme. Requirements for field
surveys may also be reduced.
C-32
-------
Other advantages of remote sensing techniques include:
1. Land use changes can be monitored and the corresponding
map and statistical information updated
2. Interpretation subjectivity of land use classifications
is minimized once spectral signatures for land use features
have been determined
3. Land use features are displayed during analysis in final
or near final form and require little or no additional
interpretation
4. Land use features can be displayed individually and at a
variety of scales
5. Statistical summary tables of land use features for any
area in the region can be quickly generated.
Three major limitations of the current state-of-the-art land use appli-
cations of remote sensing techniques are:
1. The acquisition and interpretation of the data requires
professional expertise and sophisticated equipment con-
siderably beyond that existing within a typical 208 agency
2. Extensive ground truth measurements and field verification
efforts may be required to assure that accuracies of 90
to 95% are achieved for detailed classifications at large
scales, and
3. The cost of using remote sensing data acquisition and
analysis techniques will generally exceed the cost of
extracting land use data from existing data sources,
unless it is more efficient to use the new data source
than to perform manipulations required to put existing
8
data into useful form.
Table C-3 illustrates the various sources of remote sensing data and general
applications of data obtained from the various platforms. Aircraft photo-
graphy will generally be most appropriate for providing land use data required
for 208 planning purposes. Table C-4 provides an indication of the film
types, season and scale of aerial photography most appropriate for specific
C-33
-------
TABU- C-3
ELEMENTS OF A COORDINATED REMOTE-SENSOR PROGRAM
FOR LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Data Source
Data Output Quality
Applications
LANDSAT Satellite
(unmanned)
Low spatial resolution
Broadband spectral resolution
Small-scale wide-area coverage
Repetitive data base
Synoptic update of temporal dynamic
changes in Skylab derived regional
land use 5 resource baseline
Trend projection
Skylab Satellite
(manned)
Moderate to high spatial resolution
Narrowband spectral resolution
Small-scale wide-area coverage
Static data base
Land use baseline
Regional land resource evaluation data base
Enhance LANDSAT interpretation in defining
high-priority areas
High-Altitude
Aircraft Photography
High spatial resolution
Moderate scale
Specific coverage, as required
Detailed analysis of high-priority areas
Correlative data base for field activities
6 decision-making
Low-Altitude
Aircraft Photography
Very high spatial resolution
Large scale
Specific "pinpoint" area coverage, as required
Specific land use 5 urban area studies
Detailed engineering analyses
Complete remote-sensor data base
Field Investigations
Specific point investigations
Quantitative spectral measurements
Surface or urban sampling
Verification of remote-sensor analyses derived
from satellite 6 aircraft data
Coordinated data base for decision-making
Source: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Skylab Earth Resources Data Catalog, Lyndon B. Johnson
Space Center, Houston, Texas, 1974, page 52.
C-34
-------
TABLE C-4
GUIDELINES FOR AERIAL SURVEYS
Description of Task
Forest mapping; conifers
Forest mapping; mixed stands
Timber volume estimates
Locating property boundaries
Measuring areas
Topographic mapping; highway surveys
Urban planning
Automobile traffic studies
Surveys of wetlands or tidal regions
Archeological explorations
Identifying tree species
Assessing insect damages
Assessing plant diseases
Water resources and pollution
Agricultural soil surveys
Mapping range vegetation
Real estate assessment
Industrial stockpile inventories
Recreational surveys
Film Type
B § W Pan
Color IR
Pan or IR
B § W Pan
B 6 W Pan
B § W Pan
B § W Pan
B 5 W Pan
B f, W IR
B 5 W IR
Color
Color IR
Color IR
Multispectral
Color
Color
Color negative
Color negative
Color negative
Season
Fall, Winter
Late spring, fall
Spring, fall
Late fall, winter
Late fall, winter
Late fall, winter
Late fall, winter
All seasons
All seasons-low tide
Fall, winter
Spring, summer
Spring, summer
Spring, summer
All seasons
Spring or fall, after plowing
Summer
Late fall, winter
All seasons
Late fall, winter
Scale
1:12,000-1:20,000
1:10,000-1:12,000
1:5,000-1:20,000
1:10,000-1:25,000
All scales
1:5,000-1:10,000
1:4,800-1:9,600
1:2,400-1:6,000
1:5,000-1:30,000
1:2,400-1:20,000
1:600-1:4,800
1:600-1:5,000
1:1,200-1:7,200
1:4,800-1:8,000
1:4,800-1:8,000
1:600-1:2,400
1:4,800-1:12,000
1:1,200-1:4,800
1:5,000-1:12,000
n
tn
Source: T. Eugene Every, Photointerprctation for Land Managers, Eastman Kodak Company, Rochester, New York,
1970, page 19.
-------
data analysis tasks. In general, panchromatic black-and-white film with
various filter combinations is likely to provide the most useful and in-
expensive photographic data base for land use analysis. Color infrared
photography is also a very useful data source for determining land use
patterns but costs approximately three to five times more than black-and-
white photography. Other remote sensing media, such as thermal infrared,
radar and laser sensors, will probably not provide land use data that other-
wise cannot be obtained by less expensive remote sensing systems. However,
thermal infrared data may be very important for determining the location of
point sources of thermal pollution. Assistance in the planning of an aerial
survey should be sought from local aerial firms, state agencies or remote
sensing schools at state universities who, from local experience, can aid in
the determination of the optimal photographic film/filter and scale for a
land use inventory of a particular region.
Commercial contractors and Federal and state governmental agencies are the
primary repositories of existing aerial photography and have the required
multispectral camera and scanning systems for acquiring recent remotely
sensed data in both photographic and digital formats. In general, commercial
contractors acquire aerial photography at low and medium altitudes (5,000 to
30,000 feet), and selected governmental agencies acquire and maintain large
volumes of photography taken at medium and high altitudes. Satellite imagery
and photography acquired as part of NASA's LANDSAT (formerly ERTS-Earth
Resources Technology Satellite) space program are also available for purchase
by the general public through the:
U.S. Geological Survey
Earth Resources Observation System
Sioux Falls, South Dakota 57198
(605) 594-6511
Selected aerial survey and mapping firms, specialized architectural and
engineering firms, and some research and development firms have the staff
and maintain the expensive facilities and equipment for machine-aided and
computerized analysis of remotely sensed data. Costs for analyzing remotely
sensed data are dependent mainly upon the size of the area and the number
C-36
-------
of classification parcels per area, and to a lesser degree on the scale of
the product and the difficulty of interpretation. Costs for obtaining and
analyzing satellite photography to provide generalized land use classifica-
tions for a 208 region have ranged from $.50 per square mile for general
classifications to $1.50 per square mile for intensive multi-feature classi-
fications.
General characteristics of remotely sensed data which are used to identify,
map, and inventory natural and cultural land use/land cover features are the
shape, size, tone, location, and texture characteristics of the feature on
the imagery. Each land feature absorbs, reflects and emits light in a
characteristic way and thus can be identified by its "spectral signature".
Various combinations of filters, films and sensors are used to .record the
differences in spectral reflectance. Ground truth data obtained through
field work and low altitude photography of small sample areas are commonly
required as identification keys for identifying specific land use/land cover
features of a larger area.
A variety of land use data products of direct value to 208 planning can be
obtained from remotely sensed data using sophisticated techniques. Color
additive viewers employ density analysis techniques to produce thematic maps
that show, for example, all cement and blacktopped paved areas (impervious
surface), general intensity levels of urbanized development, areas of new
construction, and areas of land under cultivation. Density analysis includes
the separation of photographic images to display discrete levels of reflect-
ivity, and such viewers generally have built in electronic planimeters which
give an instantaneous readout of the land area associated with the specific
land use being displayed. Computers can statistically analyze massive
quantities of digitized spectral data and determine fine variations between
spectral responses which can also be used to identify land use patterns.
Computer classified, color-coded, composite land use maps have been produced
from LANDSAT imagery which show dominant land use features at an approximate
cell or "pixel" size of 1.4 acres. Since LANDSAT data is in digital format,
data can be summarized by county, drainage basin or other statistical unit.
C-37
-------
Major limitations of land use information obtained by the above sophisticated
remote sensing data collection and data analysis techniques are that the
weather must be virtually cloud free, and that unrelated land uses may have
the same spectral characteristics and thus be incorrectly identified. For
example, a plowed field and a construction site may be placed in the same
classification, or conversely, an agricultural field crop such as wheat may
be misclassified as grassland. Also, not all desired land use classifications
e.g. small feedlots may be discernible at reasonable expense, and thus manual
photo-interpretation or field surveys may be required to obtain certain land
use classifications. In general, the more sophisticated remote sensing tech-
niques are more applicable for obtaining land use information of large rural
areas than urban areas. Land use information obtained through remote sensing
programs requires field verification to determine levels of accuracy. Never-
theless, remote sensing techniques can be successfully employed to map and
inventory large areas at relatively large scales on a timely basis, and
produce specific land use data related to water quality programs that may
not be otherwise obtainable.
C.6 Identification of Land Use and Demographic Data Management Techniques
Once land use and demographic data have been acquired from secondary sources
or produced by the 208 agency, the agency must determine the procedures to
be employed for managing the data. This data management function often
includes data transfer, data storage, and data manipulation and extraction
activities. The two basic data handling options are manual, and computer-
aided techniques. Each technique is briefly described in the subsections
that follow.
C.6.1 Manual Data Management Techniques
Manual data management techniques are those techniques which are accomplished
by human skill, often aided by drafting, photographic, and photogrammetric
equipment, but not by a computer. In general, these techniques are still
used to carry out most tasks of spatial data handling.
C-38
-------
Discussed below are selected manual land use and demographic data management
approaches that might be employed by 208 agencies. Included are discussions
related to the transfer and storage of data, as well as data manipulation
and extraction.
Data transfer is defined as the way in which data in map, graphic, tabular,
or report format from a variety of sources are grouped into one comprehensive
data base. This process of moving data from various documents to form
another data base can be done before the data are stored or at any time there-
after.
The transfer of descriptive data is generally a straightforward task of
copying alphanumeric information by various methods such as photocopying, or
hand-copying, and the summation of data into graphic or tabular formats.
Reproduction facilities should be located in the immediate vicinity of the
data center. A copier is a valuable asset for furnishing quick copies to
users and can be leased for about $3,000 to $6,000 per year. Since the cost
of constructing, equipping, and maintaining a photographic laboratory is
generally prohibitive for a 208 agency in terms of anticipated benefits,
arrangements should be made with another governmental agency or a commercial
firm to provide any photographic services that may be required. The manual
transfer of image data (photographs and maps), on the other hand, is a
complex operation, particularly when the accuracy and the relationships
between the elements must be retained. The transfer of image data may
involve two types of data: planimetric or non-planimetric. Planimetric
image data are positionally accurate and have a uniform linear scale. Topo-
graphic maps and orthophotographs are examples of planimetric image data.
Conversely, non-planimetric data, such as aerial photographs, have inherent
distortions that affect accuracies of measurement.
For almost all 208 land use planning efforts, it will be sufficient and cost
effective for 208 agencies to work with documents in the non-planimetric form
rather than incur the expense of producing a planimetric map or photograph.
The transfer of non-planimetric data can simply be completed by using visual
C-39
-------
guidance aids (such as overlay grids at varying scales) or calculated refer-
ence points to transfer the necessary information to a new record base. If
great care is exercised, a high degree of accuracy can be achieved. Light
tables are useful for transferring transparent or translucent images. A
simple and inexpensive light table can be constructed by placing a light bulb
in a metal desk drawer and using a heavy frosted plate-glass or opalescent
glass as the table surface. Reflecting projectors (overhead projector) are
also useful for projecting the image of an illuminated photograph or other
source material through a lens and one or more mirrors onto a map overlay or
other manuscript. More expensive and accurate photogrammetric instruments
that are not frequently found within a planning agency, but are often used
by engineering and mapping agencies to transfer planimetric image data,
include copy cameras, rectifiers, stereoscopes, and stereoscopic plotters
o
and orthophotoscopes.
The selection and arrangement of facilities for storage of maps, aerial
photographs, reports and other land use and demographic planning data are
important to assure ease of access and to provide adequate protection from
dust, sunlight, dampness and careless handling. Maps are conveniently stored
in map files. A typical steel map file case consisting of two five-drawer
units with inside drawer dimensions of 50 x 38 x 2 inches costs approximately
$650. Aerial photographs are commonly stored in vertical file cabinets but
stiff cardboard dividers should be placed between flight lines for each of
access and to prevent the photographs from curling. If cut from rolls,
aerial photographic transparencies should be placed in plastic protectors
o
to prevent damage from scratching and fingerprints.
Data should be indexed using appropriate library card catalog procedures.
Almost all standard map series such as USGS 1:24,000 (7 1/2 minute) maps,
and county highway maps have graphic indexes available for map indexing
purposes. Also, photo indexes of aerial photographs, which are made by
creating a mosaic from exposures of specified areas and adding flight data,
geographical references and other information, are very useful for locating
specific aerial photographs.
C-40
-------
No data base is very useful unless pertinent information can be extracted,
manipulated, and used efficiently. Manual data manipulation operations are
performed on data to make them more suitable for further processing, e.g.
to improve their comparability, or to facilitate their retrievability. Data
extraction involves the process of selecting and retrieving data from storage
for subsequent analysis.
Manual data manipulation is often required to correct inaccuracies in the
data and to overcome compatability constraints arising from the use of the
data for analysis. Generally, some summarizing or generalization of the data
does not substantially lessen the amount and value of the data, but care must
be exercised to avoid the loss of any information. Depending on the type of
data manipulation, time required for manipulation, volume of data, and possible
use of the data, this operation can take place either when the data are
prepared for storage or when they are retrieved from storage for use.
Specific manual data manipulations that may be required include:
1. Synthesis of data from various data sources into graphic
or tabular formats
2. Map or photo scale changes and/or adjustments
3. Reclassification of descriptive data, e.g., changing feet
to meters
4. Aggregation of data onto another aerial base, e.g., census
tracts or transportation corridors to drainage basins
5. Generalization of data records based on similar descriptor
codes to the same descriptor coding scheme (for example,
deciduous forest and conifer forests into forest land) and
6. Coding of image data by using various grid patterns
Such data manipulations normally are labor-intensive, but labor requirements
can be reduced by the use of calculators, grid overlays, and drafting equip-
ment. A pantograph, which is a simple drafting device that mechanically
links a drawing device to a cursor with which the original image is traced,
is commonly used to copy and change map scales. More expensive optical
transfer equipment not normally found in planning agencies, such as zoom
transfer scopes, also can be used to superimpose photographs onto maps or
C-41
-------
transfer map data onto another map.
In data extraction processes, the selection of specific data inputs is based
on the requirements of the particular analysis to be made and on the knowledge
of the contents of the data center from previous experience or data files.
The time, effort, and costs involved in all types of search and identification
operations are substantially influenced by how the data elements are organized
and indexed. This is why the development of a well-organized data management
system is so important in 208 planning efforts, whether that system be
manually operated or computer-aided as discussed in the next subsection.
C.6.2 Computer-Assisted Data Management Techniques
More sophisticated than the manual data management techniques just discussed,
computer-assisted techniques also may be utilized for land use data transfer,
storage, and manipulation by 208 agencies. If the data base to be utilized
is very large and/or very complex, or if computer models are to be used for
subsequent analyses, the 208 staff should consider the use or computer-
assisted data management.
Clearly, access to computer facilities is a prerequisite for the use of such
techniques. Since many designated 208 agencies do not have an in-house
computer capability, it may be necessary to arrange for computer access from
other public agencies or from private consulting firms if computer-assisted
data management techniques are selected. Rental fees and use rate expenses
(excluding staff charges) for computer services for a 208 agency would likely
range from $5,000 to $7,500 per year. It should be noted that an agency-wide
data base that includes data relevant to other planning programs, e.g.
transportation planning, may be the best approach if an investment is to be
made in a computer-assisted data management system. This would also facil-
itate accounting for these other kinds of planning programs in the 208
planning process. It would also provide a solid data base that could be
easily updated and quickly accessed as the agency moves into the continuing
planning process after the initial 2 year 208 planning effort.
C-42
-------
It is important to recognize that, as with manual data management, special
care must be taken to avoid errors in the data placed into the computer-
assisted data management system. Any attempt to use other than error-free
data files can have disastrous effects on subsequent analyses, since the
computer can only deal with conditions that have been explicitly defined,
whether correctly or incorrectly.
It is also important for the 208 practitioner to recognize that a total data
management system can be conceived of as a logical set of techniques, some
performed manually and others with the use of the computer, with the objective
being to optimize the performance of the total system. Thus a combination of
manual and computer-assisted techniques may provide the designated 208 agency
with the optimal approach to data management.
C.6.3 Selecting a Data Management Approach
While it is not possible to deal with the variety of agency-specific data
management needs in a manual of this type, this subsection provides some
general guidance on selecting an approach to data management, whether that
approach uses manual, computer-assisted, or some combination of the two types
of techniques.
The assessment of the differences between manual and computer-assisted
approaches to data management involves the following considerations:
1. Data complexity
2. Operational flexibility
3. Costs
4. Time requirements
5. Personnel requirements.
The paragraphs that follow briefly discuss each of these considerations.
The complexity of the data base is important to evaluate before the selection
of a data management approach is made. If the data base is not very complex,
and if the data are already or can be aggregated easily by hand, then manual
C-43
-------
data management techniques are most appropriate. However, as the complexity
of the data base and the volume of the data at hand increase, computer aided
techniques generally are more desirable than manual techniques.
With respect to operational flexibility, there are advantages and dis-
advantages to both manual and computer-assisted techniques. Manual approaches
are very flexible as long as there is enough time available to do the data
manipulation. On the other hand, computer-assisted approaches generally are
more rigidly structured, but in general can be programmed to provide data
management flexibility much quicker than manual techniques.
Clearly, cost considerations are extremely important in the selection of an
appropriate data management system. It is impossible to provide a meaningful
range of costs for manual data management systems here because of the wide
range of data management needs in individual 208 agencies. As mentioned
previously, rental fees and use rate expenses (excluding staff charges) for
computer services range from $5,000 to $7,500 annually. For 208 agencies
with in-house computer capability, the economics of computer-assisted data
management will be more favorable. In-house expertise and/or consultant
services should be utilized to provide the specific cost figures for manual
or computer-aided data management systems tailored specifically to the
agency's needs.
In terms of time requirements, the 2 year time frame of the 208 program
may significantly affect the desirability of going to a computer-assisted
data management system. If in-house computer facilities do not exist, it
may take too much time to organize the data base, develop or acquire the
computer capability, and get the data into the system. If the in-house
capability is already present, or can be quickly acquired, computer-
assisted techniques become more desirable, especially since they commonly
expedite the subsequent data analysis effort. It should also be noted that
manual techniques might be used for the initial 2 year planning period while
plans are formulated for the use of computer-aided systems in the continuing
planning process. In this instance, the manually managed data base should be
prepared in a manner that will expedite conversion to a computerized data
C-44
-------
base at some subsequent date.
Finally, the personnel requirements for manual and computer-assisted ap-
proaches are somewhat different. Manual techniques may utilize existing
agency staff to a large extent while computer-aided approaches require
computer science expertise, e.g. computer programmers, and data management
specialists. Even if consultants are utilized, it is recommended that some
in-house expertise in computer science be acquired to effectively direct and
coordinate the work of the consultants.
Each of the above considerations should be included in the assessment of
alternative approaches to data management. How they are used, and the
relative importance of these considerations in the decision-making process
must be left to the individual 208 agencies.
C.7 Inventory of Land Use and Demographic Data Analysis Techniques
The discussion in this section of the Appendix covers a wide range of land
use and demographic data analysis techniques from the simple, traditional
approaches to the more complex, sophisticated approaches. The emphasis is
on the practical application of such techniques in the context of 208
planning. Each technique will be discussed in terms of the following
elements:
1. A brief description of the approach, and the kinds of
input data required
2. A description of the output of the technique, and how
the output might be used with other tools/techniques,
such as water quality models, to formulate and evaluate
water quality management alternatives
3. An outline of potentially significant constraints on
the use of each technique, along with suggestions on
how to avoid potential^ problem areas
4. A summary of the strengths and weaknesses of the approach
relative to the 208 program
5. An estimate of relative costs for each technique.
C-45
-------
C.7.1 Relatively Simple, Low-Cost Techniques
This subsection will discuss techniques for demographic and land use analyses
at the relatively simple end of the spectrum of potential techniques. These
techniques make maximum use of the existing secondary data bases likely to be
available to the 208 planner. In terms of cost, they are the least expensive
techniques to implement, although they are not as analytically sophisticated
as some of the other approaches.
Demographic and economic projections are very important to subsequent land
use analyses. The next few paragraphs outline a simple technique for perform-
ing the demographic projections for the 208 program which involves the use of
data available from the U.S. Bureau of Census, and the Social and Economic
Statistics Administration, both in the U.S. Department of Commerce. Data
from both these sources, namely census and OBERS data respectively, are
possibly already utilized within each designated 208 planning agency for
other planning programs. Data collected from the above two sources (see
Section C.5) might be utilized by the 208 agency as a baseline from which
historical population growth rates can be extrapolated by 5 year increments
for the 20 year planning period. The output would be population projections
by SMSA, County, and/or township for the 208 region. These data would then
serve as inputs to subsequent land use calculations. Using this sort of desk
top extrapolation technique assumes that the historical growth rates will
hold over the next 20 years. Modifications of the growth rates can be made
to generate alternative scenarios for the future.
The use of OBERS Series E population data is also a very attractive, rela-
tively simple option for the 208 agency to use for its demographic pro-
jections. Of particular interest to 208 agencies is Volume III, where the
data are aggregated by water resources regions and subareas. The units of
aggregation in this Volume include twenty major regions defined by hydrologic
boundaries that are further divided into tributary and main stem reaches
entitled water resources subregions. The subregions cut across county lines
C-46
-------
to coincide with drainage patterns. However, the water resources subareas
are actually county-defined approximations of the actual hydrologic units
they represent. In some instances, the 208 agency's planning area may closely
approximate the water resource subarea boundaries, in which case the popula-
tion projections can be utilized directly for the increments given. In other
cases, one of the other levels of data aggregation, e.g. by Bureau of
Economic Analysis region, may be easier for the 208 agency staff to work with.
This determination must be made by comparing the study area boundary with the
various data aggregation boundaries, and picking the most appropriate one.
Whatever the case, the population data are available by county from 1929 and
are projected to 2020. Using these data, the 208 planner need not extrapolate
as mentioned previously with the census data since the projections are given
in appropriate 5 year intervals. Thus, the OBERS Iprojections are of direct
utility to subsequent land use projections. The technique is simple to
complete and is likely even less expensive than having the staff extrapolate
from census data. One note of caution is in order, however. The assumptions
made to arrive at the OBERS projections are explicitly stated in Volume I.
(See Section C.5). If these assumptions represent significant violations of
the prevailing conditions in the subject 208 region, then extrapolations
using different assumptions would be more appropriate.
It should also be noted that many states have their own programs that generate
population and economic projections. Likewise, many universities engage in
similar projection activities. It is conceivable that projections formulated
from such sources would be more appropriate for some 208 programs. For
example, if there is one or more 201 planning efforts ongoing in a given
208 region and the 201 program is using state projections, the 208 program
should consider the need for consistency in the use of the same state pro-
jections.
The simplest approach to the land use element of 208 is to make maximum use
of existing land use maps, as well as any maps of projected land use con-
figurations in the study area. Using these maps (if available), the major
drainage areas in the 208 region should be superimposed upon the existing
and projected land use configurations. Once this is complete, a planimeter
C-47
-------
can be used to calculate the square mileage and/or acreage of the various
land use types in each drainage area. This information will be useful in
making water quality projections when associated with precipitation data and
estimated runoff characteristics. These land use/drainage area maps can also
be used to display the location of major point and nonpoint sources in the
208 region.
Where it becomes necessary to estimate the future land use configuration of
a region, (for example the existing land use projections may be for the year
2000 without any indication of what the 1980 and 1990 configurations might
be), the population projections can be used along with existing zoning maps,
which commonly indicate residential densities, to estimate the extent of
urban fringe development that would occur over a given time frame, e.g. over
5 year intervals. The allocation of anticipated population increases using
graphic overlays of present zoning restrictions will provide the 208 planner
with a picture of how the existing land use pattern might be expected to
change incrementally over the 20 year study period. This information can
again be utilized as an input to the water quality analyses by using a plani-
meter to derive acreage figures for each type of land use. It is anticipated
that the greatest change over time will take place on the urban fringe. Thus,
land uses within some drainage areas may be expected to change very little
over the 20 year planning period.
The above techniques for estimating future land use patterns are relatively
simple and inexpensive because they depend upon existing data and table-top
analyses. They also do not have the sophistication and the analytical flex-
ibility that is characteristic of some of the more complex techniques. The
specific costs of the techniques are dependent upon what kinds of existing
and projected land use maps are available at the local level, and for what
future time periods. In most cases, the land use categories used for these
maps will be compatible with the subsequent use of the information in the 208
planning process. This should be checked, however, and appropriate modifi-
cations in land use categories made if they are not useful for subsequent
analyses.
C-48
-------
C.7.2 Intermediately-Complex, Moderate-Cost Techniques
These techniques still involve only manually executed analyses, but include
a more careful look at alternative futures in terms of land use/water quality
relationships than the simple techniques described previously. Some primary
data collection, e.g. aerial photography, will likely be necessary to perform
these analyses instead of complete reliance on existing secondary data
sources.
The demographic analyses in this category will still utilize, as a baseline,
the census and/or OBERS data discussed previously. The principal difference
between this approach and the simpler approaches is that a simple extrapo-
lation of past growth rates is only one possibility evaluated. The 208
planner using the intermediately complex approach postulates alternative
futures based upon other sets of conceivable assumptions. Thus a range of
future growth scenarios is calculated based upon explicit assumptions made
using the census or OBERS data as a baseline. A range of population growth
scenarios is valuable to consider in the formulation of areawide plans
that are sensitive to different alternative futures for the study area.
Again, this technique involves manual calculations using reasonable assump-
tions upon which to base population projections that differ from those
assumptions found in the sources mentioned previously. This approach also
allows for the incorporation of region-specific factors that may significantly
inhibit or facilitate population growth, e.g., rapidly declining in-migration,
that may not be accounted for in other projections.
The land use analysis techniques classified as intermediately complex attempt
to incorporate more land use-related variables into the analysis, e.g., land
use suitability based upon the physical features of the land surface. The
most common example of a technique of intermediate1 complexity is the overlay
approach conceptualized by Ian McHarg in his book Design with Nature. A
version of this approach the Land Use Decision-Making System (LUDMS) , is
described in an EPA publication entitled, "A Land Use Decision Methodology
for Environmental Control."
C-49
-------
LUDMS utilizes a technique that focuses on the development of environmental
analysis component maps. This approach consists of the formulation of a base
map of appropriate regional scale and series of clear plastic overlays, each
mapping a land use parameter relevant to the land use/water quality relation-
ship. The base map should be relatively uncluttered, but should include
major natural and man-made features, e.g. streams, lakes, significant
political boundaries etc. The overlays should map the occurrence of key
parameters of interest such as:
1. Aquifer recharge areas (based on regional geology)
2. Major point and nonpoint dischargers (from NPDES permits
and other available water quality information)
3. Areas unsuitable for septic tank systems (based on soils
data, regional geology, and water quality data inputs)
4. Areas with steep slopes (from USGS topographic maps)
5. Critical fish and wildlife habitat (from numerous
potential sources, e.g. State Departments of Natural
Resources etc.)
6. Existing water and sewer service areas, and projected
service areas (from local public utility departments etc.).
These overlay maps can be utilized to illustrate development constraints
related to water quantity and quality considerations. These constraints
could, in turn, be used as a basis for modifying future land use projections
in alternative ways that would be more sensitive to water resource management
concerns.
In addition, the overlay technique can be used to identify and evaluate
regions where development opportunities exist which will minimize adverse
impacts on regional water resources, and the environment in general.
The map overlay from the above analysis can be utilized in conjunction with
demographic projections and existing zoning maps to derive alternative future
land use configurations for the study area. The procedures for this part of
the analysis are similar to those previously described in the section on
relatively simple techniques. The final output of the analysis will be one
C-50
-------
or more land use configurations that represent alternative future scenarios
for the region. These future configurations should be more sensitive to
water resource management concerns because this technique provides for a more
explicit and intensive consideration of water quantity/quality concerns than
the traditional land use planning process, upon which the more simplified
techniques are more dependent.
The alternative configurations that evolve out of the analysis can then be
tabulated in percentages of each land use type present in each drainage area
in the planning region. A planimeter can be used to estimate the acreage of
each land use type in each drainage area. These figures can then serve as
an input to the water quality evaluations. These quantitative values can
also be better tempered with qualitative judgement using this moderately
complex approach, because of the more focused consideration of water resource-
related parameters.
The overlay approach is likely to be more expensive than the simple approach
described in the previous subsection due to the additional staff time involved
in working with additional variables. The 208 planner needs to decide whether
the additional information provided by the overlay approach is worth the
additional expenditure. This decision will depend, in part, upon the confi-
dence the planner has in existing land use projections, and in their sensitivity
to water quality considerations.
C.7.3 Relatively Sophisticated, High-Cost Techniques
The final category of demographic and land use analysis techniques involves
the relatively sophisticated computer
that follow discuss several such approaches, some of which are being employed
in ongoing 208 programs.
One example of a computerized demographic projection model is the Demographic
and Economic Modeling System (DEMOS) developed by Battelle's Columbus Lab-
oratories. DEMOS is useful for the following applications relevant to 208
planning:
C-51
-------
1. Projecting population characteristics by single year,
five year or other appropriate intervals, and by
political subdivision
2. Analyzing spatial patterns of population distribution
3. Analyzing migration propensities
4. Analyzing demographic structure and labor force potential.
Items 1 and 2 above are particularly relevant to the land use element of the
208 planning process.
DEMOS utilizes many facets of previously developed projection tools such as
the cohort survival technique, but combines these concepts with region-
specific factors that influence population and employment growth. For
example, the model concentrates upon relationships between migration and
unemployment, birth rates and unemployment, labor force participation rates
and the ratio of employment to population, and labor availability and the
demand for labor. Through these relationships, economic and demographic
conditions in a given region can be interrelated via demographic, economic,
and feedback submodels to provide the practitioner with realistic projections
that can be modified to reflect varying assumptions. The model's basic out-
puts are population by age, employment by industry, and labor force by age,
although numerous other variables may also be explored in the model.
It should be noted that one of the attractive aspects of DEMOS and some other
similar models such as SEMOS, a model used by the Southeast Michigan Council
of Governments (Detroit) in their 208 program, is that it is available in a
computer-interactive form. This is to say that the planner can sit at a
computer terminal, and with very little previous experience, perform regional
projections with varying assumptions. The computer program actually leads
the user via a series of questions through the projection process, affording
him or her the opportunity to explore the model's assumptions, and the mathe-
matical equations upon which the model is based.
The computerized approach to demographic projections has advantages and dis-
advantages that should be considered by the 208 planner before an approach
C-52
-------
is selected. The primary advantages are the flexibility the models afford
the user in exploring alternative futures quickly and relatively inexpensively
after the "front-end" investment is made, and the increased sophistication
and regional sensitivity provided by such an approach. The major dis-
advantages are that the acquisition of the computer access, the support
facilities, and the model are relatively expensive relative to reliance on
census or OBERS data. Projections for a 5 county 208 area down to the town-
ship level cost in the range of $23,000-27,000 including staff time. This
disadvantage might be overcome somewhat by working out a cost-sharing arrange-
ment with other programs and/or agencies, since most planning efforts rely
upon good demographic projections. The use of such models also requires
staff expertise that may not be present in some 208 programs.
An exhaustive discussion of other demographic projection techniques, including
computer models, is found in Demographic Information for Cities: A Manual
for Estimating and Projecting Local Population Characteristics written by
Peter A. Morrison (see Annotated Bibliography section of Appendix I).
The Toledo, Ohio, 208 program has employed a computer-based information
14
system called the Land Resources Information System (LRIS). LRIS serves
as a good example of a relatively sophisticated land use data management
and analysis technique. It is designated to measure the co-occurrence of
land resource features in a manner that facilitates the measurement of an
14
area's potential for nonpoint source pollution. The technique involves a
multivariate analysis on a watershed basis of the impact on water quality
of land cover, soils characteristics, and slope variables. The data inputs
to LRIS include land cover data derived from an analysis of recent color
infrared aerial photography; soils information from available soil surveys;
elevation data to the nearest 5 feet derived from USGS 7-1/2 minute quad-
rangle maps; and location information identifying points by minor watershed,
political subdivision, and in metropolitan Toledo, by traffic zone. Special
care was taken in the formulation of LRIS to insure the aggregability of
data into larger units.
The data are organized according to a 4 hectare rectangular grid system that
C-53
-------
covers the entire 2006 square mile study area. An unaligned random sampling
technique is used to place a single point within each grid cell at which the
data for the different variables is recorded to represent the entire cell.
The only exception is with the land cover variable for which two decisions
are made for each cell, namely the dominant land cover in the entire cell,
and the exact cover at the randomly placed point.
By using the data system described above, the Toledo Metropolitan Area
Council of Governments is able to identify the co-occurrence of land resource
characteristics, e.g. little vegetative cover, and steep slope, that signifi-
cantly affects regional water quality. To date LRIS has been utilized as a
tool for analyzing nonpoint source pollution, as well as for generalized land
use planning.
The advantages of such a technique are significant. First of all, the data
base is up-to-date for the analyses. The data are we11-organized, highly
accessible, easy to store, and the computer program facilitates the analytical
work. The same system is also very relevant to other ongoing planning
programs, e.g., transportation, coastal zone management, and solid waste pro-
grams.
The front-end costs of developing such a system are substantial compared to
the less sophisticated techniques discussed previously. This kind of approach
also requires some in-house staff capabilities in computer science, and data
management.
Another land use model of potential interest to 208 planners, is a model
developed by A.B. Corbeau and C.F. Meger to evaluate future land uses in
the St. Louis SMSA. The model is designed to allocate anticipated popula-
tion and employment in 10 year increments to parcels of land categorized into
four categories:
1. Industrial
2. Residential
3. Commercial, and
C-54
-------
4. Public.
Desirability criteria relative to each land use type drive the land allocation
process in the model. The data inputs for the model include economic data
such as the number of people engaged in a particular land use-related acti-
vity; regional population projections; and parameter override factors that
permit specific anticipated land use changes as well as controls on population
density. The output of this model includes summary reports on the land
allocation process by land use type, along with what are called diagnostic
reports containing detailed information on each land unit being modelled.
This kind of information would be useful in the 208 planning process for
anticipating conversion of one land use type into another. This information
can then be translated into anticipated water quality impacts using tools
discussed elsewhere in this Manual.
The general advantages and disadvantages of the St. Louis model are much the
same as those discussed previously relative to the Toledo approach. More
specifically, this particular model is quite flexible, and could be applied
to most 208 regions. A weakness of the model, however, is that the ranking
of the desirability of certain land development is subjective.
One final model of possible applicability to 208 planning is the Dynamic Land
Use Allocation Model III (DYLAM III) developed by David Seader and Peter
Masseri. This model has been utilized in a water supply study, in a flood
plain and stormwater management study, and for numerous long range land use
planning efforts.
In essence, DYLAM III simulates land use location decisions allowing for the
projection and analysis of probable development. The model also has the
capability to simulate the impact of proposed facilities and alternative
policies on land use patterns.
In terms of input data requirements, DYLAM III is quite flexible in that it
can accomodate any information that can be mapped in a grid cell data format.
For example, one study that used the model involved, in part, the following
C-55
-------
mapped data elements:
1. Moderately sloping land
2. Steeply sloping land
3. Flood plains
4. Swelling soils
5. Water and sanitation districts
6. Industrial parks
7. Lakes and streams.
The model can accommodate up to 60 such elements, and the elements can be
tailored specifically to the problem at hand, e.g., characterizing the land
use/water quality relationship.
The basic work of the model is to geographically distribute anticipated
increments of development. It should be noted, however, that the total
estimated acreage of new development must be an input to the model. The
model's work involves five basic tasks described briefly as follows:
1. Search for sites, defined as grid cells
2. Determine a grid cell's suitability for development based
on input locational requirements
3. Compute a numerical attractiveness of suitability score
4. Rank all developable grid cells from the most to least
attractive based upon the numerical scores
5. Allocate the amount of new development specified to the most
suitable grid cells.
The conceptual framework of DYLAM III lends itself to a potential 208 applica-
tion in which the locational requirements for development include relevant
water quality and quantity considerations.
The output of the model includes both tabular and mapped information. The
maps include present and projected land use configurations at the end of
each time period used. The maps highlight where new development occurred.
The tabular information indicates the projected order for site development.
C-56
-------
The model also has the capability to produce maps illustrating one or more
data base elements superimposed on one another. The composite maps produced
in this manner can be very useful in highlighting potential water quality
problems associated with projected development as discussed in the previous
subsection.
The model has the same advantages and disadvantages that the other computer
models discussed have had, along with some DYLAM III specific advantages. The
model is very flexible in terms of being applicable to a broad range of
potential land use-related concerns, including those of the 208 program. The
mapping capability is very useful in most applications, including those for
208. The model can also be easily fitted to a broad range of geographic areas,
from a single municipality to a large multi-county region.
There are a couple of potentially significant disadvantages of DYLAM III also.
Land use development can only be simulated by rectangular grid cells in the
model. In addition, only one land use can be assigned to each grid cell at
a time, and all the data utilized in the model are nominal data. That is,
either the data element is present or absent in a given grid cell. Various
degrees of presence cannot be accommodated.
Additional material on potentially relevant land use planning models may be
found in the following two documents (See Annotated Bibliography):
1. "Review of Operational Urban Transportation Planning
Models", U. S. Department of Transportation
2. "Models and Methods Applicable to Corps of Engineers Urban
Studies", U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment System
C.8 Appendix Summary
This Appendix has attempted to provide the practicing 208 planner with some
assistance in developing the land use element of the areawide water quality
management program. The focus has been on the following topics:
1. Identification of land use data needs
2. Identification of existing data sources and characteristics
C-57
-------
3. Matching of data needs with available data sources
4. Collection of land use data
5. Identification of demographic and land use data
management techniques
6. Inventory of demographic and land use data analysis
techniques.
In each case, the discussion has been structured to provide the practitioner
with a range of potential approaches to land use data collection, management,
and analysis, from simple to complex. As mentioned at the outset, this
Appendix is not designed to be prescriptive in any way, but rather is meant
to provide a "shopping list" description of potential approaches along with
supporting documentation. The references that follow and the Annotated
Bibliography in Appendix F provide the reader with sources of additional
information on topics discussed herein that may be of further interest.
C-58
-------
C.9 References
1. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Planning Division, "Land
Use-Water Quality Relationship," Washington, D. C., March 1976, pg 1-1.
2. "Land Use Planning Assistance Available Through the United States
Department of Agriculture," U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington,
D. C. 20402, February 1974.
3. University of Wisconsin-Madison, Institute for Environmental Studies,
"Data Needs and Data Gathering for Areas of Critical Environmental
Concern: Part I - Summary Report," University of Wisconsin-Madison,
Madison, Wisconsin 53706, September 1975, pg. 120.
4. Anderson, J. R., Hardy, E., and Roach, J. T., 1972, "A Land Use
\
Classification System for Use with Remote Sensor Data," Geological
Survey, Circular 671, Washington, D. C.
5. Federal Register, December 12, 1974 (39.240) Title 24, part 600.
6. Mansel, Paul W., Leivo, Carl E., and Lewellen, Michael T., "Regional
Land Use Classification Derived from Computer-Processed Satellite
Data," Journal of the American Institute of Planners, April 1976,
pgs. 153-164.
7. Examples of in-depth discussion of population projection methods can be
found in:
Atchley, Robert C., "Population Projections and Estimates for Local
Area," Scripps Foundation for Research in Population Problems, Miami
University, Oxford, Ohio, 1970. or:
Morrison, Peter, "Demographic Information for Cities: Manual for
Estimating and Projecting Local Population Characteristics," Rand
Corporation, June 1971.
8. U. S. Department of Interior, "Information/Data Handling: A Guidebook
for Development of State Programs," (unpublished draft report) July 1975,
pgs 110-116.
9. For further discussion on this mapping technique see:
Ohio Department of Economic and Community Development and Battelle-
Columbus Laboratories, "Utilizing SKYLAB Data in On-Going Resource
Management Programs in the State of Ohio," November 1975, pgs 64-83.
(Available through NTIS).
C-59
-------
10. Chapin, F. Stuart, Jr., "Urban Land Use Planning," University of
Illinois Press, Urbana, Illinois, 1965, pgs. 277-291.
11. Such a land use study from LANDSAT data undertaken by the Ohio-
Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments (OKI) in their 208
program. For more information contact:
Timothy G. Mara
OKI
426 East 4th Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202
(513) 621-7060
12. McHarg, Ian, "Design with Nature," Doubleday and Company3 Inc., Garden
City, New York, 1971.
13. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, "A Land Use Decision Methodology for Environmental Control,"
Washington, D. C., March 1975, pg. 47.
14. Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments, "Development and
Utilization of Regional Land Use Planning Data Base Using Modern
Computer Technology," unpublished concept paper, April 1976.
15. Corbeau, A. B., and Merger, C. F. , "A Land Use Model for the St. Louis
SMSA," University of St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, Draft Report,
November 1973.
16. Brown, J. W., et al., "Models and Methods Applicable to Corps of
Engineers Urban Studies," U. S. Army Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, Mississippi, August 1974, pgs. A-71, A-97, to 101.
C-60 OUSGPO: 1976 — 757-056/5404 Region 5-11
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
-------
APPENDIX D
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS, METHODS, AND COSTS
D.I Introduction
The nation's waters are as mixed and varied as its population and, just as
there is no single measure of human health, there is no single measure of
water quality. Furthermore, the nation's waters themselves (ground waters,,
streams, lakes, estuaries, and coastal waters) vary considerably in size,
geological features, flow characteristics, climate and meteorological in-
fluences, and the type and extent of human impacts on them, and all these
factors have a bearing on water quality.
Most definitions of water quality today are use-related, and each water use
is sensitive to different pollution types and levels. For example, suffi-
cient dissolved oxygen is critical to fish and other aquatic life but of
little significance to drinking water supplies or swimming. On the other
hand, coliform bacteria counts are a classical water pollution measure for
human contact or ingestion but have little significance for most industrial
uses or aquatic life. Even for the same parameter, the critical concentra-
tion for which one use begins to be impaired may be quite different from the
level at which another use is affected. Thus, water quality monitoring -
the collective activity that allows determination of the suitability of a
particular water source for a specific use - is heavily use dependent. It
is one thing to evaluate the lower Mississippi River as a drinking water sup-
ply and quite another to evaluate Lake Erie for swimming, a small stream in
Michigan for trout fishing, or the South Platte River for irrigation. A dif-
ferent monitoring effort would be required for each.
D-l
-------
D.I.I How to Use This Appendix
In view of the foregoing, this Appendix cannot be a cookbook. Its overall
objective is to provide the 208 planner with a range of information, consid-
erations, and techniques that will allow him to design and implement a water
quality monitoring program that is suited to his particular requirements. As
indicated in Chapter 1 of this Manual, special emphasis is placed on equipment
and methods suitable for storm-generated discharges.
The organization of this Appendix is indicated in Table D-l. By referring to
it, the reader can locate information on the topic of immediate interest,
e.g., where to look for available water quality data, how to select test
catchments for stormwater model calibration and verification, how to choose
an automatic sampler, etc. The topical organization is intended to support
the chapters in the main body of this Manual by allowing quick reference to
specific information, but it is recommended that this entire Appendix be read
and understood thoroughly before implementation.
D.I.2 Purposes and Objectives of 208 Monitoring
The broad objective of a monitoring activity is to provide information upon
which decision-makers can act. A more specific statement of objectives is
required, however, for design and implementation of a monitoring effort.
Examples of more specific monitoring objectives of interest to 208 agencies
include:
1. Establishing baseline conditions
2. Determination of assimilative capacities of streams
3. Following the effects of a particular project or activity
4. Pollutant source identification
5. Long-term trend assessment
6. Waste load allocation
7. Projecting future water characteristics
D-2
-------
TABLE D-l. ORGANIZATION OF APPENDIX D
Page
D.I Introduction D-l
D.I.I How to Use This Appendix D-2
D.1.2 Purposes and Objectives of 208 Monitoring D-2
D.I.3 Types of Monitoring Activities D-8
D.I.3.1 Reconnaissance Survey D-9
D.1.3.2 Point Source Characterization D-9
D.I.3.3 Intensive Survey D-10
D.I.3.4 Fixed Station Monitoring Networks D-12
D.I.3.5 Ground Water Monitoring D-12
D.I.3.6 Biological Monitoring D-13
D.I.4 Coordination With Other Monitoring Programs D-14
D.I.5 Available Data Sources D-16
D.I.5.1 Meteorological Data D-17
D.I.5.2 Geographical Data D-18
D.I.5.3 Water Quality Data D-18
D.2 Measurement Site, Parameter, and Frequency Selection D-22
D.2.1 Site Selection D-22
D.2.1.1 Overall Site Location Guidance D-22
D.2.1.2 Site Selection for Waste Load
Allocation Surveys D-27
D.2.1.3 Catchment Selection for Stormwater Model
Calibration and Verification D-29
D.2.1.4 Specific Site Selection Criteria D-32
D.2.2 Parameter Selection D-34
D.2.2.1 Parameters for Storm-Generated Discharges . . . D-36
D.2.2.2 Parameters for the National Water
Quality Monitoring Program D-41
D.2.2.3 Parameters for Waste Load Allocations D-43
D.2.3 Measurement Frequency Selection D-43
D.2.3.1 Frequency for Background and Trend Data .... D-43
D.2.3.2 Frequency for Waste Load Allocation
Surveys D-50
D.2.3.3 Frequency for Storm-Generated Discharges .... D-51
D-3
-------
TABLE D-l. ORGANIZATION OF APPENDIX D (Cont'd)
Page
D.3 Flow Measurement Considerations, Equipment, and Procedures . . . D-52
D.3.1 General Considerations D-52
D.3.2 Flow Measurement Equipment D-57
D.3.2.1 Desirable Equipment Characteristics D-58
D.3.2.2 Evaluations of Some Promising Devices D-63
D.3.2.3 Review of Commercially Available Equipment
and Costs D-68
D.3.2.4 Review of Recent Field Experience D-73
D.3.3 Flow Measurement Field Procedures D-76
D.4 Sampling Considerations, Equipment, and Procedures D-79
D.4.1 Sample Types D-80
D.4.2 Automatic Sampling Equipment D-84
D.4.2.1 Elements of an Automatic Sampler System .... D-84
DA. 2. 2 Considerations in Automatic
Sampler Selection D-91
D.4.2.3 Survey of Commercially Available Equipment . . . D-92
D.4.2.4 Review of Recent Field Experience D-97
D.4.3 Manual Versus Automatic Sampling D-99
D.4.4 Sampling Field Procedures D-100
D.4.4.1 Manual Sampling Procedures D-100
D.4.4.2 Automatic Sampling Procedures D-108
D.4.5 Sample Quantity, Preservation, and Handling D-112
D.4.6 Sampling Accumulated Roadway Material D-115
D.5 Cost Estimation • D-122
D.5.1 Instrumentation Costs D-122
D.5.2 Related Equipment Costs D-124
D.5.3 Manpower Costs D-125
D.5.4 Field Operations Costs D-127
D.5.5 Laboratory Analysis Costs D-129
D.5.6 Data Analysis and Reporting D-129
D.5.7 Example USEPA Costs D-130
D.6 Waste Load Allocation Study Procedures D-133
D-4
-------
These monitoring objectives include both point and nonpoint source considera-
tions involving variable and intermittent as well as continuous flows (see
Chapter 1 of this Manual). In particular, Section 208 of PL 92-500 has fo-
cused money and attention on stormwater runoff and the need for urban runoff
quality planning. The goals of such planning efforts are to define the run-
off problem, identify potential solutions and costs, and measure the effec-
tiveness of solution alternatives versus costs. Planning of this nature
requires a method of evaluation that can provide comprehensive and areawide
analysis, including the prediction of alternative futures. Mathematical
models represent a developing tool that can be used by planners to meet these
needs (see Appendix A). Such models require field data for their calibration
and verification, and monitoring for this objective, along with problem as-
sessment monitoring, will be emphasized in this Appendix.
A detailed listing of some USEPA uses for monitoring information is given in
Table D-2. From a review of this table, it is readily apparent that a proper
understanding of what is sought is paramount in the design and implementation
of any given monitoring activity. Furthermore, the objectives should be re-
duced to writing, not only to ensure careful consideration of what they ac-
tually should be and help prevent misunderstandings by those involved, but
also to set the limits, and thus discourage the pursuit of interesting but
nonessential bypaths. These objectives will also provide a basis for measur-
ing the extent to which the results of the effort meet the needs that justi-
fied the undertaking.
To illustrate the form such objective statements might take, several examples
will be given. These were taken from actual 208 program efforts that are be-
ing designed and implemented now.
The stated objective for an instream sampling survey is to provide water qual-
ity and flow data for calibration and verification of a continuous water qual-
ity simulation model which will be used to simulate existing and future
D-5
-------
TABLE D-2
SOME USEPA USES OF MONITORING INFORMATION
Develop/revise water quality standards
Develop/revise 303 basin plans
Develop/revise 208 areawide plans
Develop/revise 201 facilities plans
Document progress toward achievement/
maintenance of ambient standards and
legislative goals
Monitor primitive areas for background
levels and significant deterioration
Development of baseline information
Model validation/development
Develop health research/control techniques
Develop/evaluate Environmental Impact
Statements
Develop/revise effluent standards
Formulate/revise discharge permits
Determine permit compliance
Develop/revise drinking water standards
Develop/revise pesticides monitoring plan
Develop/revise toxic standards
Develop/revise pretreatment standards
Investigate single pollution incidents (fish
kills, oil spills)
Develop/assess/revise point source control
strategies
Develop/assess/revise nonpoint source
control strategies
Allocate resources
Report indices, trends, etc., to the public
Support enforcement actions
Develop/revise waste load allocations
-------
conditions in selected streams and rivers in northeastern Illinois. Since
organic pollutants and nutrients are considered the most general and wide-
spread water quality problems in the region, the sampling and analysis pro-
gram is designed to provide information necessary to simulate these
parameters.
The stated objective for a land use runoff study is to determine nonpoint
source pollution loading functions for homogeneous land uses. Transfer-
ability of data is required, since these loading functions will then be ap-
plied to other areas throughout the region.
The stated objective for a lake study is to determine, in terms of quantity
and quality, the pollutional load from nonpoint sources that enters Lake
Michigan during storm events. Note that this objective does not suggest that
a complete survey of Lake Michigan be undertaken (a task of great magnitude)
but, rather, seeks to determine what is going into the lake.
The three foregoing statements of objective were selected to illustrate that
being specific and concise can go together (and should). As a final example,
the following eight objectives are stated for an urban nonpoint source
monitoring network:
Collect basin rainfall and runoff data for 14 Philadelphia area
drainage basins.
• Calibrate the USGS Dawdy parametric rainfall-runoff model using
3 to 5 years of data.
• Using long-term Weather Service rainfall records as input to the
calibrated model, develop flood frequency duration curves for
14 urban drainage basins.
• Measure physical basin characteristics of the 14 urban drainage
basins.
D-7
-------
Relate physical basin characteristics to optimized model
parameters.
• Using developed regression relationships between model and basin
characteristics, develop flood-frequency duration curves for un-
gaged basins.
• Verify results with collected data on selected test basins.
Collect average stream quality data for development of quality
trends as related to type of development.
Once the objective statement has been clearly formulated, the survey design
can begin, but not before.
D.I.3 Types of Monitoring Activities
There exist a number of types of monitoring activities that can be employed
in meeting overall monitoring requirements. Their suitability and applica-
bility will depend upon the purposes and objectives of the particular effort
involved. Included are (1) reconnaissance surveys, (2) point source charac-
terizations, (3) intensive surveys, (4) fixed station network monitoring
networks, (5) ground water monitoring, and (6) biological monitoring. The
last two types of monitoring activities are broken out separately only be-
cause they require skills, equipment, and techniques that are markedly dif-
ferent from those used in the first four. None of these should be considered
as completely separate activities in actual practice. Comprehensive data in-
terpretation will require that all monitoring data be considered together.
A brief description of these monitoring activities follows, with emphasis
placed on typical objectives of each. By comparing them, the reader can see
how they differ and how they may be combined to meet overall 208 monitoring
objectives.
D-8
-------
D.I.3.1 Reconnaissance Survey
A reconnaissance survey is a general or overall examination of a particular
area. It is a visual or superficial qualitative (and sometimes quantitative)
survey. Typical objectives of a reconnaissance survey include:
1. Getting the "lay of the land" in preparation for an intensive survey.
2. Identification of all waste sources in a particular catchment.
3. Identification of water uses in terms of types, locations, quan-
tities, and frequencies.
4. Determination of general stream characteristics.
5. Obtaining information necessary for establishing the overall design
of a fixed-station network.
6. Investigation of reported pollution incidents or spills.
D.I.3.2 Point Source Characterization
A point source characterization (or effluent monitoring) study is one con-
ducted to determine the characteristics of an identifiable, discrete dis-
charge (either continuous or intermittent) into a receiving body of water.
Although several point sources are usually involved in a complete survey,
the mechanics of execution are basically similar, and the same general con-
siderations apply. It is also possible that more than one measurement site
(i.e., sampling and flow determination) might be involved as, for example,
in a treatment plant efficiency study. Mass loading discharges rather than
simple parameter concentrations are usually sought. Some objectives are:
1. Determination of frequency, quantity, and strength of combined
sewer overflows.
2. Characterization of storm sewer discharges.
3. Determination of treatment plant efficiency.
4. Verification of a permit application.
5. Infiltration/inflow determination at a given site.
D-9
-------
6. Verification of self-monitoring data with regard to permit
compliance.
7. Determination of pretreatment requirements or verification of
compliance with pretreatment standards.
8. Verification of toxic substances sources.
9. Case preparation (as part of an enforcement action).
D.I.3.3 Intensive Survey
Intensive surveys are major elements in a monitoring program. The intensive
survey: (1) bridges the gap between the data bases generated by effluent
monitoring and fixed-station monitoring; (2) provides a definitive basis for
understanding and describing receiving water quality and the mechanisms and
processes that affect water quality; (3) provides the documentation required
to explain the trends observed at fixed network stations; and (4) is a tool
for determining the ultimate fate of pollutants in the water environment.
Some generalizations concerning the overall nature of intensive surveys and
their planning and execution follow.
1. Repetitive measurements of water quality are made at each station
(sources and receiving water). The stations will typically comprise
a short, very dense, sampling network throughout the duration of
the field effort.
2. The duration of an intensive survey is dictated by the objectives
of the survey, with 3 to 14 days being typical for freshwater
streams, lakes, and reservoirs. Surveys in tidal bodies are typ-
ically more complex and longer in duration as are nonpoint source
surveys (e.g., for calibrating a stormwater management model).
3. The measurements taken during an intensive study vary. A study
may be oriented towards one particular type of data (chemical,
biological, sediment, etc.) or it may involve the collection of
many types of data.
D-10
-------
4. Continuous and intermittent point and nonpoint sources within the
survey area are usually monitored during the study.
Some major objectives of intensive surveys are:
1. Determining quantitative cause-and-effect relationships of water
quality for making load allocations, assessing the effectiveness
of pollution control programs, or for developing alternative
solutions to pollution problems.
2. Setting priorities for establishing or improving pollution
controls.
3. Supporting and setting priorities for enforcement actions.
4. Identifying and quantifying nonpoint sources of pollution and as-
sessing their impact on water quality.
5. Assessing the biological, chemical, physical, and trophic status
of publicly-owned lakes and reservoirs.
6. Providing data for the classification or reclassification of
stream segments as being either effluent limited or water quality
limited.
7. Evaluating the locations and distribution of fixed monitoring
stations.
8; Calibrating and verifying stormwater management models.
Such objectives should be considered mutually compatible. The incremental
cost of expanding a single-purpose survey into a multipurpose survey should
always be evaluated prior to conducting the survey.
D-ll
-------
D.I.3.4 Fixed Station Monitoring Networks
The fixed monitoring network is a system of fixed stations that are sampled
in such a way that well-defined histories of the physical, chemical, and
biological conditions of the water and sediments can be established. In
general, other monitoring data will be needed to explain, in detail, the
trends observed at the fixed stations. Thus, a high level of coordination
between the fixed-station monitoring network and other monitoring activities
is essential for developing a useful data base. The basic objectives of
fixed monitoring networks are to provide data and information that, when
taken in combination with other data, will:
1. Characterize and define trends in the physical, chemical, and
biological condition of surface waters, including significant
publicly-owned lakes and impounded waters.
2. Establish baselines of water quality.
3. Provide for a continuing assessment of water pollution control
programs.
4. Identify and quantify new or existing water quality problems
or problem areas.
5. Aid in the identification of stream segments as either effluent
limited or water quality limited.
6. Act as a triggering mechanism for intensive surveys, enforcement
proceedings, or other actions.
D.I.3.5 Ground Water Monitoring
Because of the increasing threat to the quality of ground water posed by
some waste management practices and a general lack of comprehensive informa-
tion on the origins, scope, and nature of existing ground water pollution
D-12
-------
problems, it is important that programs be established and maintained to mon-
itor ground water quality. Some objectives of ground water monitoring are:
1. Obtaining data for the purpose of determining baseline conditions
in ground water quality and quantity.
2. Providing data for the early detection of ground water pollution
or contamination, particularly in areas of ground water use.
3. Identifying existing and potential ground water pollution sources
and maintaining surveillance of these sources, in terms of their
impact on ground water quality.
4. Providing a data base upon which management and policy decisions
can be made concerning the surface and subsurface disposal of
wastes and the management of ground water resources.
Ground water monitoring has been extensively treated in a recent series of
USEPA reports (1-5) and will not be discussed further in this Appendix. It
is only mentioned here to point up its importance to the 208 planning process,
D.I.3.6 Biological Monitoring
Aquatic organisms and communities act as natural pollution monitors. Some
organisms tend to accumulate or magnify toxic substances, pesticides, radio-
nuclides, and a variety of other pollutants. Organisms also can reflect the
synergistic and antagonistic interactions of point and nonpoint source
pollutants within the receiving water system. Some objectives of a biolog-
ical monitoring program are to gather biological data in such a manner as to:
1. Determine suitability of the aquatic environment for supporting abun-
dant, useful, and diverse communities of aquatic organisms.
D-13
-------
2. Provide information adequate to detect, evaluate, and characterize
changes in water quality through the study of biological produc-
tivity, diversity, and stability of aquatic systems.
3. Detect the presence and buildup of toxic and potentially hazardous
substances in aquatic biota.
4. Provide information adequate to periodically update the eutrophic
condition classification of freshwater lakes.
D.I.4 Coordination With Other Monitoring Programs
An attempt to put 208 monitoring somewhat in perspective is presented in Fig-
ure D-l, taken from the National Water Monitoring Panel (6). It is obvious
that if each functional purpose is to be productive, the proper information
must be provided by the monitoring program. It also should be clear that
persons responsible for monitoring must maintain a frequent and substantive
contact with those programs requiring information. Finally, there is abun-
dant need for coordination among all aspects of a monitoring program.
The importance of this last statement regarding coordination among monitoring
activities can be emphasized by considering the following. At the federal
level, legislative authority for monitoring is contained in at least six
Acts:
• The Federal Water Pollution Control Act
• The Safe Drinking Water Act
• The Refuse Act
The Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act
• The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
• The Solid Waste Disposal Act
When combined with State and local legislation, the legislative mandates form
an almost staggering dimension. The activities responsible for monitoring
implementation form an equally large dimension. At the federal level alone,
D-14
-------
o
I
MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM EVALUATION;
PRIORITIES - POLICIES
REPORTING, MONITORING NEEDS
PROGRAM PRIORITIES
REPORTING, MONITORING NEEDS
PLANNING
BASIN PLANS
AREAWIDE PLANS
PROGRAM PRIORITIES
PERMIT ISSUANCE
MUNICIPAL PERMITS
INDUSTRIAL PERMITS
LOAD ALLOCATIONS
[REPORTING, MONITORING NEEDS
PROGRAM PRIORITIES
COMPLIANCE
LIST OF VIOLATORS
ENFORCEMENT PRIORITIES
PERMIT CONDITIONS
ENFORCEMENT
BRING VIOLATORS INTO
COMPLIANCE
PERMIT VIOLATIONS
/ DATA FOR LOAD
'ALLOCATIONS, FACILITY
SITING, ETC. i
ADDITIONAL DATA
FOR PERMIT
CONDITIONS
DATA FROM
COMPLIANCE
SURVEYS
DATA FOR
EVIDENCE
DATA FOR PROGRAM EVAL-
UATION: FIXED STATIONS,
TRENDS, NEW PROBLEMS,
WATER QUALITY CHANGES
MONITORING
FIGURE D-l
.MONITORING IN PERSPECTIVE
-------
they include the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; the U.S. Geological
Survey; the U.S. Department of Agriculture; the Bureau of Reclamation; the
Department of Defense, including the Army Corps of Engineers and the Naval
Facilities Engineering Command; the Bureau of Mines; the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration; the Occupational Safety and Health Administration;
the Food and Drug Administration; the Energy Research and Development
Administration; and others, not to mention special purpose monitoring efforts
conducted by federal activities such as the National Science Foundation, the
Council on Environmental Quality, the Office of Manpower and Budget, the
Office of Technology Assessment, and so on. These efforts must be combined
with those of the states, designated agencies, and all pollutant dischargers
operating under effluent permits. Typically, monitoring efforts are far from
centralized. For example, in the USEPA alone, monitoring responsibilities -
encompassing both the collection and use of information - are found in
16 Headquarters offices under 5 assistant administrators. Similarly, USEPA
field responsibilities are dispersed among the 10 regional offices and 13 re-
search laboratories.
D.I.5 Available Data Sources
The prudent use of resources dictates that the maximum use practicable be
made of existing data. For 208 planning, these can be grouped into three
categories: meteorological, geographical, and water quality. Available data
sources for each category will be discussed in turn. One caveat more or less
applicable to each must be mentioned, however. All prior data may not be of
acceptable quality (i.e., truthfulness, suitability, accuracy). Where at all
possible, attempt to determine the original- source and some indication of the
"goodness" of the data. For example, USGS stream gage records are annotated
with a somewhat subjective indication of the quality of the record, e.g.,
poor, fair, good, etc. Unfortunately, this is the exception rather than the
rule. Be especially chary of water quality records; attempt to determine
how the samples were taken, whether or not they were handled properly, and
how the analyses were run.
D-16
-------
D.I.5.1 Meteorological Data
The best source of long-term rainfall data in the United States is the
National Weather Service (NWS). Data can be obtained from the NWS either
on tape files or through published daily and hourly summaries. Tapes can
be obtained by contacting:
U.S. Department of Commerce
National Climatic Center
NOAA Environmental Data Service
Federal Building
Ashville, N.C. 28801
Telephone (704) 258-2850
Data are available on two record files: Deck 448-USWB HOURLY PRECIPITATION
and Deck 345-WBAN SUMMARY OF DAY. Most first-order stations are covered.
The period of record is usually from August 1949 to the current data with
some gaps. Long-term 5-minute data are also available from the NWS for over
50 major U.S. cities, and can be generated for most cities having a NWS city
or airport office.
One word of caution; be sure to determine if there is a high aerial vari-
ability of rainfall for the region in question. For example, the total
rainfall measured at the NWS station at Philadelphia International Airport
was 44.47 inches for 1975. The totals for individual gaged catchments within
the city for the same period ranged from 40 to over 60 inches, with a city-
wide average of 51.37 inches.
Other meteorological data available from NOAA include snowfall, temperature,
wind, sunshine and sky cover, evaporation, and humidity. Local data sources
and the possible existence of data from previous studies should also be
investigated.
D-17
-------
D.I.5.2 Geographical Data
In this context, the term geographical is used in its broadest meaning.
Chief among this category are land use data, but other physical, cultural,
and demographic data will also be desired (e.g., catchment slopes and terrain,
soil types, sewer maps, population distributions, etc.). Sources of such data
are described in detail in Appendix C of this Manual, but generally include:
• U.S. Census Bureau
• Metropolitan Sanitary Districts
State and local planning agencies
Office of the County Surveyor (or equivalent)
U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
USDA Soil Conservation Service
• Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area Data
Previous basin (303e) or facilities (201) plans
D.I.5.3 Water Quality Data
The STORE! system of the USEPA is the largest source of water quality data in
the nation. The system is operated as a utility serving states, areawide
agencies, and other organizations. Data are stored in the system by the data
collecting organization for their own purposes as well as for sharing with
others. The STORET system should be queried for existing data during the
initial design phase of the 208 areawide monitoring effort. USEPA headquar-
ters and iregional offices may be contacted for assistance in the use of
STORET.
Other existing water quality data are widespread, but the recent establish-
ment of the National Water Data Exchange (NAWDEX) should considerably assist
users in locating and acquiring needed data. Unlike STORET, NAWDEX is not a
large depository of water data. Rather, its objective is to provide the user
with sufficient information to define what data are available, where these
D-18
-------
data may be obtained, in what form the data are available, and some of the
major characteristics of the data.
The U.S. Geological Survey has the lead-role responsibility for NAWDEX. In
this capacity, it has established the NAWDEX Program Office at its National
Center in Reston, Virginia. This office became active in November 1975 and
provides the central management for NAWDEX. It also has the responsibility
for coordinating all operational activities within the program. This
includes serving as liaison between NAWDEX members and users of the system.
The service capabilities of NAWDEX will be supported by a nationwide network
of Local Assistance Centers established in the offices of NAWDEX members to
provide local and convenient access to NAWDEX and its services. This network
will initially be established in late 1976 in the 46 district offices of the
U.S. Geological Survey. These offices are located in 45 states and Puerto
Rico. Most are equipped with computer terminals, thereby providing an
extensive telecommunication network for access to the computerized directory
and indexes being developed for the NAWDEX program. As the NAWDEX membership
increases, additional centers will be added in large population areas and
areas of high user interest to provide improved access to NAWDEX and its
services.
The NAWDEX Program Office is currently developing a Water Data Sources
Directory. This directory will identify organizations that collect water
data, locations within these organizations from which water data may be
obtained, the geographic areas in which water data are collected by these
organizations, the types of water data collected, alternate sources for ac-
quiring the organization's data, and the media in which the data are avail-
able. This directory is scheduled for release in 1977.
A computerized Master Water Data Index is also being prepared which is sched-
uled for nationwide use in November 1976. This index will identify individ-
ual sites for which water data are available, the locations of these sites,
the organizations collecting the data, the hydrologic disciplines represented
by the data, the periods of record, water data parameters, the frequency of
D-19
-------
measurement of the parameters, and the media in which the data are available.
More than 350,000 water data sites are currently being indexed from informa-
tion contributed by 19 federal agencies and more than 300 non-Federal
agencies.
Through its Water Data Sources Directory, Master Water Data Index, and indexes
and other reference sources made available by its participating members,
NAWDEX assists its users in locating data of special interest. These data
include water data in computerized and in both published and unpublished
forms. The user is then referred to the organization(s) having the needed
data. NAWDEX thus serves as a central point of contact for locating water
data that may be held by several different organizations. Data search assist-
ance may be obtained from the NAWDEX Program Office or from any of the Local
Assistance Centers.
To expedite locating existing data, NAWDEX and STORET should be queried at
the same time. In addition to referring the user to STORET, NAWDEX will pro-
vide information on other data sources for the area under consideration in
many instances.
Requests for services or additional information related to NAWDEX and STORET
may be directed to:
National Water Data Exchange STORET (WH-553)
U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
421 National Center 401 M Street, S.W.
Reston, VA 22092 Washington, D.C. 20460
Telephone (703) 860-6031 Telephone (202) 426-7792
Local points of contact for the USEPA STORET system and state Water quality
.agencies are given in Chapter 2 of this Manual (Tables 2-4 and 2-7). Se-
lected federal sources for water quality information are given in Table D-3.
A call to the Federal Information Center, (202) 755-8660, with its staff of
trained information specialists, will assist the user in finding the appro-
priate contact within any of these federal agencies.
D-20
-------
TABLE D-3
SELECTED FEDERAL SOURCES FOR WATER QUALITY INFORMATION
Department of Agriculture
Forest Service
Soil Conservation Service
Department of Commerce
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Bureau of Standards
Department of Defense
Army Corps of Engineers
Army Civil Engineering Research Laboratory
Navy Facilities Engineering Command
Air Force Civil Engineering Research Center
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
Public Health Service
Department of Interior
Bureau of Reclamation
Bureau of Land Management
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Bureau of Mines
Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife
Bureau of Outdoor Recreation
Geological Survey
Office of Saline Water
Fish and Wildlife Service
Office of Water Resources Research
Department of Transportation
Coast Guard
Energy Research and Development Administration
Environmental Protection Agency
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Water Resources Council
Council on Environmental Quality
D-21
-------
D.2 Measurement Site, Parameter, and Frequency Selection
D.2.1 Site Selection
The location of measurement sites is critical to obtaining good quality data
and properly interpreting them. The following discussion covers overall site
location guidance, site selection for waste load allocation surveys, catch-
ment selection for stormwater model calibration and verification, and specific
local site selection criteria.
D.2.1.1 Overall Site Location Guidance
For overall background and problem assessment the following locations are
recommended for the chemical and physical sampling of the water column.
Biological and sediment stations should also be established at these loca-
tions, as appropriate.
1. At critical locations in water quality limited areas. Stations
should be located within areas that are known or suspected to
be in violation of water quality standards, ideally at the site
of the most pronounced water quality degradation. The data
from these stations should gage the effectiveness of pollution
control measures being required in these areas.
2. At the major outlets from and at the major or significant in-
puts to lakes, impoundments, estuaries, or coastal areas that
are known to exhibit eutrophic characteristics. These stations
should be located in such a way as to measure the inputs and
outputs of nutrients and other pertinent substances into and
from these water bodies. The information from these stations
will be useful in determining cause/effect relationships and
in indicating appropriate corrective measures.
3. At critical locations within eutrophic or potentially eutrophic
lakes, impoundments, estuaries, or coastal areas. These
D-22
-------
stations should be located in those areas displaying the most
pronounced eutrophication or considered to have the highest
potential for eutrophication. The information from these sta-
tions, when taken in combination with the pollution source data,
can be used to establish cause/effect relationships and to
identify problem areas.
4. At locations upstream and downstream of major population and/or
industrial centers which have significant waste discharges into
flowing surface waters. These stations should be located in
such a way that the impact on water quality and the amounts of
pollutants contributed can be measured. The information col-
lected from these stations should gage the relative effective-
ness of pollution control activities.
5. Upstream and downstream of representative land use areas and
morphologic zones within the area. These stations should be
located and sampled in such a manner as to compare the relative
effects of different land use areas (e.g., cropland, mining
area) and morphologic zones (e.g., piedmont, mountain) on water
quality. A particular concern for these stations is the
evaluation of nonpoint sources of pollution and the establishment
of baselines of water quality in sparsely populated areas.
6. At the mouths of major or significant tributaries to mainstem
streams, estuaries, or coastal areas. The data from these sta-
tions, taken in concert with permit monitoring data and intensive
survey data, will determine the major sources of pollutants to
the area's mainstem water bodies and coastal areas. By compari-
son with other tributary data, the relative magnitude of pollu-
tion sources can be evaluated and problem areas can be identified.
7. At representative sites in mainstem rivers, estuaries, coastal
areas, lakes, and impoundments. These stations will provide
data for the general characterization of the area's surface
D-23
-------
waters and will provide baselines of water quality against
which progress can be measured. The purpose of these stations
is not to measure the most pronounced areas of pollution, but
rather to determine the overall quality of the water. Bio-
logical monitoring will be a basic tool for assessing the over-
all water quality of an area.
8. In major water use areas, such as public water supply intakes,
commercial fishing areas, and recreational areas. These sta-
tions serve a dual purpose: the first is public health pro-
tection and the second is for the overall characterization of
water quality in the area. Determining the presence and
accumulation of toxic substances and pathogenic bacteria and
their sources are primary objectives of these stations.
Sediment sampling sites should be located in sink areas as determined by in-
tensive surveys, reconnaissance surveys, and historical data. A major con-
cern of sediment monitoring will be to assess the accumulation of toxic
substances, and locations for sediment sampling should be chosen with this
in mind. Sediment mechanics and the hydrological characteristics of the
water body must be considered. Refer also to Chapter 4 of this Manual.
In general, biological monitoring stations should be established as follows:
1. At key locations in water bodies that are of critical value for
sensitive uses such as domestic water supply, recreation, and
propagation and maintenance of fish and wildlife.
2. In major impoundments near the mouths of major tributaries.
3. Near the mouths of major rivers where they enter an estuary.
4. At locations in major water bodies potentially subject to
inputs of contaminants from areas of concentrated urban, indus-
trial, or agricultural use.
D-24
-------
5. At key locations in water bodies largely unaffected by man's
activities.
For purposes of biological monitoring, a station will normally encompass
areas, rather than points, within a reach of river or area of lake, reservoir,
or estuary adequate to represent a variety of habitats typically present in
the body of water being monitored. Unless there is a specific need to evalu-
ate the effects of a physical structure, it is advisable to avoid areas that
have been altered by a bridge, weir, within a discharge plume, etc. Thus,
biological sampling stations may not always exactly coincide with water column
or sediment stations.
To the extent possible, all monitoring stations should be located in such a
manner as to aid cause/effect analyses. Some station requirements may be
such that, with careful station siting, one particular station could meet the
criteria of a number of types of stations. Caution should be exercised,
however, to avoid compromising the worth of a station for the sake of false
economy. In general, the quality of a monitoring program is not judged
solely by the number of stations. A few critically located stations may be
extremely valuable, while a large number of randomly selected stations may
yield meaningless data. Resource constraints will limit the total number of
stations. Figure D-2, taken from (6), shows some examples of station
locations.
The stations shown on Figure D-2 are described as follows:
1. At a water supply intake; upstream station of a pair bracketing
a municipal and industrial center.
2. At a critical location in a water quality limited segment; down-
stream station of a pair bracketing a municipal and industrial
center; mouth of a significant input to a reservoir known to
exhibit eutrophic characteristics.
D-25
-------
1. (W, B) WATER
SUPPLY INTAKE
MUNICIPAL-
INDUSTRIAL
COMPLEX
IRRIGATED
CROPLAND
STRIP MINING AREA
WILDERNESS AREA.
MOUNTAINOUS 6 FORESTED
X STATION NUMBER
(X, X) STATION TYPE
W WATER COLUMN
B BIOLOGICAL
S SEDIMENT
FIGURE D-2
STATION LOCATIONS
D-26
-------
3. At a critical location in a reservoir known to exhibit eutrophic
characteristics; in an area of recreation.
4. Upstream of a major land use area (strip mining); major outlet
from a eutrophic reservoir.
5. Downstream of a land use area (strip mining); mouth of a signif-
icant tributary to mainstem river.
6. Upstream of a major land use area (irrigated cropland).
7. Downstream of a land use area (irrigated cropland); mouth of a
significant tributary; representative site for other streams
passing through same land use.
8. Upstream of a major land type area (wilderness).
9. Downstream of a major land type area (wilderness); mouth of sig-
nificant tributary to mainstem river.
10. Representative site in mainstem river.
11. Representative site in mainstem river, mouth of major input to a
potentially eutrophic estuary.
12. Representative site in estuary, recreational area, shellfish
harvesting area.
D.2.1.2 Site Selection for Waste Load Allocation Surveys
Intensive surveys for waste load allocation will form an important part of a
208 agency's monitoring program. Since water quality problems don't manifest
themselves on demand and we can't afford to wait around for the 10-year dry
spell, the use of mathematical models for problem assessment will be required.
These models will require monitoring data from intensive surveys for
D-27
-------
calibration and verification. By and large, at least two intensive surveys
will be required for each waste load allocation study. The first, or pre-
liminary, survey should be performed during slightly higher flow conditions
than the second, or primary, survey which should be conducted when flow condi-
tions are as low as possible.
For the case where only one outfall impacts upon the water quality of a
stream, measurement sites should be located as follows:
A - directly upstream of the outfall.
B - effluent from the outfall.
C - mix point (i.e., where effluent is thoroughly mixed with
stream flow).
D. - intermediate points between the mix point and the DO sag point
or a tributary, if one enters the stream ahead of the sag point.
Spacing of 0.1 mile or less is usually warranted.
E - directly upstream of any tributaries.
F - tributary.
G- - intermediate points between tributaries (if more than one) or
between tributary and sag point.
H - sag point.
I. - points downstream from the sag point. Measure at least every
0.1 mile until there is a definite recovery in the DO profile.
Where more than one outfall discharges into the stream, these sources must
also be measured, and the above site locations altered accordingly.
D-28
-------
The problem of determining the mix point deserves special mention. The com-
mon practice of locating the mix point either by visual inspection of the
stream or by simply assuming that the stream is well mixed a certain distance
downstream is simply inadequate. A more rigorous method must be used. One
technique that has successfully been employed is to follow the concentration
of chlorides downstream. The steps in this procedure are:
1. Measure chloride concentration upstream of the outfall.
2. Measure chloride concentration in the effluent.
3. Perform a mass balance calculation to determine the mixed chloride
concentration.
4. Measure chloride concentrations at increasing distances downstream
from the outfall.
5. Locate the mix point where the measured chloride concentration is
equal to the calculated value.
D.2.1.3 Catchment Selection for Stormwater Model Calibration and
Verification
Field data will be required for calibration and verification of stormwater
models, with details dependent upon the actual model selected (see Ap-
pendix A). However, it must be emphasized at the outset that instrumentation
of a large, multiuse drainage basin can only generate data for verification
of urban planning models. Calibration of these models requires data from
small catchments of uniform land use to provide information for adjusting
model parameters for each individual land use. Since it will not be prac-
ticable to instrument all catchments within a planning area, the effective-
ness of the planning models will depend to a large degree on the ability to
D-29
-------
estimate parameters for catchments that have no calibration data. This im-
plies the selection of catchments that have a high potential for data trans-
ferability as "benchmark" stations and instrumenting them accordingly. Each
instrumented catchment must therefore be viewed as a "sample" of the planning
area's catchments. Selection of representative and (to the extent possible)
uniform "samples" is necessary in order to arrive at a set of transferable
model parameters that cover the variations among catchments for the entire
planning area.
Catchment selection begins with an inventory of catchments in the planning
area. Minimum characterization includes size; present and projected land
use; drainage type (non-sewered, degrees of partial sewer service, fully
sewered, and sewer types); physical catchment characteristics; and relation-
ship to major streams, lakes, or estuaries within the area of interest.
Catchments in urban areas are small and numerous, emphasizing the need for
selecting a small, representative subset. The size will affect the relative
importance of runoff flow and water quality constituent routing. Very small
(e.g., less than 0.1 square mile) catchments should be avoided as their
(typically) extremely rapid response times may make runoff characterization
impossible. It is unlikely that the requirement for uniformity of land use
will allow utilization of large (e.g., over 5 square miles) catchments in
urban areas.
The extent of sewering will have a significant impact on catchment runoff,
affecting routing, length of overland flow, and the relative importance of
infiltration. In urban areas, the ratio of sewer length to drainage area
typically falls between 8 and 18. The corresponding ratio for natural river
and stream channels would be less than 2. The physical catchment charac-
teristics such as percent imperviousness, ground slope, soil characteristics,
and infiltration potential will obviously affect runoff and must be con-
sidered in selecting representative catchments for instrumentation.
The recommended procedure is to prepare a matrix inventory characterizing
each catchment within the area of interest. These should then be categorized
D-30
-------
using land use as the factor, since parameters in currently available models
are largely functions of land use. One should not feel constrained to use
only the conventional single-family residential, multi-family residential,
commercial, industrial, and open-space land use types. Use types reflecting
the local conditions are more meaningful. For example, it may be desirable
to distinguish between single-family residential areas near the center of a
city and those in the suburbs; review of the catchment inventory may indicate
a number of small suburban shopping centers and the desirability of a mixed
residential/commercial category. Other locally important factors for
determining land use types might be traffic volume, population density, age
of development, family income, percent of streets with curb and gutter,
type of industry, and so on. Although local conditions will determine the
exact number of land use categories to be employed, fewer than five will
probably not allow satisfactory data transfer and more than ten will increase
field data collection costs beyond reason. See Appendix C of this Manual for
further guidance.
The problem of site selection from among those catchments in each land use
category now remains. Budgetary constraints will mandate selection of only
one catchment for instrumentation in each land use category for the most
part and, therefore, the "best" must be selected. Although random selection
may be expedient, a more rigorous and comprehensive approach is usually
desirable. On the other hand, a sophisticated multiple regression analysis
with serial and/or factor differentiation of catchment variables is probably
not warranted. The technique of weighted suitability ratings often employed
in land use planning will be adequate in most instances. It has the advan-
tage that the selection criteria can easily be illustrated on a single chart
for relative catchment comparison. Although the procedure is necessarily
subjective in the selection of factors, suitability values, and weights, so
was the basic selection of land use types.
D-31
-------
D.2.1.4 Specific Site Selection Criteria
Givei an identified catchment, stream reach, or other general location where
measurements are desired, there are some general criteria that can aid in
selecting the specific measurement site. They include:
1. Maximum accessibility and safety. Manholes on busy streets
should be avoided if possible; shallow depths with manhole steps
in good condition are desirable. Sites with a history of sur-
charging or submergence by surface water, or both, should be
avoided if possible.
2. Be sure that the site provides the information desired. Famili-
arity with the sewer system is necessary. Knowledge of the ex-
istence of inflow or outflow between the measurement point and
point of data use is essential.
3. Make certain the site is far enough downstream from tributary
inflow to ensure mixing of the tributary with the main stream.
4. Locate in a straight length of channel, at least six widths
below bends.
5. Locate at a point of maximum turbulence, as found in sections
of greater roughness and of probable higher velocities.
Locate just downstream from a drop or hydraulic jump, if
possible.
6. In all cases, consider the cost of installation, balancing cost
against effectiveness in providing the data needed.
The success or failure of selected equipment or methods, with respect to
accuracy and completeness of data collected as well as reasonableness of
cost, depends very much on the care and effort exercised in selecting the
D-32
-------
site. A requirement with regard to flow measurement that appears to be
obvious, but which is frequently not sufficiently considered, is that the
site selected be located to give the desired flow measurement. Does flow
at the site provide information actually needed to fulfill given needs?
Sometimes influent flows, diversions, or storage upstream or downstream from
the selected site would bias the data in a manner not understood without a
thorough study of the proposed site. Such study would include reference to
surface maps and to sewer maps and plans. Sometimes groundwater infiltration
or unrecorded connections may exist. For these reasons, a thorough field
investigation should be made before establishing a flow measurement site.
A basic consideration in site selection is the possible availability of
measurements or records collected by others. At times, data being collected
by the USGS, by the state, or by other public agencies can be used. There
are locations where useful data, although not currently being collected, may
have been collected in prior years. Additional data to supplement those
earlier records may be more useful than new data collected at a different
site.
Requirements that apply to all measurement sites are accessibility, per-
sonnel and equipment safety, and freedom from vandalism. If a car or other
vehicle can be driven directly to the site at all times, the cost in time re-
quired for installation, operation, and maintenance of the equipment will be
less, and it is possible that less expensive equipment can be selected.
Consideration should be given to access during periods of adverse weather
conditions and during periods of flood stage. Sites on bridges or at man-
holes where heavy traffic occurs should be avoided unless suitable protec-
tion for men and equipment is provided. If entry to sewers is required, the
more shallow locations should be selected where possible. Manhole steps and
other facilities for sewer access must be carefully inspected, and any
needed repairs made. Possible danger from harmful gases, chemicals, or
explosion should be investigated. With respect to sites at or near streams,
historical flood marks should be determined and used for placement of access
D-33
-------
facilities and measurement equipment above flood level where this is possible.
Areas of known frequent vandalism should be avoided.
In this last regard, the problem of vandalism can be serious and costly, both
in terms of equipment damage and data loss. The selection of sites in open,
rather than secluded, areas may help reduce vandalism as may illumination at
night. Attempts to hide or camouflage equipment have been generally unsuc-
cessful. Instrumentation should be sheltered to the extent possible, trading
off the cost of protective facilities, the latitude afforded by the site, and
the need for easy access. Occasionally, solid masonry or steel shelters sur-
rounded by heavy fencing may be required for measurement sites, and these
additional costs must be included in such instances. Finally, warning signs
are generally unsuccessful; they may only encourage vandalism regardless of
the type of threat -- high voltage, radiation hazard, fine, or imprisonment.
D.2.2 Parameter Selection
A review of the Parameter Handbook points out that the list of possible water
quality parameters that might be of interest to the 208 planner is almost end-
less. Parameter selection must be based on the specific objectives of the
study and a knowledge of general pollution source characteristics. For ex-
ample, nonmunicipal effluent limitations guidelines for existing point
sources, standards of performance for new sources, and pretreatment standards
for new and existing sources discharging to publicly-owned waste treatment
facilities have been published for 28 point source categories (40 CFR 405-432),
Effluent limitations establish the mass of specific pollutants that may be
discharged per unit of production or raw material input. Limitations are es-
tablished for a maximum production day and for the 30-day average. Table D-4
summarizes the effluent parameters included in each of the published effluent
guidelines.
For publicly-owned treatment works in existence on July 1, 1977, or approved
for a Federal construction grant prior to June 30, 1974, effluent limitations
D-34
-------
TABLE D-4
EFFLUENT PARAMETERS BY INDUSTRIAL CATEGORIES
INDUSTRY CATEGORY
1. PULP, PAPER AND PAPERBOARDS
2. BUILDERS PAPER AND BOARD
3. TIMBER PRODUCTS
4. SOAP AND DETERGENTS
5. DAIRY PRODUCTS
6. ORGANIC CHEMICALS
7. PETROLEUM REFINING
8. LEATHER TANNING AND FISHING
CANNED AND PRESERVED
FRUITS AND VEGETABLES
10. NONFERROUS METALS
11. GRAIN MILLS
12. SUGAR PROCESSING
13. FERTILIZERS
14. ASBESTOS
15. MEAT PRODUCTS
16. FERROALLOYS
17. GLASS
18. ELECTROPLATING
19. PHOSPHATE MANUFACTURING
20. FEEDLOTS
21. CEMENT MANUFACTURING
22. RUBBER PROCESSING
23. PLASTICS AND SYNTHETICS
24. INORGANIC CHEMICALS
25. IRON AND STEEL
26. TEXTILES
STEAM ELECTRIC GENERATING
1 • EQUIPMENT
28. SEAFOOD PROCESSING
TOTALS:
£
g
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
18
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
27
X
ex
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
27
cc
3
8
X
X
2
o
o
u
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
11
PHENOLS |
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
8
UJ
o:
o
Q
J
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
12
SURFACTANTS |
X
1
t_)
g
X
X
2
fl
i
X
X
X
X
X
5
SULFIDE |
X
X
2
_j
<
u
o
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
7
M>
t*
U
X
X
X
X
4
g
M
X
X
X
3
K. NITROGEN |
X
1
FECAL COLIFORM ]
X
X
X
X
X
X
6
•sn
o
a:
X
X
2
ORGANIC N |
X
1
T. PHOSPHORUS j
X
X
X
3
FLUORIDE |
X
X
X
X
X
s
t~
X
X
X
X
4
COPPER |
X
X
X
3
ALUMINUM ]
X
X
2
CYANIDE ]
X
X
X
3
MANGANESE
X
1
NICKEL
X
X
2
ARSENIC
X
1
3NIH01H3
X
1
e£
X
X
2
0
2
X
i
MERCURY
X
X
2
T. DISSOLVED SOLIDS
X
X
2
D-35
-------
are based upon an effluent standard of secondary treatment. Secondary treat-
ment is defined in 40 CFR 133.102 and consists of:
Parameter
BOD5
Suspended Solids
Fecal Coliform Bacteria
(geometric mean)
Removal Efficiency
pH
7-day Average
45 mg/£
45 mg/fc
400/100 m£
30-day Average
30 mg/Jl
30 rag A
200/100 m£
85 percent
6.0 - 9.0
The recommended procedure is to examine the sources and processes involved in
the study area and, on the basis of need-to-know and reasonable expectation,
select measurement parameters accordingly. Flow should always be included.
Parameters should not be limited to those that are known to be a problem, but
should also include those that can reasonably be expected to become a problem.
The 208 monitoring program should identify new problems as well as track
existing ones. The results of early analyses should be used to assess param-
eter coverage and assist in determining whether an increase or decrease is
warranted. Resist the temptation to "look at the whole world." Analyses
cost money, and wise resource management dictates that only parameters, the
knowledge of which directly supports specific study objectives, should be in-
cluded. Put in writing a justification for each parameter selected. Use the
Parameter Handbook for guidance.
D.2.2.1 Parameters for Storm-Generated Discharges
Parameter selection will be facilitated by initially considering water qual-
ity characteristics in gross categories rather than as specific compounds or
D-36
-------
elements. As an example, the following treats the quality characteristics
considered important for storm-generated discharges. See Wullschleger et.al.
(7) for elaboration.
D.2.2.1.1 Oxygen Demand
One of the most important quality characteristics in a receiving body of wa-
ter is the dissolved oxygen concentration. The dissolved oxygen concentra-
tion has a direct bearing on the quality and natural balance of much of the
aquatic biota. Dissolved oxygen concentration can also have an effect on
the recreational and aesthetic uses of a body of water. Storm-generated dis-
charges that contain organic and inorganic compounds that exert a demand for
the oxygen dissolved in water can be considered pollutional discharges in the
same sense as dry-weather municipal wastewaters.
Oxygen demand is exerted by (1) organic compounds that undergo biochemical
oxidation as a result of microbial activity and (2) by the immediate demand
exerted by the chemical oxidation of inorganic reduced compounds. However,
storm-generated discharges have certain characteristics different from
municipal sewage that affect not only the DO level in the receiving waters,
but also the conventional tests used to measure oxygen demand. Since com-
bined sewer overflows have a variety of sources other than just municipal
sewage, the discharges may contain materials that cause special problems.
During dry weather, when flow through a combined sewer system is low, solids
settle out. At the start of a storm, the first flush of water through the
system may have a high concentration of solids that affects the demand char-
acteristics of the waste. It has been found that the fraction of BOD in the
particulate form can range from 69 to 87 percent, which is considerably
higher than the 30 to 50 percent present in most municipal wastewaters.
Also, combined sewer overflows from industrial areas and urban runoff may
contain oils, toxic materials and chemicals which are foreign to the natural
environment and interfere with traditional oxygen demand tests. Finally,
D-37
-------
storm-generated discharges contain a large amount of natural materials such
as silt, vegetation, wood, and other materials such as plastic that may not
exert an immediate demand but will eventually use the oxygen required for
decomposition. These characteristics cause these discharges to be different
from that waste normally encountered in sanitary analyses.
There are numerous tests available for use as potential oxygen demand in-
dicators, including BOD , BOD , BODY, ACOD, COD, TOC, and TOD. The desired
D £.\J A.
test should have a well established, standardized test procedure and provide
a measurement of the total oxygen demand on the environment. No single
analytical test can meet both of these criteria. Therefore, two parameters
are recommended to indicate oxygen demand for storm-generated discharges, TOD
and BOD,.. TOD reflects the long-term demand, allowing correct determination
of discharge effects, and lacks the serious interference problems of other
tests, notably COD. BOD^ is recommended, despite its numerous disadvantages,
because of its widespread and historical use. Also, because of toxicity
effects on the BOD^ test, comparison of BOD and TOD results can yield in-
formation about the degree of toxicity and its possible effect on the natural
environment.
D.2.2.1.2 Particulate Concentration
The solid matter present in storm-generated discharges can be divided into
two major categories; namely, particulate solids and dissolved solids.
Particulate solids are important in combined sewer overflows and storm run-
off applications because they usually represent a large fraction of the total
solids. Also, these solids are generally removed from the flow by physical
treatment processes such as sedimentation, screening, flotation, and filtra-
tion—the type of processes most commonly used for storm-generated dis-
charges. It is, in fact, the relatively high concentration of particulate
solids in these flows which makes such processes attractive.
The recommended parameter for indicating particulate concentration in storm-
generated discharges is nonfilterable residue (suspended solids). The
D-38
-------
analysis is routine and not as time consuming and cumbersome as some of the
other particulate tests and, with a few additional steps, both the volatile
and fixed portions can be determined, yielding another useful piece of
information in most instances. Where settleable residue is desired, the
gravimetric method is recommended, not the Imhoff cone. Turbidity measure-
ments provide little comparable data about particulate matter or concentra-
tion and are not recommended for this purpose.
D.2.2.1.3 Pathogenic Microorganism Potential
Any discharge that includes waters which have come into contact with excre-
ment from warm-blooded animals of any type should be considered as having
the potential for conveying pathogenic bacteria, viruses, protozoa, and other
contagions. It is extremely difficult, if not logistically impossible, to
monitor these discharges for the many pathogens themselves. This problem was
recognized in the water supply field many years ago and has led to the almost
universal usage of the coliform group of bacteria as the indicator or measure
of the sanitary quality of water. The coliforms themselves are not neces-
sarily pathogenic, but their presence should infer the possible presence of
pathogens. However, for a number of reasons the coliform group is not
necessarily the most sensitive indicator as far as storm-generated discharges
are concerned.
The recommended indicator parameters are fecal coliform and fecal strep-
tococcus. Furthermore, it is recommended that the membrane filter (MF)
technique be used rather than the multiple tube fermentation procedure where
results are expressed as the most probable number (MPN) statistic.
D. 2.2.1.4 Eutrophic Potential
In addition to sunlight and carbon dioxide, aquatic plants require nutrients
and trace salts. The principal nutrients are compounds which contain the
elements phosphorus, nitrogen, and potassium. The proliferation of aquatic
plants in most water bodies is undesirable. The term "eutrophic" refers to
D-39
-------
a condition in a water body where copious plant growth has resulted in an
undesirable or unsightly situation of accelerated lake deterioration. Al-
though eutrophication is a natural process, it can be accelerated by man's
activities.
Nitrogen and phosphorus are measures of the eutrophic potential of storm-
generated discharges. It is recommended that two nitrogen analyses be con-
ducted, nitrate plus nitrite (run by reducing nitrate to nitrite and
measuring the latter) and Kjeldahl. Of the 14 different phosphorus frac-
tions, total phosphorus is the recommended parameter.
D.2.2.1.5 Toxic and Related Substances
A large number of compounds of varying toxicity and concentration are likely
to be found in combined sewer overflows and storm runoff. However, the
toxicants of major concern can be divided into the general categories of
heavy metals, pesticides, and herbicides.
When studying the quality of storm flows, it is recommended that a composite
sample of the flow be analyzed for lead, zinc, copper, chromium, mercury,
cadmium, arsenic, nickel, and tin four times a year (seasonally). Based
upon the results of these tests, a decision can be made as to how often cer-
tain heavy metals will have to be analyzed thereafter. It is expected that
lead, zinc, copper, and chromium may be measured routinely. In certain com-
bined sewer areas serving known industries, or in certain storm sewer dis-
charges from areas of heavy vehicular traffic, it may be necessary to do
more frequent analysis.
Because of the wide variability of pesticides in use, the periodic nature
of their application depending upon season and nature of the drainage area,
and the complexity of the laboratory analyses, no pesticides or associated
compounds are recommended for routine analysis. However, it is recommended
that, when evaluating the quality of a storm-generated discharge, a study of
the drainage area should be made to determine the likelihood of pesticide
D-40
-------
application (and the type) and if it is probable that the storm flow may
contain pesticides. At least one discharge should be analyzed to see if that
pesticide is present. Depending upon this result, a decision can be made as
to whether more analyses are needed.
D.2.2.1.6 Other Parameters
There are a host of other parameters that can be used to characterize storm-
generated discharges. In the absence of site specific concerns, however,
only pH is recommended for routine measurement.
D.2.2.2 Parameters for a National Water Quality Monitoring
Program
As a further aid in parameter selection, the proposed minimum parameter list
for a national water quality monitoring program will be discussed.
Temperature, pH, and dissolved oxygen are included because they are the
primary constituents in most chemical reactions that occur within the water-
body. They are also the essential factors that govern whether the ecosystem
will maintain aquatic life. A conductivity measurement is included to
determine the degree to which dissolved solids contribute to the water qual-
ity. This is a most reliable measurement and can be done on site. Salinity
is measured in estuaries and bays.
Fecal coliform is included because it is, at present, the most reliable test
for indicating the possible presence of pathogenic microorganisms in the
system. Trace metals were limited to those that are of high priority and
are toxic. Since the concern of the program is to measure the total load,
total metals instead of dissolved forms are measured.
In order to determine the extent of total nutrient contribution, total
phosphorus, total Kjeldahl nitrogen, and nitrite and nitrate are measured.
Since the basic concern of the program is the total nutrient load, total
phosphorus is measured instead of the other various forms of phosphorus.
D-41
-------
This is also more economically sound. In determining the contribution of
nitrogen to the system, the concern of the program is also to arrive at some
understanding of the stage of nitrification within the system. Therefore,
total Kjeldahl nitrogen is included as a measurement of organic nitrogen and
ammonia, and nitrate and nitrite are included to determine the extent of
oxidized nitrogen.
A total suspended solids measurement is included to measure the contribution
of solid material to the system and to give some indication of water clarity
and the probability of chemical adsorption.
A chemical oxygen demand (COD) measurement is included to get an indication
of the oxygen demand placed on the system. Chemical oxygen demand was chosen
over biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and total organic carbon (TOG) because
it is more reliable than BOD, does not involve problems with holding time
and sample transport as do BOD samples, and does not require the sophisti-
cated equipment required of a TOC measurement. COD is not measured in lakes
and impoundments because it is usually found only in such low concentrations
that it renders the measurement meaningless. TOC is measured in estuaries
because the COD measurement does not yield satisfactory results in salt wa-
ter due to chloride interference.
The trace organics included in the program were chosen because they appear
most frequently on several USEPA priority lists relating to toxic substances;
for example, measurements required for the permit program, measurements re-
quired for the drinking water program, the Section 307(a) list, and several
listings proposed by the Office of Toxic Substances.
The effects of contaminants on aquatic organisms are complex. Synergistic
chemical/physical reactions, biomagnification, and other natural events
cannot be easily quantified. For these reasons and for the purposes of
the program, the best approach to determine the presence and potential
health threat of toxic substances in the ecosystem appears to be the chem-
ical analysis of fish and shellfish tissue. This has, therefore, been
included in the monitoring program.
D-42
-------
D.2.2.3 Parameters for Waste Load Allocations
As an example of possible parameter coverage for waste load allocation sur-
veys, Tables D-5 and D-6 indicate minimum parameters for the preliminary and
primary intensive surveys discussed in Section D.2.1.2. The measurement lo-
cations indicated in the tables are those described in Section D.2.1.2. In
addition to the indicated parameters, it will usually be desirable to perform
a metals and pesticide scan on at least one sample from the preliminary sur-
vey and, based on the results, consider additional parameters for the primary
low flow survey.
D.2.3 Measurement Frequency Selection
Monitoring frequencies are established by the variations of the system
(sources and receiving water) and the nature of the pollutants (conservative
and nonconservative). Frequencies selected should be adequate to account for
variations in the flows and quality of pollution sources, the variations in
stream flow, and tidal action. This establishes a spectrum ranging from a
periodic grab sample (suitable for the rare steady-state condition) to con-
tinuous collection over a suitable time period.
D.2.3.1 Frequency for Background and Trend Data
Background and trend data must be representative of the variations in water
quality and changes in pollution occurring over the course of a year, and
the measurement frequency must be less than the shortest anticipated fre-
quency of pollutant variation. To aid in such sampling frequency determina-
tion, Tables D-7, D-8, and D-9 present the proposed sampling frequencies for
the national water quality monitoring program for rivers and streams, lakes
and impoundments, and estuaries and bays.
The sampling frequencies given in the foregoing represent the bare minimum
and, depending upon the anticipated variability, considerations should be
given to utilizing more frequent intervals. If at all possible, new stations
should be sampled on a weekly or biweekly basis for the first 6 months to
D-43
-------
TABLE D-5
PARAMETERS FOR PRELIMINARY SURVEY
Location
A
B
C
D.
E
F
Gi
H
I.
DO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Temp
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Distance
Downstream
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Travel
Time
X
X*
X*
X
X*
Flow
Measurement
X
X
X
X
X
X*
BOD2Q
X
BOD20
Inh
X
X
Nitrogen
Compounds
X
X
* Measurements need be taken at only one of the multiple locations desig-
nated by each of D., G-, or I..
TRIBUTARY
D-44
-------
TABLE 6
PARAMETERS FOR PRIMARY SURVEY
Location
A
B
C
D.
E
F
G.
i
H
I.
DO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
PH
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Temp
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Distance
Downstream
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Travel
Time
X
X
X
X
X
X
Flow
Measurement
X
X
X
X
X
X*
Continuous
DO
X
•
X
Nitrogen
Compounds
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
BOD5
X
BOD5
Inh
X
X
X
X
X
BOD20
Inh
X
X
X
X
X
o
*>.
C/1
Measurements need be taken at only one of the multiple locations designated by I..
H
TRIBUTARY
-------
TABLE D-7
PARAMETER LIST AND SAMPLING FREQUENCY
FOR THE NATIONAL MONITORING PROGRAM
Rivers and Streams
Parameter (Units) (STORET Parameter Code)
Sampling Frequency
Temperature (C°) (00010)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/£) (00300)
pH (Standard Units) (00400)
Conductivity (UMHOS/cm 8 25°C) (00095)
Fecal Coliform (No./lOOmfc) (31616)
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (mg/£) (00625)
Nitrate + nitrite (mg/£) (00630)
Total phosphorus (mg/£) (00665)
Chemical oxygen demand (mg/£) (00335)
Total suspended solids (mg/£) (00530)
Representative fish/shellfish tissue analysis (see Table D-9)
Flow (CFS) (00060)
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Annually
Monthly
-------
TABLE D-7
PARAMETER LIST AND SAMPLING FREQUENCY
FOR THE NATIONAL MONITORING
PROGRAM (Cont'd)
Lakes and Impoundments, Including the Great Lakes
Parameter (Units) CSTORET Parameter Code)
Sampling Frequency
pH (Standard Units) (00400)
Temperature (°C) (00010)
Dissolved oxygen (rog/&) (00300)
Conductivity (UMHOS/cro @ 25°C) (00095)
Fecal Coliform (No./100mA) (31616)
Total phosphorus (mg/£) (00665)
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (mg/£) (00625)
Nitrate + nitrite (mg/£) (00630)
Total suspended solids (mg/£) (00530)
Representative fish/shellfish tissue analysis (see Table D-9)
Transparency Secchi Disk (Meters) (00078)
Seasonally
Seasonally
Seasonally
Seasonally
Seasonally
Seasonally
Seasonally
Seasonally
Seasonally
Annually
Monthly
-------
TABLE D-7
PARAMETER LIST AND SAMPLING FREQUENCY
FOR THE NATIONAL MONITORING
PROGRAM (Cont'd)
Estuaries and Bays
Parameter (Units) (STORET Parameter Code)
Sampling Frequency
-Pa.
00
Temperature (°C) (00010)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/&) (00300)
Total organic carbon (mg/£) (00680)
pH (Standard Units) (00400)
Salinity (°/oo) (00480)
Fecal Coliform (No./100m£) (31616)
Transparency Secchi Disk (Meters) (00078)
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (mg/£) (00625)
Total phosphorus (mg/£) (60665)
Nitrate + nitrite (mg/£) (00630)
Total suspended solids (mg/£) (00530)
Representative shellfish tissue analysis (see Table D-9)
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Annually
-------
TABLE D-8
TRACE ORGANICS AND METALS ANALYSES FOR WATER COLUMN
(1)
Parameter (STORET), (yg/1)
PCBs (39516)
Aldrin (39330)
Dieldrin (39380)
o.p-DDE (39327)
p.p-DDE (39320)
o.p-DDD (39315)
p,p'-DDD (39310)
o,p-DDT (39305)
p,p'-DDT (39300)
Chlordane
cis isomer (39062)
trans isomer (39065)
cis nonachlor (39068)
trans nonachlor (39071)
Endrin (39390)
Methoxychlor (39480)
Hexachlorobenzene (39700)
Pentachlorophenol (39032)
Hexachlorocyclohexane
a-BHC (39334)
Y-BHC (39810)
Arsenic (01002)
Cadmium (01027)
Chromium (01042)
Copper (01034)
Mercury (71900)
Lead (01051)
(1) For water column analysis when applicable (24).
TABLE D-9
TRACE ORGANICS AND METALS ANALYSES FOR FISH/SHELLFISH TISSUE AND SEDIMENT
Parameter (STORET:tissue, STORET:sediment), (yg/g tissue, yg/kg sediment)
PCBs (39520,39519)
Aldrin (39334, 39333)
Dieldrin (39387, 39383)
o,p-DDE (39329, 39328)
p,p'-DDE (39322, 39321)
o,p-DDD (39325, 39316)
p,p'-DDD (39312, 39311)
o,p-DDT (39318, 39306)
p,p'-DDT (39302, 39301)
Chlordane
cis isomer (39063, 39064)
trans isomer (39066, 39067)
cis nonachlor (39069, 39070)
trans nonachlor (39072, 39073)
Endrin (39397, 39393)
Methoxychlor (39482, 39481)
Hexachlorobenzene (39703, 39701)
Pentachlorophenol (39060, 39061)
Hexachlorocyclohexane
a-BHC (39074, 39076)
Y-BHC (39075, 39811)
Arsenic (01004, 01003)
Cadmium (71940, 01028)
Chromium (71939, 01029)
Copper (71937, 01039)
Mercury (71930, 71921)
Lead (71936, 01052)
D-49
-------
1 year of operation or until the data indicate that less frequent sampling
is warranted.
Fish samples should be collected annually in the fall, since contaminant con-
centrations are at their maximum at this time of year. Only fish samples
that will be most representative of the water quality in the area of interest
should be collected for tissue analysis. Migratory species should be dis-
counted. Two replicate whole fish composite samples of a representative bot-
tom feeder and one whole fish composite sample of a predator species should
be collected at each station. Commercially or recreationally important
species should be collected wherever possible. Each composite should include
at least five fish, each of approximately the same size. Because of their
sedentary existence and great water-filtering capabilities, shellfish are ex-
cellent concentrators of contaminants. Therefore, wherever possible, shell-
fish samples should be collected and analyzed, especially in estuarine
environments.
Where incidents of fish kill occur, the appropriate information should be
recorded. This should include the date of occurrence (or period if it per-
sists) , the location or affected area, the species affected, estimates of
the magnitude of the kill (i.e., number of fish), and any other information
that would be useful. The frequency and magnitude of such events should
decrease as a result of implementing the areawide plans, and this can be a
dramatic way of indicating progress.
D.2.3.2 Frequency for Waste Load Allocation Surveys
Samples could be taken at any convenient time if stream conditions did not
vary. The necessary number of samples would be only that dictated by the
desired degree of precision of the results, taking into account the preci-
sion of the laboratory analytical methods. In theory, the times of collec-
tion and numbers of samples are dictated by the need to ensure both an
acceptable measure of the variations in stream conditions and an acceptable
precision of laboratory analysis. In practice, these considerations are tem-
pered by inescapable limitations of budget, personnel, and facilities, and
frequently by the amount of time available.
D-50
-------
There is no fixed number of samples that will yield results within selected
limits of precision in all situations. The number of samples needed for any
point on a stream varies with the variability in water quality at that point.
A preliminary estimate of the variability can be calculated after a limited
number of analytical results has been obtained. A preliminary prediction of
the number of samples needed to ensure final results within selected confi-
dence limits can be based on the preliminary estimate of variability. The
prediction can be refined as the number of analytical results is increased
until the point is reached at which a firm prediction of the number of sam-
ples required becomes possible. Data from a previous study under comparable
conditions may be used to determine variability and predict the number of
samples required.
In the absence of better information, daily grab samples should be taken from
each stream measurement site over at least a 14-day period. Furthermore, the
time of sampling at each site should be varied as much as possible to indi-
cate any diurnal variations. Try to collect at least one set of samples at
night to indicate photosynthetic effects. Review the analytical results from
the early samples, and adjust the frequency accordingly.
For continuous point source discharges, the sampling frequency will also be
dependent upon anticipated pollutant variability. If knowledge about the
time-varying characteristics of the discharge is required, collect a sequen-
tial discrete sample series. Hourly time steps will be adequate for most
continuous discharges, but in some instances either shorter time periods or
flowmeter pacing will be required. If only average daily loadings are re-
quired, twenty-four-hour, flow proportional composite samples represent the
best approach. These should be taken over a minimum of five consecutive
days, and longer if variability indicates.
D.2.3.3 Frequency for Storm Generated Discharges
For intermittent storm related discharges, measurement frequencies must be
quite short, especially for model calibration and verification where knowl-
edge of temporal variations is very important. The measurement interval
D-51
-------
required is related to catchment size, shape, slope, and percent impervi-
ousness. During sampling of the first few storms in a catchment, it is
prudent to estimate sampling intervals on the short side. They can be in-
creased later if the data warrant. Model input frequency requirements must
also be considered. Suggested minimum measurement intervals are given in
Table D-10. The first sample should be collected as close to the beginning
of the storm-generated runoff as possible. This can be accomplished by
triggering an automatic sampler at a predetermined indication of stage or
rate of rise. Subsequent samples can be paced by timer settings or a flow-
meter with flow increments selected so that the rising limb is well charac-
terized. It may not be necessary to analyze all samples on the falling limb.
Early data analysis will indicate if some can be eliminated or composited and
still allow adequate discharge characterization.
D.3 Flow Measurement Considerations, Equipment, and Procedures
Although flow can be thought of as simply another parameter, it is so often
neglected that it should properly be considered as an essential component of
a monitoring program. Flow measurements are absolutely necessary for mass
discharge calculations, stream and runoff studies, and model calibration and
verification.
D.3.1 General Considerations
Concentrations of natural constituents, such as alkalinity, hardness, and
minerals, generally vary inversely with stream flows. Total loads, or quan-
tities, of natural constituents carried by a stream, on the other hand, in-
crease as flow increases. The increasing water carried by the stream more
than balances the decreasing concentration to yield a greater load in terms
of a unit of total quantity, such as pounds per day. Other factors come
into play with unstable constituents. Time-of-water travel increases as flow
decreases, and this serves to accomplish natural purification in shorter dis-
tances. Higher densities of bacteria, for example, occur just below the
D-52
-------
TABLE D-10
MAXIMUM MEASUREMENT INTERVALS
Desirable Maximum Measurement
Interval (min)
Catchment
Size
50 acres
100 acres
600 acres
3000 acres
Variable
Rainfall
Flow
Water Quality
Rainfall
Flow
Water Quality
Rainfall
Flow
Water Quality
Rainfall
Flow
Water Quality
Highly Impervious
Catchment
2
2
3
3
3
4
5
5
7
12
12
15
Highly Pervious
Catchment
3
3
4
5
5
7
12
12
20
20
20
30
D-53
-------
point of discharge at lower flows, but they die off in shorter distances
because of the longer time of travel. Likewise, BODs are higher near the
point of discharge but stabilize in shorter distances at low discharges.
The natural flow of uncontrolled streams usually varies over a wide range.
Stream flows follow precipitation patterns except in the colder areas of the
country, where precipitation falls as snow in winter and much of the surface
water is frozen. There can be wide differences in stream flow throughout
the year and in the annual flow cycle from year to year. Flow in most areas
tends to be high in late winter and to taper off to minimum quantities in
the fall. High flows usually occur in colder areas when relatively warm
spring rains melt the winter accumulation of ice and snow. However, the
natural cycle may be altered to a considerable extent in streams controlled
by impoundments. Thus, stream flows must be considered in selecting
periods for stream study because of the considerable variations in water
quality that accompany changes in flow. The objectives of the study are im-
portant in this selection, as they are in other decisions.
In manmade conduits, the effects of flow variation are probably greatest in
storm sewers. Although storm sewers are basically designed to carry storm
runoff, during periods of no rainfall they often carry a small but signifi-
cant flow (dry weather flow). This may be flow from ground water, or "base
flow," which gains access to the sewer from unpaved stream courses. Much of
the dry weather flow in storm sewers is composed of domestic sewage or in-
dustrial wastes or both. Where ordinances concerning connections to sewers
are lax or are not rigidly enforced, unauthorized connections to storm
sewers will appear. In some cases, the runoff from septic tanks is carried
to them. Connections for the discharge of swimming pools foundation drains,
sump pumps, cooling water, and pretreated industrial process water to storm
sewers are permitted in many municipalities and contribute to flow during
periods of no rainfall. In some areas, sewers classed as storm sewers are,
in fact, sanitary or industrial waste sewers due to the unauthorized or
inappropriate connections made to them. This may become so aggrevated that
D-54
-------
a continuous flow of sanitary or industrial wastes, or both, discharges into
the receiving stream. Furthermore, this "dry-weather" portion of storm
sewer flow may vary significantly with time.
Storm runoff is the excess rainfall which runs off the ground surface after
losses resulting from infiltration to ground water, evaporation, transpira-
tion by vegetation, and ponding occur. In general, storm runoff is inter-
mittent in accordance with the rainfall pattern for the area. It is also
highly variable from storm to storm and during a particular storm. The
time-discharge relationship, or hydrograph, of a typical storm, with its
synchronous time-precipitation relationship, or hyetograph, is illustrated in
Figure D-3. The meanings of various parameters given in the figure are:
R - Rainfall retained on the permeable portion of the drainage
basin, and not available for runoff.
P - Precipitation in excess of that infiltrated into the ground,
plus that retained on the surface. (Equals the volume of
flood runoff.)
F - Average infiltration of the ground during the storm.
av
T - Period of rise from the beginning of storm runoff to peak of
the hydrograph.
T - Time from center of gravity of rainfall excess to the hydro-
graph peak (.lag time).
b,,b? - Baseline separating groundwater discharge from surface
runoff.
The total volume of runoff for a particular storm is represented by the areas
between the baseline and the hydrograph.
D-55
-------
DURATION OF PRECIPITATION EXCESS
a
i
en
IN./HR
CENTROID OF PRECIPITATION EXCESS
NOTE: 1 INCH = 2.54 CM
1 CUBIC FOOT =28.3 LITERS
3 4
APRIL, 1959
FIGURE D-3
TYPICAL STORM HYETOGRAPH AND HYDROGRAPH
-------
To illustrate some of the problems in measuring storm runoff in small basins,
peak flows exceeding 85 cubic meters per second per 260 hectares (3000 cfs
per square mile) have been observed. Lag times (t ) of 15 minutes to a
hydrograph peak of about 28 cubic meters per second (1000 cfs) from a 600-
hectare (2.3 sq mi) area are not uncommon. With such rapid changes in the
flow, only highly responsive flow measurement methods can be used. The high
rates of flow, with accompanying high velocities, further limit the usable
flow measuring methods.
All flow data must be synchronized with time, at least on a watch time basis,
to have any useful meaning. A particular need for attention to the time
element occurs in the measurement of flows from small urban storm sewers in
order to define the hydrograph and to provide data for the development and
verification of rainfall-runoff-quality models. Peak flows, storm runoff
volumes, daily flows, or other flow parameters are often correlated with
similar flows at other points on a storm sewer or stream, or with flows of
other storm sewers or streams, to provide a means for flow estimation.
Correlations with temperature, soil moisture, or antecedent precipitation
may be made at times. In most cases, it is essential that the correlated
variables be synchronous, so accurate timing of the data is often required.
It is mandatory if time-series analysis is contemplated.
Timing of measured flows and collection of quality samples can be useful
in determining sources of pollution. For example, they can be related to
time of release of pollutants from industrial plants, or to the time of
accidental spills of pollutants. The time of travel of pollutants along a
stream or storm sewer can be estimated from the time of travel of small
rises or other flow changes in the channel.
D.3.2 Flow Measurement Equipment
This brief discussion is intended to provide an overview to aid the 208 plan-
ner in the selection of equipment for the quantitative measurement of flows.
For further reading, see Shelley and Kirkpatrick (8), ASME (9),
D-57
-------
Replogle (10), McMahon (11), USDI Bureau of Reclamation (12), Leupold and
Stevens (13), and any of the many standard texts on hydraulics and fluid
mechanics.
Any flow measurement system consists of two distinct parts, each having a
separate function to perform. The first, or primary element, is that part
of the system which is in contact with the fluid, resulting in some type of
interaction. The secondary element is that part of the system which trans-
lates this interaction into the desired readout or recording. While there
is almost an endless variety of secondary elements, primary elements are
related to a more limited number of physical principles, being dependent upon
some property of the fluid other than, or in addition to, its volume or mass
such as kinetic energy, inertia, specific heat, or the like. These primary
element physical principles form a natural classification system for flow-
measuring devices as presented in Table D-ll.
D.3.2.1 Desirable Equipment Characteristics
Not all types of flow meters are suitable for measuring wastewater flows.
The severe conditions and vagaries of many of these flows place a number of
very stringent design requirements on flow measurement equipment if it is to
function satisfactorily. No single design can be considered ideal for all
flow measurement activities in all flows of interest. Despite this, one can
set forth some equipment "requirements" in the form of primary design consid-
erations and some desirable equipment features in the form of secondary
design considerations.
The following are primary design considerations for equipment that is to be
used to measure more difficult wastewaters such as storm and combined sewer
flows:
1. Range. Since flow velocities may range from 0.03 to 9 m/s (0.1 to
30 fps), it is desirable that the unit have either a very wide
range of operation; be able to automatically shift scales; or
otherwise cover at least a 100 to 1 range.
D-58
-------
TABLE D-ll
FLOW METER CATEGORIZATION
Division
Quantity
Quantity
Quantity
Quantity
Quantity
Quantity
Quantity
Quantity
Quantity
Quantity
Quantity
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Classification
Gravimetric
Gravimetric
Gravimetric
Volumetric
Volumetric
Volumetric
Volumetric
Volumetric
Volumetric
Volumetric
Volumetric
Differential Pressure
Differential Pressure
Differential Pressure
Differential Pressure
Differential Pressure
Differential Pressure
Differential Pressure
Differential Pressure
Differential Pressure
Differential Pressure
Differential Pressure
Differential Pressure
Differential Pressure
Differential Pressure
Differential Pressure
Differential Pressure
Variable Area
Variable Area
Variable Area
Head-Area
Head-Area
Head- Area
Head-Area
Head-Area
Head-Area
Head-Area
Head-Area
Head-Area
Head-Area
Head-Area
Flow Velocity
Flow Velocity
Flow Velocity
Flow Velocity
Flow Velocity
Flow Velocity
Flow Velocity
Flow Velocity
Force- Displacement
Force- Displacement
Force- Displacement
Force- Displacement
Force- Displacement
Force-Momentum
Force-Momentum
Force-Momentum
Force-Momentum
Thermal
Thermal
Thermal
Other
Other
Other
Other
Other
Other
Other
Type
Weigher
Tilting Trap
Weight Dump
Metering Tank
Reciprocating Piston
Oscillating or Ring Piston
Nutating Disc
Sliding Vane
Rotating Vane
Gear or Lobed Impeller
Dethridge Wheel
Venturi
Dall Tube
Flow Nozzle
Rounded Edge Orifice
Square Edge Orifice
Square Edge Orifice
Square Edge Orifice
Square Edge Orifice
Centrifugal
Centrifugal
Centrifugal
Impact Tube
Impact Tube
Linear Resistance
Linear Resistance
Linear Resistance
Gate
Cone and Float
Slotted Cylinder and Piston
Weir
Weir
Flume
Flume
Flume
Flume
Flume
Flume
Flume
Flume
Open Flow Nozzle
Float
Float
Tracer
Vortex
Vortex
Turbine
Rotating Element
Rotating Element
Vane
Hydrometric Pendulum
Target
Jet Deflection
Ball and Tube
Axial Flow Mass
Radial Mass
Gyroscopic
Mangus Effect
Hot Tip
Cold Tip
Boundary Layer
Electromagnetic
Acoustic
Doppler
Optical
Dilution
Electrostatic
Nuclear Resonance
Subtype
Concentric
Eccentric
Segmented
Gate or Variable Area
Elbow or Long Radius Bend
Turbine Scroll Case
Guide Vane Speed Ring
Pitot-Static
Pitot Ventyri
Pipe Section
Capillary Tube
Porous Plug
Sharp Crested
Broad Crested
Venturi
Parshall
Palmer- Bowlus
Diskin Device
Cutthroat
San Dimas
Trapezoidal
Type HS, H, and HL
Simple
Integrating
Vortex-Velocity
Eddy-Shedding
Horizontal Axis
Vertical Axis
D-59
-------
2. Accuracy. For most purposes, an accuracy of ±10 percent of the
reading at the readout point is necessary, and there will be
applications where an accuracy of ±5 percent is highly desirable.
Repeatability of better than ±2 percent is desired in almost all
instances.
3. Flow Effects on Accuracy. The unit should be capable of maintaining
its accuracy when exposed to rapid changes in flow; e.g., depth and
velocity changes in an open channel flow situation. There are
instances where the flows of interest may accelerate from minimum
to maximum in as short a time period as 5 minutes.
4. Gravity and Pressurized Flow Operation. Because of the conditions
that exist at many measuring sites, it is sometimes desirable that
the unit have the capability (within a closed conduit) of measuring
over the full range of open channel flow as well as the conduit
flowing full and under pressure.
5. Sensitivity to Submergence or Backwater Effects. Because of the
possibility of changes in flow resistance downstream of the measuring
site due to blockages, rising river stages including possible re-
verse flow, etc., it is highly advantageous that the unit be able to
continue to function under such conditions or, at a minimum, be able
to sense the existence of such conditions which would lead to
erroneous readings.
6. Effects of Solids Movement. The unit should not be seriously af-
fected by the movement of solids such as sand, gravel, debris, etc.,
within the fluid flow.
7. Flow Obstruction. The unit should be as nonintrusive as possible
to avoid obstruction or other interference with the flow, which
could lead to flow blockage or physical damage to some portion of
the device.
D-60
-------
8. Head Loss. To be usable at a maximum number of measurement sites,
the unit should induce as little head loss as possible.
9. Manhole Operation. To allow maximum flexibility in utilization, the
unit should have the capability of being installed in confined and
moisture-laden spaces such as sewer manholes.
10. Power Requirements. The unit should require minimum power at the
measuring site to operate; the ability to operate on batteries is a
definite asset for many installations.
The following secondary design considerations are desirable features for flow
measuring equipment.
Site Requirements. Unit design should be such as to minimize site require-
ments, such as the need for a fresh water supply, a vertical drop, excessive
physical space, etc.
Installation Restrictions or Limitations. The unit should impose a minimum
of restrictions or limitations on its installation and be capable of use on
or within sewers of varying size.
Simplicity and Reliability. To maximize reliability of results and opera-
tion, the design of the unit should be as simple as possible, with a minimum
of moving parts, etc.
Unattended Operation. For the majority of applications, it is highly desir-
able that the equipment be capable of unattended operation.
Maintenance Requirements. The design of the equipment should be such that
routine maintenance is minimal and troubleshooting and repair can be effected
with relative ease, even in the field.
Adverse Ambient Effects. The unit should be unaffected by adverse ambient
conditions such as high humidity, freezing temperatures, hydrogen sulphide
or corrosive gases, etc.
D-61
-------
Submersion Proof. The unit should be capable of withstanding total immersion
without significant damage.
Ruggedness. The unit should be of rugged construction and as vandal and
theft proof as possible.
Self Contained. The unit should be self contained insofar as possible in
view of the physical principles involved.
Precalibration. In order to maximize the flexibility of using the equipment
in different settings, it is desirable that it be capable of precalibration;
i.e., it should not be necessary to calibrate the system at each location and
for each application.
Ease of Calibration. Calibration of the unit should be a simple, straight-
forward process requiring a minimum amount of time and ancillary equipment.
Maintenance of Calibration. The unit should operate accurately for extended
periods of time without requiring recalibration.
Adaptability. The system should be capable of: indicating and recording
instantaneous flow rates and totalized flows; providing flow signals to as-
sociated equipment (e.g., an automatic sampler); implementation of remote
sensing techniques or incorporation into a computerized urban data system,
including a multisensor single readout capability.
Cost. The unit should be affordable both in terms of acquisition and instal-
lation costs as well as operating costs, including repair and maintenance.
It is not necessary that all of these primary and secondary design consider-
ations be achieved for all applications. For example, flow measurement
devices used to calibrate others need not necessarily be self-contained, nor
would unattended operations be required. Furthermore, meeting all of the
listed design considerations for all installations and settings would be
difficult, if not impossible, to achieve in a single design. Nonetheless,
D-62
-------
the primary and secondary design considerations can be used to formulate a
set of evaluation parameters against which a given design or piece of equip-
ment can be judged. Since application details may make certain parameters
more or less important in one instance or another, no attempt has been made
to apply weighting factors or assign numerical rank. The evaluation factors
should prove useful, as a check list among other things, for the 208 planner
who has a flow measurement requirement and who may require assistance in the
selection of his equipment. The evaluation parameters together with quali-
tative scales, are presented in the form of a flow measurement equipment
checklist in Table D-12.
D.3.2.2 Evaluations of Some Promising Devices
A slightly modified form of the flow measurement equipment checklist given in
Table D-12 has been used to evaluate the various flow-measuring devices and
techniques of Table D-ll, and a matrix summary is given as Table D-13. It
must be emphasized that these evaluations are made with a highly variable
wastewater application such as storm or combined sewer flow measurement in
mind and will not necessarily be applicable for other types of flows.
Only a few of the evaluation parameters normally have numbers associated with
them. To assist the reader in interpreting the ratings, the following gen-
eral guidelines were used. If the normal range of a particular device was
considered to be less than about 10 to 1, it was termed poor; if it was con-
sidered to be greater than around 100 to 1, it was termed good. The inter-
mediate ranges were termed fair. The accuracy that might reasonably be
anticipated in measuring storm or combined sewer flows was considered rather
than the best accuracy achievable by a particular device. For example, al-
though a sharp-crested weir may be capable of achieving accuracies of
±1.5 percent or better in clear irrigation water flows, accuracies of much
better than ±4 to 7 percent should not necessarily be anticipated for a
sharp-crested weir measuring stormwater or combined sewer discharges. If the
accuracy of a particular flow-measuring device or method was considered to be
better than around ±1 to 2 percent, it was termed good; if it was considered
D-63
-------
TABLE D-12
FLOW MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST
Designation:
Evaluation Parameter
Scale
Weight and Score
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Range
Accuracy
Flow Effects on Accuracy
Gravity § Pressurized Flow
Operation
Submergence or Backwater
Effects
Effect of Solids Movement
Flow Obstruction
Head Loss
Manhole Operation
Power Requirements
Site Requirements
Installation Restrictions
or Limitations
Simplicity and Reliability
Unattended Operation
Maintenance Requirements
Adverse Ambient Effects
Submersion Proof
Ruggedness
Self Contained
Precalibration
Ease of Calibration
Maintenance of Calibration
Adaptability
Cost
Portability
D Poor O Fair D Good
Q Poor D Fair a Good
Q High Q Moderate D Slight
D No O Yes
Q High O Moderate D Low
D High D Moderate Q Slight
O High Q Moderate D Slight
D High D Medium D Low
Q Poor D Fair D Good
Q High Q Medium D Low
Q High Q Moderate D Slight
Q High Q Moderate D Slight
Q Poor a Fair
D No a
D High Q Medium
O High D Moderate
D No
D Poor D Fair
D No
D No
D Poor D Fair
D Poor Q Fair
D Poor D Fair
D High D Medium
O No
D Good
0 Yes
a LOW
a Slight
D Yes
D Good
Q Yes
a Yes
D Good
a Good
O Good
D Low
D Yes
Comments:
D-64
-------
to be worse than around ±10 percent, it was termed poor. The intermediate
accuracies were termed fair.
The flow-measuring devices and techniques were not rated on two evaluation
parameters, submersion proof and adaptability, because these factors are so
dependent upon the design details of the secondary element selected by the
user.
In comparison with Table D-13, Table D-14 offers a different (and even more
subjective) comparison of the most promising primary devices or techniques.
Each method is numerically evaluated in terms of its percent of achievement
of several desirable characteristics. Dilution techniques as a class appear
to be most promising of all. In view of the current state-of-the-art, how-
ever, their usefulness is probably greatest as a tool for in-place cali-
bration of other primary devices. They have also been extremely useful for
general survey purposes and have found some application as an adjunct to
other primary devices during periods of extreme flow such as pressurized flow
in a conduit that is normally open channel.
Acoustic open channel devices are also quite promising; but, because of their
dependency upon the velocity profile and the frequently resulting requirement
for several sets of transducers, they are presently only justifiable for very
large flows in view of the expense involved. The usefulness of the Parshall
flume is evidenced by its extreme popularity. The requirement for a drop in
the floor is a disadvantage, and submerged operation may present problems at
some sites. Known uncertainties in the head-discharge relations (possibly up
to 5 percent) together with possible geometric deviations make calibration in
place a vital necessity if high accuracy is required. Palmer-Bowlus type
flumes are very popular overall. They can be used as portable as well as
fixed devices in many instances, are relatively inexpensive, and can handle
solids in the flow without great difficulty.
All point velocity measuring devices have been lumped together in the current
meter category. In the hands of a highly experienced operator, good results
can be obtained (the converse is also true, unfortunately), and they are
D-65
-------
TABLE D-13
FLOWMETER EVALUATION SUMMARY
00
C
CO
Gravimetric-all types
Volumetric-all types
Verturi Tube
Dall Tube
Flow Nozzle
Orifice Plate
Elbow Meter
Slope Area
Sharp-Crested Weir
Broad-Crested Weir
Subcritical Flume
Parshall Flume
Palmer-Bowlus Flume
Cutthroat Flume
ume
Type HS, H S HL Flume
Open Flow Nozzle
Float Velocity
Tracer Velocity
Vortex Velocity
Eddy-Shedding
Turbine Meter
Rotating-Element Meter
Vane Meter
Hydrometric Pendulum
Target Meter
Force-Momentum
Hot-Tip Meter
Boundary Layer Meter
Electromagnetic Meter
Acoustic Meter
Doppler Meter
Optical Meter
G
P
P
P
P
P
P
F
F
F
F
G
F
p
G
G
G
G
F
P
F
P
F
P
P
P
P
F
G
F
G
P
F
Dilution r.
j Accuracy
G
G
G
G
G
F
f
P
f
F
F
F
F
F
p
p
F
F
P
F
F
F
F
F
F
P
F
G
P
G
G
G
G
P
C
accuracy
| Flow Effects on ;
H
H
S
S
S
S
S
H
M
S
S
S
S
c
S
JJ
5
S
S
H
M
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
M
el
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
t
| Submergence or Ba
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
H
M
H
L
M
M
^
L
H
H
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
Movement
TJ
o
o
*J
u
V
UJ
H
H
S
M
S
H
S
S
H
H
S
S
S
S
g
c
M
M
S
S
H
M
H
H
M
M
M
M
H
S
S
M
H
S
S
| Flow Obstruction
H
H
S
S
S
H
S
S
H
M
S
S
S
H
S
c
g
S
S
S
S
H
M
H
M
H
M
H
M
M
S
S
S
S
S
S
I
T3
Q
H
M
L
L
M
H
L
L
H
M
L
L
L
L
L
I
1
H
H
L
L
L
L
M
L
L
L
M
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
[ Manhole Operatior
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
G
F
G
F
F
G
P
P
P
G
G
G
G
P
G
P
F
F
G
P
P
F
P
P
F
F
F
G
in
j Power Requirement
M
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
|
1
L
L
L
M
L
L
L
L
L
L
M
H
M
M
H
M
M
L
M
1 Site Requirement*
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
M
M
M
M
M
S
S
c
c
M
M
S
S
H
S
H
S
S
S
S
H
M
M
M
M
M
S
S
:rictions or Lim
| Installation Rest
II
H
H
M
M
S
S
S
M
M
S
M
S
S
S
g
Q
M
M
S
S
H
S
M
S
M
S
M
H
M
M
M
M
M
S
S
X
a
\ Simplicity and R<
P
F
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
fj
Q
G
G
G
F
F
F
F
G
G
G
F
P
F
F
F
F
F
G
F
e
o
| Unattended Operal
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Lrements
J Maintenance Requi
H
H
M
M
L
H
L
L
H
L
L
L
L
H
L
M
M
L
M
H
M
H
H
M
L
II
H
H
M
M
M
M
L
M
Adverse Ambient 1
Submersion Proof
M -
M -
M -
M -
M -
M -
M -
M -
M -
M -
H -
M -
M -
H
M -
M -
M -
H -
S -
S -
S -
S -
N -
M -
H -
S -
S -
M -
S -
S -
S -
S -
H -
S -
| Ruggedness
F
F
G
G
G
F
G
G
C
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
F
F
F
F
C
G
C
P
P
F
G
F
F
F
C
F
| Self Contained
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
| Precalibration
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
-
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
c
o
ie of Calibrat:
S
G
G
G
G
G
G
F
F
G
F
G
G
G
G
r-
G
G
G
-
G
F
r,
G
G
F
F
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
alibration
intenance of C;
iptabi lity
£ ~3.
F -
F -
C -
T -
C -
P -
G -
G -
P -
F -
G -
G -
G -
G -
~
G
F -
F -
- -
G -
F -
F -
F -
G -
F -
F -
F -
G -
F -
G -
G -
G -
G -
G -
G -
8
H
H
H
H
M
L
L
H
L
L
M
M
L
L
|
1
L
L
L
H
H
M
H
L
L
L
II
H
H
H
H
H
H
L
H
•tability
£
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Legend:
F - Fair N - No
G - Goal P - Poor
H - High S - Slight
L - Low Y - Yes
M - Medium or Moderate
D-66
-------
TABLE D-14
COMPARISON OF MOST POPULAR PRIMARY DEVICES OR TECHNIQUES
Primary Device
or Technique
Dilution
Acoustic (Open Channel)
Parshall Flume
Palmer Bowlus Flume
Current Meter
Electromagnetic
Acoustic (Pressure Flow)
Open Flow Nozzle
Sharp-Crested Weir
Flow Tube
Venturi Tube
Trajectory Coordinate
Slope Area
Desirable Characteristic (% of Achievement)
Range
100
100
90
80
90
50
100
60
60
50
20
80
80
Uncalib.
Accuracy
100
100
95
90
95
100
100
95
95
100,
100
70
50
Head
Loss
100
100
80
85
100
100
100
70
70
95
90
50
100
Free From
Upstream
Effects
100
60
90
90
100
100
60
80
80
40
70
100
20
Free From
Downstream
Effects
100
90
80
85
100
100
90
75
80
100
100
70
100
Solids
Bearing
Liquids
100
95
90
90
90
100
95
80
50
95
90
100
100
Portability
100
80
70
90
100
0
0
80
80
0
0
100
100
Unattended
Operation
80
100
100
100
0
100
100
95
90
100
100
0
0
Comments
Especially useful as a calibra-
tion tool.
Good in large flows but
expensive.
Requires drop in floor.
Good overall.
Results are very operator
dependent.
Generally requires pressure flow..
Wetted transducers recommended.
Good if head drop is available.
Will require frequent cleaning.
Pressurized flow only.
Pressurized flow only.
Requires free discharge.
Use as last resort.
o
I
-------
often used to calibrate primary devices in place or for general survey work.
They are generally not suited for unattended operation, however.
Electromagnetic flowraeters show considerable promise where pressurized flow
is ensured, as do closed pipe acoustic devices. Neither can be considered
portable if one requires that the acoustic sensors be wetted, a recommended
practice for most wastewater applications.
Open flow nozzles and sharp-crested weirs are often used where the required
head drop is available. Weirs will require frequent cleaning and are best
used as temporary installations for calibration purposes. Flow tubes and
Venturis are only suitable for pressurized flow sites such as might be en-
countered, for example, at the entrance to a treatment plant.
Trajectory coordinate techniques, such as the California pipe or Purdue meth-
ods, require a pipe discharging freely into the atmosphere with sufficient
drop to allow a reasonably accurate vertical measurement to be made, a situa-
tion not often encountered in sewers. Slope area methods (e.g., Manning,
formula) must generally be considered as producing estimates only, and con-
sequently should be considered as the choice of last resort (despite their
apparent popularity).
D.3.2.3 Review of Commercially Available Equipment and Costs
The number of commercial firms that offer liquid flow-measuring equipment in
the marketplace today is astoundingly large, probably well in excess of 200.
Many manufacturers offer more than one type of primary device (and these
typically in numerous models) and, when combined with secondary device
choices, the number is virtually overwhelming. Thus, no attempt to cover all
available equipment can be made here. We simply note that two or more firms
offer all devices that were described except for sharp-crested weirs, which
are usually fabricated directly by (or for) the user in accordance with
specifications for the particular measuring site.
D-68
-------
The firms offering flow-measuring equipment as at least a part of their prod-
uct line range from very large, well-known manufacturers that have offered a
wide range of flow-measuring equipment for over a century to relatively small
organizations with a limited product line that has only recently been intro-
duced. This latter category should not be excluded from consideration solely
because of their seemingly novitiate status. The principals involved fre-
quently have many years of experience, and their designs often reflect the
most up-to-date expressions of the state-of-the-art.
The revolution in the electronics industry, especially as regards solid-state
designs and integrated circuitry, has not gone unnoticed by most flowmeter
manufacturers; as a result, many new, sophisticated secondary devices have
recently appeared, and older equipment is frequently being upgraded in design
to reflect the more modern technologies. Furthermore, many of these new
secondary devices are of digital (rather than analog) design and are fre-
quently computer compatible as supplied, offering tremendous possibilities
for system structure.
A listing, by no means complete, of some manufacturers who offer flow-
measuring equipment in the categories listed in Table D-14 is presented in.
Table D-15. Under the heading "Company," the name, address, and telephone
number have been provided. Under the heading "Products" only those products
bearing on the flow measurement categories of Table D-14 have been listed,
even though the particular company may have a much more extensive flow meas-
urement product line. The product emphasis was placed on primary devices,
with secondary devices (in the form of level gages) indicated only where
they are offered as "flowmeters." It can be generally assumed that each
manufacturer offers a complete line of secondary elements for use with his
primary devices.
Table D-15 can be used to obtain direct, up-to-date information on all of the
types of equipment discussed from at least two suppliers. Reference can be
made to Shelley and Kirkpatrick (8) for descriptions of the offerings of
these and a number of other manufacturers.
D-69
-------
TABLE D-15
SOME FLOW MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURERS
o
i
«vl
o
Company
American Chain and Cable Company, Inc.
ACCO Bristol Division
Waterbury, Connecticut 06720
Telephone (203) 756-4451
Badger Meter, Inc.
Instrument Division
4545 Nest Brown Deer Road
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53223
Telephone (414) 355-0400
Badger Meter, Inc.
Precision Products Division
6116 East 15th Street
Tulsa, Oklahoma 74115
Telephone (918) 836-4631
BIP - A Unit of General Signal
1600 Division Road
West Warwick, R.I. 02893
Telephone (401) 885-1000
Brooks Instrument Division
Emerson Electric Company
407 West Vine Street
Hatfield, Pennsylvania 19440
Telephone (215) 247-2366
Controlotron Corporation
176 Control Avenue
Fanningdale, L.I.. New York 11735
Telephone (516) 249-4400
Gushing Engineering Inc.
3364 Commercial Avenue
Northbrook, Illinois 60062
Telephone (312) 564-0500
C.W. Stevens, Inc.
P. 0. Box 619
Kennett Square, Pennsylvania 19348
Telephone (215) 444-0616
Drexelbrook Engineering Company
205 Keith Valley Road
Horsham, Pennsylvania 19044
Telephone (215) 674-1234
Environmental Measurement Systems
A Division of We s mar
905 Dexter Avenue North
Seattle, Washington 98109
Telephone (206) 285-1621
150 Nassau Street
Suite 1430
New York. New York 10038
-Telephone (212) 349-2470
Fischer § Porter Co.
Warminster, Pennsylvania 18974
Telephone (215) 67S-6000
Products
Combination depth and
velocity measuring device
in a single unit
Flow tubes, open flow
nozzles, Parshall flumes
Acoustic (open channel)
Flow tubes, open flow
nozzles, Parshall flumes,
"universal" . venturi tubes
E 1 ect romagne t i c
Acoustic (pressure flow)
Electromagnetic
Acoustic level gage
Electronic level gage
Acoustic (open channel)
gages
Electromagnetic, flow
tubes, open flow nozzles,
Parshall flumes, level
gages
Company
Carl Fisher and Company
Division of Formulabs, Inc.
529 West Fourth Avenue
P. 0. Box 1056
Escondido, California 92025
Telephone (714) 745-6423
Flumet Co.
P. 0. Box 575
Westfield, New Jersey
N. Y. Office: Telephone (212) 227-6668
The Foxboro Company
Foxboro, Massachusetts 02035
Telephone (617) 543-8750
Hinde Engineering Company of California
P. 0. Box 56
Saratoga, California 95070
Telephone (408) 378-4112
Intero
3510 Kurtz Street
San Diego, California 92110
Telephone (714) 299-4500
Kahl Scientific Instrument Corporation
P. 0. Box 1166
El Cajon, California
Telephone (714) 444-2158
F. B. Leopold Company
Division of Sybron Corporation
227 S. Division St.
Zelienople, Pennsylvania 16063
Telephone (412) 452-6300 '
Leupold 6 Stevens, Inc.
P. 0. Box 588
600 N. W. Meadow Drive
Beaverton , Oregon 97005
Telephone (503) 646-9171
Manning Environmental Corp.
120 Du Bois Street
P. 0. Box 1356
Santa Cruz, California 95061
Telephone (408) 427-0230
Martig Bub-L-Air
2116 Lakemoor Drive
Olympia, Washington 98502
Telephone (206) 943-2390
77 Commonwealth Avenue
West Concord, Massachusetts 01742
Telephone (617) 369-7500
NB Products, Inc.
35 Beulah Road
New Britain, Pennsylvania 18901
Telephone (215) 345-1879
Products
Fluorescent dyes
Palmer-Bowlus flumes
Electromagnetic, lovel
gages
Pa Imer- Bow lus flumes
gages
Current meters,
fluorescent dyes
Open flow nozzles.
Palmer- Bow lus flumes ,
Parshall flumes
Float level gages
Acoustic and "dipper"
level gages
Bubbler level gage
Electronic level gage
Portable V-notch weirs.
level gages
-------
TABLE D-15
SOME FLOW MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURERS (Cont'd)
Company
Products
Company
Products
O
N-Con Systems Company
308 Main Street
New Kochelle, New York 10801
Telephone (914) 235-1020
Nusonics, Inc.
9 Keystone Place
Paramus, New Jersey 07652
Telephone (201) 265-2400
Ocean Research Equipment, Inc.
Falmouth, Massachusetts 02541
Telephone (617) 548-5800
The Permutit Company
Division of Sybron Corporation
E49 Midland Avenue
Paramus, New Jersey
Telephone (201) 262-8900
Plasti-Fab, Inc.
11650 S. W. Ridgeview Terrace
Beaverton, Oregon 97005
Telephone (502) 644-1428
Plocon, Inc.
An Affiliate of Carl F. Buettner
6 Associates, Inc.
5106 Hampton Avenue
St. Louis, Missouri 63109
Telephone (314) 353-5993
PORTAC
Min-Ell Company, Inc.
1689 Blue Jay Lane
Cherry Hill, New Jersey 08003
Telephone (609) 429-0421
Robertshaw Controls Company
P. 0. Box 3523
Knoxville, Tennessee 37917
Telephone (615) 546-0524
Saratoga Systems, Inc.
10601 South Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road
Cupertino, California 95014
Telephone (408) 247-7120
Scarpa Laboratories, Inc.
46 Liberty Street, Brainy Boro Station
Metuchin, New Jersey 08840
Telephone (201) 549-4260
Float and "dipper"
level gages
Acoustic (pressure flow)
Acoustic (open channel)
Flow tubes, open flow
nozzles, Parshall flumes,
venturi tubes
Palmer-Bowlus flumes,
Parshall flumes, V-notch
weir boxes
Open channel flow tube
Current meter flow tube
Parshall flumes,
level gages
Acoustic (pressure flow)
Acoustic (pressure flow)
Sigmamotor, Inc.
14 Elizabeth Street
Middleport, New York 14105
Telephone (716) 735-3616
Singer-American Meter Division
13500 Philmont Avenue
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19116
Telephone (215) 637-2100
Sirco Controls Company
8815 Selkirk Street
Vancouver 14, British Columbia, Canada
. Telephone (604) 261-9321
Taylor
Sybron Corporation
Taylor Instrument Process Control Division
Telephone (716) 235-5000
Tri-Aid Sciences, Inc.
161 Norris Drive
Rochester, New York 14610
Telephone (716) 461-1660
Universal Engineered Systems, Inc.
7071 Commerce Circle
Pleasanton, California 94566
Telephone (415) 462-1543
Vickery-Simms, Inc.
P. 0. Box 459
Arlington, Texas 76010
Telephone (817) 261-4446
Wailace-Murray Corporation
Carolina Fiberglass Plant
P. 0. Box 580
510 East Jones Street
Wilson, North Carolina 27893
Telephone (919) 237-5371
Wesmar Industrial Systems Division
905 Dexter Avenue North
Seattle, Washington 98109
Telephone (206) 285-2420
Westinghouse Electric Corporation
Oceanic Division
P. 0. Box 1488, Mail Stop 9R30
Annapolis, Maryland 21404
Telephone (301) 765-5658
Bubbler level gage
Palmer-Bowlus flumes,
Parshall flumes, level
gages
Acoustic level gage
Electromagnetic
Acoustic level gage
Palmer-Bowlus flumes
Parshall flumes, venturi
Parshall flumes
Acoustic, level gages
Acoustic (open channel)
-------
In these days of inflation, little can be said about equipment costs except
in a very cursory fashion. For example, one manufacturer is anticipating
a 30-percent increase in the cost of basic flow tube forgings, catalog
pricing is giving way to individual quotes for larger systems, and some
manufacturers are quoting tentative estimates subject to adjustment at de-
livery. Desired features such as remote readouts, digital outputs, recorder
types, battery parts, etc., add another diversion to total system costs.
The following discussion is more indicative them precise, and all costs must
be increased if many accessories are desired.
Dilution flow measurement systems can be put together for under $3K. The
chemicals (salt, dye, etc.) are inexpensive. Acoustic open channel devices
start at around $5K, and larger systems are quoted on an installation basis
only, with $15-40K being a typical charge for a four-path system and some
large, complex installations approaching $100K in cost. Parshall flumes run
from $300 to over $2K in portable versions, depending upon size, and from
$500 to $5K for fixed installations, not counting secondary devices.
Palmer-Bowlus flumes without a level gage will cost between $300 and $3K
depending upon size. Construction materials also affect flume prices.
Simple current meters start at around $300 for basic Price or Ott types and
may run as high as $1,500. Electromagnetic current meters cos£ from $2K
to $3K. Electromagnetic pipe meters start at around $2K for small (2 in.)
sizes and run to over $30K in the largest practicable sizes. Acoustic pipe
meters run from $2K to $20K depending upon size. These prices are for
complete systems including secondary devices.
Open flow nozzles, flow tubes, and Venturi tubes are comparably priced with
forging costs and machining accounting for the major portion. In small sizes
(3 in.) they run under $1K, and range up to $15-20K in large sizes (48 in.).
These prices do not include secondary devices.
The liquid level gage market is intensely competitive at the present time,
and prices are similar regardless of technique (e.g., electronic, bubble,
acoustic, dipper, etc.). They run from just under $1K for a basic device
D-72
-------
with visual read-out to over $2K with flow converters, recorders, transmit-
ters, etc., as accessories.
As a closing note, construction, installation, and (importantly) projected
maintenance and repair costs must be considered in addition to the equipment
acquisition costs given above to arrive at true cost of ownership, which is
the only real basis for comparison.
D.3.2.4 Review of Recent Field Experience
A brief review of flow measurement experiences, with emphasis on recent .proj-
ects in the storm and combined sewer area, will be given to allow a better
appreciation of the application of some of the flow-measuring devices and
techniques in an actual field setting. The various experiences are presented
by primary device or technique as listed in Table D-14. It should be pointed
out that, although the following discussion focuses more on the negative ex-
periences, instances of good results were encountered with all types of flow
measurement.
Dilution methods were successfully used to calibrate primary devices in sev-
eral instances. In one installation, this technique was used to measure
flows in a sewer under surcharged conditions. A Palmer-Bowlus flume was em-
ployed for normal flow conditions. When the secondary device indicated that
the sewer line was nearly filled, a signal was given to begin chemical in-
jection. An automatic sampler was used to obtain samples for concentration
analysis at a site downstream from the injection equipment. Some other at-
tempts to use dilution methods were less successful, and it was abandoned by
several projects. Erroneous effects due to exposed sludge banks, insuffi-
cient turbulence to ensure mixing, and poor equipment operation (especially
samplers) were among difficulties cited.
Open channel acoustic devices had rather little use in the projects examined
because of their recent origin. Although successful installations exist,
their use has been abandoned at other locations. The primary difficulties
have to do with particles, notably air bubbles, in the flow causing improper
D-73
-------
readings, the complex velocity patterns requiring a number of transverse
sensors, and simple shakedown difficulties typical of early designs of many
complex electronic devices. Acoustic level gages were plagued by wind (in
an open application), foam, standing ripples on the water surface, and false
echoes from manhole structures or other confined areas. More recent indica-
tions are that such problems are being overcome, and satisfaction with these
devices appears to be increasing.
Parshall flumes were used in many projects, and they performed well when
dimensions were faithfully followed, standard approach conditions were pres-
ent, and (especially) when calibrated in place. Unfortunately, far too many
Parshall flume installations are nonstandard, reflecting difficulties in
making precise structures from poured concrete, the improper use of a light-
weight plastic flume liner as a form, etc.
Palmer-Bowlus type flumes were successfully used in a number of instances,
including portable versions intended for short-time application at any given
site. Other than their loss of accuracy as the pipe fills and surcharges, no
general negative comments about the devices themselves were encountered.
There were numerous complaints concerning secondary devices used in conjunc-
tion with Palmer-Bowlus flumes, however, especially bubblers. Instances of
their collecting debris and otherwise requiring frequent cleaning and mainte-
nance abound. In one project, their use was abandoned altogether, and they
were replaced with another type of level sensor.
Current meters were almost exclusively used to spot check flows and verify or
rate existing structures. There were flows where they could not be used at
all, however, because they immediately became fouled by rags, plastic sheets,
and other debris.
Electromagnetic devices were not encountered, except where they had already
been installed for other purposes. They appeared to work well, but the need
for periodic inspection and verification of any fixed flow-measuring device
was illustrated at one installation. As a part of a general flowmeter in-
spection in one district an apparently well performing electromagnetic
D-74
-------
flowmeter was found to be in error by over 50 percent. The cause was a piece
of utility pole resting in the meter proper.
No projects examined used pressure flow acoustic meters, but their use in in-
dustrial plant applications has apparently been successful in many instances.
Open flow nozzles performed rather well where sites allowed their use. Fre-
.quent inspection and cleaning were required at several installations, however,
to ensure proper readings.
Sharp-crested weirs were among the most commonly used (and misused) primary
devices encountered. Problems ranged from failure to properly account for
approach velocity, improper sizing, backwater elevations causing surcharging
and flooding, to almost continual cleaning being required in very trashy
flows.
Flow tubes and venturi tubes were seldom encountered, except where they had
existed for other purposes. They generally seemed to produce complete and
accurate records.
Trajectory coordinate estimates were uncommon, owing to the lack of suit-
able sites.
Slope-area methods (Manning in particular) were far and away the most fre-
quently encountered. They ranged from proper applications yielding reason-
able discharge estimates to totally unsuitable applications, as in one case
where the combined sewer discharge was found to considerably exceed the
measured precipitation event. Difficulties ranged from accurately measuring
slopes to estimating the proper friction coefficient (n) to use, in the best
instances, to unknowledgeable attempts and improper applications in the
worst. Apparently, far too many persons think that all that has to be done
is to measure stage and plug into a handy formula to obtain flow. It is long
past time that that situation be corrected.
D-75
-------
D.3.3 Flow Measurement Field Procedures
For flow measurement in natural streams and channels, it is recommended that
USGS assistance be obtained. They will establish gaging stations (temporary
or permanent) at reasonable cost upon request and provide ratings to convert
stage to discharge. Often a culvert or some other control structure for which
a theoretical rating can be developed will be used. In some instances, weirs
or flumes will have to be used. It is prudent to spot check the ratings of
new gaging stations periodically. Be alert to changes in channel character-
istics that would affect the established rating, e.g., sedimentation, ero-
sion, deposition of large stones or boulders, etc.
Follow the manufacturer's recommendations for the installation, calibration,
and operation of the liquid level gages used to record stage. Where stilling
wells are employed, the connecting pipe should be checked for obstruction on
each visit, as should the float and cable operation. Note any instances that
could affect readings in the field log and the corrective action taken. It
is also prudent to verify chart time at each visit if record length exceeds
visit frequency (e.g., weekly flow charts but daily sampling). If a manual
sample is taken, a mark made on the flow chart can assist in subsequent data
analysis.
For manually gaging natural streams at the time of sampling, follow the
guidance given by the Bureau of Reclamation (12). Do not take a stream gag-
ing until all required samples for the site have been collected. Try to min-
imize or avoid walking in the stream until sampling is completed. Stirring
up the bottom may result in nonrepresentative samples. A complete flow
record is more desirable, however, and flow determinations made manually at
the time of sampling should be considered as a last choice.
For flow measurement in man-made channels and conduits, the use of an ap-
propriate primary device (refer to discussion in section D.3.2) is recom-
mended. These should be properly installed, following manufacturer's
recommendations in the case of commercial devices. The Bureau of Reclamation
D-76
-------
Manual (12) provides much helpful information. An independent verification
of the installation (i.e., by someone not on the installation team) will be
prudent in most instances. This is especially true where existing flow-
metering stations are to be used. Checklists for each type of primary device
should be prepared to facilitate field inspection. As an example, a check-
list for a contracted rectangular weir is presented in Table D-16.
Comments made above for secondary devices apply here as well. In closed con-
duits that are subject to occasional surcharging, try to install the level
gage so that it will indicate when this condition occurs. Although the
degree of surcharging cannot be indicated by most designs, knowledge of the
period of time over which the surcharge condition exists may be helpful in
subsequent data analysis. Such sites are best avoided wherever possible,
however.
On each visit, the flow-measuring equipment should be inspected to ensure
proper functioning. Visual verification of stage readings with a staff gage
is recommended at each visit, and results should be noted in the field log,
along with any anomalies discovered (e.g., a rag caught in the notch of a
weir, a stuck float, a clogged stilling well connection tube, etc.) and any
corrective actions taken. The possible buildup of sediment behind a weir
should be checked (the staff gage can be used) and any accumulation removed.
An occasional in-place calibration check is recommended to ensure that subtle
changes that could affect the record have not occurred.
One word of caution as regards the use of sewer maps is in order. Typically,
such maps (elevations especially) reflect intentions rather than installa-
tions. Even so-called as-built drawings may only indicate average invert
slopes from manhole to manhole and tell little about variations in true
slope. It is generally a prudent practice to verify pipe slopes entering
and leaving manholes where flow measurements are to be made.
Flow measurement at outfall sites can present some unique difficulties.
Where there is a drop from the discharge pipe invert to the upper level of
the receiving stream, the site will probably be acceptable, and a temporary
D-77
-------
TABLE D-16
CHECKLIST FOR CONTRACTED RECTANGULAR WEIR
1. What is the maximum measurable head?
2. Is upstream face of bulkhead smooth? I I
3. Is upstream face of bulkhead vertical? f—|
(check for plumb with level) | |
4. Is upstream face of weir plate smooth, straight, Ij
and flush with upstream face of bulkhead? LJ
5. Is weir axis perpendicular to channel axis? r—i
(check with line and carpenter's square) I I
6. Is entire crest level? II
7. What is thickness of crest in flow direction?
(should be between 0.03 and 0.08 inch)
8. Is upstream corner of crest sharp and at r~~i
right angles to upstream face? I I
9. Are both side edges truly vertical and of same
15. Is head reading taken upstream a distance of
at least 3 times the maximum head on the crest?
D
thickness as crest?
10. Are downstream edges of notch chamfered? i—
(angle should be 45° or more to crest surface) |
11. What is distance of crest from bottom of
approach channel?
(should be at least twice the depth above
the crest and never under one foot)
12. What is distance from sides of weir to sides
of approach channel?
(should be at least twice the depth above
the crest and never under one foot)
13. Does nappe touch only the upstream edges of ^_^
the crest and sides? Is nappe free? I I
Is there free fall? '—'
14. Does zero head reading match with crest i—i
elevation? I I
D
16. Is the cross-sectional area of the approach I—I
channel at least 8 times that of the nappe? I I
17. Does this condition extend upstream at least
15 times the depth above the crest?
18. If weir pool is smaller than defined above,
measure velocity of approach with current
meter.
19. If appreciable velocity of approach is r~]
measured are head readings being corrected? I—I
D-78
-------
weir box can be installed and used satisfactorily. Where the receiving
stream level is above the invert but below the crown, a pipe extension and
Palmer-Bowlus flume (or a Parshall flume in some instances) can possibly be
used. The real problem occurs where the outfall is completely submerged, and
the expense of a permanent device such as an electromagnetic flow meter
(otherwise, an excellent choice for such a site since it can measure flow in
either direction) cannot be tolerated. The best advice is to find another
site. If that cannot be done, the only recourse is to use a current meter
to obtain a velocity, adjust this to an average value, and multiply by the
pipe area to obtain flow. Where there is insufficient debris in the flow to
cause problems in operation, an oceanographic type recording current meter or
some other recording point velocity sensor can be used. For very trashy
flows, the only solution may be to measure velocities manually, cleaning up
the current meter between observations. This approach may be acceptable for
some intermittent discharges if a man can get to the site on time, but con-
tinuous records are impracticable.
D.4 Sampling Considerations, Equipment, and Procedures
The objective of any sampling effort is to remove, from a defined universe,
a small portion that is in some way representative of the whole. Ideally, a
representative sample will accurately reflect the physical and chemical char-
acteristics of the bulk source in every respect as they were during the sam-
pling period. In water quality, such representativeness is seldom if ever
achieved and, fortunately, seldom required. As used herein, a representative
sample is one that, when examined for a particular parameter, will yield a
value from which that bulk source characteristic can be determined. The
proper sampling methodology, i.e., that which will produce a representative
sample, is dependent upon the type of bulk source to be sampled, e.g., sur-
face water in natural channels (rivers, streams, lakes), municipal waste-
water, ground water, urban runoff, industrial wastewater, treatment lagoon,
and so on. Nonetheless, there are some more or less universal sampling con-
siderations, and they will now be addressed.
D-79
-------
D.4.1 Sample Types
The selection of the type of sample to be collected depends on a "number of
factors, such as the rates of change of flow and the character of the water
or wastewater, the accuracy required, and the availability of funds for con-
ducting the sampling program. All samples collected, either manually or
with automatic equipment, are included in the following types, which terminol-
ogy has been recommended for standard usage by Shelley and Kirkpatrick (14).
Discrete Sample
A discrete sample (sometimes called a grab sample) is one that is collected
at a selected point in time and retained separately for analysis. A sequen-
tial discrete sample is a series of such samples, usually taken at constant
time intervals (e.g., one each hour over a 24-hour period), but sometimes at
constant discharge increments (e.g., one for each 100,000 gallons of flow)
when paced by a flow totalizer.
Simple Composite Sample
A simple composite sample is one that is made up of a series of aliquots
(smaller samples) of constant volume (Vc) collected at regular time intervals
(Tc) and combined in a single container. Such a sample could be denoted by
TcVc, meaning time interval between successive aliquots constant and volume
of each aliquot constant.
Flow Proportional Composite Sample
A flow proportional composite sample is one collected in relation to the flow
volume during the period of compositing, thus indicating the "average" con-
dition during the period. One of the two ways of accomplishing this is to
collect aliquots of equal volume (Vc), but at variable time intervals (Tv),
that are inversely proportional to the volume of the flow. That is, the time
interval between aliquots is reduced as the volume of flow increases. Alter-
natively, flow proportioning can be achieved by increasing the volume of each
D-80
-------
aliquot in proportion to the flow (Vv), but keeping the time interval between
aliquots constant (Tc).
Sequential Composite Sample
A sequential composite sample is composed of a series of short-period compos-
ites, each of which is held in an individual container. For example, each of
several samples collected during a 1-hour period may be composited for the
hour. The 24-hour sequential composite is made up from the individual 1-hour
composites.
Continuous Sample
A continuous sample is one collected by extracting a small, continuously
flowing stream from the bulk source and directing it into the sample con-
tainer. The sample flow rate may be constant (Qc), in which case the sample
is analogous to the simple composite, or it may be varied in proportion to
the bulk source flow rate (Qv), in which case the sample is analogous to the
flow proportional composite.
For initial characterization of wastewater flows, sequential discrete sam-
pling is generally desired. It is mandatory for accurate stormwater charac-
terization, since it allows characterization of the wastewater over a time
history and provides information about its variations with time. If the sam-
ples are sufficiently large, manual compositing can also be performed, based
on flow records or some other suitable weighting scheme, and a preferred com-
posite type determined. Some form of automatic compositing will usually be
desired for continued wastewater discharge characterization.
A brief look at the different types of composite samples is in order. Any
scheme for collecting a composite sample is, in effect, a method for mechani-
cally integrating to obtain average flow characteristics. The simple compos-
ite is the crudest attempt at such averaging and will be representative of
the waste flow during the period only if the flow properties are relatively
constant.
D-81
-------
For variable flows, some type of proportioning must be used. This is equiv-
alent to saying that the simple composite is a very poor scheme for numerical
integration, and a higher order method is desirable. There are two funda-
mental approaches to obtaining better numerical integration, given a fixed
number of steps. One is to increase the order of the integration scheme to
be used, as in going from the trapezoidal rule to Simpson's rule. The other
is to vary the step size in such a way as to lengthen the steps when slopes
are changing very slowly and shorten them when slopes change rapidly. Typ-
ical of the first approach are the constant time interval, variable volume
(TcVv) proportional composites. There are two straightforward ways of
accomplishing this. One is to let the aliquot volume be proportional to the
instantaneous flow rate, and the other is to make the aliquot volume pro-
portional to the quantity of flow that has passed since extraction of the
last aliquot. Typical of the second approach is the variable time interval,
constant volume (TvVc) proportional composite. Here a fixed volume aliquot
is taken each time an arbitrary quantity of flow has passed.
It is instructive to compare these four composite sample schemes. For the
purposes of this example, four flow functions and five concentration func-
tions are examined. The selections are completely arbitrary (except for
simplicity in exact integration) and, in practice, site specific data should
be used. For each flow/concentration combination, the exact average concen-
tration of the flow was computed (as though the entire flow stream were di-
verted into a large tank for the duration of the event and then its
concentration measured). The ratio of the composite sample concentration to
the actual concentration so computed is presented in matrix form in Fig-
ure D-4 (taken from Shelly and Kirkpatrick, 15). The four rows in each cell
represent the four types of composite samples discussed as indicated in the
legend. The best overall composite for the cases examined is the TcVv, with
the volume proportional to the instantaneous flow rate q. The TcVv where the
volume is proportional to the flow since the last sample, and the TvVc gave
very similar results with a slight edge to the former. However, the dif-
ferences are not large for any case. This brief look at compositing merely
scratches the surface. Flow records and a knowledge of the temporal
D-82
-------
^•H^^V^^W V^
1
/
Lx
\s
K -
1
p \ sinirt
K
l-t
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.90
1.35
0.90
0.86
0.87
0.68
0.95
0.92
0.92
0.90
1.01
0.90
0.90
f^
12"
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
1.09
0.97
0.96
0.96
0.87
0.98
0.97
0.97
0.97
1.00
0.97
0.97
[^
TTt
COS— j
0.92
0.92
0.92
0.92
1.26
0.90
0.87
0.89
0.72
0.98
0.95
0.93
0.88
1.00
0.92
0.92
f-_
e
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
1.14
0.97
0.95
0.95
0.82
0.96
0.95
0.95
0.97
1.00
0.95
0.95
^
sinirt
0.99
0.99
0.99
0.99
0.99
0.90
0.89
0.97
0.99
1.12
1.09
0.97
0.80
1.01
0.98
0.97
The rows within each flow/concentration cell refer to the following sample
types:
Row 1. TcVc
Row 2. TcVv
Row 3. TcVv
Row 4. TvVc
Simple composite
Volume proportional to flow rate (q)
Volume proportional to flow (Q) since last sample
Time varied to give constant AQ
FIGURE D-4
RATIO OF COMPOSITE SAMPLE CONCENTRATION TO
ACTUAL CONCENTRATION
D-83
-------
fluctuation of pollutants, as can be obtained from discrete samples, are
required in order to choose a "best" compositing scheme for a given
installation.
Continuous samples are also composite in nature but do not fit in the fore-
going discussion since the discrete step integration analogy is not appli-
cable. Had we included the Qv continuous sample in the foregoing example,
its ratio would have been unity for all combinations in Figure D-4. Other
considerations severely limit the instances where a continuous sample is
the composite of choice. For wastewater sampling, it is generally agreed
that the minimum line inside diameter is 0.6 cm (1/4 in.) and that the sample
flow velocity should be at least 0.76 m/s (2.5 fps). A simple calculation
shows that the minimum volume of a 24-hour continuous sample would be
2085 liters (551 gal), hardly a practicable size. For this reason, contin-
uous samples are useful only for very pristine flows (e.g., drinking water),
where the very low flow rates necessary to keep sample volumes reasonable may
still allow a representative sample to be obtained.
D.4.2 Automatic Sampling Equipment
In the following, a systems breakdown of automatic sampling equipment is
given in generic terms to allow the reader to better appreciate their func-
tional purposes and requirements. A survey of commercially available auto-
matic sampling equipment and costs is given, and a review of field experience
with these devices is provided.
D.4.2.1 Elements of an Automatic Sampler System
In a system breakdown by functional attributes, an automatic liquid sampler
may be divided into five basic elements or subsytems. Each of these will
be discussed in turn.
D-84
-------
D.4.2.1.1 Sample Intake Subsystem
The operational function of the sample intake is to reliably allow the
gathering of a representative sample from the flow stream in question. Its
reliability is measured in terms of freedom from plugging or clogging, to
the degree that sampler operation is affected, and invulnerability to phys-
ical damage due to large objects in the flow. It is also desirable, from
the viewpoint of sewer operation, that the sample intake offer a minimum
obstruction to the flow in order to reduce the possibility of blockage of
the entire pipe by lodged debris, etc.
The sample intake of many commercially available automatic liquid samplers
is often only the end of a plastic suction tube, and the user is left to his
own ingenuity and devices if he desires to do anything other than simply
dangle the tube in the stream to be sampled. Some manufacturers provide a
weighted, perforated plastic cylinder that screens the hose inlet from the
unwanted material that might cause choking or blockage elsewhere within the
sampler. Typical hole sizes are around 1/3 cm (1/8 in.) in diameter and, if
there are sufficient holes to ensure free flow, results have been satisfac-
tory in some applications. Samplers that employ pneumatic ejection have
their own intake chambers that must be used in order for the equipment to
function properly.
D.4.2.1.2 Sample-Gathering Subsystem
Three basic sample-gathering methods or categories can be identified: mechan-
ical, forced flow, and suction lift. The sample lift requirements of the
particular site often play a determining role in the gathering method to be
employed.
Mechanical Methods. There are many examples of mechanical gathering methods
used in both commercially available and one-of-a-kind samplers. One of the
more common designs is the cup on a chain driven by a sprocket drive arrange-
ment. In another design, a cup is lowered within a guide pipe, via a small
automatic winch and cable. Other examples include a self-closing pipe-like
D-85
-------
device that extracts a vertical "core" from the flow stream, a specially con-
toured box assembly with end closures that extracts a short length (plug) of
the entire flow cross section, and a revolving or oscillating scoop that
traverses the entire flow depth.
Some of the latter units employ scoops that are characterized for use with a
particular primary flow measurement device, such as a weir or Parshall flume,
and extract an aliquot volume that is proportional to the flow rate. Another
design for mechanically gathering flow-proportional samples involves the use
of a sort of Dethridge wheel with a sample cup mounted on its periphery.
Since the wheel rotation is proportional to flow, the effect is that a fixed
volume aliquot is taken each time a certain discharge quantity has passed,
and total discharge can be estimated from the size of the resultant composite
sample.
The foregoing designs have primarily arisen from one of two basic considera-
tions: (1) site conditions that require very high lifts, or (2) the desire
to gather samples that are integrated across the flow depth. One of the
penalties that must be traded off in selecting a mechanical gathering unit is
the necessity for some obstruction to the flow, at least while the sample is
being taken. The tendency for exposed mechanisms to foul, together with the
added vulnerability of many moving parts, means that successful operation
will require periodic inspection, cleaning, and maintenance.
Forced Flow Methods. All forced flow gathering methods require some obstruc-
tion to the flow, but usually it is less than with mechanical gathering meth-
ods. It may be only a small inlet chamber with a check valve assembly of
some sort, or it may be an entire submersible pump. The main advantage of
submersible pumps is that their high discharge pressures allow sampling at
greater depths, thereby increasing the flexibility of the unit somewhat, in-
sofar as site depth is concerned. Pump malfunction and clogging, especially
in the pump sizes often used for samplers, is always a distinct possibility;
because of the pump's location in the flow stream itself, maintenance is much
more difficult and costly to perform than on above-ground or more easily
D-86
-------
accessible units. Submersible pumps also necessarily present an obstruction
to the flow and are thus in a vulnerable position as regards damage by
debris.
Pneumatic ejection is a forced flow gathering method used by a number of com-
mercial samplers. The gas source required by these units varies from bottled
refrigerant to motor-driven air compressors. The units that use bottled re-
frigerant must be of a fairly small scale to avoid an enormous appetite for
the gas and, hence, a relatively short operating life before the gas supply
is exhausted. Furthermore, concern has recently been expressed about the
quantities of freon that are being discharged into the atmosphere. The abil-
ity of such units to backflush or purge themselves is also limited. The ad-
vantages of few moving parts, inherent explosion-proof construction, and
high lift capabilities must be weighed against low or variable line veloc-
ities, low or variable sample intake velocities, and relatively small sample
capacities in some designs. Another disadvantage of many pneumatic ejection
units is that the sample chamber fills immediately upon discharge of the
previous sample. Thus, it may not be representative of flow conditions at
the time of the next triggering and, if paced by a flow meter, correlation
of results may be quite difficult.
Suction Lift Methods. Suction lift units must be designed to operate in the
environment near the flow to be sampled or else their use is limited to a
little over 9m (30 ft) due to atmospheric pressure. Several samplers that
take their suction lift directly from an evacuated sample bottle are
available today. Vacuum leaks, the variability of sample size with lift, the
requirement for heavy glass sample bottles to withstand the vacuum, the dif-
ficulty of cleaning due to the requirement for a separate line for each sam-
ple bottle, the necessity of placing the sample bottles near the flow stream
(and hence in a vulnerable position), and the varying velocities as the sam-
ple is being withdrawn, are among the many disadvantages of this technique.
Other units are available that use a vacuum pump and some sort of metering
chamber to measure the quantity of sample being extracted. These units, in
some designs, offer the advantages of fairly high sample intake and transport
D-87
-------
velocities. The fluid itself never comes in contact with the pump, and the
pump output can easily be reversed to purge the sampling line and intake to
help prevent cross-contamination and clogging.
A variety of positive displacement pumps have been used in the design of suc-
tion lift samplers, including flexible impeller, progressive cavity rotary
screw, roller or vane, and peristaltic types. Generally these pumps are
self-priming (as opposed to many centrifugal pumps), but some designs should
not be operated dry because of internal wearing of rubbing parts. The desir-
ability of a low-cost pump that is relatively free from clogging has led many
designers to use peristaltic pumps. A number of types have been employed
including finger, nutating, and two- and three-roller designs using either
molded inserts or regular tubing. Most of these operate at such low flow
rates, however, that the representativeness of suspended solids is question-
able. Newer high-capacity peristaltic pumps are now available and are find-
ing application in larger automatic samplers. The ability of some of these
pumps to operate equally well in either direction affords the capability to
blow down lines and help remove blockages. Also, they offer no obstruction
to the flow since the transport tubing need not be interrupted by the pump,
and strings, rags, cigarette filters, and the like are passed with ease.
All in all, the suction-lift gathering method appears to offer more advan-
tages and flexibility than either of the others for many applications. The
limitation on sample lift can be overcome by designing the pumping portion of
the unit so that it can be separated from the rest of the sampler and thus
positioned within 6m (20 ft) or so of the flow to be sampled. For many
sites, however, even this will not be necessary.
D. 4. 2.1.3 Sample Transport Subsystem
The majority of the commercially available automatic samplers have fairly
small line sizes in the sample train. Such tubes, especially at 1/3 cm
(1/8 in.) inside diameter and smaller, are very vulnerable to plugging, clog-
ging due to the buildup of fats, etc. For many applications, a better mini-
mum line size would be 1 to 1.3 cm (3/8 to 1/2'in.) inside diameter.
D-88
-------
For flows that are high in suspended solids, it is imperative that adequate
sample flow rate be maintained throughout the sampling train in order to ef-
fectively transport them. In horizontal runs, the velocity must exceed the
scour velocity while, in vertical runs, the settling or fall velocity must be
exceeded several times to ensure adequate transport of solids in the flow.
Sharp bends and twists or kinks in the sampling lines should be avoided if
there is a possibility of trash or debris in the lines that could become
lodged and restrict or choke the flow. The same is true of some valve de-
signs. In summary, the sampling train must be sized so that the smallest
opening is large enough to give assurance that plugging or clogging is un-
likely in view of the material being sampled. However, it is not sufficient
to simply make all lines large, which also reduces friction losses, without
paying careful attention to the velocity of flow. For many applications,
minimum velocities of 0.6 to 1 m/s (2 to 3 fps) would appear warranted, and
even higher velocities are required for some applications.
D.4.2.1.4 Sample Storage Subsystem
The sample container itself should either be easy to clean or disposable.
Although some of today's better plastics are much lighter than glass and can
be autoclaved, they are not so easy to clean or inspect for cleanliness.
Also, the plastics will tend to scratch more easily than glass and, conse-
quently, cleaning a well-used container can become quite a chore.
The requirements for sample preservation are discussed elsewhere, but it
should be noted here that refrigeration is stated as the best single preser-
vation method and will, in all likelihood, be required unless the sampling
cycle is brief and samples are retrieved shortly after being taken. Light
can also affect samples, and either a dark storage area or opaque containers
would seem desirable. If opaque containers are used, however, they should
be disposable, since it would be difficult to inspect an opaque container
for cleanliness.
D-89
-------
D.4.2.1.5 Controls and Power Subsystem
The control aspects of some commercial automatic samplers have come under
particular criticism. It is no simple matter, to provide great flexibility
in operation of a unit while at the same time avoiding all complexities in
its control system. The problem is not only one of component selection but
of packaging as well. For instance, even though the possibility of immersion
may be extremely remote in a particular installation, the corrosive, highly
humid atmosphere, which will, in all likelihood, be present, makes sealing
of control elements and electronics desirable in most instances.
The controls determine the flexibility of operation of the sampler, e.g., its
ability to be paced by various types of flow-measuring devices. Built-in
timers should be repeatable, and time periods should not be affected by volt-
age variations. The ability to repeatedly gather the required aliquot volume
independent of flow depth or lift is very important if composite samples are
to be collected. Provisions for manual operation and testing are desirable,
as is a clearly laid out control panel. Some means of determining the time
when discrete samples were taken is necessary if synchronization with flow
records is contemplated. An event marker is desirable for a sampler that is
to be paced by an external flow recorder. Reliability of the control system
can dominate the total system reliability. At the same time, this element
will, in all likelihood, be the most difficult to repair and calibrate.
Furthermore, environmental effects will be the most pronounced in the control
system.
The required tasks can be best executed, in the light of the current elec-
tronics state-of-the-art, by a solid-state controller element. Such designs
offer higher inherent reliability and are becoming more and more common in
commercially available samplers. In addition, the unit should be of modular
construction for ease of modification, performance monitoring, fault loca-
tion, and replacement/repair. Such an approach also lends itself to encap-
sulation, which will minimize environmental effects. Solid-state switching
eliminates the possibility of burned or welded contacts, either of which will
cause complete sampler breakdown.
D-90
-------
Some automatic samplers available today require a 110V AC power supply, but
many battery-operated units are also available. The latter are, of neces-
sity, smaller in size and sample transport velocity but still have a wide
range of application. Other portable units utilize compressed gas or spring
motors as the only required power source.
D.4,2.2 Considerations in Automatic Sampler Selection
Presently available automatic liquid samplers have a great variety of charac-
teristics with respect to size of sample collected, lift capability, type of
sample collected (discrete or composite), materials of construction, and
numerous other both good and poor features. A number of considerations in
selection of a sampler are:
Rate of change of wastewater conditions
Frequency of change of wastewater conditions
Range of wastewater conditions
Periodicity or randomness of change
• Availability of recorded flow data
Need for determining instantaneous conditions, average conditions,
or both
Volume of sample required
• Need for preservation of sample
Estimated size of suspended matter
Need for automatic controls for starting and stopping
• Need for mobility or for a permanent installation
• Operating head requirements
In addition to the foregoing attributes of automatic sampling equipment,
there are also certain desirable features that will enhance the utility and
value of the equipment. For example, the design should be such that mainte-
nance and troubleshooting are relatively simple tasks. Spare parts should
be readily available and reasonably priced. The equipment design should be
such that the unit has maximum inherent reliability. As a general rule, com-
plexity in design should be avoided even at the sacrifice of a certain degree
D-91
-------
of flexibility of operation. A reliable unit that gathers a reasonably rep-
resentative sample most of the time is much more desirable than an extremely
sophisticated, complex unit that gathers a very representative sample 10 per-
cent of the time, the other 90 percent of the time being spent undergoing
some form of repair due to a malfunction associated with its complexity.
It is also desirable that the cost of the equipment be as low as practical
both in terms of acquisition as well as operational and maintenance costs.
For example, a piece of equipment that requires 100 man-hours to clean after
every 24 hours of operation is very undesirable. It is also desirable that
the unit be capable of unattended operation and remaining in a standby con-
dition for extended periods of time.
The sampler should be of sturdy construction with a minimum of parts exposed
to the sewage or to the highly humid, corrosive atmosphere associated di-
rectly with the sewer. It should not be subject to corrosion or the possi-
bility of sample contamination due to its materials of construction. The
sample containers should be capable of being easily removed and cleaned;
preferably they should be disposable.
For portable automatic wastewater samplers, the list of desirable features
is even longer. Harris and Keffer (16) give a number of features of an
"ideal" portable sampler, which are based upon sampler comparison studies
and over 90,000 hours of field experience.
D.4.2.3 Survey of Commercially Available Equipment
Some types of automatic liquid sampling equipment have been available commer-
cially for quite a while. In the last few years, however, there has been a
proliferation of commercial sampling equipment designed for various applica-
tions. New companies are being formed and existing companies are adding au-
tomatic sampling equipment to their product lines. In addition to their
standard product lines, most manufacturers of automatic sampling equipment
provide special adaptations of their equipment or custom designs to meet
unique requirements of certain customers. Some designs that began in this
way have become standard products, and this can be expected to continue.
D-92
-------
The products themselves are also rapidly changing. Not only are improvements
being made as field experience is gathered with new designs, but attention is
also being paid to certain areas that have heretofore been largely ignored.
For example, one company is introducing sampling probes that allow the gath-
ering of oil or various other liquids from the flow surface; solid-state
electronics are being used more and more in sampler control subsystems; new
types of batteries are offering extended life between charges and less weight;
and so on. Table D-17 lists the names and addresses of some 38 manufacturers
who are known to offer standard lines of automatic wastewater sampling
equipment.
An overall matrix, which summarizes the equipment characteristics to facil-
itate comparisons, is presented in Table D-18. There are several column
headings for each sampler model (or class of models). "Gathering Method"
identifies the actual method used (mechanical, forced flow, suction lift)
and type (peristaltic, vacuum, centrifugal pump, etc.). Depending upon the
gathering method employed, the sample flow rate may vary while a sample is
being taken, vary with parameters such as lift, etc. Therefore, the "Flow
Rate" column typically lists the upper end of the range for a particular
piece of equipment, and values significantly lower may be encountered in a
field application. "Lift" indicates the maximum vertical distance that is
allowed between the sampler intake and the remainder of the unit (or at least
its pump, in the case of suction lift devices).
"Line Size" indicates the minimum line diameter of the sampling train.
"Sample Type" indicates which type or types of sample the unit (or series)
is capable of gathering. Not all types can necessarily be taken by all units
in a given model class; e.g., an optional controller may be required to
enable taking a TvVc type sample, etc. The "Installation" column is used to
indicate if the manufacturer considers the unit to be portable or if it is
primarily intended for a fixed installation. "Cost Range" indicates either
the approximate cost for a typical unit or the lowest price for a basic model
and a higher price reflecting the addition of options (solid-state control-
ler, battery, refrigerator, etc.) that might enhance the utility of the
D-93
-------
TABLE D-17
AUTOMATIC WASTEWATER SAMPLER MANUFACTURERS
A § II Enterprises
1711 South 133 Avenue
Omaha, Nebraska 68144
Advanced Instrumentation, Inc.
Box 2216
Santa Cruz, California 95063
T. A. Baldwin Company, Inc.
16760 Schoenborn Street
Sepulveda, California 91343
Bestel-Dean Limited
92 Worsley Road North,
Worsley
Manchester, England M28 5QW
BIF Sanitrol
P.O. Box 4
Largo, Florida 33546
Brails ford and Company, Inc.
Milton Road
Rye, New York 10580
Brand/wine Valley Sales Co.
20 East Main Street
Honey Brook, Pennsylvania 19344
Chandler Development Company
1031 East Duane Avenue
Sunnyville, California 94086
Chicago Pump Division
FMC Corporation
1800 FMC Drive
Itasca, Illinois 60143
Collins Products Co.
P.O. Box 382
Livingston, Texas 77351
Environmental Marketing
Associates
3331 Northwest Elmwood Dr.
Corvallis, Oregon 97330
ETS Products
12161 Lackland Road
St. Louis, Missouri 63141
Fluid Kinetics, Inc.
3120 Production Drive
Fairfield, Ohio 45014
Horizon Ecology Company
7435 North Oak Park Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60648
Hydro-Numatic Sales Co.
65 Hudson Street
llackensack, New Jersey 07602
Hydraguard Automatic Samplers
850 Kees Street
Lebanon, Oregon 97355
Instrumentation Specialties Co.
Environmental Division
P.O. Box 5347
Lincoln, Nebraska 68505
.Kent Cambridge Instrument Co.
73 Spring Street
Ossining, New York 10562
Lakeside Equipment Corp.
1022 East Devon Avenue
Bartlett, Illinois 60103
Manning Environmental Corp.
120 DuBois Street
P.O. Box 1356
Santa Cruz, California 98061
Markland Specialty Eng. Ltd.
Box 145
Etobicoke, Ontario (Canada)
Nalco Chemical Company
180 N. Michigan Avenue
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Nappe Corporation
Croton Falls Industrial Complex
Route 22
Croton Falls, New York 10519
N-Con Systems Company
308 Main Street
New Rochelle, New York
10801
Paul Noasc'ono Company
805 Illinois Avenue
Collinsville, Illinois 62234
NP Industries, Inc.
P.O. Box 746
Niagara Falls, New York 14302
Peri Pump Company, Ltd.
180 Clark Drive
Kenmore, New York 14223
Phipps and Bird, Inc.
303 South 6th Street
Richmond, Virginia 23205
Protech, Inc.
Roberts Lane
Malvern, Pennsylvania 19355
Quality Control Equipment Co.
P.O. Box 2706
Des Moines, Iowa 50315
Sigmamotor, Inc.
14 Elizabeth Street
Middleport, New York 14105
Sirco Controls Company
8815 Selkirk Street
Vancouver, B.C.
Sonford Products Corporation
400 East Broadway, Box B
St. Paul Park, Minnesota 55071
Testing Machines, Inc.
400 Bayview Avenue
Amityville, New York 11701
Tetradyne Corporation
1681 South Broadway
Carrollton, Texas 75006
Tri-Aid Sciences, Inc.
161 Norris Drive
Rochester, New York 14610
Williams Instrument Co., Inc.
P.O. Box 4365, North Annex
San Fernando, California 91342
Universal Engineered Systems, Inc.
7071 Commerce Circle
Pleasanton, California 94566
-------
TABLE D-18
SAMPLER CHARACTERISTIC SUMMARY MATRIX
Ci
i
Cn
Sampler
Bestel-Dean Mk II
Bestel-Dean Crude
BJF 41
Brailsford DC-F 6 EP
Brailsford EVS
Brailsford DV-2
BVS PP-100
BVS PE-400
BVS SE-800
BVS PPE-4QO
Chicago Pump
Collins 42
Collins 40
EMA 200
ETS FS-4
Horizon S7570
Horizon S7576
Horizon S7578
Hydraguard HP
Hydraguard A
Hydra-Numatic
ISCO 1392
ISCO 1480
ISCO 1580
Kent SSA
Kent SSB
Kent SSC
Lakeside T-2
Manning S-4000
Markland 1301
Markland 101 6 102
Markland 104T
Midlab ML 1000 a 2000
Midlab ML 3000
Nalco S-100
Nappe Porta-Positer
Nappe Series 46
Noascono Shift
N-Con Surveyor 11
N-Con Scout II
N-Con Sentry 500
Gathering Method
S- Wat son- Mar low
S-screw type
M-cup on chain
S-piston type
S- vacuum pump
S-piston type
F- pneumatic
F-submersible pump
F-submersible pump
F-pneumatic
user supplied
user supplied
user supplied
F-piston type
S-peristaltic
S-peristaltic
S-peristaltic
S-peristaltic
F-pneumatic
F-pneumatic
S- centrifugal
S-peristaltic
S-peristaltic
S-peristaltic
S-peristaltic
S-peristaltic
S-screw type
M- scoop
S-vacuum pump
F-pneumatic
F-pneumatic
F-pneumatic
S-peristaltic
S-peristaltic
F-submersible pump
S-flexible impeller
S-flexible impeller
S-peristaltic
S-flexible impeller
S-peristaltic
S-peristaltic
Flow
Rate
(ml/min)
690
Unk
NA
10
5
10
•
7,600
7,600
•
-133,000
>3,785
-5,000
Unk
-20
100
100
100
*
•
5,700
1,500
NA
1,400
150
200
33,000
NA
3,800
•
*
*
1,680
1,680
28,400
11,400
13,200
8
20,000
150
ISO
Lift
(m)
6.1
6.1
4.9
<2
3.7
<2
85
9.8
9.8
85
NA
NA
NA
<1
8.8
9.1
9.1
9.1
>9
>9
4.6
7.9
7.9
7.9
4.9
4.0
5.0
0
6.7
18.3
18.3
18.3
9.1
9.1
7.6
1.8
4.6
9.1
1.8
5.5
5.5
Line
Size
(mn)
6.4
19.1
25.4
4.8
4.8
4.8
3.2
12.7
12.7
3.2
25.4
2.4
2.4
9.5
6.4
0.8
0.8
0.8
6.4
6.4
6.4
6.4
6.4
6.4
6.4
6.4
25.4
12.7
9.5
6.4
6.4
6.4
6.4
6.4
12.7
6.4
9.5
4.8
6.4
6.4
6.4
Sample
Type
D, TcVc, TvVc
D, TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
Continuous
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
D, TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
Continuous
Grab
TcVc
Continuous, TcVc
TcVc
TcVc
TcVc, TvVc
D, TcVc, TvVc, S
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
Discrete
D, TcVc, TvVc, S
D, TcVc, TvVc, S
TcVv
D, S
TcVc, TvVc
D, TcVc
D, TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TcVv
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc
TcVc, TvVc
Continuous
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
Sequential
Installation
Portable
Portable
Fixed
Portable
Portable
Portable '
Portable
Portable
Fixed
P or F
Fixed
P or F
P or F
Portable
Portable
Portable
Portable
Portable
Portable
Portable
Portable
Portable
Portable
Portable
Portable
Fixed
Fixed
Fixed
Portable
Portable
Fixed
Fixed
Portable
Portable
Portable
Portable
Fixed
Portable
Portable
Portable
Portable
Cost Range
($)
Unk
Unk
-1,000
296-373
520-672
373
853-1,525
1,500-2,510
5,650
1,450-3,350
2,600-3,200
985-2,478
835-2,328
199-456
1,095-up
-410
-220
595
246-541
285-668
1,800
1,095-1,498
645-1,020
750-1,130
1,240
2,354
2,354
~700-up
1,290
1,095-1,350
594-2,189
1,094-2,644
1,500-2,500
3,000-3,500
Unk
225-285
1,100-1,800
Unk
290-590
575-935
1,125-1,205
Power
AC/DC
AC
AC
DC
AC/ DC
DC
AC/DC
AC/DC
AC
AC/DC
AC
AC
AC
AC/DC
AC
AC/DC
AC
DC
Air
Air 6 AC
AC
AC/DC
AC/DC
AC/ DC
AC/ DC
AC
AC
AC
DC
Air 6 DC
Air 5 DC
Air 6 AC
AC
AC
AC
AC/DC
AC
AC
AC
AC/ DC
AC/DC
-------
-TABLE D-18
SAMPLER CHARACTERISTIC SUMMARY MATRIX (Continued)
o
i
Sampler
N-Con Trebler
N-Con Sentinel
Peri 704
Phipps and Bird
ProTech CG-110
ProTech CG-125
ProTech CG-125FP
ProTech CEG-200
ProTech CEL-300
ProTech DEL-4005
QCEC CVE
QCEC CVE 11
QCEC E
Rice Barton
SERCO NW-3
SERCO TC-2
Sigmamotor WA-1
Sigmamotor WAP- 2
Sigmamotor WM-3-24
Sigmamotor KA-S
Sigmamotor WAP-5
Sigmamotor WM-5-24
Sirco B/ST-VS
Sirco B/1E-VS
Sirco B/DP-VS
Sirco MK-VS
Son ford HC-4
Streamgard DA-2451
TMI Fluid Stream
TMI We 38 (Hants)
Tri-Aid
Williams Oscillamatic
Gathering Method
M- scoop
user supplied
S-peristaltic
M-cup on chain
F-pneumatic
F-pneumatic
F-pneumatic
F-pneumatic
F-submersible pump
F-submersible pump
S- vacuum pump
S-vacuum pump
M-cup on chain
S-vacuum pump
S-evacuated jars
user supplied
S-peristaltic
S-peristaltic
S-peristaltic
S-peristaltic
S-peristaltic
S-peristaltic
S-vacuum pump
M-cup on cable
user supplied
S-vacuum pump
M-dipper
user supplied
F-pneumatic
S-evacuated jars
S-peristaltic
S-diaphragm type
Flow
Rate
(ml/min)
NA
63,000
160
NA
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
6,000
6,000
3,000
3,000
NA
Unk
Varies
42,000
60
60
60
80
80
80
12,000
NA
6,000
NA
NA
•
Varies
500
60
Lift
(m)
0
NA
7.6
18.3
9.1
9.1
9.1
16.8
9.1
9.1
6.1
6.1
18.3
3.7
1.3
NA '
6.7
6.7
6.7
5.5
5.5
5.5
6.7
61
NA
6.7
0.5
NA
7.6
1-3
7.5
3.6
Line
Size
(mn)
12.7
25.4
6.4
NA
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
12.7
12.7
6.4
6.4
NA
25.4
6.4
•U9
3.2
3.2
3.2
6.4
6.4
6.4
9.5
9.5
9.5
9.5
19.0
6.4
12.7
3.2
9.5
6.4
Sample
Type
TcVv
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc
TcVc
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
Discrete
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc
Discrete
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc
TcVc, TvVc
Discrete
TcVc
TcVc, TvVc
Discrete
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc, TvVc
D, TcVc, TvVc, S
TcVc, TvVc
Discrete
TcVc
Discrete
TcVc, TvVc
TcVc
[nstallation
Fixed
Fixed
Portable
Fixed
Portable
Portable
Portable
P or F
P or F
Fixed
Portable
Portable
Fixed
Fixed
Portable
Fixed
Portable
Portable
Portable
Portable
Portable
Portable
P or F
Fixed
P or F
Portable
Portable
Portable
Fixed
Portable
P or F
P or F
Cost Range
(*)
1,050-1,350
1.2,600
Unk
1,000-up
485
695-1,205
925-1,610
1,354-2,445
1,495-2,750
3,995-4,765
570-1,030
i.l,000-up
1.1 ,000-up
Unk
1.1,000
x2,500
430-730
650-870
975-1,525
750-990
850-1,215
1,225-1,775
1,900-3,000
1.500-3,000
1,600-3,000
M,300-up
325-495
775
•x.800
•WOO-up
650-985
438
Power
AC
AC
DC
AC
- -
-/AC
AC/ DC
Air/AC
AC
AC
AC/DC
AC/ DC
AC
AC
-
Air 6 AC
AC/ DC
AC/ DC
AC/DC
AC/ DC
AC/DC
AC/DC
AC/ DC
AC
AC/DC
AC/ DC
AC/ DC
-
Air 6 AC
-
AC
-
M - Mechanical
F - Forced Flow
S - Suction Lift
* - Depends on pressure and lift
NA - Not Applicable
Unk - Unknown at time of writing
-------
device. Finally, the "Power" column is used to indicate whether line current
(AC), battery (DC), or other forms of power (e.g., air pressure) are required
for the unit to operate.
D.4.2.4 Review of Recent Field Experience
In order to assess the efficacy of both commercially available samplers and
custom engineered units in actual field usage*, a survey of recent USEPA
projects, many of which were in the storm and combined sewer pollution con-
trol area, was conducted. None of these projects was undertaken solely to
compare or evaluate samplers, but all required determination of water qual-
ity. In the following paragraphs, difficulties encountered with various
elements of the liquid samplers are described.
The small diameter, low intake velocity probes found in several commercial
units were felt to be unable to gather as representative a sample of the
flow as could be obtained manually. There were many instances of inlet tube
openings being blocked by rags, paper, disposable diapers, and other such
debris. Although less a fault of the equipment than an installation prac-
tice, there were several instances of intake tubes being flushed over
emergency overflow weirs, up onto manhole steps, etc., during periods of
high flow and left high and dry and unable to gather any samples when the
flow subsided.
There were numerous instances of pre-evacuated bottle samplers losing their
vacuum in 24 to 48 hours, resulting in little or no data. Furthermore, per-
sonnel find these units with their 24 individual intake tubes virtually im-
possible to clean in the field. The low suction lifts on many commercial
units render some sites inacessible. In one project, three sites required
manual sampling because none of the samplers on hand could meet the 5- to
6-meter lifts required at these sites. There were several instances of sam-
ple quantity varying with sewage level as well as with the lift required at
the particular site. On at least two occasions, submersible pumps were dam-
aged or completely swept away by heavy debris in the flow.
D-97
-------
Within the sampling train itself, line freezing during winter operation was
a problem in several projects with instances of up to 60-percent data loss
reported. In one project, the intake line was too large, which allowed
solids to settle out in it until it ultimately became clogged. There were
numerous instances of smaller suction tubes becoming plugged with stringy
and large-sized material. A very frequent complaint, applied especially to
discrete samplers, was that they gathered inadequate sample volumes for the
laboratory analyses required.
On one project, although not directly the fault of the sampling equipment
itself, data were lost for 14 storms due to improper sterilization of non-
disposable sample bottles.
The control subsystems of commercial units probably came in for more criti-
cism than any other. Comments on automatic starters ranged from poor to
unreliable to absolutely inadequate. There were instances where dampness
deteriorated electrical contacts and solenoids causing failure of apparently
well-insulated parts. The complexity of some electrical systems made them
difficult to maintain and repair by field personnel. Inadequate fuses and
failures of microswitches, relays, and reed switches were commonly encoun-
tered. The minimum time between collection of samples for some commercial
units was too long to adequately characterize some rapidly changing flows.
Collected USEPA experience in one region reported by Harris and Keffer (16)
involved over 90,000 hours use of some 50 commercial automatic liquid sam-
plers of 15 makes and models. They found that the mean sampler failure
rate was approximately 16 percent with a range of 4 to 40 percent among
types. They also found that the ability of an experienced team to gather a
complete 24-hour composite sample is approximately 80 percent. When one
factors in the possibility of mistakes in installation, variations in per-
sonnel expertise, excessive changes in lift, surcharging, and winter opera-
tion, it is small wonder that projects on which more than 50 to 60 percent
of the desired data were successfully gathered using automatic samplers were,
until recently, in the minority.
D-98
-------
In fairness to present day equipment, it must be pointed out that some of the
above cited complaints stem from equipment designs of up to 10 years ago, and
many commercial manufacturers, properly benefitting from field experience,
have modified or otherwise improved their products' performance. The would-
be purchaser of commercial automatic samplers today, however, should keep in
mind the design deficiencies that led to the foregoing complaints when select-
ing a particular unit for his application.
D.4.3 Manual Versus Automatic Sampling
The decision whether to sample manually or use automatic samplers is far from
straightforward, and involves many considerations in addition to equipment
costs. Experience has indicated that operator training is necessary if manual
sampling is to produce reproducible results. Instances have been noted
wherein two different operators were asked to obtain a sample at a particular
site with no other guidance given. Analyses of samples taken at almost the
same instants in time have shown differences exceeding 50 percent. Other
work conducted solely to compare manual sampling methods has indicated such
discrepancies in results that suspicion must be cast upon manual methods that
involve dipping of samples out of raw waste sources and has raised questions
regarding the suitability of such manual grab sampling as a yardstick against
which to measure other techniques.
The decision to use automatic sampling equipment does not represent the uni-
versal answer to water and wastewater characterization, however. For initial
characterization studies, proper manual sampling may represent the most eco-
nomical method of gathering the desired data. It is also prudent from time
to time to verify the results of an automatic sampler with manual samples.
In general, manual sampling is indicated when infrequent samples are required
from a site, when biological or sediment samples or both are also required
from a site, when investigating special incidents (e.g., fish kills, hazard-
ous material spills), where sites simply will not allow the use of automatic
devices, for most bacteriological sampling, etc. Manual sampling will often
be the method of choice in conducting stream surveys, especially those of
D-99
-------
relatively short duration where only a single daily grab sample is required
from each site. For large rivers, lakes, and estuaries, manual sampling will
almost always be required.
Automatic samplers are indicated where frequent sampling is required at a
given site, where long-term compositing is desired, where simultaneous sam-
pling at many sites is necessary, etc. Automatic sampling will often be the
method of choice for storm-generated discharge studies, for longer period
outfall monitoring, for treatment plant efficiency studies, where 24-hour
composite samples are required, and so on.
Typically, the wide spectrum of 208 agency monitoring activities will require
a capability for both manual and automatic sampling, and so the question is
not which capability to obtain but when to use each. The answei should be
determined in the design of each survey, using the above information as
guidance.
D.4.4 Sampling Field Procedures
D.4.4.1 Manual Sampling Procedures
The preferred method of gathering manual samples from a raw waste stream is
to use a pump to actually extract the fluid and tubing of appropriate size to
transport it to the sample container. Pump and tubing sizes should be such
that effective collection and transport of all suspended solids of interest
is ensured. Both small, flexible impeller centrifugal pumps and progressive
cavity screw pumps have been successfully used with good repeatability of
results. It should be noted, however, that the collection of flow propor-
tional or sequential composite samples can become quite tedious if performed
manually at the sampling site. Locate the intake at approximately the three-
quarters depth point (i.e., one-fourth of the way up from the bottom) and
point it upstream into the flow. Adjust the pump speed until intake velocity
approximately equals the mean flow velocity (obtained from a flow-measuring
device or current meter) and, after about 60 seconds, direct the stream into
the sample container. Avoid using an intake screen unless absolutely
necessary.
D-100
-------
When manually sampling natural streams, use a depth-integrating sampler at
the center of the stream if the flow is laterally homogeneous. Check the
site for this by occasionally taking samples from the quarter points and
comparing results. If significant differences are found, either choose
another site or take a number (5 to 20 depending upon stream width) of depth
integrated samples along a transect perpendicular to the flow. Based on the
results, choose the minimum number of transverse stations that will yield
acceptable results.
Depth integrating samplers for use in more swiftly running streams are rela-
tively heavy, and so some type of hoist or winch is normally used to facil-
itate handling. These can be mounted on boats for river and estuary cruises,
on trucks or trollies for bridge sampling, etc. Contact the nearest USGS
field office for more information on availability and use of different depth
integrating samplers.
Samples may be manually gathered at a given depth in the water column by
using a Juday bottle or one of its modifications (e.g., Kemmerer, Van Dorn).
This type is essentially a cylinder with stoppers that leave the ends open
while the sampler is being lowered to allow free passage of water through
the cylinder. When the desired depth is reached (as determined by markings
on the line, for instance) a messenger is sent down the line and causes the
stoppers to close the cylinder, which is then raised and the sample trans-
ferred to its container. These devices can be used to approximate depth in-
tegration through the water column, to investigate stratification in lakes,
or wherever a sample from a particular depth is desired. When using such
devices from bridges, take precautions so that the messenger, when dropped
from the height of the bridge, does not batter and ruin the triggers that
release the stoppers. One simple way to avoid this is to support the mes-
senger a few feet above the sampler with a string and release it when the
desired depth is reached.
If vertical concentration gradients are not severe, a single grab sample
will suffice. It is recommended that a container smaller in volume than the
desired total sample volume be used, and that the required sample volume be
D-101
-------
obtained by repeated dippings at one minute intervals. Rinse the container
two or three times in the water to be sampled prior to taking the first ali-
quot. Comparison of the results between depth integrated and simple grab
samples will indicate when the latter technique will suffice.
For reproducibility of manual sampling results, operator training is abso-
lutely essential; 208 agencies can ill afford to entrust this task to well-
intentioned but untrained staff or volunteers. Also, it is time that we
forget about using a beer can nailed to a stick as a sample gathering device.
All in all, the manual pumping sampler described earlier in this section will
produce the most reproducible results, and its use is recommended whenever
feasible. One subject that should also be touched on briefly is manual com-
positing according to flow records. Given a series of discrete samples of
equal volume taken at regular time intervals and a flow record, the question
is what size aliquot should be taken from each discrete sample container to
form the flow proportional composite sample? Recall from Section D.4.1 that
this can be done in one of two ways: either extract an aliquot volume that
is proportional to the instantaneous flow rate at the time the discrete sam-
ple was taken, or extract an aliquot volume that is proportional to the total
discharge that has occurred since the last discrete sample was taken. The
formula used for this can be written as:
a. = f. V /Ef.
i i c i
where: a. = aliquot volume to be extracted from the i-th discrete
sample, i.e., the one taken at time t.
i = index indicating the order in which the discrete samples
were taken, l£i£n
f. = flow variable; either the flow rate when the i-th discrete
sample was taken (q.) or the total discharge that has
occurred since the (i-l)-th sample was taken (AQ.=Q.-Q._,)
V = composite sample volume desired
n = number of discrete samples taken
The desired composite sample volume is determined based on the requirements
for the analyses to be conducted. The subtle problem is that one does not
D-102
-------
have complete freedom in selecting V because of the fixed discrete sample
volume (V,), and the entire sequential discrete series may be wasted if this
is not recognized, because there might not be enough sample in one bottle to
fulfill its aliquot requirements. This is best illustrated by an example
(see Table D-19). Note that if steps 3 and 4 had not been carried out, when
the operator came to bottle number 5 he would not have been able to continue,
since he would be 250 ml. short. This has happened. Also, it is incorrect
to use leftover liquid from the adjacent discrete samples to make up the
deficit (which has also occurred).
In actuality, one can compute the maximum composite sample volume that can
be formed from a series of discrete samples. The formula is
(V ) = V, Zf./(f.)
v c'max d i' *• n/max
If this quantity is greater than the amount desired, the formula given earlier
for determining aliquot volume can be used. If not, the aliquot size should
be computed from
a. = f. V,/(fO
i id i max
This will be illustrated by a second example, shown in Table D-20. Since the
available composite sample is nearly half a liter less than was desired, a
new decision on how to allocate the available volume must be made.
Example III (Table D-21) is included to indicate how to manually prepare a
time-constant, volume-proportional-to-discharge-since-last-sample-was-taken
composite when a record of flow rate rather than discharge is available. The
results of Examples II and III agree because the same flow function (q=5,000
sin irt/8) was used in each case and the trapezoidal integration scheme worked
well.
The details for manually preparing a time-constant, volume-proportional-to-
instantaneous-flow-rate composite sample using the flow rate record given
in Example III will not be presented (a.=191, 354, 462, 500, 462, 354, 191,
0; Za.=2,514 m£), but it is of interest to contrast the measured concentration
of a constituent of interest obtained by this method as opposed to the method
of Example II. For this purpose, assume that the constituent behavior is a
p-103
-------
TABLE D-19
MANUAL COMPOSITE SAMPLE EXAMPLE I
Example:
Given:
Steps :
1.
2.
3.
4.
Manually preparing a time-constant, volume-proportional-to-
instantaneous- flow-rate composite sample.
A 500 m£ discrete sample was taken at the end of each hour over
an 8-hour shift. A 2-liter composite is desired. A recording
of flow rate is available.
Sample No. (i) q. a.
1 300 47
2 600 94
3 1,200 188
4 2,400 375
5 4,800 750
6 2,000 312
7 1,000 156
8 500 78
Eq. = 12,800 2,000
a.x500/750
31
63
125
250
500
208
104
52
1,333
Enter q. from record and sum.
Calculate ai=qiVc/Zqi=2000q./12,800.
Check to see if maximum a. exceeds discrete sample volume. .
Compute new aliquot volume = a.x500/750.
D-104
-------
TABLE D-20
MANUAL COMPOSITE SAMPLE EXAMPLE II
Example: Manually preparing
a time-constant, volume-proportional- to-
discharge- since- last- sample-was -taken
Given: A 500-m£ discrete
an 8 -hour shift.
Steps :
of totalized flow
Sample No. (i)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
sample was
A 3-liter
taken at
composite
composite .
the end of each hour over
is desired. A recording
is available.
Qi
0
969
3,729
7,860
12,732
17,605
21,736
24,496
25,465
^AQi
AQ,
_
969
2,760
4,130
4,873
4,873
4,130
2,760
969
= 25,464
a.
_
99
284
424
500
500
424
284
99
2,614
1. Enter Q. from record and calculate AQ. = Q. - Q. ..
2. Calculate (V ) = (500) (25,464)/4,873 = 2,614 mi.
C IH3.X
3. Since (V ) is less than desired, calculate aliquot size from
c'max n
a. = 500 AQ./4,873.
D-105
-------
TABLE D-21
MANUAL COMPOSITE SAMPLE EXAMPLE III
Example: Manually preparing a time- constant, volume-proportional-to-
discharge- since- last-sample-was- taken
Given: A 500-mJl discrete
an 8-hour shift.
sample was
A 3-liter
taken at
composite
composite.
the end of each hour over
is desired. A recording
of flow rate is available.
Steps :
Sample No. (i)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
q±
0
1,913
3,536
4,619
5,000
4,619
3,536
1,913
0
EAQi
AQ.
-
957
2,725
4,078
4,810
4,810
4,078
2,725
957
= 25,140
a.
i
-
99
283
424
500
500
424
283
99
2,612
1. Enter q. from record and use trapezoidal rule to calculate
AQ. = (q.+q. ,)/2 (another integration scheme could be used
if warranted) .
2. Calculate (V )
c max
3. Calculate a. = 500
= (500) (25
AQi/4,810
,140)/4,810 = 2,613
D-106
-------
simple linear decay (i.e., conc.=9-t). The true concentration in the flow
rate proportional sample would be 5.0 (assuming the discrete samples from
which the composite was formed were 100 percent representative). The corre-
sponding true concentration of the discharge proportional composite
(Example II) would be 4.5, a difference of around 10 percent due solely to
the method of compositing.
The possible importance of sediment oxygen demand (SOD) measurements to
208 agency plans is well illustrated by Butts (17) who noted, as a result of
an extensive SOD study, that "... it is doubtful that the aquatic ecology of
the (Illinois) waterway can be measurably enhanced solely by achieving cur-
rent water quality standards." The subject of SOD measurement remains some-
what controversial, but it is recommended that determinations be made in situ
rather than in the laboratory. Ascertaining the relationship between SOD
rates and DO content of the overlying waters is better accomplished by perform-
ing in situ measurements. This can be done, for example, by setting a bell-
shaped shallow cover over the spot on the bottom where the measurement is to
be made, circulating the water within this "sampler" with a small pump, and
measuring the change in DO with time.
The design of an in-situ SOD measuring device developed by the Illinois State
Water Survey is described by Butts (17), who also reports favorably on its
use. The cover was made from a 14-inch-diameter by 24-inch-long steel pipe
split longitudinally in half. End plates were welded on, and angle iron was
welded around the lower edge to act as cutting edges and seating flanges.
Fittings for raising and lowering the device, two hose attachments to allow
connection of a pump for water circulation, and a split collar to hold the
DO/temperature probe were also welded in place. The "sampler" covered a flat
bottom area of about 0.2 square meter (336 sq in.), and the total volume of
water within the system was around 31 liters. The device is handled with a
USGS bridge winch adapted for use on a boat.
D-107
-------
D.4.4.2 Automatic Sampling Procedures
When using automatic samplers, the greatest problem comes in mounting the
intake. Screened intakes should be used in waters containing large solids,
trash, or debris to prevent clogging. Screen openings should be slightly
smaller than the smallest opening in the sampling train. More and more com-
mercial devices are now provided with intake screens by their manufacturers.
When using these, the end of the intake hose should be approximately at the
center of the screen. If intake screens are not provided with the samples,
they can be fabricated quite simply by drilling a large number of appropri-
ately sized holes in a piece of plastic pipe, cementing on end covers, and
drilling out one end to accept the sample tube and fastening it with a hose
clamp and fitting. Clear plastic is recommended to facilitate inspection.
A typical size for an intake screen to accommodate a 3/8 inch ID tube is ap-
proximately 1.5 to 2 inches in diameter by 6 to 10 inches long. Hole diam-
eters could be 1/4 inch if the rest of the sampling train is larger.
The flexible plastic intake tubing commonly used in most commercial automatic
samplers will require some protection in many installations, or wear from
particles in the flow and damage from debris will necessitate frequent re-
placement. Flexible electrical conduit and reinforced garden hose have been
successfully used in this regard. Even with such protection, it is recom-
mended that sample intake lines be trenched in where they run over earthen
surfaces.
One of the most challenging sample intake mounting problems is in a natural,
wet weather stream. If the intake is allowed to rest on the bottom where it
could obtain samples at very low flows and, hence, more readily determine
first flush effects, there is a possibility that flow fields around the in-
take may induce scour and cause artificially high solids readings. Mounting
the intake well above the bottom obviates this problem but prevents acquiring
samples of very low flow. The best compromise seems to be to mount the in-
take horizontally, at right angles to the flow, in the middle of the stream
and with its lowest surface around 2 inches above the bottom (higher if sig-
nificant bedload depths are anticipated). The stream bottom at this point
D-108
-------
should be reasonably flat and free of stones or other flow-altering obstruc-
tions upstream of the intake. For cobble-strewn bottoms, follow the above
procedure but measure from a sheet of plywood resting on the stones.
To anchor the sample intake to the bottom, use screw augers or metal rods
driven well into the soil. Simple hose clamps can be used to affix the intake
screen to these supports.
For continuously flowing natural streams, similar considerations pertain.
The main difference will be in the vertical location of the intake. In the
absence of other factors, mount the intake near the low flow mid-depth. If
stream depth allows, the intake should be mounted with its center line ver-
tical, and suction taken from the bottom. In this configuration, a single
mounting rod can be used. It should be located to one side of the intake
(never in front of it).
The foregoing has been written with smaller streams, typical of those that
would be encountered in an urban runoff study, in mind. As indicated earlier
in this section, it is not expected that automatic samplers will find wide
use in river monitoring.
In man-made channels and conduits, there is no longer a concern for bottom
scour. For those carrying intermittent flows, the intake screen can be
allowed to rest on the bottom unless significant bedload depths are antici-
pated. Where large debris is likely to be encountered, a spring-loaded
intake screen mounting should be considered to help prevent destruction. It
is a fairly common practice to simply let the intake screen trail downstream
by its tubing. In very low or no-flow periods it will rest on the invert
and, during higher flows, hydrodynamic forces will tend to lift it up. The
chief objection to this practice is that probes facing downstream do not
gather representative solids due to momentum effects. Data on the degree of
under-representation caused by this practice are virtually nonexistent, how-
ever. Use this practice as a last resort.
D-109
-------
Where the flow is continuous (but variable), position the intake screen near
the low flow mid-depth. As opposed to natural streams, however, in many man-
made conduits it will be more convenient to dangle the intake from above with
the suction tube pointing down. Although the vertically up orientation is
preferable, this practice is also acceptable. The chief disadvantage of
"dangling" approaches to intake mounting is that you never really know where
the intake is. Be certain that there is no possibility of full flow posi-
tioning the intake where it could be left "high and dry" as the flow recedes.
Manhole benches, steps, weirs, and the like have taken their toll in careless
intake installations.
For the (rare) case where relatively steady flow is anticipated in either
natural or man-made channels, position the intake at about the three-
quarter depth point. If two automatic sampling devices are used for redun-
dancy at a critical site, position one intake at the eight-tenths depth point
and one at the four-tenths depth point. Shelley (18) discusses the rationale
for sample intake location in some detail and presents designs for maintain-
ing intakes at a constant percentage of depth in variable flows, noninvasive
intakes, etc.
All of the foregoing has been written primarily with suction lift intakes
in mind, but similar considerations apply if forced-flow devices are used.
For samplers employing mechanical gathering methods, follow the manu-
facturer's directions.
Mounting the main body of the automatic sampler is rather straightforward;
follow the manufacturer's directions. Keep the lift as short as possible
commensurate with the likelihood of submergence. If excess sample tubing
exists, cut it off. Do not simply coil it out of the way, thinking that the
extra length might be useful at the next installation.
D-110
-------
After setting up the controls and power subsystem according to the operator's
manual for the particular sampler being used, manually cycle it a few times
and measure the quantity of sample actually being taken. This is especially
important where fixed aliquot volume composite samples are to be collected.
Verify sample volume gathered on each site visit. Partial plugging, intake
blockage, or other occurrences that might not be immediately obvious can
affect the sample quantity in most designs. Also, use a stopwatch to record
the time that it takes to gather the sample and verify this on subsequent
visits. For battery-operated units, frequent voltage checks are in order
until service life can be established for the installation. Manufacturers
are not noted to be conservative in estimating battery life, and it will be
affected by a number of factors such as sample lift, temperature, etc.
Always inspect the sample intake at each visit.
For operation in very cold weather, a heated enclosure for the sampler body
will be required. Sample lines should be wrapped with heater tape and
insulated -- large plastic trash bags work well for this. Check for possible
ice buildup at each visit. Should frozen (or partially frozen) samples be
encountered, do not discard them, but immediately enter the facts in the
field log and also report the condition to the analytical laboratory when
the samples are delivered.
Maintenance and troubleshooting of automatic samplers are so design-dependent
that little general guidance can be given other than to follow manufacturer's
instructions and recognize the importance of these activities in contributing
to project success. However, one word of caution pertaining to suction lift
samplers using peristaltic pumps must be made. Some of these pump designs
require that the tubing be lubricated. This must be done or tube life will
be considerably shortened; failures after less than 2 hours of operation
have been reported for some designs when inadequate lubrication was applied.
With care and consideration, most automatic samplers can be made to work
reasonably well; with carelessness and disregard, almost none will.
D-lll
-------
D.4.5 Sample Quantity, Preservation, and Handling
Since the required sample volume is dependent upon the type and number of
parameters to be analyzed for and the instrumentation and methods to be
employed in the analysis at the laboratory, the laboratory analyst is the
best person to specify the quantity needed. A preliminary estimate of
sample volume can be obtained as follows. Determine the parameters to be
analyzed for and, from the Parameter Handbook, obtain the sample volume
required for each analysis. Sum these to obtain the minimum volume, and
increase this amount as necessary to allow for spillage, mistakes, sample
splitting, and for analytical laboratory quality control purposes. In the
absence of better information, doubling the minimum volume should be
adequate.
Having collected a representative sample of the fluid mixture in question,
there remains the problem of sample preservation and analysis. It is a
practical impossibility either to perform instant analyses of the sample on
the spot or to completely and unequivocally preserve it for subsequent ex-
amination. Preservation methods are intended to retard biological action,
retard hydrolysis of chemical compounds and complexes, and reduce volatility
of constituents. They are generally limited to pH control, chemical addi-
tion, refrigeration, and freezing. The USEPA (19) has compiled a list of
recommendations for preservation of samples according to the measurement
analysis to be performed. In order to provide an overview for some common
parameters, this list has been reproduced here as Table D-22. For other
parameters and program design, reference should be made to the Parameter
Handbook.
Proper sample handling is also essential to obtaining successful results from
any monitoring program. A few general guidelines are given below.
1. Each sample container must have a designation, normally a number,
that uniquely distinguishes it from all other samples in the survey.
D-112
-------
TABLE D-22
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PRESERVATION OF SAMPLES ACCORDING TO MEASUREMENT
d)
o
I
Acidity
Alkalinity
Arsenic
BOD
Bromide
COD
Chloride
Chlorine Req
Color
Cyanides
Dissolved Oxygen
Probe
Ninkler
Fluoride
Hardness
Iodide
MBAS
Metals
Dissolved
Suspended
Total
Mercury
Dissolved
Nitrogen
Ammonia
Kjeldahl
Nitrate
Nitrate
Vol
Req
100
100
100
1000
100
50
50
50
SO
500
300
300
100
100
250
200
100
100
400
SOO
100
SO
p.o'2'
P.G
P.G
P.G
P.G
P.G
P.G
P.G
P.G
P.G
G only
P.C
P.G
P,G
P.C
P,C
P.C
P,C
P.C
P.G
P.G
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4"C
HNO- to pH <2
3
Cool, 4 C
Cool, 4 C
H-SO. to pH <2
t a,
None Req
Cool, 4*C
Cool, 4*C
Cool, 4"C
NaOH to pH 12
Det on site
Cool. 4'C
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
Filter on site
HN03 to pH <2
Filter on site
HNO to pH <2
Filter
HNO to pH <2
Cool, 4*C
H2S04 to pH <2
Cool. 4'C
H.SO to pH <2
Cool, 4*C
H2S04 to pH <2
Cool, 4'C
(6)
Hoi ing
24 Hrs
24 Hrs
6 Mos
6 Hrs(3)
24 Hrs
7 Days
7 Days
24 Hrs
24 Hrs
24 Hrs
No Holding
7 Days
7 Days
24 Hrs
24 Hrs
6 Mos
6 Mos
6 Mos
38 Days (Glass)
13 Days (Hard
Plastic)
24 Hrs'4'
24 Hrs'4'
24 Hrs'4'
24 Hr,'4'
NTA
Oil and Grease
Organic Carbon
pH
Phenolics
Phosphorous
Orthophosphate,
Dissolved
Hydrolyzable
Total
Total,
Dissolved
Filterable
Nonfilterable
Total
Volatile
Settleable Matter
Selenium
Silica
Specific
Conductance
Sulfate
Sulfide
Sulfite
Temperature
Threshold Odor
Turbidity
Vol
Req
50
1000
25
25
500
50
50
SO
50
100
100
100
100
1000
50
50
100
50
SO
50
1000
200
100
P.G
G only
P,G
P.G
G only
P.G
P.C
P.G
P.G
P.G
P.C
P.G
P.C
P.G
P.G
P only
P.C
P.C
P,G
P.G
P.G
G only
P.G
Cool. 4'C
Cool, 4'C
H2S04 to pH <2
Cool, 4'C
H2S04 to pH <2
Cool, 4'C
Det on site
Cool. 4'C
HjP04 to pH <4
l.Og CuS04/l
Filter on site
Cool, 4'C
Cool. 4'C
H2S04 to pH <2
Cool, 4'C
Filter on site
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
None Req
HN03 to pH <2
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
2 mt zinc
acetate
Cool, 4'C
Det on site
Cool, 4'C
Cool, 4'C
Holding Time'^'
24 Hrs
24 Hrs
24 Hrs
6 Hrs'3'
24 Hrs
24 Hrs'4'
24 Hrs'4'
24 Hr,'4'
(4)
24 Hrs' '
7 Days
7 Days
7 Days
7 Days
24 Hrs
6 Mos
7 Days
24 Hrs'5'
7 Days
24 Hrs
24 Hrs
No Holding
24 Hrs
7 Days
1. Taken from (9).
2. Plastic or Glass.
3. If samples cannot be returned to the laboratory in less than
6 hours and holding tine exceeds this limit, the final reported
data should indicate the actual holding tine.
concentration of 40 ng/l, especially if a longer holding ,tine
is required. However, the use of mercuric chloride is dis-
couraged whenever possible.
5. If the sample is stabilized by cooling, it should be warned
to 25*C for reading, or temperature correction made and
results reported at 25*C.
6. It has been shows that samples properly preserved nay be
held for extended periods beyond the recommended holding
time.
-------
2. When frequent sampling over a long time period is involved, con-
sideration should be given to incorporating a temporal indication
as a part of the sample identification number; e.g., the number
of the week in a year, the last two digits of the year, etc. The
temptation to code too much information about the sample into its
identification number must be resisted, however, or else the risk
of mixups due to unauthorized abbreviations becomes too great.
3. Consideration should be given to the use of preprinted, sticky-back
labels in many instances. Be certain, however, that they are
waterproof. Rubberband and tie-on tags have also been used success-
fully.
4. The use of color-coded labels has been successful where sample
splitting or different preservation techniques are employed. In
the latter case, for example, a green label could indicate that
nitric acid had been added and that, therefore, an analyst could
obtain aliquots from this sample for metal analyses, etc.
5. Where possible, the type of sample, date, and any preservatives added
should be written on the sample label prior to collecting the sample
in the field. The time of day should be added when the sample is
collected. Additional information should be noted in the field
notebook and on supplemental forms where used.
6. The foregoing should be observed in addition to any chain-of-custody
procedures that are involved. See (20) for USEPA recommendations
for a chain-of-custody program.
The proper cleaning of all equipment used in the sampling of wastewater is
essential to ensuring valid results from laboratory analyses. Cleaning
protocols should be developed for all sampling equipment early in the design
of the monitoring program. Here, also, the laboratory analyst should be
consulted, both to ensure that the procedures and techniques are adequate as
D-114
-------
well as to avoid including practices that are not warranted in view of the
analyses to be performed. The possibility of the container affecting the
sample analyses should be checked periodically. Distilled or demineralized
water should be placed in a typical container for a period of time similar
to that of a normal sample. Then the particular constituent of interest
should be measured in the water from this blank. Also, checks for sample
adsorption on the container should be made by placing a known amount of a
particular constituent in a typical container. After a specified holding
time, analyses should be made to determine if any of the material was ad-
sorbed into the container or changed in any other manner. These checks
should be done after sample bottles have been used for a series of samples.
In this way the cleaning techniques used can be tested for thoroughness.
The use of blanks and spikes just mentioned brings up the subject of qual-
ity control in general. Although outside the scope of this Appendix, each
208 agency must have a viable quality assurance program. The USEPA (21, 22)
has published minimal requirements for a water quality assurance program and
a handbook for analytical quality control in the laboratory. The recommenda-
tions in these two references should be followed by all 208 agencies.
D.4.6 Sampling Accumulated Roadway Material
Accumulated roadway material may represent a significant source of pollution
during storm-generated discharges in urban areas. In order to quantify this
source, provide inputs for models, determine if better urban housekeeping
practices would produce commensurate water quality improvements, etc., sam-
pling of accumulated roadway material will be required. The following dis-
cussion is abstracted from Wullschleger et al. (7).
Samples of materials deposited on roadways are collected using a combination
of sweeping, vacuuming, and water flushing techniques. Each sample will con-
sist of three fractions: litter, dust and dirt, and water flush. The par-
ticulate materials collected by sweeping and vacuuming are separated on the
basis of particle size into a litter fraction and dust and dirt fraction.
The litter fraction consists of that portion of the particulates retained by
D-115
-------
a U.S.A. No. 6 sieve (i.e., greater than 3.35 mm in diameter). This fraction
is usually composed of stones, gravels, wood fragments, and other larger
sized materials in addition to bottles, cans, paper production, etc., which
are normally thought of as litter. The dust and dirt fraction will contain
particulates smaller than 3.35 mm in diameter. The water flush fraction con-
tains those components of the dust and dirt fraction which were not picked up
at high efficiencies by the sweeping and vacuuming techniques. The flush
plus the dust and dirt constitute a total dust and dirt fraction which is the
major source of water pollutants found in runoff from urban roadways.
If a physical and chemical description of the street surface contaminants is
needed, the sample should be collected by hand sweeping, followed by flush-
ing. All of the dry solid material collected from the test area should be
placed in clean containers and shipped back to the laboratory. There it
should be air dried thoroughly and sealed for storage until analyzed. All of
the flushed material should be measured for volume, but only a portion of it
need be retained for analysis. The liquid sample should be stored in clean
containers (glass, if pesticide analyses are to be made) and cooled to <4°C
if possible. The analyses of the liquid fraction should be made as soon as
possible after collection. To reduce the number of chemical analyses re-
quired, the dry and liquid samples can be combined on an equal sample area
basis before the analyses are performed.
If only physical loading information (such as kg (Ib) of solids per curb km
(mile)) is needed, hand sweeping is probably sufficient. In most cases, the
additional quantity of material that can be obtained by subsequent vacuuming
and/or flushing is insignificant. If information regarding particle size
distribution is required, then the sample should be collected using a combi-
nation of hand sweeping and dry vacuuming. The vacuum is more efficient in
removing the fine particles which are needed for size distribution analyses.
If size distribution of the solids in the wet phase is needed, then flushing
will also be required.
D-116
-------
The basic procedures for the collection of samples are:
Hand sweeping - Hand sweeping for dry solids collection should utilize a
standard stiff-bristled push broom. The sweeping pattern should be from the
center of street or from one edge of the test area towards the gutter or op-
posite side of the test area. After concentrating the material along this
edge, the sample should be collected, using a whisk broom and dustpan.
Vacuuming - Vacuuming the test area usually removes more smaller-sized par-
ticles than is possible by only using sweeping techniques. The vacuuming
pattern should approximate the pattern described for hand sweeping. An in-
dustrial wet/dry "shop" vacuum cleaner with a 5-7.6 cm (2 in. to 3 in.) di-
ameter hose is recommended. Other types of units, ranging from small
household vacuums to large motorized vacuum sweepers, may also be satisfac-
tory, depending on the size of the test area.
Flushing - The test area can be flushed with water after hand sweeping to re-
move soluble films and other nonswe'epable material. The materials removed
with this method more closely resemble those which are removed by a runoff
event. The test area is first slightly wetted to soften and facilitate re-
moval of soluble materials. It is then flushed with a stream of water from a
garden hose and spray nozzle connected to a fire hydrant or other water sup-
ply. Begin at the road crown and flush toward the edge. The downslope gut-
ter is dammed with sandbags to create a collection area. A small vacuum
collector is used before an industrial wet/dry vacuum cleaner to remove the
sample water from the collection area. All water and contaminants are col-
lected using this vacuum-operated collector trap. This is an air-tight box
or drum with a capacity of several gallons to several hundreds of gallons
(depending upon specific test procedures), outfitted to function as a "trap"
in a vacuum line. The inlet hose of the collector trap has a pickup nozzle
on the open end. The outlet hose of the collector trap is connected to an
industrial shop vacuum.
The vacuum cleaner used for collection of roadway particulates consists of a
pick-up head attached to a 38£ (10 gal) canister on the top of which is
D-117
-------
mounted an exhaust motor. Exhaust ports from the canister leading to the
motor are covered by a filter bag to retain solids picked up during the vacu-
uming operations. Since the finer particles found on roadways are relatively
more heavily laden with water pollutants, experiments have been performed to
determine the retention of smaller-sized particles by the filter bag. Re-
coveries of 99, 93, and 94 percent were obtained using a new filter bag with
each sampling run. These tests indicate satisfactory retention of fine par-
ticulates by the filter bags as well as quantitative removal and recovery of
vacuumed particles from the canister walls and bags.
The water flush procedure has also been tested in the field. It was found
that a roadway area of 92 sq m (1000 sq ft) could be thoroughly flushed with
about 95£ (25 gal) of water. In most cases, over 50 percent of the applied
flush was recovered by vacuuming of the impounded water along the curb.
A specific stepwise sampling procedure for the collection of street surface
contaminants is given below.
1. Select a roadway sampling site 30.48 continuous curb meters
(100 ft) or more. The street surface and curbing should be
in relatively good condition. Mark the limits of the sampling
length selected.
2. Rake and/or brush along the curb for 3.0 or 4.6m (10 or
15 ft) from the limit markings away from the section to be
sampled.
3. Knock the brush clean. Rake and/or brush from the higher ele-
vation limit. Shovel bulk litter plus swept dust and dirt
into a clean galvanized garbage can.
4. Vacuum along the entire curb length of the roadway sampling
site out to a distance of four to five feet from the curb.
Three vacuumings of the site should be carried out to collect
the dust and dirt sample fractions. Two vacuum cleaners are
D-118
-------
used simultaneously to speed up the operation with particular
attention at the litter pickup point.
5. Position several sand bags at the curb of the lower limit of
the sampling area to impound the flush water.
6. Place the nozzle of a dual motor shop vacuum at a low point in
front of the sand bags so as to suck water into a 2081 (55-gal)
drum.
7. Place the intake hose from a rotary screw pump into a 208£
(55-gal) drum filled with water and begin flushing the roadway
using the garden hose.
8. Flush the entire roadway surface area toward the curb and finish
by flushing the gutter toward the sand bags.
9. Approximately 57 to 95fc (15 to 25 gal) of water are required to
flush 56-93 sq m (600-1000 sq ft) of roadway. Generally greater
than 50 percent of the flush water applied is recovered by the
vacuum.
10. Take out the filter bags and shake well into garbage can with
bulk material. Save the bags.
11. Empty vacuum canisters into garbage can. Brush canisters well.
12. Take combined litter and dust and dirt in garbage can and the
flush fraction to the laboratory. Other equipment may proceed
to next sampling site.
Sampling sites should be chosen to represent the range of conditions that oc-
cur in the area. Important variables may include land use, average daily
traffic, type of adjacent landscaping, and street surface material. It is
recommended that at least a single complete analysis be made for each land
D-119
-------
use area, with total solids analyses being made on samples representing other
identified variables. If several sampling sites are established in each land
use area, a portion of each sample could be combined for complete composite
chemical analysis representing that land use.
For one 12-month field study, seven area roadways were chosen based primarily
upon the range of average daily traffic levels and road use categories encom-
passed. Other factors considered in the roadway selections were speed limit
and roadway surface material. Satisfactory condition of the street surface
and a sufficient length of curb against which the sample could be deposited
and collected were important factors in selection of the specific sampling
sites on the area roadways chosen.
In general, the following information should be collected for a sampling
site: sampling location; date; local land use; parking restrictions; traffic
characteristics; composition, type and condition of the street, gutter, and
curb; the size of the test area; and a description of the adjoining area.
Photographs of the area are often valuable. Data concerning the cleaning
frequency, the date of the last recorded cleaning, and the recent rainfall
history should also be obtained for each test area.
If the selected study area is subject to vehicular traffic, it will be neces-
sary to establish some type of traffic control for the protection of the
field workers. Flagmen and traffic cones are probably a minimum precaution
which should be used in all areas.
The type of study area (street surface, parking lots, or other large sur-
faces) and sampling objectives will determine the size of sampling area. A
typical secondary street can usually be sampled using a single test area of
about 93 sq m, 7.6m x 12.2m (1000 sq ft, 25 x 40 ft). Large paved surfaces
may be better sampled using several smaller test areas (0.9 sq m (10 sq ft))
and averaging the results. Experimental design procedures should be incorpo-
rated to determine the necessary types of study areas to sample to satisfy
specific study objectives.
D-120
-------
As with the selection of the study area, the frequency of sampling will de-
pend on the objectives of the sampling program. For one 12-month field
study, a schedule was set up early in the program such that the roadways
were sampled during several seasons of the year in order that seasonal ef-
fects on pollutant deposition rates might be studied. However, during the
winter season, freezing conditions prevented the collection of some of the
flush fractions.
Sampling periods were scheduled to begin on a Monday and end one week later
on the following Monday. Sample collections were planned to be carried out
in the following manner:
1. An initial sample was obtained by cleaning the roadway surface
and quantitative collection of materials initially found on
the site. No measurements of traffic were taken to correspond
with the initial sample; however, records of precipitation and
dates of the most recent antecedent cleaning of the roadway
surfaces were maintained throughout the 12-month field study.
2. The site was sampled a second time after an accumulation period
of approximately 24 hours during which time a measured volume
of traffic passed the roadway site. As many as four samples
having a one-day accumulation period were taken during the re-
mainder of the week. Traffic counts were taken with each one-
day sample.
3. The final sample of the period was gathered following the week-
end. Ideally then, a sampling period consisted of an initial
sample, four one-day samples, and a weekend sample with traffic
data for all samples except the initial one.
4. Precipitation frequently interrupted the planned pattern of the
sampling periods. Samples were gathered after rainstorms in
a few cases; however, it was felt that such samples would be
atypical; and, therefore, collections after runoff events were
D-121
-------
abandoned early in the program. The roadway site was cleaned
as soon as convenient after precipitation had ceased and a new
sample accumulation period begun. Sampling periods were ex-
tended in some instances in order to make up for loss of sam-
ples due to precipitation.
Experimental design procedures should be incorporated to determine the re-
quired sampling frequency and sample numbers to satisfy specific study ob-
jectives. The published results of previous sampling programs may be useful
in this design process.
D.5 Cost Estimation
It is difficult to provide precise program cost information, since costs are
dependent upon so many program and locality related factors, e.g., insti-
tutional setting and accounting procedures, area complexities and program
size, opportunity free labor, etc. This section presents a methodology for
cost estimation for any given program, some "ball park" rules of thumb for
preliminary rough cut costing, and some specific examples. The costing
methodology is divided into six steps:
1. Estimate Instrumentation Costs
2. Estimate Related Equipment Costs
3. Estimate Manpower Costs
4. Estimate Field Operations Costs
5. Estimate Laboratory Analysis Costs
6. Estimate Data Analysis and Reporting Costs
These will be discussed in turn. Note that modeling costs are not included.
D.5.1 Instrumentation Costs
Instrumentation costs were discussed in Section D.3 and will only be sum-
marized here. These costs represent capital acquisition costs for the most
part, and amortization schedules will be a matter of local accounting
D-122
-------
procedures and discretion. Resist the temptation to lower apparent program
costs by using long amortization periods, especially for equipment used in
storm-generated discharge studies. Such hostile flows take a great instru-
mentation toll, and one or two years life is much more typical than ten or
twenty.
For flow measurement, the types and numbers of primary and secondary devices
must be determined. These are multiplied by the cost of each to arrive at
the total dollars required. Make an allowance for spare parts for secondary
devices (say 10% in the absence of more specific information). Consider the
purchase of at least one complete extra unit to allow for quick field fixes.
Instrument breakdown is most likely to occur during important data collection
periods, and record interruptions should be as brief as possible.
Langbein and Harbeck (23) reported that a sample of four USGS districts
yielded the following costs (in 1972 dollars) for flow-gaging stations: $5K
to $10K for installation of an indefinite-term full-record station; $2.5K
to $4K for installation of a short-term full-record station; station
operating costs of $0.8K to $1.3K per year; office costs for processing the
record of $0.5K to $1.3K per year. For partial-record stations, costs as a
percentage of full-record stations were stated as: 5 percent for low flow
only; 15 to 20 percent for crest stage record; and up to 50 percent for a
flood hydrogram. They also noted that there could be extremely large
variations outside of these nominal ranges.
In the absence of better information, it is suggested that $10K be budgeted
for each urban flow measurement site for the acquisition and installation of
a primary flow measurement device. Allow $2K each for the secondary device.
The former number takes into account that some sites will allow relatively
inexpensive portable devices to be used, while others may require consider-
able modification, e.g., installation of a below ground metering vault. The
desirability of using existing USGS gaging sites where feasible is obvious.
Where possible, try to use existing meteorological instrumentation operated
by others. One notable exception will be raingages. They typically cost
D-123
-------
less than $400 each; recorders may add another $500-$1,000 each. Give
serious consideration to the use of leased telephone lines to provide rain-
fall indication back to a central location. The cost is nominal, and the
information is invaluable in crew dispatching and operations. At least one
raingage per catchment will be required.
For automatic samplers, the number and types must be determined. For storm-
generated discharge sampling, the bulk of the commercially available devices
will not be suitable without some modification. Most manufacturers will do
this, but it adds cost. Between $2K and $4K should be allowed for each unit.
Allow 10 percent for spares and purchase at least one complete extra unit.
Also give consideration to installing two separate automatic samplers at
critical sites for redundancy. If both function flawlessly, the extra sample
quantity won't hurt, and the likelihood of missing a critical storm event is
considerably diminished. Manual sampling equipment must be provided to each
field crew. Allow two sets for each crew and plan on $100 for each set.
D.5.2 Related Equipment Costs
Shelters will be required for monitoring instrumentation at most sites.
Costs can range from under $300 for a metal garden shed to well over $2K if
concrete slabs and heavy fencing are required. Consideration should be given
to ease of moving instrumentation from site to site; transportable (i.e.,
trailer) shelters have been used successfully in this regard. For some
installations, e.g., one with a large mechanically refrigerated sampler, AC
power will be required, and the expense of running electrical lines should
be included as part of the overall station cost. Such costs may not be in-
significant; $6.4K was spent just to get power to one 208 stormwater monitor-
ing site in Illinois. Site preparation costs should not be capitalized.
Other related equipment that will be required includes small tools, personnel
safety and protective gear (e.g., waders, hard hats, respirators, harnesses,
etc.), and miscellaneous field hardware. These may or may not be already
D-124
-------
available. As a very rough, estimate, allow 2 percent to 5 percent of the
total instrumentation acquisition cost for this purpose. Do not capitalize
them.
Other related equipment includes vehicles (automobiles, vans, trucks, etc.),
boats, motors, generators, pumps, and the like. These are capital equipment
items but, because of their multiplicity of uses, they should probably not
be fully charged to a 208 program alone. In the event that the local 208
agency does not have such equipment at its disposal, consideration should
be given to leasing rather than purchase. Lease rates vary with locality,
but for longer term rentals, i.e., months, not days, rates can be quite
reasonable. For mobility of field crews, consideration should be given to
leasing extra vehicles during periods of intense activity. Of course all
leasing costs should be directly charged to the monitoring program.
D.5.3 Manpower Costs
The manpower costs associated with a 208 monitoring program will vary tre-
mendously from agency to agency, depending upon the size of the program
(and hence the number and skill mix of personnel required) as well as local
wage scales (including fringe benefits) and accounting practices (applica-
tion rates for overhead and general and administrative expenses). Therefore,
skill levels here will be indicated by estimating equivalent federal govern-
ment service ratings. Salaries can be adjusted up or down to suit local
conditions, and burdens can be applied according to local accounting
practices. Table D-23 indicates the types of talent that a 208 program may
require.
As an example of the use of Table D-23 to estimate manpower requirements,
consider the following. It is desired to conduct one intensive survey per
month for a one-year period. The objective of these intensive surveys is to
provide information for waste load allocation studies. The basic unit man-
power for the estimates made here consist of a field party chief, three
qualified technicians, a chemist, a microbiologist, and a biologist. It is
assumed that the minimum sampling period would be 5 consecutive days. The
D-125
-------
TABLE D-23
TALENT REQUIREMENTS
Skill Area
Environmental Engineer (1)
Sanitary Engineer
Hydro logist
Chemical Engineer
Chemist
Oceanographer (2)
Biologist
Limnologist (3)
Field Technicians
Lab Technicians
Clerical
Federal
GS Rating
GS 13-14
GS 11-12
GS 9-11
GS 9-11
GS 11-13
GS 11-12
GS 9-12
GS 9-11
GS 3-6
GS 5-7
GS 2-4
Annual
Pay Rate
$23K to $35K
$16K to $25K
$13K to $21K
$13K to $21K
$16K to $30K
$16K to $25K
$13K to $25K
$13K to $21K
$7K to $13K
$9K to $14K
$6K to $10K
NOTES:
1. Assumed to be responsible for overall monitoring program.
2. Required for estuarine or near coastal studies.
3. Required for lake surveys.
D-126
-------
basic intensive survey unit manpower estimates are shown in Table D-24.
Using the salary figures from Table D-23 as a guide, the direct labor costs
for one intensive survey are as follows: Field Party Chief, $26K x 3.75 MW =
$1.9K; Chemist, $18K x 16 MW = $5.5K; Biologist, $16K x 5 MW = $1.5K; Field
Technicians, $9K x 5 MW = $0.9K; Lab Technicians, $11K x 3.25 MW = $0.7K;
Typist $7K x 1 MW = $0.1K. Thus, the total salary requirements for one
intensive survey would be approximately $10.6K.
Of course it must be kept in mind that not all personnel time can be utilized
at 100 percent efficiency due to a number of reasons (e.g., in runoff stud-
ies the field crews have to be paid whether it rains or not), and so a better
procedure for budget estimation is to calculate annual salary costs for all
required personnel rather than on a work unit basis. One last comment on
manpower costs deals with the actual hours worked while in the field.
Twelve hour (or longer) days are the rule rather than the exception, and
extra compensation for this overtime must be allowed for in arriving at total
manpower costs. Non-professional (i.e., non-exempt) personnel must be paid
in accordance with applicable wage/hour laws (e.g., time and one-half for
over 8 hours per day or sixth straight day in a week, etc.). Professional
(exempt) personnel will be paid straight time for hours worked, given com-
pensatory time off, or some such consideration depending upon local policy,
but this also represents cost to the program and must be accounted for.
D.5.4 Field Operations Costs
This is a miscellaneous category that covers costs incurred incidental to
field operations and that do not logically fit in any of the foregoing dis-
cussions. Included are such items as personnel travel costs and per diem
as appropriate, miscellaneous supplies (as opposed to equipment, e.g., ice
for samples if required, chemical preservatives, sample containers, gasoline,
etc.), performance bonds for site restoration if required, charges for util-
ities (electricity, telephone lines, etc.), and so on.
D-127
-------
TABLE D-24
ESTIMATED MANPOWER REQUIREMENTS FOR INTENSIVE SURVEYS
Activity
Personnel
Time
Onan-weeks)
Remarks
K)
OO
Initial planning
Reconnaissance
(if needed)
Mobilize field equip-
ment and crew
Field sampling
Fixed lab analyses
chemistry and biology
Data analyses and
report preparation
Field party chief*
and lab personnel
Field party chief*
and biologist
Field party chief*
technicians and
lab crew
Field party chief*
2 laboratory crew
3 technicians
1 biologist
Chemist
Biologist
Field party chief*
chemist and
microbiologist, typist
2 MW
1 MW
1 MW
1 MW
3 MW
4 MW
1 MW
15 MW
3 MW
3 MW
Assemble maps and post data
Select sampling sites and
synoptic biological screening
Get all equipment together
and ensure it is in working
order
Field sample collection and
field lab analyses
Assume 20 samples per day
for 15 parameters, chemistry
and plankton, and invertebrate
identification and enumera-
tion
Analyze data, write and type
report
In the case of estuarine or near coastal studies this would be an oceanographer.
-------
Taken individually, these items do not represent major sums of money but,
collectively, they form a sum that may not be insignificant for many 208
monitoring programs and, therefore, must be considered in total cost estima-
tion. They are so project and locality specific that no specific guidance
can be given for cost estimation. Lacking anything else, add 2 to 5 percent
of the total survey cost to cover this category and adjust as appropriate
during detailed survey design.
D.5.5 Laboratory Analysis Costs
Use costs for analyses of the selected parameters quoted by the chosen labo-
ratory where possible. Use costs given in the Parameter Handbook for pre-
liminary estimating if local cost data are not available. Add 10 percent to
20 percent to the total for quality control costs.
As an example, Table D-25 contains average analysis costs for the minimum
recommended parameter list for characterizing urban runoff. Summing the
costs for the individual analyses results in a total estimated analysis cost
of $163 per sample. If a sequential discrete sample series of 24 bottles
was collected to characterize a storm event, the total lab fee would be
$163 x 24 = $3,912. Adding 15 percent for quality control, the final esti-
mated laboratory analysis cost would be approximately $4.5K per storm event.
Thus, laboratory analysis costs are one of the major operating costs and may
amount to 30 percent to 50 percent of the total cost for this portion of the
program budget.
D.5.6 Data Analysis and Reporting
Costs in this category will depend upon the complexity of the survey, the
degree of data interpretation required, computer charges for statistical
analyses where necessary, and ,the type of report being generated, e.g., event
summary, annual project, etc. Ball park estimates of 20 percent to 50 per-
cent of the estimated professional manpower costs for field work will be
adequate in most instances. Use more refined, project specific cost informa-
tion as it becomes available.
D-129
-------
TABLE D-25
AVERAGE ANALYSIS COSTS FOR URBAN RUNOFF PARAMETERS
Parameter
Cost
BOD,.
D
TOD
Suspended Solids (NFS)
Volatile Suspended Solids
Fecal Coliform (MF)
Fecal Streptococcus (MF)
Nitrate-Nitrite Nitrogen
Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Total Phosphorous
Lead
Zinc
Copper
Chromium
PH
$ 10
30
8
7
10
10
15
15
15
10
10
10
10
3
D.5.7 Example USEPA Costs
Harris and Keffer (16) have provided some information on the costs of a USEPA
Surveillance and Analysis Field Investigations Section engaged in effluent
monitoring for compliance verification purposes and technical assistance to
208 agencies, e.g., stream monitoring. Major field equipment with approxi-
mate initial costs is listed in Table D-26. The Field Investigations Section
professional staff includes two sanitary engineers (GS-13 and 11), one
chemical engineer (GS-11), and one hydrologist (GS-9). The subprofessional
D-130
-------
staff consists of four engineering technicians in grades ranging from GS-3
to 6. The regional laboratory, with a staff of eight professional chemists
(GS-7 to 13) and three microbiologists (GS-7, 9, and 12), is responsible
for operating the mobile laboratories of the section during field surveys.
TABLE D-26
MAJOR FIELD EQUIPMENT AVAILABLE TO USEPA REGION VII
SAD FIELD INVESTIGATIONS SECTION
Quantity
Equipment
Approximate Initial Cost
1
1
7
5
50
Mobile Laboratory
Mobile Laboratory (on loan)
GSA Vehicles
Boats and Motors
Automatic Samplers
Flow-Measuring Devices
Field Analysis Devices
Portable Detector
Metal Detector
$15,000
5,000
28,000
6,600
6,100
1,200
300
In areas outside the range in which analytical support can be provided by the
regional laboratory, field sampling teams normally operate within a 161-km
(100-mile) radius of a mobile laboratory, which is generally set up at a
wastewater treatment facility in a community within the area of interest.
Because of logistics problems in some of the more sparsely populated areas of
the region, it is frequently necessary to work field teams outside of this
161-km (100-mile) radius. Ten to twenty-five percent of the total field ac-
tivity may be conducted at distances up to 322 km (200 miles) from the labo-
ratory base. Operating at these greater distances reduces capability by an
estimated 50 percent and greatly increases the unit cost of sample collection.
Prior to mounting a survey, every effort is made to ascertain and consoli-
date the various data needs of the Agency and of the State in order to avoid
D-131
-------
duplication of effort and to minimize the number of laboratory setups. It
requires a minimum of 1 week to 10 days to prepare and stock a mobile
laboratory; get it on site; have electricity, water, and phone installed; and
then torn down and returned to the base station following completion of a
survey. If possible, field activities in areas requiring mobile laboratory
support are restricted to surveys of 30 days duration or longer.
Under favorable conditions, a mobile laboratory field operation works best
with a crew of seven people including: two engineers, two engineering tech-
nicians, one chemist, one microbiologist, and one laboratory technician.
Working entirely within a 161-km (100-mile) radius of the mobile laboratory,
this staff (which is rotated at 2-week intervals) would be able to install
samplers and collect approximately 100 samples per week for field and labo-
ratory analyses. Total time and costs for a 30-day field survey are esti-
mated as follows:
Engineers
1 man-month office preparation
2 man-months field work
2 man-months data analyses and report writing
Engineering Technicians
2 man-months mobile laboratory and equipment repair and preparation
4 man-months field work
Laboratory Personnel
6 man-months mobile laboratory work
6 man-months regional laboratory analytical work
Clerical
2 man-months planning and report preparation
Costs
Salaries $23,500
Per Diem 7,300
Travel of Personnel 400
Government Bill of Ladings 400
Vehicles 1,000
Miscellaneous Equipment 1,500
(Ice, batteries, containers, utilities, chemicals, etc.)
$34,100
D-132
-------
When reviewing the foregoing costs, it should be kept in mind that they do
not reflect any burdens (e.g., office space, heating, employee fringe bene-
fits) , that equipment costs have increased considerably, and that this team
is proficient, well trained, and one of the most efficient in the country.
D.6 Waste Load Allocation Study Procedures
This section contains procedures for conducting a waste load allocation
study and some recommendations and guidelines for implementation of the
field surveys that will be necessary to carry it out. Most waste load al-
location studies will require, as a minimum, one reconnaissance survey and
two intensive surveys, one to gather model calibration data and the other
to gather verification data. The procedural steps to be followed in con-
ducting a waste load allocation study are outlined in Table D-27.
The first step is to obtain all relevant existing data. This will include
all available water quality and flow data for surface water and known
sources of wastes. Locations of water use (and a list of legitimate uses)
should be determined. Obtain maps and either mark or prepare overlays
showing land uses, outfall locations; existing stream gaging and monitoring
site locations; stream slopes, cross sections, and flows; locations of
rapids, dams, pools, etc.
Analyze the existing data; estimate stream velocities, relative loads from
each point source and nonpoint source area, water quality coming into and
leaving the planning area, travel times downstream from discharge locations,
etc. Use the results to determine first approximations of station locations
and parameters to be covered. Plan the reconnaissance survey accordingly.
It is recommended that the reconnaissance survey include a toxics scan of
all major discharges and others of concern to the 208 agency in order to
identify toxic parameters that should be included in the intensive survey.
The next step is the conduct of the reconnaissance survey. The information
gathered at this time will form the basis for the intensive survey imple-
mentation plan. In conducting the reconnaissance survey, the field survey
D-133
-------
TABLE D-27
PROCEDURAL STEPS FOR CONDUCTING A WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION STUDY
(1) Obtain all relevant existing data.
(2) Analyze existing data and perform preliminary calculations.
(3) Based on (1) and (2), plan reconnaissance survey.
(4) Conduct reconnaissance survey.
(5) Analyze results of reconnaissance survey and make preliminary
model runs.
(6) Based on (3) and (5), plan calibration survey.
(7) Conduct intensive survey for model calibration.
(8) Reduce data from calibration survey and analyze results.
(9) Fit model using results from (8) and run.
(10) Review results of model runs.
(11) Based on (8) and (10), plan verification survey.
(12) Conduct intensive survey for model verification.
(13) Compare results of verification survey with model predictions.
(14) If results of (13) are favorable, use the model for planning.
If not, make adjustments to the model as warranted in view of
(13), using the verification data gathered in (12) as additional
calibration data. New verification data will now be required,
so repeat steps (11) through (13).
manager should be accompanied by persons who supplement his own skills, e.g.,
if he is a sanitary engineer, he may have with him a biologist and a chemist.
The biologist is an especially important member of the reconnaissance team.
An experienced aquatic biologist in a very short time can collect and ex-
amine bottom organisms that will reveal both the severity of pollution in a
general way, and the length of stream affected. His findings can, for ex-
ample, reveal whether the effects of the wastes have extended farther down-
stream in the past then they do at the time of the reconnaissance and will
have an important influence on the final planning of the study, especially
with regard to the number and locations of biological sampling sites.
D-134
-------
A quick tour of the area and the streams at readily accessible points may be
taken to get the general "lay of the land" and the relationships among water
uses, waste sources, and the stream. After this, the individuals of the team
may go about their separate duties. The field survey manager needs to cover
much of the ground that each of the others does, though in less detail. He
must have the entire situation in mind to develop the final study plan,
supervise the subsequent field operation, and prepare the report.
The field survey manager should become thoroughly familiar with characteris-
tics of the streams. A trip throughout each reach by boat, if the stream is
deep enough, provides the best opportunity for observation. Access to the
stream may be limited to bridges and roads that parallel the stream if a
boat cannot be used. An overall view of the stream may be obtained from a
plane or helicopter, but observation of detail from the height involved is
limited. Walking often is difficult because of undergrowth or rough terrain,
and can be extremely time consuming unless the stream reach is very short.
Detailed notes of observations should be made promptly; don't depend on
memory. Notes should include general impressions of depths, currents, veloc-
ities, bends, widths, types of bottom, water uses, waste discharges and
mixing of wastes, availability of access, and sensory evidences of pollution,
such as excessive plankton or attached growth, floating materials, oil, color,
suspended matter, sludge deposits, gas bubbles, and odor. Special attention
should be paid to tentative sampling stations selected in the preliminary
planning. Accessibility of stations, as well as suitability for sampling,
must be considered. Stations should be marked or otherwise identified to en-
sure sample collection at the proper points. For example, the stream miles
may be painted on bridges, with arrows indicating the sampling points.
A dry run of the sampling route or routes should be made and timed. This in-
formation will be needed in estimating the final number of sample collectors
that will be necessary and the maximum time samples will be held. The routes
should be marked on a map, and notes made of any check points that will
assist in following the routes. Stream samples for preliminary analysis
D-135
-------
should be collected at this time to assist in parameter selection for the
intensive survey and to familiarize the laboratory personnel with what to
anticipate when the study starts, e.g., determination of coliform and BOD
will assist in selection of proper dilutions, possible interferences can
be identified, etc. Simple field determinations, such as those of tempera-
ture, DO, and pH, may be made at the same time.
Potential locations for a mobile laboratory, if one is to be used, should be
investigated. Frequently the site is a local water or sewage treatment plant.
Accessibility and suitability of an area where the unit may be parked must
be considered. Availability of necessary water and electrical connections
must be checked. Arrangements for metering water or electricity should be
made, if necessary. An area, sewer, or drain to which wastes can be dis-
charged from the laboratory without nuisance is needed. Arrangements for
access at any time, day or night, must be made if the area is fenced or other-
wise protected. A nearby storage room or space for supplies and materials
that are not in immediate use in the laboratory is useful. Convenient tele-
phone service is a must, especially if the laboratory is to serve as head-
quarters for the field crew.
Facilities may be established in a local laboratory of a water or sewage
treatment plant, high school, university, or industrial plant as a substitute
for a mobile laboratory. The chemist in the reconnaissance survey crew
should review such local facilities to determine their adequacy and what ad-
ditional equipment and supplies will be needed.
If stormwater runoff is a survey concern, try to include a rainy-day visit as
part of the reconnaissance effort. Much valuable information can be obtained,
as well as a better appreciation of the conditions the field crew will be
working under. For urban areas, sewer maps should be verified as to discharge
locations, and the possibility of unrecorded outfalls investigated. Obtain
information on traffic density by driving during rush hours and use these
travel times for urban field crew logistics planning.
D-136
-------
After completion of the reconnaissance survey, analyze the results and make
preliminary model runs using the reconnaissance data to get the model seg-
mented properly and to better locate stations. With the results of the re-
connaissance survey and model runs as a guide, a workable intensive survey
plan may be generated. Start by a careful review of the objectives; can
they all be accomplished? Now is the time for any additions or deletions,
not halfway through the field activity. Put the detailed plan down in writ-
ing and have it reviewed by all involved prior to finalizing. Don't dis-
count helpful comments and suggestions from the field technicians. Include
samples of all field data sheets, equipment checklists, etc.
Pay especial attention to all logistics aspects during preparation of the
intensive survey plan. For example, if ice is used to cool samples and the
survey calls for round-the-clock activity, locate sources where ice can be
obtained at odd hours, e.g., automatic machines at service stations, all-
night convenience stores, etc., and write them down so all will know. The
25-cent do-it-yourself car wash facilities at some service stations represent
sources of high-pressure hot water (and soap, if detergent analyses are not
performed) that can be used for cleaning automatic sampling and other field
equipment, and their locations should be indicated.
The parameters to be measured must be listed, taking into account the prob-
lem assessment of parameters determined from the toxics scan, along with
any special handling precautions to be observed, preservatives to be used,
sample volumes required, etc. Lists of special supplies and equipment and
personnel requirements should be prepared at this time. The funds allo-
cated for the survey and the anticipated cost of the field operations should
be reviewed here also.
For around-the-clock survey efforts (with two crews working 12-hour shifts,
for example), allow for communication of significant information at shift
change by having each shift leader report at least 30 minutes early. If such
surveys are for extended periods of time, plan on changing crews every 2 weeks
to avoid excessive fatigue. In any event, a system of communication that
D-137
-------
allows any crew member to be contacted within a reasonable period of time
(say 3 hours) is highly recommended. Radios on vehicles are also useful
communication aids.
Prepare complete equipment inventories that show locations, status, and main-
tenance and calibration schedules. Be certain that maintenance responsibil-
ities are clearly defined. In addition to the more obvious equipment,
instrumentation, and spares discussed earlier in this Appendix, there are a
number of other miscellaneous items that will prove useful in the field, and
a few examples will be mentioned. A fairly strong magnet on a line is use-
ful for retrieving metal objects dropped in water. A metal detector is also
a handy device at times. A set of basic surveying gear (transit, distance
tape or chain, stadia poles, optical rangefinder, etc.) will be useful in
some instances. A pick, shovel, ax, and saw will find several applications,
such as improving rural stream access for sampling. Some of the basic car-
penter's tools on hand will be needed at times. A Danaides (orifice) bucket
is useful for estimating moderate pipe discharges into open air. A number
of uses will arise for rope, string, wire, and reinforced sticky tape. A
walkie-talkie set greatly facilitates communications in the field.
Obviously, not every contingency can be allowed for, and experience in con-
ducting field surveys will facilitate future planning. However, the field
survey manager should feel very uncomfortable in reviewing the intensive
survey implementation plan if he:
Does not clearly understand the survey objectives,
• Has strong preconceived notions about the results,
• Has not personally visited each measurement site,
Has not consulted with laboratory personnel,
Has not clearly assigned responsibilities,
• Has trusted to luck or favorable opportunities.
Conduct the intensive survey in accordance with the implementation plan
insofar as practicable. Be certain that there are compelling reasons for
any changes or deviations and document them. The importance of recording
D-138
-------
all information that might aid in the interpretation and analysis of other
data that are being collected has been stressed throughout this Appendix.
Even seemingly insignificant bits of information may be very useful in
fitting the entire puzzle together. However, if they are not recorded in
a clear and intelligible way, they are likely to be lost completely. Never
trust to memory.
Field logbooks should be provided to each leader of a survey team and others
as appropriate. Standard procedures for field data taking should be observed,
e.g., logbooks should be bound with pages numbered serially, entries should
be made with ballpoint pen, erasures should never be permitted (use strike-
outs), all entries should be signed and dated, etc. Field logbooks should be
clearly titled on the cover (to prevent the aquatic biologist from acciden-
tally picking up the equipment crew's log, for example) and should have an
assigned location when not in use. The field survey managers should fre-
quently review all field logbooks and initial and date them when this is
done.
The field logbooks are the main source of data annotation information. Be
sure to record information so that it will be useful to future surveys as
well as the present one. For example, entries may range from snake sight-
ings to traffic jams that delayed getting samples to the laboratory.
Knowledge of the former can reduce possible future danger to personnel, while
information about the latter may suggest the desirability of route alteration.
It would be improper to assume the snake would never pose a problem (even if
it were killed, others may be around) or that anyone could tell that there
had been a delay in getting the samples to the laboratory by comparing the
time they were removed from the sampler with the time they were logged in at
the laboratory.
The importance of time synchronization of data has been stressed earlier.
This is equally important with data annotations. Write down the time of day
(use watch time) whenever an entry is made in a field logbook. This will as-
sist in subsequent interpretation. Finally, make full use of field logs and
other annotation records in report preparation. The perfect survey has yet
D-139
-------
to be performed, and mistakes and errors will happen. Sweeping these under
the table is much more censorable than admitting that they occurred, espe-
cially where a significant impact on data quality or interpretation is
likely to result. The worst sin is data fudging (or outright falsification)
in an attempt to cover up mistakes. This abhorrent practice should be subject
to the most severe reprimand possible. Do not confuse this with data adjust-
ment based on the best available information and professional judgment, e.g.,
adjustment to a flow record time base to account for a uniformly slow-running
clock drive, accounting for a zero offset, etc. Data adjustment is an accept-
able practice if it is clearly annotated and explained.
After completing the intensive survey for model calibration, reduce and
analyze the data and prepare it for model input. Fit the model using the
calibration data and make several runs. After reviewing the results of
the calibration survey and the model runs, plan the intensive survey to
collect verification data. Unless confidence in the model results is very
high, it will be prudent to plan and conduct the verification survey with
the same degree of coverage as the calibration survey. Conduct the inten-
sive survey for verification data following the above guidance for the
calibration survey and taking advantage of lessons learned from it.
Finally, compare the results of model runs with the data gathered during
the verification survey. If the comparison is favorable, the model may be
considered verified and can be used for waste load allocation planning.
If differences are significant, make adjustments to the model as warranted
from a review of the discrepancies between the model predictions and the
t
results of the verification survey, using the verification data now as
additional calibration data. Once this latter step is done, there is no
longer any information about the verification of the model. The importance
of this point must not be overlooked. To verify the model it will be neces-
sary to plan and conduct another intensive survey solely for this purpose.
In many instances, however, it will not need to be as extensive as the
earlier intensive surveys, since the level of confidence in model results
should be considerably higher than before.
D-140
-------
REFERENCES
1. Todd, D. K. , &Lume.ntation, D. M. Considine, ed., McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York,
NY (1964).
12. Watesi MeMAuAejn&nt Manual. Second Edition, U.S. Dept. of Interior,
Bureau of Reclamation, GPO, Washington, D.C. (1967).
13. Leupold and Stevens, Inc., WflLteA Re60UAc&4 Vcuta Book. First Edition,
P.O. Box 688, Beaverton, OR 97005 (1974).
14. Shelley, P. E. , and Kirkpatrick, G. A., "An Assessment of Automatic
Sewer Flow Samplers." In WoteA Po££u£ton fa>&mejnt: Automatic
SampLing and Meo6uA.eme»i£, ASTM Special Tech. Pub. 582, Phila., PA
(1975).
D-141
-------
15. Shelley, P. E., and Kirkpatrick, G. A., "An Assessment of Automatic Sewer
Flow Samplers - 1975." USEPA Environmental Protection Technology Series,
EPA-600/2-75-065 (1975).
16. Harris, D. J., and Keffer, W. J., "Wastewater Sampling Methodologies
and Flow Measurement Techniques." USEPA, EPA 907/9-74-005 (1974).
17. Butts, T. A., "Measurements of Sediment Oxygen Demand Characteristics
of the Upper Illinois Waterway." Report of Investigation 76, ISWS-74-
R176, Illinois State Water Survey, Urbana, IL (1974).
18. Shelley, P. E., "Design and Testing of a Prototype Automatic Sewer
Sampling System." USEPA Environmental Protection Technology Series,
EPA-600/2-76-006 (1976).
19. "Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes." USEPA Environ-
mental Monitoring and Support Laboratory (formerly Methods Development
and Quality Assurance Research Laboratory), EPA-625-/6-74-003 (1974).
20. "Model State Water Monitoring Program." USEPA National Water Monitoring
Panel, EPA-440/9-74-002 (1975).
21. "Minimal Requirements for a Water Quality Assurance Program." USEPA,
EPA-440/9-75-010 (1976).
22. "Handbook for Analytical Quality Control in Water and Wastewater
Laboratories." USEPA Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
(formerly Analytical Quality Control Laboratory) (1972).
23. Langbein, W. B., and Harbeck, G. E., Jr., "A Note on Costs of Collecting
Hydrometric Flow Data in the U.S." Hydno'logical SCxcence6 Bu£., 19,
pp 227-229 (1974).
24. "A Basic Water Monitoring Program," Standing Work Group on Water
Monitoring, EPA-440/9-76-025 (January 28, 1977).
D-142
-------
APPENDIX D, PART II
PARAMETER HANDBOOK
This Parameter Handbook has been written as a part of the
Areawide Assessment Procedures Manual to aid 208 planning agencies
in the establishment and conduct of water quality monitoring pro-
grams. The material presented summarizes existing work rather
than representing new research results. The intent is to present,
on one sheet of paper, enough salient information about a partic-
ular water quality parameter to allow decisions to be made as to
the likelihood of the constituent's presence in a particular stream
or discharge, its effects upon water quality or use, and factors
pertaining to sampling and analysis of the constituent that should
be considered in determining the ramifications of including the
parameter in a water quality monitoring program. The information
presented on analytical methodology, including sample quantity and
preservation and handling considerations, was largely taken from
one of three widely available sources:
• Me£kodt> fax. Chwlcat Anaty& ofi WcvteA and Mu-tea, 7974
(commonly called "EPA Methods Manual"). Available from
USEPA Environmental Research Information Center,
Cincinnati, OH 45268.
• Standciid Me£kod& ^o/t the. Examination o£ WateA. and Wtute.
W&teA, 14th Edition, 1976 (commonly called "Standard
Methods"). Available from the American Public Health
Association, 1015 18th Street, N.W., Washington,
D.C. 20036.
• Annual Book o£ Standasidi>, Posit 31, W&te/i, 1975 (commonly
called "ASTM Methods"). Available from the American
Society for Testing and Materials, 1916 Race Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103.
The information presented herein was taken in the order indicated
above, i.e., if the parameter is covered in the EPA Methods Manual,
that reference was used as the primary source; if the parameter is
not in the EPA Methods Manual but is covered by Standard Methods,
the latter was used as the primary source; and so on. For param-
eters not treated by any of the above sources, other publications,
especially those of the U.S. Geological Survey, were used.
It must be emphasized that this Parameter Handbook is not a
specification; the information presented herein is illustrative,
not exhaustive, and carries no legal authority. In this latter
D-143
-------
regard, the USEPA has published, pursuant to section 304 (g) of the
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments (PL 92-500), "Guidelines
Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants" in
the Wednesday, December 1, 1976 issue of the Federal Register
(40 CFR 136), a copy of which is attached at the end of this
Parameter Handbook. Some minor corrections to these Guidelines
were published in the Federal Register on Tuesday, January 18, 1977.
The synoptic presentations in this Parameter Handbook are
written for a reader without extensive training or experience in
water and wastewater analysis. A common format, depicted in
Figure 1, has been used for each parameter. The entries will be
discussed in turn.
Parameter Name: This is the most common name by which the param-
eter is most frequently known, not necessarily its proper chemical
name. Where other names are commonly used or the chemical for-
mula might be helpful, they are indicated in the general discus-
sion.
A number of parameters are part of the USEPA water quality
data storage and retrieval system (STORET) at the present time,
and more will be added in the future. Where a parameter is a
part of the STORET System as of March 1977, the following two
entries are filled in; otherwise they are left blank.
Parameter Group: Each parameter is assigned to a designated group
(e.g., metals, general organic, pesticides) in the STORET System,
and this entry indicates the group to which the parameter belongs.
STORET Units: The units that must be used for entry of the concen-
tration of the parameter into the STORET System are given here;
e.g., micrograms per liter
General : This is a brief summary of salient parameter character-
istics. Typically covered are such things as what the parameter
is; any common alternate name or chemical formula where possibly
helpful; natural sources; uses of the substance and possible
sources related thereto; indications of the persistence of the
parameter in water, including its solubility where appropriate;
effects of the parameter on water use, including toxicity data
where appropriate; and, since many of these parameters are
actually toxic substances or surrogate measures for toxic sub-
stances, the level of regulation that has been imposed upon them
(such as the two technologically feasible control oriented stand-
ards of "best practicable control technology currently available"
(BPT) or "best available control technology economically achiev-
able" (BAT) or "toxicity effluent limitations") has been noted
in accordance with the regulation (40 CFR 136) , BAT parameters
under the Consent Decree, or toxicity guidelines under the Consent
Decree or other regulatory mandates.
D-144
-------
PARAMETER NAME
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General:
Criterion;
Preservation Method:
Maximum Holding Time:
Container Type:
Sample Volume Required:
Measurement:
Precision and Accuracy:
Cost of Analysis;
Figure 1. Format for Parameter Information
D-145
-------
Criteria: If the USEPA has issued water quality criteria for the
parameter, they are g-iven here along with the beneficial use to be
protected by the criterion established.
Preservation Method: Physical and chemical preservatives to be
used to help maintain sample integrity are indicated here along
with any special sample handling considerations, e.g., keep sealed
until analyzed.
Maximum Holding Time: The maximum holding time between gathering
and preserving the sample and its analysis in the laboratory is
given here. It is a function not only of the physical and chemical
characteristics of the substance involved but also of the other
constituents in the sample. The holding times given are con-
servative in some instances and, if data indicate that longer
holding times do not significantly affect analytical results, they
may be used.
Container Type: Acceptable sample container materials are indi-
cated here. Although not addressed here, sample equipment cleaning
is very important, and special cleaning protocols will be required
for some parameters, e.g., pesticides, as will other special con-
siderations such as the use of TFE fluorocarbon cap liners, etc.
Sample Volume Required: An estimate of the quantity of sample
necessary to allow analysis for the parameter is given here. No
allowance for replication, sample splitting, spillage, etc., is
made. The exact sample quantity required will depend upon the
strength of the constituent, the need for concentration or dilu-
tion, removal of interferences, etc., and is best established after
preliminary laboratory work, but the given volumes can be used as
a first cut.
Measurement: Descriptions of common methods for making the deter-
mination are given here, primarily to indicate any special lab-
oratory equipment that might be required (e.g., AA, GC).
Applicable concentration ranges are given, and possible inter-
ferences and precautions are indicated in many cases. Where a
measurement is mandated by regulation, the regulation is cited.
Precision and Accuracy; Method sensitivity and detection limits are
provided where generally agreed to. Precision and accuracy data are
given where known.
Cost of Analysis: The information provided here is intended to
give an appreciation of the relative magnitude of cost for per-
forming the analysis. The data are typically presented as a range
that represents differences in cost among laboratories and (some-
times) methods for a given parameter. Cost information was ob-
tained from various laboratories across the United States and
D-146
-------
representative values were selected for the range. Extremely low
or high costs for a particular parameter from a given laboratory
were discarded as atypical. Costs are also influenced by sample
preparation procedures necessary to remove interferences. This is
especially true for pesticide analyses and is represented by large
ranges in many instances, with the lower end of the range being
more typical in most cases. Finally, although not indicated in
the cost data presented herein, many laboratories offer quantity
discounts that may be quite substantial, and local laboratories
should be consulted if firm budget numbers are desired.
There are many water quality parameters that might be of
interest to some 208 agencies. Those that were selected for in-
clusion in this first edition of the Parameter Handbook are the
ones that were considered to have the broadest appeal. They rep-
resent a compilation of those found in the newly issued EPA
Water Quality Criteria, the EPA Methods Manual, and the majority
of the substances listed in the Consent Decree. It is contemplated
that the parameter coverage will be increased in future editions of
this handbook. For many parameters, preferred analytical methods,
preservation techniques, maximum holding times, etc., have not
been established or are tentative. Considerable advancement is
expected in the near term time frame, and future editions will be
updated to disseminate this information.
To assist the reader in locating parameters of interest, a
number of tables are provided. In Table 1, all the parameters
in the handbook are listed in alphabetical order. The parameters
are alphabetically listed within each STORET parameter group in
Table 2. Those parameters for which the USEPA has issued water
quality criteria are alphabetically listed in Table 3. Finally,
those parameters designated by the Consent Decree are listed
alphabetically in Table 4. The parameter sheets in the handbook
are in alphabetical order. A copy of the 1 December 1976
Federal Register is attached at the end.
D-147
-------
TABLE 1. ALPHABETICAL LISTING OF PARAMETERS
Acidity
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Alkalinity
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Asbestos
Atrazine
Barium
Benzene
Benzene Hexachloride (BHC)
Benzidine
Beryllium
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)
Boron
Bromide
Cadmium
Calcium
Captan
Carbaryl
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Chlordane
Chloride
Chlorinated Benzenes
Chlorinated Ethanes
Chlorinated Naphthalene
Chlorinated Phenols (Other)
Chlorine Demand
Chlorine Dioxide
Chlorine, Residual
Chloroalkyl Ethers
Chloroform
2-Chlorophenol
Chromium
Cobalt
Color
Copper
Cyanide
2, 4-D
DD
DDE
DDT
Demeton
Diazinon
Dichlorobenzenes
Dichlorobenzidine
Dichloroethylenes
2, 4-Dichlorophenol
Dichloropropane
Dichloroprbpene
Dieldrin
2, 4-Dimethylphenol
Dissolved Oxygen
Disyston
Diuron
Endosulfan
Endrin
Ethylbenzene
Fecal Coliform
Fecal Streptococci
Fluoride
Guthion
Haloethers
• Halomethanes
Hardness, Total
Heptachlor
Iodine
Iron
Lead
Lindane
Lithium
Magnesium
Malathion
Manganese
D-148
-------
TABLE 1. ALPHABETICAL LISTING OF PARAMETERS (Cont'd)
Mercury
Methane
Methoxychlor
Methyl Parathion
Methylene Blue Active
Substances (MBAS)
Mirex
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrilotriacetic Acid (NTA)
Nitrobenzene
Nitrogen-Ammonia
Nitrogen, Kjeldahl
Nitrogen, Nitrate
Nitrogen, Nitrate-Nitrite
Nitrogen, Nitrite
Nitrophenols
Oil and Grease
Organic Carbon
Parathion
PCNB
Pentachlorophenol
pH
Phenolics
Phosphorous (all forms)
Phthalate Esters
Polychlorinated Biphenyls
Polynuclear Aromatic
Hydrocarbons
Potassium
Radioactivity (alpha and beta)
Radium
Residue, Settleable
Residue, Total
Residue, Total Filterable
Residue, Total Nonfilterable
Residue, Volatile
Selenium
Silica
Silicon
Silver
Silvex (2, 4, 5-TP)
Sodium
Specific Conductance
Strontium
Sulfate
Sulfide
Sulfite
2, 4, 5-T
Temperature
Thallium
Threshold Odor
Tin
Titanium
Toluene
Total Coliform
Toxaphene
Trichloroethylene
Turbidity
Uranium
Vandaium
Vinyl Chloride
Xylene
Zinc
D-149
-------
TABLE 2. LISTING OF PARAMETERS ACCORDING TO
STORET GROUP
Bacteriologic
Fecal Coliform
Fecal Streptococci
Total Coliform
Dissolved Oxygen
Dissolved Oxygen
General Organic
Benzene
Methylene Blue Active
Substances (MBAS)
Nitrilotriacetic Acid (NTA)
Oil and Grease
Organic Carbon
Phenolics
Phthalate Esters
Polychlorinated Biphenyls
Toluene
Xylene
General Inorganic
Acidity
Alkalinity
Asbestos
Bromide
Chloride
Chlorine Demand
Cyanide
Fluoride
Hardness, Total
Iodide
Sulfate
Sulfide
Sulfite
Metals
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Lithium
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Thallium
Tin
Titanium
Uranium
Vanadium
Zinc
Miscellaneous
Chlorine, Residual
D-150
-------
TABLE 2. LISTING OF PARAMETERS ACCORDING TO
STORET GROUP (Cont'd)
Nitrogen
Nitrogen-Ammonia
Nitrogen, Kjeldahl
Nitrogen, Nitrate
Nitrogen, Nitrate-Nitrite
Nitrogen, Nitrite
Oxygen Demand
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
(BOD)
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Pesticides
Aldrin
Atrazine
Benzene Hexachloride (BHC)
Benzidine
Captan
Carbaryl
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloroform
2, 4-D
ODD
DDE
DDT
Demeton
Diazinon
Dieldrin
Disyston
Diuron
Endosulfan
Endrin
Guthion
Heptachlor
Lindane
Malathion
Methoxychlor
Methyl Parathion
Mirex
Parathion
Pentach1oropheno1
Silvex (-2, 4, 5-TP)
2, 4, 5-T
Toxaphene
Phosphorous
Phosphorus (all forms)
Physical
Color
PH
Specific Conductance
Threshold Odor
Turbidity
Radiological
Radioactivity (alpha and beta)
Strontium
Solids
Residue, Settleable
Residue, Total
Residue, Total Filterable
Residue, Total Nonfilterable
Residue, Volatile
Silica
Silicon
Temperature
Temperature
D-151
-------
TABLE 3. PARAMETERS FOR WHICH THE USEPA
HAS ISSUED WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
Aldrin
Alkalinity
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Cadmium
Chlordane
Chlorine, Residual
Chromium
Color
Copper
Cyanide
2,4-D
DDT
Demeton
Dieldrin
Dissolved Oxygen
Endosulfan
Endrin
Guthion
Heptachlor
Iron
Lead
Lindane
Malathion
Manganese
Mercury
Methoxychlor
Mirex
Nickel
Oil and Grease
Parathion
PH
Phenolics
Phosphorus (all forms)
Phthalate Esters
Polychlorinated Biphenyls
Residue, Total Filterable
Residue, Total Nonfilterable
Selenium
Silver
Silvex
Temperature
Toxaphene
Zinc
D-152
-------
TABLE 4. CHEMICAL CLASSES AND COMPOUNDS DESIGNATED
AS PRIORITY POLLUTANTS IN THE TOXICS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
Acenaphthene
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Antimony (total)
Arsenic (total)
Asbestos
Benzene
Benzidine
Beryllium (total)
Cadmium (total)
Carbon Tetrachloride
(tetrachloromethane)
Chlordane (technical mixture
and metabolites)
Chlorinated Benzenes (other
than dichlorobenzenes)
Chlorinated Ethanes (including
1, 2-trichloroethane and
hexachloroethane)
Chlorinated Naphthalene
Chlorinated Phenols, (other
than those listed else-
where; includes trichloro-
phenols and chlorinated
cresols)
Chloroalkyl Ethers (chloro-
methyl, chloroethyl, and
mixed ethers)
Chloroform (trichloromethane)
2-Chlorophenol
Chromium (total)
Copper (total)
Cyanide (total)
DDT and Metabolites
Dichlorobenzenes
Dichlorobenzidine
Dichloroethylenes (1,
1-dichloroethylene and
1, 2-dichloroethylene)
2, 4-Dichlorophenol
Dichloropropane and Dichloro-
propene
2, 4-Dimethylphenol
2, 4-Dinitrophenol
Dinitrotoluene
1, 2-Diphenlhydrazine
Endosulfan and Metabolites
Endrin and Metabolites
Ethylbenzene
Fluroanthene
Haloethers (other than those
listed elsewhere)
Halomethanes (other than those
listed elsewhere)
Heptachlor and Metabolites
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachlorocyclohexane (all
isomers)
Hexachlorocyc1op entadiene
Isophorone
Lead (total)
Mercury
Naphthalene
Nickel (total)
Nitrobenzene
Nitrophenols (including 2,
4-dinitrophenol and dinitro-
cresol)
Nitrosamines
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phthalate Esters
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB's)
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons
Selenium (total)
Silver (total)
2, 3, 7, 8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-
P-Dioxin (TCDD)
Tetrachloroethylene
Thallium (total)
Toluene
Toxaphene
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride (chloroethylene)
Zinc (total)
D-153
-------
ACIDITY
Parameter Group: General STORET Units: mg/£ as CaCOj
Inorganic
General: Acidity is a measure of a gross property of water, its
quantitative ability to neutralize a strong base to a designated
pH. It can be interpreted in terms of specific substances only
when the chemical composition of the sample is known. Acids con-
tribute to corrosiveness and influence certain chemical and bio-
logical processes; therefore, the acidity of water is important.
This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed
by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method; Analyze as soon as practicable. Fill sample
bottles completely and cap tightly. The sample should not be agi-
tated or exposed to air for a prolonged period of time. Cool to
4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£
Measurement: The pH of the sample is determined and a measured
amount of standard acid is added, as needed, to lower the pH to
4 or less. Hydrogen peroxide is added, the solution boiled for
several minutes, cooled, and titrated electrometrically with
standard alkali to pH 8.2. Suspended matter present in the sam-
ple, or precipitates formed during the titration may cause a slug-
gish electrode response. This may be offset by allowing a 15-
20 second pause between additions of titrant or by slow dropping
addition of titrant as the endpoint pH is approached. For BPT
NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: On a round robin conducted by ASTM on
4 acid mine waters, including concentrations up to 2,000 mg/£, the
precision was found to be ±10 mg/£.
Cost of Analysis: $4 - $5
D-154
-------
ACROLEIN
Parameter Group: STORET Units;
General: Acrolein (also known as acrylic aldehyde or 2-propenol)
is a clear, colorless liquid at ordinary temperatures with a pun-
gent irritating odor. It is extremely irritating to the skin
and mucous membranes and is readily soluble in water. Its main
use is as an aquatic weed killer. This parameter will be regu-
lated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion; Not established
Preservation Method: Sample history must be known before any chem-
ical or physical preservation steps can be applied to protect
against separation. Fill the sample bottle completely and seal
until analysis is performed. Do not refrigerate.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown; preferably analyze within 1 hour.
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: In excess of 200 m£
Measurement: No standard procedures for acrolein have been de-
veloped. It may require special treatment to extract from water
prior to gas chromatographic analysis. A BAT NPDES method will be
prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Precision and accuracy data are not
available.
Cost of Analysis: Expensive; must be quoted based on sample
composition.
D-155
-------
ACRYLONITRILE
Parameter Group: STORE! Units:
General: Acrylonitrile is a flammable liquid used in the manu-
facture of synthetic rubber and plastics and as a pesticide fumi-
gant for stored grain. It is moderately soluble in water and does
not disassociate markedly. Upon disassociation it can form HCN,
the toxic cyanide principle. Concentrations of 20 mg/£ are dele-
terious for many fish. This parameter will be regulated by BAT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of
the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method; Sample history must be known before any chem-
ical or physical preservation steps can be applied to protect
against phase separation. Fill the sample bottle completely and
seal until analysis is performed. Do not refrigerate.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown; preferably analyze within 1 hour.
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: In excess of 200 m€
Measurement: No preferred method has been established. Acrylon-
itrile has been determined in wastewater by azeotropic distilla-
tion with methanol followed by measurement of NH, liberated by
alkali saponification, but the method may not be practicable for
many wastewaters. Detection limits are around 2,000 yg/£. A BAT
NPDES method will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Precision and accuracy data are not
available.
Cost of Analysis: Expensive; must be quoted based on sample
composition.
D-156
-------
ALDRIN
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: pg/£
General: Aldrin, the common name of an organochlorine insecticide,
is metabolically converted to dieldrin by aquatic organisms. Be-
cause of this metabolic conversion and because of evidence that
dieldrin is as toxic or slightly more toxic than aldrin to aquatic
organisms, an acceptable water concentration is based on the
presence of either aldrin or dieldrin or the sum of both. Aldrin
is used agriculturally at rates varying from 2 oz to 6 Ib per
acre, usually as a dust or emulsifiable concentrate; it is vir-
tually insoluble in water. This parameter will be regulated by BAT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of
the Consent Decree pollutants. A toxic effluent limitation has
been prescribed for this parameter by the NPDES permits program.
Criteria
003 pg/£ for freshwater and marine aquatic life
The persistence, bioaccumulation potential, and carcino-
genicity of aldrin cautions human exposure to a minimum.
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 50-100 mi or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction and detection and
measurement accomplished by electron capture, microcoulometric or
electrolytic conductivity gas chromatography is recommended for
aldrin. Many interferences exist, especially PCB's, phthalate
esters, and organophosphorus pesticides, and the method is only
recommended for use by a skilled, experienced pesticide analyst
(or under close supervision of such a person). For BPT NPDES
purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but usually falls in the 0.001 to 1 yg/£ range. In-
creased sensitivity is likely to increase interference. Typically,
the percent recovery decreases with increasing concentration. For
example, at the 0.015 and 0.110 yg/£ concentrations, recoveries
were around 69% and 72% and precisions were 47% and 41%,
respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-157
-------
ALKALINITY
Parameter Group: General STORET Units; mg/£ as CaC03
Inorganic
General: Alkalinity is a measure of a gross property of water,
its quantitative ability to neutralize a strong acid to a desig-
nated pH. It can be interpreted in terms of specific substances
only when the chemical composition of the sample is known. Alka-
linity, therefore, is a measure of the buffering capacity of the
water, and since pH has a direct effect on organisms as well as
an indirect effect on the toxicity of certain other pollutants in
the water, the buffering capacity is important to water quality.
This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines pre-
scribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: 20 mg/£ or more as CaCO, for freshwater aquatic life
except where natural concentrations are less.
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as practicable. Fill sample
bottles completely and cap tightly. The sample should not be agi-
tated or exposed to air for a prolonged period of time. Cool to
4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£
Measurement; An unaltered sample is titrated to an electrometri-
cally determined end point of pH 4.5. The sample must not be
filtered, diluted, concentrated, or otherwise altered in any way.
Substances such as salts of weak organic and inorganic acids pres-
ent in large amounts may cause interference in the electrometric
pH measurements. Oil and grease may interfere by coating the
electrode, thereby causing sluggish response. For BPT NPDES pur-
poses the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: No general statement can be made about
precision due to the great variation in sample characteristics.
Forty analysts in seventeen laboratories analyzed synthetic water
samples containing increments of bicarbonate equivalent to around
9 and 116 mg/£ CaC03. The bias was approximately +16% and -8%
and relative standard deviation was approximately 14% and 5%,
respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $4 - $5
D-158
-------
ALUMINUM
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: yg/£ as Al
General: Aluminum, being the third most abundant element in the
earth's crust, occurs in minerals, rocks, and clays. Aluminum is
found as a soluble salt, a colloid, or an insoluble compound in
natural waters. Aluminum in wastewaters occurs from primary alu-
minum production and from secondary aluminum processes such as in-
got cooling and shot quenching, scrubbing of furnance fumes during
demagging, and wet milling of residues. Washwater from water
treatment plants is another likely source, as are discharges from
dyeing and cloth printing operation, paper mills, disinfectant op-
eration, tanneries, viscose rayon plants, and many other industrial
operations. Very little ingested aluminum is absorbed in the
alimentary canal, so its presence does not normally pose a public
health problem. Conflicting literature abounds on crop effects.
An average daily dose of 2 mg aluminum has not harmed rats. This
is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by
the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO- to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 m£
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 309.2 nm. Aluminum is partially ionized in
the nitrous oxide-acetylene flame. This problem may be con-
trolled by the addition of an alkali metal (potassium, 1,000 yg/
m£) to both sample and standard solutions. For BPT NPDES pur-
poses the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 1,000 yg/£;
its detection limit is 100 yg/£. The optimum concentration range
is 5,000-100,000 yg/£. At a concentration of 300 yg/£, the rela-
tive standard deviation is 22.2%, and the relative error is 0.7%.
Precision and accuracy decrease markedly for decreasing concen-
trations. For example, in an interlaboratory study on trace metals
analysis, at true values of 35 and 15 yg/£, the relative standard
deviations were 309% and 1,120%, respectively, while the relative
errors were 175% and 627%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $20
D-159
-------
ANTIMONY
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: yg/£ as Sb
General; Natural antimony occurs chiefly as the sulfide or in
oxide forms. Antimony is used in various industrial operations,
especially in alloying as, for example, with lead for storage
battery plates, with lead and tin in type metals, and with tin
and copper as a bearing or antifriction material, and may be
introduced into wastewaters from such sources, as well as the
rubber, textile, explosives, paint, ceramic, and glass industries.
Antimony has been reported to cause dermatitus and gastroin-
testinal disturbances in humans (it has long been used as an
emetic) and has been found to shorten the life span of rats.
This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines pre-
scribed by the NPDES permits program. This parameter will be
regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits pro-
gram. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO_ to pH <2.
O
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 mi
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 217.6 nm. In the presence of lead
(1,000 mg/£), a spectral interference may occur at the 217.6 nm
resonance line. In this case, the 231.1 nm antimony line should
be used. Increasing acid concentrations decrease antimony ab-
sorption. To avoid this effect, the acid concentration in the
samples and in the standards should be matched. For BPT NPDES
purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 500 yg/£;
its detection limit is 200 yg/£. The optimum concentration range
is 1,000-40,000 yg/£. In a single laboratory, using a mixed
industrial-domestic waste effluent at concentrations of 5,000 yg
and 15,000 yg Sb/£, the relative standard deviations were 1.6% and
.66%, respectively. Recoveries at these levels were 96% and 97%,
respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $20
D-160
-------
ARSENIC
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: yg/£ as As
General: Mineral dissolution, industrial discharges, or the ap-
plication of pesticides may lead to the occurrence of arsenic in
water. Though most forms of arsenic are toxic to humans, arsen-
icals have been used in the medical treatment of spirochaetal in-
fections, blood dyscrasias and dermatitis. Arsenic and arsenicals
have many diversified industrial uses such as hardening of copper
and lead alloys, tannery operations, pigmentation in paints and
fireworks, and the manufacture of glass and ceramics, cloth, elec-
trical semiconductors, and petroleum products. Arsenicals are
used in the formulation of herbicides for forest management and
agriculture. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guide-
lines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. This parameter will
be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits pro-
gram. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criteria:
50 yg/£ for domestic water supplies (health)
100 'yg/£ for irrigation of crops
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO_ to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 m£
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric gaseous hydride method is
recommended for determining total arsenic, using a wavelength of
193.7 nm. The method is applicable to most fresh and saline
waters in the absence of high concentrations of chromium, copper,
cobalt, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, and silver. A BAT NPDES
method will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is approximately
2.5 vg/t; its detection limit is 2.0 yg/£. The working range of
the method is 2.0-20 yg/£. At a concentration of 10 yg/£, the
relative standard deviation is 6% and the relative error is 1%.
Ten replicate solutions of o-arsenilic acid at the 5, 10, and
20 yg/£ level were analyzed by a single laboratory. Relative
standard deviations were 6%, 9%, and 5.5% with recoveries of
94, 93, and 85%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $15 - $20
D-161
-------
ASBESTOS
Parameter Group: General STORET Units; Count/liter
Inorganic with length/
width >1
General: Asbestos is primarily an air pollutant which has been
shown to produce asbestosis, lung cancer, and mesothelioma in as-
bestos workers. However, the problems of asbestos in water have
been recognized. It was discovered in 1973 that the drinking
water of Duluth, Minnesota, and other cities on Lake Superior was
heavily contaminated with asbestos. Sources of asbestos contami-
nation include: asbestos mining, pulpmills, asbestos products,
installation of asbestos construction material, spray-on steel
fireproofing, and insulating cement application. This parameter
will be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES per-
mits program. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion; Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Glass or plastic
Sample Volume Required: Approximately 1,000 m£
Measurement: The present procedure is the microscopic count-
ing of fibers in water. Asbestos probably cannot be routinely
determined in effluents in the absence of gross contamination.
A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for this parameter in
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Precision and accuracy data are not
available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: No standard pricing due to impracticability of
analysis.
D-162
-------
ATRAZINE
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General; Atrazine, 2-chloro-4-ethylamino-6-isopropylamino-S-
triazine, is a triazine pesticide. It is used as a selective
herbicide. It has an oral LD5 in rats of 3.08 g/kg. This is a
parameter which is regulated by BPT guide-lines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time; Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 1,000 m£
Measurement: The recommended method covers the determination of
various symmetrical triazine pesticides. It involves an efficient
sample extraction procedure and provides, through use of column
chromatography, a method for the elimination of non-pesticide in-
terferences and the pre-separation of pesticide mixtures. Identi-
fication is made by selective gas chromatographic separation, and
measurement is accomplished by the use of an electrolytic conduc-
tivity detector (CCD). Solvents, reagents, glassware, and other
sample processing hardware may yield discrete artifacts and/or
elevated baselines causing misinterpretation of gas chromatograms.
The interferences in industrial effluents are high and varied.
Nitrogen containing compounds other than the triazines may
interfere. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this param-
eter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Atrazine can be determined by this method
with a sensitivity of 1 pg/£. Precision and accuracy data are not
available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $30 to $150, depending upon preparation
required.
D-163
-------
BARIUM
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: yg/£ as Ba
General: Barium compounds are used in a variety of industrial ap-
plications including the metallurgical, paint and dye, glass,
ceramic, and electronics industries, as well as for medicinal
purposes, the vulcanizing of rubber, and explosives manufacturing.
Barium naturally occurs only in trace amounts in water. Therefore,
appreciable amounts of barium indicates undesirable industrial dis-
charges. A barium dose of 550,000 to 600,000 yg is considered
fatal to human beings. This is a parameter which is regulated by
BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: 1 mg/£ for domestic water supply (health)
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO, to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required; 100-200 m£
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 553.6 nm. The use of a nitrous oxide-
acetylene flame virtually eliminates chemical interference; how-
ever, barium is easily ionized in this flame and potassium must
be added (1,000,000 yg/£) to standards and samples alike to con-
trol this effect. If the nitrous oxide flame is not available and
acetylene-air is used, phosphate, silicon and aluminum will
severely depress the barium absorbance. This may be overcome by
the addition of 2,000,000 yg/£ lanthanum. For BPT NPDES purposes
the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 400 yg/£;
its detection limit is 30 yg/£. The optimum concentration range
is 1000-20,000 yg/£. At a concentration of 500 yg/£, the relative
standard deviation is 10%, and the relative error is 8.6%. In a
single laboratory, using a mixed industrial-domestic waste efflu-
ent at concentrations of 400 and 2,000 yg Ba/£, the relative stand-
ard deviations were 10.8% and 6.5%, respectively. Recoveries at
these levels were 94% and 113%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $15
D-164
-------
BENZENE
Parameter Group: General STORE! Units: pg/£
Organic
General: Benzene (C,H,) is the simplest of the aromatic compounds
and is used extensively as a commercial solvent and for the syn-
thesis of other organic substances. At normal temperatures it is
a volatile, flammable, colorless liquid with an ethereal odor. It
is moderately soluble in water, 820 mg/£ at 22°C. It occurs in
wastes from chemical plants, dyeing and other textile operations,
and many other industrial processes. The oral LD for rats is
around 5,600 mg/kg of body weight. The toxicity of benzene toward
fish has been reported from 5,000 yg/£ up to 395,000 yg/£ depend-
ing upon age and species. This parameter will be regulated by BAT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of
the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion; Not established
Preservation Method: Not determined. Analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 200-1,000 m£
Measurement: Hexadecone extraction followed by a gas chromato-
graphic and mass spectrometric analysis is often used. A BAT NPDES
method will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Detection limits should be around
2-10 yg/£.Precision and accuracy data are not available at this
time.
Cost of Analysis: $15 - $30
D-165
-------
BENZENE HEXACHLORIDE (BHC)
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General: Benzene hexachloride (BHC), the common name of hexa-
chlorocyclohexane, is an organochlorine pesticide. It has five
known stereoisomers, the gamma isomer (lindane) being the most
powerful insecticidal principle. BHC has a residual life in
soil approaching that of DDT. Elevated concentrations of BHC
reduce treatment plant efficiency, cause stream organisms to
disappear, and produce disagreeable odors. It can impart a
musty odor and taste to crops. This parameter will be regulated
by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It
is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 50-100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction and detection and
measurement accomplished by electron capture, microcoulometric or
electrolytic conductivity gas chromatography is recommended for
BHC. Many interferences exist, especially PCB's, phthalate esters,
and organophosphorus pesticides, and the method is only recommended
for use by a skilled, experienced pesticide analyst (or under
close supervision of such a person). A BAT NPDES method will be
prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors but usually falls in the 0.001 to 1 yg/£ range. Increased
sensitivity is likely to increase interference. Typically, the
percent recovery decreases with increasing concentration.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-166
-------
BENZIDINE
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units:
General: Benzidine (4, 4'-diaminobiphenyl, C1?H12N7) is a poly-
nuclear organic pesticide. A crystalline substance, it is only
slightly soluble in water. It possesses carcinogenic properties
and must be handled with great care. This is a parameter which is
regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits
program. This parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines pre-
scribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent
Decree pollutants. A toxic effluent limitation has been pre-
scribed for this parameter by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method; Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 1 week
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 1,000-4,000 m£, depending on concentration
and instrument used.
Measurement: Benzidines are separated and concentrated by multiple
extractions and then oxidized by chloramine T. The oxidation prod-
uct is extracted and measured spectrophotometrically. For BPT
NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136. A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for this param-
eter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is approximately
0.2 yg/£.Precision and accuracy data are not available at this
time.
Cost of Analysis; $20 - $40; because of its carcinogenic proper-
ties, special facilities may be required at greatly increased cost.
D-167
-------
BERYLLIUM
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: yg/£ as Be
General: Beryllium is not likely to occur at significantly toxic
levels in ambient natural waters. Beryllium could enter waters in
effluents from certain metallurgical plants and discharges from
industries dealing with atomic reactors, X-ray diffraction tubes,
neon signs, aircraft and rockets, and missile fuel. This is a
parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program. This parameter will be regulated by BAT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of
the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criteria:
11 yg/£ for the protection of aquatic life in soft fresh
water
1,100 yg/£ for the protection of aquatic life in hard
fresh water
100 pg/£ for continuous irrigation on all soils; except
• 500 yg/£ for irrigation on neutral to alkaline fine-
textured soils
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO_ to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 m£
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric or aluminum colorimetric
methods are suitable. The latter requires either a spectro-
photometer for use at 515 nm or a filter photometer equipped with
a green filter having maximum transmittance near 515 nm; either
must provide a light path of 5 cm. Sodium and silicon at concen-
trations in excess of 1,000,000 yg/£ have been found to severely
depress the beryllium absorbance. Bicarbonate ion is reported to
interfere; however, its effect is eliminated when samples are
acidified to a pH of 1.5. Aluminum at concentrations of >500 pg/£
is reported to depress the sensitivity of beryllium. For BPT NPDES
purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136. A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for this param-
eter in 40 CFR 136.
D-168
-------
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 25 yg/£; its
detection limit is 5 yg/£. The optimum concentration range is
50-2,000 yg/£. In a single laboratory, using a mixed industrial-
domestic waste effluent at concentrations of 10, 50, and 250 vg/£,
the relative standard deviations were 10%, 2%, and 1%, respec-
tively. Recoveries at these levels were 100%, 98%, and 97%, re-
spectively. In 32 laboratories using a known sample containing
250 \ig/t, the beryllium was determined 'colorimetrically with a
relative standard deviation of 7% and a relative error of 12%.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $20
D-169
-------
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (BOD)
Parameter Groups Oxygen Demand STORET Units: mg/£
General: The biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) determination is an
empirical test used to obtain a measure of the relative oxygen de-
mand of water, especially treatment plant loadings and removal ef-
ficiencies. It is important to realize that BOD results cannot be
compared unless the results have been obtained under identical test
conditions and that the test is of limited value in determining the
actual oxygen demand of surface waters. Complete stabilization of
a given sample may require a period of incubation too long for prac-
ticable purposes, so the 5-day test is most commonly reported. As
an indicator parameter, BOD is not a pollutant and exercises no di-
rect harm. Its indirect effect is to depress dissolved oxygen
levels. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines
prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion; Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 1000 m£
Measurement: The recommended method is an empirical bioassay type
procedure which measures the dissolved oxygen consumed by microbial
life while assimilating and oxidizing the organic matter present.
The standard test conditions include dark incubation at 20°C for
5 days. The determination of dissolved oxygen may be made by use
of either the modified Winkler or the electrode method. Many sam-
ples will require seeding due to low microbal populations. For
BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed
by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Eighty-six analysts in fifty-eight labora-
tories analyzed natural water samples plus an exact increment of
biodegradable organic compounds. At mean values of 2.1 and
175 mg/£ BOD, the standard deviations were ±0.7 and ±26 mg/£,
respectively. There is no acceptable procedure for determining
the accuracy of the BOD test.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $17
D-170
-------
BORON
Parameter Group; Metals STORET Units: yg/£ as B
General: Boron is usually found in nature as a sodium or calcium
borate salt. A major source of boron in domestic wastewater is
sodium perborate, used as a bleach in household washing powders.
Fluoroborate solutions are used for plating of cadmium, copper, lead,
nickel, tin, and zinc. Boron salts are used in fire retardants, the
production of glass, leather tanning and finishing industries,
cosmetics, photographic materials, metallurgy, and for high energy
rocket fuels. The ingestion of excessive doses of borates may
cause nausea, cramps, convulsions, coma, or other symptoms of
distress. It appears to pose a greater hazard to plants than
humans, however. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: 750 yg/£ for long-term irrigation on sensitive crops
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO_ to pH <2.
O
Maximum Holding Time: 6 .months
Container Type: Polyethylene bottles or alkali-resistant, boron-
free glassware.
Sample Volume Required: 50-200 m£
Measurement: The curcumin method using colorimetric equipment is
recommended for concentrations in the 100 to 1,000 yg/£ range.
When a sample of water containing boron is acidified and evaporated
in the presence of curcumin, a red-colored product called rosocya-
nine is formed. The rosocyanine is taken up in a suitable solvent,
and the red color is compared with standards either visually or
photometrically. One of the following equipments will be required:
(a) spectrophotometer for use at 540 nm with a light path of 1 cm,
or (b) a filter photometer equipped with a green filter having a
maximum transmittance near 540 nm with a minimum light path of
1 cm. Nitrate nitrogen concentrations above 20,000 yg/£ interfere.
Significantly high results are possible when the total of calcium
and magnesium hardness exceeds 100,000 yg/£ as CaCO_. Passing the
sample through a cation exchange resin eliminates this problem.
Close control of such variables as volumes and concentrations of
reagents, as well as time and temperature of drying, must be ex-
ercised for maximum accuracy. For BPT NPDES purposes the measure-
ment of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
D-171
-------
Precision and Accuracy: The minimum detectable quantity is
0.2 pg/£ B.A synthetic sample, containing 240 yg/£ B, 40 yg/£
As, 250 yg/£ Be, 20 yg/£ Se, and 6 yg/£ V in distilled water, was
analyzed by the curcumin method in 30 laboratories with a relative
standard deviation of 22.8% and a relative error of 0%.
Cost of Analysis: $5 - $20
D-172
-------
BROMIDE
Parameter Group: General STORET Units: mg/£ as Br
Inorganic
General: Naturally occurring bromide in water is negligible, out-
side of coastal areas, the major sources being chemical industry
and saltworks effluents. It is used for medicinal compounds,
dyestuffs, gasoline additives, and swimming pool water steriliza-
tion. Like other halogens it is antiseptic and disinfectant and,
hence, may possibly interfere with bacterial and other natural
purification processes. This is a parameter which is regulated by
BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£
Measurement: The titrimetric method is recommended. The concen-
tration range for this method is 2-20 mg bromide/£.. After pre-
treatment to remove interferences, the sample is divided into two
aliquots. One aliquot is analyzed for iodide. The other aliquot
is analyzed for iodide plus bromide. Bromide is then calculated
by difference. Iron manganese and organic matter can interfere;
however, the calcium oxide pretreatment removes or reduces these
to insignificant concentrations. Color interferes with the ob-
servation of indicator and bromine - water color changes. This
interference is eliminated by the use of a pH meter instead of a
pH indicator and the use of standardized amounts of oxidant and
oxidant quencher. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this
parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: In a single laboratory, using a mixed
domestic and industrial waste effluent, at concentrations of 0.3,
2.8, 5.3, 10.3, and 20.3 mg/£ of bromide, the relative standard
deviations were 43%, 13%, 7.2%, 4.3%, and 2.1%, respectively. At
concentrations of 2.8, 5.3, 10.3, and 20.3 mg/£ of bromide, re-
coveries were 96%, 83%, 97%, and 99%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $15 - $20
D-173
-------
CADMIUM
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: yg/£ as Cd
General: Cadmium occurs in nature chiefly as a sulfide salt, fre-
quently in association with zinc and lead ores. The salts of the
metal also may occur in wastes from electroplating plants, pigment
works, textile and chemical industries. Cadmium is also used in
everyday items such as paint, some pottery pigments, plastics, and
automobile tires. Cadmium is present as an impurity in the more
common galvanized coatings. Biologically, cadmium is a nonessen-
tial, nonbeneficial element recognized to be of high toxic po-
tential. The concentration and not the absolute amount determines
the acute toxicity of cadmium. Cadmium and cadmium compounds
produce acute or chronic symptoms varying in intensity from irri-
tations to extensive disturbances resulting in death. This is a
parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program. This parameter will be regulated by BAT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of
the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criteria:
10 pg/£ for domestic water supply (health)
• Aquatic Life:
Fresh Water
Soft Water Hard Water
0.4 vg/t 1.2 yg/£ for cladocerans
and salmonid
fishes
4.0 pg/£ 12.0 yg/£ for other, less
sensitive, aquatic
life
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO_ to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 mi
D-174
-------
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 228.8 nm. For levels of cadmium below
20 yg/£, the extraction procedure is recommended. The dithizone
procedure may also be used. It requires either a spectrophotom-
eter for use at 518 nm or a filter photometer equipped with a
green filter having a maximum light transmittance near 518 nm;
either must provide a light path of at least 1 cm. For BPT NPDES
purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136. A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for this
parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 250 yg/£; its
detection limit is 2 yg/£. The optimum concentration range is 50-
2,000 yg/£. At a concentration of 50 yg/£, for the AA method the
relative standard deviation is 21.6% and the relative error is
8.2%, while for the dithizone method they are 24.6% and 6.0%,
respectively. \
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $15
D-175
-------
CALCIUM
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: mg/£ as Ca
General: Calcium enters water supplies through passage over de-
posits of limestone, dalomite, gypsum, and gypsiferous shale.
Calcium salts and ions are among the most commonly encountered
substances in water. Calcium salts breakdown on heating to form
scale in boilers, pipes, and cooking utensils. Calcium adds to
the total hardness of water. Calcium salts used on unpaved road-
ways and in innumerable industrial discharges represent other
sources. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines
prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO, to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 m£
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 422.7 nm. Phosphate, sulfate and aluminum
interfere but are masked by the addition of lanthanum. The nitrous
oxide-acetylene flame will provide two to five times greater sensi-
tivity and freedom from chemical interferences. lonization in-
terferences should be controlled by adding a large amount of
alkali to the sample and standards. For general use, the EDTA
titrimetric method is the method of choice due to its simplicity
and rapidity. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this
parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 0.08 mg/£;
its detection limit is 0.003 mg/£. The optimum concentration
range is 0.2-20 mg/£. In a single laboratory, using distilled
water at concentrations of 9.0 and 36 mg/£, the relative standard
deviations were 3.3% and 1.6%, respectively. Recoveries at both
these levels were 99%. In a 44-laboratory test, synthetic un-
known samples containing 108 mg/£ Ca (with other metals) were
analyzed with a relative standard deviation of 9.2% and a relative
error of 1.9%.
Cost of Analysis: $5 - $15
D-176
-------
CAPTAN
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORE! Units: yg/£
General: Captan is an approved name for the organochlorine fungi-
cide CgHgCl-NCLS. It is the active ingredient in the proprietary
product Captan 50-W and was also known as SR-406, Vancide 89, and
Orthocide. It is insoluble in water but partially soluble in some
organic solvents. Captan has a very low toxicity to mammals (e.g.,
the LDt-Q for rats is over 9 g/kg of body weight) and is readily
hydrolyzed, the effective residual life being on the order of two
weeks. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines
prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required; 50-100 mt or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction and detection and
measurement accomplished by electron capture, microcoulometric or
electrolytic conductivity gas chromatography is recommended for
captan. Many interferences exist, especially PCB's, phthalate
esters, and organophosphorus pesticides, and the method is only
recommended for use by a skilled, experienced pesticide analyst
(or under close supervision of such a person). For BPT NPDES
purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy; The detection limit is affected by many
factors but usually falls in the 0.001 to 1 pg/£ range. Increased
sensitivity is likely to increase interference. Typically, the
percent recovery decreases with increasing concentration.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-177
-------
CARBARYL
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORE! Units: \ig/t
General: Carbaryl, commonly known as Sevin, is an 0-ARYL
carbamate insecticide. It is commonly used on lawns as well as
for other purposes. It is slightly soluble in water, sparingly
soluble in most organic solvents, but freely soluble in amides.
It has low mammalian toxicity, the acute oral LDrr. to rats being
rejorted from 500,000 to 2,190,000 yg/kg of body weight. Although
persistent, its toxicity to aquatic life appears to be low also.
This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines pre-
scribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 1,000 m£
Measurement: In the recommended method, a measured volume of water
is extracted with methylene chloride, and the concentrated extract
is cleaned up with a Florisil column. Appropriate fractions from
the column are concentrated and portions are separated by thin-
layer chromatography. The carbamates are hydrolyzed on the layer
and the hydrolysis products are reacted to yield specific colored
products. Quantitative measurement is achieved by visually com-
paring the responses of sample extracts to the responses of
standards on the same thin layer. Identifications are confirmed by
changing the pH of the layer and observing color changes of the
reaction products. Phenols interfere directly, and indirect inter-
ferences may be encountered from naturally colored materials whose
presence masks the carbamate reaction. The method is recommended
for use only by an experienced pesticide analyst (or under close
supervision of such a person). For BPT NPDES purposes the measure-
ment of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Carbaryl can be determined with a
sensitivity of 1 yg/£. Precision and accuracy data are not
available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $60
D-178
-------
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units:
General: Carbon tetrachloride, CC1., is used in industry as an
organic solvent, fire extinguisher, and for dry cleaning of cloth-
ing. In human and veterinary medicine, it is used as an anti-
helminthic. Carbon tetrachloride is colorless nonflammable liquid
with a strong odor. Death has occurred from ingestion of 5 m£,
about 8 grams. Repeated skin contact will result in dermatitis.
This parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by
the NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent Decree
pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Sample history must be known before any chem-
ical or physical preservation steps can be applied to protect the
sample from phase separation. Fill the sample bottle completely and
seal until analysis is performed. Do not refrigerate.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown; preferably analyze within 1 hour.
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: In excess of 200 m£
Measurement: The recommended method for carbon tetrachloride is a
direct aqueous-injection procedure for the determination of gas
chromatographable chlorinated hydrocarbons. A 3-10 y£ aliquot of
the sample is injected into the gas chromatograph equipped with a
halogen specific detector. Compounds containing bromine or iodine
will interfere with the determination. A BAT NPDES method will be
prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Sensitivity of the method is approxi-
mately 1,000 yg/£.Detection limits of 0.2-3 yg/£ may be achieved.
Precision and accuracy data are not available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: Around $60.
D-179
-------
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
Parameter Group: Oxygen Demand STORET Units: mg/£
General: The chemical oxygen demand (COD) test determines the
quantity of oxygen required to oxidize a portion of organic matter
in a waste sample, under specific conditions of oxidizing agent,
temperature, and time. It is an important parameter for stream
and industrial waste studies and control of waste treatment plants
and can be rapidly determined. Exactly the same technique must be
used each time, since the results depend upon the chemical oxidant
used, the structure of the organic compounds, and the manipulative
procedures. Although empirical correlations with other oxygen de-
mand indicators may be made for a given waste stream, there is no
uniform theoretical basis for association. COD is not a pollutant
in and of itself and exercises no direct harm. Its indirect
effect is to depress dissolved oxygen levels. This is a parameter
which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES per-
mits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add H2SO. to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 7 .days
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 50 m£
Measurement: The dichromate reflux method is recommended. The
method is applicable to domestic and industrial waste samples
having an organic carbon concentration greater than 15 mg/£. For
lower concentrations of carbon such as in surface water samples,
the low level modification should be used. When the chloride con-
centration of the sample exceeds 2,000 mg/£, the modification for
saline waters is required. To reduce loss of volatile organics,
the flask should be cooled during addition of the sulfuric acid
solution. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this param-
eter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy; Eighty-six analysts in fifty-eight labo-
ratories analyzed a distilled water solution containing oxidizable
organic material equivalent to 270 mg/£ COD. The relative standard
deviation was 6.6% and relative error was 4.7%. A set of synthetic
unknowns analyzed by 74 laboratories resulted in a relative stand-
ard deviation of 6.5% at the 200 mg/£ COD level. At 160 mg/£ COD
and 100 mg/£ chloride, the relative standard deviation was 10.8%.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $17
D-180
-------
CHLORDANE
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General: Chlordane, the common name of an organochlorine insecti-
cide, is a highly persistent chemical which bioaccumulates in
aquatic organisms used for human food. Technical grade chlordane
is a mixture of toxic compounds that have not been separated in
manufacture. There is an extremely wide range for the acute
toxicity of chlordane to various species of freshwater fishes.
Fishes can concentrate chlordane directly from water by a factor
of 1,000 to 3,000 times, and invertebrates may concentrate to twice
this magnitude. Chlordane is stable in the soil and is fungi-
cidal. It could be contained in irrigation return flows. This is
a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program. This parameter will be regulated by BAT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of
the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criteria:
0.01 yg/£ for freshwater aquatic life
0.004 yg/£ for marine aquatic life
The persistence, bioaccumulation potential, and carcino-
genicity of chlordane cautions human exposure to a minimum.
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 50-100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction and detection and
measurement accomplished by electron capture, microcoulometric
or electrolytic conductivity gas chromatography is recommended for
chlordane under favorable conditions. Many interferences exist,
especially PCB's, phthalate esters, and organophosphorus pesti-
cides, and the method is only recommended for use by a skilled,
experienced pesticide analyst (or under close supervision of such
a person). For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this param-
eter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136. A BAT NPDES method will be
prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
D-181
-------
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but usually falls in the 0.001 to 1 yg/£ range. Increased
sensitivity is likely to increase interference. Typically, the
percent recovery decreases with increasing concentration.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-182
-------
CHLORIDE
Parameter Group: General STORET Units; mg/£ as Cl
Inorganic
General; Chloride is one of the major inorganic anions in water
arising from natural mineral origin, seawater intrusion, salts
used for agricultural purposes, sewage, industrial effluents (in-
cluding paperworks, galvanizing plants, water softening plants,
oil wells, and petroleum refineries), roadway deicing, and other
sources. Chlorides in drinking water are not normally harmful at
palatable concentrations. It is generally the cation associated
with the chloride that produces a harmful effect. Chloride ions
exert a significant effect on the corrosion rate of metals (e.g.,
steel and aluminum) and are considered to be among the most
troublesome anions in irrigation water. Injury to livestock seldom
occurs below the 4,000 mg/£ level, but injury to fish has been re-
ported at 400 mg/£. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: None required
Maximum Holding Time: 7 days
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 50 m£
Measurement: The mercuric nitrate method is recommended wherein
a dilute mercuric nitrate solution is added to an acidified sample
in the presence of mixed diphenylcarbazone-bromophenol blue indi-
cator. The method is suitable for all concentration ranges, but
to avoid large titration volumes, the sample aliquot should not
contain more than 10 to 20 mg Cl per 50 m£. Sulfites interfere
and, if their presence is suspected, oxidize by treating 50 m£ of
sample with 0.5 to 1.0 m£ if H2Q2' Bromi<^e anci iodide are
titrated in the same manner as chloride. For BPT NPDES purposes
the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: A synthetic unknown sample containing
241 mg/£ Cl was analyzed in 10 laboratories with a relative
standard deviation of 3.3% and a relative error of 2.9%.
Cost of Analysis: $3 - $4
D-183
-------
CHLORINATED BENZENES
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General: Chlorinated benzenes (other than dichlorobenzenes) in-
clude chlorobenzene, 1, 2, 4-trichlorobenzene, and hexachloroben-
zene. They are heavy liquids and settle to the bottom in quiescent
water unless emulsified. Their chief use is as aquatic herbicides
to control weeds in lakes and ditches. They have pungent odors and
therefore are unlikely to cause serious harm to humans through di-
rect ingestion. Mild symptoms of poisoning of sheep and cattle
have been reported at concentrations in excess of 2,700 mg/£. This
parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Not determined. Analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 200-1,000 m£
Measurement: No standard procedures have been developed. The
methodology generally requires extraction, concentration, and gas
chromatographic analysis. A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed
for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Detection limits of 0.1 to 10 yg/£ should
be achievable. Precision and accuracy data are not available at
this time.
Cost of Analysis: $25 - $40
D-184
-------
CHLORINATED ETHANES
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General; Chlorinated ethanes are volatile halocompounds including:
1, 2-trichloroethane; hexachloroethane; 1, 2-dichloroetharie; 1, 1,
1-trichloroethane; hexachloroethane; 1, 1-dichloroetharie; 1, 1,
2-trichloroethane; 1, 1, 2, 2-tetrachloroetharie; and chloroethane.
Widely used in various industries and processes, their character-
istics vary from compound to compound. For example, 1,
2-dichloroethane (also called ethylene dichloride, C-H.Cl-) is a
heavy liquid with a pleasant odor and sweet taste and is highly
soluble in water. It is used as an industrial solvent and in the
manufacture of tobacco extract. Its oral LD^,. for rats is
770 mg/kg of body weight. By contrast, 1, 1, 1-trichloroethane
(also called methyl chloroform) is insoluble in water. It is used
as a solvent for fats, waxes, resins, and alkaloids, and for
cleaning metal and plastic molds. Its toxicity towards the
marine pinperch is twice that of 1, 1, 2-trichloroethane (i.e.,
75-100 mg/£ versus 150-175 mg/£). This parameter will be regu-
lated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion; Not established
Preservation Method; Sample history must be known before any chem-
ical or physical preservation steps can be applied to protect
against phase separation. Fill the sample bottle completely and
seal until analysis is performed. Do not refrigerate.
Maximum HoIding Time: Unknown; preferably analyze within 1 hour.
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: In excess of 200 m£
Measurement: In the recommended Bellar procedure the sample is
stripped with an inert gas; volatiles are captured on an ad-
sorbent trap and desorbed into a modified gas chromatograph
equipped with a halogen-specific detector. Methodology should be
checked for interferences, e.g., from bromine or iodine. A BAT
NPDES method will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Sensitivity of the method is approximately
1,000 yg/£. Detection' limits of 0.2-3 pg/£ may be achieved. Pre-
cision and accuracy data are not available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: Around $60
D-185
-------
CHLORINATED NAPHTHALENE
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General; 2-chloronaphthalene (C10H_C1) is a solid Cat normal tem-
peratures) polynuclear organic compound. It is insoluble in water,
but moderately soluble in other media such as alcohol, benzene, and
ether. This parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines pre-
scribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent
Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Not determined. Analyze promptly. Cool to
4*(T:
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-1,000 m£
Measurement: The general procedure involves extraction and meas-
urement with a gas chromatograph. Various cleanup techniques to
remove interferences may be required depending upon other con-
stituents in the sample. A skilled chemist or specialist will be
required. A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for this param-
eter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Detection limits in the 1-10 yg/£ range
should be achievable. Precision and accuracy data are not avail-
able at this time.
Cost of Analysis; $40 - $60
D-186
-------
CHLORINATED PHENOLS (OTHER)
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General: Other chlorinated phenols (C,H Cl 0) include the tri-
chlorophenols and chlorinated cresols (C_H_C10). Although their
specific properties vary from compound to compound, they are gen-
erally only slightly soluble in water but fairly soluble in other
media such as alcohol, benzene, and ethers. Their main aesthetic
problem stems from their organoleptic properties in water and
fish. For example, the threshold odor level in water for 2, 4,
6-trichlorophenol is 3 yg/-£. They tend to be persistent in water
and are capable of being transported long distances. They are not
efficiently removed by conventional water treatment processes and
can cause odor problems in distribution systems. This parameter
will be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits
program. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Acidify to a
pH of 4 with H3P04. Add l.Og CuS04«5H20/£ to inhibit biodegrada-
tion of phenols. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-1,000 mg/£ or more depending upon
initial concentration.
Measurement: The recommended method involves direct aqueous in-
jection for the gas-liquid chromatographic determination of con-
centrates containing more than 1 mg/£. phenolic compounds. A
flame-ionization detector is used for their individual measure-
ment. Suspended matter may interfere by plugging the microsyringe.
Interfering nonphenolic organic compounds may be removed by dis-
tillation. Steps should be taken to minimize or eliminate
ghosting. A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for this param-
eter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy; Few precision and accuracy data are
available. Precision is very operator dependent. For example,
total precision may be 2 to 5 times single operator precision
values.
Cost of Analysis: $40 - $60
D-187
-------
CHLORINE DEMAND
Parameter Group; General Inorganic STORET Units: mg/£
General: The chlorine demand of water is caused by inorganic re-
ductants and others and varies with the amount of chlorine applied,
contact time, pH, and temperature. It is the difference between
the amount of chlorine applied at the amount of free, combined, or
total available chlorine remaining at the end of the contact pe-
riod. The usual purpose of a chlorine demand test is to determine
the amount of chlorine that must be applied to produce a specific
residual after a selected period of contact, rather than as an in-
dicator of pollution. It should not be confused with chlorine
requirement.
Criterion; Not designated
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type; Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 200-500 m£; 5,000 m£ may be required to
develop a breakpoint curve.
Measurement: A laboratory method is recommended which involves
the addition of chlorine to the sample until the "breakpoint" is
reached. At the end of the contact period the free and/or combined
available residual chlorine is determined by a suitable technique,
e.g., the amperometric titration method.
Precision and Accuracy: Precision and accuracy will depend upon
the method chosen to measure free and/or combined available resid-
ual chlorine.
Cost of Analysis: $50 - $80 with breakpoint curve
D-188
-------
CHLORINE DIOXIDE
Parameter Group: STORET Units;
General: Chlorine dioxide is added to water supplies to combat
tastes and odors due to phenolic-type wastes, actinomycetes, and
algae as well as to oxidize soluble iron and manganese to a more
easily removable form. Chlorine dioxide acts as a disinfectant.
See also the residual chlorine discussion.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Avoid exposing
the sample to sunlight or agitation that aerates the sample
excessively.
Maximum Holding Time: No holding. Analyze on site if possible.
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 200 m£
Measurement: The amperometric titration method is recommended.
It is an extension of the method for residual chlorine.
Precision and Accuracy: Precision and accuracy data are not
available.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $40
D-189
-------
CHLORINE, RESIDUAL
Parameter Group: Miscellaneous STORET Units: mg/£
General: The toxicity of chlorine to aquatic life will depend upon
the concentration of total residual chlorine, which is the amount
of free chlorine plus chloramines. The persistence of chloramines
is dependent on the availability of material with a lower
oxidation-reduction potential. Free available chlorine (HOC1 and
OC1 ) and combined available chlorine (mono- and di-chloramines)
appear transiently in surface or ground waters as a result of dis-
infection of domestic sewage or from industrial processes that use
chlorine for bleaching operations or to control organisms that grow
in cooling water systems. This is a parameter which is regulated
by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criteria: Total residual chlorine:
2.0 yg/£ for salmonid fish
10.0 yg/£ for other freshwater and marine organisms
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Chlorine determinations should be started immediately after sam-
pling, avoiding excessive light and agitation.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 50 m£
Measurement; The amperometric titration method is recommended. It
is applicable to all types of waters and wastes that do not contain
a substantial amount of organic matter. This method cannot be used
for samples containing above 5 mg/£ total residual chlorine. Sam-
ples containing significant amounts of organic matter interfere with
the amperometric titration and the iodometric method must be used.
The amperometric titration is not subject to interference from
color, turbidity, iron, manganese, or nitrite nitrogen. For BPT
NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: A sample containing a concentration of
.8 mg/£ was analyzed by 23 laboratories using the amperometric
method. The relative standard deviation was 42.3% with a rela-
tive error of 25.0%.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $40
D-190
-------
CHLOROALKYL ETHERS
Parameter Group: STORE! Units;
General: Chloroalkyl ethers are volatile halocompounds including
bis (chl°rometnyl) ether, bis C2-chloroethyl) ether, and
2-chloroethyl vinyl ether (mixed). This parameter will be regu-
lated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Sample history must be known before any chem-
ical or physical preservation steps can be applied to protect
against phase separation. Fill the sample bottle completely and
seal until analysis is performed. Do not refrigerate.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown; preferably analyze within 1 hour.
Container Type; Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: In excess of 200 m£
Measurement: No standard procedure has been established. Method-
ology may require extraction, concentration, gas chromatography,
and mass spectrometry. Detection limits of 60 yg/£ or less should
be achievable if procedure is optimized for sample composition.
A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for this parameter in
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Precision and accuracy data are not
available.
Cost of Analysis: $20 - $30 each
D-191
-------
CHLOROFORM
Parameter Group; Pesticides STORE! Units:
General; Chloroform is used as an anesthetic, counterirritant,
solvent, cleansing agent, and antiseptic. It is a colorless
and volatile liquid with an ethereal odor and sweetish taste.
Stickleback will avoid solutions of 100,000 to 200,000 yg/£ of
chloroform in tap water. At 500,000 yg/£, they become anes-
thetized. This parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines
prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent
Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Sample history must be known before any chem-
ical or physical preservation steps can be applied to protect the
sample from phase separation. Fill the sample bottle completely and
seal until analysis is performed. Do not refrigerate.
Maximum Holding Time; Unknown; preferably analyze within 1 hour.
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: In excess of 200 mi
Measurement: The recommended method for chloroform is a direct
aqueous-injection procedure for the determination of gas chromato-
graphable chlorinated hydrocarbons. A 3-10 p£ aliquot of the sam-
ple is injected into the gas chromatograph equipped with a halogen
specific detector. Compounds containing bromine or iodine will
interfere with the determination. A BAT NPDES method will be pre-
scribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Sensitivity of the method is approximately
1,000 yg/£.Detection limits of 0.2-3 yg/£ may be achieved. Pre-
cision and accuracy data are not available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: Around $60.
D-192
-------
2-CHLOROPHENOL
Parameter Group; STORET Units:
General: 2-chlorophenol (C6Ht.C10) is a liquid only slightly
soluble in water but fairly soluble in other media such as alco-
hol. Its major aesthetic problem stems from its organoleptic
properties in water and fish. Threshold odor levels for
2-chlorophenol are around 2 yg/£. It is a persistent substance,
capable of being transported long distances in water and is not
removed efficiently by conventional water treatment. This
parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Acidify to a
pH of 4 with H3P04. Add l.Og CuS04'5H20/£ to inhibit biodegrada-
tion of phenols. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-1,000 mg/£ or more depending upon
initial concentration.
Measurement: The recommended method involves direct aqueous in-
jection for the gas-liquid chromatographic determination of con-
centrates containing more than 1 mg/£ phenolic compounds. A
flame-ionization detector is used for their individual measurement.
Suspended matter may interfere by plugging the microsyringe. In-
terfering nonphenolic organic compounds may be removed by distil-
lation. Steps should be taken to minimize or eliminate ghosting.
A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for this parameter in
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Few precision and accuracy data are
available. Precision is very operator dependent. For example,
total precision may be 2 to 5 times single operator precision
values.
Cost of Analysis: $40 - $60
D-193
-------
CHROMIUM
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: yg/£ as Cr
General: The primary source of chromium is industrial discharges.
Chromium compounds are used in cooling water to inhibit corrosion
and are employed in the manufacture of paint pigments, in chrome
tanning, aluminum anodizing, and other metal cleaning, plating,
and electroplating operations. Chromium in industrial wastes
occurs predominately as the hexavalent form, but the trivalent
form is also present, either as a result of partial wastewater
treatment or from its direct use. Industries that use trivalent
chromium directly in manufacturing processes include glass,
ceramics, photography, and textile dyeing. It is not clear if
chromium is an essential element to man. Hexavalent chromium has
been considered a toxic metal for years. Trivalent chromium is
less toxic, no reports of oral toxicity are known. This is a
parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program. This parameter will be regulated by BAT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of
the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criteria:
50 pg/£ for domestic water supply (health)
100 yg/£ for freshwater aquatic life
Preservation Method: Acidify all samples at the time of collec-
tion to keep the metal in solution and prevent plating out on the
container wall; therefore, analyze as soon as possible. If stor-
age is necessary, add HNO, to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 m£
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended for
the determination of total chromium in water and wastewater samples.
The colorimetric method may be used for the determination of hex-
avalent chromium in potable water. Use a wavelength of 357.9 nm
with the AA spectrophotometric method. The absorption of chromium
is suppressed by iron and nickel. If the analysis is performed in
a lean flame the interference can be lessened but the sensitivity
will also be reduced. The interference does not exist in nitrous
oxide-acetylene flame. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of
this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136. A BAT NPDES method
will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
D-194
-------
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 100 yg/£; its
detection limit is 20 yg/£. The optimum concentration range is
200-10,000 yg/£. At a concentration of 50 yg/£, the relative
standard deviation is 26.4%, and the relative error is 2.3%. These
decrease with concentration; at 15.0 yg/£ they are 60% and 6.8%
respectively, while at 7.4 yg/£ they are 105% and 38%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis; $10 - $15
D-195
-------
COBALT
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: \ig/t as Co
General: Cobalt naturally occurs primarily as arsenide and sul-
fide, generally associated with iron, nickel, copper, and silver
minerals. Cobalt is used in alloys for magnets, high hardness
steels, cutting tools, heat resistant jet engine parts, etc., and
may appear in discharges from these and other industrial sources,
including nuclear technology, china and glass, ink, galvanoplating,
and as a feed supplement in salt licks. Ingestion of cobalt salts
may cause nausea or vomiting due to irritation, but it has a
relatively low toxicity to man. This is a parameter which is regu-
lated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO, to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time; 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 m£
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 240.7 nm. For levels of cobalt below
50 mg/£, the extraction procedure is recommended. For BPT NPDES
purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 200 yg/£;
its detection limit is 30 pg/£. The optimum concentration range is
500-10,000 yg/£. In a single laboratory, using a mixed industrial-
domestic waste effluent at concentrations of 200, 1,000 and
5,000 yg Co/£, the relative standard deviations were 6.5%, 1.0%,
and 1.0%, respectively. Recoveries at these levels were 98%, 98%,
and 97%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $15
D-196
-------
COLOR
Parameter Group: Physical STORET Units: Platinum-
Cobalt Units
General; The most common causes of color in natural water are
minerals and complex organic compounds originating from the de-
composition of naturally-occurring organic matter. Sources of
organic material include humic materials from the soil such as
tannins, humic acid and humates; decaying plankton; and other
decaying aquatic plants. Virtually all industrial discharges and
irrigation return flows also contain color to varying extents.
The effects of color on public water supplies are aesthetic. The
effects of color in water on aquatic life are to reduce light pen-
etration, and thereby generally reduce photosynthesis by phyto-
plankton and to restrict the zone for aquatic vascular plant
growth. Color is undesirable in waters for a number of industrial
uses also. Color values are extremely pH dependent. This is a
parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program.
Criteria:
Waters shall be virtually free from substances producing
objectionable color for aesthetic purposes;
The source of supply should not exceed 75 color units on
the platinum-cobalt scale for domestic water supplies;
Increased color (in combination with turbidity) should not
reduce the depth of the compensation point for photo-
synthetic activity by more than 10 percent from the
seasonally established norm for aquatic life.
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 50 m£
Measurement: The platinum-cobalt visual comparison method is
acceptable for measuring the color of potable water. The method
is not applicable to color measurement on waters containing highly
colored industrial wastes, in which case the spectrophotometric or
tristimulus methods are useful. In the platinum-cobalt method,
color is measured by visual comparison of the sample with
platinum-cobalt standards. One unit of color is that produced by
D-197
-------
1 mg/£ platinum in the form of the chloroplatinate ion. Slight
amounts of turbidity interfere with the determination; therefore,
samples showing visible turibidity should be clarified by cen-
trifugation. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this param-
eter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Precision and accuracy data are not
available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $3 - $5 for visual
$10 - $15 for tristimulus
$30 - $40 for spectrophotometric (10 ordinates)
$70 - $80 for spectrophotometric (30 ordinates)
D-198
-------
COPPER
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: yg/£ as Cu
General: Oxides and sulfates of copper are used for pesticides,
algicides, and fungicides. Copper is frequently incorporated into
paints and wood preservatives to inhibit growth of algae and
invertebrate organisms. Copper salts are'used in water supply
systems for controlling biological growths and for catalyzing the
oxidation of manganese. Primary sources of copper in industrial
wastewater are metal process pickling and plating baths; other
sources involve mine drainage, pulp and paper mills, fertilizer
manufacturing, petroleum refining, and certain rayon processes.
This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines pre-
scribed by the NPDES permits program. This parameter will be
regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits pro-
gram. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criteria:
1.0 mg/£ for domestic water supplies (welfare).
For freshwater and marine aquatic life, 0.1 times a
96-hour LC as determined through nonaerated bio-
assay using a sensitive aquatic resident species.
Preservation Method: Copper ion tends to be adsorbed on the
surface of the sample container; therefore, analyze as soon as
possible. If storage is necessary, use 0.5 m£ 1 + 1 HC1 per
100 m£ of sample to prevent plating out. Alternatively, add HNO_
to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 50 to 200 mi
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric and neocupreine methods are
recommended because of their high degree of freedom from interfer-
ences. The latter requires either a spectrophotometer for use at
457 nm or a filter photometer equipped with a narrow-band violet
filter having maximum transmittance in the 450- to 460-nm range;
either must provide a light path of at least 1 cm. For BPT NPDES
purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136. A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for this param-
eter in 40 CFR 136.
D-199
-------
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 100 yg/£;
its detection limit is 100 yg/-£. Precision and accuracy decrease
with concentration. At 1,000 yg/£, the relative standard devia-
tion is around 11% and the relative error, 3%. At 300 yg/£, the
relative standard deviation has increased to nearly 18%, at
70 \ig/£ it is over 30%, and approaching 10 yg/£ it exceeds 80%.
Relative error has increased to nearly 16% at the last concentra-
tion.
Cost of Analysis: $5 - $10
D-200
-------
CYANIDE
Parameter Group; General STORET Units: mg/£ as CN
Inorganic
General: All of the CN groups in cyanide compounds that can be
determined as the cyanide ion, CN~, whether in simple, e.g.,
A(CN)x, or complex, AyM(CN)x, form. In the first expression, A
may be an alkali or a metal; in the second, A is an alkali and M a
heavy metal. In such latter alkali-metallic cyanides, the anion
is not the CN group but the radical M(CN)x. Sources of cyanide in
waste streams include ore mining and extracting, photographic
processing, coke furnaces, synthetic manufacturing, case hardening
and pickling of steel, electroplating, and industrial gas scrub-
bing. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines
prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion; 5.0 ng/£ for freshwater and marine aquatic life and
wildlife.
Preservation Method: Most cyanides are very reactive and unsta-
ble. Analyze as soon as possible. If oxidizing agents are pres-
ent, reduce with ascorbic acid. Add NaOH to raise sample pH to
12 or above and cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time; 24 hours
Container Type; Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 500 m£
Measurement: For total cyanides, both dissociable and nondisso-
ciable forms of cyanide are being measured. Cyanides amenable to
chlorination represent only the former. Standard methods for de-
termination of total cyanide make use of a reflux-distillation pro-
cedure for concentrating and removing cyanides. The liberated
hydrogen cyanide is collected in sodium hydroxide, and its concen-
tration determined by using a titration method (above 1 mg/£), a
colorimetric method (below 1 mg/£), or an ion selective electrode
method (0.05 to 10 mg/£). Although the distillation procedure
eliminates or reduces many interferences, sulfides will distill
over and adversely affect the colorimetric and titrimetric proce-
dures, fatty acids will distill and form soaps under the alkaline
titration procedures obscuring the end point, thiocyanates may
interfere when distillation is carried out with the cuprous
chloride reagent, and aldehydes will convert cyanide to nitrile
under the distillation conditions. Special precautions are re-
quired when any of these are present. The colorimetric method re-
quires either a spectrophotometer for use at 578 run or a filter
photometer equipped with a red filter having maximum transmittance
D-201
-------
in the 570 to 580 nm range; either must provide a light path of
1 cm. The ion selective electrode method requires a suitable
meter, a cyanide-ion selective electrode, and a double junction
reference electrode. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of
this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The titrimetric method yields a relative
standard deviation of 2% for samples containing more than
1 mg/£ CN without significant interferences, increasing with de-
creasing concentration down to the limit of sensitivity, which is
around 0.1 mg/£, e.g., at 0.4 mg/£ the relative standard deviation
is 8%. The colorimetric method is sensitive to about 0.02 mg/£.
Within its designated range, its overall precision is given as
0.115X + 0.031, where X is the CN concentration in mg/£. Using
mixed domestic and industrial waste samples at concentrations of
0.28 and 0.62 mg/£ CN, relative standard deviations of 11% and
15% and recoveries of 85% and 102%, respectively, were observed
in a single laboratory. The overall precision of the ion selective
electrode method is given as 0.113X + 0.024, where X is the con-
centration in mg/£ CN.
Cost of Analysis; $10 - $30
CAUTION! Exercise care in the manipulation of cyanide samples be-
cause of their toxicity. Avoid contact, inhalation, or ingestion.
D-202
-------
2, 4-D
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General: 2, 4-D (2, 4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid) is the widely
used chlorophenoxy herbicide CgH-Cl-CL. This compound is formu-
lated in a variety of salts and esters that may have a marked
difference in herbicidal properties, but all are hydrolyzed rap-
idly to the corresponding acid in the body. 2, 4-D herbicide is
used for weed control on land, and as an aquatic herbicide in
lakes, streams, and irrigation canals. It is a plant hormone
that stimulates excessive growth, causing the plant to destroy
itself. 2, 4-D is of low toxicity to mammals, the acute oral
LD for rats being 500,000 yg/kg of body weight, but may give
water an unpleasant taste. Fish toxicity levels are in the
hundreds of mg/£. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: 100 yg/£ for domestic water supply (health).
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-1,000 m£, depending upon measurement
BE
th
method used.
Measurement: In the recommended method, chlorinated phenoxy acids
and their esters are extracted from the acidified water sample with
ethyl ether. The esters are hydrolyzed to acids and extraneous
organic material is removed by a solvent wash. The acids are con-
verted to methyl esters which are extracted from the aqueous phase.
The extract is cleaned up by passing it through a micro-adsorption
column. Detection and measurement are accomplished by electron
capture; microcoulometric or electrolytic conductivity gas chroma-
tography. Interferences may be high and varied and often pose
great difficulty in obtaining accurate and precise measurement of
chlorinated phenoxy acid herbicides. Organic acids, especially
chlorinated acids, cause the most direct interference with the
determination. Phenols including chlorophenols will also inter-
fere with this procedure. The method is recommended for use only
by an experienced pesticide analyst (or under the close supervision
of such a person)-. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this
parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
D-203
-------
Precision and Accuracy: Sensitivity of the method is 1 \ig/t. De-
tection limits of 0.05 yg/£ or so may be achieved. Precision and
accuracy data are not available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $45 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-204
-------
ODD
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units:
General: DDD, a metabolite of DDT, is an organochlorine insecti-
cide. It is the same as IDE and is also known as Rhbthane. DDD
has much the same properties and is used similarly to DDT. Its
insecticidal activity approaches that 'of DDT, but its mammolian
toxicity is only about 20% of that of DDT. This is a parameter
which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES
permits program. This parameter will be regulated by BAT guide-
lines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of the
Consent Decree pollutants. A toxic effluent limitation has been
prescribed for this parameter by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time; Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required; 50-100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction and detection and
measurement accomplished by electron capture, microcoulometric
or electrolytic conductivity gas chromatography is recommended for
DDD. Many interferences exist, especially PCB's, phthalate esters,
and organophosphorus pesticides, and the method is only recommended
for use by a skilled, experienced pesticide analyst (or under close
supervision of such a person). For BPT NPDES purposes the measure-
ment of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136. A BAT NPDES
method will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but usually falls in the 0.001 to 1 yg/£ range. In-
creased sensitivity is likely to increase interference. Typically,
the percent recovery decreases with increasing concentration.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-205
-------
DDE
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General: DDE, a metabolite of DDT, is an organochlorine insecti-
cide. It is the same as DDX. DDE has much the same properties
and is used similarly to DDT. This is a parameter which is regu-
lated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
This parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by
the NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent Decree pol-
lutants. A toxic effluent limitation has been prescribed for this
parameter by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 50-100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction and detection and
measurement accomplished by electron capture, microcoulometric
or electrolytic conductivity gas chromatography is recommended for
DDE. Many interferences exist, especially PCB's, phthalate esters,
and organophosphorus pesticides, and the method is only recommended
for use by a skilled, experienced pesticide analyst (or under close
supervision of such a person). For BPT NPDES purposes the measure-
ment of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136. A BAT NPDES
method will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but usually falls in the 0.001 to 1 yg/£ range. In-
creased sensitivity is likely to increase interference. Typically,
the percent recovery decreases with increasing concentration.
Cost of Analysis; $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-206
-------
DDT
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General: DDT (1, 1, 1-trichloro -2, 2-bis (p-chlorophenyl)
ethane) is an organochlorine insecticide. Acute toxicity to
mammals generally is low. DDT is a highly persistent chemical
which bioaccumulates in aquatic organisms used for human food and
also is considered a potential human carcinogen. DDT will accum-
ulate in the food chain. A residue accumulation of up to two
million times for fish can occur. Application of DDT in agri-
culture and forest areas contributes to the presence of this toxic
material in surface and ground waters. Practically insoluble in
water, dilute acids, and alkalies, it is readily soluble in many
organic solvents. The vehicle is very important in determining
the toxicity of DDT. It has been found in river waters at con-
centrations to 20 \ig/t. This is a parameter which is regulated
by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. This
parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
A toxic effluent limitation has been prescribed for this parameter
by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion:
0.001 yg/£ for freshwater and marine aquatic life
The persistence, bioaccumulation potential, and carcino-
genicity of DDT cautions human exposure to a minimum.
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type; Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 50-100 ra£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction and detection and
measurement accomplished by electron capture, microcoulometric or
electrolytic conductivity gas chromatography is recommended for DDT.
Many interferences exist, especially PCB's, phthalate esters, and
organophosphorus pesticides, and the method is only recommended for
use by a skilled, experienced pesticide analyst (or under close
supervision of such a person). For BPT NPDES purposes the measure-
ment of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136. A BAT NPDES
method will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
D-207
-------
Precision and Accuracy; The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but usually falls in the 0.001 to 1 yg/£ range. In-
creased sensitivity is likely to increase interference. Typically,
the percent recovery decreases with increasing concentration. For
example, at the 0.040 and 0.200 yg/£ concentrations, recoveries
were around 101% and 77% and precisions were 40% and 19%,
respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-208
-------
DEMETON
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units:
General: Demeton (also known as Systox) is the organophosphorus
insecticide CgHjgO-PS-. Commercial demeton is a mixture of
isomers of varying toxicities. It is insoluble in water but solu-
ble in alcohol. The estimated fatal dose to a 70-kg man is
0.1 gram. The acute oral LD_0 for stock and wildlife is re-
ported between 2,500 to 40,000 yg/kg of body weight. Toxicity to
aquatic life varies widely with age and species. Demeton is
unique in that the persistence of its ACHE enzyme inhibiting abil-
ity is greater than that of ten other common organophosphates,
even though its acute toxicity is apparently less. This is a
parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program.
Criterion: 0.1 yg/£ for freshwater and marine acquatic life.
Preservation Method; Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction, column chromatog-
raphy, and liquid-liquid partition, and detection and measurement
accomplished by flame photometric gas chromatography using a
phosphorus specific filter is recommended for demeton. Great care
must be exercised in the selection and use of methods to minimize
interferences, and the method is only recommended for use by a
skilled, experienced pesticide analyst (or under close supervision
of such a person). For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this
parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors but is usually 0.010 yg/£ or higher. Sensitivity is typi-
cally 1 yg/£. Precision and accuracy data are not available at
this time.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-209
-------
DIAZINON
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General; Diazinon is the registered trade name of an organophos-
phorus insecticide. It is a liquid with a faint ester-like odor
and is miscible with a number of hydrocarbon solvents. Diazinon
has very high insecticidal and acaricidal properties. The esti-
mated fatal dose for a 70-kg man is 25 grams. The oral LD,_n to
rats ranges from 100,000 to 435,000 yg/kg of body weight. Toxicity
data for aquatic life are limited. This is a parameter which is
regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits
program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction, column chromatog-
raphy, and liquid-liquid partition, and detection and measurement
accomplished by flame photometric gas chromatography using a phos-
phorus specific filter is recommended for diazinon. Great care
must be exercised in the selection and use of methods to minimize
interferences, and the method is only recommended for use by a
skilled, experienced pesticide analyst (or under close supervision
of such a person). For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this
parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy; The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but is usually 0.010 yg/£ or higher. Sensitivity is
typically 1 yg/£. Precision and accuracy data are not available
at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-210
-------
DICHLOROBENZENES
Parameter Group: STORE! Units:
General: Dichlorobenzenes (C,H.C12) include 1, 2-dichlorobenzene,
1, 3-dichlorobenzene, and 1, 4-dichlorobenzene. Metadichloroben-
zene is a colorless liquid, insoluble in.water, and seldom used
commercially. Othodichlorobenzene is also a liquid and insoluble
in water and is used as a solvent for waxes, for preserving plants,
and for destroying insects such as termites. Paradichlorobenzene
is a white crystallic solid with a characteristic odor used chiefly
for killing moths, their larvae, and other insects. It is slightly
soluble, in water, 70 mg/£ at 25°C. This parameter will be regu-
lated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Not determined. Analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type; Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 200-1,000 mi
Measurement: No standard procedures have been developed. The
methodology generally requires extraction, concentration, and gas
chromatographic analysis. A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed
for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy; Detection limits of 0.1 to 10 pg/£ should
be achievable. Precision and accuracy data are not available at
this time.
Cost of Analysis: $25 - $40
D-211
-------
DICHLOROBENZIDINE
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General: Dichlorobenzidine (3, 3'-dichlorobenzidine) is a poly-
nuclear organic compound. Due to its suspected carcinogenic
properties, it must be handled with great care. This parameter
will be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES
permits program. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 1 week
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required; 1,000-4,000 m£ depending on concentration
and instrument used.
Measurement: Dichlorobenzidine is separated and concentrated by
multiple extractions and then oxidized by chloramine T. The
oxidation product is extracted and measured spectrophotometrically.
A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for this parameter in
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is approximately
0.2 yg/£.Precision and accuracy data are not available at this
time.
Cost of Analysis: $20 - $40; because of its carcinogenic proper-
ties, special facilities may be required at greatly increased
cost.
D-212
-------
DICHLOROETHYLENES
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General: Dichloroethylenes are volatile halocompounds including
1, 1-dichloroethylene and 1, 2-dichloroethylene. This parameter
will be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits
program. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Sample history must be known before any chem-
ical or physical preservation steps can be applied to protect
against phase separation. Fill the sample bottle completely and
seal until analysis is performed. Do not refrigerate.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown; preferably analyze within 1 hour.
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: In excess of 200 mi
Measurement: In the recommended Bellar procedure the sample is
stripped with an inert gas; volatiles are captured on an ad-
sorbent trap and desorbed into a modified gas chromatograph
equipped with a halogen-specific detector. Methodology should be
checked for interferences, e.g., from bromine and iodine. A BAT
NPDES method will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy; Sensitivity of the method is approximately
1,000 yg/£. Detection limits of 0.2-3 yg/£ may be achieved. Pre-
cision and accuracy data are not available at this time.
Cost of Analysis; Around $60
D-213
-------
2, 4-DICHLOROPHENOL
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General: 2, 4-dichlorophenol (C^H.Cl^O) is a colorless, crystal-
line substance only slightly soluble in water but fairly soluble
in other media such as alcohol. It is used in the manufacture of
the herbicide 2, 4-D as well as for other purposes. It is per-
sistent and, since it is not efficiently removed by conventional
water treatment processes, can cause odor problems in distribution
systems. Fish flesh tainting concentrations range from 1 to
5 Mg/£, levels that do not appear to adversely affect the fish.
The threshold odor level in water is as low as 1 vg/£. This
parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Acidify to a
pH of 4 with H3P04. Add l.Og CuS04«5H20/£ to inhibit biodegrada-
tion of phenols. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-1,000 mg/£ or more depending upon
initial concentration.
Measurement: The recommended method involves direct aqueous in-
jection for the gas-liquid chromatographic determination of con-
centrates containing more than 1 mg/£ phenolic compounds. A
flame-ionization detector is used for their individual measurement.
Suspended matter may interfere by plugging the microsyringe. In-
terfering nonphenolic organic compounds may be removed by distil-
lation. Steps should be taken to minimize or eliminate ghosting.
A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for this parameter in
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Few precision and accuracy data are
available. Precision is very operator dependent. For example,
total precision may be 2 to 5 times single operator precision
values. :
Cost of Analysis: $40 - $60
D-214
-------
DICHLOROPROPANE
Parameter Group: STORE! Units:
General: 1, 2-dichloropropane (also called propylene chloride,
C,H-C19) is a heavy liquid that is slightly soluble in water.
O O *L
This parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by
the NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent Decree
pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Sample history must be known before any chem-
ical or physical preservation steps can be applied to protect
against phase separation. Fill the sample bottle completely and
seal until analysis is performed. Do not refrigerate.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown; preferably analyze within 1 hour.
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: In excess of 200 rat
Measurement: In the recommended Bellar procedure the sample is
stripped with an inert gas; volatiles are captured on an ad-
sorbent trap and desorbed into a modified gas chromatograph
equipped with a halogen-specific detector. Methodology should be
checked for interferences, e.g., from bromine or iodine. Confir-
mation should be made for dichloropropane. A BAT NPDES method
will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Sensitivity of the method is approximately
1,000 yg/£.Detection limits of 0.2-3 pg/£ may be achieved. Pre-
cision and accuracy data are not available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: Around $60
D-215
-------
DICHLOROPROPENE
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General: 1, 3-dichloropropene (C,H.C12) is a heavy liquid, in-
soluble in water, and with a chloroform-like odor. It is used as
a soil fumigant for the control of neraatodes. This parameter will
be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits
program. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Sample history must be known before any chem-
ical or physical preservation steps can be applied to protect
against phase separation. Fill the sample bottle completely and
seal until analysis is performed. Do not refrigerate.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown; preferably analyze within 1 hour.
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: In excess of 200 m£
Measurement: In the recommended Bellar procedure the sample is
stripped with an inert gas; volatiles are captured on an ad-
sorbent trap and desorbed into a modified gas chromatograph
equipped with a halogen-specific detector. Methodology should be
checked for interferences, e.g., from bromine or iodine. Con-
firmation should be made for dichloropropene. A BAT NPDES method
will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Sensitivity of the method is approximately
1,000 yg/£.Detection limits of 0.2-3 yg/£ may be achieved. Precision
and accuracy data are not available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: Around $60
D-216
-------
DIELDRIN
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General: Dieldrin, the common name for an organochlorine insecti-
cide, is a highly persistent chemical which bioaccumulates in
aquatic organisms used for human food and is also considered a
potential human carcinogen. The USEPA has suspended the produc-
tion and use of dieldrin. This should result in a gradual decrease
in concentration in the environment. This is a parameter which is
regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits pro-
gram. This parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines pre-
scribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent
Decree pollutants. A toxic effluent limitation has been pre-
scribed for this parameter by the NPDES permits program.
Criteria:
.003 yg/<£ for freshwater and marine aquatic life
The persistence, bioaccumulation potential, and carcino-
gencity of dieldrin cautions human exposure to a minimum.
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 50-100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction and detection and
measurement accomplished by electron capture, microcoulometric
or electrolytic conductivity gas chromatography is recommended for
dieldrin. Many interferences exist, especially PCB's, phthalate
esters, and organophosphorus pesticides, and the method is only
recommended for use by a skilled, experienced pesticide analyst
(or under close supervision of such a person). For BPT NPDES
purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy; The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but usually falls in the 0.001 to 1 yg/£ range. Increased
sensitivity is likely to increase interference. Typically, the
percent recovery decreases with increasing concentration. For
example, at the 0.02 and 0.125 yg/£ concentration, recoveries were
around 108% and 85% and precisions were 91% and 24%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150 depending upon preparation required.
D-217
-------
2, 4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General; 2, 4-dimethylphenol (2, 4-dimethyl-l-hydroxybenzene) is
only slightly soluble in water but highly soluble in other media
such as alcohol. It has a higher odor threshold concentration
than many other phenolic compounds, up to 75 iug/£. It is a per-
sistent substance, capable of being transported long distances in
water and is not removed efficiently by conventional water treat-
ment processes. This parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines
prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent
Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Acidify to a
pH of 4 with H3P04. Add l.Og CuS04*5H20/£ to inhibit biodegrada-
tion of phenols.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-1,000 mg/£ or more depending upon
initial concentration.
Measurement: The recommended method involves direct aqueous in-
jection for the gas-liquid chromatographic determination of con-
centrates containing more than 1 mg/£ phenolic compounds. A
flame-ionization detector is used for their individual measurement.
Suspended matter may interfere by plugging the microsyringe. In-
terfering nonphenolic organic compounds may be removed by distil-
lation. Steps should be taken to minimize or eliminate ghosting.
A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for this parameter in
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Few precision and accuracy data are
available. Precision is very operator dependent. For example,
total precision may be 2 to 5 times single operator precision
values.
Cost of Analysis; $40 - $60
D-218
-------
DISSOLVED OXYGEN
Parameter Group: Dissolved Oxygen STORET Units: mg/£
General: Dissolved oxygen CPO) levels in water, an important gage
of its overall quality, depend upon its physical, chemical, and
biological activities. Although excessive DO may be detrimental
to certain uses Ce-g-> it increases metallic corrosion), the main
concern is with DO deficiencies. Insufficient DO in the water
column may be detrimental to aquatic fauna, causes anaerobic de-
composition of any organic materials present, and generally de-
grades the aesthetic quality of the water body. This is a
parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program.
Criteria:
• Aesthetics; Water should contain sufficient dissolved
oxygen to maintain aerobic conditions in the water column
and, except as affected by natural phenomena, at the
sediment-water interface.
• Freshwater aquatic life: A minimum concentration of dis-
solved oxygen to maintain good fish populations is 5.0 mg/£.
The criterion for salmonid spawning beds is a minimum of
5.0 mg/£ in the interstitial water of the gravel.
Preservation Method: Electrode: determine on site; Winkler: fix
on site.
Maximum Holding Time: No holding
Container Type: Glass only
Sample Volume Required; 300 m£
Measurement; The electrode method is recommended for a variety of
reasons, including freedom from interferences and, when used in
situ, from sampling effects that are otherwise difficult to account
for. Modified Winkler methods may be used, but great care in sam-
pling and accounting for interferences must be exercised. For BPT
NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: With most commercially available membrane
electrode systems an accuracy of ±0.1 mg/t and a precision of
±0.05 mg/£ should be obtainable. No meaningful precision and accu-
racy data are available for the modified Winkler method.
Cost of Analysis: $3 - $6
D-219
-------
DISYSTON
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: pg/£
General: Disyston, an organophosphorus insecticide, is a clear,
oily liquid that is slightly soluble in water and quite soluble
in most organic solvents. Its acute oral LD™ to rats has been
reported from 2,600 to 12,500 yg/kg of body weight. Toxicity
data for aquatic life are sparse but indicate a wide variability
with age and species. This is a parameter which is regulated by
BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion; Not established
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction, column chromatog-
raphy, and liquid-liquid partition, and detection and measurement
accomplished by flame photometric gas chromatography using a
phosphorus specific filter is recommended for disyston. Great
care must be exercised in the selection and use of methods to
minimize interferences, and the method is only recommended for
use by a skilled, experienced pesticide analyst (or under close
supervision of such a person). For BPT NPDES purposes the meas-
urement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but is usually 0.010 yg/£ or higher. Sensitivity is
typically 1 yg/£. Precision and accuracy data are not available
at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-220
-------
DIURON
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General: Diuron is the urea pesticide CqHinCl2N_0. It is a
crystalline compound only slightly soluble in water and oils.
Its acute oral LD5Q to rats is 3,400 yg/£ of body weight. Its
toxicity to fish varies widely with age and species, but lethal
doses are measured in mg/t concentrations. Apparently, aeration
slightly reduces the toxicity of diuron to aquatic life. This is
a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by
the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time; Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 1,000 mi
Measurement: The recommended method involves an extraction process
with methylene chloride and the concentrated extract is cleaned up
with a Florisil column. A thin-layer chromatography process is
then used. The layer is sprayed with 1-naphthol and the products
appear as colored spots. The measurement is achieved visually.
Direct interferences may be encountered from aromatic amines that
may be present in the sample. Indirect interferences may be en-
countered from naturally colored materials whose presence masks
the chromogenic reaction. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement
of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy; The determination can be made with a
sensitivity of 1 yg/£. Precision and accuracy data are not avail-
able at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $60
D-221
-------
ENDOSULFAN
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General: The acute toxicity of endosulfan, an organochlorine
insecticide, to different fish species varies widely. No data are
available on the levels to which endosulfan could be expected to
accumulate in tissues of aquatic organisms at various water con-
centrations. Residues in fish are not anticipated to pose a haz-
ard to fish-eating predators because of endosulfan1s low oral
toxicity to birds and mammals. Application of endosulfan in
agriculture and forest areas contributes to the presence of this
toxic material in surface and ground waters. This is a parameter
which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES
permits program. This parameter will be regulated by BAT guide-
lines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of the
Consent Decree pollutants.
Criteria:
0.003 ug/£ for freshwater aquatic life
0.001 yg/£ for marine aquatic life
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 50-100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction and detection and
measurement accomplished by electron capture, microcoulometric
or electrolytic conductivity gas chromatography is recommended for
endosulfan. Many interferences exist, especially PCB's, phthalate
esters, and organophosphorus pesticides, and the method is only
recommended for use by a skilled, experienced pesticide analyst
(or under close supervision of such a person). For BPT NPDES
purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136. A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for this param-
eter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but usually falls in the 0.001 to 1 yg/£ range. In-
creased sensitivity is likely to increase interference. Typically,
the percent recovery decreases with increasing concentration.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-222
-------
ENDRIN
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units:
General: Application of endrin, an organochlorine insecticide, in
agriculture and forest areas contributes to the presence of this
toxic material in surface and ground waters. It is possible that
some fish would accumulate endrin to 30,000 times water concentra-
tion. Although it has strong residual toxicity as does its closely
related compound dieldrin, endrin has been found to be eliminated
quickly after termination of exposure and to disappear relatively
quickly. Thus, it does not appear to cause an accumulation prob-
lem. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines
prescribed by the NPDES permits program. This parameter will be
regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits pro-
gram. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants. A toxic efflu-
ent limitation has been prescribed for this parameter by the NPDES
permits program.
Criteria:
0.2 ug/£ for domestic water supply (health)
• 0.004 yg/£ for freshwater and marine aquatic life
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 50-100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction and detection and
measurement accomplished by electron capture, microcoulometric
or electrolytic conductivity gas chromatography is recommended for
endrin. Many interferences exist, especially PCB's, phthalate
esters, and organophosphorus pesticides, and the method is only
recommended for use by a skilled, experienced pesticide analyst
(or under close supervision of such a person). For BPT NPDES
purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136. A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for this param-
eter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but usually falls in the 0.001 to 1 yg/£ range. In-
creased sensitivity is likely to increase interference. Typically,
the percent recovery decreases with increasing concentration.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-223
-------
ETHYLBENZENE
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General: Ethylbenzene (CRH...J is a volatile, flammable liquid with
an ethereal odor. It is insoluble in water at normal temperatures.
It is used commercially as a solvent and in the synthesis of other
organic compounds. Its toxicity to fish varies with water tempera-
ture, age, and species. This parameter will be regulated by BAT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of
the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Not determined. Analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glas^
Sample Volume Required: 200-1,000 m£
Measurement: Hexadecone extraction followed by gas chromatographic
and mass spectrometric analysis is often used. A BAT NPDES method
will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Detection limits should be around
2-10 pg/£.Precision and accuracy data are not available at this
time.
Cost of Analysis: $15 - $30
D-224
-------
FECAL COLIFORM
Parameter Group; Bacteriologic STORET Units: MPN
General: Pollution of aquatic systems by the excreta of warm-
blooded animals creates public health problems for man and
animals and potential disease problems for aquatic life. It is
known that enteric microbial pathogens may inhabit the gut of
most warmblooded animals and are shed in feces. The presence of
bacterial, viral, protozoan, and possibly fungal species is in-
dicated by the presence of the fecal coliform group of bacteria.
The number of fecal coliforms present is indicative of the degree
of health risk associated with using the water for drinking,
swimming, or shellfish harvesting. The fecal coliform bacteria,
which comprise a portion of the total coliform group, are able to
grow at 44.5°C and ferment lactose, producing acid and gas. This
is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by
the NPDES permits program.
Criteria:
Bathing Waters
Based on a minimum of not less than five samples taken over a
30-day period, the fecal coliform bacterial level should not ex-
ceed a log mean of 200 per 100 mt, nor should more than 10 percent
of the total samples taken during any 30 day period exceed
400 per 100 mt.
Shellfish Harvesting Waters
Not to exceed a median fecal coliform bacterial concentra-
tion of 14 MPN per 100 mt with not more than 10 percent of samples
exceeding 43 MPN per 100 mt for the taking of shellfish.
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C. Add a dechlorinating agent
(e.g., sodium thiosulfate) if residual chlorine is present. Sam-
ples high in heavy metals should have a chelating agent (e.g.,
EDTA) added to reduce metal toxicity.
Maximum Holding Time; 6 hours (30 hours absolute maximum for po-
table water samples).
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 mt
Measurement: The multiple tube fermentation technique may be
used if a determination of the total coliform group is also being
made. Otherwise, the simpler membrane filter technique is
D-225
-------
recommended. Results of the former are expressed statistically as
the Most Probable Number CMPN), while the latter are expressed as
number of colonies per 100 mi. For BPT NPDES purposes the measure-
ment of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The accuracy of the membrane filter
technique for differentiating between coliforms from warm-blooded
animals and coliforms from other sources is approximately 93%.
Cost of Analysis; $10 - $12 MFT
$15 - $20 MPN
D-226
-------
FECAL STREPTOCOCCI
Parameter Group: Bacteriologic STORET Units; Unspecified
General: The normal habitat of the fecal streptococcus group of
bacteria is the intestines of man and other warm-blooded animals
and, thus, these organisms are indicators of fecal pollution.
Because of their survival characteristics, it is not recommended
that fecal streptococci be used as the sole fecal indicator. Since
certain fecal streptococci are host-specific, they may provide val-
uable additional information about the source of pollution; e.g.,
a predominance of S. bovis and S. equinus would indicate excrement
from nonhuman, warm-blooded animals as, for example, from feedlot
and farmland runoff, dairy wastes, and meat processing plants.
S. faecalis var liquefaciens is not restricted to the intestines of
warm-blooded animals, being also associated with vegetation, in-
sects, and certain types of soils. Biochemical characterization
is required to eliminate the possibility of a preponderance of this
latter type, thus avoiding misinterpretation of results. This is a
parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C. Add a dechlorinating agent
(e.g., sodium thiosulfate) if residual chlorine is present. Sam-
ples high in heavy metals should have a chelating agent (e.g.,
EDTA) added to reduce metal toxicity.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 hours (30 hours absolute maximum for po-
table water samples).
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£
Measurement: The multiple tube fermentation technique and the
simpler membrane filter technique are both recommended, especially
for nondrinking water tests. Results of the former are expressed
statistically as the Most Probable Number (MPN), while the latter
are expressed as number of colonies per 100 m£. The fecal strepto-
coccal plate count method may also be used. For BPT NPDES purposes
the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Not applicable
Cost of Analysis; $10 - $12 MFT
$15 - $20 MPN
D-227
-------
FLUORIDE
Parameter Group: General STORE! Units: mg/£ as F
Inorganic
General: The most reactive nonmetal, flourine is never found free
in nature, but it is a constitute of a number of minerals.
Fluorides in high concentrations are not common in natural surface
waters. They are used as insecticides, as disinfectants, as a
flux in steelmaking, for preserving wood and mucilages, for the
manufacture of glass and enamels, in chemical industries, tooth-
paste manufacture, for water treatment, and a host of minor ap-
plications. They are not normally found in industrial wastes
(other than traces) except as a result of spillage. In sufficient
quantities (over 200 mg), fluorides can be toxic to humans. Up to
5 mg/£ the only bad effect seems to be tooth discoloration. Under
100 mg/£ produces little adverse effects on plants. Toxic ef-
fects on aquatic life are observed starting at concentrations
above 2 mg/£. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guide-
lines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 7 days
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 300 mt
Measurement; The SPADNS method with Bellack distillation is rec-
ommended. A spectrophotometer for use at 570 nm or a filter
photometer equipped with a greenish yellow filter having maximum
transmittance at 550-580 nm is required; either must have a light
path of at least 1 cm. The method covers the range from 0.1 to
about 2.5 mg/£ F. Following distillation to remove interferences,
the sample is treated with the SPADNS reagent. The loss of color
resulting from the reaction of fluoride with the zirconyl-SPADNS
dye is a function of the fluoride concentration. The SPADNS rea-
gent is more tolerant of interfering materials than other accepted
fluoride reagents. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this
parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy; On a sample containing 0.83 mg/t F with
no interferences, the results of 53 analysts using the SPADNS
method had a relative standard deviation of 8% and a relative
error of 1.2%. After direct distillation, the relative standard
deviation was 11.0% and the relative error 2.4%. On a sample con-
taining 0.57 mg/£ F (with 200 mg/£ S04 and 10 mg/£ Al as
D-228
-------
interferences) results from the 53 analysts had relative standard
deviations and errors of 16.2% and 7.0% without distillation and
17.2 and 5.3 with distillation.
Cost of Analysis: $3 - $5 without distillation
$15 - $20 with distillation
D-229
-------
GUTHION
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General: Guthion is the organophosphorus insecticide
C10H12N3°3PS2* Jt *s a brown waxX solid that is insoluble in
water but soluble in most organic solvents. The half-life of
guthion spray and dust on cotton leaves has been reported as
2-4 days and 1-2 days for pondwater. An investigation of the
persistence of guthion in fish revealed that 50% of the
chemical was lost in less than one week. The estimated fatal
dose for a 70-kg man is 0.2 grams. The acute oral LD™ to rats
ranges from 11,000 to 80,000 yg/kg of body weight. This is a
parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program.
Criterion: 0.01 yg/£ for freshwater and marine aquatic life.
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type; Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction, column chromatog-
raphy, and liquid-liquid partition, and detection and measurement
accomplished by flame photometric gas chromatography using a phos-
phorus specific filter is recommended for guthion. Great care
must be exercised in the selection and use of methods to minimize
interferences, and the method is only recommended for use by a
skilled, experienced pesticide analyst Cor under close supervision
of such a person). For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this
parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but is usually 0.010 yg/£ or higher. Sensitivity is
typically 1 yg/£. Precision and accuracy data are not available
at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-230
-------
HALOETHERS
Parameter Group; STORET Units:
General: Haloethers as used here comprise 4-chlorophenyl phenyl
ether; 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether, bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether;
and bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane. This parameter will be regulated
by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is
one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Not determined. Analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type; Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 200-1,000 rat
Measurement: No standard procedures have been developed. The
methodology generally requires extraction, concentration, and gas
chromatographic analysis. A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed
for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy; Detection limits of 1 to 10 pg/£ should be
achievable. Precision and accuracy data are not available at this
time.
Cost of Analysis: $40 - $60
D-231
-------
HALOMETHANES
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General: The halomethanes include dichloromethane (methylene
chloride), chloromethane (methyl chloride), bromomethane (methyl
bromide), tribromomethane Cbromoform), dichlorobromomethane, tri-
chlorofluoromethane (Freon 11), dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12),
and chlorodibromomethane. These volatile halocompounds are mostly
gaseous at surface water temperatures and atmospheric pressure.
They range from soluble to insoluble in water; e.g., methyl chlo-
ride is soluble to about 4,000 mg/£ at 20°C. Chief uses are as
refrigerants, aerosol propellents, and certain industrial opera-
tions. Taste of water containing halomethanes in appreciable con-
centrations is sharp, sickening, and sweetish when first taken
into the mouth, followed by a burning sensation. It is unlikely
that humans would voluntarily drink such water. This parameter
will be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES
permits program. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Sample history must be known before any chem-
ical or physical preservation steps can be applied to protect
against phase separation. Fill the sample bottle completely and
seal until analysis is performed. Do not refrigerate.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown; preferably analyze within 1 hour.
Container Type: Borosilicate gl,ass
Sample Volume Required: In excess of 200 mi
Measurement: In the recommended Bellar procedure the sample is
stripped with an inert gas; volatiles are captured on an ad-
sorbent trap and desorbed into a modified gas chromatograph
equipped with a halogen specific detector. Methodology should be
checked for interferences, e.g., from bromine or iodine. A BAT
NPDES method will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Sensitivity of the method is approximately
1,000 yg/£.Detection limits of 0.2-3 yg/£ may be achieved. Pre-
cision and accuracy data are not available at this time.
Cost of Analysis; Around $60
D-232
-------
HARDNESS, TOTAL
Parameter Group: General STORET Units_: mg/£ as CaCO,
Inorganic
General; Water hardness is caused by the polyvalent metallic ions
dissolved in water. Principally, these are calcium and magnesium.
Other metals such as iron, strontium, and manganese contribute to
the extent that appreciable concentrations are present. Natural
sources of hardness are soil and geological formations (e.g.,
limestone) with which the water may have come in contact. In-
dustrial sources include the inorganic chemical industry and dis-
charges from operating and abandoned mines. Irrigation return
flows also increase hardness. The detrimental effects of hardness
include excessive soap consumption, the formation of scums and
curds in laundries and textile mills, the toughening of vegetables
cooked in hard water, and the formation of scabs in boilers, hot
water heaters, pipes, and utensils. Hence, they are principally
economic in nature. The hardness of "good" water should not exceed
250 mg/£. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines
prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion; Not established
Preservation Method; Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time; 7 days
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£
Measurement: The EDTA method, recommended when a complete mineral
analysis is not performed, is applicable to drinking, surface, and
saline waters, domestic and industrial wastes. Calcium and mag-
nesium ions in the sample are sequestered upon the addition of
disodium ethylenediamine tetraacetate (Na2EDTA). The end point of
the reaction is detected by means of Calmagite Indicator, which has
a red color in the presence of calcium and magnesium and a blue
color when the cations are sequestered. Excessive amounts of heavy
metals can interfere. This is usually overcome by complexing the
metals with cyanide. Routine addition of sodium cyanide solution
to prevent potential metallic interference is recommended. For
BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed
by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: A synthetic unknown containing 610 mg/£
total hardness as CaCO_ was analyzed in 56 laboratories with a
relative standard deviation of 2.9% and a relative error of 0.8%.
Cost of Analysis: $5 - $15
D-233
-------
HEPTACHLOR
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General: The acute toxicity of heptachlor, a refined ingredient
of the well-known organochlorine insecticide chlordane, is gener-
ally low to mammals; however, aquatic organisms exhibit sensitivity
to this pesticide at microgram-per-liter levels. Heptachlor will
accumulate in the food chain. Heptachlor is a highly persistent
chemical which bioaccumulates in aquatic organisms used for human
food and also is considered a potential human carcinogen. In
July 1975, the USEPA suspended the production and use of heptachlor.
This should result in a gradual decrease in concentrations in the
environment. Any addition of heptachlor to water should be con-
sidered potentially hazardous to humans. This is a parameter
which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES
permits program. This parameter will be regulated by BAT guide-
lines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of the
Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion:
001 yg/£ for freshwater and marine aquatic life
The persistence, •bioaccumulation potential, and carcino-
genicity of heptachlor cautions human exposure to a minimum.
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 50-100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction and detection and
measurement accomplished by electron capture, microcoulometric
or electrolytic conductivity gas chromatography is recommended for
heptachlor. Many interferences exist, especially PCB's, phthalate
esters, and organophosphorus pesticides, and the method is only
recommended for use by a skilled, experienced pesticide analyst
(or under close supervision of such a person). For BPT NPDES
purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136. A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for this
parameter in 40 CFR 136.
D-234
-------
Precision and .Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but usually falls in the 0.001 to 1 yg/£ range. In-
creased sensitivity is likely to increase interference. Typically,
the percent recovery decreases with increasing concentration.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-235
-------
IODIDE
Parameter Group: General STORET Units: mg/£ as I
Inorganic
General: Only trace concentrations of iodides are found in natural
fresh water; seawater is somewhat higher. Higher concentrations
may also be found in natural brines, waters treated with iodine as
the disinfectant, and a limited number of industrial wastes. It is
used sparingly in industry, e.g., for medicines, germicides, ana-
lytical chemistry, and as a table salt additive. All waterbome
pathogens are destroyed by 8 mg/£ of iodine; no adverse effects
were reported when water containing over twice this concentration
was consumed in the tropics. This is a parameter which is regu-
lated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion; Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£
Measurement; The titrimetric method is recommended. After pre-
treatment to remove interferences, the sample is analyzed for
iodide by converting the iodide to iodate with bromine wate.r and
titrating with phenylarsine oxide (PAU) or sodium thiosulfate.
Iron, manganese and organic matter can interfere; however, the
calcium oxide pretreatment removes or reduces these to insignif-
icant concentrations. 'Color interferes with the observation of
indicator and bromine-water color changes. This interference can
be eliminated by the use of a pH meter instead of a pH indicator
and the use of standardized amounts of bromine water and sodium
formate solution instead of observing the light yellow color
changes. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter
is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: In a single laboratory, using a mixed
domestic and industrial waste effluent, at concentrations of
1.6, 4.1, 6.6, 11.6, and 21.6 mg/t of iodide, the relative stand-
ard deviations were 14.4%, 4.1%, 1.4%, .5%, and 2.3%, respectively.
At concentrations of 4.1, 6.6, 11.6 and 21.6 mg/£ of iodide,
recoveries were 80%, 97%, 97%, and 92%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $15 - $20
D-236
-------
IRON
Parameter Group; Metals STORE! Units: yg/£ as Fe
General: Iron is an essential trace element required by both
plants and animals. The ferrous, or bivalent (Fe ), and the fer-
ric, or trivalent (Fe ) irons, are the primary forms of concern
in the aquatic environment. The ferrous (Fe ) form can persist in
waters void of dissolved oxygen and originates from groundwaters
or mines when these are pumped or drained. The ferric (Fe ) form
is insoluble. Potential sources of dissolved iron species include
discharges from mining operations, ore milling, chemical indus-
tries (organic, inorganic, petrochemical), dye industries, metal
processing industries, textile mills, food canneries, tanneries,
titanium dioxide production, petroleum refining, and fertilizers.
Limitations in drinking water arise primarily from taste
consideration. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criteria:
0.3 mg/£ for domestic water supplies (welfare)
1.0 mg/£ for freshwater aguatic life
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO_ to pH <2. For precise determinations of total
iron, use a separate container for sample collection and treat
with acid immediately to place the iron in solution and prevent
adsorption or desposition on the container walls.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required; 100-200 m£
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 248.3 nm. The orthophenanthroline method
may be used for natural and treated waters. It requires either a
spectrophotometer for use at 510 nm or a filter photometer
equipped with a green filter having maximum transmittance near
510 nm; either must have a light path of at least 1 cm. In the
presence of excessive amounts of organic constituents, the sample
should first be digested to ensure complete dissolution of the
iron. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter
is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
D-237
-------
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 120
its detection limit is 20 yg/£. The optimum concentration range
is 300-10,000 Mg/t. At a concentration of 300 yg/£, the relative.
standard deviation is 16.5%, and the relative error is 0.6%. For
the colorimetric method at 300 yg/£ Fe, the values were 25.5% and
13.3%, respectively, from a 44-laboratory test. Serious diver-
gences have been found in reports of different laboratories be-
cause of variations in methods of collecting and treating samples.
Cost of Analysis: $3 - $15
D-238
-------
LEAD
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: yg/£ as Pb
General: Natural lead concentrations in surface waters may range
up to 40 vg/t. Lead and its compounds may also enter water at any
stage during mining, smelting, and processing. Lead is used in
the manufacture of storage batteries, television tubes, printing,
pigments, fuels, photographic materials, pesticides, and explo-
sives. The dissolution of lead plumbing is another source. This
is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by
the NPDES permits program. This parameter will be regulated by
BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one
of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criteria:
• 50 pg/£ for domestic water supply (health)
0.01 times the 96-hour LC™ value, using the receiving
or comparable water as the diluent and soluble lead
measurements (nonfilterable lead using a 0.45 micron
filter), for sensitive freshwater resident species.
Preservation Method; Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO_ to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time. 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required; 100-200 mi
Measurement; The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 283.3 nm. The analysis of this metal is ex-
ceptionally sensitive to turbulence and absorption bands in the
flame. Therefore, care should be taken to position the light beam
in the most stable, center portion of the flame. The dithizone
colorimetric method may also be used. For BPT NPDES purposes the
measurement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 500 pg/£;
its detection limit is 50 pg/£. The optimum concentration range
is 1,000-20,000 pg/£. At a concentration of 50 yg/£, the relative
standard deviation'is 23.5%, and the relative error is 19.0%. At
25 yg/£, the relative error was 25.7% in a 60-laboratory test.
Cost of Analysis; $10 - $15
D-239
-------
LINDANE
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General: Lindane, the common name of the gamma isomer of benzene
hexachloride (BHC), is an organochlorine insecticide. Application
of lindane in agriculture and forest areas contributes to the
presence of this toxic material in surface and ground waters. The
highest level of lindane found to have minimal or no long-term
effects in the most sensitive mammal tested, the dog, is 15.0 mg/
kg in the diet or 0.3 mg/kg of body weight/day. An increased re-
sistance to lindane toxicity among fish and invertebrates ex-
periencing previous exposure to the chemical has been observed.
This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed
by the NPDES permits program. This parameter will be regulated by
BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one
of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criteria:
4.0 yg/£ for domestic water supply (health)
0.01 yg/£ ftfr freshwater aquatic life
0.004 yg/£ for marine aquatic life
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 50-100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction and detection and
measurement accomplished by electron capture, microcoulometric
or electrolytic conductivity gas chromatography is recommended for
lindane. Many interferences exist, especially PCB's, phthalate
esters, and organophosphorus pesticides, and the method is only
recommended for use by a skilled, experienced pesticide analyst
(or under close supervision of such a person) . For BPT NPDES
purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but usually falls in the 0.001 to 1 yg/£ range. In-
creased sensitivity is likely to increase interference. Typically,
the percent recovery decreases with increasing concentration. For
D-240
-------
example, at the 0.010 and 0.100 yg/£ concentrations, recoveries
were around 97% and 73% and precisions were 53% and 26%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis; $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-241
-------
LITHIUM
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: pg/£ as Li
General: Lithium is present in fresh waters in concentrations be-
low 10,000 yg/£; brines and thermal waters may be higher. Lithium
and its salts are used in dehumidifying units, as a deoxidizer and
degasser for nonferrous castings, to form a protective atmosphere
in furnaces, in medicinal waters, in metallurgical processes, in
the manufacture of some types of glass and storage batteries, and
as the hydride for many controlled organic reductions. In addi-
tion to these sources, lithium hypochlorite is used as a source of
chlorine in some swimming pools. Lithium may have a toxic effect
on plants and some forms of aquatic life, but little data exist
documenting toxicity to man.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO_ to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Pyrex bottle
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 mi
Measurement: The flame photometric method is often used, using a
wavelength of 671 nm. Interferences in the photometric determina-
tion include barium, strontium, and calcium. These can be removed
by the addition of a sodium sulfate-sodium carbonate solution.
Digestion will be necessary if considerable organic matter is
present.
Precision and Accuracy: The minimum detectable lithium concentra-
tion is approximately 100 pg/£. In a lithium range of 700 to
1,200 pg/£, an accuracy of ±0.1 to 200 yg/£ can be obtained in the
determination of the lithium concentration.
Cost of Analysis: $12 - $18
D-242
-------
MAGNESIUM
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: mg/£ as Mg
General: Magnesium salts are important contributors of hardness
to water. Sources of magnesium include mining and ore processing,
oxide production, metallurgy, refractories, iron and steel produc-
tion, and its use in flash and incendiary products, signal flares,
as a deoxidizer in the casting of metals, as a reagent in organic
chemistry, and a host of other applications. Magnesium is an es-
sential element to humans, the daily requirement being about
700 mg. Taste considerations, rather than toxicity, are para-
mount for magnesium in drinking water. This is a parameter which
is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits
program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO_ to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type; Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required; 100-200 m£
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 285.2 run. The interference caused by
aluminum at concentrations greater than 2 mg/£ is masked by the
addition of lanthanum. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement
of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 0.007 mg/£;
its detection limit is 0.0005 mg/£. The optimum concentration
range is 0.02-2 mg/£. At a concentration of .2 mg/£, the relative
standard deviation is 10.5%, and the relative error is 6.3%. In
a single laboratory, using a distilled water sample at concentra-
tions of 2.1 and 8.2 mg/£, the relative standard deviations were
4.7% and 2.4%, respectively. Recoveries at both of these levels
were 100%.
Cost of Analysis: $10
D-243
-------
MALATHION
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORE! Units: yg/£
General; Malathion, the organophosphorus pesticide cinHig°6PS2«
enters the aquatic environment primarily as a result of its appli-
cation as an insecticide. Because it degrades quite rapidly in
most waters, depending on pH, its occurrence is sporadic rather
than continuous. It is soluble in water to 145,000 vg/£. The
freshwater fish most sensitive to malathion appear to be the
salmonids and centrarchids. Many aquatic invertebrates appear
to be more sensitive than fish to malathion. It appears to be
about 100 times less toxic to warm-blooded animals than parathion,
but only 2 to 4 times less toxic to insects. The estimated fatal
dose for a 70-kg man is 60 grams. This is a parameter which is
regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits
program.
Criterion: 0.1 yg/£ for freshwater and marine aquatic life.
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type; Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 mi. or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction, column chromatog-
raphy and liquid-liquid partition, and detection and measurement
accomplished by flame photometric gas chromatography using a phos-
phorus specific filter is recommended for malathion. Great care
must be exercised in the selection and use of methods to minimize
interferences, and the method is only recommended for use by a
skilled, experienced pesticide analyst (or under close supervision
of such a person). For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this
parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but is usually 0.010 yg/£ or higher. Sensitivity is
typically 1 yg/£. Precision and accuracy data are not available
at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-244
-------
MANGANESE
Parameter Group; Metals > STORET Units: yg/£ as Mn
General: Manganese and its salts are used in manufacturing steel
alloys, dry cell batteries, glass and ceramics, paint and varnish,
ink and dye, and matches and fireworks. Manganese is normally in-
gested as a trace nutrient in food. Very large doses of ingested
manganese can cause some diseases and liver damage. Inadequate
quantities of manganese in domestic animal food results in reduced
reproductive capabilities and deformed or poorly maturing young.
Manganese imparts objectionable and stubborn stains to laundry and
plumbing fixtures. Low limits on domestic water supplies stem
from these, rather than toxicological, considerations. This is a
parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program.
Criteria:
50 yg/£ for domestic water supplies (welfare)
100 yg/£ for protection of consumers of marine mollusks
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO, to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required; 100-200 m£
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 279.5 nm. For levels of manganese below
25 yg/£, the extraction procedure is recommended. Analytical
sensitivity is dependent on lamp current. For BPT NPDES purposes
the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 50 yg/£; its
detection limit is 10 yg/£. The optimum concentration range is
100-10,000 yg/£. At a concentration of 50 yg/£, the relative
standard deviation is 13.5%, and the relative error is 6.0%.
These increase at decreasing concentrations. In a 55-laboratory
test, at concentrations of 17 and 11 yg/£ the relative standard
deviations were 118% and 245%, respectively, and the relative
errors were 22% arid 93%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $10
D-245
-------
MERCURY
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: yg/£ as Hg
General: Mercury is widely distributed in the environment, and
biologically is a nonessential or nonbeneficial element. Dis-
charged mercury does not remain localized. Mercury can enter the
environment by seeping up through layers of earth to the surface,
outgassing of mercury from rock and soil, and transport by natural
cycles. Most industrial mercury is eventually lost as waste into
streams or the atmosphere. Uses of mercury include the electrical
industry, chlor-alkali industry, industrial control equipment,
paints, agriculture, dental preparations, pulp and paper industry,
catalysts in chemical manufacturing processes, and general labor-
atory uses. The toxicity of mercury is attributed to its high
affinity for sulfur-containing compounds. Toxic effects vary with
the form of mercury and its mode of entry into the organism. This
is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by
the NPDES permits program. This parameter will be regulated by
BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one
of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criteria:
• 2.0 pg/£ for domestic water supply (health)
• 0.05 yg/£ for freshwater aquatic life and wildlife
0.10 yg/£ for marine aquatic life
Preservation Method; Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO_ to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 38 days (glass), 13 days (hard plastic)
Container Type: Glass or hard plastic
Sample Volume Required; 100 m£
Measurement: The flameless AA spectrophotometric method is recom-
mended. It is a physical method based on the absorption of radia-
tion at 253.7 nm by mercury vapor. The mercury is reduced to the
elemental state and aerated from solution in a closed system. The
mercury vapor passes through a cell positioned in the light path
of an atomic absorption spectrophotometer. Absorbance is measured
as a function of mercury concentrations. Possible interference
from sulfide is eliminated by the addition of potassium per-
manganate. Copper has also been reported to interfere. Inter-
ference from certain volatile organic materials which will absorb
at this wavelength is also possible. For BPT NPDES purposes the
measurement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
D-246
-------
Precision and Accuracy: At a concentration of 0.4 vg/t, the rela-
tive standard deviation is 21.2%, and the relative error is 2.4%.
In a single laboratory, using an Ohio River composite sample with
a background mercury concentration of 0.35 pg/-£, spiked with con-
centrations of 1, 3, and 4 yg/£, the standard deviations were
±0.14, ±0.10, and ±0.08, respectively. Standard deviation at the
0.35 level was ±0.16. Percent recoveries at the three levels were
89%, 87%, and 87%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $15 - $25
D-247
-------
METHANE
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General: Methane is a gaseous saturated (paraffin) hydrocarbon.
It is colorless, odorless, tasteless, and flammable. Methane
sources include the anaerobic decomposition of organic matter
(e.g., some marshes, mines, treatment plants, etc.) &nd natural
gas and petroleum plants. Concern about methane arises from its
explosion hazard rather than its negligible toxicity. For ex-
ample, an explosive limit of methane in air could be reached in a
poorly ventilated space sprayed with hot (68°C) water having a
methane concentration of only 0.7 mg/£.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. When collect-
ing the sample, ensure that the sample is under sufficient pressure
to ensure that no gas escapes from the water.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown, but short
Container Type: Glass
Sample Volume Required: 3,000 m£
Measurement: The combustible-gas indicator method is often used.
The procedure is based on the catalytic oxidation of a combustible
gas or a heated platinum filament that is made a part of a wheat-
stone bridge. Small amounts of ethane, hydrogen gas, and hydrogen
sulfide may interfere. For greater accuracy, a gas chromatograph
should be used.
Precision and Accuracy: The sensitivity of the method is approx-
imately 0.2 mg/£.The accuracy of the determination is limited by
the accuracy of the instrument employed; errors of around 10% may
be expected.
Cost of Analysis: $15 - $20
D-248
-------
METHOXYCHLOR
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units:
General: Application of methoxychlor, an organochlorine insecti-
cide, in agriculture and forest areas contributes to the presence
of this material in surface and ground waters. It is slightly
soluble in water but very soluble in alcohol. Sodium and
dimethylamine salts are freely soluble in water. The concentra-
tion of methoxychlor has been found to be degraded in a few weeks
or less in natural waters. The highest level of methoxychlor
found to have minimal or no long-term effects in man is 2.0 mg/kg
of body weight/day. Few data are available on acute and chronic
effects of methoxychlor on freshwater fish. Methoxychlor appears
to be considerably less bioaccumulative in aquatic organisms than
some of the other organochlorine pesticides. Methoxyehlor has a
very low accumulation rate in birds and mammals. This is a param-
eter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES
permits program.
Criteria:
100 yg/£ for domestic water supply (health)
• 0.03 yg/£ for freshwater and marine aquatic life
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 50-100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction and detection and
measurement accomplished by electron capture, microcoulometric
or electrolytic conductivity gas chromatography is recommended for
methoxychlor. Many interferences exist, especially PCB's,
phthalate esters, and organophosphorus pesticides, and the method
is only recommended for use by a skilled, experienced pesticide
analyst (or under close supervision of such a person). For BPT
NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but usually falls in the 0.001 to 1 ng/£ range. In-
creased sensitivity is likely to increase interference. Typically,
the percent recovery decreases with increasing concentration.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-249
-------
METHYL PARATHION
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: jig/£
General: Methyl parathion is an organophosphorus insecticide
similar in action to parathion, Phosdrin, and TEPP. Its toxicity
is also similar. The half-life of methyl parathion on cotton
leaves is less than one hour. The estimated fatal dose for a
70-kg man is 0.15 gram. The acute oral LD™ for rats ranges
from 9,000 to 25,000 yg/kg of body weight. Toxicity dat.a for
aquatic life are sparse but appear to range widely with age and
species. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines
prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time; Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction, column chromatog-
raphy and liquid-liquid partition, and detection and measurement
accomplished by flame photometric gas chromatography using a phos-
phorus specific filter is recommended for methyl parathion. Great
care must be exercised in the selection and use of methods to
minimize interferences, and the method is only recommended for use
by a skilled, experienced pesticide analyst (or under close super-
vision of such a person). For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement
of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but is usually 0.010 yg/£ or higher. Sensitivity is
typically 1 yg/£. Precision and accuracy data are not available
at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-250
-------
METHYLENE BLUE ACTIVE SUBSTANCES (MBAS)
Parameter Group: General STORET Units:
Organic
General: Certain solutes, even at low concentrations, have the
property of lowering the surface tension or other interfacial prop-
erties of their solvents. Such solutes are known as surfactants
or surface-active agents. They are found in soaps, detergents,
emulsifiers, wetting agents, and penetrants, with the most common
use, by far, being in synthetic detergents where they may account
for 20% - 40% of the product in active form alone. The specific
surfactant most widely used until recently is the group of alkyl
benzene sulfonates (ABS), which persist in sewage and streams in
biologically active solution without appreciable decomposition
from either treatment processes or natural purification, being
largely immune to biological degradation. Today, the more .biode-
gradable linear alkyl sulfonate (LAS) has essentially replaced ABS
on the surfactant market so that measurable surface-active agents
will probably be LAS type materials. In addition to foaming prob-
lems, anionic surfactants may enhance slime growth, inhibit the
growth of nitrifying bacteria, delay gas exchange with the atmos-
phere, and interfere with the uptake of oxygen. This is a parame-
ter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES
permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type; Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 250 m£
Measurement: Anionic-type surfactants react with methylene blue dye
in aqueous solution to form a blue colored salt which is extracta-
ble with chloroform, its color intensity being proportional to the
concentration of MBAS. The more complicated, time consuming, and
expensive tests for specific substances (e.g., LAS) are not usually
warranted. The method is recommended for determination in drinking
waters, surface waters, domestic and industrial wastes. It is not
applicable to measurement of surfactant-type materials in saline
waters. Chlorides at concentration of about 1,000 mg/£ show a pos-
itive interference, but the degree of interference has not been
quantified. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this parame-
ter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
D-251
-------
Precision and Accuracy: A sample of filtered river water, spiked
with 2.94 mg LAS/£ was analyzed in 110 laboratories with a relative
standard deviation of 9.1% and a relative error of 1.4%. In
similar analyses with a sample of tap water spiked with 0.48 mg
lAS/t, relative standard deviations and errors of 9.9% and 1.3%
were obtained, and for a sample of distilled water spiked with
0.27 mg LAS/£, the respective values were 14.8% and 10.6%.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $15
D-252
-------
MIREX
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General: Mirex, an organochlorine insecticide, is largely used to
control the imported fire ant in the southeastern United States.
Crayfish and channel catfish survival is affected by mirex in the
water or by ingestion of the bait particles. Bioaccumulation is
well established for a wide variety of organisms but the effect of
this bioaccumulation on the aquatic ecosystem is unknown. There
is evidence that mirex is very persistent in bird tissue. Con-
sidering the extreme toxicity and potential for bioaccumulation,
every effort should be made to keep mirex bait particles out of
water containing aquatic organisms. This is a parameter which is
regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits
program.
Criterion: 0.001 yg/£ for freshwater and marine aquatic life.
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 50 to 100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction and detection and
measurement accomplished by electron capture, microcoulometric or
electrolytic conductivity gas chromatography is recommended for
mirex. Many interferences exist, especially PCB's, phthalate
esters, and organophosphorus pesticides, and the method is only
recommended for use by a skilled, experienced pesticide analyst
(or under close supervision of such a person). For BPT NPDES
purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but usually falls in the 0.001 to 1 yg/£ range. In-
creased sensitivity is likely to increase interference. Typically,
the percent recovery decreases with increasing concentration.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-253
-------
MOLYBDENUM
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Unit; yg/£ as Mo
General : Molybdenum occurs naturally as molybdenum sulfide and
lead molybdate. Its chief use is in the production of alloy steels
(especially corrosion-resistant stainless steels) where advantage
is made of its marked passivity. Other possible sources include
mining and ore processing operations, chemical production, some
fertilizers, and metallurgical operations. Molybdenum has a rela-
tively low order of toxicity. This is a parameter which is regu-
lated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNOj to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 m£
Measurement : The AA spectrophotbmetric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 313.3 nm. With the nitrous oxide-acetylene
flame, interferences of calcium and other ions may be controlled
by adding 1,000,000 ug/£ of a refractory metal such as aluminum.
This should be done to both the samples and standards. For BPT
NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 300
its detection limit is 100 vg/t. The optimum concentration range
is 500-20,000 yg/£. In a single laboratory, using a mixed
industrial-domestic waste effluent at concentrations of 300,
1,500, and 7,500 yg Mo/£, the relative standard deviations were
2.3%, 1.3%, and .93%, respectively. Recoveries at these levels
were 100%, 96%, and 95%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $15
D-254
-------
NAPHTHALENE
Parameter Group: STORET Units;
General: Naphthalene (Ci0Hg) is the most abundant single consti-
tuent of coal tar. It is a white solid with the odor of moth
balls. It is soluble in water at 20°C to the extent of about
30 mg/£. The use of naphthalene in organic syntheses and dye man-
ufacture is extensive, and hence it may occur in wastes from re-
fineries, coal-tar plants, textile mills, and chemical industries.
Lethal concentrations to fish are around 5-20 mg/£. Fish tainting
can occur at 1 mg/£. This parameter will be regulated by BAT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of
the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Not determined. Analyze promptly. Cool to
4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type; Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required; 100-1,000 mi
Measurement: The general procedure involves extraction and meas-
urement with a gas chromatograph. Various cleanup techniques to
remove interferences may be required depending upon other con-
stituents in the sample. A skilled chemist or specialist will be
required. A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for this parame-
ter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Detection limits in the 1-10 yg/£ range
should be achievable. Precision and accuracy data are not avail-
able at this time.
Cost of Analysis; $40 - $60
D-255
-------
NICKEL
Parameter Group; Metals STORET Units: vg/l as Ni
General: Nickel principally occurs in nature as sulfide. Its
main industrial use is in electroplating, alloying, coin making,
and in alkaline storage batteries. Other potential sources include
silver refineries, basic steel works and foundaries, motor vehi-
cle and aircraft industries, and printing operations. This is a
parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program. This parameter will be regulated by BAT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permit program. It is one of
the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: 0.01 of the 96-hour LC5Q for freshwater and marine
aquatic life.
Preservation Method; Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO- to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 mi
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 232.0 nm. The 352.4 nm wavelength is
less susceptible to nonatomic absorbance and may also be used.
The calibration curve is more linear at this wavelength; however,
there is some loss of sensitivity. For BPT NPDES purposes the
measurement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 150 yg/£;
its detection limit is 20 yg/£. The optimum concentration range
is 300-10,000 ug/£. In a single laboratory, using a mixed
industrial-domestic waste effluent at concentrations of 200,
1,000, and 5,000 yg Ni/£, the standard deviations were ±0.011,
±0.02, and ±0.04, respectively. Recoveries at these levels were
100%, 97%, and 93%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $15
D-256
-------
NITRILOTRIACETIC ACID (NTA)
Parameter Group: General STORET Units: mg/£
Organic
General: Nitrilotriacetic acid (NTA) is insoluble in water, but
its tribasic salt is quite soluble. NTA has a strong affinity
for iron, calcium, magnesium, and zinc, but its relative affinity
for toxic metals such as cadmium and mercury is not known, nor
have its chelating properties in complex ionic solutions been
characterized. It has a potential large-scale use as a substitute
for phosphates in detergents. No cases of acute human poisoning
by NTA have been reported. It is biodegraded in the natural en-
vironment within 4 to 5 days; degradation is accelerated by bio-
logical waste treatment.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 50 m£
Measurement: The zinc-zircon method is often used. In this
method, NTA refers to the tri-sodium salt of nitrilotriacetic
acid. It is applicable to surface waters in the range of 0.5-
10.0 mg/£ NTA. Cations, such as calcium, magnesium, zinc, cop-
per, iron, and manganese, complex with NTA and give a negative
interference. These ions are removed by batch treating samples
'with, ion-exchange resin. At concentrations higher than expected
in typical river waters, only zinc, copper, and iron were not
completely removed with ion-exchange treatment.
Precision and Accuracy: In a single laboratory, using spiked
surface water samples at concentrations of 0.5, 2, 6, and
10 mg/l NTA, relative standard deviations were 3.4%, 7%, 1.7%,
and 1.6%, respectively. In a single laboratory, using spiked
surface water samples at concentrations of 1.0 and 7.5 rag/t NTA,
recoveries were 120% and 103%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $12
D-257
-------
NITROBENZENE
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General: Nitrobenzene (C,H,.N02) is moderately soluble in water.
It is used in the manufacture of analine, soaps, and shoe polishes.
Nitrobenzene is an oily liquid and has an almond odor. A concen-
tration of 0.03 mg/£ in water will produce a faint odor. The oral
LD,-0 for rabbits is 700 mg/kg of body weight. This parameter will
be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits
program. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Not determined. Analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 200-1,000 m£
Measurement: No standard procedures have been developed. The
methodology generally requires extraction, concentration, and gas
chromatographic analysis. A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed
for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Detection limits of 1 to 10 yg/£ should be
achievable. Precision and accuracy data are not available at this
time.
Cost of Analysis: $40 - $60
D-258
-------
NITROGEN-AMMONIA
Parameter Group: Nitrogen STORET Units; mg/£ as N
General; Ammonia, one of the chemically interconvertible compo-
nents of the nitrogen cycle, is naturally present in surface and
ground water in concentrations from less than 0.01 to around
0.2 mg/£ as N in the absence of pollution. It is produced largely
by the deamination of nitrogenous organic matter and the hydrolysis
of urea. It may also result from the reduction of nitrate under
anaerobic conditions. Other sources include the discharge of indus-
trial wastes from chemical and gas plants, from ice plants, and
where it is used in scouring and cleaning operations. There ap-
pears little physiological risk in palatable concentrations, the
odor threshold being 0.037 mg/£. Because it changes rapidly to
nitrites and nitrates, ammonia is actually a fertilizer for most
crops; ammonium salts constitute a major source of nitrogen fer-
tilization. The toxicity of ammonia to fish is highly pH dependent.
This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed
by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion; Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Add 2 m£ of
concentrated H2SO. or 40 mg HgCl2/£ and store at 4°C. The use of
mercuric chloride is discouraged whenever possible, however.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 400 m£
Measurement: The distillation procedure is recommended for the
determination of ammonia-nitrogen. The method covers the range
from about 0.05 to 1.0 mg/£ NH_-N/£ for the colorimetric proce-
dures, from 1.0 to 25 mg/£ for the titrimetric procedure, and
from 0.05 to 1,400 mg/£ for the electrode method. A number of
aromatic and aliphatic amines will cause turbidity upon the ad-
dition of Nessler reagent. Cyanate will hydrolyze to some extent.
Volatile alkaline compounds may cause an off-color upon Nessleri-
zation. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter
is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy; Precision and accuracy are highly depend-
ent upon concentration, other constituents present, and the finish
method. Relative standard deviations may range from around 4% to
and relative errors from under 1% to over 15%.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $12
D-259
-------
NITROGEN, KJELDAHL
Parameter Group; Nitrogen STORET Units: mg/£ as N
General: Kjeldahl nitrogen is defined as the sum of free-ammonia
and organic nitrogen compounds which are converted to ammonium
sulfate (NH.KSO. under conditions of digestion. Organic nitrogen
includes natural materials such as proteins and peptides, nucleic
acids and urea, and numerous synthetic organic substances. The
organic nitrogen concentrations of water and wastewater may vary
from less than 0.01 mg/£ for the former to over 10 mg/£ for the
latter. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines
prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Add 2 m£ of
concentrated H2S04 to pH <2 or 40 mg HgGl2/£ and store at 4°C.
The use of mercuric chloride is discouraged whenever possible,
however.
Maximum Holding Time; 24 hours
Container Type; Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required; 500 m£
Measurement: In the Kjeldahl nitrogen determination the sample is
heated in the presence of concentrated sulfuric acid, K2SO., and
HgSO. and evaporated until SO, fumes are obtained and the solution
becomes colorless or pale yellow. The residue is cooled, diluted,
and is treated and made alkaline with a hydroxide-thiosulfate
solution. The ammonia is distilled and determined by either the
titrimetric method, the Nesslerization method, or the potenti-
ometric method. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this
parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Thirty-one analysts in twenty laboratories
analyzed natural water samples containing exact increments of
organic nitrogen. At the 0.2-0.3 mg/£ as N concentration level the
relative standard deviation and error were around 90% and 10%,
respectively. At around 4 mg/£ as N they were about 25% and 1%,
respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $15 - $20
D-260
-------
NITROGEN, NITRATE
Parameter Group: Nitrogen STORET Units: mg/£ as N
General: Nitrate, one of the chemically interconvertible compounds
of the nitrogen cycle, occurs in trace quantities in surface
water and in small amounts in fresh domestic wastewater. It is
seldom abundant, since it serves as an essential nutrient for all
types of plants. Some ground water may contain high levels of
nitrate (as a result of leachings from cesspools or excess appli-
cations of fertilizers, etc.) due to the lack of photosynthetic
action. There has been no reporting of physiological harm at
concentrations of less than 10 mg/£ as N. Nitrates are injurious
for certain industrial uses (e.g., fabric dyeing, fermentative
processes). High nitrate concentrations stimulate the growth of
plankton and aquatic weeds and accelerate eutrophication. This is
a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Add 2 m£ con-
centrated H2S04/£ to ph <2 or 40 mg HgCl2/£ and store at 4°C.
The use of mercuric chloride is discouraged whenever possible,
however.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£
Measurement: The brucine method is recommended in the range from
0.1 to 2 mg NO,-N/£ for determination in drinking, surface, and
saline waters, domestic and industrial wastes. Dissolved or-
ganic matter will cause an off color. The effect of salinity is
eliminated by the addition of sodium chloride to the blanks, stand-
ards, and samples. All strong oxidizing or reducing agents
interfere. Residual chlorine interference is eliminated by the
addition of sodium arsenite. Ferrous and ferric iron and quadri-
valent manganese give slight positive interferences. Uneven heat-
ing of the samples and standards during the reaction time will
result in erratic values. The cadmium reduction method may also
be used; see discussion under Nitrogen, Nitrate-Nitrite. For BPT
NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
D-261
-------
Precision and Accuracy: Five synthetic samples containing nitrate
and other constituents were analyzed in 50 laboratories at con-
centrations of 0.05, 0.5, and 5 mg/£ as N; relative standard
deviations were 66.7%, 14.4%, and 15.4% and relative errors were
7.6%, 0.6%, and 4.5%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $12
D-262
-------
NITROGEN, NITRATE-NITRITE
Parameter Group: Nitrogen STORET Units: mg/£ as N
General: See discussions under nitrate and nitrite. The combined
test is less expensive than making individual determinations and
provides a determination of total oxidized nitrogen. This is a
parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Store at 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 mt
Measurement: The cadmium reduction method is recommended for the
determination of nitrite and nitrate combined in drinking, surface,
and saline waters, domestic and industrial wastes. Buildup of
suspended matter in the reduction,column will restrict sample
flow. Low results might be obtained for samples that contain high
concentrations of iron, copper, or other metals. EDTA is added to
the samples to eliminate this interference. Samples that contain
large concentrations of oil and grease will coat the surface of
the cadmium. This interference is eliminated by pre-extracting
the sample with an organic solvent. For BPT NPDES purposes the
measurement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The applicable range of this method is
0.01 to 1.0 mg/£ nitrate-nitrite nitrogen. In a single laboratory,
using sewage samples at concentrations of 0.04, 0.24, 0.55, and
1.04 mg N0_ + N02-N/£, the relative standard deviations were 12.5%,
1.6%, .9%, and .9%, respectively, while recoveries were 100%, 102%,
and 100%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $15
D-263
-------
NITROGEN, NITRITE
Parameter Group: Nitrogen STORET Units: mg/£ as N
General: Nitrite, one of the chemically interconvertible compounds
of the nitrogen cycle, occurs in the oxidation of ammonia to
nitrate and in the reduction of nitrate. This oxidation and reduc-
tion may occur in wastewater treatment plants, water distribution
systems, and natural waters. In conjunction with ammonia and
nitrate, nitrites are often indicative of water pollution. They
exhibit the same deleterious effects as nitrates except at lower
concentrations, e.g., no physiological harm under 2 mg/£ as N.
This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed
by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Store at 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 50 m£
Measurement: The diazotization method is recommended for the de-
termination of nitrite nitrogen in the range from 0.01 to
1.0 mg N02-N/£. The diazonium compound formed by diazotation of
sulfanilamide by nitrite in water under acid conditions is coupled
with N-(l-naphthyl)-ethylenediamine to produce a reddish-purple
color which is read in a spectrophotometer at 540 nm. The presence
of strong oxidants or reductants to the samples will affect the
nitrite concentrations. High alkalinity (>600 mg/£) will give
low results due to a shift in pH. For BPT NPDES purposes the
measurement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Precision and accuracy data are not
available.
Cost of Analysis: $5 - $12
D-264
-------
NITROPHENOLS
Parameter Group: STORET Units;
General: Nitrophenols include 2, 4-dinitrophenol; dinitrocresol,
2-nitrophenol, 4-nitrophenol, and 4, 6-dinitro-o-cresol. Metani-
trophenol is highly soluble in cold water, p-nitrophenoi moderately
so, and o-nitrophenol only sparingly soluble. The ortho isomer is
used in chemical manufacturing. Minimum lethal doses to fish vary
with isomer, species, and other water constituents Ce-g-» hard
water concentrations may be 10 times greater than those of dis-
tilled water). This parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines
prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent
Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Not determined. Analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type; Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 200-1,000 m£
Measurement: No standard procedures have been developed. The
methodology generally requires extraction, concentration, and gas
chromatographic analysis. A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed
for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Detection limits of 1 to 10 yg/£ should be
achievable. Precision and accuracy data are not available at this
time.
Cost of Analysis: $40 - $60
D-265
-------
OIL AND GREASE
Parameter Group: General STORET Units: mg/£
Organic
General; Oils and grease are not definitive chemical categories
but include thousands of organic compounds with varying physical,
chemical, and toxicological properties. Grease and oil include
hydrocarbons, fatty acids, soaps, fats, waxes, and oils. The
three major industrial sources of oily waste are the petroleum1
industry, metals manufacture and machining, and food processors.
Field and laboratory evidence have demonstrated both acute lethal
toxicity and long-term sublethal toxicity of oils to aquatic
organisms. Bioaccumulation of petroleum products presents two
especially important public health problems: (1) the tainting of
edible, aquatic species, and (2) the possibility of edible marine
organisms incorporating the high boiling, carcinogenic polycyclic
aromatics in their tissues. The direct effects of aquatic oil
pollution on man are minimal. This is a parameter which is regu-
lated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criteria: For domestic water supply: Virtually free from oil
and grease, particularly from the tastes and odors that emanate
from petroleum products.
For aquatic life:
• 0.01 of the lowest continuous flow 96-hour LC5Q to several
important freshwater and marine species, each having a
demonstrated high susceptibility to oils and petrochemicals.
Levels of oils or petrochemicals in the sediment which
cause deleterious effects to the biota should not be
allowed.
Surface waters shall be virtually free from floating non-
petroleum oils of vegetable or animal origin, as well as
petroleum-derived oils.
Preservation Method; Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
required, cool to 4°C, add H2SO. to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Glass
Sample Volume Required: 1,000 mi
D-266
-------
Measurement: The Soxhlet extraction method is recommended when
relatively polar, heavy petroleum fractions are present. The
method is applicable to the determination of relatively non-
volatile hydrocarbons, vegetable oils, animal fats, waxes, soaps,
and greases. The separatory funnel extraction method can also
be used. The infrared method is applicable for ^measurement of
most light petroleum fuels. The Soxhlet extraction and separatory
funnel extraction methods are not applicable to the light hydro-
carbons that volatize at temperatures below 70°C. For BPT NPDES
purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The three oil and grease methods were
tested by a single laboratory on a sewage.. The Soxhlet extrac-
tion method determined the oil and grease level in the sewage
to be 14.8 mg/£. When 1-liter portions of the sewage were dosed
with 14.0 mg of a mixture of #2 fuel oil and Wesson oil, the
recovery was 88% with a standard deviation of 1.1 mg. The
separatory funnel extraction method determined the oil and grease
level in the sewage to be 12.6 mg/£. When 1-liter portions of the
sewage were dosed with 14.0 mg of a mixture of #2 fuel oil and
Wesson oil, the recovery was 93% with a standard deviation of
0.9 mg. The infrared method determined the oil and grease level
in the sewage to be 17.5 mg/£. When 1-liter portions of the
sewage were dosed with 14.0 mg of a mixture of #2 fuel oil and
Wesson oil, the recovery was 99% with a standard deviation of
1.4 mg.
Cost of Analysis: $15 - $30
D-267
-------
ORGANIC CARBON
Parameter Group: General STORET Units: mg/£ as C
Organic
General: Organic carbon is the carbon oxidized by dichromate or
other strong oxidizing agents, the most common measurement being
total organic carbon (TOC). As in the case of BOD, TOC is a
measure of a significant aspect of the strength of a discharge
but is not a pollutant per se. The value of TOC usually falls
below the true concentration of organic contaminants because
other constituent elements are excluded. TOC is a more direct
expression of the organic chemical content of water than either
the BOD or COD tests and is faster and more convenient. It is
often used, after an empirical relationship has been established,
to estimate BOD or COD. This is a parameter which is regulated
by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Add H2S04 to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass (brown glass preferred)
Sample Volume Required: 25 m£
Measurement: The combustion-infrared method is recommended. The
method is applicable to measurement of organic carbon above
1 mg/£. Carbonate and bicarbonate carbon represent an interfer-
ence under the terms of this test and must be removed or accounted
for in the final calculation. Instrument manufacturer's direc-
tions must be followed. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement
of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy; The difficulty of sampling particulates
limits the precision to approximately 5 to 10% or higher. On
clear or filtered samples, the precision may approach 1 to 2%.
A distilled water solution containing 107 mg/£ of oxidizable
organic compounds was analyzed by 28 analysts in 21 laboratories
with a relative standard deviation of 7.6% and a relative error of
1.01%. :
Cost of Analysis: $12 - $15
D-268
-------
PARATHION
Parameter Group; Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General: Parathion is the organophosphorus insecticide C.-H .0 NPS.
It is a yellow liquid that is insoluble in water or kerosene but
freely soluble in alcohols and aromatic hydrocarbons. It is most
commonly applied to row and orchard crops. Few chronic exposure
data are available for aquatic organisms. At high concentrations
of parathion, deformities, tremors, convulsions, hypersensitivity,
hemorrhages were evident in bullheads. Inhibition of cholinester-
ase enzymes is the established mode of physiological action of
parathion. Parathion has been found acutely toxic to aquatic
invertebrates. The half-life of parathion in river water
(pH 7.3-8.0) is one week. The estimated fatal dose for a 70-kg
man is 0.1 gram. The acute oral LC,-n for rats ranges from 3,000
J\J
to 15,000 yg/kg of body weight. This is a parameter which is
regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits
program.
Criterion: 0.04 \\g/t for freshwater and marine aquatic life.
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction, column chromatog-
raphy and liquid-liquid partition, and detection and measurement
accomplished by flame photometric gas chromatography using a phos-
phorus specific filter is recommended for parathion. Great care
must be exercised in the selection and use of methods to minimize
interferences, and the method is only recommended for use by a
skilled, experienced pesticide analyst (or under close supervision
of such a person). For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this
parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but is usually 0.010 yg/£ or higher. Sensitivity is
typically 1 pg/£. Precision and accuracy data are not available
at this time.
Cost of Analysis: -$30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-269
-------
PCNB
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General: Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB) is an organochlorine in-
secticide. It is used as an agricultural fungicide. It is
soluble in carbon disulfide, benzene, and chloroform. It is
practically insoluble in water and cold alcohol.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 50-100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction and detection and
measurement accomplished by electron capture, microcoulometric
or electrolytic conductivity gas chromatography is recommended
for PCNB. Many interferences exist, especially PCB's, phthalate
esters, and organophosphorus pesticides, and the method is only
recommended for use by a skilled, experienced pesticide analyst
(or under close supervision of such a person).
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but usually falls in the 0.001 to 1 yg/£ range. In-
creased sensitivity is likely to increase interference. Typically,
the percent recovery decreases with increasing concentration.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required
D-270
-------
PENTACHLOROPHENOL
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General: Pentachlorophenol (Cx-HCl-0) is a crystalline material
only slightly soluble in water but freely soluble in alcohol,
ether, and benzene. However, its sodium salt is highly soluble
in water. Pentachlorophenol possesses bactericidal, herbicidal,
insecticidal, fungicidal, and molluscicidal properties. In con-
centrated doses, it causes lung, liver, and kidney damage to
humans. In sea water, a concentration of 1.0 mg/£ of soidum
Pentachlorophenol prevents the attachment of marine fouling or-
ganisms in pipe and conduit. Its toxicity is highly dependent
upon the vehicle in which it is administered. This is a param-
eter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES
permits program. This parameter will be regulated by BAT guide-
lines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of the
Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion; Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Acidify to a
pH of 4 with H3P04. Add l.Og CuS04'5H20/£ to inhibit biodegrada-
tion of phenols. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-1,000 mg/£ or more depending upon
initial concentration.
Measurement: The recommended method involves direct aqueous in-
jection for the gas-liquid chromatographic determination of con-
centrates containing more than 1 mg/-£ phenolic compounds. A
flame-ionization detector is used for their individual measurement.
Suspended matter may interfere by plugging the microsyringe. In-
terfering nonphenolic organic compounds may be removed by distil-
lation. Steps should be taken to minimize or eliminate ghosting.
For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter is pre-
scribed by 40 CFR 136. A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for
this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Few precision and accuracy data are
available. Precision is very operator dependent. For example,
total precision may be 2 to 5 times single operator precision
values.
Cost of Analysis: $40 - $60
D-271
-------
pH
Parameter Group: Physical STORE! Units: Standard Units
General: The pH of a solution is expressed as the logarithm of
the reciprocal of the hydrogen ion activity in moles per liter
at a given temperature. The practical scale extends from 0 (very
acidic) to 14 (very alkaline) with 7 corresponding to exact neu-
trality at 25°C. Whereas alkalinity and acidity are measures of
the total resistance to pH change or buffering capacity of a
sample, pH represents the free hydrogen ion activity not bound by
carbonate or other bases. The pH of most natural waters falls in
the range of 4 to 9 with the majority being slightly basic.
Changes in the normal pH for a given water may indicate the dis-
charge of alkaline or acidic wastes. This is a parameter which is
regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criteria:
5-9, domestic water supplies (welfare).
6.5 - 9.0, freshwater aquatic life.
6.5 - 8.5, marine aquatic life (within this range, pH should
not be more than 0.2 unit outside the normally occurring
range).
Preservation Methods: Analyze on site if at all possible. Other-
wise, seal the sample container and cool to 4°C. Sample bottle
should not be opened before analysis.
Maximum Holding Time: Any holding time beyond 6 hours should be
reported with the measurement.
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 25 to 100 m£
Measurement: Although pH can be measured colorimetrically, the
method suffers from numerous interferences, deterioration of
indicators and color standards, and limited indicator range. The
glass electrode method is the standard technique, employing ei-
ther a glass electrode in conjunction with a separate reference
(constant potential) electrode, e.g., calomel, silver-silver
chloride, or a combination electrode (glass and reference). The
measurement is temperature-dependent. Oil and grease may coat the
pH electrode and cause a sluggish response. For BPT NPDES purposes
the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
D-272
-------
Precision and Accuracy: The precision and accuracy attainable
will depend upon the type and condition of the water and the care
used in standardization and operation. Precisions of ±0.02 pH
and accuracies of ±0.05 pH are achievable, but ±0.1 pH represents
the accuracy limit under normal conditions. Typical standard
deviations are from;0.1 to 0.2 pH.
Cost of Analysis: $3
D-273
-------
PHENOLICS
Parameter Group: General STORET Units: jjg/£
Organic
General; Phenols are hydroxy derivatives of benzene and its con-
densed nuclei. Phenolic compounds include a wide variety of or-
ganic chemicals and may arise from the distillation of coal and
wood; from oil refineries; chemical plants; livestock dips; human
and other organic wastes; hydrolysis, chemical oxidation, and
microbial degradation of pesticides; and from naturally occurring
sources and substances. Despite the fact that it is used as a
bactericide, weak phenol solutions are decomposed by bacteria and
biological action, rates typically exceeding 2,000 yg/£ per day
in natural streams. Chlorination of water containing phenolic
compounds produces odoriferous and objectionable tasting chloro-
phenols. The ingestion of concentrated solutions of phenol will
result in severe pain, renal irritation, shock, and possibly
death. A 1.5-gram dose may be fatal. Many of the phenolic
compounds are more toxic than pure phenol, especially to lower
life forms. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guide-
lines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: 1 yg/£ for domestic water supply (welfare), and to
protect against fish flesh tainting.
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Add H3P04 tp pH <4 and l.Og CuS04/£.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Glass only
Sample Volume Required: 500 m£
Measurement: The 4-aminoantipyrine (4-AAP) method with distilla-
tion is recommended and is applicable to the analysis of drinking,
surface, and saline waters, domestic and industrial wastes. Pheno-
lic materials react with 4-aminoantipyrine in the presence of
potassium ferricyanide at a pH of 10 to form a stable reddish-
brown colored antipyrine dye. The amount of color produced is a
function of the concentration of the phenolic material. For most
samples, a preliminary distillation is required to remove inter-
fering materials. Gas chromatograph tests can be used to isolate
specific compounds. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of
this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
D-274
-------
Precision and Accuracy: Using the extraction procedure for con-
centration of color, six laboratories analyzed samples at concen-
trations of 9.6, 48.3, and 93.5 yg/£. Relative standard deviations
were 10.3%, 6.4%, and 4.5%, respectively. The method must be re-
garded as an approximation representing the minimum amount of
phenols present because the phenolic value varies with the types of
phenols within a given sample. It is therefore impossible to
express the accuracy of the method.
Cost of Analysis: $15 - $25
D-275
-------
PHOSPHORUS (ALL FORMS)
Paramete^ Group: Phosphorus STORET Units: mg/£ P
General: Phosphorus in its elemental form (yellow phosphorus) does
not occur free in nature and is particularly toxic to animal life,
being subject to bioaccumulation in much the same way as mercury.
Phosphorus as phosphate is abundant in nature and also from the
activities of man. Phosphates occur as a result of leaching from
minerals and ores in natural processes of degradation, from agri-
cultural drainage as one of the stabilized products of decomposi-
tion of organic matter, as a result of innumerable industrial
discharges, from some treated cooling waters, and as a major ele-
ment of municipal sewage. It is an essential nutrient for plant
and animal growth. Major uses include fertilizers, detergents,
and industrial chemicals. Organic phosphates are used extensively
in pesticides. The chief deleterious effect of high concentrations
is accelerated eutrophication. They also interfere with coagula-
tion and removal of turbidity. This is a parameter which is regu-
lated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Definitions of the various phosphorus forms are given below.
Total Phosphorus - all of the phosphorus present in the sam-
ple, regardless of form, as measured by the persulfate diges-
tion procedure.
Total Orthophosphate - inorganic phosphorus in the sample as
measured by the direct colorimetric analysis procedure.
Total Hydrolyzable Phosphorus - phosphorus in the sample
as measured by the sulfuric acid hydrolysis procedure, and
minus pre-determined orthophosphates. This hydrolyzable
phosphorus includes polyphosphorus plus some organic
phosphorus.
Total Organic Phosphorus - phosphorus (inorganic +
oxidizable organic) in the sample measured by the persulfate
digestion procedure, and minus hydrolyzable phosphorus and
Orthophosphate.
Dissolved Phosphorus - all of the phosphorus present in the
filtrate of a sample filtered through a phosphorus-free
filter of 0.45 micron pore size and measured by the persul-
fate digestion procedure.
Dissolved Orthophosphate - as measured by the direct
colorimetric analysis procedure.
D-276
-------
Dissolved Hydrolyzable Phosphorus - as measured by the sul-
furic acid hydrolysis procedure and minus pre-determined
dissolved orthophosphates.
Dissolved Organic Phosphorus - as measured by the persulfate
digestion procedure, and minus dissolved hydrolyzable phos-
phorus and orthophosphate.
When sufficient amounts of phosphorus are present in the sample to
warrant such consideration, the insoluble forms may be calculated
as the total minus the dissolved fraction and reported as Insoluble
Phosphorus, Insoluble Orthophosphate, Insoluble Hydrolyzable
Phosphorus, or Insoluble Organic Phosphorus.
Criterion: 0.10 vg/t yellow (elemental) phosphorus for marine or
estuarine waters.
Preservation Method: Filter on site if dissolved determination is
desired. Cool to 4°C. Analyze as soon as possible. Add 40 mg/£
mercuric chloride as a preservative if absolutely necessary, but
its use is discouraged whenever possible.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 50 m£
Measurement: The persulfate digestion method is recommended.
After digestion, determine the total orthophosphate in the
sample by the direct colorimetric analysis procedure. High iron
concentrations can cause precipitation of and subsequent loss of
phosphorus. Mercury chloride interferes when the chloride level
of the sample is low, <50 mg Cl/£. For BPT NPDES purposes the
measurement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Natural water samples with an exact
increment of organic phosphate were analyzed by 33 analysts in
19 laboratories. At around 0.1 and 0.8 mg/£ P, relative standard
deviations were around 35% and 15%, respectively, and relative
error ranges were 3-12% and 1-3%, respectively. Natural water
samples with an exact increment of orthophosphate were analyzed
by 26 analysts in 16 laboratories. At around 0.01 and 0.02 mg/£ P,
relative standard deviations were around 28% and 6% respectively,
and relative errors were around 5.5% and 2.3%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $15
D-277
-------
PHTHALATE ESTERS
Parameter Group: General STORET Units: yg/£
Organic
General: Phthalate esters include bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate,
butyl benzyl phthalate, di-n-butyl phthalate, diethyl phthalate,
and dimethyl phthalate and are organic compounds used as plasti-
cizers, particularly in polyvinyl chloride plastics. The di-2-
ethylhexyl and di-n-butyl phthalates are used as an orchard
acaricide and insect repellent. Phthalate esters can be detri-
mental to aquatic organisms at low water concentrations. Ability
to concentrate high levels from water and reproductive impair-
ment in certain species are suggestive of potential environmental
damage. This parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines pre-
scribed by the NPDES permits program. It"is one of the Consent
Decree pollutants.
Criterion: 3 yg/£ for freshwater aquatic life.
Preservation Method: Not determined. Analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 200-1,000 mi
Measurement: No standard procedures have been developed. The
methodology generally requires extraction, concentration, and
gas chromatographic analysis. A BAT NPDES method will be pre-
scribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Detection limits of 0.1 to 10 yg/£ should
be achievable. Precision and accuracy data are not available at
this time.
Cost of Analysis: $25 - $40
D-278
-------
POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS
Parameter Group: General STORET Units:
Organic
General: Pol/chlorinated biphenyls (PCB's) are a class of compounds
produced by the chlorination of biphenyls and are registered in the
fR")
United States under the trade^name Aroclor*- J. PCB compounds are
slightly soluble in water (25 to 200 yg/£), soluble in lipids,
oils, and organic solvents, and resistant to both heat and biolog-
ical degradation. PCB's are relatively nonflammable, have useful
exchange and dielectric properties, and were used principally in
the electrical industry in capacitors and transformers. The acute
and chronic effects of PCB's have been determined on a number of
aquatic organisms. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. This parameter
will be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits
program. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants. A toxic
effluent limitation has been prescribed for this parameter by the
NPDES permits program.
Criterion:
.001 pg/£ for freshwater and marine aquatic life and for
consumers thereof
Every reasonable effort should be made to minimize human
exposure.
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type; Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-1,000 m£
Measurement: The recommended gas chromatograph method covers the
following PCB mixtures: Aroclors 1221, 1232, 1242, 1248, 1254,
1260, and 1016. It is an extension of the method for organochlorine
pesticides - both the PCB's and the organochlorine pesticides may be
determined on the same sample. They are co-extracted by liquid-
liquid extraction and separated from one another prior to gas
chromatographic determination. A combination of the standard
Florisil column cleanup procedure and a silica gel microcolumn sepa-
ration procedure are employed. Identification is made from gas
chromatographic patterns obtained through the use of two or more
unlike columns. Detection and measurement is accomplished using an
electron capture, microcoulometric, or electrolytic conductivity
D-279
-------
detector. Solvents, reagents, glassware, and other sample process-
ing hardware may yield discrete artifacts and/or elevated baselines
causing misinterpretation of gas chromatograms. All of these
materials must be demonstrated to be free from interferences under
the conditions of the analysis. For BPT NPDES purposes the measure-
ment of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136. A BAT NPDES
method will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Analysis: The detection limit is approximately
1 \ig/t. Precision and accuracy data are not available at this
time.
Cost of Analysis: $45 to $50 for a scan and one compound
$95 to $100 for total PCB's
D-280
-------
POLYNUCLEAR AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General: Pol/nuclear aromatic hydrocarbons include 1,
2-benzanthracene, 3, 4-benzopyrene, 3, 4-benzofluoranthene, 11,
12-benzofluoranthene, chrysene, acenapthylene, anthracene, 1,
12-benzoperylene, fluoroethane, phenanthrene, 1, 2:5,
6-dibenanthracene, indeno (1, 2, 3-C, D) pyrene, and pyrene.
This parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by
the NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent Decree
pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method; Not determined. Analyze promptly. Cool to
4*CT
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 1,000-4,000 m£
Measurement: Procedures for determination of polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons involve extraction, thin layer chromatography, and
fluorescence or UV absorption spectra. They require confirmation
on wastewater. A BAT NPDES method will be prescribed for this
parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Detection limits range from around 0.2
to 20 ng/£.Precision and accuracy data are not available at this
time.
Cost of Analysis: $300 - $600
D-281
-------
POTASSIUM
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: mg/£ as K
General: Potassium occurs in nature as chloride or sulfate in
certain salt deposits, in common rocks (average of the solid
earth shell is 2.6%) and minerals (e.g., feldspar, greensand,
alunite, leucite), and is present in vegetation. It is one of the
most active metals and, hence, is only found in the ionized or
molecular form. Its salts are indispensable for fertilizers, some
varieties of glass, and certain other purposes. All are highly
soluble and uses include baking powders, effervescent antiacids,
as a flux for silver solders, treating coal to prevent slag for-
mation, tanning, soap manufacturing, in matches and explosives,
pesticides, in wood industries, dyeing and bleaching cotton, paint
and varnish removers, electroplating, photoengraving, lithography,
photographic emulsions, table salt, disinfectants, and a host of
other uses. Potassium is an essential nutritional element, but in
excessive doses it acts as a cathartic. Its level of toxicity to
fish and other aquatic life depends upon its form and the age and
species involved. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO_ to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or Pyrex
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 m£
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 766.5 nm. Sodium may interfere if present
at much higher levels than the potassium. This effect can be
compensated by approximately matching the sodium content of the
potassium standards with that of the sample. The flame photo-
metric method is rapid, sensitive, and accurate but requires a
special instrument and much preliminary work before samples can
be run routinely. The colorimetric method is usually inadvisable
for potassium levels below 10 mg/£. For BPT NPDES purposes the
measurement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 0.04 mg/£;
its detection limit is 0.005 mg/£. The optimum concentration
range is 0.1-2 mg/£. In a single laboratory, using distilled
D-282
-------
water samples at concentrations of 1.6 and 6.3 mg/£, the relative
standard deviations were 13% and 8%, respectively. Recoveries at
these levels were 103% and 102%. In a 33-laboratory test using a
synthetic unknown at 3.1 mg/£ K, results from the flame photo-
metric method yielded a relative standard deviation of 15.5% and
a relative error of 2.3%.
Cost of Analysis: $5 - $10
D-283
-------
RADIOACTIVITY (ALPHA AND BETA)
Parameter Group: Radiological STORET Units: Unspecified
General: Naturally occurring radioactivity in water is due to
contact with mineral deposits; many springs and deep wells have
high levels of radioactivity. Uranium, thorium, and radium and
their long series of daughter products are the chief naturally
occurring emitters of alpha and beta radiation. With the advent
of nuclear science, man has produced a long series of radioactive
products, including almost all of the elements in the periodic
table. In addition to mining and separation operations, other
manmade sources include the manufacture of nuclear weapons,
nuclear reactors, the production of isotopes, and their use in
medical therapy, research, and industrial processes and instru-
mentation. Radioactivity may be considered as an indestructable
property from the viewpoint of man's inability to cancel or
neutralize it by chemical or physical means. Gross alpha and beta
activity measurements represent the best overall indicator of the
presence of radioactive contamination in waters and the need for
more specific determinations of the more hazardous radionuclides.
The radioactivity of natural waters is usually in the 1 to
1,000 pCi/£ range but may reach 100,000 pCi/£, and the radon
(short-lived) content of some mineral springs has been found to
be as high as 750,000 pCi/£. This is a parameter which is regu-
lated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Preservatives may alter the distribution of
radioactivity in a sample and should not be used until the sample
is separated into suspended and dissolved fractions.
Maximum Holding Time: Unstated. Adsorption onto container surfaces
represents the greatest problem.
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 1,000 m£
Measurement: The internal proportional counter is the recommended
instrument for counting gross beta radioactivity. With a Geiger
counter, the alpha activity cannot be determined separately. Alpha
counting efficiency in end-window counters may be very low. For
BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed
by 40 CFR 136.
D-284
-------
Precision and Accuracy: In a study of two sets of paired water
samples containing known additions of radionuclides, 15 labora-
tories determined the gross alpha activity and 16 analyzed the
gross beta activity. The average recoveries of added gross alpha
activity were 86%, 87%, 84%, and 82%. The average recoveries of
added gross beta activity were 99%, 100%, 100%, and 100%.
Cost of Analysis: $9 - $15
D-285
-------
RADIUM
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General: There are four naturally occurring radium isotopes:
radium 223, radium 224, radium 226, and radium 228. Radium 226
has a half life of 1600 years. Ra-228 is a beta emitter; the
others are alpha emitters. Although alpha particles cannot pene-
trate the skin, they are particularly dangerous when ingested and
deposited within the body. The determination of radium by precip-
itation is a screening technique applicable in particular to drink-
ing water. It includes all alpha emitting isotopes, and as long
as concentrations are within standards for Ra-226, the need for
examination by a more specific method is minimal. This is a param-
eter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES
permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: None
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown, but prompt analysis is recommended.
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 1,000 mi
Measurement: The recommended method is the determination of
radium by precipitation. It involves the alpha counting of a
borium-radium sulfate precipitate that has been isolated from the
sample and purified. The method is also applicable to sewage and
industrial wastes, provided that steps are taken to destroy organic
matter and eliminate other interfering ions. A counting instru-
ment is required. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this
parameter is prescribed.by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: In a 20-laboratory study involving the
analysis of four samples for total radium, all four results from
two laboratories and two results from a third had to be rejected
as outliers. Of the remainder, recoveries averaged higher than
95%. At the 95% confidence level, the precision was around 30%.
Cost of Analysis: $40 - $50
D-286
-------
RESIDUE, SETTLEABLE
Parameter Group: Solids STORET Units: mi/I
General: Settleable residue (solids) which blankets the bottom of
water bodies damage the invertebrate populations, block gravel
spawning beds, and if organic, remove dissolved oxygen from over-
lying waters. They can interfere with recreation, navigation,
fish and shellfish production, and destroy aesthetic values of
water. They may decompose to produce putrefactive odors and may
exude products of decomposition to overlying waters. This is a
parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 1000 m£
Measurement; Settleable matter is measured volumetrically with an
Imhoff cone. The practical lower limit of the determination is
about 1 m£/£/hr. For some samples, a separation of Settleable and
floating materials will occur. In such cases, the floating materi-
als are not measured. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of
this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Precision and accuracy data are not avail-
able at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $3 - $5
D-287
-------
RESIDUE, TOTAL
Parameter Group; Solids STORET Units: mg/£
General: Total residue (total solids) refers to all the solid mat-
ter (suspended and dissolved) in water or wastewater and is the ma-
terial left in a vessel after evaporation of a sample and its
subsequent drying in an oven. Thus it is the sum of filterable and
nonfilterable residue. Waters with high residue are generally of
inferior palatability and may induce adverse reaction to transient
consumers. Also see discussions of filterable and nonfilterable
residue. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines
prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 7 days
Container Type: Plastic or resistant glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 mi
Measurement: A well mixed aliquot of the test sample is quantita-
tively transferred to a pre-weighed evaporating dish and evaporated
to dryness at 103-105°C. The practical range of the determination
is from 10 mg/£ to 20,000 mg/£. Large, floating particles or sub-
merged agglomerates (non-homogeneous materials) should be excluded
from the test sample. Floating oil and grease, if present, should
be included in the sample and dispersed by a blender device before
aliquoting. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this param-
eter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The practical upper limit for this deter-
mination is 20,000 mg/£. Precision and accuracy data are not
available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $3 - $15
D-288
-------
RESIDUE, TOTAL FILTERABLE
Parameter Group: Solids STORET Units: mg/£
General: Total filterable residue (total dissolved solids) consists
of inorganic salts, small amounts of organic matter, and dissolved
materials. The principal inorganic anions dissolved in water in-
clude the carbonates, chlorides, sulfates and nitrates (principally
in ground waters); the principal cations' are sodium, potassium,
calcium, and magnesium. Excess dissolved solids are objectionable
in drinking water because of possible physiological effects, un-
palatable mineral tastes, and higher costs because of corrosion or
the necessity for additional treatment. Some communities use water
containing up to 4,000 mg/£. for drinking purposes. There is no
proof of beneficial or therapeutic value to mineral waters. This
is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by
the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: 250 mg/£ for chlorides and sulfates in domestic water
supplies (welfare).
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 7 days
Container Type: Plastic or resistant glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£
Measurement: The recommended method is applicable to drinking,
surface, and saline waters, domestic and industrial wastes. A well
mixed sample is filtered through a standard glass fiber filter.
The filtrate is evaporated and dried to constant weight at 180°C.
Highly mineralized waters containing significant concentrations of
calcium, magnesium, chloride and/or sulfate may be hygroscopic and
will require prolonged drying, desiccation and rapid weighing.
Samples containing high concentrations of bicarbonate will require
careful and prolonged drying at 180°C to insure that all the bicar-
bonate is converted to carbonate. Too much residue in the evapo-
rating dish will crust over and entrap water that will not be
driven off during drying. Total residue should be limited to about
200 mg. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter
is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The practical range of the determination
is 10 mg/£ to 20,000 mg/£. Precision and accuracy data are not
available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $3 - $15
D-289
-------
RESIDUE, TOTAL NONFILTERABLE
Parameter Group; Solids STORET Units: mg/£
General: Total nonfilterable residue (suspended solids) is the
material retained on a standard glass fiber filter disk after fil-
tration of a well mixed sample. In natural waters it consists of
erosion silt, organic detritus, and plankton. The discharge of
wastewater presents virtually unlimited possibilities. Total non-
filterable residue includes all settleable solids. It has varying
effects upon water uses (apart from individual effects of the sub-
stances constituting the suspended solids). It is the most diffi-
cult parameter in terms of obtaining a representative sample from
the bulk source and is used as a measure of treatment plant
efficiency. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guide-
lines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Should not reduce the depth of the compensation point
for photosynthetic activity by more than 10% from the established
norm - for aquatic life.
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 7 days
Container Type: Plastic or resistant glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£
Measurement: The recommended method involves filtering a well
mixed sample through a standard glass fiber filter, and the residue
retained on the filter is dried to constant weight at 103-105°C.
Too much residue on the filter will entrap water and may require
prolonged drying. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this
parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The practical range of the determination
is 10 mg/£ to 20,000 mg/£. Precision and accuracy data are not
available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $3 - $15
D-290
-------
RESIDUE, VOLATILE
Parameter Group: Solids STORET Units: mg/£
General: The volatile components in the residue represent a rough
indication of the amount of organic matter present. Since the re-
sult may reflect loss of water of crystallization, loss of volatile
organic matter before combustion, incomplete oxidation of certain
complex organics, and decomposition of mineral salts during combus-
tion, it may not yield an accurate measure of organic carbon.
This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed
by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 7 days
Container Type: Plastic or resistant glass
Sample Volume. Required: 100 m£
Measurement: The recommended method determines the weight of solid
material combustible at 550°C. The residue obtained from the de-
termination of total, filterable, or nonfilterable residue is ig-
nited at 550°C in a muffle furnace. The loss of weight on ignition
is reported as mg/£ volatile residue. For BPT NPDES purposes the
measurement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: A collaborative study involving three lab-
oratories examining four samples by means of ten replicates showed
a standard deviation of ±11 mg/£ at 170 mg/£ volatile residue
concentration.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $15
D-291
-------
SELENIUM
Parameter Group; Metals STORET Units: yg/£ as Se
General: Selenium appears in the soil as basic ferric selenite,
calcium selenate, and as elemental selenium. Selenium salts are
used in many industries, including paint, pigment and dye pro-
ducers, electronics, glass manufacture, insecticide sprays,
electrical apparatus (rectifiers, semiconductors, photoelectric
cells, etc.), rubber, and alloying. This is a parameter which is
regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits pro-
gram. This parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines pre-
scribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent
Decree pollutants.
Criteria;
10 yg/£ for domestic water supply (health)
For marine and freshwater aquatic life; 0.01 of the
96-hour LC,-ft as determined through bioassay using
a sensitive resident species
Preservation Method; Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNCL to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 50 m£
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric gaseous hydride method is
recommended using a wavelength of 196.0 run. The method is ap-
plicable to most fresh and saline waters, in the absence of high
concentrations of chromium, cobalt, copper, mercury, molybdenum,
nickel and silver. The diaminobenzidine colorimetric method may
also be used. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this
parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is approximately
2.5 yg/£; its detection limit is 2 yg/£. The working range of the
method is 2-20 yg/£. At a concentration of 10 yg/£, the relative
standard deviation is 11% and the relative error is 0.0%. Ten
replicate solutions of selenium oxide at the 5, 10 and 15 yg/£
level were analyzed by a single laboratory. Relative standard
deviations were 12%, 11%, and 19% with recoveries of 100%, 100%,
and 101%.
Cost of Analysis: $15 - $40
D-292
-------
SILICA
Parameter Group: Solids STORET Units; mg/£ as Si02
General: Silica is abundant in the earth's crust. It appears as
an oxide in many rocks. The degradation of the rocks results in
the presence of silica in natural waters. Silica is also widely
used in industry and in water treatment. Silica in water forms
silica and silicate scales in various equipments, particularly on
high pressure steam turbine blades. In normally occurring concen-
trations it does not appear to cause adverse physiological effects.
This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed
by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 7 days
Container Type: Plastic or hard rubber
Sample Volume Required: 50-1000 m£
Measurement: Total silica is determined by a gravimetric method
wherein silica acids are formed and precipitated, ignited, and the
final determination made as the loss on volatilization. The rec-
ommended method for dissolved silica involves filtering a well-
mixed sample through a 0.45y membrane filter. The filtrate, upon
the addition of molybdate ion in acidic solution, forms a greenish-
yellow color complex proportional to the dissolved silica in the
sample. The color complex is then measured spectrophotometrically.
Excessive color and/or turbidity interfere. For BPT NPDES purposes
the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Precision of the gravimetric method is
approximately ±0.2 mg SiO_. Photometric evaluations by the amino-
naphthal-sulfuric acid procedure have an estimated precision of
±0.10 mg/£ in the range from 0 to 2 mg/£. Photometric evaluations
of the silica-molybdate color in the range from 2 to 50 mg/£ have
an estimated precision of approximately 4% of the quantity of
silica measured.
Cost of Analysis: $5 - $15
D-293
-------
SILICON
Parameter Group: Solids STORET Units: yg/£ as Si
General: Silicon, the second most abundant element making up
26% of the earth's crust, is not found free in nature but occurs
chiefly as the oxide (silica) in sand, quartz, agate, opal, etc.,
and as silicates in granite, feldspar, kaqlinite, and other
minerals. Silicon is one of man's most useful elements, with ap-
plications ranging from metallurgy to solid state electronics and
the production of silicones, polymeric products ranging from liq-
uids to hard glass-like solids with many beneficial properties.
Silicon is also important in plant and animal life.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO, to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 m£
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is often used,
with a wavelength of 251.6 nm. Avoid any prolonged contact with
glass.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 2,000 pg/£;
its detection limit is 300 pg/£. Precision and accuracy data are
not available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $20
D-294
-------
SILVER
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: yg/£ as Ag
General: Silver ions cannot be expected to occur in significant
concentrations in natural waters. As a solid metal, silver is
used in the jewelry, silverware, metal alloy, and food processing
industries. The solid metal produces very little soluble waste.
Silver nitrate, which is soluble, is used in the porcelain, photo-
graphic, electroplating and ink manufacturing industries, and as
an antiseptic. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. This param-
eter will be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES
permits program. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criteria:
50 yg/<£ for domestic water supply (health)
For marine and freshwater aquatic life, ,0.01 of the
96-hour LCcfl as determined through bioassay using a
sensitive resident species
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO, to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 mi
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 328.1 run. For BPT NPDES purposes the mea-
surement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136. A BAT
NPDES method will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 60 yg/£; its
detection limit is 10 yg/£. The optimum concentration range is
100-4,000 yg/£. At a concentration of 550 yg/£, the relative
standard deviation is 17.5%, and the relative error is 10.6%.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $15 .
D-295
-------
SILVEX (2, 4, 5-TP)
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General: Silvex, 2 (2, 4, 5-trichlorophenoxy) propionic acid, is
a chlorinated phenoxy acid herbicide. It is used for weed con-
trol on land, and its esters and salts have been used as an
aquatic herbicide in lakes, streams, and irrigation canals. It
is slightly soluble in water and freely soluble in acetone and
methyl alcohol. Silvex is reported to be slightly less toxic than
2, 4-D and 2, 4, 5-T type materials. Its acute oral LD to rats
is 650,000 mg/kg of body weight. At a level of 2,000 yg/£ it has
temporarily (e.g., 2 weeks) reduced the number of plankton in
lakes, but fish are unaffected. Apparently the threshold of
toxicity for fish is around 5,000 yg/£. In some instances, how-
ever, fish have acquired an unpleasant, oily taste following ex-
posure to Silvex. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: 10 yg/£ for domestic water supply (health).
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 - 1,000 m£, depending on measurement
method used.
Measurement: In the recommended method, chlorinated phenoxy acids
and their esters are extracted from the acidified water sample
with ethyl ether. The esters are hydrolyzed to acids, and extra-
neous organic material is removed by a solvent wash. The acids
are converted to methyl esters which are extracted from the
aqueous phase. The extract is cleaned up by passing it through
a micro-adsorption column. Detection-and measurement are accom-
plished by electron capture, microcoulometric or electrolytic
conductivity gas chromatography. Interferences may be high and
varied and often pose great difficulty in obtaining accurate and
precise measurement of chlorinated phenoxy acid herbicides. Or-
ganic acids, especially chlorinated acids, cause the most direct
interference with the determination. Phenols including chloro-
phenols will also interfere with this procedure. The method is
recommended for use only by an experienced pesticide analyst (or
under the close supervision of such a person). For BPT NPDES
purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
D-296
-------
Precision and Accuracy: Sensitivity of the method is 1 yg/£. De-
tection limits of 0.01 yg/£ or so may be achieved. Precision and
accuracy data are not available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $45 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-297
-------
SODIUM
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: mg/£ as Na
General: Sodium is present in most natural waters and, as the
cation of many salts used in industry, is one of the most common
ions in industrial waters. A high sodium ratio has harmed soil
permeability. Humans with certain diseases (cardiac, renal, and
circulatory) require water with a low sodium concentration.
Otherwise, taste considerations prevail as far as human ingestion
is concerned. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guide-
lines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Add HNO_ to
pH of 2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Polyethylene bottles
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 m£
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 589.6 nm. Low-temperature flames increase
sensitivity by reducing the extent of ionization of this easily
ionized metal. Ionization may also be controlled by adding
potassium (1,000 mg/£) to both standards and samples. The flame
photometric method may also be used. For BPT NPDES purposes the
measurement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 0.015 mg/£;
its detection limit is 0.002 mg/£. The optimum concentration
range is 0.03-1.0 mg/£. In a single laboratory, using distilled
water samples at levels of 8.2 and 52 mg/£, the relative standard
deviations were 1.2% and 1.5%, respectively. Recoveries at these
levels were 102% and 100%. In a 35-laboratory test using the
flame photometric method on a synthetic unknown at 19.9 mg/£ Na,
a relative standard deviation of 17.3% and a relative error of
4.0% were reported.
Cost of Analysis: $5 - $10
D-298
-------
SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE
Parameter Group: Physical STORET Units: ymhos/cm @ 25°C
General: The determination of conductivity (specific electrical
conductance) is a quick method for determining the ion concentra-
tion of water. The mobility of each of the various ions, their
valences, and their actual and relative concentrations affect
conductivity. The specific conductance of potable waters generally
ranges from 50 to 1,500 ymhos/cm; for wastewaters it is highly
variable and may be well in excess of 10,000 ymhos/cm. This is a
parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£
Measurement: The specific conductance of a sample is measured by
use of a self-contained conductivity meter, Wheatstone bridge-type
or equivalent. Samples are preferably analyzed at 25°C. If not,
temperature corrections are made and results reported at 25°C.
For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter is pre-
scribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Typically, relative standard deviations
of around 7 to 9% and relative errors from 2 to 5% are experienced.
Cost of Analysis: $3 - $5
D-299
-------
STRONTIUM
Parameter Group: Radiological STORET Units: Unspecified
General: The radioactive nuclides of strontium produced in
nuclear fission are Sr-89 and Sr-90. Strontium 90 is one of the
most hazardous of all fission products. It has a half-life of
28 years. Strontium is concentrated in the bones if it is
ingested. Ten percent of the occupational maximum concentration
for Sr-90 in water is 100 pCi/£. This is a parameter which is
regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits
program.
Criterion: Not established.
Preservation Method: None
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown, but prompt analysis is recommended.
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: Not determined
Measurement: The recommended method involves the use of a "car-
rier" which is inactive strontium ions in the form of strontium
nitrate. Precipitation is used to obtain strontium carbonate
from the strontium carrier and the radionuclide of strontium. It
is dried to determine recovery of the carrier and then measured
for radioactivity. Radioactive barium interferes in the determina-
tion of radioactive strontium. A counting instrument is required.
For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter is pre-
scribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: In a study of two sets of paired water
samples containing known additions of radionuclides, 12 labora-
tories determined the total radiostrontium and 10 laboratories
determined Sr-90. The average recoveries of total radiostrontium
from the four samples were 99%, 99%, 96%, and 93%. The average
recoveries of added Sr-90 from the four samples were 90%, 96%,
80%, and 94%.
Cost of Analysis: $40 - $50
D-300
-------
SULFATE
Parameter Group: General STORET Units: mg/£ as SO.
Inorganic
General: Sulfates occur naturally in waters as a result of leach-
ings from gypsum and other common minerals or as the final oxi-
dized stage of sulfides, sulfites, and-thiosulfates having both
mineral and organic origins. They may also be found in the wastes
from numerous industries, including tanneries, sulfate pulp mills,
textile mills, and other plants using sulfates or sulfuric acid.
Excessive sulfates may exert a laxative action toward new users
and cause taste problems, but such effects are not observed below
500 mg/£. Limits for industrial users (especially sugar making)
are much lower. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 7 days
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 50 m-d
Measurement: The turbidimetric method using a nephelometer is
normally acceptable. The method is suitable for all concentra-
tion ranges of sulfate; however, in order to obtain reliable
readings, use a sample aliquot containing not more than 40 mg/t
SO.. Suspended matter and color interfere. Correct by running
blanks from which the barium chloride has been omitted. The
gravimetric method is recommended when results of the greatest
accuracy are required. It is most accurate for sulfate concentra-
tions above 10 mg/£. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of
this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: A synthetic unknown sample containing
259 mg/£ sulfate, 108 mg/£ Ca, 82 mg/£ Mg, 3.1 mg/£ K, 19.9 mg/£
Na, 241 mg/£ chloride, 250 yg/£ nitrite N, 1.1 mg/£ nitrate N and
42.5 mg/£ total alkalinity (contributed by NaHCO,) was analyzed
by the gravimetric method, with a relative standard deviation of
4.7% and a relative error of 1.9% in 32 laboratories. Using the
turbidimetric method in 19 laboratories, the relative standard
deviation was 9.1% and the relative error, 1.2%.
Cost of Analysis: $4 - $12
D-301
-------
SULFIDE
Parameter Group: General STORET Units: mg/£ as S
Inorganic
General: Sulfide is often present in groundwater and is common in
some natural waters and sewage, coming in part from the anaerobic
decomposition of organic matter. Sulfides are constituents of
many industrial wastes, e.g., tanneries, paper mills, chemical
plants, and gas works. It also occurs due to bacterial reduction
of sulfates. The highly unpleasant taste and odor that results
when sulfides occur in water make it unlikely that humans or ani-
mals will consume a harmful dose. Small traces of sulfide may
be detrimental to some industrial uses. Sulfides are of little
importance in irrigation waters. The sulfide ion readily reacts
with free hydrogen ions in water to form hydrogen sulfide, which
is very toxic, attacks metals directly, and indirectly causes
serious corrosion to concrete sewers. This is a parameter which
is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits
program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Add 2 m£ zinc
acetate, fill bottle completely, and stopper.
Maximum Holding Time; 24-hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 50 rut
Measurement: The titrimetric iodine method is recommended. It is
applicable to the measurement of total and dissolved sulfides.
Acid insoluble sulfides are not measured by this test. Reduced
sulfur compounds, such as sulfite, thiosulfate and hydrosulfite,
which decompose in acid may yield erratic results. Volatile
iodine consuming substances will give high results. For BPT NPDES
purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Precision and accuracy data have not been
determined.
Cost of Analysis: $5 - $12
D-302
-------
SULFITE
Parameter Group; General STORET Units; mg/£ as S0_
Inorganic
General; Sulfite may occur in certain industrial wastes but is
most commonly found in boilers and boiler feedwater to which
sodium sulfite has been added to reduce dissolved oxygen to a
minimum and prevent corrosion. It is thought that a high concen-
tration of sulfite in water may cause exema. This is a parameter
which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES
permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 50 m£.
Measurement: The recommended method has a minimum detectable
limit of 2-3 mg/£ S0_. An acidified sample containing an indica-
O
tor is titrated with a standard potassium iodide-iodate titrant to
a faint permanent blue end point. The temperature of the sample
must be below 50°C. Oxidizable substances, such as organic com-
pounds, ferrous, iron and sulfide are positive interferences.
Nitrite gives a negative interference by oxidizing sulfite when
the sample is acidified. Copper and possibly other metals cata-
lyze the oxidation of sulfite. For BPT NPDES purposes the meas-
urement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy; Precision and accuracy data are not
available.
Cost of Analysis: $5 - $12
D-303
-------
2, 4, 5-T
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units: yg/£
General: 2, 4, 5-T (2, 4, 5-trichlorophenoxyacetic acid) is the
chlorinated phenoxy acid herbicide C0H_C1_0_. It is a crystal-
o o o o
line substance, almost insoluble in water, but soluble in alco-
hol. It is a plant hormone. The estimated lethal dose for a
90-kg man is 54 grams. The acute oral LD,-n to rats is 300,000 mg/
kg of body weight. 2, 4, 5-T forms phenol as a breakdown product.
Toxicity data for aquatic life are sparse. This is a parameter
which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES
permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-1,000 m£, depending on measurement
method used.
Measurement: In the recommended method, chlorinated phenoxy acids
and their esters are extracted from the acidified water sample
with ethyl ether. The esters are hydrolyzed to acids and ex-
traneous organic material is removed by a solvent wash." The acids
are,converted to methyl esters which are extracted from the aque-
ous phase. The extract is cleaned up by passing, it through a •
micro-adsorption column. Detection and measurement are accomplished
by electron capture, microcoulometric or electrolytic conductivity
gas chromatography. Interferences may be high and varied and often
pose great difficulty in obtaining accurate and precise measurement
of chlorinated phenoxy acid herbicides. Organic acids, especially
chlorinated acids, cause the most direct interference with the de-
termination. Phenols including chlorophenols will also interfere
with this procedure. The method is recommended for use only by an
experienced pesticide analyst (or under the close supervision of
such a person). For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this
parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Sensitivity of the method is 1 yg/£.
Detection limits of 0.002 pg/£ or so may be achieved. Precision
and accuracy data are not available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $45 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-304
-------
TEMPERATURE
Parameter Group: Temperature STORET Units; °C
General : Temperature changes in waters are due to natural climatic
phenomena or the discharge of irrigation return flows and wastes,
such as distilling effluents and cooling waters. The elevation of
stream temperatures may contribute to decreased oxygen capacity,
increased oxygen demand, anaerobic zones, and putrefaction of
sludge deposits. Temperature is a significant factor for water
treatment and many industrial uses, e.g., pulp and paper. Tem-
perature also affects the value of numerous other water quality
parameters. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guide-
lines prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criteria:
Freshwater Aquatic Life
For any time of year, there are two upper limiting tempera-
tures for a location (based on the important sensitive species
found there at that time) :
1 . One limit consists of a maximum temperature for short
exposures that is time dependent and is given by the species-
specific equation:
Uog1Q ftime^J -a j -
Temperature o- = (1/b) Uog time -a -2°C
where: l°Sin = logarithm to base 10 (common logarithm)
a = intercept on the "y" or logarithmic axis of
the line fitted to experimental data and
which is available from Appendix II-C, MAS,
1974 for some species.
b = slope of the line fitted to experimental
data and available from Appendix II-C, NAS,
1974 for some species.
and
2. The second value is a limit on the weekly average tem-
perature that :
a. In the cooler months (mid-October to mid-April in
the north and December to February in the south)
will protect against mortality of important species
D-305
-------
or
or
or
if the elevated plume temperature is suddenly dropped
to the ambient temperature, with the limit being the
acclimation temperature minus 2°C when the lower lethal
threshold temperature equals the ambient water tempera-
ture (in some regions this limitation may also be
applicable in summer).
In the warmer months (April through October in the
north and March through November in the south) is
determined by adding to the physiological optimum
temperature (usually for growth) a factor calculated
as one-third of the difference between the ultimate
upper incipient lethal temperature and the optimum
temperature for the most sensitive important species
(and appropriate life state) that normally is found
at that location and time.
c. During reproductive seasons (generally April through
June and September through October in the north and
March through May and October through November in
the south) the limit is that temperature that meets
site-specific requirements for successful migration,
spawning, egg incubation, fry rearing, and other
reproductive functions of important species. These
local requirements should supersede all other re-
quirements when they are applicable.
d. There is a site-specific limit that is found neces-
sary to preserve normal species diversity or prevent
appearance of nuisance organisms.
Marine Aquatic Life
In order to ensure protection of the characteristic indig-
enous marine community of a water body segment from adverse
thermal effects:
a. The maximum acceptable increase in the weekly average
temperature due to artificial sources is 1°C (1.8°F)
during all seasons of the year, providing the summer
maxima are not exceeded; and
D-306
-------
b. Daily temperature cycles characteristic of the
water body segment should not be altered in
either amplitude or frequency.
Summer thermal maxima, which define the upper thermal limits
for the communities of the discharge area, should be established
on a site-specific basis. Existing studies suggest the following
regional limits:
Short-term Maximum True
Maximum Daily Mean*
Sub-tropical Regions (south 32.2°C (90°F) 29.4°C (85°F)
of Cape Canaveral and Tampa
Bay, Florida, and Hawaii
Cape Hatteras, N.C., to 32.2°C (90°F) 29.4°C (85°F)
Cape Canaveral, Florida
Long Island (south shore) 30.6°C (87°F) 27.8°C (82°F)
to Cape Hatterras, N.C.
* (True Daily Mean = average of 24 hourly temperature
readings.)
Baseline thermal conditions should be measured at a site where
there is no unnatural thermal addition from any source, which is
in reasonable proximity to the thermal discharge (within 5 miles)
and which has similar hydrography to that of the receiving waters
at the discharge.
Preservation Method: Determination on site
Maximum Holding Time: No holding
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 1000 m£
Measurement: Temperature measurements may be made with any good
grade of mercury-filled or dial type Celsius thermometer, or a
thermistor. The measurement device should be checked against a
precision thermometer certified by the National Bureau of Standards.
For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter is pre-
scribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Precision and accuracy will depend upon
instrument used.
Cost of Analysis: Not immediately determinable.
D-307
-------
THALLIUM
Parameter Group; Metals STORET Units: yg/£ as Tl
General : Thallium salts are used as rodenticides and ant bait,
dyes and pigments in fireworks, in optical glass, and as a
dipilatory. They are highly soluble in water and discharges are
not likely to form precipitates. It is a cumulative poison, four
times as toxic as arsenious oxide and affects the nervous system,
causes muscular pain, endocrine disorders, and loss of hair. This
is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by
the NPDES permits program. This parameter will be regulated by
BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one
of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO, to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 mt
Measurement : The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 276.8 nm. For BPT NPDES purposes the meas-
urement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 500
its detection limit is 100 yg/£. The optimum concentration range
is 1,000-20,000 pg/£. In a single laboratory, using a mixed
industrial-domestic waste effluent at concentrations of 600, 3,000,
and 15,000 yg/£ Tl, the relative standard deviations were 3%,
1.7%, and 1.3%, respectively. Recoveries at these levels were
100%, 98%, and 98%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $15 - $20
D-308
-------
THRESHOLD ODOR
Parameter Group: Physical STORET Units: Threshold
Number
general: Odor is a quality factor that affects water in several
ways including the acceptability of drinking water, tainting of
fish, and the aesthetics of recreational waters. Odor can origi-
nate from industrial and municipal waste discharges and from natu-
ral sources such as decomposition of vegetable matter and living
microscopic organisms. Odorous substances in water must be vapor-
izable in order to be smelled.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Glass
Sample Volume.Required: 200 to 500 m£
Measurement: The consistent series method, in which the sample is
divided to the point of the least definitely perceptible odor to
each tester, is often used. Highly odorous samples are reduced in
concentration proportionately before being tested. The method
is applicable to samples ranging from nearly odorless natural
waters to industrial wastes with threshold odor numbers in the
thousands. Most tap waters and some waste waters are chlorinated.
Dechlorination is achieved using sodium thiosulfate in exact
stoichiometric quantity.
Precision and Accuracy: Precision and accuracy data are not
available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: $5 - $10
D-309
-------
TIN
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: yg/£ as Sn
General: Tin does not occur in natural waters. It is used in
dyeing of fabrics, decorating porcelain, glassworks, fingernail
polishes, some lacquers and varnishes, fungicides, insecticides,
antihelminthics, antifoulant marine coatings and, of course, the
tinning of vessels, especially foodstuff containers. Other sources
include iron and steel production and power plant and industrial
boilers. Tin is not believed to be toxic to man or other life
forms. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines
prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion; Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO, to pH <2.
o
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 mi
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 286.3 nm. For BPT NPDES purposes the meas-
urement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 4 mg/£; its
detection limit is 800 pg/£. The optimum concentration range is
16,000-200,000 yg/£. In a single laboratory, using a mixed
industrial-domestic waste effluent at concentrations of 4,000,
20,000, and 60,000 pg/£ Sn, the relative standard deviations were
6.2%, 2.5%, and .8%, respectively. Recoveries at these levels
were 96%, 101%, and 101%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $15 - $20
D-310
-------
TITANIUM
Parameter Group; Metals STORET Units: yg/£ as Ti
General: Titanium ores and salts are abundantly distributed in
the earth's crust, constituting from 0.5% to 10% of soils. The
metal is used chiefly in alloying, and its salts are used in
paint, paper, and dyeing industries, in the manufacture of elec-
tronic components, and in glass and ceramic production. There is
little evidence of harm to life forms from titanium. This is a
parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the
NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNCL to pH <2.
O
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 m£
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 365.3 nm. A number of elements increase
the sensitivity of titanium. To control this problem, potassium
(1,000 mg/£) must be added to the standards and samples. For BPT
NPDES purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 2,000 yg/£;
its detection limit is 300 yg/£. The optimum concentration range
is 5,000-100,000 yg/£. In a single laboratory, using a mixed
industrial-domestic waste effluent at concentrations of 2,000,
10,000, and 50,000 yg/£ Ti, the relative standard deviations were
3.5%, 1.0%, and .8%, respectively. Recoveries at these levels
were 97%, 91%, and 88%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $20
D-311
-------
TOLUENE
Parameter Group; General STORET Units:
Organic
General: Toluene (C6H5CH_), a flammable liquid with an odor of
benzene, is a constituent of coal tar. It is used in the manu-
facture of organic substances and as a solvent in the extraction
of various principles from plants. Toluene is modestly soluble in
water at normal temperatures. Its UL- for rats is 7,000 mg/kg of
body weight. Lethal concentrations to fish in clean water range
from 10,000 to over 90,000 pg/£ depending upon temperature and
species. This parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines pre-
scribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent
Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Not determined. Analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 2CO-1,000 m£
Measurement: Hexadecone extraction followed by gas chromatographic
and mass spectrometric analysis is often used. A BAT NPDES method
will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy; Detection limits should be around
2-10 yg/£.Precision and accuracy data are not available at this
time.
Cost of Analysis: $15 - $30
D-312
-------
TOTAL COLIFORM
Parameter Group: Bacteriologic STORET Units: See below
General: The coliform bacteria group as defined by the tests de-
scribed herein includes organisms of diverse origins, including
intermediate and Aerobactor aerogenes strains, which are usually of
soil, vegetable, or other non-fecal origin; E. coli, which is usu-
ally but not always of fecal origin; and fecal coliform, which is a
positive indication of the excrement of warm-blooded animals. The
direct examination for the presence of a specific pathogen in water
is not usually practicable for control purposes, and total coli-
form has been widely used as a microbiological indicator organism.
The more specific fecal coliform indicator is gaining in popularity,
however. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines
prescribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C. Add a dechlorinating agent
(e.g., sodium thiosulfate) if residual chlorine is present. Sam-
ples high in heavy metals should have a chelating agent (e.g.,
EDTA) added to reduce metal toxicity.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 hours (30 hours absolute maximum for po-
table water sample).
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£
Measurement: The multiple tube fermentation technique, which de-
fines the coliform group as all aerobic and facultative anaerobic,
gram negative, rod-shaped, nonspore-forming bacteria that ferment
lactose with gas formations within 48 hours at 35°C, is recom-
mended. The simpler membrane filter technique, which defines the
coliform group as the above bacteria that produce a dark colony
with a metallic sheen within 24 hours on an Endo-type medium con-
taining lactose, is also recommended, especially for nondrinking
water tests. Results of the former are expressed statistically as
the Most Probable Number (MPN), while the latter are expressed as
number of colonies per 100 m£. For BPT NPDES purposes the measure-
ment of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Not applicable
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $12 MFT
$15 - $20 MPN
D-313
-------
TOXAPHENE
Parameter Group: Pesticides STORET Units:
General: Toxaphene is a chlorinated camphene insecticide. It is
insoluble in water but highly soluble in organic solvents and oils.
It has been reported that lakes treated with toxaphene concentra-
tions ranging from 40 to 150 ug/£ remained toxic to fish for per-
iods of a few months to five years. Bioconcentration accumulations
of toxaphene of 5,000 to 21,000 times water concentrations have
been observed in brook trout exposed only through water. Accumu-
lation factors of 3,400 to 17,000 from aqueous solution have been
reported for bacteria, algae, and fungi. Owing to the turpentine
odor, it is not likely that toxic concentrations will be consumed
by man or animals. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT
guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. This parameter
will be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits
program. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants. A toxic
effluent limitation has been prescribed for this parameter by the
NPDES permits program.
Criteria:
• 5 yg/£ for domestic supply (health)
0.005 yg/-£ for freshwater and marine aquatic life
Preservation Method: Cool to 4°C; analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: 50-100 m£ or more
Measurement: The use of co-solvent extraction and detection and
measurement accomplished by electron capture, microcoulometric
or electrolytic conductivity gas chromatography is recommended for
toxaphene under favorable conditions. Many interferences exist,
especially PCB's, phthalate esters, and organophosphorus pesti-
cides, and the method is only recommended for use by a skilled,
experienced pesticide analyst (or under close supervision of such
a person). For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this parame-
ter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
D-314
-------
Precision and Accuracy: The detection limit is affected by many
factors, but usually falls in the 0.001 to 1 yg/£ range. In-
creased sensitivity is likely to increase interference. Typically,
the percent recovery decreases with increasing concentration.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $150, depending upon preparation required.
D-315
-------
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General: Trichloroethylene, a nonflammable liquid with a
chloroform-like odor, is practically insoluble in water. It is
used as a solvent and in solvent extraction by several industries,
in degreasing, in the manufacture of chemicals and Pharmaceuticals,
and in dry cleaning. The oral LD5Q for dogs is 5.86 g/kg of body
weight. Concentrations of 55 mg/£ will stupify fish within
10 minutes. This parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines
prescribed by the NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent
Decree pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Sample history must be known before any chem-
ical or physical preservation steps can be applied to protect
against phase separation. Fill the sample bottle completely and
seal until analysis is performed. Do not refrigerate.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown; preferably analyze within 1 hour.
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: In excess of 200 ro£
Measurement: In the recommended Bellar procedure the sample is
stripped with an inert gas; volatiles are captured on an ad-
sorbent trap and desorbed into a modified gas chromatograph
equipped with a halogen-specific detector. Methodology should be
checked for interferences, e.g., from bromine or iodine. A BAT
NPDES method will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Sensitivity of the method is approximately
1,000 ug/£.Detection limits of 0.2-3 vg/£ may be achieved. Pre-
cision and accuracy data are not available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: Around $60
D-316
-------
TURBIDITY
Parameter Group: Physical STORET Units: Formazin
Turbidity
Units
General: Turbidity is an optical property of water, reflecting
its propensity for scattering light. From chlorination considera-
tions, finished drinking waters typically have a maximum limit of
1 turbidity unit where the water enters the distribution system.
Turbid water interferes with recreational use and aesthetic en-
joyment of water. The less turbid the water, the more desirable
it becomes for swimming and other water contact sports. See
discussion for suspended solids. This is a parameter which is
regulated by BPT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits
program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: 24 hours
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100 m£
Measurement: The recommended method is applicable to drinking,
surface, and saline waters in the range of turbidity from 0 to
40 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU). The method is based upon
a comparison of the intensity of light scattered by the sample
under defined conditions with the intensity of light scattered by
a standard reference suspension. The presence of floating debris
and course sediments which settle out rapidly will give low read-
ings. Finely divided air bubbles will affect the results in a
positive manner. For BPT NPDES purposes the measurement of this
parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: In a single laboratory, using surface
water samples at levels of 26, 41, 75 and 180 NTU, the relative
standard deviations were 2.3%, 2.3%, 1.6%, and 2.6%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $3 - $5
D-317
-------
URANIUM
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: mg/£
General: In addition to atomic energy applications, uranium is
used in photography, glazing and painting porcelain, and in chemi-
cal processes. Many uranium salts are soluble in water. It has
been reported that uranium and many of its salts are toxic; how-
ever, limited studies indicate that natural uranium, absorbed by
people through the water and foodstuffs grown on land, may be a
limiting factor in the incidence of leukemia. There is generally
greater concern about the radiological hazards of uranium than
about its chemical effects, however.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. Add HNO to
pHw2 and cool to 4°C.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 50 m£
Measurement: The direct fluorometric method is often used. The
concentration range is from 0.005 to 2.0 mg/£. For higher con-
centrations, the extraction method may be used. The method in-
volves the measurement of the fluorescence of a fused disk of so-
dium fluoride, lithium fluoride, and uranium compound exposed to
ultraviolet light. The intensity of the fluorescence is propor-
tional to the uranium concentration. Small quantities of cadmium,
chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, nickel, lead,
platinum, silicon, thorium, and zinc interfere by quenching the
uranium fluorescence and a purification or spiking method must be
used. The AA method may also be used.
Precision and Accuracy: The single operator precision (S) at a
uranium concentration of X mg/£ may be estimated from
log (S-0.0016) = log 0.129 + 120 log X.
Cost of Analysis: $30 - $40
D-318
-------
VANADIUM
Parameter Group; Metals STORET Units: yg/£ as V
General: Minerals containing vanadium are widespread in nature.
In addition to its metallurgical uses, principally in steel
alloying, its salts are used in the manufacture of glass, ce-
ramics, ink, in photography, and in the dyeing and printing of
fabrics. It is not considered toxic and, in fact, may play a
beneficial role in reducing cholesterol, preventing heart disease
and dental caries, and lowering the phospholipid content of the
liver. Small quantities of vanadium may stimulate plant growth.
This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guidelines pre-
scribed by the NPDES permits program.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO_ to pH <2.
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 mi
Measurement; The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 318.4 nm. High concentrations of aluminum
and titanium increase the sensitivity of vanadium. This inter-
ference can be controlled by adding excess aluminum (1,000 mg/£)
to both samples and standards. For BPT NPDES purposes the meas-
urement of this parameter is prescribed by 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 800 yg/£;
its detection limit is 200 yg/£. The optimum concentration range
is 1,000-100,000 yg/£. In a single laboratory, using a mixed
industrial-domestic waste effluent at concentrations of 2,000,
10,000, and 50,000 yg/£ V, the relative standard deviations were
5%, 1%, and .4%, respectively. Recoveries at these levels were
100%, 95%, and 97%, respectively.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $20
D-319
-------
VINYL CHLORIDE
Parameter Group: STORET Units:
General: Vinyl chloride (chloroethene, CH2:CHC1), a flammable gas
with an ethereal odor, is only slightly soluble in water. It is
prepared by catalytic addition of hydrogen chloride to acetylene or
by pyrolysis of ethylene dichloride and is used chiefly for making
vinyl resins. U.S. production exceeds 3 billion pounds annually.
This parameter will be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by
the NPDES permits program. It is one of the Consent Decree
pollutants.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method: Sample history must be known before any chem-
ical or physical preservation steps can be applied to protect
against phase separation. Fill the sample bottle completely and
seal until analysis is performed. Do not refrigerate.
Maximum Holding Time: Unknown; preferably analyze within 1 hour.
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required: In excess of 200 mi
Measurement; In the recommended Bellar procedure the sample is
stripped with an inert gas; volatiles are captured on an ad-
sorbent trap and desorbed into a modified gas chromatograph
equipped with a halogen-specific detector. Methodology should be
checked for interferences, e.g., from bromine or iodine. A BAT
NPDES method will be prescribed for this parameter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: Sensitivity of the method is approximately
1,000 yg/£.Detection limits of 0.2-3 yg/£ may be achieved. Pre-
cision and accuracy data are not available at this time.
Cost of Analysis: Around $60
D-320
-------
XYLENE
Parameter Group: General STORE! Units: yg/£
Organic
General: Xylene (C,H.(CH_)_), a flammable liquid, is a constitu-
ent of coal tar. It is used in the manufacture of dyes and or-
ganic substances, as a solvent, and as a cleaning agent. Xylene is
insoluble in water. Its LD for white rats is 4.3g/kg of body
weight. Lethal concentrations to fish range from 10,000 to
90,000 yg/£ depending upon temperature and species.
Criterion: Not established
Preservation Method; Not determined. Analyze promptly.
Maximum Holding Time; Unknown
Container Type: Borosilicate glass
Sample Volume Required; 200-1,000 mi
Measurements Hexadecone extraction followed by gas chromatographic
and mass spectrometric analysis is often used.
Precision and Accuracy: Detection limits should be around
2-10 yg/£.Precision and accuracy data are not available at this
time.
Cost of Analysis: $15 - $30
D-321
-------
ZINC
Parameter Group: Metals STORET Units: pg/£ as Zn
General: Zinc is usually found in nature as the sulfide. Zinc is
used in galvanizing and in the preparation of alloys for dye cast-
ing. Zinc is also used in brass and bronze alloys, slush castings,
photoengraving, printing plates, silver and stainless steel table-
ware, viscose rayon yarn, wood pulp, and newsprint paper. Other
sources include mining areas, paint pigments, cosmetics, pharmaceu-
tics, insecticides, and many more. Zinc is an essential and bene-
ficial element in human metabolism. Excessive amounts of zinc
affect growth rates and decrease both the weight and fat content
of the liver. This is a parameter which is regulated by BPT guide-
lines prescribed by the NPDES permits program. This parameter will
be regulated by BAT guidelines prescribed by the NPDES permits pro-
gram. It is one of the Consent Decree pollutants.
Zinc is a
Criteria;
• 5,000 yg/£ for domestic water supplies (welfare).
For freshwater aquatic life, 0.01 of the 96-hour LC as
determined through bioassay using a sensitive resident
species.
Preservation Method; Analyze as soon as possible. If storage is
necessary, add HNO_ to pH <2.
O
Maximum Holding Time: 6 months
Container Type: Plastic or glass
Sample Volume Required: 100-200 ml
Measurement: The AA spectrophotometric method is recommended,
using a wavelength of 213.9 nm. The air-acetylene flame absorbs
about 25% of the energy at the 213.9-nm line. The sensitivity may
be increased by the use of low-temperature flames. For BPT NPDES
purposes the measurement of this parameter is prescribed by
40 CFR 136. A BPT NPDES method will be prescribed for this param-
eter in 40 CFR 136.
Precision and Accuracy: The AA method sensitivity is 20 yg/£; its
detection limit is 5 yg/£. The optimum concentration range is 50-
2,000 yg/£. At a concentration of 500 yg/£, the relative standard
deviation is 8.2%, and the relative error is 0.4%.
Cost of Analysis: $10 - $15
D-322
-------
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 16, 1973
WASHINGTON, D.C.
Volume 38 • Number 199
PART II
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
WATER PROGRAMS
Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures
(or Analysis of Pollutants
No. 199—Pt. H 1
D-323
-------
28758
RULES AND REGULATIONS
Title 4O—Protection of Environment
CHAPTER I—ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AUENCY
SUBCHAPTER D—WATER PROGRAMS
PART 136—GUIDELINES ESTABLISHING
TEST PROCEDURES FOR THE ANALY-
SIS OF POLLUTANTS
Notice was pubished in the FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of June 29, 1973 (38 FR
17318) at 40 CFR 130, that the Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA) was
giving consideration to the testing pro-
cedures required pursuant to section
304 (g) of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments of 1972 (86
Stat. 816, et seq., Pub. L. 92-500 (1972))
hereinafter referred to as the Act. These
considerations were given in the form of
proposed guidelines establishing test
procedures.
Section 304(g) of the Act requires that
the Administrator shall promulgate
guidelines establishing test procedures
for the analysis of pollutants that shall
'include factors which must be provided
in: 1, any certification pursuant to sec-
tion 401 of the Act, or 2, any permit ap-
plication pursuant to section 402 of the
Act. Such test procedures are to be used
by permit applicants to demonstrate that
effluent discharges meet applicable pol-
lutant discharge limitations, and by the
States and other enforcement activities
in routine or random monitoring of ef-
fluents to verify effectiveness of pollu-
tion control measures.
These guidelines require that discharge
measurements, including but not limited
to the pollutants and parameters listed
in Table I, be performed by the test
procedures indicated; or under certain
circumstances by other test procedures
for analysis that may be more advan-
tageous to use, when such other test
procedures have the approval of the Re-
gional Administrator of the Region
where such discharge will occur, and
when the Director of an approved State
National Pollutant Discharge Elimina-
tion System (NPDES) Program (here-
inafter referred to as the Director) for
the State in which such discharge will
occur has no objection to such approval.
The list of test procedures in Table I
is published herein as final rulemaking
and represents major departures from
the list of proposed test procedures which
was published in 38 FR 17318, dated
June 29, 1973. These revisions were made
after carefully considering all written
comments which were received pertain-
ing to the proposed test procedures. All
written comments are on file and avail-
able for public review with the Quality
Assurance Division, Office of Research
and Development, EPA, Washington, D.C.
The principal revisions to the proposed
test procedures are as follows:
1. Where several reliable test proce-
dures for analysis are available from
the given references for a given pollutant
or parameter, each such test procedure
has been approved for use for making
the measurements required by sections
401 and 402 and related sections of the
Act. Approved test procedures have been
selected to assure an acceptable level of
Intel-comparability of pollutants dis-
charge data. For several pollutants and
parameters it has still been necessary to
approve only a single test procedure to
assure this level of acceptability. This is
a major departure from the proposed
test procedures which would have re-
quired the use of a single reference
method for each pollutant or parameter.
2. Under certain circumstances a test
procedure not shown on the approved
list may be considered by an applicant
to be more advantageous to use. Under
guidelines in §| 136.4 and 136.5 it may be
approved by the Regional Administrator
of the Region where the discharge will
occur, providing the Director has no ob-
jections. Inasmuch as there is no longer
a single approved reference method
against which a comparison can be made,
the procedures for establishing such
comparisons that were required by the
proposed test procedures in 1130.4(b)
have been deleted from this final guide-
line for test procedures for the analysis
of pollutants.
3. A mechanism is also provided to
assure national uniformity of such ap-
provals of alternate test procedures for
the analysis of pollutants. This is
achieved through a centralized, internal
review within the EPA of all applications
for the use of alternate testing proce-
dures. These will be reviewed and ap-
proved or disapproved on the basis of
submitted information and other avail-
able information and laboratory tests
which may be required by the Regional
Administrator.
As deemed necessary, the Administra-
tor will expand or revise these guide-
lines to provide the most responsive and
appropriate list of test procedures to
meet the requirements of sections 304 (g),
401 and 402 of the Act, as amended.
These final guidelines establishing test
procedures for the analysis of pollutants
supersede the interim list of test proce-
dures published in the FEDERAL REGISTER
on April 19. 1973 (38 FR 9740) at 40 CFR
Part 126 and subsequent procedures pub-
lished on July 24, 1973 (38 FR 19894)
at 40 CFR Part 124. Those regulations
established interim test procedures for
the submittal of applications under sec-
tion 402 of the Act. Because of the im-
portance of these guidelines for test
procedures for the analysis of pollutants
to the National Pollution Discharge Elim-
ination System (NPDES), the Adminis-
trator finds good cause to declare that
these guidelines shall be effective Octo-
ber 16,1973.
JOHN QoArtLES,
Acting Administrator.
OCTOBER 3, 1973.
PART 136—TEST PROCEDURES FOR THE
ANALYSIS OF POLLUTANTS
Sec.
136.1 Applicability.
136.2 Definitions.
136.3 Identification of teat procedures
136.4 Application for alternate test proce-
dures.
136:5 Approval of alternate test procedures.
: Sec. 304(8) of Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
86 Stat. 816, et seq., Pub. L. 93-500).
§ 136.1 Applicability.
The procedures prescribed hereto
shall, except as noted in g 136.5, be used
to perform the measurements Indicated
whenever the waste constituent specified
is required to be measured for:
(a) An application submitted to the
Administrator, or to a State having an
approved NPDES program, for a permit
under section 402 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act as amended
(FWPCA), and,
(b) Reports required to be submitted
by dischargers under the NPDES
established by Parts 124 and 125 of this
chapter, and,
(c) Certifications issued by States pur-
suant to section 401 of the FWPCA, as
amended. ,
§ 136.2 Definitions.
As used in this part, the term:
(a) "Act" means the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, as amende^, 33
U.S.C. 1314, et seq.
(b) "Administrator" means the Ad-
ministrator of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.
(c) "Regional Administrator" means
one of the EPA Regional Administrators.
(d) "Director" means the Director of
the State Agency authorized to carry
out an approved National Pollutant Dis-
charge Elimination System Program
under section 402 of the Act.
(e) "National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES)" means
the national system for the issuance of
permits under section 402 of the Act and
includes any State or interstate program
which has been approved by the Admin-
istrator, in whole or in part, pursuant to
' section 402 of the Act.
(f) "Standard Methods" means Stand-
ard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Waste Water, 13th Edition,
1971. This publication is available from
the American Public Health Association,
1015 18th St. NW.. Washington. D.C.
20036.
(g) "ASTM" means Annual Book of
Standards, Part T3, Water, Atmospheric
Analysis, 1972. This publication is avail-
able from the American Society for
Testing and Materials, 1916 Race St.,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
(h) "EPA Methods" means Methods
tor Chemical Analysis of Water and
Wastes, 1971, Environmental Protection
Agency, Analytical Quality Control Lab-
oratory, Cincinnati, Ohio. This publica-
tion is available from the Super-
intendent of Documents, U.S. Govern-
ment Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
20402 (Stock Number 5501-0067).
§ 136.3 Identification of test proce-
dures.
Every parameter or pollutant for
which an effluent limitation is now spec-
ified pursuant to sections 401 and 402
of the Act is named together with test
descriptions and references in Table I.
The discharge parameter values for
which reports are required must be de-
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 38, NO. 199—TUESDAY, OCTOBER 16, 1973
D-324
-------
O-4
tn
termined by one of the standard ana- glonal Administrator or the Director in
lytical methods cited and described the Region or State where the discharge
in Table I, or under certain circum- will occur may determine for a par-
stances by other methods that may be ticular discharge that additional param-
more advantageous to use when such eters .or pollutants must be reported.
other methods have been previously ap- Under such circumstances, additional
proved by the Regional Administrator of test procedures for analysis of pollutants
the Region in which the discharge will may be specined by the Regional Ad-
of C the astdater°nldwnifichh such1 discharge mmlstrator or Director upon the recom-
will occur does not object to the use of mendatlon of the Director of the
such alternate -test procedures. Methods Development and Quality As-
Under certain circumstances the Re- surance Research Laboratory.
TABLE I — LIST or APPROVED TEST PROCEDURES
References
Standard ASTM EPA
methods methods
General analytical methods:
1. Alkalinity as CaCOimg Tllrallnn' elcctronv.trlc, manual or auto- p. 370 p. 143 p. 6.
CaCO'/tlter. mated method— methyl orange. p. 8.
2. B.O.D.flvedaymg/llter. Modified wlnkleror probe method p. 489
3. Chemical oxygen de- Dlchromate reflux p. 496 p. 219 p. 17.
mand (C.O.D.) mg/
Illnr.
4. Total solids mg/lller 0 ravi metric 103-105° C p. 536 p. 280.
8. Total dissolved (filter- Glass fiber filtration 1HO" C p. 276.
able) solids mg/Uter.
filterable) solids mg/
liter.
7. Total volatile solids rag/ Gravimetric 850° C p. S38 p. 282.
liter.
8. Ammonia (as N) mg/ Dlstlllalion— nrsslcrltatlon or tltratlon au- p. 134.
liter. toinatod nlienolato. p. 141.
mg/llter. tltratlou utomatod digestion phenolate. p. 167.
10. Nllrate (as N) mg/llter. Cadmium reduction; bruclne sulfate; au- p. 458 p. 124 p. 170.
Hon. p. 186.
mg/llter. (ascorbic acid), or manual digestion, p. 632 p. 246.
nnd aulomntod single roogont or stan- D. 269.
nous chloride.
12. Acidity mg CaCOi/lilcr Elcctromelrtc end point or phenolphthal- p. 148
rln end point.
13. Total organic carbon Combustion— Infrared method ' .... p. 287 D 702 o 221.
(TOO) mp/Uter. * "v "
14. Hardness— total mg EDTA tltratlon; automated colorlmetric p. 179 . p 170 p. 76.
CaCOi/llter. atomic absorption. " " p. 78.
15. Nitrite (as N) mg/lltcr. Manual or automated colorlmetric dlazotl- . p. 185.
Analytical methods for trace
mctais:
10. Aluminum— total ' mg/ Atomic absorption p. 210 p. 98.
liter. P P
liter.
IS. Arsenic— total mg/llter. Digestion plus silver dlethyldlthlocarba- p. 65 p. 13.
mate; atomic absorption.' p. 62 ... .
1'J. Barium-total ' mg/llter. Atomic absorption ' p. 210 . .
Iffl. llcrylllum— tolnl ' mg/ Alumlnon; atomic absorption p. 67
liter. p. 210
21. Boron —total me/liter... Curcumln . p. 69
22. Cadmium— total ' rag/ Atomic absorption; colorlmetric p. 210 D. 692 .. p. 101.
liter. p. 422 „ „
23. Calcium-total 'mg/llter. EDTA tltrallon: atomic absorption p. 84 . p 692 p. 102.
24. Chromium VI mg/lltor. Extraction and atomic absorption; color!- p. 4?'J p. 94.
metric.
Parameter and units
25. Chromium— total' mg/
liter.
26. Cobalt— total ' mg/llter.
27. Copper— total' mg/llter.
28. Iron — total ' mg/Uter.
29 Lead total ' mg/Uter
liter.
31, Manganese— total 'mg/
liter.
33. Molybdenum— total '
mg/llter.
34. Nickel— total ' mgAlter.
35. Potassium — total ' mg/
liter.
36. Selenium— total mg/lltcr.
37. Silver— total '
38. Sodium-total' mg/llter.
30 Thallium— total 'mg/liter
40 Tin lolal ' mg/llter
41. Titanium— total mg/
liter.
42. Vanadium-total' mg/
liter.
43. Zinc— total ' mg/liter...
Analytical methods for nu-
trients, anlons, and organlcs:
44. Organic nitrogen (as N)
mg/llter.
45. Ortho-phosphate (as P)
mg/Uter.
46. Sulfate (as SO,) mg/
liter.
47. Sulfide (as S). mg/lltcr..
48. Sulflte (as SOj) mg/
liter.
49. Bromide mg/liter
60. Chloride mg/llter
61. Cyanide— total mg/Uter.
62. Fluoride mg/llter
83. Chlorine— total residual
mg/llter..
84. Oil and grease mg/lltcr..
56. Surfactants mgAlter
88. Bcntldlne mg/Uter
89. Chlorinated organic
compounds (except
pesticides) mg/llter.
60. Pesticides mg/liter
Analytical methods for
physical and biological
parameters:
61. Color platinum-cobalt
units or dominant
wave-length, hue,
luminance, purity.
62. Specific conductance
mho/cm at 25° C.
63. Turbidity Jackson
units.
See Note at end of Table I
Method
Atomic absorption; colorlmetric
Atomic absorption: colorlmetric
do
do ...
Atomic absorption .
Atomic absorption '
Atomlo absorption; colorlmetric; flame
photometric.
Atomlo absorption '
Flame photometric; atomic absorption
do
. . do
KJcldahl nitrogen minus ammonia
nitrogen.
Direct single reagent; automated single
reagent or stannous chloride.
Gravimetric; turbldlmetric; automated
colorlmetric— barium chloranllate.
Tltrimelric— Iodine
Tltrimetric; lodide-lodate
do ,
Silver nitrate; mercuric nitrate; automated
cotorimetrlc-ferricyanlde.
Distillation— silver nitrate tltratlon or
pyrldlne pyratolone colorlmetric.
Distillation— SPADNS
Colorimctric; amperometric tltratlon
Liquid-Liquid extraction with trichloro-
trlfluoroethaue.
Colorlmetric, 4 AAP
Methylene blue colorlmetric
Gas chromatography •
Colorlmetric; speclrophotometrtc
Wbeatstone bridge.... ;..;
Turbidlmeter
Standard
methods
p. 210
p. 426
p. 210
p. 430
p. 210
p 433
p. 210
p. 436
p. 210
p. 416
p. 201
p. 210
p. 443
p. 285
p. 210
p. 317
p. 210
p. 444
p. 468
p. 532
p. 331
p. 334
p. 551
p. 337
p. 96
p. 97
p. 397
p. 171
p. 174
p. 382
p. 254
p. 802
p. 339
p. 180
p. 392
p. 323
p. 350
References
ASTM
p. 892
p. 403
p. 692 . ...
p. 692
p. 410
p. 692
p. 162
p. 692
p. 692
p. 692
p. 692
p. 328
.......
P-828
p. 692
P. 42
p. 61
p. 62
p. 261
p. 216
p. 23
p. 21
p. 868
p. 191
p. 223
p. 448
p. 619
p. 163
p. 487
EPA
methods
p. 104.
p. 106.
pYi&r""
p. 110.
p. 112.
p. 114.
p. 116.
"p.'m."""
p. 120.
p. 149.
p. 235.
p. 246.
p. 259.
p. 286.
p. 288.
p. 294.
p. 29.
p. 31.
p. 41.
p. 64.
p. 232.
p. 181.
p. 38.
p. 284.
p. 308.
C
m
v\
Z
O
m
O
O
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 38, NO. 199—TUESDAY, OCTOBER 16, 1973
to
to
-------
28760
RULES AND REGULATIONS
Parameter and onlta
Standard
methods
References
ASTM EPA
methods
64. Fatal streptococci MPN; membrane filter; plate count p. 689 _
bacteria number/100 p. 690—
ml. p. <91
65. CoUform bacteria MPN: Membrane filter p. 689
(fecal) number/100 p.6S4
ml.
66. CoUform bacteria do p. 664
(total) Dumber/100 p. 679
ml.
Radiological parameters:
67. Alpha—total pd/Uter.. Proportional counter; scintillation counter p. 608 p. 609
68. Alpha—counting error do p. 69S p. 612
pCI/Uter.
69. Beta—total pCI/Uter... Proportional counter! p. 698 p. 478
70. Beta—counting error do p. 598 p. 478
pCI/Uter.
71. Radium—total pCI/ Proportional counter; scintillation counter., p. 611 p. 674 „
liter. p. 617
1 A number of such systems manufactured by various companies are considered to be comparable in their per-
formance. In addition, another technique, based on Combustion-Methane Detection, is also 'icceptable.
' For the determination of total mentis the sample is not Altered before processing. Choose a volume of sample
appropriate for the expected level of metals. If much suspended material is present, as little as 60-100 ml of well-mixed
sample will most probably be sufficient. (The sample volume required may also vary proportionally with the number
of metals to be determined.)
Transfer a representative aliquot of the well-mixed sam pic to a Griffin beaker and add 3 ml of concentrated distilled
HNOi. Place the beaker on a hotplate and evaporate to dryness making certain that the sample does not boil. Cool
the beaker and add another 3 ml portion of distilled concentrated HNOi. Cover the beaker with a watch glass and
return to the hotplate. Increase the temperature of the hotplate so that a gentle reflux action occurs. Continue heating,
adding additional acid as necessary until the digestion Is complete, generally indicated by a light colored residue.
Add (1:1 witb distilled water) distilled concentrated UC1 in an amount sufficient to dissolve the residue upon warm-
ing. Wash down the beaker walls and the watch glass with distilled water and filter the sample to remove silicates
and other insoluble material that could clog the atomlier. Adjust the volume to some predetermined value based
on the expected metal concentrations. The sample Is now ready for analysis. Concentrations so determined shall be
reported as "total".
1 See D. C. Manning, "Technical Notes", Atomic Absorption Newsletter, Vol. 10, No. 6 p. 123, 1971. Available
from Perkin-Elmer Corporation. Main Avenue, Norwalk, Connecticut 06862.
< Atomic absorption method available from Methods Development and Quality Assurance Research Laboratory,
National Environmental Research Center, USEPA, Cincinnati, Ohio 46268.
' For updated method, see: Journal of the American Water Works Association 64, No. 1, pp. 20-26 (Jan. 1972) or
ASTM Method D 3223-73, American Society for Testing and Materials Headquarters, 1916 Race St., Philadelphia.
Pa. 19103.
1 Interim procedures for algicides, chlorinated organic compounds, and pesticides can be obtained from the Methods
Development and Quality Assurance Research Laboratory, National Environmental Research Center, USEPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio 46268.
' Beniidine may be estimated by the method of M.A. El-Dib, "Colorimetric Determination of Aniline Derivatives
In Natural Waters", El-Dlb, M.A., Journal of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Vol. 64, No. 6, Nov.
1971, pp. 1383-1387.
tAs a prescreening measurement.
§ 136.4 Application for alternate test
procedures.
(a) Any person may apply to the Re-
gional Administrator in the Region
where the discharge occurs for approval
of an alternative test procedure.
(b) When the discharge for which an
alternative test procedure, is proposed
occurs within a State having a permit
program approved pursuant to section
402 of the Act, the applicant shall sub-
mit his application to the Regional Ad-
ministrator through the Director of the
State agency having responsibility for
issuance of NPDES permits within such
State.
(c) Unless and until printed applica-
tion forms are made available, an appli-
cation for an alternate test procedure
may be made by letter in triplicate. Any
application for an alternate test proce-
dure under this subchapter shall:
(1) Provide the name and address of
the responsible person or firm making
the discharge (if not the applicant) and
the applicable ID number of the existing
or pending permit, issuing agency, and
type of permit for which the alternate
test procedure is requested, and the dis-
charge serial number.
(2) Identify the pollutant or parame-
ter for which approval of an alternate
testing procedure is being requested.
(3) Provide justification for using
testing procedures other than those
specified in Table I.
(4) Provide a detailed description of
the proposed alternate test procedure.
together with references to published
studies of the applicability of the alter-
nate test procedure to the effluents in
question.
§ 136.5 Approval of alternate lest pro-
cedures.
(a) The Regional Administrator of
the region in which the discharge will
occur has final responsibility for ap-
proval of any alternate test procedure.
(b) Within thirty days of receipt of
an application, the Director will forward
such application, together with his rec-
ommendations, to the Regional Admin-
istrator. Where the Director recommends
rejection of the application for scien-
tific and technical reasons which he pro-
vides, the Regional Administrator shall
deny the application, and shall forward
a copy of the rejected application and
his decision to the Director of the State
Permit Program and to the Director of
the Methods Development and Quality
Assurance Research Laboratory.
(c) Before approving any application
for an alternate test procedure, the Re-
gional Administrator shall forward a
copy of the application to the Director
of the Methods Development and Qual-
ity Assurance Laboratory for review and
recommendation.
(d) Within ninety days of receipt by
the. Regional Administrator of an appli-
cation for an alternate test procedure.
the Regional Administrator shall notify
the applicant and the appropriate State
agency of approval or rejection, or shall
. specify the additional information which
is required to determine whether to ap-
prove the proposed test procedure. Prior
to the expiration of such ninety day pe-
riod, a recommendation providing the
scientific and other technical basis for
acceptance or rejection will be forwarded
to the Regional Administrator by the Di-
rector of the Methods Development and
Quality Assurance Research Laboratory.
A copy of all approval and rejection
notifications will be forwarded to the
Director, Methods Development and
Quality Assurance Research Laboratory,
for the purposes of national coordination.
|FR Doc.73-21466 Filed 10-15-73:8:45 am]
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 38, NO. 199—TUESDAY, OCTOBER 16, 1973
D-326
-------
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1976
PART II:
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
WATER PROGRAMS
Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures
for the Analysis of Pollutants
Amendments
D-327
-------
52780
RULES AND REGULATIONS
Title 40—Protection of Environment
CHAPTER I—ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
SUBCHAFTER D—WATER PROGRAMS
[FRL 630-4]
PART 136—GUIDELINES ESTABLISHING
TEST PROCEDURES FOR THE ANALYSIS
OF POLLUTANTS
Amendment of Regulations
On June 9,1975, proposed amendments
to the Guidelines Establishing Test Pro-
cedures for the Analysis of Pollutants
(40 CPB 136) were published in the .FED-
ERAL REGISTER (40 FB 24535) as required
by section 304 (g) of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of
1972 (86 Stat. 816, et seq., Pub. L. 92-500,
1972) hereinafter referred to as the Act.
Section 304 (g) of the Act requires that
the Administrator shall promulgate
guidelines establishing test procedures
for the analysis of pollutants that shall
include factors which must be provided
in: (1) any certification pursuant to sec-
tion 401 of the Act, or (2) any permit ap-
plication pursuant to section 402 of the
Act. Such test procedures are to be used
by permit applicants to demonstrate that
effluent discharges meet applicable pol-
lutant discharge limitations and by the
States and other enforcement activities
in routine or random monitoring of ef-
fluents to verify compliance with pollu-
tion control measures.
Interested persons were requested to
submit written comments, suggestions, or
objections to the proposed amendments
by September 7, 1975. One hundred and
thirty-five letters were received from
commenters. The following categories of
organizations were represented by the
commenters: Federal agencies accounted
for twenty-four responses; State agen-
cies accounted for twenty-six responses;
local agencies accounted for seventeen
responses; regulated major dischargers
accounted for forty-seven responses;
trade and professional organizations ac-
counted for eight responses; analytical
instrument manufacturers and vendors
accounted for seven responses; and an-
alytical service laboratories accounted
for six responses.
All comments were carefully evaluated
by a technical review committee. Based
upon the review of comments, the follow-
ing principal changes to the proposed
amendments were made:
(A) Definitions. Section 136.2 has been
amended to update references: Twenty
commenters, representing the entire
spectrum of responding groups pointed
out that the references cited in §§ 136.2
(f), 136.2(g), and 136.2(h) were out-of-
date; i§ 136.2(f), 136.2(g),and 136.2(h),
respectively, have been amended to show
the following editions of the standard
references: "14th Edition of Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water
and Waste Water;" "1974 EPA Manual
of Methods for the Analysis of Water and
Waste;" and "Part 31,1975 Annual Book
of ASTM Standards."
(B) Identification of Test Procedures.
Both the content and format of § 136.3,
"Table I. List of Approved Test Proce-
dures" have "been revised in response to
twenty-one comments received from
State and local governments, major regu-
lated dischargers, professional and trade
associations, and analytical laboratories.
Table I has been revised by:
(1) The addition of a fourth column
of references which includes procedures
of the United States Geological Survey
which are equivalent to previously ap-
proved methods.
(2) The addition of a fifth column of
miscellaneous references to procedures
which are equivalent to previously ap-
proved methods.
(3) Listing generically related param-
eters alphabetically within four subcate-
gories: bacteria, metals, radiological and
residue, and by listing these subcategory
headings in alphabetic sequence rel-
ative to the remaining parameters.
(4) Deleting the parameter "Algicides"
and by entering the single relevant algi-
cide, "Pentachlorophenol" by its chemi-
cal name.
(C) Clarification of Test Parameters.
The conditions for analysis of several
parameters have been more specifically
defined as a result of comments received
by the Agency:
(1) In response to five commenters
representing State or local governments,
major dischargers, or analytical instru-
ment manufacturers, the end-point for
the alkalinity determination is specifi-
cally designated as pH 4.5.
(2) Manual digestion and distillation
are still required as necessary prelimi-
nary steps for the Kjeldahl nitrogen pro-
cedure. Analysis after such distillation
may be by Nessler color comparison,
titration, electrode, or automated pheno-
late procedures.
(3) In response to eight commenters
representative of Federal and State gov-
ernments, major dischargers, and ana-
lytical instrument manufacturers, man-
ual distillation ait pH 9.5 is now specified
for ammonia measurement.
(D) New Parameters and Analytical
Procedures. Forty-four new parameters
have been added to Table I. In addition
to the designation of analytical proce-
dures for these new parameters, the fol-
lowing modifications have been made in
analytical procedures designated in re-
sponse to comments.
(1) The ortho-tolidine procedure was
not approved for the measurement of
residual chlorine because of its poor ac-
curacy and precision. Its approval had
been requested by seven commenters rep-
resenting major dischargers, State, or
local governments, and analytical instru-
ment manufacturers. Instead, the N,N-
diethyl-p-phenylenediamine (DPD)
method is approved as an interim pro-
cedure pending more intensive laboratory
testing. It has many of the advantages
of the ortho-tolidine procedure such as
low cost, ease of operation, and also is of
acceptable precision and accuracy.
(2) The Environmental Protection
Agency concurred with the American Dye
Manufacturers' request to approve Its
procedure for measurement of color, and
copies of the procedure are now available
at the Environmental Monitoring and
Support Laboratory, Cincinnati (KMSL-
CI).
(3) In response to three requests from
Federal, State governments, and dis-
chargers, -"hardness," may be measured
as the sum of calcium and magnesium.
analyzed by atomic absorption and ex-
pressed as their carbonates.
(4) The proposal to limit measure-
ment of fecal coliform bacteria in the
presence of chlorine to only the "Most
Probable Number" (MPN) procedure has
been withdrawn in response to requests
from forty-five commenters including
State pollution control agencies, permit
holders, analysts, treatment plant op-
erators, and a manufacturer of analyt-
ical supplies. The membrane filter (MF)
procedure will continue to be an ap-
proved technique for the routine meas-
urement of fecal coliflorm in the pre-
sence of chlorine. However, the MPN
procedure must be used to resolve con-
troversial situations. The technique
selected by the analyst must be reported
with the data.
(5) A total of fifteen objections, re-
presenting the entire spectrum of com-
menters, addressed the drying tempera-
tures used for measurement of residues.
The use of different temperatures in dry-
ing of total residue, dissolved residue and
suspended residue was cited as not allow-
ing direct intercomparability between
these measurements. Because the intent
of designating the three separate residue
parameters is to measure separate waste
characteristics (low drying temperatures
to measure volatile substances, high dry-
ing temperatures to measure anhydrous
inorganic substances), the difference in
drying temperatures for these residue
parameters must be preserved.
(E) Deletion of Measurement Tech-
niques. Some measurement techniques
that had been proposed have been de-
leted in response to objections raised
during the public comment period.
(1) The proposed infrared spec-
trophotometric analysis for oil and
grease has been withdrawn. Eleven com-
menters representing Federal or State
agencies and major dischargers claimed
that this parameter is defined by the
measurement procedure. Any alteration
in the procedure would change the def-
inition of the parameter. The Environ-
mental Protection Agency agreed.
(2) The proposed separate parameter
for sulfide at concentrations below 1
mg/1, has been withdrawn. Methylene
blue spectrophotometry is now included
in Table I as an approved procedure for
sulfide analysis. The .titrimetric iodine
procedure for sulfide analysis may only
be used for analysis of sulfide at concen-
trations in excess of one milligram per
liter.
(F) Sample Preservation and Holding
Times. Criteria for sample preservation
aind sample holding times were requested
by several commenters. The reference for
sample preservation and holding time
criteria applicable to the Table I param-
eters is given in footnote (1) of Table I.
(G) Alternate Test Procedures. Com-
ments pertaining to § 136.4, Application
for Alternate Test Procedures, included
objections to various obstacles within
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 41, NO. 232—WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1976
D-328
-------
RULES AND REGULATIONS
52781
these procedures for expeditious ap-
proval of alternate test procedures. Four
analytical instrument manufacturers
commented that by limiting of applica-
tion for review and/or approval of alter-
nate test procedures to NPDES permit
holders, § 136.4 became an impediment to
the commercial development of new or
improved measurement devices based on
new measurement principles. Applica-
tions for such review and/or approval
will now be accepted from any person.
The intent of the alternate test pro-
cedure is to allow the use of measure-
ment systems which are known to be
equivalent to the approved test proce-
dures in waste water discharges.
Applications for approval of alternate
test procedures applicable to specific dis-
charges will continue to be made only by
NPDES permit holders, and approval of
such applications will be made on a
case-by-case basis by the Regional Ad-
ministrator in whose Region the dis-
charge Is made.
Applications for approval of alternate
test procedures which are Intended for
nationwide use can now be submitted by
any person directly to the Director of the
Environmental Monitoring and Support
Laboratory In Cincinnati. Such applica-
tions should Include a complete methods
write-up, any literature references, com-
parability data between the proposed al-
ternate test procedure and those already
approved by the Administrator. The ap-
plication should include precision and
accuracy data of the proposed alternate
test procedure and data confirming the
general applicability of the test proce-
dure to the Industrial categories of waste
water for which It is Intended. The Di-
rector of the Environmental Monitoring
and Support Laboratory, after review of
submitted Information, will recommend
approval or rejection of the application
to the Administrator, or he will return
the application to the applicant for more
information. Approval or rejection of ap-
plications for test procedures Intended
for nationwide use will be made by the
Administrator, after considering the rec-
ommendation made by the Director of
the Environmental Monitoring and Sup-
port Laboratory, Cincinnati. Since the
Agency considers these procedures for
approval of alternate test procedures for
nationwide use to be Interim procedures,
we will welcome suggestions for criteria
for approval of alternate test procedures
for nationwide use. Interested persons
should submit then- written comments In
triplicate on or before June 1, 1977 to:
Dr. Robert B. Medz, Environmental Pro-
tection Technologist, Monitoring Quality
Assurance Standardization, Office of
Monitoring and Technical Support (RD-
680), Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C. 20460.
(H) Freedom of Information, A copy
of all public comments, an analysis by
parameter of those comments, and docu-
ments providing further information on
the rationale for the changes made In
the final regulation are available for
Inspection and copying at the Environ-
mental Protection Agency Public Infor-
mation Reference Unit, Room 2922,
Waterside Mall, 401 M Street, SW..
Washington, D.C. 20460, during normal
business hours. The EPA Information
regulation 40 CFR 2 provides that a rea-
sonable fee may be charged for copying
such documents.
Effective date: These amendments be-
come effective on April 1, 1977.
Dated: November 19,1976.
JOHN QUARLES,
Acting Administrator,
Environmental Protection Agency.
Chapter I, Subchapter D, of Title 40,
Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:
1. In § 136.2, paragraphs (f), (g), and
(h) are amended to read as follows:
§ 136.2 Definitions.
(f) "Standard Methods" means Stand-
ard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Waste Water, 14th Edition,
1976. This publication is available from
the American Public Health Association,
1015 18th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.
20036.
(g) "ASTM" means Annual Book of
Standards, Part 31, Water, 1975. This
publication is available from the Ameri-
can Society for Testing and Materials,
1916 Race Street, Philadelphia, Pennsyl-
vania 19103.
(h) "EPA Methods" means Methods
for Chemical Analysis of Water and
Waste, 1974. Methods Development and
Quality Assurance Research Laboratory,
National Environmental Research Cen-
ter, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268; U.S. Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency, Office of
Technology Transfer, Industrial Envi-
ronmental Research Laboratory, Cincin-
nati, Ohio 45268. This publication is
available from the Office of Technology
Transfer.
2. In § 136.3, the second sentence of
paragraph (607)
3 278 111 41 '(007)
3. Ammonia (as N), milligrams
per liter.
BACTERIA
4. Coliform (fecal)' number per
100ml.
5. Coliform (fecal)' In presence
of chlorine, number per 100
ml.
6. Coliform (total),'numberper
100ml.
7. Coliform (total) * in presence
of chlorine, number per 100
ml.
8. Fecal streptococci,1 number
per 100 nil.
9. Bencidine, milligrams per liter.
10. Biochemical oiygen demand,
5-d (BODi), milligrams per
liter.
11. Bromide, milligrams per liter..
12. Chemical oxygen demand
(COD), milligrams per liter.
13. Chloride, milligrams per liter..
See footnotes at end of table.
Manual distillation < (at pH
9.5) followed by nessleri-
tatlon, tltratlon, elec-
trode, Automated phe-
nolate.
159
410 .
412
237
116
616 .
MPN; 'membrane filter
do."
do.'
MPN;' membrane filter .
with enrichment.
MPN;' membrane filter; .
plate count.
. Oildation — colorimetric •
Winfcler (Azide modifies- .
tion) or electrode method. .
. Titrimetric, iortine-lodate..;
Dichromate reflux
. Silver nitrate; mercuric -ni- .
Irate; or automated colori-
metric-ferrlcyanide.
922
937
922
628,937
916
928
916
933
943
944
947
643
14 ..
20 650
303
29 304
31 613
i(45)
'(35)
'(50)
t (50)
»<17)
323 68
472 124 ' ' (610)
W/17)
""287
J65 _ ;. »<615)
"(46) ...„
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 41, NO. 232—WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1976
D-329
-------
52782
RULES AND REGULATIONS
Parameter and units
Method
1974 Uth ed.
KPA standard
methods methods Ft. 31
References
(page nos.)
USDS
1975 methods'
ASTM
Other
approved
methods
14. Chlorinated organic com- Gas chromatography '•
pounds (except pesticides),
milligrams per liter.
15. Chlorine—total residual, milli- lodometric titratron, amper- 318 _
grams per liter. ometric or starch-iodine 35 322 278 .
end-point; DPD color!- 332
metric or Titrimetric __ 329
methods (these last 2 are
interim methods pending
laboratory testing).
16. Color, platinum cobalt units Colorirnetric; spectrophoto- 36 04 82
or dominant wave length, metric; or ADM1 pro- 39 66
hue. luminance, purity. cedure." _.
17. Cyanide, total," milligrams Distillation followed by 40 361 503 85 »C!2j
per liter. silver nitrate titration or
pyridine pyrazolone (or
barbituric acid) colori-
metric.
18. Cyanide amenable to chlorin- do 49 376 UK.. _
atlon, milligrams per liter.
10. Dissolved oxygen, milligrams Winkler (Azide modifies. 51 443 368 126 3(609)
per liter. tion) or electrode method. 56 450
20. Fluoride, milligrams per liter.. Distillation' followed by 389
ion electrode; SPADNS; 65 391 307 93 ..
or automated complexone. 59 393 305
61 614
M. Hardness—Total, as CaCOj, EDTA titration; auto- 68 202 161 94 »(617)
milligrams per liter. mated colorimetric; or 70 _
atomic absorption (sum ___ _ _ _ _
of Ca and Mg as their
respective carbonates).
21. Hydrogen ion (pH), pH units. Electrometric measurement. 239 460 178 129 '(609)
23. Kjeldanl nitrogen (as N), Digestion and distillation 175 437 ._ 122 »(612)
milligrams per liter. followed by nesslerization, 165 _
titration, or electrode; 182
automated digestion auto-
mated phenolate.
METALS
M. Aluminum—Total,milligrams Digestion » followed by 92 15* "(19) __.
perliter. atomic absorption " or by 171 ___
eotorimelric (Eriochroma
Cyanine R).
25. Aluminum—Dissolved, milli- 0.45 micron filtration" fol- -.-.
grams per liter. lowed by referenced meth-
ods for total aluminum.
2C. Antimony—Total, milligrams Digestion" followed by M __
perliter. atomic absorption."
27. Antimony—Dissolved, milli- 0.45 micron nitration" fol- __ _
grams per liter. lowed by referenced
method for total antimony.
28. Arsenic—Total, milligrams Digestion followed by silver 285
per liter. diethyldithiocarbamate: 9 283 «(31)
^ or atomic absorption."» » 1» «(37)
2». Arsenic—Dissolved, milli- 0.45 micron filtration" fol-
grams per liter. lowed by referenced
method for total arsenic.
30. Barium—Total, milligrams Digestion" followed by 97 152 52
per liter. atomic absorption."
31. Barium—Dissolved, milli- 0.45 micron nitration" fol- _
grams per liter. lowed by referenced
method for total barium.
32. Beryllium—Total, milligrams Digestion" followed by 99 152 53
perliter. atomic absorption " or by 177
colorimetric (Aluminon).
33. Beryllium—Dissolved, milli- 0.45 micron filtration" fol- _
grams per liter. lowed by referenced
method for total beryllium.
34. Boron—Total,'milligrams per Colorimetric (Curcumin).... 13 287
35. Boron—Dissolved, milligrams 0.45 micron nitration" fol-
per liter. lowed by referenced meth-
od for total boron.
36. Cadmium—Total, milligrams Digestion » followed by 101 148 345 62 «(619) »(»7)
perliter. atomic absorption " or by 182
colorimetric (Dithizone).
37. Cadmium—Dissolved, milli- 0.45 micron filtration " fol-
grams per liter. lowed by referenced meth-
od for total cadmium.
38. Calcium—Total, milligrams Digestion" followed by 103 148 345 66
perliter. atomic absorption; or 189
EDTA titration.
39. Calcium—Dissolved, milli- 0.45 micron filtration » fol-
grams per liter. lowed by referenced meth-
od for total calcium.
40. Chromium VI, milligrams per Extraction and atomic ab- 89,105 76 -
liUr. ' sorption; colorimetric (Di- 192 75
phenylcarbazide).
41. Chromium VI—Dissolved, 0.45 micron filtration" fol-
milligrams per liter. lowed by referenced meth-
od for chromium VI.
42. Chromium—Total, milligrams Digestion >' followed by 105 148 345 78 • (•!»)
perliter. atomic absorption "or by 192 288 77
colorimetric (Diphenyl-
carbazide).
43. Chromium—Dissolved, milli- 0.45 micron filtration" fol-
grams per liter. lowed by referenced meth-
od for total chromium.
See footnotes at end of table.
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 41, NO. 232—WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER .1, 1976
D-330
-------
RULES AND REGULATIONS
5278.1
Parameter and units
Method
References
1074 14th ed. (page nos.)
EPA standard :
melliods methods Pt. 31 VSGS
1975 methods -
AST.M
44. Cobalt— Total, milligrams per
liter.
45. Cobalt— Dissolved. milli-
grams per liter.
46. Copper— Total. milligrams
per liter.
47. Copper- — 1 Dissolved, milli-
grains per liter.
48. Gold— Total, milligrams per
liter.
49. Iridium— Total, milligrams
per liter.
50. Iron— Total, milligrams per
liter.
51. Iron— Dissolved, milligrams
per liter.
32. Lead— Total, milligrams per
liter.
53. Lead— Dissolved, milligrams
per liter.
54. Magnesium— Total. milli-
grams per liter.
55. Magnesium— Dissolved milli-
grams per liter.
56. Manganese— Total milligrams
per liter. ' .
57. Manganese— Dissolved milli-
grams per liter.
58. Mercury— Total. . milligrams
per liter. .-
50. Mercury — Dissolved, milli-
grams per liter.
60. Molybdenum— Total, milli-
grams per liter.
61. Molybdenum— Dissolved,
milligrams per liter.
62. Nickel— Total. milligrams
per liter.
63. Nickel— Dissolved, milli-
grams per liter.
64. Osmium— Total, milligrams
per liter.
65. Palladium— Total, milligrams
. per liter.
66. Platinum— Total, milligrams
per liter.
67. Potassium— Total, milligrams
per liter.
68. Potassium— Dissolved, milli-
grams per liter.
69. Rhodium— Total, milligrams
per liter.
70. Ruthenium— Total, milli-
grams per liter.
71. Selenium— Total, milligrams
per liter.
72. Selenium— Dissolved, milli-
grams per liter.
73. Silica— Dissolved, milligrams
per liter.
74. Silver— Total," milligrams
per liter.
75. Silver— Dissolved," milli-
grams per liter.
76. Sodium— Total, milligrams
• per liter.
77. Sodium— Dissolved,
grams per lit er.
milli-
107
118
108
148
1y
atomic absorption."
0.45 micron filtration " tol-
lowed hy referenced meth-
od for total cobalt.
Digestion u followed hy
'atomic absorption " or by
colorimetric (Neocu-
proine).
0.45 micron filtration17 fol-
lowed by referenced meth-
od for total copper.
Digestion " followed by
atomic absorption."
Digestion" followed by
atomic absorption."
Digestion « followed by
atomic absorption " or by
colorinietric U'henanthro-
line).
0.45 micron filtration" fol-
lowed by referenced meth-
od for total iron.
Digestion" followed by
atomic absorption icorby
colorimetric (Dithi/.one). . __________ 215
0.45 micron filtration" fol- ._ . ...... ........... ...
lowed by referenced meth-
od for total lead.
Digestion 1! followed by
atomic absorption: or
gravimetric.
0.43 micron nitration " (37
S3 » (61W) » (37)
no
148
208
345
326
102 ' (619)
345
105
'(619)
315
109
"(619)
i (619)
338
"(51)
139
350
141
148 .
345
115
by
by
by
143
235
234
134
"(620)
403
by
.by
145
1S9
274
146
487
148
243
398
139
142 '(619) »(87)
14T
250
...
403
143
'(421)
See footnotes at end of table.
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOl. 41, NO. 232—WEDNESDAY, DECEMIEI 1, 197*
D-331
-------
52784
RULES AND REGULATIONS
1974 14th ed.
Parameter and units Method EPA standard
methods methods
78. Thallium— Total, milligrams Digestion" followed by
per liter. atomic absorption."
79. Thallium— Dissolved, milli- 0.45 micron filtration" fol- ..
grams per liter. ' lowed by referenced meth-
od for total thallium.
60. Tin— Total, milligrams per Digestion" followed by
liter. atomic absorption."
81. Tin— Dissolved, milligrams 0.45 micron filtration " fol-
per liter. lowed by referenced meth-
od for total tin.
82. Titanium— Total, milligrams Digestion « followed by
per liter. atomic absorption."
83. Titanium— Dissolved, milli- 0.45 micron nitration" fol- ..
grams per liter. lowed by referenced meth-
od for total titanium.
84. Vanadium— Total, milligrams Digestion " followed by
per liter. atomic absorption " or by
colorimctric (Gallic acid).
85. Vanadium — Dissolved, milli- 0.45 micron filtration '" fol-
grajns per liter. lowed by referenced meth-
od for total vanadium.
86. Zinc— Total, milligrams P':r Digestion " followed by
colon metric (Dithizone).
87. Xiiic — Dispolvil, milligrams 0.45 micron nitration 17 fol-
per liter. lowed by referenced meth-
od for total zinc.
88. Nitrate ('as N), milligrams P"r Cadmium reduction; bru-
liter. cine sulfute; automated
I'udminm or hydrazine re-
duction.^
80. Nitrate <'.a.s Xi. milligram;-: per Manual or automated colori-
liter. nietric (Diazotizatiou).
DO. Oil and gr^ise. milligram? pt-r Liquid-liquid extraction
liter. with triehloro-trifluoro-
ethane-gravimetric.
91. Organic carbon; total (TOO), Combustion — Infrared
milligrams per liter. method."
92. Organic nitrogen (as NT), mjlli- Kjeldahl nitrogen minus
grams per liter. ammonia nitrogen.
03. Orthophosphate (a? P), milli- Manual or automated ascor-
grams per liter. bic acid reduction.
94. Pe.ntaehlorophenol, milli- Gas chromatography "
grams per liter.
liter.
97. Phosphorus (elemental), milli- Gas ehromatography3*... - _
grams per liter.
08. Phosphorus; total (as P), Persulfate digestion fol-
milligrams per liter. • lowed'by manual or' auto-
mated ascorbic acid reduc-
tion.
RADIOLOGICAL
DO. Alpha — Total pCi per lit'-r. Proportional or scintillation
counter.
per liter.
liter.
103 (a) Radium — Total pCi per do
liter.
(bt :M Ra pCi per liter . Scintillation counter.. .
RES1DUK
104. Total, milligrams per liter liravimetrie, I03tol05° C...
105. Total dissolved (lilterable), Ulass liber liltration, 180° U.
milligrams per liter.
106. Total suspended (nonfllter- Olass fiber filtration, 103 to
able), milligrams per liter. 105° C.
or milligrams per liter.
108. Total volatile, milligrams per Gravimetric, 550° C
liter.
100. Specific conductance, micro- \Vheatstonc bridge coiuluc-
inhos per centimeter at 25° timetry.
C.
iwr liter. or automated eolorimetric
i barium chloranilate).
11). Sulfide i'at £!, itiHIigrAinF PIT Titrinietric— Iodine for lev-
liter; Methylcnc blue pho-
tometric.
112. Sulfite. tas f.O-J, miUigrams Tiuimetric, ioiline-iodate...
per liUT.
113. Surfactants, luilligrams p
A8TM
" (65)
441 » (67)
345 150
358 119
121
407 * (4)
122
384 131
529 » (24)
545
384 133
591"iii7i+78)
694 « (79)
6011'. a (.75-1-78)
606 " (79)
601
...... » (81)
120 148
424
425
154
435
404 "(11)
«(3D
223 156
Other
approved
methods
>(619)»(37)
'(.614) >V28)
' (612, 614)
"(621)
'(«21)
'(606)
• (624)
•(623)
110. nirijKijiy, JN j u ... ^epni.'iomeinc r.o i*c £tt joo
1 ReoommtMiilatior.s for samplinp and preservation o/ -yiinples according to parameter m»>ft.«ured may be found in
"Methods to'. i.'lu'iiiic.'H: An;»]\>is ot W:ir.-r ami Wanes, 10H" U.S. Envirciniientn! I'lotect/'jii Ayuoy, table 2, pp.
viii >ii.
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 41, NO. 732—WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1976
D-332
-------
RULES AND REGULATIONS
52785
' All page references for USGS methods, unless otherwise noted, arc to Brown, E., Skougslad, M. W., and Fisli- 8 136.5 [ Amended]
innu.M. J., "Methods for Collection and Analysis of Water Samples for Dissolved Minerals and Gases," U.S. Geologi-
cal Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Inv., book 5, ch. Al, (1970).
" EI'A comparable method may be found on indicated page of "Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of
Official Analytical Chemists" methods manual, 12th ed. (1975).
• Manual distillation is not required if comparability data on representative effluent samples are on company file
to show that this preliminary distillation step is not necessary; however, manual distillation will be required to resolve
any controversies.
' The method used must be specified.
« The 5 tube MPN is used.
7 Slack K. V. and others, "Methods for Collection and Analysis of Aqual ic Biological and Mircobiological Samples:
U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Inv. book 5, ch. A-4 (1973)."
' Since the membrane filter technique usually yields low and variable recovery from chlorinated wastewaters, the
MPN method will be required to resolve any controversies.
1 Adequately tested methods for benzidine. are not available. Until approved methods are available, the following
interim method can be used for the estimation of benzidino: (1) "Method for Benzidine and Its Salts in Wastewaters,"
available from Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cin-
cinnati, Ohio 45268.
w American National Standard on Photographic Processing Effluents, Apr. 2, 1975.' Available from ANSI, 1430
Broadway, New York, N.Y. 10018.
" Fishman, M. 3. and Brown, Eugene, "Selected Methods of the U.S. Geological Survey for Analysis of Waste-
waters," (1976) open-file report 76-177.
12 Procedures for pentachlorophenol, chlorinated organic compounds ,and pesticides can be obtained from the En-
vironmental Monitoring and Support Lbaoratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio 45208.
11 Color method (ADMI procedure) available from Environmental Monitoring and Support Lbaoratory, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
14 For samples suspected of having thiocyanato interference, magnesium chloride is used as the digestion catalyst.
In the approved test procedure for cyanides, the recommended catalysts are replaced with 20 ml of a solution of 510 g/1
magnesium chloride (MgClj-GHzO). This substitution will eliminate thiocyanate interference for both total cyanide
and cyanide amendable to chlorination measurements.
15 For the determination of total metals the sample is not filtered before processing. Because, vigorous digestion
procedures may result in a loss of certain metals through preciptation, a loss vigorous treatment is recommended as
given on p. 83 (4.1.4) of "Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes" (1974). In those instances where a
more vigorous digestion is desired the procedure on p. 82 (4.1.3) should be followed. For the measurement of the noble
metal series (gold, iridium, osmium, palladium, platimum, rhodium and ruthenium), an aqua regia digestionisto be
substituted as follows: Transfer a represent!! ive aliquot of the well-mixed sample to a Griffin beaker and add 3 ml
of concentrated redistilled HNOj. Place the beaker on a steam bath and evaporate to dryness. Cool the beaker and
cautiously add a 5 ml portion of aqua regia. (Aqua regia is prepared immediately before use by carefully adding 3
volumes of concentrated HC1 to one volume of concentrated IINOs.) Cover the beaker with a watch glass and return
to the steam bath. Continue heating the covered beaker for 50 min. Remove cover and evaporate to dryness. Cool
and take up the residue in a small quantity of 1:1 HC1. Wash down the beaker walls and watch glass with, distilled
water and lllter the sample to remove silicates and other insoluble material that could clog the atomizer. Adjust the
volm c to some predetermined value based on the expected metal concentration. The sample is now ready for analysis.
10 As the various furnace devices (flameless AA) are essentially atomic absorption techniques, they are considered
to be approved test methods. Methods of standard addition are to be followed as noted in p. 78 of "Methods for Chem-
ical Analysis of Water and Wastes," 1974.
17 Dissolved metals are defined as those constitutents which will pass though a 0.45 ^m membrane filter. A pre-
filtration is permissible to free the sample from larger suspended solids. Filter the sample as soon as practical
after collection using the first 50 to 100 ml to rinse the filter flask. (Glass or plastic filtering apparatus are recommended
to avoid possible contamination.) Discard the portion used to rinse the flask and collect the required volume of
filtrate. Acidify the filtrate with 1:1 redistilled HNOj to a pH of 2. Normally, 3 ml of (1:1) acid per liter should be
sufficient to preserve the samples.
11 See "Atomic Absorption Newsletter," vol. 13,75 (1974). Available from Pcrkin-Elmer Corp., Main Ave., Norwalk,
Conn. 06852.
» Method available from Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
«° Recommended methods for the analysis of silver in industrial wastewaters at concentrations of 1 mg/1 and
above are inadequate where silver exists as an inorganic halide. Silver halides such as the bromide and chloride
are relatively insoluble in reagents such as nitric acid but are readily soluble in an aqueous buffer of sodium thio-
sulfate and sodium hydroxide to a pH of 12. Therefore, for levels of silver above 1 mg/1 20 ml of sample should be
diluted to 100 ml by adding 40 ml each of 2M NasSjOs and 2M NaOH. Standards should be prepared in the same
manner. For levels 'of silver below 1 mg/1 the recommended method is satisfactory.
«' An automated hydrazine reduction method is available from the Environmental Monitoring and Support
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
o A number of such systems manufactured by various companies are considered to be comparable in their per-
formance. In addition, another technique, based on combustion-methane detection is also acceptable.
» Goerlitz, D., Brown, E., "Methods for Analysis of Organic Substances in Water": U.S. Geological Survey Tech-
niques of Water-Resources Inv., book 5, ch. A3 (1972).
2i R. F. Addison and R. G. Ackman, "Direct Determination of Elemental Phosphorus by Gas-Liquid Chronia-
tography," "Journal of Chromatography," vol. 47, No. 3, pp. 421-126, 1970.
» The method found on p. 75 measures only the dissolved portion while the method on p. 78 measures only sus-
pended. Therefore, the 2 results must be added together to obtain "total.''
« Stevens, II. H., Ficke, J. F., and Smoot, G. F.. "Water Temperature—Influential Factors. Field Measurement
md Data Presentation: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water Resources Inv.. book 1 i
4. In § 136.4, the second sentence of
paragraph (c) is amended by deleting
the word "subchapter" immediately fol-
lowing the phrase "procedure under this"
and immediately preceding the word
"shall" and replaced with the phrase
"paragraph c;" and § 136.4 is amended
by adding a new paragraph (d) to read
as follows:
§ 136.4 Application
procedures.
for alternate test
(c) * * * Any application for an alter-
nate test procedure under this paragraph
(c) shall: * * *
(d) An application for approval of an
alternate test procedure for nationwide
use may be made by letter in triplicate
to the Director, Environmental Monitor-
ing and Support Laboratory, Cincinnati,
Ohio 45268. Any application for an alter-
1 (1975)."
nate test procedure under this paragraph
(d) shall:
(1) Provide the name and address of
the responsible person or firm making
the application.
(2) Identify the pollutant(s) or pa-
rameter (s) for which nationwide ap-
proval of an alternate testing procedure
is being requested.
(3) Provide a detailed description of
the proposed alternate procedure, to-
gether with references to published or
other studies confirming the general ap-
plicability of the alternate test procedure
to the pollutant (s) or parameter (s) in
waste water discharges from representa-
tive and specified industrial or other
categories.
(4) Provide comparability data for the
performance of the proposed alternate
test procedure compared to the perform-
ance of the approved test procedures.
5. In § 136.5, paragraph (a) is amended
by inserting the phrase "proposed by the
responsible person or firm making the
discharge" immediately after the words
"test procedure" and before the period
that ends the paragraph.
6. In § 136.5, paragraph (b) is amended
by inserting in the first sentence the
phrase "proposed by the responsible per-
son or firm making the discharge" im-
mediately after the words "such applica-
tion" and immediately before the comma.
The second sentence of paragraph (b)
is amended by deleting the phrase
"Methods Development and Quality As-
surance Research Laboratory" immedi-
ately after the phrase "State Permit
Program and to the Director of the" at
the end of the sentence, and inserting in
its place the phrase "Environmental
Monitoring and Support Laboratory,
Cincinnati."
7. In § 136.5, paragraph (c) is amended
by inserting the phrase "proposed by the
responsible person or firm making the
discharge" immediately after the phrase
"application for an alternate test pro-
cedure" and immediately before the
.comma; and by deleting the phrase
"Methods Development and Quality As-
surance Laboratory" immediately after
the phrase "application to the Director
of the" and immediately before the
phrase "for review and recommenda-
tion" and inserting in its place the phrase
"Environmental Monitoring and Support
Laboratory, Cincinnati."
8. In § 136.5, the first sentence of para-
graph (d) is amended by inserting the
phrase, "proposed by the responsible
person or 'firm making the discharge,"
immediately after the phrase, "applica-
tion for an alternate test procedure,"
and immediately before the comma.
The second sentence of paragraph (d)
is amended by deleting the phrase,
"Methods Development and Quality As-
surance Research Laboratory," immedi-
ately after the phrase, "to the Regional
Administrator by the Director of the,"
and immediately preceding the period
ending the sentence and inserting in its
place the phrase, "Environmental Moni-
toring and Support Laboratory, Cin-
cinnati."
The third sentence of paragraph (d)
is amended by deleting the phrase,
"Methods Development and Quality As-
surance Research Laboratory," immedi-
ately after the phrase, "forwarded to the
Director," and immediately before the
second comma and by inserting in its
place the phrase, "Environmental Moni-
toring and Support Laboratory, Cin-
cinnati."
9. Section 136.5 Is amended by the
addition of a new paragraph (e) to read
as follows:
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 41, NO. 232—WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1976
D-333
-------
52786 RULES AND REGULATIONS
§ 136.5 Approval of alternate test pro-
cedures.
• • • • •
let Within ninety days of the receipt
by the Director of the Environmental
Monitoring and Support Laboratory,
Cincinnati of an application for an
alternate test procedure for nationwide
use, the Director of the Environmental
Monitoring and Support Laboratory,
Cincinnati shall notify the applicant of
his recommendation to the Adminis-
trator to approve or reject the applica-
tion, or shall specify additional informa-
tion which is required to determine
whether to approve the proposed test
procedure. After such notification, an
alternate method determined by the Ad-
ministrator to satisfy the applicable re-
quirements of this part shall be approved
for nationwide use to satisfy the require-
ments of this subchapter; alternate test
procedures determined by the Adminis-
trator not to meet the applicable require-
ments of'this part shall be rejected.
Notice of these determinations shall be
submitted for publication in the FEDERAL
REGISTER not later than 15 days after
such notification and determination is
made.
IFRDoc.76-35032 Filed 11-30-76:8:45 am]
FEDERAL REGISTER. VOL 41. NO. 232—WEDNESDAY. DECEMBEt 1. 1976
D-334
-------
3306 RULES AND REGULATIONS
Title 40—Protection of Environment
CHAPTER I—ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
SUBCHAPTER D—WATER PROGRAMS
PART 136—GUIDELINES ESTABLISHING
TEST PROCEDURES FOR THE ANAL-
YSIS OF POLLUTANTS
Amendment of Regulations; Corrections
In FR Doc. 76-35032 appearing at
pages 52780 to 52786 in the FEDERAL REG-
ISTER of Wednesday, December 1. 1976,
the following changes should be made1
§ 13-S.3 [Amended I
1. On Page 52783, for parameter num-
ber 62. Nickel—Total, add "232" to the
page references in the column under the
14th edition of Standard Methods op-
posite the colorimetric method designa-
tion.
2. On page 52784, for parameter num-
ber 89, change the parameter designa-
tion from "Nitrate" to "Nitrite."
3. On page 52784, for parameter num-
ber 96, Phenols, delete the present meth-
od designation, "Colorimetric, (4AAP),"
and replace it with the method designa-
tion. "Distillation followed by colorimet-
ric, (4AAP)"; delete the page reference
in the column under the 14th edition of
Standard Methods, "582." and replace
it with page number "574".
Dated. January 10,1977.
WILSON K. TALLEY,
Assistant Administrator for
Research and Development.
| PR Doc.77-1463 Piled 1-17-77:8:46 am|
FEDERAL REGISTER. VOl. 42, NO. 12—TUESDAY, JANUARY 18, 1977
U-335
-------
APPENDIX E
DOCUMENTATION FOR SYNOPTIC RAINFALL DATA ANALYSIS PROGRAM - SYNOP
E.I Introduction
An integral part of the assessment of storm loads on water quality, is
the statistical evaluation of rainfall records. Hourly rainfall records
of many years duration are cumbersome and difficult to analyze. Tools
to summarize the variables of interest (volume, duration, intensity, and
time between storms) are needed to determine seasonal trends which are
of importance in assessing impacts and selecting control alternatives
for storm related loads. The purpose of the SYNOP rainfall data analysis
program is to provide the user with a tool for summarizing and
statistically characterizing a rainfall record of interest. Copies of
the Synoptic Rainfall Data Analysis Program (SYNOP) with sample rainfall
tapes and documentation can be obtained at a modest cost from:
National Technical Information Service
Office of Computer Products
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, Virginia 22161
E.2 Description
Hourly rainfall data is obtained for a minimum of five years of record
to provide sufficient confidence in the rainfall characterization.
Longer term records covering many years are preferable and are usually
available from U.S. Weather Bureau Stations.
The hourly data are then summarized by storm events, each with an
associated unit volume (V, inches), duration (D, hours), average intensity
(I = V/D, inches/hour), and time since the previous storm (A, hours)
measured from the midpoint of the successive storms. A storm definition
E-l
-------
must be established to determine when, in the hourly record, a storm
begins and ends. Program SYNOP delineates storm events as rainfall
periods separated by a minimum number of consecutive hours without
rainfall. The recommended number of hours without rainfall is 3 hours.
The statistics of relevant storm parameters are then computed. The mean
and the coefficient of variation of each parameter are determined: the
mean is the arithmetic average; the coefficient of variation is defined
as the standard deviation divided by the mean. The parameters of interest
are storm intensity, duration, unit volume and time between storms. At
the end of each year, a histogram is produced showing the amount of
rainfall for each hour of the year.
After the complete period of record has been read, the following operations
are performed on duration, D, intensity, I, volume, V, and delta, A:
1. Statistics by month
2. Plot of average and standard deviation by month
3. Statistics by year
4. Plot of average and standard deviation by year
5. Percent of occurrences less than or equal to the given value
(and associated plot)
6. Return period in years and associated plot.
E.3 Input Structure
The usual method for transmitting rainfall data is via magnetic tape.
SYNOP has been written assuming that the data is aligned on a U.S.
Weather Bureau tape in chronological order within each station. There
is no logical separation between stations and a tape marker appears at
the end of a file. Sometimes, depending on the retrieval system used to
generate the tapes, stations are divided by time periods among several
tape files. The various possibilities have been accounted for by the
several fields that appear on the control card. For each station, at
least one control card is needed for each tape file. The user concludes
his input deck with a card containing a /* in columns 1 and 2.
E-2
-------
E.3.1 Control Card Description
8
10
15
20
25
30
35
41
ISTA IRQYR IRWD STMDF ISKIP IPAUS IDISM ICNST TAPEN
(Ending
Col. Nos.)
FORMAT (A6,
ISTA
IRQYR
IRWD
STMDF
ISKIP
IPAUS
IDISM
ICNST
TAPEN
A2, 12, 515, 3A2)
desired station number (station number is defined by the
U.S. Weather Bureau)
last 2 digits of year number where execution is to begin.
If left blank, then the execution will begin at the first
hourly rainfall record.
0, begin search immediately (used for initial search)
1, rewind tape before beginning search (used as required
in subsequent searches)
storm definition, number of consecutive hours without
rainfall which indicates the end of a storm (3 hours is
recommended)
0, print hourly rainfall data
1, skip printing hourly rainfall data
0, indicates that data for the requested station will end
after the present tape file has been read.
1, indicates that more data for the requested station is
expected after the present tape file has been read. The
program will pause to allow the operator to change tapes
if necessary.
0, no rewind after the present tape file has been read.
1, rewind and dismount tape after file has been read.
IDISM = 1 for last analysis on a tape.
0, data for the requested station begins with the current
tape.
1, data for the requested station is being continued from
a previous tape file.
next tape number to be mounted (is printed on the console
typewriter as an operator instruction).
E-3
-------
In the example shown in Table E-l, 2 stations are requested, Station
410016 appears on 4 tape files (thus requiring 4 control cards) and
Station 052220 appears on only one tape file. A brief explanation of
this data input follows.
Card Number Explanation
1 Station 410016; rewind tape before beginning search; 3
consecutive dry hours define end of storm; print hourly
data; pause after reading tape file because more data is
expected; rewind after tape file has been read; data for
410016 begins with this tape file; next tape is W1036.
2 Station 410016; starting in 1962; rewind tape before
search begins; 3 consecutive dry hours end storm; print
hourly data; pause after reading tape file because more
data is expected; rewind after tape file has been read;
this is a continuation of Station 410016; next tape is
W3375.
3 Same as 2, but do not rewind after station has been read
and start at first hourly rainfall record. Note that the
next tape to be mounted is W3375 (the same as the present
tape). No rewinding is done since the next set of data
is on the next file on the same tape.
4 Begin in 1974; do not rewind tape before search begins; 3
consecutive dry hours end each storm; print hourly data;
end of station will be recognized after this tape file
has been read; rewind tape after tape file has been read;
this is a continuation of Station 410016.
5 Station 052220; rewind tape before beginning search; 3
consecutive dry hours define the end of storm; print
hourly data; end of station after this tape file has been
read.
6 End of input data deck.
E-4
-------
TABLE E-l
INPUT STRUCTURE FOR PROGRAM SYNOP
n
(U
a
m 2;
i 0
en
1
2
3
4
5
6
/• —
_-^
^_
en
^^
50
M
O
V
o
•n
en
i— i
13
i
a
,-*-
! 2 Q . 5
i- $ 21 §
i ^-, /•*-• / — x
-------
E.4 Source Listing of Program SYNOP
Program SYNOP is written in FORTRAN IV, Level G for IBM 1130 compatible
computer systems. Minor changes in the coding of input-output functions
will facilitate its use on other computer systems. The program nominally
uses a high speed printer, a disk drive, a magnetic tape drive, and a
card reader.
This section presents a flow chart of the SYNOP program and a complete
listing of the FORTRAN source code. Section E.5 presents an example
execution of program SYNOP.
E.4.1 Flow Chart For Program SYNOP
A flow chart for program SYNOP is presented on the following two pages.
E-6
-------
REWIND
TAPE BEFORE
SEARCH ?
READ
RAINFALL
INFORMATION
NDOF:
I) YEAR
2) STATION
) TAPE
FIGURE E-l
FLOW CHART FOR PROGRAM 'SYNOP1
E-7
-------
COMPUTE, PRINT,
AND SAVE SYPNOTIC
FILE FOR THE
CURRENT YEAR
PRINT HISTOGRAM
OF RAINFALL FOR
THE YEAR
TYPE OPERATOR
MESSAGE
FOR NEXT TAPE
AND PAUSE
END
DATA FOR
HIS STATION WITH
RRENT
FILE?
CHANGE TAPE,
IF NECESSARY
STATISTICS, PLOTS,
%OF OCCURRENCE
LVALUE,
RETURN PERIOD_
.ANALYSIS
FIGURE E-KCONT'D.)
FLOW CHART FOR PROGRAM 'SYNOP1
E-8
-------
E.4.2 Source Listing for Program SYNOP
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
***** SUBROUTINE COAD2 *****
SUBROUTINE COftD2 ( X, Y ,XyAX ,Xv|IN, YMAX , YMIN,NTOT, NPLT, MLINE.NXSPA.
1ICODE.INOSK.ISIOE.ISYM)
THIS SUBROUTINE WILL PLOT UP TO 10 SIMULTANEOUS PLOTS DM THE SAME
GRAPH
IT WILL ALSO PLOT 2 GRAPHS SIDE 3* SIDE IF ISlDE IS SET E3UAL TO 1
XrARRAY OF X«S <1-Dl^ENSIONAL ARRAY, FIRST NTOT REPRESENT XI, SECOND
NTOT REPRESENT X2, ETC.)
YrARRAY OF Y«S (I-DIM^NSIONAL ARRAY, FIRST NTOT REPRESENT Yl, SECOND
NTOT REPRESENT YZ, ETC.)
WHEN USING THE OPTION TO PLOT 2 SRAPHS SIDE BY SIDE. THEN INPUT
THE X»S AND YtS AS FOLLOWS...
THE FIRST NTOT(1)*NPLT(1) A*E FOR THE LEFT GRAPH AND THE NEXT NTOT(2)
*NPLT<2» ARE FOR THE RIGHT GRAPH
XMAX = MAXIM|IM VALUE IN X.DIRECTION!
XMIN=MINIMuM VALUE IN X DIRECTION
YMAX = MAXIM|JM VALUE IN Y-DIREcTION
YMIN = MlNIMi|V| VALUE IN Y-DIREcTION
NTOT=NUM3ER 3F POINTS PE^ PLOT
NPLT=NUM3ER OF PLOTS
THERE IS A XMAX, XMIN, YMAX« YMIN«MTOT, NPLT FOR EACH GRAPH IF 2 ARt
BEING USED
NLINE=NUMBER OF LINES IN Y-DlRECTION
NXSPArN'JMRER OF SPACES I-M THE X-DlRECTION FOR EACH GRAPH
ICODE=O IF ONLY ONE SET OF x«s ARE TO BE PLOTTED
ICODE=J IF MORE THAN ONE SET OF x«s ARE TO PLOTTED
NOTE--EXCEPT WHEN ICOoE IS 0, DIMENSION X AND Y 3Y NTOT*NPLT IN THE
MAINLINE.
WHEN ICODE=0, DIMENSION Y BY NTOT*NPLT, AND X 3Y NTOT IN THE MAINLINE.
INOSKrOPTION MOT TO SKIP TO A NE«I PAGE EACH TIME COIPL IS CALLED.
INOSKrO—SKIP TO A NEW PAGE
TNOSK=1~-DO NOT SKI3 TO A NEW PAGE
ISIDE DETERMINES WHETHER 1 OR 2 GRAPHS WILL 3E PLACED SIDE 3Y SIDE
isioEro..i PLOT ON PAGE
ISIDE=l..2 ADJACENT GRAPHS WILL 3E PLOTTED
ISYM=VECTOR OF SUBSCRIPTS CORRESPONDING TO SYMBOLS TO 3t PLOTTED
FOR EACH OBSERVATION
TABLE OF CORRESPONDING SYM30LS—
NUM SYM3
NUM SYM3
NUM SYMB
NUM SYM3
MUM SYM3
NUM SYM3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
9
0
A
B
C
0
E
F
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2n
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
0
P
0
R
S
T
U
V
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
W
X
Y
Z
.
*
,
/
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
t
)
(
t
•f
.
DIMENSION Yd),Yd
DIMENSION *MAX(2),
DIMENSION YVALJ2).
DIMENSION ABC(?0),
DATA I3/' «/,TX/20*'!•/,A3C/20*'
2),YMIN(2)«XSCAL(2).YSCAL(2).E(2)
\|PLT(2) ,ICODE(2)
IX(lo2),FSCAL(ll)«:
E-9
-------
DATA Ift/«l|.t2'«l3t.tt»l»t5l,»6t.t7l,«8t.f9«,»0'.«A'»l3t«'Ct»tD*»tE
l»»«Fttt5»,»Hi,«I»,«J».1Kl«tL««tM«»tNti'Ott*P«t«0«ttR>«tS'ttTi,«Uti
2lVt»tWt»'X1««Yt«tZt«'.l»'*l«'«t't/t«t*'«t>t«'<'«205'»l»«320Dl*'' + ''
3«-«,« ,/
10=5
c SET ARRAY ic DIMENSIONED 10 x 2 EOUAL TO i
CALL SETlA(IC,10,2,l)
DO 16 1=1.?
C CALCULATE INTERVAL 3ETWEEN PRINT POSITIONS OM X-AXIS ANO
C BETWEEN LINES OM Y-AxIS
XSCAL > /FLOAT < NLINE )
C E=HALF THE INTERNAL IN THE Y-DlRECTION (EPSILON)
16 E(I>=YSCAL(I)/2.
C NG^TO=NUMBER OF 3OiMTS X NUMBER OF PLOTS. GRAMO TOTAL
C OF THE NUMBER OF POINTS ON THE LEFT SIDE GRA3H.
NGRTOrNTOT(l)*NPLT(l)
C CHECK IF Nrw PAGE IS DESIRED
IF (INOSK .NE. 1) WRITE I<«10(A4tAl) )
KXSPA=NXSPA+2
NLIN=NLINE+I
C M2 = NU;JI8ER OF SIDE 3Y SIDE GRAPHS
M2 = H-ISIDE
DO 13 Krl.MLIN
c SET OUTPUT LINE TO BLANKS
CALL SETlAdX, 102,1. IB)
C SET RIGHT SIDE OF LINE TD BLANKS
CALL SETIA(IY,51.1,I3)
c SET LAST ELEMENT OF LINE TO AN «i«
IX(KXSPA)=-li*nj6
IF (ISIDE-l) 8B.87.88
C IF SIOE BY SIDE IS CHOSEM, SET LAST ELEMENT OF RIGHT SIDE
C TO AN • I'
P7 IY(KXSPA)=-1"»016
88 DO 18 M=1,M2
C YVAL=VALUE OF CURRENT POSITION ALOMG Y-AXIS. (3EGIMNING
C AT TOP OF THE GRAPH WITH A VALUE OF YMAX AND DECREASING
C BY A VALUE OF YSCAL FOR EACH LINE)
YVAL(M)=YMAX(M)-(K-1)*YSCAL(M)
C NP=NUVBER OF °LOTS ON THIS SIDE
NP=NPLT(M)
C NT = N'JM3ER OF oOjMTS ON THIS SIDE
NT=NTOT(M)
C "* LOOP IS FOR EACH PLOT
DO
-------
C 11 LOOP IS FOR EACH POINT
DO 11 KQ=1,NT
C CHECK IF COUNTER FOR THIS PLOT EXCEEDS NU1BER OF POINTS
C FOR THIS PLOT
IF(IC(I,M)-NT) 20,20,4
C IF NOT, SET u EQUAL TO CURRENT COUNTER VALUE
20 J=IC(I,"1)
C IlsSUpSCRIPT OF CURRENT ooiNT
I1=J+(I-1)*NTOT(V|)+NGRTO*( v|-i)
C TESTrDTFFERENCE BETWEEN Y VALUE OF CURRENT POINT AND CUR-
c RENT Y POSITION
TEST = ABS(Y(I1)-YVAL<«) >
C IF TEST IS LESS THAN OR E3UAL TO EPSlLON, THIS POINT IS TO
c BE PLOTTED ON CURRENT LINE
IF(TEST-E(M)-i.E-6) 12.12,3
C IF TEST IS GRrATER THAN EPSlLON. SEE IF Y-VALUE OF CURRENT
C POINT IS GREATER THAN CURRENT Y POSITION
3 IF( Ydl)-YVAL(M)) <*,t,5
C IT IS GREATER, THEREFORE INCREASE COUNTER AND SO TO NEXT
C POINT
5 IC(I.H) = IC(I,M)*1
GO TO 11
C TEST INDICATES THE PQlNT IS TO BE PLOTTED ON THIS
C l2=Cr>RRESPONDING SUBSCRIPT IN X-DIRECTION
12 I2 = J+(I-l)*NTOT(v|)*icoDE(M)+NGRTO*,(Ix(J).J=ltKXSPA)
206 FORMAT (IX,Fin.3,« I',t3Al)
WRITE(IO,207)YVAL(2>.(IY(J).J=1.KXSPA)
207 FORMAT (lH+i 55X»F10.3, • I«,(»2A1)
13 CONTINUE
DO 10 1=1,20
10 IX(I)=-moi6
WRITE(IO,2p3)(ABC(I),IX{I),I=l,LXSPA)
IF (ISlDE-i) 3P,39,38
39 WRITE!10,2n5)(ABC(I),IX(I),I=1,LXSPA)
33
E-ll
-------
00 17 M=1,M2
I2=KXSPA*M
DO 17 1=11,12
17 FSCAL(I)=XVIIN(M)*(I-1-(M-1)*KXSPA)*XSCAL(M)*10.
WRITER 10, ?0<») (FSCAL(J),J=i,KXSPA)
20<» FORMAT (6X.11F10.2)
IF (ISIDE-D 60, 43,60
<»3 WRITE ( Io» 210 )(FSCAL(J),J = H. 12)
210 FORMAT ( 1H+, 60X.5F1 0 . 2)
60 RETURN
END
C
c
C ***** SUBROUTINE DAlQA *****
C
SUBROUTINE DAI DA ( IOAYN, ONTH.DAY, YEAR)
INTEGER MOS<12) .MONTH. DAY, YEAR
DATA MOS/3l,0,31,30,3l,30,31,31,30,31,30,3l/
IDATE=0
DO 10 YEAR=1,99
NDAYY = 3f,5
IF (YEAR/i»*<4 .EO. YEAR) NDAYY=366
IF (IDATE .GE. IDAYN) GO To 20
10 CONTINUE
20 IDATE=IDATE-NDAYY
MOS(2)=?B
IF
-------
C FINAL ARRANGEMENT OF IA (JKCLAST+1)=0)
C ID=ARRAY iw 1 OT 1 CORRESPONDANCE WITH JK TO DETERMINE DIRECTION OF
C SORT. 10=1...ASCENDING
C 10=2...DESCENDING
DIMENSION IA(l),ID(1),JK<1)
INTEGER ITES1*H,ITES2*'»
C FIND MsONE LESS THftN LEAST POWER OF 2.GT.N
1=0
10 IsM+l+l
IF (V|-N) in,20,20
C 20 OUTER LOOP. .HALVE *.
20 M=M/2
C TEST FDR END OF OUTER LODP.
IF (VI) 70,70,30
C 30 FIND LIMIT FDR MIDDLE LOOP
30 K=N-M
C BEGIN DIDDLE LOOP
00 60 J=1«K
C SETUP FOR INNE* LOOP
I = J
C HO MIDDLE AND INNER LOOP . .
LJ=1
2S IAD=WROW»(JK(LJ)-1)
L1=L*IAD
I1=I*IAD
IDEC=ID(LJ)
ITES2=Ift(Ll)
ITES1=IA(I1 )
GO TO (21.22),IOEC
21 IF (ITES1-ITES2) 60i61t50
22 IF (ITES1-TTES2) 50.61*60
61 LJ=LJ+1
IF (JK(LJ)) 60,60,23
50 MOT IN SEQUENCE, SO SWAP
50 DO 80 IP=1,NCOL
NROCDrMROW*(IP-l>
NI=NROCO+I
NL=NROCO+L
lACNI)rlA(NL)
60 IA(NL)=ITEVIP
C GO DDWM INNER LOOP . . ONLY IF SWAP
I = I-M
C TEST FOR END OF INNER LOOP
IF (I) 60,60.<«0
C 60 END OF TNNER AND MIDDLE LOOP.
60 CONTINUE
GO TO 20
C 70 SORT COMPLETE
70 RETURN
END
C
C ***** SUBROUTINE SHELR *****
C
C SHELL SORT
E-13
-------
C REFERENCES..
C 0.A.SHELL, CACM, VOL 2 (1959). PP 30..32
C T.M. HI33ERD, SOC RPEORT SP-982
C J.ROOTilROYO. CACM, AL3Q3ITHM 201
C THIS IS A FORTRAN VERSIOM DP ALGORITHM 201.
SUBROUTINE SHELR ( A« M. NROw ..-gcOL. J.<« ID)
C A=INPUT ARRAY TO 3E ARRAN3ED
C NrNUMBER OF ELEMENTS (FILLED ROWS) IN A
C NROW=NUM3ER OF ROWS IN A
C NCOLrNUVIBER OF COLUMNS IM A
C JKsARRAY CONTAINING HIERARCHY OF COLUMNS TO DETERMINE
c FINAL ARRANGEWEMT OF A iJK(LAST+D=O)
C ID = ARRAY IN 1 OT 1 CORRESPoNDANCE »IITH JK TO DETERMlVlE DIRECTION OF
C SORT. 10=1...ASCENDING
C ID=2...DESCENDING
DIMENSION A(l)ilD
-------
C 70 SORT COMPLETE
70 RETURN
END
C
C
c ***** FUNCTION IDATE *****
C
FUNCTION IDATECIDAY. MONTH, IYEAR)
IDATE=IDAY
JYEAR=IYEAR-1
00 300 1=1901, JYEAR
!F((I/m*'*-I)lOO,200,lOO
100 IDATE=IDATE+365
GO TO 300
200 IDATE=IDATE+366
300 CONTINUE
1R (IYEAR/H)*i*-I YEAR )<»00, 500,<»00
i»00 IFE3=23
SO TO SOO
500 IFEBr29
600 60 TO (1,2, 3, it, 5, 6,7, g, 9, 10, 11,12) (MONTH
12 IDATE=IDATE+30
11 IDATE=IDATE+31
10 IDATE=IDATE+30
9 IDATE = IDATIT + 31
8 IDATE=IOATE+31
7 IDATE=IDATE+30
6 IDATE=IDATE+31
5 IDATE=IOATE+30
«> IDATErIOATE + 31
s IDATE=IDATE+IF'EB
2 IDATE=IDATE+31
1 RETURN
END
C
C
C ***** SUBROUTINE S£TlA *****
C
SUBROUTINE SETIA ( I AR/\Y, MROW.NCOt , IVALU)
C SfT INTEGER ARRAY DIMENSIONED NROW X NCOL TO IVALU
INTEGER lARAY(l)
DO 10 I=1,MELEM
IARAy
-------
C AS THE TAPE DEVICE CODE.
C
C
C
C
INTEGER JKi»(2)
INTEGER JK3<2)
INTEGER NSPAC<2>.BLANK
INTEGER ISTA(3),KEY(3*00,3).JK1(3).JK2<3)
INTEGER TITLE(5«<»),NA3RK(3,2)
INTEGER ICOUN(13,22)
INTEGER ICARKU9)
INTEGER YEAR,MONTH,DAY.CARD,RAIN<12),STA(6),PREST(6)
INTEGER lNPHR<;66,?7),DRY,WETtPRCON,STORM.MSTRM,DSTRV|,rSTRM.HSTRq
INTEGER DURAT,STMDF,DURLS«COND
INTEGER IBUFUOO)
INTEGER ISAVEJ9)
INTEGER ISYM(100),TAPEN<3)
INTEGER ANDGT
REAL PLOTCSO.S)
REAL XVALU(3500«2)
REAL Y2MAX(t)
REAL X<30),Y<30,8),XWAX(2),XMlN<2>»YK|AX(t)
REAL IMTEN
REAL RESVD(i*),STAT
-------
C 1=DON'T PRINT
C IPAUS=CODE TO PAUSE AFTER THIS STATION OR TAPE HAS 3EEN READ.
c O=END OF STATIOM AFTER THIS READ OF TAPE, I=PAJSE-CONTINUE
C STATION! ON NEXT FILE OR NEXT TAPE.
C IDISv| = cODE TO RErfINO CALL MAGTA(3.0)
IRC01=1
IF (IRWD .EO. 1 .OR. LOC99 ,GT. 10) GO TO 2
READ (B9'l) IBUF
1RC01=LOC99
GO TO 510
C READ K BLOCK OF TAPE
2 CALL MAGTA (0 , 0,400,IBUF(2))
C CONVERT TO IBS'! 1130
CALL EXELM (HOO.IBUF)
510 DO t I=IRC01,10
C ***************
c REPLACE BY
C IF (IRWD .T3. 1) REWIND 99
C 2 READ (99,1030,END = 1) (IBUF ( J) , j=l, <»)
C1030 FORMAT (1A2)
C K = 0
C
CALL DATSW(OtTSWO)
IF (ISWO ,E3. 1) GO TO 210
C CHECK FIRST 6 CHARACTERS OF EACH RECORD FOR DESIRED
C STATION
DO 3 J=l,3
IFdBUF(K) ,NE. ISTA(J)) GO TO t
CONTINUE
IF REQUESTED YEAR EXISTS, CHECK THAT IT
IF (IR3YR ,NE. BLAMK .AMD. IROYR .NE. IBUF(I)) GO TO H
C
c
c
c
c
DESIRED
* * * *
WRITE (89«]> IBL
CALL DEOF
LOC99=I
* * * *
REPLACE
STATION
* *
JF
* *
BY
FO'JND
*******
* * *****
* * * * *
*
*
*
* * * * *
E-17
-------
C BACKSPACE 99
C
60 TO 5
l» CONTINUE
IRCOl=l
60 TO ?
5 CONTINUE
C
C ***»*«******
C SET UP FOR END-OF-TAPE MARKER
CALL E.MDGO
GO TO ?00
9999 CONTINUE
C ************
C
c RESET INITIAL CONDITIONS FOR NEW STATION
IF (ICMST .EQ. 1) GO TO 3
LOC9B=1
DURLS=0
CONDrDSY
NDRY=0
NDRHR=0
VOLUV| = 0
DURAT=0
NOYRS=0
B CONTINUE
ILSTC=2
c READ STATION NUMBER AND YEAR FROH NEXT RECORD
c
c *********** *»****«i
READ (99'LoC99,iooo) STA«NE«YR *
LOC99=LOC99-1 *
c ******************
c REPLACE BY
C READ(99,1000,END=200)STAtNEWYR
C BACKSPACE 99
C
NEWYRsNEWYR+1900
DO 6 I=lt6
PKEST(I)=STA(I)
6 CONTINUE
C CLEAR THIS YEAR'S MATRIX
7 CONTINUE
CALL SETIA(IMPHR. 366. 27,0)
C COMPUTE STARTING D/\Y NUM3ER FOR THIS YEAR
IDAST=IOATE<0.1»NEWYR)
WRITE (IO,?OHO)
IPRN=0
10 CONTINJE
C
C **************«*<
C CHrCK IF NEXT BLOCK OF TAPE IS TO BE READ
IF (LOC99 ,LE. 10) GO TO 11
c READ A BLOCK OF TAPE
CALL *IAGTA (o,o,"»oo,i9UF<2) )
c CONVERT TO IBM nso ARRAY CONVENTION
E-18
-------
CALL EXELM
WRITE (fl9'i) IBUF
CALL DEOF
LOC99=1
c EACH BLOCK OF TA'E CONTAINS 10 RECORDS
11 CONTINUE
READ (99lLOC99,1000tEND=200«ERR=30)STA,YEAR,v|ONTH«DAY .CARDiRAINi
IYRA2,IMOA2«IDYA2
C *****************
C REPLACE ABOVE 3Y
C READ (99.1000,END=200,ER3=30)STAtYEARtMONTHiDAY.CARD«RAIN,
C • IYRA2«lMOA2,IDYA2
C
REREAD lOlOtlCARl
C
C ******************
c SWITCH o UP WILL CAUSE PROGRAM TO BRANCH TO END OF STATION*
C ROUTINE *
CALL DATSW(O.ISWO) *
IF (ISdO .EQ. 1) GO TO 210 *
C ******************
C
IF (CARD .NE. 1 .AND. CARD ,NE. 2) 60 TO 30
C CHECK FOR 2 CONSECTIvE CARD 1'S OR 2«S
IF (CARD .ME. ILSTC) 60 TO In
C PRINT LAST RECORD IF TWO CONSECUTIVE CARD 1
IF (CARD ,EQ. 1) WRITE (10,2000) ISAVE,(INPHR(IDAY,I),1=112*)«I AST
C PRINT AN ASTERISK IF 2 CONSECUTIVE CARD 2«S
IF (CARD ,E3. 2) WRITE (10,2200) IAST
C CHECK FOR SA"IE STATION
1<4 DO 16 1 = 1,6
IF (STAd) .NE. PREST(I)) SO TO 17
16 CONTINUE
C SAME STATION
GO TO 19
C NEW STATION-CO^PJTE THE SYNOPTIC DATA FILE FOR THE YEAR
C JUST CONCLUDED
17 IALT=1
GO TO tO
C CHECK FOR SAME YEAR
19 YEAR=YEAR+J900
IF (YEAR ,LT. NEWYR) GO TO 30
C A NEW YEAR SIGNALS ALTERNATIVE 2
C
C ******************
IF (YEAR .NE. NEWYR) LOc99=LOC99-l *
C ******************
c REPLACE ABOVE BY
C IF (YEAR .ME. NEWYR) BACKSPACE 99
C
IF (YEAR .NE. NEWYR) IALT=2
IF (YEAR .ME. NEWYR) GO TO <»0
ILSTC=CARD
C ADD TO THIS YEAR'S MATRIX. FIND DAY NUMBER
IDAY=IDATE(DAY,MONTH,YEARJ-IDAST
YEAR=YEAR-1900
IHR=(CARO-1)*12
E-19
-------
00 20 1=1,12
IHR=IHR+1
INPHR
<»0 WRITE (10,2030)
C SAVE LAST STORM NUM3ER AMD PRESENT FILE NUMBER
NOLDSrSTORv)
LOLD9=LOC9fl
NDRSft=MDRY
C FIMD NUMBER OF DAYS IN THIS YEAR
NDAYR=l0ATE(l.l«NEWYRtl)-lDATE(l,l»NEWYR>
CALL SETIA (ICOUN,13,22,0)
NOYRS=NOYRS*1
DO 100 J=1,NOAYR
IDAYM=IOATr(l,l,NEWYR)+J-l
CALL DAIDA (IDAYN,IROW,iDYl,iYl)
IROW=IROW
DO 90 <=l,?t
IF (INPHR(J,K) .EO. 0) NCATGsl
IF (INPHR(J.K) .NE. 0) NCATG=(INPHR(J,K)-1)/1+2
IF (NCATG .GT. 20) NCATG=2l
ICOUM(IROW,NCATG>=ICOUN(IROW,NCATG)+1
C PRESENT CONDITION! IS DETERMINED IF ANY PRECIPITATION IS
c RECORDED FOR THIS HOUR
PRCON=2
IF (INPHR(J,K) .GT. 0) PRCON=1
C PREVIOUS CONDITION ANjO PRESENT CONDITION DETERMINE CURRENT
C STATUS
NEXT=(COND-1)*2+PRCON
C PPCON AND COND CAN BE EITHER 1 OR 2. THUS NEXT
C WHICH DEFINES THE CURRENT STATUS CAN BE EITHER 1,2,3, OR «»
C AS INDICATED IN THE FOLLOWING TABLE
C
C PREVIOUS CONDITION
C rfET DRY
E-20
-------
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
(COMOrl)
PRESENT
CONDITION
WET
(PRCONrl)
DRY
1
2
(COND=2)
3
i*
GO TO (50, fcO, 70.80). Nr
C CONTINUE STORvi (MEXT = 1)
50 DURAT=DURAT+1+NDRHR
NDRHRrfl
VOLUMr\/OLUM+INPHR< J«K)*O.Ol
GO TO 90
C DRY PERIOD (NCXT=2)-CHECK IF NOL OF CONSECUTIVE DRY HOURS
C IS SUFFICIENT TO 3E CONSIDERED AS END OF STORM
60 NDRHR = \JDRHR + 1
IF (MD^HR .LT. STWDF) GO To 90
c END OF STORM
STORM=STORM+i
C . FOR FIRST STORV! DN FILE ASSUME DURATION OF LAST STORM TO
C BE THE SAME AS THE FIRST STORM
IF (STORM .E9. 1) DURLS=DURAT
IF (STORM ,E3. 1) DELTA=0.
VOLUM=VOLUM+0.000005
INTENrVOLUM/FLOAT(DURAT)
WRITE (98'LOC98i2niO) PREST . mSTR.v|. DSTRMi YSTRM« HSTRvi. DURAT, IMTENf
VoLUMtOELTA
WRITE (I0,?020) PREST,STORv|,v|STRV|,DSTRM.YSTRM.HSTRMtDURATtIMTENi
VoLUMtQELTA
NDRY=NORHR
NDRHR=0
CONDrDRY
OURLS=DURAT
GO TO 90
c BEGINNING OF STORM
-------
00 9135 1=1,12
WRITE (IO,2220) GO TO 210 *
C ******************
C
C CHECK FOR °AUSINS FOR IMExT TAPE
IF (IPAUS ,EQ. 0) GO TO 210
WRITE (ITYP,2190) TAPEN
PAUSE 1111
60 TO 1
c REWIND TAPE AND so TO SUMMARY
c
c ******************
200 CALL MAGTA (6,0) *
C ******************
C REPLACE ABOVE BY
C 200 REWIMD 99
C
IALT=1
GO TO 40
C READ SYNOPTIC FILE KEY FIELDS (MONTH AND YEAR)
C WRITE EOF ON OIS<
210 WRITE (9B«LOC98,2050)
LOC9B=1
1 = 1
220 READ (98«LOC9n,10'»0»END=23o) (KEY(I, J) , J=l«2)
KEY(I,3)=I
E-22
-------
1=1+1
60 TO 2?0
230 NREC=I-1
FOp EACH KEY, OBTAIM STATISTICS
DO <»00 ICOL=1,2
JK1(1)=ICOL
CALL SHELL ( KEY ,MREC,3800,3,JK1,JK2)
WRITE (IO,?07D)((NABRM J«ICOL> »J=1«3)«I=1,2)
KEYV=KEY(1,ICOL>
NRECl = NREC-fl
IC = 0
00 235 J = l,4
YMAX(J)=0.
Y2MAX(J)=0.
235 CONTINUE
DO 300 J=1,NREC1
IF (J ,E3. 1) GO TO 260
IF (J .EQ. NRECD GO TO 240
CHECK FOR CHAMGE IN KEY
IF (KEY(J,ICOL) ,E3. KEY*/) GO TO 280
BREAK OCCUREO
240 IC=IC+1
X(IC)=FLOAT(KEYV)
DO 250 1 = 1, f
STAT(I,5)=STAT(I.2)/STAT(I,1)
STAT(I,6)=SQRT(ABS((STAT(I,6)-STftT11,2)**2/STAT(1»1f)/(STAT(1,1) •
1.0)))
STAT(I.7)=STRT(I.6)*»?
STAT(I,8)=STAT(I,6)/STAT(1,5)
SftVE MEAN AND STD DEV FOR EACH VARIABLE FOR PLOTTING
ICNO=(I-l)*2tl
Y(IC,ICNO)rST/\T(I,5)
Y(IC,ICNO+i>=STAT(I,6)
IF
-------
IF (DATA .61. STATdti*)) STAT ( I ti» )=OATA
STAT(I.6)=sTAT(I«6)+DATA*DATA
290 CONTINUE
300 CONTINUE
WRITE: (TO,2090)((NABRK
00 310 1=1, 1C
WRITE: (To. 2120 xm.
PLOT(K+1,2)=Y( J.I+1)
PLOT(K+1»3)=29.
315 CONTINUE
NTOT=2*IC
CAUL SHELR(PLOT»!MTOT,60,3, JK3,JK3)
00 318 J=1,NTOT
ISYM(J)=IFTX(PLOT(J,3)+0.5)
313 CONTINUE
CALL COAD2(PLOT(l,l),PLOT(l«2) tX«IAX(ICOL)«XSIlN(lcOL)iYqftXU>.YMIN,
« NTOT«1,50,NSPAC(ICOL) ,0,0»0,ISYM)
WRITE (10,2100) (TlTLE(M,L),v| = l,5)i(MABRK(V|,iCOL).M = l,3)
320 CONTINUE
i»00 CONTINUE
DO 500 IVAR=1,4
LOC9B=1
K=l
READ VARIABLE
READ (9BtLOC9B,l050«END =
XVALU(K»D=X(TVAR)
GO TO i»10
120 MOCCU=K-1
C SORT BY VALUE
CALL SHELR ( XVALU, NOCCU. 5500 , 1 , JK4 , JK"» )
WRITE (I0«21tn> ( (TITLE! J«IVAR) ,J=l,5)«I=lt2)
C COMPUTE 'PLOTTINS POSITION1
00 H30 I=1,NOCCU
XVALU( I,2)=FLOOT(I)/FLOAT(NOCCU)*100.
130 CONTINUE
WRITE (10,2150) < (XVALU ( I • U) , J=l, 2) • I=l« NOCCU)
c PLOT RESULTS
C SORT FIRST COLU^M REVERSED
CALL SHELR (XVALU, NOCCU. 3500. 2 «JKtj,UK3)
CALL COAD2J XVALU (1,2) ,XvALu(lil>«100. « 0 . , Y2MAX( I VAR ) ,0. ,NOCCu«l«
. 50,100,0,2,0,ISY^>
WRITE (I0,?100) (TITLE(U.IVAR)»U=1«5)
WRITE (10,2160)
c COMPUTE RECURRANCE INTERVAL
DO m»o 1=1, NOCCU
XVALU(I,2)^FLOAT(NOYRS)/FLOAT(I)
E-24
-------
mo CONTINUE
WRITE (IO,2170)(TTTLE(J.IVAR).J=l«5)
WRITE (TOt?15fU ((XVALU ( I.J),J = l.2),1 = 1.NOCCU)
X2MAX=FLOAT(MOYRS)
: PLOT RESULTS
CALL cOAD2(XVALU(i,21,XVALU(I.D,x2MAX.o..r2MAX(iVAR),O.,NOCCU.I«
• 50,100.0.2,O.ISYM)
WRITE (10.2100) (TITLE(J.IVAR),J=1.5)
WRITE (10,2130)
500 CONTINUE
60 TO 1
999 CALL EXIT
1000 FORMAT (6A1,312.I1.1213,T7,3A2)
1010 FORMAT (M9A1)
1020 FORMAT (tA2,lx,U.515,3A2)
1030 FORMAT (6Al,312)
1050
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
2070
HOURS INCHES/HR
FORMAT (12y,I2,<*x,I2)
FORMAT (25x,F5.0,3F10.0)
FORMAT (3x,6Al'lX,2(I2,'/'),l2,5X.2m'»,2X.A2)
FORMAT ("*x,6Al,2x,2(A?,'/'),A2,2l5,F10.6,Fl0.2,F10.1)
FORMAT (3X,6A1,2X,I5,2X,2(A2,'/'),A2,2I6,F12.6,F10.2,F12.1)
FORMAT (1H1.20X.'STORX ^VENT SUMMARY'/
. • STATION STORM DATE HOUR DURAT INTENSITY
.VOLUME DELTA'/
. • NO
iINCHES HOURS'/)
FORMAT dHi,i»2x.«HYDROSCIEMCE RAINFALL ANALYSIS PROGRAM'//
. 50*.'HOURLY PRECIPITATION-HUNDREOTHS OF AN INCH'/
• ' STATION DATE 1 2 3 t 5 6 7
.8 9 10 11 12 13 1"» 15 16 17 IB 19 20 21 22 23 2m
./)
FORMAT (•/*•)
FORMAT c * • ,i»9Ai,2ox»«3Ao DATA IM RECORD*)
FORMAT (1H1.35X,'RAINFALL STATISTICS 3Y ',3A2.'(FOR PERIOD OF RECO
.RD)'/lX.3A2t
• 11X,'NUMBER',9X,•TOTAL',7X,•MINI MUM',7X,«MAXIMUM',
. 7X,'AVERAGE',7X,«STD DEV,6X,'VARIANCE',6X,'COEF-VAR')
2080 FORMAT ( 3X , 5A2 .F6. 0 . 7rm« 6 )
2090 FORMAT (1H1.12X.•SJMMARY OF RAINFALL STATISTICS 3Y ««3A2.'(FOR PER
.IOD OF RECORD)•/
• lX«3A?« 5X.'DURATION'.12X.'INTENSITY'.12X.'VOLUME'«15X
..'DELTA'/6x ,"»(• AVERAGE STD DEV'))
2100 FORMAT (40Y.5A2.' VS',3A2.20X,'A=AVERAGE, S=STD. DEV.')
21-10 FORMAT ( 25X. F"5. 0 , JFIO. 0 )
2120 FORMAT (lX,F5.n,2Fl0.2,2F10.<*,2Fl0.2,2F10.0)
2130 FORMAT (1X.I6)
2135 FORMAT (/' TOTAL HOURS FOR THE YEAR = ',16)
21i»0 FORMAT (IHl. <»9X . ' PR03A3ILITY ANALYSIS-', 5A2//
27X,'PERCENTAGE OF OCCURRENCE LESS THAN OR E3UAL TO TH
.E GIVEN VALUE OF ',5A2///1X.S(3X,'VALUE',5X,'PCT'))
2150 FORMAT (1X.16F8.3)
21f.O FORMAT (IH-t-, 53X, ' PERCENT LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO')
2170 FORMAT (IHlit5X.'RETURN 'ERIOD (IN YEARS) FOR ',5A2///1X,8(3X.'VAL
E-25
-------
.UE'«2X,'PERIOn'>»
21BO FORMAT (iH+.SJXt'RETURN PERIOD IM YEARS')
2190 FORMAT (///• OPERATOR.VIOJNT TAPE NO. '.3A2,' AND THEM PRESS START*
.)
2200 FORMftT (121X.A?)
2210 FORMAT (///stx,'NUMBER oc HOURS OF RAINFALL IN HJNDREDTHS OP AN IN
.CH«/i*lX,ilMTERVALS BETWEEN 0,00 AND 0.20 INCHESt/' MONTH 0»»
. 2015. i»x,» TOTAL1 /I 0'»X,ft2,»X,' HOURS' /115X.' PER'/115X, • MDNTH')
2220 FORMAT <6X,21I5,I9,T2,Iei)
tND
E-26
-------
E.5 Example of Computer Output From Program SYNOP
The example output presented in this section demonstrates the application
of program SYNOP for a rainfall analysis of U.S. Weather Bureau station
052220 in Denver, Colorado. This is the same data which is contained in
the sample data set transmitted with copies of the program.
The program presents a complete summary of the rainfall history for each
year of record. This includes an hourly percipitation history, a summary
of each event's statistics, and a histogram of rainfall events for each
month of the year. The sample output only presents this analysis for
1948 through 1950, and 1973.
The program then proceeds through a series of statistical summaries of
the entire data record. These are:
Aggregate monthly rainfall statistics
Plots of rainfall statistics by month
Annual rainfall statistics
Plots of rainfall statistics by year
Probability analysis of rainfall statistics
Probability density function
Return period analysis
This output will serve as a check on program SYNOP. The program input
is that on card 5 and 6 in Table E-l.
E-27
-------
HYDROSCIENCE RAINFALL ANALYSIS PROGRAM
m
i
KJ
00
STATION
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05?220
052220
.352220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
U52220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
352220
DATE
8/
a/ 2/<4«
a/ <*/<»8
8/21/48
3/25/<»B
9/ l/<48
9/30/<48
lO/ 1/"4B
10/ 5/"4P
10/28/"48
ll/
ll/ 5/"»8
ll/ 7/<»B
ll/ 8/t*
H/lP/te
11/11/tB
11/20/4B
12/ I/up
12/22/t»B
12/?3/"p
HOURLY PRECIPAITATION-HUNQREOTHS OF AN INCH
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1<4 13 16 17 18
19 20 2l 22 23 24
12/27/48
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
. 1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
0
0
0
37
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
4
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
3
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
2
2
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
-------
rn
i
K)
STATION
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05?220
052220
052220
05?220
052220
052220
05?220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
STORH
MO
1
2
3
it
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
H
15
16
17
18
19
20-
21
22
23
21
STORM
DATE
08/01/19
09/02/1»
08/OV«8
09/10/19
09/19/19
09/21/13
09/21/19
08/?5/18
09/J9/H8
09/30/18
10/01/18
10/05/18
10/16/19
10/16/18
in/?9/i8
11/03/18
11/07/18
11/08/19
11/10/19
11/20/18
11/20/19
12/22/18
12/?3/i(9
12/27/18
EVENT
HOUR
22
I1*
IS
11
13
18
19
2
IB
19
3
19
7
21
21
23
16
9
21
9
23
?1
5
21
SUMMARY
DURAT
H3URS
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
3
2
1
1
11
1
2
2
11
3
6
8
8
2
23
1
INTENSITY
INCHES/HR
0.015002
0.12000>>
0>010002
0.010002
0.020005
0.130005
0.010005
0.030002
0.133331
0.025002
0.010005
0.010005
0.007273
0.010005
0.025002
0.060002
0.018571
0.006668
0.011667
0.011250
0.011250
0.010002
0.009565
0.020005
VOLUME
INCHES
0.03
0.12
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.13
0.01
O'.OS
0.10
0.05
0.01
0.01
0.08
0.01
0.05
0.12
0.26
0.02
0.07
0.09
0.09
0.02
0.22
0.02
DELTA
HOJRS
0.0
15.5
50.5
112.0
211.5
53.0
73.0
7.5
616.5
261.5
7.5
112.0
257.0
9.0
291.5
113.0
95.0
11.5
61.5
229.0
11.0
763.0
18.5
10<».0
NUMBER OF HOURS OF RAINFALL IN HUNDREDTHS OF AN INCH
INTERVALS BETWEEN 0.00 AMD 0.20 INCHES
TH
i
2
3
1
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
0
711
696
711
720
711
720
711
732
716
7*1
682
723
8696
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
1
11
23
17
59
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
in
5
16
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
7
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
IT
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
19
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
s>
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
TOTAL
HOURS
PER
mONTH
711
696
711
720
711
720
711
711
720
711
720
711
TOTAL HOURS FOR THE YEAR = 9781
-------
HYOROSCIENCE
AMALYSIS PR06RAM
STATION
HOURLY PR£CI?«IT»TIOM-HUNDREOTHS OF AN INCH
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 2o 21 22 23 24
tn
i
oj
o
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05222Q
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
U52220
052220
052220
052220
05J220
052220
052220
052220
U52220
052220
05222U
052220
052220
052220
05*220
052220
U52220
052220
052220
052220
052220
U52220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05?220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
I/ 1/4*
I/ 2/49
I/ 3/49
I/ 4/49
I/ 8/49
I/ 9/49
1/2V49
1/27/49
1/28/49
2/ 1/4*
2/12/49
3/ 1/49
3/ 5/49
3/ 6/49
3/ 8/40
3/12/49
3/14/49
3/23/49
3/24/49
3/25/40
3/28/49
3/29/49
3/30/49
4/ 1/49
4/ 2/49
4/ 3/49
4/ 8/49
4/ 9/49
4/10/49
4/13/4Q
4/14/49
4/20/49
4/21/49
4/26/40
4/30/49
5/ J/49
5/ 5/49
5/ 7/49
5/11/49
5/13/49
5/15/49
5/16/49
5/18/49
5/20/49
5/21/49
5/23/49
5/27/49
5/28/49
6/ 1/49
6/ 2/49
6/ 3/49
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
1
0
0
0
5
0
0
7
1
0
0
0
0
11
0
0
3
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
1
0
0
0
6
0
0
8
2
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
9
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
5
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
7
4
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
4
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
2
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
3
0
0
1
0
0
4
0
0
24
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
1
4
0
2
0
0
7
0
0
2
0
0
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
i
2
0
0
6
0
0
5
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
1
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
6
10
0
0
1
5
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
3
•
-------
tn
i
052220
052220
032220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05?220
05*220
052220
052220
05?220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
Oi?220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05,220
05222C
052220
052220
05222U
0322*0
ft/ 1/19
6/ 5/19
6/ 6/19
6/ 7/19
&/ fl/19
S/12/1*
6/13/19
6/11/19
6/17/19
6/18/19
6/23/19
6/2
-------
tn
c/i
NJ
STATION STORH
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05J220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05?220
C52220
052220
052220
05J220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
055220
MO
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
10
i»l
42
>»3
44
45
16
17
48
19
50
51
52
53
51
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
61
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
71
75
76
77
STORM EVENT SUMMARY
DATE HOU* D'JRAT
HOURS
01/02/19
01/08/19
01/23/19
01/27/19
01/27/19
02/12/19
02/12/19
03/01/19
03/05/19
03/08/19
03/08/19
03/12/19
03/11/1*
03/23/19
03/25/19
07/28/19
03/?9/19
03/30/19
01/01/19
01/02/19
01/03/19
01/08/19
04/0«/49
01/09/19
01/09/19
01/10/49
04/13/19
04/13/19
01/11/19
01/20/19
01/20/19
01/26/49
04/30/49
05/05/49
05/05/49
05/11/49
05/13/49
05/13/19
05/15/19
05/15/4*
05/16/49
05/16/49
05/18/19
05/18/19
05/20/19
05/21/49
05/23/49
05/27/49
05/28/49
06/01/49
06/02/19
06/03/49
06/06/4»
15
23
10
3
19
12
IB
1
19
1
20
13
17
21
21
9
19
1
23
13
3
10
23
10
19
4
11
21
9
17
2*
9
7
3
3
15
7
20
3
1»
13
22
13
21
15
19
17
18
15
12
20
19
7
49
10
1
4
16
2
1
3
7
4
1
5
1
8
3
25
1
13
11
1
3
4
4
1
5
11
1
9
6
1
2
11
1
1
46
9
10
1
3
6
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
7
35
1
INTENSITY
INCHES/HR
0.017347
0.010000
0.010005
0.010001
0.010625
0.010002
0.010005
0.026668
0.035714
0.007501
0.010005
0.054000
0.010005
0.025000
0.016668
0.010100
0.010005
0.021538
0.006364
0.010005
0.006668
0.007501
0.057501
0.010005
0.056000
0.011818
0.030005
0.022222
0.015000
0.010005
0.020002
0.027273
0.010005
0.010005
0.037826
0.041111
0.067000
0.040005
0.036668
0.021667
0.010002
0.025002
0.050005
0.010002
0.010002
0.010002
0.030005
0.020005
0.010005
0.010005
0.044286
0.056000
0.010005
VOLUME
1MCHES
O.B5
0.10
0.01
0.01
0.17
0.02
0.01
O.OB
0.25
0.03
0.01
0.27
0.01
0.20
0.11
1.01
0.01
0.23
0.07
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.23
0.01
0.23
0.13
0.03
0.20
0.09
0.01
0.01
0.30
0.01
0.01
1.74
0.37
0.67
0.0'+
0.11
0.13
0.02
0.05
0.05
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.31
1.95
0.01
DELTA
HOURS
159.0
132.5
312.5
95.5
17.0
470.0
5.5
392.0
116.0
52.5
17.5
96.0
15.0
223.5
15.5
71.0
22.0
12.0
69.0
9.0
20.0
122.5
13.0
9.5
11.0
12.0
74.0
11.0
10.5
119.5
7.5
133.5
S9.0
116.0
27.5
132.5
40.5
8.5
32.0
12.5
21.0
9.0
33.5
8.5
42.0
2B.Q
45.5
97.0
21.0
93.0
35.0
37.0
43.0
-------
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
m 052220
1 052220
W 052220
°^ 052220
052220
OS2220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05?220
052220
P52220
0*2220
052220
0°'2220
052220
052220
05?220
052220
052220
05P220
78
79
80
81
82
S3
01*
85
P. 6
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
103
101
102
103
ini*
105
106
1(17
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
1?2
123
121*
125
125
127
1?8
129
1JO
131
132
133
174
06/06/1*9
06/06/1*9
05/08/1*9
06/08/1*9
05/12/1*9
06/13/1*9
05/13/1*9
06/17/1*9
06/18/1*9
05/23/1*9
06/26/1*9
06/27/1*9
05/27/1*9
06/28/1*9
07/01/1*9
07/03/1*9
07/05/1*9
07/06/1*9
07/06/H9
07/07/1*9
07/08/1*9
07/11/1*9
07/13/1*9
07/lt*/i*9
07/li»/i»9
07/18/1*9
07/21/49
07/2i»/t*9
07/35/t*"
07/28/1*9
07/?8/i*9
08/03/1*9
08/08/1*9
08/09/1*9
03/11/1*9
08/12/1*9
08/13/1*9
08/14/49
08/17/1*9
08/19/1*9
08/?i»/i*9
08/25/1*9
06/29/1*9
09/03/1*9
09/n3/49
09/30/1*9
19/08/1*9
10/n8/49
1(1/09/4"
10/09/1*9
10/18/1*9
10/19/1*9
10/19/1*9
lfl/?9/49
11/11/1*9
12/11/1*9
12/20/1*9
17
22
15
22
19
15
23
IS
I1*
19
17
12
17
15 -
15
17
14
17
21
20
17
15
17
3
15
23
16
21
16
19
23
6
17
1*
15
23
15
23
15
11
19
17
23
8
15
10
5
11
15
21
19
7
15
16
9
1
5
1
13
i*
1
7
3
3
1
1
3
2
1
2
• 1
2
1
5
1
1
1
2
1
I*
1
2
2
1
i*
1
1
5
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
5
1
1
1
2
5
1
19
1
2
1
5
13
li*
1
11
1
0.010005
0.027692
0.037501
0.010005
0.0342B6
0.006668
0.123331*
0.010005
0.010005
0.200001
0.065002
0.040005
0.010002
0.010005
0.035002
0.0300C5
0.106000
0.020005
0.050005
0.010005
0.010002
0.200001*
0.012501
0.010005
0.030002
0.020002
0.010005
0.027501
0.020005
0.010005
0.022000
0.015002
0.105002
0.085002
0.020005
0.010002
0.070001*
0.050005
0.020002
0.010005
0.051*000
0.010005
0.020005
0.020005
0.060002
0.028000
0.010005
0.013681*
0.010005
0.060002
0.110004
0.008000
0.031538
0. 026428
0.010005
0.028182
O.OIDOOS
0.01
0.3S
0.15
0.01
0.24
0.02
0.37
0.01
0.01
0.6Q
0.13
0.04
0.02
0.01
0.07
0.03
0.53
0.02
0.05
0.01
0.02
0.20
0.05
0.01
0.06
0.04
0.01
0.11
0.02
0.01
0.11
0.03
0.21
0.17
0.02
0.02
0.07
0.05
0.04
0.01
0.27
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.12
0.14
0.01
0.26
0.01
0.12
0.14
0.04
0.41
0.37
0.01
0.31
0.01
10.0
11.0
36.5
5.5
95.0
18.0
8.0
88.0
22.0
126.0
69.5
18.5
5.5
21.5
73.5
4B.5
47.0
25.0
4.0
23.0
21.5
70.5
50.5
8.5
12.5
104.0
64.5
78.5
17.5
75.0
6.0
125.5
131.0
21.0
49.5
31.5
15.5
32.0
64.5
43.5
130.0
20.0
102.0
105.0
7.5
644.5
185.0
15.0
20.0
5.5
213.5
14.0
12.0
241 .5
298.5
717.0
215.0
-------
052220
133 12/20/1*9
0.010005
0.01
4.0
NUMBER OF HOURS OF RAINFALL IN HUNOREDTHS OF AN INCH
INTERVALS BETWEEN o.oo AND 0.20 INCHES
ITH
1
2
3
<*
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
If.
0
669
669
679
663
658
641
7-11
723
713
695
719
731
8273
1
56
3
22
?8
26
?9
15
6
3
?B
1
3
220
2
12
0
9
in
i°i
13
U
6
1
6
n
9
78
3
2
0
S
5
12
8
6
2
1
2
0
6
49
4
0
0
9
1
10
3
3
0
0
6
0
2
34
5
3
0
6
2
9
3
3
1
0
1
0
0
28
6
0
0
5
2
4
3
0
2
0
0
0
0
16
7
1
0
3
4
1
3
0
1
0
1
0
0
1<*
8
0
0
2
0
1
2
0
0
0
1
0
n
6
9
1
0
3
2
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
8
10
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
5
11
0
0
0
1
1
3
0
0
1
2
0
0
8
12
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1»
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
4
IS
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
16
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
n
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
18
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
19
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
20
s>
0
0
0
0
1
5
2
0
0
0
0
0
8
TOTAL
HOURS
PER
HONTH
744
672
744
720
744
720
744
744
720
744
720
744
TOTAL HOURS FOR THE YEAR = 8760
m
-------
HYDROSCIENCE RAIMFAU. ANAUTSIS PROGRAM
I-ION
DATE
HOURLY PRECI'AITATION-HUNDREDTHS OF AN INCH
7 3 9 10 11 12 13 m 15 16 17 18 19 2fl
2l 22 23 24
m
i.
0*1
Cn
>22fl
2220
>22fl
?220
>22u
2220
>220
2220
2220
2220
2220
2220
2220
2220
2220
222U
2220
2220
2220
2220
2220
2220
2220
2220
2220
2220
2220
2220
2220
2220
2220
2220
• 2220
.2220
•2220
.222U
.2220
i2220
i2220
12220
,2220
)2220
)2220
)2220
S2220
52220
52220
52220
52220
52220
52220
52220
If 1/50
I/ 2/50
I/ 3/50
l/l"/5n
1/24/50
1/25/50
1/29/50
l/5n/5n
2/ 1/50
2/ 7/50
2/ B/50
2/11/5U
2/12/50
2/28/50
3/ 1/50
3/11/50
3/12/50
3/1B/5U
4/ 1/5(1
I/ 3/50
4/ 4/50
4/15/50
l/^/'io
4/19/50
4/19/50
4/21/50
1/29/50
5/ 1/50
5/ 1/50
5/ 5/50
5/ 7/50
5/ 9/50
5/10/50
5/15/50
5/25/50
5/26/50
5/27/5U
5/2H/50
&/ 1/50
&/ 2/50
6/ 3/50
6/16/50
6/1H/50
6/19/50
6/29/5U
7/ 1/50
7/ 2/50
If U/50
7/ 5/50
7/16/50
7/17/50
7/18/50
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
14
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
3
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
It
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
3
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
n
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
n
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
n
0
0
7
8
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
n
0
0
0
1
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
11
0
2
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
11
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
3
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
22
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
3
0
0
0
8
0
0
13
0
0
0
62
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
If
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
13
0
0
0
2
0
0
3
0
2
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
16
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
8
0
0
0
11
0
0
1
0
2
11
0
1
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
57
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
55
0
0
0
6
0
0
3
0
1
14
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
3
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
42
0
0
0
5
0
0
4
0
1
8
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
2
0
17
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
0
0
3
0
0
5
5
0
5
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
57
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
11
0
0
7
0
0
2
5
0
5
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
3
0
1
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-------
tn
1
OJ
ON
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05J220
05222Q
052220
05?220
052220
052220
052220
052?20
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05J220
05222Q
052220
052220
7/29/50
B/ 1/50
8/11/50
8/13/50
3/16/50
9/26/50
B/27/5p
9/ 1/5.0
9/ 8/50
9/ 9/50
9/10/50
9/11/50
9/12/50
9/15/50
9/16/5n
9/19/50
If)/ 1/50
ll/ l/5n
ll/ 2/50
ll/ 3/50
ll/ R/5n
ll/ 9/5H
ll/19/5n
12/ 1/50
12/ t/50
12/ 5/5n
12/31/5U
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
n
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
n
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
-------
m
i
STATION
052220
032220
032220
0-52220
052220
052220
05*220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
057220
052220
052220
P52220
052220
052220
05?220
052220
052220
052220
052220
U52220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05222U
052220
052220
052220
U52220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
STOR»1
MO
136
137
138
139
140
mi
142
113
144
115
146
117
148
li»9
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
16t
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
171
175
176
177
178
179
180
1«1
182
1B3
1?»1
l«5
1«6
187
Iflfl
STORM
DATE
01/02/50
01/03/50
01/14/50
01/24/50
01/24/50
01/29/50
01/30/50
02/07/50
02/11/50
02/2B/50
03/11/50
03/11/50
03/10/50
01/03/5"
01/03/50
01/01/50
01/15/50
04/18/50
01/19/50
01/28/50
05/01/5"
05/01/50
05/07/50
05/09/50
05/10/50
05/15/50
05/25/50
05/27/50
05/2R/50
06/02/50
05/16/50
06/1*/50
06/29/50
07/01/50
07/02/50
07/01/50
07/05/50
07/16/50
07/17/50
07/lfl/50
07/28/50
OS/11/5U
OB/13/50
08/16/50
OS/26/50
08/27/50
09/09/50
09/09/50
09/10/50
09/10/50
09/11/50
09/12/50
09/15/50
EVENT
HOUR
23
15
21
3
22
9
21
21
21
12
10
17
15
2
15
23
15
5
4
18
1
12
15
19
22
19
2
12
17
20
17
22
5
19
15
13
17
15
17
1?
19
20
16
IB
12
3
10
17
17
23
IB
6
21
SUMMARY
DURAT
M3URS
10
1
1
9
5
1
1
6
10
1
4
20
1
7
7
1
20
2
1
12
4
15
9
5
2
1
29
2
1
20
5
5
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
2
2
1
5
1
2
3
2
1
2
4
6
1
9
INTENSITY
INCHES/HR
0.004000
0.010005
0.020005
0.036667
0.010000
0.010005
0.010005
0.013331
0.011000
0.010005
0.005001
0.011000
0.010005
0.017143
0.010000
0.010005
0.106500
0.055002
0.010005
0.044167
0.007501
0.031333
0.014144
0.080000
0.050002
0.010005
0.051379
0.020002
0.130005
0.027000
0.412000
0.142000
0.010005
0,055002
0.030005
0.010005
0.020002
0.010005
0.025002
0.035002
0.120002
0.100005
O.OOS001
0.010005
0.015002
0.010001
0.280002
0.010005
0.010002
0.095001
0.015000
0.010005
0.005556
VOLUME
INCHES
0.04
0.01
0.02
0.33
0.05
0.01
0.01
0.03
0.11
0.01
0.02
0.23
0.01
0.12
0.07
0.01
2.13
0.11
0.01
0.53
0.03
0.17
0.13
0.10
0.10
0.01
1.19
0.04
0.13
0.54
2.05
0.71
0.01
0.11
0.03
0.01
0.04
0.01
0.05
0.07
0.24
0.10
0.04
0.01
0.09
0.03
0.55
0.01
0.02
0.38
0.09
0.01
0.05
DELTA
HOURS
330.5
11.3
273.0
223.0
17.0
105.0
35.0
194.5
101. 0
391.5
263.5
15.0
155.5
374.0
13.0
29.0
253.5
55.0
22.5
235.5
126.0
13.5
73.0
49.0
25.5
115.5
237.0
11.5
23.5
132.5
325.5
53.0
215.0
62.5
19.5
16.0
28.5
261.5
26.5
25.0
240.0
335.5
46.0
72.0
234.5
15.5
294.5
30.5
24.5
7.0
20.0
9.5
91.0
-------
m
i
00
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
1R9
110
191
192
193
191
195
196
09/16/50
09/19/50
10/01/50
11/02/50
11/02/50
11/08/50
11/19/50
12/OV50
15
16
17
9
22
3
11
13
2
3 '
6
5
1*
25
1
11
0.010002
0.126668
0.020000
0.036000
0.007501
0.029600
0.050005
0.021515
0.09
0.33
0.12
0.1S
0.03
0.71*
0.05
0.27
I**. 5
73.5
290.5
759.5
12.5
l':0.5
255.0
372.0
OF HOURS OF RAINFALL IN HJNOREDTHS OF AN INCH
INTERVALS BETWEEN o.oo AND 0.20 INCHES
ITH
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
12
0
722
653
723
676
679
693
731
735
696
739
6R7
731
3170
1
I1*
10
13
12
10
5
6
4
12
1
7
7
101
?
3
?
7
9
11
1
0
2
3
3
B
0
5?
3
0
2
0
2
13
1
2
1
1
0
9
3
31
4
1
0
1
1
a
f,
l
0
i
0
4
0
26
5
2
n
0
i
B
1
0
0
0
1
1
2
19
6
1
0
0
2
2
1
2
1
1
0
2
1
13
7
1
0
0
3
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
8
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
7
9
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
10
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
5
11
0
0
0
2
3
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
6
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
- o
0
0
0
0
0
13
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1*
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
17
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
18
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
19
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
s>
0
0
0
4
0
4
0
0
3
0
0
0
11
TOTAL
HO'JSS
PER
MONTH
741
672
744
720
7H1
720
744
741
720
741
720
74"»
TOTAL HO'JRS FOS THE YEAR = 8750
BREAK :
iAMC PROC£EDUft£ IS REPEATED
fOR lISl - I17Z
-------
HYDROSCIENCE RAINFALL ANALYSIS PROGRAM
STATION
DATE
HOURLY PRECI°AITATION-HUNOREDTHS OF AN INCH
7 9 9 10 11 12 13 \n 15 16 17 18 19
2fl 21 22 23 24
m
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05?220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05222U
052220
052J20
052220
052220
33?220
052220
052220
052220
05?22o
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
I/ 1/73
I/ 3/73
I/ 7/73
I/ S/73
I/ 9/73
1/20/73
1/21/73
1/26/73
1/27/73
2/ 1/73
2/ 7/73
2/13/73
2/JP/73
2/19/73
S/ 1/73
3/ 2/73
3/ 3/73
3/13/73
3/14/73
3/15/73
3/18/73
3/19/73
3/21/73
3/24/73
3/25/73
3/27/73
3/28/73
3/29/73
3/30/73
4/ 1/73
<*/ 2/73
4/ 3/73
4/ 6/73
"»/ 7/73
4/ R/73
4/15/73
4/19/73
4/21/73
4/24/73
H/25/7J
4/26/73
4/30/73
5/ 1/73
S/ 2/73
5/ 5/73
5/ 6/73
5/19/73
5/21/73
5/22/73
5/24/73
5/26/73
5/29/73
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
c
0
0
0
2
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
4
0
0
1
0
0
1
3
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
10
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
4
0
1
1
0
0
0
fl
0
4
0
0
1
0
0
9
1
0
1
0
0
4
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
4
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
2
1
0
0
1
0
4
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
4
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
3
0
0
0
1
4
0
1
0
1
2
0
0
3
0
1
0
0
0
16
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
7
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
2
0
0
8
1
0
0
0
0
36
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
2
0
2
0
0
4
0
0
2
0
0
5
0
0
1
0
0
28
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
c
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
2
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
1
0
0
14
0
0
3
n
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
16
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
4
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
6
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
27
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
5
0
2
0
0
0
2
0
1
1
0
0
14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
5
0
0
3
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
5
0
0
3
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
4
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
24
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
2
1
0
4
0
0
1
0
0
0
25
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
5
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
6
0
0
0
22
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
15
0
0
0
13
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
4
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
20
0
0
1
14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
12
0
4
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
0
8
0
0
10
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
3
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
4
2
0
0
0
16
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
5
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
3
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
10
0
1
1
0
2
1
0
0
2
1
0
1
4
1
0
0
0
11
0
0
2
3
0
16
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
7
3
0
0
0
0
9
1
0
3
2
0
12
0
0
4
0
0
0
4
-------
m
i
•P*.
o
057220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
OS222Q
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05?22Q
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05P220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05?220
052220
052220
052220
052220
0522-20
052220
052220
5/3P/73
6/ 1/73
6/ 3/73
&/ 4/7*
6/12/73
6/14/73
7/ 1/73
7/ 9/73
7/12/7J
7/13/73
7/11/73
7/15/73
7/16/73
7/1P/73
7/19/73
7/20/73
7/21/73
7/22/73
7/23/73
7/21/73
7/30/73
7/31/73
3/ 1/73
8/ ?/73
S/ 6/73
9/ 7/73
8/11/73
8/21/73
8/24/73
9/J8/73
9/31/7?
9/ 1/73
9/ 2/73
9/ R/7?
9/ 9/7?
9/10/73
9/11/73
9/15/73
9/16/73
9/25/73
9/2f-/73
9/27/73
9/2P/73
9/29/73
10/ 1/73
10/ 3/73
10/ 9/73
10/10/7*
10/11/77
10/29/73
11/3(1/73
ll/ 1/73
ll/ 2/73
ll/ 3/73
ll/ "*/73
11/19/73
11/2&/73
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
3
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
q
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
2
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
2
0
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
0
If
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
50
0
1
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
1»
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
7
0
- 0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
15
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
II
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
13
D
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
n
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
6
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
94
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
3
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
0
1
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
76
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
13
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
26
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
s
0
0
c
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
5
6
0
0
0
0
0
53
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
<«
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
9
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
3
1
1
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
2
5
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
3
0
0
0
2
0
-------
052220 11/27/73
052220 12/ 1/73
052220 12/ 2/73
052220 12/ S/73
052220 12/1B/73
052220 12/23/73
052220 12/24/73
052220 12/25/73
052220 12/26/7*
052220 12/29/73
052220 12/Sn/73
0
0
0
16
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
15
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
S
0
0
4
0
2
0
0
0
a
0
s
0
0
6
0
2
0
a
0
0
a
0
0
0
i
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
i
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
I*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
i»
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
<»
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
H
8
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
2
20
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
7
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
2
10
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
14
0
5
16
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
n
0
3
17
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
2
17
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
0
1
3
0
1
0
0
0
m
-------
re
i
STATION !
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052?20
052220
052220
05^220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05?220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05222J
052220
052220
052220
052220
STORM EVENT SUMMARY
JTORM DATE HOUR OURAT
NO
2238
2539
2210
2211
2?12
2?13
2211
2215
22i6
2217
2218
2219
2250
2251
2?52
2253
2?51
2255
2256
2257
2258
2259
2260
2261
2252
2263
2261
2265
2266
2267
2268
2269
2270
2271
2272
2273
2271
2275
2276
2277
2278
2279
22PO
2281
2282
22P3
22B1
2285
22»6
22B7
2288
2289
2290
HOURS
01/03/73
01/0-V73
01/07/73
01/08/73
01/08/73
01/09/73
01/20/73
01/26/73
02/07/73
02/13/73
02/18/73
03/02/73
03/13/73
03/11/73
03/15/73
03/18/73
03/21/73
03/21/73
03/27/73
03/28/73
03/29/73
03/29/73
03/30/73
03/30/73
01/01/73
01/02/73
01/06/73
01/08/73
01/15/73
01/15/73
01/19/73
01/19/73
01/21/73
01/21/73
01/21/73
01/25/73
01/30/73
01/30/73
05/P1/73
05/01/73
05/02/73
0°i/05/73
05/05/73
05/19/73
05/21/73
05/21/73
05/21/73
05/21/73
05/21/73
05/26/73
05/P9/73
06/01/73
06/03/73
15
21
1
6
23
5
5
20
10
11
23
?3
IS
23
IS
19
21
22
20
23
7
22
7
13
23
5
22
21
5
10
2
15
16
15
21
?<*
5
11
7
23
1
18
23
17
15
19
2*
12
19
15
22
15
15
1
1
1
1
1
1
25
15
3
1
3
13
2
1
1
12
3
12
17
5
1
1
2
1
3
25
27
3
1
9
6
1
1
2
IB
7
1
16
5
2
1
1
23
1
1
1
11
1
1
1
11
1
5
INTENSITY
INCHES/HR
0.010005
0.010005
0.010005
0.010005
0.010005
0.010005
0.036800
0.022000
0.010001
0.010005
0.010001
0.029231
0.070002
0.010005
0.010005
0.053333
0.023331
0.021667
0.008235
0.008000
0.010005
0.010005
0.015002
0.020D05
0.016668
0.022800
0.036665
0.013331
0.010005
o.omn
0.013331
0.010005
0.010005
0.025002
0.052222
0.008572
0,010005
0.019375
0.006001
0.025002
0.010005
0.010005
0.151317
0.010005
0.010005
0.010005
0.032727
0.010005
0.025001
0.010005
0.059286
0.010005
0.016000
VOLUME
INCHES
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.92
0.33
0.03
0.01
0.12
0.33
O.I1*
0.01
O.Ol
0.61
0.07
0.26
0.11
0.01
O.Ol
0.01
0.03
0.02
0.05
0.57
0.99
0.0'+
0.01
0.13
0.03
O.Ol
0.01
0.05
0.91
0.05
0.01
0.79
0.03
0.05
0.01
0.01
3.55
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.36
0.01
0.10
0.01
0.33
0.01
0.03
DELTA
HOURS
107.0
s.o
76.0
29.0
17.0
6.0
276.0
151.0
272.0
111.0
133.0
293.0
251.5
30.5
17.0
80.5
69.5
77.5
72.5
21.0
6.0
15.0
9.5
5.5
59.0
17.0
II1*. 0
35.0
151.0
9.0
86.5
10.5
19.0
71.5
1<*.0
21.5
98.0
13.5
11.5
I1*. 5
1.5
86.0
16.0
319.0
16.0
<*.o
10.0
55.0
8.5
12.5
05.5
59.5
50.0
-------
m
052220
052C20
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
T52220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
05*220
052220
052220
052220
05?220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
0522.20
052220
05?220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
052220
2291
2292
2293
2294
2215
2296
2297
2298
2299
2300
2301
2302
23P3
2304
2305
2306
2307
2308
2309
2310
2311
2312
2313
2314
2315
2316
2317
2318
2319
2320
23?1
2322
2323
2321
23?5
2326
2327
2328
23?9
2330
2331
2332
2333
2331
2335
2336
2337
2338
2339
2310
2341
2342
2343
2311
2315
2346
2347
06/01/73
06/12/73
06/H/73
07/09/73
07/12/73
07/13/73
07/15/73
07/16/73
07/18/73
07/l«5/73
07/19/73
07/19/73
07/PO/7*
07/21/73
07/21/73
07/22/73
07/23/73
07/?4/73
07/30/73
07/31/73
08/05/73
Oft/06/73
09/07/73
00/11/73
03/21/73
08/21/73
09/28/73
03/31/73
09/02/73
09/08/73
09/09/73
09/09/73
09/10/73
09/11/73
09/11/73
09/11/73
09/15/73
09/15/73
09/16/73
09/16/73
09/16/73
09/P5/73
09/27/73
10/03/73
lfl/03/73
10/09/73
10/09/73
in/10/73
10/10/73
10/10/73
10/29/73
11/01/73
11/02/73
11/03/73
11/19/73
11/26/7J
11/27/73
9
17
:2
20
13
21
15
16
21
8
12
20
15
4
13
13
21
17
15
20
IS
13
15
H
17
13
15
7
13
21
2
19
15
5
H
21
9
16
5
12
20
22
21
9
17
13
21
3
16
21
22
22
23
23
H
19
2
2
1
1
2
4
8
5
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
2
3
1
4
5
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
4
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
33
1
2
2
1
1
3
9
4
9
1
10
11
4
1
0.010002
0.020005
0.010005
0.030002
0.067501
0.005000
0.006001
0.010005
0.020005
0.010005
0.005001
0.530004
0.010005
0.010005
0.045002
0.063331
0.020005
0.265001
0.016000
0.010002
0.020005
0.010005
0.175002
0.010005
0.050005
0.110001
0.010005
0.030001
0.030005
0.070004
0.030001
0.070002
0.020005
0.270002
0.110004
0.010005
0.010005
0.010005
0.010005
0.030005
0.010005
0.020000
0.049091
0.020005
0.010002
0.015002
0.010005
0.010005
0.010001
0.026667
0.027501
0.023333
0.010005
0.011000
0.035454
0.025001
0.010005
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.05
0.27
0.01
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.53
0.01
0.01
0.09
0.19
0.02
1.05
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.95
0.01
0.05
0.11
0.01
0.09
0.03
0.07
0.12
0.11
0.02
0.54
0.11
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.03
0.01
0.12
1.62
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.03
0.24
0.11
0.21
0.01
0.11
0.39
0.10
0.01
15.5
199.5
13.0
608.5
71.0
32.0
37.5
23.0
53.0
11.0
5.D
6.5
19.0
13.0
9.5
21.5
31.0
13.5
112.5
27.5
115.5
26.0
22.5
93.5
213.0
68.0
98.0
65.0
58.0
147.0
5.5
16.0
19.5
11.5
B.5
10.0
81.0
7.0
13.0
7.0
8.0
220.5
63.5
113.0
8.5
110.0
7.5
6.0
11.0
11.0
451.5
71.5
21.0
28.5
375.5
169. 5
5.5
-------
m
i
052220 2348
05J220 2349
052220 2350
052220 2351
052220 2352
052220 2353
052220 2354
MONTH 0 "
1 7ol
2 665
3 633
4 613
5 679
S 710
7 7Q9
9 733
9 664
10 723
11 687
12 636
3253
TOTAL HOURS
i
20
4
28
35
16
5
19
4
I1*
10
3
14
177
FOR
12/02/73
12/18/73
12/23/73
15/25/73
12/29/73
12/30/73
12/30/73
2
3
1
10
24
6
2
3
1
9
6
13
1?
90
THE
3
3
0
7
10
4
2
3
1
7
1
7
3
48
YEAR =
19
7
13
24
21
13
IB
4
8
1
6
13
9
0
0
1
a
i
2
3
57
3760
10 0.071000 0.71 141.5
18 0.033333 0.60 376.0
1C 0.076666 1.38 126.0
5 0.012001 0.06 52.5
3 0.010001 0.03 92.0
2 0.015002 0.03 15.3
5 0.006001 ' 0.03 6.5
NUMBER OF HOURS OF RAINFALL IN HUNDREOTHS OF AN INCH
INTERVALS BETWEEN 0.00 AND 0.20 INCHES
5f t a .a i A •« 1O 1T < 11 1R « fc
1
0
2
6
2
1
1
2
3
0
1
5
24
o
2
1
1
4
5
0
3
0
3
3
1
1
24
»
3
0
3
2
3
0
1
0
3
0
0
3
18
u
1
0
2
5
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
4
15
r
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
5
AU
0
0
1
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
6
A *
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
3
* b
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
* •*
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
f
A -*
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
4
A w
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
*f
A **
0
0
0
1
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
17
A '
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
IB
4 **
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
19
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2fl
* u
s>
0
0
1
1
8
0
3
1
1
0
0
1
• f
1*
TOTAL
HOURS
PER
MONTH
744
672
744
720
744
720
744
744
720
744
7*0
744
-------
m
i
t/i
MONTH
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
6
9
10
11
NUMBER
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLU"E
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUMr
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
150.
150.
150.
ISO.
142.
142.
142.
142.
2?"*.
2?4.
2?4.
?24.
224.
??4.
22*.
221*.
272.
272.
?72.
27?.
2?7.
257.
257.
257.
?59.
259.
259.
259.
233.
233.
233.
233.
171.
171.
171.
171.
132.
132.
132.
132.
139.
139.
139.
139.
TOTAL
0.764000E
0.219&61E
0.139799E
0.186345E
O.B41000E
0.253&03E
0.17B39<>£
0.179&10E
0.129700E
0.i*40279E
0.30439&E
0.18U405E
0.131SOOE
0.fi032B?E
0.46149<4E
0.185380E
0.13R900E
0.10U375E
0.660992E
0.191&90E
0.769000E
0.131S49E
O.H52395E
0.l7i550E
0.675000E
0.167S71E
0.<45099i*E
0.i9it705E
0.5t3000E
0.135952E
0.34099&E
0.1B9285E
0.730000E
0.830957E
0.351397E
0.166235E
0.7S1000E
0.368089E
0.253193E
0.198020E
0.785000E
0.281239E
0.18709SE
0.174025E
03
01
02
05
03
01
02
05
Oi»
01
02
05
Oi»
01
02
05
0<4
02
02
05
03
02
02
05
03
02
02
05
03
02
02
05
03
01
02
05
03
01
02
05
03
01
02
05
MINIMUM
0.100000E 01
0.400000E-02
0.100000E-01
O.ilOOOOOE Ol
O.lOOOOOE 01
0.500000E.02
0.100000E-01
0.500000E Ol
.O.lOOOOOE 01
0.<*73700E-02
O.lOOOOOE. 01
0.400000E 01
O.lOOOOOE 01
0.600100E-02
0.100000E-01
o.qoooooE 01
O.lOOOOOE Ol
0.500100E-02
O.lOOOOOE. 01
0.400000E 01
O.lOOOOOE 01
0.6&6BOOE-02
O.lOOOOOE. 01
O.HOOOOOE Ol
O.lOOOOOE 01
0.500000E-02
0.100000E-01
O.HOOOOOE Ol
O.lOOOOOE 01
0.500000E-02
O.lOOOOOE. 01
O.OOOOOOE 00
O.lOOOOOE 01
0.500100E-02
O.lOOOOOE. 01
0.500000E Oi
O.lOOOOOE 01
0.600100E.H2
O.lOOOOOE. 01
0.500000E 01
O.lOOOOOE 01
0.500100E-02
0.100000E-01
O.tOOOOOE 01
MAXIMUM
0.490000E
02
0.600010E-01
0.104000E
O.l07i50£
0.330000E
01
04
02
0.750010E-01
0.110000E
0.787000E
0.370000E
0.167501E
0.170000E
0.860500E
0.420000E
0.240004E
0.325000E
0.821500E
0.580000E
0.503334;:
0.433000E
0.636300E
0.350000E
0.650001E
0.282000E
0.366500E
0.220000E
0.760004::
0.205000E
0.60B500E
0.170000E
0.675Q02E
0.343000E
0.493000-:
0.400000E
0.655002E
0.164000E
0.&&0500E
0.390000E
0.170004E
0.170000E
0.118150E
0.300000E
0.775010E
0.820000E
0.918000E
01
03
02
00
01
03
02
00
01
03
02
CO
01
03
02
00
01
03
02
00
01
03
02
00
01
03
02
00
01
03
02
00
Oi
04
02
-01
00
03
AVERAGE
0.509333E 01
0.146440E-01
0.931992E-01
0.124230E 03
0.592253E 01
0.178597E-01
0.125985E 00
0.126485E 03
0.579017E 01
0.196553E-01
0.135891E 00
O.S23236E 02
0.587500E 01
0.269322E.01
0.2Q6Q24E 00
0.829821E 02
0.510661E 01
0.38373lE:-01
0.243011E 00
0.715772E 02
0.299221E 01
0.51225&E-01
0.176029E 00
O.S67509E 02
0.260617E 01
0.646221E-01
0.17I4090E 00
0.751756E 02
0.233047E 01
0.5BJ059E-01
0.14635QE 00
0.812382E 02
0.426900E 01
0.4858B1E-01
0.205495E 00
0.97213HE 02
0.591666E 01
0.278855E-01
0.19181&E 00
0.150015E 03
0.564748E 01
0.20233QE.Q1
0.134603E 00
0.125197E 03
STD DEV
0.656750E 01
0.993968E-02
0.1&245oE 00
0.1S6778E 03
0.632463E 01
0.126667E-01
0.181S89E 00
0.144351E 03
0.6537&2E 01
0.176319E-01
0.223920E 00
0.106&20E 03
0.723299E 01
0.317325E-01
0.423935E 00
0.109177E 03
0.7&0314E Ol
0.467786E-01
0.528912E 00
0.947347E 02
0.397943E 01
0.737433E-01
0.384295E 00
0.7J9571E 02
0.264955E 01
0.994411E-01
0.297045E 00
0.883221E 02
0.217900E 01
0.9HU089E-01
0.3Q9547E 00
0.847S13E 02
0.574129E 01
0.732302E-01
0.334049E 00
0.122170E 03
0.722278E 01
0.281713E-01
0.306619E 00
0.184240E 03
0.566J08E 01
0.145090E-01
0.174464E 00
0.155972E 03
VARIANCE
0.431321E 02
0.987973E-04
0.263922E-01
0.278151E 05
0.400010E 02
0.1604^7E.03
0.330111E-01
0.20B374E 05
0.427405E 02
0.312&51E-03
0.50140'4E-01
0.1l3i7SE 05
0.5231&1E 02
0.100&95E-02
0.179&3SE 00
O.H9196E 05
0.57B077E 02
0.219S24E-02
0.2797i»3E 00
0.89746SE 04
0.15835SE 02
0.543307E.02
0.147SS3E 00
0.546965E 04
0.701'+84E 01
0.983353E-02
0.882361E-01
0.780079E 04
0.4743Q7E 01
0.891304E-02
0.95BS15E-01
0.7l6l*^9E 04
0.329624E 02
0.53626SE-02
0.111589E 00
0.149257E 05
0.521S35E 02
0.793S25E-03
0.9m331E.01
0.339'4i*6E 05
0.320704E 02
0.210511E-03
0.304379E-01
0.243273E 05
COEF-VAR
0.123943E 01
0.678751E 00
0.174311E 01
0.134250E 01
0.1067B9E 01
0.70923&E 00
0.144215E 01
0.114124E Ol
0.11290BE 01
0.899599E 00
0.1&4779E 01
0.129513E 01
0.123114E 01
0.117823E 01
0.205720E 01
0.131567E Ol
0.1488S8E Ol
0.121904E 01
0.217646E 01
0.132353E 01
0.132992E 01
0.143957E 01
0.218313E 01
0.110795E Ol
0.101626E 01
0.153830E 01
0.170627E 01
0.117497E Ol
0.935006E 00
0.1&1919E 01
0.211579E 01
0.104336E 01
0.134437E 01
0.150716E 01
0.162558E 01
0.125672E Ol
0.122075E 01
0.101025E 01
0.159954E 01
0.122814E 01
0.10027&E 01
0.717095E 00
0.129613E 01
0.1245BQE 01
-------
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
151.
151.
151.
151.
0.71<*OOOE 03
0.2<»9S<»2E: 01
0.1<*7S98E 02
0.202905E 05
O.iOOOOOE Ol
0.500100E-02
O.IOOOOOE.01
O.IOOOOOE 01
0.290000E 02
0.766S60E-01
0.13BQOOE 01
0.7630001 03
0.'»728'»7E 01
0.1&532&E-01
0.97615CE-01
0.134374E 03
0."»9932'4E Ol
0.115&08E-01
0.166791E 00
0.172661E 03
02
0.133653r_OJ
0.27BV95E-01
0.298119E 05
0.105599E Ol
0.699276t 00
0.170666E 01
0.128493E 01
tn
I
-------
SUMMARY OF RAINFALL STATISTICS BY
ONTH DURATION
i.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
AVERAGE
5.09
5.92
5.79
5.87
5.10
2.99
2.60
2.33
4.26
5.91
5.64
4.72
STD DEV
6.56
6.32
6.53
7.23
7.60
3.97
2.64
2.17
5.74
7.22
5.6b
4.99
INTENSITY
AVERAGE
0.0146
0.0176
0.0196
0.0269
0.0383
0.0512
0.054&
0.0583
O.OU85
0.0278
0.0202
0.0165
ST3 DEV
0.0099
0.0126
0.0176
0.0317
0.0467
0.0737
0.0994
0.094't
0.0732
0.0281
0.0145
0.0115
MONTH(FOR
PERIOD OF
VOLUME
AVERAGE
0.09
0.12
0.13
0.20
0.24
0.17
0.17
0.14
0.20
0.19
0.13
0.09
STO DEV
0.16
0.13
0.22
0.42
0.52
0.38
0.29
0.30
0.33
3.30
0,17
0.16
RECORD)
DELTA
AVERAGE
124.
126.
82.
82.
71.
66.
75.
81.
97.
150.
125.
134.
STO DEV
166.
144.
106.
109.
94.
73.
88.
84.
122.
184.
155.
172.
m
i
-------
m
i
00
7.603
7.451
7.299
7.146
6.994
6. 842
6.690
6. 538
6.386
6.234
6.082
5.930
5.778
5.626
5.474
5.322
5.170
5.018
4.866
4.713
4.561
1.409
4.237
4.105
3.953
3.801
3.649
3.497
3.345
3.193
3.041
2.839
2.737
2.585
2.433
2. 280
1.976
1.824
1.672
1.520
36S
216
064
912
760
0.608
0.456
0.304
0.152
0.000
I....I....I....I....I....I....I....I....I....I.... I.... I.
I S
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I...
0.00
S S
S
A A
A
..I...
2.00
..I...
4.00
....I....I
6.00
DURATION
...I....I.
a.oo
VS MONTH
...I...
10.00
I
I
I
SI
I
AI
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
...I
12.00
:AVERAGE. S=STOt DEV.
-------
m
i
0.099
0.097
0.095
O.OV3
O.D91
0.089
0.097
0.035
O.OBi
0.081
0.079
0.077
0.075
0.073
0.071
0.069
0.067
0.065
0.063
0.061
0.059
0.057
0.055
0.053
0.051
0.01*9
0.0<»7
0.0<*5 '
0.043
0.011
0.039
C.037
0.035
0.033
0.031
0.029
0.027
0.025
0.023
0.021
0.019
0.017
0.01S
0.013
0.011
0.009
0.007
0.005
0.003
0.001
0.000
S I
I
I
S I
I
I
I
S S
A
A
A
S A
A
S
A A
A A
A S
AI
A S I
S SI
S
T I I T I T I I I I I • X • * • I
0.00 ' ' 2.00 ^.00 ' 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.0
INTENSITY VS MONTH
A=AVERAGEi S=STD. DEV.
-------
m •
i
tn
O
0.523
0.513
0.507
0.497
0.486
0.176
0.465
0.454
0.444
0.433
0.423
o.4i2
O.itOl
0.391
0.380
0.370
0.359
0.349
0.333
0.327
0.317
0.30S
0.296
0.235
0.275
0.264
0.253
0.243
0.232
0.222
0.211
0.200
0.190
0.179
0.169
0.158
0.148
0.137
0.126
0.116
0.105
0.095
0.034
0.074
0.063
0.052
0.042
0.031
0.021
0.010
0.000
I S
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I S
I
I
I
I S
I
I
I
I S
I
I
I S S
I S
I
I
I
I
I A
I
S I
I
ft * I
A I
S A I
A S SI
I S I
I A I
I A A I
I ft I
I I
I I
I A AI
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 1
I I
I I
I I
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.0
VOLUME VS MONTH
A=AVERAGE. S=STD. DEV.
-------
m
i
en
1BL210
180.555
176.871
173.196
169.501
165.816
162.131
15B.117
15L7&2
151.077
117. 39*
113.707
1'40. 022
136.338
132.653
128.968
125.233
1?1.598
117.91"*
111.229
Il0.5"t<»
106.859
103.171
99.1*90
95.805
92.120
88.135
8"*.750
81.065
77.381
73.696 ]
70.011 ]
£6.326 ]
62.61*1 ]
58.957 ]
55.272 ]
51.537 I
17.902 1
11.217 ]
10.532 ]
36. 8*8
33.163 ]
29.173 1
25.793 ]
22.108
18.121
11.739
11.051
7.369
3.681
0.000
(
I S I
r i
r i
t SI
t i
t S I
i
i
S
A
S
A
A A A
S
S
S
S A
S
A S
A A
I
S A I
A I
A I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
[
[
[
[
t I
I I
I
J.OO 2.00 1.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.0
DELTA VS MONTH
A=AVERASE. S=STD. DCV.
-------
m
i
Ln
TEAR
18
49
50
31
52
53
5*
55
56
57
58
NUMBER
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLU«E
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLJME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUV-:
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
2"».
21*.
24.
2".
111.
111.
111.
111.
62.
62.
6?.
62.
110.
110.
110.
IlO.
B5.
85.
P5.
B5.
86.
36.
36.
86.
68.
68.
68.
68.
R2.
fl2.
92.
92.
70.
70.
70.
70.
111.
111.
111.
111.
103.
103.
103.
103.
TOTAL
O.iOODOOE
0.724S3?r
0.192999E
0.355350E
0.53&OOOE
0.33S794E
0.167799E
O.B57700E
0.332000E
0.265045E
0.139399E
0.903950E
O.U99000E
0.429033E
0.194199E
0.374300E
0.415000E
0.2390B3E
0.135599E
O.R80500E
0.409000E
0.270241E
o.i4io99E
O.B64450E
0.236000E
0.240782E
0.750993E
0.?7S200E
0.352000E
0.407&80E
0.160t99E
O.B1P550E
0.35&OOOE
0.305555E
0.137199E
0.924550E
0.456000E
0.430027E
0.215798E
O.S'tO'+SOE
0.497000E
0.51490BE
0.1B7999E
0.932500E
03
00
01
0"*
03
01
02
04
03
01
02
04
03
01
02
0<4
03
01
02
04
03
01
02
04
03
01
01
01
03
01
02
04
03
01
02
04
03
01
02
04
03
01
02
04
MINIMUM
O.IOOOOOE Cl
0.6668COE-02
0.1000COE-01
O.OOOOOOE no
O.IOOOOOE 01
0.636400E.02
O.IOOOOOE. 01
0.400000E Oi
O.iOOOOOE Ol
0.400000E-02
O.IOOOOOE. 01
0.700000E 01
O.IOOOOOE 01
0.571400E-02
0.100000E-01
0.450000E Ol
O.IOOOOOE 01
0.533300E-02
0.100000E-01
0.500000E Ol
O.iOOOOOE Ol
0.500100E-02
O.IOOOOOE. 01
0.500000E 01
O.IOOOOOE 01
0.666700E.02
0.100000E-C1
0.450000E DI
O.jOOOOOE Ol
0.666800E-02
0.100000E-01
0.400000E 01
O.IOOOOOE 01
0.666800E-02
O.IOOOOOE. 01
0.650000E Ol
O.IOOOOOE Ol
0.500000E-02
O.IOOOOOE. 01
0.450000E 01
O.IOOOOOE 01
0.500100E-02
O.IOOOOOE. 01
0.400000E 01
MAXIMUM
0.230000E
0.133334E
0.400000E
0.763000^
0.490000E
0.200004E
0.196000E
0.717000E
0.290000E
0.412000£
0.213QOOE
0.759500E
0.250000E
0.65000'4E
0.343000E
0.459500E
0.370000E
0.26000tE
0.1500001
0.787000E
0.3300001
0.350001-:
0.187000E
0.606000E
0.210000E
0.42000'»E
0.115000E
0.757000E
0.330000E
0.655302E
0.137000E
0.6490001
0.300000E
0.675002E
o.i6iooo:
0.119150E
0.320000E
0.240004E
0.329300E
0.422300E
0.230000E
0.520004E
0.151000E
0.902000E
02
00
00
03
02
00
01
03
02
00
01
03
02
00
01
03
02
00
01
03
02
00
01
03
02
00
01
OJ
02
00
01
03
02
00
01
04
02
00
01
03
02
00
01
03
AVERAGE
0.416666E Ol
0.301930E-01
0.304166E-01
0.1'*80&2E 03
O.V82882E 01
0.303418E-01
0.151170E 00
0.772702E 02
0.535483E Ol
0.427493E-01
0.224838E 00
0.1'»579BE 03
0.15363&E 01
0.390030E-01
0.17&544E 00
0.794318E 02
0."»88235E 01
0.281274E-01
0.159528E 00
0.103588E 03
0.475581E Ol
0.314233E-01
0.164069E 00
0.100517E 03
0.347058E 01
0.354091E-01
O.llO^tOE 00
0.128705E: 03
0.429268E Ol
0.497171E-01
0.195731E 00
0.998231E 02
0.508571E 01
0.436507E.01
0.195999E 00
0.132078E 03
o.mosioE 01
0.387412E-01
0.194413C 00
0.757162E 02
0.4B2524E Ol
0.499910E-01
0.1B2523E 00
0.905339E 02
STD DEV
0.532lbtE Ol
0.393428E-01
0.947067E-01
0.191573E 03
0.7B0661E 01
0.339153E-01
0.2891B2E 00
0.112657E 03
0.622290E Ol
0.667&B2E-01
0.424303E 00
0.156591E 03
0.511610E 01
0.798531E-01
0.394613E 00
0.9?0?43E 02
0.700410E 01
0.3282'*3E-01
0.305558E 00
0.125816E 03
0.603701E Ol
0.450213E-01
0.290116E 00
0.124448E 03
o.nsstsE 01
0.601270E-01
0.191158E 00
0.1170&2E 03
0.573593E Ol
0.84f,472E-01
0.322757E 00
0.128251E 03
0.559954E 01
0.6642B6E-01
0.322316E 00
0.202405E 03
0.542276E Ol
0.466055E-01
0.449628E 00
0.967613E 02
0.495554E Ol
0.880508E-01
0.262&3&E 00
0.133838E 03
VARIANCE
0.283183E 02
0.15475Si-02
0.895937-:-02
0.367002E 05
0.609431E 02
0.115025E-02
0.83S263E-01
0.126917:: 05
0.387244E 02
0.445799E-02
0.180'457E 00
0.2452Q9E 05
0.261775E 02
0.637S52E-02
0.155719E 00
0.846343E 04
0,"*90574E 02
0.107743E-02
0. 933658:1-01
0.153298E 05
0.364'455E 02
0.202S92E-02
0.841&75E-01
0.154373E 05
0.172S77E 02
0.361526E-02
0.365414E.01
0.21627JE 05
0.329009E 02
0.7165li£-02
o.iotmt. oo
0.1&448I4E 05
0.313543E C2
0.74&991E-02
0.103337E 00
0.409S80E 05
0.294063C 02
0.217207C-02
0.2Q21&5E 00
0.936276E 04
0.245573E 02
0.775294E-02
0.689776E-01
0.179127E 05
COEF.VAR
0.127717E Ol
0.130304E 01
0.117770E 01
0.129386E 01
0.161666E 01
0.111777E 01
0.191295E 01
0.145797E Ol
0.11&210E Ol
0.15S135E 01
0.183937E 01
0.107402E 01
0.1127S6E 01
0.20"*735E 01
0.223520E 01
O.H5780E pi
0.143457E 01
0.11669BE 01
0.191538E 01
0.12145BE Ol
0.126939E Ol
0.143273E 01
0.176825E 01
0.123807E 01
0.119733E 01
0.169806E 01
0.173086E 01
0.11t262E Ol
0.133621E 01
0.170257r 01
oas^sgat 01
0.12847BE 01
0.110103E 01
0.196000E 01
0.164447E 01
0.1532'«6E Ol
0.132001E 01
0.120299E 01
0.231274E 01
0.127794E 01
0.102700E Ol
0.176133E 01
0.143891E 01
0.147832E 01
-------
tn
i
On
OJ
61
63
64
65
69
70
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLJVE
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLJME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLJME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLJME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLjyr
DELTA
DURATION.
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
88.
f>8.
8fl.
P8.
74.
74.
74.
74.
111.
111.
111.
111.
87.
«7.
97.
87.
B7.
87.
P7.
S7.
*4.
B4.
8*.
84.
II1*.
114.
II1*.
II1*.
91.
91.
91.
91.
I?1*.
I?1*.
124.
124.
B9.
89.
89.
89.
105.
105.
105.
105.
86.
O.gOitOOOE
0.252017E
0.165399E
0.864950E
0.442000E
0.?53319E
0.149799E
O.S81700E
0.519000E
0.350319E
0.190099E
O.B72B50E
0.319000E
0.188387E
o.B4i»99sE
0.87J050E
0.362000E
0.33208SE
0.122299E
O.B87000E
0.35500QE
0.223S07E
0.101599E
O.S75250E
0.532000E
0.114200&E
0.?1B69*E
O.B6515QE
0.289000E
0.408537E
0.10B09qE
O.B8&200E
0.47700QE
0.62234JE
0.233093E
O.BB2900E
0.363000E
0.3241&OE
0.121299E
0.87B550E
0.497000E
0.3B9S8
-------
71
72
73
INTENSITY
VQL'JUr
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUVlC
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLUME
DELTA
DURATION
INTENSITY
VOLU«E
DELTA
86.
96.
R6.
78.
78.
73.
78.
107.
107.
107.
j07.
117.
117.
117.
117.
0.265086E
0.137299E
O.R2B500E:
0.39BOOOE
0.?6t|i»<»&E
0.109599E
0.91575QE
O.HSIOOOE:
0.3730265!
0.168&99E
O.S85900C
0.55i»DOOE
0.i»3735i»E
0.22959BE
0.877SOOE
01
02
0<4
03
01
02
0"*
03
01
02
Oi»
03
01
02
OH
0."*73700E-02
O.lOOOOOE-Ol
O.tOOOQOE 01
O.lOOOOOE HI
0.600000E-02
O.lOOOOOE. 01
O.LOOOOOE 01
O.lOOOOOE 01
0.500100E-02
O.lOOOOOE. 01
O.HOOOOOE Oi
O.lOOOOOE 01
0.500000E-02
O.lOOOOOE. 01
O.tOOOOOE Oi
0.190001E
0.282000E
O.B60500E
O.LOOOOOE
0.7&OOOI»E
0.160000E
O.S^OOOOH:
0.2tOOOO£
0.302501E
0.30HOOOE
0.554000E
0.330000E
O.SSOOOtE
0.355QOOE
0.608500E
00
01
03
02
00
01
03
02
00
01
03
02
00
01
03
0.308239E-01
0.159650E 00
0.963372E 02
0.510256E 01
0.339033EI.01
0.1!*0512E 00
0.117'»03E 03
0.'»02a03E 01
0.348&22E-01
0.157662E 00
0.3279if>E 02
0.l»7350tE 01
0.373807E.01
0.196238E 00
0.75008SE 02
0.339786E-01
0.362936E 00
0.1305H&E 03
0.687663E Ol
0.905136E-01
0.268893E 00
0.139766E 03
O.SOUtO&E 01
0.187233E-01
0.359712E 00
0.103978E 03
0.637667E 01
0.732807E-01
0,'*34959E 00
0.1007BHE 03
0.115H55E-02
0.13l7?2i 00
0.170'42'4E 05
O.H72BBOE 02
O.B19272E-02
0.72303HE-01
0.1953"«5E 05
0.25t'»25E 02
0.23739SE.02
0.129392E 00
0.108115E 05
0."*06S19E 02
0.537006C.02
0.189139C 00
0.10l57iȣ 05
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
o.
0.
11023HE 01
227331E 01
135510E 01
13"«758E 01
266975E 01
191366E 01
ll9Qi»7E 01
125223E 01
139759E 01
228153E 01
125586E Ol
13'*669E 01
196038E 01
2216H8E 01
iS'tSSSE Ol
-------
m
i
Cn
SUMMARY OF RAINFALL STATISTICS BY
YEAR
48.
•»9.
50.
51.
52.
53.
5*.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
55.
66.
67.
69.
69.
70.
71.
7?.
73.
DURATION
AVERAGE
4.16
4.H2
5.35
4.53
4.RB
4.75
3.47
4.29
5.08
t.10
4.*2
5.72
5.97
4.67
3.66
t.16
4.22
4.66
3.17
3.«4
4.07
4.73
4.34
5.10
4.02
4.73
STO DEV
5.J2
7.RO
6.22
5.11
7.0"
6.0*
4.15
5.73
5.59
5.4?
4.95
7.t5
7.33
5.8i»
"».39
5.U9
5.55
5.69
J.J3
••.•iS
"*.63
ft. 19
"*.71
6.87
5.01*
6.37
INTENSITY
AVERAGE
O.OjOl
0.0303
0.0427
0.039Q
0.0231
0.03H*
0.0354
0.0t97
0.04J6
n.03«7
0.01499
0.0286
n.03^2
0.0315
0.0?17
0.0331
0.026S
0.0337
O.OU46
0.0502
0.0361*
0.0371
0.0309
0.0339
0.0348
0.0373
ST3 OEV
0.0393
0.0339
0.0667
0.0798
0.0323
0.0450
0.0631
0.0346
0.086'*
0.0466
0.0330
0.0275
0.0472
0.0446
0.0200
0.0592
0.0259
0.0504
0.0326
0.0830
0.0517
0.0616
0.0339
0.0905
0.0487
0.0732
YEARlFOFt
PERIOD OF
VOLUME
AVERAGE
0.08
0.15
O.J2
0.17
0.15
0.16
0.11
0.19
0.19
0.19
0.13
0.18
0.20
0.17
0.09
0.14
0.12
0.19
0.11
0.18
0.13
0.20
0.15
0.14
0.15
0.19
STD 3EV
0.09
0.28
0.42
0.39
0.30
0.29
0.19
0.32
0.32
0.44
0.26
0.31
0.30
0.32
0.17
0.27
0.23
0.36
0.16
0.39
0.21
0.51
0.36
0.26
0.35
0.43
RECORD)
DELTA
AVERAGE
148.
77.
1*5.
79.
103.
100.
128.
99.
132.
75.
90.
98.
119.
78.
100.
101.
104.
75.
97.
71.
98.
83.
96.
117.
82.
75.
STD DEV
191.
112.
156.
92.
125.
124.
147.
128.
202.
96.
133.
117.
134.
100.
133.
145.
II1*.
121.
133.
94.
106.
93.
130.
139.
103.
100.
-------
m
i
in
8.190
8.026
7.862
7.698
7.535
7.371
7.207
7.043
6.879
6.716
6.552
6.388
6.224
6.060
5.897
5.733
5.569
5.405
5.241
5.078
4.914
4.730
4.536
4.422
4.258
4.095
3.931
3.767
3.603
3.439
3.276
3.112
2.948
2.784
2.620
2.457
2.2*3
2.129
1.965
1.B01
1.638
1.474
1.310
1.146
0.9S2
0.819
0.655
0.491
0.327
0.163
0.000
.no
.I....I....T....I....I....I....I....I....I....I....I....I....I....I....I....I
S I
A S
S A
S
S
S S
A S
S A S A
S A
A S
A A A A
A AS
S A
A A
A S A A A A
-I.
15.00
50.00
S5.00 60.00 65.00
DURATION VS TEAR
70.00 75.00 BO. 00
A=AVERAGE« S=STD. DEV.
-------
m
on
0.090
O.OBfl
0.086
0,085
O.CB3
O.OB1
0.079
O."077
0.076
0.07H
0.072
0,070
0.06B
0,066
0.065
0.063
0.061
0.059
0.037
0.056
0.05H
0.052
0.050
0.0t«3
0.0"»7
O.OU5
0.0f3
o.om
0.039
0.033
0.036
0.034
0.032
0.030
0.028
0.027
0.025
0.023
0.021
0.019
0.018
0.016
0.01<»
0.012
0.010
0.009
0.007
0.005
0.003
0.001
0.000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
40.00
S I
S I
S I
S I
S S I
I
S
S
S
S I
S S I
I
I
I
S I
ASA I
A S I
S S
S S A
A A
S A
A A A A A
A A I
S A S A A I
S I
A A A A A I
A A
S A
S
A
S
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i»fi.OO 50.00 55.00 60.00 65.00 70.00 75.00 80.0
E» S=STD. OEV.
-------
0.510
0.500
0.439
0.479 1
0.469
S.459
0.449
0.438
0.428
0.41B
0.403
0.398
0.387
0.377
0.367
0.357
0.347
0.336
0.326
0.316
0.306
0.296
0.285
0.275
0.265
0.255
0.244
y1 0.234
On 0.224
00 0.214
0.204
0.193
0.183
0.173
0.163
0.153
0.142
0.132
0.122
0.112
0.102
0.091 ]
0.031 ]
0.071 ]
0.061
0.051
0.040
0.030
0.020 ]
0.010 ]
0.000 ]
[ S I
[ I
[ I
I
S
S
S
S
S
S S
S
•
S S
S S
S S
S S
S
S S
S
A
S
A A
S A A A A A
A A A
A AS
A A S A
A A
A A
A
A A
A
A
S
[ A
t
[
[
I... .I....I. ...I... .1.. ..I. ...I.. ..I. ...I. ...I... .!....!.. ..I.. ..I. ...I. ...I.. ..I
40
.00 45.00 50.00 55.00 60.00 65.00 70.00 75.00 SO.00
VOLUME VS TEAR ArAVERAGE. S=STO. OEV.
-------
202.405
198.357
194.309
190.261
196.213
192.165
178.117
174.063
170.0*0
165.972
161.924
157.676
153.823
149.780
145.732
141.634
137.635
133.587
129.539
125.491
121.443
117.395
113.347
109.299
105.250
101.202
tn 97-15"
1 93.106
On 39.053
*° • 85.010
80.962
75.914
72.866
68.817
54.769
50.721
56.673
52.625
48.577
44.529
40.431
36.433
32.384
28.336
24.288
20.240
16.192
12.144
8.096
4.048
0.000
4(
I S !
I I
I I
I S \
I I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
S I
I
* I
ASS I
S I
I
A S S S S I
I AS SI
I S S I
I S I
[ S A A I
IS S I
I I
t A A S S I
'• A A S A A S I
I S A A A A I
f s s s i
r A i
A I
A A I
« A A A A I
A I
I
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
I
I
I
1.00 45.00 50.00 55.00 50.00 65.00 70.00 75.00 60.00
DELTA VS YEAR A = AVERAGE. S=STD. DEV
-------
PROBABILITY ANALYSIS-DURATION
PERCENTAGE OF OCCURRENCE LESS THAN OR EOUAL TO THE SIVEN VALUE OF DURATION
m
i
VALUE
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
PCT
0.012
0.382
0.72?
1.06?
1.M01
i.7m
2.P81
2.421
2.761
3.101
3.440.
3. 780
4.120
1.460
I.POO
5.140
5."*BO
5.819
6.159
6.U99
6.839
7.179
7.519
7.. 058
B.t9B
6.538
8.»78
9.21H
9.55«
9.098
10.237
10. -577
10.917
11.257
11.597
11.937
12.276
12.616
12.956
13.296
13.636
13.976
14.316
14.655
I1*. 995
15.335
15.675
16.015
16.355
16.694
17.034
VALUE
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.oon
i.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.oon
1.000
i.noo
l.COO
i.noo
1.POC
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.non
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.POO
1.000
i.opo
I.OPO
1.000
1.000
i.noo
i.noo
i.ono
1.000
1.000
i.oon
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.oon
1.000
i.noo
1.000
PCT
0.031
0.424
0.751*
J.104
I."*1*1*
1.73"*
2.12<«
2.453
2.803
3. 113
3.4B3
3.823
4.163
4.502
4.842
«>.1S2
5.522
5.852
6.202
6.512
6.0,31
7.221
7.561
7.901
8.211
P.?B1
3.920
9.260
9.600
9.910
10.230
10.620
10.960
11.299
11.639
11.979
12.319
12. £59
12.999
1J.33B
13.678
lu.nia
14.358
It. 698
15.038
IS. 378
15.717
16.057
16.397
16.757
17.077
VALUE
1.000
1.000
i.noo
1.030
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.COO
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.030
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.noo
1.000
i.ono
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
PCT
0.127
0.467
0.307
1.146
1.436
1.826
2.166
2.506
2.846
3.186
3.525
3.865
1.205
4.545
1.885
5.225
5.564
5.904
6.244
6.584
6.924
7.264
7.604
7.943
8.283
8.623
8.963
9.303
9.643
9.983
10.32'2
10.662
11.002
11.312
11.682
12.022
12.361
12.701
13.011
13.381
13.721
14.061
14.401
14.740
15.080
15.420
15.760
16.100
16.440
16.779
17.119
VALUE
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.COO
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
PCT
0.169
0.509
0.349
1.139
1.529
1.369
2.209
2.548
2.888
3.228
3.568
3.908
4.248
4.587
4.927
5.267
5.507
5.947
6.287
6.527
6.966
7.306
7.646
7.986
8.326
B.666
9.005
9.345
9.685
10.025
10.565
10.705
11.045
11.384
11.724
12.064
12.404
12.744
13.034
13.423
13.763
14.103
14.443
14.783
15.123
15.463
15.302
16.112
16.132
16.322
17.162
VALUE
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
PCT
0.212
0.552
0.892
1.231
1.571
1.911
2.251
2.591
2.931
3.271
3.610
3.950
4.290
4.630
4.970
5.310
5.649
5.989
6.329
6.669
7.009
7.349
7.689
8.028
8.358
8.708
9.048
9.368
9.728
10.067
10.407
10.747
11.067
11.427
11.767
12.107
12.446
12.786
13.126
13.466
13.806
14.146
14.485
14.825
15.165
15.505
15.845
16.185
16.525
16.864
17.204
VALUE
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.OOl)
1.000
1.000
PCT
0.254
0.594
0.934
1.274
1,614
1.954
2.293
2.633
2.973
3.313
3.653
3.993
4.333
4.672
5.012
5.352
5.692
6.052
6.372
6.711
7.051
7.391
7.731
8.071
8.411
8.751
9.090
9.430
9.77Q
10.110
10.150
10.790
11.129
11.169
11.809
12.119
12.489
12.829
13.169
13.508
13.848
11.188
11.528
11.868
15.206
15.518
15.887
16.227
16.567
16.907
17.247
VALUE
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
PCT
0.297
0.637
0.977
1.316
1.656
1.996
2.336
2.676
3.016
3.355
3.695
1.035
1.375
4.715
5.055
5.395
5.734
6.074
6.414
6.754
7.094
7.434
7.774
8.113
8.453
8.793
9.133
9.173
9.813
10.152
10.192
10.832
11.172
11.512
11.852
12.192
12.531
12.871
13.211
13.551
13.891
11.231
11.570
11.910
15.250
15.590
15.930
16.270
16.610
16.949
17.289
VALUE
l.OOC
1.000
1.000
1.003
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.OCO
1.300
1.000
1.000
1.300
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.goo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
PCT
0.339
0.679
1.019
1.359
1.699
2.039
2.379
2.713
3.053
3.393
3.733
4.073
4.113
4.757
5.097
5.437
5.777
6.117
6.457
6.795
7.135
7.475
7.815
8.155
8.495
8.335
9.175
9.515
9.855
10.195
10.535
10.875
11.21!,
11.554
U.99'4
12.23-4
12.574
12.914
13.254
13.595
13.933
11.273
11.613
11.953
15.293
15.632
15.972
16.312
16.652
16.992
17.332
-------
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.OOU
l.OOU
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.OOU
i.oou
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.003
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
m 1.000
ON 1.000
h^ 1.000
l.O'OO
1.000
1.000
l.OOD
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.030
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
17.371
17.714
18.051
18.J9H
IP. 734
19.073
19.113
19.753
?0.093
20.133
20.773
21.113
?1.152
21.79?
22.132
22.1*72
22.812
23.152
23. U91
23.P31
?1.171
2<».511
21.«51
25.191
25.S31
25.P7n
26.?10
2f..f>50
26.990
27.230
27.570
27.909
2B.?19
28.589
2S.<>29
29.?69
29.609
29.919
30.280
30.?,2<<
50.^6?
31.308
31.618
31. "88
J2.327
32.667
33.007
33.317
33.687
31.027
31.367
31.70ft
35.016
35.386
35.726
36.066
36.106
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.oon
1.000
l.noo
1.000
1.000
1.100
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.oon
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i .noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
.000
.000
.000
.too
.000
.000
.000
l.noo
1.000
l.noo
l.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.oon
1.000
1.000
17.117
17.757
IB. 096
I*. 136
1R.776
19.116
19.156
19.796
20.135
20.175
20.015
21.155
21.195
21.835
22.175
22.511
2?. 851
23.191
23.531
23.071
21.211
21.553
21.S93
25.233
2S.573
25.913
2ft. 253
26.593
26.932
27.272
27.612
27.952
28.292
23.632
29.971
29.311
29.651
29.991
30.331
30.671
31.011
31.350
31.690
32.030
32.370
32.710
33.050
33.339
33.729
31.059
31.109
31.719
35.039
35.129
35.758
36.108
36.118
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.ono
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.noo
1.000
l.ODO
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
17.159
17.799
18.139
18.179
10.819
19.156
19.198
19.838
20.178
20.518
20.858
21.197
21.537
21.877
22.217
22.557
22 ,897
23.237
23.576
23.916
21.256
21.596
21.936
25.276
25.615
25.955
26.295
26.635
26.975
27.315
27.655
27.991
28.331
28.671
29.011
29.351
29.691
30.033
30.373
30.713
31.053
31.393
31.733
32.073
32.112
32.752
33.092
33.132
33.772
31.112
31.152
31.791
35.131
35.171
35.811
36.151
36.191
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.noo
1.000
1.000
17.502
17.311
18.181
18.521
18.361
19.201
19.511
19.881
20.220
20.550
20.900
21.210
21.530
21.920
22.259
22.599
22.939
23.279
23.519
23.959
21.299
21.538
21.978
25.318
25.658
25.998
26.338
26.677
27.017
27.357
27.597
28.037
28.377
28.717
29.056
29.396
29.736
30.076
30.116
30.756
31.096
31.135
31.775
32.115
32.155
32.795
33.135
33.171
33.311
31.151
31.191
31.B31
35.171
35.511
35.853
36.193
36.533
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.300
1.000
17.511
17.881
18.221
18.561
18.903
19.213
19.583
19.923
20.263
20.603
20.913
21.232
21.622
21.962
22.302
22.612
22.932
23.322
23.661
21.001
21.311
21.681
25.021
25.351
25.700
26.010
26.3BO
26.720
27.060
27.100
27.710
28.079
28.119
28.759
29.099
29.139
29.779
30.118
30.153
30.793
31.139
31.178
31.818
32.158
32.197
32.837
33.177
33.517
33.857
31.197
31.536
31.876
35.216
35.556
35.896
36.236
36.576
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
LOGO
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
17.587
17.926
18.266
18.606
18.916
19.286
19.626
19.966
20.305
20.615
20.985
21.325
21.665
22.005
22.311
22.681
23.021
23.36'*
23.701
21.0H
21.381
21.723
25.063
25.103
25.713
26.083
26.123
26.762
27.102
27.H2
27.782
28.122
28.162
28.802
29.111
29.181
29.821
30.161
30.501
30.811
31.180
31.520
31.860
32.200
32.510
32.680
33.220
33.559
33.899
31.239
31.579
31.919
35.259
35.598
35.938
36.278
26.618
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.COO
1.030
1.000
1.003
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
17.629
17.969
18.309
18.619
18.988
19.328
19.668
20.008
20.318
20.688
21.023
21.367
21.707
22.017
22.367
22.727
23.067
23.106
23.716
21.086
21.126
21.766
25.106
25.116
25.735
26.125
26.155
25.805
27.115
27.185
27.321
28.161
28.501
28.811
29.181
29.521
29.851
30.203
30.513
30.883
31.223
31.563
31.903
32.212
32.582
32.922
33.262
33.602
33.912
31.282
31.621
31.961
35.301
35.611
35.981
36.321
36.661
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.COO
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.OCO
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
17.672
18.011
18.351
18.691
19.031
19.371
19.711
20.050
20.390
20.730
21.070
21.110
21.753
22.090
22.129
22.759
23.109
23.119
23.789
21.129
21.163
21.303
25.113
25.183
25.323
26.163
26.503
26.517
27.187
27.527
27.867
28.207
26.517
28.887
29.226
29.565
29.9C5
30.215
30.586
30.925
31.265
31.605
31.915
32.285
32.525
32.965
33.305
33.511
33.981
31.321
31.561
35.001
35.311
35.683
36.023
36.363
36.703
-------
m
i
1.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
?.ooo
2.000
?.OOU
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2. COO
?.ooo
2.000
2.000
2.000
?.ooo
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2. COO
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2. COO
2.000
2.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
36.7i»5
37.08-i
37.
-------
tfi
I
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
4.000
U.OOO
u.ooo
U.OOO
U.ODO
u.ooo
t.OOO
U.OOO
1.000
u.ooo
<».ooo
U.OOO
U.OOO
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.cou
u.ooo
u.ooo
U.OOO
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
?.ooo
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
56.117
56.U57
56.796
57.136
57.U76
57.816
58.156
5P.U96
5B.B36
59.175
59.515
59.855
50.195
60.535
60.B75
S1.21U
51.55U
61.B9U
62.23U
S?.57u
52.91U
f.3.25U
63.593
63.933
f.U.273
6U.613
6U.953
55.293
55.f.3?
55.972
66.312.
66.^.52
66.992
67. 332
57.672
s^.nii
58.351
SB. 691
69.n31
69.371
69.711
70.050
70.390
70.730
71.07Q
71.U10
71.750
72.090
72.U29
72.769
73.109
73.UU9
73.789
7U.129
7U.U68
7U.80B
75.1U8
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3. 000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
s.noo
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
U.OOO
U.OOO
U.OOO
u.ooo
u.ooo
U.OOO
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ioo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
U.OOO
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
•5.000
5.000
5.000
56.159
56.U99
56.B39
57.179
57.519
57.858
58.198
5B.538
59.B78
59.218
59.558
59.898
60.237
60.S77
60.917
61.257
61.597
61.937
62.276
62.616
62.956
63.296
63.636
63.975
6U.315
6U.655
6U.995
65.335
65.675
66.015
66.355
6S.69U
67.(l3U
67.37U
S7.71H
6R.05U
59.39U
6B.73U
69.073
69.U13
69.753
70.093
70.UJ3
70.773
71.113
71.U52
71.792
72.132
72.U72
72.812
73.152
73.U91
73.831
7U.171
7U.5H
7U.B51
75.191
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.0PO
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.00.0
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.0PO
3.000
U.OOO
U.OOO
U.OOO
U.OOO
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.coo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
U.OOO
u.ooo
u.ooo
U.OOO
u.ooo
U.OOO
u.ooo
u.ooo
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
s.noo
5.000
56.202
56.5U2
56.381
57.221
57.561
57.901
58.2U1
58.581
58.920
59.260
59.600
59.9UO
60.280
60.620
60.960
SI. 299
61.639
61.979
62.319
62.659
62.999
63.339
63.678
6U.018
6U.358
6U.696
65.038
65.378
65.717
66.057
66.397
66.737
67.077
67.U17
67.757
68.096
68.U36
58.776
69.116
69.U56
69.796
70.135
70.U75
70.315
71.155
71.U95
71.835
72.175
72.51U
72.85U
73.19U
73.53U
73.87U
7U.21U
7U.553
7U.893
75.233
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
U.OOO
U.OOO
U.OOO
u.ooo
u.noo
u.ooo
u.ooo
U.OOO
u.ooo
U.OOO
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
U.OOO
U.OOO
U.OOO
U.OOO
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
5.000
5.000
s.noo
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
36.2UU
56.58U
56.92U
57.26U
57.60U
57.9U3
58.283
58.623
58.963
59.303
59.SU3
59.983
50.322
SO. 552
61.002
S1.3U2
51.632
52.022
52.361
62.701
S3.0U1
53.381
53.721
SU.061
5U.U01
5U.7UO
55.080
S5.U20
55.760
56.100
56.UUO
56.779
67.119
S7.U59
57.799
68.139
58.U79
58.319
59.158
S9.U98
59.838
70.178
70.518
70.358
71.197
71.537
71.377
72.217
72.557
72.397
73.237
73.576
73.916
7U.256
7U.596
7U.936
75.276
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
U.OOO
U.OOO
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
56.237
56.627
56.956
57.306
57.6U6
57.986
58.326
58.656
59.005
59.3U5
59.685
60.025
50.365
60.705
61.0U5
61.38U
61.72U
62.06U
62.UOU
62.7UU
63.0BU
63.U23
63.763
6U.103
6U.UU3
6U.733
65.123
65.U63
65.802
66.1 '4 2
66.U32
66.822
67.162
67.502
67.8U1
68.181
68.521
68.861
69.201
69.5U1
69.831
70.220
70.550
70.900
71.2UO
71.580
71.920
72.259
72.599
72.939
73.279
73.519
73.959
7U.299
7U.638
7U.978
75.318
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
U.OOO
U.OOO
U.OOO
U.OOO
U.OOO
U.OOO
u.ooo
U.OOO
U.030
u.ooo
U.OOO
u.oco
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
U.OOO
u.ooo
U.OOO
U.OOO
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
56.329
56.669
57.009
57.3U9
57.689
58.028
58.368
58.708
59.0U8
59.388
59.723
60.067
60.U07
S0.7U7
61.087
61.U27
61.767
62.107
62.UU6
62.786
63.12S
63.U66
63.806
6U.1U5
6U.U85
5U.825
65.165
65.505
65. BUS
66.185
66.525
66.86U
67.20U
67.5UU
57.83U
68.22U
68.56U
68.90U
69.2U3
69.583
69.923
70.263
70.603
70.9U3
71.232
71.622
71.962
72.302
72.6U2
72.982
73.322
73.661
7U.001
7U.3U1
7U.681
75.021
75.361
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.030
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.030
U.OOO
U.OOO
U.OOO
U.OOO
u.ooo
u.ooo
U.ODO
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
U.030
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.030
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
56.372
5&.7H
57.051
57.391
57.731
53.071
53.U11
53.751
59.090
59.U30
59.770
60.110
60.U53
60.790
61.129
61.US9
61.809
62.1U9
62.U89
62.529
63.169
63.508
63. BUS
6U.1S3
SU.528
6U.B6S
55.208
55.5U8
S5.887
55.227
66.567
65.907
&7.2U7
&7.5S7
57.926
68.266
68.606
68.9U5
69.285
59.625
69.966
70.305
70.&U5
70.985
71.325
71.565
72.005
72.3UU
72.68U
73.02'4
73.35U
73.70U
7U.OUU
7U.38U
7U.723
75.063
75.U03
3.000
3.000
3.000
3,000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
U . 0 0.0
U.OOO
U.OOO
u.ooo
u.ooo
U.OOO
U.OOO
U.OOO
u.ooo
U.OOO
u.ooo
u.noo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
U.OOO
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
u.ooo
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
56.U1U
56.75U
57.09U
57.U3U
57.77U
58.113
58.U53
53.753
59.133
59.U73
59.313
60.152
60.U92
60.832
61.172
61.512
61.352
62.192
62.531
62.371
63.211
63.551
63.891
6U.231
6U.573
&U.910
65.253
65.590
65.933
66.270
66.610
66.9U9
67.283
57.529
67.959
68.309
68.6U9
68.983
69.329
69.66S
70.003
70.3U3
70.583
71.023
71.357
71.707
72.0U7
72.387
72.727
73.067
73.U05
73.7U5
7U.065
7U.U2S
7U.76S
75.105
75.UUS
-------
5.000
s.ooo
5.000
5.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.030
6.000
6.000
6.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
8.000
8.000
P. 000
e.ooo
e.ooo
71 3.000
OS 9.000
*>• 9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
11.000
11.000
11.000
12.000
12.000
12. COO
13.000
13.000
13.000
13.000
1U.OOO
i*.ooo
1*.000
15.000
15.000
16.000
75.*8B
7S.928
76.168
76.508
76.P*7
77.187
77.?27
77.867
78.207
78.5*7
78.fl87
79.226
79.^66
79.°06
BO. 2*6
BO.'iPfe
P0."26
81.265
81.605
91.9*5
3?. 285
92.625
P2.965
83.305
P3.5**
83.93*
1*.32*
8*. 66*
35. PO*
95.3**
95.633
B6.n23
86.363
R6.703
P7.n*3
37.383
37.723
PP.n&2
98.*02
B8.7*2
99.082
B9.*22
99.762
90.101
90.**!
90.781
91.121
91.*61
91.P01
92.1*1
92.*80
92.P20
93.160
93.SOO
93.P*0
9*. 180
9*. 519
5.000
«..ooo
5.000
5.000
fi.OOO
6.000
S.non
6.000
fi.OOO
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
n.ooo
p.non
P. 000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
9.000
".POO
9.000
1.000
in. ooo
in. noo
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
11. 000
11 .000
11.000
12.000
12.000
12.000
13.000
13.000
13.000
13.000
1*.000
1*.000
15.000
15.000
15.000
16.000
75.531
75.P70
76.210
76.550
76.P90
77.250
77.570
77.909
7P.2*9
7S.539
79.929
79.269
79.609
79.9*9
P0.238
80. 628
P0.963
81.308
81.6*8
31.038
P2.327
82.667
."5.007
P3.3*7
83.637
8*. 027
8*.3S7
P*.706
85.0*6
85.396
85.726
86.066
86.106
86.7*5
87.035
87.*25
87.745
P«.105
PP.**5
BP.735
89.12*
39. *6*
89. PO*
90.1**
90. *3*
90.82*
91.163
91.503
91.8*3
92.133
92.523
92. "S3
93.203
93.5*2
93.R92
90.222
9*. .562
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
e.ooo
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.0PO
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.0PO
9.000
9.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
11.000
11.000
11.000
12.000
12.000
12.000
13.000
13.000
13.000
13.000
1*.000
1*.000
15.000
15.000
15.000
16.000
75.573
75.913
76.253
76.593
76.932
77.272
77.612
77.952
78.292
78.632
78.971
79.311
79.651
79.991
80.331
90.671
81.011
81.350
81.690
82.030
82.370
92.710
83.050
33.389
83.729
8*. 069
8*.*09
9*. 7*9
85.089
B5.*29
85.768
36.108
86.448
86.788
87.128
87.*68
37.807
38.1*7
83.*87
88.927
89.167
89.507
89.8*7
90.186
90.526
90.866
91.206
91.5*6
91.886
92.226
92.565
92.905
93.2*5
93.585
93.925
9*. 265
9*. 60*
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
11.000
11.000
11.000
11.000
12. POO
12.000
12.000
13.000
13.000
13.000
1*.000
1*.000
1*.ODO
15.000
15.000
15.000
16.000
75.615
75.955
76.295
76.535
76.975
77.315
77.655
77.99*
78.33*
78.57*
79.01*
79.35*
79.69*
30.033
90.373
30.713
31.053
31.393
31.733
32.073
32.*12
32.752
33.092
33.*32
33.772
3*. 112
B*.*52
3*. 791
85.131
35.*71
35.811
36.151
B6.*91
35.330
37.170
37.510
37.850
38.190
38.530
38.870
99.209
39.5*9
39.389
90.229
90.569
90.909
91.2*8
91.588
91.928
92.268
92.608
92.9*8
93.288
93.627
93.967
9*. 307
3*. 6*7
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
11.000
11.000
11.000
11.000
12.000
12.000
12.000
13.000
13.000
13.000
1*.000
1*.000
14.000
15.000
15.000
16.000
16.000
75.658
75.998
76.338
76.678
77.017
77.357
77.697
78.037
78.377
78.717
79.056
79.396
79.736
80.076
80.*16
80.756
81.096
81.*35
81.775
82.115
82.*55
82.795
83.135
83. *7*
83.81*
6*. 15*
B*.*9*
8*. 93*
85.17*
85.51*
85.853
86.193
86.533
86.873
87.213
87.553
87.692
88.232
88.572
88.912
89.252
89.592
89.932
90.271
90.611
90.951
91.291
91.631
91.971
92.310
92.650
92.990
93.330
93.670
9*. 010
9*. 350
9*. 689
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
8.000
B.OOO
8.000
8.000
B.OOO
8.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
11.000
11.000
11.000
11.000
12.000
12.000
12.000
13.000
13.000
13.000
1*.000
1*.000
1*.000
15.000
15.000
16.000
16.000
75.700
76.0*0
76.380
76.720
77.0&0
77.*00
77.7*0
78.079
78.*19
78.759
79.099
79.*39
79.779
80.118
80.*58
80.799
81.139
Bl.*79
81.818
82.158
B2.*97
82.837
83.177
83.517
83.857
8*. 197
8*. 536
8*. 876
85.216
85.555
B5.896
86.236
86.576
86.915
87.255
87.595
B7.9i5
88.275
BP.615
80.95*
89.29*
B9.63i»
09.97H
90.31*
90.65*
90.99*
91.333
91.673
92.013
92.353
92.593
93.033
93.372
93.712
9*. 052
9*. 392
9*. 732
5.000
5.000
5.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
8.000
B.OOO
9.000
3.000
8.000
3.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
10.000
10.000
10,300
10.000
10.000
10.000
11.000
11.000
11.000
11.000
12.000
12.000
12.000
13.000
13.000
13.00U
1*.000
14.000
1*.003
15.000
15.000
16.000
16.000
75.7*3
76.083
76.*23
76.762
77.102
77,**2
77.782
78.122
78,*62
78.802
79.1*1
79.*Bl
79.821
30.161
80.501
30.8*1
81.180
91.520
81.660
82.200
32.5*0
62.880
83.220
83.559
33.899
S*.239
8*. 579
8*. 919
35.259
95.593
35.939
66.278
B6.619
86.958
87.293
87.639
87.977
88.317
88.657
38.997
99. J37
39.677
90.016
90.355
90.695
91.036
91.376
91.716
92.056
92.395
92.735
93.075
93.*15
93.755
9*. 095
9*.*35
9*. 77*
S.OOO
5.000
5.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
B.OOO
8.000
B.OOO
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
11.000
11.003
11.000
11.000
12.000
12.000
12.000
13.000
13.000
13.000
14.000
1*.000
14.000
15.000
15.000
16.000
16.000
75.785
76.125
76.*65
76.805
77.1*5
77.*85
77.82*
78.16*
78.50*
78.8**
79.18*
79.52*
79.86'4
80.203
60.5*3
80.883
81.223
81.563
81.903
82.2*2
32.582
82.922
33.262
83.602
83.9*2
8*. 28?
8*. 521
8*. 961
85.301
85.6*1
85.991
B6.321
86.661
87.000
87.3*0
97.583
88.020
88.360
88.703
39.039
89. J79
89.719
90.059
90.399
90.739
91.079
91.*13
91.759
92.093
92.*3D
92.773
93.113
93.*57
93.797
9*. 137
9*.*77
9*. 817
-------
m
i
tn
16.000
17.000
18.000
18.000
19.000
20.000
21.000
22.000
22.000
2<*.000
25.000
26.000
2B.COO
31.000
36.000
1*9.000
9H;«59
95.199
95.539
95. "79
96.?19
96.559
96.K98
97.?3fl
97.57B
97.918
9B.?5fi
98.598
98.<»37
99.277
99.617
99.957
17.000
17.00D
IP. 000
l«iOOO
19.000
20.000
21.000
??.noo
22.000
2u.oon
25.000
27.000
?9.000
32.non
37.000
58.000
9i*.o02
95. 2*2
95.532
95.921
96.P51
96.601
96. 91*!
97.231
97.621
97.960
9B.300
gs.e^o
98.930
99.320
99.650
100. 000
17.000
17.000
18.000
18.000
19.000
JO. 000
21.000
22.000
23.000
2"*.000
25.000
27.000
29.000
33.000
37.000
9t.9<*i*
95.28i»
95. 62"*
95.961*
96.30"*
96. 61*1*
96.983
97.323
97.663
98.003
98.3<«3
98.683
99.022
99.362
99.702
17.000
17.000
18.000
19.000
19.000
20.000
21.000
22.000
23.000
2"».000
25.000
27.000
29.000
33.000
37.000
9V. 987
95.327
95.566
36.006
96.346
96.636
97.026
97.365
97.706
98.015
98.385
98.725
99.055
99.<*05
99.71*5
17.000
17.000
18.000
19.000
19.000
20.000
21.000
22.000
23.000
21.000
25.000
27.000
29.000
33.000
39.000
95.029
95.369
95.709
96.01*9
96.389
96.728
97.068
97.1*08
97.71*8
98.088
98.1*28
98.768
99.107
99.1*1*7
99.787
17.000
17.000
18.000
19.000
19.000
20.000
21.000
22.000
23.000
25.000
25.000
27.000
29.000
33.000
i»0.000
95.072
95.1*12
95.751
96.0'1
96.1*31
96.771
97.111
97.1*51
97.791
98.130
98.1*70
98.810
99.150
99.1+90
99.830
17.000
18.000
18.000
19.000
19.000
20.000
21.000
22.000
23.000
25.000
26.000
27.000
30.000
35.000
1*2.000
95.11"*
95. 451*
95.791*
96.13"*
95,<*7i»
96.813
97.153
97.H93
97.833
93.173
98.513
98.853
99.192
99.532
99.872
17.000
lB.000
18.000
19.000
19.000
20.000
21.000
22.000
23.000
25.000
26.000
28.000
30.000
36.000
46.000
95.157
95.1*97
95.336
96.175
96.515
96.356
97.195
97.535
97.375
98.215
98.555
98.395
99.235
99.575
99.915
-------
58.000
56.810
55.6BO
54.520
33.360
52.200
51.040
H9.890
18.720
17.560
16.400
<*5.240
1*4. OHQ
•42.920
11.760
10.600
39.410
38.280
37.120
35.960
34.800
33.640
32.480
31.320
30.160
29.000
m 27.810
I 26.680
0 25.520
°* 24.360
23.200
22.040
20.890
19.720
18.560
17.400
16.240
15.080
13.920
12.760
11.600
10.440
9.2SO
8.120
6.960
5.800
4.640
3.430
2»
-------
RETURN PERIOD
-------
m
i
00
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.030
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
4.000
t.OOO
4.000
4.000
4.000
<». 000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.COU
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
0.061
0.060
o.nSR
o.n57
0.056
0.055
O.n54
0.054
O.fl53
0.052
O.nSl
o.nso
0.049
0.049
0.04B
0.047
0.047
0.146
0.045
0.045
O.r>44
0.043
0.043
0.042
0.042
0.041
0.041
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.03"
0.038
O.OSfl
0.037
0.037
o.o36
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
O.n34
0.034
0.034
O.T33
0.033
0.033
0.03?
O.P3?
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
o.nso
0.030
0.030
O.P29
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
6.000
6.000
fi.OOO
f .000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
".000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
S.OOO
5.000
5.000
= .000
5.100
5.000
5.000
5.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
3.000
s.noo
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
O.OS1
0.059
0.058
0,057
0.056
0.055
0.054
0.053
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.049
0.049
0.048
0.047
0.046
0.046
0.0'-»5
0.044
0.044
0.043
0.043
0.012
0.042
0.041
0.041
0.010
0.040
0.039
0.039
0.03B
0.03B
0.037
0.037
0.056
0."36
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.0PO
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4,000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.054
0.053
0.052
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.049
0.048
0.048
0.047
0.046
0.046
0.045
0.044
0.044
0.043
0.043
0.042
0.042
0.041
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.038
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.029
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6. COO
6.000
6.000
6.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
i.ooo
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
i.ooo
1.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
i.ooo
4.000
4.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.354
0.053
0.052
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.049
0.048
0.048
0.047
0.046
0.046
0.015
0.044
0.044
0.043
0.043
0.042
0.041
0.041
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.038
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.336
0.036
0.055
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.029
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
6.000
6. COO
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.300
4.000
4. 000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.054
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.051
0.050
0.049
0.048
0.048
0.047
0.046
0.046
0.045
0.044
0.044
0.043
0.042
0.042
0.041
0.041
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.029
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6. ODD
6.000
6.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
i.ooo
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
3.030
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.05&
0.055
0.054
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.050
0.049
0.048
0.047
0.047
0.046
0.045
0.045
0.044
0.044
0.043
0.042
0.042
0.011
0.041
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.043
0.037
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.03Q
0.029
0.029
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
6.000
6.000
£.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
5.000
5.030
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.030
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.054
O.C53
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.050
0.049
0.043
0.047
0.047
0.046
0.045
0.0145
0.044
0.043
0.043
0.042
0.042
0.041
0.041
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.03S
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.029
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
0.060
0.059
0.053
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.054
0.053
0,052
0.051
0.050
0.053
0.04?
0.043
0.047
0.047
0.04S
0.045
0.045
0.044
0.043
0.043
0.042
0.04?
0.041
0.041
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.039
0,033
0.033
0.037
0,037
0.03S
0.035
0.03S
0,035
0.035
0.03'4
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.03D
0.030
0.033
0.029
0.029
-------
3.00U
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3. COO
3.COU
3.000
3.00U
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
J.OOO
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
2.000
2. COO
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2. COO
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.00U
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
?.ooo
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
0.029
0.029
0.02B
0.026
0.02«
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.127
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
O.P25
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.02?
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
J.OOO
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.CIOO
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2. TOO
2.000
2.000
2.0QO
2.000
?.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
?.ooo
2.000
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.025
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
s.or.o
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2. ODD
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
C.022
3.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.POO
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2. COO
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2,000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.028
0,029
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3,,000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2,000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2. COO
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0,027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3,000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3.000
3,000
3.000
3.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2,000
2. COO
2.000
2.000
2.000
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.023
0.02S
0.023
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.02S
0.025
0.026
0.026
0.02S
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.02'4
0.024
0.024
0.024
0 . 0 2 '4
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.02D
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
-------
m
i
-•j
o
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
1.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.OOU
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.COO
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.OOU
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.OOU
1.000
l.OOU
1.000
1.000
1.000
O.P19
0.019
0.019
0.019
O.P19
o.ois
0.018
0.018
o.nis
O.P1B
0.01B
O."18
0.018
o.nie
0.017
O.nly
0.017
0.017
0.017
O.P17
0.017
0.017
0.017
O.P17
o.ni7
0.016
0.016
0.0.16
O.Plf.
O.P16
0.016
o.nis
O.nl6
0.016
0.016
O.Olf.
0.016
O.nis
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
- 0.015
0.015
O.P15
0.015
0.015
0.015
O.P15
B.ri4
0.014
0.014
0.014
o.ni4
0.014
0.014
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
3.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
?.ooo
2.000
P.OOO
2.000
1.000
I. 000
i.noo
i.ooo
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1 .000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.100
1.000
1.000
1.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
o.nis
0.018
o.pis
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
o.oi"*
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.0CO
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
C.01B
0.018
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.oob
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.0X8
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.014
0.314
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2. COO
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.oob
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0,015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2,000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.ooo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
x.ooo
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.013
0.013
o.ois
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
o.ois
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.316
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.DOO
2.CDO
2.030
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.030
2. COO
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.003
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.330
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.003
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.003
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.003
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.030
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.318
0.013
0.018
0.013
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.013
0.017
0.317
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
2,000
2.000
2.0CO
2.000
2.000
2.000
2.000
1.030
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.030
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.003
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.003
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.019
0.013
0.019
0.019
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.019
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.317
0.317
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.015
0.01&
0.016
O.OIS
o.ois
O.OIS
0.016
O.OIS
O.OIS
O.OIS
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
O.C15
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.314
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
-------
1.000
l.OOU
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
J.OOO
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.oou
1.000
1.000
l.OOU
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.OOU
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
tn 1'°°°
, 1.000
~J 1.000
1-1 1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.OOU
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.COO
1.000
1.003
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.OOU
o.ni<>
0.014
O.nl4
0.014
0.014
O.P14
o.om
o.oi4
o.oi4
0.013
0.113
o.ni3
0.013
o.nis
0.013
0.013
o.nis
O.P13
0.013
o.nis
o.nis
0.013
o.nis
O.P13
0.013
0.013
O.P1?
0.01?
0.012
0.012
o.ni2
0.012
0.012
0.012
O.M2
o.ni?
o.ni2
o.ri?
0.012
o.pi2
0.012
0.012
O.P12
o.ni?.
0 . n 1 2
0.012
O.ni?
O.Pll
0.011
O.Pll
o.nii
0.011
O.Pll
0.011
O.Pll
o.nii
0.011
1.000
l.POO
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
J.POO
1.000
1.000
i.oon
1.000
1.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
1.000
1.000
i.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.oon
l.POO
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
.noo
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.POO
.000
.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.noo
1.000
1.000
l.POO
1.000
0.014
o.om
0.014
o.oi1*
0.011*
0.014
o.ni1*
o.ni1*
0.013
0.013
O.P13
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.0.13
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
O.P12
0.012
0.012
0,012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
o.ni2
0.011
o.nii
0.011
o.oii
0.011
o.nii
o.nii
0.011
0.011
o.oii
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.POO
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.noo
l.POO
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.noo
l.POO
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.noo
i.ono
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
O.OI1*
O.Olt
O.OI1*
O.OI1*
O.OI1*
o.oi4
O.OI1*
O.OI1*
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.01?
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.01?
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
l.POO
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.030
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.POO
1.000
1.000
i.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
o.om
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012'
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.COO
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
O.OI1*
0.014
0.014
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
C.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
1.000
1.300
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
o.on
0.011
0.011
O.OH
o.oii
0.011
0.011
o.oii
0.011
o.oii
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.030
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.OOC
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.COO
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
o.oi:
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1,000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.00-0
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.OCO
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.014
0 . 0 1 '4
o.om
0 . 0 1 V
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0 . 0 1 1
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.01?
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.01?
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
-------
m
i
N)
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.OOU
1.000
1.000
i.noo
1.000
1.000
1.000
o.nii
0.011
o.nii
0.011
o.nii
0.011
0.011
o.nii
0.011
0.011
o.nii
0.011
0.011
0.011 1
t.ooo
L.OOO
I. 000
L.oon
1.000
.000
L.OOO
L.OOO
.000
.noo
.000
.000
.000
L.OOO
0.011
0.011
o.nii
o.oii
0.011
0.011
o.nii
0.011
O.Oll
0.011
O.Oll
o.oii
O.Oll
o.oii
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
O.Oll
0.011
0.011
0.011
O.Oll
0.011
0.011
0.011
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.011
O.Oll
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.011
O.Oll
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
O.Oll
0.011
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
0.011
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.011
O.Oll
0.011
O.Oll
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.011
O.Oll
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
O.Oll
0.011
O.Oll
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
-------
58.000
56.8140
55.680
54.520
53.360
52.200
51. QUO
i*9. B30
1(8.720
47.560
46. tOO
145.240
44. 030
1(2.920
41.760
i»0.600
39.ti*0
38.230
37.120
35.960
34.600
33.640
32.430
31.320
30.160
?9.000
HI 27.840
1 26.680
W 25'520
i!4.3&0
23.200
22.040
20.330
19.720
IB. 560
17.400
16.240
15.030
13.920
12.760
11.600
10.440
9.280
8.120
6.960
5.800
4.640
3.480
2.320
1.160
0.000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I *
I
I
I
I *
I
1 * *
I
I * **
I **
I *
I
I ***
I *
I *
I **
I *
I **
**
*
*
*
*
*
I *
I «
I *
I *
I *
I**
I*
I*
I*
I*
I*
I*
I«
I*
I»
I.
I
0.00 2.60 5.20 7.80
DURATION
*I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
* I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Z
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
10.40 13.00 15.60 18.20 20.80 23.40 26.00
yS RETURN PERIOD IN YEARS
-------
PR03A3ILITY ANALYSIS-INTENSITY
OF OCCURRENCE LESS THAN OR E^UAL TO THE GIVEN VALUE OF INTENSITY
VALUE
0.001
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.006
0.006
0.006
n.006
0.006
0.006
0.007
n.oo7
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.009
0.01U
0.010
0.010
IT) 0.010
1 0.010
^ 0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.ciu
0.010
o.oiu
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
n.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.OIU
0.010
0.010
0.010
PCT
0.012
O.J32
0.722
1.062
1.101
1.71*1
2.nei
2.121
?.76l
3.101
3.«10
3.730
1.120
1.160
l.aoo
5.110
5.180
5.«19
6.159
6.1)9'?
6.B39
7.179
7.519
7.?,58
B.198
B.53R
8.R78
9.218
9,?58
9.R9fl
10.P37
10.577
10. "17
11.257
11.597
11.937
12.?7ft
12.616
12.956
13.296
13.636
13.976
11.316
If. 655
ii.og's
15.335
15.e,75
16.015
16.355
16.691
17.031
VALUE
o.ooi
0.005
0.005
n.oos
0.006
0.006
0.006
n.006
0.006
0.006
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
O.OOS
0.00ft
O.OOB
0.000
0.009
0.010
O.OJO
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
P. mo
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
n.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
PCT
0.091
0.121
0.761
1.101
1.111
1.791
2.121
2.153
2.803
3.113
3.193
3. 823
1.153
1.502
1.812
5.192
5.522
5.S52
6.202
6.512
6.891
7.221
7.561
7.901
P. 211
8.591
8.920
9.?SO
9.600
9.910
10.?30
10.620
10.960
11.299
11.639
11.979
12.319
12.659
12.999
13.338
13.676
11.016
11.358
11.698
15.038
15.378
15.717
15.057
16.397
16.737
17.077
VALUE
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.005
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
o.oofl
O.OC8
0.003
0.008
0.009
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0,010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
PCT
0.127
0.167
0.807
1.116
1.186
1.826
2.166
2.506
2.816
3.186
3.525
3.865
1.205
1.515
1.895
5.225
5.561
5.901
6.211
6. 581
6.921
7.261
7.601
7.913
8.283
8.623
8.953
9.303
9.613
9.983
10.322
10.662
11.002
11.312
11.682 .
12.022
12.361
12.701
13.011
13.381
13.721
11.061
11.101
11.710
15.080
15.120
15.760
16.100
16.110
16.779
17.119
VALUE
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.006
0.006
0.006
O.OOfa
0.006
0.006
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
o.oofl
0.009
O.OOB
0.008
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.ulO
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
PCT
0.169
0.509
O.S19
1.199
1.529
1.369
2.209
2.518
2.398
3.228
3.568
3.90B
1.218
1.587
1.927
5.267
5.507
5.917
6.297
6.627
6.966
7.306
7.516
7.986
8.326
8.666
9.005
9.315
9.585
10.025
10.365
10.705
11.015
11.381
11.721
12.061
12.101
12.711
13.081
13.123
13.753
11.103
11.113
11.783
15.123
15.163
15.30?
16.112
16.182
16.S22
17.162
VALUE
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
PCT
0.212
0.552
0.892
1.231
1.571
1.911
2.251
2.591
2.931
3.271
3.610
3.950
1.290
1.630
1.970
5.310
5.619
5.999
6.329
6.669
7.009
7.319
7.689
8.028
8.368
8.708
9.018
9.388
9.728
10.067
10.107
10.717
11.087
11.127
11.767
12.107
12.116
12.786
13.125
13.166
13.806
11.116
11.135
11.825
15.165
15.505
15.815
16.165
16.525
16.861
17.201
VALUE
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.008
0.008
O.OOB
0.006
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
PCT
0.25<»
0.59i»
0.931
1.27i*
1.611
1.95<»
2.293
2.533
2.973
3.313
3.653
3.993
1.333
1.672
5.012
5.3S2
5.692
6.032
6.372
6.711
7.051
7.391
7.731
8.071
8.111
8.7bl
9.090
9.13Q
9.770
10.110
10.150
10.790
11.129
11.169
11.809
12.119
12.189
12.829
13.169
13.508
13.818
11.186
11.528
11.868
15.208
15.518
15.887
16.227
16.567
16.907
17.217
VALUE
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.006
0.096
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.009
0.008
O.OOS
0.006
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
PCT
0.297
0.637
0.977
1.316
1.656
1.996
2.336
2.676
3.016
3.355
3.695
1.035
1.375
1.715
5.055
5.395
5.7Ji»
6.071
6.111
6. 75*
7.091
7.131
7.771
8.113
8.153
8.793
9.133
9.173
9.813
10.152
10.192
10.832
11.172
11.512
11.832
12.192
12.531
12.871
13.211
13.551
13.891
11.231
11.570
11.910
15.250
15.590
15.930
16.270
16.610
16.919
17.289
VALUE
O.OOS
0.005
0.005
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.007
0.007
0,007
0.007
0.007
0.008
0.006
O.OOS
0.009
0.010
0.010
0,010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
PCT
0.339
0.679
1.019
1.35?
1.69?
2.039
2.373
2.713
3.053
3.393
3.733
1.073
1.113
1.757
5.097
5.137
5.777
6.117
6.157
6.795
7. 135
7. 175
7.31S
8.155
8.195
8.336
9.175
9.515
9.355
10.195
10.535
10.375
11.211
11.55'4
11.691
12.231
12.571
12.911
13.251
13.593
13.933
11.273
11.613
11.953
15.293
15.632
15.972
16.312
16.652
16.992
17.332
-------
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
n.oiu
O.C1U
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0,010
0.010
m o.oio
I 0.010
^ 0.010
0.010
0.01U
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.P10
0.01U
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.01U
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
17.371*
17.71U
is.n54
lfl.391*
18.734
19.073
19.413
19.753
?0.(193
20.133
?0.773
?1.113
21.1*5?
21.792
22.132
22.472
22.P12
23.152
23.491
23. "31
2*4.171
2i*. 511
24.851
25.191
25.S31
25.P70
26.210
26.550
26.890
27.230
27.570
27.909
2S.P49
2?. 599
2B.C>29
29.269
29.A09
29.949
30.2DP
30.62?
30.96S
31.308
31.64H
31.98»
32.327
32.667
33.007
33.J47
33.687
34.027
31.367
3
-------
0.010
O.OlO
P. 010
0.010
0.010
0.011
0.011
0.011
P. 012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.015
0.015
0.015
P. 015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.018
0.018
P. 019
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.P20
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.C20
0.020
0.020
0.020
36.745
37.085
37.425
37.765
3S.105
38.445
38.785
39.124
39.464
39.0.04
40.144
40.484
40.824
41.163
41.503
41.043
4?. 183
42.52.3
42.P63
43.203
43.542
43.882
44.r>2?
44.552
44.902
45. ?4?.
45.581
45.921
46.261
•4 & . e, n \
46.941
47.231
47.621
47.960
4B.JQO
48.640
4B.990
49.320
49.660
50.000
50.339
50.679
51.P19
51.359
51 ,%99
52.039
52.378
52.718
53.P5R
53.398
53.73R
54.P7H
54.418
54.757
55.097
55.437
55.777
0.010
O.OlO
O.nio
0.010
0.010
n.on
0.011
0.011
o.oi?
n.012
0.012
P. 012
0.01?
0.013
0.013
P . P 1 3
P. 013
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.015
O.P15
0.015
P. 015
0.015
P. 015
0.015
P. 015
P. 015
0.016
0.016
O.P16
P. 017
0.017
0.019
0.018
0.018
0.019
0.020
0.020
O.T20
0.020
P.P20
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0. 020
P. 020
P. 020
0.020
P. 020
0.020
O.P20
0.020
36.7->8
37.128
37.458
37.807
3H.147
3B.437
38.327
39.157
39.507
39.947
40.136
40.526
40.856
41. ?0&
41.546
41.R96
42.226
42.555
4?. 905
43.245
43.595
43.925
44.255
44.604
44.944
45.294
45.624
45.954
46.304
46. f 44
46.993
47.323
47.653
48.003
48. 343
49.633
49.022
49.352
49.702
50.042
50.332
50.722
51.052
51.401
51.741
52.091
52.421
52.751
53.101
53.440
53.730
54.120
54.450
54.300
55.140
55.490
55.919
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.011
0.011
O.Pll
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
O.P12
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
P. 015
0.015
0.015
P. 015
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.017
0.017
0.01ft
0.018
0.019
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.0?0
0.020
0.020
0.0?0
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
36.830
37.170
37.510
37.850
38.190
38.530
38.870
39.209
39.549
39.839
40.229
40.569
40.909
41. 248
41.586
41.928
42.269
42.608
42.948
43.288
43.627
43.967
44.307
44.647
44.987
45.327
45.666
46.006
46.346
46.686
47.026
47.366
47.706
48.C45
48.385
48.725
49.065
49.405
49.745
50.084
50.424
50.764
51.104
51.444
51.784
52.124
52.463
52.303
53.143
53.483
53.823
54.163
54.502
54.842
55.182
55.522
55.862
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.011
O.Pll
0.011
0.01?
0.012
0.012
0.01?
0.012
0.01?
0.013
0.013
0.013
O.P13
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.017
0.017
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.P20
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
36.973
37.213
37.553
37.992
38.232.
38.572
38.912
39.252
39.592
39.932
40.271
40.611
40.951
41.291
41.531
41.971
42.310
42.550
42.990
43.330
43.570
44.010
44. 350
44.589
45.029
45.369
45.709
46.049
46.399
46.72ft
47.068
47.408
47.748
48.088
48.428
48.763
49.107
49.447
49.787
50.127
50.467
50.807
51.146
51.486
51.326
52.156
52.506
52.946
53.136
53.525
53.365
54.205
54.545
54.895
55.225
D5.565
55.904
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.01?
0.012
0.012
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.014
0.014
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.017
0.017
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
36.915
37.255
37.595
37.935
38.275
38.615
38.954
39.294
39.634
39.974
40.314
40.654
40.994
41.333
41.673
42.013
42.353
42.693
43.033
43.372
43.712
44.052
44.392
44.7.32
45.072
45.412
45.751
46.091
46.431
46.771
47.111
47.451
47.791
48.130
48.470
48.810
49.150
49.490
49.830
50.169
50.509
50.949
51.189
51.529
51.869
52.209
52.548
52.R98
53.228
53.568
53.908
54.248
54.587
54.927
55.267
55.607
55.947
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.014
0.014
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.01&
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.017
0.017
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.0?0
0.020
36.958
37.299
37.6*8
37.977
38.317
38.657
38.997
39.337
39.677
40.016
40.356
40.69?;
41.036
41.376
41.716
42.056
42.395
42.735
43.075
43.415
43.755
44.095
44.445
44.774
45.114
45.454
45.794
46.134
46.474
46.813
47.153
47.493
47.833
48.173
48.513
48.853
49.19?.
49.532
49.872
50.212
50.552
50.892
51.231
51.571
51.911
52.251
52.591
52.931
53.271
53.610
53.950
54.290
54.6iO
54.970
55.310
55.649
55.989
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.014
0.014
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.317
0.017
0.013
0.013
0.019
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
37.000
37.340
37.680
38.020
38.360
38.700
39.039
39.379
39.719
40.059
40.399
40.739
41.079
41.418
41.753
42.098
42.438
42.778
43.118
43.457
43.797
44.137
44.477
44.817
45.157
45.497
45.836
46.176
46.516
46.856
47.196
47.535
47.875
48.215
48.555
48.395
49.235
49.575
49.915
50.254
50.594
50.934
51.274
51.614
51.954
52.293
52.633
52.973
53.313
53.653
53.993
54.333
54.672
55.012
55.352
55.692
56.032
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.014
0.014
o.oi1*
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.01&
0.016
0.016
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.018
0.018
0.019
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
37J043
37.383
37.723
3B.062
38.402
38.742
39.082
39.422
39.762
40.101
40.441
40.781
41.121
41.461
41.301
42.141
42.480
42.820
43.160
43.500
43.340
44.18D
44.519
44.859
45.199
45.539
45.879
46.219
46.559
46.993
47.233
47.573
47.913
48.253
48.593
48.937
49.277
49.617
49.957
50.297
50.537
50.977
51.315
51.655
51.995
52.335
52.675
53.015
53.155
53.695
54.035
54.375
54.715
55.055
55.395
55.734
56.074
-------
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.021
0.021
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.021
0.021
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.026
0.026
0.026
m 0.027
1 0.027
^ 0.028
0.028
0.029
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.03J
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
D.03U
0.030
0.030
0,030
O.OJ1
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.033
0.033
0.031
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.036
0.036
0.037
56.117
56.157
56.79ft
57.136
57.1*76
•i7.aift
58.156
58.U96
53.836
59.175
59.515
59.055
60.195
60.535
50.875
51.211
51.551
61.891
62.231
62.571*
62.911
53.254
63. =,93
53.933
64.273
61.613
61.953
65.293
65.632
65.972
66.31?
66.«.52
66.992
67.332
67.672
6B.011
68.351
68.691
69.031
69.^71
69.711
70.050
70.390
70.730
71.070
71.110
71.750
72.090
72.129
72.76?
73.109
73.110
73.789
71.129
71.168
71.808
75.118
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.920
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.021
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.021
0.021
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
P. 025
0.0?6
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.027
0.027
0.028
0.028
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
O.C30
o.nso
0.031
0.032
0.032
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.031
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.036
0.036
0.037
56.159
56.199
56.839
57.179
57.519
57.858
58.198
58.538
58.878
59.?18
59.558
50.893
60.?37
60.577
60.017
61.257
61.537
61.937
62.276
62.616
62.956
63.296
63.636
63.976
61.316
61.655
61.995
65.335
65.675
66.015
66.355
65.691
67.031
67.371
67.711
68.051
6B.331
6«.731
69.073
6Q.113
69.753
70.093
70.133
70.773
71.113
71.152
71.792
72.132
72.172
72.812
73.152
7X.191
73.831
74.171
71.511
71.051
75.191
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.0?0
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.021
0.021
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.021
0.021
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.0?5
0.025
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.027
0.027
0.028
0.029
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0 . 0 3 0
0.030
0.030
0.030
o.nso
0.031
0.032
0.032
0.013
0.033
0.033
0.031
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.036
0.057
0.038
56.202
56.512
56.881
57.221
57.561
57.901
58.2.11
58.581
58.920
59.260
59.600
59.910
60.230
60.620
60.960
61.299
51.639
61.979
52.319
62.659
62.999
63.339
63.678
51.018
61.358
61.698
65.038
65.378
65.717
66.057
66.397
66.737
67.077
67.117
67.757
68.096
68.136
68.776
69.116
69.156
69.796
70.135
70.175
70.815
71.155
71.195
71.835
72.175
72.511
72.851
73.191
73.531
73.871
71.211
71.553
714.893
75.233
0.0?0
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.021
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.021
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.027
0.027
0.028
0.028
0.029
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.0 JO
0.031
0.032
0.032
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.031
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.036
0.037
0.038
55.211
56.581
56.921
57.251
57.501
57.9i»3
58.293
58.523
58.963
59.303
59.613
59.933
60.322
50."io2
61.002
51.312
51.532
52.022
52.361
52.701
63.011
53.331
63.721
51.061
51.101
51.710
55.080
55.120
55.760
56.100
66.110
56.779
57.119
57.159
57.799
68.139
68.179
58.319
69.158
59.19ft
59.833
70.178
70.518
70.358
71.197
71.537
71.377
72.217
72.557
72.397
73.237
73.576
73.916
71.256
71.596
71.936
75.276
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.021
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.021
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.027
0.027
0.028
0.028
0.029
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.031
0.032
0.032
0.033
0.033
0.031
0.031
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.036
0.037
0.038
56.287
56.627
56.966
57.306
57.616
57.986
58.326
58.666
59.005
59.315
59.685
60.025
60.355
60.705
61.015
61.331
61.721
62.061
62.101
62.711
53.081
63.123
63.763
61.103
61.113
61.783
65.123
65.163
65.802
66.112
66.182
66.82.2
67.162
67.502
67.811
68.181
68.521
68.851
59.201
69.511
69.881
70.220
70.560
70.900
71.210
71.580
71.920
72.259
72.599
72.939
73.279
73.619
73.959
71.299
71.638
74.978
75.318
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.021
0.021
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.0?3
0.023
0.023
0.021
0.021
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.027
0.027
0.028
0.028
0.029
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.031
0.032
0.032
0.033
0.033
0.031
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.036
0.036
0.037
0.038
56.329
56.669
57.009
57.319
57.689
58.028
58.368
58.708
59.018
59.38B
59.728
60.067
60.107
60.717
61.087
51.127
61.767
62.107
62.116
62.786
63.126
63.166
63.806
61. H&
61.185
61.825
55.165
65.505
65.815
66.185
66.525
66.861*
67.201
67.511
67.8BI*
68.221
68.561
68.901
69.213
59.583
69.923
70.263
70.603
70. 943
71.282
71.522
71.962
72.3U2
72.612
72.982
73.322
73.661
71.001
71.311
71.681
75.021
75.361
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.021
0.021
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.021
0.021
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.027
0.027
0.023
0.023
0.029
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.031
0.032
0.032
0.03J
0.033
0.031
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.036
0.036
0.037
0.038
56.372
56.7ii
57.051
57.391
57.731
58.071
58.111
53.751
59.090
59.130
59.770
60.110
&0.150
60.790
61.129
61.169
51.309
62.119
62.189
62.829
63.169
63.508
63.818
61.133
61.528
51.863
55.203
65.518
65.387
65.227
66.557
66.907
67.217
67.587
67.926
68.266
68.605
58.916
69.286
69.626
69.966
70.305
70.615
70.985
71.325
71.665
72.005
72.311
72.581
73.021
73.361
73.701
71.014
74.381
71.723
75.063
75.403
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.021
0.021
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.321
0.021
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.027
0.027
0.028
0.028
0.029
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.031
0.032
0.032
0.032
3.033
0.033
0.031
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.036
0.036
0.037
0.038
56.114
56.75'+
57.094
57.434
57.774
58.115
58.453
58.793
59.133
59.473
59.313
60.152
60.492
60.332
61.172
61.512
51.352
62.192
62.531
62.371
63.211
63.551
63.391
64.231
61.573
61.910
65.253
65.590
65.933
66.273
66.510
66.919
67.239
67.629
67.969
68.309
68.619
68.983
69. 32<*
69.563
70.003
70.313
70.683
71.023
71.357
71.707
72.047
72.387
72.727
73.067
73.405
73.745
74.085
74.425
74.765
75.105
75.445
-------
m
i
— j
OO
0.038
0.040
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
o.oio
0.010
0.012
0.013
0.011
0.015
0.015
o.ois
P. 016
0.017
0.019
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.052
n.053
0.051
0.055
0.055
0.056
0.058
0.060
C.050
o.oso
o.oso
O.OS1
0.053
O.CS5
O.OS7
O.C70
O.C70
0.071
0.073
0.076
0.077
0.080
0.080
0.035
0.088
0.090
0.092
0.095
0.100
0.100
0.106
0.110
0.120
0.120
75.i3n
75.92P
76.16«
76.50B
76.917
77.187
77.527
77.967
73.?07
73.517
79.987
79.226
70. -166
79.906
"0.2.16
30.586
9n.92S
91.265
31.605
91.915
92.P85
P2.625
S2.965
93.305
93.61U
S3.98U
91.321
91.66"
95.001
95.311
35.683
S6.n23
86.363
96.703
97.013
67.383
97.723
98.T62
99.102
08.71*2
89.082
P9.122
99.76?
90.101
90.111
93.711
91.121
91.U61
91.301
92.1i*l
92.HBO
92.320
93.160
9J.500
93.910
91.180
9"*. 519
0.038
n.oi5
0.0«5
0.015
n.ni6
n.018
0.01*9
O.OSO
n.oso
O.P50
0.050
O.T51
0.05?
n.053
0.051
0.055
0.055
n.fi56
0.059
0.060
n.06o
O.ne.0
0.060
0.06?
o.osi
0.065
0.067
0.070
0.070
0.071
0.07U
0.076
O.OflO
O.OBO
O.OS2
0.08".
0.08B
0.090
0.092
0.095
0.100
0.100
0.106
0.110
0.120
0.120
75.551
75.070
76.210
76.550
76.390
77.230
77.570
77.909
79.219
73.539
7«.929
79.269
79.609
79.9i»9
80.238
30.628
Bn.958
81.303
Sl.6'48
81.938
82.327
92.657
83.007
83.3I*7
83.637
91.027
91.357
«i*. 706
95.046
85.336
8s. 725
96.066
86.1*05
96.715
87.035
87.1*25
97.765
83.105
99.115
69.795
69.121*
99.151
89.80"*
9o.ui
90.<*3<»
90. 821*
°1.153
91.503
91. 8*3
92.133
92.523
92.B53
93.203
93.512
93.892
9i*. 222
9i*. 562
0.039
o.0i»o
0.010
o.ono
O.OUO
0.0'*0
0.01*0
0.01*0
0.01*1
0.0'42
O.Oi*1*
O.OH5
0.01*5
0.01*5
O.OU5
0.0i*6
0.01*8
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.0^0
0.050
0.051
0.052
0.053
0.051*
0.055
0.055
0.056
0.060
O.OSO
0.060
0.050
O.OSO
O.OS2
O.OS5
0.065
0.067
0.070
0.070
0.072
0.07<»
0.076
0.030
0.090
0.032
O.P35
0.090
0.090
0.092
0.095
0.100
0.105
0.106
0.112
0.120
0.120
75.573
75.913
76.253
76.593
76.932
77.272
77.612
77.952
78.292
78.632
73.371
79.311
79.651
79.991
80.331
80.671
81.011
81.350
81.690
82.030
82.370
82.710
63.050
83.389
83.729
Si*. 059
B
-------
m
i
^j
to
0.123
n.i30
0.130
0.136
0.140
0.155
0.165
0.130
0.195
0.210
0.230
0.270
0.302
11.350
0.480
0.675
94.859
95.199
95.539
95.R79
96.P10
96.559
96.e9ft
97.?31
97.S7P
97.91fl
98.P58
93.59ft
98.937
99.?77
99.617
99.957
0.125
0.130
0.130
n.137
0.1<40
n.iss
0.167
o.iao
0.200
0.210
0.233
0.270
0.320
0.390
n.sos
0.760
94.902
95.?42
95.532
95.921
95.261
96.601
96.9i»l
97.231
97.621
97.950
9B.300
98.640
93.930
99.320
99.660
100.000
0.125
0.150
0.1JO
0.138
0.140
0.160
0.157
0.193
o.2no
0.213
0.235
0.270
0.325
0.390
0.520
94.944
95.234
95.624
95.96"*
96.304
96.644
96.933
97.323
97.663
98.003
93.31*3
98.683
99.022
99.362
99.702
0.125
0.130
0.130
0.138
0.11*2
0.150
0.170
0.190
0.200
0.216
0.21*0
0.272
0.330
0.412
0.530
?i*. 937
95.327
95.S66
96.006
96.31*6
96.586
97.026
97.365
97.706
93.045
93.335
98.725
99.065
99.1*05
99.71*5
0.126
0.130
0.133
0.140
0.1<*6
0.160
0.170
0.190
0.200
0.216
0.2i*0
0.275
0.3m
0.416
0.640
95.029
95.369
95.709
96. 049
96.389
96.728
97.068
97.1*08
97.748
98.088
98.428
98.768
99.107
99.447
99.787
0.126
0.130
0.135
0.140
0.147
0.160
0.170
0.190
0.200
0.220
0.260
0.276
0.345
0.420
0.650
95.072
95.412
95.751
96.091
96.431
96.771
97.111
97.451
97.791
98.130
98.470
98.810
99.150
99.490
99.830
0.127
0.1JO
0.135
0.140
0.150
0.160
0.172
0.190
0.200
0.223
0.2S5
0.230
0.350
0.420
0.650
95.114
95.454
95.794
96.134
96.474
96.813
97.153
97.493
97.833
98.173
98.513
98.853
99.192
99.532
99.872
0.123
0.130
0.136
0.140
0.154
0.163
0.176
0.191
0.201
0.230
0.266
0.290
0.350
0.475
0.655
95.157
95.497
95.83S
96.175
96.515
96.855
97.195
97.535
97.375
98.215
98.555
98.895
99.235
99.575
99.915
-------
00
o
0.760
0.744
0.729
0.714
0.699
0.634
0.669
0.653
0.638
0.623
0.603
0.592
0.577
0.562
0.547
0.532
0.516
0.501
C.496
0.471
0.456
0.425
0.410
0.39">
0.380
0.364
0.349
0.334
C.319
0.304
0.288
0.273
0.25S
0.243
0.228
0.212
0.197
0.1R2
0.167
C.152
0.136
0.121
0.106
0.091
0.076
O.U60
0.045
0.030
0.015
0.000
(••••I»««»I»
llt*«*l»«»*l*«««l*«««l»*«»l«»««l»**«l«««*l»*l
»I*««*I***«I««**I»*«*I»**«***«*I
• I
*I
• I
*I
*I
*I
**
•
*
**
*
*
I **********
I******
**
*
*
**
*•
**
**
***
****
*****
**********
****************
it***************************************
.1.
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
INTENSITY
40.00 SO.00 60.00 70.00
VS PERCENT LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
60.00
90.00
100.00
-------
RETURN PERIOD (IN YEARS) FOR INTENSITY
VALUE
0.760
0.503
0.390
0.320
0.270
0.233
0.210
0.200
0.1BU
0.167
0.155
0.110
0.137
0.13U
0.130
0.125
0.12U
0.120
0.110
0.106
0.100
0.100
0.095
0.092
0.090
0. 088
0.035
0.082
0.030
0.03U
0.076
0.071
0.071
0.070
0.07U
0.067
0.065
0.061
0.062
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.06U
0.059
0.056
0.055
0.055
0.051
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.050
PERIOD
26.000
2.838
1.529
1.010
0.787
O.f.31
0.530
0.156
0.100
0.356
O.?20
0.29?
O.P68
O.?17
0.230
0. ?11
O.P01
0.189
0.179
0.569
0.161
0.153
O.H6
0.110
0.131
0.129
0.121
0.119
0.115
0.111
0.107
0.101
0.101
0.098
0.095
0.092
0.089
0.037
0.085
0.083
0.080
0.079
0.177
0.075
0.073
0.072
0.070
0.06A
0.067
0.066
O.C61
0.063
0.062
VALUE
0.675
0.1BO
0.350
0.302
O.?70
0.230
0.210
0.195
O.lflO
0.165
0.155
0.110
n.lSf,
(1.130
0.130
0.123
0.120
0.120
0.110
0.106
0.100
0.100
0.095
0.092
0.090
n.OBR
0.0?5
0.030
O.OBO
0.077
0.076
0.073
1.071
0.070
0.070
0.067
0.065
0.063
0.061
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.05B
0.056
0.055
0.055
(1.051
0.053
0.052
0.050
0.050
0.050
PERIOD
13.000
2.600.
1.111
1.000
0.751
0.619
0.520
0.110
0.393
0.351
0.317
0.238
0.255
0.215
0.228
0.213
0.900
0.1BB
0.178
0.163
0.150
0.152
0.116
0.139
0.131
0.128
0.123
0.119
0.115
O.IU
0.137
0.101
0.100
0.097
0.091
0.092
0.039
0.037
0.081
0.032
0.090
0.078
0.076
0.075
0.073
0.071
0.070
0.058
0.067
0.055
0.051
0.053
0.052
VALUE
0.655
0.175
0.350
0.290
0.266
0.230
0.201
0.191
0.176
0.153
0.151
0.110
0.136
0.130
0.1?3
0.1?3
0.120
0.118
0.110
0.136
0.100
0.097
0.095
0.091
0.090
0.097
0.081
0.080
o.oao
0.077
0.075
0.073
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.057
0.055
0.053
0.061
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.050
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.055
0.051
0.053
0.052
0.050
0.050
0.050
PERIOD
8.666
2.363
1.36B
0.962
0.712
0.601
0.509
0.110
0.388
0.316
0.313
0.285
0.262
0.212
0.226
0.211
0.198
0.187
0.176
0.167
0.159
0.152
0.115
0.139
0.133
0.128
0.123
0.118
0.111
0.110
0.106
0.103
0.100
0.097
0.091
0.091
0.089
0.086
0.081
0.082
0.080
0.078
0.076
0.071
0.073
0.071
0.070
0.068
0.067
0.065
0.061
0.063
0.062
VALJE
0.650
0.120
0.350
0.280
0.255
0.??B
0.200
0.190
0.172
0.150
0.150
0.110
0.135
0.130
0.127
0.123
0.120
0.115
0.110
0.105
0.100
0.097
0.095
0.090
0.090
0.087
0.081
0.030
O.OBO
0.077
0.075
0.073
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.057
0.055
0.063
0.051
0.050
0.050
0.060
0.060
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.051
0.051
0.053
0.052
0.050
0.050
0.050
PERIOD
6.500
2.166
1.300
0.928
0.722
0.590
0.500
0.133
0.382
0.312
0.309
0.232
0.260
0.210
0.221
0.209
0.196
0.195
0.175
0.165
0.158
0.151
0.111
0.133
0.132
0.127
0.122
0.118
0.111
0.110
0.106
0.103
0.100
0.097
0.091
0.091
0.089
0.385
0.081
0.082
0.080
0.078
0.076
0.071
0.073
0.071
0.069
0.068
0.067
0.065
0.061
0.063
0.061
VALUE
0.650
0.120
0.315
0.276
0.260
0.220
0.200
0.190
0.170
0.160
0.117
0.110
0.135
0.130
0.12.5
0.120
0.120
0.115
0.110
0.105
0.100
0.096
0.095
0.090
0.090
O.OB6
0.083
0.080
0.080
0.077
0.075
0.073
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.066
0.065
0.063
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.056
0.056
0.355
0.051
0.053
0.053
0.051
0.050
0.050
0.050
PERIOD
5.200
2.000
1.238
0.896
0.702
0.577
0.190
0.126
0.376
0.337
0.305
0.279
0.257
0.238
0.222
0.208
0.195
0.181
0.171
0.155
0.157
0.150
0.113
0.137
0.131
0.126
0.122
0.117
0.113
0.109
0.106
0.102
0.099
0.096
0.093
0.091
0.098
0.036
0.091
O.OB2
0.080
0.078
0.076
0.071
0.072
0.071
0.069
0.068
0.066
0.065
0.061
0.062
0.061
VALUE
0.610
0.116
0.311
0.275
0.210
0.216
0.200
0.190
0.170
0.160
0.116
0.110
0.133
0.130
0.126
0.120
0.120
0.111
0.110
0.105
0.100
0.096
0.095
0.090
0.090
0.095
0.083
0.090
0.090
0.076
0.075
0.073
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.066
0.065
0.053
0.060
0.060
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.056
0.056
0.055
0.051
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.050
0.050
PERIOD
1.333
1.857
1.181
0.866
0.681
0.555
0.181
0.119
0.371
0.333
0.302
0.276
0.251
0.236
0.220
0.206
0.191
0.183
0.173
0.161
0.155
O.H9
O.H2
0.136
0.131
0.126
0.121
0.117
0.113
0.109
0.105
0.102
0.099
0.096
0.093
0.090
0.088
0.086
0.083
0.081
0.079
0.077
0.076
0.07<»
0.072
0.0?1
0.069
0.068
0.066
0.0&5
0.0&1
0.062
0.061
VALUE
0.530
0.112
0.330
0.272
0.210
0.216
0.200
0.190
0.170
0.160
0.112
0.133
0.130
0.130
0.125
0.120
0.120
0.112
0.107
0.105
0.100
0.095
0.091
0.090
0.090
0.035
0.082
0.080
0.330
0.076
0.071
0.072
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.055
0.055
0.352
0.060
0.063
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.056
0.056
0.355
0.051
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.050
0.050
PERIOD
3.7H
1.733
1.130
0.838
0.666
0.553
0.172
0.112
0.366
0.329
0.298
0.273
0.252
0.231
0.218
0.201
0.192
0.181
0.172
0.163
0.155
0.118
0.112
0.136
0.130
0.125
0.120
0.116
0.112
0.103
0.105
0.101
0.093
0.095
0.093
0.090
0.083
0.085
0.083
0.081
0.079
0.077
0.075
0.071
0.072
0.070
0.069
0.067
0.066
0.065
0.063
0.062
0.061
VALUE
0.520
0.390
0.325
0.270
0.235
0.213
0.200
0.183
0.167
0.160
0.110
0.138
0.130
0.130
0.125
0.120
0.120
0.112
0.106
0.105
0.100
0.095
0.092
0.090
0.090
0.085
0.082
0.080
0.030
0.076
0.071
0.072
-0.070
0.070
0.067
0.065
0.065
0.052
0.060
0.050
0.060
0.060
0.063
0.056
0.055
0.055
0.051
0.053
0.052
0.051
0,050
0.050
0.050
PERIOD
3.250
1.625
1.083
0.312
0.650
0.511
0.161
0.105
0.351
0.325
0.295
0.273
0.253
0.23?
0.215
0.203
0.191
0.180
0.171
0.162
0.151
O.H7
0.111
0.135
0.130
0.125
0.120
0.115
0.112
0.103
0.101
0.101
0.099
0.095
0.09?
0.090
0.087
O.C85
0.083
0.091
0.073
0.077
0.075
0.073
0.072
0.073
0.069
0.067
0.065
0.065
0.063
0.062
0.061
-------
00
ts)
0.050
0.050
0.049
0.048
0.016
0.045
p.015
0.015
0.014
0.044
0.042
0.011
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.040
o.o4o
o.oio
o.oio
0.038
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.031
0.033
0.033
0.033
O.C32
0.032
n.o3i
0.030
0.030
0.030
n.030
0.030
0.030
n.oso
0.030
0.030
0.03U
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.028
0.028
O.C27
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
n.026
0.025
P. 025
0.025
0.061
O.n60
0.05P
0.057
O.r56
0.05s
o.pSii
0.054
0.053
0.05?
0.051
o.p5o
0.019
O.P49
O.PIfi
0.047
0.047
0."46
0.045
o.o45
O.P44
o . n 4 5
O.P43
0.04?
D.o4?
0.041
o.n4i
O.P40
o.oio
O.P39
0.039
o.p3*
O.P3P
0.037
0.037
0.036
fl.nJf,
0.036
0.035
0.135
O.P3u
0.034
O.T34
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
o.n3?
0.03?
0.031
0.031
0.031
o.nso
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.050
n.OsO
n.049
0.047
0.046
0.045
0.045
0.045
0.044
0.013
n.fll?
0.010
9.040
0.040
0.110
0.040
0.010
0.010
0.040
0.03P
0.037
n.036
0.03S
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.03*
0.033
0.03?
0.03?
0.03?
0.031
n.030
O.P30
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
n.njo
P. "30
P. 030
P. 030
0.030
P. 030
1.0?9
0.028
P. 02?
P.OP7
P. 027
0.026
0.026
0.0?6
0.0?5
0.02*
0.025
0.025
0.051
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
P. 055
0.054
0.053
0.053
0.052
P. 051
0.050
0.019
O.P19
0.018
0.017
0.016
0.016
P.P45
P . 0 1 1
P. OH
o . n 1 3
0.013
o.o42
0.012
o.o4i
n.pii
0.010
o.oio
0.039
0.039
O.P3B
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.036
0.035
P. 035
P.P31
O.P31
0.031
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.050
O.OsO
0.0'49
0.-047
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.011
0.013
0.012
0 . P 1 0
0.010
0.040
0.040
0 . 0 '4 0
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.038
0.077
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.0*2
o.on
O.OJO
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
O.P30
0.0?9
0.023
0.0?8
0.0?7
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.0?6
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.0?5
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.051
0.053
0.052
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.019
0.018
0.04P
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.011
0.011
0.013
0.013
0.042
0.04.'
0.011
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.038
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.031
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.029
0.050
0.050
0.018
0.017
0.016
0.045
0.015
0.045
0.044
0.043
0.012
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.010
0.040
0.040
0.010
0.038
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.031
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.031
O.D30
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.025
0.0?6
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.054
0.053
0.052
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.049
0.04R
0.048
0.047
0.046
0.046
0.045
0.044
0.044
0.043
0.043
0.012
0.011
O.DH
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.038
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.029
0.050
0.050
0.04R
0.047
0.046
0.045
0.045
0.045
0.04i»
0.043
0.042
0.04Q
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.038
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.054
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.051
0.050
0.049
0.048
0.048
0.047
0.046
0.046
0.045
0.044
0.044
0.043
0.042
0.042
0.041
0.041
0.040
0.010
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.0?9
0.029
0.050
0.05"
0.048
0.047
0.015
0.015
0.045
0.045
0.044
0.042
0.042
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.038
0.037
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.028
0.02B
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.054
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.050
0.049
0.048
0.047
0.047
0.046
0.045
0.045
0.044
0.044
0.043
0.042
0.042
0.041
o.oii
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.039
0.037
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.03?
0.032
0.032
0.031
O.Oil
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.0^0
0.029
0.029
0.050
0.050
0.043
0.047
0.045
0.045
0.045
0.045
0.044
0.042
0.041
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.043
0.039
0.033
0.037
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.033
0.0?0
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.023
0.023
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.054
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.050
0.049
0.048
0.047
0.047
0.046
0.045
0.045
0.044
0.043
0.043
0.042
0.042
0.041
0.041
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.039
0.033
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.031
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.029
0.050
0.050
0.018
0.045
0.045
0.045
0.045
0.045
0.044
0.042
0.011
0.010
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.038
0.037
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
O.C32
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.060
0.059
0.053
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.054
0.05J
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.053
0.049
0.043
0.047
0.017
O.Oli
0.045
0.045
0.04*
0.043
0.043
0.042
0.04?
0.041
o.on
0.043
0.04D
0.039
0.03?
0.03S
0.033
0.037
0.037
0.038
0.03S
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.03?
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.033
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.029
-------
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.021
0.02"*
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.02C
0.020
0.02U
0.02U
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.02Q
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.02i)
m 0-020
, 0.020
00 0.020
w 0.020
0.020
O.C20
0.020
n.o2o
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.018
0.018
0.013
0.017
0.017
O.C16
o.oi&
0.016
0.015
P. 015
0.015
0.015
0.015
O.C15
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.029
O.n?9
0.028
O.n?8
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.127
0.027
0.127
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
O.n2«i
0.025
O.n«!5
O.C25
O.T25
0.021
0.02"*
0.021
0.021
O.P21
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
O.P?2
O.n?2
O.P22
0.02?
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
o".P21
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.P20
0.020
0.020
0.119
O.nl9
o.nl9
o.ni9
0.0?5
0.0??
o.n??
P.0?1
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.0?3
P. 02?
0.0??
0.0?2
0.021
0.021
0.020
P.0?0
o.n?o
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
P. 020
P.0?0
0.020
0.020
0.0?0
0.020
0.020
0.020
n.o?.o
P.0?0
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
o.n?o
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
P. 01?
p . 0 1 8
P. 017
0.017
P. 017
O.dlfe
0.016
n.ni6
0.015
0.01?
e.o.15
p.oi1;
0.015
0.015
0.01«
n.ni'i
n.ois
P.0?9
0.029
0.028
0.029
0.028
0.029
0.027
0.027
P.P?7
0.0?7
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.0?6
O.P25
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
O.P?1*
O.O?1*
o.o?t
0.024
0.021
0.021
O.n23
O.n23
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
O.n22
O.P22
O.P22
0.022
0.922
0.0?1
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.0?1
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.P20
0.020
0.020
O.n20
0.020
0.019
P.P19
O.pl9
0.019
0.0?5
0.025
0.025
0.0?1
0.024
0.0?3
0.023
0.0?3
P.P22
0.022
0.022
0.0?1
0.021
0.020
O.P?0
0.0?0
0.0?0
0.0?0
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.0?0
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
o.opo
0.020
O.H20
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
o.nis
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.029
0.029
0.02S
0.028
0.028
0.026
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.02?
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.0?5
0.025
0.025
0.021
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.023
O.P22
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
O.O'O
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.P20
O.P20
0.0?0
O.P20
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.018
0.1)18
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
O.f)15
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.029
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.023
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.320
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.021
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.01R
0.019
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.029
0.0?9
0.028
0.02.8
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.0?7
0.02.6
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.025
0.0?5
0.025
0.021*
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
o.n?o
0.020
0.020
O.P20
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.320
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.013
o.oia
0.013
0.017
o.ni7
0.016 .
O.C16
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.0?7
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.025
0.025
0.024
0.021
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.U20
0.020
0.020
0.018
0.01S
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.029
0.029
0.029
0.029
0.023
0.023
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.025
0.02S
0.025
0.02S
0.02S
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.021
0.02'4
0.024
0.021
0.02*
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.02?
0.02?
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
-------
O.om
o.oi<*
n.om
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
O.C12
(1.012
n.oi2
0.011
o.oii
0.011
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.C10
0.010
0.010
o.oio
n.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
*? 0.01U
00 0.010
*"• 0.010
P. 010
n.oio
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.01U
0.010
0.010
n.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
n.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.013
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.019
0.019
o.ni9
0.019
0.018
0.01?
O.OIB
o.oie
o.pm
o.nm
O.Plfl
n.nifl
O.PlS
0.018
o.ni7
0.017
O.P17
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
O.C17
0.017
0.017
0.017
O.P16
O.C16
0.0 If,
0.016
O.T16
0.016
O.Plf
0.016
0.016
O.C16
0.016
O.P16
O.P15
0.015
0.015
O.nl5
O.P15
O.P15
0.015
O.P15
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
o.om
O.Oltt
0.01"*
o.om
0.014
O.om
o.om
o.om
n.nm
O.Oli*
0.013
0.013
n.oi3
0.013
0.012
O.P12
0.012
0.012
n.ni2
0.011
P. Oil
n.nn
n.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
n.oio
0.010
P. 010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
n.oio
0.010
n.oin
o.nio
0.010
P. 010
o.oin
o.nio
P. 010
0.010
n.oio
n.oio
O.PIO
n.oio
0.010
n.oio
n.oin
0.010
n.nio
0.010
n.oin
0.010
0.010
n.oio
n.oio
0.010
n.oio
0.010
n.oio
0.010
P. 010
n.nio
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.018
n.ois
o.niB
0.016
0.018
0.018
n.ois
n.nie
0.018
0.018
n.niT
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
n.ni7
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
n.oi6
n.ni6
O.P16
P. 015
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
O.nl6
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
n.pis
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.0l<»
0.0l<»
o.oi«»
n.nm
o.om
o.om
o.nm
O.om
o.nii*
O.Ol1*
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
o.nin
0.010
0.010
0.010
n.oio
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
. o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
o.cuo
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.01B
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
O.Olfl
0.018
0.018
o.oia
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
o.ni6
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
O.OU
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
0.011
o.om
o.om
o.om
0.011*
0.013
0.013
O.P13
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
o.nio
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.013
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
o.oie
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
o.om
o.om
o.om
0.01"*
o.om
o.om
o.om
O.Ol1*
0.0l<*
o.nis
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
o.ni2
O.OU
0.011
O.OU
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.01*
o.ois
O.OlB
0.01B
0.018
O.OlB
0.018
0.018
o.oie
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
O.Olfi
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
o.oie
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
O.om
o.om
O.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
0.0l<*
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.C10
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0,010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.013
0.010
0.010
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
O.Olfl
0.018
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
O.Olt
o.om
o.om
O.Olt
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
0.0l<*
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
O.OU
o.nio
o.oio
0.010
o.nio
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
o.nio
o.oio
o.oio
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.019
0.013
0.019
0.019
O.OlB
0.016
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
O.OIS
O.OIS
O.OU
O.OIS
O.OIS
O.OIS
0.016
O.OIS
0.015
O.OIS
O.OIS
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.01«i
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.01*
O.OU
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
-------
m
i
oo
on
0.010
0.01U
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
n.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
n.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.01U
0.010
0.010
n.oio
o.oiu
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.P10
n.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.009
o.ooa
0.008
0.008
0.008
o.riu
o.nm
0.014
o.nm
O.olii
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.015
0.013
n.oi3
0.013
o.nn
0.013
O.C13
0.013
o . r, 1 3
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
O.Ol?
0.012
0.012
o.oi?.
0.012
0.01?
0.012
0.01?
o.nifc
o.ni2
0.012
0.012
0.01?
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
O."12
0.01?
0.011
0.011
o.oii
o.on
O.oll
0.011
0.011
O.oll
0.011
o.nii
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010 .
o . n i o
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
n.010
0.01C
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
P. 010
0.010
n.oio
0.010
0.010
n.oio
o.nio
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
n.nio
0.010
0.009
n.ooa
n.oo*
n.oofl
0.007
O.Ol1*
0.014
O.Ol1*
n.ni4
0.014
O.Ol1*
O.P14
O.Ol1*
n.nis
0.013
9.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
n.ni2
n.ni2
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
O.?12
O.nl2
o.ni2
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
o.ou
0.011
O.Oll
O.Oll
o.nii
0.011
n.oii
o.nii
0.011
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
n.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.009
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.007
0.014
0.0l<*
0.01<»
o.ni<*
O.Ol1*
O.Ol1*
0.014
O.Ol1*
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
O.Oll
0.011
0.011
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
o.nio
o.nio
0.010
0.010
o.nio
o.nio
0.010
0,010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.910
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.ooa
0.008
0.008
o.oon
0.007
o.ou
O.Oll*
O.Ol1*
0.01
-------
m
i
00
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.006
O.CO&
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.005
0.005
0.005
O.OO1*
O.Oll
o.nii
0.011
O.CH
O.nll
O.nll
n.nii
O.nll
o.nii
o.nii
o.nii
O.Pll
O.PH
o.nii
0.007
P. 107
P. 007
0.007
0.005
n.nof,
p.nofi
n.006
0.006
0.006
,p.no5
0.00?
0.005
o.ooi
O.Oll
n.nii
n.nii
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
n.nii
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.OP7
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.006
0.006
0.00&
0.00&
0.006
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.011
O.OU
0.011
0.011
0.011
O.Oll
O.Oll
0.011
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
0.011
O.Oll
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.006
o.no&
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.005
o.nos
0.005
0.011
O.OU
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.311
0.007
0.00?
0.007
0.007
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.036
0.006
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.011
0.011
o.nii
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
O.CO&
o.no6
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.005
0.035
0.005
O.OU
0.011
O.OU
O.OU
O.OU
O.OU
O.OU
O.OU
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.OU
O.Oll
O.Oll
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.006
O.OC6
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.005
0.005
0.035
0.011
O.OU
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.011
O.Oll
0.011
0.011
0.011
O.Olt
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
-------
m
i
00
0.760
0.744
0.7?9
0.7m
0.&99
0.6<*4
0.663
0.653
0.63S
0.623
0.604
0.592
0.577
U.56?
0.547
0.532
0.516
0.501
0.436
0.1471
0.456
0.440
0.425
0.410
0.395
O.JflO
0.364
0.349
0.334
0.319
0.301
0.283
0.273
0.258
0.243
0.228
0.212
0.197
0.182
0.167
0.152
0.136
0.121
0.106
0.091
0.076
O.U60
0.045
0.030
0.015
0.000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I *
I * * *
T *
I
I
I
I
I
I
I *
I *
I *
I *
I *
I
I
I *
I *
I *
I
I
I **
I **
I *
I *
I *
I »«
I «
I *
I **
I »
I *•
I *
I
I
I
I
I
I*
I«
I*
I*
I«
I*
r«
0.00 2.60 5.20 7.80 10.40 13.00 15.60
INTENSITY VS RETURN PERIOD IN YEARS
• I
I
I
I
I
I
18.20 20.80 23.40 26.0
-------
PROBABILITY ANALYSIS-VOLUME
PERCENTAGE OF OCCURRENCE LESS THAN OR E3UAL TO THE GIVEN VALUE OF VOLUME
VALUE
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.C10
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
tn o.oio
M °-010
00 0.010
0.010
O.Old
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.Oll)
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
"CT
o.n4;>
0.382
0.722
l.n&?
l.uoi
1.741
?.nsi
2.421
2.761
3.101
3.440
3.780
4.120
4.U60
4. BOO
5.140
5. 490
5.910
ft .159
6.<»99
6.039
7.179
7.519
7.958
P. 198
B.539
8.P79
9.21fl
9.559
9.S98
10.237
10.577
10.917
11.P57
11.597
11.937
12.P76
12. 616
12.956
13.296
13.636
13.976
14.316
14.655
14.995
15.335
15.675
16.015
16.355
16.69<*
17.034
VALUE
n.nio
o.nio
o.nio
P. 010
o.nio
0.010
n.nio
o.nio
0.010
n.nio
o.nio
0.010
0.010
o.nio
n.nio
0.010
o.nio
n.oio
n.nio
n.nin
P. 010
0.010
n.Pin
P. 010
0.010
o.nio
n.nin
p.nio
o.oin
0.010
n.nin
o.nin
n.nin
0.010
0.010
p.nio
n.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
n.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
P:T
n.n94
n.424
0.7&t
1.104
1.444
1.734
2.124
2.453
2.903
3. 1*3
3.493
3.923
4.153
4.S02
4.942
5.132
5.522
5.962
6.202
6.5'42
6.931
7.J21
7.561
7.901
a.?*!
B.531
9.920
9.250
9.600
9.940
10.?90
10.620
in. 950
11.299
11.639
11.979
12.319
12.659
12.999
13.338
13.678
in.nis
1'4.358
li*.698
!5.(l3B
15.378
15.717
16.057
16.397
16.737
17.077
VALUE
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
o.nio
0.010
0.010
o.mo
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
PCT
0.127
0.457
0.807
1.116
1.486
1.826
2.166
2.506
2. 646
3.186
3.525
3.365
4.205
4.545
4. 985
5.225
5.564
5.904
6.244
6.584
6.324
7.264
7.604
7.943
8.283
8.623
8.963
9.303
9.643
9.983
10.332
10.662
11.002
11.342
11.682
12.022
12.361
12.701
13.041
13.381
13.721
14.061
14.401
14.740
15.080
15.420
15.760
16.100
16.440
16.779
17.119
VALUE
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
o.nio
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
o.nio
o.nio
0.010
0.010
o.nin
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.P10
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
PCT
0.169
0.509
0.849
1.139
1.529
1.359
2.209
2.548
2.388
3.22B
3.558
3.908
4.243
4.5B7
4.927
5.267
5.507
5.9'47
6.287
6.527
6.966
7.306
7.646
7.986
8.326
8.666
9.005
9.345
9.535
10.025
10.JS5
10.705
11.045
11.334
11.724
12.054
12.404
12.744
13.034
13.423
13.753
14.103
14.443
14.793
15.123
15.'»63
15.302
16. 1*2
16.432
16.922
17.162
VALUE
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.D10
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.310
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.310
0.010
0.010
0.010
PCT
0.212
0.552
0.892
1.231
1.571
1.911
2.251
2.591
2.931
3.271
3.61Q
3.950
4.290
4.630
4.97C
5.310
5.649
5. 989
6.329
6.669
7.009
7.349
7.689
8.028
8.368
8.708
9.048
9.388
9.728
10.067
ID.^07
10.747
11.037
11.427
11.767
12.107
12.446
12.796
13.126
13.466
13.806
14.146
14.435
14.825
15.155
15.505
15.S45
16.185
16.525
16.664
17.801
VALUE
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.C10
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
PCT
0.254
0.594
0.934
1.274
1.614
1.954
2.293
2.633
2.97J
3.313
3.653
3.993
4.3i3
4.67J
5.012
5.352
5.692
6.032
6.372
6.711
7.051
7.391
7.751
8.071
8.411
8.751
9.090
9.430
9.77Q
10.110
10.U5Q
10.790
11.129
11.469
11.809
12. 119
12.489
12.629
13.169
13.508
13,848
14.188
14.528
14.868
15.208
15.548
15.887
16.227
16.567
16.907
17.2"*7
VALUE
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
3.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
PCT
0.297
0.637
0.977
1.316
1.656
1.996
2.336
2.676
3.016
3.355
3.695
1.035
4.375
4.715
5.055
5.395
5.73'i
6.074
&.tl<»
6.754
7.094
7.434
7.774
8.113
8.453
8.793
9.133
9.473
9.813
10.152
10.492
10.832
11.172
11.512
11.852
12.192
12.531
12.871
13.211
13.551
13.891
I1*. 231
11.570
14.910
15.250
15.590
15.930
16.270
16.610
16.949
17.289
VALUE
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0,010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0,010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
PCT
0.339
0.679
1.019
1.359
1.699
2.039
2.373
2.713
3.053
3.399
3.733
1.079
4.413
4.757
5.097
5 437
5.777
6.117
6.457
6.795
7.136
7.475
7.816
6.155
8.495
8. 935
9.175
9.515
9.855
10.195
10.535
10.875
11.214
11. 55*
H.89'4
12.23-4
12.574
12.914
13.254
13.593
13.933
14.273
14.613
14.953
15.293
15.632
15.972
16.312
16.652
16.992
17.332
-------
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.01U
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.C10
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
_ 0.020
71 0.020
00 0.020
<£> 0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.02U
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.030
17.371*
17.71i»
IB.OSi*
18.394
IP. 734
1".073
19. "13
19.753
20.093
?0.433
20.773
71.113
21.145?
?1.79?
22.132
22.1472
22.«12
23.15?
23.191
23.S31
?4.171
24.511
24.851
25.191
25.531
25.070
26,?10
2ft. 550
26. "90
27.P30
27.570
?7.90C)
29.M9
2R.=S9
28.929
29.?69
29.609
29.°49
JO.P8R
30.62R
30.96*
31.308
31.643
31.988
32.327
32.667
33.007
33.347
33.687
314.027
3!*.367
31.706
35.n16
35.386
35.726
36.066
36.406
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
n.oio
0.010
0.010
n.oio
n.oio
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
n.nio
0.110
1.020
n.n?o
n.nzn
0.020
o.r>2n
n.r>2o
0.020
0.020
0.020
o.n?o
0.020
o.n?.o
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
(1.020
0.020
0.020
o.n?o
0.0?0
o.n?o
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.0?0
0.020
o.n?o
0.020
n.02o
0.020
P. 020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
o.nso
17.1417
17.757
18.096
la. 135
la. 776
19.116
19.455
19.796
?.0.135
20.1475
20.815
21.155
21. 1495
2l.flS5
22.175
22.511
22.P51
?3.l9i»
23.5314
23.374
?4.?14
214.553
24.«93
25.?33
25.573
?5.ol3
?£,.?53
26.593
26.932
27.272
27.612
?7.952
28.292
28. 632
23.971
29.311
29.651
20.991
30.331
30.&71
31. nil
31.350
3l.f90
32.nSO
32.370
3?. 710
33.050
33.339
33.729
314.069
314.1409
314. 7*9
35.099
35.4J9
3?. 768
36.108
36. OB
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
C.nio
0.010
0.110
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.mo
0.010
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.ODO
0.020
0.020
o.n?o
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
o.n?o
o.n?o
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.320
0.020
0.020
O.O'O
0.020
0.020
o.n?o
0.020
0.020
0.0?0
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.1120
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.030
17.1459
17.799
18.139
18.i(79
13.819
19.158
19.1498
19.838
20.178
20.518
20.858
21.197
21.537
21.877
22.217
22.557
22.397
23.237
23.576
23.916
24.256
214.596
214.936
25.276
25.615
25.955
26.295
26.635
26.975
27.315
27.655
27.99<4
28.3314
28.6714
29. nl1*
29.3514
29.6914
30.033
30.373
30.713
31.053
31.393
31.733
32.073
32.1412
32.752
33.092
33.1432
33.772
34.112
31.1452
34.791
35.131
35.471
35.811
36.151
36.1*91
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0 ,. 0 1 0
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.110
0.020
o.n2n
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
o.o2n
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.030
0.030
17.502
17.8141
IS. 131
19.521
18.361
19.201
19.51*1
19.381
20.220
20.550
20.900
21.2140
21.580
21.920
22.259
22.599
22.939
23.279
23.619
23.959
2i*.299
24.538
214.978
25.318
25.558
25.998
26.338
26.677
27.017
27.357
27.697
2B.037
28.377
28.717
29.056
29.396
29.736
30.075
30.1416
30.756
31.096
31. 135
31.775
32.115
32.155
32.795
33.135
33.171
33.311
31.151
31.191
31.331
35.171
35.511
35.353
36.193
36.533
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.030
17.511
17.881
18.221
18.561
18.903
19.213
19.583
19.923
20.263
20.603
20.913
21.292
21.622
21.96?
22.302
22.512
22.932
23.322
23.661
21.001
21.311
21.681
25.021
25.361
25.700
26.010
26.380
26.720
27.060
27.100
27.710
28. 07*
28.119
28.759
29.099
29.139
29.779
30.118
30.158
30.798
31.138
31.178
31.818
32.158
32.197
32.837
33.177
33.517
33.857
31.197
31.536
31.876
35.216
35.556
35.896
56.236
36.576
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.030
0.030
17.587
17.926
18.266
18.606
18.916
19.286
19.626
19.966
20.305
20.615
20.985
21.325
21.665
22.005
22.311
22.681
23.021
23.361
23.701
21.011
24.331
24.723
25.063
25.103
25.713
26.083
26.123
26.75?
27.102
27.112
27.782
28.122
28.162
2B.802
29.111
29.181
29.821
30.161
30.501
30.811
31.180
31.520
31.860
32.200
32.540
32.88Q
33.220
33.5b9
33.899
31.239
31.579
34.919
35.259
35.598
35.938
36.276
36.618
0.010
0.010
0.310
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.320
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.030
0.030
17.629
17.959
18.309
18.649
18.983
19.328
19.568
20.008
20.348
20.683
21.023
21.367
21.707
22.047
22.387
22.727
23.067
23.106
23.745
24.086
21.426
24.765
25.106
25.446
25.735
26.125
26.465
26.805
27.115
27.185
27.821
28.164
28.504
28.844
29.184
29.524
29.864
30.203
30.543
30.883
31.223
31.563
31.903
32.242
32.532
32.922
33.262
33.602
33.912
31.282
31.621
31.961
35.301
35.641
35.981
36.321
36.661
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
3.010
0.020
0.020
O.C20
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0,020
0.020
0.023
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0,020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0,020
0.020
0.320
0,020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.030
0.030
17.672
18.011
18.351
18.691
19.D31
19.371
19.711
20.050
23.390
20.730
21.07fl
21.113
21.750
22.093
22.429
22.769
23.109
23.449
23.789
24.129
24.463
24.305
25.143
25.433
25.323
26.i6B
26.503
26.947
27.187
27.527
27.857
28.207
28.517
28.387
29.225
29.565
29.905
30.215
30.585
30.925
31.265
31.605
31.915
32.285
32.625
32.965
33.305
33.611*
33.98'4
31.32'4
34.664
35.004
35.344
35.683
36.323
36.363
36.703
-------
m
i
0.030
O.CMO
0.030
O.OJO
0.030
O.C30
0.030
C.OSo
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.03J
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.04U
O.G40
0.040
0.040
0.040
o,04a
0.040
0.040
0.0*0
n.oto
0.04C,
0.04J
0.040
o.o4o
0.040
0.050
O.P50
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
n.oso
O.C50
0.050
0.050
0.060
o.oso
o.oso
0.060
n.cso
O.CiO
o.osu
0.060
0.060
o.o&o
0.060
36.745
37.085
37.0JS
37.765
33.105
38.445
3P.735
39.12"*
39.M&4
39.«04
40.14U
40.484
40.924
"1.163
•U.503
41.P43
t2.l83
t2.523
'42.B&3
43.P03
43.54?
43. «B?
44.222
44.S&2
44.902
45.242
45.581
45.921
4f,.?&l
46.601
45.941
47.??!
47.621
47.9&0
48./500
48.640
1*9. 9SO
49.320
49,f6n
50.000
50.330
50.679
51.nl9
51.359
51. 599
52.039
52.378
5?. 718
S3.n58
?3.?98
S3. 738
54.P78
54.419
51*. 757
5?. 097
55.«37
53.777
0.030
0.030
0.03P
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
P. 030
0.130
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
O.T30
0.03(1
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.010
0.040
o.o4o
0.040
n.1'40
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
O.?50
n.nr o
n.n.50
n.050
o.nso
O.nso
n.oso
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.fl6P
0.050
o.oso
0.060
0.060
o.nso
0.060
0.060
36.733
37.128
37.468
37.807
33.147
30.1*37
3*. 827
39.167
39.507
39.8'47
40.136
40.526
40.8=6
41.206
41.546
41.BB6
42.226
42.555
42.905
4J.245
45.535
43.925
44.255
44.604
44.q44
'45.234
4?.62<»
4s. 954
46.304
46.644
46.933
47.323
47.«,S3
48. 033
4ft. 343
43.693
4'.. 022
49.352
49.702
50.042
50.332
50.722
51 .052
51.<*01
51.741
s?.nsi
52.4?.l
•52.761
5?. 101
"13.440
53.730
54.120
54.450
54. ROD
55.140
55.430
55.819
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.040
0.0"0
0.040
0.040
0.040
0 . 0 '4 0
0.040
o.n<*o
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.053
O.P50
0.150
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
O.OSO
0.060
0.050
o.oso
O.OSO
O.OSO
O.OSO
O.U60
O.O&O
0.060
O.O&O
36.830
37.170
37.510
37.850
38.190
38.530
38.370
39.209
39.549
39.839
40.229
40.569
40.909
41.248
41.588
41.928
42.268
42.608
42.948
43.288
43.627
43.967
44.307
44.647
44.937
45.327
45.666
46.006
46.346
46.636
47.026
1(7.366
47.706
48.045
48.385
1*5.725
49.065
49.405
49.745
50.034
50.424
50.764
51.104
51.444
51.784
52.124
52.463
52.803
53.143
53.483
53.823
54.163
54.502
54.842
55.18?
55.522.
55.862
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
o.nso
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
O.P50
o.nso
O.OP.O
O.OSO
0.060
0.060
o.nso
0.050
0.050
c.o&o
O.OSO
0.060
0.060
3S.373
37.213
37.553
37.392
33.232
38.572
38.912
39.252
39.592
39.932
40.271
40.611
40.951
41.291
41.531
41.971
'42.310
42.550
42.990
43.330
43.570
44.010
44,350
44.689
45.029
45.369
'45.709
46.049
46.389
46.726
47.068
47.403
47.748
48.088
48.428
48.763
49.107
49.447
49.737
50.127
50.467
50.307
51.146
51.436
51.326
52.1&6
52.506
52.346
53.136
53.525
53.365
54.205
54.545
54.385
55.225
55.565
55.904
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.03Q
0.030
0.030
0.030
0,030
0.030
0.030
0.03Q
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.03Q
0.04Q
0.04Q
0.040
0.04Q
0.04Q
0.040
0.04Q
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.04Q
0.040
0.040
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
O.O&O
0.060
O.O&O
0.060
O.O&O
0.060
0.060
36.915
37.255
37.59S
37.935
38.275
38.615
38,954
39.294
39.634
39.974
40.314
40.654
40.994
41.333
41.673
42.013
42.353
42.693
43.033
43.372
43.712
44.052
44.392
44.732
45.072
45.412
45.751
46.091
46.431
46.771
47.111
47.451
47.791
48.130
48.470
48.810
49.150
49.490
49.830
50.1S9
50.509
50.849
51.189
51.529
51.869
52.209
52.548
52.888
53.228
53.553
53.908
54.248
54.587
54.927
55.267
55.607
55.947
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.0.30
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
O.OSO
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.050
0.050
O.P50
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
o.nso
0.050
0.050
O.OSO
o.nf.0
0.050
O.OSO
0.060
0.060
o.o&o
0.060
O.OSO
o.or>o
0.060
0.060
36.958
37.298
37.633
37.977
38.il7
38.637
38.997
39.337
39.677
40.016
40.356
40.696
41.036
41.376
41.716
42.05&
42.395
42.735
43.075
43.415
43.755
44.095
44.435
44.774
45.114
45.451*
45.794
46.134
46.47t*
46.813
47.1?3
47.49J
47.833
48.173
43.513
48.853
49.192
49.532
49.872
50.212
50.552
50.892
51.231
51.571
51.911
52.251
52.591
52,931
53.271
53.610
53.950
54.290
54.630
54.970
55.310
55.649
55.9B9
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.040
O.OHO
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
o.nso
o.'oso
O.OSO
O.OSO
0.050
O.O&O
0.060
O.OSO
0.060
O.OSO
0.060
0.060
37.000
37.340
37.630
38.020
38.350
38.700
39.039
39.379
39.719
40.059
40.399
40.739
41.079
41.416
41.756
4?. 098
42.433
42.776
43.113
43.457
43.797
44.137
44.477
44.817
45.157
45.497
45.836
46.176
46.516
46.856
47.196
47.536
47.875
48.215
48.555
43.895
H9.235
49.575
49.915
50.254
50.594
50.934
51.274
51.614
51.954
•52.293
52.633
52.973
53.313
53.653
53.993
54.333
54.S72
53.012
55.352
55.692
56.032
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
O.OSO
0.050
O.OSO
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.050
0.060
0.060
0.060
0,060
0.060
0.060
O.O&O
37.043
37.383
37.723
38.062
38.402
38.742
39.082
39.422
39.762
40.101
40.441
40.781
41.121
41.461
41.301
42.141
42.43!)
42.320
43.1&0
43.500
43.B4Q
44.160
44.519
44.359
45.199
45.539
45.379
46.219
46.539
46.893
47.233
47.575
47.913
48.253
48.593
48.937
49.277
49.617
49.957
50.297
50.637
50.977
51.315
51.55S
51.99J
52.335
52.S7&
53.01S
53.355
53.595
54.035
54.375
54.715
55.055
55,395
55.734
56.074
-------
m
i
0.050
0.060
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.030
O.OBO
0.080
O.OSO
O.CBO
0.030
O.OSO
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
n.no
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.130
0.130
O.liO
0.1JO
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.150
0.150
0.150
0.160
0.160
0.170
0.170
56.117
56.457
56.796
57.136
57.476
57.816
56.156
58.496
58.836
59.175
59.515
59.055
60.195
60.?35
60.875
61.214
61.55U
61.8914
6?. ?3>4
62.57i«
62.914
63.P54
63.593
63.933
64.?73
61.613
64.953
55.293
65.632
65.97?
66.31?
66.R52
66.992
67.332
67.672
68.011
6B.351
63.691
59.031
69.371
69.711
70.050
70.390
70.730
7i.n7n
71. mo
71.750
72.090
72.429
72.769
73.109
73.449
73.789
74.129
74.463
74.808
75.148
O.H60
n.nso
0.070
n.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
O.C70
n.nyn
0.070
0.070
0.080
n.nso
0.090
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.090
0.090
0.090
n.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.100
n.ioo
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.150
0.150
0.150
0.160
0.160
n.170
0.170
56.159
56.499
56.839
57.179
57.519
57.858
5B.198
5B.538
59.878
59.218
59.558
59.898
60.237
60.577
60.917
61.257
61.597
61.937
62.276
62.616
62.°56
63.296
63.636
63.976
64.316
64.655
64.995
65.335
65.675
66.015
66.355
66.694
67.034
67.374
67.714
68.054
68.394
63.734
69.073
69.413
69.753
70. 093
70.433
70.773
71.113
71.452
71.792
72.132
72.472
72.812
73.152
73.491
73.831
74.171
74.511
74.851
75.191
0.060
O.O&O
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
O.OBO
o.nso
O.OBO
0.030
0.090
1.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.150
0.150
0.150
O.l&O
O.l&O
0.170
0.170
56.202
56.542
56.991
57.221
57.561
57.901
58.241
58.581
58.920
59.260
59.600
59.940
60.230
60.620
60.960
61.299
61.639
61.979
62.319
62.659
62.999
63.339
63.678
64.018
64.358
64.698
65.038
65.378
65.717
66.057
66.397
66.737
67.077
67.417
67.757
68.096
68.436
68.776
69.116
69.456
69.796
70.135
70.475
•70.815
71.155
71.495
71.835
72.175
72.514
72.854
73.194
73.534
73.874
74.214
74.553
74.893
75.233
0.060
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.080
0.080
0.030
0.080
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
O.P90
0.090
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.150
0.150
0.160
0.160
0.160
0.170
0.170
56.244
56.534
56.924
57.264
57.604
57.943
58.233
58.623
58.963
59.303
59.543
59.983
50.322
50.662
61.002
£1.342
51.532
52.022
62.361
52.701
63.041
53.381
53.721
54.061
54.401
54.740
55.080
55.420
55.760
66.100
56.440
66.779
67.119
57.459
57.799
58.139
58.479
68.919
59.158
59.498
59.338
70.178
70.513
70.358
71.197
71.537
71.377
72.217
72.557
72.897
73.237
73.576
73.916
74.256
74.595
74.936
75.276
0.050
0.070
0.070
o.oro
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.080
0.030
O.OBO
O.OSO
0.090
0.080
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.150
0.150
0.150
0.160
0.160
0.170
0.170
0.170
56.287
56.627
56.966
57.306
57.646
57.986
58.326
58.666
59.005
59.345
59.685
60.025
60.365
60.705
61.045
61.394
61.724
62.064
62.404
62.744
63.034
63.423
63.763
64.103
64.443
64.733
65.123
65.463
65.902
66.142
66.482
66.822
67.162
67.502
67.841
68.131
68.521
68.861
69.201
69.541
69.881
70.220
70.560
70.900
71.240
71.580
71.920
72.259
72.599
72.939
73.279
73,619
73.959
74.299
74.638
74.978
75.318
0.050
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.03.0
0.090
0.090
O.OBO
O.OBO
0.080
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.1CO
0.100
0.100
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.150
0.150
0.150
0.160
0.150
0.170
0.170
0.170
56.3Z9
56.669
57.009
57,349
57.689
58.028
58.368
58.708
59.048
59.388
59.728
60.0&7
60.407
60.747
61.087
61.427
61.767
62.107
62.446
62.786
63.126
63.466
63.806
64.146
64.485
64.325
65.165
65.505
55.845
66.185
66.525
66.8614
67.204
67.544
67.384
68.224
6B.5&4
68.904
69.243
69.583
69.923
70.263
70.603
70.943
71.282
71.622
71.962
72.302
72.642
72.982
73.322
73.661
74.001
74.341
74.681
75.021
75.361
0.060
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.080
0.030
O.OSO
n.080
0.090
O.OBO
0.080
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.150
0.150
0.150
0.150
0.150
0.170
0.170
0.170
56.372
56.711
57.051
57.391
57.731
58.071
58.411
58.751
59.090
59.430
59.770
60.110
60.450
60.790
61.129
61.469
61.809
62.149
62.489
62.829
63.169
63.508
63.848
64.188
54.523
64.863
65.208
65.548
65.887
66.227
66.567
66.907
67.247
67.537
67.926
68.266
&8.606
68.945
69.286
69.625
59.965
70.305
70.645
70.985
71.325
71.665
72.005
72.344
72.684
73.024
73.364
73.704
74.044
74.384
74.723
75.065
75.403
0.060
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.080
0.080
0.080
O.OBO
0.080
0.030
0.080
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.150
0.150
0.150
0.160
0.160
0.170
0.170
0.170
56.414
56.75'4
57.09'+
57.434
57.7714
58.113
58.453
58.793
59.133
59.473
59.313
60.152
60.492
60.332
61.172
61.512
61.952
62.192
62.531
62.871
63.211
63.551
63.891
64.231
64.570
64.310
65.250
55.590
65.930
66.270
66.613
66.949
57.289
67.629
67.969
68.309
68.649
68.933
69.329
69.663
70.003
70.349
70.633
71.029
71.367
71.707
72.047
72.337
72.727
73.067
73.405
73.745
74.085
74.425
74.765
75.105
75.445
-------
O.lBO
O.lBO
0.180
0.130
0.130
P. 190
0.190
0.190
0.200
0.200
0.210
0.210
0.2.20
0.220
0.230
0.230
0.210
0.210
0.250
0.26U
0.250
0.270
0.270
0.270
0.280
0.2BO
0.290
m 0.300
I 0.300
<~D 0.310
NJ C-JJO
0.320
0.330
0.310
0.350
0.360
0.360
0.370
0.3BO
0.380
0.390
0.100
0.100
0.120
0.130
0.150
0.160
0.170
O.lBO
0.520
0.510
0.550
0.570
0.600
0.630
0.650
0.670
75.188
75.929
76.168
75. SOP
76.917
77.197
77.527
77.967
78.207
78.517
78.887
79.226
79.566
79.0D6
80.216
80.596
90.926
91.265
91.605
91.915
92.285
92.625
8£. 965
P3.*05
83.611
83.081
91.321
Pl.f 61
85.001
95.311
85.683
96.023
36.36?
86.703
37.013
97.J93
97.723
OP.062
9P.102
8P.71?
99.032
99.122
99.762
90.101
90.111
90.791
91.121
91.161
91.801
92.111
92.180
92.020
93.160
93.500
93.810
91.180
91.519
(1.180
0.180
0.1PO
0.190
0.190
0.190
P. 190
0.200
0.200
0.210
0.210
1.210
0.220
0.220
0.230
0.230
0.210
0.210
0.250
0.260
0.260
0.270
P. 271
t).?70
O.P.80
0.290
0.290
0.300
(1.300
0.310
0.320
0.330
0.330
0.310
oisso
0.360
0.3&0
0.370
0.380
0.390
0.390
0.100
0.100
0.120
0.130
0.150
0.170
0.190
0.190
0.520
0.510
0.550
0.570
0.600
0.610
0.650
0.570
75.531
75.970
76.210
76.550
76. "90
77.230
77.570
77.909
79.219
79.599
79.929
79.259
79.609
79.919
90.296
80.628
80.958
91.308
81.619
81.998
82.327
92.657
33.007
93.317
83.697
81.027
81.357
PI. 706
95.016
85.396
85.726
85. (166
86.106
86.715
67.095
87.125
B7.7S5
99.105
88.115
89.795
89.121
PO.H51
89.801
90. I1**
90.191
90.821
91.153
91.503
91.813
92.193
92.523
9?. 953
93.203
93.512
93.892
91.222
91.562
0.190
0.190
0.190
0.190
0.190
0.130
0.190
0.200
0.200
0.210
0.210
0.210
O.?20
0.220
0.230
0.210
0.210
0.?'40
0.250
0.260
0.260
O.?70
0.270
0.270
0.280
0.290
0.290
0.300
0.310
0.310
0.3?0
0.3?0
0.330
0.310
0.350
0.350
0.360
0.370
0.330
0.350
0.390
o.mo
0.110
0.120
0.130
O.U50
0.170
0.190
0.190
0.530
0.510
0.550
0.570
0.610
0.610
0.650
0.670
75.573
75.913
76.253
76.593
76.932
77.272
77.512
77.952
78.292
79.632
78.971
79.311
79.651
79.991
80.331
80.671
61.011
81.350
81.690
82.030
82.370
82.710
83.050
83.389
83.729
81.069
91.109
81.719
85.089
85.129
85.769
86.108
96.118
86.788
87.128
37.168
87.807
88.117
89.187
88.827
39.167
89.507
89.617
90.186
90.526
90.866
91.2.06
91.516
91.886
92.226
92.565
92.905
93.215
93.585
93.925
91.265
9H.601
O.lBO
0.190
0.190
0.190
0.190
0.190
0.190
0.200
0.200
0.210
0.210
0.210
O.?20
0.220
0.230
0.210
0.210
0.210
O.P50
0.250
0.250
0.270
0.270
0.290
0.290
0.290
0.290
0.330
0.310
0.310
0.320
0.330
0.330
0.310
0.350
0.360
0.350
0.370
0.330
0.330
0.390
0.100
0.110
O.U20
0.130
0.160
0.170
0.190
0.500
0.530
0.510
0.550
0.570
0.610
0.610
0.650
0.630
75.515
75.955
76.295
76.535
76.975
77,315
77.555
77.991
76.331
78.571
79.011
79.351
79.691
90.033
30.373
30.713
31.053
31.393
81.733
32.073
32.112
32.752
B3.092
33.132
33.772
81.112
31.152
31.791
35.131
35.171
85.311
66.151
85.191
36.930
97.170
37.510
97.350
38.190
98.530
38.370
89.209
39.519
39.889
90.229
90.569
90.909
91.218
31.538
31.328
92.268
32.503
92.918
93.238
93.527
33.367
31.307
91.517
O.lBO
O.lBO
0.18Q
0.180
0.190
0.190
0.190
0.200
0.230
0.210
0.210
0.210
0.220
0.220
0.230
0.210
0.210
0.210
0.250
0.26Q
0.260
0.270
0.27Q
0.280
0.280
0.280
0.290
0.300
0.310
0.310
0.320
0.330
0.330
0.310
0.350
0.360
0.360
0.370
0.380
0.380
0.390
0.100
0.110
0.123
0.110
0.160
0.170
0.180
0.500
0.530
0.510
0.550
0.580
0.620
0.610
0.660
0.590
75.658
75.998
76.338
76.678
77.017
77.357
77.697
78.037
78.377
78.717
79.056
79.396
79.736
80.076
80.116
80.756
81.096
81.135
81.775
32.115
82.155
82.795
83.135
83.171
83.811
81.151
81.191
81.831
85.171
85.511
85.853
86.193
86.533
86.873
87.213
87.553
87.992
98.232
88.572
88.912
89.252
89.592
89.932
90.271
90.611
90.951
91.291
91.631
91.971
92.310
92.650
92.990
93.330
93.670
91.010
91.350
91.639
0.180
0.190
0.190
0.130
0.190
0.190
0.190
0.200
0.200
0.210
0.210
0.220
0.220
0.220
0.230
0.210
0.210
0.250
0.250
0.250
0.250
0.270
0.270
0.280
0.230
0.290
0.290
0.300
0.310
0.310
0.320
0.330
0.330
0.350
0.350
0.360
0.370
0.370
0.390
0.380
0.100
0.100
0.110
O.U20
0.150
0.160
0.170
0.180
0.500
0.530
0.510
0.560
0.590
0.620
0.610
0.660
0.630
75.700
76.010
76.380
76.720
77.060
77.100
77.710
78.0*9
76.119
78.759
79.099
79.139
79.779
60.116
80.158
80.798
81.139
81.178
81.818
82.159
82.197
62.837
83.177
83.517
83.857
81.197
81.535
81.876
85.216
85.556
85.896
86.236
86.576
86.915
87.255
67.595
87.935
88.275
88.615
83.951
89.291
89.631
89.971
90.311
90.651
90.9*1
91.333
91.673
92.013
92.353
92.6*3
93.033
93.372
93.712
91.052
91.3*2
91.732
O.lBO
0.180
0.130
0.130
0.190
0.190
0.190
0.200
0.200
0.210
0.210
0.220
0.220
0.220
0.230
0.210
0.210
0.250
0.250
0.260
0.270
0.270
0.273
0.230
0.280
0.280
0.290
0.300
0.310
0.320
0.320
0.330
0.330
0.350
0.350
0.360
0.370
0.370
0.390
0.390
0.100
0.130
0.110
0.120
0.150
0.160
0.170
0.190
0.510
0.530
0.51C
0.560
0.600
0.620
0.650
0.660
0.690
75.713
76.083
76.123
76.762
77.102
77.112
77.782
78.122
78.162
73.802
79.111
79.181
79.321
80.161
80.501
90.811
81.180
91.520
81.360
92.200
82.510
92.830
83.220
83.559
83.899
81.239
81.579
91.919
85.259
65.598
95.938
86.273
86.618
86.958
87.298
87.639
87.977
98.317
88.657
88.997
89.337
89.677
90.016
90.356
90.696
91.036
91.376
91.716
92.056
92.395
92.735
93.075
93.115
93.755
91.095
91.135
91.771
O.lBO
0.180
0.190
0.130
0.190
0.190
0.190
0.200
0.200
0.210
0.210
0.220
0.220
0.220
0.233
0.210
0.210
0.250
0.250
0.250
0.270
0.270
0.270
O.Z80
0.280
0.280
0.290
0.300
0.310
0.320
0.320
0.330
0.310
0.350
0.360
0.360
0.370
0.370
0.380
0.390
0.100
0.100
0.120
0.130
0.150.
0.160
0.170
0.180
0.510
0.530
0.510
0.560
0.600
0.620
0.650
0.670
0.690
75.785
76.125
76.165
76.905
77.115
77.195
77.321
78.161
79.501
78.91'*
79.181
79.521
79.861
00.233
80.513
80.383
81.223
81.563
81.903
32.21?
82.582
82.922
83.26?
83.602
83.91?
81.26?
81.621
81.961
85.301
85.611
85.981
86.321
S6.561
87.000
87.313
87.533
88.020
89.360
88.700
39.033
89.373
89.719
90.059
90.393
90.733
91.079
91.119
91.753
92.093
92.139
92.773
93.113
93.157
93.797
91.137
91.177
91.917
-------
cn
i
<£>
0.690
0.720
0.760
0.800
0.850
0.920
0.930
1.040
1.090
1.200
1.310
1.160
1.610
1.870
2.220
5.550
9U.B59
95.199
95.539
95.879
96.?19
95.559
S6.S99
97.?3«
97.S78
97.918
9B.?5P
98. -598
98.937
99.277
99.617
99.957
0.690
0.720
0.760
0.800
0.850
0.920
0.990
1..050
1.100
1.210
1.350
1.460
1.620
1.950
2.330
4.330
94.902
95. 2**2
9S.592
95.921
96.251
96.601
96.941
97.?91
97.621
97.950
98.300
9fl.6'40
98.990
99.320
99.660
100.000
0.700
0.720
0.7&0
0.820
O.P70
0.930
0.9?0
1.050
1.110
1.210
1.3SO
1.190
1.61*0
1.950
2.770
94.944
95.284
95.624
95.961
96.304
96.641
96.983
97.323
97.663
98.003
98.343
98.683
99.022
99.362
99.702
0.700
0.7JO
0.780
0.820
0.870
0.940
0.990
1.050
1.110
1.240
1.370
1.500
1.660
2.050
2.820
94.987
95.327
95.566
96.006
96.346
96.636
97.026
97.366
97.706
98.045
93.385
98.725
99.055
99.405
99.745
0.700
0.730
0.790
0.320
0.870
0.950
1.000
1.070
1.150
1.250
1.380
1.510
1.700
2.060
3.040
95,029
95.369
95.709
96.049
96.389
96.728
97.068
97.408
97.748
98.038
98.428
98.768
99.107
99.447
99.787
0.710
0.740
0.790
0.820
0.880
0.950
1.010
1.070
1.160
1.260
1.390
1.510
1.700
2.120
3.250
95.072
95.412
95.751
96.091
96.431
96.771
97.111
97.451
97.791
98.130
98.470
98.810
99.150
99.490
99.830
0.710
0.750
0.800
0.330
0.890
0.970
1.010
1.080
1.160
1.280
1.430
1.570
1.740
2.130
3.290
95.114
95.454
95.794
96.134
96.474
96.313
97.153
97.493
97.833
98.173
98.513
98.853
99.192
99.532
99.872
0.710
0.750
0.800
0.830
0.910
0.970
1.030
1.080
1.200
1.300
1.430
1.600
1.760
2.150
3.430
95.157
95.497
95.934
96.175
96.515
96.855
97.195
97.535
97.875
98.215
98.555
98.895
9S.23S
99.575
99.915
-------
tn
vo
4.330
4.243
4.156
4.070
3.983
3.897
3.810
3.723
3.637
3.550
3.464
3.377
3.290
3.204
3.117
3.031
2.944
2.857
2.771
2.684
2.5*8
2.511
2.424
2.338
2. 251
2.1&5
2.078
1.991
1.905
1.818
1.732
1.645
1.553
1.472
1.335
1.299
1.212
1.125
1.039
0.952
0.8S6
0.779
0.692
0.606
0.519
0.433
0.345
0.259
0.173
0.086
Of! rt fl
. uuu
I
I
I
I
I
I
i!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I*****************************************
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.
VOLUME VS
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
*I
*I
I
• I
I
I
• I
I
»I
• I
I
I
I
I
»I
• I
• I
*
*
*
*
»*
*
*
**
**
**
**
***
*****
*******
**********
***********************
00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 90.00 100.0
PERCENT LESS THAM OR EOUAL TO
-------
RETURN PERIOD (IM YEARS) FOR VOLUME
VALUE
1.330
2.380
1.950
1.620
1.160
1.350
1.210
1.100
1.050
0.930
0.920
0.850
O.BOU
0.760
0.720
0.690
0.670
0.650
0.64U
0.600
0.570
0.550
0.5'40
tn °-520
1 0.190
ID 0.180
01 0.170
0.15U
0.130
0.120
0.100
o.ioo
0.390
0.330
0.330
0.370
0.360
0.360
0.350
0.310
0.330
0.330
0.320
0.310
0.300
0.300
0.290
0.280
0.230
0.270
0.270
0.370
0.260
PERIOD
26.non
2.im
1.529
1.010
0.787
0.634
0.530
0.456
0.100
0.356
0.320
0.»92
0,?69
0.217
O.?30
0.?!"*
0.201
0.199
0.179
0.169
0.161
0.153
0.116
0.110
0.134
0.129
0.124
0.119
0.115
0.111
0..107
0.104
0.101
0.096
0.095
0.092
0.089
0.087
O.C85
0.083
0.080
0.079
0.077
O.P75
0.073
0.072
0.070
n.06A
0.067
0.066
0.064
0.0&3
0.062
VALUE
3.550
?.?20
1.870
1.610
1.160
1.310
1.200
1.090
1.040
0.930
0.9?0
o.nso
0.800
0.760
0.720
0.690
0.670
0.650
0.630
0.600
0.570
0.550
0.540
0.520
o.iao
0.470
0.4SO
0.450
0.130
0.120
0.400
0.400
0.390
n.?ao
0.380
P. 370
0.360
0.360
0.350
0.340
0.330
n.s?o
0.320
0.310
0.300
0.300
P. 290
0.2RO
0.2BO
0.270
0.270
0.270
O.?60
PERIOD
13.000
3.600
1.444
1.000
0.754
0.619
0.520
0.118
0.393
0.351
0.317
0.2.88
0.255
0.215
0.?23
0.213
0.200
0.193
0.178
0.1&8
0.160
0.152
0.1 '•»&
0.139
0.134
0.123
0.1?3
0.119
0.115
0.1U
0.107
0.101*
O.lOO
0.097
0.094
0.092
0.099
0.037
0.094
O.n92
0.090
0.073
0.076
0.075
0.073
0.071
0.070
0.069
0.067
0.065
0.054
O.P53
0.052
VALJE
3.430
2.150
1.760
1.6QO
1.430
1.300
1.200
1.090
1.030
0.970
0.910
0.830
0.800
0.750
0.710
0.690
0.670
0.650
0.6?0
0.600
0.560
0.540
0.530
0.510
0.1PO
0.170
0.460
0.150
0.130
0.420
0.400
0.100
0.390
0.390
0.370
0.370
0.350
0.350
0.350
0.340
0.330
0.3?0
0.320
0.310
0.3QO
0.290
0.2*0
0.280
0.2SO
0.270
0.270
0.270
0.260
PERIOD
8.666
2.363
1.368
0.962
0.712
0.601
0.509
0.110
0.338
0.346
0.313
0.265
0.262
0.242
0.226
0.211
0.198
0.187
0.176
0.167
0.159
0.152
0.145
0.139
0.133
0.128
0.123
0.118
0.111
0.110
0.106
0.103
0.100
0.097
0.094
0.091
0.089
0.086
0.084
0.082
O.OflO
0.078
0.076
0.074
0.073
0.071
0.070
0.068
0.067
0.065
0.064
0.063
0.062
VALJE
3,290
2.130
1.740
1.570
1.430
1.280
1.150
1.080
1.010
0.970
0.890
0.830
0.100
0.750
0.710
0.680
0.660
0.550
0.620
0.600
0.560
0.510
0.530
0.510
0.180
0.170
0.160
0.150
0.120
0.410
0.400
0.400
0.390
0.390
0.370
0.370
0.350
0.350
O.J50
0.330
0.330
0.320
0.320
0.310
0.300
0.290
0.290
0.230
0.230
0.270
0.270
0.270
O.?f>0
PERIOD
6.500
2.166
1.300
0.928
0.722
0.590
0.500
0.433
0.382
0.342
0.309
0.282
0.260
0.240
0.224
0.209
0.196
0.135
0.175
0.166
0.158
0.151
0.141
0.133
0.132
0.127
0.122
0.118
0.114
0.110
0.106
0.103
0.100
0.097
0.094
0.091
0.089
0.096
0.084
0.032
O.OSO
0.078
0.076
0.074
0.073
0.071
0.069
0.068
O.D57
0.065
0.064
0.053
0.061
VALUE
3.250
2.120
1.700
1.510
1.390
1.250
l.l&O
1.070
1.010
0.950
0.380
0.320
0.790
0.740
0.710
0.580
0.560
0.540
0.620
0.590
0.5&0
0.540
0.530
0.500
0.180
0.170
0.160
0.450
0.120
0.110
0.400
0.400
0.3SO
0.330
0.370
0.370
0.3&0
0.350
0.350
0.350
0.330
0.320
0.310
0.310
0.300
0.290
0.280
0.230
0.280
0.270
0.270
0.260
0.260
PERIOD
5.200
2.000
1.238
0.896
0.702
0.577
0.490
0.426
0.376
0.337
0.305
0.279
0.257
0.238
0.222
0.208
0.195
0.184
0.174
0.165
0.157
0.150
0.143
0.137
0.131
0.126
0.122
0.117
0.113
0.109
0.106
0.102
0.099
0.096
0.093
0.091
0.068
0.086
0.094
0.082
0.080
0.078
0.076
0.074
0.072
0.071
0.069
0.068
0.066
0.065
0.064
0.062
0.061
VALUE
3.040
2.060
1.700
1.510
1.390
1.250
1.150
1.070
1.000
0.950
0.870
0.820
0.790
0.730
0.700
0.630
0.650
0.640
0.620
0.580
0.550
0.540
0.533
0.500
0.480
0.470
0.460
0.440
0.420
0.410
0.400
0.390
0.380
0.380
0.370
0.360
0.360
0.350
0.340
0.330
0.330
0.320
0.310
0.310
0.300
0.290
0.290
0.290
0.230
0.270
0.270
0.260
0.260
PERIOD
4.353
1.B57
1.181
0.866
0.684
0.565
0.481
0.419
0.371
0.333
0.302
0.276
0.251
0.236
0.220
0.206
0.194
0.18J
0.173
0.164
0.156
O.H9
O.H2
0.13&
0.131
0.126
0.121
0.117
0.113
0.109
0.105
0.102
0.099
0.096
0.093
0.090
0.086
0.086
0.083
0.081
0.079
0.077
0.076
0.071
0.072
0.071
0.069
0.066
0.066
0.065
0.061
0.062
0.061
VALUE
2.620
2.050
1.650
1.500
1.370
1.240
1.110
1.050
0.990
0.940
0.870
0.820
0.780
0.720
0.700
0.630
0.650
0.640
0.610
0.570
0.550
0.540
0.530
0.500
0.430
0.470
0.460
0.430
0.420
0.410
0.400
0.390
0.380
0.390
0.370
0.360
0.360
0.350
0.340
0.330
0.330
0.320
0.310
0.310
0.300
0.290
0.230
0.29D
0.230
0.270
0.270
0.260
0.260
PERIOD
3.714
1.733
1.130
0.838
0.666
0.553
0.472
0.412
0.366
0.329
0.298
0.273
0.252
0.234
0.218
0.204
0.192
0.181
0.172
0.163
0.155
0.148
0.142
0.136
0.130
0.125
0.120
0.116
0.112
0.108
0.105
0.101
0.098
0.095
0.093
0.090
0.088
0.035
0.093
0.081
0.079
0.077
0.075
0.0'74
0.072
0.070
0.069
0.067
0.066
0.065
0.063
0.062
0.061
VALUE
2.770
1.960
1.640
1.190
1.360
1.210
1.110
1.050
0.990
0.930
0.870
0.820
0.760
0.720
0.700
0.670
0.650
0.610
0.610
0.570
0.550
0.510
0.530
0.190
0.480
0.470
0.450
0.430
0.420
0.410
0.400
0.390
0.380
0.380
0.370
0.360
0.360
0.350
0.340
0.330
0.33C
0.320
0.310
0.310
0.300
0.290
0.260
0.260
0.270
0.270
0.270
0.260
0.260
PERI03
3.250
1.625
1.083
0.312
0.550
0.541
0.464
0.405
0.361
0.325
0.295
0.270
0.250
0.232
0.215
0.2C3
0.191
0.190
0.171
0.162
0.154
0.147
0.111
0.135
0.130
0.125
0.120
0.1H
0.152
0.103
0.10'4
0.101
0.098
0.095
0.092
0.090
0.087
0.085
0.083
0.081
0.079
0.077
0.075
0.073
0.072
0.070
0.069
0.067
0.066
0.065
0.063
0.062
0.061
-------
m
0.260
0.250
0.240
0.240
0.230
0.230
0.220
0.220
0.210
0.210
0.210
0.200
0.203
0.19Q
0.190
0.160
3.180
0.160
0.180
0.130
0.170
0.170
0.160
0.160
0.150
0.15U
0.150
0.140
0.14D
0.140
0.140
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.110
0.110
0.110
P. 110
0.110
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.090
0.090
O.C90
0.090
0.090
0.061
0.060
0.05«
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.054
0. 054
o!o53
0.052
0.151
0.050
0.049
0.049
0. f>48
O.P47
0.047
0.046
0.045
0.045
0.044
0.043
0.043
0.042
0.042
0.041
0.041
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.03?
0.034
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.2fiO
0.250
0.240
0.240
0.230
0.230
0.220
0.220
0.210
0.210
0.200
0.200
0.190
0.190
0.190
0.180
0.180
0.190
0.180
0.180
0.170
0.170
0.160
0.160
0.150
0.150
O.ISO
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
O.HO
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.051
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.054
0.053
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.049
0.0t9
0.048
O.C47
0.046
0.046
0.045
0.044
0.044
0.043
0.043
0.042
0.042
0.041
0.041
0.040
0.0.40
0.039
0.039
O.P39
0.033
0.037
0.037
0.036
o.nss
0.036
0.035
O.OS5
0.034
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.250
O.?50
0.240
0.240
0.230
0.220
0.220
0.2?.0
0.210
0.210
0.200
0.200
0.190
0.190
0.190
0.130
0.180
0.180
0.190
0.170
0.170
0.170
0.160
0.150
0.150
0.150
0.150
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.090
O.P90
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.054
0.053
0.052
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.049
0.048
0.048
0.047
0.046
0.046
0.045
0.044
0.044
0.043
0.043
0.042
0.042
0.041
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.038
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.029
0.250
O.?50
0.240
0.240
0.230
0.220
O.?20
0.220
0.210
0.210
0.200
0.200
0.190
0.190
0.190
0.130
0.180
0.190
0.190
0.170
0.170
0.170
0.160
0.150
0.150
0.150
0.150
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.054
0.053
0.052
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.049
0.048
0.043
0.047
0.046
0.046
0.045
0.044
0.044
0.043
0.043
0.042
0.041
0.041
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.038
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.029
0.250
0.250
0.240
0.240
0.230
0.220
0.220
0.220
0.210
0.210
0.200
0.200
0.190
0.190
0.190
0.130
0.180
0.180
0.180
0.170
0.170
0.170
0.16Q
0.160
0.150
0.150
0.150
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.054
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.051
0.050
0.049
0.048
0.048
0.047
0.046
0.046
0.045
0.044
0.044
0.043
0.042
0.042
0.041
0.041
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.029
0.250
0.240
0.240
0.240
0.230
0.220
0.220
0.210
0.210
0.210
0.200
0.200
0.190
0.190
0.190
0.1BO
0.190
0.190
0.190
0.170
0.170
0.170
0.160
0.150
0.150
0.150
0.150
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.120
0.1?0
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.130
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.054
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.050
0.049
0.048
0.047
O.Q47
0.046
0.045
0.045
O.Q44
0.044
0.043
0.042
0.042
0.041
0.041
0.040
o.o^o
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.039
0.037
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.03&
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
3.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.029
0.250
U.240
0.240
0.240
0.230
0.220
0.220
0.210
0.210
0.210
0.200
0.200
0.190
0.190
0.180
0.130
0.190
0.180
0.190
0.170
0.170
0.160
0.160
0.163
0.150
0.150
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.054
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.050
0.049
0.048
0.047
0.047
0.046
0.045
0.045
0.044
0.043
0.043
0.042
0.342
0.041
0.041
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.033
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.029
0.250
0.240
0.240
0.240
0.230
0.220
0.220
0.210
0.210
0.210
0.^00
0.200
0.190
0.190
O.ISO
0.180
0.160
0.180
0.160
0.170
0.170
0.160
0.160
0.150
0.150
0.150
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.130
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.120
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.110
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.055
0.055
0.054
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.050
0.049
0.043
0.047
0.047
0.045
0.045
0.045
0.044
0.043
0.043
0.042
0.042
0 . 0.4 1
0.041
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.039
0.03S
0.039
0.037
0.037
0.036
O.C3S
O.OJi
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.0:3
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.033
0.030
0.033
0.033
0.029
0.029
-------
0.090
0.090
0.080
0.080
0.030
O.OBO
O.OBU
0.030
O.OSO
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.060
0.060
0.050
0.060
0.050
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
m °-060
, 0.060
<£> 0.060
•^ 0.060
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.05U
0.040
0.040
O.OtO
o.oto
O.OtO
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
O.OtO
O.OtO
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
0.029
0.029
0.029
0.021
O.P28
0.02".
0.027
O.P27
O.P27
O.P27
0.027
0.026
0.020
0.090
O.OBO
O.OSO
O.OSO
0.090
0.030
O.ORO
0.090
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
O.OSO
0.060
0.050
O.OSO
0.060
0.060
O.OSO
0.050
O.OSO
O.OSO
O.OSO
O.OSO
O.OSO
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
O.OtO
o.oto
o.oto
O.OtO
o.oto
O.OtO'
O.OtO
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
O.OtO
O.OtO
O.OtO
o.oto
O.OtO
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.02t
0.02t
0.02t
0.02t
0.02t
0.02t
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.090
0.090
O.OBO
0.080
O.OSO
O.OSO
O.OBO
0.080
0.030
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.060
O.OSO
0.050
O.PSO
O.OSO
O.OSO
0.060
O.PSO
O.PSO
O.OSO
O.OSO
0.050
O.OSO
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
O.OtO
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
0.030
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.02t
0.02t
0.02t
0.02t
0.02t
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.090
0.090
0.080
O.OBO
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.050
0.050
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.360
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.05Q
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
0.030
O.C29
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.02t
0.02t
0.02t
0.02t
0.02t
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.0?1
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
O.OJ.9
0.019
0.019
0.090
0.090
0.030
O.OSO
O.OSO
O.ORO
0.080
0.080
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.060
0.060
0.060
O.OSO
O.OSO
O.OSO
O.PSO
O.OSO
0.060
0.060
O.OSO
O.OSO
O.PSO
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
O.OtO
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.pto
o.oto
o.oto
O.PtO
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
O.OtO
o.oto
o.oto
0.030
0.029
0.029
0.02B
0.02B
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.02S
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.02t
0.02t
0.02'*
0.02t
0.02"*
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.02Q
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.090
0.090
0.380
O.OSO
O.OSO
O.OSO
O.OSO
0.030
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
O.OSO
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
O.OSO
0.060
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
o.oto
O.OtO
o.oto
O.OtO
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
O.OtO
O.OtO
O.OtO
o.oto
0.030
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.023
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.326
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
O.C25
0.025
0.025
0.02t
0.02t
0.02t
0.02t
0.02t
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.02?
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.023
0.020
0.323
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.090
0.090
O.OBO
O.OBO
0.380
O.OBO
0.080
O.OBO
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.050
0.060
0,060
0.360
0.060
0.063
0.060
0.06C
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
O.OtO
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
o.oto
0.030
0.029
0.029
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.025
0.026
0.02S
0.025
0.02S
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.325
0.025
0.02t
0.02'4
0.02-4
0.32-4
0.02-4
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.02T
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.321
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.023
0.02D
0.023
0.020
0.023
0.023
0.013
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
-------
00
0.03U
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
3.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.038
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.P20
o.oJa
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.02!)
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.02U
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.018
0.018
O.P18
O.Olt
O.Olfl
O.Plfl
0.018
o.oi«
O.P18
0.01P
O.C17
0.017
0.017
0.017
O.P17
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.01*
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
O.P15
O.P15
0.015
O.PI;
0.015
O.P15
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
O.P14
0.014
0.014
O.P14
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.030
0.030
0.030
O.T30
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.130
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
0.020
O.PJO
O.OJO
0.020
O.OJO
O.OJO
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
O.OJO
O.OJO
O.OJO
O.OJO
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
O.nj.o
O.OJO
O.OJO
O.OJO
0.020
f .020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.018
0.018
0.016
0.018
0.019
o.niB
0.018
0.013
0.018
0.016
P.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
P.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
O.nl4
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
O.C30
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.0*0
0.030
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
O.PJO
O.OJO
O.OJO
0.020
O.OJO
0.02C
O.OJO
O.OJO
O.OJO
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
O.OJO
O.OJO
O.OJO
O.OJO
O.OJO
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.018
0.018
0.018
O.Olft
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.013
0.018
0.018
0.317
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.315
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.315
0.015
0.314
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.330
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.02Q
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
C.019
0.018
0.018
0.018
o.oia
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.030
0.030
0.030
O.P30
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
O.OJO
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
0.020
O.OJO
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
0.020
O.OJO
O.OJO
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
O.OJO
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.018
0.018
o.ois
o.oia
0.018
o.oia
0.013
0.018
0.018
0.017
C.317
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
0.020
0.020
0.020
O'.OJO
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.320
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.018
0.013
0.018
O.OIS
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.023
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.320
O.OJO
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.OJO
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.013
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.013
0.013
0.019
0.019
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.317
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
t.015
0.015
0.015
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.3H
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
-------
m
ID
ID
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.010
0.010
n.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.013
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oiu
n.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010 •
0.010
O.OIU
O.P10
0.010
o.oiu
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.om
o.om
O.om
O.om
o.nm
0.01<4
O.om
o.nm
O.om
0.013
O.nis
0.013
0.013
O.?13
0.013
0.013
0.013
O.IU3
O.rl3
O.P13
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
O.nl3
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
o.ni?
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.01?
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
O.pll
0.011
0.011
0.020
n.020
0.020
0.020
0.010
0.010
n.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
P. 010
0.110
0.010
0.010
r.oio
0.010
0.010
n.oio
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.niO
0.010
0.010
0.010
n.oin
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
n.oio
0.010
0.010
n.nio
o.nio
n.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
n.oio
o.om
O.Oli*
o.om
O.om
O.om
O.om
n.nm
O.Ol1*
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
O.C13
0.013
0.013
0.013
n.ois
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0 . 0 1 0
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
o.om
0.011
o.om
o.om
O.Ol1*
O.Ol1*
O.Ol1*
o.om
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.P10
0.010
b.oio
O.C10
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.C10
0.010
0.01"*
O.Ol1*
O.Oll*
0.01"*
o.om
O.Ol1*
O.Ol1*
o.om
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.020
0.020
C.020
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
P. 010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.910
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
O.Ol1*
o.om
o.om
o.oi:
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
o.oio
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
O.Ol1*
o.om
O.Ol1*
o.om
O.Ol1*
O.Ol1*
o.om
o.om
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.Oll
O.OH
O.Oll
O.Oll
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
o.om
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
O.C11
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
o.oio
0.010
o.oio
0.010
O.U10
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oio
0.010
0.010
o.om
o.om
o.om
O.Oll*
O.Oli*
o.om
o.om
0 . 0 1 '4
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
O.Oll
0.011
O.Oll
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
-------
m
i
o
o
0.010
O.OlO
o.nio
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oia
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.011
0.011
0.011
o.nii
0.011
0.011
O.nll
0.011
o.nii
0.011
0.111
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
P.nio
0.010
0.010
n.010
0.110
0.01C
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
o.oii
o.nii
O.OH
o.nii
o.oii
o.oii
0.011
o.oii
o.oii
o.oii
O.U11
0.011
o.oii
o.oii
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
O.OH
0.011
0.011
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
O.G11
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.011
o.on
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
O.OU
0.011
O.OU
o.oii
o.oii
O.OU
O.OU
o.oii
0.011
o.oii
O.OU
o.oii
O.OU
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.011
O.OU
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.010
O.OlO
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.011
O.OU
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
-------
m
i
>».330
H.Zti
<».156
<*.070
3.993
3.897
3.810
3.723
3.637
3.550
!.<*&<»
3.377
3.290
3.201
3.117
3.031
2.9HU
2.857
2.771
2.631*
2.598
2.511
2."»2
-------
PROBABILITY ANALYSIS-DELTA
OF OCCURRENCE LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO THE GIVEN VALUE OF DELTA
VALUE
0.000
4.00U
4.000
4.500
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.500
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.500
6.500
6.500
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.500
7.500
7.500
B.OOO
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.500
8. SOU
8.500
8.500
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.500
9.500
9.500
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10. SOU
10. SOU
10.500
10.500
11.000
11.000
PCT
0.042
0.?82
0.722
1.062
1.401
1.711
2.081
2.121
2.761
3.101
3.110
3.780
1.120
1.160
i.aoo
5.140
5.130
5.(U9
6.159
6.499
6.«39
7.179
7.519
7.158
8.198
8.538
8.S7B
9.218
9.558
9.398
10.537
10.577
10.017
ll.?57
11.597
11.937
12.276
12.616
12.956
13.296
13.636
13.976
14.316
14.655
14.995
15.J35
15.675
16.nl5
16.355
16.691
17.034
VALUE
4.noo
4.000
4.000
4.500
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.500
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.500
6.500
6.500
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7. son
7. SOP
7.500
8.0CO
8. POO
e.ooo
8. POO
«.500
8.500
8.^00
8.500
9.000
9. POO
9.000
9,000
9.500
9.500
9.500
10.000
10.000
10.0PO
10.000
10.500
10.500
10.500
10.500
11.000
11.000
PCT
O.D34
0.121
0.754
1..104
1.444
1.734
2.124
2.463
2.803
3.143
3.133
3.823
4.153
4.502
4.842
1.132
S.522
5.862
6.202
5.542
6.831
7.221
7.551
7.901
8.241
8.531
8.920
9.250
9.600
9.940
10.250
10.620
10.950
11.299
11.639
11.979
12.319
12.659
1?.999
13.338
13.678
14.018
11.358
14.698
15.038
15.378
15.717
16.057
16.397
16.737
17.077
VALJE
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.500
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.500
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.500
6.500
6.500
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.500
7.500
7.530
7.500
8.000
8.000
8.0PO
8.000
P. 500
8.500
8.500
8.500
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.500
9.500
9.500
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.500
10.500
10.500
11.000
11.000
11.000
PCT
0.127
0.467
0.807
1.146
1.486
1.826
2.166
2.506
2.846
3.186
3.525
3.865
4.205
4.545
4. BBS
5.225
5.561
5.901
6.211
6.581
6.924
7.264
7.604
7.943
8.283
8.623
8.963
9.303
9.643
9.983
10.322
10.662
11.002
11.342
11.682
12.022
12.361
12.701
13.041
13.381
13.721
14.061
14.401
14.740
15.080
15.420
15.760
16.100
16.440
16.779
17.119
VALUE
4.000
4.000
4.500
4.500
5.000
5.000
5.000
5.500
5.500
5.500
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.500
6.500
6.500
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.500
8.000
8.000
8.000
B.OOO
8.500
8.500
8.500
8.500
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.500
9.500
9.500
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.500
10.500
10.500
11.000
11.000
11.000
?CT
0.159
0.509
0.349
1.189
1.529
1.369
2.209
2.546
2.388
3.228
3.558
3.908
1.218
1.587
1.927
5.257
5.607
5.947
6.287
6.627
6.966
7.306
7.546
7.986
8.326
8.666
9.005
9.345
9.685
10.025
10.365
10.705
11.045
11.334
11.724
12.064
12.404
12.744
13.034
13.423
13.763
14.103
14.113
11.783
15.123
15.463
15.302
16.142
16.482
16.822
17.162
VALUE
4.000
4.000
4.500
4.500
5.000
5.000
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.500
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.500
6.500
6.500
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.500
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.500
8.500
8.500
8.500
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.500
9.500
9.500
9.500
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.500
10.500
10.500
11.000
11.000
11.000
PCT
0.212
0.552
0.892
1.231
1.571
1.911
2.251
2.591
2.931
3.271
3.610
3.950
4.290
4.630
4.970
5.310
5.649
5.989
6.329
6.669
7.009
7.349
7.689
8.028
8.368
8.708
9.048
9.338
9.728
10.067
10.407
10.717
11.087
11.127
11.767
12.107
12.116
12.786
13.126
13.166
13.806
14.146
14.135
11.825
15.165
15.505
15.815
16.185
16.525
16.864
17.204
VALUE
1.000
4.000
4.500
4.500
5.000
5.000
' 5.500
5.500
5.500
5.500
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.500
6.500
6.500
6.500
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.500
8.000
8.000
8.000
B.OOO
8.500
8.500
8.500
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.500
9.500
9.500
9.500
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.500
10.500
10.500
11.000
11.000
11.000
PCT
0.254
0.594
0.931
1.271
1.614
1.954
2.293
2.633
2.973
3.313
3.653
3.993
4.333
4.672
5.012
5.352
5.692
6.032
6.372
6.711
7.051
7.391
7.731
8.071
8.411
8.751
9.090
9.43Q
9.77Q
10.110
10.450
10.790
11.129
11.469
11.809
12.149
12.489
12.829
13.169
13.508
13.848
14.188
14.528
14.868
15.208
15.548
15.887
16.227
16.567
16.907
17.247
VALUE
4.000
4.000
4.500
4.500
5.000
5.000
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.500
6.000
6.000
6.0CO
6.000
6.000
6.500
6.500
6.500
6.500
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.500
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.500
B.500
8.500
8.500
9.000
9.000
9.300
9.000
9.500
9.500
9.500
9.500
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.500
10.500
10.500
11.000
11.000
11.500
PCT
0.297
0.637
0.977
1.316
1.656
1.996
2.336
2.676
3.015
3.355
3.695
4.035
4.375
4.715
5.055
5.395
5.734
6.074
6.414
6.754
7.094
7.434
7.774
8.113
8.153
8.793
9.133
9.473
9.313
10.152
10.492
10.832
11.172
11.512
11.352
12.192
12.531
12.071
13.211
13.551
13.891
14.231
14.570
14.910
15.250
15.590
IS. 930
16.270
16.610
16.919
17.289
VALUE
4.000
4.000
4.500
5.000
5.000
S.300
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.500
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.000
6.500
6.500
6.500
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.500
8.000
B.OOO
8.000
8.500
8. 500
8.500
8.500
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.500
9.500
9.500
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.300
10.000
10.500
10.500
10.500
11.000
11.000
11.500
PCT
0.339
0.679
1.019
1.359
1.69?
2.039
2.373
2.713
3.053
3.393
3.733
4.073
4.413
4.757
5.097
5.437
5.777
6.117
6.457
6.796
7.13S
7.47s
7.815
8.156
8.19S
8.336
9.175
9.515
9.355
10.195
10.535
10.875
11.211
11.554
11.894
12.234
12.574
12.914
13.254
13.593
13.933
14.273
14.613
11.953
15.293
15.632
15.972
16.312
16.652
16.992
17.332
-------
m
11.500
11.500
11.500
12.000
12.000
12.000
12.500
13.000
13.000
13.000
13.500
13.500
13.500
14.000
14.000
14.000
14.500
14.500
14.500
15.000
15.000
15.500
15.500
16.000
16.000
16.500
17.000
17.000
17.000
17.500
17.500
19.000
18.000
IP. 500
18.500
18.500
19.000
I'. 000
19.500
19. SOU
20.00U
20.000
20.000
20.500
20.500
21.000
21.000
21.500
21.500
22.000
22.000
22.500
22.500
23.000
23.000
23.500
23.500
17.37U
17.714
18.054
19.394
1B.73U
19.173
19.413
19.753
20.093
20.433
20.773
21.113
21.452
21.792
22.132
22.47?
22.812
23.152
23.491
23.831
24.171
24.511
24.851
25.191
25.531
25.870
26.210
26.550
2C-.990
27.230
27.57P
27.009
28.249
28.589
29. "29
29.269
?9.<;09
29.949
30.P88
30.*28
30.968
31.309
31.648
31.9BP
32.327
32.667
33.007
S3. 347
33.687
34.027
34.367
34.706
35.046
35.386
35.726
36.066
36.406
11.500
11.500
11.500
is.noo
12.101
12.500
12.500
13.000
13.000
13.000
13.500
13.500
13.500
14.000
14.000
14.100
14.500
14.500
14.500
15.000
15.000
15.500
15.500
If .100
16.000
15.501
17.000
17.000
17.000
17.500
17.500
19.000
IB. 000
19.500
19.500
IB. 500
I". 009
19.000
IP. 500
19.500
20.000
20.000
po.noo
20.500
20.501
21.000
21 .000
21.500
21.500
22.000
22.000
??.500
22.500
23.000
23.001
23.500
23.500
17.417
17.757
18.096
IP. 436
19.776
19.116
19.456
19.796
20.135
20.475
20.915
21.155
21.495
21.835
22.175
22.514
22.854
25.194
23.534
23.874
24.214
24.553
24.993
25.233
25.573
25.913
26.253
26.593
26.932
27.272
27.612
27.952
29.292
29.632
28.971
29.311
29.651
29.191
30.331
30.671
31.011
31.350
31.690
Sp.oJO
32.370
32.710
33.050
73.339
33.729
34.069
34.U09
34.749
35.039
35.429
35.759
36.108
36.448
11.500
11.500
11.500
12.000
12.000
12.500
12.500
13.000
13.000
13.000
13.500
13.500
13.500
14.000
14.000
14.000
14.500
14.5UO
15.000
15.000
15.000
15.500
15.500
16.000
16.500
16.500
17.000
17.000
17.000
17.500
17.500
IB. 000
18.000
18.500
18.500
18.500
19.000
19.000
19.500
19.500
20.000
20.0CO
20.000
20.500
20.500
21.000
21.000
21.500
21.500
22.000
?2.000
22.500
22.500
23.000
23.000
23.5nO
23.500
17.459
17.799
18.139
18.479
18.919
19.158
19.498
19.838
20.17P
20.518
20.858
21.197
21.537
21.877
22.217
22.557
22.897
23.237
23.576
23.916
24.256
24.596
24.936
25.276
25.615
25.955
26.295
26.635
26.975
27.315
27.655
27.994
28.334
28.674
29.014
29.354
29.694
30.033
30.373
30.713
31.053
31.393
31.733
32.073
32.412
32.752
33.092
33.432
33.772
34.112
34.452
34.791
35.131
35.471
35.811
36.151
36.491
11.500
11.500
11.500
12.000
12.000
12.500
12.500
13.000
13.000
13.000
13.500
13.500
14.000
14.000
14.000
14.000
14.500
14.500
15.000
15.000
15.000
15.500
15.500
16.000
16.500
16.500
17.000
17.000
17.000
17.500
17.500
18.000
18.000
18.500
18.500
19.000
19.000
19.000
19.500
20.000
20.000
20.000
20.500
20.500
21.000
21.000
21.000
21.500
21.500
22.000
22.000
22.500
22.500
23.000
23.000
23.500
23.500
17.502
17.341
18.131
18.521
18.961
19.201
19.541
19.381
20.220
20.560
20.900
21.240
21.530
21.920
22.259
22.599
22.939
23.279
23.519
23.959
24.299
24.538
24.97(J
25.318
25.658
25.998
26.338
26.577
27.017
27.357
27.697
28.037
28.377
28.717
29.056
29.396
29.735
30.076
30.416
30.755
31.096
31.435
31.775
32.115
32.455
32.795
33.135
33.474
33.314
34.154
34.494
34.334
35.174
35.514
35.953
36.193
36.533
11.500
11.500
11.500
12.000
12.000
12.500
12.500
13.000
13.000
13.000
13.500
13,500
14.000
14.000
14,000
14.000
14,500
14.500
15.000
15.000
15.500
15.500
15.500
16.000
16.500
16.500
17.000
17.000
17.000
17.500
17.500
18.000
18.000
18.500
18.500
19.000
19.000
19.500
19.500
20.000
20.000
20.000
20.500
20.500
21.000
21.000
21.500
21.500
21.500
22.000
22.000
22.500
22.500
23.000
23.000
23.500
23.500
17.544
17.884
18.224
18.564
18.903
19.243
19.583
19.923
20.263
20.603
20.943
21.282
21.622
21.962
22.302
22.642
22.982
23.322
23.661
24.001
24.341
24.681
25.021
25.351
25.700
26.040
26.380
26.720
27.050
27.400
27.740
28.079
28.419
28.759
29.099
29.439
29.779
30.118
30.458
30.798
31.138
31.478
31.818
32.158
32.497
32.837
33.177
33.517
33.857
34.197
34.536
34.876
35.216
35.556
35.896
36.736
36.576
11.500
11.500
11.500
12.000
12.000
12.500
12.500
13.000
13.000
13.000
13.500
13.500
14.000
14.000
14.000
14.000
14.500
14.500
15.000
15.000
15.500
15.500
15.500
16.000
16.500
16.500
17.000
17.000
17.000
17.500
17.500
18.000
18.000
18.500
18.500
19.000
19.000
19.500
19.500
20.000
20.000
20.000
20.500
20.500
21.000
21.000
21.500
21.500
22.000
22.000
22.000
22.500
22.500
23.000
23.000
23.500
23.500
17.587
17,926
18.266
18.606
18.946
19.286
19.626
19.965
20.305
20.645
20.985
21.325
21.665
22.005
22.344
22.694
23.024
23.364
23.704
24.044
24.384
24.723
25.063
25.403
25.743
26.083
26.42J
26.762
27.102
27.442
27.782
28.122
28.462
28.302
29.141
29.481
29.821
30.161
30.501
30.841
31.180
31.520
31.860
32.200
32.54Q
32.880
33.220
33.559
33.899
34.239
34.579
34.919
35.259
35.598
35.93ft
36.278
36.618
11.500
11.500
12.000
12.000
12.000
12.500
12.500
13.000
13.000
13.000
13.500
13.500
14.000
14.000
14.000
14.000
14.500
14.500
15.000
15.000
15.500
15.500
16.000
16.000
15.500
17.000
17.000
17.000
17.500
17.500
17.500
18.000
18.000
13.500
18.500
19.000
19,000
19.500
19.500
20.000
20.000
20.000
20.500
20.500
21.000
21.000
21.500
21.500
22.000
22.000
22.000
22.500
22.500
23.000
23.000
23.500
23.500
17.629
17.969
18.309
18.649
18.988
19.328
19.668
20.008
20.348
20.686
21.028
21.367
21.707
22.047
22.387
22.727
23.067
23.406
23.746
24.086
24.426
24.766
25.106
25,446
25.785
26.125
26.465
26.805
27.145
27.495
27.824
28.164
28,504
28.844
29.184
29.524
29.864
30.203
30.543
30.933
31.223
31.563
31,903
32.242
32.582
32.922
33.262
33.302
33.942
34.292
34,621
34.961
35.301
35.641
35.931
36.321
36.661
11.500
11.500
12.000
12.000
12.000
12,500
13.000
13.000
13.000
13.000
13.500
13.500
14.000
14.000
14.000
14.000
14.500
14.500
15,000
15.000
15.500
15.500
16.000
16.000
16.500
17.000
17.000
17.000
17.500
17.500
18.000
18.000
19.000
19.500
18.500
19.000
19.000
19.500
19.500
20.000
20.000
20.000
20.500
20.500
21.000
21.000
21.500
21.500
22.000
22.000
22.000
22,500
22.500
23.000
23.000
23,500
23.500
17.672
16.011
18.351
18.591
19.031
19.371
19.711
20.050
20.393
20.730
21.070
21.410
21.750
22.090
22.42?
22.769
23.109
23.44?
23.789
24.129
24.463
24.803
25.149
25.488
25.823
26.169
26.509
26.947
27.197
27.527
27.967
28.207
28.547
28.337
29.226
29.566
29.905
30.245
30.585
30.925
31.265
31.505
31.945
32.235
32.625
32.965
33.305
33.641*
33.934
34.324
34.664
35.004
35.344
35.683
36.023
36.355
36. 70S
-------
33.500
21.000
21.000
21.500
21.500
25.000
25.000
25.500
26.000
26.000
26.500
2S.500
27.001)
27.500
27.500
28.000
23.500
23.500
29.000
29.500
30.500
31.500
3?. 000
32.500
31.000
35.000
36.000
m 35.000
' 37.000
0 38.000
4^. 38.500
39.000
10.000
10.500
12.000
12.500
13.000
11.000
41.500
11.500
15.500
16.000
16.000
16.500
17.000
17.500
18.000
18.500
19.000
19.000
50.000
50.500
51.000
52.000
53.000
53.500
55.000
36.715
37.085
37.125
37.765
73.105
38.115
38.785
39.121
39.161
39. HOI
10.111
10.181
10. "21
11.163
11.S03
11.813
12.183
12.523
12.863
13.203
13.512
13.382
11.222
11.56?
11.902
15.J12
15,581
15.921
16.261
16.f-01
16.911
17.281
17.621
17.960
18.300
la.^O
16.980
19.320
19.660
50.000
50.339
50.679
51.019
51.359
51.699
5?. 039
52.378
52.718
53.05P
53.398
53.738
51.076
51.118
51.757
55.097
55.137
55.777
??.500
21.000
21.000
21.500
21.500
25.000
25.500
25.500
26.000
26.000
26.500
26.500
27.000
27.500
27.500
?«.ooo
28.500
28.500
29.000
30.000
so.snn
31.500
32.000
33.000
31.000
3S.POO
36.000
3f .500
37.000
38.000
38.500
39.000
in. POO
10. son
12.000
13.000
13.500
11.000
11.500
11.500
15.500
16.000
11.000
16.500
i7.noo
17.500
18.000
18.500
19.000
10.000
50.000
50.500
M.noo
52.000
53.000
51.000
55. son
36.788
37.128
37.158
37.807
38.117
38.137
38.827
39.157
39.507
39.017
10.136
10.526
10.«56
11.206
11.516
11.036
12.226
12.555
12.905
13.215
H.535
13.925
11.2&5
11.601
11.911
"5.231
15.621
15.961
16.301
16.611
16.933
17.323
17.653
13.003
18.313
18.693
19.n22
1^.352
19.702
50.012
50.332
50.722
51.0^2
51.101
51.711
52.091
52.121
52.751
53.101
53.1"*0
53.730
51.120
51.150
51.800
55.110
55.1BO
55.B19
23.500
21.000
pi.ooo
21.500
25.000
?5.000
25.500
26.000
26.000
26.000
26.500
27.000
27. ODD
27.500
27.500
28.000
28.500
29.000
29.000
30.000
30.500
31.500
32.000
33.000
31.000
35.000
36.000
36.500
37.000
38.000
38.500
39.000
10.000
10.500
12.000
13.000
13.500
11.000
11.500
11.500
15.500
16.000
16.000
16.500
17.000
17.500
18.000
18.500
19.000
19.000
50.000
50.500
51.500
52.000
53.000
51.000
55.500
36.830
37.170
37.510
37.050
38.190
38.530
38.870
39.209
39.519
39.839
10.229
10.569
10.9Q9
11.218
11.588
11.928
12.268
12.608
12.918
13.288
13.627
13.967
11.307
11.617
11.987
15.327
15.666
16.006
16.316
16.686
17.026
17.366
17.706
18.015
18.385
18.725
19.065
19.105
19.715
50.081
50.121
50.761
51.101
51.111
51.781
52.121
52.163
52.803
53.113
53.183
53.823
51.163
51.502
51.812"
55.182
55.522
55.862
23.500
21.000
21.000
21.500
25.000
25.000
25.500
26.000
26.000
26.000
26.500
27.000
27.000
27.500
28.000
28.000
28.500
29.000
29.000
30.000
31.000,
31.500
32.000
33.500
31.000
35.000
36.000
36.500
37.500
38.000
38.500
39.500
10.000
11.000
12.000
13.000
13.500
11.000
11.500
15.000
15.500
16.000
16.500
16.500
',7.000
17.500
18.000
18.500
19.000
19.500
50.000
50.500
51.500
52.000
53.000
51.500
56.000
36.873
37.213
57.553
37.392
38.232
38.572
38.912
39.252
39.592
39.332
10.271
10.611
10.951
11.291
11.631
11.971
12.310
12.650
12.990
13.330
13.570
11.010
11.350
11.689
15.029
15.369
15.709
16.019
16.389
16.728
17.068
17.108
17.713
18.088
18.128
'48.768
19.107
19.117
19.787
50.127
50.167
50.307
51.116
51.136
51.326
52.166
52.506
52.916
53.186
53.525
53.365
51.205
51.515
51.985
5S.22S
55.565
55.901
23.500
21.000
21.000
21.500
25.000
25.000
25.500
26.000
26.000
26.000
26.500
27.000
27.000
27.500
28.000
28.000
28.500
29.000
29.500
30.000
31.000
31.500
32.000
33.500
31.000
35.500
36.000
36.500
37.500
38.000
38.500
39.500
10.500
11.500
12.000
13.000
13.500
11.000
11.500
15.000
15.500
16.000
16.500
17.000
17.000
17.500
18.000
18.500
15.000
19.500
50.000
51.000
51.500
52.000
53.500
55.000
56.000
36.915
37.255
37.595
37.935
38.275
38.615
38.951
39.291
39.631
39.971
10.311
10.651
10.991
11.333
11.673
12.013
12.353
12.693
13.033
13.372
13.712
11.052
11.392
11.732
15.072
15.112
15.751
16.091
16.131
16.771
17.111
17.151
17.791
18.130
18.170
18.810
19.150
19.190
19.830
50.169
50.509
50.819
51.189
51.529
51.869
52.209
52.518
52.888
53.228
53.568
53.908
51.218
51.587
51.927
55.267
55.607
55.917
21.000
21.000
21.000
21.500
25.000
25.000
25.500
26.000
26.000
26.000
26.500
27.000
27.500
27.500
28.000
28.500
28.500
29.000
29.500
30.500
31.500
31.500
32.000
33.500
31.500
35.500
36.000
36.500
37.500
38.500
39.000
39.500
10.500
11.500
12.500
13.000
13.500
11.000
11.500
15.000
15.500
16.000
16.500
17.000
17.000
17.500
18.000
18.500
19.000
19.500
50.500
51.000
51.500
52.500
53.500
55.000
57.000
36.958
37.293
37.638
37.977
38.317
38.657
38.997
39.347
39.677
10.016
10.356
10.696
11.036
11.376
11.716
12.056
12.395
12.735
13.075
13.115
13.755
11.095
11.135
11.771
15.111
15.151
15.791
16.131
16.171
16.813
17.153
17.193
17.833
18.173
18.513
18.853
19.192
19.542
19.872
50.212
50.552
50.892
51.231
51.571
51.911
52.251
52.591
52.931
53.271
53.610
53.950
51.290
51.630
51.970
55.310
55.619
55.989
21.000
21.000
21.500
21.500
25,300
25.000
25.500
26.000
26.000
26.500
26.500
27.000
27.500
27.500
28.000
28.5QO
28.5QO
29.000
29.500
30.500
31.500
32.000
32.000
33.500
31.500
35.500
36.000
37.000
33.000
33.500
39.000
39.500
10.500
11.500
12.500
13.000
11.000
11.000
11.500
15.000
15.500
16,000
15.500
17.000
17.000
17.500
13.000
18.500
19.030
19.500
50.500
51.000
51.500
52.500
53.500
55.000
57.000
37,000
37.310
37,680
38.020
38.360
38.700
39.039
39.379
39.719
10.059
10.399
10.739
11.079
11.118
11.753
12,098
12.138
12.778
13.119
13.157
13.797
11.137
11,177
11.817
15.157
15.197
15,835
16.176
16.516
16.856
17.196
17.535
17.875
18.215
18.555
16.895
19.235
19.575
19.915
50.251
50.591
50.931
51.271
51.611
51,951
52.293
52.633
52.973
53.313
53,653
53.993
51.333
51.672
55.012
55.352
55.692
56.032
21.000
21.000
21,500
21.500
25.000
25.000
25,500
26.000
26.000
26.500
26.500
27.000
27,500
27.500
28,000
28.500
28.500
29.000
29.500
30.500
31.500
32.000
32.500
31.000
31.500
35,500
36.000
37.000
38.000
38.500
39.000
10.000
10.500
12.000
12.500
13.000
11.000
11.500
11.500
15.500
16.000
16.000
16.500
17.000
17.500
18.000
18.000
13,500
19.000
50.000
50.500
51.000
52.000
52.500
53.500
55.000
37.000
37.013
37.383
37.723
38.062
38.102
38.712
39.08?
39.122
39.762
10.101
10.111
10.781
11.121
11.161
11.801
12.111
12.18Q
12.320
13.163
13.500
13.810
11.180
11.519
11.359
15.199
15.539
15.879
16.213
16.559
16.393
17.233
17.573
17.913
18.253
18.599
18.937
19.277
19.617
19.957
50.297
50.637
50.977
51.315
51.655
51.995
52.335
52.675
53.015
53.355
53.695
51.035
51.375
51.715
55.053
55.395
55.731
56.071
-------
57.000
58.000
59.000
60.000
6J.OOO
63.500
61.500
65.000
66.000
67.000
68.000
59.000
70.000
71.000
71.500
72.500
73.000
73.500
75.000
75.500
76.500
77.500
78.500
79.500
80.500
83.000
85. SOU
tn B&.500
1 38.000
O 91.000
01 92.000
93. COO
9<».000
95.000
96.000
96.500
97.500
91.000
100.000
102.000
101.500
105.500
107.000
109.500
111.500
113.000
113.500
115.000
116.000
111.500
119.500
121.000
122.000
121.000
125.500
126.500
129.500
56.117
55.U57
56.796
57,136
57.176
57.116
58.156
59.l9f,
53.136
59.175
59.515
59.P55
60.195
60.535
60.875
61.211
61.55i»
61.191
62.231
62.57H
62.91t
63.25<*
63.593
63.533
61.273
61.613
61.953
65.?93
65.632
65.97?
66.312
56.652
6&.°?2
67.3J2
67.672
63. fill
69. 351
68.691
59.031
69.371
69.711
70.050
70.J90
70.730
71.070
71.110
71.750
72.090
72.129
72.769
73.109
73.119
73.789
71.129
7<«.q58
71.SO«
75.11*
57.000
51. "00
5<».000
60. POO
6?. 000
63.?00
61.500
65.000
66.000
67.000
61.000
69.000
70.000
71.000
72.000
7?. 500
73.000
71.000
75.000
7S.OOO
76.50(1
77.500
7P.500
10.000
fll .000
83.500
65.500
97.000
99.000
91.000
92.000
"3.000
91*. 000
95.000
96.000
96.500
97.500
9P.500
100.500
10J.50C
101.500
lOfi.OOO
107.500
109.500
111.500
113.000
113.500
115.500
116.000
111.500
120.000
121.000
122.500
121.000
X25.500
127.000
129.500
55.159
56.1*9'
56.839
57.179
57.519
57.858
59.198
58.538
59.«78
59.218
59.558
59.S98
60.?37
60.577
60.917
61.257
61.597
61.937
62.276
62.616
62. "56
61.2'6
63.636
63.976
61.315
61.655
6i*.995
65.335
65.675
6S.fll5
66.355
65.691
67.031
67.371
67.711
6S.051
69.391
6". 731
69.073
69.113
69.753
70.093
70.133
70.773
71.113
71.152
71.792
72.132
72.172
72.112
73.152
73.191
73.831
71.171
71.511
71.B51
75.191
57.000
58.000
59.000
60.500
62.500
53.500
61.500
55.000
66.500
67.000
68. ODD
59.000
70.500
71.000
72.000
7?. 500
73.500
71.000
75.000
76.000
77.000
77.500
79.000
90.000
11.000
83.500
85.500
17.000
39.000
91.000
92.500
93.000
91.000
95.500
96.000
96.500
98.000
98.500
101.000
102.500
101.500
106.000
107.500
110.000
111.500
113.000
m.ooo
H5.500
116.500
118.500
120.000
121.500
122.500
121.000
125.500
127.000
129.500
56.202
56.512
56.381
57.221
57.551
57.901
58.211
58.581
58.920
59.260
59.600
59.910
60.280
60.620
60.960
61.299
61.639
SI. 979
52.319
52.659
62.999
63.339
63.678
61.018
51.358
61.698
65.038
55.378
65.717
66.057
66.397
66.737
67.077
57.117
67.757
68.096
58.136
68.776
59.116
69.156
69.796
70.135
70.175
70.915
71.155
71.195
71.835
72.175
72.511
72.851
73.191
73.531
73.871
71.211
71.553
71.893
75.233
57.000
58.000
59.500
60.500
62.500
53.500
51.500
65.000
66.500
67.500
68.500
59.500
70.500
71.000
72.000
72.500
73.500
71.000
75.000
76.000
77.000
77.500
79.000
80. POO
31.000
83.500
65.500
37.000
99.000
91.500
92.500
93.500
91.500
95.500
96.000
97.000
98.000
98.500
101.000
102.500
105.000
106.000
107.500
110.500
112.000
J13.000
111.500
115.500
116.500
119.000
120.000
121..500
123.000
121.500
126.000
127.500
130. 000
56.211
56.581*
56.921
57.261
57.501
57.913
56.233
58.523
58.963
59.303
59.513
59.983
60.322
60.662
51.002
51.312
51.592
52.022
52.361
52.701
53.011
63.331
63.721
51.061
51.101
51.710
55.080
55.120
65.760
66.100
56.110
56.779
57.119
57.159
57.799
58.139
58.179
58.819
69.158
59.198
69.938
70.178
70.518
70.858
71.197
71.537
71.377
72.217
72.557
72.997
73.237
73.576
73.916
71.256
71.596
71.936
75.276
57.500
58.500
59.500
61.000
63.000
61.000
61.500
65.500
66.500
67.500
69.000
69.500
70.500
71.500
72.000
72.500
73.500
71.000
75.000
76.000
77.000
78.000
79.000
80.000
81.000
81.000
86.000
87.000
89.500
91.500
92.500
93.500
91.500
95.500
96.000
97.000
98.000
99.000
101.500
102.500
105.000
106.500
108.500
110.500
112.000
113.500
111.500
115.500
117.000
119.000
120.500
121.500
123.000
121.500
126.000
127.500
130.000
56.267
56.627
56.956
57.306
57.616
57.996
58.326
58.666
59.00^
59.315
59.635
60.025
60.365
60.705
61.015
61.391
61.721
62.061
62.101
62.711
63.091
63.123
63.763
61.103
61.113
61.783
65.123
65.163
65.302
66.112
66.192
66.822
67.152
67.502
67. fill
68.131
68.521
68.861
69.201
69.511
69.931
70.220
70.550
70.900
71.210
71.590
71.920
72.259
72.599
72.939
73.279
73.619
73.959
71.299
71.638
71.978
75.318
57.500
58.500
59.500
61.000
63.000
61.000
65.000
65.500
66.500
67.500
69.000
69.500
71.000
71.500
72.000
73.000
73.500
71.500
75.000
76.500
77.000
78.000
79.000
80.000
81.000
81.000
86.000
67.000
89.500
91.500
92.500
93.500
95.000
95.500
96.000
97.000
98.000
99.500
101.500
101.000
105.000
107.000
109.000
110.500
112.500
113.500
115.000
115.500
117.500
119.000
120.500
121.500
123.000
125.000
126.000
128.000
130.000
56.329
56.669
57.009
57.319
57.689
58.026
58.369
58.703
59.018
59.388
59.728
60.0&7
60.107
60.717
61.087
61.127
61.767
62.107
62.116
62.786
63.126
63.166
63.906
61.116
61.185
61.825
65.165
65.505
55.315
66.185
66.525
66.861
67.201
67.511
67.881,
68.221*
68.5&1
68.901
69.213
69.583
69.923
70.263
70.603
70.913
71.282
71.622
71.962
72.302
72.612
72.982
73.322
73.661
71.001
71.311
71.681
75.021
75.361
57.500
59.000
60.000
61.000
63.000
61.000
65.000
66,000
67.000
67.500
69.000
69.500
71.000
71.500
72.000
73.000
73.500
71.500
75.000
76.500
77.000
78.000
79.000
80.000
81.530
81.000
86.500
87.500
90.000
91.500
92.500
91.000
95.030
95.500
96.000
97.000
98.000
99.500
101.500
101.000
105.000
107.000
109.000
110.500
112.530
113.500
115.000
116.000
117.500
119.500
120.500
122.000
123.500
125.030
125.500
123.500
130.500
56.372
55.711
57.051
57.391
57.731
58.071
58.111
58.751
59.090
59.130
59.770
60.110
60.150
60.790
61.129
61.169
61.809
62.119
52.189
62.329
63.169
63.508
63.818
61.198
61.528
61.863
65.203
55.518
65.387
66.227
66.557
6f.907
67.217
67.587
67.925
68.266
68.606
69.915
59.286
69.626
69.966
70.305
70.615
70.985
71.325
71.665
72.005
72.311
72.681
73.021
73.361
73.701
71.011
71.381
71.723
75.063
75.103
57.500
59.000
60.000
61.500
63.000
61.000
65.000
66.000
67.000
67.500
69.000
70.000
71.000
71.500
72,000
73.000
73.500
75,000
75.500
76.500
77.500
78.500
79.500
80.500
82.500
35.000
86.500
83.000
90.000
92.000
92.500
91.000
95.000
95.500
96.500
97.500
98.000
100.000
102.000
101.000
105.000
107.000
109.500
111.000
112.500
113.500
115,000
116.000
118.000
119.500
121.000
122,000
121.000
125.003
125.500
129.000
130.500
56.111
56.75i*
57.09i«
57.131
57.771
56.113
56.153
58.79J
59.133
59.173
59.313
60.152
60.192
60.832
61.172
61.51?
61.852
62.192
62.531
62.371
63.211
63.551
63.691
61.231
61.57Q
61.510
65.250
65.59D
65.930
66.270
66.613
66.919
67.289
67.629
67.969
68.309
68.619
68.989
69.323
69.669
70. DOS
70.313
70.683
71.023
71.367
71.707
72.017
72.387
72.727
73.067
73.105
73.715
71.085
71.125
71.765
75.105
75.115
-------
m
i
131.000
132.500
ISM. 000
136.500
138.500
1*0.000
1*1.000
1*2.000
1*3.500
I1*?. 500
1*7.000
150.500
152.000
15i». 500
156.500
153. ODD
162.000
165.500
167.000
169.500
171.000
171.000
178.500
181.500
185.000
136.500
183.500
193. COO
198.500
201.500
2U5.500
208.000
211.000
214.500
21S.OOO
?19.500
223.500
225.500
232.500
235.500
239.500
212.000
2*3.500
2*8.000
253.000
257.000
262.500
261.500
271.500
277.500
289.000
293.000
299.000
309.500
319.500
328.500
331.500
75.H8R
75.828
76.16R
76.50ft
76.f>*7
77.187
77.527
77.S67
78.207
78.517
7*.P87
79.226
7°. 566
79.906
80.216
80.586
90.126
91.265
31. 605
31.915
82.285
92.625
82. 965
93.305
63.611
P3.991
31.321
91.661
95.001
95.31"
85.683
?6.n23
86.363
96.703
97.013
87.383
97.723
98.062
88.102
P8.712
89.082
89.122
89.762
90.J01
90.111
90.781
91.121
91.161
91.S01
92.111
92.180
92.920
93.160
93.500
93. BIO
91.180
91.519
131.000
132.500
131.000
136.500
139.500
110.000
111.000
112.500
111.000
115.500
117.000
150.500
152.000
15*. 000
156.500
159.000
162.000
165.^00
167.000
169.500
172.000
171.030
17q.OOO
1«2.500
195. non
136.500
19°. "00
193.000
199.000
20?. 000
205.500
20°. 500
212.000
211.500
216.000
220.000
223.500
22S.500
233.000
236.000
239.000
212.500
211.000
211.000
251.500
257.500
263.000
261.500
272.000
279.000
289.000
291.000
301.000
311.000
322.500
329.000
332.500
75.531
75.P70
76.210
76.550
76.990
77.230
77.570
77.909
79. 2*9
78.599
79.929
79.?S9
79.609
79.919
80.238
80.628
80.968
91.308
61.618
81.938
82.327
82.657
83.007
P3.3*7
83.697
91.027
8t. 357
81.706
85.0*6
85.396
85.725
B6.n56
95.106
96.7*5
87.035
67.125
87.755
89.105
89.1*5
89.735
89.121
89.15*
89.90*
90.1*1
90.19*
90.92*
91.153
91.503
9l.«*3
92.133
92.523
92.853
93.203
93.5*2
93.B32
91.222
91.552
131.500
133.000
131.5QO
137.000
138.500
1*0.000
1*1.500
1*2.500
1*1.030
115.500
1*7.000
150.500
152.000
155.000
156.5QO
159.500
152.000
166.000
1S7.000
168.500
172.000
171.500
179.500
192.500
185.000
196.500
198.500
191.500
199.500
202.500
206.000
210.000
212.000
2l*.5oO
216.500
220.500
223.500
226.000
233.000
236.000
239.000
2*2.500
211.5QO
219.5QO
255.000
257.500
263.000
265.000'
273.000
287.000
289.500
291.500
301.000
317.000
322.500
329.000
333.500
75.573
75.913
76.253
76.593
76.932
77.272
77.612
77.952
70.292
78.632
78.971
79.311
79.651
79.991
80.331
30.671
81.011
31.350
81.690
82.030
82.370
82.710
83.050
83.389
83.729
81.069
31.109
81.719
85.089
85.129
85.768
86.108
86.118
86.788
37.128
87.166
87.807
88.117
98.137
88.827
89.167
69.507
89.817
90.186
'90.526
90.866
91.206
91.516
91.836
92.226
92.565
92.905
93.215
93.585
93.925
91.265
9*. 60*
132.000
133.000
131.500
137.000
138.500
110.000
112.000
112.500
1*5.000
1*6.000
1*7.000
150.500
153.000
155.000
156.500
160.000
152. COO
166.000
167.000
158.500
172.500
176.000
179.500
182.500
135.500
137.000
189.000
195.000
199.500
202.500
205.500
210.500
212.000
211.500
216.500
221. non
221.000
229.000
233.500
236.000
239.500
2*2.500
2*5.000
251.000
255.000
258.500
263.000
266.500
271.500
237.500
290.000
295.500
303.500
317.500
3i3.000
330.000
33*. 500
75.515
75.955
76.295
76.635
76.975
77.315
77.655
77.991
78.331
78.671
79.011
79.351
79.591
30.033
30.373
30.713
31.053
31.393
31.733
32.073
32.*12/
32.752
93.092
33.132
33.772
3*. 112
9*. 152
81.791
35.131
85.171
35.311
36.151
36.191
36.830
37.170
37.510
37.350
38.190
38.530
38.870
39.209
39.5*9
39.389
90.229
90.559
90.909
91.2*8
91.598
91.929
92.268
92.508
92.9*8
93.288
93.527
93.967
91.307
91.617
132.000
133.000
131.500
137.500
139.000
110.000
112.000
113.000
115.000
116.000
1*8.000
151.000
153.000
155.500
157.500
160.000
163.000
166.500
167.500
.169.500
173.000
176.000
180.000
193.000
186.000
197.000
199.500
195.500
199.500
201.000
207.000
211.000
213.500
211.500
217.000
221.000
221.000
229.000
231.500
237.000
210.000
2*2.500
2*6.000
251.500
256.000
259.000
263.500
267.000
271.500
287.500
290.500
296.000
301.500
318.000
325.500
330.500
331.500
75.658
75.998
76.338
76.678
77.017
77.357
77.697
78.037
76.377
78.717
79.056
79.396
79.736
80.076
80.*16
80.756
81.096
81.*35
81.775
82.115
82.*55
82.795
83.135
83.17*
83.81*
8*. 151
81.191
81.831
85.171
85.51*
85.853
86.193
86.533
86.873
87.213
87.553
87.892
88.232
88.572
38.912
89.252
89.592
89.932
90.271
90.611
90.951
91.291
91.631
91.971
92.310
92.650
92.990
93.330
93.670
91,010
91.350
91.639
132.000
133.500
135.500
137.500
139.000
1*0.500
1*2.000
113.500
115.000
116.500
118.000
151.000
153.500
155.500
157.500
160.500
161.000
166.500
167.500
170.000
173.000
176.000
181.000
193.000
186.000
187.500
191.000
197.000
200.000
20*. 500
207.500
211.000
213.500
215.000
217.000
221.500
22*. 500
229.500
235.000
237.000
2*0.000
2*3.000
216.000
252.000
256.000
260.500
263.500
268.000
275.000
287.500
291.500
297.000
305.000
318.000
325.500
330.500
335.000
75.700 132.000
76.0*0 131.000
76.38Q 135.500
76.720 138.000
77.0&0 139.500
77.100 110.500
77.7*0 112.000
78.0'9 113.500
78.119 1*5.500
78.759 1*5.500
79.099 1*9.000
79.*39 151.000
79.779 153.500
80.118 156.000
80. OB 153.000
60.798 161.000
81.138 16*. 500
81.178 165.500
81.813 168.000
82.158 170,000
82.*97 173.000
82.837 176.500
83.177 181.000
63.517 183.000
83.857 185.000
81.197 187.500
8*. 536 192.000
8*. 376 198.000
85.216 2QO.OOO
85.556 20*. 500
85.395 209.000
86.236 211.000
86.576 213.500
86.915 215.000
87.255 218.000
87.595 223.000
87.935 22*. 500
88.275 230.500
88.615 235.500
88.951 237.500
89.291 210.500
89.631 2*3.000
89.971 215.500
90.311 252.500
90.651 257.000
90.991 260.500
91.333 263.500
91.673 263.000
9J.013 276.000
92.353 289.500
92.69J 292.000
93.033 293.500
93.372 305.500
93.712 319.000
91.032 328.000
91.392 330.500
91.732 335.500
75.7*3
76.083
76.*23
76.762
77.102
77.*12
77.782
78.122
78.162
78.802
79.1*1
79.181
79.921
80.161
80.501
80.811
81.180
81.520
31.860
82.200
82.510
32.880
83.220
33.559
83.899
31.239
51.579
81.919
85.259
85.599
85.933
86.278
86.618
86.953
37.293
87.633
87.977
88.317
88.657
33.997
89.337
89.677
90.016
90.355
90.696
91.036
91.376
91.716
92,056
92.395
92.735
93.075
93.115
93,755
91.095
9*.*35
9"».77*
132.500
13*. POO
135.500
138,000
110.000
110.500
112.000
113.500
115.500
1*7,000
1*9.500
151.500
151.000
156.500
153.000
162.000
165.000
166.500
163.000
171.000
173.500
177.500
181.000
163.500
186.000
133.000
192.500
193.500
200.500
205.000
2QS.OOO
211.000
211.000
215.000
219.000
223.000
225.000
231.000
235.300
233.500
211.500
2*3.000
217.000
253,000
257.000
261.300
263.500
269.500
276.000
289.000
293.000
299.000
309,500
319.000
328.000
331.000
336.500
75.735
76.125
76.155
76.805
77.115
77.185
77.821
78.161
78.50'*
78.81*
79.18*
79.52*
79.861
80.203
30.513
80.883
81.223
81.563
91.903
82.2*2
32.532
82.922
83.262
83.602
83.9*2
8*. 282
81.521
81.961
85.301
85.611
85.981
86.321
86.661
87.000
87.3*0
87.680
88.020
88.360
88.700
89.039
89.379
U9.719
90.059
90.393
90.739
91.079
91.119
91.753
92.093
92.*39
92.778
93.113
93.*57
93.797
91.137
91.177
9*. 817
-------
337.500
340.000
358.500
369.000
375.500
391.500
101.500
no. noo
130. OOU
159.000
186.500
530.000
566.000
611.500
757.000
1071.500
91. R5"
95.199
95.539
95.R79
96.?19
96.559
96.R9B
97.33P
97.57ft
97.°1P
98.258
gB.'igfl
98.937
99.P77
99.617
338.000
314?. 500
35P.500
370.000
376.000
39J.OOO
tO?. 500
111.500
132.000
159.000
193.000
537.000
569.500
61*7.500
759.500
99. 9571131.500
91.902
95.2'*2
95.532
95.921
96.251
96.601
96.911
97.231
97.621
97.960
98.300
99.610
98.990
99.320
99.660
100. 000
358.000
311.500
360.000
371.500
378.500
392. 500
105.000
116.000
135.500
•»59.5CIO
tg&.soo
538. 000
579.500
6l»9.000
763.000
91.9I*1*
95.281
95.621
95.961
96.301
96.611
96.933
97.323
97.663
98.003
96.313
98.683
99.022
99.362
99.702
338.500
311.500
360.000
372.000
379.000
391.000
105.000
116.500
138.000
162.000
"99.000
510.000
606.000
619.500
787.000
91.987 J38.500
95.327 316.000
95.566 362.000
96.006 373.000
96.316 380.000
96.586 397.;000
97.026 106,000
97.366 119.500
97.706 112.000
98.015 161.500
98.335 509.000
98.725 517.000
99.065 608.500
99.105 660.500
99.715 821.500
95.029
95.369
95.709
96.019
96.389
96.728
97.068
97.108
97.718
98.088'
98.128
98.768
99.107
99.117
99.737
339.000
350.000
363.000
373.500
383.000
397.500
108.000
120.000
113.500
173.000
510.500
550.000
616.500
660.500
360.500
95.072
95.112
95.751
96.0^1
96.131
96.771
97.111
97.151
97.791
98.130
98.17Q
98.810
99.150
99.190
99.83Q
310.000
351.000
365.000
371. ODO
387.000
399.000
108.500
122.000
151.500
176.500
521.000
551.000
636.000
717.000
902.000
95.111
95.151
95.791
96.131
96.171
96,813
97.153
97.193
97,833
98.173
98.513
98,853
99,192
99.532
99.372
310.000
351.500
366.500
375.000
388.500
399.000
"108.500
122.000
156.500
181,500
523.000
556.000
636.500
711.000
918.000
95.157
95.197
95.336
96.175
96.51S
96.855
97.19$
97.535
97.375
98.215
98.555
98.895
99.23?
99.575
99.915
CD
I
-------
m
i
o
00
1191.500 I
1157.870 I
113t.2<»0 I
1110.610 I
:036.9«0 I
1063.350
1039.720
1016.090
992.460
968.830
9*5.200 I
921.570 I
897. 9<»0 I
87t.310 I
850.630 I
827.050 I
303. t20 I
779.790 I
756.160 I
732.530
708.900
695.270
661.640
638.010
611.380
590.750
557.120
519.860
096.230
1*72.600
1*143.970
U25. 3<*0
1*01.710
378.080
35"*.<*5D
330.820
307,1*0 I
293.560 I
259. 93C I
236.300 I
212.670 I
189.040 I
165.110 I
11*1.780 I
118.150 I
9
-------
RETURN PERIOD UN YEARS) FOR DELTA
VALUE
1181.500
759.500
647,500
569.500
537.000
493.000
459.000
432.000
411.500
402.500
392.000
376.000
J70.000
358.500
342.500
338.000
332.500
329.000
322.500
314.000
301. OOU
294.000
289.000
m 279.000
1 272.000
g 264.500
05 263.000
257.500
254.500
249. OOU
244.000
242.500
239.000
236. OOU
233.000
225.500
223.500
220.000
216.000
214.500
212.000
203.500
205.500
202.000
199.000
193.000
18B.500
186.500
185.000
182.500
179.000
174.000
172.000
PERIOD VALUE
26.nOOi07l.50n
2.888 757.000
1.529 644.500
1.P40 556.000
0.787 530.000
0.634 4B6.500
0.^30 459.000
0.456 430.000
0.400 410.000
0.356 401.500
0.320 391.500
0.292 375.500
0.268 369.000
O.P47 35P.500
0.230 34P.OOO
0.214 337.500
0.201 331.500
0.189 32P.500
0.179 319.500
0.169 309.500
0.161 299.000
0.153 293. POO
0.146 230.000
0.140 277.500
0.134 271.500
0.129 2614.500
0.124 262.500
0.119 257.000
0.115 253.000
0.111 24?. 000
0.107 243.500
0.104 242.000
0.101 23?. 500
0.098 235.500
0.095 23?. 500
O.P9? 225.500
0.089 223.500
O.OB7 219.500
0.085 216.000
0.083 21U.5IJO
0.080 211.000
0.079 201.000
0.077 205.500
0.075 2P1 .500
O.C73 193.500
0.072 193.000
0.070 1RB.500
0.063 196.500
0.067 185.000
O.P66 1B1.500
0.064 17B.500
0.063 174.000
0.062 171.000
PERIOD VALUE
13.000 9i8.000
2.600 7i»1.000
1.444 636.500
1.000 556.000
0.754 523.000
0.619 481.500
0.520 456.500
0.448 422.000
0.393 408.500
0.351 399.000
0.317 338.500
0.238 375.000
0.255 366.500
0.245 351.500
0.228 3HO.OOO
0.213 336.500
0.200 331.000
0.188 323.000
0.178 3J9.000
0.158 309.500
0.150 299.000
0.152 293.000
0.146 299.000
0.139 276.000
0.134 269.500
0.128 2O. 500
0.123 261.500
0.119 257.000
0.115 253.000
0.111 2<»7.000
0.107 2!»3.000
0.104 241.500
0.100 238.500
0.097 235.5QO
0.094 231.000
0.092 225.000
0.089 223.000
0.037 219.000
0.034 215.000
0.032 214.000
0.030 2il.ooO
0.078 208.000
0.076 205.000
0.075 200.500
0.073 198.500
0.071 192.500
0.070 138.000
0.058 196.000
0.057 1S3.500
0.055 131.000
0.054 177.500
0.063 173.500
0.062 171.000
PERIOD VALUE
8.666 902.000
2.363 717.000
1.368 636.000
0.962 554.000
0.742 521.000
0.604 476.500
0.509 451.500
0.440 422.000
0.388 408.500
0.346 399.000
0.313 397.000
0.285 374.000
0.262 355.000
0.242 351.000
0.226 340.000
0.211 335.500
0.198 330.500
0.187 328.000
0.176 319.000
0.167 305.500
0.159 298.500
0.152 292.000
0.145 288.500
0.139 276.000
0.133 268.000
0.128 263.500
0.123 260.500
0.118 257.000
0.114 252.500
0.110 246.500
0.106 243.000
0.103 240.500
0.100 237.500
0.097 235.500
0.094 230.500
0.091 224.500
0.089 223.000
0.086 218.000
0.084 215.000
0.082 213.500
0.080 211.000
0.07fl 208.000
0.076 204.500
0.074 200.000
0.073 198.000
0.071 192.000
0.070 137.500
0.068 186.000
0.067 183.000
0.065 181.000
0.061* 176.500
0.063 173.000
0.062 170.000
PERIOD VALUE
6.500 860.500
2.166 660.500
1.300 516.500
0.923 550.000
0.722 510.500
0.590 473.000
0.500 41*3.500
0.433 420.000
3.382 408.000
0.342 397.500
0.309 333.000
0.232 373.500
0.260 363.000
0.240 350.000
0.224 339.000
0.209 335.000
0.196 330.500
0.185 325.500
0.175 318.000
0.166 305.000
0.158 297.000
0.151 291.500
0.144 287.500
0.138 275.000
0.132 268.000
0.127 263.500
C.122 260.500
0.118 256.000
0.114 252.000
0.110 246.000
0.106 243.000
0.103 2DO.OOO
0.100 237.000
0.097 235.000
0.094 229.500
0.091 224.500
0.089 221.500
0.086 217.000
0.084 215.000
0.082 213.300
0.080 2H.OOO
0.078 207.500
0.076 2Q4.500
0.074 200.000
0.073 197.000
0.071 191.000
0.069 187.500
0.068 186.000
0.067 183.000
0.065 181.000
0.064 176.000
0.063 173.003
0.061 170.000
PERIOD VALUE
5.200 821.500
2.000 660.500
1.238 608.500
0.896 547.000
0.702 509.000
0.577 464.500
0.490 442.000
0.426 419.500
0.376 406.000
0.337 397.000
0.305 330.000
0.279 373.000
0.257 362.000
0.238 346.000
0.222 338.500
0.208 334.500
0.195 330.500
0.184 325.500
0.174 318.000
0.165 304.500
0.157 296.000
0.150 290.500
0.143 287.500
0.137 274.500
0.1X1 267.000
0.126 263.500
0.122 259.000
0.117 256.000
0.113 251.500
0.109 246.000
0.106 242.500
0.102 240.000
0.099 237.000
0.096 234.500
0.093 229.000
0.091 224.000
o.oes 221. coo
0.086 217.000
0.084 214.500
0.082 213.500
0.080 211.000
0.078 207.000
0.076 204.000
0.074 199.500
0.072 195.500
0.071 189.500
0.069 187.000
0.068 186.000
0.066 183.000
0.055 180.000
0.064 176.000
0.062 173.000
0.061 169.500
PERIOD VALUE
4.333 787.000
1.857 649.500
1.181 606.000
0.866 540.000
0.681* 499.000
0.565 462.000
0.481 438.000
0.419 415.500
0.371 405.000
0.333 394.000
0.302 379.000
0.276 372.000
0.254 360.000
0.236 344.500
0.220 338.500
0.205 334.500
0.19i* 330.000
0.163 323.000
0.173 317.500
0.164 303.500
0.156 295.500
0.149 290.000
0.142 287.500
0.13& 274.500
0.131 266.500
0.126 263.000
0.121 258.500
0.117 255.000
0.113 251.000
0.109 245.000
0.105 242.500
0.1.02 239.500
0.099 235.000
0.096 233.500
0.093 229.000
0.090 224.000
0.088 221.000
0.086 216.500
0.083 214.500
0.081 212.000
0.079 210.500
0.077 206.500
0.076 232,500
0.071* 199.500
0.072 195.000
0.071 189.000
0.069 187.000
0.068 185.500
0.066 132.500
0.06s 179.500
0.064 176.000
0.062 172.500
0.061 168.500
PERIOD VALUE
3.7m 763.000
1.733 649.000
1.130 579.500
0.833 538.000
0.666 496.500
0.553 459.500
0.472 435.500
0.412 41&.000
0.366 405.000
0.329 392.500
0.298 378.500
0.273 371.500
0.252 360.000
0.234 344.500
0.218 338.000
0.204 333.500
0.192 329.000
0.181 322.500
0.172 317.000
0.163 301.000
0.155 294.500
0.148 289.500
0.142 287.000
0.136 273.000
0.130 265.000
0.125 263.000
0.120 257.500
0.116 255.000
0.112 249.500
0.108 244.500
0.105 242.500
0.101 239.000
0.098 236.000
0.095 233.000
0.093 226.000
0.090 223.500
0.083 220.500
0.085 216.500
0.083 214.500
0.081 212.000
0,079 210.000
0.077 206.000
0.075 202.500
0.074 199.500
0.072 194.500
0.070 188.500
0.069 136.500
0.067 185,000
0.066 182.500
0.055 179.500
0.063 174.500
0.062 172.000
0.061 168.500
PtHIOD
3.250
1.525
1.083
0.812
0.650
0.541
0.45'4
0.405
0.361
0.325
0.293
0.270
0.250
0.232
0.216
0.203
0.191
0.180
0.171
0.162
0.154
0.147
0.141
0.135
0.130
0.125
0.120
0.115
0.112
0.109
0.104
0.101
0.093
0.095
0.092
0.090
0.087
0.085
0.083
0.081
0.079
0.077
0.075
0.073
0.072
0.070
0.06?
0.067
0.066
0.063
0.063
0.062
0.061
-------
163.500
1ST. 000
165.500
167.000
159.000
156.500
155.000
152.000
150.500
117.000
I1* -5. 500
I1*1*. 000
I1*?. 500
in. ooo
140.000
US. 500
156.500
iStt.OOO
13?. 500
131.000
129.500
127.000
125.500
m.ooo
122.500
121.000
1?O.OOU
118.500
, 116.000
1- 115.500
"-1 113.500
° 113.000
111.500
109.500
107.500
106. COO
104.500
102.500
100. 5UU
98.500
97.500
96.500
95.000
9?. 000
9i».000
93.000
92.000
91.000
89.000
37.000
85.500
83.500
81.000
80.000
78.500
77.500
76.500
O.P61
0.060
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
O.p5i»
o.n54
O.nSS
0.052
0.051
0.050
O.P49
0.0t9
O.ptB
0.017
0.0*7
o.nt6
0.015
0.0*5
O.Otl
0.«43
o.ots
O.C*2
0.0*2
O.nll
O.n«»l
0.010
0.0*0
0.039
0.039
O.fl3fl
0.030
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0."36
0."35
0.035
0.03<»
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
O.P32
0.032
0.031
0.031
O.n3i
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
164.500
167.000
165.500
152.000
158.000
156. 500
154.500
I5?.noo
150.500
147.000
145.500
1*3.500
142.000
141.000
140.000
13P.500
13P-.500
1311.000
133.500
1ST. 000
129.500
126.500
125.500
124.000
1?2.000
121.000
119.500
118.500
116.000
115.000
113.500
113. POO
m.soo
109.500
107.000
109.500
104.500
10?. 000
ion. ooo
98.000
97.500
96.500
96.000
95.000
91*. 000
93.000
92.000
91.000
88.000
86.500
8?. 500
83.000
80.500
79.500
78.500
77.500
76.500
O.OS1
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.05<»
0.053
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.0*9
0.049
o.ots
0.047
0.0*6
o.nt6
o.ots
O.Ott
o.ott
o.ots
o.ots
0.0t2
o.ota
O.Otl
o.oti
0.0*0
o.oto
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.031
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
o.nso
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
168.000
166.500
165.000
162.000
158.000
156.500
151.000
151.500
119.500
1147.000
H»5.500
113.500
142.000
mo. soo
110.000
138.000
135.500
131.000
132.500
130.500
129.000
126.500
125.000
l?t.OOO
122.000
121.000
119.500
118.000
116.000
115.000
H3.500
112.500
111. 000
109.500
107.000
105.000
m.ooo
102.000
100.000
98.000
97.500
96.500
95.500
95.000
91.000
92.500
92.000
90.000
88.000
86.500
95.000
82.500
90.500
79.500
78.500
77.500
76.500
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.051
0.053
0.052
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.019
o.ots
o.ote
0.0t7
0.016
0.016
o.ots
o.oti
0.011
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.0t2
O.OH
o.oto
0.010
0.039
0.039
D.038
0.038
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.029
168.000
166.500
161.500
161.000
158.000
156.000
153.500
151.000
119.000
116.500
115.500
113.500
112.000
110.500
139.500
138.000
135.500
131.000
132.000
130.500
128.500
It6.500
125.000
123.500
182.000
120.500
119.500
117.500
116.000
115.000
113.500
112.500
110.500
109.000
107.000
105.000
lOt. 000
101.530
99.500
98.000
97.000
96.000
95.500
95.000
?1.030
92.500
91.500
90.000
87.500
86.500
81.000
81.500
80.000
79.000
78.000
77.000
76.500
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.051
0.053
0.052
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.019
0.018
0.018
0.017
0.016
0.016
o.ots
0.011
o.oit
0.013
0.013
0.012
o.oti
0.011
0.010
0.010
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.038
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.031
0.031
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.029
167.500
166.500
161.000
160.500
157.500
155.500
153.500
151.000
118.000
116.500
145.000
113.500
112.000
110.500
139.000
137.500
135.500
133.500
132.000
130.000
128.000
126.000
125.000
123.000
121.500
120.500
119.000
117.500
115.500
115.000
113.500
112.5QO
110.500
109.000
107.000
105.000
lot. ooo
101.500
99.500
98.000
97.000
96.000
95.500
95.000
93.500
92.500
91.500
89.500
87.000
86.000
81.000
81.000
80.000
79.000
78.000
77.000
76.500
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.054
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.051
0.050
0.019
o.ota
0.018
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.014
0.044
0.043
0.012
0.012
0.041
O.Otl
0.040
o.oto
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.0?9
0.029
167.500
166.500
163.000
160.000
157.500
155.500
153.000
151.000
148.000
146.000
115.000
113.000
112.000
140.000
139.000
137.500
134.500
133.000
132.000
130.000
127.500
126.000
1?4.500
123.000
121.500
120.500
119.000
117.000
115.500
111.500
113.500
112.000
110.500
108.500
106.500
105.000
102.500
101.500
99.000
98.000
97.000
96.000
95.500
94.500
93.500
92.500
91.500
89.500
87.000
86.000
84.000
81.000
BO.noo
79.000
78.000
77.000
76.000
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.0^5
0.054
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.050
O.OSo
0.0t9
o.ote
0.0t7
0.0t7
0.0t6
o.ots
o.ots
0.0*4
0.0t4
0.0*3
0.0t2
0.0*2
0.0*1
0.0*1
0.040
o.oto
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
O.Q31
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.029
167.000
166.000
162.500
160.000
156.500
155.000
153.000
150.500
147.000
146.000
145.000
142.500
142.030
140.000
139.500
137.000
131.500
133.000
132.000
130.000
127.500
126.000
121.500
123.000
121.500
120.000
119.000
116.500
115.500
111.500
113.000
112.000
110.500
107.500
106.000
105.000
102.500
101.000
98.500
98.000
97.000
96.000
95.500
91.500
93.500
92.500
91.500
89.000
87.000
85.500
83.500
81.000
80.000
79.000
77.500
77.000
76.000
0.060
0.059
0.058
0.057
0.056
0.055
0.051
0.053
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.050
0.019
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.046
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.011
O.Otl
0.040
0.040
0.039
0.039
0.038
0.038
0.037
0.037
0.036
0.036
0.036
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.032
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.029
0.029
167.000
166.000
162.300
159.500
156.500
155.000
152.000
150.500
147.000
145.500
144.000
142.500
141.500
140.000
133.500
137.000
134.500
133.000
131.500
129.500
127.000
125.500
121.000
122.500
121.500
120.000
118.500
116.500
115.500
111.000
113.000
111.503
110.000
107.500
106.000
101.500
102.500
101.000
98.500
98.000
96.500
96.000
95.500
91.000
93.000
92.500
91.000
89.000
87.000
85.500
83.500
81.000
80.000
79.000
77.500
77.000
76.000
0.060
0.055
0.053
0.057
0.056
0.035
0.054
0.353
0.052
0.051
0.050
0.053
0.019
0.018
0.017
0.047
O.O'.S
0.045
0.045
0.014
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.04?
O.Otl
O.OH
0.040
0.010
0.339
0.039
0.033
0.039
0.037
0.037
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.034
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.932
0.032
0.032
0.031
0.031
0.031
0.030
0.030
0.033
0.030
0.029
0.029
-------
tn
i
76.000
75.000
7t.OOO
73.000
72.500
72.000
71.000
70.000
69.000
68.000
67.000
66.000
65.000
St. 500
63.500
62.000
60.000
59.000
58.000
57.000
55.500
5U.OOO
53.000
52.000
SI. 000
50.500
50.000
1*9.000
1*9.000
1*8.500
4B.OOO
t7.500
1*7.000
1*6. 500
tft.OOO
1*6.000
"•5.500
tt.500
tu.500
tH.OOO
<*3.500
t3.000
t2.000
«*0. 500
<»o.ooo
39.000
38.500
38.000
37.000
36.500
36.000
35.000
31*. 000
33.000
3?. 000
31.500
30.500
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.02H
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
O.P27
0.026
0.02ft
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.021*
0.021*
O.P2<»
0.02<*
O.n2i*
0.021*
O.n23
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
O.P23
O.C22
O.P22
O.n23
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
O.n21
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.n20
O.n?o
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
75.500
75.000
73.500
73.000
72.500
71.500
71.000
70.000
69.000
68.000
67.000
66.000
65.000
6<*.500
63.500
62.000
60.000
59.000
5?.000
57.000
55.000
51.500
53.000
52.000
51.000
50.^00
50.000
U9.000
i*9.000
1*8.500
i*n.OOO
U7.500
<*7.000
i*6.500
1*6.000
1*6.000
H5.^00
tit.500
tt.500
UU.OOO
<*3.000
U?.500
1*2.000
tO. 500
UO. POO
30.000
3P.500
30.000
37.000
36.000
36.000
35.000
3i*. 000
32.500
32.000
31.500
30.500
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.023
0.028
0.029
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.021*
0.02t
0.021*
0.02<*
0.021*
O.P2I*
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.0?2
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
o.o?.o
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
75.500
75.000
73.500
73.000
72.000
71.500
71.000
70.000
69.000
67.500
67.000
66.000
55.000
6t.OOO
63.000
61.500
60.000
59.000
57.500
57.000
55.000
53.500
52.500
52.000
51.000
50.500
50.000
H9.000
1*8.500
1*8.000
H8.000
U7.500
H7.000
1*6.500
<*6.000
tfi.OOO
•45.500
tt.500
tt.500
i»<».000
t3.000
i»2.500
1*2.000
tO. 500
to. ooo
39.000
3R.500
38.000
37.0PO
36.000
35.500
St. 500
3t.OOO
32.500
32.000
31.500
30.500
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.02t
0.02"*
0.02t
0.02i*
0.021*
0.02t
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
75.000
7"».500
73.500
73.000
72.000
71.500
71.000
69.500
69.000
67.500
67.000
66.000
65.000
6t.OOO
63.000
61.000
60.000
59.000
57.500
57.000
55.000
53.500
52.500
51.500
51.000
50.500
t9.500
t9.000
t8.500
t*B.OOO
t7.500
t7.000
t7.000
t6.500
t&.OOO
t5.500
tS.OOO
tt.500
tt.OOO
tt.ooo
tS.OOO
t2.500
tl.500
to.sao
*9.*00
39.000
Sa.-iOO
38.000
37.000
36.000
35.500
St. 500
33.500
32.000
32.000
31.500
30.500
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.02t
0.021*
0.02t
0.02t
0.02t
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
75.000
7t.500
73.500
73.000
72.000
71.500
71.000
69.500
69.000
67.500
66.500
65.500
65.000
6t.OOO
63.000
61.000
59.500
58.500
57.500
57.000
55.000
53.500
52.500
51.500
51.000
50.500
t9.500
H9.000
t8.500
ts.ooo
t7.500
t7.000
t7.000
t6.500
1*6.000
t5.500
ts.ooo
tt.500
tt.OOO
tS.500
ts.ooo
i*?.500
tl.500
tO. 500
39.500
39.000
38.500
37.500
36.500
36.000
35.500
3t.5QO
33.500
32.000
31.500
31.500
30.500
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.327
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.02t
0.02t
0.02t
0.02t
0.02t
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.02?
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
75.000
7t.OOO
73.500
72.500
72.000
71.500
70.500
69.500
69.000
67.500
66.500
65.500
6t.500
6t.OOO
63.000
61.000
59.500
58.500
57.500
56.000
55.000
53.500
52.000
51.500
51.000
50.000
t9.500
t9.000
t8.500
ts.ooo
t7.500
t7.000
t7.000
t6.500
t6.000
H5.500
"5.000
tt.500
tt.OOO
t3.500
ts.ooo
t2.000
tl.500
tO. 500
39.500
38.500
38.000
37.500
36.500
36.000
35.500
3t.oOO
33.500
32.000
31.500
31.000
30.000
0.029
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.02B
0.023
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.02t
0.02i*
0.021*
0.021*
0.021*
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
75.000
Tt.OOO
73.500
72.500
72.000
71.000
70.500
69.500
68.500
67.500
66.500
65.000
6t.500
63.500
62.500
60.500
59.500
58.000
57.000
56.000
5t.500
53.000
52.000
51.500
50.500
50.000
t9.500
t9.000
1*8.500
tS.OOO
t7.500
t7.000
t6.500
t6.500
ts.ooo
t5.500
ts.ooo
tt.500
tt.OOO
t3.500
ts.ooo
>*2.000
tl.OOO
to. ooo
39.500
33.500
38.000
37.500
3S.500
3&.000
35.000
St.OOO
33.500
32.000
31.500
31.000
30.000
0.029
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.023
0.028
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.02t
0.02t
0.02<»
0.02t
0.02t
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.019
0.919
0.019
0.019
0.019
75.000
74.000
73.500
72.500
72.000
71.000
70.500
69.000
6B.OOO
67.000
66.500
65.000
6t.500
63.500
62.500
60.500
59.000
58.000
57.000
55.500
st.ooo
53.000
52.000
51.500
bO.500
50.000
t9.000
t9.000
tB.500
t8.000
t7.500
t7.000
t&.500
<*i.OOO
1*6.000
t5.500
tt.500
tt.500
tt.OOO
tS.500
ts.ooo
42.000
tO. 500
to. ooo
39.000
38.500
33.000
37.900
36.500
36.000
35.000
st.ooo
33.000
32.000
31.500
30.500
30.000
0.029
0.029
0.023
0.023
0.023
O.C23
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.027
0.026
0.026
0.02S
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.024
0.02t
0.02i»
0.02'4
0.02'4
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.022
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.021
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.023
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
-------
30.000
29.000
29.500
28.500
2p.ooo
27.500
27.500
27.000
26.500
2f.500
26.000
26.000
25.500
25.500
25.000
24.500
21.500
2«.000
21.000
23.500
23.500
23.500
23.000
23.000
22.500
22.500
22.000
22.000
21.530
21.500
21.000
21.000
20.500
20.500
20.000
20.000
20.000
19.500
19.500
19.000
19.000
18.500
18.500
IP. 500
18.000
18.000
17.500
17.500
17.000
17.000
17.000
16.500
16.000
16.000
15.500
15.500
15.000
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.01"
0.018
O.Olfl
0.018
O.P18
o.niR
0.018
o.oie
0.018
O.nis
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
O.H16
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.116
O.PU
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
o.nis
0.015
o.nis
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.01<»
0.014
0.014
o.oi4
0.014
0.014
29.500
29.000
?«.500
2B.500
29.000
27.500
27.500
27.000
26.500
26.500
26.000
26.000
25.500
25.000
25.000
24.500
24.500
24.000
24.000
?3.500
23.500
23.500
?3.noo
23.000
2?. 500
22.500
??.OQO
2?. 000
21.500
21.500
Jl.OOO
21.000
20.500
?0.500
20.000
20.000
20.000
19.500
19.500
19.000
19.000
IP. 500
19.500
lfl.500
18.000
18.000
17.500
17.500
17.000
17.000
17.100
16.500
16.000
16.000
15.500
1-S.500
15.000
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.018
o.nia
0.019
0.018
o.nis
o.nis
O.OlB
O.P13
0.018
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
O.P16
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.016
0.01&
0.016
O.P16
0.016
o.nlfe
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
o.nis
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
O.Ol*
0.01*
O.Ol*
o.oi*
O.Ol*
o.oi*
o.oi*
29.500
29.000
28.500
J8.500
28.000
27.500
27.5QO
27.000
26.500
26.500
26.000
26.000
25.530
25.000
25.000
2"».500
2"».500
2t.OOO
2*. 000
23.500
23.500
23.000
23.000
22.500
22.500
72.000
22.000
22.000
21. SCO
21.500
21.000
21.000
20.500
?0.500
20.000
20.000
20.000
19.500
19.500
19.000
19.000
18.500
18.500
18.000
18.000
18.000
17.500
17.500
17.000
17.000
17.000
16.500
16.000
16.000
15.500
15.500
15.000
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
o.oie
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.013
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.01*
0.014
0.014
29.500
29.000
28.500
28.500
28.000
27.500
27.500
27.000
26.500
26. -500
26.000
26.000
25.500
25.000
25.000
2*. 500
2*. 500
24.000
2*. 000
23.500
23.500
23.000
23.000
22.500
22.500
22.000
22.000
22.000
21.500
21.500
21.000
21.000
20.500
20.500
20.000
20.000
20.000
19.500
19.500
19.000
19.000
18.500
18.500
18.000
18.000
17.500
17.500
17.500
17.000
17.000
17.000
16.500
16.030
16.000
15.500
15.500
15.000
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.018
0.018
0.018
O.OlB
0.01S
0.018
0.018
o.oia
o.ois
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
o.om
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
29.500
29.000
28.500
28.500
28.000
27.500
27.500
27.000
26.500
26.000
26.000
26.000
25.500
25.000
25.000
24.500
24.000
24.000
24.000
23.5QQ
23.500
23.000
23.000
22.500
22.5QO
22.000
22.000
22.000
21.500
21.500
21.000
21.000
20.500
20.500
20.000
20.000
20.000
19.500
19.500
19.000
19.000
18.500
18.500
18.000
18.000
17.500
17.500
17.000
17.000
17.000
16.500
16.500
16.000
15.500
15.500
15.SOO
15.000
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
o.oic
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015,
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
29.500
29.000
28.500
28.000
28.000
27.500
27.000
27.000
26.500
26.000
26.000
26.000
25.500
25.000
25.000
2*. 530
24.000
24.000
23.500
23.500
23.500
23.000
23.000
22.500
22.500
22.000
22.000
21.500
21.500
21.500
21.000
21.000
20.500
20.500
20.000
20.000
20.000
19.500
19.500
19.000
19.000
18.500
18.500
18.000
18.000
17.500
17.500
17.000
17.000
17.000
16.500
16.500
16.000
15.500
15.500
15.500
15.000
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.013
0.01*
O.OlB
o.ois
0.018
0.018
O.OlB
0.018
0.013
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
o.ois
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
29.000
29.300
28.500
23.000
23.000
27.500
27.000
27.000
26.500
26.030
26.000
26.003
25.5QO
25.000
25.000
2*. 500
24.000
24.000
23.500
23.500
23.500
23.000
23.000
22.500
22.500
22.000
22.000
21.500
21.500
21.000
21.000
21.000
20.500
20.500
20.000
20.000
20.000
19;500
19.000
19.000
19.000
18.500
18.SOO
18.000
18.000
17.530
17.530
17.000
17.000
17.000
16.500
16.500
16.000
15.500
15.500
15.000
15.000
0.019
0.0l9
0.019
0.019
O.OlB
0.018
0.018
0.018
0.018
O.OlB
0.018
0.013
0.018
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
O.OIS
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
29.000
29.000
28.500
28.000
27.500
27.500
27.000
27.000
26.500
26.300
26.000
26.000
25.500
2S.QOO
25.000
24.500
24.000
24.000
23.500
23.500
23.500
23.000
23.000
22.500
22.500
22.000
22.000
21.500
21.500
21.000
21.000
20.500
20.500
20.000
20.000
20.000
19.500
19.500
19.000
19.000
IB. 500
18.500
18.500
18.000
13.000
17.500
17.500
17.000
17.000
17.000
16.500
16.500
16.000
15.500
15.503
15.000
15.000
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.019
O.OIS
0.019
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.015
0.015
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
O.OIS
0.016
0.016
0.016
O.OU
O.OU
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.013
O.OIS
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
-------
15.0CO
m.soo
li*. 500
10.500
11.000
It. 000
114.000
13.500
13.500
13.500
13.000
13.000
IS. 000
12.500
12.500
12.00U
12.000
11.500
11.500
11.500
11.000
11.000
10.500
10.500
10.500
10.500
10.000
10.00U
, 10.000
I— 10.000
M 9.500
W 9.500
9.500
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
8.500
8.500
P. 500
6.500
8.000
B.OOO
8.000
8.000
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
S.500
6.500
6.500
6.000
6.000
o.ni4
0.014
o.ni4
0.014
o.ei4
o.oiw
O.ni4
O.olu
0.014
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.01!
0.013
O.nls
0.01J
o.nis
O.nls
0.013
o.nis
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
O.nl2
0.012
0.012
0.012
o.nl?
o.ni2
0.012
O.C12
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
O.P12
0.012
O.P12
o.ni?
O.P12
O.IU2
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
O.CU1
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
H.nno
m.soo
14.500
14.500
14.000
in. 000
14.000
13.500
u.5oo
13.500
13.000
13.000
13.000
12.500
12.000
12.000
12.000
11.500
11.500
11.500
11.000
11.000
10.500
10.500
10.500
10.500
10.000
10.000
in. ooo
10.000
9.500
9.500
9.500
q.nno
9.000
9.000
9.000
«.5PO
8.500
8.500
P. 500
B.OOO
ft. 000
8.100
8.000
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
6.500
6.500
6.500
A. 000
6.000
o.nit
0.014
0.014
o.ni4
o.oi4
0.014
o.oi4
0.014
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
o.nia
O.nl3
0.013
o.ni3
0.013
o.nis
0.013
0.013
0.012
O.(ll2
0.012
o.ni2
0.012
o.ni2
0.012
n.niz
o.ni2
0.012
0.012
o.nia
0.012
0.012
P. 012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
O.Pll
o.ou
o.oii
0.011
0.011
o.oii
o.ou
o.oii
o.ou
o.ou
15.000
14.500
I1*. 500
14.000
14.000
14.000
I1*. 000
13.500
13.500
13.000
13.000
13.000
13.000
12.500
12.000
12.000
12.000
11.500
11.500
11. 500
11.000
11.000
10.500
10.500
10.500
10.000
10.000
lo.noo
10.000
10.000
9.500
9.500
9.500
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
8.500
8.5PO
8.500
8.500
8.000
B.OOO
8.000
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.000
7.000
7.000
7.000
6.500
6.500
6.500
6.000
6.000
0.014
0.014
0.014
O.Ol1*
O.Ol1*
0.014
0.014
o.om
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
O.OU
0.011
O.OU
O.OU
0.011
O.OU
0.011
0.011
0.011
o.ou
15.000
14.500
14.500
It. 000
14.300
14.000
14.000
13.500
13.500
13.000
13.000
13.000
12.500
12.500
12.000
12.000
12.000
11.500
11.500
11.500
11.000
11.000
10.500
10.500
10.500
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
9.500
9.500
9.500
9.500
9.noo
9.000
9.000
9.000
8.500
8.500
8.500
8.500
8.000
8.000
8.000
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.000
7.000
7.000
6.500
6.500
6.500
6.500
6.000
6.000
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
15.000
14.500
14.500
14.000
14.000
14.000
14.000
13.500
13.500
13.000
13.000
13.000
12.500
12.500
12.000
12.000
11.500
11.500
11.500
H.OOO
11.000
11.000
10.500
10.500
10.500
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
9.500
9.500
9.500
9.500
9.000
9.000
9. 300
9.000
8.500
8.530
8.500
8.000
3.000
8.000
8.000
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.000
7.000
7.000
6.500
6.500
6.500
6.500
6.000
6.000
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
o.oia
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
o.ou
0.011
0.011
is.noo
14.500
14.500
14.000
14.000
14.000
14.000
13.500
'3.500
13.000
13.000
13.000
12.500
12.500
12.000
12.000
11.500
11.500
11.500
11.000
11.000
11.000
10.500
10.500
10.500
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
9.500
9.500
9.500
9.500
9.000
9.000
9.000
8.500
8.500
8.500
8.500
8.000
8.000
8.000
8.000
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.000
7.000
7.000
6.500
6.500
6.500
6.000
6.000
6.000
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
C.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
O.OU
O.OU
O.OU
O.OU
O.OU
O.OU
o.ou
O.OU
o.ou
o.ou
15.000
14.500
14.500
14.000
14.000
14.000
14.000
13.500
13.500
13.000
13.000
13.000
12.500
12.500
12.000
12.000
11.500
11.500
11.500
11.000
11.000
11.000
10.500
10.500
10.500
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
9.500
9.500
9.500
9.000
9.000
9.000
9.000
8.500
8.500
8.500
8.500
9.000
B.OOO
8.000
8.000
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.000
7.000
7.000
6.530
6.500
6.500
6.000
6.000
6.000
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.013
0.013
0.013
O.Oli
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
o.oii
0.011
0.011
0.011
15.000
14.500
14.500
14.000
14.000
14.000
13.500
13.500
13.500
13.0CO
13.000
13.000
12.500
12.500
12.000
12.000
11.500
11.500
11.500
11.000
11.000
11.000
10.500
10.500
10.500
10.000
10.000
10.000
10.000
9.500
9.500
9.500
9.000
9.000
9. COO
9.000
8.500
8.500
8.500
8.500
8.000
8.000
3.000
S.OOO
7.500
7.500
7.500
7.500
7. COO
7.000
7.000
6.500
6.500
5.500
6.000
6.000
6.000
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
O.OU
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.013
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
O.OU
O.OU
O.OU
0.011
O.OU
0.011
O.OU
o.ou
o.ou
o.ou
o.ou
-------
6.000
6.000
6.000
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.000
5. COO
5.000
<».500
14.000
4.000
4.000
0.011
O.P11
0.011
o.nn
O.Pll
0.011
0.011
O.oii
0.011
0.011
0.011
O.Pll
0.011
0.011
6.000
6.000
6.000
?.500
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.000
5.000
5.000
0.500
4.000
4.000
0.000
o.mi
o.nn
o.ou
o.oii
o.ou
o.ou
o.oii
o.ou
o.ou
0.011
o.ou
o.ou
o.ou
o.ou
6.000
6.000
6.000
5.5QO
5.500
5.5QO
5.500
5.000
5.000
5.000
0.500
4.000
4.000
O.OU
0.011
0.011
O.OU
0.011
O.OU
0.011
0.011
o.ou
0.011
0.011
o.ou
o.ou
6.000
6.000
6.000
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.000
5.000
4.500
4.500
4.000
4.000
0.011
O.Oll
0.011
O.OU
O.OU
O.OU
0.011
O.OU
o.ou
o.ou
0.011
o.ou
o.ou
6.000
6.000
6.000
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.000
5.000
4.500
4.500
4.000
4.000
0.011
o.ou
0.011
O.OU
0.011
0.011
0.011
O.OU
o.ou
o.ou
o.ou
0.011
o.ou
6.000
6.000
6.000
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.000
5.000
4.500
4.500
4.000
"».OOC
O.OU
0.011
O.OU
o.ou
O.Oll
o.ou
o.ou
O.OU
O.Gil
o.ou
O.OU
O.OU
O.OU
6.000
s.ooo
6.000
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.000
5.000
5.000
4.500
4.500
4.000
4.000
0.011
O.Oll
O.OU
O.OU
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
0.011
C.011
6.000
6.000
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.500
5.000
5.000
S.OOO
4.500
4.000
4.000
4.000
O.OU
O.On
0.011
o.ou
0.011
o.ou
0.011
o.ou
o.ou
o.ou
0.011
o.ou
o.ou
m
i
-------
m
i
1161.500
1157.870
1134.240
1110.610
1036.980
1063.350
1039.720
1016.030
992.1*60
966.830
943.200
921.570
897. 940
874.310
850.680
827.050
803.420
779.790
756.160
732.530
708. VOO
695.270
661.640
638.010
614.380
590.750
567.120
543.490
519.360
496.230
472.600
448.970
425.340
401.710
178.030
354.450
330.820
307.190
283.560
259.930
236.300
212.670
139.040
155.410
141.780
118.150
94.520
70.890
47.260
23.630
0.000
I
I
I
I
I *
I *
I
I *
I ** *
I *
I *
**
««*
**
*
*
**
*
**
*
*
I *
I **
I *
I
I
I
I
I*
I*
I*
I*
I*
I*
I*
I*
I*
I*
I*
I*
0.00 2.60 5.20
*
*
*
*
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
7.80 10.40 13.00 15.60 18.20 20.80 23.40 26.0
DELTA VS RETURN PERI03 IN YEARS
-------
APPENDIX I
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Land Use
Alford et al., "Evaluation of the Use of Existing and Modified Land Use
Implementation Measures to Achieve and Maintain Environmental Quality,"
Final Report: Contract No. 68-01-3231, (June 1976).
Allen Co. Soil H Water Conservation District, "Environmental Impact of
Land Use on Water Quality," EPA-G005103, (May 1973).
Berry, J. L., "Land Use Forms § The Environment, An Executive Summary,"
EPA 600/5-75-003, (March 1975).
Clark, R. M. and Toftner, R. 0., "Land Use Planning § Solid Waste
Management," Public Works Magazine, (March 1972).
Isard, W., et al., "Marginal Pollution Analysis for Long Range Forecasts."
Regional Sci. Dissertation § Monograph Series #4, Center for Urban
Development Res., Cornell Univ., Ithaca, New York (1975).
Jacobs, J. J.j and Timmons, J. F., "An Economic Analysis of Agricultural
Land Use Practices to Control Water Quality." Amer. Jour. Agr. Econ., 56,
791 (1974).
Meta Systems, Inc., "Land Use-Water Quality Relationship," Report for the
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Planning Division, (March 1976).
Strong, A., and Keene, J., "Environmental Protection Through Public and
Private Development Controls," EPA-R5-73-018, (May 1973).
Thurow, C., et al., "Performance Controls for Sensitive Lands: A Practical
Guide for Local Administrators," EPA-600/5-75-005, (March 1975).
U. S. EPA, "Promoting Environmental Quality Through Urban Planning and
Controls," Washington, D. C., U. S. Government Printing Office (February 1974)
Urban Systems Research and Engineering, Inc., "The Growth Shapers - The Land
Use Impacts of Infrastructure Investments," Prepared for the Council on
Environmental Quality (May 1976).
"Performance Criteria for Relating Water Quality Management Plans § 701
Land Use Elements," (1975-76).
1-1
-------
Collection Systems
Allen, W.M., Chesapeake's Gravity Sewer Line Upgraded." Water § Sew. Works,
120:9,114 (1973).
Amer. City, "Interceptor Sewers Too Big, Says Environmental Council."
89:12,80 (1974).
Amer. City, "Pioneering Plant Provides Cost-Saving Alternative to
Separating Sewers." 88:10,90 (1973).
Amer. City, "Plastic Lining Saves Deteriorated Sewer Main." 89:8,68 (1974).
Amer. City § County, "Plastic Pipe Use Grows for Sewer Main Installations."
90:10,84 (1975).
American Consulting Services, Inc., "Sewer System Evaluation for Infiltration/
Inflow." U.S. EPA, Rept., Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Argaman, Y., et al., "Design of Optimal Sewerage Systems." Jour. Environ.
Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, EE5, 703 (1973).
Arnett, R.C., et al., "Diurnal Wastewater Flow and Quality Patterns in a
Combined Sewerage System." Paper presented at the 46th Annual Conf. Water
Poll. Control Fed., Cleveland, Ohio (1973).
Bagwell, M.V., "Georgia Permits Better, Less Costly Pipeline Crossing of
Highways." Civil Eng., 43:2,45 (1973).
Bascom, S., et al., "Secondary Impacts of Transportation and Wastewater
Investments: Research Results." EPA-600/5-75-013 (July 1975).
Beckrith, R.A., "Infiltration/Inflow Program for EPA Grants." Water &
Sew. Works, 122, Ref. No. R-16 (1975).
Bexson, J., "Infiltration Smoked-Out," Water § Wastes Eng., 11:9,59 (1974).
Bhattacharya, S., et al., "Model to Design Stormwater Detention Tanks for
Nonpoint Source Pollution Abatement." Prepared for The Catholic University
of America (April 1975).
Bigler, D.E., "Collection System-Operation and Maintenance." Water Poll.
Control Fed., Deeds § Data, 11:8,0-2 (1974).
1-2
-------
Blume, O.H.W., and Barney, K.P., "Computer Master Plan Signals Sewer
Problems Before They Start." Amer. City, 88:5,96 (1973).
Brokaw, A.T., "Infiltration/Inflow Studies and Their Relationship to the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972." Paper presented
at the 46th Annual Conference, Water Poll. Control Fed., Cleveland, Ohio
(1973).
Calhoun, T.P., "Longevity of Sewer Grout Under Severe Conditions." Pub.
Works, 106:10,80 (1975).
Carcich, I.G., et al., "Pressure Sewer Demonstration." Jour. Environ. Eng.
Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100, EE1, 25 (1974).
Carcich, I.G., et al., "The Pressure Sewer: A New Alternative to Gravity
Sewers." Civil Eng., 44:5,50 (1974).
Caesares, David J., and Field, R., "Infiltration Flow Analysis." Jour.
Environ. Eng. Div. Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101, EE5, 775 (1975).
Cesareo, D.J., and Field, R., "Considerations for Analysis of Infiltration-
Inflow." Reporter, Amer. Public Works Assoc., 42,7 (1975).
Cesareo, D.J., and Field, R., "How to Analyze Infiltration/Inflow." Water §
Sewage Works, April 30 (1975).
Cesareo, D.J., and Field, R., "Infiltration-Inflow Analysis." Jour, of the
Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Eng., 101,775 (1975).
Chien, J.S., "Pollutional Loadings Approach to Identifying I-I." Deeds
and Data, Water Poll. Control Fed. (October 1975).
Click, C.N., and Mixon, P.O., "Flow Smoothing in Sanitary Sewers." Jour.
Water Poll. Control Fed., 46,522 (1974).
Colyer, P.J., and Pethick, R.W., "Storm Drainage Design Methods - A
Literature Review." Report No. INT 154, Hydraulics Research Station,
Wallingford, Oxfordshire, England (March 1976).
Dajani, J.S., and Hasit, Y., "Capital Cost Minimization of Drainage Networks."
Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100, EE2, 325 (1974).
Doan, R., and Broderick, M., "Sewer Insertion Renewal Saves Town $2.5
Million." Pub. Works, 106,9,72 (1975).
Durazo, R., "Recommendations for Installing PVC Gravity Sewer Piping."
Pub. Works, 105:4,80 (1974).
Environ. Sci. § Technol., "Upping the Down Sewer Line Repairs." 7:7,586
(1973).
1-3
-------
Evans, R.L., et al., "Mercury in Public Sewer Systems." Water § Sew.
Works, 120:2,74 (1973).
Ewing, R.L., "Computerized Sewer Design: New Tool for an Old Problem."
Water § Sew. Works, 122:4,67 (1975).
Fairweather, V., "Sewer Pipe: Infiltration is the Issue." Civil Eng.,
44:7,79 (1974).
Farmer, H., "Sewer System Evaluation and Rehabilitation Cost Estimates."
Water § Sew. Works, 122, Ref. No. R-8 (1975).
Farmer, V.H., "EPA Guidelines for Sewer System Evaluation." Paper
presented at the 46th Annual Conf. Water Poll. Control Fed., Cleveland,
Ohio (1973).
Feldman, R.A., "Computer Use on an Environmental Engineering Project."
Civil Eng., 43:1,60 (1973).
Fine, J.L., and Kelley, J.D., "Design and Construction to Minimize
Infiltration/Inflow." Paper presented at 48th Annual Conference of the
Water Poll. Control Fed., Miami Beach, Florida (1975).
Fisher, W., "New Pipe May Cut Installation Costs." Water £ Wastes Eng.,
12:6,69 (1975).
Fitzpatrick, E.G., and Beckman, W.J., "Constructing an Ocean Outfall."
Civ. Eng., 44:9,83 (1974).
Gautreau, J., "Laser Light Used to Lay Pipe." Water § Poll. Control
(Can.), 112:1,34 (1974).
Giessner, W.R., et al., "Planning and Control of Combined Sewerage Systems."
Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100, EE4, 1013 (1974).
Gifford, J.B., "Hydraulic Sewer Flusher Speeds Cleaning Operations." Pub.
Works, 105:2,93 (1974).
Godfrey, K.A., "What's New in Water and Sewer Pipe? Civil Eng., 44:5,72
(1974) .
Gutierrez, A.F., and Wilmut, C., "Eliminating Excess Infiltration/Inflow."
Water Poll. Control Fed., Deeds & Data, ll:8,D-7 (1974).
Gutierrez, A.F., and Wilmut, C., "The Feasibility of Infiltration/Inflow
Elimination." Pub. Works, 106, 4 (1975).
Harlan, T.S., and Allman, W.B., "Polyethylene Pipe Slipped into Defective
Sanitary Sewer." Civil Eng., 43:5,78 (1973).
Harris, J.P., et al., "Flow Monitoring Techniques in Sanitary Sewers."
Paper presented at the 46th Annual Conf., Water Poll. Control Fed., Cleveland,
Ohio (1973).
1-4
-------
Harris, J.P., et al., "Flow Monitoring Techniques in Sanitary Sewers."
Water Poll. Control Fed., Deeds § Data, 11:7,D-1 (1974).
Harwood, J.J., "Making Sewer Cleaning Scientific." Amer. City, 89:4,57 (1974)
Heckroth, C., "Sewers: Scapegoats in Land-Use Planning?" Water § Wastes
Eng., 12:7,22 (1975).
Heckroth, C.W., "P.L. 92-500 (Two Years Later) is Not the Answer." Water
$ Wastes Eng., 11:12,34 (1974).
Hendricks, G.F., and Sanson, R.L., "Pressure Sewer Design Procedure."
Water & Sew. Works, 120:11,53 (1973).
Henry, D.T., "Computer Monitors Remote Pumping Stations." Water fj Sew.
Works, 121:6,104 (1974).
Holcomb, A.E., "Good Safety Practices for Sewer Maintenance." Deeds §
Data, Water Poll. Control Fed., Washington, D.C., 10:5,0-5 (1973).
Hoover, M.G., "Cast Iron Pipe for Modern Sewage Systems." Water § Sew.
Works, 120:8,58 (1973).
Hoover, M.G., "Wastewater Collection System Criteria, Part I." Water §
°Sew. Works, 122:3,42 (1975).
Jones, R.S., and Nelson, D.W., "Getting the Most Out of an Infiltration/
Inflow Analysis." Pub. Works, 106:12,50 (1975).
Kay, J., "Miami Sewer Plan Takes the Positive Approach." Water § Wastes
Eng., 12:9,31 (1975).
Kemmet, R.H., "Sewer Grouting Cures Plant Overload Problem." Pub. Works,
104:7,94 (1973).
Kerri, K.D., and Brady, J., "Management of an Effective Maintenance Program."
Water § Sew. Works, 122:11,56 (1975).
Khanna, P., "Discussion-Design of Optimal Sewerage Systems." Jour. Environ.
Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100, EE4, 1042 (1974).
Kienow, K., "Protecting Reinforced Concrete Pipe Sanitary Sewers." Water §
Sew. Works, 122:10,94 (1975).
Labadie, J.W., et al., "Automatic Control of Large-Scale Combined Sewer
Systems." Jour. Env°. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101,27 (1975).
Labadie, J.W., et al., "Minimization of Combined Sewer Overflows by Large-
Scale Mathematical Programming." Computers § Operations Res. (G.B.),
1,421 (1974).
1-5
-------
Lager, J.A., and Smith, W.G., "Catchbasin Technology Overview and Assess-
ment." Draft report prepared for the Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, Palo Alto, California.
Lash, R.D., "Large Diameter Polyethylene Force Mains Installed Quickly."
Pub. Works, 105:1,45 (1974).
Lee, C.A.,, "Ripon Solves Its Sewer Inspection Problem Without Raising
Taxes." Water § Sew. Works, 120:4,110 (1973).
Li, C.Y., "Sewerage Plan Involves Open Space Preservation." Civil Eng.,
43:1,85 (1973).
MacKay, B.B., "No More 'Crises Reaction1 Sewer Maintenance." Amer. City,
89:7,39 (1974).
MacKay, D.L., et al., "Vancouver Uses Innovative Ways for Placing Large
Submarine Pipelines." Civil Eng., 44:10,74 (1974).
McCarty, J.E., "Oakland Maps Program to Combat Sewer Infiltration." Pub.
Works, 104:2,82 (1973).
Mclntire, M., "Improved Procedures for Municipal Regulation of Industrial
Discharges to Public Sewers." Final Report, Grant No. 801372 (March 1976).
McLaughlin, S.J., "TV Inspections Slash Sewer Costs $300 per Repair."
Amer. City, 89:9,51 (1974).
Merritt, L.B., and Bogan, R.H., "Sewer Design Optimization Using Dynamic
Programming." Paper presented at the 46th Annual Conf., Water Poll. Control
Fed., Cleveland, Ohio (1973).
Morgan, H.E., "How Long Does Sewer Joing Grouting Last?" Pub. Works,
105:10,98 (1974).
Mougenot, G., "Measuring Sewage Flow Using Weirs and Flumes." Water §
Sew. Works, 121:7,78 (1974).'
Munson, E.D., "Houston Infiltration Abatement Program." Jour. Environ. Eng.
Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, EE5, 729 (1973).
Nester, A.W., "Sewer-Within-Sewer Saves City $400,000." Amer. City,
89:2,45 (1974).
Nichols, P.M., "Elimination of Surface Water Inflow/Infiltration in Sewer
Systems." Paper presented at the 46th Annual Conf., Water Poll. Control
Fed., Cleveland, Ohio (1973).
Nichols, P.M., "Smoke Testing Pinpoints Surface Water Inflow." Water Poll.
Control Fed., Deeds £ Data, ll:6,D-2 (1974).
1-6
-------
Nichols, P.R., "When You Go Into a Manhold or a Sewer You Should Understand
Sewer Gases." Water Poll. Control Fed. Deeds § Data, 12:l,D-2 (1975).
Paintal, A.S., "Interceptor Sewer Cost Analysis." Water § Sew. Works,
122:11,44 (1975).
Pelligrino, A.M., and St. Onge, H., "Reaming and Vibrating Equipment for
Maximum Capacity Sewer Relining." Paper presented at the 46th Annual Conf.,
Water Poll. Control Fed., Cleveland, Ohio (1973).
Pellegrino, A.W., "Sewer Lining-The Toronto Technique." Amer. City $
County, 90:9,86 (1975).
Pew, K.A., et al., "Data Acquisition and Combined Sewer Controls in
Cleveland." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 45,2276 (1973).
Podolick, P.A., "Preparing an Infiltration/Inflow Analysis." Water § Sew.
Works, 122, Ref. No. R-31 (1975).
Prabel, B.A., and Allman, W.B., "Sewer Insertion Renewal-Design Considera-
tions for Inserted Polyethylene Pipe." Paper presented at the 46th Annual
Conf., Water Poll. Control Fed., Cleveland, Ohio (1973).
Prefer, E.H., "H2S Won't Hurt This Sewer." Amer. City, 90:2,35 (1975).
Pub. Works, "A New Tight Fit-Insertion of a Plastic Liner in a 42-Inch
Sewer." 104:6,98 (1973).
Pub. Works, "PVC Pipe Restores 'Lost1 Sewer." 105:3,98 (1974).
Pub. Works, "PVC Sewer Pipe Meets Tight Specifications." 105:7,84 (1974).
Pub. Works, "Sewer in Flood Plain Must Fight Infiltration." 104:1,66 (1973),
Rattray, J.D., et al., "Alleviating Denver's Infiltration In-flow Problem."
Water § Sew. Works, 121:12,56 (1974).
Reiter, G.M., and Hirsch, L., "Use of Plastic Pipe for Sewers." Pub. Works,
104:4,88 (1973).
Sanson, R.L., "Design Procedure for a Rural Pressure Sewer System." Pub.
Works, 104:10,86 (1973).
Schmidt, O.J., "Master Sewerage System Plan for Metropolitan Manila."
Discussion, Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99,
EE3, 377 (1973).
Shah, J.B., "Simple Method for Wastewater Flow Measurement." Jour. Water
Poll. Control Fed., 45,932 (1973).
Sheppard, W.L., Jr., "How to Acid Proof Joints in Terra Cotta Industrial
Sewer Lines." Water § Sew. Works, 122:12,64 (1975).
1-7
-------
Smith, H.L., "Abstract for a Progress and Projection Report on the State of
the Art of Wastewater Collection." Paper presented at the 46th Annual Conf.
Water Poll. Control Fed., Cleveland, Ohio (1973).
Spiess, L., "Budget Problems? Try Specialized Contractor." Water § Sew.
Works, 122:2,76 (1975).
Stall, J.B., and Terstriep, M.L., "Storm Sewer Design, An Evaluation of the
RRL Method." EPA-R2-72-068 (October 1972).
Stein, M.F., et al., "Rehabilitating an 80-Year Old Sewer System." Pub.
Works, 106:12,61 (1975).
Stephenson, R.L., and Oatess, W.E., "Installation of Sampling Equipment in
Manholes." Water Poll. Control Fed., Deeds § Data, 11:1,0-4 (1974).
Tang, W.H., et al., "Optimal Risk-Based Design of Storm Sewer Networks."
Jour. Env. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101,381 (1975).
Van Natta, W.S., "Computerized Reports Improve Sewer Maintenance." Amer.
City, 89:6,81 (1974).
Wagner, V.G., "How Safe are Sewers for Construction and Maintenance Crews?"
Water Poll. Control Fed., Deeds £ Data, 11:4,D-1 (1974).
Wahlstrom, C., "Sewer Maintenance." Water Poll. Control Fed., Deeds § Data,
11:3,0-2 (1974).
Walsh, S., and Brown, L.C., "Least Cost Method for Sewer Design." Jour.
Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, EE3,333 (1973).
Walsh, S., "Computerized Sewer Design/A New Engineering Tool." Pub. Works,
104:6,75 (1973).
Water § Sew. Works, "Grouting Saves Sewer Line." 122:11,54 (1975).
Water § Sew. Works, "Lateral Connections with 'Inserted1 Polyethylene
Piping." 122:3,66 (1975).
Water § Sew. Works, "Polyethylene Pipe Solves Problem of Force Main Sewer
Line Installation Across an Inland Waterway." 120:8,54 (1973).
Water § Sew. Works, "Pipe Insertion Renews Sewer with Little Excavation."
122 (1975).
Water § Sew. Works, "Pre-Cast Pipe Saves a Year of Construction Time."
121:6,115 (1974).
Water § Sew. Works, "Pressure Sewer Systems Gain New Popularity."
122:2,84 (1975).
1-8
-------
Water & Sew. Works, "Railroad Installs 1600-Foot Wastewater Line in 3 Days."
122:2,74 (1975).
Water $ Sew. Works, "Relining Restores Pipelines." 122:5,74 (1975).
Water § Sew. Works, "Santa Glaus Sewage System Nears Completion."
122:10,79 (1975).
Water § Sew. Works, "Sewer Pipe Run Passes Deflectometer Tests.", 122:9,68
(1975).
Water § Sew. Works, "Zero Infiltration in Sewer Pipe Tests." 121:12,32
(1974).
Webber, E.S., "Optimal Design of Urban Wastewater Collection Networks."
Discussion, Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr.,
99, EE3, 564 (1973).
Wensink, R.B., and Miner, J.R., "Predicting the Performance of Feedlot
Control Facilities at Specific Oregon Locations." Project Completion Report
WRRI-34, Water Resources Res. Institute, Oregon State Univ., Corvallis (1975).
Wiley, N.P., Jr., "Insertion of Polyethylene Pipe Renews Damaged Sewer."
Pub. Works, 104:2,64 (1973).
Williams, T.C., "Plastic Pipe Pressure Sewers Mark Expansion." Water §
Wastes Eng., 12:11,85 (1975).
Yao, K.M., "Sewer Line Design Based on Critical Shear Stress." Jour. Environ.
Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100, EE2, 507 (1974).
1-9
-------
Comprehensive Planning
Abt Associates, Inc., "Preventive Approaches to Stormwater Management".
Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Cambridge,
Massachussetts.
Bartal, K.A., and Gutierrez, L.V., Jr., "Comprehensive Water Quality
Management Planning". Jour. Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr.,
101, 371 (1975).
Bechtel Corp., "Methodology for Economic Evaluation of Municipal Water
Supply/Wastewater Disposal Including Considerations of Seawater Distilla-
tion and Wastewater Renovation", San Francisco, California (August 1970).
Bishop, A.B., and Bigler, "A Planning Process for Residuals Management: A
Regional Application"," Final Report, Grant No. R803203-01-3 (August 1976).
Bovet, E.D., "Evaluation of Quality Parameters in Water Resource Planning
(A State-of-the-Art Survey of the Economics of Water Quality)". IWR Con-
tract Report 74-13, U.S. Army Engineer Institute for Water Resources,
Fort Belvoir, Virginia (1974).
Camp, Dresser and McKee and Alexander Potter Assoc., "Phase I Report of
Technical Alternatives to Ocean Disposal of Sludge in the New York City-
New Jersey Metropolitan Area" (June 1975)
Chester-Betz Engineers, "Pennypack Creek Watershed Interim Planning Study,
Chapter VII Development, Evaluation and Comparison of Water Quality Manage-
ment Alternatives". Prepared for Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (June 1976).
Clark, R.M., and Gilleen, J.I., "Renovated Wastewater as an Alternative
Source for Municipal Water Supply: An Economic Evaluation". U.S. EPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio.
Davis, Robert K., "The Range of Choice in Water Management - A Study of Dis-
solved Oxygen in the Potomac Estuary". Baltimore: The John Hopkins Press
(1968).
Dorcey, A.H.J., and Fox, I.K., "An Assessment of University Interdiscipli-
nary Research: The Wisconsin River and the Lower Fraser River Water Quality
Studies". Proc. Conf. on Interdisciplinary Analysis of Water Resource
Systems, Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., New York, New York (1975).
Douglas County Public Works Department, "Glide Sewer Study". Glide-Idleyld
Area Study, Southwestern Oregon.
1-10
-------
Dracup, J.A., and Fogarty, T.J., "Optimal Planning for a Thermal Discharge
Treatment System". Water Resources Res., 10,67 (1974).
Dudley, N.J., et al., "Irrigation Planning 2: Choosing Optimal Acreages
Within a Season". Water Resources Res., 7, 1051 (1971).
Fleming, G., "Application of Hydrologic Simulation to Water Resources
Planning". In "Hydraulics Research and Its Impact on the Environment".
Proc., 14th Congr. Intl. Assn. Hydraul. Res., 5,257 (1971).
Gleeson, M.., et al., "Case Study of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Council as
an Environmental Management Organization", Final Report, Grant No. $803406-
01-0 (January 1976.
Hein, C., et al., "Regional Governmental Arrangements in Metropolitan Areas:
Nine Case Studies", EPA-600/5-74-024.(January 1974).
Howe, R., and White, N., "Development of Residuals Management Strategies",
Interim Report and Executive Summary, EPA-600/1-76-01/A § B (February 1976).
Jenks and Adamson, Consulting Sanitary and Civil Engineers, "A Program for
Water Reclamation and Groundwater Recharge - Serving the Palo Alto Bayfront
Area". Prepared for the Santa Clara County Flood Control and Water District
(April 1973).
Jenks and Adamson, Consulting Sanitary and Civil Engineers, "A Program for
Water Reclamation and Groundwater Recharge - Predesign Report". Prepared
for the Santa Clara Valley Water District (October 1974).
Joeres, E.F., et al., "Planning Methodology for the Design of Regional Waste
Water Treatment Systems". Water Resources Res., 10, 643 (1974)
Kaiser, E.J., and Elfers, K., et al., "Promoting Environmental Quality
Through Urban Planning and Controls", EPA 600/5-73-015 (February 1974).
Linsley, R.K., "Evaluation of the Decision Process in Water Resource
Planning". Program in Eng. Econ. Planning Rept. No. EEP-38, Stanford
Univ., California (1970).
Liu, C.S., et al., "Use of Systems Analysis". An Addendum. Dept. of
Environ. Conserv., Bur. of Water Resources Planning, New York (1971).
Loucks, D.D., and Bell, J.M., "Administration Systems Analysis", Journal
WPCF (June 1976).
Lykins, B.W., Jr., and Smith, J.M., "Interim Report on the Impact of Public
Law 92-500 on Munnicipal Pollution Control Technology", U.S. EPA, Cincinnati,
Ohio (January 1976).
Marks, D.H., "Models in Water Resources". In "A Guide to Models in
Governmental Planning and Operations". Sauger Books, Potomac, Maryland,
103 (1974).
1-11
-------
Orcutt, R.G., and Bottorff, L.D., et al,, "Optimal Planning of Regional
Wastewater Systems and Their Impacts on Stream Quality with a Case Study
of the Carson River Basin". CRS No. EN-2 (August 1975).
Parker, F., et al., "Integrating Environmental Planning and Management in
State Government", Final Report, Grant No. R803171-01-0 [January 1976).
Pingry, D., and Whinston, A., "Planning for Pollution Control - A Critical
Survey". Office of Water Resources Res., Rept. No. B-020-IND (4), Purdue
Univ., Lafayette, Indiana (1971).
Pingry, D.E., and Whinston, A.B., "Application of Multigoal Water Quality
Planning Model". Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr.,
100, 61 (1974).
Pingry, D.E., and Whinston, A.B., "A Regional Planning Model for Water
Quality Control". In "Models for Environmental Pollution Control".
R.A. Deininger (Ed.), Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Ann Arbor, Michigan,
61 (1973).
Porcella, D., et al., "Comprehensive Management of Phosphorus Water Pollu-
tion", EPA-600/5-74-Q10 (February 1974).
Rink, D., "Evaluation of Alternative Institutional Arrangements for Regional
Environmental Management", Final Report, Grant No. 803847 (February 1976).
Sigvaldason, O.T., et al., "The Saint John Study: An Example of Comple-
mentary Usage of Optimization and Simulation Modelling in Water Resources
Planning". Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources
Systems, 3, 576 (1972).
B § P Silveston, Engineers, "Computer-Aided Planning of Regional Sludge
Disposal System User's Manual - Research Program for the Abatement of
Municipal Pollution under Provisions of the Canada-Ontario Agreement on
Great Lakes Water. Quality, Canada". (September 1976).
«
Spooner, C., et al., "A Demonstration of Areawide Water Resources Planning",
Final Report, Grant Nos. EPA 16110 FEY and S802149 (March 1976).
Taylor, A.C., "A Planning Model for A Water Quality Management Agency".
Management Sci., 20,675 (1973).
Tihansky, D.P., "Models of Industrial Pollution Control in Urban Planning".
Rand Corp., AD-72-401, Natl. Tech. Inform. Service, U.,S. Dept. of Commerce,
Springfield, Virginia (1972).
U.S. EPA, "Contributions of Urban Roadway Usage to Water Pollution".
Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office (March 1975).
U.S. EPA, "Development of Residuals Management Strategies". Washington, D.C,,
U.S. Government Printing Office (June 1975).
1-12
-------
U.S. EPA, "Demonstrati-n of a Planning Perspective for Waste Water Sludge
Disposition - Ohio/Kentucky/Indiana Regional Council of Governments". Water
Planning Division, Washington, D.C. (January 1976).
U.S. EPA, "Demonstration of a Planning Perspective for Waste Water Sludge
Disposition". Water Planning Division, Washington, D.C. (November 1975).
U.S. EPA, "Draft Guidelines for State and Areawide Water Quality Management
Program Development". Washington, D.C. (February 1976).
U.S. EPA, "Planner's Handbook for Residual Waste Management". Water Planning
Division, Washington, D.C. (March 1976).
U.S. EPA, "Residual Management by Land Disposal". Cincinnati, Ohio (July
1976).
U.S. EPA, Urban Storrawater::Mariageraent Seminars. Washington, D.C. (January
1976).
Upchurch, S.B., and Robb, D.C.N., "Mathematical Models: Planning Tools for
the Great Lakes". Water Resources Bull., 8,338 (1972).
Warner, M., et al., "An Assessment Methodology for the Environmental Impact
of Water Resources Projects", EPA-600/5-74-016 (July 1974).
Wyatt, J.M., and White, P.E., Jr., "Sludge Processing, Transportation, and
Disposal/Resource Recovery: A Planning Perspective". U.S. EPA Water
Planning Division, Washington, D.C. (December 1975).
"State Continuing Planning Process (September 1975),
"Upper White River Water Quality Management Program" (October 1975).
"Water Quality Strategy Overview", Fourth Edition (December 1975).
"Wisconsin's Continuing Planning Process for Water Quality Management",
Dept. Nat. Resources, Wisconsin (March 1961).
1-13
-------
Data Bases
Bennett, F.W., "A Regional Approach to Environmental Management of the San
Juan River Basin." (None) (1970).
Bishop, A. B., Fullerton, H.H., et al., "Carrying Capacity in Regional
Environmental Management." EPA 600/5-74-021 (Feb. 1974).
Brown and Caldwell, Consulting Engineers, "Geohydrologic Investigation of
the Bayfront Area, Palo Alto, California." Prepared for the Santa Clara
Valley Water District (October 1974).
Bunce, R.E., "Demonstration of a State Water Quality Management Information
System." EPA-600/5-74-022 (August 1974).
Conn, W.D., "Environmental Management in the Malibu Watershed:Institutional
Framework." EPA-600/5-75-018 (June 1975).
DiGiano, F.A. § Mangarella, P.A., "Short Course Proceedings Application of
Stormwater Management Models." EPA-670/2-75-065 (June 1975).
Donigian, A.S., Jr. § Linsley, R.K., "The Use of Continuous Simulation in
the Evaluation of Water Quality Management Plans," Hydrocamp, Inc. (Aug.
1976).
Field, R., "Management £ Control of Comb. Sewer Overflows." Edison W.Q.
Research Div. (Jan. 1972).
Gagliano, S.M. § Van Beek, J.L., "Environmental Base § Management Study -
Atchafalaya Basin, Louisiana." EPA-600/5-75-006 (Feb. 1975).
Grayman, W.M., et al., "Land-Based Modeling System for Water Quality
Management Studies." Jour. Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr.,
101, 567 (1975).
Hagarman, J.A. £ Dressier, F.R.S., "Storm Water Management Model. Dissemina-
tion $ User Assistance." EPA-670/2-75-041 (May 1975).
Baseman, W.D., et al., "Water Quality Management and Information Systems."
Jour. Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101, 477 (1975).
Heaney, J.P., Huber, W.C., et al., "Urban Stormwater Management Modeling
§ Decision-Making." EPA 670/2-75-022 (May 1975).
Lager, J.A. § Smith, W.G., "Urban Stormwater Management § Technology. An
Assessment." EPA-670/2-74-040 (Dec. 1974).
1-14 .
-------
Leiser, C.P., "Computer Management of a Comb. Sewer System." EPA-670/2-74-022
(July 1974).
O'Connor, D.J., Thomann, R.V., et al., "Dynamic Water Quality Forecasting §
Management." EPA-660/3-73-009 (Aug. 1973).
Palk, I.K., Harrington, J., Jr., et al., "The Integrated Multi-Media
Pollution Model." EPA 600/5-74-020 (Feb. 1974).
Proctor § Redfern, Limited, "Storm Water Management Model Study-Volume I."
Research Report No. 47, Environment Canada (Sept. 1976).
Stochastics, Inc., "Stochastic Modeling for Water Quality Management."
WPCRS 16090 DUH 02/71 (Feb. 1971).
Ward, R., "Data Acquisition Systems in Water Quality Management," EPA-R5-73-
014, (May 1973).
Ward, R.C., "Data Acquisition Systems in Water Quality Management." EPA-R5-
73-014 (May 1973).
Whinston, A.B., "Implementation of a N.P.D.E.S. Data Management System."
Technical Completion Report No. 69, Purdue Univ. Water Resources Res. Center,
West Lafayette, Ind. (1975).
(None), "Evaluation of Water Quality Models:Management Guide for Planners,"
EPA, R&D (1976).
(None), "Major Elements of 208 Areawide Wastewater Management Planning
Program," (None).
(None), "Management Agencies Handbook for Sect. 208 AWTM," U.S. Gov. Pr.
Off. 1975-210-810:58 (December 1975).
1-15
-------
Monitoring
Adamski, J.M., and Villard, S.P., "Application of the Methylthymol Blue
Sulfate Method to Water and Wastewater Analysis." Anal. Chem., 47,1191
(1975).
Afghan, B.K., and Ryan, J.E., "Substituted Benzophenone as Fluorometric
Reagent in Automated Determination of Nitrate." Anal. Chem., 47,2347 (1975).
Afghan, B.K., et al., "Automated Fluorometric Method for Determination of
Boron in Waters, Detergents, and Sewage Effluents." Water Res. (G.B.),
6,1475 (1972).
Afghan, B.K., et al., "Automated Fluorometric Method for Determination of
Citric Acid in Sewage and Sewage Effluents." Water Res. (G.B.), 8,789 (1975)
Afghan, B.K., et al., "New Automated Colorimetric Method for the Determina-
tion of Chloride Using Chromotripic Acid." Anal. Chem., 47,556 (1975).
Afghan, B.K., et al., "Determination of Formaldehyde and Related Compounds
in Water and Industrial Effluents." Environ. Letters, 7,53 (1974).
Agmadjian, M., and Brown, C.W., "Feasibility of Remote Detection of Water
Pollutants and Oil Slicks by Laser-Excited Raman Spectroscopy." Envir. Sci.
§ Technol., 7,452 (1973).
Ahnoff, M., and Josefsson, M., "Simple Apparatus for On-Site Continuous
Liquid-Liquid Extraction of Organic Compounds from Natural Waters." Anal.
Chem., 46,658 (1974).
Aki, H., and Mori, S., "New Instrumentation and Control Systems in Waste-
water Treatment." Hydron, 57,119 (1975).
Albrecht, D., "Improved Methods for the Automatic Analysis of Water in
Limnology." Vom Wasser (Ger.), 41,129 (1973); Chem. Abs., 81,41233 (1974).
Allen, H.S., and Fletl, D.R., "New Plant Solyes Seasonal Problem." Water §
Wastes Eng., 12:10;23 (1975).
Alton, D.W., "Continuous Monitor for Hexavalent Chromium in River Water."
U.S. Atomic Energy Comm., BNWL-1168 (1969); Nucl. Sci. Abs., 24,5943 (1970);
Chem. Abs., 73,38306z (1970).
1-16
-------
Amer. Inst. Chem. Engr., "How Shall We Control Real-Time Wastewater
Parameters?" In "Automation of Wastewater Treatment Plants." L.K. Cecil
et al. [Eds.], Water-1974: II. Municipal Wastewater Treatment. Symp.
Ser. 145, 71, 328 (1975).
Amer. Pub. Health Assn., "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater." 12th Ed., New York, N.Y. (1965).
American Public Health Association, "Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater," Thirteenth Edition, published jointly with the
American Water Works Association and the Water Pollution Control Federation,
Washington, D.C. (1971).
Ammer, H., "Continuous Detection of Important Cations and Anions within the
Trace Range." VGB Kraftswerkstechnik (Ger.), 55,109 (1975); Chem. Abs., 83,
168236 (1975).
Amy, G., Pitt, R., Singh, R., Bradford, W.L., and LaGraff, M.B., "Water
Quality Management Planning for Urban Runoff," U.S. EPA Report No.
EPA-40/9-75-004 (1974).
Anderson, E.H., "Bloomington Goes Solid-State." Water § Wastes Eng., 12:11,
65 (1975).
Annett, C.S., and D'ltri, P.M., "Preservation of Total Soluble Phosphorus."
Proc. Conf. Great Lakes Res., 16,214 (1973); Chem. Abs., 81,29402 (1974).
Appelyard, B.L., "On-Line Conductivity Measurement System Makes its Debut."
Contron & Instr. (G.B.), 7:3,39 (1975).
Arang, J.B., and Crawford, W.A., "Compressor Instrumentation Systems."
Instr. Technol., 21:4,46 (1974).
Ardzhanov, I.V., and Shaginyan, L.B., "Automatic Industrial Digital Titrimeters
for the Determination of Milk of Lime Concentration and Water Basicity at
Water Treatment Plants." Novaya App. Avtomat. Ustroistva Tekhnol. Obrab.
Vody (USSR), 137 (1972); Chem. Abs., 78,75683 (1973).
Arin, L.M., "Monitoring with Carbon Analyzers." Environ. Sci. § Technol.,
8,898 (1974).
Armstrong, F.A.J., "Analysis of Phosphorus Compounds in Natural Waters."
In "Analytical Chemistry of Phosphorus Compounds." M. Halmann [Ed.],
Interscience, New York, N.Y., 743 (1972).
Avotino, P., and Jenne, E.A., "The Time Stability of Dissolved Mercury in
Water Samples-II. Chemical Stabilization." Jour. Environ. Qual., 4,515
.(1975).
Axelsson, S., and Ohlsson, E., "Remote Sensing of Oil Slicks." Ambio (Swed.),
2,70 (1973); Chem. Abs., 79,83121 (1973).
1-17
-------
Axt. G., "Appartus and Method Employing Microorganisms for Continuously
Determining the Toxicity of Water, Sewage, and Other Liquids." Ger. Offen.
2,155,060, (May 10, 1973); Chem. Abs., 79,2375 (1973).
Bailey, S.J., "A Process Controller That's Both Analog and Digital."
Control Eng., 21:11,57 (1974).
Bailey, S.J., "Flow Measurement '74." Control Eng., 21:5,36 (1974).
Bailey, S.J., "Flowmeters '75: Many for On-Stream Use; Some for Effluents."
Control Eng., 22:11,34 (1975).
Bailey, S.J., "Pressure Measurement Today: Options Galore." Control Eng.,
21:12,38 (1974).
Bailey, S.J., "Process Controllers: A Case of Pneumatic_Electronic Coexis-
tence." Control Eng., 20:12,46 (1973).
Bailey, S.J., "Quiet is Common in New Control Valves." Control Eng., 22:5,30
(1975)
Bailey, S.J., "Single Ultrasonic Beam Measures Liquid Flow." Control Eng.,
21:12,53 (1974).
Bailey, S.J., "Updating Control Valves, Actuators, and Positioners." Control
Eng., 21:7,46 (1974).
Balch, N., et al., "Monitoring Marine Outfalls by Using Ultraviolet Absorbance."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 47,195 (1975).
Barnard, J.L., "Desirable Provision in Current Designs for Future Development
in Relation to Reclamation of Effluent." Water Poll. Control (G.B.), 74,
177 (1975).
Baumann, H.D., "How to Estimate Pressure Drop Across Liquid-Control Valves."
Chem. Eng., 81:9,137 (1974).
Baumann, H.D., "Important Trends in Control Valves and Actuators." Instr. § .
Control Systems, 48:11,21 (1975).
Bearcroft, K., "Temperature Control System Meets Demands of Industry."
Control & Instr. (G.B.), 33 (March 1974).
Beckers, C., and Chamberlain, S., "Design of Cost-Effective Water Quality
Surveillance Systems," EPA-600/5-74-004 (January 1974).
Beckers, E., et al., "Quantitative Methods for Preliminary Design of Water
Quality Surveillance Systems," EPA-R5-72-001 (November 1972).
Beckers, C.V., and Chamberlain, S.G., "Design of Cost Effective Water Quality
Surveillance Systems," U.S. EPA Socioeconomic Environmental Studies Series
No. EPA-600/5-74-004 (1974).
1-18
-------
Becknell, D.E.j et al., "Use of Anion Exchange Resin-Loaded Paper in the
Determination of Trace Mercury in Water by Neutron Activation Analysis."
Anal. Chem., 43,1230 (1971).
Belick, P.M., and Von Kirk, F.N., "California Plant Gets Straight A's in
Computer Control." Water § Wastes Eng., 12:4,20 (1975).
Bellomo, A., et al., "Cyclic Multichannel Apparatus for Wireless Simultaneous
Transmission of Conductivity Measurements." Anal. Chem., 47,1207 (1975).
Benedict, H.M., et al., "Analytical Methodology for Mercury." In "Environ-
mental Mercury Contamination," Intl. Conf. (1970). R. Hartung [Ed.],
Ann Arbor Science Publ., Ann Arbor, Michigan, 161 (1972).
Benesch, R., and Mangelsdorf, P., "Method for Colorimetric Determination of
Ammonia in Sea Water." Helgoliinder Wiss. Meeresunters. (Ger.), 23,365
(1972); Chem. Abs., 78,33725 (1973).
Benes, P., and Steinnes, E., "Migration Forms of Trace Elements in Natural
Fresh Waters and the Effect of the Water Storage." Water Res. (G.B.), 9,751
(1975).
Bennett, T.B., Jr., et al., "Automated Flameless Atomic Absorption Procedure
for Mercury in Water." Adv. Autom. Anal., Technicon Int. Congr. 1972, 8,73,
Mediad, Inc., Tarrytown, N.Y. (1973).
Berg, W.W., Jr., et al., "A Continuous Turbidity Monitoring System for
Coastal Surface Waters." Limnol. $ Oceanog., 20,137 (1975).
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, "Instrumentation for Environmental Monitoring:
WATER." LBL-1, Vol. 2, Tech. Inform. Divl, Berkeley, California.
Berthier, P., "Continuous Monitoring of Chloride and Fluoride Ions by Orion
Electrodes in Surface and Underground Water." Analysis 2,722 (1974); Chem.
Abs., 82,102936 (1975).
Berthouex, P.M., and Hunter, W.G., "Treatment Plant Monitoring Programs: A
Preliminary Analysis." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 47,2143 (1975).
Bhagat, S.K., et al., "Trace Element Analysis of Environmental Samples by
Neutron Activation Method." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 43,2414 (1971).
Bibbero, R. J., "Avoiding Pitfalls in the Design of Optimizing Controls."
Control Eng., 21:4,50 (1974).
Blakely, C.P., and Thomas, T.K., "Instrumentation for Water Pollution
Monitoring." Environ. Sci. § Technol., 7, 1006 (1973).
Blanc, F.C., and Molof, A.J., "Electrode Potential Monitoring and Electro-
lytic Control in Anaerobic Digestion." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 45,
655 (1973).
1-19
-------
Blasso, L., "Flow Measurement Under Any Condition." Instr. § Control Systems,
48:2,45 (1975).
Bologna, A., "Automatic Waste Sludge Sampler." Deeds and Data (Water Poll.
Control Fed.), D4 (April 1974).
Bowling, J.L., and Dean, J.A., "Determination of Selenium in Natural Waters
Using the Centrifugal Photometric Analyzer." Anal. Lett., 7,205 (1974).
Boyer, F.E., "Current Views on Fluidics Technology." Chem. Eng., 81,26,117
(1974).
Braunlich, G., "Continuous Determination of Organic Substances in Waste
Water by Infrared Photometry." Ger. Offen, 2,164,670, (June 28, 1973);
Chem. Abs., 79, 83238 (1973).
Bray, J.T., et al., "Phosphate in Interstitial Waters of Anoxic Sediments.
Oxidation Effects during Sampling Procedure." Science, 180,1362 (1973).
Brennan, P.J., "Another Look at Chart Recorders." Instr. § Control Systems,
48:5,31 (1975).
Brett, R.W.J., et al., "Feed Forward Control of an Activated Sludge Process."
Water Res. (G.B.), 7,525 (1973).
Brez, C., "Predicting Limit Cycling in Control Valves." Control Eng.,
22:7,35 (1975).
Briggs, R., "Instrumentation for Monitoring Water Quality." Water Trt. §
Exam., (G.B.), 24,23 (1975).
Brinkman, F.J.J., et al., "Inhomogeneous River Water Quality. Automatic
Measurement." Deut. Gewasserk. Mitt. (Ger.), 17,159 (1973); Chem. Abs.,
80,112221 (1974).
Britton, R.E., "Rack Enclosures for Field Instruments." Instr. Technol.,
21:5,35 (1974).
Brown, C.W., et al., "Monitoring Narragansett Bay Oil Spills by Infrared
Spectroscopy." Environ. Sci. $ Technol., 8, 669 (1974).
Brown, O.R., and Barton, J., "Automated Instrument for Measuring Biological
Transport Kinetics over Intervals of a Few Seconds." Biotechnol. Bioeng.,
16,1645 (1974).
Brown, L.C., "Determination of Phosphorus -32 and -33 in Aqueous Solution."
Anal. Chem., 43,1326 (1971).
Buckley, P.S., "Dynamic Design of Pneumatic Control Loops." Instr. Technol.
22:4,33 (1975).
1-20
-------
Buckley, P.S., "Application Principles and Practices." Instr. Technol.,
22:6,39 (1975).
Buelow, R.W., et al., "An Improved Method for Determining Organics by
Activated Carbon Adsorption and Solvent Extraction." Jour. Amer. Water
Works Assn., 65,57,195 (1973).
Buhr, H.O., et al., [Eds.], "Research Needs for Automation of Wastewater
Treatment Systems." Proc. Clemson Univ. Workshop, S.C. (September 1975).
Burchett, M.E., and Tchobanoglous, G., "Facilities for Controlling the
Activated Sludge Process by Mean Cell Residence Time." Jour. Water Poll.
Control Fed., 46,973 (1974).
Burke, D.A., "Know the Common Level Controls." Instr. § Control Systems,
48:8,17 (1975).
Cairns, J., et al., "Development of an Automated Biological Monitoring System
for Water Quality." Natl. Tech. Info. Serv., No. PB-238 492/3 GA (1975).
Cairns, J., Jr., et al., "Development of an Automated Biological Monitoring
System for Water-Quality." Res. Div., Bull. No. 59. Va. Polytech. Inst.
State Univ. (1973).
Cairns, J., Jr., et al., "The Relationship between Continuous Biological
Monitoring and Water Quality Standards for Chronic Exposure." In "Bioassay
Techniques and Environmental Chemistry." G.E. Glass [Ed.], Ann Arbor Science
Publ., Ann Arbor, Mich., 383 (1973).
Canelli, E., and Mitchell, D.G., "A Semi-Automated Procedure for the
Determination of Phosphorus in Water, Wastewaters, and Particulates."
Water Res. (G.B.), 9,1093 (1975).
Cargill, G.G., "PLC Principle Allows for a Change in the Control System."
Control § Instr. (G.B.), 28 (March 1974).
Carr, R. R., "Combined Sampling and Flow Measurement." Pub. Works, 104:4,71
(1973).
Cerijo, M.R., "Transport Delay—Neither Infinite nor Infinitesimal." Instr.
§ Control Systems, 48:4,41 (1975).
Chalfin, S., "Specifying Control Valves." Chem. Eng., 81,21,105 (1974).
Chamberlain, S.G., et al., "Quantitative Methods for Preliminary Design of
Water Quality Surveillance Systems." Water Resources Bull., 10,199 (1974).
Chapman, R.L., "Standards for Pollution Analyzer Performance." Instr.
Technol., 21:4,41 (1974).
1-21
-------
Cheremisinoff, P.N., and Young, R.A., "1975 Annual Review of the New Develop-
ments in Water Quality Instrumentation." Poll. Eng., 7:3,28 (1975).
Chermisinoff, P.N., J'Water Pollution Sampling, Monitoring, and Analysis
Instrumentation." Poll. Eng., 6:4,36 (1974)
Chiu, S.Y., et al., "ATP Pools in Activated Sludge." Jour. Water Poll.
Control Fed., 45,1746 (1973).
Cho, C.H., "Determining Level Control Stability." Instr. Technol., 21:6,41
(1974).
Cho, C.H., "Using Control Element Characteristics to Compensate for Process
Nonlinearities." Control Eng., 21:8,52 (1974).
Ciaccio, L. L., et al., "Automated and Instrumental Methods in Water Analysis."
In "Water and Water Pollution Handbook," 4, L.L. Ciaccio [Ed.], Marcel Dekker,
New York, N.Y. 1431, (1973).
Cioce, F., et al., "Automatic Determination of Ammonia and Amino Acid
Nitrogen in Marine and Brackish Waters." Arch. Oceanogr. Limnol. (Ital.),
17,297 (1972); Chem. Abs.80,63687 (1974).
Cohen, A;, et al., "A Quantitative Method for Effluent Compliance Monitoring
Resource Allocation," EPA-600/5-75-015. (September 1975).
Cohen A.I., Bar-Shalom, Y., et al., "A Quantitative Method for Effluent
Compliance Monitoring Resource Allocation." EPA-600/5-75-015 (Sept. 1975).
Coleman, R.F., "Comparison of Analytical Techniques for Inorganic Pollutants."
Anal. Chem. 46,989A (1974).
Collins, A.S., and Gilliland, B.E., "Control of Anaerobic Digestion Process."
Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100,487 (1974).
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Dept. of Environmental Resources, Bureau of
Water Quality Management, "Demonstration of a State Water Quality Management
Information System," U.S. EPA Socioeconomic Environmental Studies Series
Report No. EAP-600/5-74-022 (1974).
Conetta, A., et al., "Automated Analysis for Cyanide." Poll. Eng., 7,36
(1975).
Conetta, A., et al., "Monitor IV. New Instrument Designed for Effluent
Monitoring." Adv. Autom. Anal. Technicon Int. Congr. 1972, 8,25, Mediad,
Inc., Tarrytown, N. Y. (1973).
Control § Instr. (G.B.), "Surveying the Field of Liquid Level Measurement."
30 (September 1974).
1-22
-------
Corcoran, W.S., and Honeywell, J., "Practical Methods for Measuring Flows."
Chem. Eng., 82,14,86 (1975).
Gosling, R.H., "Automatic Process Control of Sewage Treatment Works." PACE
(S. Australia), 26:12,14 (1973).
Cotter, D.E., et al., Feasibility Study of Automation and Surveillance Systems
for Utility Plants at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri" [2 Vol.], Natl. Tech.
Info. Serv., Nos. AD-A013, 410/6ST, and AD-A016 945/8ST (1975).
Cotter, J.E., "Best Effluent the Goal." Water $ Wastes Eng., 11:2,46 (1974).
Cotton, P., "Automation of the Control and Operation of Water Pollution
Control Works." Water Poll. Control (G.B.), 72,635 (1973).
Coughenower, D.D., and Curl, H.C., Jr., "An Automated Technique for Total
Dissolved Free Amino Acids in Sewawter." Limnol. £ Oceanog. 20,128 (1975).
Coyne, R.V., et al., "Water Sampling Guidelines and Interpretation of Data."
U.S. Nat. Tech. Inform. Serv., AD Rep. No. 752537 (1972); Chem. Abs., 78,
151445 (1973).
Creason, S.L., "How to Choose a pH control System." Instr. § Control Systems,
48:9,25 (1975).
Cronholm, M., and Winbladh, E., "Control of Chemical Oxygen Demand of Waste
Water with the Axel Johnson Institute KS-Meter." Vatten (Swed.), 28,367
(1972); Chem. Abs., 78,101765 (1973).
Daneker, J.R., and Kontor, J.S., "New Flowmeter Passes Tests." Water $
Wastes Eng., 12:4,58 (1975).
D'Arrigo, C., et al., "Determination of the Chlorine Content of Sea Water by
a New Automatic Potentiometric Titer Indicator." Rass. Chim. (It.), 24,393
(1972); Chem. Abs., 78,151453 (1973).
Davey, E.W., and Soper, A.E., "Apparatus for the in situ Concentration of
Trace Metals from Seawater." Limnol. $ Oceanog., 20,1019 (1975).
Davis, J.C., "Computer Process Control: The Options Keep Growing." Chem.
Eng. 81,19,52 (1974).
Davis, J.J., et al., "Generic Feed Forward Control of Activated Sludge."
Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99,301 (1973).
Deaner, D.G., and Martinson, S., "Definition and Calculation of Mean Cell
Residence Time." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 46,2422 (1974).
Degobbis, D., "On the Storage of Seawater Samples for Ammonia Determination."
Limnol. Oceaongr., 18,146 (1973).
1-23
-------
deHeer, H.J., "Choosing an Economical Automatic Protective System." Chem.
Eng., 82:6,73 (1975).
Deka, O.K., "an Explanation of Zero and Span." Instr. Technol. 21:11,40
(1974).
DeManche, J.M., et al., "An Automated Analysis for Urea in Seawater."
Limnol. Oceanogr., 18, 686 (1973).
Denham, D.H., "Recommended Methodology for Environmental Surveillance."
Battelle Mem. Inst. Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, Washington, Report
# BNWL-SA-4835, 11 pp. (1974).
Denisova, L.G., "Experimental Use of Ion-Selective Electrodes for the
Automatic Monitoring of Sodium Ion Content in the Feed Water of Thermal
Electric Power Plants." Teploenergetika (U.S.S.R.), 11, 37 (1973);
ChemAbs., 80,52229 (1974).
Dennis, P., "The Systems Approach to Weighing Could Cut Raw Material Costs."
Control § Instr. (G.B.), 7:2,46 (1975).
DeTaeye, P., "Assay of Methylene Blue Active Substance in Rince, Effluent,
and River Waters by Auto Analyzers." Tenside Deterg., 12,41 (1975); Chem.
Abs., 83,32672 (1975).
Deuschle, R., "Pneumatic? Electronic? Which to Buy?" Instr. § Control
Systems, 48:2,51 (1975).
de Villaret, F., and Himmelblau, D.M., "Kinetic Modeling of Aeration Basins."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 45, 292 (1973).
Devries, J.J., et al., "Diary of a Sick Control System." Civil Eng., 45:5,68
(1975).
Dikiya, Y., and Yamazaki, S., "Loss of Trace Elements from Natural Waters
during Storage. I. Behavior of Mercury-203 and Zinc-65 Added to Pond Water."
Environ. Lett. 7,67 (1974).
Dobbs, R.A., et al., "Use of Ultraviolet Absorbance for Monitoring the Total
Organic Carbon Content of Water and Wastewater." Water Res. (G.B.), 6,1173
(1972).
Driskell, L., "Control Valve Sizing with ISA Formulas." Instr. Technol. 21:7,
33 (1974).
Ebock, V., "Amperometric Measurements of Cyanide and Chromate in Waste Waters."
Chem. Tech. (Ger.) 25,715 (1974); Chem. Abs., 82,76839 (1975).
Ecker, H.W., et al., "Electrical Safety: Designing Purged Enclosures."
Chem. Eng., 81:10,93 (1974).
1-24
-------
Eckfeldt, E.L., and Proctor, W.E., Jr., "Low Level Sodium Ion Measurement
with the Glass Electrode." Anal. Chem., 43,332 (1971).
Eilers, R.G., and Smith, R., "Executive Digital Computer Program for Pre-
liminary Design of Wastewater Treatment Systems." National Tech. Info. Serv.,
No. PB-222 765/0 (March 1973).
Ellerker, R., and Collinson, B., "Use of an AutoAnalyzer for Sewage Works
Analyses." Water Poll. Control (Can.), 71,54 (1972); Chem. Abs., 79,23251
(1973).
Elvins, B.J., "Water Quality Monitoring Experience in the Somerset River
Authority Area, 1968-72." Water Poll. Control (G. B.), 73,33 (1974).
Enke, C.G., "Measurement and Monitoring Units for Waste Water." Wasser,
Luft and Betrieb (Ger.), 18, 20 (1974).
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory (EMSL), (formerly Analytical
Quality Control Laboratory), "Analytical Quality Control in Water and
Wastewater Laboratories," a Technology Transfer Publication, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio (1972).
Environmental Monitoring and support Laboratory (EMSL), (formerly Analytical
Quality Control Laboratory), "Minimal Requirements for a Water Quality
Assurance Program," U.S. EPA Report No. EPA-440/9-75-010 (1976).
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory (EMSL), (formerly Methods
Development and Quality Assurance Research Laboratory) "Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and Wastes," a Technology Transfer Publication, U.S. EPA
Cincinnati, Ohio (1974).
Environ. Sci. § Technol., "The Monitoring Jackpot." 9,1109 (1975).
Environmental Protection Agency, "Handbook for Monitoring Industrial Waste-
water." Office of Technology Transfer Handbook (August 1973).
Epler, R. J., "Minicomputer's Role in Monitoring." Environ. Sci. § Technol.,
8,28 (1974).
Erdmann, D.E., "Automated Ion-selective Electrode Method for Determining
Fluoride in Natural Waters." Environ. Sci. § Technol. 9,252 (1975).
Erickson, L.E., "Design and Control of Transient Waste Treatment Processes."
Natl. Tech. Info. Serv., No. PB-223962 (July 1973).
Ermakov, I.S., and Messengisser, M.J., "The Automatic Filter Press, FPAKM."
Chemische Technik (Ger.), 26,32 (1974).
Everett, L.G., Schmidt, K.D., Finlin, R. M., and Todd, O.K., "Monitoring
Groundwater Quality: Methods and Costs, " U.S. EPA Environmental Monitoring
Series Report No. EPA-600/4-76-023 (1976).
1-25
-------
Federal Inter-Agency Sedimentation Project (FIASP) "Field Practice and
Equipment Used in Sampling Suspended Sediments," Report No. 1, St. Paul U.S.
Engineer District Sub-Office Hydraulic Laboratory, University of Iowa,
Iowa City, 10 (1940).
Feher, Z., et al., "The Use of Precipitate Based Silicone Rubber Based
Graphite Voltammetric Electrodes in Continuous Analysis." Analyst (G. B.)
99, 699 (1974).
Feldman, C., "Preservation of Dilute Mercury Solutions." Anal. Chem.,
46, 99 (1974).
Feltz, H. R., and Culbertson, J. K., "Sampling Procedures and Problems in
Determining Pesticide Residues in the Hydrologic Environment." Pesticides
Monitoring Jour., 6, 171 (1972).
Fiedler, U., et al., "Measurement of Carbon Dioxide with the Air-Gap
Electrode. Determination of the Total Inorganic and the Total Organic Carbon
Contents in Waters." Anal. Chim. Acta, 74, 423 (1975).
Finch, R. E., and Strutynski, B. J., "An Automated Spectrophotometric
Suspended Solids Analysis for Activated Sludge." Jour. Water Poll. Contr.
Fed., 47, 1043 (1975).
Fitzgerald, W. F. and Lyons, W. B., "Mercury Concentrations in Open Ocean
Waters: Sampling Procedures." Limnol. § Oceanog., 20, 468 (1975).
Flanagan, M. J. and Jones, G. M., "Automation Comes to L.A." Water £ Wastes
Eng., 11:2,41 (1974).
Flanagan, M.J., "Full Automation Goal of Water Reclamation Plant." Water §
Wastes Eng., 12:12,18 (1975).
Florczyk, H., "Location of Automatic Stations for Measuring Water Quality."
Mater. Badaw., Inst. Gospod Wodnij, No. 11 (1971); Chem. Abs., 78, 101818
(1973).
Forester, R., and Overland, D., "Portable Device to Measure Industrial
Wastewater Flow." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 46, 777 (1974).
Foster, R. A., "Guidelines for Selecting On-line Process Analyzers."
Chem. Eng., 82:6,65 (1975).
Fraser, G., "Getting to Know All About Liquid Level Measurement." Control §
Instr. (G. B.), 34 (Sept. 1974).
Froman, C. A., Jr., "The Pros and Cons of Automated Filters." Water § Wastes
Engr., 11:3,43 (1974).
Fuhs, G. W., "Improved Device for the Collection of Sedimenting Matter."
Limnol. § Oceanogr., 18, 989 (1973).
1-26
-------
Galluzzo, J. F., "Automatic Sewer Sampling System Monitors for Spills."
Poll. Eng., 7:9,73 (1975).
Ganapathy, V., "Instant Reynolds Number: Nomography for Air Saves Time."
Instr. & Control Systems, 48:2,73 (1975).
Gaston, G. N. and Lee, A. K., "Note on Effects of Storage on Mercury
Analysis." Jour. Amer. Water Works Assn., 66, 495 (1974).
Geisler, C., et al., "New COD Analysis Arrives." Waste Water Eng., 11:4,26
(1974).
George, P., "Developing Pneumatic Logic Control." Control £ Instr. (G. B.),
7:4,24 (1975).
Gesser, H. D., et al., "The Monitoring of Organic Matter with Polyurethane
Foam." Jour. Amer. Water Works Assn., 65, 220 (1973).
Ghoshj S., and Pohland, F. G., "Kinetics of Substrate Assimilation and
Product Formation in Anaerobic Digestion." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed.,
46, 748 (1974).
Goderis, I., "Assay of Phosphates in Effluent and River Waters by
Autoanalyzers." Ten-side Deterg., 12, 46 (1975); Chem. Abs., 83, 15379
(1975).
Goldberg, M. C., et al., "Extraction and Concentration of Organic Solutes
from Water." Anal. Chem., 45, 89 (1973).
Gomberg, M. L., et al., "Apparatus for Automatic Control of Sediment Level."
Bumazhnayer Promyshlennost (U.S.S.R.), 2, 24 (1973).
Goodman, B. L., and Englande, A. J., "A Unified Model of the Activated
Sludge Process." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 46, 312 (1974).
Goswamy, P., "Automatic Water Pollution Monitoring." Chem. Eng. World,
8:9, 49 (1973); Chem. Abs., 80, 63477 (1974).
Goulden, P. D., and Brooksbank, P., "Automated Atomic Absorption Determina-
tion of Arsenic, Antimony and Selenium in Natural Waters." Anal. Chem.,
46, 1431 (1974).
Goulden, P. D., and Brooksbank, P., "Automated Determinations of Dissolved
Organic Carbon in Lake Water." Anal. Chem., 47, 1943 (1975).
Goulden, P. D., and Brooksbank, P., "Automated Phosphate Analysis in the
Presence of Arsenate." Limnol. § Oceanogr., 19, 705 (1974).
Goulden, P. D., and Brooksbank, P., "The Determination of Total Phosphate
in Natural Waters." Anal. Chim. Acta, 80, 183 (1975).
1-27
-------
Goulden, P. D., "Chemical Analysis of Nutrients." In "Nutrients in Natural
Waters." H. E. Allen and J. R. Kramer [Eds.], John Wiley 5 Sons., New York,
N. Y., 125 (1972).
Goulden, P. D., et al., "Determination of Submicrogram Levels of Phenol in
Water." Anal. Chem., 45, 2430 (1973).
Graef, S. P., and Andrews, J. F., "Stability and Control of Anaerobic
Digestion." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 46, 666 (1974).
Grasshoff, K., and Chan, K., "Automatic Method for the Determination of
Hydrogen Sulfide in Natural Water." Advan. Automat. Anal. Technicon Intl.
Congr., 2, 147 (1969); Chem. Abs., 72, 136235z (1970).
Grasshoff, K., and Johannson, H., "New Sensitive and Direct Method for the
Automatic Determination of Ammonia in Sea Water." Jour. Cons., Cons. Int.
Explor. Mer., 34, 516 (1972); Chem. Abs., 78, 154434 (1973).
Grasshoff, K., and Wenck, A., "Modern Version of the Mohr-Knudsen Titration
for the Chlorinity of Sea Water." Jour. Cons., Cons. Int. Explor. Mer.,
34, 522 (1972); Chem. Abs., 78, 151436 (1973).
Gray, J., et al., "An Automatic Sequential Rainfall Sampler." Rev. Sci.
Instr., 45, 1517 (1974).
Green, D., "Resonance Frequency Measurement: Tool of the Seventies?"
Control & Instr. (G. B.), 7:2,40 (1975).
Green, R. M., and Stackhouse, G. E., "Control by Variance with the Probabil-
ity Computer." Control Eng., 21:1,50 (1974).
Groves, B., "Telemetry, Telemetering, or Data Communications." Instr. §
Control Systems, 48:7,15 (1975).
Grunnet, K., and Hansen, J.C., "Measurement of Organic Carbon in Water,
BOD, COD, and TOG (Total Organic Carbon)." Vatten (Swed.), 28, 356 (1972);
Chem. Abs., 78, 101764 (1973).
Guenther, G., et al., "Michigan Water Resources'Enforcement and Information
System," EPA-R5-73-020 (July 1973).
Gump, B. H., et al., "Drop Sampler for Obtaining Fresh and Sea Water
Samples for Organic Compound Analysis." Anal. Chem., 47, 1223 (1975).
Guy, H. P., and Norman, V. W., "Field Methods for Measurement of Fluvial
Sediment," USGS Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, Book 3,
Chapter C2, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia (1970).
Hansen, E.A., and Harris, A.R., "A Groundwater Profile Sampler." Water
Resources Res., 10, 375 (1974).
1-28
-------
Harriett, D. B. , and Randall, D. C. , "Automatic Analysis of River Water."
Water Trt. § Exam. (G. B.), 21:4,342 (1972); Chem. Abs., 78, 163844 (1973).
Harris, D. J., and Keffer, W. J., "Performance of Automatic Wastewater
Compositors." Proc. 29th Ind. Waste Conf., Purdue Univ., W. Lafayette, Ind.,
Ext. Ser. 145, 213 (1974).
Harris, D. J., and Keffer, W. J., "Wastewater Sampling Methodologies and
Flow Measurement Techniques." U.S. EPA 907/9-74-005, Region VII Surveil,
Analysis Div.; Field Invest. Sect., Kansas City, Mo., 130pp. (1974).
Harris, L. E., "GC/MS (Gas Chromatograph/Mass Spectrometer) Computer System
for Identification of Organic Pollutants in Water." Anal. Instrum., 11,
183 (1973).
Harshe, B. L., "A Simplified Approach to Estimating Instrument Accuracy."
Chem. Eng., 81:6,93 (1974).
Haruo, M., "Automated Method for the Determination of Trace Amounts of
Metal Ions by Ion-Exchange Chromatography. Determinatino of Zn(II) in
Waters." Anal. Chim. Acta (G. B.), 66, 143 (1973).
Harwood, J. E., and Huyser, D. J., "Automated Analysis of Ammonia in
Water." Water Res., (G. B.), 695 (1970); Chem. Abs., 74, 45453u (1971).
Heath, R. L., and Cline, J. E., "Effluent Monitoring in Nuclear Plants
Using On-Line Gamma-Ray Spectrometry." IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., 20, 65
(1973); Chem. Abs., 78, 131070 (1973).
Heckroth, C. W., "Outlook: Great But Many Obstacles Ahead." Water $ Wastes
Eng., 11:2,34 (1974).
Helfgott, T., [Ed.], "How Shall We Measure Wastewater Parameters?" In "The
Automation of Wastewater Treatment Plants." Water-1972, Amer. Inst. Chem.
Engr. Symp. Ser. 129:69,572 (1973).
Helfgott, T., [Ed.], "What Wastewater Parameters Shall We Measure?" In "The
Automation of Wastewater Treatment Plants." Water-1971, Amer. Inst. Chem.
Engr. Symp. Ser. 124:68,445 (1972).
Henn, E. L., and Bassett, D. 0., "Automated Analysis. Increasing Need in
the Modern Water Laboratory." Adv. Autom. Anal., Technicon Int. Congr.
1972, 8, 55, Mediad, Inc., Tarrytown, N. Y. (1973).
Henriksen, A., "Automatic Method for Determining Sulfate in Natural Soft
Water and Precipitation." Vatten (Swed.), 30, 187 (1974); Chem. Abs., 81,
175973 (1974).
Hirata, H., et al., "Ion-selective Membrane Electrodes and Their Apparatus
for Determining Concentrations of Pollutants." Nat'l. Tech. Rep. (Matsushita
Electr. Ind. Co., Osaka, Jap.), 20,553 (1974);Chem.Abs.,82, 128966 (1975).
1-29
-------
Hirsch, A. A., "Sampler-Culture Apparatus for the Detection of Coliform
Bacteria in Potable Waters." U.S. 3,708,400, Jan. 2, 1973; Chem. Abs.,
78, 75741 (1973).
Hiser, L. I., and Herrera, W. R., "Application of NASA-Developed Technology
to the Automatic Control of Municipal Sewage Treatment Plants." NASA Tech.
Rept., NASA-CR-132340 (Nov. 1973).
Hodge, V. F., et al., "Simple Recovery of Plutonium, Americium, Uranium and
Polonium from Large Volumes of Ocean Water." Anal. Chem., 46, 1334 (1974).
Hollo, F. R., "Programmable Controllers: Familarity Breeds Success."
Automation, 21:2,68 (1974).
Holmes, J. R., "Telemetry in Water Pollution Control." Water Poll. Control
(G. B.), 73, 433 (1974).
Hoogeveen, L. P. J., and Butzelaar, P. F., "Detector for Measuring the
Chemical Oxygen Demand." Ger. Offen. 2,220,976, Nov. 9, 1972; Chem. Abs.,
78, 33763 (1973).
Hoover, T. B., "Rapid Detection System for Organophosphates and Carbamate
Insecticides in Water." U.S. Nat. Tech. Inform. Ser., PB Rep. No.214764/3
(1972); Chem. Abs., 79, 9569 (1973).
Holste, D., and Kaestner, H. J., "Automatic Apparatus for Withdrawal of
Wastewater Samples Which Are Proportional to the Quantity of Flow." Ger.
Offen. 2,113,675, Sept. 21, 1972; Chem. Abs., 78, 115028 (1973).
Holz, Von F., and Kremers, H., "Automatic Photometric, Simultaneous
Determination of Sulfate and Nitrate in Drinking, River and Drainage Water."
Landwirt. Forsch. Sonderh (Ger.), 28, 189 (1973); Chem. Abs., 80, 100045
(1974).
Howard, F. B., "Inplant pH Control Permits Optimum Aeration Efficiency."
Pulp $ Paper, 47:13,108 (L973).
Imsland, T., "Connecting DP Elements for Flow Sensing." Instr. § Control
Systems, 48:10,62 (1975).
Imsland, T., "Connecting DP Elements for Level Sensing." Instr. § Control
Systems, 48:11,43 (1975).
Ingle, J. D., Jr., and Crouch, S. R., "Simultaneous Determination of Silicate
and Phosphate by an Automated Differential Kinetic Procedure." Anal. Chem.,
43, 7 (1971).
Issaq, H. J., and Zielinski, W. L., Jr., "Loss of Lead from Aqueous
Solutions During Storage." Anal. Chem., 46, 1328 (1974).
1-30
-------
Ivanov, V. S., and Chernousov, N. N., "Equipment for Determining the Micro-
amounts of Phenol in Wastewater." USSR, 373,263, Mar. 12, 1973; Chem. Abs.,
79, 34906 (1973).
Jagner, D., and Aren, K., "Rapid Semi-automatic Method for the Determination
of the Total Halide Concentration in Sea Water by Means of Potentiometric
Titration." Anal. Chim. Acta, 52, 491 (1970); Chem. Abs., 74, 15636P (1971).
Jarbo, G. J., and Mislan, J. P., "Automated Colorimetric Method for the
Determination of Parts per Billion of Sulfide Ion in Water." Report AECL-
4612, 13 pp., Chalk River Nuc. Lab, At. Energy Canada, Ltd., Chalk River,
Ontario (1973); Avail. INIS Sectipn, Int. At. Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria;
Chem. Abs., 82, 174888 (1975).
Jenne, E. A., and Avotino, P., "The Time Stability of Dissolved Mercury in
Water Samples-I. Literature Review." Jour. Environ. Qual., 4, 427 (1975).
Jirka, A. M., and Carter, M. D., "Micro Semi-Automated Analysis of Surface
and Wastewaters for Chemical Oxygen Demand." Anal. Chem., 47, 1397 (1975).
John, J., "Californium-Based System for the Automated Detection of Heavy
Metals in Inland Waters." Nucl. Methods Environ. Res. Proc. Amer. Nucl.
Soc. Top. Meeting, 72 (1971); Chem. Abs., 79, 96749 (1973).
Johnson, A. H., et al., "Some Observations Concerning Preparation and
Storage of Stream Samples for Dissolved Inorganic Phosphate Analysis."
Water Resources Res., 11, 559 (1975).
Jones, M., et al., "Simultaneous Determination of Traces of Cobalt,
Chromium, Copper, Iron, Manganese, and Zinc by Atomic Fluorescence
Spectrometry with Preconcentration by an Automated Solvent Extraction
Procedure." Anal. Chim. Acta (G. B.), 63, 210 (1973).
Jones, R., and Stuart, C. J. S., "A Sampler for the Chemical Analysis of
Freshwaters Using Evacuated Tubes." Limnol. Oceanogr., 18, 805 (1973).
Kaminski, R. K., "I/P Transducers and I/P Positioners." Instr. Technol.,
22:3,45 (1975).
Kamphake, T. J., and Williams, R. T., "Automated Analyses for Environmental
Pollution Control." Adv. Autom. Anal., Technicon Int. Congr. 1972, 8, 43,
Mediad Inc., Tarrytown, N. Y. (1973).
Kan, K. T., "Automated Method for the Determination of Arsenic and Antimony."
Anal. Letters, 6, 63 (1973).
Kanno, S., and Koizumi, -I., "Automatic Monitoring Instruments for Water
Quality Control." Farumashia, 8, 328 (1972); Chem. Abs., 79, 57505 (1973).
Kanwisher, J. W., et al., "An Improved, Self-Contained Polarographic Dis-
solved Oxygen Probe." Limnol. § Oceanogr., 19, 700 (1974).
1-31
-------
Karlhuber, B. A., and Eberle, D. 0., "Advances Toward Automation of
Pesticide Residue Determinations." Anal. Chem., 47, 1094 (1975).
Kaufman, H. L., et al., "Advanced Design: Superior Effluent, Stability and
Economy, I." Water § Sew. Works, 122:2,88 (1975).
Kaufman, H. L., et al., "Advanced Design: Superior Effluent, Stability and
Economy, II." Water $ Sew. Works, 122:2,88 (1975).
Kazmann, R., "Water Surveillance in Sub-surface Disposal Projects."
Groundwater, 12, 418 (1974).
Kehoe, T. J., "Status Report on On-Line Process Analyzers." Chem. Eng.,
79:20,33 (1972).
Keinath, T. M., and Carnahan, R. P. , "Mathematical Modeling of Heterogeneous
Sorption in Continuous Contactors for Wastewater Decomposition." NatI.
Tech. Info. Serv., No. AD-777 530/7 (Dec. 1973).
Kennedy, J. P., "Changing Economy: Its Impact on Equipment." Chem. Eng.,
82:6,54 (1975).
Kermode, R. I., et al., "Process Control of Activated Sludge Treatment."
Natl. Tech. Info. Serv., No. ,PB-227 238/3 (July 1973).
Kern, R., "Control Valves in Process Plants." Chem. Eng., 82:8,85 (1975).
Kerrem, K., "Apparatus for Automatic Qualitative Determination of Toxic
Substances in Water." Ger. Offen. 2,164,702, July 12, 1973; Chem. Abs., 79,
149213 (1973).
Khramov, A. V., et al., "Apparatus for the Automatic in situ Measurement
of the Concentration of Dissolved Oxygen." Tr. Morsk. Gidrofiz. Inst., Akad.
Nauk Ukr. SSR (USSR), 41, 81 (1969); Chem. Abs., 73, 28696u (1970).
Khramov, A. V., et al., "Apparatus for the Automatic Measurement of the
Concentration of Molecular Oxygen Dissolved in Sea Water." Ekspress-Inform.,
Morsk. Gidrofiz. Inst., Akad. Nauk Ukr. SSR (USSR), 14, 74 (1969);
Chem. Abs., 73, 28709u (1970).
Khramov, A. V., et al., "Development and Study of Diffusion Sensors and
Apparatus for the Automatic Measurement of Oxygen Dissolved in Sea Water."
Tr. Morsk. Gidrofiz. Inst., Akad. Nauk Ukr. SSR (USSR), 41, 55 (1969);
Chem. Abs., 73, 28710u (1970).
King, W. G., et al., "Losses of Trace Concentrations of Cadmium from Aqueous
Solution during Storage in Glass Containers." Anal. Chem., 46, 771 (1974).
Kitchen, D., "Electrochemical Sensors in the Environment. Practical
Applications." Proc. Soc. Anal. Chem., 11:10, 270 (1974).
1-32
-------
Kitsutaka, H., "Detecting Pollutants in Wastewater and its Apparatus."
Japan, Kokai 74:79,591, Aug. 1, 1974; Chem. Abs., 82, 102890 (1975).
Kittrell, F. W., "A Practical Guide to Water Quality Studies of Streams,"
U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Federal Water Pollution Control Admin.,
Cincinnati, OH (1969).
Klei, H. E., and Sundstrom, D. W., "Automatic Control of an Activated Sludge
Reactor." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 46, 993 (1974).
Klimenko, A. M., et al., "Industrial Testing of an Automatic Oxygen Meter."
Energ. Elek. (USSR), 1, 13 (1973); Chem. Abs., 78, 163888 (1973).
Klimenko, A. M., "Theory of Electrochemical Devices for Continuous
Measurement of Concentration of Oxygen Dissolved in Water." Zb. Nauk. Rob.
Aspir., L'vov Politekh. Inst. No. 6, 113 (1972); Chem. Abs., 78, 143394(1973).
Kok, R., and Zasic, J. E., "Dynamic Response of a Polarographic Oxygen
"Probe." Biotechnol. Bioeng., 17, 527 (1975).
Kolk, R. W., "Interactions in Multivariable Systems." Control Eng., 21:11,59
(1974).
Kolk, W. R., "Computer Control-How Fast To Sample." Control Eng., 21:5,47
(1974).
Kramer, H., et al., "Automatic Continuous Carbon Determination in Water."
Ger. Offen. 2,116,148, Oct. 5, 1972; Chem. Abs., 78, 7713 (1973).
Kulin, et al., "A Guide to the Methods and Standards for the Measurement of
Water Flow." Natl. Bureau of Standards Rept., No. NBS-SP-421 (May 1975).
Labadie, J. W., et al., "Automatic Control of Large-Scale Combined Sewer
Systems." Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101, 27 (1975).
Lakshman, G., "Monitoring Agricultural Pollution Using Natural Fluorescence."
Water Resources Res., 11, 705 (1975).
Latterell, J. J., "Sorption of Orthophosphate on the Surface of Water Sample
Containers." Water Resources Res., 10, 865 (1974).
Lawford, V. N., "Differential-Pressure Instruments: The Universal Measurement
Tools." Instr. Technol., 21:12,30 (1974).
Ledet, E. J., and Laeseter, J. L., "Comparison of Two Sampling Devices for
the Recovery of Organics from Aqueous Surface Films." Anal. Letters, 7, 553
(1974).
Lee, M. L., and Burrell, D. C., "Extraction of Cobalt, Iron, Indium, and
Zinc from Seawater by Means of the Trifluoroacetylacetone-toluene System."
Anal. Chim. Acta, 62, 153 (1973).
1-33
-------
Lehocky, J., "Standard Methods for Sampling and Determination of Petroleum
Produces and Extractable Substances in Water." Vod. Hospod., B, 23, 264
(1973); Chem. Abs., 80, 124447 (1974).
Leschber, R., and Schumann', H., "Water Quality Monitoring with Automatic
Monitors in Berlin." Dechema-Monogr. (Ger.), 75, 279 (1974).
Levden, D. E., et al., "Preconcentration and X-Ray Fluorescence Determination
of Copper, Nickel, and Zinc in Sea Water." Anal. Chem., 47, 733 (1975).
Lewin, Jr., and Chen, C. H., "Changes in the Concentration of Soluble and
Particulate Iron in Seawater Enclosed in Containers." Limnol. Oceanogr.,
18, 590 (1973).
Lewin, V. H., and Latten, A., "Automatic Samplers for Sewage and Effluents."
Process Biochem. (G. B.), 6, 15 (1973).
Lin, C. S., "An Optimal Control Algorithm with Transportation Delay." Con-
trol Eng., 21:1,60 (1974).
LiptSk, B. G., and Kaminski, R. K., "Ultrasonic Instruments for Level and
Flow." Instr. Technol., 21:9, 49 (1974).
Liptak, B. G., "Higher Profits via Advanced Instrumentation." Chem. Eng.,
82:13,152 (1975).
Liptak, B. G., "New Instrumentation Can Boost Your Profits." Instr. §
Control Systems, 48:5,41 (1975)..
Liptak, B. G., "Pollution Analyzers for Air and Water-Who Makes What."
Instr. Technol., 21:1,43 (1974).
Liptak, B. G., "Trends in On-Stream Analyzers for Pollution Control."
Contr. Eng., 20:7,43 (1973); Chem. Abs., 79, 93202 (1973).
Liskowitz, J. W., et al., "Suspended Solids Monitor." EPA Technol. Ser.
EPA-670/2-75-002 (April 1975).
Little, A. H., "Sampling and Samplers." Water Poll. Control (G. B.),
72^, 606 (1973).
Lobring, L. B., and Booth, R. L., "Evaluation of the AutoAnalyzer II."
Adv. Autom. Anal., Technicon Int. Congr. 1972, 8, 7, Mediad, Inc.,
Tarrytpwn, N. Y. (1973).
Lochmueller, C. H., et al., "Integrating Sampling Methods for Trace Metal
Analysis of Natural Water Systems. Ion Exchange Membrane Targets for
Proton-Excited X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis." Anal. Letters, 5, 943 (1972).
Lochmuller, C. H., et al., "Trace Metal Analsis in Water by Proton-Induced
X-Ray Emission Analysis of Ion-Exchange Membranes." Anal.Chem.,46,440(1974).
1-34
-------
Loeb, M. B., "Determining Chlorine-Gas Flowrates from Cylinders." Chem.
Engr., 82:1,126 (1975).
Lo, J. M., and Wai, C. M., "Mercury Loss from Water During Storage:
Mechanisms and Prevention." Anal. Chem., 47, 1869 (1975).
Lomas, D. J., "Vortex-Shedding Flowmeter Senses Pressure Fluctuations."
Control Eng., 22:3,40 (1975).
Lorenzi, A., "Evaluating the Design of a Prototype Linear Resistance
Flowmeter." Control § Instr. (G. B.), 7:9,24 (1975).
Ludwig, R. G., and Parkhurst, J.D./'Simplified Application of Palmer-Bowlus
Flow Meters." Jour. Water Poll. Control. Fed., 46, 2764 (1974).
Lutz, K., "A Digital Flowmeter." Instr. § Control Systems, 48:8,37 (1975).
Lynworth, L. C., "Clamp-on Ultrasonic Flowmeters." Instr. Technol., 22:9,37
(1975).
Lyons, J. L., "One-Stop Guide to Valve Sizing." Automation, 22:6,66 (1975).
Lysyj, I., "Pyrographic Analysis of Waste Waters." Environ. Sci. § Technol.,
8, 31 (1974).
Maddock, H., "Electronic Control Module Drive Pneumatic Equipment." Control
£ Instr. (G. B.), 38 (May 1974).
Makabe, H., and Ishiji, T., "Shimadzu Automatic Mercury Analyzer."
Shimadzu Hyoron (Jap.), 30, 19 (1973); Chem. Abs., 81, 96095 (1974).
Malhotra, S.K., and Myers, F. A., "Design, Operation and Monitoring of
Municipal Land Irrigation Systems in Michigan." Paper presented at 47th
Annual Conf., Water Poll. Control Fed., Denver, Colo. (Oct. 1974).
Manahan, S. E., et al., "Automated Potentiometric Techniques for the On-Site
Monitoring of Anion Concentrations in Water." Chem. Abs., 74, 6268t (1971).
Manczak, H., "Statistical Model of the Interdepenctence of River Flow Rate
and Pollution Concentration." Proc. Enviorn. Contr. Seminar, Govt. Printing
Off., Wash., D.C., 111 (1971); Chem. Abs., 78, 101766 (1973).
Mangelsdorf, P., "Methodological Improvements for Determining Phosphate in
Sea Water Employing the AutoAnalyzer, Especially for Shipboard Use."
Helgolander Wiss. Meeresunters. (Ger.), 23, 376 (1972); Chem. Abs., 78,
140248 (1973).
Manning, P., "Making Microprocessors by the Module." Instr. § Control
Systems, 47:11,57 (1974).
1-35
-------
Manning, P., "Need More 'Intelligence1? Plug in a Microcomputer."
Automation, 21:10,53 (1974).
Matsui, H., "Automatic Spectrophotometric Determination of Mn(II) (in River
Water) after Cation-Exchange Chromatography." Anal. Chim. Acta (G. B.),
69, 216 (1974).
Mattson, J. S., et al., "Continuous Monitoring of Dissolved Organic Matter
by UV-Visible Photometry." Limnol. £ Oceahogr., 19* 530 (1974).
Matutano, J., et al., "Continuous Measurement of and Radioactivity of
Water in View of Maximum Permissible Concentrations for the Public."
Commis. Energy At. (Fr.), Rep. CEA-CONF-2007 (1972); Chem. Abs., 78, 33597
(1973).
Maylath, R. E., "Monitoring New York's Water Automatically." Jour. Amer.
Water Works Assn., 63, 517 (1971).
Maynard, V., and Hopkins, T. L., "Evaluation of Effects of Field and Lab
Procedures on Nitrate-Nitrite Nitrogen." Adv. Autom. Anal., Technicon
Int. Congr. 1972, 8, 29, Mediad, Inc., Tarrytown, N. Y. (1973).
McAvoy, R. L., "Automation in a Water Quality Laboratory Scheme." Adv.
Autom. Anal., Technicon Int. Congr 1972, 8, 37, Mediad, Inc., Tarrytown,
N.Y. (1973).
McClelland, N. I., and Mancy, K. H., "Water Quality Monitoring in Distribu-
tion Systems." Jour. Amer. Water Works Assn., 64, 795 (1972).
McCluney, W. R., "Radiometry of water turbidity measurements." Jour. Water
Poll. Control Fed., 47, 252 (1975).
McCormack, K., "System for Detecting the Presence or Absence of Petroleum
Products on or in a Water Surface." Ger. Offen. 2,251,116, May 24, 1973;
Chem. Abs., 79, 57465 (1973).
McCutcheon, E. G., "Control Theory-Modern vs. Classical." Control Eng.,
21:5,85 (1974). '
McDonald, D., "Squeezing Five Days BOD Determination Down to an Hour's Work."
Process Eng. (G. B.), 12, 68 (1973).
McKenzie, L. R., and Young, P. N. W., "Determinatino of Ammonia-, Nitrate-,
and Organic Nitrogen in Water and Wastewater with an Ammonia-Sensing
Electrode." Analyst, (G. B.), 100, 620 (1975).
McNelis, P. J., "Monitoring of Water Systems." In "Water and Water Pollution
Handbook," 4, L. L. £iaccio [Ed.], Marcel Dekker, New York, N.Y. 1389 (1973).
McSwain, M. R., et al., "Improved Methylthymol Blue Procedure for Automated
Sulfate Determinations." Anal. Chem., 46, 1329 (1974).
1-36
-------
Mertens, J., et al., "Automation of the Potentiometric Determination of
Fluoride and Its Application." Jour. Pharm. Belg. (in Fr.)» 29, 181 (1974);
Chem. Abs., 81, 85510 (1974).
Mertens, J., et al., "Use of an Ammonium Selective Electrode for the
Automatic Determination of Ammonia in Boiler Feed Waters." Anal. Letters,
6, 81 (1973).
Mertens, J., "On-Stream Determination of Ammonia in Boiler Feed-Water with an
Ammonium Ion Selective Electrode and an Ammonia Probe." Bull. Soc. Chem.
Gelg., 83, 19 (1974); Chem. Abs., 81, 176018 (1974).
Mez, E., "Oxygen Probe." Ger. Offen. 2,142,438, Mar. 8, 1973; Chem. Abs.,
78, 140328 (1973).
Midgely, D., and Torrance, K., "Continuous Determination of Ammonia in
Condensed Steam and High-Purity Boiler Feed Water Using a Potentiometric
Ammonia Probe." Analyst (G. B.), 98, 217 (1973).
Miget, R., et al., "New Sampling Device for the Recovery of Petroleum
Hydrocarbons and Fatty Acids from Aqueous Surface Films." Anal. Chem., 46,
1154 (1974).
Miller, W. M., and Carson, W. M., "Pollution Monitoring of a Sprinkler
Disposal System for Dairy Cattle Waste." Can. Soc. Agr. Eng. Annual Meeting,
Brandon Univ., Brandon, Man., Can., Paper No. 75-201 (1975).
Minear, R. A., "Analytical Techniques for the Measurement and Monitoring of
Trace Metals in Water Supplies." Jour. Amer. Water Works Assn., 67,9 (1975).
Minutdinova, N. M., "Automatic Monitoring of the Concentration of Suspended
Substances in Mine Waters." Nauchn. Tr., Permsk. Nauchno-Issled, Urol'n
Inst. (U.S.S.R.), 16, 125 (1973); Chem. Abs., 81, 175748 (1974).
Mitchell, D., and Oskowis, J. J., "Automation of the Continuous Coagulation
Monitor." Natl. Tech. Info. Serv., No. PB-240 815/1ST (1974).
Molvar, A. E., and Rbesler, J. F., "Selected Abstracts for Instrumentation
and Automation of Wastewater Facilities." Natl. Tech. Info. Serv., No.
PB-225 520/6 (1973).
Montgomery, H. A. C., and Hart, I. C., "The Design of Sampling Programmes
for Rivers and Effluents." Water Poll. Control (G. B.), 73, 77 (1974).
Mordhorst, A. R., "Instrument Manifolds." Instr. § Control Systems, 48:1,39
(1975).
Morfaux, T. N., and Sarris, J., "Automated Determination of COD (Chemical
Oxygen Demand). Critical Study of the Oxidation of Some Pure Substances."
Trib. CEBEDEAU (Belg.), 27, 97 (1974).
1-37
-------
Morfaux, J. N., et al., "Relation between COD and Organic Carbon in Waste
Waters. Automated Method of Simultaneous Determination of these Parameters."
Ind. Aliment Agr. (Fr.), 89, 1579 (1972); Chem. Abs., 79, 45420 (1973).
Morgan, W. S. G., and Kuhn, P. C., "A Method to Monitor the Effects of
Toxicants Upon Breathing Rate of Largemouth Bass (Micropterus salmoides
Lapecede)." Water Res. (G. B.), 8, 67 (1974).
Morrow, J; J., and Roop, R. N., "Advances in Chlorine-Residual Analysis."
Jour. Amer. Water Works Assn., 67, 184 (1975).
Moskvin, L. N., et al., "Continuous Monitoring of pH and Chloride Con-
centrations in the Water Coolant of Nuclear Reactors." At. Energ. (USSR),
38, 143 (1975); Chem. Abs. 83, 15389 (1975).
Mrkva, M., "Automatic UV-Control System for Relative Evaluation of Organic
Water Pollution." Water Res., 9, 587 (1975).
Musselwhite, C. C., "An Automated Method for Determination of Residual
Methanol in Denitrified Effluents." Water Poll. Control, 74, 110 (1975).
Musselwhite, C. C., and Petts, K. W., "An Automated Method for the Determina-
tion of Formaldehyde in Sewage and Sewage Effluent." Water Poll. Control
(G. B.), 73, 443 (1974).
National Science Foundation, "The Sacramento Regional Wastewater Management
Program: A Case Study," Interpretive Summary, NSF 76-500, Washington, D.C.
(1976).
National Technical Information Service, "Biomass Determination-A New
Technique for Activated Sludge Control." No. PB-211 127 (Jan. 1972).
National Water Monitoring Panel, "Model State Water Monitoring Program,"
USEPA Report No. EPA-440/9-74-002 (1975).
Nazarova, A. A., et al., "Measurement of pH, Eh, and pNa Values During
Automation of the Monitoring of the Chemical Composition of Natural Waters."
Gidroklim. Mater. (USSR), 59, 163 (1973); Chem. Abs. 81, 158532 (1974).
Nelson, D. W., and Romkens, M. J. M., "Suitability of Freezing as a Method
of Preserving Runoff Samples for Analysis of Soluble Phosphate." Jour.
Environ. Qual., 1, 323 (1972).
Nelson, M. D., and Annen, R. C., "Analog Sensing of Ion Exchange Resins."
Ind. Water Eng., 11:5, 18 (1974).
Neuberger, E., "Speeding Up the On-Line Measurement of Oxygen in Process
Gases." Control and Instr. (G. B.), 7:6,24 (1975).
Nevelus, J., "Maintenance Slashed on D.O. Probes." Water § Wastes Eng.,
12:5,80 (1975).
1-38
-------
Newton, D. W., and Ellis, R., Jr., "Loss of Mercury (II) from Solution."
Jour. Environ. Qual., 3, 20 (1974).
Nieman, G. R., "Mini-Systems in the Processing Plant-Part I: Background
and Batch." Instr. § Control Systems, 47:2,57 (1974).
Nikolov, K., and Todorovski, D., "Neutron Activation Analysis Determination
of Lithium in Khisary Mineral Water." God. Sofu. Univ. Khim. Fak.
1967-1968, 62, 387 (1970); Chem. Abs., 74, 34498m (1971).
Novaya App. Automat. Ustroistva Tekhnol. Obrab. Vody, "Apparatus for
Automatic Monitoring of Water Alkalinity and Automation of Coagulant Field
According to Residual Alkalinity During Purification of Water." (U.S.S.R.),
147 (1972); Chem. Abs., 78, 75715 (1973).
Nyiri, L. K., et al., "On-Line Measurement of Gas Exchange Conditions in
Fermentation Process." Biotechnol. Bioeng., 17, 1663 (1975).
O'Brien, J. E., and Olsen, R. A., "Evaluation of Automatic Chemical Analysis
Monitor for Waste Quality Parameters." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed.,
42, 380 (1970).
O'Connor, J. R., "An Apparatus for Sampling Gravel Substrate in Streams."
Limnol. § Oceanogr., 19, 1007 (1974).
Oehme, F., "Monitoring Sewage with Automatic Metering Stations." CA-Chem.
Tech. (Ger.), 3, 187 (1974); Chem. Abs., 81, 111028 (1974).
Oliver, R. T., and Mannion, R. F., "Ion-Selective Electrodes in Process
Control. Water Hardness Measurement of Ion-Exchange Water." Water Qual.
Instrum., 1, 74 (1972); Chem. Abs., 78, 7687 (1973).
Olsen, R. D., and Sommerfeld, M. R., "Technique of Extraction and Storage of
Water Samples for Manganese, Cadmium and Lead Determination by Atomic
Absorption Spectroscopy." Atomic Absorption Newsletter, 12, 165 (1973);
Chem. Abs., 80, 124480 (1974).
Orkney, J. B., "Ultrasonic Liquid Flow Measurement." Poll. Eng., 7:2,39
(1975).
Ornee, L., "Propeller-Type Flowmeters." Control § Instr. (G. B.), 24
(July-Aug. 1974).
Osburn, Q. W., I'Automated Method for Orthc-, Ortho-Plus Hydrolyzable, and
Total Phosphate in Surface and Wastewaters." Environ. Sci. § Technol.,
8, 363 (1974).
Osthues, R., "Valve Actuators Determine Control." Instr. § Control Systems,
48:6,23 (1975).
1-39
-------
Ostling, G., "A Simplified Automated Curcumin Method for the Determination of
Boron in Sea Water." Anal. Chim. Acta, 78, 507 (1975).
Ostling, G., "Discrete Automatic Analysis System Autolab." Chem. Instrum.,
5, 1 (1973); Chem. Abs., 79, 96731 (1973).
Overbeck, C. J., and Hickey, J. J., "Rapid Field Procedure for the Determina-
tion of Chemical Oxygen Demand." U.S. Patent 3,540,845 (1971); Chem. Abs.,
74, 34438s (1971).
Palko, T. N., "Conversion of Six Chemical Water Tests from Manual to
Automated Methods." Arkansas Acad. Sci. Proc., 26, 87 (1972); Chem. Abs.,
81, 96258 (1974).
Paoletti, A., et al., "Use of the AutoAnalyzer Mounted in a Small Boat for
Studying the Dilution and Diffusion of Urban Wastes in the Sea." Nuovi Ann.
Ig. Microbiol. (Ital.), 24, 199 (1973); Chem. Abs., 81, 96195 (1974).
Parisin, V. D., and Orlov, A. I., "Feasibility of Automatic Determination of
Copper Ion Concentration in Mine Waters." Kontr. Avtomat. Intensifk.
Technol. Protsessov (Met. Obogashch., Khim. Technol.) (USSR), No. 1, 186
(1972); Chem. Abs., 79, 96525 (1973).
Pauls, J., "Device for Continuous Control of Toxic Substances in Tap Water."
Ger. Offen. 2:304,315,(Aug. 1, 1974); Chem. Abs., 82, 21648 (1975).
Paulson, G. 0., "Study of the Nutrient Variations in the Surface and Mixed
Layer of Monterey Bay Using Automatic Analysis Techniques." U.S. Nat. Tech.
Inform. Serv., AD Rep. No. 757700, (1972); Chem. Abs., 79, 23457 (1973).
Pavoni, J. L., and Spinney, P. R., "Automation of Wastewater Treatment
Systems." Natl. Tech. Info. Serv., No. AD-753 926 (Dec. 1972).
Pekrul, P. J., "Vibration Monitoring Increases Equipment Availability."
Chem. Eng., 82:17, 109 (1975).
Perav, R., et al., "Continuous Detection of the Radioactive Contamination of
Suspect Effluents." Report CEA-CONF-2700, Commis. Energ. At. France.
Nucl. Sci. Abs., 31, 5699 (1975).
Perras, J. C., "Portable Gas Chromatographic Technique to Measure Dissolved
Hydrocarbons in Sea Water." U.S.N.T.I.S. AD Rep. No. 786583/5GA, 55 pp.
(1973); Govt. Rep. Announce. (U.S.), 74, 73 (1974).
Philips, S. L., et al., "Instrumentation for Water Quality Monitoring."
Anal. Chem., 46, 345A (1974).
Phillips, D., and Mislan, J. P., "Proposed Automatic Specific Ion Electrode
System for Measuring Trace Sulfide Concentrations in Aqueous Solution."
Atomic Energy Canada Ltd. Rept. 4605 (1973); Chem. Abs., 80, 148895 (1974).
1-40
-------
Phillips. S., and Mack, D., "Instruments for Water Quality Measurements."
Environ. Sci. 5 Technol., 9, 214 (1975).
Phillips, S. L., "Instrumentation for Water Quality Monitoring." Anal. Chem.,
46, 345A (1974).
Pierce, F. D., et al., "Improved Automated Extraction Method for Atomic
Adsorption Spectrometry." Anal. Chem., 47, 1132 (1975).
Poisson, N. A., "Buying a Programmable Controller." Automation, 21:4,68
(1974).
Powley, C., "Moisture Measurement." Control $ Instr. (G. B.), 7:5,24 (1975).
Prager, M. J., "Automated Water Monitoring Instrument for Phosphorus
Contents." U.S.N.S. PB Kept. No. 22277216 (1973); Chem. Abs., 80, 40780
(1974).
Prall, J. R., "Semi-automatic Determination of Traces of Uranium." Adv.
Autom. Anal., Technicon Int. Congr., 8, 85 (1972); Mediad, Inc. Tarrytown,
N.Y. (1973).
Pugh, K. B., and Chubb, L. W., "Hybrid Automatic Analyzer." Chemosphere,
3, 97 (1974); Chem. Abs., 81, 68269 (1974).
Pugh, K. B., and Gibbs, C. F., "Adapted Determination of Phosphate in Sea
Water for Use with the Hybrid Automatic Analyzer." Chemosphere, 3, 103
(1974); Chem. Abs., 81, 68270 (1974).
Puzniak, T. J., et al., "Mobile Water Conservation Laboratory." Water
Qual. Instrum., 1, 184 (1972); Chem. Abs., 78, 7762 (1973).
Radziul, J. V., and Suffet, I. H., "Automation of Water Analysis and Its Use
to Control the Water Purification Process." Intl. Water Supply Assn.,
Congr. (Pap.), 9th,(1972), PI (1973); Chem. Abs., 81, 82150 (1974).
Ramirez-Munoz, J., "Determination of Chloride in Natural and Potable Water
Samples by Turbidimetric Discrete-Sample Automatic Analysis." Anal. Chim.
Acta, 74, 309 (1975).
Ramirez-Munoz, J., "The Colorimetric Determination of Phosphates in Water at
Low ppm Levels by Automatic Discrete-Sample Analysis." Anal. Chim. Acta,
78, 431 (1975).
Ramirez-Munoz, J., "The Determination of Nitrate in Waters at Low PPM Levels
by Automatic Discrete-Sample Analysis." Anal. Chim. Acta (G. B.), 72, 437
(1974).
Rechnitz, G., "Ion-Selective Membrane Electrodes for Water Pollution
Monitoring." U.S.N.T.I.S. AD/A Rep. 1974, No. 238490/7GA, 31 pp. (1975);
Chem. Abs., 83, 152043 (1975).
1-41
-------
Reil, G., et al., "Radioactivity Monitor for Power Plant Environmental Water."
Nucl. Technol., 17, 275 (1973); Chem. Abs., 78, 128817 (1973).
Reuther, W., "Measuring Equipment for the Rapid Determination of Oxygen
Dissolved in Water." Dtsch. Gewaesserkd. Mitt., (Ger.), 18, 79 (1974);
Chem. Abs., 81, 158513 (1974).
Requa, D. A., and Schroeder, E. D., "Kinetics,of Packed-Bed Denitrification."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 45, 1696 (1973).
Rice, G. K., and Varga, L. P., "Theory and Application of Continuous
Monitoring for Chemical Research on Natural Water Systems." Rept. ORO-4254-8
(1972); Chem. Abs., 80, 19260 (1974).
Richter, J. D., et al., "Waste Neutralization Control-Digital Simulation
Spots Nonlinearities." Instr. Technol., 21:4,35 (1974).
Rickard, D. J., "Monitoring and Control of Industrial Effluent Treatment."
Aust. Chem. Process Eng., 26, 16 (1973); Chem. Abs., 79, 139554 (1973).
Ridgeway, D. G., "How Do. You Explain the Cost?" Water § Wastes Eng., 11:2,49
(1974).
Riley, C. W., "Proportional Diluter for Effluent Bioassays." Jour. Water
Poll. Control Fed., 47, 2620 (1975).
Riley, W. J., "Combustible Gas Detectors." Instr. Technol., 22:8,37 (1975).
Riseman, J. M., "Specific Ion Electrodes-Versatile Analytical. Tools."
Ind. Wastes, 1970 (1971).
Robinson, D. J., et al., "An Ion-Exchange Process for Recovery of Chromate
from Pigment Manufacturing." Environ. Protection Technol. Ser., EPA-670/2-
74-044 (June 1974).
Rodriguez-Iturbi, I., "The Design of Rainfall Networks in Time and Space."
Water Resources Res., 10, 713 (1974).
Roesler, J. F., and Wise, R. H., "Instrumentation and Automation of Waste-
water Treatment Systems." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 47, 1369 (1975).
Roesler, J. F., and Wise, R. H., "Variables to be Measured in Wastewater
Treatment Plant Monitoring and Control." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed.,
46, 1769 (1974).
Roesler, J. F., "Plant Performance Using Dissolved Oxygen Control." Jour.
Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100, 1069 (1974).
Rogers, M. E., "Keeping Watch on Wastewater." Water § Wastes Eng., 11:6,38
(1974).
1-42
-------
Roll, E., "New Arizona Wastewater Plant to Alleviate Problems." Water § Sew.
Works, 121:4,60 (1974).
Roper, R. E., Jr., and Grady, C. P. L., Jr., "Activated Sludge Hydraulic
Control Techniques Evaluation by Computer Simulation." Jour. Water Poll.
Control .Fed., 46, 2565 (1974).
Rossum, J. R., "An Inexpensive Precision Conductance Meter." Jour. Amer.
Water Works Assn., 63, 387 (1971).
Royer, J. L., et al., "Automated Colorimetric Method for Total Cyanide in
Water and Wastewater." Anal. Letters, 6, 619 (1973).
Rudd, J. W. M., and Hamilton, R.D., "Two Samplers for Monitoring Dissolved
Gases in Lake Water and Sediments." Limnol. § Oceanog., 20, 902 (1975).
Rudd, W. G., "Microcomputers in Instrumentation and Control." Instr. §
Control Systems, 47:4,63 (1974).
Rumyantsev, I. I., and Vekent'ev, I. G., "Automatic Analyzer:of Organic
Impurities in Industrial Waste Waters of a Synthetic Rubber Plant."
Avtomat. Kontr.-Izmer Prib., Nauch-Tekh. Sb. (U.S.S.R.), 1, 15 (1973);
Chem. Abs., 80, 635 84 (1974).
Saltzman, R. S., and Bonam, W. L., "Continuous Monitoring of Low Chromium
(VI) C oncentrations with a Photometric Analyzer System." Anal. Instrum.,
12, 95 (1974); Chem. Abs., 81, 126479 (1974).
Sayles, F. L., et al., "In Situ Sampler for Marine Sedimentary Pore Waters.
Evidence for Potassium Depletion and Calcium Enrichment." Science, 181, 154
(1973).
Schatzberg, P., and Jackson, D. F., "Remote Sampler for Determining Residual
Oil Content of Surface Waters." Proc. Joint Conf. Prev. Control Oil Spills,
139 (1973); Chem. Abs., 80, 112381 (1974).
Schatzberg, P., and Jackson, D. F., "Remote Samplers for Determining
Residual Oil Contents of Surface Waters." U.S. Nat. Tech. Inform. Serv.,
AD Rep. No. 760217 (1972); Chem. Abs., 79, 96559 (1973).
Schierjott, G., et al., "Simultaneous Continuous Determination of Chemical
Oxygen Demand and of Organic Carbon." Vom Wasser (Ger.)-r~39, 1 (1972);
Chem. Abs., 81, 29238 (1974).
Schleimer, J. A., "Equipment for Monitoring Deposition and Corrosion In
Circulating Water Systems." Ger. Offen. 2,134,832, Feb. 1, 1973; Chem. Abs.,
78, 128336 (1973).
Schmid, L., "Pilot Plant Demonstration of a Lime-Biological Treatment
Phosphorus Removal Method." Natl. Tech. Info. Serv., No. PB-224 476/2
(June 1973).
1-43
-------
Schmidt, F. J., et al., "Automated Determination of Arsenic, Selenium,
Antimony, Bismuth, and Tin by Atomic Absorption Utilizing Sodium Borohydride
Reduction." Anal. Letters, 8, 123 (1975).
Schneider, L., "Pinch Valves are Gaining." Water 5 Wastes Eng., 12:1,39
(1975).
Schwartz, J. C., "Understanding Timers for Better Control." Instr. $ Control
Systems, 48:12,21 (1975).
Schwindt, B. W., "New Concept in Water Management Analysis Systems." Adv.
Instrum., 27, 702 (1972); Chem. Abs., 78, 88477 (1973).
Scotton, J. W., and Mullen, K. T., "Directory of EPA,'State § Local
Environmental Quality Monitoring £ Assessment Activities, EPA (None)
(Dec. 1974).
Scull, W., "Control Valve Noise Rating: Prediction vs. Reality." Instr.
Technol., 21:10,46 (1974).
Scull, W. L., "Selecting Temperature Controls for Heaters." Chem. Eng.,
82:11,128 (1975).
Seitz, W. R., AND Neary, M. P., "Chemiluminescence and Bioluminescence in
Chemical Analysis." Anal. Chem., 46, 188A (1974).
Sekerka, I., and Lechner, J., "Automation of Direct Potentiometry." Intl.
Jour. Environ. Anal. Chem., 2, 313 (1973).
Sekerka, I., and Lechner, J. F., "Automated Determination of Flouride Ion in
the Parts per Million Range." Talanta (G. B.), 20, 1167 (1963).
Sekerka, I., and Lechner, J. F., "Automated Simultaneous Determination of
Water Hardness, Specific Conductance and pH." Anal. Lett., 7, 399 (1974).
Sekerka, I., and Lechner, J. F., "Simultaneous Determination of Sodium,
Potassium, and Ammonium Ions by Automated Direct Potentiometry." Anal.
Lett., 7, 463 (1974).
Sekerka, I., and Leckner, J. F., "Simultaneous Determination of Total, Non-
Carbonate and Carbonate Water Hardness by Direct Potentiometry." Talanta,
22, 459 (1975).
Selmer-Olsen, A. R., and Oien, A., "Determination of Chloride in Aqueous Soil
Extracts and Water Samples by Means of a Chloride-Selective Electrode."
Analyst (G. B.), 98, 412 (1973).
Shapiro, J., "A Field Fixation Technique for Dissolved Phosphate in Lake
Water." Limnol. Oceanogr., 18, 143 (1973).
1-44
-------
Sharadin, P. R., "Instrumentation Services . . . Calibration, Startup and
Mainetnance." Instr. Technol., 22:10,37 (1975).
Shelley, P.E., and Kirkpatrick, G. A., "An Assessment of Automatic Samplers,"
in Water Pollution Assessment: Automatic Sampling and Measurement, ASTM
Publication STP-582, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia,
PA, pp. 19-36 (1975).
Shelley, P.E., and Kirkpatrick, G.A., "An Assessment of Sewer Flow Samplers-
1975." USEPA Environmental Protection Techology Series No. EPA-600/2-75-065
(1975).
Shelley, P. E., and Kirkpatrick, G. A., "Sewer Flow Measurement - A State-of-
the-Art Assessment." USEPA Environmental Protection Technology Series Report
No. EPA 600/2-75-027 (1975).
Shelley, Philip E., "Collection of Field Data for Stormwater Model
Calibration," in Application of Stormwater Management Models-1975. University
of Massachusetts Short Course Handbook, Amherst, MA (1975).
Shelley, Philip E., "Design and Testing of a Prototype Automatic Sewer
Sampling System." USEPA Environmental Protection Technology Series Report
No. EPA-600/2-76-006 (1976).
Shelley, Philip E., "Field Data for Environmental Modeling - Adjunct or
Integral?," to appear in the Conference on Environmental Modeling and
Simulation Proceedings, sponsored by USEPA in Cincinnati, OH (1976).
Shelley, Philip E., "Implementation of New Technologies in the Design of an
Automatic Liquid Sampling System" in Water Resources Instrumentation; Vol 1 -
Measuring and Sensing Methods, Ann Arbor Science Publ., Inc., Ann Arbor, MI
(1976).
Shelley, Philip E., "Review of Automatic Liquid Samplers," in Urban Runoff-
Quantity and Quality, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, NY, pp.
183-191 (1975).
Shelley, Philip E., "Sediment Measurement in Estuaine and Coastal Areas."
EG&G Washington Analytical Services Center, Inc., Report No. TR-7115-001
(to appear as a NASA publication (1976).
Shendriker, A. D., and West, P. W., "Rate of Loss of Selenium from Aqueous
Solution Stored in Various Containers." Anal. Chim. Acta, 74, 189 (1975).
-Sherrard, J. H., and Kincannon, D. F., "Operational Control Concepts for the
Activated Sludge Process." Water § Sew. Works, 121:3,44 (1974).
Sherrard, J. H., and Lawrence, A. W., "Design and Operation Model of Activa-
ted Sludge." Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99,
773 (1973).
1-45
-------
Sherrard, J. H., "Automate Activated Sludge ..." Water § Wastes Eng., 11,
1, A-5 (1974).
Shinskey, F. G., "Adaptive pH Controller Monitors Nonlinear Process."
Control Eng., 21:2,57 (1974).
Shinskey, G., "Character!zers for Flumes and Weirs." Instr. § Control
Systems, 47:9,111 (1974).
Skala, V., "Improving Instrument Service Factors." Instr. Technol., 21:11,27
(1974).
Slack, K. V., "Average Dissolved Oxygen Measurement and Water Quality Signifi-
cance." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 43, 433 (1971).
Slavinska, D., and Slavinski, J., "Chemiluminescent Flow Method for
Formaldehyde." Anal. Chem., 47, 2101 (1975).
Slevogt, K., et'al., "Ion-Selective Electrodes and Their Testing for
Continuous Concentration Determination in Drinking and Waste Water." Vom
Wasser (Ger.), 42, 1 (1974); Chem. Abs., 81, 175899 (1974).
Smith, R. G., Jr., "Improved Ion-Exchange Technique for the Concentration of
Manganese from Sea Water." Anal. Chem., 46, 607 (1974).
Smith, R., "Monitoring of the Effluent Stream from Wastewater Treatment
Plants, U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, December 1971.
Snaddon, X. V. M., et al., "Printout Colorimeter for Autoanalysis of Water
Pollution." Process Biochem., 8:9, 15 (1973); Chem. Abs., 80, 40782 (1974).
Srna, R. F., et al., "Use of Ion Specific Electrodes for Chemical Monitoring
of Marine Systems. I.Ammonia Electrode as a Sensitive Water Quality Indicator
Probe for Recirculating Mariculture Systems." Rept. DEL-SG-14-73 NOAA
73091703 (1973); Chem. Abs., 80, 100027 (1974).
Stainton, M.P., et al., "Chemical Analysis of Fresh Water." Misc. Spec.
Publ.-Fish Mar. Serv. (Can.), 25, 120pp. (1974); Chem. Abs., 82, 34893
(1975).
Stainton, M.P., "Simple, Efficient Column for Use in the Automated
Determination of Nitrate in Water." Anal. Chem., 46, 1616 (1974).
Stanley, G. H., "Use of the Technician Auto-Analyzer for Continuous On-
stream COD Analyses of Wastewater." Adv. Autom. Anal., Technicon Int. Congr.
1972, 8, 17, Mediad, Inc., Tarrytown, N.Y. (1973).
Steen, I., et al., "On-Line Studies of Five Devices for Measuring the Con-
centration of Activated Sludge." Vatten (Swed.), 3, 286 (1975).
Stensel, H. D., et al., "Biological Kinetics of Suspended-Growth Denitrifica-
tion." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 45, 249 (1973).
1-46
-------
Suffet, I. H., et al., "Continuous Water Quality Measurement. Present Status
and Future Trends." Water Qual. Instrum., I, II (1972); Chem. Abs., 78,
7629 (1973).
Sugino, K., et al., "Automatic Analyzer for Total Carbon Dioxide by Electric
Conductivity." Nippon Kaisui Gakkai-Shi (Jap.), 26, 311 (1973); Chem. Abs.,
83, 32837 (1975).
Sullivan, W. T., "Experiences with Nitrogen Compounds in Natural Waters."
Jour. Amer. Water Works Assn., 67, 146 (1975).
Sultanov, E. G., "Automatic Analyzers of Quality Parameters of Drinking
Water." Novaya App. Avtomat. Ustroistva Tekhnol. Obrab. Vody (USSR), 132
(1972); Chem. Abs., 78, 62020 (1973).
Sunahara, H., et al., "Automatic Instrumentation and Data Processing the
Water Qualities in Environmental and Industrial Waste Waters." Chem. Econ.
Eng. Rev., 2, 34 (1970); Chem. Abs., 74, 34419m (1971).
Tench, H. B., "Sludge Filter Pressing and Incineration at Sheffield." Water
Res. (G.B.), 6, 539 (1972).
Teske, G., "Continuous Electrochemical Measurement of Cyanide and Halide Ion
Trace Concentrations with Potentiostatic Procedures." Dechema Monogr. (Ger.),
75, 295 (1974); Chem. Abs., 81, 126464 (1974).
Thomas, R.F., and Booth, R.L., "Selective Electrode Measurement of Ammonia in
Water and Wastes." Environ. Sci. $ Technol., 7, 523 (11973).
Thorsen, T., and Oen, R., "How to Measure Industrial Wastewater Flow." Chem.
Eng., 82:4,95 (1975).
Tiffany, F., and Pederson, R., "Barriers Can Alter Circuit Parameters."
Instr. § Control Systems, 48:8,25 (1975).
Tifft, E.C., and Cain, B.C., "Evaluation of Automated COD for Industrial and
Municipal Waste." Adv. Autom. Anal., Technicon, Int. Congr. 1972, 8, 11,
Mediad, Inc., Tarrytown, N.Y. (1973).
Todd, O.K., Tinlin, R.M., Schmidt, K.D., Everett, G., "Monitoring Groundwater
Quality: Monitoring Methodology," USEPA Environmental Monitoring Series
Report No. EPA-600/4-76-026 (1976).
Toms, R. G., "Continuous Monitoring of Water Quality." Water Poll. Control
(Can.) 72, 20 (1973); Chem Abs., 78, 151444 (1973).
Trinel, P. A., and Leclerc, H., "Automation of Bacteriological Water
Analysis. I. New Test Specific for Fecal Contamination and Optimum
Conditions of its Use." Water Res. (G.B.), 6, 1445 (1972).
1-47
-------
Truesdale, V.W., and Smith, P.J., "The Automatic Determination of Iodide or
lodate in Solution by Catalytic Spectrophotometry, with Particular Reference
to River Water." Analyst, (G.B.), 100, 111, (1975).
Tulumello, A., "Automatic Organic Monitoring System for Storm and Combined
Sewers." Environ. Protection Technol. Ser., EPA-670/2-75-067 (June 1975).
Van den Winkel, P., et al., "Automated Colorimetric and Potentiometric
Determinations in Environmental Analysis." Meded. Fac. Landbouwwetensch.,
Rijksuniv, Gent., 38, 1837 (1973); Chem. Abs., 81, 140480 (1974).
Villalobos, R., "Process Gas Chromatography." Anal. Chem., 47, 938A (1975).
Vinitskii, A. M., "Practical Experience with the Use of Automatic Stations
for Monitoring the Quality of Surface Waters in Poland." Probl. Okhr. Vod.
(Russ.), 1, 185 (1972); Chem. Abs., 81, 16633 (1974).
Vogler, P., "Analysis Automation in Water Laboratories with Flow-Stream
Automata. II. Combined Automatic Determination of Orthophosphate and
Orthosilicate in Waters." Acta Hydrochim. Hydrobiol. (Ger.), 3, 145 (1975);
Chem. Abs., 83, 152033 (1975).
Walker, R. J., and Smith, R.R., "Continuous Analysis and Control of Fluoride."
Jour. Amer. Water Works Assn., 63, 246 (1971).
Walker, W.H., "Monitoring Toxic Chemical Pollution from Land Disposal Sites
in Humid Regions." Groundwater, 12,26 (1974).
Walker, W.R., et al., "Flow-Measuring Flume for Wastewater Treatment Plants."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 45, 542 (1973).
Ward, R.C., "Data Acquisition Systems in Water Quality Management," USEPA
Socioeconomic Environmental Studies Series No. EPA-R5-73-014 (1973).
Warner, D.L., "Monitoring Disposal - Well Systems," USEPA Environmental
Monitoring Series Report No. EPA-680/4-75-008 (1975).
Warner, D.L., "Rationale § Methodology for Monitoring Groundwater Polluted
by Mining Activities." EPA-680/4-74-003 (July 1974).
Water § Sew. Works, "Self-contained Sampling and Measurement System Features
Respirometer." 121:2,53 (1974).
Watt, T.R., et al., "Sewerage System Monitoring and Remote Control." EPA
Technol. Ser., EPA-670/2-75-020 (May 1975).
Watt, T.R., Skrentner, R.G., et al., "Sewerage System Monitoring & Remote
Control," EPA-670/2-75-020 (May 1975).
Webb, A. S., "Electromagnetic Flowmetering." Instr. Technol., 21:3,29 (1974).
1-48
-------
Westcott, C.C., and Ramirez-Munoz, J., "Application of Water Analysis to
Monochannel and Multichannel Operation." Beckman Instr., Inc., Tech
Report T.R.-594, 30 pp. (1974); Chem. Abs., 82, 34891 (1975).
White, W. S., and Wetzel, R.G., "A Modified Sediment Trap." Limnol. §
Oceanogr., 18, 986 (1973).
Williams, W.D., "Initiating a Computer Control Project." Control Eng., 21:9,
87 (1974).
Wills, R., et al., "Steady State Water Quality Monitoring in Stream." Jour.
Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101, 254 (1975)
Wilson, M.F., et al., "An Evaluation of Some Sodium Ion-selective Glass
Electrodes in Aqueous Solution. Part I. Electrode Calibration Characteristics
and Selectivity with Respect to Hydrogen Ions. Part II. Electrode Sensitiv-
ity with Respect to Potassium, Silver, and Ammonium Ions-Measurement and
Comparison of Response Times." Anal. Chim. Acta, 74,395 (1975).
Wise, R. H., '"Off-the-Shelf1 Analyzers for Measuring Adenosine Triphosphate
(ATP) in Activated Sludge." Natl. Tech. Info. Serv., No. PB-231 345/AS
(Apr. 1974).
Wise, R. H., "On-Line Colorimetric Analyzers for Monitoring Nitrate-Nitrite,
Ammonia, Orthophosphorus, and Total Hydrolyzable Phosphorus in Wastewater-
Treatment Process Streams." Natl. Tech. Info. Serv., No. PB-231 990/AS
(June 1974).
Wudzinska, I., "Automatic Determination of Anion-Active Compounds in Indus-
trial Waste Waters." Zesz. Nauk. Politech. Slask., Chem. (Pol.), No. 64A,
69 (1973); Chem. Abs., 81, 82098 (1974).
Wuerthele, M., et al., "Descriptions of a Continuous-Flow Bioassay Laboratory
Trailer and the Michigan Diluter." In "Bioassay Techniques and Environmental
Chemistry." G.E. Glass (Ed.), Ann Arbor Science Publ., Ann Arbor, Mich., 345
(1973).
Yamamoto, H., "New Turbidimeter for Continuous Measurement." Keiso (Jap.),
16, 28 (1973); Chem. Abs., 79, 106366 (1973).
Yard, J., "A Practical Guide to Low-Flow Measurement." Chem. Eng., 81:8,74
(1974).
Yasaki, E.K., "The Emerging Microcomputer." Datamation, 20:12,81 (1974).
Yeaple, D.S., et al., "A Computer Model for Evaluating Community Phosphorus
Removal Strategies." Natl. Tech. Info. Serv., No. PB-228 440/4 (Oct. 1973).
Young, I.G., "Conductivity. Danger, Handle with Care." Water Qual. Instrum.,
2, 152 (1974).
1-49
-------
Young, R.A., et al., "Liquid Level Control Devices." Poll. Eng., 7:7,18
(1975).
Zimmer, W.H., "Automatic Radioactive Inventory System." IEEE Trans. Nucl.
Sci., 20, 352 (1973); Chem. Abs., 78, 131080 (1973).
Zipper, J.J., et al., "Computer-Controlled Monitoring and Data Reduction for
Multiple Ion-Selective Electrodes in a Flowing System." Anal. Chem., 46, 2111
(1974).
1-50
-------
Nonurban Runoff
Ackenheil § Associates Geo Systems, Inc., "Evaluation of Pollution Abatement
Techniques Applicable to Lost Creek and Brown's Creek Watershed, West
Virginia." Rept. to Appalachian Regional Comm. (1973).
Ackenheil and Assoc., Inc., Anon., "Chartiers Creek Mine Drainage Pollution
Abatement Project." Phase III Rept. to Pa. Dept. Mines Miner. Ind. (1970).
Adrano, D.C., et al., "Effect of Soil Application of Dairy Manure on
Germination and Emergence of Some Selected Crops." Jour. Environ. Quality,
2, 396 (1973).
Adriano, D.C. et al., "Nitrate and Salt in Soils and Ground Waters from Land
Disposal of Dairy Manure." Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc., 35, 759 (1971).
Agnew, A.F., and Corbett, D.M., "Hydrology and Chemistry of Coal-mine Drain-
age in Indiana." ACS Div. Fuel Chem. Preprints, 13:2,137 (1969).
Agr. Res., Anon., "Fertilizers § Feedlots...What Role in Groundwater Pollu-
tion?" 18:6,14 (1969). ~
Ahmad, M.U., "Coal Mining and its Effect on Water Quality." In "Extraction
of Minerals and Energy: Today's Dilemmas." R.A. Deju (Ed.), Ann Arbor
Science Publishers, Inc. (1974).
Akers, D.J., Jr., and Moss, E.A., "Dewatering of Mine Drainage Sludge."
Environ. Protection Technol. Ser., EPA-R2-73-169, EPA, Washington,D.C.(1973).
Aleti, A., et al., "Methods for Identifying and Evaluating the Nature and
Extent of Non-point Sources of Pollutants from Agriculture." Proc. 1974
Cornell Agricultural Waste Management Conf., Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N.Y.,
10 (1974).
Alther, G.R., "Geochemical Analysis of Stream Sediments as a Tool for
Environmental Monitoring: A Pigyard Case Study." Geol. Soc. Amer. Bull.,
86:2,174 (1975).
American Society of Agricultural Engineers, "Managing Livestock Wastes-Proc.
of 3rd Internatl. Symp. on Livestock Waste, Univ. of Illinois, Urbana-
Champaign, 111 (1975).
Appalachian Regional Comm., Anon., "Acid Mine Drainage in Appalachia."
Rept. to President (1969).
Appell, H.R., et al., "Conversion of Cellulosic Wastes to Oil." Bureau of
Mines, Pittsburgh, Pa., NTIS Rept. No. PB-240 839/1ST (Feb. 1975).
1-51
-------
Applied Science Laboratories, Inc., "Purification of Mine Water by Freezing."
Rept. to Pa. Dept. Mines Miner. Ind. and EPA, Water Poll. Control Res. Ser.
14010 DRZ02/71 (1971).
Ardakani, M.S., et al., "Consecutive Steady State Reactions of Urea, Ammonium
and Nitrite Nitrogen in Soil." Can. Jour. Soil Sci., 55, 83 (1975).
Avnimelech, Y., and Raveh, A., "The Control of Nitrate Accumulation in Soils
by Induced Denitrification." Water Res. (G.B.), 8, 553 (1974).
Azevdo, J., et al., "Elemental Composition of Particulates near a Beef Cattle
Feedlot." Jour. Environ. Qual., 3, 171 (1974).
Bailey, G.W., Barnett, A.P., et al., "Herbicide Runoff from Four Coastal
Plain Soil Types." EPA-660/2-74-017,(April 1974).
Bailey, G.W., et al., "Predicting Pesticide Runoff from Agricultural Land: A
Conceptual Model." Jour. Environ. Qual., 3, 95 (1974).
Baker, R.A., and Wilshire, A.G., "Evaluation of Caulobacter as an Inhibitor
of Acid Mine Drainage Formation." Carnegie-Mellon Univ., Mellon Inst., Rept.
to U.S. Dept. of the Int., FWQA (July 1970).
Baker, R.A., and Wilshire, A.G., "Evaluation of Potential Acid Mine Drainage,"
Water $ Sew. Works, 117, 6, IW/10 (1970).
Baker, R.A., and Wilshire, A.G., "Microbiological Factor in Acid Mine Drainage
Formation: A Pilot Plant Study." Environ.Sci. £ Technol., 4, 401 (1970).
Barth, D.L., and Bond, J.H., "Water Management in Livestock Waste Handling
Systems." OWRT-A-025-SC, Office Water Res. § Technol. (Jan. 1975).
Barth, C. L., et al., "Aerobic and Anaerobic Lagooning of Dairy and Milking
Wastes." South Carolina Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech. Contribution No. 1060 (1973).
Beafore, F.J., "Tour of Mountaineer Division Operations-August 4, 1971."
Acid Mine Drainage Workshop, Ohio Univ., Athens,(Aug. 2-6, 1971).
Bell, W.E., and Eseher, E.D., "A Study of Inert Gas Atmospheres on the
Oxidation of Coal Mine Pyrites." ACS Div. Fuel Chem. Preprints, 13:2,42
(1969).
Benoit, R.J., "Concentrated Mine Drainage Disposal into Sewage Treatment
Systems." Environmental Research and Applications, Inc., Rept. to EPA,
Water Poll. Control Res. Ser. 14010 FBZ09/71 (1971).
Berkowitz, J.H., et al., "Persistence of Salmonellae in Poultry Excreta."
Jour. Environ. Qual., 3,158 (1974).
Berven, B.B., et al., "Solids Reduction of Beef Cattle Wastes in a Semibatch-
process Oxidation Ditch." Trans. Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng. , 18, 316(Mar-Apr 1975).
1-52
-------
Betson, R.P., and McMaster, W.M., "A First Generation Nonpoint Sources
Mineral Water Quality Model." Paper presented at the 47th Annual Conf.,
Water Poll. Control Fed., Denver, Colo., (Oct. 6-11, 1974).
Bhagat, S.K., and Proctor, D.E., "Treatment of Dairy Manure by Lagooning."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 41, 785 (1969).
Bhatt, H.G., "Economics of Coal Mine Drainage Treatment." Presented at
Seminar on Design of Coal Mine Drainage Treatment Facilities, Pa. State
Univ., University Park (1973).
Bhatt, H.G., "Factors Affecting the Selection of Mine Drainage Treatment
Methods." Proc. Fifth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, 331 (1974).
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc., "Mine Drainage Abstracts-A Bibliography."
1970 Supplement, Pa. Dept. Mines Miner. Ind., Harrisburg, Pa. (1971).
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc., "Mine Drainage Abstracts-A Bibliography."
1971 Supplement, Pa. Dept. Environ. Resources, Harrisburg, Pa. (1972).
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc., "Mine Drainage Abstracts-A Bibliography."
1972 Supplement, Pa. Dept. Environ. Resources, Harrisburg (1973).
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc., "Mine Drainage Abstracts-A Bibliography."
1973 Supplement, Pa. Dept. Environ. Resources, Harrisburg (1974).
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc., "Mine Drainage Abstracts-A Bibliography."1974
Supplement, Pa. Dept. Environ. Resources, Harrisburg (1975).
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc., Studies on Densification of Coal Mine Drain-
age Sludge." Rept. to EPA, Water Poll. Control Res. Ser. 14010 EJT09/71
(1971).
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc., "Anon., "Studies on Limestone Treatment of
Acid Mine Drainage." Rept. to Pa. Dept. Mines Miner, Ind. and U.S. Dept. of
the Int., FWQA (1970).
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc., Anon., "Sulfide Treatment of Acid Mine Drain-
age." Rept. to U.S. Dpet. Interior, FWPCA, Water Poll. Control Res. Ser.,
DAST-2 (1969)
Black, Sivalls § Bryson, Inc. , Evaluation of a New Acid Mine Drainage
Treatment Process." Rept. to EPA, Water Poll. Control Res. Ser. 14010
(1971).
Bloom, D.N., Jennings, L.D., and Bisque, R.E., "In situ Treatment of
Sulfite Minerals to Reduce Acid Drainage." Amer. Inst. Chem. Engr. Meeting,
Houston, Tex., (1969)
Bodman, G.R., and Baker, D.E., "Land Application of Sewage Sludge Potential
and Limitations." Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng. Winter Meeting, Chicago, 111., Paper
No. 75-2531 (1975).
1-53
-------
Bowen, D.H.M., "Ion Exchangers Sweeten Acid Water". Environ. Sci. §
Technol., 5:1,24 (1971).
Boyer, J.F., and Gleason, V.E., "Coal and Coal Mine Drainage." Jour. Water
Poll. Control Fed., 46,1290 (1974).
Boyer, J.F., and Gleason, V.E., "Coal and Coal Mine Drainage." Jour. Water
Poll. Control Fed., 47,1466 (1975).
Boyer, J.F., Jr., "Status of Coal Mine Drainage Control Technology." Coal
Mining Process, 9:1,56 (1972).
Bradford, G.R., et al., "Trace Element Concentrations of Sewage Treatment
Plant Effluents and Sludges: Their Interaction with Soils and Uptake by
Plants." Jour. Environ. Qual., 4,123 (1975).
Brant, J.W., "Stream Pollution of the Loyalhanna Creek Watershed." Water
Poll. Control Assoc. Pa. Mag., 4:1,4 (1971).
Brezina, E. R., et al., "Effects of Acid Mine Drainage on Water Quality of a
Reservoir." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 42,1429 (1970).
Brown, M.J., et al., "Sediment in Irrigation and Drainage Waters and Sediments
Inputs and Outputs for Two Large Tracts in Southern Idaho." Jour. Environ.
Qual., 3,347 (1974).
Brown, R. J., "Animal Waste Pollution and Its Control (A Bibliography with
Abstracts)." NTIS Rept. No. NTIS/PS-75/531/4ST (June 1975).
Brown, R.J., "Sewage and Organic Waste Irrigation (A Bibliography with
Abstracts)." NTIS/PS-75/460/6ST (June 1975).
Brown, R.L., "The Occurrence and Removal of Nitrogen in Subsurface Agricul-
tural Drainage from the San Joaquin Valley, California." Water Res. (G.B.)
9,529 (1975).
Bruce, R.R., et al., "A Model for Runoff of Pesticides from Small Upland
Watersheds." Jour. Environ. Qual. 4,541 (1975).
Bullard, W.E., Jr., "Natural Filters fro Agricultural Waste." Soil Conserv.,
34:4,75 (1968); Land § Water Control, 11:10,7 (1969).
Buford, J.R., "Ethylene in Grassland Soil Treated with Animal Excreta."
Jour. Environ. Qual., 4,55 (1975).
Burke, L.O., and Cudmore, J.F., "Treatment of Mine Drainage." Australian
Coal Industry Res. Labs. Ltd., P.R. 72-5 (1972).
Burwell, R.E., et al., "Nutrient Transport in Surface Runoff as Influenced
by Soil Cover and Seasonal Periods." Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc., 39,523
(1975).
1-54
-------
Butler, R.L., et al., "Fish and Food Organisms in Acid Mine Waters of
Pennsylvania." Ecological Res. Ser., EPA-R3-73-032, EPA, Washington,
D.C. (1973).
Buxton, B.M., and Ziegler, S.J., "Cost of Reducing Surface Water Pollution
from U.S. Dairy Farms." Proc. Cornell Univ. Conf. on Processing and Manage-
ment of Agricultural Waste, 86 (March 1974).
Cairney, T., and Frost, R.C., "A Case Study of Mine Water Quality Deterioration,
Mainsforth Colliery, County Durham." Jour. Hydrol., 25:3/4,275 (1975).
Campbell, R.S., and Line, O.T., "Water Quality and Aging of Strip-Mine
Lakes." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 41,1943 (1969).
Canada and United States, "Agricultural Pollution of the Great Lakes Basin."
13020 (July 1971).
Caruccio, F.T., "The Quantification of Reactive Pyrite by Grain Size Dis-
tribution." Third Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa.,
123 (1970).
Catania, P.J. [Ed.], Proc. Symposium Uses of Agricultural Wastes—Food, Fuel,
Fertilizer. Regina, Saskatchewan, Can., November 1974 (1975).
Chang, A.C., and Adriano, D.C., "Weathering of Accumulated Wastes in Unroofed
and Unpaved Confined Livestock Operations." Jour. Environ. Qual., 4:1,82
(1975).
Chang, A.C., et al., "Waste Accumulation on a Selected Dairy Corral and Its
Effects on The Nitrate and Salts of the Underlying Soil Strata." Jour.
Environ. Quality, 2,233 (1973).
Chappelow, C.C., Jr., "Agriculture and Clean Water." EPA-600/9-75-005
(August 1975).
Chem. Eng. News, Anon., "Inert Atmosphere in Mines Could Abate Acid Drainage."
48,21,33 (1970).
Christensen, L.A., "A Framework for Evaluating Institutional and Socio-
Economic Issues of Land Treatment of Waste Water." Jour. Environ. Qual.,
4,145 (1975).
CIAC-ORSANCO, Anon., "Papers Presented Before the Third Symposium on Coal
Mine Drainage Research." Pittsburgh, Pa. (1970).
Clark, R.N., et al., "Analysis of Runoff from Southern Great Plains Feedlots."
Trans, of Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng., 18,319 (March-April 1975).
Clark, R.N., et al., "Analysis of Runoff from Southern Great Plains Feedlots."
Trans. Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng., 18,319 (March-April 1976).
1-55
-------
Clarkson, R.B., and Moore, J.A., "Vascular Aquatic Plants in Acid Mine Water
of the Monongahela River, West Virginia." West Virginia Univ., Morgantown,
Water Res. Inst., Bull. 2, Ser. 71, No. 7-5 (1971).
Claudon, D.G., et al., "Prolonged Salmonella Contamination of a Recreational
Lake by Runoff Waters." Appl. Microbiol'., 21,875 (1971).
Coal Age, Anon., "Acid Mine Drainage." 74:7,183 (1969).
Coal Age, Anon., "Acid Mine Water + Linestone = Clean Stream." 74:2,112
(1969).
Coal Age, Anon., "Drainage." 75,:10,135 (1970).
Coal Age, "Mine Drainage and Acid Water Treatment." 76:7,186 (1971).
Coal Age, "Mining Guidebook--Mine Drainage and Acid Water Treatment."
77:7,159 (1972).
Coal Age, "Reclamation: Restoring Beauty and Balance is US Steel's Goal."
78:11,100 (1973).
Coal Age, Anon., "U.S. Steel Solves Acid-water Problems." 74:5,64 (1969).
Coal Age, Anon., "Ventilation and Drainage." 74:10,145 (1969).
Coalgate, J.L., "A Study of Coal-Associated Wastes Resulting from the Mining,
Processing and Utilization of Coal: Lieterature Survey: Coal Associated
Wastes." W.Va. Univ., Coal Res. Bur., Interim Rept. No. 2 to U.S. ERDA,
R§D Rept. 75, FE-12-8-T-1 (1975).
Coal Industry Advisory Committee-Ohio River Valley Sanitation Commission
(sponsored by), "Papers Presented Before the Fourth Symposium on Coal Mine
Drainage Research." Pittsburgh, Pa. (1972).
Coal Mining Process, "Acid Mine Drainage Converted to Potable Water." 8:3,38
(1971).
Comptroller General of the United States, "Problems Caused by Coal Mining
Near Federal Reservoir Projects." Rept. to Conservation and Natural
Resources Subcommittee, Committee on Government Operations, U.S. House of
Representatives, B-177092 (1973).
Consol. News, Anon., "Christopher Plant Attacks Mine Drainage, Sludge
Problems." 8:1,2 (1969).
Converse, J.C., et al., "Storage Lagoon Versus Underfloor Tank for Dairy
Cattle Manure." Trans. Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng., 18,558 (May-June 1975).
Corbett, D.M., "Acid Mine-Drainage Problem of the Pakota River Watershed,
Southwestern Indiana." Indiana Univ., Water Resources Res. Center, Rept.
Invest. No. 4 (1969).
1-56
-------
Counts, C.A., "Lime Stabilized Sludge: Its Stability and Effect on Agricul-
tural Land." EPA-670/2-75-012 (1975).
Crawford, N.H., and Donigian, A.S., Jr., "Pesticide Runoff and Transport
Model for Agricultural Land." EPA Tech. Ser., EPA 660/2-74-013, Office of
Research and Development, U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C. (1973).
Cross, O.E., "Pollutional Aspects and Crop Yields Resulting from High Manure
Applications on Soil." Trans. Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng., 18,331 (March-April
1975).
Crowe, R., and Phillips, R.L., "Lagoons for Milking Center Wastes." Proc.
Cornell Agr. Waste Mgmt. Conf., Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N.Y. (1972).
Cunningham, J.D., et al., "Phytotoxicity and Uptake of Metals Added to Soils
as Inorganic Salts or in Sewage Sludge." Jour. Environ. Qual., 4,460 (1975).
Curtis, W.R., "Chemical Changes in Streamflow Following Surface Mining in
Eastern Kentucky." Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints,
Pittsburgh, Pa., 19 (1972).
Daniel, T.C., and Bouma, J., "Column Studies of Soil Clogging in a Slowly
Permeable Soil as a Function of Effluent Quality." Jour. Environ. Qual.,,
3,321 (1974).
Dambach, C.A., and Olive, J.H., "Development of Biological Indices to Pollu-
tion Levels in Streams Affected by Acid Mine Drainage and Oil Field Brine
Wastes." Ohio State Univ., Water Resources Center and Natural Resources
Inst., Res. Project Completion Rept. to U.S. Office Water Resources Res.,
(1969).
Darkes, W.F., Jr., et al., "Final Report: Experimental Research Project in
the Treatment of Mine Drainage--Harwick Mine of Duquesne Light Company
Monarch Shaft--Indiana Township Allegheny County, Pennsylvania." Pa. Dept.
Mines Miner. Ind. (January 1971).
Davidson, J.M., et al., "Use of Soil Parameters for Describing Pesticide
Movement through Soils." EPA-660/2-75-009 (May 1975).
Day, A.D., et al., "Effects of Treated Municipal Wastewater and Commercial
Fertilizer on Growth, Fiber, Acid-Soluble Nucleotides, Protein, and Amino
Acid Content in Wheat Hay." Jour. Environ. Qual., 3,17 (1974).
Day, D.L., et al., "Oxidation Ditch Treatment of Swine Wastes, Summary
Report." Agr. Eng., 52:2,71 (1971).
Day, D.L., "Oxidation Ditches for Waste Disposal." Intl. Jour. Farm
Buildings Res. (Brit.), 2 (December 3, 1968).
Deane, J.A., "Acid Mine Drainage Abatement Programs in Surface Mining."
Acid Mine Drainage Workshop, Ohio Univ., Athens, August 2-6, 1971.
1-57
-------
Dean, R.B., "Disposal of Chemical Sludges and Brines." Third Symp. Coal
Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 367 (1970).
Deul, M., "Limestone in Mine Drainage Treatment." Mining Congr. Jour.,
55:11,88 (1969).
Dickey, E.G., and Vanderholm, D.H., "Water Quality and Management Character-
istics of Feedlot Runoff Holding Ponds." Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng. Winter
Meeting, Chicago, Illinois, Paper No. 75-4568 (1975).
Diesch, S.J., "Disease Transmission of Water-Borne Organisms of Animal Origin."
In "Agricultural Practices and Water Quality", T.L. Willrich and G.E. Smith
[Eds.], Iowa State University Press, Ames, 265 (1970).
Diesch, S.L., et al., "Survival of Pathogens in Animal Manure Disposal."
EPA/660/2-75-012 (June 1975).
Dodd, V.A., et al., "Regional Management of Animal Manures—A Model for
Collection, Storage Location and Distribution." Jour. Agr. Eng. Res.,
19,233 (1975).
Donigian, A.S., Jr. and Crawford, N.H., "Modeling Pesticides and Nutrients
on Agricultural Lands." Report for the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA-600/2-76-043, (February 1976).
Dougherty, M.T., et al., "Engineering and Administrative Problems, Deer Park
Daylighting Demonstration Project." Proc. Fifth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage
Res. Preprints, 79 (1974).
Dowdy, R.H., and Larson, W.E., "The Availability of Sludge-Borne Metals
to Various Vegetable Crops." Jour. Environ. Qual., 4,278 (1975).
Downs, H.W., et al., "Continuous Subsurface Injection of Municipal Sewage
Sludge." Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng. Winter Meeting, Chicago, 111., Paper No.
75-2530 (1975).
Doyle, F.J., et al., "Investigation of Mining Related Pollution Reduction
Activities and Economic Incentives in the Monongahela River Basin."
Michael Baker, Jr., Inc., Rept. to Appalachian Regional Comm., ARC-72-89/
RPC-707 (1975); U.S. Dept. Commerce, NTIS, PB-244 352/1WN.
Draper, J.C., "Mine Drainage Treatment Experience." Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal
Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 415 (1972).
Dreese, G.R., and Bryant, H.L., "Cost and Effects of a Water Quality Program
for a Small Strip Mining Company." U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute
for Water Resources, IWR Rept. 71-7 (Aug. 1971).
Dugan, P.R., "Removal of Mine Water Ions by Microbial Polymers." Third Symp.
Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 279 (1970).
1-58
-------
Elam, M.L., "California's Waste Ponds are Passing the Test." Hoard's
Dairyman, 118,311 (March 1973).
Ellis, J.R., et al., "The Nitrogen Status Beneath Beef Cattle Feedlots in
Eastern Nebraska." Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc., 39,107 (1975).
Elzam, O.E., "Stream Water Chemistry of Model Reclamation of Strip-Mined
Land." In "Extraction of Minerals and Energy: Today's Dilemmas."
R.A. Deju [Ed.], Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Inc. (1974).
Emrich, G.H., and Merritt, G.L., "Effects of Mine Drainage on Ground Water."
Ground Water, 7:3,27 (1969).
Endelman, F.J., et al., "Nitrate and Chloride Movement in the Plainfield
Loamy Sand Under Intensive Irrigation." Jour. Environ. Qual., 3,295 (1974).
Engler, C.R., et al., "Synthesis Gas from Feedlot Manure Conceptual Design
Study and Economic Analysis." Environ. Sci. $ Technol., 9,1152 (1975).
Engler, R.M., and Patrick, W.H., Jr., "Nitrate Removal from Floodwater
Overlying Flooded Soils and Sediments." Jour. Environ. Qual. 3,409 (1974).
EPA, "Mine Drainage Report to Conferees." Conference on Pollution of
Monongahela River and Its Tributaries, Pittsburgh, Pa. (August 24-25, 1971).
EPA, "Summary Report--Monongahela River Mine Drainage Remedial Project."
Conference on Pollution of Monongahela River and Its Tributaries, Pittsburgh,
Pa., (August 24-25, 1971).
EPA-OWP, "Cooperative Mine Drainage Study—Selected Areas in the Clarion
River Basin." Wheeling, W. Va. (June 1971).
Environ. Protection Technol Ser., "Feasibility Study Lake Hope Mine Drainage
Demonstration Project." EPA-R2-73-151, EPA, Washington, D.C. (1973).
Environ. Quality Systems, Inc., "Determination of Estimated Mean Mine. Water
Quantity and Quality from Imperfect Data and Historical Records." Rept. to
Appalachian Regional Comm. (1973).
Erickson, A.E., et al., "Initial Observations of Several Medium Sized
Barriered Landscape Water Renovation Systems for Animal Wastes." Proc.
Cornell Agr. Waste Mgmt. Conf., Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N.Y. (1972).
Escher, E.D., "Acid Mine Drainage Control—A Progress Report." 31st Ann.
Meeting, Intl. Water Conf., Engr. Soc. Western Pa., Pittsburgh, Pa. (1970).
Evans, J.O. and Duseja, D.R., "Herbicide Contamination of Surface Runoff
Waters." EPA-R2-73-266 (June 1973).
Feldman, M., and Hore, F.R., "Current Developments in Equipment for Injecting
Liquid Manure into the Soil." Can. Agr. Eng. Annual Meeting, Victoria, B.C.,
Can., Paper No. 73-3-3 (1973).
1-59
-------
Filip, D.S., et al., "Chemical and Biostimulation Properties of Cattle
Feedlot Runoff." Water Res. (G.B.), 9,573 (1975).
Fisher, W., Jr., "Airborne Infrared Detection and Mapping of Coal Mine
Drainage." Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh,
Pa., 331 (1972).
Flynn, J.P., "Treatment of Earth Surface and Subsurface for Prevention of
Acidic Drainage from the Soil." U.S. Pat. 3,443,882 (May 13, 1969).
Ford, C.T., and Boyer, J.F., Jr., "Treatment of Ferrous Acid Mine Drainage
with Activated Carbon." Environ. Protection Technol. Ser., EPA-R2-73-150,
EPA, Washington, D.C. (1973).
Ford, C.T., "Development of a Limestone Treatment Process for Acid Mine
Drainage." Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh,
Pa., 266 (1972).
Ford, C.T., "Selection of Limestones as Neutralizing Agents for Coal Mine
Water." Tenth Forum Geology Industrial Minerals, Ohio State Univ., Columbus
(1974).
Ford, C.T., "Selection of Limestones as Neutralizing Agents for Coal Mine
Water." Tenth Forum Geology Industrial Minerals, Ohio State Univ.,
Columbus (1974).
Ford, C.T., "Selection of Limestones as Neutralizing Agents for Coal Mine
Water." Third Symp. Coal Mine Water." Third Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res.
Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 27 (1970).
Foreman, J.W., "A Progress Report: Evaluation of Mine Drainage Abatement
Projects in Western Pennsylvania." Proc. Fifth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage
Res. Preprints, 128 (1974).
Foreman, J.W., "Deep Mine Sealing." Acid Mine Drainage Workshop, Ohio Univ.,
Athens, August 2-6, 1971.
Foreman, J.W., "Evaluation of Mine Sealing in Butler County, Pennsylvania."
Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 83
(1972).
Franco, N.B., and Balouskus, R.A., "Electrochemical Removal of Heavy Metals
from Acid Mine Drainage." Environ. Protection Technol. Ser., EPA-670/2-74-
023, EPA, Natl. Environ. Res. Cent., Cincinnati, Ohio (1974).
Frank, J.F., et al., "Report of Illinois Advisory Committee on Sludge and
Wastewater Utilization on Agriculture Land." 111. Environ. Protection Agency,
Springfield, 111. (February 1975).
Freestone, F.J., "Runoff of Oils from Rural Roads Treated to Suppress Dust."
EPA-R2-72-054 (October 1972) .
1-60
-------
Frere, M.H., et al., "Agricultural Chemical Transport Model." Agr. Res.
Serv., USDA Report ARS-H-3 (June 1975).
Frere, M.H., "Integrating Chemical Factors with Water and Sediment Transport
from a Watershed." Jour. Environ. Qual., 4,12 (1975).
FWPCA, "The Economics of Clean Water: Volume Two: Animal Wastes Profile."
(1970).
Gaines, L., et al., "Electrochemical Oxidation of Acid Mine Waters." Proc.
Fourth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 105 (1972).
Gang, M.W., and Langmuir, D., "Controls on Heavy Metals in Surface and Ground
Waters Affected by Coal Mine Drainage: Clarion River-Redbank Creek Watershed,
Pennsylvania." Proc. Fifth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res.Preprints, 39 (1974).
Cast, R.G., et al., "Nitrate and Chloride Accumulation and Distribution in
Fertilized Tile-Drained Soils." Jour. Environ. Qual., 3,209 (1974).
Gburek, W.J., and Broyan, J.G., "A Natural Non-Point Phosphate .Input to Small
Streams." Proc. 1974 Cornell Agricultural Waste Management Conf., Cornell
Univ., Ithaca, N.Y., 39 (1974)
Gilbertson, C.B., et al. , "Properties of Manure Accumulations from Midwest
Beef Cattle Feedlots." Trans. Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng., 18,327 (March-April
1975).
Gilbertson, C.B., et al., "Runoff, Solid Waste, and Nitrate Movement on Beef
Cattle Feedlots." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 43,483 (1971).
Gilbertson, C.B., et al., "The Effect of Animal Density and Surface Slope on
Characteristics of Runoff, Solid Wastes and Nitrate Movement on Unpaved Beef
Feedlots." Nebraska Agr. Exp. Sta. Publ. SB508 (1970).
Billham, R.W., and Webber, L.R., "Nitrogen Contamination of Groundwater by
Barnyard Leachates," Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 41,1752 (1969).
Glover, G., "Coal Mining, Water and the Environment." National Coal Board,
Yorkshire, G.B. (1975).
Godard, R.R., "Mine Water Treatment - Frick District." In "Report on Coal
Technology-1969). 1, American Mining Congress, Washington, D.C. (1969).
Godard, R.R., "Mine Water Treatment - Frick District." Mining Congr. Jour.
56:3,36 (1970).
Goldberg, E.F., "The Legal Framework of Acid Mine Drainage Control." Acid
Mine Drainage Workshop,. Ohio Univ., Athens, August 2-6, 1971.
Good, D.M., et al., "The Relation of Refuse Pile Hydrology to Acid Production."
Third Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 145 (1970).
1-61
-------
Good, P., et al., "Implication of Effluent Guidelines and Other Pollution
Control Measures on Dairy Farms." Proc. Cornell Univ. Conf. on Processing
and Management of Agricultural Waste, 71 (March 1974).
Green Eng. Co., Anon., "Auger Mine Drainage Study." Kept, to Pa. Dept. Mines
Mineral Ind., Coal Res. Board (1969).
Grub, W., Albin, R.C., Wells, D.M., and Wheaton, R.Z., "Engineering Analyses
of Cattle Feedlots to Reduce Water Pollution." Trans. Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng.,
12,490 (1969).
Gwin Engr., Anon., "Slippery Rock Creek Mine Drainage Pollution Abatement
Project." Rept. to Pa. Dept. Mines Miner, Ind., SL-110 (1970).
Haines, G.F., Jr., and Kostenbader, P.O., "High Density Sludge Process for
Treating Acid Mine Drainage." Third Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints,
Pittsburgh, Pa., 12 (1970).
Hall, E.P., and Cywin, A., "Water Treatment - Way to Break Minings' Pollu-
tion Cycle." AIME Environ. Quality Conf., Washington, D.C., June 7-9, 1971.
Hall, E.P., "Effluent Limitation Guidelines and Standards." Proc. Fifth
Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, 1 (1974).
Hall, E.P., "Mine Drainage Demonstration Projects." Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal
Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, -Pittsburgh, Pa., 32 (1972).
Halliburton Co., Anon., "New Mine Sealing Techniques for Water Pollution
Abatement." Rept. to U.S. Dept. of the Int., FWQA, Water Poll. Control Res.
Ser. 14010DM003/70 (1970).
Hanson, P.J., "Foam Separation of Metals from Acid Mine Drainage." Proc.
Fourth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 157 (1972).
Harmo, B.C., and Day, P.L., "Nutritive Value of Amino Acid Produced in an
Oxidation Ditch from Waste." Proc. 1974 Cornell Agricultural Waste Manage-
ment Conf., Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N.Y., 375 (1974); Trans. Amer. Soc. Engr.,
17:1,82 (1974).
Harmon, B.C., et al., "Nutritive Value of Oxidation Ditch Residue." Jour.
Animal Sci., 29,136 (1969).
Harms, L.L., et al., "Bacteriological Quality of Surface Runoff from Agri-
cultural Land-Part II." Water § Sew. Works, 122:11,71 (1975).
Harms, L.L., et al., "Physical and Chemical Quality of Agricultural Land
Runoff." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 46,2460 (1974).
Hashimoto, A.G., and Chen, Y.R., "Rheology of Aerated Livestock Waste
Slurries." Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng. Annual Meeting, Davis, California,
Paper No. 7504038 (1975).
1-62
-------
Hegg, R.O., and Larson, R.E., "Solids Balance on a Beef Cattle Oxidation
Ditch." Proc. Cornell Agr. Waste Mgmt. Conf., Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N.Y.
(1972).
Hegg, R.O., et al., "Beef Oxidation Ditch Settled Solids Fed to Steers."
Proc. 1974 Cornell Agricultural Waste Management Conf., Cornell Univ.,
Ithaca, N.Y., 382 (March 1974).
Herricks, E.E., and Cairns, J., Jr., "The Recovery of Stream Macrobenthic
Communities from the Effects of Acid Mine Drainage." Proc. Fourth Symp.
Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 370 (1972).
Herricks, E.E., et al., "Hydrologic and Water Quality Modeling of Surface
Water Discharges from Mining Operations." Va. Polytech. Inst. and State
Univ., Dept. Agr. Eng., Res. Div. Rept. 159 (1975).
Hill, D.W., "Neutralization of Acid Mine Drainage." Jour. Water Poll.
Control Fed., 41, 1702 (1969).
Hill, R.D., "Acid Mine Water Control." Mining Environ. Conf., Univ. of
Mo., Rolla, Missouri (1969).
Hill, R.D., and Martin, J.F., "Elkins Mine Drainage Pollution Control Demon-
stration Project-An Update." Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res.
Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 96 (1972).
Hill, R.D., and Wilmoth, R.C., "Limestone Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage."
SME Fall Meeting, St. Louis, Missouri (1970).
Hill, R.D., "Control and Prevention of Mine Drainage." Battelle Conf.,
Columbus, Ohio (1972).
Hill, R.D., "Elkins Mine Drainage Pollution Control Demonstration Project."
Third Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 284 (1970).
Hill, R.D., et al., "Neutrolosis Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage." 26th
Purdue Ind. Waste Conf., Lafayette, Ind., May 4-6, 1971; EPA-WQO Publ.
No. 14010 05/71.
Hill, R.D., et al., "Reverse Osmosis-Neutralization Process for Treating
Contaminated Waters." U.S. Patent 3,795,609 (March 5, 1974).
Hill, R.D., "Overview of Use of Carbonate Rocks for Controlling Acid Mine
Drainage." Tenth Forum Geology Industrial Minerals, Ohio State Univ.,
Columbus (1974).
Hill, R.D., "Non-Point Pollution from Mining and Mineral Extraction."
Conference on Non-Point Sources of Water Pollution, Virginia Water Resour.
Res. Cent., Blacksburg, Va. (1975).
Hill, R.D., "Reclamation and Revegetation of 640 Acres of Surface Mines,
Elkins, West Virginia." Intl. Symp. Ecology Revegetation Drastically
Disturbed Areas, Pa. State Univ., University Park, Pa. (1969).
1-63
-------
Hill, R.D., "Reclamation and Revegetation of Strip-mined Lands for Pollution
and Erosion Control." Amer. Soc. Agr. Engr. Winter Meeting, Chicago, 111.
(1969).
Hill, R.D., "The Effectiveness of Mine Drainage Pollution Control Measures,
Elkins, West Virginia." ACS Div. Fuel Chem. Preprints, 13:2,103 (1969).
Hinricks, D.G., et al., "Effect of Effluent from Beef Feedlots on the Physical
and Chemical Properties of Soil." Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc., 38,661 (1974).
Holland, C.T., "An Experimental Investigation of the Treatment of Acid Mine
Water Containing High Concentrations of Ferrous Iron with Limestone." Third
Symposium Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 52 (1970).
Holland, C.T., "Experience in Operating an Experimental Acid Mine Drainage
Treatment Plant." ACS Div. Fuel Chem. Preprints, 13:2,124 (1969).
Holmes, J., and Schmidt, K., "Ion Exchange Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage."
Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 179
(1972).
Hrubant, G.R., et al., "Interobacteria in Feedlot Waste and Runoff." Appl.
Microbiol., 24:3,378 (1972).
Hudson, J.T.R., and Bulley, N.R., "Effect of Dissolved Oxygen Concentration
on the Aerobic Stabilization of Swine Waste." Can. Agr. Eng. Annual Meeting,
Victoria, B.C., Can., Paper No. 73-212 (1973).
Hutchinson, G.L., and Viets, F.G., "Nitrogen Enrichment of Surface Water by
Absorption of Ammonia Volatilized from Cattle Feedlots." Science, 166,514
(1969).
Intorre, B.J., et al., "Evaluation of Ion Exchange Processes for Treatment
of Mine Drainage Waters." Burns and Roe Construction Corp., R§D Progr.
Rept. 74-925 to Office Saline Water, U.S. Dept. Int. (1974); U.S. Dept.
Commerce, NTIS, PB-227 734.
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, "Design Criteria for Municipal
Sludge Utilization on Agricultural Land." Tech. Policy WPC-3 (1975).
Jacobs, J.J., and Timmons, J.F., "An Economic Analysis of Agricultural Land
Use Practices to Control Water Quality." Amer. Jour. Agr. Econ., 56,791
(1974).
Janiak, H., et al., "Purification of Waters from Strip Lignite Mines."
Central Res. Design Inst. Openeast Mining, Poltegor (Pol.), 1st Interim
Rept. to U.S. EPA, Special Foreigh Currency Program Proj. 05-534-3 (1975).
Jasinski, R., and Gaines,L., "Electrochemical Treatment of Acid Mine Waters."
Water Poll. Control Res. Series, 14010 FNQ 02/72, EPA, Washington, D.C. (1972),
1-64
-------
Jewell, W.J.[Ed.], Proc. Cornell Univ. Conf. on Energy, Agriculture and Waste
Management. Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Ann Arbor, Mich. (1975).
Johns-Manville Products Corp., "Rotary Precoat Filtration of Sludge from
Acid Mine Drainage Neutralization." Rept. to Pa. Coal Res. Board and EPA
Water Poll. Control Res. Ser. 14010 DUOS/71 (1971).
Johnson, J.B., and Davis, G.A., "The Economic Impacts of Imposing EPA
Effluent Guidelines on the U.S. Fed-Beef Industry." Proc. Cornell Univ.
Conf. on Processing and Management of Agricultural Waste, 59 (March 1974).
Jones, J.B., and Ruggeri, S., "Abatement of Pollution from Abandoned Coal
Mines by Means of In-Situ Precipitation Techniques." ACS Div. Fuel Chem.
Preprints, 13:2,116- (1969) .
Jones, P.H., and Patni, N.K., "A Study of Foaming Problems in an Oxidation
Ditch Treating Swine Wastes." Proc. Cornell Agr. Waste Mgmt. Conf., Cornell
Univ., Ithaca, N.Y. (1972).
Jones, P.H., and Patni, N.K., "Nutrient Transformations in a Swine Waste
Oxidation Ditch." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 46,366 (1974).
Jorgensen, S.E., "Do Heavy Metals Prevent the Agricultural Use of Municipal
Sludge?" Water Res. (G.B.), 9,163 (1975).
Josephnson, J., "The Effluent Guidelines Scorecard." Environ. Sci. §
Technol., 9,908 (1975).
Kang, S.F., et al., "Modeling Feedlot Runoff Pollution 1. Analog Simulation."
Trans. Amer. Soc. Agr. Engr., 13,858 (1970).
Keeney, D.R., et al., "Guidelines for the Application of Wastewater Sludge to
Agricultural Land in Wisconsin." Tech. Bull. 88, Dept. Natural Resources,
Madison, Wis. 36 pages (1975).
Kennedy, J.L., "Sodium Hydroxide Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage." EPA,
Natl. Environ. Res. Center, Cincinnati, Ohio (1973).
Khare, M., et al., "Microbiology and Water Quality in a Tributary of
Cayuga Lake. Appendix B. Data for all Sampling Stations for Each Sampling
Data." OWRT-A-030-NY (1975).
Kimball, L. Robert, Consulting Engineers, "Surface Mine Water Quality Control
in the Eastern Kentucky Coal Fields." Rept. to Ky. Dept. Natural Resour.
Environ. Protection, and to Appalachian Regional Comm., ARC-71-66-T5 (1974).
Kimball, L. Robert, Consulting Engineers, "Two Lick Creek Mine Drainage
Pollution Abatement Project." Rept. to Pa. Dept. Mines Miner. Ind.,
Project No. SL-109 (1971).
1-65
-------
King, D.L., and Simmler, J.J., "Organic Wastes as a Means of Accelerating
Recovery of Acid Strip-mine Lakes." Univ. Mo., Mo. Water Resource Center,
Completion Rept. to Dept. Int., OWRR (1973).
King, L.D., and Morris, H.D., "Nitrogen Movement Resulting from Surface
Application of Liquid Sewage Sludge." Jour. Environ. Qual., 3,238 (1974).
Kissel, D.F., et al., "Nitrate and Chloride Leaching in a Swelling Clay Soil."
Jour. Environ. Qual., 3,401 (1974).
Klausner, S.D., et al., "Surface Runoff Losses of Soluble Nitrogen and
Phosphorus Under Two Systems of Soil Management." Jour. Environ. Qual.,
3,42 (1974).
Koehrsen, L.G., "Lake Hope Acid Mine Drainage Abatement Program." Stanley
Consultants, Rept. to Ohio Dept. Natural Resources (1969).
Koelliker, J.K., and Miner, J.R., "Desorption of Ammonia from Anaerobic
Lagoons." Trans. Amer. Soc. Agr. Engr., 16,148 (1973).
Koelliker, J.K., and Miner, J.R., "Use of Soil to Treat Anaerobic Lagoon
Effluent: Renovation as a Function of Depth and Application Rate." Trans.
Amer. Soc. Agr. Engr., 13:4,496 (1970).
Koppe, E.F., and Thompson, D.R., "Progress in the Recognition of Fractured
Rock Zones in Prevention and Abatement of Mine Drainage.: Proc. Fourth
Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 41 (1972).
Kosowski, Z.V., "Control of Mine Drainage from Coal Mine Mineral Wastes-
Phase II-Pollution Abatement and Monitoring." Environ. Protection Technol.
Series, EPA-R2-73-230, EPA, Washington, D.C. (1973).
Kosowski, Z.V., "Control of Mine Drainage from Coal Mine Mineral Wastes."
Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 423
(1972).
Kostenbader, P.O., and Haines, G.F., Jr., "High-Density Sludge Treats Acid
Mine Drainage." Coal Age, 75:9,SO (1970).
Kostenbader, P.O., "Method for Treating Acid Water Containing Metallic
Values." U.S. Patent 3,738,932 (1973).
Kralovie, R.C., and Wilson, H.A., "Survival and Activity of Sewage Micro-
organisms in Acid Mine Water." Water Res. Inst., Res. Rept. 1, W. Va.
Univ., Morgantown, W. Va. (1969).
Krause, R.R., "Mining and Reclamation Techniques to Control Mine Drainage."
Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 425
(1972).
Kreis, R.D., Scalf, M.R., et al., "Characteristics of Rainfall Runoff from a
Beef Cattle Feedlot." EPA-R2-72-061 (September 1972).
1-66
-------
Kremen, S.S., et al., "The Reclamation of Acid Mine Water by Reverse Osmosis."
Third Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 241 (1970).
r>
Kunin, R., and Demchalk, J.J., "The Use of Amberlite Ion Exchange Resins in
Treating Acid Mine Waters at Philipsburg, Pennsylvania." Proc. Fifth Symp.
Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, 302 (1974).
Kunin, R., and Downing, D.G., "Ion-Exchange System Boasts More Pulling Power."
Chem. Eng., 78,15,67 (1971).
Lau, C.M., et al., "The Role of Bacteria in Pyrite Oxidation Kinetics."
Third Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 114 (1970).
Law, J.P., and Bernard, H., "Impact of Agricultural Pollutants on Water Uses."
Trans. Amer. Soc. Agr. Engr., 13:4,474 (1970).
Lehman, O.R., and Clark, R.N., "Effect of Cattle Feedyard Runoff on Soil
Infiltration Rates." Jour. Environ. Qual., 4,437 (1975).
Lerch, O.H., et al., "Mine Drainage and Other Mining Impacts as a Regional
Development Concern." Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints,
Pittsburgh, Pa., 15 (1972).
Light, E., "The Effects of Modern Strip Mining on Water Resources." Campaign
Clean Water, Charleston, W. Va. (1975).
Linderman, C.L., and Ellis, J.R., "Quality Variation of Feedlot Runoff in
Storage." Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng. Winter Meeting, Chicago, 111., Paper No.
75-2563 (1975).
Lisanti, A.F., et al., "Technical and Economic Experience in the Operation of
the Slippery Rock Creek Mine Water Treatment Plant." Proc. Fourth Symp.
Coal Mine Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 399 (1972).
Liu, M.S., et al., "Oxygen Transfer to Water and to Sodium Sulfite Solutions."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 44,34 (1972).
Loehr, R.C., "Characteristics and Comparative Magnitude of Non-Point Sources."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 46,1849 (1974).
Loehr, R.C., "Drainage and Pollution from Beef Cattle Feedlots." Jour. San.
Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 96,1295 (1970).
Loehr, R.C., "Water Pollution Control Legislation." Agr. Eng., 50,468 (1969).
Lombardo, J.L., "State of the Art-Acid Mine Drainage Control." Amer. Mining
Congr. Convention, Denver, Colo. (1973).
Long, F.L., et al., "Effect of Soil-Incorporated Dairy Cattle Manure on Runoff
Water Quality and Properties." Jour. Environ. Qual., 4,163 (1975).
1-67
-------
Lovell, H.L., and Kaelin, D.E., "Operating Experience with Biological Iron
Oxidation-Limestone Neutralization Treatment of Coal Mine Drainage." Amer.
Inst. Mining Engr. Ann. Meeting, San Francisco, California, Preprint No.
72-F-104 (1972).
Lovell, H.L., "Coal Mine Drainage Pollution-1973." Earth and Mineral
Sciences, 42,54 (1973).
Lovell, H.L., "Limestone Treatment of Coal Mine Drainage-An Appraisal of
Process Capabilities and Parameters." Amer. Mining Congr. Coal Convention,
Pittsburgh, Pa., May 16-19, 1971.
Lovell, H.L., "Studies in the Treatment of Coal Mine Drainage by Biochemical
Iron Oxidation and Limestone Neutralization." Pa. State Univ., Spec. Res.
Rept. SR-98, to Pa. Dept. Environ. Resour. (1974).
Lovell, H.L., "The Properties and Control of Sludge Produced from the
Treatment of Coal Mine Drainage Waters by Neutralization Processes." Third
Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 1 (1970).
Loy, L.D., Jr., "Description of New, Innovative and Theoretical Mine Drainage
Abatement Techniques." Proc. Fifth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints,
146 (1974).
Lyon, W.A., "Water Quality Management in the Monongahela River Basin." Pa.
Dept. Environ. Resources, Bur1. San Eng., Publ. No. 29 (August 1971).
Mackey, H.E., Jr., "Preliminary Report on the Water Quality of the South Fork
of the Little Conemaugh River During 1972." univ. Pittsburgh at Johnstown
(1973).
Maneval, D.R., "Mine Drainage Pollution Abatement-Theory and Practice."
84th Ann. Meeting, Coal Mining Inst. Aerm., Pittsburgh, Pa. (1970).
Manges, H.L., et al., "Treatment and Ultimate Disposal of Cattle Feedlot
Wastes." EPA/660/2-75-013 (June 1975).
Maneval, D.R., and Lemezis, S., "Multistage Flash Evaporation System for the
Purification of Acid Mine Drainage." Trans. Soc. Mining Engr., 252,42 (1972).
Martin, J.F., "Quality of Effluents from Coal Refuse Piles." Proc. First
Symp. Mine and Preparation Plant Refuse Disposal Preprints, 26 (1974).
Mason, D.G., and Gupta, M.K., "Reverse Osmosis Demineralization of Acid
Mine Drainage." Water Poll. Control Res. Series, 14010 FQR 03/72, EPA,
Washington, D.C. (1972).
Mason, D.G., "Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage by Reverse Osmosis." Third
Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 227 (1970).
Mason, R.H., "Twofold Attack on the Drainage Problem." Coal Mining Process,
9:10,44 (1972).
1-68
-------
Mausel, P.W., et al., "Evaluation of Surface Water Resources from Machine-
Processing of ERTS Multispectral Data." Jour. Environ. Qual. 3,316 (1974).
Mayes, Sudderth § Etheredge, Inc., "Water Quality Management Element for
the Kentucky River Area Development District-Comprehensive Water and Sewer
Plan." Rept. to Ky. River Area Develop. Dist. (1973).
McCalla, T.M., et al., "Chemical Studies of Solids, Runoff, Soil Profile and
Groundwater from Beef Cattle Feedlots at Mead,. Nebraska." Proc. Cornell
Agr. Waste Mgmt. Conf., Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N.Y. (1972).
McCalla, T.M., et al., "Manure Decomposition and Fate of Breakdown Products
in Soil." In "Agricultural Practices and Water Quality," T.L. Willrich and
G.E. Smith [Eds.], Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames, 265 (1970).
McDonald, D.G., et al., "Studies of Lime-Limestone Treatment of Acid Mine
Drainage." Proc. Fifth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints. 229 (1974).
McElroy, A.D., et al., "Water Pollution from Nonpoint Sources." Water Res.
(G.B.), 9,675 (1975).
McGhee, T.J., et al., "Aerobic Treatment of Feedlot Runoff." Jour. Water
Poll. Control Fed., 45,1865 (1973).
McGhee, T.J., et al., "Laboratory Studies on Feedlot Runoff." Jour. San.
Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, 883 (1973).
McKinney, R.E., "Manure Transformations and Fate of Decomposition Products
in Water." In "Agricultural Practices and Water Quality," T.L. Willrich
and G.E. Smith [Eds.], Iowa State University Press, Ames, 265 (1970).
McPhiliamy, S.C., and Green, J., "A Chemical and Biological Evaluation of
Three Mine Drainage Treatment Plants." Wheeling Field Office, EPA, Wheeling,
W. Va., Work Document No. 47 (1973).
McWhorter, D.B., et al., "Water Pollution Potential of Mine Spoils in the
Rocky Mountain Region." Proc. Fifth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints,
25 (1974).
McWhorter, D.B., et al., "Water Quality Control in Mine Spoils: Upper
Colorado River Basin." Environ. Protection Technol. Ser., EPA-670/2-75-048,
EPA, Natl. Environ. Res. Cent., Cincinnati, Ohio (1975).
Meek, B.D., et al., "The Effect of Large Applications of Manure on Movement
of Nitrate and Carbon in an Irrigated Desert Soil." Jour. Environ. Qual.,
3,253 (1974).
Mehran, M., and Tanji, K.K., "Computer Modeling of Nitrogen Transformations
in Soils." Jour. Environ. Qual., 3, 391 (1974).
Menear, J.R., and Smith, L.W., "Dairy Cattle Manure Liquid: Solids Separa-
tion with a Screw Press." Jour. Animal Sci., 36,788 (1973).
1-69
-------
Merritt, G.L., and Angerman, T.W., "The Use of Ionic Tracers in Determining
the Subsurface Flow of Mine Drainage. A Case Study." Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal
Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 340 (1972).
Merritt, G.L., and Erarich, G.H., "The Need for a Hydrogeologic Evaluation in
a Mine Drainage Abatement Program: A Case Study: Toms Run Clarion County,
Pennsylvania." Third Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh,
Pa., 334 (1970).
Michelsen, D.L., et al., "Removal of Soluble Mercury from Waste Water by
Complexing Techniques." OWRT-A-044-VA (3), Office Water Res. £ Tech.
(May 1975).
Mielke, L.N., et al., "Soil Profile Conditions of Cattle Feedlots." Jour.
Environ. Qual., 3,14 (1974).
Mihok, E.A., and Moebs, N.N., "U.S. Bureau of Mines Progress in Mine Water
Research." Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh,
Pa., 33 (1972).
Mihok, E.A., "Applied Advance Technology to Eliminate Aeration in Mine Water
Treatment." Third Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa.,
181 (1970).
Mihok, F.A., "Mine Water Research: Catalytic Oxidation of Ferrous Iron in
Acid Mine Water by Activated Carbon." U.S. Bureau Mines, Rept. Invest. 7337
(1969).
Mihok, E.A., "Mine Water Research: Plant Design and Cost Estimates for
Limestone Treatment." U.S. Bur. Mines, Rept. Invest. 7368 (1970).
Mihok, E.A., "Use of Activated Carbon for Mine Water Treatment." ACS Div.
Fuel Chem. Preprints, 14:1,51 (1970).
Miller, J.D., "Removal of Dissolved Contaminants from Mine Drainage."
EPA-R2-72-130 (December 1972).
Miller, J.T., and Thompson, D.R., "Seepage and Mine Barrier Width." Proc.
Fifth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, 103 (1974).
Miller, W.D., "Infiltration Rate and Groundwater Quality Beneath Cattle
Feedlots, Texas High Plains." Water Poll. Control Res. Ser. Rept. (1971).
Miner, J.R., and Smith, R.J. [Eds.], "Livestock Waste Management with
Pollution Control." North Central Regional Res. Publ. 222, Midwest Plan
Service (June 1975).
Miner, J.R., and Willrich, T.L., "Livestock Operations and Field Spread
Manure as Sources of Pollutants." In "Agricultural Practices and Water
Quality," T.L. Willrich and G.E. Smith [Eds.], Iowa State Univ. Press,
Ames, 265 (1970).
1-70
-------
Mining Congr. Jour., "Acid Mine Drainage Treatment Process Termed Successful."
57:5,53 (1971).
Minshall, N.E., et al., "Stream Enrichment from Farm Operations." Jour. San.
Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 96, SA2, 513 (1970).
Moebs, N.N., and Chamberlain, C.E., "The Effect of Atmospheric Pressures on
the Oxygen Level in a Sealed Mine." U.S. Bureau Mines, RI 7606, Washington,
D.C. (1972).
Moebs, N.N., and Krickovic, S., "Air-Sealing Coal Mines to Reduce Water
Pollution." U.S. Bur. Mines, Rept. Invest. 7354 (1970).
Monke, E.J., et al., "Physical-Chemical Composition of Eroded Soil." Amer.
Soc. Agr. Eng. Winter Meeting, Chicago, Illinois, Paper No. 75-2584 (1975).
Moore, J.A., "Animal Waste Management to Minimize Pollution." In
"Agricultural Practices and Water Quality," T.L. Willrich and G.E. Smith
[Eds.], Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames, 286 (1970).
Moore, J.A., et al., "Settling Solids in Animal Waste Slurries." Trans.
Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng., 18,694 (July-August 1975).
Moore, T.L., and Turcotte, J.A., "Youghiogheny River Basin Mine Drainage
Pollution Abatement Project." Gibbs § Hill, Inc., Phase I Rept. to Pa.
Dept. Mines Mineral Ind. (1969).
Morth, A.H., "Acid Mine Drainage: A Mathematical Model." Ph.D. thesis, Ohio
State Univ., Columbus (1971).
Morth, A.H., and Smith, E.E., "Acid Mine Drainage: A Mathematical Model."
Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res., Pittsburgh, Pa. (1972).
Morth, A.M., et al., "Pyrite Systems: A Mathematical Model." Third Symp.
Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 132 (1970).
MSA Research Corp., "Mine Refuse Pile Coverings to Reduce Water Percolation."
Sum. Rept. to Pa. Dept. Environ. Resources (1971).
Muck, R.E., et al., "Runoff Characteristics from Manured Fields." Amer.
Soc. Agr. Eng. Winter Meeting, Chicago, Illinois, -Paper No. 75-2560 (1975).
Murray, I., et al., "Interrelationship between Nitrogen Balance, pH and
Dissolved Oxygen in an Oxidation Ditch Treating Farm Animal Waste." Water
Res. (G.B.), 9,25 (1975).
National Coal Association, and Bituminous Coal Research, Inc., "Papers
Presented Before the Fifth Symposium on Coal Mine Drainage Research."
Louisville, Ky., (1974).
1-71
-------
Nawrocki, M.A., and Vir Kathuria, D., "Evaluation of Sedimantation Ponds Used
in Surface Coal Mining." Proc. Third Symp. Surface Mining and Reclamation
Preprints, Vol. II, 42 (1975).
Nelson, W.E., "Solid Wastes, Animal Refuse, and Organic Residues Disposal,
and the Quality of Ground Water." NTIS Rept. No. PB-244 826 (1975).
Ngoddy, P.O., et al., "Enhanced Treatment of Livestock Wastewater.-I. Solid-
Liquid Separation-Estimation of Vibratory Screen Performances on Swine Waste-
water." Jour. Agr. Eng. Res., 19,313 (1974).
Nichols, L.E., and Bulow, F.J., "Effects of Acid Mine Drainage on the Stream
Ecosystem of the East Fork of the Obey River, Tennessee." Jour Tenn. Acad.
Sci., 48:1,30 (1973).
Nicholson, H.P., "The Needs for Water Quality Models on Agricultural Water-
sheds." Jour. Environ. Qual., 4,21 (1975).
Nickeson, F.H., "Republic Steel Counteracts Acid Mine Drainage." Coal Mining
Process, 7:9,36 (1970).
Nicol, K.J., et al., "Models of Soil Loss, Land and Water Use, Spatial
Agricultural Structure, and the Environment." CARD Rept. 49T, Center for
Agricultural and Rural Development, Iowa State Univ., Ames, (1974).
Nightingale, H.I., and Bianchi, W.C., "Ground Water Quality Related to
Irrigation with Imported Surface or Local Ground Water." Jour. Environ.
Qual., 3,356 (1974).
Norton, T.E., and Hansen, R.W., "Cattle Feedlot Water Quality Hydrology."
2nd Comp. of Animal Waste Mgmt., U.S. Dept. of the Int. (1969).
Novikov, V.M., et al., "Use of Sewage in Agriculture." NTIS Rept. No.
AD-017 303/9ST (Oct. 1975).
Novikov, V.M., "Natural Methods of Purifying Sewage and Its Utilization in
Agriculture Management." Cold Reg. Res. § Eng. Lab., Hanover, N.H., NTIS
Rept. No. AD-A014 971/6ST (September 1975).
NUS Corp., Cyrus Wm. Rice Division, Anon., "Gas Reauirements to Pressurize
Abandoned Deep Mines." Rept. to Pa. Dept. Mines Mineral Ind., Coal Res.
Board, and U.S. Dept. Interior, FWPCA (1969).
O'Brien, W., "Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage." Ph.D. thesis, W. Va. Univ.
(1972); University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Mich., 72-76, 887 (1973).
Ohio State Univ. Res. Found., "Acid Mine Drainage Formation and Abatement."
Columbus. Rept. to EPA, Water Poll. Control Res. Ser. 14010 FPR04/71, DAST-42
(1971).
Ohio State Univ. Res. Found., "Pilot Scale Study of Acid Mine Drainage."
Rept. to EPA, Water Poll. Control Res. Ser. 14010 EXA03/71 (1971).
1-72
-------
Olem, H., and Unz, R.F., "Treatment of Coal Mine Drainage with the Rotating
Biological Contactor." Presented at 30th Ind. Waste Conf., Purdue Univ.,
West Lafayette, Ind., (1975).
Olness, A., et al., "Nutrient and Sediment Discharge from Agricultural
Watersheds in Oklahoma." Jour. Environ. Qual., 4,331 (1975).
Osman, M.A., et al., "Coal Mine Drainage Sludge Utilization." Third
Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 376 (1970).
Owens, T. R., and Griffin, W.L., "Economics of Water Pollution Control for
Cattle Feedlot Operations." 2nd Comp. of Animal Waste Mgmt., U.S. Dept. of
the Int. (1969).
Page, A.L., "Fate and Effects of Trace Elements in Sewage Sludge when
Applied to Agricultural Lands: A Literature Review Study." EPA Rept.
670/2-75-005 (January 1974).
Parizek, R.R., and Tarr, E.G., "Mine Drainage Pollution Prevention and
Abatement Using Hydrogeological and Geochemical Systems." Proc. Fourth
Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 56 (1972).
Pash, E.A., "The Coal Mine Drainage Problem in Northern West Virginia."
Soil Conservation Soc. Amer., W. Va. Chapter, Ann. Meeting, Jacksons Mill,
W. Va. (1969).
Pash, E.A., "The Coal Mine Drainage Problem in Southwestern Pennsylvania."
Spring Geogr. Conf. Environ. Poll., California State Coll., California, Pa.
(April 1970).
Pearson, F.H., and McDonnell, A.J., "Evaluation of Prototype Crushed Lime-
stone Barriers for the Neutralization of Acidic Streams." Pa. State Univ.,
Inst. Res. Land Water Resour., Res. Publ. No. 80 (1974).
Pa. Dept. Mines Mineral Ind., Anon., "Mine Drainage Abstracts. A
Bibliography. 1968 Supplement." Harrisburg, Pa. (1969).
Pa. Dept. Mines Miner. Ind., Anon., "Mine Drainage Abstracts. A
Bibliography." 1969 Supplement, Harrisburg, Pa. (1970).
Penrose, R.G., Jr., "Limestone Selection for Permeable Plug Mine Seals."
Proc. Fifth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, 133 (1974).
Plass, W.T., "Changes in Water Chemistry Resulting from Surface-Mining on
Coal on Four West Virginia Watersheds." Proc. Third Symp. Surface Mining
and Reclamation Preprints, Vol. 1, 152 (1975).
•
Plass, W.T., et al., "Water Quality Models for a Contour Mined Watershed."
Proc. Third Symp. Surface Mining and Reclamation Preprints, Vol. I, 197
(1975).
1-73
-------
Porter, L.K., et al., "Pollution Abatement from Cattle Feedlots in
Northeastern Colorado and Nebraska." EPA-660/2-75-015 (June 1975).
Pos, J., and Robinson, J.B., "Winter Operation of Aerated Liquid Animal
Waste Storage Systems." Can. Agr. Eng., 15,1 (1973).
Poultry Dig., "Oxidation Ditch in Cage Layer House." 30,337 (1971).
Powers, W.L., et al., "Research Status on Effects of Land Application of
Animal Wastes." EPA-66/2-75-010 (May 1975).
Prakasam, T.B.S., et al., "Approaches for the Control of Nitrogen with an
Oxidation Ditch." Proc. 1974 Cornell Agricultural Waste Management Conf.,
Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N.Y., 421 (March 1974).
Pratt, G.L., et al., "Feedlot Runoff Control Systems for Cold Climates."
Can. Soc. Agr. Engr. Annual Meeting, Brandon Univ., Brandon, Man., Can.,
Paper No. 75-203 (1975).
Pratt, G.L., et al., "Treatment of Beef Cattle Waste Water for Possible
Reuse." Trans. Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng., 12:4,471 (1969).
Proctor, D.E., "Anaerobic-Aerobic Lagoon Treatment of Dairy Manure Wastes."
Washington State Univ., Pullman, Environ. Eng. Sec., W74-11804, EPA 660/
2-74-030 (1974).
Ramsey, J.P., "Control of Acid Pollution from Coal Refuse Piles and Slurry
Lagoons." Third Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa.,
138 (1970).
Ramsey, R.H., et al., "Livestock and the Environment: A Bibliography with
Abstracts, Vol. II. Pollution, Animal Waste Management.
Rao, P.S.C., et al., "Field Study of Solute Movement in Highly Aggregated
Oxisol with Intermittent Flooding: II. Picloram." Jour. Environ. Qual.,
3,197 (1974).
Ream, V.H., "Lime Slurry System at Pursglove No. 15 Mine." Mining Congr.
Jour., 56:1,55 (1970).
Renton, J.J., et al., "Relative Acid-Producing Potential of Coal." W. Va.
Geol. and Econ. Surv., Environ. Geol. Bull. No. 11 (1973).
Resnik, A.V., and Rademacher, J.M., "Animal Waste Runoff-A Major Water
Quality Challenge." 2nd Comp. of Animal Waste Mgmt. U.S. Dept. of the
Int. (1969).
Rex Chainbelt, Inc., Anon., "Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage by Reverse
Osmosis." Rept. to Pa. Dept. Mines Miner. Ind. and U.S. Dept. of the Int.,
FWQA (1970).
1-74
-------
Rhoades, J.D., et al., "Minimizing the Salt Burdens of Irrigation Drainage
Waters." Jour. Environ. Qual., 3,311 (1974).
Ricca, V.T., and Chow, K., "Acid Mine Drainage Quantity and Quality Genera-
tion Model." Trans. AIME, 253,328 (1974).
Rice, J.K., "The Use of Inert Gas to Eliminate Acid Production by Abandoned
and Active Deep Mines." Third Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints,
Pittsburgh, Pa., 169 (1970).
Rice, P.A., and Raboline, F., "Biological Treatment of Acid Mine Water."
Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 293
(1972).
Riley, C.V., and Rinier, J.A., "Reclamation and Mine Tip Drainage in Europe."
Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 1
(1972).
Robbins, J.W.D., and Kriz, G.J., "Relation to Agriculture to Groundwater
Pollution: A Review." Trans. Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng., 12:3,397 (1969).
Robbins, J.W.D., et al., "Stream Pollution from Animal Production Units."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 44:8,1536 (1972).
Robohn, W.F., "Major Problems of Water Pollution Created by Agricultural
Practices." 2nd Comp. of Animal Waste Mgmt., U.S. Dept. of the Int. (1969).
Romkens, M1J.M., and Nelson, D.W., "Phosphorus Relationships in Runoff from
Fertilized Soils." Jour. Environ. Qual., 3,10 (1974).
Rose, J.L., "Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage by Ion Exchange Processes."
Third Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 267 (1970).
Rozelle, R.B., and Swain, H.A., Jr., "Removal of Manganese from Mine Drainage
by Ozone and Chlorine." Environ. Protection Technol. Ser., EPA 670/2-75-006,
EPA, Natl. Environ. Res. Cent., Cincinnati, Ohio (1975); U.S. Dept. Commerce,
NTIS, PB-241 143.
Rump, 0., "Phenolic Acids as Indicators of Pollution with Liquid Manure-A
Method for Their Detection." Water Res. (G.B.), 8,889 (1974).
Salter, P.J., et al., "Effect of Farmyard Manure on Matric Suctions Prevail-
ing in a Sandy Loam Soil." Jour. Soil Sci., 18,318 (1967); Biol. and Agr.
Index, 53,3 (1967).
Satterwhite, M.B., and Bilbertson, C.B., "Grass Response to Applications of
Beef Cattle Feedlot Runoff." Proc. Cornell Agr. Waste Mgmt. Conf., Cornell
Univ., Ithaca, N.Y. (1972).
Schaffer, R.B., "The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System and the
Coal Industry." Proc. Third Symp. Surface Mining and Reclamation Preprints,
Vol. I, 2 (1975).
1-75
-------
Schaffer, W.H., et al., "An Economic Analysis of Policies to Control Nutrient
and Soil Losses from a Small Watershed in New York." Proc. 1974 Cornell
Agricultural Waste Management Conf., Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N.Y., 200 (1974).
Schultz, D.A., "A Balance Sheet Method of Determining the Contribution of
Agricultural Wastes to Surface Water Pollution." Proc. Cornell Univ. Conf.
on Agr. Waste Mgmt., 251 (1970).
Schuman, G.E., and McCalla, T.M., "Chemical Characteristics of a Feedlot
Soil Profile." Soil Sci., 119,113 (1975).
Schuman, G.F., and Burwell, R.E., "Precipitation Nitrogen Contribution
Relative to Surface Runoff Discharges." Jour. Environ. Qual., 3,266 (1974).
Scott, R.B., et al., "Cost of Reclamation and Mine Drainage Abatement-Elkins
Demonstration Project." SME Fall Meeting, St. Louis, Missouri (1970).
Scott, R.B., "Evaluation of Shavers Fork Mine Seals." EPA, Office of Research
and Monitoring, Norton Mine Drainage Field Site, Publ. No. 14010 09/71
(September 1971).
Scott, R.L., and Hays, R.M., "Inactive and Abandoned Underground Mines-
Water Pollution Prevention and Control." Michael Baker, Jr., Inc., Rept.
to EPA, Office of Water and Hazardous Materials, EPA-440/9-75-007 (1975).
Selmeczi, J.G., "Design of Oxidation Systems for Mine Water Discharges."
Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 307
(1972).
Sewards, G.J., and Holder, G.A., "Disposal of Dairy Whey by Two Stage
Biological Treamtnet-I. Kinetic Studies of the Aerobic Stage." Water
Res. (G.B.), 9,409 (1975).
Shackelford, J.M., "Water Reuse in Industry-Part 3-Mine Water." Mech.
Eng., 95:6,32 (1973).
Shah, P.M., et al., "Enhancement of Specific Waste Water Treatment by the
Uncoupler 2,4-Dinitrophenol." Jour. Food Sci., 40,302 (1975).
Shearer, R.E., et al., "Characteristics of Viable Anti-Bacterial Agents
Used to Inhibit Acid-Producing Bacteria in Mine Waters." Third Symp. Coal
Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 188 (1970).
Shumate, K.S., Smith, E.E., et al., "Resources Allocation to Optimize
Mining Pollution Control." EPA-600/2-76-112 (November 1976).
Singer, P.C., and Stumm, W., "The Rate-Determining Step in the Production
of Acidic Mine Wastes." ACS Div. Fuel Chem. Preprints, 13:2,80 (1969).
Skelly and Loy, Anon., "Alder Run Watershed Mine Drainage Study." Rept. to
Pa. Dept. Mines Miner. Ind., SL-143 (1970).
1-76
-------
Sleigh, J.H., and Kremen, S.S., "Acid Mine Waste Treatment Using Reverse
Osmosis." Gulf Environmental Systems Company, Rept. to EPA, Water Poll.
Control Res. Ser. 14010 DYG08/71 (1971).
Smith, E.E., and Shumate, K.S., "A Study of the Sulfide to Sulfate Reaction
Mechanism as it Relates to the Formation of Acid Mine Waters." Ohio State
University, Rept. to U.S. Dept. of the Int., FWQA (1970).
Smith, E.E., and Schumate, K.S., "Rate of Pyrite Oxidation and Acid
Production Rate in the Field." Acid Mine Drainage Workshop, Ohio Univ.,
Athens, August 2-6, 1971.
Smith, G.C., et al., "Coal Mine Drainage Treatment." Spring Meeting SME of
AIME, Pittsburgh, Pa. (April 16-17, 1970).
Smith, G.R., and Abbott, F.D., "Ponds Stop Pollution from Feedlots." Soil
Conserv., 34:4,78 (1968).
Smith, J.E., Jr., et al., "Biological Oxidation and Disinfection of Sludge."
Water Res. (G.B.), 9,17 (1975).
Smith, J.H., III, "The Advantage of a Crowd for Acid Waste Liquors."
Mining Eng., 24:12,57 (1972).
Smith, M.J., "Acid Production in Mine Drainage Systems." In "Extraction
of Minerals and Energy: Today's Dilemmas." R.A. Deju [Ed.], Ann Arbor
Science Publishers, Inc. (1974).
Smith, R.M., et al., "Mine Spoil Potentials for Soil and Water Quality."
Environ. Protection Technol. Ser., EPA-670/2-74-070, EPA, Natl. Environ.
Res. Cent., Cincinnati, Ohio (1974).
Smith, R.M., Sobek, A.A., et al., "Extensive Overburden Potentials for Soil
and Water Quality." EPA-600/2-76-184 (August 1976).
Smith, S.J., and Davis, R.J., "Relative Movement of Bromide and Nitrate
through Soils." Jour. Environ. Qual., 3,152 (1974).
Soil Conserv., Anon., "Cattle Feeders Avoid Pollution by Using Waste in
Irrigation." 34:4,84 (1968); Land S Water Control, 11:10,10 (1969).
Soil Conservation Service, "Agricultural Waste Management Field Manual."
SCS/Eng/FM-AWM, Washington, D.C. (August 1975).
Stauffer, T.E., and Lovell, H.L., "The Oxygenation of Iron (II) Solutions
Relationships to Coal Mine Drainage Treatment." ACS Div. Fuel Chem.
Preprints 13:2,88 (1969).
Stephens, G.R., and Hill, D.E., "Using Liquid Poultry Wastes in Woodlands."
Proc. Intl. Conf. on Land for Waste Management, Ottawa, Ont., Can. (1973).
1-77
-------
Stewart, et al., "Control of Water Pollution from Cropland-Vol. I."
EPA-600/2-75-026a and ARS-H-5-1 (November 1975).
Stickney, R.R., and Campbell, R.S., "Aufwuchs Accrual in Strip-Mine Lakes."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 44,2172 (1972).
Streeter, R.C., et al., "Reduction of Hydrous Ferric Oxide to a Magnetic Form
with Sodium Dithionite; Implications for Coal Mine Drainage Treatment." ACS
Div. Fuel Chem. Preprints, 15:2,13 (1971).
Streeter, R.C., "Reduction of Hydrous Ferric Oxide to a Magnetic Form with
Sodium Dithionite; Implications for Coal Mine Drainage Treatment." Ph.D.
thesis, Pennsylvania State Univ., College Park (1971).
Streeter, R.C., "Sulfide Treatment of Coal Mine Drainage." Third Symp.
Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 152 (1970).
Swain, H.A., Jr., and Rozelle, R.B., "Removal of Manganese from Mine Waters."
Proc. Fifth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, 357 (1974).
Tabita, R., et al., "Microbial Ecology of Mine Drainage." Third Symp. Coal
Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 94 (1970).
Temmel, P.M., "Case History on Acid Mine Drainage Control." Amer. Mining
Congr. Convention, Denver, Colo. (1973).
Thomas, G.W., and Barfield, B.J., "The Unreliability of Tile Effluent for
Monitoring Subsurface Nitrate-Nitrogen Losses from Soils." Jour. Environ.
Qual., 3,183 (1974).
Thomas, G.W., and Crutchfield, J.D., "Nitrate-Nitrogen and Phosphorus
Contents of Streams Draining Small Agricultural Watersheds in Kentucky."
Jour. Environ. Qual., 3,46 (1974).
Thomas, R.E., and Kerr, R.S., "Feasibility of Overland-Flow Treatment of
Feedlot Runoff." EPA 660/2-74-062*(December 1974).
To'lsma, J., and Johnson, A.N., "Use of Latex as a Soil Sealant to Control
Acid Mine Drainage." Water Poll. Control Res. Series, 14010 EFK 06/72,
EPA, Washington, D.C. (1972).
Truhlar, J.F., and Reed, L.A., "Occurrence of Pesticide Residues in Four
Streams Draining Land-Use Areas in Pennsylvania." NTIS Rept. No. PB-242
770/AS (June 1975).
Tuttle, J.H., Dugan, P.R., and Randies, C.I., "Microbial Sulfate Redaction
and its Potential Utility as an Acid Mine Water Pollution Abatement
Procedure." Appl. Microbiol., 17,297 (1969).
Tuttle, J.H., Dugan, P.R., MacMillan, C.B., and Randies, C.I., "Microbial
Dissimilatory Sulfur Cycle in Acid Mine Water." Jour. Bacteriol., 97,594
(1969).
1-78
-------
Tyco Laboratories, Inc., "Silicate Treatment for Acid Mine Drainage Preven-
tion." Rept. to EPA, Water Poll. Control Res. Ser. 14010 DL101/71 (1971).
Underwood, C., "Irrigating with Animal Wastes." Soil Conserv., 34:4,81
(1968); Land § Water Control, 11:10,9 (1969).
U.S. Dept. Interior, FWPCA, Ohio Basin Region, Anon., "Inventory of Coal
Mine Drainage Sources, Selected Areas, Upper Ohio River Basin." Work
Document No. 32 (1969).
U.S. Dept. of the Int., FWQA, Ohio Basin Region, Mine Drainage Unit, Anon.,
"Extent of Coal Mine Drainage Pollution: McMahon Creek Watershed, Ohio."
Work Document No. 34 (1970).
U.S. Dept. Int., Water Resources Scientific Information Center, "Acid Mine
Water-A Bibliography." Washington, D.C., WRSIC 75-202 (1975).
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Agriculture Research Service, "Control of Water
Pollution from Cropland; Volume I, User's Manual for Guideline Development;
Volume II, An Overview," EPA-600/2-75-026a and b, ARS-H-5-1 and 2. Vol. I.
Vol. II, June 1976.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, "Economic Impact of Controlling Surface Water
Runoff from Point Sources in U.S. Hog Production." Agricultural Economic
Rept. No. 263 (July 1974).
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, "Economic Impact
of Controlling Surface Water Runoff from U.S. Dairy Farms." Agricultural
Economic Rept. No. 260 (June 1974).
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, "Economic
Implications of Water Pollution Abatement in Family Farm Livestock
Production." Bull. ERS-508 (December 1972).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "EPA Enforcement, December 1972 to
November 1974-Air, Water, Pesticides." NTIS Rept. No. PB-244 948/6ST (1975).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "EPA Regulations for Small Farms
Examined." Conservation Report, National Wildlife Fed., Report No. 36,481
(October 1975).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Evaluation of Land Application
Systems." EPA-430/9-75-001 (March 1975).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Methods for Identifying and
Evaluating the Nature and Extent of Non-Point Sources of Pollutants."
EPA 430/9-73-014, Washipgton, D.C. (1973).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Feedlots: Point Source Category."
EPA 440/1-73-004 (August 1973).
1-79
-------
VanArdsdall, R.N., "Economic Impact of Controlling Surface Water Runoff
from Point Sources in U.S. Hog Production." Proc. Cornell Univ. Conf. on
Processing and Management of Agricultural Waste, 97 (March 1974).
Vanderholm, D.H., and Beer, C.E., "Use of Soil to Treat Anaerobic Lagoon
Effluent: Design and Operation of a Field Disposal System." Trans. Amer.
Soc. Agr. Engr., 13,562 (1970).
van der Leeden, F., et al., "Ground Water Pollution Problems in the
Northwestern United States." EPA-660/3-75-018 (May 1975).
Walker, J.P., et al., "Caged Layer Performance in Pens with Oxidation
Ditches and Liquid Manure Storage Tanks." Poultry Sci., 50,501 (1971).
Walsh, F., and Mitchell, R., "Biological Control of Acid Mine Pollution."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 44,763 (1972).
Walter, M.F., et al., "Movement and Transformation of Manurial Nitrogen
Through Soils at Low Temperatures." Proc. 1974 Cornell Agricultural Waste
Management Conf., Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N.Y., 175 (1974).
Walter, M.F., et al., "Predicting Vertical Movement of Manurial Nitrogen
in Soil." Trans. Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng., 18, 100 (January-February 1975).
Wayman, C.H., "Abatement Procedures Related to Acid Mine Drainage." Amer.
Inst. Chem. Engr. Meeting, Houston, Tex. (1969).
Weidner, R.B., Christiansen, A.G., Weibel, S.R., and Robeck, G.C., "Rural
Runoff as a Factor in Stream Pollution." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed.,
41,377 (1969).
Wellings, F.M., et al., "Demonstration of Virus in Groundwater after
Effluent Discharge onto Soil." Appl. Microbiol., 29,759 (1975).
Wells, D.M., et al., "Control of Water Pollution from Southwestern Cattle
Feedlots." Proc. 5th Intl. Conf. Water Poll. Res., Pergamon Press, London,
Eng. (1971).
Wentz, D.A., "Effect of Mine Drainage on the Quality of Streams in Colorado,
1971-72." Colo. Water Resour. Circ. No. 21, Colo. Water Conserv. Bd. (1974).
West, E.G., "Corrosion of Navigation Facilities." Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal
Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 344 (1972).
W. Va. Dept. Natural Resour., Div. Planning Development and Div. Reclamation,
"Drainage Handbook for Surface Mining." (Revised 1975).
W. Va. Dept. Natural Resour., Div. Water Resour., "West Virginia Acid Mine
Drainage Study in North Branch Potomac River Basin." (1974).
Wheeling Field Office, EPA, "Cooperative Mine Drainage Survey-Kiskiminetas
River Basin." Wheeling, W. Va. (1972).
1-80
-------
Whitesell, L.B., Jr;, et al., "Microbiological Treatment of Acid Mine
Drainage Waters." Continental Oil Co., Rept. to EPA, Water Poll. Control
Res. Ser. 14010 ENW09/71 (1971).
Whitesell, L.B.,Jr., et al., "The Microbiological Oxidation of Ferrous Iron
in Mine Drainage Water-Pilot Plant Studies." ACS 162nd Natl. Meeting,
Washington, D.C., September 12-17, 1971.
Whitesell, L.B., Jr., Huddleston, R.L., and Allred, R.C., "The Microbiological
Oxidation of Ferrous Iron in Mine Drainage Water." ACS Div. Fuel Chem.,
157th Natl. Meeting, Minneapolis, Minn. (1969).
Whitfield, E.J., and Zabban, W., "Saw Mill Run, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania,
Report on Sources of Acid Mine Drainage." Chester Engrs., Inc., Rept. to Pa.
Dept. Mines Mineral Ind. (1969).
Williams, H.R., "The Farm Role in Water Quality Management." Water and Sew.
Works, 115,463 (1968).
Wilmoth, R.C., and Hill, R.D., "Mine DRainage Pollution Control by Reverse
Osmosis." Soc. of Mining Engr. of the Amer. Inst. Mining Engr. Fall Meeting,
Birmingham, Ala. (1972).
Wilmoth, R.C., and Scott, R.B., "Neutralization of High Ferric Iron Acid
Mine Drainage Res. Preprints, Pittsburgh, Pa., 66 (1970).
Wilmoth, R.C., et al., "Treatment of Ferrous Iron Acid Mine Drainage by
Reverse Osmosis." Proc. Fourth Symp. Coal Mine Drainage Res. Preprints,
Pittsburgh, Pa., 115 (1972).
Wilmoth, R.C., "Limestone and Limestone-Lime Neutralization of Acid Mine
Drainage." Environ. Ptotection Technol. Ser., EPA-670/2-74-051, EPA, Natl.
Environ. Res. Cent. Cincinnati, Ohio (1974).
Wittmuss, H.D., "Disposal of Cattle Feedlot Runoff on Agricultural Land."
OWRT-A-029-NEB, Office Water Res. § Technol. (June 1975).
Witzel, S.A., Minshall, N., Nichols, M.S., and Wilke, J., "Surface Runoff
and Nutrient Losses of Finnimore Watersheds." Trans. Amer. Soc. Agr. Engr.,
12:3,338 (1969).
Witzel, S.A., Wilke, J.T., and Schmitz, F.L., "Witschwitz Runoff Sampler."
Trans. Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng., 11:6,883 (1968).
Wood, G.W., et al., "Faunal Responses to Spray Irrigation of Chlorinated
Sewage Effluent." OWRT-B-059-PA(5), Office of Water Res. § Technol.
(June 1975).
Young, C.E., "Current Research on Land Application of Wastewater and Sludge."
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Economic Res. Serv. (Nov. 1975).
1-81
-------
Young, G.K., et al., "Simulation and Optimization of Acid Mine Drainage
Abatement Alternatives." Water Resources Engr., Inc., Rept. to U.S. Army
Corps of Engr.; NTIS AD-757-782 (1973).
Yu, S.L., et al., "Assessing Unrecorded Organic Pollution from Agricultural
Urban and Wooded Lands." Water Res. (G.B.), 9,849 (1975).
Zaval, F.J., and Robins, J.D., "Revegetation Augmentation by Reuse of
Treated Active Surface Mine Drainage." EPA-R2-72-119 (November 1972).
Zaval, F.J., and Robins, J.D., "Water Infiltration Control to Achieve Mine
Water Pollution Control-A Feasibility Study." Environ. Protection Technol.
Ser., EPA-R2-73-142, EPA, Washington, D.C. (1973).
Zwarman, P.J., et al., "Rates of Water Infiltration Resulting from Applica-
tion of Dairy Manure." Proc. Cornell Univ. Conf. on Agr. Waste Mgmt., 263
(1970).
Zwerman, P.J., et al., "Surface Runoff Nutrient Losses from Various Land
Disposal Systems for Dairy Manure." Proc. Cornell Agr. Waste Mgmt. Conf.,
Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N.Y. (1972).
"Agricultural Activities National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System."
40 CFR Pts. 124,125, Fed. Reg. Vol. 41, No. 36 (February 1976).
"Methods § Practices for Controlling Water Pollution from Agricultural
Nonpoint Sources." EPA 430/9-73-015 (October 1973)
Water Infiltration Control to Achieve Mine Water Pollution Control
1-82
-------
Rainfall/Runoff Relationships
Adams, B. J., and Gemmell, R. S., "Mean Estimate Deficiencies in Water
Quality Studies," Jour. Hdraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Eng., 101,
989 (1975).
Anier. Public Works Assoc. and National Science Foundation, Grant Number
Dl-38422, "Dynamic Technology Transfer and Utilization: The Key to
Progressive Public Works Management, (1974).
Amer. Public Works Assoc., "Problems of Comb. Sewer Facilities and
Overflows," WPCRS WP 20-11, (1967).
Amy, G., et al., "Water Quality Management Planning for Urban Runoff," EPA,
Washington, D. C., EPA-440/9-75-004 (1974).
Barton, B. M. J., "Synthetic Monthly Runoff Records for Ungauged British
Catchments," Jour. Inst. Water Eng., 27:3, 149 (May 1973); (Abs.) Mun.
Technol. Bull., EPA, Washington, D. C. 0223 (Sept 1973).
Becker, C. C., et al., "Approaches to Stormwater Management," Hittman
Assoc., Columbia, Md., Report No. OWRR-C-4140, 9025, 1 (Nov 1973); (Abs.)
Selected Water Res. Abs., Dept. of the Int., 7:9, 54 (1974).
Ber. Abwassertech. Ver., "Influence of the Local Precipitation Quantity on
the Loading of Water Bodies with Mixed Water," 26, 163 (1973).
Bishop, H. F., "A Master Planning Methodology for Urban Drainage," Amer.
Soc. Civil Engr., Reprint No. 187, Natl. Water Res. Eng. meeting, Washington,
D. C., (Jan 29-Feb 2, 1973); (Abs.) Water Res. Sci. Info. Center, U. S.
Dept. of the Int., Acct. No. W73-120Q6 (1973).
Bishop, H. F., "Master Planning for Urban Drainage," Jour. Hydraul. Div.,
Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100, 189 (1974).
Bhutani, J., et al., "Impacts of Hydrologic Modification on Water Quality,"
EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-600/2-75-007 (1975).
Blackwood, H. R., "Runoff Water Quality of Three Tuscan Watersheds," Office
of Water Research Tech. (OWRT), Dept. of the Int., NTIS No. PB 240 287 (1975),
Bleek, L., "Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Procedures in Urban Hydrology," Paper
in proceedings of the National Symposium on Urban Hydrology and Sediment
Control, Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky. (1975).
1-83
-------
Blume, 0. H., and Barney, K. P., Jr., "Computer's Master Plan Signals Sewer
Problems Before They Start," Amer. City, 88:5, 96 (1973).
Board of Advising Engineers for the French Government, "A Study of Storm
Overflows," (November 1972).
Bowers, C. E., et al., "Computer Programs in Hydrology," Minnesota Univ.,
Minneapolis, WRCC Bull. 44 W72-07520, OWRR-A-20-Minn., 4 (Jan 1972); (Abs.)
Govt. Rept. Announce, 72, 12 (1973).
Brandstetter, A., "Assessment of Mathematical Models for Storm and Combined
Sewer Management," EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, Final Report at Printer, Contract
No. 68-03-0251 (1975).
Brandstetter, A., "Comparative Analysis of Urban Stormwater Models," Paper
in proc. for "A Short Course: Applications to Stormwater Management Models,"
Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst, and EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (Aug 1974).
Brandstetter, A., et al., "A Mathematical Model for Optimum Design and
Control of Metropolitan Wastewater Management Systems," Pacific Northwest
Lab., Battelle Memorial Inst., Richland, Wash. (1973).
Brandyopadhyay, M., and Bose, B., "A Non-linear Hyrologic Model for Calcutta
Town System," Paper in proceedings of The National Symposium on Urban
Hydrology and Sediment Control, Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky. (1975).
Bras, R. L., and Perkins, F. E., "Effects of Urbanization on Catchment
Response," Jour; Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Eng., 101, 451 (1975).
Brater, E. F., and Sherrill, J. P., "Rainfall-Runoff Relations on Urban and
Rural Areas," EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA 670/2-75-041 (1975).
Brater, E. F., et al., "Seasonal Effects in Flood Synthesis," Water
Resources Res., 10, 441 (1974).
Brown, J. W., et al., "Models and Methods Applicable to Corps of Engineers
Urban Studies," U. S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Miss., NTIS No. AD-876-516 (1974).
Bureau of Sanitary Engineering, Portland, Ore., Combined Sewer Overflow
Section, "Portland's Combined Sewer Overflows," (1972).
Carrigan, P. H., "Calibration of U. S. Geological Survey Rainfall/Runoff
Model for Peak Flow Synthesis - Natural Basins," Geological Survey, Reston,
Va., Water Resources Div.; (Abs.) Govt. Rept. Announce, Dept. of Comm.,
74:6, 77 (1974).
Chan, M. L., "Studies in the Analysis of Metropolitan Water Resources
Systems, Volume X - Optimal Real-Time Control of Urban Stormwater Drainage,"
Cornell Univ., Water Resources and Marine Sciences Center, Tech. Rept. No.
87, (1974).
1-84
-------
Chen, C. K., ana Saxton, W. W., "Combined Wastewater Overflows," Jour.
Water Poll. Control Fed., 45, 434, (1973).
Chien, J., and Saigal, K. K., "Urban Runoff by Linearized Subhydrographic
Method," Jour. Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100, 1141
(1974); (Abs.) Mun. Technol. Bull., Washington, D. C., 2, 8, 1 (1974).
Chow, V. T., and Ben-Zvi, A., "The Illinois Hydrodynamic Watershed Model
III," Civil Eng. Studies, Hydraulic Eng. Series, No. 26, Dept. of Civil
Engr., Univ. of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, UILU-ENG-73-2016 (1973).
Chun, M. J., et al., "Wastewater Effluents and Surface Runoff Quality,"
Hawaii Univ. Water Resources Res. Center Tech. Rept. n63 (1972); (Abs)
Eng. Index, 11, 2, 282 (1973).
Churchill, D. H., "Development of a Flood and Pollution Control Plan for
the Chicago Area: Computer Simulation Programs," A Final Rpt. on Pt. 2,
prepared by Dept. of Public Works, Chicago, 111. (Dec 1972); (Abs.) Govt.
Rept. Announce., Dept. of Comm, NTIS No. PB-228 645/8GA (1974).
Gity of Overton, Texas Comprehensive Plan: 1972-1992 Vol. II," Texas Dept.
of Community Affairs, Austin Div. of Comprehensive Planning (April 1973);
(Abs.) Govt. Rept. Announce., Dept of Comm., 74, 1, 111 (1974).
Clark, G. G., and Malina, J. F., "Evaluation of Loading on Waterway Quality
Attributable to Non-Point Sources," Center for Research of Water Resources,
Texas Univ., CRWR-102 (Aug 1973); (Abs.) Eng. Index, 2, 506 (1974).
Colston, N. V., Jr., "Characterization of Urban Land Runoff," Paper presented
at the Amer. Soc. Civil Engr. Natl. Water Resources Conf. in Los Angels,
Calif. (Jan 1974).
Comptroller General of the U. S., "Report to the Congress: Need to Control
Discharges Carrying Both Sewage and Storm Runoff," EPA, B-166506 (March 1973).
Condon, F. J., "Considerations in Characterization of Urban Runoff for PL
92-500 Section 208 Planning," Office of Research and Development, EPA,
Washington, D. C. (1975).
Condon, F. J., "Methods of Assessment of Non-Point Runoff Pollution,"
Diplomate of the Amer. Acad. Environ. Engr., 8:5, 4 (1973).
Consoer, Townsend § Assoc., Consulting Engrs., "Humboldt Avenue Pollution
Abatement Demonstration Project," EPA, Washington and Milwuakee Dept. of
Public Works, Draft Rept. 11020 FAU (1973).
Cox, L. M., and Zuzel, J. F., "Forecasting Runoff from Universal Surface
Gage Snowmelt Measurements," Jour, of Soil § Water Cons., 28:3, 134 (1973).
Crawford, N. H., "Computer Simulation of Design Criteria for Urban Flow
Storage Systems," Hydrocomp, Inc., Palo Alto, Calif., OWRR-C-3235, 3704, 1,
(1973). Selected Water Res. Abs., U. S. Dept. of the Int., 6, 12 (1973).
1-85
-------
Cunge, J. A., "Evaluation Problem of Stormwater Routing Mathematical
Models," Water Res., 8, 1083 (1974).
Davis, A. L., and O'Neel, W. G., "Sam: A Sewer System Model for Public
Works Engineers," Public Works, 106:10, 78 (1975).
Davis, D. R., et al., "A Decision-Theoretic Approach to Uncertainty in the
Return Period of Maximum Flow Volumes Using Rainfall Data," Depts. of Hydrology
and Water Resources and Systems and Industrial Eng., Univ. of Arizona,
Tucson (1974).
Davis, D. R., et al., "Uncertainty in the Return Period of Maximum Events:
A Bayesian Approach." Paper presented at the International Symposium on
Uncertainties in Hydrologic and Water Resource Systems, Univ. of Arizona,
Tucson (1974).
Davis, P. L. and Borchardt, F., "Comb. Sewer Overflow Abatement Plan,"
Des Moines, Iowa, EPA-R2-73-170, (Apr 1974).
Davis, W. S., and Bain, A. T., "Watershed Management in Montgomery County,
Maryland. A Case Study," Paper in proceedings of the National Symposium
on Urban Hydrology and Sediment Control, Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky.
(1975).
Debo, T. N., "Survey and Analysis of Urban Drainage Ordinances and a
Recommended Model Ordinance," Georgia Environmental Resource Center,
Atlanta, Ga., Rept. No. ERC0475, NTIS No. PB 240 817 (1975).
Delleur, S. W., et al., "On Modeling the Runoff Process in Urban Areas,"
Paper in the proceedings of The National Symposium on Urban Hydrology and
Sediment Control, Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky. (1975).
Dempter, G. R., "Effects of Urbanization on Floods in the Dallas, Texas,
Metropolitan Area," Geological Survey, Austin, Tex.; (Abs.) Selected Water
Res. Abs., Dept. of the Int. 7:9, 52 (1974).
Denver Regional Council of Governments, Colo., "Urban Storm Drainage
and Flood Control in the Denver Region - Final Report." (Aug. 1972).
Diskin, M. H., and Boneh, A., "Determination of Optimal Kernels for
Second-Order Stationary Surface Runoff-Systems," Water Resources Res.,
9:2, 311 (1973); Selected Water Res. Abs., 6, 13 (1973).
Div. of Water Resources, "Urban Runoff Characteristics," WPCRS 11024 DQU
10/70 (Oct 1970).
Dorsch Consult. Limited, Toronto, Canada, "Pollution of Receiving Water
Bodies from Combined and Storm Sewer Systems," (June 1973).
Dracup, J. A., et al., "Synthesis and Evaluation of Urban Regional Hydrologic
Rainfall-Runoff Criteria," Environ. Dynamics, Los Angeles, Calif., OWRR-C-
2182, 3407, 1 (Feb 1973); Selected Water Res. Abs., U. S. Dept of the Int.,
6, 17 (1973).
1-86
-------
Duncan and Jones, and Yoder-Trotter-Orlob and Assoc., prepared for San
Diego County Comprehensive Planning Org., Tech Rept., HUD P-384 (g),
"Initial Water, Sewerage and Flood Control Plan," (June 1972).
Durban, T. J., "Selected Effects of Suburban Development on Runoff in
South Coastal California," Paper in proceedings of the National Symposium
on Urban Hydrology and Sediment Control, Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky
(1975).
Eagleson, P. S., and Goodspeed, M. J., "Linear Systems Techniques Applied
to Hydrologic Data Analysis and Instrument Evaluation: A Case Study on Data
from the Alice Springs Area," Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial
Research Organization, Canberra, Austrailia; (Abs.) Selected Water Res.
Abs., Dept of the Int., 7:9, 1 (1974).
Elliot, J. A., et al., "Urban Systems Engineering Demonstration Program.
Vol. I," For the Gulfport Regional Planning Comm. (1972); Selected Water
Resources Abs., U. S. Dept of the Int., 6, 19 (1973).
Engineering Outlook, "Rain Drain," Univ of Illinois Bulletin, College of
Engineering, 15:8, 1 (April 1974).
Envirogenics Co., "Urban Storm Runoff § Combin. Sewer Overflow Pollution,"
WPCRS 11024 FKM 12/71 (Dec 1971).
Escrit, L. B., "Coordination of British and American Methods of Estimating
Rainfall Runoff to Sewers," Survey Local Govt. Technol. (G. B.), 141:4220,
40 (April 1973); (Abs.) Eng. Index, 11, 7 (1973).
Eshelman, P. W., and Blase, R. A., "A Thermal Wave Flowmeter for Measuring
Combined Sewer Flows," EPA, Washington, DC, EPA R2-73-145 (1973).
Epsey, W. H., "Urban Flood Frequency Characteristics," Jour. Hydraul. Div.,
Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100, 279 (1974).
Everhart, R. C., "New Town Planned Around Environmental Aspects," Civil
Eng., 43:9, 69 (1973).
Fahlbusch, F., et al., "Hydrological Reservoir Design Using Basic Systems
Theory Techniques," Water Power Intl. Jour, for Hydroelectric Develop.,
25:1, 18 (1973); (Abs.) Water Res. Sci. Info. Center, U. S. Dept. of the
Int., Ace. No. W73-07377 (1973).
Falk, J., and Niemczynowicz, S., "Runoff from Hardened Earth," Vatten (Swed.),
3, 231 (1975).
Field, R., Comb. Sewer Overflow Seminar Papers, EPA-670/2-73-077 (Nov 1973).
Field, R., "Combined Sewer Overflows," Civil Eng., 43:2, 57 (1973).
Field, R., "Coping with Urban Runoff in the United States," Water Res. (G. B.)
9 (1975).
1-87
-------
Field, R., "Countermeasures for Pollution from Overflows," The State of The
Art, EPA-670/2-74-090 (Dec 1974).
Field, R., Curtis, J., et al., "Urban Runoff and Combined Sewer Overflow,"
Journal WPCF (June 1976).
Field, R., et al., "Urban Runoff Pollution Control Program Overview: FY 76,"
Storm and Combined Sewer Section, Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, EPA, Edison, NJ (1975).
Field, R., "Introduction to Applications of Stormwater Management Models,"
Paper in proc. for "A Short Course: Applications to Stormwater Management
Models," Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst, and EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (Aug
1974).
Field, R., "Urban Runoff Must be Controlled," Baltimore Engineer (Mar 1975).
Fogel, H. M., et al., "Predicting the Hydrologic Effects of Land Modifications,"
Paper presented at the 1973 Annual Meeting of the Amer. Soc. of Agric. Eng.,
Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, Paper No. 73-250 (June 1973).
Franklin Inst. Res. Lab, "Municipal Technology Bulletin," EPA, Washington,
D. C., 1 (1973).
Franklin Inst. Res. Lab, "Municipal Technology Bulletin," EPA, Washington,
D. C., 2 (1974).
Gangopadhyay, P., and Brylinsky, M., "Simulation of Urban Water and Waste
Water System," Canplan Consult. Limited, Halifax, Nova Scotia; (Abs.) Eng.
Index, 7, 45502 (1974).
Ganneau, M., "The Sewers of Paris," Travaux (Fr.), 455, 40 (1973); (Abs.)
Mun. Technol. Bull., EPA, Washington, C. C., (June 1973).
George, A. I., "Pollution of Karst Aquifers," Water Well Jour., 27:8, 28
(1973); (Abs.) Water Res. Sci. Info. Center, U. S. Dept. of the Int.,
Ace. No. W73-13203.
Giege, F. W., "Simulation of Urban Runoff Pollution Using a Modified
Unit Hydrograph and a Nonsteady Routing Method," Paper in proceedings of
the National Symposium on Urban Hydrology and Sediment Control, Univ. of
Kentucky, Lexington, Ky. (1975).
Govt. Rept. Announce, Dept of Comm., "Water/Sewer/Drainage Element of the
Comprehensive Plan Champaign County, Illinois," 74:4, 146 (1974).
Graham, P. H., et al., "Estimatation of Imperviousness and Specific Curb
Length for Forecasting Stormwater Quality and Quantity," Jour. Water Poll.
Control Fed., 46, 717 (1974).
Grigg, N. S., and Labadie, J. W., "Computing the Big Picture," Water §
Wastes Eng., 12:5, 37 (1975).
1-88
-------
Grigg, N. S., et al., "Metropolitan Water Intelligence Systems - Completion
II," Colorado State Univ., Dept. of Civil Engr., OWRR-C-3105 (1973).
Griggs, N. S., et al., "Metropolitan Water Intelligence Systems Completion
Report - Phase II," U. S. Dept of the Int. Office of Water Res., 14-31-0001-
3685 (June 1973).
Grigg, N. S., et al., "Planning and Wastewater Management of a Combined
Sewer System in San Francisco," Dept. of Civil Eng., Colorado State Univ.,
Fort Collins, Metropolitan Water Intelligence System, OWRR No. 4172, 9028,
2 (1973); (Abs.) Mun. Technol. Bull., Washington, D. C., 1:1, 3, (1973).
Grigg, N. S., et al., "Planning and Wastewater Management of a Combined Sewer
System in San Francisco," Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, OWRR No. W74-
10413 (1974).
Grigg, N. S., "Evaluation and Implementation of Urban Drainage Projects,"
Jour. Urban Planning, Development, Div., Amer. Soc. Civil Eng., 101, 93
(1975).
Haan, C. T., "Comparison of Methods for Developing Urban Runoff Hydrographs,"
Paper in proceedings of The Nation Symposium on Urban Hydrology and
Sediment Control, Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky. (1975).
Hallsworth, E. G., and Adams, W. A., "The Heavy Metal Content of Rainfall
in the East Midlands," Environ. Poll. (G. B.) 4, 231 (1973).
Hamm, D. W., et al., "Statistical Analysis of Hydrograph Characteristics
for Small Urban Watersheds," Tractor, Inc., Austin, Tex.; (Abs.) Selected
Water Res. Abs., Dept of the Int. 7:9, 1 (May 1974).
Hampton, B. B., "Annual Compilation and Analysis of Hydrologic Data for
Urban Studies in the Fort Worth, Texas Metropolitan Area, 1971," Geol.
Surv. Texas District Open-File Rept. (1973).
Hayes, Seay, et al., "Engineering Investigation of Sewer Overflow Problems,"
WPCRS 11024 DMS 5/70 (May 1970)
Heald, E. J., and Tabb, D. C., "Applicability of the Interceptor Waterway
Concept to the Rookery Bay Area," Prepared by Tropical Bioindustries
Development Co., South Miami, Fla.; (Abs.) Govt. Rept. Announce, Dept of
Comm., 5, 124, (1974).
Heany, J. P., et al., "Methodology for Evaluating the Cost of Urban
Stormwater Quality Management," Paper in proceedings of Applications of
Stormwater Management Models, Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst, Mass.;
EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (1975).
Heaney, J. P., et al., "Nationwide Evaluation of Combined Sewer Overflows
and Urban Stormwater Discharges, Volume II: Cost Assessment and Impacts,"
University of Florida (May 1976).
1-89
-------
Heaney, J. P., et al., "Role of Models in Urban Stormwater Management
Planning," Paper in proceedings of Applications of Stormwater Management
Models, Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst, Mass.; EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (1975),
Heaney, J. P., et al., "Storm Water Management Model: Refinements, Testing
and Decision-Making," Dept of Environ. Eng. Sci., Univ. of Florida, Gaines-
ville, EPA and Lancaster, Pa., 11023 GSC (June 1973).
Heaney, J. P., et al., "Stormwater Management Modeling and Decision-Making,"
EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-75-022 (1975).
Heeps, D. P., and Mein, R. G., "Independent Comparison of Three Urban
Runoff Models," Jour. Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100,
995, (1974).
Heerdegen, R. G., "The Effects of Physiography and Climate on Unit Hydro-
graphs," M. S. Thesis, Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, Pa.
(1973); (Abs.) Govt. Rept. Announcement, Dept. of Comm., NTIS No. PB 240
891/2 Ga. (1975).
Heitzenrater, P., "Final Report - National Assessment of Water Pollution
From Non-Point Sources," MRI Project No. 3922-C Appendix, Midwest Research
Report (1975).
Hellwig, D. H. R., "Survey of Rain Run-Off Harvesting," S. African Jour.
of Sci., 69:3, 77 (1973).
Henningson, Durham § Richardson, Inc., "Combined Sewer Overflow Abatement
Plan, Des Moines, Iowa," EPA, Washington, D. C., 11024 FEJ (1973).
Hergert, L., "Urban Runoff Quality and Modeling Study," M. S. Thesis, Univ.
of Nebraska, Dept. of Civil Eng., Lincoln, Neb. (1975).
Hickok, E. A., and Associates, "Stormwater Impact Investigation for the
Metropolitan Council," Wayzata, Minn. (1973).
*
Holub, H., "Some Legal Problems of Urban Runoff," "Hydrology and Water
Resources in Arizona and the Southwest," 2, Proc., 1972 meetings of the
Arizona Section, Amer. Water Resources Assn., and the Hydrology Section,
Arizona Acad. Sci., May 5-6 (1972); Selected Water Res. Abs., U. S. Dept.
of the Int., 6:17, 106 (1973).
Horner, R. W., et al., "London's Stormwater Quantity and Quality," Paper
presented at 48th Annual Conference of the Water Poll. Control Fed., Miami
Beach, Fla. (1975).
Howard, W. T., and Buller, R. D., "The Relationship Between Water Quality
and Non-Point Discharges from Unsewered Development," Paper presented
at Symposium on Urbanization and Water Quality Control, Rutgers Univ.,
New Brunswick, N.J. (1975).
1-90
-------
Huber, W. C., et al., "The EPA Stormwater Management Model: A Current
Overview," In Combined Sewer Overflow Seminar Papers, EPA and New York
State Dept. of Conservation, EPA-670/2-73-077 (Sept 1973).
Huber, W. C., Heaney, J. P., et al., "Establishment of an Urban Rainfall -
Runoff Data Base Interim Report, Phase I" University of Flordia (Mar 1975).
Huber, W. C., "Modeling for Stormwater Strategies," Reporter, American
Public Works Association, 4, 5, (1975).
Huber, W. C., "Use of Modeling for Planning Storm Water Strategies," Paper
presented at 1974 International Public Works Congress and Equipment Show,
Toronto, Canada (Sept 1974).
Huff, F. A., "Interim Report of METRO-MEX Studies: 1971-1973," Illinois
State Water Survey, Urbana, 111. (1974).
Huff, F. A., "Surface Water Studies," Illinois State Water Survey Urbana,
111. (1975).
Hydrologic Engineering Center, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, "Urban
Runoff: Storage, Treatment, and Overflow Model Storm," Program No.
723-58-22520 (Sept 1973).
Jens, S. W., and Reitz, H. M., "Some Notes on Changing Approaches to Urban
Stormwater Management," Paper in proceedings of the National Symposium on
Urban Hydrology and Sediment Control, Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (1975).
Jewell, T. K., et al., "Application and Testing of the EPS Stormwater
Management Model to Greenfield, Massachusetts," Paper in proc. for "A
Short Course: Application to Stormwater Management Models," Univ. of
Massachusetts, Amherst, and EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (Aug 1974).
Johnson, S. L., and Sayre, D. M., "Effects of Urbanization on Floods in
the Houston, Texas, Metropolitan Area, Geological Survey, Austin, Texas"
Water Resources Inves. Rept. 3-73 (1973).
Karubian, J. F., "Polluted Groundwater: Estimating the Effects of Man's
Activities," EPA-680/4-74-002 (July 1974).
Kibler, D. E., and Roesner, L. A., "The Stormwater Model for Computer
Simulation of Urban Runoff Quantity and Quality in a Combined Sewer
System," Water Resources Engineers, Walnut Creek, Calif. (1975).
Killman, E. T. Associates, Inc. for Middlesex County Planning Board, "Storm
Drainage Plan and Program for Middlesex County, New Jersey," (Aug 1972).
Kirshen, P. H., and Marks, D. H., "Screening Model for Storm Water Control,"
Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100, 807 (1974).
Kirshen, P. H., et al., "Mathematical Model for Screening Storm Water Control
Alternatives," Rept. No. 157, EPA, MIT, and U. S. Dept. of the Int., DSR 72943
(Oct 1972).
1-91
-------
Kisiel, I. T., et al., "Turbulence in Shallow Water Flow Under Rainfall,"
Jour. Mech. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, Paper 9535 (Feb
1973); (Abs.) Water Res. Sci. Info. Center, U. S. Dept. of the Int.,
Ace. No. W73-07404 (1973).
Knapp, G. L., and Glasby, J. P., "Urban Hydrology - A Selected Bibliography
with Abstracts," Geol. Surv. Water Resources Inves. 3-72 (1972); Selected
Water Resources Abs., U. S. Dept. of the Int., 6:13, 41 (1973).
Krauth, K., "The Total Runoff Coefficient in Mixed Sewer Systems," Gas-u
Wasserfach, Wasser/Abwasser (Ger.), 113:7, 329 (1973); (Abs.) Mun. Technol.
Bull., EPA, Washington, D. C., 0014 (Jan 1973).
Krauth, K., "Water Decontamination Through Rainwater in Storm Water
Retention Tanks," Wasserwirtschaft (Ger.), 63:2, 42 (1973); (Abs.), Mun.
Tech. Bull., EPA, Washington, D. C., 0125 (May 1973).
Kupriyanov, V. V., and Skakalskiy, B. G., "Urbanization and its Effects
on Regimen and Quality of Surface Waters," Gosudarstvennyi Gidrologicheskii
Institut, Leningrad, U.S.S.R.; Selected Water Res. Abs.; Dept. of the
Int., 7:3, 41 (1974).
Labadie, J. W., et al., "Automatic Control of Large-Scale Combined Sewer
Systems," Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Eng., 101, 27
(1975).
Labadie, J. W., "Optimization Techniques for Minimization of Combined Sewer
Overflows," Technical Water Intelligence Systems, Colorado State Univ.,
Fort Collins, Tr No 11 (1973).
Lager, J. A., "Controls Dry Up Wet Weather Pollution," Water § Wastes Eng.,
11:9, 35 (1974).
Lager, J. A., and Smith, W. G., "Urban Stormwater Management and Technology:
An Assessment," EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-74-040 (1974).
Lager, J. A., and Smith, W. G., "Urban Stormwater Management and Technology:
An Assessment," EPA, Washington, D. C., Draft Report, Contract No. 68-03-0179.
Lager, J. A., and Torno, H., "Research Needs for Automation of Wastewater
Collection Systems," Illinois State Water Survey, Urbana, 111. (1974).
Lager, J. A., "A Simplified Stormwater Management Model for Planning,"
Paper in proceedings of Applications of Stormwater Management Models, Univ.
of Massachusetts, Amherst, Mass., and EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (1975).
Lager, J. A., "Criteria for Selection of Stormwater Management Management
Models - Planning vs. Design," Paper in proceedings of Applications of
Stormwater Management Models, Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst, Mass., and
EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (1975).
1-92
-------
Lager, J. A., "Impact of CSO/SWD on Water quality," Paper presented at
Urban Stormwater Management Seminars at Atlanta, Ga. and Denver, Colo.;
EPA, Washington, D. C. (1975).
LaGrega, M. D., and Keenan, J. D., "Characterization of Water Quality from
Combined Sewer Discharges," Paper presented at Symposium on Urbanization
and Water Quality Control, Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. (1975).
Langford, K. J., and Turner, A. K., "An Experimental Study of the Application
of Kinematic-Wave Theory to Overland Flow," Jour. Hydrol., 18:2, 125 (1973);
(Abs.) Water Res. Sci. Info. Center, U. S. Dept of the Int., Ace. No.
W73-07045 (1973).
Lanyon, R. F., and Jackson, J. P., "A Streamflow Model for Metropolitan
Planning and Design," Amer. Soc. Civil Engr. Urban Water Resources Research
Program, Tech. Memo. No. 20 (1974).
Lautrich, R., German Patent 1,484,877 (Feb. 22, 1973); (Abs.) Mun. Technol.
Bull., EPA, Washington, D. C. 0153 (June 1973).
Leary, R. D., and Lundy, D. T., "Lake Michigan Gets Help," Water § Wastes
Eng., 10:9, 64 (1973).
Lee, B. H., "A Method of Predicting Environmental Runoff Sequences," Ph.D.,
Thesis, Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, Pa. (1973); (Abs.) Govt.
Rept. Announcement, Dept. of Comm., NTIS No. Pb 240 891/2 Ga. (1975).
Leiser, C. P., "Computer Management of a Combined Sewer System," EPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-74-022 (1974).
Libbey, C. J., and Litsky, W., "What Is the Role of Flood Flows in the
Pollution of the Connecticut River and Its Amelioration," Mass. Water
Resources Res. Center Publ. No. 25, OWRRC-2169, No. 3377, 1 (1973).
Lindholm, 0. G., "Factors Affecting the Performance of Combined Versus
Separate Sewer Systems," Paper in proc. for the 7th Intl. Conf. of the
Intl. Assn. on Water Poll. Res., Paris, France (Sept 1974).
Limerinos, J. T., "Estimating Water Loss and Direct Runoff from Storm
Rainfall by the Use of the Infiltrometer," Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept.
(Feb. 20, 1973); Selected Water Res. Abs., U. S. Dept. of the Int. 6, 19
(1973).
Linsley, R., and Crawford, N., "Continuous Simulation Models in Urban
Hydrology," Geophysical Res. Letters, 1:1, 59 (1974); (Abs.) Mun. Technol.
Bull., Washington, D. C., 2:1, 7 (1974).
Li, R. M., et al., "Nonlinear Wave Approximation for Water Routing," Water
Resources Res., 11:2, 24 (1975).
1-93
-------
Linsley, R. K., "A Manual on Collection of Hydrologic Data for Urban
Drainage Design," Hydrocomp, Inc., Palo Alto, Calif. (March 1973); (Abs.)
Water Res. Sci. Info. Center, U. S. Dept. of the Int., Ace. No. W73-0780
(1973).
Longdong, D., "Pollution of Water by Storm Sewerage Overflows," Gewass.
Abwass. (Ger.), 10, 65 (1973).
Lowing, M. J., and Newson, M. D., "Flood Event Data Collation," Water £
Water Eng. (G. B.), 77:925, 91 (March 1973).
Lumb, A. M., and James, L. D., "Flood Hydrograph Simulation for Urban
Flood Frequency Analysis: Application to a Watershed," Paper in proceedings
of The National Symposium on Urban Hydrology and Sediment Control, Univ.
of Kentucky, Ky. (1975).
Lumb, A. M., and James, L. D., "Flood Hydrograph Simulation for Urban
Flood Frequency Analysis: The Model." Paper in proceedings of the National
Symposium on Urban Hydrology and Sediment Control, Univ. of Kentucky,
Lexington, Ky. (1975).
Lumb, A. M., "UROS4: Urban Flood Simulation Model Part I. Documentation
and Users Manual," Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Ga., NTIS No.
PB 242 936 (1975).
Main, R. G., et al., "Simple Nonlinear Model for Flood Estimation," Jour.
Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Eng., 100, 1507 (1974).
Mallory, C. W., "The Beneficial Use of Storm Water," EPA-R2-73-139, (Jan 1973)
Mandeville, A. N., and O'Donnell, T., "Introduction of Time Variance to
Linear Conceptual Catchment Models," Water Resources Res., 9:2, 298 (1973);
Selected Water Res. Abs., U. S. Dept of the Int., 6:13, 1 (1973).
Maniak, U., "The Uncertainties in Search of Design Precipitation as Input
Data for Rainfall-Runoff Models," Wasser u. Boden (Ger.) 24:10, 299 (1972);
(Abs.) Mun. Technol. Bull., EPA, Washington, D. C., 0029 (Feb. 1973).
Manning, M. J., "Urban Stormwater Pollutant Loadings," Paper presented at
2nd Annual National Conference on Environmental Engineering Research,
Development and Design, Amer. Soc. Civil Eng., and Univ. of Florida,
Gainesville, Fla. (1975).
Marsalek, J., "Instrumentation for Field Studies of Urban Runoff," Environ-
ment Canada, Ottawa, Canada (1975).
Marsalek, J., "Sampling Techniques in Urban Runoff Quality Studies," Water
Quality Parameters, ASTM, STP 573, Amer. Soc. Testing Materials (1975).
McCarty, J. E., "Oakland Maps Program to Combat Sewer Infiltration," Pub.
Works, 104:2, 82 (1973).
1-94
-------
McCuen, R. H., and Peper, H. W., "Hydrologic Impact of Planned Unit
Developments," Jour. Urban Planning, Development Div., Amer. Soc. Civil
Engineers, 101, 93 (1975).
McManis, G., "The Application of Binary Tree Structures to Hydrologic
Network Simulators," M.S. Thesis, Nebraska Univ., Lincoln, Neb. (1972);
(Abs.) Govt. Rept. Announce., Dept. of Comm. NTIS No. PB-228 698 (1974).
McPherson, M. B., and Sheider, W. J., "Problems in Modeling Urban Watersheds,"
Water Resources Res., 10, 434 (1974).
McPherson, M. B., "Better Design of Stormwater Drainage Systems," Paper
in proc. for "A Short Course: Applications to Stormwater Management Models,"
Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst, and EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (Aug 1974).
McPherson, M. B., "Innovation: A Case Study," Amer. Soc. Civil Engr. Urban
Water Resources Research Program Tech. Memo No. 21 (1974).
McPherson, M. B., "Need for Metropolitan Balance Inventories," Jour.
Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, HY 10, 100781 (1973).
McPherson, M. B., "Regional Earth Science Information in Local Water
Management," Amer. Soc. Civil Eng. Urban Water Resources Research Program
(1975).
McPherson, M. B., "Special Characteristics of Hydrologic Processes in Urban
Areas," Amer. Soc. Civil Eng. Urban Water Resources Research Program (1974).
McPherson, M. B., "Urban Hydrological Modeling and Catchment Research in
the U.S.A.," Amer. Soc. Civil Eng. Urban Water Resources Research Program
(1975).
McPherson, M. B., "Urban Runoff," Amer. Soc. Civil Eng., Urban Water
Resources Research Program, Tech. Memo. No. 18 (1972); Selected Water
Resources Abs., 6:1, 22 (1973).
Meinholz, T. L., et al., "An application of the SWMM," Paper presented at
the National Symposium on Urban Rainfall and Runoff and Sediment Control,
Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington (July 1974).
Mein, R. G., and Larson, C. L., "Modeling Infiltration During a Steady Rain,"
Water Resources Res., 9:2, 384 (1973).
Meredith, D. D., et al., "Chlorides in Lake Erie Basin," Office of Water
Research Tech. (OWRT), Dept. of the Int., NTIS No. PB 239 964 (1975).
Metcalf § Eddy, Inc., "Storm Water Problems § Control in Sanitary Sewers,"
WPCRS 11024 EQG.03/71 (Mar 1971).
Metcalf § Eddy, Inc., "Reconnaisance Study of Combined Sewer Overflows and
Storm Sewer Discharges," prepared for D. C. Dept. of Environ. Services Eng.
and Construction Administration (March 1973).
1-95
-------
Mevius, E., "Analysis of Urban Sewer Systems by Hydrograph-Volume
Method," Paper presented at the Natl. Conf. on Urban Engr. Terrain
Problems, Montreal, Canada (May 1973).
Meyer, M., et al., "The Mathematical Model for the Filling Process
of the Retnetion Basin Stoehna," Wasserwirtsch-Wasser-tech. (Ger.)»
22:11, 382 (1972); (Abs.) Mun. Technol. Bull., EPA, Washington, D. C.,
0070 (Mar. 1973).
Meyers, J., "How Users Benefit from Private Weather Forecasts," Rural §
Urban Roads, 12:6, 17 (1974).
Mitci, C., "Determine Urban Runoff the Simple Way," Water £ Wastes Eng.,
11:1, 24 (1974).
Molvar, A., and Tulumello, A., "Assessment and Development Plan for
Monitoring of Organics in Storm Flows," EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/
2-74-087 (Nov. 1974).
Morel-Seytoux, H. J., "Techniques of Statistical Evaluation of Runoff
Results of Precipitation Modification," Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins,
Dept. of Civil Eng. Rec-14-06-D6597 Q972); (Abs.) Govt. Rept. Announce.,
72:12, 35 (1972).
Mun. Technol. Bull., (Abs.), Washington, D. C., 2:8, 1 (1974); "Australian
Rainfall and Runoff," Austrailian Road Res., 5:3, 50 (Oct. 1973).
Muzik, I., "Laboratory Experiments with Surface Runoff," Jour. Hydraul. Div.,
Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100, 501 (1974).
Mytelka, A. I., "Characteristics of Stormwater Overflows," New Jersey
Effluents, 4 (1973).
Mytelka, A. I., et al., "Combined Sewer Overflow Study for the Hudson
River Conference," EPA, Washington, D. C., EPA-R2-73-152 (1973).
Mytelka, A. I., "Interstate Sanitation Commission Combined Sewer Overflow
Study," New Jersey Effluents, 6:1, 40 (1972).
National Eutrophication Survey Staff, "Relationships Between Drainage Area
Characteristics and Non-Point Source Nutrients in Streams," Working paper
No. 25, EPA, Washington, D. C., NTIS No. PB 240 619 (1975).
National Water Commission, "Water Policies for the Future," Final Report
to the President and the Congress of the United States, Washington, D. C.,
(June 1973).
Nebolsine, R., and Vercelli, G. L., "Is the Separation of Sewers Desirable?"
Paper presented at the National Symposium on Urban Hydrology and Runoff and
Sediment Management, Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington (July 1974).
1-96
-------
New York State Dept. of Conservation, "Combined Sewer Overflow Seminar
Papers," EPA-670/2-73-077 (Setp 1973).
Nichols, F. M., "Elimination of Surface Water Infiltration in Sewer
Collection Systems Through Smoke Testing," Paper presented at 46th Annual
Conference, Water Poll. Control Fed. (Oct 1973).
Nichols, F. M., "The Case for Smoke Testing," Water S Poll. Control (Can.),
111:6, 20 (1973).
Nobb, N., and Brittor, J. D., "Computer Modeling Applications in Urban
Water Planning," Amer. Soc. Civil Eng. Urban Water Resources Res. Program
Tech., Memo No. 22 (1974).
Noland, R. F., and Posthuma, A. R., "Stream Pollution and Abatement from
Combined Sewer Overflows," Paper presented at the 46th annual conf., Water
Poll. Control Fed., Cleveland, Ohio (Oct. 1973).
O'Brien Manufacturing Comp., U. S. Patent 3,740,785 (June 26, 1973); (Abs.)
Mun. Technol. Bull., EPA, Washington, D. C. 0196 (Aug 1973).
Offner, F. F., "Computer Simulation of Storm Water Runoff," Jour. Hydraul.
Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, 2185 (1973).
Orlob, G. T., "Selected Case Studies Using Stormwater Management Models -
Quantity Aspects," Paper in proc. for "A Short Course: Applications to
Stormwater Management Models," Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst, and EPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio (Aug. 1974).
Osborn, H. B., et al., ''Uncertainties in Estimating Runoff-Producing
Rainfall-Runoff Models," In Vol. I, Proc. Intl. Symp. on Uncertainties
in Hydrol. and Water Resource System, Univ. of Ariz., Tucson, (12/11-14/72);
Selected Water Res. Abs., U. S. Dept. of the Int. 6, 19 (1973).
'Otto, H., "The Influence of Combined and Separate Sewers on the Receiving
Stream," H-0 Tidischrift Voor Watervoorziening (Neth.) 5, 460 (1972); Water
Poll. Abs. (G. B.), 46, 1, (1973).
Paintal, A. S., "Time of Concentration - A Kinematic Wave Approach," Metro-
politan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago, 111., Sewer Design Section,
Ref. No. 1974 (April 1974).
Papadakis, C. N., and Preul, H. C., "Methods for Determination of Urban
Runoff," Jour. Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, 1319 (1973).
Perez, A. I., Huber, W. C., et al., "A Water Quality Model for a Conjunctive
Surface - Groundwater System, EPA-600/5074-013, (May 1974).
Pew, I. A., "Data Acquisition and Combined Sewer Controls in Cleveland,"
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 45, 2276 (1973).
1-97
-------
Pitt, R. E., and Field, R., "Water Quality Effects from Urban Runoff," Paper
presented at 94th Annual Conf. Amer. Water Works Assoc., Boston, Mass. (June
1974).
Poertner, H. G., "An Overview of Urban Hydrology and Runoff Management,"
Paper presented at the National Symposium on Urban Hydrology and Runoff
and Sediment Management Seminar, College of Engineering, Univ. of Kentucky,
Lexington (July 1974).
Poertner, H. G., "Better Storm Drainage Facilities at Lower Cost," Civil Eng.,
43:10, 67 (1973).
Polet, H., "The Great Wastewater Transportation Jobs Performed in Paris and
Its Crowded Areas," Travaux (Fr.), 455, 46 (1973); (Abs.) Mun. Technol. Bull.,
U. S. Dept. of the Int., 0131 (June 1973).
Preul, H. C., and Papadakis, C. N., "Development of Design Storm Hyetographs
for Cincinnati, Ohio," Water Resources Bull., 9:2, 291 (1973).
Pseil, V. K., "Determination of Rain Runoff with Special Regard to Runoff
from Individual Plots Part II: Applications of Assumed Rainfall Duration
to Small Areas, Method of Summation of Runoff Lines, Storage Capacity in
Mixed and Rainwater Sewers," Heizung Leuftung Haustechnik, 25:4, 131 (1974);
(Abs.) Mun. Technol. Bull., Washington, D. C., 2:6, 8 (1974).
Rabe, F. T., et al., "A Methcrdology for Assessing Environmental Impact of
Water Resources Development," Report No. OWRR-C-4324, 9408, 1, Environmental
Impact Center Inc., Cambridge, Mass.. (Nov. 1973); (Abs.) Govt. Rept. Announce.,
Dept. of Comm., 74:5, 138 (1974).
Ray, D. L., "Simulation of Control Alternatives for Combined Sewer Overflows,"
Ph.D. thesis, Univ. of Mass., Amherst (Aug. 1972).
Richardson, S. L., "A Solution to Combined Sewer Overflows," Clearwaters, 4:4,
14 (1975) .
Rockwell, M. L., "Consensus: The First Step," Water Spectrum, 5:1, 9 (1973);
(Abs.) Water Resources Sci. Info. Center, U. S. Dept. of the Int., Ace.
No. 12234 (1973).
Roesner, L. A., et al., "A Model for Evaluating Runoff-Quality in Metropolitan
Master Planning," Amer. Soc. Civil Engr. Urban Water Resources Research
Program, Tech. Memo. No. 23 (April 1974).
Roesner, L. A., "Impact of Stormwater Runoff on Receiving Water Quality,"
Paper in proc. for "A Short Course: Applications to Stormwater Management
Models," Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst, and EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (Aug.
1974).
Roesner, L. A., "Quality Aspects of Urban Stormwater Runoff," Paper in
Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst, and EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (Aug 1974).
1-98
-------
Roffman, H. K., et al., "The Effects of Large Shopping Complexes on Stormwater
Runoff," Paper in proceedings of the National Symposium on Urban Hydrology
and Sediment Control, Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky. (1975).
Sarma, P.B.S., et al., "Comparison of Rainfall-Runoff Models for Urban Areas,"
Jour. Hydrol., 18, 329 (1973).
Sandoski, D. A., "Selected Urban Storm Water Runoff Abstracts July 1971 -
June 1972," EPA-R2-72-127, (Dec. 1972).
Schulz, E. F., and Lopez, 0. G., "Determination of Urban Watershed Response
Time," Colorado Univ., Fort Collins, Colo., submitted to the Hydrologic Eng.
Center, Corps of Engineers, Dept. of Army, Davis, Calif. (Dec. 1973).
Science Information Serv. Dept., "Selected Urban Storm Water Runoff
Abstracts," WPCRS 11024 EJC 07/70 (July 1970).
Science Information Serv. Dept., "Selected Urban Storm Water Runoff
Abstracts," Second Quarterly Issue, WPCRS 11024 EJC 01/71 (January 1971).
Selected Water Res. Abs., "Water, Sewer and Storm Drainage Plan for the
Cumberland Plateau Planning District," Thompson and Litton, Inc., for the
Cumberland Plateau Planning District Comm., Lebanon, Va. (June 1972), U.S.
Dept. of the Int., 6, 13 (1973).
Sevuk, A.S., and Yen, B.C., "A Comparative Study on Flood Routing Computa-
tion." In Proc. Intl. Symp. on River Mechanics, Bangkok, Thailand, 3, 275
(Jan. 1973); (Abs.) Water Res. Sci. Info. Center, U.S. Dept. of the Int.,
Ace. No. W73-07926 (1973).
Sevuk, A.S., and Yen, B.C., "Comparison of Four Approaches in Routing Flood
Wave Through Junction." Proc., 15th Congress, Intl. Assn. for Hydraulic Res.,
5, 169, Istanbul, Turkey (Sept. 1973).
Sevuk, A.S., et al., "Illinois Storm Sewer System Simulation Model: User's
Manual." U.S. Dept. of the Int., Water Resources Res. Rept. No. 74, Univ. of
Illinois, Urbana (Sept. 1973).
Sevuk, A.S., "Unsteady Flow in Sewer Networks." Ph.D. thesis, Univ. of
Illinois, Urbana-Champaign (1973).
Shaheen, D.G., "Contributions of Urban Roadway Usage to Water Pollution,"
EPA-600/2-75-004 (March 1975). .
Shelley, P.E., and Kirkpatrick, G.A., "An Assessment of Automatic Sewer Flow
Samplers-1975." EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-600/2-75-065 (1975).
Shelley, P.E., and Kirkpatrick, G.A., "An Assessment of Automatic Sewer Flow
Samplers." Water Pollution Assessment: Automatic Sampling and Measurement,
ASTM, STP 582, Amer. Soc. Testing Materials (1975).
1-99
-------
Shelley, P.E., and Kirkpatrick, G.A., "An Assessment of Automatic Sewer Flow
Samplers." EPA, Washington, D.C., EPA R2-73-261 (1973).
Shelley, P.E., and Kirkpatrick, G.A., "Sewer Flow Measurement-A State-of-the-
Art Assessment." EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-600/2-75-027 (1975).
Shelley, P.E., "Collection of Field Data for Stormwater Model Calibration."
Paper in proceedings of Applications of Stormwater Management Models, Univ.
of Massachusetts, Amherst, Mass., and EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (1975).
Shelley, P.E., "Design and Testing of a Prototype Automatic Sewer Sampling
System." EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-600/2-76-006 (1975).
Shib, G.B., et al., "Regional Analysis of Runoff Characteristics for Small
Urban Watersheds." Office of Water Research Tech. (OWRT), Dept. of the Int.,
NTIS No. PB 243 517 (1975).
Shih, C.S., et al., "Reliability and Economic Optimization for Urban Return
Flows Management." Water Resources Bull., 10:1,101 (1974).
Shubenski, R.P., and Nelson, S.N., "Effects of Urbanization on Water Quality."
Amer. Soc. Civil Eng. Urban Water Resources Program, Tech. Memo No. 26 (1975).
Shubinski, R.P., and Rosner, L.A., "Linked Process Routing Models." Paper
presented at the Symposium on Models for Urban Hydrology, Spring Meeting,
Amer. Geophys. Union, Washington, D.C. (April 16-20, 1973).
Shulman, M.D., and Brotak, E.A., "Investigation of the Effects of
Urbanization on Precipitation Type, Frequency, Areal and Temporal Distribu-
tion, Phase II." Water Resources Research Institute, Rutgers Univ.,
New Brunswick, N.J.; (abs.) Selected Water Res. Abs., Dept. of the Int.,
7:8,34 (1974).
Shukla, S.S., and Leland, H.V., "Heavy Metals: A Review of Lead." Jour.
Water Poll. Control Fed., 46, 1319 (1974).
Singh, V.P., "A Postulated Approach to Kinematic Wave Modeling of Watershed
Surface Runoff." Paper in proceedings of The National Symposium on Urban
Hydrology and Sediment Control, Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky. (1975).
Smith, R.L., et al., "Determination of Discharge-Frequency Relationships
Utilizing Non-Linear Hydrographs and a Modified Rational Formula."
Kansas Water Resources Research Institute, Univ. of Kansas, Lawrence,
Proj. No. B-022-KAN, NTIS No. PB-230 036 (19*73).
Soderlund, G., and Lehtinen, H., "Comparison of Discharges from Urban
Stormwater Run-off, Mixed Storage Overflow and Treated Sewerage." Paper
presented at the International Conference on Advances in Water Pollution
Resources, Jerusalem, Israel (June 1972).
1-100
-------
Soderland, G., "Storm Water Purifying-Advanced Guesswork at a Cost of Four
Thousand Million Dollars." Ketia (Swed.)> 4, 50 (1972).
Soil Conservation Service, "Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds."
Washington, D.C., Tech. Release No. 55, NTIS No. PB 244 531 (1975).
Sold, H., "Nomograms for Search of Symbols Pu and Tu of Storm-Overflow in a
Mixing Conduit." Wasser u. Boden (Ger.) 24:9,312 (1972); (Abs.) Mun. Technol.
Bull., EPA, Washington, D.C., 0056 (Feb. 73).
Stankowski, S.J., "Magnitudes and Frequency of Floods in New Jersey with
Effects of Urbanization." State of N.J., Dept. of Environmental Protection,
Div. of Water Resources, Special Rept. No. 38 (1974).
Stern, G.L., "An Evaluation of Practical Experience in Stormwater Management."
Paper in Proceedings of The National Symposium on Urban Hydrology and
Sediment Control, Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky. (1975).
Stetefeld, W., "Runoff Conditions, Calculation Methods, Dimension Criteria."
Wass u. - Energiewirt (Ger.), 66:4,5(1974); (abs.) Mun. Technol. Bull.,
Washington, D.C., 2:5,1 (1974).
Stubchaer, J.M., "The Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph Method." Paper in
proceedings of the National Symposium on Urban Hydrology and Sediment
Control, Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky. (1975).
Surkan, A.J., and Kelton, P., "Binary Tree Model Simulation of the Behaviour
of Urban Hydrologic Systems." Inter. Jour. Systems Sci., 1 (1974).
Surkan, A.J., "Hydra:Dynamic Model for Urban Hydrologic Systems." Nebraska
Univ. Lincoln, Dept. of Computer Sci. OWRR B-016-Neb(2) (July 1973); (Abs.)
Water Resources Sci. Info. Center, U.S. Dept. of the Int., Ace. No. W73-
13012 (1973).
Swinneston, C.J., et al., "Conceptual Model Design for Motorway Stormwater
Drainage." Eng. § Publ. Works Review, 68:799,123 (1973).
Swinnerton, C.J., et al., "Dimensionless Hydrograph Design Method for Motor-
way Stormwater Drainage Systems." Jour. Inst. Highway Engl., 19:11,2 (1972);
(Abs.) Eng. Index, 11:2,262 (1973).
Tafuri, A.N., "Pollution from Urban Land Runoff," News of Environmental
Research in Cincinnati, EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (April 1975).
Telleck, D.A., "Optiman Antecedent Precipitation Indices for Small Eastern
Watersheds." M.S. Thesis, Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, Pa.;
(abs.) Govt. Rept. Announcement, Dept. of Comm., NTIS No. PB 240 902/7 GA
(1975).
Telly, L.J., and Hausshild, W.L., "Use of Productivity of Periphyton to
Estimate Water Quality." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 47, 2157 (1975).
1-101
-------
Theile, K., "Infiltration Model with Regard to Surface Runoff."
Wasserwirtsch.-Wassertech. (Ger.), 22:12,415 (1972); (Abs.) Mun. Technol.
Bull. EPA, Washington, D.C., 0069 (March 1973).
The Journal Times, "Kenosha Displays Plant for Handling Dual Sewer Systems."
(June 6, 1973).
Tersfriep, M.L., and Stall, J.B., "The Illinois Urban Drainage Area
Simulator, ILLUDAS." Illinois State Water Survey, Urbana, 111., Bulletin 58
(1974).
Tovar, F.H., "Annual Compilation and Analysis of Hydrologic Data for Urban
Studies in the Austin, Texas Metropolitan Area." Geol. Surv., Texas District
Open File Rept. (May 1973); Selected Water Res. Abs., U.S. Dept. of the Int.,
6:22,30 (Nov. 16, 1973).
Trent, D.S., and Welty, D.S., "Numerical Thermal Plume Model for Vertical
Outfalls in Shallow Water." EPA-R2-73-162 (March 1975).
true, H.A., "Planning Models for Non-Point Runoff Assessment." (None).
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, "Environmental Management for the Metropolitan
Area-Part II Urban Drainage." Seattle District (Oct. 1974).
Univ. of Massachusetts, "A Short Course: Applications of Stormwater
Management Models." Proc. for a short course, Amherst, and EPA, Cincinnati,
Ohio (Aug. 1974).
Uttormark, P.O., et al., "Estimating Nutrient Loadings of Lakes from Non-
Point Sources." Ecological Research Series, EPA, Washington, D.C.,
EPA-660/3-74-020 (1974).
Viessman, W., Jr., "Hydrologic Models for Poorly Defined Drainage Areas."
Nebraska Univ., Lincoln, Water Resources Res. Inst. OWRR-A-021-Neb(l)
(June 1973); (Abs.) Water Res. Sci. Info. Center, U.S. Dept. of the Int.,
Ace. No. W73-12496 (1973).
Waite, T.D., and Greenfield, L.J., "Stormwater Runoff Characteristics and
Impact on Waterways." Paper presented at 2nd Annual National Conference on
Environmental Eng. Res., Development and Design, Amer. Soc. Civil Eng. and
Univ. of Florida, Gainesville, Fla. (1975).
Wallace, J.R., and Wang, K.L., "Sensitivity Analysis of a Thunderstorm
Rainfall Model." School of Civil Eng., Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta, Rept. No. ERC-0374 (Jan. 1974).
Waller, D.H., et al., "Urban Drainage Model Comparison for a Catchment in
Halifax, Nova Scotia." Draft report, Ministry of the Environment, Ontario,
Canada (1975).
1-102
-------
Wanielista, M.P., et al., "Transient Water Quality Responses from Non-Point
Sources." Paper presented at 48th Annual Conference of the Water Poll. Con-
trol Fed., Miami Beach, Fla. (1975).
Warren, S., and Bewtra, S.K., "A Model to Study the Effects of Time-Variable
Pollutant Loads on Stream Quality." Water Res., 8, 1057 (1974).
Water § Wastes Eng., "Sewer Overflows." 10:8,9 (1973).
Water Poll. Abs. (G.B.), "Surface Water and Storm Sewerage." 46:4,130 (1973).
Water Poll. Control Fed., "Akron Solves Storm Flow Problem." Deeds & Data,
10, 9, D-ll (1973).
Water Resources Engineers and the Hydrologic Engineering Center,"Management
of Urban Storm Runoff." Corps of Engineers; Amer. Soc. Civil Engr. Urban
Water Resources Research Program, Tech. Memo. No. 24 (May 1974).
Watt, T.R., et al., "Sewerage System Monitoring and Remote Control." EPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-75-020 (1975).
Wells, D.M., et al., "Variation of Urban Runoff Quality with Duration and
Intensity of Storms-Phase II." NTIS No. PB-223 930 (Aug. 1973).
Wenster, P., et al., "Diffuse Communal Pollution Loads. Examples from
Motala and Uppsala." Vatten (Swed.), 3, 274 (1975).
Wenzel, H.G., "Meter for Sewer Flow Measurement." Jour. Hydraul. Div., Proc.
Soc. Civil Eng., 101, 115 (1975).
Whipple, W., et al., "Unrecorded Pollution from Urban Runoff." Jour. Water
Poll. Control Fed., 46, 873 (1974).
Whipple, W., Jr., "Non-Point Sources and Planning for Water Pollution
Control." Paper presented at 48th Annual Conference of the Water Poll.
Control Fed., Miami Beach, Fla. (1975).
Whipple, W., Jr., "Water Pollution: Environmental Impacts and Means of
Control." 8th Annual Hennry M. Shaw Lecture Series in Civil Eng., North
Carolina State Univ., 14-19 (1973).
White, T.H., and Bunker, T.J., "Using Your Storm Sewers Twice." Paper pre-
sented at 48th Annual Conference of the Water Poll. Control Fed., Miami
Beach, Fla. (1975).
Wisnovszky, I., "Assessment of Models Suited for the Hydrologic Analysis of
Urban Storm Drainage." Hidrologiai Kozlony (Hung.), 52:10,443 (1972); (Abs.)
Mun. Technol. Bull., EPA, Washington, D.C., 0068 (March 1973).
Wittenburg, H., "A Model to Predict the Effects of Urbanization on Watershed
Response." Paper in proceedings of the National Symposium on Urban Hydrology
and Sediment Control, Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky. (1975).
1-103
-------
Wullschleger, R.E., Zanoni, A.E., et al., "Methodology for the Study of
Urban Storm Generated Pollution 5 Control," EPA-600/2-76-145 (Aug. 1976).
Yen, B.C., "Methodologies for Flow Prediction in Urban Storm Drainage
Systems." Univ. of 111. Water Resources Center Rept. No. 72, U.S. Dept. of
the Int. Rept. Proj. No. B-043-I11. (1973).
Yen, C.L., and Sakhleh, S.N., "Sensitivity of Surface Runoff to Variations
of Watershed Parameters in Small Urban Areas." Dept. of Civil Eng., Howard
Univ., Washington, D.C., C.E. Rept. 74-02 (Jan. 1974).
Yomatovian, I., "Surface Runoff Simulation Model." M.S. Thesis, Univ. of
Nebraska, Dept. of Civil Eng., Lincoln, Neb., NTIS No. PB 237 159 (1973).
Young, C.P., "Estimated Rainfall for Drainage Calculations in the United
Kingdom." Transp. Road Research Lab. (G.B.), LR 595, 23 (1973); (abs.) Eng.
Index, 12:3,356 (1974).
Young, G.K., "Decision Perspectives on Urban Stormwater Pollution." Water
Planning Division, EPA, Washington, D.C. (1974).
Zawadski, I.I., "Errors and Fluctuations of Raingauge Estimates of Areal
Rainfall." Jour. Hydrol. (Neth.), 18:3/4,243 (1973).
Zogorski, S.S., et al., "Temporal Characteristics of Stormwater Runoff-An
Overview." Paper presented at Symposium on Urbanization and Water Quality
Control, Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. (1975).
"Guidance for Sewer System Evaluation." EPA, Office of Water Program
Operation, Washington, D.C. (March 1974).
"Hydrological Effects of Urbanization, Warsaw, 1973." Report of the Inter-
national Workshop on the Hydrological Effects on Urbanization, A Report to
the U.S. National Science Foundation (Jan. 1974).
"Reduction in Water Consumption and Flow of Storage." Report to the
Congress, submitted by the EPA (June 1974).
"Selected Urban Storm Water Runoff Abstracts," Third Quarterly Issue. WPCRS
11024 FJE 04/71 (April 1971).
"The President's Third Annual Message on the Environment." p. 16 (Aug.1972).
1-104
-------
Residuals Management
Alford, J.M., "Sludge Disposal Experiences at North Little Rock, Arkansas."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 41,175 (1969).
Alter, J.H., "Nu-Earth-Chicago's Merchandising Program." Compost Sci.,
16:3,22 (1975).
American Water Works Association Research Foundation, "Disposal of Wastes
from Water Treatment Plants." FWPCA Water Pollution Control Research Series
ORD-2 (1969).
Andersland, O.B., and Mathew, P.J., "Consolidation of High Ash Papermill
Sludges." Jour. Soil Mech. § Found. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr.,
22, SMS, 365 (1973).
Appell, H.R., and Tosh, J.A., "Conversion of Municipal Refuse, Sewage Sludge,
and Other Wastes to Heavy Oil or Bitumen." U.S. Patent 3,733,255 (15 May
1973); Chem. Abs., 79:4,23381V (1973).
Aspitarte, T.R., et al., "Methods for Pulp and Paper Mill Sludge Utilization
and Disposal." Environ. Protection Technol. Ser., EPA-R2-73-232 (1973).
Avnimelech, Y., and Raveh, A., "The Control of Nitrate Accumulation in
Soils by Induced Denitrification." Water Res. (G.B.), 8,553 (1974).
Barlow, J.H., "Sludge Handling and Disposal." Jour. Amer. Water Works
Assn., 65,395 (1973).
Barnard, J., and Eckenfelder, W.W., Jr., "Interrelationships in Sludge
Separations." In "Water Quality Improvement by Physical and Chemical
Processes." E.F. Gloyna and W.W. Eckenfelder, Jr. [Eds.], Univ. of Texas
Press, Austin, 409 (1970).
Bechtel Corporation, "I, The Waste Management Concept; II, Criteria for
Waste Management; III, Technical Aspects of Pipelining of Waste Materials."
FWPCA Waste Management Study (1969).
Berrow, M.L., and Webber, J., "Trace Elements in Sewage Sludges." Jour.
Sci. Food Agr., 23,93 (1972).
Biddlestone, A.J., and Gray, K.R., "Composting-Application to Municipal and
Farm Wastes." Chem. Engr. (G.B.), 270,76 (1973).
1-105
-------
Bittel, R., "Behavior of Heavy Metals in a Marine Environment with Regard
to Evaluating the Tolerance Limit of Oceanic Ecosystems for Chemical
Pollution." Rev. Int. Oceanogr. Med. (Fr.), 30, 3 (1974); Chem Abs.,
81,14,81979Y (1974)..
Bolton, J., "Liming Effects on the Toxicity to Perennial Ryegrass of a
Sewage Sludge Contaminated with Zinc, Nickel, Copper, and Chromium." Environ.
Poll., 9:4,295 (1975).
Borgerding, J., and Calkins, R., "A Centralized Treatment Facility for
Residuals at Ventura, California." Proc. Natl. Conf. on Management and
Disposal of Residues from the Treatment of Industrial Wastewaters, Informa-
tion Transfer, Inc., Washington, D.C., 31 (1975).
Bravo, A.C., "Environmental Systems at Walt Disney World." Jour. Environ.
Eng. Div., Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101,887 (1975).
Carpenter, J.H., "Determining Ultimate Capacity of the Coastal Zone for
Wastewater and Wastewater Residuals." Proc. Natl. Symp. on Ultimate Disposal
of Wastewaters and Their Residuals, Water Resources Inst., North Carolina
State Univ., Raleigh, 216 (1974).
Carroll, T.E., et al., "Review of Landspreading of Municipal Sewage Sludge."
EPA Techno1. Series, EPA-670/2-75-049, Washington, D.C. (1975).
Cassel, A.F., and Mohr, R.T., "Sludge Handling and Disposal at Blue Plains."
Proc. Natl. Conf. on Municipal Sludge Management, Information Transfer, Inc.,
Washington, D.C., 171 (1974).
Cassell, E.A., and Walker, T.W., "Solidification of Sludges with Portland
Cement." Jour. San. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 96, SA1,
15 (1970).
Cebula, J., "Vegetation Tests with Sewage Sludge for its Agriculture Use."
Pr. Nauk. Inst. Inz. Ochr. Srodowiska Politech Wroclaw (Pol.), 20,169 (1973);
Chem. Abs., 81:10,54032C (1974).
Chawla, V.K., et al., "Biochemical Characteristics of Digested Chemical
Sewage Sludges." Sludge Handling and Disposal Seminar, Conf. Proc. No. 2,
63 (1974); Water Res. Abs., 8,24,W75-12132 (1975).
Chawla, V.K., et al., "Disposal of Chemical Sewage Sludges on Land and Their
Effects on Plants, Leachate, and Soil Systems." Sludge Handling and
Disposal Seminar, Conf. Proc. No. 2, 207 (1974); Water Res. Abs., 8,23,
W75-11721 (1975).
Civil Eng., "Chicago Reclaiming Strip Mines with Sludge." 44:6,43 (1974).
Clark, R.M., "Systems Simulation and Solid Waste Planning, A Case Study."
EPA 670/5-73-12 (July 1973).
1-106
-------
Clark, R.M., "Urban Solid Waste Management Economic Case Study."
EPA-R2-72-012 (August 1972).
Colonna, R.A., "Decision-Makers Guide in Solid Waste Management." SW-500
(1976).
Cosentino, R.M., "Sludge Management in Allegheny County." Proc. Natl. Conf.
on Municipal Sludge Management, Information Transfer, Inc., Washington, D.C.,
135 (1974).
Counts, C.A., and Shuckrow, A.J., "Lime Stabilized Sludge: Its Stability and
Effect on Agricultural Land." EPATechnol. Series, EPA-670/2-75-012 (1975).
Curnoe, W.E., "Runoff and Erosion Losses." Sludge Handling and Disposal
Seminar, Conf. Proc. No. 2, 174 (1974); Water Res. Abs., 8,24,W75-12137
(1975).
Dahl, B.W., "Polymers Help Connecticut Plant." Water § Wastes Eng., 11:11,26
(1974).
Dalton, F.E., and Murphy, R.R., "Land Disposal IV: Reclamation and
Recycle." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 45,1489 (1973).
Darnell, R.M., Pequegnat, W.E., et al., "Impacts of Construction Activities
in Wetlands of the United States." EPA 600/3-76-045 (April 1976).
Davis, J.C., "Coping with Nuclear Wastes." Chem. Eng., 81:2,82 (1974).
de Haan, S., "Discussion of Land Application of Liquid Municipal Wastewater
Sludges." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 45, 2707 (1975).
Dick, R.I., "Alternatives to Marine Disposal of Sewage Sludge." In Marine
Chemistry of the Coastal Environment, T.M. Church [Ed.], ACS Symp. Series 18,
Amer. Chem. Soc., Washington, D.C. 453 (1975).
Diosady, L.L., "Recycling of Incinerator Ash." Environment Canada Research
Report No. 19 (1974); Water Res. Abs., 8,23,W75-11714 (1975).
Dolzhenko, A.P., "Utilization of Activated Sludge." Gidroliz Lesokhim. Prom.
(USSR), 6,29 (1974); Water Res. Abs., 8,12,W75-06344 (1975).
Dove, L.A., "Total Wastewater Recyling and Zero Discharge in St. Petersburg,
Florida." In Energy, Agriculture and Waste Management, W.J. Jewell [Ed.],
Ann Arbor Sci. Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan, 187 (1975).
Edmisten, J.A., "Agricultural Utilization of Digested Sludges from the City
of Pensacola." Proc. Natl. Conf. on Municipal Sludge Management, Information
Transfer, Inc., Washington, D.C., 177 (1974).
Ehler, C.N., "Development of Residuals Management Strategies." EPA-600/1-
76-01/B (1976).
1-107
-------
Environ. Sci. § Technol., "Sludge Handling: The Hardest Phase of Waste
Treatment." 5,670 (1971).
Epstein, E., and Wilson, G.B., "Composting Sewage Sludge." Proc. Natl.
Conf. on Municipal Sludge Management, Information Transfer, Inc., Washington,
D.C., 123 (1974).
Farrell, J.B., et al., "Lime Stabilization of Primary Sludges." Jour.
Water Poll. Control Fed., 46,113 (1974).
Farrell, J.B., "Design Information on Dewatering Properties of Wastewater
Sludges." Sludge Handling and Disposal Seminar Conf. Proc. No. 2, 269
(1974); Water Res. Abs., 8,23,W75-11722 (1975).
Flaxman, E.W., and Powell, M.G., "Economy Studies in Water Pollution Control."
Water Poll. Control (G.B.), 72,463 (1973).
Fourie, J.M., "Composting of Municipal Solid Refuse." Water Poll. Control
(G.B.), 72,205 (1973).
Francis, A.J., et al., "Re-use of Sewage Effluent and Sludge." Jour. Inst.
Water Engr., 29:4,195 (1975).
Franz, M., "Developing A safe Way to Recycle Sewage Sludge on the Land."
Compost Sci., 15:1,6 (1974).
Franz, M., "Survey of Sewage Sludge Research at Agricultural Experiment
Station." Compost Sci., 15:2,16 (1974).
Fulton, G.P., "Alum Recovery of Filtration Plant Waste Treatment." Water
§ Wastes Eng., 7:6,78 (1970).
Gates, W.E., § Assoc., "Development of Sludge Disposal Cost Curves.",
Fairfax, Va., (May 1975).
Goldberg, T.L., "Improving Rural Solid Waste Management Practices." SW-107
(1973).
Golueke, C., "Latest Methods of Composting and Recycling." Compost Sci.,
14:4,7 (1973).
Goranssoon, B., and Moberg, P.O., "Metal-Finishing Waste Treatment in
Sweden." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 47,764 (1975).
Gordon, et al., "Regional Materials Management as an Alternative to In-Plant
Treatment of Industrial Residuals." Proc. Natl. Conf. on Management and
Disposal of Residues from the Treatment of Industrial Wastewaters, Informa-
tion Transfer, Inc., Washington, D.C., 35 (1975).
Gray, D.H., and Penessis, C., "Engineering Properties of Sludge Ash." Jour.
Water Poll. Control Fed., 44,847 (1972).
1-108
-------
Gray, K.R., and Biddlestone, A.J., "Composting-Process Parameters. The
Chem. Engr. (G.B.), 270,71 (1973).
Gruninger, R.M., and Westerhoff, G.P., "Filter Plant Sludge Disposal."
Environ. Sci. § Technol., 8,122 (1974).
Guarino, C.F., et al., "Land Sea Solids Management Alternatives in
Philadelphia." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 47,2551 (1975).
Guiver, K., "The Disposal of Toxic Wastes." Water Poll. Control (G.B.), 74,
346 (1975).
Halcrow, W., et al., "Distribution of Trace Metals and Fauna in the Firth of
Clyde in Relation to the Disposal of Sewage Sludge." Jour. Mar. Biol. Assn.,
U.K. (G.B.), 53,721 (1973); Chem. Abs., 80:12,63487M (1974).
Halderson, J.L., et al. , "Recent Sanitary District History in Land Reclama-
tion and Sludge Utilization." Proc. Natl. Conf. on Municipal Sludge Manage-
ment, Information Transfer, Inc., Washington, D.C., 129 (1974).
Half, S., Jr., "Guidelines for Local Governments on Solid Waste Management."
SW-17c (1971).
Hamilton, C.E., "Disposal of Waste Activated Sludge with the Concurrent
Production of Useful Fuel." U.S. Patent 3,724,542 (3 April 1973); Chem.
Abs., 79,4,23367V (1973).
Harrison, J.R., "Earn an A if You Cope With the C's and D's of Solids."
Water £ Wastes Eng., 9:7,32 (1972).
Hatcher, C.L., "Virginia City Uses Liquid Sludge to Grow Crops." Compost
Sci., 15:1,18 (1974).
Hayes, J., et al., "A Comprehensive Scheme for Sewage Sludge Disposal in
North-West England." Proc. Inst. Civil Engr. (G.B.), 55, Part 2, 1 (1973).
Hecht, N.L., and Duvall, D.S., "Characterization and Utilization of Municipal
and Utility Sludges and Ashes, Volume I. Summary." EPA Technol. Series,
EPA-670/2-75-033a (1975).
Hecht, N.L., et al., "Characterization and Utilization of Municipal and
Utility Sludges and Ashes, Volume II. Municipal Sludges." EPA Technol.
Series, EPA-670/2-75-033b (1975).
Hecht, N.L., and Duvall, D.S., "Characterization and Utilization of Municipal
and Utility Sludges and Ashes, Volume III. Utility Coal Ash." EPA Technol.
Series, EPA-670/2-75-033c (1975).
Hecht, N.L., and Duvall, D.S., "Characterization and Utilization of Municipal
and Utility Sludges and Ashes, Volume IV. Municipal Incinerator Residues."
EPA Technol. Series, EPA-670/2-75-033d (1975).
1-109
-------
Heckroth, C., "Here Come the Sludge." Water § Wastes Eng., 8:11,40 (1971).
Herrnhut, H., and Bosshard, E., "First Gamma-Irradiation Plant for Sewage-
Sludge Hygienization." Sulzer Tech. Rev. (Switz.), 56,77 (1974); Chem.
Abs., 81,18,111033E (1974).
Hinesly, T.D., and Sosewitz, B., "Digested Sludge Disposal on Crop Land."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 41,822 (1969).
Hovsenius, G., "Composting and Use of Compost in Sweden." Jour. Water Poll.
Control Fed., 47,741 (1975).
Hsv, H.H., "Feasibility of Using Pulp Mill Sludge as an Additive to
Corrugating Medium." Washington Univ., Seattle (1972); Water Resources
Abs., 6,21,§73-13081 (1973).
Ill'in, B.N., "Possible Uptake of Radioactive Strontium by the Soil During
the Use of Sludge from Biological Sewage Treatment Plants as Fertilizer."
Gig. Sanit. (USSR), 7,102 (1974); Chem. Abs., 82:8,47470m (1975).
Indiana Univ., "Water Quality Guidance: Development of Residuals Management
Strategies, An Executive Summary." PB-251 Oil (January 1976).
Institute of Water Pollution Control, "Proceedings of Symposium on Disposal
of Municipal and Industrial Sludges and Solid Toxic Wastes." London (1973).
Interstate Electronics Corp., "Ocean Waste Disposal in Selcted Geographic
Areas." Natl. Tech. Info. Service, Springfield, Va. (1973); Water Resources
Abs., 7:2,W74-00928 (1974).
Jeris, J.S., and Regan, R.W., "Controlling Environmental Parameters for
Optimum Composting." Compost Sci., 14:2,8 (1973); Chem. Abs., 78,26,
163626H (1973).
Jewell, W.J., et al., "Design Guidelines for Septic Tank Sludge Treatment
and Disposal." Prog. Water Tech., 7,191 (1975).
Jones, R.H., et al., "Waste Citrus Activated Sludge as a Poultry Feed
Ingredient." EPATechnol. Series, EPA-660/2-75-001 (1975).
John, M.K., et al., "Factors Affecting Plant Uptake and Phytotoxicity of
Cadmium Added to Soils." Environ. Sci. § Technol., 6,1005 (1972).
Johnston, R.A., "Some Microbiological Aspects of the Land Disposal of
Sludge." Sludge Handling and Disposal Seminar, Conf. Proc. No. 2,185
(1974); Water Res. Abs., 8,24,W75-12138 (1975).
Jorgensen, S.E., "Do Heavy Metals Prevent the Agricultural Use of
Municipal Sludges." Water Res. (G.B.), 9:2,163 (1975).
1-110
-------
Kardos, L.T., et al., "Use of Sewage Wastewater and Sludge in Revegetating
Strip Mine Spoil Banks." Proc. 32nd Annual Conf. of Chemurgic Council,
Washington, D.C., 22 (1970); Water Res. Abs., 8:3,W75-01237 (1975).
Keeney, D.R., et al., "Guidelines for the Application of Wastewater Sludge
to Agricultural Land in Wisconsin." Wisconsin Dept. of Natural Res., Tech.
Bulletin No. 88 (1975).
King, L.D., and Morris, H.D., "Land Disposal of Liquid Sewage Sludge: IV.
Effect on Soil Phosphorus, Potassium, Calcium, Magnesium, and Sodium."
Jour. Environ. Qual., 2,411 (1973).
King, L.D., et al., "Application of Municipal Refuse and Liquid Sewage
Sludge to Agricultural Land. I. Field Study." Jour. Environ. Qual.,
3,361 (1974); Chem. Abs., 82:8,47415x (1975).
King, L.D., "Mineralization and Gaseous Loss of Nitrogen in Soil-Applied
Liquid Sewage Sludge." Jour. Environ. Qual., 2,365 (1973).
Kirkham, M.B., "Disposal of Sludge on Land: Effect on Soils, Plants, and
Ground Water." Compost Sci., 15:2,6 (1974).
Kostolich, M.S., "Hauling Digested Sludge in Tank Cars." Proc. Natl. Symp.
on Ultimate Disposal of Wastewaters and Their Residuals, Water Resources Res.
Inst., North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, 178 (1974).
Kramer, L.D., and Born, P.P., "Minnesota's Role in Hazardous Industrial
Sludge Management." Proc. Natl. Conf. on Management and Disposal of Residues
from the Treatment of Industrial Wastewaters, Information Transfer, Inc.,
Washington, D.C,, 25 (1975).
Kruth, M.A., Booth, D.H., et al., "Creating A Countywide Solid Waste
Management System." (1972).
Kurdna, F., "Chicago's Prairie Plan-Why Does it Work and What Does it Mean
to Other Cities." Compost Sci., 15:3,22 (1974).
i
Kurdna, F.L., and Kelly, G.T., "Implementing the Chicago Prairie Plan."
In Recycling Treated Municipal Wastewater and Sludge through Forest and
Cropland, W.E. Sopper and L.T. Kardos, [Eds.], The Pennsylvania State Univ.
Press, University Park (1973).
Kugel, G., "Pasteurization of Raw and Digested Sludge." Water Res. (G.B.)
6,561 (1972).
Kurney, W., "Composting Plant for Refuse-Sewage Sludge in the District of
Gross-Gerau." Aufhereit-Tech. (Ger.), 16:5,219 (1975); Water Res. Abs.,
8,23,W75-11749 (1975).
Landreth, R.E., and Mahloch, J.L., "Stabilization of Hazardous Waste SO
Sludges." Proc. Natl. Conf. on Management and Disposal of Residues from
Treatment of Industrial Wastewaters, Information Transfer, Washington,
D.C., 215 (1975).
1-111
-------
Larson, W.E., et al., "Use of Sewage Sludge in Agriculture with Adequate
Environmental Safeguards." Sludge Handling and Disposal Seminar, Conf.
Proc. No. 2,27 (1974) ;' Water Res. Abs., 8,23,W75-11718 (1975).
Lear, J., "The American Farmer and His Right to Apply Sewage Sludge to
His Land." Compost Sci., 14:4,12 (1974).
Leicher, T.R., "Utilizing Treated Municipal Wastes for Strip Mine
Reclamation." Mining Eng., 25:3,49 (1973); Chem. Abs., 79:4,232450 (1973).
Lemon, E., et al., "The Sun's Work in a Cornfield." Science, 174,4007,371
(1971).
Lilijegren, J.R., "Separation of Inorganic Impurities from Sewage and
Their Utilization in Soil-Improving Compositions." U.S. Patent 3,476,-683
(Nov. 4, 1969): Chem. Abs., 72:8,35585h (1970).
Lumb, C., "Presidential Address." Water Poll. Control (Can.), 71,5 (1972).
Lynam, B.T., et al., '"Liquid Fertilizer' to Reclaim Land and Produce
Crops." Water Res. (G.B.), 6,545 (1972).
MacDonald, D., Cole, J.M., et al., "Residual Waste Model State Legislation."
PB 251 031 WPD 3/76-01 (March 1976).
Maeda, T., and Nibe, T., "Treatemtn of Mercury-Containing Mud to be Used
in Concrete." Japanese Patent 7,342,970 (21 June 1973); Chem. Abs.,
79,16,96640? (1973).
Manson, R.J., and Merrit, C.A., "Farming and Municipal Sludge: They're
Compatible." Compost Sci., 16:4,16 (1975).
Manson, R.J., and Merritt, C.A., "Land Application of Liquid Municipal
Wastewater Sludges." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 47,20 (1975).
Mattel, P.P., "Sludge Management Systems for St. Louis." Proc. Natl.
Conf. on Sludge Management, Information Transfer, Inc., Washington, D.C.
205 (1974).
McMichael, W.F., "Costs of Hauling and Land Spreading by Domestic Sewage
Treatment and Plant Sludge." Natl. Tech. Inform. Serv., Springfield, Va.,
PB-227 005 (1974).
Mears, D.R., et al., "Thermal and Physical Properties of Compost." In
Energy, Agriculture, and Waste Management, W.J. Jewell [Ed.], Ann Arbor
Sci. Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan 515 (1975).
Meredith, W.R., "Costings and Operational Problems of Sewage Sludge
Processing." Water Res. (G.B.), 9,6-3 (1975).
Miller, S.S., "Sludges: There are Options." Environ. Sci. § Tech., 9,613
C1975).
1-112
-------
Mills, R.A., and Tschobanoglous, G., "Energy Consumption in Wastewater
Treatment." In Energy, Agriculture, and Waste Management, W.J. Jewell
[Ed.], Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor, Mich., 151 (1975).
Mitchell, F., et al., "High Gradient Magnetic Separation of Microorganisms
and other Non-Magnetic Suspended Solids from Wastewater." Paper presented
at 48th Annual Conference of the Water Poll. Control Fed., Miami Beach, Fla.
(1975).
Molina, J.A.E., et al., "Aeration-Induced Changes in Liquid Digested Sewage
Sludge." Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc., 35:1,60 (1971).
Morse, N., and Roth, E.W., "Systems Analysis of Regional Solid Waste
Handling." PHS Pub. No. 2065 (1970).
Nash, N., "Sludge Disposal and the Coastal Metropolis." In Marine Chemistry
in the Coastal Environment." T.M. Church [Ed.], ACS Symp. Series 18, Amer.
Chem. Soc., Washington, D.C., 410 (1975).
National Commission on Materials Policy, "Material Needs and the Environment,
Today and Tomorrow." U.S. Govt. Printing Off., Washingto., D.C. (1973).
Nelson, D.M., and Loehr, R.C., "Conservation of Energy and Mineral Resources
in Wastes through Pyrolysis." In Energy, Agriculture, and Waste Management,
W.J. Jewell [Ed.], Ann Arbor Sci. Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor, Mich. 495
(1975).
Neptune, M.D., "Planners' Handbook for Residual Waste Management." Pedco-
Environmental (March 1976).
Newton, M., "Hazardous Waste Managemtne in the States." Proc. Natl. Conf. on
Management and Disposal of Residues from the Treatment of Industrial Waste-
waters, Information Transfer, Inc., Washington, D.C., 13 (1975).
Norstedt, R.A., and Baldwin, L.B., "Sludge Accumulation and Stratification
in Anaerobic Dairy Waste Lagoons." Trans. Amer. Soc. Agr. Eng., 18,312
(March-April 1975).
O'Neal, J., "The Use of Sludge Should be a Business." Compost Sci., 16:3,28
(1975).
Owes, R.J., "Economic Aspects of Regional Versus Local Solid Waste
Management." University of Washington (1971).
Page, A.L., "Fate and Effects of Trace Elements in Sewage Sludge When
Applied to Agricultural Lands." EPA Tech. Service, EPA-670/2-74-005 (1974).
Parkman, C.C., and Hindmarch, G.N., "Wigan Sludge Process Design Analysis."
Pub. Health Engr., 18,149 (1975).
1-113
-------
Pasztor, L., et al., "Stack Gas Desulfurization Residue Management."
Proc. Natl. Conf. on Management and Disposal of Residues from the Treatment
of Industrial Wastewaters, Information Transfer, Inc., Washington, D.C., 59
(1975).
Patterson, J.C., "Enrichment of Urban Soil with Composted Sludge and Leaf
Mold - Constitution Gardens." Compost Sci., 16:3,18 (1975).
Pearson, D., and Webb, M., "The Salvage and Recycling of Useful Materials."
The Chem. Engr. (G.B.), 270,89 (1973).
Poincelot, R.P., "A Scientific Examination of the Principles and Practice of
Composting." Compost Sci., 15:3,24 (1974).
Powell, H.E., et al., "Recovery of Phosphates and Metals from Phosphate
Sludge by Solvent Extraction." U.S. Nat. Tech. Inform. Serv., No. 211933
(1972); Chem. Abs., 78:10,61947W (1973).
Premi, P.R., and Cornfield, A.H., "Incubation Study of Nitrogen Mineralization
in Soil Treated with Dried Sewage Sludge." Environ. Poll., 2:1,1 (1971).
Proc. Natl. Conf. Municipal Sludge Management, "Municipal Sludge Management."
Information Transfer, Inc., Washington, D.C. (1974).
Protz, R., "Cation Distribution in Soils as Related to Sewage Sludge Disposal
on Land." Sludge Handling and Disposal Seminar, Conf. Proc. No. 2, 192
(1974); Water Res. Abs., 8,24,W75-12139 (1975).
Rawcliffe, E., and Saul, G.W., "The Agricultural Use of Blackburn Sewage
Sludge." Water Poll. Control (G.B.), 73:2,168 (1974).
Reed, C.H., "Equipment for incorporating Sewage Sludges into the Soil."
Compost Sci., 15:4,31 (1974).
Remley, S., "Facing Up to Sludge Disposal in New Jersey." Compost Sci.,
16:4,26 (1975).
Research Triangle Universities, "Ultimate Disposal of Wastewaters and Their
Residuals." Proc. Natl. Symp. Water Resources Res. Inst., North Carolina
State Univ., Raleigh (1974).
Robinson, J.H., "New Regional Plant Built for the Future." Water § Wastes
Eng., 10:8,35 (1973).
Romanoff, E., "Regional Solid Waste Management and Economic Growth." (1971).
Roszinski, H., and Herzel, F., "Behavior and Effect of Environmental Pollu-
tion Substances in Composts from Refuse and Sewage Sludge. 2. Reduction of
the Herbicide Simazine During the Decomposition." Z. Kulturtech.
Flurbercinig (Ger.), 13:5,304 (1972); Chem. Abs., 78,22,1399850 (1973).
1-114
-------
Russell, C.S., and Spofford, W.O., "A Quantitative Framework for Residuals-
Environmental Quality Management." Proceedings of 1969 Water Resources
Seminar, Water Resources Res. Center, Purdue Univ., Lafayette, Ind., 66 (1969)
Russell, C.S., and Spofford, W.O., Jr., "A Quantitative Framework for
Residuals Management decisions." In "Environmental Quality Analysis,
Theory and Method in the Social Sciences." The Johns Hopkins Press,
Baltimore, Md., and London, Eng., 115 (1972).
Russell, G.A., "From Lagooning to Farmland Application: The Next Step in
Lime Sludge Disposal." Jour. Amer. Water Works Assn., 67,585 (1975).
Ryan, J.A., et al., "Nitrogen Transformations and Availability of an
Anaerobically Digested Sewage Sludge In Soil." Jour. Environ. Qual.,
2,489 (1973); Chem. Abs., 80:10,52064V (1974).
Salib, W.A., "Sludge Handling and Disposal Practices in Metropolitan
Toronto." Sludge Handling and Disposal Seminar, Conf. Proc. No. 2, 452
(1974); Water Res. Abs., 8,23,W75-11731 (1975).
Schmalensee, R., Ramanathan, R., et al., "Measuring External Effects of
Solid Waste Management." EPA-600/5-75-010 (March 1975).
Schmidtke, N.W., and Monteith, J.R., "Industrial Residue Policy Program and
Activities of the Environmental Protection Service of Canada." Proc. Natl.
Conf. on Management and Disposal of Residues from the Treatment .of Indus-
trial Wastewaters, Information Transfer, Inc., Washington, D.C., 17 (1975).
Schulz, W., "Device for Sewage Sludge Disinfection." German Patent No.
2,234,352 (January 31, 1974); Chem. Abs., 80,22,124385A (1974).
Schwing, J.E., and Puntenney, J.L., "Denver Plan." Water $ Wastes Eng., 11:
9,24 (1974).
Scott, D.S., and Horlings, H., "Removal of Phosphates and Metals from Sewage
Sludges." Sludge Handling and Disposal Seminar, Conf. Proc. No. 2, 413
(1974); Water Res. Abs., 8,23,W75-11729 (1975).
Seidel,'G., and Schneider, M., Wasser. Luft Betr. (Ger.), 14:6,216 (1970);
Chem. Abs., 73,16,80305y (1970).
Seitz, W.D., "Strip-Mined Land Reclamation with Sewage Sludge: An Economic
Simulation." Amer. Jour. Agr. Econ., 56,799 (1974); Water Res. Abs., 8,18,
W75-0936 (1975).
SHannon, E.E., et al., "Aspects of Incinerating Chemical Sludges." Sludge
Handling and Disposal Seminar, Conf. Proc. No. 2, 391 (1974); Water Res.
Abs., 8,23,W75-11728 (1975).
Shipp, R.F., and Baker, D.E., "Pennsylvania's Sewage Sludge Research and
Extension Program." Compost Sci., 16:2,6 (1975).
1-115
-------
Simonen, E.R., "Sludge Handling and Disposal Practices in the Regional
Municipality of Niagara." Sludge Handling and Disposal Seminar, Conf.
Proc. No. 2, 444 (1974); Water Res. Abs., 8,23,W75-11730 (1975).
Silveston, B. § P. Engrs., et al., "Computer_Aided Planning of Regional
Sludge Disposal Systems, Research Report No. 46." Environment Canada
(September 1976).
Singer, P.C., "Sofener Sludge Disposal: What's Best? Water 5 Wastes Eng.,
11:12,25 (1974).
Singley, M.E., "Bridgeton, J.J. Sludge Composting Project-A City-Farm
Relationship." Compost Sci., 14:5,18 (1973).
Sopper, W.E., et al., "Reclamation of.Anthracite Coal Refuse Using Treated
Municipal Wastewater and Sludge." Natl. Tech. Inform. Serv., Springfield,
Va., PB-243 114 (1975); Water Res. Abs., 8,18,W75-09131 (1975).
Smith, R., and Eilers, R.G., "Computer Evaluation of Sludge Handling and
Disposal Costs," Proceedings of the 1975 National Conference on Municipal
Sludge Management and Disposal, Anaheim, California (August 1975).
Snell, J.R., "Low Cost Ways of Stabilizing Liquid and Solid Organic Wastes."
Water § Wastes Eng., 7:5,54 (1970).
Spruill, E.L., "Color Removal and Sludge Recovery from Total Mill Effluent."
Tappi, 56:4,98 (1973); Chem. Abs., 78,24,151159V (1973).
Spotswood, A., and Raymer, M., "Some Aspects of Sludge Disposal on Agri-
cultural Land." Water Poll. Control (G.B.), 72:1,71 (1973).
Stern, G., "Pasteurization of Liquid Digested Sludge." Proc. Natl. Conf.
on Municipal Sludge Management, Information Transfer, Inc. , Washington,
D.C., 163 (1974).
Stone, R., and Kahle, R.L., "Water and Sewage Sludge Absorption by Solid
Waste." Jour. San. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 98,731 (1972).
Stone, R., "Landfill Disposal of Liquid Sewage Sludge." Jour. Environ. Eng.
Div., Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101,91 (1975).
Stone, R., "Sewage Sludge Disposal in a Sanitary Landfill, Vol. I; Summary
and Conclusion; Vol. II: Description of Study and Technical Data." Natl.
Tech. Inform. Serv., Springfield, Va., PB-225 361 (1973); Water Res. Abs.,
8:4,W75-01925 (1975).
Struble, R.G., "Sewage Sludge Aids Farm Crops in West Chester, Pennsylvania."
Compost Sci., 15:2,20 (1974).
Styers, F.C., "Sludge Recycling: The Winston-Salem Experience." Proc.
Natl. Symp. on Ultimate Disposal of Wastewaters and Their Residuals, Water
Resources Res. Inst., North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, 143 (1974).
1-116
-------
Suess, A., et al., "Experimental Irradiation Facility for the Sterilization
of Sewage Sludge." Kerntechnik (Ger.), 16,65 (1974); Chem. Abs., 80,22,
124300U (1974).
Swanson, R.L., "Ocean Dumping in the New York Bight." U.S. Govt. Printing
Office, CSS.13: ERL 321-MESA 2 (1975); Water Res. Abs., 8,24,W75-12172 (1975),
Taylor, E., "Letchworth Water Pollution Control Works. " Publ. Health Engr.,
7,21 (1974).
Texaco Development Corporation, "Liquid-Phase Coking of Sewer Sludge and
Municipal Wastes." French Patent 2,145,748 (30 March 1973); Chem. Abs.,
79,14,83214C (1973).
Thompson, R., "How Farmers Can Reduce Fertilizer Bills by Using On-Farm
Wastes and Urban Sludge." Compost Sci., 16:3,14 (1975).
Tietjen, C., "European Experiences in Applying Sludge to Farmland." Compost
Sci., 14:4,4 (1973).
Toftner, R.O., "Developing A Local and Regional Solid Waste Management
Plan." Open File Report (TO 14.0 ) (1971).
Troemper, A.P., "The Economics of Sludge Irrigation." Proc. Natl. Conf. on
Municipal Sludge Management, Information Transfer, Inc., Washington, D.C.,
115 (1974).
Tucker, G.E., "Sewage Treatment in the City of Plymouth." Water Poll. Control
(G.B.), 73,325 (1974).
Tullander, V., "Final Disposal of Municipal Sludge in Sweden." Jour. Water
Poll. Control Fed., 47,688 (1975).
Van Loon, J.C., "Agricultural Use of Sewage Treatment Plant Sludges, A
Potential Source of Mercury Contamination." Environ. Letters, 4:4,259
(1973); Chem. Abs., 79:4,23312Y (1973).
Vater, W.A.G., "European Practices in Sludge Digestion and Disposal." In
"Water Quality Improvement by Physical and Chemical Processes." E.F. Gloyna
and W.W. Eckenfelder, Jr. [Eds.], Univ. of Texas Press, Austin, 421 (1970).
Vincent, H., et al., "Use of Wastes by Liquid-Phase Coking." German Patent
2,130,476 (21 December 1972); Chem. Abs., 78,16,10177T (1973).
Vlamis, J., and Williams, D.E., "Utilization of Municipal Organic Wastes
as Agricultural Fertilizers." Calif. Agr., 25:7,7 (1971); Poll. Abs.,
2:6,71-6TF-1808 (1971).
Wadehra, P.K., and Adelman, M., "Phosphorus Leaching from Sewage Sludge as a
Landfill." Water Poll. Res. (G.B.), 8,202 (1973); Water Res. Abs., 8:7,
W75-03782 (1975).
1-117
-------
Walker, J.M., and Willson, G.B., "Composting Sewage Sludge: Why?" Part I.
Compost Sci., 14:4,10 (1973).
Walker, J.M., "Sewage Sludges-Management Aspects for Land Application."
Compost Sci., 16:2,12 (1975).
Walker, J.M., "Trench Incorporation of Sewage Sludge." Proc. Natl. Conf.
on Municipal Sludge Management, Information Transfer, Inc., Washington, D.C.,
139 (1974).
Water £ Waste Trt. Jour., "Frimley and Camberley, Surrey Sewage Works
Extension." (G.B.), 15,13 (1972).
Water Poll. Abs., "Worthing Disposal Problem Solved by Waste Composting."
43,370 (1970); Mun. Eng. (G.B.), 146,1137 (1969).
Water Poll. Control Fed., "Utilization of Municipal Wastewater Sludge."
Manual of Practice No. 2, Washington, D.C. (1972).
Water Pollution Research Laboratory, "Water Pollution Research 1969."
Webber, J., "Sludge Handling and Disposal Practices in England." Sludge
Handling and Disposal Seminar, Conf. Proc. No. 2,10 (1974); Water Res. Abs.,
8,23,W75-11717 (1975).
Weber, J., "Effects of Toxic Metals in Sewage on Crops." Water Poll.
Control (Can.), 71,404 (1972).
Webber, M.D., and Gaynor, J.D., "Extractable Metals in Mixtures of Soil
and Sewage Sludge." Sludge Handling and Disposal Seminar, Conf. Proc. No. 2,
249 (1974); Water Res. Abs., 8,24,W75-12141 (1975).
Wesche, J., and Roszinski, H., "Behavior and Effect of Environmental Pollu-
tion Substances in Composts from Refuse and Sewage Sludge. 1. Influence on
Decomposition by a Detergent, by Diesel Oil, and by a Herbicide."
Z. Kulturtech. Flurbereinig (Ger.), 13:5,289 (1972); Chem. Abs., 78,22,
139986E (1973).
Westerhoff, G.P., and Daly, M.P., "Water Treatment Plant Wastes Disposal."
Jour. Amer. Water Works Assn., 66,319; 378, 441 (1974).
Weston, R.F., "Solid Waste Management Plan - New York." Report (SW-5TSG)
(1970).
Whittington, D., "Experiences with Sludge Handling in Texas." Third U.S.-
Japan Conf. on Sewage Treatment Tech. Proc., 239 (1974); Water Res. Abs.,
8,23, W75-11736 (1975).
Willard, H.K., "Feasibility of Converting Bark Residues to Electric Power
and Pyrolytic Products." Proc. Natl. Conf. on Management and Disposal of
Residues from the Treatment of Industrial Wastewaters, Information Transfer,
Inc., Washington, D.C. 79 (1975).
1-118
-------
Williams, F.H., "Use of Sewage Sludge on Agricultural Land and the Effects
of Metals on Crops." Water Poll. Control (G.B.), 24,635 (1975).
Wilson, G.B., and Walker, J.M., "Composting Sewage Sludge: How?" Part II.
Compost Sci., 14:5,30 (1973).
Wolf, H.W., "Composting Sludge in Germany." Compost Sci., 15:5,31 (1974).
Wolf, R., "Sludge in the 'Mile-High' City." Compost Sci., 16:1,20 (1975).
Wood, G.M., "Regulatory Aspects of Sludge Utilization on Land." Sludge
Handling and Disposal Seminar, Conf. Proc. No. 2, 110 (1974); Water Res.
Abs., 8,24,W75-12134 (1975).
Wood, R., and Ferris, S.B., "Disposal of Disgested Sludge." Water Res.
(G.B.), 6,551 (1972).
Wood, R., and Smith, W.S., "Maple Lodge 1961-71: The Second Decade."
Water Poll. Control (G.B.), 72,405 (1973).
Wood, R., "The Utilization of Sewage Sludge." Effl, £ Water Trt. Jour.,
15,455 (1975).
Wyatt, J.M., and White,P.E., Jr., "Sludge Processing, Transportation and
Disposal/Resource Recovery, A Planning Perspective." PB 251 013
(December 1975).
Yamoto, T., "Activated Carbon and Other Adsorbants as By-Products from the
Activated-Sludge Treatment of Waste Waters from Pig Pens." Japanese
Patent 7,229,-289 (4 November 1972); Chem. Abs., 78,16,101781W (1973).
Yen, C., and Chuang, C-Y, "Possibility of a Closed Cycle System of Organic
Waste Disposal." Neng Yuan Chi Kan (Jap.), 4,98 (1974); Chem. Abs., 81,12,
68058C (1974).
Young, L.J., and Purcupile, J.C., "Food from Sewage? It Can Be Done."
Water & Wastes Eng., 10:6,47 (1973).
"Areawide Waste Treatment Management Planning." Office Public Affairs
(A-107) (November 1974).
"EPA 208 Areawide Waste Treatment Management Planning Experience.".
"Guidelines for Areawide Waste Treatment Management Planning." EPA-
Section 208 FWPCA (August 1975).
1-119
-------
Runoff Quality and Control
Akan, A.O., "Unsteady Gutter Flow into Grate Inlets." M.S. thesis, Univ. of
111., Urbana-Champaign (1973).
Allen, D.M., and Sargent, R.L., "Treatment of Comb. Sewer Overflows by High
Gradient Magnetic Separation." EPA 68-03-2218 (March 1976).
Amer. City, "Accept and Treat Wet Weather Flow Efficiently." 88:5,102 (1973).
Amer. City, "Pioneering Plant Provides Cost-Saving Alternatives to Separating
Sewers." 88:10,90 (1973).
Amer. City, "Salt Deicing Cuts Accidents by 75% According to New 116-City
Survey." 88:1,16 (1973).
Amer. Process Equip. Corp., "Ultrasonic Filtration of Comb. Sewer Overflows."
WPCRS 11023 DZF 6/70 (June 1970).
American Public Works Assoc., "Comb. Sewer Regulator Overflow Facilities."
WPCRS 11022 DMU (07/70).
American Public Works Assoc., "Control of Infiltration S Inflow into Sewer
System," WPCRS 11022EFF 12/70 (Dec. 1970).
American Public Works Assoc., "New Stormwater Detention Report Published by
the American Public Works Asso." Reporter, Amer. Public Works Assoc.,
41:5,22 (1974).
American Public Works Assoc., "Prevention § Correction of Excessive
Infiltration § Inflow into Sewer Systems - A Manual of Practice." WPCRS
11022 EFF 01/71 (Jan. 1971).
Anderson, J.J., et al., "An Investigation of the Evaluation of Automation
and Control Schemes for Combined Sewer Systems." Colorado State Univ.,
Fort Collins, Dept. of Civil Eng., Tech. Rept. on Task 3, TR-4 W73-00148
(1972).
Anderson, J.J., "Present Practice and Research Needs in Wastewater
Collection System Design and Operation." Paper presented at Research Needs
for Automation of Wastewater Treatment, Clemson Univ., Clemson, S.C. and
EPA, Washington, D.C. (1975).
Anderson, R.C., and Auster, C., "Costs and Benefits of Road Salting."
Boston College Environmental Law Center; Environ. Affairs. 3:1,128 (1974).
1-120
-------
Argaman, Y., et al., "Design of Optimal Sewerage Systems." Jour. Environ.
Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, 703 (1973).
Arnett, R., et al., "Diurnal Flow and Quality Patterns in a Combined
Sewerage System." Pacific Northwest Lab., Battelle Memorial Inst.,
Richland, Wash., Paper presented at 46th Annual Conf., Water Poll. Control
Fed. (Oct. 1973).
Aron, G., and Bonelli, J.R., "Practical Alternatives in Storm Runoff Control."
Paper in proceedings of the National Symposium on Urban Hydrology and
Sediment Control, Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky. (1975).
Autotrol Corp., Biosystems Div., "Combined Sewer Overflow Treatment by the
Rotating Biological Contactor Process." EPA, Washington, D.C./U.S. Dept. of
the Int., 11022 (14-12-24) (1973).
Asbury Park Evening Press, "Stormwater Adds to Water Pollution." Asbury Park,
N.J. (April 29, 1974).
Bell, P.W.W., "Optimal Control of Flow in Combined Sewer Systems." NTIS No.
PB-223 668 (1974).
Bell, W., and Winn, C.B., "Minimization of Pollution from Combined Storm
Sewer Systems." In Intl. Symposium on Systems Eng. and Anal. Vol. II,
Contributed Papers, Purdue Univ. (Oct. 1972).
Berger, B.B., "A General Comment on Stormwater Management Models." Paper in
proc. for "A Short Course:Application to Stormwater Management Models."
Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst, and EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (Aug. 1974).
Black, Crow, et al., "Storm § Comb. Sewer Pollution Sources S Abatement."
WPCRS 11024 ELB(1/71).
Blakey, A.W., "Design of Long Interceptor Sewers." Jour. Inst. Mun. Engr.
(G.B.), 99:12,338; (Abs.) Eng. Index, 11:3,268 (1973).
Blanic, R., and Dubus, S., "A Method of Managing the First Flush of Storm-
water: Horizontal Selective Storm Overflows." Tech. et. Sci. Mun. (Fr.),
70:1,15; (Abs.) Water Resources Council Information, 2, 15 (1975).
Blood, D.O., "Snow Removal Tailored to Reduce Salt Pollution." Amer. City,
88:1,16 (1973).
Boericke, R.R., et al., "The Helical Bend Combined Sewer Overflow Regulator-
Separator." EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-600/2-75-062 (1975).
Bremner, R.M., Australian Patent 434,566 (April 19, 1973); (Abs.) Mun.
Technol. Bull., EPA, Washington, D.C., 0193 (Aug. 1973).
1-121
-------
Brokaw, A.T., "Infiltration/Inflow Studies and Their Relationship to the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972." Presented at the
46th Annual Conference, Water Poll. Control Fed. (Oct. 4, 1973).
Brown, R.K., "Drainage Alternatives." APWA Reporter, 40:6,18 (1973).
Brunnenr, P.G., "Pollution of the Runoff in Separate Sewer Systems, and
Measures for the Reduction of Rainwater Runoff-Generated Pollution of Water
Bodies." Gas-Wasser-Abw. (Ger.), 53:4,109 (1973); Municipal Tech. Bull., EPA
Washington, D.C., 0208 (Aug. 1973).
Bryan, E.H., "Concentrations of Lead in Urban Stormwater." Jour. Water Poll.
Control Fed., 46, 2419 (1974).
Buck, C.E., "The Effect of Road Salt on Aerobic Soil Bacteria Adjacent to a
Major Highway." Research in the Life Sciences, Univ. of Maine, Orono, 21, 6
(1974).
Burgess § Niple, "Stream Pollution § Abatement from Comb. Sewer Overflows."
WPCRS 11024 FKN 11/69 (Nov. 1969).
Burry, A., "Superposition of Two Pipes in a Common, Mixed Sewer System."
Tech. Su. Mur.-L'Eau (Fr.), 68:4,173 (1973); (Abs.) Mun. Technol. Bull.,
0203 (Aug. 1973).
Bursztynsky, T.A., et al., "-Treatment of Combined Sewer Overflows by
Dissolved Air Flotation." EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-600/2-75-033 (1975).
Butler, J.D., "Salt-Tolerant Grasses for Roadsides." Highway Res. Rec.,
411, 1, (1972); (Abs.) Eng. Index, 11:3,128 (1973).
Byrne, B., "PVC Pipe Cuts Colorado District's Flow Cost." Water £ Sew. Works,
119:12,51 (1972).
Carcich, I.G., et al., "Pressure Sewer:A New Alternative to Gravity Sewers."
Civil Eng., 44:5,50 (1974).
Carcich, I.G., et al., "Pressure Sewer Demonstration." Jour. Environ. Eng.
Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100, 25 (1974).
Carcich, I.G., "Pressure Sewers." In Combined Sewer Overflow Seminar Papers,
EPA/New York State Dept. of Conservation, EPA-670/2-73-077 (Sept. 1973).
Carr, F.H., Jr., "Pre-Mixed Chlorecles Provide Better Roads in Winter."
Public Works, 106:1,48 (1975).
Carr, R.R., "Combined Sampling and Flow Measurement." Pub. Works, 104:4,71
(1973).
Central Engr. Lab. FMC Corp., "A Flushing System for Comb. Sewer Cleansing,"
WPCRS -1020 DNO 3/72 (March 1972).
1-122
-------
Chermisinoff, P., "Water Pollution Sampling Monitoring and Analysis
Instrumentation." Poll. Eng., 6:4,36 (1974).
Chow, V.T., and Yen, B.C., "Urban Storm Water Runoff:Determination of
Volumes § Flowrates." EPA-600/2-76-116 (May 1976).
City of Portland, Oregon, "Demonstration of Rotary Screening for Comb. Sewer
Overflows." WPCRS 11023 FDD 07/71 (July 1971).
City of St. Paul, Minn., "Temporary Detention of Storm § Combined Sewage in
Natural Underground Formations." EPA-R2-73-242 (May 1973).
Civil Eng., "Environmental Effects of Road Salting." 3:3,100 (1973).
Civil Eng., "Sanitary Sewer Suspended in Storm Sewer." 4:5,93 (1973).
Click, C.N., and Mixon, P.O., "Flow Smoothing in Sanitary Sewers." Jour.
Water Poll. Control Fed., 46,522 (1974).
Click, C.N., "The Feasibility of Flow Smoothing Stations in Municipal Sewage
Systems." EPA, Washington, 11010 FDI, EPA-R2-73-138 (Feb. 1973).
Cochrane Div., Crane Co., "Microstraining § Disinfection of Comb. Sewer
Overflows." WPCRS 11023 EVO 6/70 (June 1970).
Colston, N V., "Characterization and Treatment of Urban Land Runoff." EPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-74-096 (1974).
Condon, F.J., "Storm and Combined Sewer Abatement Technology in the United
States-An Overview." Paper in proceedings of Third U.S./Japan Conference on
Sewage Treatment Technology. Tokyo, Japan, EPA-670/9-75-005 (1974).
Consoer, Townsend and Associates, "Detention Tank for Combined Sewer Overflow."
EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-600/2-75-071 (1975).
Cooley, R.L., et al., "Influence of Surface and Near-Surface Caliche
Distribution on Infiltration Characteristics and Flooding, Las Vegas Area,
Nevada." Nevada Univ., Reno Center for Water Resources Res., OWRR-B-055-
Nev, 1 (1973).
Cornell, Howland, et al., "Rotary Vibratory Fine Screening of Comb. Sewer
Overflows." WPCRS 11023 FDD 03/70 (March 1970).
Cowen, W.F., and Lee, G.F., "Leaves as a Source of Phosphorus." Environ.
Sci. & Technol., 7:9,853 (1973).
Crecelius, E.A., and Piper, D.Z., "Particulate Lead Contamination Recorded
in Sedimentary Cores from Lake Washington, Seattle." Environ. Sci. § Technol.,
7,1053 (1973).
1-123
-------
Dalrymple, R.J., et al., "Physical and Settling Characteristics of
Particulates in Combined Sewer Overflow, Sanitary Wastewater and Urban
Stormwater." EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-75-011 (1975).
Davis, J.A., III, and Jackson, J., "Heavy Metals in Wastewater in Three
Urban Areas." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 47, 2292 (1975).
Derrick, C., and Logie, K., "Flow Augmenting Effects of Additives on Open
Channel Flows." EPA, Washington, D.C., EPA-R2-73-238 (June 1973).
Dodson, Kinney, et al., "Evaluation of Storm Standby Tanks." WPCRS 11020 FAL
3/71 (March 1971).
DuFresner-Henry Engr. Corp., "Sewer System Evaluation § Rehabilitation."
Techn. Bulletin (Sept. 1975).
Effl. § Water Trt. Jour., "Design Basis for the Rotating Disc Process."
Steels, I.H., (G.B.), 14:8,59 (August 1974).
Elgmork, K., et al., "Polluted Snow in Southern Norway during the Winters
1968-1971." Environ. Poll., 4:1,41 (1973); (abs.) Selected Water Res. Abs.,
Dept. of the Int., 7:9,62 (1974).
Eng. News-Rec., "When It Rains, It Pours Through the Pavement." 191:15,38
(1973).
Engineering Science, Inc., "Characterization and Treatment of Combined
Sewer Overflows." EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-75-054, NTIS No. PB 241
299/AS (1975).
Envirogenics Co., "In-Sewer Fixed Screening of Comb. Sewer Overflows."
WPCRS 11024 FKJ 10/70 (Oct. 1970).
Field, R., and Cesareo, D.J., "Considerations for Analysis of Infiltration-
Inflow." Paper presented at 1974 Intl. Public Works Congress and Equipment
Show, Toronto, Canada (Sept. 1974).
Field, R., and Lager, J.A., "Countermeasures for Pollution from Overflows."
EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-74-090 (1974).
Field, R., "A Swirl Device for Regulating and Concentrating Combined Sewer
Overflows." News of Environmental Research Cincinnati (NERC) Advanced Waste
Treatment Research, EPA (Oct. 1974).
Field, R., "Design of a Combined Sewer Overflow Regulator/Concentrator."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 46, 1722 (1974).
Field, R., "Environmental Effects from Street Salting." Presented before the
Wisconsin Legislature Comm. on Environ. Quality, Madison, Wis. (March 9,
1973).
1-124
-------
Field, R., et al., "Treatability Determination for a Prototype Swirl
Combined Sewer Overflow Regulator/Solids Separator." Paper presented at
Design-Operation Interactions at Large Treatment Plants, International
Association on Water Poll. Res., Vienna, Austria (1975).
Field, R., et al., "Water Pollution and Associated Effects from Street
Salting." EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-R2-73-257 (1973).
Field, R., et al., "Water Pollution and Associated Effects from Street
Salting." Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100, 459
(1974); (Abridgmenet) Report prepared for 53rd Annual Meeting of Highway
Research Board, Transportation Research Record 506, Washington,D.C. (1974).
Field, R., Struzeski, E. J. Jr., et al., "Water Pollution § Associated
Effects from Street Salting." EPA-R2-73-257 (May 1973).
Field, R., "The Dual Functioning Swirl Combined Sewer Overflow Regulator/
Concentrator." EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-73-059 (1973).
Field, R., "The Swirl Concentrator as a Comb. Sewer Overflow Regulator
Facility." EPA-R2-72-008 (Sept. 1972).
Freestone, F.J., "Runoff of Oils from Rural Roads Treated to Suppress Dust."
EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-R2-72-054 (Oct. 1972).
Gibbs, C.V., et al., "System for Regulation of Combined Sewage Flows." Jour.
San. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 98, 951 (1972).
Glover, G.E., and Herbert, G.R., "Microstraining § Disinfection of Comb.
Sewer Overflows-Phase II." EPA-R2-73-124 (Jan. 1973).
Glover, G.E., "Application of Microstraining to Combined Sewer Overflow."
In Combined Sewer Overflow Seminar Papers, EPA/New York State Dept. of
Conservation, EPA-670/2-73-077 (Sept. 1973).
Glover, G.E., "High-Rate Disinfection of Combined Sewer Overflow." In
Combined Sewer Overflow Seminar Papers, EPA/New York State Dept. of
Conservation, EPA-670/2-73-077 (Sept. 1973).
Gottstein, I.E., "Sewer System Evaluation for Infiltration/Flow." Amer.
Consult. Serv., Inc. (None).
Gottstein, L.E., "Sewer System Evaluation for Infiltration/Inflow." Paper
presented for the EPA Technology Transfer Program, Washington, D.C.
(Aug. 1973).
Gupta, M.K., and Agnew, R.W., "Screening/Disso'lved-Air Flotation Treatment
of Combined Sewer Overflows." In Combined Sewer Overflow Seminar Papers,
EPA/New York State Dept. of Conservation; EPA-670/2-73-077 (Sept. 1973).
Gupta, M.K., and Agnew, R.W., "Two Wisconsin Cities Treat Combined Sewer
Overflows." Water & Sew. Works, 120:8,49 (1973).
1-125
-------
Gupta, M.K., "Feasibility Studies for the Upgradation of Flotation Treated
Combined Sewer Overflows." For the Wis. Dept. of Natural Resources (1973).
Gutierrez, A.F., and Wilmut, C., "Eliminating Excess Infiltration/Inflow."
Highlights, Water Poll. Control Fed., Washington, D.C., 11:8,1 (1974).
Hamid, A., and Dolan, F., "Wet Weather Flows Source Control and Treatment."
Paper presented at 47th Annual Conference of Water Pollution Control Fed.,
Denver, Colo. (1974).
Hansen, C.A., and Agnew, R.W., "Two Wisconsin Cities Treat Combined Sewer
Overflows." Water § Sew. Works, 120:8,48 (1973).
Harlan, T.S., and Allman, W.B., "Polyethylene Pipe Slipped into Defective
Sanitary Sewer." Civil Eng., 43:6,78 (1973).
Harlan, T.S., "Collection System Renewal." Water Poll. Control Fed., Deeds
$ Data, 10:5,0-1 (1973).
Haro, B., "Storm Drainage 'Filtered' Before Discharge." Publ. Works, 104:9,
124 (1973).
Harvey, P., "High Rate Multi-Media Filtration." In Combined Sewer Overflow
Seminar Papers, EPA/New York State Dept. of Conservation, EPA-670/2-73-077
(Sept. 1973).
Harza, R.D., and LaRusso, R.S., "Deep Tunnel Technology." Reporter, American
Public Works Assoc., 40:9,11 (1973).
Hernandez, J.W., and Wright, J.R., "Design Parameters for Tube-Settlers."
Proc. 25th Ind. Waste Conf., Purdue Univ., Ext. Ser. 137, 805 (1970).
Hoffman, E.K., "Country Combats Urban Stormwater Runoff Problems." Public
Works, 106:5,92 (1975).
Homack, P., et al., "Utilization of Trickling Filters for Dual Treatment of
Dry and Wet Weather Flows." EPA, Washington, D.C., EPA-670/2-73-071 (1973).
Homack, P., Zippier, K.L., et al., "Utilization of Trickling Filters for
Dual Treatment of Dry & Wet Weather Flows." EPA-670/2-73-071 (Sept. 1973).
Hutchinson, R.E., and White, J.B., "A Storm-Overflow Chamber Without Drop
in Invert Level-Laboratory Tests." Jour. Inst. Mun. Engr. (G.B.), 100, 279
(1973).
Ireland, D., "Salt Particle Size Affects Fuel Use." Rural and Urban Roads,
12:6,50 (1974).
Jackson, T.J., and Ragan, R.M., "Hydrology of Porous Pavement Parking Lots."
Jour. Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Eng., 100, 1739 (1974).
1-126
-------
Johnson, L., "A Comprehensive Snow and Ice Control Program." APWA Reporter,
40:1,14 (1973).
Jones, J., "Plastic Cures Pipeline Leaks." Water § Wastes Eng., 10:10,42
(1973).
Jubboori, S.H., et al., "Aquifer Clogging in Combined Wastewater Recharge."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 46, 2732 (1974).
Kemmet, R.H., "Sewer Grouting:An Economical Choice." Water Poll. Control Fed.,
Deeds § Data, 10:1,0-6 (1973).
Kemmet, R.H., "Sewer Grouting Cures Plant Overload Problem." Pub. Works,
104:7,94 (1973).
Kenosha News, "New Sewage Control Unit Rated Success." (June 5, 1973).
Klein, L.A., et al., "Source of Metals in New York City Wastewater." Jour.
Water Poll. Control Fed., 46, 2653 (1974).
Kluesener, J.W., and Lee, F.G., "Nutrient Loading from a Separate Storm
Sewer in Madison, Wisconsin." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 46, 920 (1974).
LaBarre, N., et al., "Lead Contamination of Snow." Water Res. (G.B.), 7, 1215
(1973).
Lautrich, R., "The Intermediary of Stormwater Retention Tanks Instead of Rain
Outlets by Subsequent Enlargement of Rate of Flow or Mixing Rate." Wasser u.
Boden (Ger.), 2, 41 (1973); (Abs.) Mun. Technol. Bull., EPA, Washington, D.C.,
0111 (May 1973).
Li, R.M., et al., "On Overland Flow Water Routing." Paper in proceedings of
the National Sympsoium on Urban Hydrology and Sediment Control, Univ. of
Kentucky, Lexington, Ky. (1975).
Lumb, A.M., et al., "Analysis of Urban Land Treatment Measures for Flood
Peak Reduction." Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Ga., OWRR Project
No. C-2064 (1974).
Maher, M., "Microstraining and Disinfection of Combined Sewer Overflows-
Phase III." EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-74-049 (1974).
Mahida, V.U., et al., "Multi-Purpose Combined Sewer Overflow Treatment
Facility, Mount Clemens, Michigan." EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-75-010
(1975).
Mallory, T.W., and LeiSer, C.P., "Control of Combined Sewer Overflow Events."
Paper presented at the 1973 Intl. Public Works Congress and Equipment Show,
Denver, Colo. (1973).
1-127
-------
Malmquist, P.A., and Svenson, G., "Heavy Metals in Stormwater." Vatten
(Swed.), 3, 213 (1975).
Malmquist, P.A., "Heavy Metals in Urban Stormwater." Paper presented at
International Conference on Heavy Metals in the Environment, Swedish Council
for Building Research, Toronto, Canada (1975).
Masters, H., "Using Porous Pavement to Control Runoff." News of Environ. Res.
in Cincinnati, EPA, Natl. Environ. Res. Center (August 10, 1973).
Mayer, R.B., et al., "Multi-Purpose Combined Sewer Overflow Treatment
Facility, Mount Clemens, Michigan. EPA, Washington, D.C., 11023 FAR (1973).
Mekosh, G., and Ramos, D., "Pressure Sewer Demonstration at the Borough of
Phoenixville, Pennsylvania." EPA, Washington, D.C., EPA-R2-73-270 (1973).
Melpar An Amer.-Std. Co., "Comb. Sewer Temporary Underwater Storage Facility."
WPCRS 11022 DPP 10/70 (Oct. 1970).
Miller, R.P., Jr., "Screening and Aerating Concentrator." U.S. Patent
3,739,912 (June 19, 1973); (Abs.) Water Res. Sci. Info. Center, U.S. Dept.
of the Int., Ace. No. W73-09176 (1973).
Minn.-St. Paul San. Dist., "Dispatching System for Control of Comb. Sewer
Losses." WPCRS 11020 FAQ 03/71 (March 1971).
Moffa, P.E., et al., "Bench-Scale High-Rate Disinfection of Combined Sewer
Overflows with Chlorine and Chlorine Dioxide." EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio,
EPA-670/2-75-021 (1975).
Moffa, P.E., et al., "Disinfection Techniques for Point-Source Treatment of
Combined Sewer Overflows." Paper presented at the New York Water Pollution
Control Association Spring Meeting (June 1974).
Montgomery Co. San. Dept., Dayton, Ohio, "Ground Water Infiltration §
Internal Sealing of Sanitary Sewers." WPCRS 11020 DHQ 06/72 (Jun. 1972).
Mook, P.H., "Rotating Screen Separator." U.S. Patent, 3,743,094 (July 1973).
Muni, of Metro Seattle, Wash., "Maximizing Storage in Comb. Sewer Systems."
WPCRS 11022 ELK 12/71 (Dec. 1971).
Mun. Technol. Bull., "Special Methods Open Storm-Blocked Pipeline." Water £
Sew. Works, 121:8,60 (1974); (abs.) Washington, D.C., 2:8,8 (1974).
Murphy, C.B., Jr., et al., "Single P.C. Unit Removal of Nutrients from
Combined Sewer Overflows." Paper presented at 48th Annual Conference of the
Water Poll, Control Fed,, Miami Beach, Fla. (1975),
Murray, D.M., and Eigerman, M.R., "A Search:New Technology for Pavement Snow
S Ice Control." EPA-R2-72-125 (Dec. 1972).
1-128
-------
Nebolsine, R., and Harvey, P.J., et al., "High Rate Filtration of Comb. Sewer
Overflows." WPCRS 11023 EY1 04/72 (April 1972).
Nelson, O.F., and Agnew, R., "Quick Treatment of Combined Sewer Overflow
Shows Promise." Water fi Wastes Eng., 10:8,39 (1973).
Newton, C.D., et al., "Street Runoff as a Source of Lead Pollution." Jour.
Water Poll. Control Fed., 46, 999 (1974).
O'Brien, P.J., et al., "Chemical Impact of Snow Dumping Practices." EPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-74-086 (1974).
Oliver, B.C., et al., "Chloride and Lead in Urban Snow." Jour. Water Poll.
Control Fed., 46, 766 (1974).
Oliver, J.B., et al., "Chloride and Lead in Urban Snow." Jour. Water Poll.
Control Fed., 46, 766 (1974).
O'Neill, J.O., "The Use of Storm Tanks for Tertiary Treatment of Sewage."
Water Poll. Control (G.B.), 72:1,87 (1973).
Oster, C.C., "Storage § Treatment of Comb. Sewer Overflows." EPA-R2-72-070
(Oct. 1972).
Partridge, D.B., III, et al., "A Scientific Approach to Infiltration/Inflow."
Paper presented at 48th Annual Conference of the Water Poll. Control. Fed.,
Miami Beach, Fla. (1975).
Peloquin, A.E., et al., "Treatment of Combined Sewer Overflows Via Thin Film
Chemistry." Paper presented at 48th Annual Conference of the Water Poll.
Control Fed., Miami Beach, Fla. (1975).
Peterson, F.L., and Hargis, D.R., "Subsurface Disposal of Storm Runoff."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 45, 1663 (1973).
Pew, K.A., and Goswami, M.K., "On Central Completer Controlled Automated
Regulators." Paper presented at 48th Annual Conference of the Water Pollution
Control Fed., Miami Beach, Fla. (1975).
Pitt, R.E., and Amy, G., "Toxic Materials Analysis of Street Surface
Contaminants." EPA, Washington, D.C. 11034 FUJ, EPA-R2-73-283 (1973).
Poertner, H.G., "Detention Storage of Urban Stormwater Runoff." APWA
Reporter, 40:5,14 (1973).
Poertner, H.G., "On-Site Detention of Urban Stormwater Runoff." Paper
presented at the Storm Water Detention Basin Design Institute, Univ. of
Wisconsin-Extension, Madison, Wis. (May 1974).
Pontius, U.R., and Pavia, E.H., et al., "Hypochlorination of Polluted
Stormwater Pumpage at New Orleans." EPA-670/2-73-067 (Sept. 1973).
1-129
-------
Popkin, B.P., "Effect of a Grass and Soil Filter on Tucson Urban Runoff."
In Proc. 1972 meetings of the Arizona Section, Amer. Water Res. Assn. and
the Hydrol. Section, Arizona Acad. of Sci. (1972); Selected Water Res. Abs.,
U.S. Dept. of the Int., 16:17,93 (1973).
Ports, M.W., "Sediment and Erosion Control Design Criteria." Reporter, Amer.
Public Works Assoc., 42:5,18 (1975).
Price, V.J., "Storm Water, Hold It." Soil Conserv., 38:6, 123 (1973).
Pub. Works, "A New Tight Fit-Insertion of a Plastic Liner in a 42 Inch
Sewer." 104:6,98 (1973).
Pub. Works, "Sewer in Flood Plain Must Fight Infiltration." 104:1,66 (1973).
Pub. Works, "Sidewalk Plow Pushes Sludge As Well As Snow." 104:9,120 (1973).
Pub. Works, "Underground Detention for Storm Overflows." 104:10,116 (1973).
Public Works, "Winter Deicing Program a Success With Cal-Salt Premix."
106:10,74 (1975).
Quase, H.G., "Storm Sewage Treatment." U.S. Patent No. 3,674,687 (1972).
Reddy, Y.R., and Pickford, J.,"Experiments with Unconventional Storm
Overflows." Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99:3,177
(1973).
Richardson, D.L., et al., "Manual for Deicing Chemicals: Application
Practices." EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-74-045 (1974).
Richardson, D.L., et al., "Manual for Deicing Chemicals: Storage and
Handling." EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-74-033 (1974).
Richardson, D.L., "Manual for Deicing Chemicals:Application Practices."
EPA 670/2-74-045 (Dec. 1974).
Richardson, D.L., "Manual for Deicing Chemicals: Storage § Handling."
EPA-670/2-74-033 (July 1974).
Risley, C., Jr., "Detention Tank for Comb. Sewer Overflow," Milwaukee, Wis.,
Demonstration Project. EPA-600/2-75-071,(Dec. 1975).
Rohrer, K.R., "Underwater Storage of Comb. Sewer Overflows." WPCRS 11022
ECV 9/71 (Sept. 1971).
Rural $ Urban Roads, "Citizen Cooperation Speeds City's Small Snow Fleet."
12:6,54 (1974).
Rural § Urban Roads, "Deicing Chemicals: Red Flag for Ecology or Green for
Safety?" 11:6,31 (1973).
1-130
-------
Rural § Urban Roads, "New Ideas in Deicing Techniques." 11:6,39 (1973).
Rural § Urban Roads, "Off-Season School Shapes Up Men and Plow Units."
12:6,33 (1974).
Rural § Urban Roads, "Preplanning Snow Removal: How One City Raised
Efficiency." 11:6,40 (1973).
Rural § Urban Roads, "Runways Kept Clear with Fast Plows and Wind Vigilance."
12:6,46 (1974).
Rural § Urban Roads, "Salt and Its Storage Dominate Snow Conference."
11:6,25 (1973).
Rural § Urban Roads, "Speed Plowing, Berms, Raised Grades: How a Prairie
County Does It." 12:6,28 (1974).
Rural § Urban Roads, "Temperature Sensors, Echelon Plowing. Provide Fast and
Economical Snow Control." 11:6,22 (1973).
Sager, P.E., and Wiersma, J.H., "Phosphorous Sources for Lower Green Bay,
Lake Michigan." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 47, 504 (1975).
Sartor, J.D., et al., "Water Pollution Aspects of Street Surface Contami-
nants." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 46, 458 (1974).
Saucer, V.W., "Concentrator and Flotation Cell Increase Wastewater Plant
Capacity Fourfold." Amer. City, 88:4,49 (1973).
Schulz, M., and Comerton, L. J., "Effect of Aircraft Deicer on Airport Storm
Runoff." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 46, 173 (1974).
Shaheen, D.G., "Contributions of Urban Roadway Usage to Water Pollution."
EPA, Washington, D.C., EPA-600/2-75-004 (1975).
Shaheen, D.G., "Passenger Cars are Big Water Polluters, Biospherics Finds."
Chem. $ Eng. News, 51:27,10 (July 1973).
Shaw, J.B., "A Simplified Method to Relate Average Head to Total Flows."
Water $ Sew. Works, 119 (Ref. No.), R69 (Aug. 31, 1972); Poll. Abs., 4, 5
(Sept. 1973).
Shuckrow, A.J., et al., "Physical-Chemical Treatment of Combined and
Municipal Sewage." EPA, Washington, D.C., 11020 DSQ, EPA-R2-73-149
(Feb. 1973).
Sliter, J.T., "Infiltration/Inflow Guidelines Spark Controversy." Jour.
Water Poll. Control Fed., 46,6 (1974).
Springfield San. Dist. 111., "Retention Basin Control of Comb. Sewer
Overflows," WPCRS 11023 8/70 (Aug. 1970).
1-131
-------
Stevens, L.C., "Effects of Deicing Chemicals upon Ground and Surface Waters."
New Eng. Water Works Assn., 87:1,1 (1973).
Stratfull, D.L., "Investigation of Alternative De-icing Chemicals."
Calif. Dept. of Transportation, presented at the Highway Res. Bd. 53rd
Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C. (Jan. 1974).
Sullivan, R.H., Boericke, R.R., et al., "The Helical Bend Comb. Sewer
Overflow Regulator." EPA-600/2-75-062 (Dec. 1975).
Sullivan, R.H., Conn, M.M., et al., "The Swirl Concentrator as a Grit
Separator Device." EPA-670/2-74-026 (June 1974).
Sullivan, R.H., "Combined Sewer Overflow Regulator Facilities." In Combined
Sewer Overflow Seminar Papers, EPA/New York State Dept. of Conservation, EPA
670/2-73-077 (Sept. 1973).
Sullivan, R.H., et al., "Relationship Between Diameter and Height for Design
of a Swirl Concentrator as a Combined Sewer Overflow Regulator." EPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-74-039 (1974).
Sullivan, R.H., et al., "The Swirl Concentrator as a Grit Separator Device."
EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-74-026 (1974).
Sullivan, R.H., et al., "The Swirl Concentrator as a Grit Separator Device."
EPA, Washington, D.C., and Lancaster, Pa., Draft Rept. 11023 GSC (Oct. 1973).
Sullivan, R.H., "Prevention and Control of Infiltration and Inflow." IN
Combined Sewer Overflow Seminar Papers, EPA/New York State Dept. of
Conservation, EPA-670/2-73-077 (Sept. 1973).
Sullivan, R.H., "The Swirl Concentrator as a Combined Sewer Overflow
Regulator." In Combined Sewer Overflow Seminar Papers, EPA/New York State
Dept. of Conservation, EPA-670/2-73-077 (Sept. 1973).
t
Sylvester, R.O., and DeWalle, F.B., "Character and Significance of Highway
Runoff Waters, A Preliminary Appraisal." Washington State Highway Com.,
Y-1441 (1972).
Tabler, R.D., "New Engineering Criteria for Snow-Fence Systems." U.S.
Forest Service, presented at the Highway Res. Bd. 53rd Annual Meeting,
Washington, D.C. (Jan. 1974).
Tang, W.H., et al., "Optimal Risk-Based Design of Storm Sewer Networks."
Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc., Civil Eng., 101, 381 (1975).
The Dow Chemical Co., "Chemical Treatment of Comb. Sewer Overflows."
WPCRS 11023 FOB 9/70 (Sept. 1970).
Thelen, E., Grover, W. C., et al., "Investigation of Porous Pavements for
Urban Runoff Control." WPCRS 11034 DUY 03/72 (March 1972).
1-132
-------
Tulumello, A., "Automatic Organic Monitoring System for Storm and Combined
Sewers." EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-75-067 (1975).
Van Loon, J.C., "The Snow Removal Controversy: Salt and Heavy Metals in Snow
and Waterways." Water S Poll. Control (Can.), 110:11,16 (1972).
Venkataraman, P., and Subramaya, K., "A Practical Proportional Weir." Water
Power, 25:5,189 (1973).
Walker, W.R., et al., "Flow-Measuring Flume for Wastewater Treatment Plants."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 45, 434 (1973).
Water § Sew. Works, "Unique Combination Sewer Installed in Pontiac,
Michigan." 120:6,85 (1973).
Water § Wastes Eng., "Infiltration Smoked Out." Bexson, J., 11:9,59 (1974).
Water $ Wastes Eng., "Sewers Get a Facelift." 10:9,69 (1973); (Abs.) Mun.
Technol. Bull., EPA, Washington, D.C., 0729 (Nov. 1973).
Water £ Wastes Eng., "Town Halts Infiltration." 10:10,47 (1973).
Welburn, H.L., "Surge Facility for Wet and Dry Weather Flow Control." EPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-74-075 (1975).
Welch, F.L., and Stucky, D.J., "Combined Sewer Overflow Treatment by the
Rotating Biological Contractor Process," Autotrol Corp., Milwaukee, Wis.,
EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-74-050, NTIS No. PB-231 892 (1974).
Wenzel, H.G., "Development of a Meter for Measurement of Sewer Flow." Univ.
of Illinois, Urbana, Water Resources Center (Dec. 1973).
Westfall, T.R., "Up-Flow Separator." U.S. Patent 3,737,038 (June 1973).
Weston, R.F., Inc., "Combined Sewer Overflow Abatement Alternatives." WPCRS
11024 EXF 08/70 (Aug. 1970).
White, R.A., "A Small Swirl Concentrator for Storm Flow." M.S. thesis, Univ.
Wisconsin, Madison (May 1974).
White, R.L., and Cole, T.G., "Dissolved Air Flotation for Combined Sewer
Overflows." Pub. Works, 104:2,50 (1973).
Wiley, N.P., "Insertion of Polyethylene Pipe Renews Damaged Sewer." Pub.
Works, 104:2,64 (1973).
Wingerter, R.E., "Infiltration Determinations Within Sanitary Sewers." N.J.
Effluents, 6:2,15 (1973).
Winn, C.B., and Moore, J.B., "The Application of Optimal Linear Regulator
Theory to a Problem in Water Pollution." Inst. Electrical § Electronic Eng.
Transact, on Systems, Man. S Cyber., SMC-3:5,450 (Sept. 1973).
1-133
-------
Wistort, R.A., "Storm Drainage System Design." Build. Syst. Des., 70:2,32
(1973); (Abs.) Eng. Index, 11:4,286 (1973).
Wren, E.J., "Preventing Landfill Leachate Contamination of Water." Gulf
South Research Inst. (April 1972).
Yao, K.M., "Theoretical Study of High-Rate Sedimentation." Jour. Water Poll.
Control Fed., 42, 218 (1970).
Yen, B.C., et al., "Designing Storm Sewers Using the Rational Method." Water
§ Sew. Works, 121:10,92 (1974).
Yen, B.C., "Open-Channel Flow Equations Revisited." Jour. Mech. Eng. Div.,
Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, EMS, 979 (1973).
Zak, J.M., and Kasheski, P.A., "Flat Pea for Highway Slopes in Massachusetts."
Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst, presented at the Highway Res. Bd., 53rd
Annual Meeting (Jan. 1974).
(None), "Comb. Sewer Overflow Abatement Technology," WPCRS 11024 06/70 (June
1970)
(None), "Pollutional Effects of Stormwater § Overflows From Comb. Sewer
Systems." U.S. H.E.W. (Nov. 1964).
1-134
-------
Socioeconomics
Acres Ltd., H.G., "Water Quality Models." Niagara Falls, Ont., Canada (1971)
Adams, B.J., et al., "On the Centralization of Wastewater Treatment
Facilities." Water Resources Bull., 8, 669 (1972).
Airan, D.S., "The Need for a Comprehensive Approach in the Management of
Environmental Resources." Water Resources Bull., 9, 421 (1973)..
Allee, D.J., and Chapman, D., "The Economics of Water Development and
Environmental Quality." Environ. Quality and Water Develop., C.R. Goldman,
et al. (Eds.), W.H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco, Calif. (1973).
Anderson, R.B., "Concepts for Effective Management of Water Quality in
Connecticut." Inst. of Water Resources, Univ. of Connecticut, Storrs (1973).
Arnold, D.G., and Petri, E., "Cost Reductions through Tax Provisions for
Pollution Control Facilities: What the R § D Men Should Know." Economist,
19, 219 (1974).
Ashraf, M., and Christensen, R.L., "Economic Costs of Water Quality
Protection on Dairy Farms." Water Resources Bull., 10, 318 (1974).
Bain, J.S., "Environmental Decay: Economic Causes and Remedies." Little,
Brown and Co., Boston, Mass. (1973).
Bargur, J., "Economic Evaluation of Water Part VI: A Dynamic Interregional
Input-Output Programming Model of the Calif, and Western States Water
Economy." Water Resource Center, Contrib. 128, Univ. of Calif., Berkeley,
Calif. (1969).
Barnett, A.H., et al., "Establishing Markets for Water Quality." Water
Resources Res. Inst., Clemson Univ., Clemson, S.C. (1974).
Bartal, K.A., and Gutierrez, L.V., Jr., "Comprehensive Water Quality
Management Planning." Jour. Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr.,
101, 371 (1975).
Bascom, S., et al., "Secondary Impacts of Transportation and Wastewater
Investments: Review and Bibliography." EPA-600/5-75-002 (January 1975).
Bayer, M.B., "A Nonlinear Mathematical Programming Model for Water Quality
Management." Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources
Systems, 2, 341 (1972).
1-135
-------
Belfort, G., and Daly, J.A., "Optimization of an Electrodialysis Plant."
Desalination, 8, 153 (1970).
Bella, D.A., "Fundamentals of Comprehensive Environmental Planning." Jour.
Prof. Activities, Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100, 17 (1974).
Benjes, H.H., Jr., "Estimating Construction Costs and Operating and
Maintenance Requirements for Combined Sewer Overflow Storage and Treatment
Facilities." Prepared for Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati, Ohio (May 1976).
Bennentt, E.R., et al., "Economic Aspects of Sludge Dewatering and Disposal.'
Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, 55 (1973).
Bhalla, H.S., and Rikkers, R.F., "Multi-Time Period Facilities Location
Problems: A Henristic Algorithm with Application to Waste Water Treatment
Systems." Water Resources Res. Ctr., Dept. Ind. Eng. and Operations Res.,
Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst (1971).
Bishop, A.B., et al., "Evaluating Water Reuse Alternatives in Water
Resources Planning." Utah Water Res. Lab., Utah State Univ., Logan (1974).
Bishop, A.B., et al., "Social, Economic, Environmental, and Technical
Factors Influencing Water Reuse." Utah Water Res. Lab., Utah State Univ.,
Logan (1973).
Blecker, H.G., et al., "Capital and Operating Costs of Pollution Control
Equipment Modules, Vol. 1-User Guide, Vol. II-Data Manual." EPA, Washington,
D.C. (1973).
Bleyer, B., "The Environmental Economics of the Soviet Union." The Amer.
Economist, 18:1,124 (1974).
Bolitho, V., "Economic Choices in Sludge Treatment and Disposal." Water
Poll. Control (G.B.), 72, 195 (1973).
Borrows, P., et al., "The Economics of Accidental Oil Pollution by Tankers
in Coastal Waters." Jour, of Public Economics (Neth.), 3,251 (1974).
Bovet, E.D., "Evaluation of Quality Parameters in Water Resource Planning
(A State-of-the-Art Survey of the Economics of Water Quality)." U.S. Army
Engr. Inst. for Water Resources, Fort Belvoir, Va. (1974).
Boyd, J.H., "Pollution Charges, Waste Assimilative Capacity Investment and
Water Quality: The Public Costs of a Public Good." Water, State of Ohio
Water Resources Center, Ohio State Univ. (1969).
Bramer, H.C., "Costs of Water Pollution Control in the Chemical Industry."
Ind. Water § Wastes, 19:1,33 (1973).
Bramer, H.C., "Economic Feasibility of Minimum Industrial Waste Load
Discharge Requirements." EPA, Washington, D.C. (1973).
1-136
-------
Brandstetter, A., et al., "A Mathematical Model for Optimum Design and
Control of Metropolitan Wastewater Management Systems." Water Resources
Bull., 9, 1188 (1973).
Buchanan, J.M., and Tullock, G., "Polluters' Profits and Political Response:
Direct Controls Versus Taxes." The Amer. Econ. Review, 55, 139 (1975).
Bundgaard-Nielsen, M., and Himmelblau, "A Note on the Evaluation of Activity
Dependent Recreational Damage Cost Functions." Water Resources Bull., 10,
580 (1974).
Bundgaard-Nielsen, M., and Hwang, C.L., "On Taxation and Firms Choice of
Waste Water Treatment Technology." Water Resources Bull., 11, 805 (1975).
Burchell, R.W., et al., "The Environmental Impact Handbook." Ctr. for Urb.
Policy Res., Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. (1975).
Burke, R., III, et al., "Water Resources and Social Choices." Water Resources
Bull., 9, 433 (1973).
Galloway, J.A., et al., "Industrial Economic Model of Water Use and Waste
Treatment for Ammonia." Water Resources Res., 10, 650 (1974).
Camp, Dresser and McKee, "Report on Development of a Mathematical Model for
Minimizing Construction Costs in Water Pollution Control." Boston, Mass.
(1969).
Carlson, G.A., and Young, C.E., "Factors Affecting Adoption of Land
Treatment of Municipal Waste Water." Water Resources Res., 11, 616 (1975).
Chase Econometric Asso., "The Macroeconomic Impacts of Federal Pollution
Control Programs." Environ. News (EPA) (Jan. 1975).
Chaudhuri, N., "System Analysis and Its Application to River Basin Pollution
Control Management." Inst. of Engr. (Ind.), Public Health Engr. Div.,
49:10,118 (1969).
Chen, G.K., et al., "Computer Software for Wastewater Treatment Plant
Design." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 44, 746 (1972).
Christensen, L.A., "A Framework for Evaluating Institutional and Socio-
Economic Issues of Land Treatment of Waste Water." Jour. Environ. Goiality,
4, 145 (1975).
Clark, R.M., "An Investment Decision Model for Control Technology."
EPA-R5-72-004 (Sept. 1972).
Coffey, P.J., and Ortolano, L., "Economic Framework for Salinity Control
Projects." Jour. Amer. Water Works Assn., 61, 237 (1969).
1-137
-------
Comptroller General of the U.S., "Examination Into the Effectiveness of the
Construction Grant Program for Abating, Controlling and Preventing Water
Pollution." Report to the Congress, B-166506 (1969).
Congressional Quarterly Weekly Rept., "Water Pollution Hampered by Lack of
Funds." 32, 121 (1974).
Converse, A.O., and Tyler, J., "Vermont Water Quality Simulation Project
Report." Project EPIC, Vermont Natural Resources Council (1972).
Coy, J.G., et al., "Critique of Water Resources Council's Proposed Principles
and Standards for Planning Water and Related Land Resources." Environ.
Quality and Water Develop., C.R. Goldman, et al. (Eds.)> W-H. Freeman and
Co., San Francisco, Calif. (1973).
Cremeans, J.E., "Capital Expenditures by Business for Air and Water Pollution
Abatement 1973 and Planned 1974." Survey of Current Business, 54, 58 (1974).
Crews, J.E., "Establishing Priorities in Mine Drainage Reduction: A Cost-
Effectiveness Approach." Water Resources Bull., 9, 567 (1973).
Dajani, J.S., and Gemmell, R.S., "Economics of Wastewater Collection
Networks." Water Resources Ctr. Rept. No. A-042-ILL, Univ. of Illionis,
Urbana (1971).
Dallaire, G., "U.S. Water Clean-up Program Speeds Up-But Still Much Red TapeJ'
Civil Eng., 145:8,71 (1975).
Dallaire, G., "Will Industry Meet Water Quality Requirements?" Civil Eng.,
145:12,68 (1975).
D'Arge, R.C., and Kogiku, K.C., "Economic Growth and the Environment." Rev.
Econ. Studies, 40, 61 (1973).
Deacon, R.W., and Giglio, R.J., "A Methodology for Determining Optimal
Longitudinal Spacing of Effluent*Discharges into a River." Water Resources
Res. Ctr., Dept. Ind. Eng. and Operations Res., Univ. of Massachusetts,
Amherst (1971).
Deininger, R.A., "Minimum Cost Regional Pollution Control Systems." Proc.
Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 2, 352 (1972).
DeLucia, R.J., Koppel, L.M., et al., "Evaluation of Alternative Methods for
Financing Municipal Waste Treatment Works." EPA-600/,5-75-001 (Feb. 1975).
Dobbs, T.L., and Huff, C.E., "Analyzing Reimbursement Mechanisms for
Resource Development Projects." Water Resources Res., 10, 1061 (1974).
Dodson, W.G., and Cassell, R.B., "An Examination of the Economic Impact of
Pollution Control upon Georgia's Water-Using Industries." Environ. Resources
Ctr., Georgia Inst. of Tech., Atlanta (1973).
1-138
-------
Donigan, A., Jr., and Waggy, W.H., "Simulation-A Tool for Water Resource
Management," Water Resources Bull., 10,229 (1974).
Dorcey, A.H.J., "Effluent Charges, Information Generation and Bargaining
Behavior." Nat. Resources Jour., 13,118 (1973).
Dorfman, N., and Snow, A., "Who Bears the Cost of Pollution Control?" Nat.
Technical Information Serv. (PB-226 447), Springfield, Va. (1974).
Dombusch, D.M., and Barrager, S.M., "Benefit of Water Pollution Control on
Property Values." Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. (1973).
Dornbusch, D.M., and Falcke, C.O., "A Generic Methodology to Forecast
Benefits from Urban Water Resource Improvement Projects." David M. Dornbusch
and Co., San Francisco, Cali. (1974).
Downing, D.A., "Sewer and Water Pricing and Investment Policies to
Implement Urban Growth Policy." Water Resources Bull., 11, 345 (1975).
Drucker, P., et al., "Displacement of Persons by Major Public Works." Water
Resources Res. Inst., Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington (1974).
Dysart, B.C., Ill, and Mines, W.W., "Development and Application of a
Rational Water Quality Planning Model." Water Resources Center, Rept.
WRC-0668, Georgia Inst. of Technol., Atlanta, Ga. (1969).
Dysart, B.C., Ill, "Alternate Policies for River Basin Water Quality
Management." In "Hydraulics Research and Its Impact on the Environment."
Proc. 14th Congr. Intl. Assn. Hydraul. Res., 5, 419 (1971).
Dysart, B.C., Ill, "The Use of Dynamic Programming in Regional Water Quality
Planning." Appl. Syst. Anal. San. Eng., Proc. 4th Annual Amer. Assoc. of
Prof, in San. Eng. Workshop, Clemson Univ., Clemson, S.C. (1969).
Edde, H., and Westerbert, E.N., "Pulp Mill Internal-External Pollution
Control Economic Modeling for Receiving Water Protection." Proc. Intl.
Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 2, 289 (1972).
Edel, M., "Economies and the Environment." Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood
Cliffs, N.J. (1973).
Eilers, R.G., "Estimating Costs of Conventional Water Supplies," U.S. EPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio, February 1972.
Elliott, R.D., "Economic Study of the Effect of Municipal Sewer Surcharges
on Industrial Wastes and Water Usage." Water Resources Res., 9, 1121 (1973).
•
Envirometrics, Inc., "Economic Sector." WPCRS 16110 12/71-3 (Dec. 1971).
Ethridge, D., "The Inclusion of Wastes in the Theory of the Firm." Jour.
Pol. Econ., 81, 1430 (1973).
1-139
-------
Evans, M.K., "A Forecasting Model Applied to Pollution Control Costs." Amer.
Econ. Rev., 63, 244 (1973).
Evenson, D.E., Orlob, G.T., and Monser, J.R., "Preliminary Design of Waste
Treatment Systems." Ind. Water Eng., 16, 16 (1969).
Evenson, D.E., Orlob, G.T., and Monser, J.R., "Preliminary Selection of
Waste Treatment Systems." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 41, 1845 (1969).
Everett, H.W., II, and Miller, W.L., "Sectoral and Regional Economic Impact
of Controlling Nonpoint Pollution in Forested Areas." Water Resources Res.
Ctr., Purdue Univ., W. Lafayette (1975).
Ferrar, T.A., et al., "Effluent Charges and Political Realities-A Qualifica-
tion." Jour. Environ. Systems, 5, 97 (1975).
Ferrar, T.A., Brownstein, A.B., et al., "Financial Incentives £ Pollution
ControlrA Case Study." EPA-600/5-75-007 (April 1975).
Ferrar, T.A., "Progressive Taxation as a Policy for Water Quality Management."
Water Resources Res., 9, 563 (1973).
Fischer, D.W., and Kerton, R.R., "Toward a Theory of Environmental Economics!'
Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ont., Canada (1973).
Fisher, A.C., and Krutilla, J.V., "Valuing Long Rum Ecological Consequences
and Irreversibilities." Jour. Environ. Econ. and Management, 1, 96 (1974).
Fish, H., "Financing of Pollution Prevention Procedures: Principles and
Philosophies in the United Kingdom and Eruope." Wter Poll. Control (G.B.),
72, 169 (1973).
Flaxman, E.W., and Powell, M.G., "Economy Studies in Water Pollution Control"
Water Poll. Control (G.B.), 72, 463 (1973).
Foerstner, A., "Paying the Way for Pollution Control," Ind. Water § Wastes,
19:2,20 and 3, 32 and 4, 28 (1973).
Forsund, F.R., "Externalities, Environmental Pollution and Allocation in
Space: A General Equilibrium Approach." Regional § Urban Econ., 3:1,3 (1973).
Freeman, A.M., Ill, et al., "The Economics of Environmental Policy." John
Wiley & Sons, New York, N.Y. (1973).
Giglio, R.J., Adrian, D.D., Kaminsky, F.C., and Rikkers, R.F., "A Systems
Approach to Waste Management." Proc. 4th Amer. Water Resources Conf.,
New York, N.Y., 344 (1968).
Goldman, C.R., et al, "Environmental Quality and Water Development." (Eds.),
W.H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco, Calif. (1973).
1-140
-------
Gore, P.H., et al., "A Sociological Approach to the Problem of Water
Pollution." Growth and Change, 6, 17 (1975).
Granade, J.W., and Street, D.R., "The Economic Impact of Mercury Pollution
on Fisheries and Other Related Businesses Around Pickwick Lake." In
Theoretical and Applied Concepts of Water Resources for Social Welfare, D.R.
Street (Ed.), Aurburn Univ., Auburn, Ala. (1973).
Grantham, G.R., et al., "Model for Flow Augmentation Analysis-An Overview."
Jour. San. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 96:SA5,1045 (1970).
Graves, G.W., et al., "Mathematical Programming for Regional Water Quality
Management." Water Poll. Control Res. Ser., U.S. Dept. of the Int. (FWQA)
FPX 08/70 (1970).
Graves, G.W., et al., "Mathematical Programming for Regional Water Quality
Management." Water Resources Res., 8, 273 (1972).
Griffin, J.M., "An Econometric Evaluation of Sulfur Taxes." Jour. Pol. Econ.,
82, 669 (1974).
Hanke, S.H., and Davis, R.K., "Potential for Marginal Cost Pricing in Water
Resources Management." Water Resources Res., 9, 808 (1973).
Hanke, S.H., and Walker, R.A., "Benefit-Cost Analysis Reconsidered: An
Evaluation of the Midstate Project." Water Resources Res., 10, 898 (1974).
Hanke, S.H., et al., "Project Evaluation During Inflation." Water Resources
Res., 11, 511 (1975).
Hass, J.E., "Optimal Taxing for the Abatement of Water Pollution." Chapter
IV, ph.D. Thesis. "Decentralized Decision Making: Non-Linear Decomposition
Procedures and Their Uses." Carnegie-Mellon Univ., Pittsburgh, Pa. (1969).
Hass, J.E., "Optimal Taxing for the Abatement of Water Pollution." Water
Resources Res., 6, 353 (1970).
Hatfield, G.B., and Graves, G.W., "Optimization of a Reverse Osmosis System
Using Nonlinear Programming." Desalination, 7, 147 (1970).
Haynes, K.E., and Kleeman, W.T., "Environmental Quality and Inflation: A
Regional Perspective on the Cost-Push Impact of the 1972 Pure Water
Legislation." Environ. § Planning A (G.B.), 7, 567 (1975).
Hays, Jr., et al., "Optimal Water Quality Management for the Houston Ship
Channel." Jour. San. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 98:SA1,195
(1972).
Heady, E.O., and Nicol, K.J., "Models of Land and Water Allocation to
Improve Environment and Water Quality Through Soil Loss Controls." Water
Resources Res., 11, 795 (1975).
1-141
-------
Heaney, J.E., and Pyatt, E.E., "Benefits of Flow Augmentation for Water
Quality Control." In "Hydraulics Research and Its Impact on the Environment."
Proc. 14th Congr. Intl. Assn. Hydraul. Res., 5, 345 (1971).
Heinz, H.J., III, "Pollution Control Tax Act of 1972." Congressional Rec.,
119, H8620 (Sept. 20, 1972).
Herfindahl, O.C., and Kneese, A.V., "Economical Theory of Natural Resources."
Charles E. Merrill Pub. Co., Columbus, Ohio (1974).
Hines, W.W., and Dysart, B.C., Ill, "Water Quality Management and a Policy
Model." Amer. Inst. Ind. Engrs. Trans., 3, 7 (1971).
Hines, W.W., and Willeke, G.E., "Public Perceptions of Water Quality in a
Metropolitan Area." Water Resources Bull., 10, 745 (1974).
Hinomoto, H., "Determination of Investment Cost Functions of Water Treatment
Plants." Water Resources Ctr., Univ. of 111., Urbana (1974).
Hinomoto, H., "Dynamic Programming of Capacity Expansion of Municipal Water
Treatment System." Water Resources Res., 8, 1178 (1972).
Hittman Assoc., "The Beneficial Use of Storm Water." Columbia, Md. (1973).
Hollman, K.W., et al., "Methods to Facilitate Managerial Effectiveness in
Municipal Water Systems." Water Resources Res. Inst., Mississippi State
Univ., Starkville (1975).
Howe, C.W., and Orr, D.V., "Effects of Agricultural Acreage Reduction on
Water Availability and Salinity in the Upper Colorado River Basin." Water
Resources Res., 10, 893 (1974).
Hyden, J.W., et al., "Simulation of Water Quality Management Policies."
Jour. Environ. Engr. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101, 623 (1975).
Irwin, W.A. § Liroff, R.A., "Economic Disincentives for Pollution Control:
Legal, Political & Administrative Dimensions." EPA-600/5-74-026 (July 1974).
Irwin, W. and Liroff, R., "Economic Disincentives for Pollution Control:
Legal, Political and Administrative Dimensions, EPA-600/5-74-026 (July 1974).
James, E., "Optimal Pollution Control and Trade in Collective Goods." Jour.
of Public Economics (Neth.), 3, 203 (1974).
Joeres, E.F., et al., "Planning Methodology for the Design of Regional
Wastewater Treatment Systems." Water Resources Res., 10, 643 (1974).
Johnson, J.R., "Regional Wastewater Management: A New Perspective in
Environmental Planning." Water Resources Bull., 8, 773 (1972).
Johnson, J.F., "Regional Wastewater Management: A New Perspective in Environ-
mental Planning." Water Resources Bull., 8, 773 (1972).
1-142
-------
Johnson, R., "President's Page." Water Resources Bull., 11:5,iii (1975).
Jordening, D.L., and Allwood, J.K., "Research Needs and Priorities: Water
Pollution Control Benefits and Costs." Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C. (1973).
Jordening, D.L., "Estimating Water Quality Benefits." EPA-600/5-74-014
(Aug. 1974).
Kalter, R.J., and Gosse, L.E., "Distributional Impacts of Environmental
Management:Federal Grants for Water Pollution Control." Water Resources Bull.,
10,498 (1974).
Kerns, W.R., and Holemo, F.J., "Cost of Waste Water Pollution Abatement in
Poultry Processing Rendering Plants in Georgia." Environ. Resources Ctr.,
Georgia Inst. of Tech., Atlanta (1973).
Kerns, W.R., and Jansma, J.D., "Financial Need Priorities for Awarding
Construction Grants-in-Aid." Growth 5 Change, 4:1,17 (1973).
Klippel, R.W., "Impact of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act on
Industrial Wastewater Treatment Costs." Ind. Water 5 Wastes, 19:5,24 (1973).
Knesse, A.V., "A Theoretical Analysis of Minute 242." Nat. Resources Jour.,
15, 135 (1975).
Knesse, A. and Church, A., "Effectiveness of Local/Regional Policy
Instrument in Achieving and Maintaining Environmental Quality Objectives,"
Final Report: Grant No. R803539-01-0, (August 1976).
Knneese, A.V., and Maler, K-G., "Bribes and Charges in Pollution Control: An
Aspect of the Coase Controversy." Nat. Resources Jour., 13, 705 (1973).
Knight, J.E., and Hines, W.W., "Complex Systems Analysis of Water Quality
Dynamics: The Feedback Systems Structure." Tech. Rept. A-023-GA. School of
Industrial and Systems Engineering. Georgia Inst. of Technol., Atlanta(1970).
Kooyoomjian, K.H., and Clesceri, N.L., "Perception of Water Quality by Select
Respondent Groupings in Inland Water-Based Recreational Environments." Water
Resources Bull., 10, 728 (1974).
Komeichev, A. I., et al., "Optimization of Basic Parameters of Thermal
Desalting Plants with Adiabatic Evaporation." Desalination, 7, 179 (1970).
Kraus, M., and Mohring, H., "The Role of Pollutee Taxes in Externality
Problems." Economica (G.B.), 42, 171 (1975).
Krier, J.E., and Montgomery, W.D., "Resource Allocation, Information Cost
and the Form of Government Intervention." Nat. Resources Jour., 13, 89 (1973).
1-143
-------
Krutilla, J.V., "The Economics of Natural Environments: Studies in the
Valuation of Commodity and Amenity Resources." Johns Hopkins Univ. Press,
Baltimore, Md. (1975).
Lacy, A.W., "International Production Aspects of Water and Environmental
Quality Control." In "Theoretical and Applied Concepts of Water Resources
for Social Welfare," D.R. Street (Ed.), Auburn Univ., Auburn, Ala. (1973).
Lawrence, C.H., "Estimating Indirect Cost of Urban Water Use." Jour.
Environ. Engr. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101, 517 (1975).
Leggett, R.L., "National Water Commission Report-A National Disaster."
Congressional Rec., 119, H393 (Jan. 23, 1973).
Leonard, R.L., "Pricing of Industrial Wastewater Treatment Services." Inst.
of Water Resources, Univ. of Conn., Storrs (1973).
Leone, R.A., et al., "Changing Water Use in Selected Manufacturing
Industries." U.S. Army Engr. Inst. for Water Resources, IWR Contract Rep.
74-10, Springfield, Va. (1974).
Lesser, A., Jr., and Tirabassi, M.A., "Costs and Benefits Relating to Paper
Mill Wastewater Treatment." Jour. Prof. Activities, Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil
Engr., 100, 61 (1974).
Loucks, D.P., "A Systems Approach to Water Pollution Control." Water and
Wastes Eng., 6:7,43 (1969).
Macaulay, H.H., "Economic Effects of Subsidies for Waste Abatement." Water
Resources Res. Inst., Clemson Univ., Clemson, S.C. (1973).
Mar, B.W., "A System of Waste Discharge Rights for the Management of Water
Quality." Water Resources Res., 7, 1079 (1971).
Markland, R.E., et al., "A Benefit-Cost Analysis of Alternative Land
Disposal Waste Water Methods in an Urban Environment." School of Bus. Adm.,
Univ. of Missouri, St. Louis (1^74).
Marks, D.H., "Comments on "Water Pollution Control Using By-Pass Piping,'
A.W. Graves, G.B. Hatfield, and A. Whinston." Water Resources Res., 5,
1159 (1969).
Markusen, J.R., "Cooperative Control of International Pollution and Common
Property Resources." Quar. Jour, of Economics, 89, 618 (1975).
Maler, K.G., "Environmental Economics: A Theoretical Inquiry." The Johns
Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, Md. (1974).
Marlin, J.T., "Accounting for Pollution." Jour. Accountancy, 136:2,41(1973).
Marsden, J.R., et al., "The Large-Scale Regional Plant Hypothesis: Discrimi-
nant Analysis." Water Resources Res., 11, 1013 (1975).
1-144
-------
Marshall, H.E., and Ruegg, R.T., "Analysis of Cost Sharing Programs for
Pollution Abatement of Municipal Wastewater." Nat. Bur. of Stds., U.S. Govt.
Printing Office, Washington, D.C. (1974).
Marshall, H.E., "Cost Sharing and Multi-objectives in Water Resources Develop-
ment," Water Resources Res., 9, 1 (1973).
Martin, W.E., "Economic Magnitudes and Economic Alternatives in Lower Basin
Use of Colorado River Water." Nat. Resources Jour., 15, 229 (1975).
Mathur, V.K., "Time, Affluence and Pollution in the Theory of Consumer's
Behavior." Jour. Environ. Econ. and Management, 1, 89 (1974).
McCongha, D.L., and Converse, A.O., "Design and Cost Allocation Algorithm for
Waste Treatment Systems." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 45, 2558 (1973).
McFarland, J.W., and Hyatt, M.L., "Alternative Futures Using the Wollman-
Bonem Models," Water Resources Bull., 9, 755 (1973).
McKean, J.R., and Ericson, R.K., "Quality of Life and Environmental Social
Overhead Impact." Water Resources Res., 11, 789 (1975).
McManus, J.C., "The Costs of Alternative Economic Organizations." Can. Jour.
Econ., 8, 334 (1975).
McPherson, M.B., "Innovation: A Case Study." ASCE Urb. Water Resources Res.,
Prog., T.M. No. 21, New York (1974).
Meier, P.M., "A Branch-and-Bound Algorithm for Regional Water Quality Manage-
ment." In "Hydraulics Research and Its Impact on the Environment." Proc. 14th
Congr. Intl. Assn. Hydraul. Res., 5, 355 (1971).
Mendiratta, A.K., and Davidson, B., "Best Combination of Waste Treatment and
Spatially Distributed Discharge of Effluent." Water Resources Res., 8,565
(1972).
Mercer, L.J., and Morgan, W.D., "Evaluation of a Probability Approach to
Uncertainty in Benefit-Cost Analysis." Water Resources Ctr., Univ. of
California, Davis (1975).
Metzler, D.F., and Nosenchuck, N.H., "Financing Water Pollution Control
Works in the United States." Water Poll. Control (G.B.), 72, 176 (1973).
Miernyk, W., "An Interindustry Forecasting Model with Water Quantity and
uality Constraints." Systems Analysis for Great Lakes Water Resources, Proc.
4th Symp. on Water Resources Res., Water Resources Center, Ohio State Univ.,
Columbus, 49 (1969).
Miller, W.L., and Byers, D.M., "Development and Display of Multiple-Objective
Project Impacts." Water Resources Res., 9, 11 (1973).
1-145
-------
Miller, W.L., and Erickson, S.P., "Systematic Development of Methodologies in
Planning Urban Water Resources for Medium Size Communities." Water Resources
Res. Ctr., Purdue Univ., W. Lafayette, Ind. (1973).
Miller, W.L., and Erickson, S.P., "The Impact of High Interest Rates on
Optimum Multiple Objective Design of Surface Runoff Urban Drainage Systems."
Water Resources Bull., 11, 49 (1975).
Mobasheri, F., and Harboe, R., "Optimum Conjunctive Use of a Dual-Purpose
Desalting Plant and a Surface Water Reservoir." Desalination, 9, 141 (1971).
Modani, N.K., and Holley, W.H., "The Impact of Water Pollution Abatement on
Competition and Pricing in the Alabama Paper Industry." Water Resources Res.
Inst., Auburn Univ., Auburn (1973).
Morse, A. L., and Zeigler, E., "Powers of the State of Kentucky in Implemen-
ting an Effluent Tax as a Part of an Interstate Ohio River Basin Water
Pollution Control Program." Water Resources Res.Inst., Univ. of Kentucky,
Lexington (1974).
Moss, F.E., "The Report of the National Water Commission." Congressional Rec.,
119, S13310 (July 13, 1973).
Moss, L.I., "Taxing U.S. Polluters." Environ. Problems, W.H. Mason and G.W.
Folkerts (Eds.), W.C. Brown Co., Dubuque, la. (1973).
Mukherjee, S.K., "Programming Model of Regional Water Quality Management."
In "Hydraulics Research and Its Impact on the Environment." Proc. 14th Congr.
Intl. Assn. Hydraul. Res., 5, 277 (1971).
Muller, A.B., "Interdisciplinary Modeling in the Analysis of the Salinity
Problems of the Safford Valley." Water Resources Bull., 10, 245 (1974).
Naito, M., Takamatsu, T., and Fan, L. T., "Optimization of the Activated
Sludge Process-Optimum Volume Ratio of Aeration and Sedimentation Vessels."
Water Res. (Brit.), 3, 433 (1969).
Nash, C., "An Evaluation of Cost-Benefit Analysis Criteria." Scottish Jour.
Pol. Econ., 22, 121 (1975).
National Commission on Water Quality, "Review Draft: Proposed Report."
Washington, D.C. (1975).
National Technical Information Service, "Analysis of Cost Sharing Programs
for Pollution Abatement of Municipal Wastewater.." Prepared for Washington
Environmental Research Center (November 1974).
Nielsen, K.S., et al., "A Note on Cost-Effectiveness in Data Acquisition in
Water Quality Management." Water Resources Res., 11, 357 (1975).
1-146
-------
Orlob, G.T., "Estuarial Systems Analysis Quantity and Quality Considerations."
Proc. Natl. Symp. on Anal. Water Resources Systems, Amer. Water Resources
Assn., Denver, Colo., 341 (1968).
Orsborn, J.F., et al., "A Summary of Quantity, Quality and Economic
Methodology for Establishing Minimum Flows." Water Research Ctr., Washington
State Univ., Pullman (1973).
Ortolano, L., and Smith, F.A., "Cost of Thermal Effluent Standards for Power
Plants." Jour. Power Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100, 15 (1974).
Ortolano, L., "Water Resources Decision Making on the Basis of the Public
Interest." U.S. Army Engr. Inst. for Water Resources, 75-1., Fort Belvoir,
Va. (1975).
Page, R.T., "Failure of Bribes and Standards for Pollution Abatement." Nat.
Resources Jour., 13, 677 (1973).
Pickle, H.B., and Rowe, G.R., "The Impact of Water Pollution Abatement on
Competition and Pricing in the Alabama Steel Industry." Water Resources Res.
Inst., Auburn Univ., Auburn (1973).
Pickle, H.B., and Rucks, A.C., "The Impact of Water Pollution Abatement on
Competition and Pricing in the Alabama Textile Industry." Water Resources
Res. Inst., Auburn Univ., Auburn (1973).
Pickle, H.B., et al., "The Economic Benefits of Abating Water Pollution in
the Steel, Textile, and Paper Industries in Alabama." Water Resources Res.
Inst., Auburn Univ., Auburn (1973).
Podolick, P.A., "An Equitable Sewer Use Charge System." Pub. Works, 106, 91
(1975).
Popovich, M.L., et al., "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Disposal Systems."
Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, 577 (1973).
Porter, R.C., "The Long-Run Assymmetry of Subsidies and Taxas as Anti-
pollution Policies." Water Resources Res., 10, 415 (1974).
Pound, C.E., Crites, R.W., et al., "Costs of Wastewater Treatment by Land
Application." EPA-430/9-75-003 (June 1975).
Pyatt, E.E., et al., "A Model for Quantifying Flow Augmentation Benefits."
Final Rept. Southeast Reg., FWPCA, Atlanta, Ga. (1969).
Quirk, T.P., and Eder, L.J., "Evaluation of Alternative Solutions for
Achievement of River Standards." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 42, 272
(1970).
Rachford, T.M., "Case Study on Sensitivity Analysis and Nonlinear Programming
Applications to Process Analysis and Control." In "Treatise on Urban Water
Systems," Colorado State Univ. Press, Fort Collins, 694 (1971).
1-147
-------
Randall, A., "Coasian Externality Theory in a Policy Context." Nat. Resources
Jour., 14, 35 (1974).
Randies, C.I., et al., "Development of an Oxygen Based Performance Model for
the Western Lake Eric Physico-Biological System." Systems Analysis for Great
Lakes Water Resources, Proc. 4th Symp. on Water Resources Res., Water
Resources Center, Ohio State Univ., Columbus, 29 (1969).
Raphael, D.L., and Maugeri, J., "Water Quality and Regional Economy, A
Decision Model." Proc. 4th Amer. Water Resources Conf., New York, N.Y. 132
(1968).
Rausser, G.C., et al., "Learning, External Benefits, and Subsidies in Water
Desalination." Water Resources Res., 8, 1385 (1972).
Rege, R.S., "Modeling and Optimization of Water Quality in Streams." Office
of Water Resources Res., Rept. No. B-015-KAN (11), M.S. thesis, Dept.
Chemical Eng., Kansas State Univ., Manhattan (1970).
ReVelle, C., Dietrich, G., and Stensel, D., "The Improvement of Water Quality
Under a Financial Constraint." Water Resources Res., 5, 507 (1969).
Richerson, P., and Johnston, R., "Environmental Values and Water Quality
Planning." Jour. Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101, 259(1975).
Rickert, D.A., et al., "Methods and Data Requirements for River-Quality
Assessment." Water Resources Bull., 11, 1013 (1975).
Roper, W., "Wastewater Management Studies by the Corps of Engineers." Jour.
Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, 653 (1973).
Rose-Ackerman, S., "Effluent Charges: A Critique." Can. Jour. Econ., 6, 512
(1973).
Rose, M., "Market Problems in the Distribution of Emission Rights." Water
Resources Res., 9, 1132 (1973).
Rossman, L.A., and Liebman, J.C., "Optimal Regionalization of Wastewater
Treatment for Water Quality Management." Water Resources Ctr., Univ. of 111.,
Urbana-Champaign (1974).
Russell, C.S., "Application of Microeconomic Models to Regional Environmental
Quality Management." Amer. Econ. Rev., 63, 236 (1973).
Saglio, J.F., and Garancher, J., "The Potential Role of Effluent Charges in
Water Quality Management." Proc. 6th Intl. Conf. Water Poll. Res., Pergammon,
Pr., Oxford, G.B. (1973).
Samuels, W.J., "The Coase Theorem and the Study of Law and Economics." Nat.
Resources Jour., 14, 1 (1974).
1-148
-------
Scott, D. L., "Pollution in the Electric Power Industry." D. C. Heath and
Co., Lexington, Mass. (1973).
Seeger, W. R., "Will the People Pay?" Water § Wastes Eng., 10, 4, 69,
(1973).
Seitz, W. D., et al., "Evaluation of Agricultural Policy Alternatives to
Control Sedimentation." Illinois Water Resources Ctr., Univ. of 111.,
Urbana-Champaign (1975).
Sekiguchi, S., "Environmental Regulations and Japan's Industry and Inter-
national Trade." Jap. Econ. Studies, 3, 4, 83 (1975).
Seneca. J. J., and Taussig, M. K., "Environmental Economics." Prentice-Hall,
Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N. J. (1974).
Shea, T. G., and Stockton, J. D., !Wastewater Sludge Utilization and Disposal
Costs." EPA-430/9-75-015. September 1975.
Shik, C. S., and DeFilippi, J. A., "Optimization Models for River Basin
Water Quality Management and Waste Treatment Plant Design." Proc. 4th
Amer. Water Resources Conf., New York, N. Y., 754 (1968).
Shih, C. S., and DeFilippi, J. A., "System Optimization of Waste Treatment
Plant Process Design." Jour. San. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr.,
96, SA2, 409 (1970).
Shih, C. S., and Meier, W. L., Jr., "Integrated Management of Quantity and
Quality of Urban Water Resources." Water Resources Bull., 8, 1006 (1972).
Shih, C. S., et al., "Systems Approach to Microscale Problems of Water
Pollution Control." In "Systems Approach to Environmental Pollution," G. K.
Chacko [Ed.], ORSA, Arlington, Va., 223 (1972).
Shih, C. S., "System Optimization for River Basin Water Quality Management."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 42, 1792 (1970).
Singh, K. P., and Lonnquist, C. G., "Water Treatment Plant Staging Policy."
Water Resources Bull., 8, 239 (1972).
Singh, R. N., and Wilkinson, K. P., "On the Measurement of Environmental
Impacts of Public Projects from a Sociological Perspective." Water Resources
Bull., 10, 415 (1974).
Singleton, F. D., Jr., et al., "An Integrated Power Process Model of Water
Use and Waste Water Treatment in Chlor-Alkali Production." Water Resources
Res., 11, 515 (1975).
Slater, M., "The Quality of Life and the Shape of Marginal Loss Curves."
The Economic Jour. (G.B.), 85, 864 (1975).
1-149
-------
Smith, R., "Digital Computer Programs for the Cost Engineer." U.S. EPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio, March 1971.
Smith, V. K., "Detrimental Externalities, Non-convexities and Technical
Change." Jour, of Public Economics (Neth.), 4, 289 (1975).
Sonne, M. B., "Quality Related Costs of Regional Water Users." Jour. Hydr.
Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, 1849 (1973).
Stilison, R. T., "Regional Trade and Structure Model for Pollution Abate-
ment Study." Systems Analysis for Great Lakes Water Resources, Proc. 4th
Symp. on Water Resources Res., Water Resources Center, Ohio State Univ.,
Columbus, 75 (1969).
Stone, J. C., et al., "An Integrated Power Process Model for Ethylene
Production." Water Resources Res., 11, 810 (1975).
Stone, R. and Smallwood, H., "Intermedia Aspects of Air and Water Pollution
Controls." EPA-600/5-73-003. August 1973.
Taylor, B. W., III, et al., "Approaches to Multiobjective Planning in Water
Resource Projects." Water Resources Bull., 11, 999 (1975).
Thomann, R. V., "Systems Analysis £ Water Quality Management." Environ.
Sci. Services Div., Environ. Res. and Applications, Inc., New York, N.Y.
(1972).
Tihansky, D. P., "Economic Damages from Residential Use of Mineralized Water
Supply." Water Resources Res., 10, 145 (1974).
Tihansky, D. P., "Economic Models of Industrial Pollution Control in Regional
Planning." Environment £ Planning, 5, 339 (1973).
Tulkens, H., and Schoumaker, F., "Stability Analysis of an Effluent Charge
and the Polluters Pay1 Principle.", Jour, of Public Economics (Neth.), 4,
245 (1975).
Tybout, R. A. [Ed.], "Environmental Quality and Society." Ohio State Univ.
Press, Columbue (1975).
Unger, S. G., and Woolverton, M. W., "Economci Analysis of Effluent Guide-
lines: Grain Processing Segment of the Grain Mills Industry." Development
Planning and Research Asso., Inc., Manhattan, Kan. (1975).
U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, "Impact of Federal Pollution Control and
Abatement Expenditures on Manpower Requirements." U. S. Govt. Printing
Office, Washington, D. C. (1975).
U. S. EPA, "Comparative Costs of Erosion and Sediment Control, Construction
Activities." U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington, D. C. (July 1973).
i-150
-------
U. S. EPA, "Cost Effectiveness in Water Quality Programs." Washington, D.C.
(October 1974).
U. S. EPA, "Draft Economic Impact Assessment for the Proposed Toxic Substance
Control Act." Office of Toxic Substances, NTIS, PB 242 826, Springfield,
Va. (1975).
U.S. Govt. Printing Office, "Environmental Quality: The Fourth Annual
Report." Council on Environmental Quality, Washington, D. C. (1973).
U. S. Govt. Printing Office, "Environmental Quality: The Fifth Annual
Report." Council on Environmental Quality, Washington, D. C. (1974).
U. S. Govt. Printing Office, "New Directions in U. S. Water Policy."
National Water Commission, Washington, D. C. (June 1973).
U. S. Govt. Printing Office, "Special Analyses: Budget of the U. S.
Government, Fiscal Year 1975." Office of Management and Budget.
Washington, D. C., 235 (1974).
U. S. Govt. Printing Office, "Water Policies for the Future." National
Water Commission, Washington, D. C. (June 1973).
U. S. House Committee on Public Works, "The Effects of Pollution Abatement
on International Trade II." Potential Economic Impacts of Evolving Pollution
Control Programs in the U. S. and Abroad. (July 1974).
U. S. National Bureau of Standards, "Cost Sharing to Help Clean our Water-
ways." Dimensions NBS, 58, 267 (1974).
U. S. Water Resources Council, "Principles and Standards for Planning Water
and Related Land Resources." Federal Register, 38, 24778 (September 10,
1973).
Unterberg, W., et al., "Computerized Design and Cost Estimation for
Multiple-Hearth Sludge Incinerators." EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Project No. 17070 EBP, Contract No. 14-12-547, Washington, D. C. (1971).
Upton, C., "A Model of Water Quality Management under Uncertainty." Water
Resources Res., 6, 690 (1970).
Upton, C., "Application of User Charges to Water Quality Management."
Water Resources Res., 7, 264 (1971).
VanNote, R. H., Herbert, P. V., et al., "A Guide to the Selection of Cost-
Effective Wastewater Treatment Systems." EPA-430/9-75-002, July 1975.
Verlander, F. M., and Hoag, L. N., "Sewerage: Who Should Pay?" Water §
Wastes Eng., 10, 4, 52 (1973).
1-151
-------
Walker, W. R., and Skogerboe, G. V., "The Impact of Water Quality Objectives
on Urban Water Supply Planning." Water Resources Bull., 9, 861 (1973).
Walker, W. R., et al., "Water Supply, Treatment, Distribution and Reuse
Optimization in Arid Urban Areas." Water Resources Bull., 10, 1187 (1974).
Walsh, S., and Brown, L. C., "Least Cost Method for Sewer Design." Jour.
Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, 333 (1973).
Walter, C. R., "Pricetag to Industry?" Water $ Waste Eng., 10, 1, A13 (1973).
Walter, 0., "The Pollution Content of American Trade." Western Econ. Jour.,
11, 61 (1973).
Ward, P. S., "NCWQ Released Staff Findings." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed.,
47, 2350 (1975).
Ward, R. C., and Vanderholm, S. H., "Cost-Effectiveness Methodologies for
Data Acquisition in Water Quality Management." Water Resources Res., 9,
536 (1973).
Ward, R. J., "Micro Economic Environmental Impact Methodology," The Amer.
Economist, 18, 1, 82 (1974).
"Wastewater Reclamation: Socio-Economics, Technology, and Public Acceptance."
Ralph Stone and Co., Inc., Los Angeles, Calif. (1974).
Weeter, D. W., "A Water Quality Prediction Model and a Water Quality
Simulation Program for the Wabash River." Office of Water Resources Res.,
Retp. No. A-013-IND(2), Purdue Univ., Lafayette, Ind. (1971).
Weinrobe, M., "Accounting for Pollution: Pollution Abatement and the
National Product." Land Econ., 48, 115 (1973).
Wenders, J. T., "Methods of Pollution Control and the Rate of Change in
Pollution Abatement Technology." Water Resources Res., 11, 393 (1975).
Westrope, J. S., "Simulation Decision Aid in Planning Desalting Applications."
Water Resources Bull., 6, 602 (1970).
Whipple, W. A., Jr., "Principles of Determining a Social Discount Rate."
Water Resources Bull., 11, 811 (1975).
Whipple, W., Jr., "Environmental Quality and its Evaluations." Water
Resources Res. Inst., Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N. J. (1974).
Whipple, W., Jr., "Water Quality Planning for the Delaware Estuary." Water
Resources Bull., 11, 300 (1975).
1-152
-------
Wissman, D. J., et al., "Economic Analysis of Effluent Guidelines: Apple,
Citrus and Potato Processing Segments of the Canned and Preserved Fruits
and Vegetable Industry." Development Planning and Research Asso., Inc.,
Manhatten, Kan. (1975).
Wright, C., "Some Political Aspects of Pollution Control." Jour. Environ.
Econ. and Management, 1, 173 (1974).
Young, C. E., and Carlson, G. A., "Economic Analysis of Land Treatment of
Municipal Wastewater.: Water Resources Res. Inst., N. C. State Univ,
Raleigh (1974).
Young, H. P., and Thompson, R. G., "Least-Cost Allocation and Valuation
Model for Water Resources." Water Resources Res., 9, 1186 (1973).
Young, R. A., et al., "Economic and Institutional Analysis of Colorado
Water Quality Management." Environ. Resources Ctr., Colorado St. Univ.,
Fort Collins (1975).
1-153
-------
Treatment Systems
Alverson, J.A., "Wastewater Irrigation and Forests". Water Spectrum, 6:4,30
(1974).
American Geophysical Union, "Symposium on Solute Transport in Subsurface
Water", San Francisco, California (December 1975).
American Institute of Chem. Engr., "2nd National Conference on Complete
Water Reuse". Chicago, Illinois (May 1975)
American Society of Agronomy, "Agronomy Abstracts for the 1975 Annual Meeting
in Knoxville, Tennessee" (June 1975).
Aulenbach, D.B., and Tofflemire, T.J., "35 Years of Continuous Discharge of
Secondary Treated Effluent Onto Sand Beds". Paper presented at National
Water Well Assn. meeting, Denver, Colorado (October 1974).
Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories, "Evaluation of Municipal Sewage
Treatment Alternatives", Final Report to Council on Environmental Quality
(February 1974).
Bechtel, Inc., "A Guide to the Selection of Cost-Effective Wastewater Treat-
ment Systems", San Francisco, California (April 1973).
Berarde, M.A., "Land Disposal and Sewage Effluent: Appraisal of Health
Effects of Pathogenic Organisms." Jour. Amer. Water Works Assn., 65,432
(1973).
Bernhart, A.P., "Treatment and Disposal of Waste Water from Homes by Soil
Infiltration and Evapotranspiration." University of Toronto Press, Toronto,
Ont., can. (December 1973).
Betz, J.V., "Proposed Standards: Land Disposal of Effluents." Civil Engr.,
45:5,77 (1975).
Black and Veatch, "Estimating Costs and Manpower Requirements for Conven-
tional Wastewater Treatment Facilities," Kansas City, Missouri (October 1971).
Bogedain, P.O., et al., "Land Disposal of Wastewater in New York State."
Rept. by N. Y. State Dept. of Environ. Conservation, Albany (June 1973)
Bopardikar, M.V., and alagarsamy, S.B., "Brackish and (or) Waste Water
Reclamation by Electrodialysis Process." Indian Chem. Mfr., 6:5-6,33
(1968); Chem. Abs., 72, 136138v (1970).
1-154
-------
Bouma, J., "Use of Soil for Disposal and Treatment of Septic Tank Effluents."
Dept. of Soil Sci., Univ. of Vermont, Burlington (September 1973).
Bouwer, H., "Design and Operation of Land Treatment Systems for Minimum
Contamination of Ground Water." Groundwater, 12,140 (1974).
Bouwer, H., et al., "A High Rate Land Treatment System for Renovating
Secondary Sewage Effluent: The Flushing Meadows Project." U.S. Water
Conservation Lab., Phoenix, Arizona.
Bouwer, H., et al., "High-rate Land Treatment I: Infiltration and Hydraulic
Aspects of the Flushing Meadows Project." and "High-rate Land Treatment II:
Water Quality and Economic Aspects of the Flushing Meadows Project." Jour.
Water Poll. Control Fed., 43,834 and 844 (1974).
Bouwer, H., "High Rate Land Treatment." Water Spectrum, 6:1,18 (1974).
Bouwer, H., "Renovating Municipal Wastewater by High-Rate Infiltration for
Ground Water Recharge." Jour. Amer. Water Works Assn., 66,159 (1974).
Brown and Caldwell, Consulting Engineers, "Evaluation of Alternatives for
On-Site Sewage Treatment and Disposal." Prepared for Department of Environ-
mental Quality, Portland, Oregon (April 1975).
Carlson, C.A., et al., "Overland Flow Treatment of Wastewater." Misc.
Paper Y-74-3, U.S. Army Eng. Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Mississippi (August 1974).
Canadian Society of Soil Science, "Program and Abstracts for International
Conference on Land for Waste Management." Ottawa, Canada (October 1973).
Ciccone, V.J., et al., "A Present Value-Unit Cost Methodology for Evaluating
Municipal Wastewater Reclamation and Direct Reuse." Water Resources Bull.,
11,21 (1975).
Cole, J.A., Ground^Water Pollution in Europe. Proceedings of 1972 and 1973
Conference, Water Information Center, Port Washington, N.Y. (1975).
Colorado State University, "Proceedings of the Symposium on Land Treatment
of Secondary Effluent." J. Ernest Flack [Ed.] (November 1973).
Correlation of Advanced Wastewater Treatment and Groundwater Recharge,"
Consoer, Townsend and Assoc., Chicago, Illinois (August 1973)?
Council on Environmental Quality and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
"Municipal Sewage Treatment—A Comparison of Alternatives." U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C. (February 1974).
County Sanitation District of Los Angeles, "State of the Technology: Semi-
Automatic Control of Activated Sludge Treatment Plants," (December 1965).
1-155
-------
Gulp, G.C., "Example Comparisons of Land Treatment and Advanced Waste
Treatment." For Technology Transfer Program: Clean Water Consultants,
El Dorado Hills, California (1975).
Davis, W.K., "Land Disposal III: Land Use Planning." Jour. Water Poll.
Control.Fed., 45,1485 (July 1973).
Day, A.D., et al., "Influence of Treated Municipal Waste Water on Growth,
Fiber, Acid-soluble Nucleotides, Protein, and Amino Acid Content in Wheat
Grain." Jour. Environ. Quality, 4,167 (1975).
Demirjian, Y.A., "Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater Effluents."
Prepared for EPA Technology Transfer Program, Muskegon County, Muskegon,
Michigan (October 1975).
Dept. of the Environment and National Research Council of Canaca, Proc.
Intl. Conf. on Land for Waste Management, Agr. Inst. Can., Ottawa, Can.
(1974).
D'ltri, P.M., et.al., "An Ovwrview of 4 Selected Facilities that Apply
Municipal Wastewater to the Land." For Technology Transfer Program, Michigan
State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824 (1975).
Ehlert, N., "Spray Runoff Disposal of Waste Stabilization Pond Effluent."
Research Report No. 22, Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Pollution
Control Branch, Toronto, Ontario (1975).
Eilers, R.G., and Smith, R., "Executive Digital Computer Program for Pre-
liminary Design of Wastewater Treatment Systems," U.S. EPA, Cincinnati,
Ohio (November 1970).
Eilers, R.G., and Smith, R., "User's Manual for Executive Digital Computer
Program for Preliminary Design of Wastewater Treatment Systems, U.S. EPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio (March 1973).
Eilers, R.G., and Smith, R., "Wastewater Treatment Plant Cost Estimating
Program," U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (April 1971).
Eilers, R.G., "Mathematical Models for Calculating Performance and Cost
of Wastewater Treatment Systems," Conference on Environmental Modeling and
Simulation, Cincinnati, Ohio (April 1976).
Environmental Protection Agency, "Evaluation of Land Application Systems."
EPA-430/9-74-015, Office of Water Program Operations, Washington, D.C.
(Sep ember 1974).
Environmental Protection Agency, "Evaluation of Land Application Systems."
EPA-430/9-75-001, EPA, Office of Water Program Operations, Washington, D.C.
20460 (1975)..
EPA-902/9-73-001, "Land Disposal of Municipal.Effluents and Sludges.", Proc.
Symp. at Rutgers Univ., N.J. (March 1973).
1-156
-------
EPA, Office of Research and Development, "Papers for the Non-sewered
Domestic Waste Disposal Workshop." EPA, Boston, Massachusetts (April 1975).
Federal Supplement, "City of North Miami vs. V. Train." 337,1264 (Southern
Dist., Florida) (1974).
Fink, W.B., Jr., and Aulenbach, D.B., "Protracted Recharge of Treated
Sewage into Sand, Part II—Tracing the Flow of Contaminated Ground Water
with a Resistivity Survey." Groundwater, 12,219 (1974).
Gilde, L.C., "Land Treatment of Food Processing Wastewaters." Jour. Irr.
and Drain. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, IR3, 339 (1973).
Golomb, A., and Besik, F., "Reverse Osmosis for Wastewater Treatment."
Ind. Water Eng., 7,16 (1970).
Hinesly, T.D., "Land Treatment Process for Wastewater Renovation." Pub.
Works, 105:2,62 (1974).
Hitchcock, C.Y., Jr., and Giggey, M.D., "Assessment of Technologies and Costs
for Publicly Owned Treatment Works under Public Law 92-500". Prepared for
National Commission on Water Quality by Metcalf § Eddy, Inc. (September 1975).
Hoeppel, R.F., et al., "Wastewater Treatment on Soils of Low Permeability."
Misc. Paper Y-24-2, U.S. Army Eng. Waterways Exp. Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
(July 1974).
Keith, F. W., and Little, T.H., "Centrifuges in Water and Waste Treatment."
Chem. Eng. Progr., 65:11,77 (1969).
Ku, H.F.H., et al., "Changes in Concentration of Certain Constituents of
Treated Wastewater During Movement Through the Magothy Aquifer, Bay Park,
N.Y." Jour, of Research of the U.S.G.S., 3,89 (1975).
Lee, C.R., and Takamatsa, T., "Cost of Trickling Filter Recirculation
Part II." Water § Sewage Works, 122:2,64 (1975).
Loehman, E., et al., "Cost Allocation for a Regional Pollution Treatment
System." In "Economics and Decision Making for Environmental Quality."
J.R. Connor and E. Loehman [Eds.], Gainseville Univ. Press of Florida, 223
(1974).
Loehr, R.C., Agricultural Waste Management, "Land Disposal of Wastes,"
pp. 353-390, Academic Press, N.Y. (1974).
Lykins, B. W., Jr., and Mitchell, T. M., "Summary of Capital and 0§M Costs
for Conventional Activated Sludge Systems," In-house Report, U.S. EPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio (March 1975).
Lykins, B.W., and Mitchell, T.M., "Summary of Capital and 0§M Costs for
Conventional Rock-Media Trickling Filter Systems," In-house Report, U.S.
EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (April 1975).
1-157
-------
Malhotra, S.K., and Myers, E.A., "Design Operation and Monitoring of Municipal
Irrigation Systems." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 47,2627 (1975).
Markland, R.E., et al., "A Benefit-Cost Analysis of Alternative Land Disposal
Waste Water Methods in an Urban Environment." Final Technical Completion
Report, Univ. of Missouri, St. Louis (1974).
Markland, R.E., et al., "A Benefit Cost Analysis of Alternate Land Disposal
Waste Water Methods in an Urban Environment." Univ. of Missouri, School of
Business Adminis., St. Louis (1975).
Marshall, H.E., Ruegg, R.T., et al., "Analysis of Cost Sharing Programs for
Pollution Abatement of Municipal Wastewater." EPA 600/5-74-031 (Nov. 1974).
Metcalf and Eddy, Inc., "Report to National Commission on Water Quality on
Assessment of Technologies and Costs for Publicly Owned Treatment Works Under
Public Law 92-500, "Boston, Massachusetts (February 1976).
Michel, P.H., et al., "Land Disposal, What's the Realistic View?" Water $
Wastes Eng., 11:6,30 (1974).
Muskegon Co. Bd., Michigan, "Engineering Feasibility Demonstration Study
for Muskegon County, Michigan, Wastewater Treatment-Irrigation System"
WPCRS 11010 FMY 10/70 (September 1370).
National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges, Washington,
D.C., "Proc. Joint Conf. on Recycling Municipal Sludges and Effluents on
Land. Champaign, Illinois." Washington, D.C. (July 1973).
National Sanitation Foundation, "2nd National Conference on Individual
Onsite Wastewater Systems." Ann Arbor, Michigan (November 1975).
Neary, D.G., "Boron Toxicity in Red Pine Following Municipal Waste Water
Irrigation." Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc., 39,981 (1975).
NSF-RAMM, Williamsburg Conference on Management of Wastewater Residuals,
Williamsburg, Virginia (November 1975).
Nutter, W.L., et al., "Sewage Effluent Irrigation Project at the Unicoi
Station," 2nd Annual Progress Report, Univ. of Georgia, School of Forest
Resources, Athens, Georgia (1975).
Oldham, W.K., "Spray Irrigation of Treated Municipal Sewage." Proceedings
of the 1974 Annual Conf. British Columbia Water and Waste Assn., Univ. of
British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C. (1975).
Olson, G.W., "Using Soils of Kansas for Waste Disposal." Agronomy Dept.,
Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N.Y. (1973).
Orcutt, R.G., et al., "Optimal Planning of Regional Wastewater Systems and
Their Impacts on Stream Quality with a Case Study of the Carson River Basin."
Cooperative Report Series Publication No. EN-2, Univ. of Nevada, Reno (1975).
1-158
-------
Osborne, J.M., "Tertiary Treatment of Campground Wastes Using a Native
Minnesota Peat." Jour. Soil and Water Conserv., 30,235 (1975).
Pound, C.E., and Crites, R.W., "Design Factors Part 1, Land Treatment of
Municipal Wastewater Effluent." For Technology Transfer Program; Metcalf
and Eddy Engineers, Palo Alto, California (1975).
Pound, C.E., and Crites, R.W., "Wastewater Treatment and Reuse by Land
Application." EPA 660/2-73-006b 1 and 2 (August 1973).
Pound, C.E., and Crites, R.W., "Treatment of Municipal Wastewater by Land
Application." Water § Sew. Works, Ref. No., R45 (1975).
Pound, C.E., et al., "Cost of Wastewater Treatment by Land Application
Systems." EPA0430/9-75-003. U.S. EPA Office of Water Program Operations,
Washington, D.C. 20460 (1975).
Powell, G.M., "Design Factors Part II, Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater
Effluents." For Technology Transfer Program; CH M Hill, 12000 E. 47th Ave.,
Denver, Colorado (1975).
Powell, G.W., and Gulp, G.L., "AWT vs. Land Treatment for Montgomery County,
Maryland." Water § Sew. Works, 120:4,59 (1973).
Ragone, S.E., et al., "Mobilization of Iron in Water in the Magothy Aquifer
During Long Term Recharge with Tertiary Treated Sewage, Bay Park, N.Y."
Jour, of Research of the U.S.G.S., 3,93 (1975).
Rhodes Technology Corporation, "Dissolved-Air Treatment of Combined Sewer
Overflows." FWPCA, Water Poll. Control Res. Ser. WP-20-17 (1970).
Richardson, R.A., and D'ltri, F., "Waste Water Renovation and Reuse: An
Urgent Environmental Need." Compost. Sci., Jour, of Waste Recycling,
16:5,26 (1975).
Richenderfer, J.L., et al., "Spray Irrigation of Treated Municipal Sewage
Effluent and its Effect on Chemical Properties of Forest Soils." U.S.D.A.
Forest Service Gen. Tech. Report N.E.-17, Upper Darby, Pa. (1975).
Sanks, R. L., and Asano, T., [Eds.] "Land Treatment and Disposal,"
Ann Arbor Science, Publishers, Inc. (1975).
Satterwhite, M.B., and Stewart, G.L., "Treatment of Primary Sewage Effluent
by Rapid Infiltration in a New England Environment." Paper presented at
Amer. Soc. of Agronomy meeting, Chicago, Illinois (November 1974).
Shende, G.B., "Sewage Utilization in Agriculture." Indian Farming (India),
23:11,25 (1974).
Skrinde, R.T., et al., "Reverse Osmosis Treatment of Waste Waters." Appl.
Polym. Symp., 13,323 (1969); Chem. Abs., 73,112673k (1970).
1-159
-------
Small, M.M., "Brookhavens Two Sewage Treatment Systems." Compost Sci. Jour.
of Waste Recycling, 16:5,7 (1975).
Smith, R., and Eilers, R.G., "Cost of Alternative Processes for Wastewater
Disinfection," U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (October 1974).
Smith, R., and Eilers, R.G.', "Economics of Consolidating Sewage Treatment
Plants by Means of Interceptor for Sewers and Force Mains," U.S. EPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio (April 1971).
Smith, R., and McMichael, W.F., "Cost and Performance Estimates for Tertiary
Wastewater Treating Processes," U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (June 1969).
Smith, R., "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Water Pollution Control," U.S.
EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (August 1974).
Smith, R., "Cost of Conventional and Advanced Treatment of Wastewater,"
U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (July 1968).
Smith, R., "Electrical Power Consumption for Municipal Wastewater Treatment,"
U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (July 1973).
Smith, R., "Factors to be Considered in Developing a Data Gathering and
Analysis Plan Leading to Improvement of the Operational Effectiveness of
Conventional Wastewater Treatment Plants," U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio
(December 1969).
Smith, R., "The Cost of Dispersed Floe Nitrification and Denitrification for
Removal of Nitrogen from Wastewater," U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (Nov. 1970).
Sopper, W., and Kardos, L.T. [Eds.], "Recycling Treated Municipal Wastewater
and Sludge Through Forest and Cropland." Symp. at Pennsylvania State Univ.,
University Park, Pennsylvania (1973).
Sorber, C.A., and Guter, K.J., "Health and Hygiene Aspects of Spray
Irrigation." Amer. Jour, of Pub. Health, 65,47 (1975).
Sprinkler Irrigation Association, "1975 Spray Irrigation Conference
Proceeding." Silver Springs, Maryland (1975).
Stevens, R.M., and Stevens, B.A., "An Evaluation of Land Treatment of Rural
Communities." Paper presented at the Rural Environ. Eng. Conference, Warren,
Vt., Center for the Study of Federalism, Temple Univ., Philadelphis, Pa.
(September 1973).
Sullivan, R.H., et al., "Survey of Facilities Using Land Application of
Wastewater." EPA Rep. 430/9-73-006 (July 1973).
Tchobanoglous, G., "Filtration Techniques in Tertiary Treatment." Jour.
Water Poll. Control Fed., 42,604 (1970).
1-160
-------
Tennessee Valley Authority, "Soil for Management and Utilization of Organic
Wastes and Wastewaters." Muscle Shoals, Alabama (March 1975).
Thomas, R.E., and Harlin, C.C., Jr., "EPA Research on Land Treatment." For
Technology Transfer Program, Robert S. Kerr Environ. Res. Lab., Ada, Okla.
74820 (1975).
Thomas, R.E., et al., "Feasibility of Overland Flow for the Treatment of Raw
Domestic Wastewater." EPA-660/2-74-087 (July 1974).
Thomas, R.E., "Land Disposal II: An Overview of Treatment Methods." Jour.
Water Poll. Control Fed., 45,1476 (1973).
Tihansky, D.P., "Cost Analysis of Water Pollution Control: An Annotated
Bibliography." EPA-R5-73-017 (April 1973).
Tofflemire, T.J., "Progress Report on Phosphate Removal at Paul Smith's
College Sewage Treatment Plant in Northern New York State: Technical Paper
No. 41, N.Y. State Department of Environ. Conserv., Albany, N.Y. (April 1975)
U.S. Department of Agriculture, "Factors Involved in Land Application of
Agricultural and Municipal Wastes." (July 1974).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Land Application of Sewage Effluents
and Sludges: Selected Abstracts." EPA-660/2-74-042 (June 1974).
U.S. EPA, "A Guide to the Selection of Cost-Effective Wastewater Treatment
Systems." Office of Water Programs Operations, Washington, D.C. (July 1975)
U.S. EPA, "Land Application of Wastewater." EPA 903-9-75-017. Sponsored by
U-.S. EPA Region III, 6th and Walnut Street, Philadelphia, Pa. 19106 (1975).
Unger, S.G. and Jordening, D.L., "Bibliography of Water Pollution Control
Benefits and Cost." EPA-600/5-74-028 (October 1974).
Unger, S.G., Emerson, M.J., et al., "State-of-the-Art Review: Water Pollu-
tion Control Benefits § Costs - Vol. 1." EPA-600/5-73-008a (October 1973).
Ward, P.S., "EPA Warns: Don't Ignore Land Treatment." Jour. Water Poll.
Control Fed., 47,232 (197t).
Whiting, D.M., "Use of Climatic Data in Design of Soils Treatment Systems".
EPA-660/2-75-018 - U.S. EPA, Corvallis, Oregon 97330 (1975).
World Health Organization, International Conference on Environmental
Sensing and Assessment, held in Las Vegas, Nevada (September 1975).
"WPCF Policy Statement: Use of Land for Wastewater Treatment and Disposal."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 45,2594 (1973).
1-161
-------
Young, C.E., and Carlson, G.A., "Land Treatment Versus Conventional Advanced
Treatment of Municipal Wastewater." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 47,2565
(1975).
Young, C.E., "Factors Affecting Adoption of Land Treatment of Municipal
Wastewater." Water Resources Res., 11, 616 (1975).
Young, E.G., and Carlson, G.A., "Economic Analysis of Land Treatment of
Municipal Wastewater." Rept. No. 98, Water Resources Research Inst., Univ.
of North Carolina, North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh (October 1974).
1-162
-------
Wastewater Treatment
Adams, B.J., et al., "On the Centralization of Wastewater Treatment
Facilities." Water Resources Bull., 8,669 (1972).
American Public Works Association, "Feasibility of Computer Control of
Wastewater Treatment." (December 1970).
Anand, A.S., and Laughlin, W.C., Jr., "Computer Simulation for Upgrading
Existing Wastewater Treatment Facilities by Chemical Physical Treatment."
Proc. Summer Computer Simulation Conf., Montreal, Can. (1973).
Bhalla, H.S., and Rikkers, R.F., "Multi-Time Period Facilities Location
Problems: A Heuristic Algorithm with Application to Waste Water Treatment
Systems." Water Resources Res. Ctr., Dept. Ind. Eng. and Operations Res.,
Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst (1971).
Bundgaard-Nielsen, M., and Hwang, C.L., "On Taxation and Firms Choice of
Waste Water Treatment Technology." Water Resources Bull., 11,805 (1975).
Euros, O.K., "Wastewater Reclamation Project, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands."
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio (June 1976).
Carlson, G.A., and Young, C.E., "Factors Affecting Adoption of Land Treat-
ment of Municipal Waste Water." Water Resources Res., 11,616 (1975).
Chen, G.K., et al., "Computer Software for Wastewater Treatment Plant Design."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 44,746 (1972).
Clarke, R.T., "Objectives and Methods of Data Processing and Analysis in
the Water Treatment Context." Jour. Soc. Water Trt. $ Exam., 20,95 (1971).
Dajani, J.S., et al., "Optimal Design of Urban Wastewater Collection Net-
works." Jour. San. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 98,853 (1972).
DeBoice, J.N., and Thomas, J.F., "Chemical Treatment for Phosphate Control."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 46,2246 (1975).
Deininger, R.A., et al., "Computer Aided Design of Waste Water Treatment
Plants." Water Res., (G.B.), 3,834 (1969).
Dracup, J.A., and Fogarty, T.J., "Optimal Planning for a Thermal Discharge
Treatment System." Water Resources Res., 10,67 (1974).
1-163
-------
EPA Technology Transfer Seminar Publication, "Flow Equalization."
Washington, D.C. (August 1973).
Evenson, D.E., Orlob, G.T., and Monser, J.R., "Preliminary Design of
Waste Treatment Systems." Ind. Water Eng., 16,16 (1969).
Evenson, D.E., Orlob, G.T., and Monser, J.R., "Preliminary Selection of
Waste Treatment Systems." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 41,1845 (1969).
Fan, L.T., et al., "Effects of Axial Dispersion on the Optimal Design of
the Activated Sludge Process." Water Res. (G.B.), 4,271 (1970).
Fan, L.T., et al., "Effect of Suspended Wastes on System Design." Jour.
Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100,1231 (1974).
Caller, W.S., "The Use of Operations Research Techniques in Wastewater
Treatment Plant Design." Proc. Natl. Symp. on Anal. Water Resources
Systems, Amer. Water Resources Assn., Denver, Colorado, 225 (1968).
Gotaas, H.B., and Caller, W.S., "Design Optimization for Biological Filter
Models." Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99,831
(1973).
Hatfield, G.G., and Graves, G.W., "Optimization of a Reverse Osmosis
System Using Nonlinear Programming." Desalination, 7,147 (1970).
Heady, E.O., and Nicol, K.J., "Models of Land and Water Allocation to Improve
Environmentand Water Quality Through Soil Loss Controls." Water Resources
Res., 11,795 (1975).
Hinomoto, H., "Dynamic Programming of Capacity Expansion of Municipal Water
Treatment System." Water Resources Res., 8,1178 (1972).
Hoffman, T.W., et al., "Simulation of A Petroleum Refinery Waste Treatment
Process." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 45^2321 (1973).
Hunter, J.S., III, "Allocation of Funding for Wastewater Treatment
Facilities." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 46,18 (1974).
Joeres, E.F., et al., "Planning Methodology for the Design of Regional
Waste Water Treatment Systems." Water Resources Res., 10,643 (1974).
Kaplan, M.A., and Haimes, Y.Y., "Dynamic Programming for Optimal Capacity
Expansion of Wastewater Treatment Plants." Water Resources Bull., 11,278.
(1975).
Korneichev, A.I., et al., "Optimization of Basic Parameters of Thermal
Desalting Plants with Adiabatic Evaporation." Desalination, 7,179 (1970).
Kuo, M-c. T., et al., "Effects of Suspended Solids on Primary Clarifier
Size optimization." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 46,2521 (1974).
1-164
-------
Lee, C.R., "Cost of Trickling Filter Recirculation Part I." Water § Sewage
Works, 122:1,57 (1975).
Lin, S.H., et al., "Design of the Optimal Outfall System for a Stream
Receiving Thermal and Organic Waste Discharges." Water Res. (G.B.),
9,623 (1975).
McConagha, D.L., and Converse, A., "Design and Cost Allocation Algorithm for
Waste Treatment Systems." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 45, 2558 (1973).
McCutchan, J.W., and Goel, V., "Systems Analysis of a Multi-Stage Tubular
Module Reverse Osmosis Plant for Sea Water Desalination." Desalination,
14:1,57 (1974).
Mendiratta, A.K., and Davidson, B., "Best Combination of Waste Treatmerft
and Spatially Distributed Discharge of Effluent." Water Resources,
8,565 (1972).
Metcalf § Eddy, Inc., "Cost-Effective Comparison of Land Application and
Advanced Wastewater Treatment," Palo Alto, California (October 1975).
Mishra, P.N., et al., "Optimal Capacity Expansion of a Secondary Treatment
System." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 46, 2704 (1974).
Mistry, J.J., and Himmelblau, D.M., "Stochastic Analysis of Trickling
Filter." Jour. Env. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Erigr., 101,333 (1975).
Mobasheri, F., and Harboe, R., "Optimum Conjunctive Use of a Dual-Purpose
Desalting Plant and a Surface Water Reservoir." Desalination, 9,141 (1971).
Mulvihill, M.E., and Dracup, J.A., "Optimal Timing and Sizing of a Conjunc-
tive Urban Water Supply and Waste Water System with Nonlinear Programming."
Water Resources Res., 10,170 (1974).
Naito, M., Takamatsu, T., and Fan, L.T., "Optimization of the Activated Sludge
Process-Optimum Volume Ratio of Aeration and Sedimentation Vessels."
Water Res. (Brit.) 3,433 (1969).
Ortolano, L., "Artificial Aeration as A Substitute for Wastewater Treatment."
In "Models for Managing Regional Water Quality." R. Dorfman, et al., [Eds.],
Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Mass., 265 (1972).
Parkin, G.F., and Dague, R.R., "Optimal Design of Wastewater Treatment
Systems by Enumeration." Jour. San Eng. Div. Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr.,
98,933 (1972).
Phillips, J.C., Quimpa, R.G., and Miller, J.P., "Simulation of Oxygen
Utilization in Storage-Treatment Plant System." The Use of Analog and
Digital Computers in Hydrol., UNESCO, 661 (1969).
Rossman, L.A., and Liebman, J.C., "Optimal Regionalization of Wastewater
Treatment for Water Quality Management." Final Rept. Univ. Of Illinois,
Water Resources Center, Urbana (1974).
1-165
-------
Shih, C.S., and De Filippi, J.A., "System Optimization of Waste Treatment
Plant Process Design." Jour. San. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr.,
96,SA2,409 (1970).
Shih, C.S., and Kirshnan, P., "Dynamic Optimization for Industrial Waste
Treatment Design." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 41,1787 (1969).
Singh, K.P., and Lonnquist, C.G., "Water Treatment Plant Staging Policy."
Water Resources Bull., 8,239 (1972).
Unterberg, W., et al., "Computerized Design and Cost Estimation for Multiple-
Hearth Sludge Incinerators." EPA, Office of Res. and Monitoring, Project
No. 17070 EBP, Contract No. 14-12-547, Washington, D.C. (1971).
Watkins, J., Jr., "Can A Computer Really Operate A Water-Filtration Plant?"
Jour. Amer. Water Works Assn., 67,351 (1975).
Weber, W.J., Jr., and Critenden, J.C., "MADAM I-A Numeric Method for Design
of Adsorption Systems." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 47,924 (1975).
Whinston, A.B., et al., "Application of Statistical Techniques to the
Selection of an Optimal Pollution Treatment Program." Technical Report
No. 51, Purdue Univ., Water Resources Res. Center, W. Lafayette, Ind. (1974),
1-166
-------
Water Quality Modeling
Abel, F.H., and Tihansky, D.P., "Methods and Problems of Estimating Water-
Quality Benefits." Jour. Amer. Water Works Assn., 66,276 (1974).
Acres, H.G., Ltd., "Water Quality Models." Niagara Falls, Ont., Canada
(1971).
Adams, B.J., and Gemmell, R.S., "Mean Estimate Deficiencies in Water
Quality Studies." Jour. Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr.,
101, 989 (1975).
Adams, C.E., et al., "A Kinetic Model for Design of Completely-Mixed
Activated Sludge Treating Variable-Strength Industrial Wastewaters."
Water Res. (G.B.), 9,37 (1975).
Ahlert, R.C., "Stochastic Variations in Water Quality Parameters." Res.
Project Technical Completion Report, Bureao of Engineering Res., The State
Univ. of New Jersey, Rutgers (1975).
Alam, A.M.Z., "Optimization Model for Churchill River Division." Jour.
Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 98,HY8,1351 (1972).
Aleksashenko, A.A., and Khublaryan, M.G., "Mathematical Models for Water
Quality Evaluation." Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water
Resources Systems, 3,603 (1972).
Anderson, D., "Models for Determining Least_Cost Investments in Electricity
Supply." Bell Jour, of Econ. $ Management Sci., 3,267 (1972).
Andersen, D.R., "Water Quality Models for Urban and Suburban Areas." Office
of Water Research Tech., Dept. of the Int., NTIS No. PB 238 622 (1975).
Andrews, J.F., "Dynamic Models and Control Strategies for Wastewater
Treatment Processes." Water Res. (G.B.), 8,261 (1974).
Andrews, R.A., and Weyrick, R.R., "Linear Programming Use for Evaluating
Water Resources and Cost and Benefit Allocation." Water Resources Bull.,
9,258 (1973).
Arbabi, M., and Elzinga, J., "A General Linear Approach to Stream Water
Quality Modeling." Water Resources Res., 11,191 (1975).
Arbabi, M., et al., "The Oxygen Sag Equation: New Properties and a Linear
Equation for the Critical Deficit." Water Resources Res., 10,921 (1974).
1-167
-------
Argaman, Y., et al., "Design of Optimal Sewerage Systems." Jour. Environ.
Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99,703 (1973).
Baldwin, R.A., "A Model of Optimum Water Allocation under Iowa's Permit
System." Office of Water Resources Res., Rept. No. B-009-1A (1), Iowa
State Univ. of Science S Tech., Ames (1970).
Bard, H., and Krutchkoff, R.G., "Predicting Pollution in the James River
Estuary. A Stochastic Model." Bull. 70, Virginia Polytechnic Inst. and
State Univ., Blacksburg.
Bargur, J., "Economic Evaluation of Water Part VI: A Dynamic Interregional
Input-Output Programming Model of the California and Western States Water
Economy." Water Resource Center, Contrib. 128, Univ. of Califor., Berkeley,
California (1969).
Bargur, J.S., et al., "An Intersectoral Programming Model for the Management
of the Waste Water Economy of the San Francisco Bay Region." Water Resources
Res., 7,1393 (1971).
Bartal, K.A., and Gutierrez, L.V., Jr., "Comprehensive Water Quality
Management Planning." Jour. Hydraulic Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr.,
101,371 (1975).
Bathke, W.L., and Freud, R.J., "The Development of a Model to Evaluate
Hydrologic Risk in a Water Resource System." Water Resources Bull.,
5:1,53 (1969).
Bathke, W.L., et al., "The Development of a Model to Evaluate Hydrologic
Risk in Water Resource System Design." Water Resources Bull., 6,476 (1970).
Bayer, M.B., "A Nonlinear Mathematical Programming Model for Water Quality
Management." Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources
Systems, 2,341 (1972).
Bayer, M.B., "Nonlinear Programming in River Basin Modeling." Water
Resources Bull., 10,311 (1974).
Beard, L.R., et al., "Alternative Approaches to Water Resource System
Simulation." Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources
Systems, 2,391 (1972).
Beck, M.B., and Young, P.C., "A Dynamic Model for DO-BOD Relationships in a
Non-Tidal Stream." Water Res. (G.B.), 9,769 (1975).
Belfort, G., and Daly, J.A., "Optimization of an Electrodialysis Plant."
Desalination, 8,153 (1970).
Beliveau, J.G., and Mattingly, G., "Nonlinear Least Squares Techniques for
System Identification in Water Quality." Jour. Environ. Systems, 4,23 (1974),
1-168
-------
Bender, M.E., "Water Quality Models and Aquatic Ecosystems Status, Problems
and Perspectives." In "Models for Environmental Pollution Control." R.A.
Deininger [Ed.], Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Ann Arbor, Mich., 137 (1973).
Bessler, M.B., and Maletic, J.T., "Salinity Control and Federal Water
Quality Act." Jour. Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101,581
(1975).
Berthouex, P.M., et al., "Modeling Sewage Treatment Plant Input B.OD Data."
Jour. Env. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101, 127 (1975).
Betson, R.P., and McMaster, W.M., "Nonpoint Source Mineral Water Quality
Model." Jour. Water.Poll. Control Fed., 47,2461 (1975).
Biere, A.W., and Lee, I.M., "A Model for Managing Reservoir Water Releases."
Amer. Jour. Agr. Econ., 54:3,411 (1972).
Bishop, A.B., et al., "Evaluating Water Reuse Alternatives in Water Resources
Planning." Res. Project Technical Completion Report.
Bovet, E.D., "Evaluation of Quality Parameters in Water Resource Planning (A
State-of-the-Art Survey of the Economics of Water Quality)." IWR Contract
Report 74-13, U.S. Army Engineer Institute for Water Resources, Fort Belvoir,
Va. (1974).
Boyd, J.H., "Pollution Charges, Waste Assimilative Capacity Investment and
Water Quality: The Public Costs of a Public Good." Water, State of Ohio
Water Resources Center, Ohio State Univ. (1969).
Brandstetter, A., et al., "A Mathematical Model for Optimum Design and
Control of Metropolitan Wastewater Management Systems." Water Resources
Bull., 9,1188 (1973).
Bruch, J.C., Jr., and Taylor, C., "The Management of Groundwater Resources
Systems." Jour. Environ. Planning § Poll. Control (G.B.), 1:2,36 (1972-73).
Brutsaert, W.F., "Water Quality Modeling by Monte Carlo Simulation." Water
Resources Bull., 11,229 (1975).
Bulkley,J.W., and Antill, J., "Validation of Political Simulation Models-
Water Resource Projects." Water Resources Bull., 7,1071 (1971).
Bulkley, J.W., "Modelling Decision Effectiveness Application to Water
Resource Systems." Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water
Resources Systems, 2,274 (1972).
Buras, N., "Multi-Disciplinary Modelling of Water Resources Systems."
Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems,
3,497 (1972).
Burges, S.J., and Lettenmaier, D.P., "Probabilistic Methods in Stream Quality
Management." Water Resources Bull., 11,115 (1975).
1-169
-------
Busby, J.B., and Andrews, J.F., "Dynamic Modeling and Control Strategies for
the Activated Sludge Process." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 47,1055
(1975).
Butcher, W.S., "Mathematical Models for Optimizing the Allocation of
Stored Water." The Use of Analog and Digital Computers in Hydrol., UNESCO,
2,714 (1969).
Camp, Dresser and McKee, "Report on Development of a Mathematical Model
for Minimizing Construction Costs in Water Pollution Control." Boston,
Mass. (1969).
Chang, S., and Yeh, W. W-G., "Optimal Allocation of Artificial Aeration Along
A Polluted Stream Using Dynamic Programming." Water Resources Bull., 9,985
(1973).
Chaudhuri, N., "System Analysis and Its Application to River Basin Pollution
Control Management." Inst. of Engr. (Ind.), Public Health Engr. Div.,
49:10,118 (1969).
Chevereau, G., "Mathematical Model for Oxygen Balance in Rivers." In "Models
for Environmental Pollution Control." R.A. Deininger [Ed.], Ann Arbor
Science Publishers, Ann Arbor, Mich., 107 (1973).
Chi, T., "Wastewater Conveyance Models." In "Models for Managing Regional
Water Quality." R. Dorfman, .et al., [Eds.], Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge,
Mass., 312 (1972).
Chow, V.T., "Hydrologic Modeling." Jour. Boston Soc. Civil Engr., 51:1,1
(1972).
Clough, D.J., "A Multiagency Decision Model Framework for Benefit-Cost
Analysis." Can. Oper. Res. Soc., 7,193 (1969).
Coffey, P.J., and Ortolano, L., "Economic Framework for Salinity Control
Projects." Jour. Amer. Water Works Assn., 61, 237 (1969).
Comptroller General of the U.S., "Examination Into the Effectiveness of
the Construction Grant Program for Abating, Controlling and Preventing
Water Pollution.: Report to the Congress, B-166506 (1969).
Consad Research Corp., "The Cost of Estimating Model for Existing Urban
Areas." EPA, Washington, D.C., Contract No. 68-01-2825 (1975).
Converse, A.O., and Tyler, J., "Vermont Water Quality Simulation Project
Report." Project EPIC, Vermont Natural Resources Council (1972).
Crews, J.S., "Establishing Priorities in Mine Drainage Reduction-A Cost-
Effectiveness Approach." Water Resources Bull., 9,567 (1973).
Cummings, R.G., and McFarland, J.W., "Groundwater Management and Salinity
Control." Water Resources Res., 10, 909 (1974).
1-170
-------
Custer, S.W., and Krutchkoff, R.C., "Stochastic Models for Biochemical Oxygen
Demand and Dissolved Oxygen in Estuaries." Water Resources Center, Virginia
Polytech. Inst. Bull. 22 (1969).
Dajani, J.S., and Gemmell, R.S., "Economics of Wastewater Collection
Networks." Water Resources Ctr. Rept. No. A-042-ILL, Univ. of Illinois,
Urbana (1971).
Davidson, B., and Bradshaw, R.W., "A Steady State Optimal Design of
Artificial Induced Aeration in Polluted Streams by the Use of Pontryagin's
Minimum Principle." Water Resources Res., 6,383 (1970).
Davidson, B., "Application of Optimal Control Theory to a Class of River
Aeration Problems." Appl. Syst. Anal. San. Eng., Proc. 4th Annual Amer.
Assoc. of Prof, in San. Eng.
Deacon, R.W., and Giglio, R.J., "A Methodology for Determining Optimal
Longitudinal Spacing of Effluent Discharges into a River." Water Resources
Res. Ctr., Dept. Ind. Eng. and Operations Res., Univ. of Massachusetts,
Amherst (1971) .
Deininger, R.A., and Loucks, D.P., "Systems Approach to Problems of Water
Pollution Control." Systems Approach to Environmental Pollution, G.K.
Chacko [Ed.], ORSA, Arlington, Va., 137 (1972).
Deininger, R.A., and Shiaw, Y.S., "Modelling Regional Waste Water Treatment
Systems." Water Res. (G.B.), 7,633 (1973).
Deininger, R.A., [Ed.], Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor,
Mich. (1973).
Deininger, R.A., "Minimum Cost Regional Pollution Control Systems."
Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 2,352
(1972).
Deininger, R.A., "Systems Analysis for Environmental Pollution Control."
In "Models for Environmental Pollution Control." R.A. Deininger [Ed.],
Ann Arbor Science Publishers Ann Arbor, Mich., 3 (1973).
Deininger, R.A., "Systems Analysis for Water Supply and Pollution Control."
In "Natural Resources Systems Models in Decision Making." Proc. 1969 Water
Resources Seminar, Water Resources Res. Center, Purdue Univ., Lafayette,
Ind. (1969).
Dixon, N., and Hendricks, D.W., "Simulation of Spatial and Temporal Changes
in Water Quality Within a Hydrologic Unit." Water Resources Bull.,
6,483 (1970).
DeLucia, R.J., and Rogers, P., "North Atlantic Regional Supply Model."
Water Resources Res., 8,760 (1972).
1-171
-------
Donigian, A., Jr., and Waggy, W.H., "Simulation-A Tool for Water Resource
Management." Water Resources Bull., 10,229 (1974).
Dooge, J.C.I., "Mathematical Models of Hydrologic Systems." Proc. Intl.
Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 1,171 (1972).
Dorcey, A.H.J., and Fox, I.K., "An Assessment of University Interdisciplinary
Research: The Wisconsin River and the Lower Eraser River Water Quality
Studies." Proc. Conf. on Interdisciplinary Analysis of Water Resource
Systems, Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., New York, N.Y. (1975).
Dorfman, R., and Jacoby, N.D., "A Model of Public Decisions Illustrated by
a Water Pollution Policy Problem." In "The Analysis and Evaluation of Public
Expenditures: The PPB System." Joint Report, Subcommittee on Economy in
Government, 91st Congress, 1st Session, 1,226 (1969) .
Dorfman, R., and Jacoby, H.D., "An Illustrative Model of River Basin
Pollution Control." In "Models for Managing Regional Water Quality."
R. Dorfman, et al., [Eds.], Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Mass. 84 (1972).
Dorfman, R., "Conceptual Model of a Regional Water Quality Authority." In
"Models for Managing Regional Water Quality." R. Dorfman, et al., [Eds.],
Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Mass., 42 (1972).
Dorfman, R., et al., [Eds.], "Models for Managing Regional Water Quality."
Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1972).
Dorfman, R., "Modelling Through." Interfaces, 3:4,1 (1973).
Dysart, B.C., Ill, "Alternate Policies for River Basin Water Quality
Management." In "Hydraulics Research and Its Impact on the Environment."
Proc. 14th Congr. Intl. Assn. Hydraul. Res., 5,419 (1971).
Dysart, B.C., Ill, and Hines, W.W., "Development and Application of a
Rational Water Quality Planning Model." Water Resources Center, Rept.
WRC-0668, Georgia Inst. of Technol., Atlanta, Georgia (1969).
Dysart, B.C., Ill, "The Use of Dynamic Programming in Regional Water
Quality Planning." Appl. Syst. Anal. San. Eng., Proc. 4th Annual Amer.
Assoc. of Prof, in San. Eng. Workshop, Clemson Univ., Clemson, S.C. (1969).
Dysart, B.C., Ill, "Water Quality Planning in the Presence of Interacting
Pollutants." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 42,1515 (1970).
Ecker, J.G., "A Geometric Programming Model for Optimal Allocation of Stream
Dissolved Oxygen." Management Sci., 21,658 (1975).
Edde, H., and Westerberg, E.N., "Pulp Mill Internal-External Pollution
Control Economic Modeling for Receiving Water Protection." Proc. Intl.
Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 2,289 (1972).
1-172
-------
Edge, B.L., and Dysart, B.C., "Modelling Techniques for Siting Large
Thermal Power Plants on Industrialized Estuaries." Proc. Intl. Symp. on
Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 1,139 (1972).
Enfield, C.G., and Leach, L.E., "Phosphorous Model of Muskegon Wastewater
System." Jour. Env. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101,911 (1975).
Enviro Control, Inc., "Systems Analysis for Water Quality Management-
Survey and Abstracts." EPA-OOWQ Contract No. 68-01-0096, Washington, D.C.
(1971).
Envirometrics, Inc., "The River Basin Model: School Department."
WPCRS 16110 FRU 12/71-7 (December 1971).
Falkner, C.H., "A Dissolved Oxygen Prediction Model for a Long River."
Water Resources Center, Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison, Tech. Rept. Title
II-C-1228, Prelim. (1969).
Fan, L.T., et al., "Analysis and Optimization of Two-Stage Digestion."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 45,591 (1973).
Fan, L., et al., "Optimization of Power Plant Cooling Water Discharge in
Streams." Jour. Power Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 97, P04.841 (1971).
Fan, L.T., et al., "Simulation of Biological Processes by Analog and
Digital Computers." Inst. for Systems Design and Optimization, Kansas
State Univ., Manhattan (1970).
Feigner, K.D., and Jaworski, N.A., "Mathematical Model Applications for
Water Quality Management in the Potomac Estuary." Proc. Intl. Symp. on
Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 1,129 (1972).
Ferrar, T.A., and Whinston, A., "Taxation and Water Pollution Control."
Natural Resources Jour., 12,307 (1972).
Ferrar, T.A., "Progressive Taxation As a Policy for Water Quality Management."
Water Resources Res., 9,563 (1973).
Foley, J.W., and Haimes, Y.Y., "Multilevel Control of Multipollutant
System." Jour. Environ. Eng., Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99,253
(1973).
Forster, D.L., "Simulated Beef Feedlot Behavior Under Alternative Water
Pollution Control Rules." Amer. Jour. Agr. Econ., 57,259 (1975).
Gates, W.E., et al., "Application of Industrial Dynamics Concepts to
Decision Making in Environmental Management." Water Resources Res., 6,1549
(1970).
Giglio, R.J., Adrian, D.D., Kaminsky, F.C., and Rikkers, R.F., "A Systems
Approach to Waste Management." Proc. 4th Amer. Water Resources Conf., New
York, N.Y., 344 (1968).
1-173
-------
Gillett, J.W., et al., "A Conceptual Model for the Movement of Pesticides
Through the Environment: A Contribution of the EPA Alternative Chemicals
Program." EPA-660/3-74-024, U.S. Environmental Prelection Agency, Corvallis,
Ore. (1974)
Glassey, C.R., and Karp, R.M., "Optimal Search for Pollution Sources."
NSF Grant GP-30961X and PHSR Grant EC00260-05 Operations Res. Center,
College of Eng., California Univ., Berkeley (1972).
Graves, G., et al., "Application of a Large Scale Non-Linear Programming
Algorithm to Pollution Control." Office of Water Resources Res., Rept.
No. B-020-IND (3), Purdue Univ., Lafayette, Ind. (1971).
Goodman, A.S., and Tucker, R.J., "Time Varying Mathematical Model for Water
Quality." Water Res. (G.B.), 5,227 (1971).
Gourishankar, V., and Lawson, R.L., "Optimal Control of Water Pollution in a
River Stream." Intl. Jour. Systems Sci. (Canada), 6,201 (1975).
Grantham, G.R., et al., "Model for Flow Augmentation Analysis-An Overview."
Jour. San. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 96,SA5, 1045 (1970).
Grantham, G.R., et al., "Water Quality Simulation Model." Jour. San.
Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 97,SA5,569 (1971).
Graves, G.W., et al., "Mathematical Programming for Regional Water Quality
Management." Water Resources Res., 8 273 (1972).
Greene, J.M., "A Study of How Water Quality Factors Can Be Incorporated Into
Water Supply Analysis." IWR Contract Report 74-2, U.S. Army Engineer
Institute for Water Resources, Fort Belvoir, Va. (1973).
Gritton, E.G., et al.,"The Use of Water-Quality Simulation Models in the
Analysis of the Thermal Effects Problem." Rand paper P-4772, Rand Corp.,
Santa Monica, California (1972).
Gritton, E.G., et al., "The Use of Water-Quality Simulation Models in the
Analysis of the Thermal Effects Problem." Rand Paper No. P-4772-1,
Rand Corp., Santa Monica, California (1972).
Gupta, R.S., and Webber, B.R., "Optimization of Circulating Water System."
Jour. Power Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 235 (1973).
Hahn, H.H., et al., "Regional Wastewater Management Systems." In "Models for
Environmental Pollution Control." R.A. Deininger [Ed.]., Ann Arbor Science
Publishers, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 41 (1973).
Haimes, Y.Y., and Hall, W.A., "Analysis of Multiple Objectives in Water
Quality." Jour. Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101,387 (1975).
Haimes, Y.Y., "Decomposition and Multi-level Techniques for Water Quality
Control." Water Resources Res., 8,779 (1972).
1-174
-------
Haimes, Y.Y., et al., "A Multilevel Approach to Determining Optimal
Taxation for the Abatement of Water Pollution." Water Resources Res.,
8,851 (1972).
Haimes, Y.Y., et al., "Computational Results for Water Pollution Taxation
Using Multi-level Approach." Water Resources Bull., 8,761 (1972).
Haimes, Y.Y., "Modeling and Control of the Pollution of Water Resources
Systems via Multilevel Approach." Water Resources Bull., 7,93 (1971).
Haith, D.A., and Loucks, D.P., "Estimating the Political Feasibility of
Alternative Water-Resource Plans." Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques
in Water Resources Systems, 2,309 (1972).
Haith, D.A., "Optimal Control of Nitrogen Losses from Land Disposal Areas."
Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99,923 (1973).
Hann, R.W., Jr., "Mathematical Modeling of Gulf Coast Estuaries." Water
Resources Bull., 6,323 (1970).
Harrington, J.J., "Systems Analysis for Water Supply and Pollution Control."
Proc. Natl. Symp. on Anal. Water Resources Systems, Amer. Water Resources
Assn., Denver, Colo., 144 (1968): Discussion Paper No. 68-11, Harvard Water
Program, Harvard Univ., Cambridge, Mass. (1968).
Hass, J.E., "Optimal Taxing for the Abatement of Water Pollution." Water
Resources Res., 6,353 (1970).
Hass, J.E., "Optimal Taxing for the Abatement of Water Pollution." Chapter IV.
Ph.D. Thesis, "Decentralized Decision Making: Non-Linear Decomposition
Procedures and Their Uses." Carnegie-Me11on Univ., Pittsburgh, Pa. (1969).
Hays, Jr., et al., "Optimal Water Quality Management for the Houston Ship
Channel." Jour. San. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 98,SA1,195
(1972).
Hearney, J.E., and Pyatt, E.E., "Benefits of Flow Augmentation for Water
Quality Control." In "Hydraulics Research and Its Impact on the Environment."
Proc. 14th Congr. Intl. Assn. Hydraul. Res., 5, 345 (1971).
Hendricks, D.W., et al., "System Economic Response to Water Quantity and
Quality-Fundamental Considerations." Water Resources Bull., 6,682 (1970).
Hetling, L.J., and Metzler, D., "Systems Analysis, Water Quality and Govern-
ment Decision Making." Systems Analysis for Great Lakes Water Resources,
Proc. 4th Symp. on Water Resources Res., Water Resources Center, Ohio State
Univ., Columbus (1969).
Hetling, L.J., "The Potomac Estuary Mathematical Model." Water § Sew.
Works, 117:2,47 (1970).
1-175
-------
Hill, R.W., et al., "Computer Simulation of the Hydrologic and Salinity Flow
Systems within the Bear River Basin." Res. Project Technical Completion
Report, PRWG104-1, Utah Water Res. Lab., Utah State Univ., Logan (1973).
Hines, W.G., et al., "Formulation and Use of Practical Models for River
Quality Assessment." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 47,2357 (1975).
Hines, W.W., and Dysart, B.C., Ill, "Water Quality Management and a Policy
Model." Amer. Inst. Ind. Engrs. Trans. 3,7 (1971).
Hoehn, R.C., et al., "Modeling the Effect of Waste Discharges in a Small
Mountain Stream." Bull. 76, Virginia Water Resources Res. Center, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State Univ., Blacksburg (1975).
Holling, C.S., "Ecological Models: A Status Report." Proc. Intl. Symp. on
Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 1,3 (1972).
Hoover, T.E., and Arnoldi, R.A., "Computer Model of Connecticut River
Pollution." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 42,R67 (1970).
Bornberger, G. M., et al., "Evaluating a Mathematical Model for Predicting
Lake Eutrophication." Bull. 82, Virginia Water Resources Res. Center,
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg (1975).
Howitt, R. E., et al., "A Simulation Approach to Recreation Planning (A Case
of Changing Quality)." -Annals of the Reg. Sci., VIII, 35 (1974).
Hwang, C. L., et al., "Regional Water Quality Management by the Generalized
Reduced Gradient Method." Water Resources Bull., 9, 1159 (1973).
Hwang, I., "Water Resources Modeling by Quasilinearization and Invariant
Imbedding." Office of Water Resources Res., Rept. No. B-015-KAN (10),
M.S. thesis, Dept. Ind. Eng., Kansas State Univ., Manhattan (1970).
Hyden, J. W., et al., "Simulation of Water Quality Management Policies."
Jour. Env. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101, 623 (1975).
Jocoby, H. D., and Loucks, D. P., "Combined Use of Optimization and
Simulation Models in River Basin Planning." Water Resources Res., 8, 1401
(1972).
Jaworski, N. A., et al., "Optimal Reservoir Releases for Water Quality
Control." Jour. San. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 96, SA3, 727
(1970).
Jeglie, J. M., and Pence, G. D., "Mathematical Simulation of the Estuarine
Behavior and Its Applications." Soc. Evon. Planning Sci., 1, 363 (1968).
Johnson, J. F., "Regional Wastewater Management: A New Perspective in
Environmental Planning." Water Resources Bull., 8, 773 (1972).
1-176
-------
Karplus, W. J., "New Simulation Approaches to the Modeling of Environmental
Systems." Proc. Summer Computer Simulation Conf., Montreal, Can. (1973).
Keegan, R. T., and Leeds, J. V., Jr., "Dynamic Programming and Estuarine
Water Quality Control." Water Resources Bull., 6, 235 (1970).
Kisiel, C. C., and Duckstein, L., "Economics of Hydrologic Modelling."
Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 2, 319
(1972).
Kneese, A. V., "Management Science, Economics and Environmental Science."
Management Sci., 19, 1122 (1973).
Knight, J. E., and Hines, W. W., "Complex Systems Analysis of Water Quality
Dynamics: The Feedback Systems Structure." Tech. Rept. A-023-GA, School
of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Inst. of Technol., Atlanta
(1970).
Knowles, G., "Mathematical Models as an Aid in the Solution of Water
Pollution Control Problems." Chem. § Ind. (G. B.), 697 (1970).
Koenig, L., "Optimal Fail-Safe Process Design." Jour. Water Poll. Control
Fed., 45, 647 (1973).
Koh, R. C., Fan, L. N., et al., "Mathematical Models for the Prediction of
Temperature Distributions Resulting from the Discharge of Heated Water into
Large Bodies of Water." Water Pollution Control Research Series, 16130 DWO
10/70, October 1970.
Koivo, A. J., and Phillips, G. R., "Identification of Mathematical Models
for DO and BOD Concentrations in Polluted Streams from Noise Corrupted
Measurements." Water Resources Res., 7, 853 (1971).
Ko, S. C., and Duckstein, L., "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Wastewater
Reuses." Jour. San. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 98, 869 (1972).
Ko, S. C., "Nuclear Power Plant Cooling System Selection." Jour. Power Div.,
Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101, 55 (1975).
Kos, Z., "Simulation Models of Water Supply for Irrigation in Water Resources
Systems." Intl. Comm. Irr. Drain. Bull. (Ind.), 47 (1970).
Krutchkoff, R. G., "Stochastic Modeling for Water Quality Management."
Rept. for the Environmental Protection Agency, Water Quality Office,
Washington, D. C. (1971).
Lee, E. S., and Hwang, I. K., "Dynamic Modeling of Stream Quality by Invariant
Imbedding." Water Resources Bull, 7, 102 (1971).
Lee, E. S., and Hwang, I. K., "Stream Quality Modeling by Quasilinearization."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 43, 306 (1971).
1-177
-------
Lee, E. S., and Misra, P. K., "Optimal Weighting Function in Water Quality
Modeling." Water Resources Bull., 10, 447 (1974).
Lee, E. S., et al., "Modeling and Optimization of Water Resources Systems -
Phase 1." Office of Water Resources Res., Completion Rept., Dept. Ind. Eng.,
Kansas State Univ., Manhattan.(1969).
Lee, T. R., and Fenwick, P. D., "The Environmental Matrix: Input-Output
Techniques Applied to Pollution Problems in Ontario." Water Resources Bull.,
9, 29 (1973).
Leendertse, J. J., "A Water-Quality Simulation Model for Well-Mixed
Estuaries and Coastal Seas: Volume I, Principles of Computation."
Memorandum RM-6230-RC, The Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. (1970).
Liu, S-K., "Stochastic Analysis and Control of Urban Estuarine Water-Quality
Systems: Vol. I - Estimation and Prediction." R-1622-NYC, The New York
City Rand Institute, N. Y. (1974).
Lombardo, P. S., and Ott, R. F., "Water Quality Simulation and Application."
Water Resources Bull., 10, 1 (1974).
Loucks, D. P., and Jacoby, H. D., "Flow Regulation for Water Quality
Management." In "Models for Managing Regional Water Quality." R. Dorfman,
et al., (Eds.), Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Mass., 362 (1972).
Loucks, D. P., and Jacoby, H. D., "Stochastic Models for Flow Regulation and
Quality Management." In "Stochastic Methods for Analyzing River Basin Systems,1
Chapt. 16, Cornell Univ. Water Resources and Marine Sci. Center, Tech. Rept.
16, Ithaea, N. Y. (1969).
Loucks, D. P., "A Systems Approach to Water Pollution Control." Water and
Wastes Eng., 6, 7, 43 (1969).
Machmeier, R. E., and Larson, C. L., "A Mathematical Watershed Routing
Model." Intl. Hydrol. Syrop., Paper No. 6220, Sci. Jour. Ser. of the
Minn. Agr. Exp. Sta., 64 (1967).
MacLaren, J. F. , "Review of Canadian Design Practice and Comparison of Urban
Hydrologic Models." Report for Environment Canada and the Ontario Ministry
of the Environment, COA Research Report No. 26, Oct. 1975.
Mahlock, J. L., "Multivariate Techniques for Water Quality Analysis." Jour.
Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100, 1119 (1974).
Mallory, C. W., and Boland, J. J., "A Systems Study of Storm Runoff Problems
in a New Town." Water Resources Bull., 6, 980 (1970).
Mar, B. W., and Butcher, W. R., "Model Development and Systems Analysis of
the Yakima River Basin Macro Model Simulation." Wash. State Univ., Nov 1974.
1-178
-------
Marini, R. C., "Cost Effectiveness of Current Environmental Engineering
Practices." Water § Sew. Works, 120, 4, R-21 (1973).
Markofsky, M., and Harleman, D. R. F., "A Predictive Model for Thermal
Stratification and Water Quality in Reservoirs." WPCRS 16130 DJH 01/71,
Jan 1971.
Marks, D. H., "Comments on 'Water Pollution Control Using By-Pass Piping,1
A. W. Graves, G. B. Hatfield, and A. Whinston." Water Resources Res., 5,«
1159 (1969).
Marks, D. H., "Models in Water Resources." In "A Guide to Models in
Governmental Planning and Operations." .Sauger Books, Potomac, Md., 103
(1974).
McBean, E., et al., "A Water Quality Simulation Model." Proc. Summer
Computer Simulation Conf., Montreal Can. (1973).
McFadden, J. T., and Armstrong, J. M., "Ecological Modeling Research in the
Great Lakes." Shore § Beach, 38, 17 (1970).
McFarland, J. W., "Groundwater Management and Salinity Control: A Case
Study in Northwest Mexico." Amer. Jour. Agr. Econ., 57, 456 (1975).
McNaught, D. C., et al., "Zooplankton Production in Lake Ontario as Influ-
enced by Environmental Perturbations." Ecological Research Series, EPA-
600/3-75-021, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Corvallis, Ore. (1975).
Mehta, B. M., et al., "Stochastic Variation of Water Quality of the Passaic
River." Water Resources Res., 11, 300 (1975).
Meier, P. M., "A Branch-and-Bound Algorithm for Regional Water Quality
Management." In "Hydraulics Research and Its Impact on the Environment."
Proc. 14th Congr. Intl. Assn. Hydraul. Res., 5, 355 (1971).
Meier, W. J., Jr., et al., "Water Resource System Optimization by Geometric
Programming." Water Resources Inst., Proj. No. A-011-TEN, Texas A§M Univ.,
College Station (1971).
Mellor, J. G., and Oxley, N. C., "Application of Mathematical Modeling to
Water Quality Management."
Meredith, D. D., and Ewing, B. B., "Systems Approach to the Evaluation of
Benefits from Improved Great Lakes Water Quality." Proc. 12th Conf. Great
Lakes Res., Intl. Assn. Great Lakes Res., Ann Arbor, Mich., 843 (1969).
Meredith, D. D., "Dynamic Programming Applied to Sewer Studies." In
"Treatise on Urban Water Systems," Colorado State Univ. Press, Fort
Collins, 626 (1971).
1-179
-------
Merritt, L. B., and Bogan, R. H., "Computer-Based Optimal Design of Sewer
Systems." Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, 35
(1973).
Merten, A. G., and Falkner, C. H., "Interactive Computing in Water Quality
Management." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 44, 1601 (1972).
Meyer, C. F., "Using Experimental Models to Guide Data Gathering." Jour.
Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 97, HY10, 1681 (1971).
Miernyk, W., "An Interindustry Forecasting Model with Water Quantity and
Quality Constraints." Systems Analysis for Great Lakes Water Resources,
Proc. 4th Symp. on Water Resources Res., Water Resources Center, Ohio State
Univ., Columbus, 49 (1969).
Monarchi, D. E., et al., "Interactive Multi-objective Programming in Water
Resources." Water Resources Res., 9, 837 (1973).
Moore, C. V., et al., "Effects of Colorado River Water Quality and Supply on
Irrigated Agriculture." Water Resources Res., 10, 137 (1974).
Moore, S. F., and Brewer, J. W., "Environmental Control Systems: Treatment
of Uncertainity in Models and Data." Proc. Intl. Symp. on Uncertainties in
Hydrologic § Water Resources Systems, 11, 16 (1972).
Moore, S. F., "Estimation Theory Applications to Design of Water Quality
Monitoring Systems." Journ. Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer Soc. Civil Engr.,
99, 815 (1973).
Moushegian, R. H., and Krutchkoff, R. G., "Generalized Initial Conditions
for the Stochastic Model for Pollution and Dissolved Oxygen in Streams."
Water Resources Res. Center, Virginia Polytech. Inst. Bull. 28, Blacksburg,
Va. (1969).
Mukherjee, S. K., "Programming Model of Regional Water Quality Management."
In "Hydraulics Research and Its Impact on the Environment." Proc. 14th
Congr. Intl. Assn. Hydraul. Res., 5, 277 (1971).
Nahavandi, A. N., and Pappas, M., "Power of Optimization for Prescribed
Thermal Pollution." Jour. Power Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 97,
P03, 631 (1971).
Nebraska Natural Resources Commission, "Middle Plate Basin Water Quality
Management Plan." Nebraska Dept. of Env. Control, Lincoln (1975).
Newsome, D. H., "The Trent River Model - An Aid to Management." Proc. Intl.
Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 3, 613 (1972).
Nicolson, G. S., et al., "A Methodology for Selecting among Water Quality
Alternatives." Water Resources Bull., 6, 23 (1970).
1-180
-------
Nielsen, K.S., et al., "A Note on Cost-Effectiveness in Data Acquisition in
Water Quality Management." Water Resources Res., 11, 357 (1975).
Novotny, V., "Mathematical Modeling of Water Quality Changes in a River
Basin." Proc. 5th Intl. Conf. Water Poll. Res., Pergamon Press Ltd., London,
Eng. (1971).
O'Donnell, T., et al., "Some Applications of Stochastic Hydrological Models."
Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 1, 227
(1972) .
O'Laoghaire, D.T., and Himmelblau, D.M., "How to Incorporate Water Quality
and Pollution Considerations Into the Model of the Water Resources System."
In "Optimal Expansion of a Water Resources System." Academic Press, Inc.,
New York and London, 143 (1974).
O'Melia, C.R., "Phosphorous Cycling in Lakes." Report UNC-WRRI-74-97, Water
Resources Res. Institute, Univ. of North Carolina, Raleigh (1974).
Ordon, C.J., "Simple Algorithm for Cost Optimization of a Three Decision
Variable System." Water 5 Sew. Works, 120:2,70 (1973).
Orlob, G.T., and Dendy, B.B., "Systems Approach to Water Quality Management."
Journ. Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, 573 (1973).
Orlob, G.T., "Estuarial Systems Analysis Quantity and Quality Considerations."
Proc. Natl. Symp. on Anal. Water Resources Systems, Amer. Water Resources
Assn., Denver, Colo., 341 (1968).
Orlob, G.T., "Introduction to Simulation Techniques." In "Models for Environ-
mental Pollution Control." R.A. Deininger (Ed.), Ann Arbor Science
Publishers. Ann Arbor, Mich., 91 (1973).
Orlob, G.T., "Mathematical Modeling of Estuarial Systems." Proc. Intl.
Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 1, 78 (1972).
Osborne, J.M., "Economic Design of Low Pressure Air Piping Systems." Jour.
Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 100, 1263 (1974).
Page, C., and Warn, A.E., "Water Quality Considerations in the Design of
Water Resource Systems." Water Res. (G.B.), 8, 969 (1974).
Palmer, M.D., and Ralston, J.G., "Mathematical Models for Water Management
in Ontario, Status of the Art, 1971." Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling
Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 3, 654 (1972).
Parker, F.L., et al., "Evaluation of Mathematical Models for Temperature
Prediction in Deep Reservoirs." EPA-660/3-75-038, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Corvallis, Ore. (1975).
1-181
-------
Paulik, G.J., "Development of a Comprehensive Simulation Model of the Fish
Resources of the Great Lakes." Systems Analysis for Great Lakes Water
Resources, Proc. 4th Symp. on Water Resources Res., Water Resources Center,
Ohio State Univ., Columbus, 11 (1969).
Pentland, R.L., et al., "Water Quality Modeling:State-of-the-Art." Proc. Intl.
Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 3, 481 (1972).
Perez, A.I., "Simulation Model for Flow Augmentation Costs." Jour. Hydraul.
Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr. , 96:HY1, 131 (1970).
Peterson, D.F., et al., "Thermal Capacity of Our Nation's Waterways." Jour.
Power Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, 193 (1973).
Pingry, D.E., and Whinston, A.B., "Application of Multigoal Water Quality
Planning Model." Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr.,
100, 61 (1974).
Pingry, D.E., and Whinston, A.B., "Multigoal Water Quality Planning Model."
Jour. Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, 99 (1973).
Pingry, D., and Whinston, A., "Planning for Pollution Control-A Critical
Survey." Office of Water Resources Res., Rept. No. B-020-IND (4), Purdue
Univ., Lafayette, Ind. (1971).
Pingry, D.E., and Whinston, A.B., "A Regional Planning Model for Water
Quality Control." In "Models for Environmental Pollution Control." R.A.
Deininger (Ed.), Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Ann Arbor, Mich., 61 (1973).
Pingry, D.E., "Programming Applications to the Economic Problems of Water
Quality Control." Office of Water Resources Res., Rept. No. B-020-IND (9),
Ph.D. thesis, Purdue Univ., Lafayette, Ind. (1971).
Pionke, H.B., and Nicks, A.D., "The Effect of Selected Hydrologic Variables
on Stream Salinity." Bull. Intl. Assn. Sci. Hydro1. , XV, 13 (1971).
Pyatt, E.E., et al., "A Model for Quantifying Flow Augmentation Benefits."
Final Rept. Southeast Reg., FWPCA, Atlanta, Ga. (1969).
Quirk, T.P., and Eder, L.J., "Evaluation of Alternative Solutions for
Achievement of River Standards." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 42, 272
(1970).
Rachford, T.M., "Case Study on Sensitivity Analysis and Nonlinear
Programming Applications to Process Analysis and Control." In "Treatise on
Urban Water Systems," Colorado State Univ. Press, Fort Collins, 694 (1971).
Randers, J., "System Simulation to Test Environmental Policy: DDT." Intl.
Jour, of Environ. Studies (G.B.), 4:1,51 (1972).
1-182
-------
Randies, C.I., et al. , "Development of an Oxygen Based Performance Model for
the Western Lake Erie Physico-Biological System." Systems Analysis for Great
Lakes Water Resources, Proc. 4th Symp. on Water Resources Res., Water
Resources Center, Ohio State Univ., Columbus, 29 (1969).
Raphael, D.L., and Maugeri, J., "Water Quality and Regional Economy, A
Decision Model." Proc. 4th Amer. Water Resources Conf., New York, N.Y. 132
(1968).
Rausser, G.C., et al., "Learning, External Benefits, and Subsidies in Water
Desalination." Water Resources Res., 8, 1385 (1972).
Rege, R.S., "Modeling and Optimization of Water Quality in Streams." Office
of Water Resources Res., Rept. No. B-015-KAN (11), M.S. thesis, Dept.
Chemical Eng., Kansas State Univ., Manhattan (1970).
Reid, G.W., "Water Quality Modeling for Forecastive and Planning Purposes."
Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 2, 383
(1972).
ReVelle, C., Dietrich, G., and Stensel, D., "The Improvement of Water
Quality Under a Financial Constraint." Water Resources Res., 5, 507 (1969).
ReVelle, C., Jocres, E., and Kirby, W., "The Linear Decision Rule in
Reservoir Management and Design. 1, Development of the Stochastic Model."
Water Resources Res., 5, 767 (1969).
Riley, J.P., et al., "Development of a Management Framework of the Great
Salt Lake." Res. Report PRJEW 116-1, Utah Water Res. Lab., Utah State Univ.,
Logan (1975).
Riordan, C., "Toward the Optimization of Investment-Pricing Decisions: A
Model for Urban Water Supply Treatment Facilities." Ph.D. Thesis, Cornell
Univ., Ithaca, N.Y. (1969).
Roesner, L.A., et al., "A Model for Evaluating Runoff-Quality in Metropolitan
Master Planning." Technical Memorandum No. 23, Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., N.Y.
(1974).
Rolfe, G.L., et al., "Modeling Lead Pollution in a Watershed-Ecosystem."
Jour. Environ. Systems, 2, 339 (1972).
Rogers, J.J., et al., "Systems Theory: A New Approach for Modeling
Watersheds Realistically." Dept. of Hydrol. and Water Resources, Rept.
B-007-ARIZ (10), Univ. of Arizona, Tucson (1970).
Ruff, L.E., "Pollution Prices in a General Equilibrium Model." Office of Sea
Grant, U.S. Govt., Grant No. GH52 (1970).
Russell, C.S., and Spofford, W.O., "A Quantitative Framework for Residuals
-Environmental Quality Management." Proceedings of 1969 Water Resources
Seminar, Water Resources Res. Center, Purdue Univ., Lafayette, Ind.,66(1969).
1-183
-------
Russell, C.S., and Spofford, W.O., Jr., "A Quantitative Framework for
Residuals Management Decisions." In "Environmental Quality Analysis, Theory
and Method in the Social Sciences," The John Hopkins Press, Baltimore, Md.,
and London, Eng., 115 (1972).
Ryder, R.A., and McGovern, M.T., "An 'Optimized Module' Approach to Waste
Water Reclamation Design." Water Res. (G.B.), 6:4/5,357 (1972).
Schaake, J.C., Jr., and Major, D.C., "Model for Estimating Regional Water
Needs." Water Resources Res., 8, 755 (1972).
Schaake, J.D., Jr., "Mathematical Programming Applications to Water Quality
Planning for the Boston Harbor Region." Urban Systems Lab. Rept. No.
TR-70-33, M.I.T., Cambridge, Mass. (1970).
Scheidegger, A.E., "Stochastic Models in Hydrology." Water Resources Res.,
6, 750 (1970).
Scherer, C.R., "On the Efficient Allocation of Environmental Assimilative
Capacity: The Case of Thermal Emissions to a Large Body of Water." Water
Resources Res., 11, 180 (1975).
Sherwani, J.K., and Moreau, D.H., "Strategies for Water Quality Monitoring."
Report No. 107, Water Resources Res. Institute, Univ. of North Carolina,
Raleigh (1975).
Shi, C.S., and Garner, J.K., "Reliability: A New Parameter in Urban Water
Quality Management." Proc. Intl. Symp. on Uncertainties in Hydrologic £
Water Resource Systems, 2, 801 (1972).
Shih, C.S., and DeFilippi, J.A., "Optimization Models for River Basin Water
Quality Management and Waste Treatment Plant Design." Proc. 4th Amer.
Water Resources Conf., New York, N.Y., 754 (1968).
Shih, C.S., and Meier, W.E., Jr., "Integrated Management of Quantity and
Quality of Urban Water Resources." Water Resources Bull., 8, 1006 (1972).
Shih, C.S., et al., "Reliability and Economic Optimization for Urban Return
Flows Management." Water Resources Bull., 10, 101 (1974).
Shih, C.S., et al., "Reliability of Urban Water Quality Management." Proc.
Intl. Symp. on the Planning of Water Resources, 2 (1972).
Shih, C.S., et al., "Systems Approach to Microscale Problems of Water
Pollution Control." In "Systems Approach to Environmental Pollution,"
G.K. Chacko (Ed.), ORSA, Arlington, Va., 223 (1972).
Shih, C.S., "Stochastic Water Quality Control by Simulation." Water
Resources Bull., 11, 256 (1975).
1-184
-------
Shih, C.S., "System Optimization for River Basin Water Quality Management."
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 42, 1792 (1970).
Sigvaldason, O.T., et al., "The Saint John Study: An Example of Complementary
Usage of Optimization and Simulation Modeling in Water Resources Planning."
Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 3, 576
(1972).
Sill, B.L., and Gnilka, A., "Optimal Discharge of Power Plant Cooling Waters."
Conf. Proc., Thermal Poll. Analysis, Virginia Polytechnic Inst. and State
Univ., Blacksburg, 83 (1974).
Silver, R.J., et al., "Dynamic Programming in a Hydroelectric System." Proc.
Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 2, 423 (1972).
Simons, T.J., "Multi-Layered Models of Current, Temperature, and Water
Quality Parameters in the Great Lakes." Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling
Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 1, 150 (1972).
Singh, M.G., "River Pollution Control." Intl. Jour. Systems Sci. (Canada),
6, 9 (1975).
Singleton, F.D., Jr., et al., "An Integrated Power Process Model of Water
Use and Waste Water Treatment in Chlor-Alkali Production." Water Resources
Res., 11, 515 (1975).
Skogerboe, G.V., et al., "Modeling Water Quality from Agricultural Lands."
Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 2, 372
(1972).
Smith, E.T., and Morris, A.R., "Systems Analysis for Optimal Water Quality
Management." Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 41, 1635 (1969).
Smith, R., "Operations Research Activities at Cincinnati Water Research
Laboratory." Proc. Natl. Symp. on Anal. Water Resources Systems, Amer.
Water Resources Assn., Denver, Colo., 241 (1968).
Smith, V.L., "Dynamics of Waste Accumulation: Disposal Versus Recycling."
Quart. Jour, of Economics, 86, 600 (1972).
Soberl, M.J., "Chebyshev Optimal Waste Discharges." Dept. Admin. Sci.,
Rept. No. 17, Yale Univ., New Haven, Conn. (1969).
Sobel, M.J., "Chebyshev Optimal Waste Discharges."Operations Res., 19, 308
(1971).
Spofford, W.O., Jr., "Total Environmental Quality Management Models." In
"Models for Environemtnal Pollution Control." R.A. Deininger (Ed.),
Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor, Mich., 403 (1973).
1-185
-------
Stillson, R.T., "Regional Trade and Structure Model for Pollution Abatement
Study." Systems Analysis for Great Lakes Water Resources, Proc. 4th Symp.
on Water Resources Res., Water Resources Center, Ohio State Univ., Columbus,
75 (1969).
Stone, J.C., et al., "An Integrated Power Process Model for Ethylene
Production." Water Resources Res., 11, 810 (1975).
Svanidze, G.G., "Some Problems of the Optimal Use of Basin Water Resources on
the Basis of Mathematical Modeling." In "Hydraulics Research and Its Impact
on the Environment." Proc. 14th Congr. Intl. Assn. Hydraul. Res., 5, 229
(1971).
Tadros, M.E., and Kalter, R.J., "Spatial Allocation Model for Projected Water
Based Recreation Demand." Water Resources Res., 7, 708 (1971).
Tarassov, V.J., Perlis, H.J., and Davidson, B., "Optimization of a Class of
River Aeration Problems by the Use of Multivariable Distributed Parameter
Control Theory." Water Resources Res., 5, 563 (1969).
Taub, F.B., "Biological Models of Freshwater Communities." EPA-660/3-73-008
(August 1973).
Taylor, A.C., and Judy, R.W., "A Model for a Water Quality Management Study."
Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 2, 461
(1972).
Taylor, A.C., "A Planning Model for A Water Quality Management Agency."
Management Sci., 20, 675 (1973).
Thomann, R.V., et al., "Mathematical Modeling of Phytoplankton in Lake
Ontario 1. Model Development and Verification." EPA-660/3-75-005, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Corvallis, Ore. (1975).
Thomann, R.V., "Optimum Water Quality Management of Stream and Estuarine
Systems." Proc. 4th Amer. Water Resources Conf., New York, N.Y., 115 (1968).
Thomann, R.V./'Systems Analysis § Water Quality Management." Environ. Sci.
Services Div., Environ. Res. and Applications, Inc., New York, N.Y. (1972).
Thomann, R.V., "The Utility of Systems Analysis in Estuarine Water Quality
Management." Systems Analysis for Great Lakes Water Resources, Proc. 4th
Symp. on Water Resources Center, Ohio State Univ., Columbus, 119 (1969).
Thomas, H.A., Jr., "Waste Disposal in Natural Waterways." In "Models for
Managing Regional Water Quality." R. Dorfman, et al., (Eds.), Harvard Univ.
Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1 (1972).
Thomas, R.F., "The Miami Conservancy District Experience in the Systems
Approach to Water Quality Improvement." In "Systems Approach to Environmental
Pollution," G.K. Chacko (Ed.), ORSA, Arlington, Va., 277 (1972).
1-186
-------
Tihansky, D.p., "Models of Industrial Pollution Control in Urban Planning."
Rand Corp., AD-72-401, Natl. Tech. Inform. Service, U.S. Dept. of Commerce,
Springfield, Va. (1972).
Tihansky, D. P., "Economic Models of Industrial Pollution Control in Regional
Planning." Environment § Planning, 5, 339 (1973).
Tirabassi, M.A., "A Statistically Based Mathematical Water Quality Model
for a Non-Estuarine River System." Water Resources Bull., 7, 1221 (1971).
»
Torno, H.C., "A Model for Assessing Impact of Stormwater Runoff and Combined
Sewer Overflows and Evaluating Pollution Abatement Alternatives." Water
Res. (G.B.), 9, 813 (1975).
Upchurch, S.B., and Robb, D.C.N., "Mathematical Models: Planning Tools for
the Great Lakes." Water Resources Bull., 8, 338 (1972).
Upton, C., "A Model of Water Quality Management under Uncertainty." Water
Resources Res., 6, 690 (1970).
Viessman, W., Jr., "Economic and Technical Aspects of the Use of Mathematical
Models in State Water Resources Planning Programs." Water Resources Res.
Inst., Univ. of Nebraska, Lincoln (1970).
Walker, W.B., et al., "Optimal Allocation of Water Quality Controls in
Urbanizing River Basins." Water Resources Bull., 10, 845 (1974).
Walsh, S., and Brown, L.C., "Least Cost Method for Sewer Design." Jour.
Environ. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 99, 333 (1973).
Ward, R.C., and Vanderholm, D.H., "Cost-Effectiveness Methodologies for Data
Acquisition in Water Quality Management." Water Resources Res., 9, 536 (1973).
Ward, R.C., et al., "An Application of Network Theory to Water Management in
Poultry Processing." Water Resources Bull., 8, 495 (1972).
Warns, J.C., "User's Manual for the Ohio State University Version of the
Stanford Streamflow Simulation Model IV." Rept. No. B-019-OHIO(1), M.S.
thesis, Coll. of Eng., Ohio State Univ., Columbus (1971).
Warren, J. and Bewtra, J.K., "A Model to Study the Effects of Time-Variable
Pollutant Loads on Stream Quality." Water Res. (G.B.), 8, 1057 (1974).
Weddle, C.L., et al., "Mathematical Model for Water-Wastewater Systems."
Jour. Amer. Water Works Assn., 62, 769 (1970).
Weeter, D.W., "A Water Quality Prediction Model and a Water Quality Simulation
Program for the Wabash River." Office of Water Resources Res., Rept. No. A-
013-IND (2), Purdue Univ., Lafayette, Ind. (1971).
1-187
-------
Wensink, R.B., and Miner, J.R., "Predicting the Performance of Feedlot Control
Facilities at Specific Oregon Locations." OWRT Project No. A-028-ORE, WRRI-34
(August 1975).
Westrope, J.S., "Simulation-Decision Aid in Planning Desalting Applications."
Water Resources Bull!, 6, 602 (1970).
Woods, J.L., and O'Callaghan, J.R., "Mathematical Modeling of Animal Waste
Treatment." Jour. Agr. Eng. Res., 19, 245 (1974).
White, W.A., et al., "Water Quality Prediction Within an Interbasin Transfer
System." Water Resources Bull., 8, 483 (1972).
Willis, R., et al., "Steady-State Water Quality Modeling in Streams." Jour.
Env. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 101, 245 (1975).
Windsor, J.S., and Chow, V.T., "A Programming Model for Farm Irrigation
Systems." Hydraul. Eng. Ser. No. 23, Proj. No. B-030-ILL. Univ. of Illinois,
Urbana (1970).
Windsor, J.S., and Chow, V.T., "Multireservoir Optimization Model." Jour.
Hydraul. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., 98:HY10,1827 (1972).
Yao, K.M., "Regionalization and Water Quality Management." Jour. Water Poll.
Control Fed., 45, 407 (1973).
Yeh, H.H., et al., "Generalized Simulation Models for Massachusetts Streams."
Jour. Boston Soc. Civil Engr., 60:3,107 (1973).
Yen, B.C., and Sevek, A.S., "Design of Storm Sewer Networks." Jour. Hydraul.
Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Eng., 101, 535 (1975).
Young, H.P., and Thompson, R.G., "Least-Cost Allocation and Valuation Model
for Water Resources." Water Resources Res., 9, 1186 (1973).
Zimmermann, R.C., "The Use of Models in Practical Resource Management."
Proc. Intl. Symp. on Modeling Techniques in Water Resources Systems, 1, 56
(1972).
(None), "Mixing Zone Guidance"- Appendix A - Draft, (None),(2/13/75).
(None), "Technical Guidance Thermal Discharge," 316(a), (Sept. 1974).
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1977-757-056/61)1(2 Region No. 5-11
1-188
-------
APPENDIX J
GLOSSARY
Abatement - The lessening of pollution effects.
Access Time - Time required by computer to locate a word in core memory and
transfer the word to a register.
Acre Foot - A unit for measuring the volume of water. It is equal to the
amount of water needed to cover one acre of land with water one foot deep.
The Act - Public Law 92-500. "Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
of 1972."
Address - Name or number which identifies a particular storage location in
the computer.
Advanced Waste Treatment - A further degree of treatment of wastewater, over
and above so-called secondary treatment, in order to further purify these
effluent waters by the removal of additional amounts or types of pollutants,
or their modification into non-polluting forms.
Advection - The hydraulic mechanism by which water quality constituents are
transported in the direction of the water flow.
Aerated Lagoon - A natural or artificial wastewater treatment lagoon
(generally from 4 to 12 feet deep) in which mechanical or diffused-air
aeration is used to supplement the oxygen supply.
Aeration - The act of exposing to the action of air, such as, to mix or
charge with air.
Aerosol - A suspension of fine solid or liquid particles in air or gas.
Agricultural Land - Land in farms regularly used for agricultural production.
The term includes all land devoted to crop or livestock enterprises; for
example, the farmstead lands, drainage and irrigation ditches, water supply,
cropland, and grazing land of every kind in farms.
J-l
-------
Agronomic Practices - The soil and crop activities employed in the production
of farm crops, such as selecting seed, seedbed preparation, fertilizing,
liming, manuring, seeding, cultivation, harvesting, curing, crop sequence,
crop rotations, cover crops, stripcropping, pasture development, etc.
Air Flotation Treatment - In this system, air bubbles are formed by intro-
ducing the gas phase directly into the liquid phase through a revolving
impeller or through diffusers. Flotation is used to remove suspended
matter and to concentrate biological sludges. Aeration alone for a short
period is not particularly effective in bringing about the flotation of
solids.
Algae - Any of numerous chlorophyll-containing plants of the phylum
thallophyta that grow in either sea water or fresh water; seaweeds and pond
scum are algae.
Algorithm - A rule or procedure for solving a logical or mathematical
problem, frequently as incorporated into computer programs.
Alkaline - Having the qualities of a base; i.e., a pH above 7.0.
Alluvial - Of or pertaining to alluvium.
Alluvium - Clay, silt, sand, gravel, or other rock materials transported by
flowing water and deposited in comparatively recent geologic time as sorted
or semi-sorted sediments in riverbeds, estuaries, floodplains, and in fans
at the base of mountain slopes.
Ambient - Completely surrounding or encompassing.
Amenable Industrial Wastes - Industrial wastewaters which contain no concen-
trations of substances which adversely affect sewer systems or inhibit the
operation of sewage treatment processes which depend on biological reactions.
Ammonia-Nitrogen (NH ) - A form of nitrogen which is an essential nutrient
to plants (can cause algal blooms if all nutrients are present in sufficient
quantities). A product of natural decomposition of fecal matter, urea and
other animal protein.
Ammonification - The biochemical process whereby ammonia-nitrogen is released
from nitrogen-containing organic compounds.
J-2
-------
Ammonium Fixation - The adsorption or absorption of ammonium ions by the
mineral or organic fractions of the soil in a manner that they are relatively
unexchangeable by the usual methods of cation exchange.
Amortization Period - The period of time over which the cost of a capital
item is amortized.
Analog - The representation of a numerical quantity by some physical variable;
e.g., translation, rotation, voltage or resistance.
Analysis of Variance - A statistical technique which analyzes the variance
which can be attributed to each of several factors which were varied singly
or in combination.
Angle of Repose - The angle which the sloping face of a bank of loose earth,
or gravel, or other material makes with the horizontal.
Actual Cost - Total annual expense of operating a treatment plant, including
capital charges, fuel, power, chemicals, supplies and maintenance materials,
taxes, insurance, and any other costs of operation.
Antecedent Conditions - Initial conditions in catchment as determined from
hydrologic events prior to storm.
Antecedent Moisture Conditions (AMC) - The degree of wetness of a watershed
at the beginning of a storm.
Antecedent Precipitation Index (API) - An indicator of the amount of water
(in inches) present in the soil at any given time. The calculation of the
API is based on the assumption that, during time periods of no precipitation,
the soil moisture decreases logarithmically with time.
Application Rate - The rate at which a liquid is dosed to the land (in./hr,
ft/yr, etc.).
Aquifer - Any geological formation that contains water, especially one that
supplies wells and springs.
Area Rainfall Distribution Factor - The ratio of the rainfall in a selected
area to that measured at a reference rainfall gage.
J-3
-------
Artesian - The occurrence of groundwater under sufficient pressure to rise
above the upper surface of the aquifer.
Artesian Aquifer - An aquifer overlain by a confining bed and containing
water under artesian conditions.
Artificial Recharge - The addition of water to the groundwater reservoir
by activities of man, such as irrigation or induced infiltration from streams,
wells, or spreading basins.
ASCII Code - American Standard Code for Information Interchange; a special
eight channel paper tape code developed to facilitate data transmission
between machines manufactured by different companies.
Asphalt Concrete - A paving material consisting of aggregate bound with
asphalt, made by heating both materials to around 300°F, followed by mixing,
delivering, spreading, and compacting while still hot.
Attenuation - The reduction of the magnitude of an event, as the reduction
and spreading out of the impact of storm effects.
Autoanalyzer - Copywritten term referring to equipment which automates
chemical tests on samples.
Available Nutrient - That portion of any element or compound in the soil
that readily can be absorbed and assimilated by growing plants.
Average Cleansing Efficiency <• The percent of deposited solids removed
from a given length of sewer.
Backfill - That material that is used to cover a sewer in a trench extending
from the sewer or select fill to the ground surface.
Background - A description of pollutant levels arising from natural sources,
and not because of man's immediate activities.
Backwater Curve - The longitudinal shape of the water surface in a stream
or open conduit where such water surface is raised above its normal level
by a natural or artificial constriction or a change in grade.
Backwater Gate - A gate installed at the end of a drain or outlet pipe to
prevent the backward flow of water or wastewater. Generally used oh sewer
J-4
-------
outlets into streams to prevent backward flow during times of flood or high
tide. Also called a tide gate,,
Bar Screen - A screen composed of parallel bars, either vertical or inclined,
placed in a waterway to catch debris, and from which the screenings may be
raked. (Also called a rack).
Base Flow - Stream discharge derived from groundwater sources. Sometimes
considered to include flows from regulated lakes or reservoirs. Fluctuates
much less than storm runoff.
Baseline Sample - A sample collected during dry-weather flow (i.e., it does
does not consist of runoff from a specific precipitation event).
Basin - The term "basin" means the streams, rivers, tributaries, and lakes
and the total land and surface water area contained in one of the major or
minor basins defined by EPA, or any other basin unit as agreed upon by the
state(s) and the Regional Administrator.
Beneficial Use of Water - The use of water for any purpose from which bene-
fits are derived, such as domestic, irrigation, industrial supply, power
development, or recreation.
Benthic Deposits - Deposits of living, bottom dwelling organisms in a stream.
Bentonite - A clay with a high content of montmorillonite. It has an expand-
ing lattice structure which enables it to absorb large amounts of water.
Best Available Technology (BAT) - "Not later than July 1, 1983, effluent
limitations for categories and classes of point sources, other than publicly
owned treatment works, ....shall require application of the best available
technology economically achievable for such category or class, which will
result in reasonable further progress toward the national goal of eliminating
the discharge of all pollutants as determined in accordance with regulations
issued by the Administrator pursuant to Section 304(b)(2) of this Act...."
(Act, Section 301(b)(2)(A)).
Best Practicable Control Technology (BPCT) - "Not later than July 1, 1977,
effluent limitations for point sources, other than publicly owned treatment
works, shall require the application of the best practicable control tech-
nology currently available as defined by the Administrator pursuant to
J-5
-------
Section (304(b) of this Act..." (Act, Section 301 (b) (1) (A) . This is also
referred to as Best Practical Technology (BPT) .
Best Practicable Waste Treatment Technology (BPWTT) - "Waste treatment
management plans and practices shall provide for the application of the best
practicable waste treatment technology before any discharge into receiving
waters, including reclaiming and recycling of water and confined disposal of
pollutants so they will not migrate to cause water or other environmental
pollution...." (Act, Section 201 (b)).
Binary - The representation of a numerical quantity by use of the two
digits 0_ and 1.
Binary Coded Decimal (BCD) - A computer coding system.
-- Five-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand: A standard test for the amount of
oxygen utilized in aerobic decomposition of a waste material during a five-
day incubation at a specified constant temperature.
Biological Treatment Processes - Means of treatment in which bacterial or
biochemical action is intensified to stabilize, oxidize, and nitrify the
unstable organic matter present. Trickling filters, activated sludge
processes, and lagoons are examples.
Biome - A major biotic community including all plant and animal life, e.g.,
the North American Boreal forest, European deciduous forest.
Bit - A basic unit of computer storage, symbolically capable of representing
only a "1" or a "0".
Bituminous - Any of various natural substances consisting mainly of hydro-
carbons, such as asphalt, coal tar, pitch, maltha, gilsonite, etc.
Bond - A written promise to pay a specified sum of money (called the face
value) at a fixed time in the future (called the date of maturity) and
carrying interest at a fixed rate, payable periodically. The difference
between a note and a bond is that the latter usually runs for a longer
period of time and requires greater formality.
Bond Discount - The excess of the face value of a bond over the price for
which it is acquired or sold.
J-6
-------
Bond Premium - The excess of the price at which a bond is acquired or sold
over its face value.
Boreal Forest - The forest extending across northern North America, consist-
ing chiefly of conifers.
Brackish Water - Water containing dissolved minerals in excess of acceptable
normal municipal, domestic, and irrigation standards, but less than that of
sea water.
Buffer Strips - Strips of grass or other erosion-resisting vegetation
between or below cultivated strips or fields.
Bypass - A pipe line which diverts wastewater flows away from or around,
pumping or treatment facilities - or bypasses them - in order to limit the
flows delivered to such facilities and prevent surcharging or adversely
affecting their operation or performance.
Byte - A few bits (typically 6 or 8, depending upon the computer) of computer
storage, required to store one character.
Calibration - The procedure of assigning values to the uncertain or unknown
parameters in simulation model and adjusting them until model predictions
correspond acceptably closely with observed prototype behavior.
Capital Charges - The portion of annual cost due to capital expense. Its
components include depreciable capital charges, nondepreciable capital
charges, and amortizable capital charges.
Capital Intensive - Measure requiring initial capital outlays for its
development and relatively little cost for operation and maintenance.
Capital Investment - The total original cost of installed facilities includ-
ing process and ancillary facilities, indirect construction cost, land,
start-up costs, and working capital.
Carrying Charge Multiplier - The sum of "Interest Rate" and "Sinking Fund
Factor"; when multiplied by bond principal yields capital charge.
Catch Basin - A chamber or well, usually built at the curb line of a street,
for the admission of surface water to a sewer or subdrain, having at its
base a sediment sump designed to retain grit and detritus below the point
J-7
-------
of overflow.
Catchment - Surface drainage area.
Channel - An elemental one-dimensional flow path having the usual properties
of a water channel, which is used to construct certain receiving water
simulation models. Also used in discussing the river channel itself.
Check Dam - Small dam constructed in a gully or other small watercourse to
decrease the streamflow velocity, minimize channel scour, and promote
deposition of sediment.
Chemical Coagulation - The destabilization and initial aggregation of
colloidal and finely divided suspended matter in wastewater by the addition
of a floe-forming chemical.
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) - A standard test which measures the total
quantity of oxygen required for oxidation of organic (carbonaceous) matter
to carbon dioxide and water using a strong oxidizing agent (dichromate)
under acid conditions.
Chemical Weathering - Chemical reactions such as hydrolysis, or oxidation,
by which rocks and minerals are broken down into soil.
Chlorine Demand - The demand for chlorine in a volume of water caused by
organic and inorganic reductants. This quantity is defined as the differ-
ence between an initial chlorine concentration in a specific volume of water
and the total available chlorine remaining at the end of a contact period.
Clay - The smallest mineral particles in soil, less than .004 mm in diame-
ter; soil that contains at least 40 percent clay particles, less than 45
percent sand, and less than 40 percent silt.
Clay Seal - A barrier constructed of impermeable clay that stops the flow of
water.
Clear Cutting - The felling of all trees in an area at one time,,
Closed Basin - A basin is considered closed with respect to surface flow if
its topography prevents the occurrence of visible outflow. It is closed
hydrologically if neither surface nor underground outflow can occur.
J-8
-------
Cohesion - The capacity of a soil to resist shearing stress, exclusive of
functional resistance.
Cohesive Soil - A soil that when unconfined has considerable strength when
air-dried and significant cohesion when submerged.
Coliform Bacteria - All the aerobic and facultative anaerobic, gram-negative
nonspore-forming, rod-shaped bacteria which ferment lactose with
gas formation within 48 hours at 35°C. Used as an indicator of bacterial
pollution.
Collector Sewer - A sewer located in the public way which collects the waste-
waters discharged through building sewers and conducts such flows into larger
interceptor sewers and pumping and treatment works. (Referred to also as
"street sewer".)
Combined Sewer - A sewer receiving both surface runoff and sewage.
Commercial Forest - The forest which is both available and suitable for grow-
ing continuous crops of raw logs or other industrial timber products,
judged capable of growing at least 20 ft of timber per acre per year.
Compiler - A programmed component of a computer, which converts sophisti-
cated programming language into elementary instructions and binary code.
Complete Sewer Separation - Separation of all public combined sewers into
two separate and independent sewer systems, one for the handling of sanitary
sewage and industrial and commercial wastes and the other for the handling
of storm water flow.
Composite Sample - Any one of a number of types of integrated samples com-
prised of a number of sub-samples (aliquots) taken over a given time period
and intended to represent average flow characteristics.
Concentration - The quantity of a given constituent in a unit volume or
weight of water.
Conductivity - A measure of the ability of a material to conduct an electric
current, the reciprocal of resistivity.
Confidence Interval - A mathematical method of stating both how close the
value of a sample statistic is likely to be to the value of a universe
J-9
-------
parameter and the calculated or desired probability of that accuracy
occurring.
Confined Aquifer - An aquifer which is bounded above and below by formations
of impermeable or relatively impermeable material.
Connate Water - Water that was deposited simultaneously with the sediments,
and has not since then existed as surface water or .as atmospheric moisture.
Conservation - The protection, improvement, and use of natural resources
according to principles that will assure their highest economic or social
benefits.
Conservative Constituents - Materials carried in the hydrologic system which,
on a class basis, do not interact with the chemical, physical, or biological
elements of the environment to a significant extent, i.e., do not decay
significantly as a function of time.
Conservative Substance - Non-interacting substance, undergoing no kinetic
reaction; examples are salinity, total dissolved solids, total nitrogen,
total phosphorus.
Consumptive Use (Water) - The sum of the quantity of water used by vegetative
growth in transpiration or building of plant tissue and the quantity evapo-
rated from adjacent soil or plant surfaces in a given specified time. Also
referred to as Evapotranspiration.
Contamination - The degredation of natural water quality as a result of
man's activities, to the extent that its usefulness is impaired.
Continuous Model - A model which simulates continuously varying processes
over a long period of time, typically many years.
Contour Furrows - Furrows plowed approximately on the contour on pasture or
rangeland to prevent soil loss and increase infiltration. Also, furrows
laid out approximately on the contour for irrigation purposes.
Contractor's Indirect Field Costs - The contractor's construction costs for
his supervision, construction equipment, small tools, consumables, temporary
facilities, temporary services, support labor, insurance, taxes and miscel-
laneous field costs.
J-10
-------
Convective Precipitation - Precipitation caused by lifting due to convective
currents, as in thunderstorms.
Conventional Tillage - Land prepared by turning with a mold-board plow,
discing, harrowing and cultivation of row crops.
Core City - The major jurisdiction within the SMSA.
Coshocton Wheel - A runoff sampler that divides the flow from an experimental
area and retains a proportional part of it in a storage tank.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis - The procedure for economic evaluation of
wastewater treatment alternatives.
Coupled Constituent - A constituent whose nonconservative behavior is
affected by the presence of a second constituent.
Cover Crop - A close-growing crop grown primarily for the purpose of protect-
ing and improving soil between periods of regular crop production or between
trees and vines in orchards and vineyards.
Critical Depth - The depth of water flowing in an open channel or partially
filled conduit corresponding to one of the recognized critical velocities.
Critical Point - The point in a stream segment at which a water quality
parameter reaches its worst value.
Curb Length - The distance of single street curb, or the length of one side
of a street or other thoroughfare. Distinguished from street-length which
normally represents two or more curb lengths.
Degree Days - Sum of negative departures of average daily temperature from
65°F; used to determine demand for fuel for heating purposes and snow melt
calculations.
Demersal Fish - The resident fish species for a particular water body.
Demineralization - The process of reducing the concentration or removing
the mineral salts from water.
Demographic - Pertaining to the science of vital and special statistics,
especially with regard to population density and capacity for expansion or
decline.
J-ll
-------
Denitrification - The biochemical reduction of nitrate or nitrite to gaseous
nitrogen, either as molecular nitrogen or as an oxide of nitrogen.
Dependent Variable - Variable whose values are functionally determined by
the independent variable.
Depletion (Ground Water) - The withdrawal of water from a groundwater source
at a rate greater than its rate of replenishment, usually over an extended
period of several years.
Depreciable Capital - Total plant cost less cost of land, salvage value, and
working capital.
Depression Storage - Watershed capacity to retain water in puddles, ditches,
depressions and on foliage.
Design Storm - A selected rainfall pattern of specified amount, intensity,
duration, and frequency which is used as a design basis.
Desilting Area - An area of grass, shrubs, or other vegetation used for
inducing deposition of silt and other debris from flowing water, located
above a stock tank, pond, field, or other area needing protection from
sediment accumulation.
Detention Dam - A dam constructed for the purpose of temporary storage of
streamflow or surface runoff and for releasing the stored water at controlled
rates.
Detention - The slowing, dampening, or attenuating of flows either entering
the sewer system or within the sewer system by temporarily holding the
water on a surface area, in a storage basin, or within the sewer itself.
Detention Time - The theoretical .time required to displace the contents of
a tank or unit at a given rate of discharge (volume divided by rate of
discharge).
Dielectric Constant - A measure of the ability of a material to hold a
charge.
Diffusion - A process by which water quality constituents are transported,
primarily depending upon the concentration gradients.
J-12
-------
Digestion - The anaerobic or aerobic decomposition of organic matter
resulting in partial gasification, liquefaction, and mineralization.
Dilution Ratio - The ratio of the quantity of combined sewer overflow or
storm sewer discharge to the average quantity of diluting water available
after initial mixing at the point of disposal or at any point under
consideration. This is not only used with respect to sewer overflows but
also it is used for any point or nonpoint sources of pollution.
Direct Capital Investment - The costs of construction associated with
specific constructed equipment. This item includes purchase and installation
of all equipment, buildings, and facilities and the cost (or value) of the
land associated with them.
Direct Connection - Any opening, pipe, or other arrangement permitting storm
water to directly enter a sanitary sewer.
Directly Connected Paved Area - The paved portion of a basin from which
runoff water can reach a sewer without first passing over grassed area.
Direct Runoff - The water that enters stream channels during a storm or soon
after. It may consist of rainfall on the stream surface, surface runoff,
and seepage of infiltrated water.
Disinfection - The art of killing the larger portion of microorganisms in
or on a substance with the probability that all pathogenic bacteria are
killed by the agent used.
Dispersion - The mixing of polluted fluids with a large volume of water in
a stream, estuary, or other body of water.
Dispersion, Longitudinal - The process by which prototype concentrations are
changed as a result of the non-uniform velocity distribution at a channel
cross-section.
Dispersion, Soil - The breaking down of soil aggregates into individual
particles, resulting in single-grain structure. Ease of dispersion is an
•
important factor influencing the erodibility of soils. Generally speaking,
the more easily dispersed the soil, the more credible it is.
J-13
-------
Disposal Field - Area used for spreading liquid effluent for separation of
wastes from water, degradation of impurities, and improvement of drainage
waters. Synonymous with infiltration field.
Dissolved Solids (PS) - The total amount of dissolved material, organic and
inorganic, contained in solution in water or wastes.
Distributed Load - A constituent load which enters the receiving water over
a considerable distance, as in the case of groundwater seepage, rather than
at a point as with a sewer outfall.
Diversity (Ecological) - Variety of species of plants and animals that
compose a biotic community or ecosystem; often expressed as total number
of different species.
D0_ - Dissolved oxygen, the amount of gaseous oxygen dissolved in a liquid
sample.
DO Deficit - The extent by which the dissolved oxygen concentration falls
below its saturation level.
Drainability - ability of the soil system to accept and transmit water by
infiltration and percolation.
Drainage Basin - A geographical area of region which is so sloped and
contoured that surface runoff from streams and other natural watercourses
is carried away by a single drainage system by gravity to a common outlet
or outlets; also referred to as a watershed or drainage area.
Drainage Density - Ratio of the total length of all drainage channels in a
drainage basin to the area of that basin.
Drawdown - The lowering of the water table or piezometric surface caused by
pumping or artesian flow.
Drop Spillway - Overall structure in which the water drops over a vertical
wall onto an apron at a lower elevation.
Dry Weather Flow - The combination of sanitary sewage, and industrial and
commercial wastes normally found in the sanitary sewers during the dry
weather season of the year. Also that flow in streams during dry seasons.
J-14
-------
Dual Treatment - Those processes or facilities designed for operating on
both dry and wet-weather flows.
Dynamic - A process which may vary freely with time.
Dynamic Equilibrium - A process which may vary with time, but only over a
limited period (e.g., one day) which repeats itself in cycles. Also known
as dynamic steady state.
Dynamic Regulator - A semiautomatic or automatic regulator device which may
or may not have movable parts that are sensitive to hydraulic conditions at
their points of installation and are capable of adjusting themselves to
variations in such conditions or of being adjusted by remote control to meet
hydraulic conditions at points of installation or at other points in the
total combined sewer system.
Ecosystem - A total organic community in a defined area or time frame.
Edge Effect - The influence of two communities upon their border, whereby
composition, density, and diversity are affected, usually being more complex
and greater than the two distinct communities (e.g., grassland bordering a
woodland) .
Effluent Limited Segments - "Any segment were it is known that water quality
is meeting and will continue to meet applicable water quality standards or
where there is adequate demonstration that water quality will meet applicable
water quality standards after the application of the effluent limitations
required by Sections 301(b)(l)(A) and 301(b)(l)(B) of the Act." (40 CFR
Effluent Limitation - "The term 'effluent limitation1 means any restriction
established by a State or the Administrator on quantities, rates, and
concentrations or chemical, physical, biological, and other constituents
which are discharged from point sources into navigable waters, the waters
of the contiguous zone, or the ocean, including schedules of compliance."
(Act, sec. 502 (11).
Effluent Standard - A restriction on the quantities or concentrations of
constituents from an effluent source.
J-15
-------
Emissions - Effluents discharged into the environment, specified as weight
per unit time for a given pollutant from a given source.
Enterococci - A group of bacteria consisting of anaerobic spore-forming
rods which indicate recent fecal pollution, sometimes referred to as fecal
streptococci.
Entry Time - The time in minutes for runoff water to flow from the most
remote point on the directly connected paved area to a specified inlet.
Equalization - The averaging (or method for averaging) of variations in
flow and composition of a liquid.
Equivalent Days of Accumulation (EDA) - A measure of the relative days of
accumulation of pollutants on a street surface as a function of rainfall
and sweeping history and respective removal efficiencies.
Equivalent Uniform Depth (E.U.D.) - The average amount of rainfall over an
area developed from the constituent rain gage stations and their associated
Thiessen Polygons contained within the network of gaging stations.
Erosion, Sheet - The removal of a fairly uniform layer of soil from the land
surface by runoff water.
Estuary - The mouth of a river, where tidal effects are evident and where
fresh water and sea water mix.
Eutrophication - The progressive enrichment of surface waters particularly
non-flowing bodies of water such as lakes and ponds, with dissolved
nutrients, such as phosphorous and nitrogen compounds, which accelerate the
growth of algae and higher forms of plant life and result in the utilization
of the useable oxygen content of the waters at the expense of other
aquatic life forms.
Evapotranspiration - The combined processes of evaporation from land, water,
and other surfaces, and transpiration by plants.
Event Model - A model which simulates the processes occurring in just a
single event, typically for a near-steady-state condition or for only one
major variation during a relatively short period of time.
J-16
-------
Exchange Coefficient - The fraction of material leaving an embayment during
ebb tide, which returns on the following flood tide.
Executive Program - A program, often supplied with a computer, which controls
loading and relocation of all software (much unknown to the programmer)
required to execute a job entered by a programmer.
Exfiltration - The leakage or discharge of flows being carried by sewers out
into the ground through leaks in pipes, joints, manholes or other sewer
system structures; the reverse of "infiltration."
Extraneous Flow - That portion of the liquid carried in the sewer that is
not normally classified as sanitary, commercial, or industrial waste or
sewage.
Factorial Arrangement - A method for apportioning the number of tests
k
required for an Analysis of Variance. Given the formula N=X where X is
the number of independent variables and k is the number of levels (factors).
Fecal Coliform - Fecal coliform are indicators of human and animal pollution
and are expressed as numbers of bacteria per volume of sample.
Feedlot - A relatively small, confined land area for raising and fattening
cattle.
Filter Strip - Strip of permanent vegetation above farm ponds, diversion
terraces, and other structures to retard flow of runoff water, causing
deposition of transported material, thereby reducing sediment flow.
First Flush - The condition, often occurring in storm sewer discharges and
combined sewer overflows, in which a disproportionately high pollutional
load is carried in the first portion of the discharge or overflow.
Floatable Trap - A device or structural configuration which intercepts
floatable solids and retains these materials at a desired location until
removed and disposed of by predetermined means.
Flooding - A method of surface application of water which includes border
strip, contour check, and spreading methods.
Floodplain - The flat ground along a stream course which is covered by water
at flood stage.
J-17
-------
Flow Augmentation - The addition of water or wastewater effluents to
surface water sources, for the purpose of increasing the volume of such
waters as rivers, lakes or other inland bodies of surface water; in the
case of groundwater, the addition of wastewater effluents which will
increase the volume of the underground water source and raise or help
maintain the groundwater table.
Fluvial Sediment - Those deposits produced by stream or river action.
Food Chain - Refers to the dependence for food of organisms upon each other
in a series, beginning with plants and ending with the largest carnivores.
Food Web - The combination of all of the food chains in a community.
Form Factor (FF) - An indicator of the drainage characteristics of a watershed.
Foundation Drain - A pipe or series of pipes which collects groundwater
from the foundation or footing of structures and discharges these waters
into sanitary, combined or storm sewers, or to other points of disposal,
for the purpose of draining unwanted waters away from such structures.
Frequency Distribution - A curve which shows the arrangement or distribution
of the occurrences of events or quantities pertaining to a single element
in order of their magnitude.
Frequency of Storm (Design Storm Frequency) - The anticipated period in
years which will elapse, based on average probability of storms in the
design region, before a storm of a given intensity and/or total volume
will recur; thus a 10-year storm can be expected to occur on the average
once every 10 years. Sewers designed to handle flows which occur under
such storm conditions would be expected to be surcharged by any storms
of greater amount or intensity.
F Value - A number corresponding to the degree of confidence of a certain
statistical correlation. A correlation with an "F" less than one is
generally discounted.
General Obligation Bonds - Bonds secured by the issuer's pledge of full
faith, credit, and taxing power for payment.
Geomorphic Province - A region in which the majority of land features have a
degree of similarity as to its origin and development.
J-18
-------
Grade Stabilization Structure - A structure for the purpose of stabilizing
the grade of a gully or other watercourse, thereby preventing further head-
cutting or lowering of the channel grade.
Grassed Waterway - A natural QT constructed waterway, usually broad and
shallow, covered with erosion-resistant grasses, used to conduct surface
water from cropland.
Grease - In sewage, grease includes fats, waxes, free fatty acids, calcium
and magnesium soaps, mineral oils, and other nonfatty materials. Substances
soluble in n-hexane.
Grit - Heavier and larger solids which, because of their size and specific
gravity, settle more readily to the floor of a swirl concentrator chamber by
the phenomenon of gravity classification.
Ground Water Infiltration - The seepage of groundwater into an opening in
a sewer.
Ground Water Basin - A ground water reservoir together with all the over-
lying land surface and the underlying aquifers that contribute water to the
reservoir. In some cases, the boundaries of successively deeper aquifers may
differ in a way that creates difficulty in defining the limits of the basin.
Ground Water Recharge - Inflow to a ground water reservoir.
Ground Water Reservoir - An aquifer or aquifer system in which ground water
is stored. The water may be placed in the aquifer by artificial or natural
means.
Ground Water Storage Capacity - The reservoir space contained in a given
volume of deposits. Under optimum conditions of use, the useable ground
water storage capacity volume of water that can be alternately extracted
and replaced in the deposit, within specified economic limitations.
Groundwater Table - The free surface of the groundwater, that surface subject
to atmospheric pressure under the ground, generally rising and falling with
the season, the rate of withdrawal, the rate of restoration, and other
conditions. It is seldom static.
J-19
-------
Gully - A channel or miniature valley cut by concentrated runoff but
through which water commonly flows only during and immediately after heavy
rains or during the melting of snow.
Gully Control Plantings - The planting of forage, legume, or woody plant
seeds, seedlings, cuttings, or transplants in gullies to establish or
reestablish a vegetative cover adequate to control runoff and erosion.
Hardness - A property of water caused by the presence of calcium and magnesium,
which is reflected in the amount of soap necessary to form suds and incrust-
ations in appliances and pipes when the water is heated. It is expressed as
an equivalent amount of calcium carbonate.
Hardware Computer - The physical equipment and devices which comprise a
computer or computer system component.
Hard Water - Water with over 60 mg/1 of hardness.
Heat Budget - The accounting of the various factors governing water temperature.
Heavy. Metals - Metallic elements with high molecular weights, generally
toxic in low concentrations to plant and animal life. Examples are: mercury,
chromium, cadmium, arsenic, and lead.
Herbicide - A chemical substance used for killing plants, especially weeds.
Higher Heating Value - Heat released in combustion of dry fuel where
combustion gases are cooled to 66 F and all water vapor is condensed prior
to release to the atmosphere.
Homogeneous - Consisting throughout of identical or closely similar material
whose proportions and properties do not vary.
Humus - That more or less stable fraction of the soil organic matter
remaining after the major portion of added plant and animal residues have
decomposed; usually amorphous and dark colored.
Hydraulic Barrier - A means of augmenting the groundwater volume and
raising the level of the water table in order to create hydraulic gradients •
higher than the level of surrounding waters which would tend to inflow or
infilter into the groundwater aquifer and introduce contaminants or other
unwanted substances which could adversely affect its quality.
J-20
-------
Hydraulic Radius - A measure of the depths of flow in a conduit or channel;
more formally it is the cross-sectional area of flow divided by the perimeter
of the channel in contact with the fluid.
Hyetograph - An intensity-time graph for rainfall derived from direct
measurements.
Hydrograph - A flow versus time graph derived from direct measurement.
Hydrological - Pertains to the branch of hydrology that treats surface and
groundwater; its occurrence and movements; its replenishment and depletion;
the properties of rocks which control groundwater movement and storage; and
the methods of investigation and utilization of groundwater.
Hydrological Budget - An accounting of all inflow to, outflow from, and
changes in storage within a hydrologic unit such as a drainage basin, soil
zone, aquifer, lake, or project area.
Hydrologic Cycle - The circuit of water movement from the atmosphere to the
earth and return to the atmosphere through various stages or processes as
precipitation, interception, runoff, infiltration, percolation, storage,
evaporation, and transpiration.
Hydrology - The science dealing with water in the atmosphere, on the earth's
surface, and underground; its properties, laws, geographical distribution, etc.
Illicit Connection - An unauthorized connection from a residence, apartment,
etc., which introduces liquid other than sewage (usually stormwater) into the
sanitary sewer.
Impervious - Not permitting penetration or passage (e.g., of water).
Independent Variable - A parameter which can be directly manipulated and
which mathematically, has a correlation coefficient of zero.
Indirect Capital Investment - Capital costs not directly associated with or
charged directly to a single cost item. Usually consists of engineering and
design; construction expenses such as temporary construction facilities,
construction equipment, tools, supplies and utilities, construction super-
vision and field engineering, and payroll burden; contractor's fees; plant
start-up; and interest during construction.
J-21
-------
Indirect Runoff - That portion of runoff that contributes to the runoff
pollution that enters receiving water as point discharges from separate
storm sewer systems and as general surface runoff.
Industrial Waste - The liquid wastes from industrial processes as distinct
from domestic or sanitary sewage.
Infiltration - The water entering a sewer system, including sewer service
connections, from the ground, through such means as, but not limited to,
defective pipes, pipe joints, connections, and manhole walls. Infiltration
does not include, and is distinguished from, inflow. Infiltration includes
all extraneous water during wet weather, i.e., groundwater and surface
water.
Infiltration. Gross - The total infiltration entering a sanitary sewer by
direct connections and by percolation through the soil.
Infiltration Inflow - A combination of infiltration and inflow waste water
volumes in sewer lines that permits no distinction between the two basic
sources and has the same effect of usurping the capacities of sewer systems
and other sewerage system facilities.
Infiltration-Percolation - An approach to land application in which large
volumes of wastewater are applied to the land, infiltrate the surface, and
percolate through the soil pores.
Infiltration Rate - A soil characteristic determining or describing the
maximum rate at which water can enter the soil under specified conditions,
including the presence of an excess of water.
Infiltration Specification - A condition for acceptance of a sanitary sewer
from a contractor by a sewer authority. This specification limits the amount
of infiltration acceptable in a sewer system.
Inflow - The water discharged into a sewer system, including service connections,
from such sources as, but not limited to, roof leaders, cellar, yard and area
drains, foundation drains, cooling water dischargers, drains from spring and
swampy area, manhole covers, cross connections from storm sewers and combined
sewers, catch basin, surface runoff, street wash waters, or drainage. Inflow
does not include, and is distinguished from, infiltration.
J-22
-------
Initial Abstraction - Initial precipitation loss including interception and
depression storage.
Inplace Pollution Source - Time build-up of pollutant load deposited in a
receiving stream-bed and existing as a load upon that receiving water.
In-System Storage - Facilities or the capacity for holding or retaining of
flows of sewage and other wastes in subterranean storage chambers or other
portions of the sewer system in order to minimize overflows from combined
sewers and permit the treatment of large volumes of such flows.
Intercepted Surface Runoff - That portion of surface runoff that enters a
sewer, either storm or combined, directly through catch basins, inlets, etc.
Interception Ratio - Pertaining to combined sewer regulators, it is the
ratio of the maximum flow which can be directed to the interceptor sewer to
the normal dry-weather flow.
Interceptor Sewer - A sewer which receives dry-weather flows from a combined
collection sewer system and pre-determined additional amounts of storm flow
by means of any form of regulating device and then conducts these flows to
point by treatment or discharge.
Invert - The lowest point on the inside of a sewer or other conduit.
Irrigation Return Flow - Irrigation water which is not consumed in evapo-
ration or plant growth, and which returns to a surface stream or groundwater
reservoir.
Isoquants - Curves representing combinations of the inputs yielding the same
amount of output.
Junction - In rivers, the point of connection of two upstream stretches or
segments. In some estuary models a junction is a segment of the estuary.
Kinetics - The dynamics of physical, chemical and biological reaction
processes. Distinct from kinematics in that mass effects are considered.
Lacustrine - Deposits which have accumulated in lakes or marshes.
Lagoon - A shallow pond, usually man-made, to treat municipal or industrial
wastewater.
J-23
-------
Land Application - The discharge of wastewaters onto land areas, as an
alternative treatment procedure to conventional method or disposal of
effluents into surface water sources.
Land Cost - Cost of land acquisition including surveys, condemnation pro-
ceedings, fees, taxes, leases, and other financial and legal actions.
Land Subsidence - The lowering of the natural land surface in response to
earth movements; lowering of fluid pressure; removal of underlaying supporting
material by mining or solution of solids, either artificially or from
natural cuases; hydrocompaction; etc.
Land Use - Differentiating the spatial arrangements and activity patterns
of land areas.
Land Use Controls - Methods for regulating the uses to which a given land
area may be put, including such things as zoning, subdivision regulation,
and flood-plain regulation.
Lateral Sewer - A sewer which receives wastes only from the house connections.
Leachate - The liquid that has percolated through the soil or other media
and has extracted dissolved or suspended materials from it.
Leaching - The removal of chemical or physical components from soil or other
media by dissolution or physical adsorption action of percolating water.
Linked Constituent - A constituent whose nonconservative behavior is affected
by the presence of one or more other constituents.
Limited Body Contact Recreation - Use of natural waters, such as rivers,
lakes, and coastal waters, for recreational purposes which do not represent
deliberate or planned total body immersion such as swimming or bathing;
thus, use of waters for boating, fishing, and related sports.
Loading - The dry weight, in pounds, of some material that is being added to
a process or disposed of.
Loadograph - A graph of pollutant load as a function of time over a defined
period of time (pollutograph).
Logic - The science of combining electronic components in order to define the
interactions of signals in an automatic data processing system.
J-24
-------
Main Sewer - A sewer to which one or more branch sewers are tributary and
which serves a large territory; also called a trunk sewer.
Materials Balance - An accounting of all transfers of mass from one point
or state to other points or states, such that the total original mass is
entirely accounted for (Also Mass Balance).
Mathematical Model - The characterization of a process or concept in terms of
mathematics, which allows the manipulation of variables in an equation to
determine how the process would act in different situations.
Mean Velocity - The average velocity of a stream flowing in a channel or
conduit at a given cross section or in a given reach. It is equal to the
discharge divided by the cross-sectional area of the reach.
Mechanical Practices - Those management techniques for soil and water
conservation that primarily change the surface of the land or that store,
convey, regulate, or dispose of runoff water without excessive erosion.
Mesophyte - A plant growing under conditions of well-balanced moisture supply,
as distinguished from one which grows under dry or desert conditions
(xerophytes) or very wet conditions (hydrophytes).
Microstrainer - Variable low-speed (up to 4 to 7 rpm), continuously backwashed,
rotating drum filters operating under gravity conditions.
Mineralization - The process of accumulation of mineral elements and/or
compounds in soil or water.
Mixing Intensity - The degree of turbulence created by the expenditure of
mechanical energy.
Most Probable Number (MPN) - A statistical indication of the number of
bacteria present in a given volume (usually 100 ml).
Mulching - The addition of materials (usually organic) to the land surface
to curtail erosion or retain soil moisture.
Multiple Tube Technique - A technique to determine the density of coliform
bacteria in a given volume of water carried out by dividing the sample into
multiple portions and testing each portion individually.
J-25
-------
Municipal Bonds - Bonds issued by a state, territory, or possession of the
United States, or by any municipality, political subdivision, or public
agency or instrumentality.
Natural Erosion - Wearing away of the earth's surface by water, ice, or
other natural agents under natural environmental conditions of climate,
vegetation, etc., undisturbed by man.
Natural Leaching - The removal by a solvent of the more soluble minerals in
soil or rocks by percolating waters.
Neutralization - The process of adding an acid or alkaline material to waste
water to adjust its pH to a neutral position of 7.0.
Nitrate (NO ) - A form of nitrogen which is an essential nutrient to plants
O
(can cause algal blooms if all other nutrients are present in sufficient
quantities). Product of bacteria oxidation of other forms of nitrogen,
from the atmosphere during electrical storms and from fertilizer manufacturing.
Nitrification - The biological oxidation of ammonium salts to nitrites and
the further oxidation of nitrites to nitrates.
Nitrogen (Ammonia) - A product of microbiologic activity sometimes accepted
as evidence of sanitary pollution in surface waters.
Nitrogen, Available - Usually ammonium, nitrite, and nitrate ions, and
certain simple amines are available for plant growth. A small fraction of
organic or total nitrogen in the soil is available at any time.
Nonconservative Constituent - A constituent whose total mass undergoes time-
dependent interaction in receiving waters through physical, chemical or
biological reactions.
Nondepreciable Capital - Land and working capital and salvage value of
depreciable capital.
Nonpoint Source Pollution - A pollutant which enters a water body from
diffuse origins on the watershed and does not result from discernible,
confined, or discrete conveyances.
Nonsewered Urban Runoff - Surface runoff in an urban drainage area which
drains into a receiving stream without passing through a sewer system.
J-26
-------
Non-Stationary Source - Mobile activity which produces air pollutant emissions.
Numerical Dispersion - Error in models using numerical approximations, caused
by the use of grids of discrete size. Also called discretization error.
Nutrient - A substance necessary for the growth and reproduction of organisms.
Nutrient, Available - That portion of any element or compound in the soil
that can be readily absorbed and assimilated by growing plants.
Off-System Storage - Facilities for holding or retaining excess flows from
combined sewers, over and above the carrying capacity of the interceptor
sewers, in chambers, tanks, lagoons, ponds, or other basins which are not
a part of the subsurface sewer system.
Organic Nitrogen - Nitrogen combined in organic molecules such as
protein, amines, and amino acids. Gradually converted to ammonia-nitrogen
and to nitrites and nitrates if aerobic conditions prevail.
Outfall - The point, location, or structure where wastewater or drainage
discharges from a sewer to a receiving body of water.
Overflow - A pipe line or conduit device, together with an outlet pipe,
that provides for the discharge of portions of combined sewer flows into
receiving waters or other points of disposal, after a regulator device
has allowed the portion of the flow which can be handled by interceptor
sewer lines and pumping and treatment facilities to be carried by and to
such water pollution control structures.
Overland Flow Irrigation - A process of land application of wastewater which
provides spray distribution onto gently sloping soil of relatively impervious
nature, such as clays, for the purpose of attaining aerobic bio-treatment
of the exposed flow in contact with ground cover vegetation, followed by the
collection of runoff waters in intercepting ditches or channels and the
return of the wastewater back to the spray system or its discharge into
receiving waters; sometimes called spray runoff.
ORP - Oxidation Reduction Potential: A measurement of relative concentrations
of oxidants and reductants in solution.
J-27
-------
Oxidation Pond - A basin for the retention of wastewater, on a batch or
continuous flow basis, where organic materials can undergo aerobic
stabilization in the presence of adequate oxygen made available by either
natural or various mechanical means of aeration and mixing.
Partial Separation - Removal of some portion of all the elements of storm
drainage into a combined sewer; e.g., streets and parking areas only,
leaving roof and foundation drainage to enter the combined sewer.
Pathogen - A microorganism capable of causing disease.
Percolation - The movement of water beneath the ground surface both
vertically and horizontally, but above the groundwater table.
Perennial Yield (Ground Water) - The amount of usable water of a ground water
reservoir that can be withdrawn and consumed economically each year for an
indefinite period of time. It cannot exceed the natural recharge to that
ground water reservoir.
Periodic Flushing - Systematic introduction of liquid into sewers at
relatively high rates.
Permeability Coefficient - The volume of water, in cubic feet, under a head
of one foot, that will pass through a square foot of porous surface in one
day.
Pervious - Allowing movement of water.
Pesticides - Chemical compounds used for the control of undesirable plants,
animals, or insects. The term includes insecticides, herbicides, algalcides
rodent poisons, nematode poisons, fungicides, and growth regulators.
Phosphorus, Available - Inorganic phosphorus which is readily available
for plant growth.
Photogrammetry - The science of making surveys and maps through the use of
photographs.
Physical-Chemical Treatment - A method of semi-advanced or advanced wastewater
treatment which combines the use of chemicals, such as activated carbon or
lime, to induce reactions such as coagulation, absorption or adsorption of
J-28
-------
pollutional substances, with processes which physically remove unwanted
contaminants by such means as straining, screening, settling or filtering.
Physiographic Province - A region, all parts of which are similar in
geologic structure and climate and which consequently has a unified
geomorphic history.
Pipe Tests - Various methods for testing sewer lines (after construction
and in service) to ascertain whether or not infiltration allowances have
been met, and locating the sources of infiltration that exceed construction
specifications. Such tests include infiltration tests, exfiltration tests,
air tests, and such means as smoke bomb tests to locate sources of infiltration
in new and existing sewer lines.
Planning Process - Strategy for directing resources, establishing priorities,
scheduling actions, and reporting programs toward achievement of program
objectives.
Plant Operating Factor - The ratio of average annual volume flow of wastewater
divided by design capacity annual flow of wastewater.
Plug Flpw - The passage of liquid through a chamber such that all increments
of liquid move only in the direction of flow and at equal velocity.
Plume - An area of contaminated water originating from a point source and
influenced by such factors as the local water flow pattern, density of
pollutant, and characteristics of the dissimilar streams.
Point Source - "The term 'point source1 means any discernible, confined and
discrete conveyance, including but not limited to any pipe, ditch, channel,
tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container, rolling stock, concentrated
animal feeding operation, or vessel or other floating craft, from which
pollutants are or may be discharged." (Act, Section 502(14).
Pollutant - "The term 'pollutant' means dredged spoil, solid waste, incinerator
residue, sewage, garbage, sewage sludge, chemical wastes, biological
materials, radioactive materials, heat, wrecked or discarded equipment, rock,
sand, cellar dirt and industrial, municipal, and agricultural waste discharged
into water." (Act, Section 502(6).
J-29
-------
Pollution Parameters - The physical, chemical, and bacterial contaminants
which can be quantified to indicate pollution levels.
Pollutograph - A graph of pollutant concentration as a function of time
during a rainfall/runoff event.
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) - Organochlorine compounds of a pesticidal
nature which are usually used for industrial purposes (such as plastic
manufacture).
Population Equivalent of Industrial Wastewater - The calculated number of
people contributing sewage equal in strength to a unit volume of the wastes
discharged into a sewer system, in terms of biochemical oxygen demand; a
common base for computing the population equivalent is that one person
contributes 0.17 pounds of 5-day BOD in the form of sanitary sewage per day.
Porous Pavement - A pavement through which water can flow at significant
rates.
Practice Factor "P" - A factor based on a maximum value of 1.0 that reflects
the effectiveness of supporting conservation practices in controlling erosion.
The factor is used in the Universal Soil Loss Equation.
Pretreatment - The removal of material such as gross solids, grit, grease,
and scum from sewage flows prior to physical, biological, or physical-
chemical treatment processes to improve treatability. Pretreatment may
include screening, grit removal, skimming, preaeration, and flocculation.
Primary Treatment - Processes or methods, that serve as the first stage
treatment of sewage and other wastes intended for the removal of suspended
and settleable solids by gravity sedimentation; provides no changes in
dissolved and colloidal matter in the sewage or wastes flows.
Probability Curve - A curve that expresses the cumulative frequency of
occurence of a given event, based on an extended period of past occurrences.
Production Well - A well from which ground water is obtained.
Proprietary Model - A computer model developed privately by a consultant/
contractor who charges for its use.
J-30
-------
Purging - The act of reversing flow or using high pressure liquid or gas to
clear a pipeline of a plug of solids.
R Value - Multiple regression value: The correlation value to many independent
variables with a single dependent variable, e.g., air temperature and solar
radiation on water temperature.
Rainfall Intensity - The rate at which rain is falling at any given instant,
usually expressed in inches per hour.
Rational Method - A means of computing storm drainage flow rates (Q) -by use of
the formula Q=ciA; where ^ is a coefficient describing the physical drainage
area, _i_ is the rainfall intensity and A^ is the area.
Raw Sewage Sludge - The accumulated suspended and setteable solids of sewage
deposited in tanks or basin mixed with water to form a semi-liquid mass.
Reach - The smallest subdivision of the drainage system consisting of a
uniform length of open channel or underground conduit. Also, a discrete
portion of river, stream or creek. For modeling purposes a reach is somewhat
homogeneous in its physical characteristics.
Reaeration - The process entraining air in liquids such as wastewater
effluents, etc. Reaeration is proportional to the dissolved oxygen deficit;
its rate will increase with increasing deficit.
Real Time Control - The remote control of sewerage systems by digital computer.
Can either be fully automated or can be partially manually controlled by the
computer operator.
Recharge Basin - A basin provided to increase infiltration for the purpose
of replenishing ground water supply.
Regulator - A structure installed in a canal, conduit, or channel to control
the flow of water or wastewater at intake, or to control the water level in
a canal, channel, or treatment unit. In the context of combined sewers, a
regulator is a device or apparatus for controlling the quantity and quality
of admixtures of sewage and storm water admitted from a combined sewer
collector sewer into an interceptor sewer or pumping or treatment facility,
thereby determining the amount and quality of the flows discharged through
an overflow device to receiving waters, or to retention or treatment facilities.
J-31
-------
Relative Correlation - A measure of the ability of a general relationship to
predict the value of an experimental parameter.
Relief Ratio - The ratio between the relief (maximum difference in elevation)
of watershed and the maximum length of watershed.
Residential Density - The number of persons per unit of residential land area.
Net density includes only occupied land. Gross density includes unoccupied
portions of residential areas, such as roads and open space.
Residual Wastes - Those solid, liquid, or sludge substances from man's
activities in the urban, agricultural, mining and industrial environment
which are not discharged to water after collection and necessary treatment.
Retention - The storage of stormwater to prevent it from entering the sewer
system; may be temporary or permanent.
Return Flow - That part of a diverted flow which is not consumptively used
and which returns to a source of supply (surface or underground).
Riparian Rights - A principle of common I.aw which requires that any user of
waters adjoining or flowing through his lands must so use and protect them
that he will enable his neighbor to utilize the same waters undiminished in
quantity and undefiled in quality.
Riprap - Rough stone of various sizes placed compactly or irregularly to
prevent erosion.
Roof Leader - A drain or pipe that conducts storm water from the roof of a
structure, downward and thence into a sewer for removal from the property,
or onto or into the ground for runoff or seepage disposal.
Routine - A sequence of computer instructions which performs a specific
computational function within a larger program.
Routing - Storing, regulating, diverting or otherwise controlling the peak
flows of wastewater through a collection system according to some
prearranged plan.
Runoff - That portion of the precipitation on a drainage area that is
discharged from the area in stream channels.
J-32
-------
Runoff Coefficient - Fraction of rainfall that appears as runoff after
subtracting depression storage and interception. Typically accounts for
infiltration into ground and evaporation.
Sag Curve - A curve which describes the gradual drop to some minimum value
followed by an increase to normal levels of the dissolved oxygen in a
flowing stream following the addition of some oxygen demanding material such
as sewage.
Salinity - Salt content concentration of dissolved mineral salts in water or
soil.
Salinization - The process of accumulation of soluble salts in soil or water.
Salt Water Barrier - A physical facility or method of operation designed to
prevent the intrusion of salt water into a body of fresh water. In under-
ground water management a barrier may be created by injection of relatively
fresh water to create a hydraulic barrier against salt water intrusion.
Salt Water Intrusion - The invasion of a body of fresh water by salt water.
It can occur either in surface or groundwater bodies.
Salt Wedge - A wedge shaped volume of salt water beneath a body of fresh
water where a river and ocean meet in an estuary area.
Sanitary Sewer - A sewer that carries liquid and water-carried wastes from
residences, commercial buildings, industrial plants, and institutions,
together with minor quantities of ground, storm, and surface waters that are
not admitted intentionally.
Scour - The clearing and digging action of flowing air or water, especially
the downward erosion by stream water in sweeping away mud and silt on the
outside of a curve or during a flood.
Scum Ring - A circular plate or baffle encircling the overflow weir, located
at a predetermined distance from the weir and at a depth that will cause it
to retain floatables and scum and prevent them from passing over the weir
crest with the clarified liquid.
Secchi Disk - A disk, painted in four quadrants of alternating black and
white, which is lowered into a body of water. The measured depth at which the
disk is no longer visible from the surface is a measure of relative transparency.
J-33
-------
Secondary Treatment - Processes or methods for the supplemental treatment of
sewage and other wastes, usually following primary treatment, to effect addi-
tional improvement in the quality of the treated wastes by biological means
of various types, including activated sludge treatment or trickling filter
treatment; designed to remove or modify organic matter. Treatment of waste-
water which meets the standards set forth in 40 CFR 133.
Section - A portion of a river basin, generally larger than a segment, which
is bounded by headwaters or major river junctions.
Sedimentation - The process of subsidence and deposition of suspended matter
carried by water, sewage, or other liquids, by gravity. It is usually
accomplished by reducing the velocity of the liquid below the point where
it can transport the suspended material.
Sediment Delivery Ratio - The fraction of the soil eroded from upland
sources that actually reaches a continuous stream channel or storage
reservoir.
Seepage Rate - Calculated from the porous permeability coefficient, is the
inches of rain that would pass through porous pavement in one hour, with
no water standing on the surface. A head exists due to the thickness of
the pavement.
Segment - A discrete portion of a water body of somewhat homogenous character,
as represented in mathematical models.
Separate Sanitary Sewer - A sewer that carries liquid and water-carried wastes
from residences, commercial buildings, industrial plants and institutions,
together with minor quantities of ground, storm and surface waters that are
not admitted unintentionally.
Separate Storm Sewer - A sewer that carries storm water and surface waters,
street wash and other wash waters, or drainage, but excludes domestic waste-
water and industrial wastes.
Service Life - The period during which the use of a property is economically
feasible; synonymous with "economic life" and "useful life."
J-34
-------
Sewer-Use Ordinance - A regulation, code, or ordinance enacted by a
jurisdiction to specify the types and volumes of waste waters that can be
discharged into sewer system, the waste waters that cannot be so discharged,
and the fees or charges to be imposed for the privilege of discharging those
wastes and volumes which are permitted.
Side Weir - A regulator which is essentially a long slot cut into the side
of a sewer. Normal dry weather flow continues through the sewer while the
increased depth during a storm will allow excessive flows to exit through
the slot to some alternate point as an overflow.
Simulation - Representation of physical systems and phenomena by computers,
models and other equipment.
Single Process Unit - A water treatment facility designed and constructed
to carry out one or more steps in the wastewater treatment process; if
geographically distinct, usually defined by all facilities within the
battery limit. Includes all equipment, instrumentation, piping, accessory
electrical equipment, plant site improvement, plant structures, and buildings
directly associated with the unit.
Singular Constituent - A constituent whose behavior is not affected by the
presence of other constituents.
Sinking Fund Bonds - Bonds issued under an agreement which requires the
utility to set aside periodically a sum which, with accrued earnings, will
be sufficient to redeem the bonds at their stated date of maturity.
Sludge Digestion - A process by which organic or volatile matter in sludge
is gasified, liquefied, mineralized, or converted into more stable organic
matter through the activities of living organisms.
Sluice Gate - A vertically sliding gate of any shape used to control or shut
off flow in a sewer or other channel.
SMSA - Except in the New England states, a standard metropolitan statistical
area is a county or group of contiguous counties which contain at least one
city of 50,000 inhabitants. In the New England states, SMSA's consist of
towns and cities instead of counties.
J-35
-------
Soft Water - Water containing 60 mg/1 or less of hardness.
Spoiler (Energy Dissipating Baffle) - A plate or structural plane constructed
from the scum ring to the weir plate in a swirl concentrator chamber for
the purpose of preventing or dampening the development of free vertex flow
conditions and minimizing agitation and rotational flow over the discharge
weir.
Spray Irrigation - The application of wastewater to land areas by means of
stationary or moving sprays which distribute the liquid in sheet, particle
or aerosol mist form.
Stability - A characteristic of numerical models. Unstable models develop
large numerical errors as computations proceed. Numerical errors reduce
in stable models as computations proceed.
Stabilized Grade - The slope of a channel at which neither erosion nor
deposition occurs.
Standard Methods - Methods of analysis of water sewage and sludge approved
by a Joint Committee by the American Public Health Association, American
Water Works Association, and Federation of Sewage Works Association.
Static Regulator - A regulator which has no moving parts or has movable
parts which are insensitive to hydraulic conditions at the point of instal-
lation and which are not capable of adjusting themselves to meet varying
flow or level conditions in the regulator-overflow structure.
Steady-State - Quantities (e.g., inputs and solution) which do not vary with
time (but may vary over space).
Step Function - A mathematical function that rises in zero time to unity
and remains at unity for all time (a normalized D.C. voltage, for example).
Stepwise Regression - A statistical technique whereby a sequence of linear
regression equations are computed in a stepwise manner, e.g. each independent
variable is entered into the equation as it becomes the greatest remaining
effect upon the variability of the dependent variable.
Stochastic - The property of being random with respect to time.
J-36
-------
Storm Frequency - The time interval between major storms of predetermined
intensity and volumes of runoff for which storm sewers and combined sewers,
and such appurtenant structures as swirl concentrator chambers, are designed
and constructed to handle hydraulically without surcharging and backflooding:
e.g, a five-year, ten-year or twenty-year storm.
Storm Sewer - A sewer which carries storm water and surface water, street
wash and other wash waters or drainage, but excludes sewage and industrial
wastes. (Also called a Storm Drain).
Storm Water Infiltration - The entrance of stormwater into a sanitary sewer.
Subarea - A subdivision of a subcatchment (generally based upon a single
land use but may be identical to a subcatchment).
Sub-Basin - A physical division of a larger basin which is associated with
one reach of the storm drainage system.
Subcatchment - A subdivision of a drainage basin (generally determined by
topography and pipe network configuration).
Subdrain - A pervious backfilled trench containing a pipe or stone for the
purpose of intercepting groundwater or seepage.
Subroutine - Computer programming terminology which refers to a small
program for an operation that is repeated many times within the main program.
Surcharge - The flow condition occurring in closed conduits when the hydrau-
lic grade line is above the crown of the sewer.
Surface Runoff - Precipitation that falls onto the surfaces of roofs,
streets, ground, etc., and is not absorbed or retained by that surface,
thereby collecting and running off.
Telemetry - Data transmission over long distances via telephone or telegraph
lines by electromagnetic means.
Terrace - An embankment or combination of an embankment and channel con-
structed across a slope to control erosion by diverting or storing surface
runoff instead of permitting it to flow uninterrupted down the slope.
J-37
-------
Tertiary Treatment - A third stage of treatment of sewage and other wastes,
following primary and secondary treatment, for the purpose of further im-
proving the quality of the treated waters by the removal or modification of
constituents which have not been removed or modified by previous treatment
steps.
Thermocline - A layer in a thermally stratified body of water in which the
temperature changes rapidly within a small increment of depth relative to
the remainder of the water body.
Thiessen Polygon - A device for determining the zone within which data taken
at a rain gage station are applicable in a network of gaging stations.
Tidal Averaging - Averaging of processes such as water currents and pollu-
tant transport over an entire tidal cycle. This averaging may reduce or
eliminate the need to solve for time variations in tidally influenced waters.
Time Sharing - Use of a computer or device for two or more purposes during
the same overall time interval, done by interspersing component actions in
time.
Topographic Factor "LS" - A dimensionless factor used in the Universal Soil
Loss Equation to represent the combined effects of slope length and steepness.
Topography - General term to include characteristics of the ground surface
such as plains, hills, mountains; degree of relief, steepness of slopes,
and other physiographic features.
Total Dissolved Solids - The dissolved salt loading in surface and subsurface
waters.
Total Solids - The solids in water, sewage, or other liquids. It includes
the dissolved, filterable, and nonfilterable solids.
Toxic Metals - Any metal substances in wastewater which could be toxic or
poisonous to grasses, to crops, or to groundwater, and which could adversely
affect those who ingest or imbibe these substances; common examples of toxic
metals are copper, cadmium and boron.
Transient - A temporary and brief time-varying solution during readjustment
to equilibrium or dynamic equilibrium, resulting from a sudden change in
J-38
-------
input(s).
Transpiration - The process by which plants of all types of agricultural,
horticultural and silvicultural growths dissipate water or moisture into
the atmosphere from stomata of leaves or other surfaces, in the form of a
vapor; dissipation of water by direct evaporation from the surface of plants,
bark or other membranes, stomata, and lenticula into the atmosphere.
Trickling Filter - A filter consisting of an artificial bed of coarse
material, such as broken stone, clinkers, slate, slats, brush, or plastic
materials, over which sewage is distributed or applied in drops, films, or
spray from troughs, drippers, moving distributors, or fixed nozzles, and
through which it trickles to the underdrains, giving opportunity for the
formation of zoogleal slimes which clarify and oxidize the sewage.
Ultimate Oxygen Demand - The total amount of oxygen that is utilized by
bacteria in the decomposition of sewage. This includes both the carbonaceous
BOD and nitrogenous BOD.
Uncontrolled Storage - Storage not controlled by any remotely operated
gates but depending entirely on weir or river elevations.
Underdrain System - A system of pipes or ducts, placed underground, to
intercept and collect percolated wastewaters and to return these waters to a
predetermined location for a predetermined purpose, often to prevent the
discharge of such underground water into water sources which it is intended
to protect.
Universal Soil Loss Equation - Predicts the short-term rates of soil loss
for localized areas. This equation takes into account the influence of the
total rainfall energy for a specific area rather than rainfall amount.
Urbanized Area - Central city, or cities, and surrounding closely settled
territory. Central city (cities) have population of 50,000 or more.
Peripheral areas with population density of 1,000 persons per acre or
more are included.
Urban Runoff - Surface runoff from an urban drainage area that reaches a
stream or other body of water or a sewer.
J-39
-------
Vadose Water - Groundwater suspended or in circulation above the normal
groundwater table.
Velocity Gradient - The unit measure of mixing intensity. It is defined
as the difference in velocity of two parallel planes of fluid divided by
the distance between the two planes, and has the dimensions of ft/sec.
ft
Verification (model) - The act of testing a model's accuracy using a
different simulation period, i.e., an independent set of input and output
data, from that used in calibration.
Virus - Any of a group of ultramicroscopic biological infectious agents that
reproduce only in living cells; therefore considered evidence of human
pollution.
Volatile Solids - The quantity of solids in water, sewage or other liquid
lost on ignition of the total solids at 600°C.
Waste Load Allocation - A waste load allocation for a stream segment is the
assignment of target pollutant loads to point and nonpoint sources so as to
achieve water quality standards in the most effective manner.
Wastewater Reclamation - The process of treating salvaged water from
municipal, industrial, or agricultural wastewater sources for beneficial
uses, whether by means of special facilities or through natural processes. -
Water Control (Soil and Water Conservation) - The physical control of water
by such measures as conservation practices on the land, channel improvements,
and installation of structures for water retardation and sediment detention.
Water Desalination - The removal of dissolved salts from a saline water
supply.
Water Quality - A term used to describe the chemical, physical, and biologi-
cal characteristics of water, usually in respect to its suitability for a
particular purpose.
Water Quality Limited Segments - "Any segment where it is known that water
quality does not meet applicable water quality standards, and is not
expected to meet applicable water quality standards even after the applica-
tion of the effluent limitations required by sections 201(b)(l)(A) and
J-40
-------
301(b)(l)(B) of the Act." (40 CFR 130.11 (d)(l)).
Water Right - A legally protected right to take possession of water
occurring in a water supply and to divert that water and put it to
beneficial use.
Watershed - The region drained by or contributing water to a stream, lake,
or other body of water,
Water Table - The upper surface of the free groundwater in a zone of
saturation except when separated by an underlying of groundwater by
unsaturated material.
Water-Table Aquifer - An aquifer containing water under water-table
conditions.
Wet-Weather to Dry-Weather Ratio - An "indicator" of the capacity of an
interceptor sewer, as designed to carry the higher flows resulting from
periods of storm, compared to the capacity provided by design to handle
flows during dry weather.
Wet Weather Flow - A combination of dry weather flows, infiltration, and
inflow which occurs as a result of rainstorms.
Windbreak - (1) A living barrier of trees or combination of trees and
shrubs located adjacent to farm or ranch headquarters and designed to
protect the area from cold or hot winds and drifting snow. Also head-
quarters and livestock windbreaks. (2) A narrow barrier of living trees or
combination of trees and shrubs, usually from one to five rows, established
within or around a field for the protection of land and crops. May also
consist of narrow strips of annual crops, such as corn or sorghum.
Zero Pollution - A degree of pollution control or prevention which eliminates
the addition of any contaminants or unwanted foreign material into surface
water sources; incorrectly interpreted as "zero discharge" of any effluents
into watercourses (land application of wastewater effluents has been
suggested as one means of establishing "zero pollution" conditions).
A (IS. GOVERNMENT PSIItTITO OFFICE: 1977- 7 57 -0 56 / 5483
J-41
-------
MODEL
APPLICABILITY SUMMARY
-------
WATER QUALITY
DATA BASES & METHODS
-------
LAND USE
DATA BASES & METHODS
-------
MONITORING
-------
STATISTICAL
ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
-------
WATER
QUALITY STANDARDS
-------
BEST
MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
-------
GLOSSARY
-------
NOTES
------- |