WATER POLLUTION CONTROL RESEARCH SERIES
16090 DBJ 08/70
        Design of Water Quality

         Surveillance Systems
         _	
u.s. DEPARTMENT'OFTHE INTERIOR  FEDERAL WATER QUALITY ADMINISTRATION

-------
Design of Water duality Surveillance Systems
          Phase I - Systems Analysis Framework
                          By
                 CYRUS  WM. RICE DIVISION
                    KUS CORPORATION
             PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA  15220
                   In Cooperation With

                     CONSULTEC, INC.
               ROCKVILLE,  MARYLAND  20850

           GURNHAM, BRAMER, AND ASSOCIATES, INC,
               McMURRAY, PENNSYLVANIA  15317
               JENNINGS,  STROUSS AND SALMON
                 WASHINGTON, D. C.  20006
                         For The

           FEDERAL WATER QUALITY ADMINISTRATION
               DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
                 PROGRAM   NO. 16090 DBJ
                 CONTRACT  NO. 14-12-U76
                      August, 1970

-------
         WATER POLLUTION CONTROL RESEARCH SERIES

The Water Pollution Control  Research Reports describe
the results and progress in  the control and abatement
of pollution in our Nation's waters.  They provide a
central source of information on the research develop-
ment, and demonstration activities in the Federal Water
Quality Administration, in the U. S. Department of the
Interior, through inhouse research and grants and
contracts with Federal, State, and local agencies,
research institutions, and industrial organizations.

A tripilicate abstract card  sheet is included in the
report to facilitate  information retreieval.  Space  is
provided on the card  for the user's accession number  and
for additional uniterms.

Inquires pertaining to Water Pollution Control Research
Reports should be directed to the Head, Project Reports
System, Planning and  Resources Office, Office of Research
and Development, Department  of the Interior, Federal
Water Quality Administration, Room 1108, Washington,
D. C.  202H2
         For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
                    Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $3.00

-------
            FWPCA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been reviewed by the Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration and
approved for publication.  Approval does not
signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration, nor does
mention of trade names or commercial products
constitute endorsement or recommendation for
use.
                      11

-------
                       ABSTRACT
In order to accomplish the goals of the Water Quality Act
of 1965, it is necessary to establish water quality sur-
veillance systems throughout the nation.  It is highly
imperative that the individual systems developed by the
various Federal, state, and interstate agencies be compat-
ible and their data systems be interconnected.  The various
inputs and decisions necessary to accomplish this task are
so complex that modern systems analysis techniques should
be applied to insure that each of these water quality sur-
veillance systems are developed and designed utilizing the
same criteria.  This study is the initial effort to apply
systems analysis techniques to the solution of this problem.
Three major river basins were selected for this study in
order to identify the parameters common to any basin
throughout the nation.  The three basins were studied by:
(1) reviewing the literature associated with their water
quality characteristics; (2) on-site visits to the river
basin areas;  (3) comparative review of the interstate water
quality standards and plans of implementation; and (4)
legal considerations in surveillance program design.   These
tasks provided the input material to develop a systems
analysis framework.  The systems analysis framework was
applied manually to select sites for water quality surveil-
lance stations on the major streams studied within the
three river basins.  This report was submitted in fulfill-
ment of Program No. 16090DBJ and Contract No. 14-12-476
between the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
and the Cyrus Wm. Rice Division, NUS CORPORATION.
Key Words:  Systems Analysis, Water Quality, Monitoring,
            Legal Aspects, Water Pollution, Water Measure-
            ment, Water Quality Act, Water Quality Control,
            Water Quality Standards, Water Quality
            Criteria, Information Retrieval, Surveillance,
            Ohio River Basin, Tennessee River Basin,
            Missouri River Basin, Southeastern River Basins,
            Systems Analysis Framework, Water Quality
            Monitors.
                             iii

-------
                        CONTENTS


                                                        Page

ABSTRACT	  iii

FIGURES	   ix

TABLES	    X

SECTION 1 - CONCLUSIONS AND  RECOMMENDATIONS	    1

SECTION 2 - PROJECT DESIGN	    7

  STUDY OBJECTIVES	    7

  PLAN OF RESEARCH	    7

  WATER QUALITY CONSIDERATIONS	   14
    Sources of Pollution	   15
    Criteria for Water Uses	   17

  SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS	   25
    General Considerations	   25
    FWPCA Mission	   26

SECTION 3 - DATA ACQUISITION FOR  SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS
            DESIGN	   27

  DATA SOURCES	   27
    Governmental Agency Documents	   27
    Technical Literature	   28
    On-Site Inspection of  the  River  Basins	   28

  DATA HANDLING AND RETRIEVAL	   30
    Indexing and Retrieval of  Published Data	   31
    STQRET Inquiries	   32
    Site Inspection Data Handling and Retrieval	   34
    Indexing Guide	   35

SECTION 4 - LEGAL PROBLEMS INVOLVED  IN THE ESTABLISH-
            MENT OF A FEDERAL  WATER  QUALITY SURVEIL-
            LANCE SYSTEM	   42

  STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR  THE  ESTABLISHMENT OF A
  FEDERAL WATER QUALITY SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM	   42
                              IV

-------
                   CONTENTS  (Cent.)
  ACQUISITION OF SITES FOR SURVEILLANCE STATIONS	   52
    Site Acquisition Under the Navigational
    Servitude	   52
    Establishment of Surveillance Stations on Federal
    Land	   57
    Acquisition of Surveillance Sites from States,
    Municipalities or Private Owners	   63
    Site Acquisition under H.R. 4148 and S. 7 and
    Recommended Legislation	   72

  ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE COLLECTED BY SCIENTIFIC
  EQUIPMENT AND TRANSMITTED BY TELEMETRY DEVICES	   74
    General	   75
    Specific Requirements	   76
    Suggestions	   80

  MISCELLANEOUS	   gO

  SUMMARY OF LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS	   g4

  SUGGESTED AMENDMENT	   85

SECTION 5 - SYSTEMS ANALYSIS APPROACH TO SURVEIL-
            LANCE PROGRAM DESIGN	   87

  THE SYSTEMS APPROACH CONCEPT	   87

  SYSTEMS ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK FOR SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS
  PROGRAMS	   91
    Generalized Framework	   96
    Lifetime Operational Concept	   96
    System Design and Performance Characteristics	  100
    Development and Test Concept	  103
    Training Concept	  105
    Facilities Survey	  106
    Manufacturing Concept	  108
    Threat Concept	  110
    Stress Conditions and Emergency Buildup Concept...  Ho
    System Effectiveness	  112
    Logistic Support Concept	  114
    Surveillance Station Locations Selection	  118
    Data Flow in Surveillance Programs	  135
    Frequency of Measurement	  136
                             v

-------
                   CONTENTS  (Cont.)


                                                        Page

SECTION 6 - SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS DESIGN	   139

  IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SYSTEMS APPROACH	   139
    Input Information Requirements	   139
    Sensitivities of Design Considerations	   141
    Criteria for the Selection of Water Quality
    Surveillance Stations	   141
    Parameters and Frequency of Measurements	   143
    Selection of Water Quality Surveillance Stations..   145
      Ohio and Tennessee River Basins	   145
      Southeastern River Basins	   149
      Lower Missouri River Basins	   152

SECTION 7 - ACKNOWLEDGMENTS	   158

SECTION 8 - REFERENCES	   159

SECTION 9 - APPENDICES	   185

  RIVER BASIN DATA AND STANDARDS

  APPENDIX I - OHIO RIVER BASIN.	   185

    River Basin Descriptions	   185
      Ohio River	   185
      Tennessee River	   188
      Wabash River	   189
      Kanawha River	   190
      Monongahela River Basins	   191
      Allegheny River Basins	   194
    Interstate Water Quality Standards	   195
      Ohio River	   195
      Tennessee River	   208
      Wabash River	   215
      Kanawha River	   216
      Allegheny River Basins	   217
      Monongahela River Basins	   221

  APPENDIX II - SOUTHEASTERN RIVER BASINS	   228

    River Basin Descriptions	   228
      Ochlockonee River	   228
      Apalachicola River	   229
        Flint River	   230
        Spring Creek	   231
                             VI

-------
                  CONTENTS  (Cont.)
      Chattahoochee River	  231
    Choctawhatchee River	  231
    Yellow River	  232
    Escambia River	  232
      Conecuh River	  233
    Perdido River	  233
    Mobile River	  234
      Alabama River	  235
      Tombigbee River	  235
      Black Warrior River	   236
    Pascagoula River	  237
    Pearl River	  238
  Interstate Water Quality Standards	  239
    Ochlockonee River	,.	  239
    Apalachicola River	  240
      Chattahoochee River	  241
      Flint River	  246
    Choctawhatchee River	  247
    Yellow River	  248
    Escambia River	  248
      Conecuh River	  251
    Perdido River	  253
    Mobile River	  254
      Alabama River	  257
      Tombigbee River	  259
    Pascagoula River	  261
    Pearl River	  263

APPENDIX III - LOWER MISSOURI RIVER BASIN	  269

  River Basin Descriptions	  269
    Lower Missouri River	  269
    Osage River	  271
      Marais des Cygnes River	  271
      Little Osage River	  271
    Kansas River	  271
      Republican River	  272
      Smoky Hill River	  272
    Platte River	  273
      South Platte River	  274
      North Platte River	  276
    Niobrara River	  277
  Water Quality Standards	  277
    Missouri River	  277
                           VII

-------
              CONTENTS  (Cont.)
Osage River	
  Marais des Cygnes River	
  Little Osage River	
Kansas River	
  Smoky Hi11 River	
  Republican River	
Platte River	
  South Platte River	   292
  North Platte River	   294
Niobrara River	   297
                       Vlll

-------
                       FIGURES


                                                       Page

 1.   Task One of the Project	     9

 2.   Task Two of the Project	    13

 3.   Task Three of the Project	    15

 4.   Task Four of the Project	    16

 5.   Operation of Information Retrieval System	    33

 6.   Steps Within the Systems Approach	    90

 7.   Generalized Systems Analysis Framework	    93

 8.   Analytical Framework for Selecting Surveillance
     Station Locations	    94

 9.   Data Flow in the Surveillance System	   119

10.   Analytical Framework for Determining the
     Frequency of Measurement	   137

11.   Map of the Study Area	   300

12.   Ohio and Tennessee River Basins	   301

13.   Southeastern River Basins	   302

14.   Lower Missouri River Basin	   303
                             IX

-------
                        TABLES
                                                       Page
1.   Surface Water Criteria for Public Water
    Supplies ..................... '.
2.  Summary of Specific Quality Characteristics of
    Surface Waters that have been used as Sources
    for Industrial Water Supplies .....................   19

3.  Suggested Guidelines for Salinity in Irrigation
    Water .............................................   22

4.  Key Water Quality Criteria for Farmstead Uses .....   23

5.  Water Quality Criteria for Recreational Uses ......   24

-------
                      SECTION 1

           CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This study has elucidated the significant parameters which
describe a water quality surveillance network system.

These factors were then applied in their relevant impor-
tance and interrelationships of the factors have been
shown through a systems analysis framework.

Inadequacies of existing data have been pointed up.

Available information has been used to locate monitors
on only those streams as specified in the proposal.  This
was done with full reality that this would allow gaps in
the monitoring network.

Specific rationales were isolated from the generalized
systems analysis framework as developed.  These provided
(1) an analytical format for selecting surveillance
station locations, (2) data flow in the surveillance
system, and  (3) frequency of measurement.

The FWPCA has received charges from the Congress in three
general areas related to water quality surveillance.  The
first of these is to monitor the interstate streams of
the nation and to provide reliable data from which the
extent of compliance with the interstate water quality
standards can be assessed.  The second charge is to provide
reliable data which will indicate long-term trends and
overall changes in water quality.  The third is to provide
an evaluation of information to the Congress from which
the effectiveness of legislative programs can be evaluated
and guidance provided for the optimum utilization of
appropriated funds.

It is highly important at this early stage of the develop-
ment of water quality surveillance systems that they be
integrated in such a fashion that specifications are uniform
as to the quality of data to be obtained and uniform so as
to insure system compatibility.  Previous systems have be-
come ineffective because of lack of coordination.

The spectrum of water quality surveillance systems across
this country is broad.  At one end of the spectrum are
surveillance systems similar to those of ORSANCO.  These

-------
utilize electronic monitors measuring several chemical and
physical parameters and are interconnected by sophisticated
data transmission systems.  Such a system provides not only
real time data, but can be used to demonstrate long-term
trends and to predict short-term water quality changes.
On the other end of the spectrum are systems where water
quality surveillance is nothing more exotic than a man with
a bucket.  If the required job is to be done, it is neces-
sary that adequate water quality surveillance systems be
developed.

A number of legal problems will be involved in the estab-
lishment of a Federal water quality surveillance system for
the three river basins designated in this study.

Legal questions involving first the statutory authority for
the establishment and implementation of a Federal surveil-
lance system were addressed.  Additional legal questions
addressed included (1) the establishment of surveillance
stations under the authority of the navigation servitude;
(2) the statutory authority for land acquisition for the
surveillance system;   (3) the establishment of stations on
various classes of Federal land pursuant to Federal
statute;  (4)  the types of interests in lands which should
be acquired;  (5) the evidentiary problems which will be
involved in utilizing data and information developed in
operation of the surveillance system in water pollution
abatement and enforcement proceedings; (6)  the potential
liability of the United States to private individuals for
damages caused by the system; and (7) the liability of
private individuals for damages to the surveillance stations
or equipment.

The present research project has provided opportunities for
appraisal of the various aspects of water quality surveil-
lance programs.  The following recommendations are made on
the basis of the work completed in the course of the
project and are generally supported by detailed information
in the body of the final report.

A single agency should serve to coordinate the pollution
evaluation related water quality surveillance activities of
all Federal,  state, and interstate agencies.  The FWPCA
seems to be the appropriate agency to fulfill this function.
Surveillance systems development and standardization, as
well as primary data-handling responsibility, should lie
with this single agency.

-------
Water quality data from whatever source should be made
available for incorporation into the STORET system.  Such
data should, in turn, be made freely available to local or
regional interested parties.

The FWPCA should encourage research and development pro-
grams leading to the development of better water quality
surveillance monitoring systems.  Whether these systems be
automated wet chemical analyses, electronic probes, or
other means, the research and development leadership should
become a major role of the FWPCA.  For too long, most of the
effort has been directed toward writing specifications for
such systems rather than encouragement of original R&D
efforts.  A joint governmental-industrial program is
needed to assemble the required technology in this area.

The FWPCA should sponsor research to evaluate, on a cost-
effectiveness basis, the water quality surveillance methods
used today.  These should include the use of manual
sampling, automated sampling techniques, and automated
monitoring techniques.  It is necessary to have better data
in order that proper choices may be made based upon total
costs of the various methods capable of providing  reliable
data.

The FWPCA should encourage the utilization of some of the
more technologically advanced systems which are being
brought to bear on such problems of today.  Among  these
are the use of aircraft in water quality surveillance;  such
uses include both remote observation and sample collection.
These  techniques are not new.  Although there have been
many literature citations to their use, they are not widely
used.  The  routine use of aircraft for water quality
surveillance  should be encouraged; a much better apprecia-
tion of  a  total watershed can be gained from an aircraft.
In bygone  days, only the helicopter could  supply both the
capability  to remotely observe  and to  sample a  stream.
A fixed  winged aircraft demonstrated recently  the  ability
of a modern line  and winch  arrangement  to  collect  stream
 samples  during a  record flood which was an aftermath  of
hurricane  Camille.

The  FWPCA should  sponsor greater utilization  of satellites,
 as well  as  high  altitude aircraft  to provide  both  color and
 infrared imagery.   Such use could  develop  considerable
water  quality surveillance  information for broad regions
 of the country.   Coordination  of this  type of  information
with other surveillance data could fill many  of the gaps
which  have existed in  our  surveillance systems.

-------
The FWPCA should improve the overall effectiveness of the
STORET system.  This system has great potential, however,
it is under-utilized at the present time.  Much of the water
quality information which is collected never finds its way
into STORET.  A program should be developed in which STORET
should receive all of the data being collected across the
country, on as close to a real time basis as possible.

STORET should also be improved so that it can handle the
vast amounts of data from current and future systems.
FWPCA should incorporate feedback systems into STORET to
provide not only the data, but visual display and alarm
systems which should make evaluation andinterpretation of
the data nearly instantaneous.

The systems analysis framework developed in this project
should be implemented by assembling all input data for a
single river watershed.  The tasks, functions, and inter-
relationships as identified in the systems analysis frame-
work should be described in specific quantitative relation-
ships.  This application should be expanded to a multi-
basin area in order to utilize the potential of the systems
analysis framework as developed.  Where possible, these
quantitative relationships should be treated by computer
techniques.  A user handbook, either manually or computer
related, should be developed to describe these techniques
and extend their utility.

Two classes of water quality monitoring surveillance stations
have been selected for each of the three river basins
studied in the project.  The Class I monitoring sites are
of greater importance than the Class II sites.

The Class I sites should be equipped with automatic
monitoring and sampling equipment.  They should be inte-
grated into a telemetry network to increase their utility.
The Class II stations are of lesser importance and should
be sampled at a monthly frequency.  The data collected
should be analyzed statistically and then further decisions
concerning equipment and frequency of sampling could be
made.

The quality of data should be readily determinable as com-
pared with the current edition of "Standard Methods" and/or
the "FWPCA Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and
Wastes."  Data which does not attain these standards should
be used but so identified.

-------
It is concluded that the establishment of a Federal water
quality surveillance system is necessary and useful in
implementing the objectives of the Water Pollution Control
laws.  Though not specifically authorized by existing
laws, the establishment of surveillance facilities is
authorized in the general context of the applicable statute,
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 70 Stat. 498
(1956), as amended, 33 U.S.C., p 466 et seq. (1964).  A
clearer authority was included in the Water Quality Improve-
ment Act of 1970.

Where surveillance sites can be located below the high
water mark on navigable streams, it may be possible for
the United States to do so without payment of compensation
pursuant to the navigation servitude vested in the Federal
Government.

Where it is desired to establish stations on Federal lands,
many inter-departmental and intra-departmental obstacles
may make acquisition of proper sites no more feasible or
economical than acquisition of sites on state or private
lands.  It must be noted, also, that mere Federal ownership
of potential sites does not guarantee the use of that site
for surveillance purposes.  Nevertheless, Federal lands
frequently offer many advantages over state or private
lands, and should be considered carefully in site selection.

In regard to the establishment of surveillance stations on
state or private lands, it is concluded that no statutory
authority exists for the acquisition of sites.  In fact,
the existing Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended, is deficient in several important respects:  (1)
specific authority for site acquisition; (2) procurement
of material; and (3) statutory authority for the admis-
sibility of data developed in enforcement and abatement
proceedings.  Such deficiencies will not be remedied by
pending amendments to the Act. H.R. 4148 and S.7, but will
require augmentation by supplemental legislation.  A draft
of prepared legislation designed to provide specifically
for the establishment of a water quality surveillance system
and for the acquisition of the necessary sites for surveil-
lance stations is set forth in the Appendix to this report.

In the light of the fact that the existing law places much
of  the initial responsibility for enforcement and abatement
on the state water pollution control agencies, the Federal
water quality surveillance system should be developed in
close consultation with cognizant state agencies and

-------
officials to minimize the duplicity of facilities and
activities.  It is desirable that any new legislation
specifically assign responsibility or provide for coordina-
tion of activities in the operation of water quality
surveillance facilities.

With respect to the use of data and information developed
by surveillance facilities in administrative and judicial
proceedings for abatement and enforcement, the applicable
evidentiary requirements pose no insuperable barrier to
the introduction of such data and information in evidence.
Applicable evidentiary requirements should be considered,
however, in the design, construction, and operation of
Federal water quality surveillance facilities.

-------
                      SECTION 2

                    PROJECT DESIGN
With the enactment of the Water Quality Act of 1965, the
Federal Government became even more firmly committed to
the attainment of clean water in the United States.  The
Water Quality Standards, submitted by the States and
approved by the Secretary of the Interior, have established
the desired water uses, the necessary water quality for
these uses, and plans for the implementation of the required
pollution abatement measures.  It is necessary, however,
that water quality be continually ascertained in a reliable
and timely manner if the objective of the Standards are to
be realized.  The surveillance programs of the FWPCA seek
to insure that these objectives are attained.
STUDY OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study have been to evaluate and
assist in the future development of the FWPCA surveillance
programs through case studies in major river basins and to
develop a generalized method for the optimum design of
such programs.  Specific objectives have been:

Study of three river basins to determine present water
quality, present and projected water uses, and the Water
Quality Standards with Plans of Implementation and Enforce-
ment.

Prepara. tion of a system analysis framework for the general
design of a surveillance program.

Definition of specific criteria for establishment of
surveillance programs using the systems analysis framework.

Presentation of plans for the establishment of surveillance
programs in the three example basins.
 PLAN  OF  RESEARCH

 The objectives  of  the study have been realized  through
 research activities outlined below as a  series  of  tasks.

-------
     Task 1    Analysis of the three specific river basins
to determine the water quality, present and projected water
uses, water quality standards, and plans for implementation
and enforcement.  The basins studied were the Ohio River
Basin, the lower Missouri River Basin, and those South-
eastern river basins draining into the Gulf of Mexico (See
Figures 1 and 11) .

Selection of the river basins to be used as source material
for this project was begun in the proposal stages of the
study.  The river basins finally selected were the result
of conferences between RICE personnel and FWPCA headquarters
and regional office personnel.  The area was narrowed down
to portions of three major river basins.  Each of these
basins had a particular facet in its makeup, which would
allow the knowledge gained by its study to be reapplied to
other basins within the United States.  A number of the
factors which determined the selection of these basins
follows:

The Southeastern River Basins draining into the Gulf of
Mexico.  They have common features such as semi-tropical
climate, estuaries that reach the Gulf of Mexico, shell-
fish industry, and many large reservoirs and water power
projects.

The Ohio River Basin drains a highly industrialized and
heavily populated area.  It also contains agricultural,
mining, and oil wastes.  It is subject to flooding and
has many control dams as well as many navigational locks
and dams.

The Lower Missouri River Basin drains an area where water
is used for irrigation, agriculture and cattle feedlots.
The rivers in the basin have high turbidity with salinities
approaching the limits of the PHS Drinking Water Standards.

It is apparent that each of these basins has been selected
to be representative of distinct areas which would require
different types of surveillance programs, and which require
varied water quality standards, plans of implementation,
and enforcement schedules.

A general description of the waters in each of the three
basins considered in this study is as follows:


                Southeastern River Basins

The rivers and tributaries to be included in those of the
Southeastern River Basins draining into the Gulf of Mexico
are:

-------
 DETERMINE
  WATER QUALITY
  PRESENT AND
  PROJECTED WATER USES
WATER QUALITY
  STANDARDS
  PLANS OF IMPLEMENT -
  ATION& ENFORCEMENT
  SOUTHEASTERN RIVER
   BASINS DRAINING
    INTO THE GULF
      OF MEXICO
    LOWER MISSOURI
      RIVER BASIN
      OHIO RIVER
        BASIN
                                                           REVIEW FWPCA ESTABLISHED STATUS
                                                            OF STATE STANDARDS AND PLANS
PHASE 1
 OBTAIN PRINTED BASIN
 DATA AND RELATED
    INFORMATION
   REVIEW STATE WATER QUALITY STAND-
   ARDS AND PLANS SUBMITTED TO FWPCA
   DETERMINE AND IDENT-FY ADDITIONAL
          BASIN DATA REQUIRED	
PHASE 2
 VIEW SPECIFIC AREAS
 OF INTEREST WITHIN
THE THREE RIVER BASINS
 PHASE 3
COMPARE AND EVALUATE

                                         FIGURE 1
                                  TASK ONE OF THE PROJECT
     INSPECT SELECTED PRESENT WATER
       QUALITY MONITORING SITES
      OBTAIN REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTAL
^**         INFORMATION	
     	1	
                                        _L
     STATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
      AND PLANS FOR IMPLEMENTATION
      AND ENFORCEMENT (FOR EACH OF
          THREE RIVER BASINS)
                                                                         r
                                                                     COMPARISON
                                                                                 1
                           BASIN DATA
                                  WATER QUALITY
                                  PRESENT WATER USE
                                  PROJECTED WATER USE

-------
The Ochlockonee River which drains into the Gulf of Mexico
at Apalachee Bay in Western Florida and its tributaries
which flow from Southwestern Georgia.

The Apalachicola River and its tributaries, the Flint River,
Spring Creek, and the Chattahoochee River, which drain into
the Gulf of Mexico via Apalachicola Bay.

The Choctawhatchee River and its tributaries which flow
from Southeastern Alabama into Western Florida and drain
into the Gulf of Mexico via Choctawhatchee Bay.

The Yellow River and its tributaries which originate in
Southeastern Alabama and flow into Pensacola Bay via East
Bay in Western Florida and on to the Gulf of Mexico.

The Escambia River empties into Pensacola Bay via Escambia
Bay.This stream originates in Southcentral Alabama and
flows southernly across Alabama into the Florida Panhandle.

The Mobile River and its tributaries, the Alabama River,
the Tombigbee River and the Black Warrior River which flow
into the Gulf of Mexico via Mobile Bay.

The Pascagoula River empties into the Gulf of Mexico at
Mississippi Sound.  It and its tributaries drain an area
of Southeastern Mississippi.  Much of this river basin is
devoted to cotton production.

The Pearl River originates in Eastcentral Mississippi and
flows south to enter the Gulf of Mexico via Mississippi
Sound.
                   Ohio River Basin

The rivers and tributaries which were studied in the Ohio
River Basin are as follows:

The Ohio River which is formed at the junction of the
Monongahela and the Allegheny Rivers at Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania and flows southwest for 981 miles to its
confluence with the Mississippi River at Cairo, Illinois.

The Allegheny River is 325 miles long, and has its head-
waters in Nortncentral Pennsylvania.  It flows into New
York, for a brief stretch and then re-enters Central
Pennsylvania and flows south to Pittsburgh.
                         10

-------
The Monongahela River and its tributaries, the Youghiogheny
River, the Cheat River, the Tygart River and West Fork
River.

The Kanawha River flows through Westcentral West Virginia
for 97 miles and joins the Ohio River at Point Pleasant,
Ohio.

The Wabash River drains the southern portions of Illinois
and Indiana.  It" is 475 miles long and enters the Ohio
River approximately 35 miles below Evansville, Indiana.

The Tennessee River is the largest tributary of the Ohio
RiverTIt is approximately 652 miles long and joins the
Ohio River at Paducah, Kentucky.  The Tennessee River
drains areas of Kentucky, Tennessee and Alabama.
              Lower Missouri River Basin

The rivers and tributaries to be included in those of the
Lower Missouri River Basin are as follows:

The Missouri River is one of the principle rivers of the
United States.  Its length is approximately 2466 miles.
It is a major tributary of the Mississippi River and is
the master stream in the Northern plains of the United
States.  The lower Missouri River Basin drains Southeastern
Wyoming, Northeastern Colorado, all of Nebraska, Kansas,
Missouri and Western Iowa.

The area of interest begins with the Niobrara River, which
joins the Missouri River at Niobrara, Nebraska.  This is
approximately 35 miles upstream from the Gavin's Point Dam,
which is one of a series of dams on the main stem of the
Missouri River.  The Gavin's Point Dam forms the Lewis &
Clark Lake.

The Niobrara River has its origin near the Northwestern tip
of Nebraska although portions of it are regarded as tempo-
rary streams in Eastern Wyoming.  It flows almost due east
and drains part of Northern Nebraska along the South Dakota
border.

The Platte River is a 310 mile long tributary of the
Missouri River.It is formed by the junction of the North
Platte and the South Platte Rivers at North Platte, Nebraska.

The South Platte River originates in Central Colorado.  It
flows east from the mountains to a few miles south of Denver
and then flows north to Denver and later east to join the
North Platte in Nebraska.


                         11

-------
The North Platte River originates in Northern Colorado.
It flows north into Wyoming and then to the east where it
enters Nebraska.

The Kansas River is formed in Central Kansas by the
junction of the Smoky Hill and Republican Rivers.  It flows
east and joins with the Missouri River at Kansas City.

The Qsage River is a 400 mile long tributary of the
Missouri River.  It is formed by the junction of the
Marais des Cygnes River and the Little Osage River in East
Central Kansas.  It joins the Missouri River nine miles
east of Jefferson City.

This task was further subdivided into three subtasks:

Subtask 1 - Evaluation of related and available printed
basin data relating to water quality.  Review of informa-
tion including the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration established standards and criteria, the
pertinent water quality standards and plans, and
additional basin data required for quality surveillance
analysis purposes.

Subtask 2 - Analysis of specific points of interest within
the three river basins.  The analysis included an on-site
inspection of selected water quality monitoring sites with
the objectives of acquiring supplemental information to
that available from published materials.

Subtask 3 - Comparison and evaluation of state water
quality standards and plans for surveillance implementation
and enforcement versus specific river basin data studied on
water quality, current water uses and projected usage.
     Task 2    Development of a systems analysis framework
to evaluate the data obtained in Task 1 for the three
river basins.  The framework addresses three primary
elements integrated in a manner which enables the assess-
ment of impact to the total system through incremental
variation in any one element.  The elements are:  (a) water
quality measurement, (b) the flow of water quality data
including methods of collection, analysis, and data trans-
mission and storage, (c) the present and projected uses of
the water and stored data.  Figure 2 illustrates the
considerations inherent to the systems approach.
                         12

-------
DEVELOP
  A SYSTEMS ANALYSIS
  FRAMEWORK FOR THE
  EVALUATION OF THE
    DATA IN TASK 1
                                  DETERMINE WATER

                                QUALITY MEASUREMENT
                                    TECHNIQUES
                                 IDENTIFY GENERATION
                                 AND FLOW OF WATER
                                   QUALITY DATA
                                 IDENTIFY PLANS FOR
                                    CURRENT AND
                                   PROJECTED USE
                                                                IDENTIFY ALTERNATE METHODS OF
                                                                      DATA COLLECTION
IDENTIFY RATIONALE FOR THE
 PLACEMENT, LOCATION, AND
    OPERATION OF DATA
   COLLECTION STATIONS
  DETERMINE DATA ANALYSIS
 TECHNIQUES AND OBJECTIVES
                                                                IDENTIFY DATA TRANSMISSION AND
                                                                    STORAGE TECHNIQUES
                                                                       AND FACILITIES
                                         I

                              RELATE TO STUDY OBJECTIVES
                                          FIGURE 2
                                  TASK TWO OF THE PROJECT
                                                                  WATER
                                                               STORED DATA

-------
     Task 3    Definition of the criteria for the establish-
ment of water quality surveillance systems within each of
the three basins using the analysis framework discussed in
Task 2.  Specifically, the following considerations were
investigated.  (See Figure 3)

                   Station Location
The method and parameters to consider in locating water
quality surveillance stations.

                      Data Type
Method and parameters to determine the type of data to be
collected.

                  Sample Collection
Method and considerations to select an appropriate sample
collection system.

                  Analytical System
Method and parameters to consider in selecting an analyti-
cal system.

                  Data Transmission
Method and considerations inherent to the selection of a
data transmission system.

                    Data Handling
Method and parameters to consider in the selection of a data
handling and dissemination system.
     Task 4    Preparation of a plan for the establishment
of water quality surveillance programs for each of the
three river basins.  Figure 4 presents the objectives for
this task.
WATER QUALITY CONSIDERATIONS

The criteria for the various water uses establish the
permissible levels of pollutants in the surface waters at
particular locations.

Sources of Pollution

In general, the quality of surface waters is determined by
two major factors:  the mineral structure of the geological
strata and the chemistry of the surface soils.  The
quality of surface waters is also affected by agricultural,
industrial, and municipal wastes.  The effects of mineral
                         14

-------
Ul
DEFINE
  THE CRITERIA FOR THE
    ESTABLISHMENT OF
  WATER QUALITY SURV-
EILLANCE SYSTEMS  WITHIN
EACH OF THE THREE BASINS
   USING THE ANALYSIS
  FRAMEWORK OF TASK 2
                                               DEFINE AN OPTIMUM
                                              METHOD FOR DETER-
                                              MINING THE LOCATION
                                               OF WATER QUALITY
                                            SURVEILLANCE STATIONS
                                               DEFINE THE METHOD
                                             TO DETERMINE THE DATA
                                             TYPE TO BE COLLECTED
                                               DEFINE A METHOD
                                               FOR SELECTING AN
                                               OPTIMUM SAMPLE
                                              COLLECTION SYSTEM
                                                DEFINE A METHOD
                                                FOR SELECTING AN
                                               ANALYTICAL SYSTEM
                                              DEFINE A METHOD FOR
                                               SELECTING A DATA
                                              TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
                                                DEFINE A METHOD
                                              FOR SELECTING A DATA
                                                 HANDLING AND
                                             DESSEMINATION SYSTEM
                                  FIGURE 3
                      TASK THREE OF  THE PROJECT
CONSIDERATIONS
 INTENDED USE OF DATA
 PROXIMITY OF POLITICAL
BOUNDARYS
 GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDRIES
 HYDROLOGICAL FACTORS
 SECURITY
 LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
 SPECIFIC POLLUTION
PROBLEMS
 ACCESSIBILITY
 RELATIVE COST
 FACILITY AVAILABILITY

CONSIDERATIONS
 BACTERIOLOGICAL
 BIOLOGICAL
 CHEMICAL
 PHYSICAL
 RADIOLOGICAL
 CLIMATIC
 PESTICIDES

CONSIDERATIONS
 MANUAL SAMPLING
 REMOTE SAMPLERS
 GRAB SAMPLERS
 COMPOSITE SAMPLING
 LANDCRAFT
 WATERCRAFT
 AIRCRAFT
CONSIDERATIONS
 PORTABLE FIELD
  LABORATORIES
 MOBILE LABORATORIES
 LOCAL LABORATORIES
 REGIONAL LABORATORIES
 NATIONAL LABORATORIES
 ON-SITE ELECTRONIC
 PROBES
 ON-SITE AUTOMATIC
 UNATTENDED PROBES
                                                               CONSIDERATIONS
                                                                TELEMETER
                                                                    LEASE LINE
                                                                    TELEPHONE
                         DELIVERY
                           MAIL
                           EXPRESS
                                                               CONSIDERATIONS
                                                               INTENDED USE OF DATA
                                                              USER AGENCY NEEDS
                                                              STORET SYSTEM
                                                               COMPATABILITY
                                                              FORMAT OF OUTPUT DATA
                                                              DEGREE OF
                                                               CENTRALIZATION OF
                       ALTERNATIVE. MANUAL AND
                       MECHANIZED METHODS OF
                       HANDLING DATA
                       ALTERNATIVE, MANUAL AND
                       MECHANIZED METHODS OF
                       DATA DISSEMINATION
                       EXTENT OF GENERAL DATA
                                                                           DATA HANDLING FACILITIES DISSEMINATION

-------
PREPARE A PLAN FOR THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF WATER
 QUALITY SURVEILLANCE
 PROGRAMS FOR EACH OF
       3 BASINS
EVALUATE THE
 RESULTS OF
   TASKS
DETERMINE THE APPROX.
LOCATION OF CURRENTLY
REQUIRED WATER QUALITY
MONITORING STATIONS


DEFINE CRITERIA FOR
SELECTION ( EACH
STATION) AS IDENTIFIED
IN TASK 3
DEVELOP A PLAN FOR
DETERMINING PROJECTED
REQUIREMENTS FOR
EACH RIVER BASIN


DETERMINE REVISIONS
AND IMPROVEMENTS
TO CURRENT STATIONS
PER PROJECTED DEMANDS
                                       FIGURE 4
                               TASK FOUR OF THE PROJECT

-------
and soil quality are almost uncontrollable by man at
present, whereas he has the technical knowledge and engineer-
ing capabilities to control water quality efforts due to
agricultural, industrial, and municipal pollution.

The agricultural uses of water add dissolved minerals,
sediments, fertilizers, pesticides, chemicals, and herbi-
cides to the surface waters.  Industrial wastes and organic
materials, inorganic ions, and suspended solids from cool-
ing waters, process waters, and surface runoff from
industrial plants or mines.  Municipal wastes consist
mainly of organic materials, suspended solids and associated
bacteria; inorganics are often contributed by surface run-
off to combined or separate storm sewers.

Criteria for Water Uses

Water pollution results when potential pollutants interfere
with one or more water uses.  The Water Quality Standards
seek to establish the levels of pollutants in the surface
waters which will allow the desired uses.  Criteria for the
various uses are different and involve values for both
specific parameters and common parameters.

The water quality criteria for municipal water supplies
may be predicated on the degree of treatment necessary to
produce a palatable and safe finished water.  Modern water
treatment methods can produce a satisfactory finished
water from literally any supply.  The cost of treatment,
however, is related to the quality of the supply and thus
becomes the measure of pollution insofar as this use is
concerned.  Of greatest significance as quality parameters
for this use are the concentrations of coliform bacteria,
organic compounds that may result in tastes and odors,
and of suspended matter.  The relative effects of these
and other quality measurements on the suitability of
supplies for municipal use are shown in Table 1.

Industrial water uses include cooling, process water,
boiler feedwater, and water for sanitary purposes.  Quality
criteria for industrial process water vary over a very
wide range depending on the industry and the nature of the
product.  Industrial uses of water for cooling and for
power are more or less common to all industries, and the
applicable criteria are thus uniform.  As in the case of
water for municipal uses, the cost of treatment becomes a
measure of pollution.  Technologically, water from almost
any source can be rendered suitable for any industrial
use.  See Table 2.
                         17

-------
                                 TABLE 1

             SURFACE WATER CRITERIA FOR PUBLIC HATER SUPPLIES
                                  Permissible              Desirable
  Constituent or characteristic    Criteria	Criteria	

PHYSICAL:
  Color  (color unit*)	 75 	< 10
  Odor	Narrative	 Virtually absent
  Temperature 	 do	 Narrative
  Turbidity	 do	 Virtually absent
MICROBIOLOGICAL:
  Coliform organisms	 10,000/100 ml   	<100/100 ml
  Fecal colifonns	 2,000/100 ml   	<20/100 ml
INORGANIC CHEMICALS:                   (mg/1)                   (rag/1)
  Alkalinity	 Narrative 	 Narrative
  Ammonia	 0.5  (as N) 	<0.01
  Arsenic	 0.05	 Absent
  Barium	 1.0  	do
  Boron	 1.0  	do
  Cadmium	 0.01	do
  Chloride 	 250  	< 25
  Chromium,  hexavalent.	 0.5  	 Absent
  Copper	 1.0	 Virtually absent
  Dissolved oxygen	  >4  (monthly mean)  	 Near saturation
                                   S3  (individual sample)
  Fluoride	Narrative .'	 Narrative
  Hardness 	 do	.do
  Iron  (filterable)	 0.3  	 Virtually absent
  Lead	 0.05	 Absent
  Manganese   (filterable)	 0.05 	do
  Nitrates plus nitrites	10 (as N) 	 Virtually absent
  pH  (range)	 6.0-8.5 	Narrative
  Phosphorus	Narrative 	do
  Selenium	 0.01 	 Absent
  Silver	 0.05 	do
  Sulfate 	 250  	<50
  Total dissolved solids  	 500  	<200
    (filterable residue)
  Uranyl ion	 5 	 Absent
  Zinc	 5 	 Virtually absent
ORGANIC CHEMICALS:
  Carbon chloroform extract
    (CCE)	 0.15 	<0.04
  Cyanide 	 0.20 	 Absent
  Methylene blue active sub-
   stances 	 0.5  	 Virtually absent
  Oil and grease	 Virtually absent	Absent
  Pesticides:
    Aldrin 	 0.017 	do
    Chlordane 	 0.003 	do
    DDT	 0.042 	do
    Dieldrin	 0.017	do
    Endrin 	 0.001 	do
    Heptachlor 	 0.018 	do
    Heptachlor epoxide  	 0.018 	do
    Lindane 	 0.056 	do
    Methoxychlor 	 0.035 	do
    Organic phosphate plus
      carbamates 	 0.1  	do
    Toxaphene	 0.005	do
  Herbicides:
    2,4-D plus 2,4,5-T, plus
      2,4,5-TO 	 0.1  	do
  Phenols 	 0.001 	do
RADIOACTIVITY:                     (pc/1)                  (pc/1)
  Gross beta	 1,000 	<100
  Radium-226  	 3 	<1
  Strontium-90 	 10	,	< 2


Source  is "Water Quality  Criteria," FWPCA,  1968.  See source for
narrative discussion.
                              18

-------
                                                              TAB^L: 2

                  SUMrtARY  OF SPECIFIC QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS OF SURFACL WATERS THAT HAVE BEEN  USED AS  SOURCES'FOR
                                                      INDUSTRIAL WATER SUPPLIES

    (Unless otherwise  indicatud,  units are mg/1 and values are ir.aximums.  No one water will have  all the  maximum values shown.)
BOILER MAKEUP WATER
Industrial
0 to 1,500
Characteristic P-ig
Silica (Si02)
Aluminum (All
Iron (Fe)
hanganese (t-ln)
Copper (Cu)
Calcium (Ca)
Magnesium (Mg)
Sodium and potassium
(Na+K)
Ammonia U1H3)
Bicarbonate (hCOj)
Sulfate (S04)
Chloride (CD
Fluoride (F)
Nitrate (N03)
Pnospnatc (PO4)
Dissolved solids
Suspended solids
liaroness (Cat_O3)
Alkalinity (CaCOa)
Acidity (CacO3)
pH, units
Color, units
Organics:
i-ietiiyleue ulue ac-
tive 3Ujjstances
Carbon tetra-
oiloride extract
Chemical oxygen de-
mand (O<>)
Hydrogen aulfide (H2S)
Temperature, F
150
3
80
10
	
---_
	

	
	
600
1,400
19,000
	
	
	
35,000
15,000
5,000
500
1,000
	
1,200


2

100

100
	
120
Utility
700 to
5,000
paig
150
3
bO
10
	
----
	

	
	
600
1,400
19,000
	
	
50
35,000
13,000
5,000
500
1,000
	
1,200


10

100

500
	
120
COOLING
Fresh
Once
Yirough
SO
3
14
2.
	
500
	

	
	
COO
680
600
	
30
4
1,000
5,000
B50
500
0
5.0-3.9
	


1.

	

	
	
100
Makeup
Recycle
150
3
80
5 10
	
500
	

	
	
600
680
500
	
30
4
1,000
15,000

-------
Important parameters of water quality for industrial
process use include color; turbidity; pH; temperature;
hardness; odor; biochemical oxygen demand; and concentra-
tions of dissolved solids, dissolved oxygen, oil, iron,
and manganese.  The importance of each of these parameters
depends on the intended use.  Color and odor for example,
are undesirable in water used in the food and beverage
industries but are of little significance in water used by
the steel industry.  Temperature and pH, on the other
hand, are important considerations for almost any industrial
use.

For most industrial applications, it would be desirable to
obtain water containing no dissolved oxygen to limit
corrosion in process equipment and piping.  Since most
other water uses require a high concentration of dissolved
oxygen and the higher concentrations indicate relatively
less pollution, the planned suppression of dissolved
oxygen would not be a realistic objective.  The biochemical
oxygen demand is a general index of the degree of organic
pollution and is of direct concern only in industries such
as the food and beverage.  For other industrial uses, it
serves only as a measure of gross pollution and an indica-
tion of the presence of potential specific pollutants or
nuisances.

Corrosion, erosion, scale formation, sludge accumulation,
and the growth of slime forming microorganisms are
phenomena that are particularly detrimental in industrial
cooling water systems.  Criteria for industrial cooling
water depend on quality parameters related to these
effects and include pH; turbidity; hardness; and the
concentrations of dissolved solids, dissolved oxygen,
iron, manganese, chlorides, and sulfates.  Temperature is
important since the capacity of the cooling system is
directly related to the initial temperature of the cooling
water.  The criteria vary in importance with such factors
as materials of construction and the degree of recircula-
tion in a given system.

The quality requirements for boiler feedwater depend on
the operating pressure of the boiler; higher pressures
impose more stringent quality requirements.  The presence
of many substances renders feedwater more difficult and
expensive to treat.  The relative importance of various
substances and the effects of boiler operating pressures
are indicated in Table 2.
                          20

-------
In water to be used for irrigation, the concentrations of
dissolved salts and the bacterial quality are of primary
importance.  The deleterious effects of salts on plant
growth can result from osmotic effects, or prevention of
water uptake; chemical effects of plant metabolism; or
indirect effects on the soil.  The presence of coliform
bacteria indicates the possibility of food crop contamina-
tion.  Typical quality criteria for irrigation water are
given in Table 3.  Unlike water for municipal and industrial
use, water for irrigation cannot reasonably be treated for
use if the supply is of unsatisfactory quality; the effect
of pollution can be elimination of the use.  Farmstead water
quality criteria are listed in Table 4.

Suspended solids may deposit in streams to block navigation
channels or in reservoirs to reduce storage capacity.  They
can also cause erosion in turbines used for hydroelectric
power generation.  Dissolved substances, particularly
acidic compounds can cause or accelerate corrosion of water-
craft and dock facilities.  Treatment for such uses, of
course, is impractical, but these uses are seldom eliminated
by water quality effects.  Pollution here is measured by
the costs added as a result of maintenance dredging, corro-
sion damage, and reservoir depletion.

Recreational uses of surface streams,, such as swimming,
fishing, boating, water sports, and streamside camping;
use for commercial fishing; and use for esthetic enjoyment
are dependent on suitable water quality.  The users can
neither alter the quality of the water nor eliminate the
effects of pollution.  Unsatisfactory quality results in
elimination of these uses.  Some general indications of
the quality criteria associated with these uses may be
seen in Table 5.  The values given for the parameters would
permit general recreational uses of a stream but would not
be optimal for fish propagation.

Polluting  substances can be assimilated to some extent
within a stream, depending on its temperature, dissolved
oxygen concentration, flow rate, and other factors.  The
use of assimilative capacity of a stream must assure that
the resultant quality does not impair other beneficial
uses.  This, of  course, is the crux of the water pollution
problem, and the quality requirements for assimilative
use cannot be stated simply.
                          21

-------
                       TABLE 3

           SUGGESTED GUIDELINES FOR SALINITY
                  IN IRRIGATION WATER
     Crop Response
  TDS mg/1
  EC1
mmhos/cm
Water for which no detri-
  mental effects will
  usually be noticed

Water which can have
  detrimental effects
  on sensitive crops

Water that may have
  adverse effects on
  many crops and re-
  quiring careful
  management practices

Water that can be used
  for salt-tolerant
  plants on permeable
  soils with careful
  management practices
      <500
  500-1,000
1,000-2,000
2,000-5,000
   <0.75
0.75-1.50
1.50-3.00
3.00-7.50
^Electrical conductivity
Source is "Water Quality Criteria", FWPCA, 1968.
                          22

-------
                       TABLE 4

              KEY WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
                  FOR FARMSTEAD USES
                                      Recommendations
                                      (at point of Use)
      Characteristic
           (at po
        General :
                Farmstead Uses
Taste and odor
Color 	
PH 	
Total dissolved
  inorganic solids
Dissolved organic
  compounds 	
Turbidity  	
Hazardous  trace
  elements  	
 Other trace  elements
 Radionuclides
 Nonpathogenic micro-
   organisms 	
Substantially free
        do
6.0 to 8.5

500 rag/1  (under certain circum-
   stances, higher levels arc
   acceptable).

Ho recommendations for total
   organics.
The concentration of persistent
   chlorinated organic pesti-
   cides should not exceed the
   following:
         Compound jig/1
   Endrin	  1
   Aldrin	 17
   Dieldrin	 17
   Lindane_	 56
   Toxaphene	  5
   Heptachlor	 IB
   II. epoxide	 18
   DDT	 42
   Chlordane	  3
   Methoxychlor	 35
Substantially free

Levels in excess of those shown
   are grounds for rejection of
   a supply:
        Substances ng/1
   Arsenic	 0.05
   Barium	 1.00
   Cadmium	 0.01
   Chromium	 0.05
   Cyanides	 0.2
   Lead	 0.05
   Selenium	 0.01
   Silver	 0.05
Levels shown helov; should not
   be exceeded if alternate
   sources are available:
        Substances mg/1
   ilanganese	 0.05
   Iron	 0.3
   Copper	 1.0
   Zinc	 5.0
   Fluoride	 0.7-1.
   nitrate	45.0
                          pc/1
Strontium-90	  10
Radiun-226	    3
In absence of above  radionu-
   clides, 1,000 pc/1  grossQ
   activity.               '

To conform to USPHS  drinking
   water  standards.
 Source is "Water Quality  Criteria", FWPCA, 1968.
                       23

-------
                      TABLE 5

             WATER QUALITY CRITERIA FOR
                 RECREATIONAL USES
           Parameter                          Criterion
Coliform organisms per 100 ml                    100
Biochemical oxygen demand, ppm                    10
Dissolved oxygen, ppm, maximum                     2
Oil, ppm                                           2
pH                                             6.5-8.6
Turbidity, ppm                                    20
Color, ppm as Pt                                  30
Temperature, F                                    65
Source is "Water Quality Criteria", by McKee and Wolf,
1963.
                         24

-------
SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS

The effective conduct of a national pollution control pro-
gram requires that reliable information on water quality
be collected, analyzed, and evaluated in a timely and
efficient manner.  This need has become more pressing with
the establishment of the Water Quality Standards and plans
for their implementation and enforcement, and the result-
ing increased rate of waste treatment facility construction.
The water quality surveillance program must be expanded to
determine:   (1)  the extent of compliance and non-compliance
with the Water Quality Standards; (2) the degree to which
water quality is improved as a result of pollution abatement
measures, such as municipal or industrial waste treatment
facility installation; and (3) potential water quality prob-
lems requiring corrective action before a crisis situation
develops.

Water quality monitoring is required routinely at a
sufficient number of locations where effects of pollution
on the various legitimate water uses can be detected and
evaluated.  Such a monitoring network is also necessary
for the  evaluation of the effectiveness of the local, State,
and Federal pollution control programs.  The construction
of treatment facilities or the completion of basin manage-
ment plans cannot assure water quality improvements; the
effectiveness of control programs can only be determined
through  long-term monitoring of actual water quality.

General  Considerations

For any  surveillance program, there are some basic con-
siderations which are, in effect, constraints upon its
nature and magnitude.  These include:  (1) needs of data
users (quantity, quality, locations, chronology); (2)
available resources  (funds, manpower, inherited facilities);
(3) legal requirements  (Federal, state, local);  (4)  avail-
able technology  (equipment, techniques);  (5) operational
criteria (economic,  social, legal, cost-effectiveness);
(6) operational responsibility.

In any particular program one or another of these general
considerations will  be the primary constraint; generally
the available resources, particularly available  funds, will
be the primary constraint.  In a program design, the above
considerations must  be ranked according to relative
importance as a guide in selecting various alternatives.
                          25

-------
FWPCA Mission

The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (33
U.S.G. 466 et. seq.)f defines the responsibilities of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration in improv-
ing and maintaining the quality of the Nation's waters.
Accurate and timely water quality data are needed in order
that these responsibilities may be implemented.  Such data
are particularly needed to carry out the provisions of the
following portions of the Act:  (1) Section 3(a), which
authorizes investigations of the condition of water and
identification of discharges which may adversely affect
such waters for the purpose of developing comprehensive
pollution control programs; Section 5(c), which requires
the Secretary of the Interior to collect and  disseminate
basic water quality data; and Section 10, which pertains
to the enforcement of interstate water quality standards.
Without water quality data, it is apparent that these
provisions could not be carried out.

The effort of the FWPCA in the past was directed toward the
collection of limited water quality information at approxi-
mately 400 points over long-term periods and  20,000 points
over  short-term periods and was primarily  intended to
fulfill Sections 3(a), 5(c), and 10 of  the Act.  The amend-
ments to  Section 10 under the Water Quality Act of 1965
require that  the effort be expanded in  scope  and intensity.
If the water  quality standards for interstate and coastal
waters developed according to the Water Quality Act of
1965  are  to be properly enforced,  these waters must be
monitored to  promptly detect violations; determinations
must  be made  for a variety of constituents, sufficiently
often, and at a sufficient number  of  locations.  If  the
Department of the  Interior does not participate  fully  in
such  a monitoring  effort,  its assigned  duties in
administering the  standards  developed under Section  10
of the Act cannot  be adequately accomplished.
                            26

-------
                      SECTION 3

    DATA ACQUISITION FOR SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS DESIGN
The monitoring networks which are in use today for surveil-
lance programs for the most part have grown like topsy,
rather than having been designed and planned beforehand.
No criticism is intended of the pioneer networks, since
they have lead the way for others to follow.  When networks
of nationwide scope with complex missions are to be designed,
a systematized, comprehensive plan should be followed.
DATA SOURCES

In order to have a satisfactory systems plan, it is necessary
that adequate data sources be used to implement it.  Initial
efforts in this study were devoted to obtaining from the
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration (FWPCA) and
other Federal, state, and private sources, the type of data,
which the combined experience of the project team judged
necessary for such a program.
Governmental Agency Documents

The documents of prime importance in this study included the
following:

     Approved Interstate _W_ater Quality Standards and plans
for the implementation and enforcement within the study
area.

     Comprehensive River Basin Surveys published by the
Corps of Engineers with the cooperation and assistance of
numerous governmental agencies.

     Proceedings of conferences on interstate water pollu-
tion conducted by FWPCA and the U. S. Public Health Service.

     Water Quality Records published by the Geological
Survey and the various States.

     Quantity of Water Records published by the Geological
Survey and the various States.
                           27

-------
     Publications concerning water quality by the various
State Departments of Health or their analogs.

     Pollution Surveys published by FWPCA Regional Basin
Offices.

     Studies of the Federal Power Commission.

     Publications of the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation
Commission.

     Publications of the Tennessee Valley Authority.

     Wastewater Treatment facility surveys by FWPCA.

     Water Treatment facility surveys by HEW.


Technical Literature

A review was made of the technical literature concerning
water quality and, in particular, surveillance programs.
This literature dates from shortly after the end of World
War II, however, most of the pertinent articles considered
have been authored within the last ten years.  Most of the
authors hold positions with State or Federal agencies.


On-site Inspection of the River Basins

Throughout the project, there were discussions with person-
nel of the FWPCA headquarters office in Arlington, Virginia
and with personnel of the three regional basin offices.
These were Atlanta, Georgia, for the Southeastern Basin;
Kansas City, for the Lower Missouri River Basin; and
Cincinnati, Ohio, for the Ohio River Basin.  For the
purposes of this project, the Tennessee River Basin was
considered as a portion of the Ohio River Basin, since it
drains in that direction.  Administratively, however, the
Tennessee River Basin is covered by the Atlanta, Georgia
office.  In addition to the discussion with FWPCA personnel,
additional visits and discussions were held with personnel
of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and the Ohio River
Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO).  Additional
communications by telephone and letter were accomplished
with the particular water pollution control officials in the
some 21 states which were covered in some fashion by this
project.
                          28

-------
Original plans for visiting the river basins were conceived
around the idea of visiting the proposed monitoring sites
once tentative selections had been made based upon the read-
ing of the collected literature.  This approach was abandoned
in favor of viewing the sites from the air.  This type of
aerial surveillance presents a much greater perspective in
evaluating the entire basin than trying to compare individual
point sites that have been visited.  The only other method
which even approaches the efficiency of the aerial surveil-
lance technique would be the use of boats to traverse the
entire watershed.  Certain areas of the streams under
consideration in this project are not navigable.  Even if
all of the streams were navigable, the slow speed of the
boat would be unsatisfactory.  After consideration of
several possible types of aircraft for use in such a survey,
it was decided to utilize a four-passenger Cessna 182.
This or similar models would be adequate for this purpose.
The aircraft is slow enough to allow adequate time for
viewing various portions of the stream and yet fast enough
to cover a suitable portion of the basin in a day's time.
This plane is also slow enough to allow good photography.
Two of the seats were removed to provide more room for the
necessary gear and maps which were used.

During the flight, tape recorders were utilized to record
current impressions, as well as to identify the conditions
under which the photographs were taken.  A 35 millimeter
single lens reflex camera with a through-the-lens light
meter, was used.  This type of metering is very beneficial,
since lighting conditions are constantly changing.  All
of the photographs were taken with the aircraft window
open in order to prevent distortion, color changes, and
reflections.  The chief utility of the photographs is to
allow future comparison of various sections within a
stream as well as comparison between streams.  Photographs
of this type could be used for enforcement purposes, pro-
vided a sufficient area were depicted to allow positive
identification of a particular outfall.  For the purposes
of this study, however, the phonographs were used to
improve recall of the various sections of the streams.
Possible water quality monitoring sites were photographed.
Previous to each day's flight, various maps were assembled.
Among the types of maps which were navigation charts as
prepared by the Army Corps of Engineers and the 7-1/2
minute, 15 minute and 1:2^0^,000 scale maps prepared by the
U. S. Geological Survey.  These maps were all of a
different scale and coverage wks not uniform or universal
so that many maps were often, necessary in order to maintain
coverage.  Previous to each  flight the maps were coordinated
in the manner in which the flight was planned so that the
                          29

-------
map could be observed and used to locate points of interest
within each of the river basins.  Since many of the basins
are close or overlap, it required that these maps be re-
assembled for nearly each daily flight.  Among the types of
things marked were existing water quality monitoring
stations, dams, bridges, major intakes or outfalls, and
the like.  The pre-planning of each of the flights on the
ground allowed for the most effective use of time in the
air.  Weather conditions and the like, as well as logisti-
cal problems, controlled the length of each of the flights,
but by proper pre-planning of the flight, the time in the
air was utilized as effectively as possible.  Logistical
problems involved the transit from one river to another
while attempting to reduce the amount of time spent moving
from one watershed to another.  On occasion these transfers
were made at dusk, or during weather conditions which were
unsuitable for surveillance.  Each area within a basin was
observed only once, unless it was a junction point of two
of the rivers.  Opinions are therefore usually based upon a
single visit.

By comparing the notes made on the showing where various
photographs had been taken, the actual photographs, and
the notes which were recorded during the flight, almost
complete recall of each of the flights over a river basin
was possible.  Comparisons both within and between river
basins were made on this basis.  This  type of surveillance
flight not only provided a portion of  the final assessment
as to where the surveillance stations would be located,
but also provided additional input to  the indexing guide
which would be further utilized in the Systems Analysis
Framework.

The use  of a  fixed wing aircraft of the  type utilized during
this project would allow a regional water pollution surveil-
lance officer  to inspect his watershed,  not only rapidly,
but would allow him  to become familiar with it in  quite  a
different perspective than is possible from maps,  reports,
surface  visits, and  the like.   Viewing an entire basin  from
the air  allows a perspective to be obtained which  is  rather
unique.  The  impact  of  an  individual  point  source  of  pollu-
tion  can then be considered as  an  effect on the entire
basin and associated with  the dynamics of the  entire  basin,
rather than  as an effect at only  a particular  point.
 DATA HANDLING AND  RETRIEVAL

 The chief purpose  in examining the various documents
 described was to enable the project team to supplement
 experience-based thoughts on the data necessary to design
                          30

-------
a water quality surveillance system and to identify the
necessary input material to a Systems Analysis Approach.
It was desired to identify the individual factors which
should be considered, as well as to locate for future
use the relevant data associated with each of the
parameters under consideration.  The next task was to
devise a data handling and retrieval system which would
be best for the study purposes.  After careful review of
many of the data handling systems which are currently in
use, it was decided to use an optical coincidence system
based on the use of keywords.
Indexing and Retrieval of Published Data

In order to provide the proper input to the system, an
"indexing guide" was developed.  The indexing guide is
exhibited in its entirety at the end of this section.
This indexing guide was used by the readers in examining
each of the pertinent documents already described.  The
indexing guide was divided numerically into the following
17 sections:

      1.  Ohio River Basin
      2.  Lower Missouri River Basin
      3.  Southeastern River Basin
      4.  Water Uses
      5.  Water Quality Monitoring
      6.  Data Acquisition and Transmission
      7.  Data Handling and Dissemination
      8.  Water Quality Biological Parameters
      9.  Water Quality Chemical Parameters
     10.  Water Quality Related Physical Measurements
     11.  Water Quality Standards
     12.  Surveillance - Enforcement Agency
     13.  Pollution Sources
     14.  Pollution Abatement Methods
     15.  General
     16.  Economic Data
     17.  States

Each of the sections, with the exception of the first three,
contained space for additional keywords.  The initial group
of keywords was designed by the authors.  The selected key-
words included those which were added by the document readers
after review by the authors.  This technique was used in
order to identify any parameters which had not been included
in the original keyword list.
                          31

-------
As a document was read, appropriate keywords were chosen
and the corresponding page numbers within the document
were marked on a space on the indexing guide opposite the
keyword.  The indexing guide can thus be used as the basis
of a retrieval system.

Each keyword corresponds to a plastic indexing card in the
information retrieval system.  The accession number of each
document containing a particular keyword is indicated on
that card by the position of a small precision-drilled
hole, located by means of an x-y plotter.  The position of
the hole, and thus the accession number can be re-identified
on a light box reader, which also includes an x-y plotter.

By utilizing individual plastic information retrieval cards,
one can identify all of these documents in which a particu-
lar keyword is significant.  By stacking several keyword
cards on the lighted reader, one can sequentially obtain
only those documents which include the series of keywords
corresponding to the cards placed on the reader.  Thus, the
search can be very broad or very narrow and is completely
under the control of the individual.  The system was
selected because of its ease of use, its compactness, its
ability to be used by almost everyone, and the lack of
need of expensive data processing equipment.  See Figure
No. 5.
STORET Inquiries

Throughout the project, the STORET system was utilized on
several occasions.  The STORET system has been described
elsewhere in much greater detail and will not be elaborated
on here.  In its simplest form, STORET is a computer-
operated storage and retrieval system developed over the
last several years by various groups within the Department
of the Interior.  They have developed programs for compil-
ing quite a variety of water resources information into a
computer program which has the ability to perform statisti-
cal summations of the data, as well as to retrieve the raw
data intact, if so desired.  The STORET computer system
has its headquarters in Washington, D. C. and has several
data input-output consoles around the nation.

This FWPCA system assembles and identifies data according
to a River Mile Index, which is constructed on the basis
of the stream configuration of the watersheds from the
headwaters to the ocean.  It also identifies data by
latitude, longitude, and political boundaries.
                          32

-------
                           ASSEMBLE
                           ORIGINAL
                          DOCUMENTS
ASSIGN 4-DIGIT
ACCESSION
NUMBERS IN
NUMERICAL ORDER



LIST ASSIGNED
NUMBERS

                             READ
                          DOCUMENTS
                      SELECT DESCRIPTIVE
                          KEY WORDS
                           F-OREACH
   LIST KEYWORD
   CARDS USED
   FORMULATE
   QUERY AS A
LIST OF KEYWORDS
ENTER ACCESSION
  NUMBERS ON
CORRESPONDING
KEYWORD CARDS
                           FILE CARDS
                          BY KEYWORDS
STACK SELECTED
   CARDS ON
  X-Y READER
                         READ ACCESSION
                          NUMBERS OF
                         CORRESPONDING
                           DOCUMENTS
                             REFILE
                         KEYWORD CARDS
                            FILE DOCUMENTS
                          BY ACCESSION NUMBER
                                RETRIEVE
                                SELECTED
                               DOCUMENTS
                                 FOR USE
HEFILE DOCUMENTS
                                          FIGURES
                       OPERATION OF INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEM
                                        33

-------
Inquiries were made to STORET first to identify existing
water quality sampling stations on the rivers under study
in this project.  Later inquiries were expanded to
include certain of the water quality data collected in
terms of various parameters, and to provide information
as to the frequency of collection.  These interrogations
pointed up many of the good and bad features of the
STORET system.  In essence, the system is very satisfactory,
if all of the data for an entire basin submitted by one
agency is wanted.  Interrogations covering multi-agencies
are more difficult.  Not all agencies code their information
in the same fashion.  For instance, the Geological Survey
codes location information by longitude and latitude,
whereas the FWPCA identifies location by a river mile
index.  There are obvious advantages and disadvantages of
both systems.  However, the use of both systems simul-
taneously causes great confusion and ineffectiveness.  Many
of the old water quality network stations are listed by
synthetic identifications as to basin, stream index, and
river mile index, which also generates confusion.

It appears that certain sub-routines should be developed.
For instance, for certain purposes, it may be very useful
to have all of the data for a Class II stream and perhaps
the first station or so for all Class III streams which
intersect and are tributaries to the Class II stream.
This type of interrogation is not now possible without
obtaining all of the data for the Class III, IV, V, etc.,
streams listed in the basin.  STORET also does not have
the capacity to handle large volumes of continuous data
effectively.  This type of data is being generated
throughout the country today and will continue to be
generated in a much greater volume in the future.  The
STORET system is very good, but like many other systems,
it needs continual upgrading in order to be effective.


Site Inspection Data Handling and Retrieval

During the on-site inspections of the river basins, certain
data were collected utilizing photographs, maps, and
dictating equipment.  After returning from the flight,
this information, along with all of the various discussions
and communications with personnel in the regions, was
assembled for the individual reaches of each river.

Portions of this summarized material were utilized in (1)
extending and improving the indexing guide; (2) describing
the overall conditions in the river basin; (3) providing
                          34

-------
input toward the selection of water quality monitoring
sites.
Indexing Guide

An Indexing Guide was developed and' expanded on several
times during the project.  The original model was designed
at the start of the project.  It was expanded during the
literature search and after the visits to the three basins.
This Indexing Guide then served not only as a portion of
the information retrieval system, but it was input material
for the systems analysis framework.  The current edition of
the Indexing Guide is listed on pages  36  through 4l.
                          35

-------
                              INDEXING GUIDE
Surveillance Project
Accession No.
FWPCA
Title
Author
1.00
1.01
1.02
1.021
1.03
1.031
1.032
1.033
1.034
1.04
1.05
1.06
2.00
2.01
2.02
2.03
2.04
2.05
2.06
2.061
2.062
2.07
2.071
2.072
3.00
3.01
3.011
3.02
3.021
3.022
3.023
3.024
3.03
3.031
- 7098


Page
Nos.
Ohio River Basin
Main Stem
Allegheny River
Basin
Kiskiminetas
River
Monongahela River
Basin
Youghiogheny River
Cheat River
Tygart River
West Fork River
Kanawha River
Wabash River
Tennessee River
Lower Missouri
River Basin
Main Stem
Niobrara River
Platte River
South Platte River
North Platte River
Kansas River
Smokey Hill River
Republican River 	
Os age River
Marais des
Cygnes River
Little Osage River
Southeastern River
Basins
Ochlockonee River
Apalachee Bay
Apalachicola River 	
Flint River 	
Spring Creek
Chattahoochee River
Apalachicola Bay
Choctawhatchee River
Choctawhatchee Bay



3.04
3.041
3.042
3.05
3.051
3.06
3.061
3.062
3.063
3.064
3.07
3.071
3.08
4.00
4.01
4.02
4.03
4.04
4.05
4.06
4.061
4.062
4.07
4.08
4.09
4.10
4.11
4.12
4.13
4.14
4.15
4.16
4.17
4.18
Indexed by
Date



Page
Nos.
Yellow River
Pensacola Bay
East Bay
Escambia River
Escambia Bay
Mobile River
Alabama River
Tombigbee River
Black Warrior
River
Mobile Bay
Pascagoula River
Mississippi Sound
Pearl River
Water Uses
Agriculture
Body Contact Sports
Commercial Fishing
Commercial
Navigation
Esthetic
Industrial Water
Supply
Process Water
Cooling Water
Pleasure Boating
Potable Water
Supply
Sport Fishing
Shell Fishing -
Commercial 	
Hunting
Hydro-Electric
Mining
Recreation
Waste Dilution -
Transport
Wildlife
Fish Propogation
Irrigation

                               36

-------
                             Page
                             Nos.
                                                              Page
                                                              Nos.
4.181
4.182

4.19
4.20
4.21
  Irrigation
  by Surface
  Water
  Irrigation by
  Ground Water
Log Transport
Others 	
Others
5.00   Water Quality
       Monitoring
5.01   Analyses,
       Automatic
5.02   Analyses,
       Field
5.03   Analyses,
       Laboratory Local
5.04   Analyses,
       Laboratory
       Regional
5.05   Sampling,
       Automatic
5.06   Sampling,
       Composite
5.07   Sampling, Manual
5.08   Sample Shipping
5.09   Photography,
       Color
5.10   Photography,
       Infrared
5.11   Using Aircraft
5.12   Using Space Vehicles
5.13   Using Watercraft
5.14   Gaging Stations
5.15   Others 	
5.16   Others

6.00   Data Acquisition
       and Transmission
6.01   Telemetry, Leased
       Line
6.011    Telemetry, Radio
         Link
6.012    Telemetry,
         Telephone Link
6.02   Delivery by Mail
6.021    Delivery by
         Express
6.022    Delivery by
         Plane
6.03   Display by
       Hand Typing
6.031    Display by
         Analog Chart
6.032

6.033

6.034

6.035

6.04
6.05
                               7.01

                               7.02
                               7.03
                               7.04
                               7.05
                               7.06
                               7.07

                               7.08

                               7.09
                               7.10
  Display by
  Paper Punch Tape
  Display by
  Magnetic Tape
  Display by
  Visual Display
  Display by
  Machine Typing
Others 	
Others
7.00   Data Handling and
       Dissemination
       STORET
       Compatibility
       Data Format
       Manual Handling
       Automatic Handling
       Regional Storage
       National Storage
       Regional
       Dissemination
       National
       Dissemination
       Others 	
       Others
                               8.00   Water Quality
                                      Biological
                                      Parameters
                               8.01   Amphibia
                               8.02   Aquatic Birds
                               8.03   Aquatic Insects
                               8.04   Aquatic Mammals
                               8.05   Aquatic Plants
                               8.06   Aquatic Reptiles
                               8.07   Aquatic Worm's
                               8.08   Bacteria
                               8.081    Coliform Bacteria
                               8.082    Fecal Coliform
                               8.083    Fecal
                                        Streptococcus
                               8.084    Total Bacteria
                               8.09   Benthic Organisms
                               8.10   Crustacea
                               8.11   Fish
                               8.12   Mollusks
                               8.13   Plankton
                               8.131    Algae -
                                        Blue-Green
                               8.132    Algae -
                                        Green
                               8.133    Cladocera
                               8.134    Copepods
                               37

-------
                             Page
                             Nos.
                                                              Page
                                                              Nos.
8.135
8.136
8.137
8.138

8.14
8.15
8.16
8.17
8.18
8.19
  Diatoms
  Flagellates
  Rotifers
  Plankton Algae-
  Red
Bioassay
Sphaerotilus
Aquatic Fungus
Actinomyces
Others 	
Others
9.00   Water Quality
       Chemical
       Parameters
9.01   Acidity
9.02   Alkalinity
9.03   Arsenic
9.04   Barium
9.05   Biochemical
       Oxygen Demand
9.06   Cadmium
9.07   Calcium
9.08   Carbon Dioxide
9.09   Chemical
       Oxygen Demand
9.10   Chloride
9.11   Chromium
9.12   Copper
9.13   Cyanide
9.14   Detergents
       (Surfactants-
        MBAS)
9.15   Dissolved Oxygen
9.16   Hardness
9.17   Herbicides
9.18   Iron
9.19   Lead
9.20   Magnesium
9.21   Manganese
9.22   Nickel
9.23   Nitrogen, Ammonia
9.24   Nitrogen, Nitrate
9.25   Nitrogen, Nitrite
9.26   Nitrogen, Organic
9.27   Nitrogen, Total
       Kjeldahl
9.28   Odor
9.29   Oil and Grease
9.30   Organics
9.301    Alcohol (CAE)
9.302    Chloroform (CCE)
9.31   Pesticides
 9.32   pH
 9.33   Phenol
 9.34   Phosphate
 9.35   Radioactivity
 9.351    Radioactivity -
          alpha
 9.352    Radioactivity -
          beta
 9.353    Radioactivity -
          gamma
 9.36   Selenium
 9.37   Silver
 9.38   Solids
 9.381    Solids, Dissolved
 9.382    Solids,
          Settleable
 9.383    Solids, Suspended
 9.384    Solids, Total
 9.385    Solids, Volatile
          Suspended
 9.39   Sodium
 9.40   Strontium
 9.41   Sulfur
 9.411    Sulfur, Sulfate
 9.412    Sulfur, Sulfide
 9.413    Sulfur, Sulfite
 9.42   Taste
 9.43   Tin
 9.44   Zinc
 9.45   Antimony
 9.46   Beryllium
 9.47   Bismuth
 9.48   Boron
 9.49   Chlorine Demand
 9.50   Cobalt
 9.51   Fluoride
 9.52   Molybden urn
 9.53   Potassium
 9.54   Silica
 9.55   Solids, Floating
 9.56   Toxic Substances
 9.57   Vanadium
 9.58   Aluminum
 9.59   Others 	
 9.60   Others 	

10.00   Water Quality
        Related Physical
        Measurements
10.01   Climate
10.02   Cloud Cover
10.03   Color
10.04   Current
                                38

-------
                              Page
                              Nos.
                                 Page
                                 Nos.
10.05   Evaporation
10.06   Flow
10.07   Humidity
10.08   Meteorological
10.09   Rainfall
10.10   Salinity
10.11   Saturation-Percent
10.12   Sediment
10.13   Snowfall
10.14   Temperature, Air
10.15   Temperature, Water
10.16   Tide
10.17   Turbidity
10.18   Wind Direction
10.181    Wind Speed
10.19   Appearance
10.20   Discharges
10.21   Drainage Area
10.22   Gas Bubbles
10.23   Hydrographs
10.24   Solar Radiation
10.25   Specific
        Conductivity
10.26   Others 	
10.27   Others
11.00   Water Quality
        Standards and
        Enforcement
11.01   Compact
11.02   Hearing
11.03   Interstate -
        Approved
11.031    Interstate -
          Tentative
11.04   Intrastate
11.05   Local
11.06   Orders and
        Permits
11.07   PHS Drinking
        Water Standards
11.08   Enforcement
11.09   Abatement Schedule
11.10   Others 	
11.11   Others
12.00   Surveillance/
        Enforcement
        Agency
12.01   Atomic Energy
        Commission (AEC)
12.02   Bureau of
        Commercial
        Fisheries  (BCF)
12.03   Bureau of
        Reclamation  (BR),
12.04   Bureau of Sport
        Fisheries &
        Wildlife  (SFW)
12.05   Conservation
12.06   Compact
12.07   Corps of
        Engineers  (CE)
12.08   Department of
        Agriculture
12.09   ESSA  (Weather-
        Coast-Geodetic)
12.10   FWPCA (WPC)
12.11   Forest Service  (FS)
12.12   Geological Survey
        (GS)
12.13   Industrial
12.14   Interstate
12.15   International
        Boundry & Water
        Commission (IBW)
12.16   Local
12.17   Marine Corps  (MC)
12.18   Naval Facilities
        (NFE)
12.19   Private
12.20   Public Health
        Service (PHS)
12.21   Regional
12.22   State
12.23   Tennessee Valley
        Authority  (TVA)
12.24   Watershed
12.25   Commerce, Department
12.26   Federal Power
        Commission
12.27   Water Treatment Plant
12.28   Ohio River Valley
        Water Sanitation
        Commission
        (ORSANCO)
12.29   Missouri Basin
        Inter-Agency
        Committee  (MBIAC)
12.30   Health, Education
        and Welfare  (HEW)
                                39

-------
                              Page
                              Nos.
                                                              Page
                                                              Nos.
12.31

12.32
12.33
Department of
Interior
Others 	
Others
13.00   Pollution Sources

13.01   Acid Mine Drainage
13.02   Agriculture
13.021    Irrigation Canal
          Discharges
13.022    Pesticide
13.023    Fertilizer
13.03   Industrial
13.031    Chemical Industries
13.032    Food Industries
13.033    Metal Finishing
          Industries
13.034    Petroleum
          Industries
13.035    Pulp & Paper
          Industries
13.036    Textile Industries
13.037    Mineral Industries
13.038    Primary Metal
          Industries
13.04   Municipal
13.05   Nuclear
13.06   Oil and Gas Wastes
13.07   Thermal
13.08   Accidental Spills
13.09   Boat Discharges
13.10   Combined Sewer
        Discharges
13.11   Federal Facilities
13.12   Feed Lots
13.13   Runoff
13.14   Soil Erosion
13.15   Solids Wastes
13.151    Municipal
13.152    Industrial
13.16   Vector-Biological
13.17   Urban Runoff
13.18   Construction Runoff
13.19   Others 	
13.20   Others 	

14.00   Pollution Abatement
        Methods
14.01   Impoundment
14.02   None
14.03   Treatment -
        Industrial
14.031    Treatment -
          Primary
14.032    Treatment -
          Secondary
14.033    Treatment -
          Tertiary
14.04   Treatment -
        Municipal
14.041    Treatment -
          Primary
14.042    Treatment -
          Secondary
14.043    Treatment -
          Tertiary
14.05   Costs of Treatment
14.06   Disposal Wells
14.07   Pipeline Disposal
14.08   Operator Training
14.09   Pollution Abatement
        Needs
14.10   Regeneration of
        Wastes
14.11   Septic Tanks and
        Cesspools
14.12   Treatment
        Recommendations
14.13   Water Reuse
14.14   Mine Drainage
        Control and
        Treatment
14.15   Sewer Separation
        and Treatment
14.16   Hydro-geological
        Methods
14.17   Construction Plans
        and Specifications
14.18   Sludge Disposal
14.19   Construction
        Projected
14.20   Others	
14.21   Others 	

15.00   General

15.01   Controlled Discharge
15.02   Cost Data
15.03   Dredging
15.04   Estuaries
15.05   Flood Control Dams
15.06   Hydro-Power Dams
15.07   Impoundmen ts
15.08   Lakes
15.09   Navigation Dams
                                  40

-------
                              Page
                              Nos.
                                                               Page
                                                               Nos.
15.10
15.11
15.12
15.13
15.14
15.15
15.16
15.17
15.18
15.19
15.20
15.21
15.22
Saltwater Intrusion
Streams
Recreation
Reservoir
Drought
Eutrophication
Fish Kills
Floods
Ground Water
Surface Water
Water Needs
Others 	
Others      	
16.00   Economic Data

16.01   Population
16.02   Employment
16.03   Income/Earnings
16.04   Industry Composition
16.041    Agricultural
16.042    Mineral
          Production
16.043    Manufacturing
16.044    Trade, Finance,
          Service
16.05   Esthetic Values
16.06   Resources
16.061    Mineral
16.062    Labor Force
16.063    Power
16.064    Water
16.065    Capital
16.066    Forests
16.067    Fish  and  Wildlife
16.068    Land
16.07   Multiplier  Effects
16.08   Economic Needs
16.09   Transportation
16.10   Data Reduction
        Methods
16.11   Economic Climate
16.12   Aggregate Growth
16.13   Cost -  Benefit
        Analysis
16.14   Damages
16.15   Fishing
16.16   Gross National
        Product
16.17   Hunting
16.18   Intangibles
16.19   Input-Output
        Analysis
16.20
16.21
16.22
16.23
16.24
16.25
17.00
17.01
17.02
17.03
17.04
17.05
17.06
17.07
17.08
17.09
17.10
17.11
17.12
17.13
17.14
17.15
17.16
17.17
17.18
17.19
17.20
17.21
Land Use
Recreation Economics
Storage Benefits
Tax Structure
Others
Others
States
Alabama
Colorado
Florida
Georgia
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maryland
Mississippi
Missouri
Nebraska
New York
Ohio
Pennsylvania
South Dakota
Tennessee
West Virginia
Wyoming
                                   41

-------
                      SECTION 4

     LEGAL PROBLEMS INVOLVED IN THE ESTABLISHMENT
    OF A FEDERAL WATER QUALITY SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM
A number of legal problems will be involved in the establish-
ment of a Federal water quality surveillance system for the
river basins designated in the study.

Initially, the study treats a basic or threshold question
involving the statutory authority for the establishment and
implementation of a Federal surveillance system.  Since such
authority is not explicit, specific amendatory legislation
is suggested and a draft of amendment is set out in the
Appendix to this section.

Other legal problems considered in this section include (1)
the establishment of surveillance stations under the
authority of the navigation servitude.!/; (2) the statutory
authority for land acquisition for the surveillance system;
(3) the establishment of stations on various classes of
Federal land pursuant to Federal statute; (4) the types of
interests in lands which should be acquired; (5) the
evidentiary problems which will be involved in utilizing
data and information developed in the operation of the
surveillance system in water pollution abatement and
enforcement proceedings;  (6) the potential liability of
the United States to private individuals for damages
caused by the system; and  (7) the liability of private
individuals for damages to the surveillance stations or
equipment.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A FEDERAL WATER
QUALITY SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM	

The Federal Water Quality Surveillance System would be useful
in a number of contexts:

          It is anticipated that a national water
          quality surveillance program would
'  Navigation servitude - A property interest held by the
   United States below the high water mark of all navigable
   streams.  It is an interest in which no private property
   rights may be acquired.
                            42

-------
          include technical guidance in legislative
          matters and ensure that all data gathering
          and evaluation  is accomplished in a uniform,
          efficient and economical manner.  Potential
          uses of the information from the Federal
          Water Pollution Control Administration
          Water Quality Surveillance Program would
          include justification of Federal expenditures
          (past and future)  for construction of sewage
          and other treatment facilities, and for research
          studies; establishment of water quality trends;
          determination of compliance and non-compliance
          with water quality standards; documentation
          of violations and support of litigation for
          enforcement; and establishment of an alarm
          system for water quality deteriorations.

The raw data collected by the system will be used to achieve
each of these purposes.  In addition, the data presumably
will be used for pure research purposes such as the effect
of particular pollutants  on the ecological structure of
aquatic environments.

The necessary authority is twofold in nature.  First, the
rivers and streams must be of a type over which the United
States is empowered to exercise its authority.  In order to
comply with the requirements of the Commerce Clause of the
United States Constitution, those rivers and streams must
be either "interstate" or "navigable".  See Gibbons v. Ogden,
22 U.S. 1 (1824); 33 U.S.C.A. p. 466g(a)  (1969 pocket part).

The judicial definition of "navigability" has not remained
a constant, though its general parameters were set out in
the late 19th Century.  In the Daniel Ball case it was
held that streams are "public navigable rivers in law
which are navigable in fact.  And they are navigable in
fact when they are used,  or are susceptible of being used,
in their ordinary condition, as highways of commerce".
The Daniel Ball,  77 U.S.  557, 563  (1870).  Thus, a stream
is navigable in full if it is navigable in part, United
States v. Rio Grande Dam & Irrigation Co., 174 U.S. 690
 (1899), and remains navigable even if no longer subject
to commercial use.  See Arizona v. California, 283 U.S.
423 (1931).

In a later case the definition of navigability was
broadened to include the  susceptibility of a stream for
navigation, thereby increasing the number of streams
subject to Federal power.  United States v. Appalachian
                            43

-------
Power Company, 311 U.S. 377 (1940).  Finally, in
United States v. Grand River Dam Authority, 363 U.S. 229
(1960) , the Supreme Court determined that nonnavigable
tributaries of navigable streams may be subject to the
commerce power of Congress so long as the mainstream falls
within the traditional definitions of navigability and in
cases in which Congress chooses to exercise its power over
such a nonnavigable tributary.

With respect to the second criterion of Federal authority
regarding the "interstate" nature of streams or rivers,
the Department of the Interior has published guidelines
relating to that subject.  These guidelines set out the
standards for determining interstate streams for which
water quality standards are to be established.  They
provide that:

          Water quality standards, under Section
          10(c) (1) of the Act are to be established
          for, and made applicable to, interstate
          waters or portions thereof within the State.

          1.  The term "interstate waters", as defined
          in Section 13(e) of the Act, means all rivers,
          lakes, and other waters that flow across or
          form a part of State boundaries, including
          coastal waters.

          2.  Within this definition, waters that flow
          across or form a part of State boundaries
          are subject to the provisions of Section 10(c)
          (1) of the Act.

          3.  Waters that flow across or form a part
          of the international boundary between a
          State and a foreign country are interstate
          waters within the meaning of the definition
          provided in Section 13(e) of the Act and
          similarly subject to the provisions of
          Section 10 (c)  (1) of the Act.

          4.  Coastal waters subject to the provisions
          of Section 10(c) (1) of the Act are the ocean
          waters along straight coasts, the waters along
          indented coasts which are subject to the ebb
          and flow of the tides, and the waters of the
          Great Lakes.
                            44

-------
          5.  As noted above, the  definition  of  "inter-
          state waters" is in terms of water  bodies  -
          "rivers",  "lakes" and  "other waters" -  and is
          not limited to only those portions  of these
          water bodies at the point at which  they flow
          across or  form a part  of State boundaries.
          In effect, therefore,  water-quality standards
          are to be  established  for and made  applicable
          to the entire stretch  of the interstate waters
          within a State.

          6.  Tributaries of interstate waters, which
          are not in themselves  interstate waters, are
          not subject to the requirements of  subsection
          10 (c) (1)  of the Act.  However, it  is
          important  to note that the discharge of any
          matter into such tributaries which  reaches
          interstate waters and  reduces the quality  of
          such interstate waters below the established
          water-quality standards is subject  to abatement
          under Section 10(c)  (5) of the Act.

Notwithstanding the  guidelines which have been set by the
Supreme Court and the Department of the Interior  in
determining the Federal power over the streams of  the United
States, it is unlikely that the establishment of  a Federal
water quality surveillance system on streams  of questionable
status would encounter the same resistance as Federal water
resource projects.  For one thing, unlike many water projects,
the necessity for the abatement of water pollution has re-
ceived almost universal acceptance.  Secondly, the establish-
ment of a Federal system would result in alleviating the
financial burdens of the states in the area of surveillance
activities.

Regardless of the way in which the states would greet
such a Federal surveillance system, however, the  decisions
of the United States Supreme  Court have greatly expanded
the number of streams over which the Federal power" extends.
Only on the smallest of streams in a river basin would the
exercise of Federal authority'be questionable.  In those
instances, the states should  be encouraged either to
coordinate their own surveillance activities with those
of the United States, or to allow the establishment of
Federal survillance stations  on necessary sites.

In addition to Constitutional  validity, the establishment
of a Federal water quality surveillance system must also
be supported by adequate statutory authority.   Logically,
one must look to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
                           45

-------
70 Stat. 498  (1956), as amended, 33 U.S.C., p. 466 et seq.
(1964) for such authority.  The Act is a compendium of
original and amendatory legislation.  The basic Act was
passed in 1948, 62 Stat. 1155, and has been modified and
strengthened by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
amendments of 1956, 70 Stat. 498 (1956), the amendments of
1961, 75 Stat. 204 (1961), the Water Quality Act of 1965,
79 Stat. 903  (1965) , and the Clean Water Restoration Act
of 1966, 80 Stat. 1246 (1966).  Additional amendments
are currently under consideration by Congress.  S. 7,
91 Cong. 1st Sess. (1969) and H.R. 4148, 91st Cong.
1st Sess. (1969).

The Act is a product of a necessity and a reality - the
necessity to halt the destruction of the Nation's water
resources, and the reality of countervailing Federal, State,
and industry powers.   Like much legislation, its goals tend
to outstrip its tools for implementation.  Throughout the
Act, and particularly noticeable in the enforcement pro-
visions, Federal authority is attenuated considerably and
authorized often only as a last resort.  Cooperation
between Federal and State authorities is encouranged by
the Act and required in some instances.2/
_/  This tone of compromise is established in Section 1 of
    the Act, wherein it is provided that:

          In connection with the exercise of juris-
          diction over the waterways of the Nation and
          in consequence of the benefits resulting to
          the public health and welfare by the prevention
          and control of water pollution, it is hereby
          declared to be the policy of Congress to recog-
          nize, preserve, and protect the primary respon-
          sibilities and rights of the States in preventing
          and controlling water pollution, to support and
          aid technical research relating to the prevention
          and control of water pollution, and to provide
          Federal technical services and financial aid to
          State and interstate agencies and to municipalities
          in connection with the prevention and control of
          water pollution.

    Taken at face value, this policy statement tends to vest
    enforcement activities primarily in the States, while
    affording the Federal government a role generally limited
    to research and assistance.  See also 33 U.S.C. p. 466a
    (c); 33 U.S.C. p. 466c(a); 33 U.S.C. p. 466c(c); 33
    U.S.C. p. 466g(b) .


                            46

-------
Because of the tangled thicket of compromise and
accommodation, it is understandable that the lines of
authority between Federal and state governments are not
clearly drawn.  It is also conceivable that Congress, in
the attempt to reconcile the conflicting interests of the
various parties,  may have overlooked the necessity for a
comprehensive surveillance system.  Since the authorization
for such a system is not explicit, the following discussion
will examine the  various provisions of the Act from which
the authority for the system might be established.

Section 3 (a) of the Act provides that the Secretary of
the Interior shall:

          ... prepare or develop comprehensive programs
          for eliminating or reducing the pollution of
          interstate waters and tributaries thereof
          and improving the sanitary condition of
          surface and underground waters.

          For the purpose of this section, the
          Secretary is authorized to make joint investi-
          gations with any (Federal, state or interstate)
          agencies of the condition of any waters in
          any State or States, and of the discharges of
          any sewage, industrial waters, or substance
          which may adversely affect such waters.
          33 U.S.C.A. p. 466(a) (1969 pocket part).

The "Comprehensive programs" to be developed as a result
of the "joint investigations" would appear to encompass the
designated programs and purposes of a water quality sur-
veillance system.  Furthermore, it would appear reasonable
to conclude that the "joint investigations" authorized by
Section 3(a) of the Act would clearly comprehend and
authorize the establishment of a water quality surveillance
system.

Any doubts to the contrary seem to be resolved by several
other provisions of the Act.  Section 5(a) for example,
provides that the Secretary "shall conduct ... research,
investigations, experiments, demonstrations, and studies
relating to the causes, control, and prevention of water
pollution".  33 U.S.C.A. p. 466c(a)  (1969 pocket part).
Section 5(b) allows the Secretary of the Interior to
conduct investigations, at the request of state or
interstate agencies, on specific pollution problems.
33 U.S.C.A. p. 466c(b)  (1969 pocket part).  And Section
5(c) requires the Secretary, in cooperation with
                            47

-------
Federal, state and interstate agencies, to "collect
and disseminate basic data on chemical, physical, and
biological water quality and other information insofar
as such data or other information relate to water
pollution and the prevention and control thereof".  33
U.S.C.A. p. 466c(c)  (1969 pocket part).

On the basis of these and other provisions of the Act,/
the conclusion can be drawn that Congress recognized the
need for adequate surveillance operations and therefore
provided for their implementation.  The conclusion is
further confirmed by the fact that the Federal government
is given a major responsibility for enforcing the water
quality standards established under the Act, and without
the means for determining violations, such as a surveillance
system, enforcement would rest on mere conjecture.  See
U.S.C.A. p. 466g(a)  (1969 pocket part).

Finally, the statutory authority for the establishment of
a surveillance system has been recognized by the Office
of the President in an Executive Order relating to pollu-
tion caused by Federal facilities.  Section 3 of Executive
Order 11507 of February 4, 1970 (35 Fed.Reg. 2573), provides
that:

           (a) Heads of agencies shall, with regard to
          all facilities under their jurisdiction:

               (1) Maintain review and surveillance to
          ensure that the standards set forth in section
          4 of this order are met on a continuing basis.

Clearly, Executive Order 11507 contemplates the establish-
ment of a system to monitor the discharge of pollutants from
Federal installations and from facilities "... owned by
or constructed or manufactured for the purpose of leasing to
the Federal Government."  Without such a system of surveil-
lance, it would be impossible to assure that pollution
control standards "... are met on a continuing basis."
' These provisions include Section 5(e), 33 U.S.C.A. p.
   466c(e) (1969 pocket part) which authorizes the Secretary
   to establish, equip and maintain field laboratory and
   research facilities; and Section 5(d)  (B), 33 U.S.C.A.
   p. 466c(d) (B) which authorizes the Secretary to develop
   and demonstrate methods for identifying and measuring
   the effects of pollutants on water uses.
                            48

-------
It is possible that the surveillance apparatus contemplated
in Executive Order 11507 is much different than the multi-
purpose system outlined in the present study.  Nevertheless,
comprehensive surveillance is necessary for Federal as well
as for private activities since many of the problems, such
as discharges from waste treatment facilities, are identical.

A comprehensive surveillance system established principally
for the monitoring of Federal activities need not be
limited exclusively to such a purpose.  Indeed, in many
instances, it would seem impossible for such a system to
monitor only Federal pollutants.  Consequently, it appears
entirely feasible that the surveillance system established
to monitor pollution from Federal sources under Executive
Order 11507 could also be used successfully to monitor
pollution from all other sources.  Since Federal activities
and those of Federal contractors and grantees are presently
so geographically extensive, it is possible that the sur-
veillance system established to monitor Federal activities
would be sufficient to monitor pollution from all sources.
In the case it is not, however, the independent statutory
authority contained in the Act and discussed suprai./ appears
sufficient to provide the necessary statutory basis for a
comprehensive surveillance system.

It is relevant to point out that the independent statutory
authority discussed hereinbefore contains a number of
references to requirements for cooperation between Federal,
state, and interstate agencies in carrying out activities
under the Act.  For example, the investigations authorized
by Section 3(a) of the Act are to be conducted jointly
with state and interstate agencies.  Sections 5(a), 5(b),
and 5(c) of the Act, discussed supra, also contain references
to cooperative efforts between Federal, state and inter-
state agencies.

Finally, inasmuch as the surveillance system will be
used principally as an enforcement mechanism, the following
provision of the Act is most significant:

          Consistent with the policy declaration
          of the Act, state and interstate action
          to abate pollution of interstate or
          navigable waters shall be encouraged
          and shall not, except as otherwise
          provided by or pursuant to court order
!/ Supra - above.
                            49

-------
          under sub-section (h), be displaced by
          Federal enforcement action.  33 U.S.C.A.
          p. 466g(b) (1969 pocket part).

The language of these sections raises the question
whether a comprehensive surveillance system can be
established and operated exclusively by the Federal
government, or whether the participation of state and
interstate agencies is imperative.

The most consistent conclusion would appear to be that
the Federal Government is directed to seek the cooperation
of state or interstate agencies, but, if it is not
forthcoming, may proceed independently.

It is difficult to conclude that Congress intended that
states, by lack of funds or mere intransigence^/, could
thwart the investigations and programs necessary to ful-
filling the purpose of the Act.  This conclusion underlies
the establishment of the Task Force on Pollution Enforce-
ment which was ordered by Secretary of the Interior Walter
J. Hickel in July, 1969.  The Task Force, in September,
1969, as a result of evidence gathered by Federal monitoring
activities, recommended the convening of hearings and the
possible initiation of litigation to halt excessive
pollution in certain areas of Kansas, Oklahoma, Ohio and
the Lake Erie Basin.  Consequently, it appears reasonable
to conclude that the Federal Government may establish a
surveillance system without the joint participation of
state and interstate agencies.  Nevertheless, the co-
operation and joint participation of state and interstate
agencies should be sought to the fullest extent even though
the failure of state participation should not be construed
to prohibit the establishment of an independent Federal
water quality surveillance system.  With respect to the
participation of interstate agencies in water pollution
control activities, it should be noted that there exist
at least ten interstate compacts which deal directly with
water pollution control problems.  Among those, at least
two directly affect two of the river basins under con-
sideration in this study.  The Ohio River Valley Sanitation
Compact (ORSANCO), 54 Stat. 752  (1940) encompasses the
states of Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, New York, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, Tennessee and West Virginia.  The Tennessee
5_/ Intransigence - The state of being uncompromising or
~~  irreconcilable; stubborness.
                            50

-------
River Basin Water Pollution Control Compact, 72 Stat.
823 (1958), numbers among its signatories the States of
Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina,
Tennessee, and Virginia.

Both compacts provide for interstate commissions, and in
both cases the commissions are invested with certain
regulatory functions, including the establishment of water
quality criteria.  The Federal government is represented
by a delegate on the ORSANCO commission.  In neither case
is the commission authorized to issue enforcement orders
without a majority vote of the compact commissioners.

The jurisdiction of each commission extends only to the
waters in the interstate drainage basin with which the
particular compact is concerned.   However, even this
limited jurisdiction enables the  commissions, like the
Federal government, to establish  water quality criteria
for the entire breadth of a stream regardless of state
boundaries.  Were it not for this authority, and that of
the Federal government, it is conceivable, indeed likely,
that different criteria would obtain on either side of
the center of a river which borders two states.  Since
both compact commission's and the Federal government have
authority over such interstate streams, any differences
in criteria or standards which might otherwise arise can
be resolved.  Indeed, the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration already has undertaken to reconcile con-
flicting criteria submitted by states bordering several
of the Great Lakes.

As an example of the duties and authority vested in
pollution compact commissions, ORSANCO is authorized:

          to survey the sanitation district
          established by the compact; study
          the pollution problems; make a com-
          prehensive report for prevention or
          reduction of pollution; confer with
          national and federal authorities;
          draft and recommend uniform legisla-
          tion dealing with stream pollution to
          the signatory states; consult with and
          advise the states and their subdivisions
          and other persons in the state regarding
          pollution problems; and recommend enact-
          ments to any state for  furtherance of the
          purposes of the compact.  Gindler, Waters
          and Water Rights 341 (Clark, ed. 1967).
                            51

-------
Regarding enforcement of water quality standards adopted
by the commission, both ORSANCO and the Tennessee River
Basin Commission are authorized to issue administrative
enforcement orders and to obtain court orders for com-
pliance in either the state or Federal courts.

Finally, both compacts provide for coordination in their
operations.  The Tennessee River Basin Compact provides
that it is not to conflict with the provisions of ORSANCO,
but that the Commission is free to set higher standards
for the signatory states than those provided by ORSANCO.

In sum, each compact commission is a viable body which
should be consulted in all operations of a Federal water
quality surveillance system, and should be invited to
participate in those operations to the greatest extent
possible.
ACQUISITION OF SITES FOR SURVEILLANCE STATIONS

An initial legal problem concerns the acquisition of
sites for the proposed surveillance stations.  Depending
on the projected size and placement of the stations,
different problems will arise, including the necessity for
payment of compensation to appurtenant landowners.
Site Acquisition Under the Navigation Servitude

It is likely that certain types of surveillance stations
will not require the use of lands which are situated above
the high water mark of a river.  This is particularly the
case in situations where it is advantageous to establish
stations on pilings anchored below the high water mark of a
river or where it is desirable to transect streams with
sampling equipment in order to obtain readings at various
points of flow, while anchoring the equipment below the
high water mark.

In those instances in which surveillance stations or
equipment can be situated below the high water mark on
rivers or streams, it is possible that the United States
will not incur liability for the payment of compensation
to private landowners who are riparian to the streams.
In such cases, it may be possible for the United States
to exercise authority pursuant to the "navigation servitude"
vested in the Federal government.
                            52

-------
This servitude, which springs from the Commerce Clause
of the United States Constitution, vests dominant  control
of the stream bed  (up to the ordinary high water mark) of
navigable waters in the Federal government.  See e.q. ,
United States v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul  & Pacific
Railroad Co., 312 U.S. 592  (1941).  Any lands  situated
below the high water mark are, thus, held subject  to  this
dominant interest of the United States and may be  taken by
the Federal government without compensation to the private
landowner.  United States v. Willow River Power Co.,  324
U.S. 499, 509  (1945).

Under the traditional view, this right of the  United
States to take private lands without compensation  appears
to be limited to those situations in which the dominant
interest is exercised in aid of navigation.  See,  e.g. ,
United States v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul  & Pacific
Railroad Co., supra; United States v. Willow River Power
Co., supra; United States v. Chandler-Dunbar Water Power
Co. , 229 U.S. 53 (1913).  However, the courts  have also
recognized that, as long as the interests of navigation
are served, other purposes may also be advanced.   See e.q.,
United States v. Twin City Power Co., 350 U.S. 222  (1956).

Nevertheless, because of this limitation, it is likely
that the "traditional view" would reject the right of the
United States to exercise the "navigation servitude"  in
acquiring sites for surveillance stations on the ground
that such stations are not an aid to navigation.

In order to reach an opposite conclusion, at least four
courses are open:  a position based upon the "traditional
view" of the servitude;  a position based upon  a novel view
of the servitude; a position based upon an expanded view
of the servitude; and, a position based upon an historically
updated view of the servitude.


     The "Traditional" View

The approach using the "traditional view" of the servitude
merely recognized the fact that pollution is a burden on
navigation since it increases the corrosion rate of vessels
used in navigation, makes navigation more difficult as a
result of water-clouding, damages dock facilities and has
numerous other deleterious effects on navigation.   Since
the surveillance stations are a part of a program designed
to eliminate pollution,  they will in fact, aid navigation
                           53

-------
and, thus, allow the servitude to be used for the traditional
purpose of assisting navigation.

The use of this approach has at least one major advantage
and one major disadvantage.

The advantage of a position based upon the traditional
view of the servitude is the fact that the courts are not
asked to change existing law in any manner.  Rather, since
the servitude is being used for the traditional purpose,
in aid of navigation, the court is merely required to
recognize that pollution is a burden upon navigation which
surveillance stations will assist in eliminating.

The infirmity of the traditional approach lies in the
Federal pollution control laws themselves.  The Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, 62 Stat. 1155 (1948), as
amended, 33 U.S.C. p. 466 (1964), is designed for the
elimination of water pollution, and neither the Act nor
its legislative history reflect an interest on the part
of Congress to assist or advance navigation.

Consequently, opponents of this view might well take the
position that, since the statutory authority for the
surveillance system is not designed to aid navigation,
and the surveillance system itself is not designed to
aid navigation, the servitude cannot be exercised in the
acquisition of surveillance sites.
     The "Novel" View

Under the "novel" view of the servitude, the bed of a
navigable stream is viewed as the corpus of a public
trust.  The United States, as trustee, may use lands
situated within the stream bed without compensation to
private owners, so long as the use is for purposes of
navigation, commerce or fisheries, all of which tend to
benefit all of the people of the state.  See generally,
Colberg, Inc. v. California, 432 P. 2d 3 (Cal. 1967);
Crary v. State Highway Commission, 68 So. 2d 468  (Miss.
1953) .

The land necessary for the surveillance sites could, under
this view, be acquired without compensation to private
owners since the land would be used for the elimination
of pollution, and thus for the purpose of aiding commerce,
navigation and fisheries.
                           54

-------
The development of the "common law of the public trust",
however, must be considered in a state of infancy, and not
sufficiently established to guarantee the validity of such
a view of the navigation servitude.
     The "Expanded" View

With respect to the third alternative mentioned above,
several commentators have argued for an expanded view of
the "navigation servitude".  See, e.g., Bartke, The
Navigation Servitude and Just Compensation - Struggle for
a Doctrine, 48 Oregon Law Review 1 (1968).  These observers
reach the conclusion that the "navigation servitude" is
proprietary in nature.  That is, because of the dominant
interest of the United States, land situated within the
bed of a navigable stream is viewed, in relation to
navigation, as a part of the public domain.  Therefore,
when dealing with this dominant interest, the authority
exercised is that vested under the property clause of the
United States Constitution.

Adopting this approach the position could be advanced that
since all lands situated within the bed of a navigable
stream are a part of the public domain, they are subject
to the proprietary interest of the United States, and,
consequently, may be utilized without compensation to the
private owner.

The difficulty in adopting the expanded view of the
navigation servitude lies in the fact that, though the
dominant interest of the United States might validly be
viewed as a segment of the public domain, the cases from
which this view of the servitude is drawn have all dealt
with the question of navigation.  In essence, therefore,
these cases tend to support the view that lands below the
high water mark are public lands only when the navigation
and authority of Congress is being exercised.  In all other
instances, and under the exercise of other authority, the
lands are not public lands and are subject to the com-
pensation provisions of the Fifth Amendment when taken for
a purpose other than navigation.
     The "Up-Dated" View

Finally, under the fourth approach, the position can be
advanced that the definition and use of the "navigation
                           55

-------
servitude" has been restricted to navigational purposes
because of a view of commerce which is now out-dated.

In this regard, it was early conceded that, by virtue of
the Commerce Clause, the United States has exclusive and
absolute control over certain waterways.  Gibbons v.
Qgden, 9 Wheat. 1 (1824).  It was also recognized that
because of this exclusive and absolute control, the
United States had an interest in the beds of navigable
waterways (i.e. , the "navigation servitude") which was
superior to the rights of private owners.  United States
v. Chandler-Dunbar Water Power Co., 229 U.S. 53, 62  (1913).
The servitude exists to serve and make effective the
exclusive and absolute control of the United States.  This
exclusive and absolute control is the power to regulate
commerce and, thus, the servitude exists to serve commerce.

However, historically, the servitude has been limited to
"purposes in aid of navigation" - a much narrower scope
than "purposes in aid of commerce".  This limitation is the
result of the manner in which the Commerce Power has
developed in relation to waterways.

Thus, traditionally, the power of absolute control has
been limited to navigable waterways.  Gibbons v. Ogden,
supra.  Such a result appears to have been reached because
water has been viewed merely as a conduit of commerce
rather than as an article of commerce itself.  It was
reasoned that since only navigable waters could support
commerce, the Commerce Power was limited to navigable
waters.  It therefore followed naturally to equate commerce
with navigation, and the servitude, which derives its
character from the absolute power which it serves, was
consequently limited to purposes in aid of navigation.

It is the view of the authors, however, that whatever the
reasons for viewing water as a mere conduit of commerce
previously, this view is no longer justified.  Water itself
has become an article of commerce rather than a mere
"navigation conduit", and should be considered in that
light.

When it is so considered, the historical equation of
"commerce" with "navigation" is no longer valid.  The
Commerce Power encompasses not only navigable streams,
but also all streams in which water is an article of
interstate commerce.
                           56

-------
Similarly, the scope of the servitude should not be
limited to purposes in aid of navigation.  The servitude
follows the power which it serves.  Since "commerce" and
"navigation" can no longer be equated, the servitude
cannot remain limited in exercise to purposes in aid of
navigation but must follow the Commerce Power.  Thus, it
should be considered available for use in aid of commerce,
and therefore in aid of controlling pollution.  The
conclusion thereby follows that the navigation servitude
may be used to acquire surveillance sites since they will
be used in a program designed to eliminate pollution and
aid interstate commerce by removing a burden on inter-
state waters.
Establishment of Surveillance Stations on Federal Land

Assuming that many of the surveillance stations will be
positioned beyond the high water mark of the rivers, it
will be necessary to secure suitable sites for their
operation.  Problems and costs of site acquisition may
be eased greatly in those instances in which the stations
can be established on Federal lands.  In such cases it will
be-necessary to secure the authorization of the agency
responsible for the administration of the lands involved.
No payment would be necessary.  However, any such per-
mission must be authorized by statute and should be in
writing and signed by the official responsible for
management of the area within which the station would
be located.  While it is not likely that special permits
would be required, it is important that the sites be
segregated from other uses by executive withdrawal or
by a suitable declaration prohibiting conflicting uses.
     Public Lands

It is quite probable that surveillance stations will be
needed on public lands owned by the United States.  In
most instances, barring the existence of previous with-
drawals or reservations, the public lands are under the
jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior and ad-
ministered and managed by the Director of the Bureau of
Land Management.  In,order to establish a surveillance
site on the public lands, it would be necessary for the
Secretary to withdraw the site from entry by executive
order pursuant to the Pickett Act, 36 Stat. 847 (1910)
43 U.S.C. p. 141 ejt seq.  (1964), or exercise his general
                           57

-------
authority to withdraw and reserve lands from entry and
settlement.  See United States v. Midwest Oil Co., 236
U.S. 459  (1915).  The authority to withdraw lands under
the Pickett Act has been delegated to the Secretary of the
Interior pursuant to Executive Order No. 10355, 17 Fed.
Reg. 4831  (1952).  In this regard, the Act provides that:

          The President may, at any time in his dis-
          cretion, temporarily withdraw from settle-
          ment, location, sale, or entry any of the
          public lands of the United States, including
          Alaska, and reserve the same for water-power
          sites, irrigation, classification of lands, or
          other public purposes to be specified in the
          orders of withdrawals, and such withdrawals
          or reservations shall remain in force until
          revoked by him or by an Act of Congress.  43
          U.S.C. p. 141 (1964).

There is little doubt that the establishment of surveillance
stations is a "public purpose" as contemplated by the Act,
and would therefore be the subject of a valid withdrawal.

A withdrawal of lands pursuant to the Pickett Act,
however, has one potential danger which should not be
overlooked.  Section 2 of the Act provides that any lands
so withdrawn "shall at all times be open to exploration,
discovery, occupation and purchase under the mining laws
of the United States, so far as the same apply to metal-
liferous minerals	" 43 U.S.C. p. 142 (1964).  Therefore,
in order to prevent the location of metalliferous mining
claims on the sites occupied by the surveillance stations,
a withdrawal pursuant to the general authority of the
Secretary would be preferable.  See e.g. , United States
v. Midwest Oil Co., supra.

In order to initiate the withdrawal, the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration would make application
to the Bureau of Land Management.  Upon application, the
lands become segregated and are no longer open to entry.

In addition to making the withdrawal, it would also be
advisable for the Secretary to transfer sufficient ad-
ministrative jurisdiction over the site to enable the
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration to perform
their duties of monitoring and surveillance.   Such a
transfer could be accomplished in the withdrawal order,
or by separate Secretarial Order.
                          58

-------
Naturally, the entire surveillance program assumes that
the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration can be
a land-administering agency.  Nothing in the applicable
Statutes appears to prohibit such responsibility.  However,
it would be advisable to establish the principle through an
opinion of the Solicitor of the Department of the Interior
or by the Attorney General of the United States.
     National Forest Lands

With respect to the establishment of surveillance stations
on National Forest lands, which are administered by the
Secretary of Agriculture, the authority is less clear.
Research has not disclosed any Congressional authorization
for an interdepartmental transfer or exchange of such lands.
However, the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized:

          to permit ... any public ... agency, to
          use and occupy suitable areas of land
          within the national forests not ex-
          ceeding eighty acres and for periods
          not exceeding thirty years, for the purpose
          of constructing or maintaining any buildings,
          structures, or facilities necessary or
          desirable for education or for any public
          use or in connection with any public
          activity.  The authority provided by this
          section shall be exercised in such a manner
          as not to preclude the general public
          from full enjoyment of the natural, scenic,
          recreational, and other aspects of the
          national forests.  38 Stat. 1101 (1915),
          16 U.S.C. p. 497 (1964).

It seems clear that such authorization embraces other
Federal agencies, such as the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, in addition to state and local
agencies.  It also appears that the language is broad
enough to authorize the establishment of surveillance
stations within the national forests upon the approval of
the Secretary of Agriculture.

Whether the Secretary of Agriculture can condition the
permits so as to preclude the location of mining claims
after establishment of the stations is unclear.  See 16
U.S.C. p. 482 (1964).  However, the Secretary of the Interior
is authorized to withdraw the lands from the location of
                          59

-------
mining claims by virtue of his delegated authority.  43
U.S.C.A. 3141 (1964 ed.); E.O. No. 10355, 17 Fed. Reg.
4831, May 26, 1952.  Such withdrawals should be effected
immediately upon issuance of the permits.
     Bureau of Reclamation Project Sites

It is possible that the Bureau of Reclamation has acquired
jurisdiction over certain potential reclamation project
sites on portions of the Lower Missouri River Basin.  In
most instances, the reclamation project sites will have
been withdrawn by the Secretary pursuant to his authority
under Section 3 of the Reclamation Act of 1902, 32 Stat.
388  (1902), 43 U.S.C. p. 391, p. 416  (1964).  If any such
sites are to be used for surveillance stations, it would
appear advisable to transfer administrative jurisdiction
over a portion of the sites to the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration.

Such an intradepartmental transfer of jurisdiction
could be accomplished by a modification of the reclamation
withdrawal over the lands to be used for the station,
followed by a restoration to withdrawn status under the
general authority of the Secretary to withdraw public
lands.  (See discussion, supra.)  In the alternative, it
is possible that agreement might be reached between the
Bureau of Reclamation and the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration allowing the use of a portion of
the reclamation site for surveillance purposes.
     Corps of Engineers Project Sites

If surveillance stations are to be established on lands
owned and administered by the Army Corps of Engineers -
a distinct possibility in any of the three river basins
under consideration - the authority for a transfer of rights
to the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration is
clear.  The Secretary of the Army is authorized:

          to grant leases of lands, including
          structures or facilities thereon, at
          water resource development projects for
          such periods, and upon such terms and
          for such purposes as he may deem rea-
          sonable in the public interest ...
          Provided further, that preference shall
                          60

-------
          be given to Federal, State, or local
          governmental agencies, and licenses,
          or leases where appropriate, may be
          granted without monetary considerations,
          to such agencies for the use of all or any
          portion of a project area for any public
          purpose, when the Secretary of the Army
          determines such action to be in the public
          interest, and for such periods of time and
          upon such conditions as he may find advis-
          able. .. .

          No use of any area to which this section
          applies shall be permitted which is incon-
          sistent with the laws for the protection of
          fish and game of the State in which such
          area is situated.   58 Stat. 889 (1944), as
          amended Oct. 23, 1962, 76 Stat. 1195  (1962),
          and Sept. 3, 1964, 78 Stat. 899 (1964); 16
          U.S.C.A. p. 460d (1969 pocket part).

In addition to this authority, the Secretary of the Army
is afforded the general power to lease non-excess property
within his jurisdiction.   70A Stat. 150 (1956); 10 U.S.C.
p. 2667  (1964).

Consequently, few legal difficulties should be anticipated
in acquiring surveillance sites on property under the
jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers.   The possibility
of interdepartmental administrative difficulties exists, and
may be more troublesome than the legal questions involved.


     Indian Reservations

The lower Missouri River  Basin drains several Indian
reservations upon which the  location of surveillance
stations may be desirable.  Among them are the Ponca,
Santee, Winnebago and Omaha  Reservations in Nebraska
and the Iowa Reservation  on  the border between Nebraska
and Kansas.6/
I/ For the legal status of the Ponca Tribe see 25 U.S.C.A.
   pp. 971-980 (1969 pocket part).
                          61

-------
All the land excompassed by the reservation is either
in tribal ownership or owned by individual Indians.  None
of the land is owned by the United States in trust for the
Indian tribes.  Consequently, any rights to the reservation
lands must be granted either by the tribe or by the in-
dividual owners of the lands.

Land owned in unrestricted, fee simple title by members
of the Tribes must be acquired in the same manner as any
other privately-owned lands.  Allotted lands, at least
those over which statutory restrictions are imposed, may
be leased according to the terms of the relevant Federal
statutes.  See Federal Indian Law (1958 ed.), pp. 804-818.
The same is true regarding the leasing of tribal property.
See Federal Indian Law, supra, pp. 687-710.
     General Problems in the Establishment of Surveillance
     Stations on Federal Lands	

In some instances, Federal lands may be devoted by
statute to a single purpose which is incompatible with
the establishment and operation of surveillance stations.
In such cases, legislation may be needed to broaden the
purpose for which the sites may be used unless alternative
sites are available and equally suitable to surveillance
activities.  Examples of such single purpose Federal
areas would be national parks and monuments and defense or
military installations.  Of course, in adopting such
legislation, Congress would be faced with the question
of the compatibility of surveillance stations with the
purposes for which the lands were originally set aside.

Without advance knowledge of the potential sites for
surveillance stations on Federal lands, it is impossible to
predict the individual problems which may arise in each
case.  However, as a general proposition, it should be
noted that mere Federal ownership of potential sites does
not guarantee the use of that site for surveillance purposes.

In this regard, many interdepartmental and intradepart-
mental obstacles may make acquisition of proper sites
on Federal lands no more feasible or economical than
acquisition of sites on state or private lands.  The
funds saved by the lack of a need to purchase Federal
sites may well be expended in the intragovernmental
intricacies of land transfers.  Nevertheless, Federal
lands frequently offer many advantages over state or
                          62

-------
private lands, and should be considered carefully in site
selection.  Indeed, if their technological or scientific
merit is equal to alternate sites on state or private
lands, the Federal sites would likely be preferable in most
instances.

Each of the three river basins under consideration
drains Federal lands upon which surveillance stations might
be located.  The Southeastern River Basins encompass a
number of National Forests, including the Apalachicalla and
Conecuh National Forests.  The Ohio River Basin drains the
Allegheny, Wayne, Hoosier and Shawnee National Forests.
The Lower Missouri River Basin drains a wider variety of
Federal lands, including public lands in Colorado and
Wyoming, National Forests in Colorado, Wyoming and
Nebraska, and Indian reservations in Nebraska.  Moreover,
an undetermined number of water project sites may exist
in the three basins, some of which no doubt would be under
the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers or the
Bureau of Reclamation.  It is possible that surveillance
stations may be located ultimately on all the types of
Federal lands which are appurtenant to the rivers under
consideration.
Acquisition of Surveillance Sites from States, Municipalities
or Private Owners	

In all  likelihood it will be necessary to acquire  interests
in state, local or private lands for the establishment  of
surveillance stations.  The following discussion concerns
the legal problems which may arise in connection with
the acquisition and use of such lands.
     Authority of States and Municipalities to Transfer
     Interests in Land	

With respect to potential sites owned by  states  or
municipalities, an initial problem concerns their
authority to transfer legal interests in  real property
to  the  United States.  Rights which might be acquired
include fee simple title, lease, permanent or temporary
easement, or license.

Since licenses are generally revocable  at will by the
licensor, it would be desirable that a  more substantial
and permanent interest be acquired for  the establishment
of  surveillance stations.  Consequently,  the real question
                          63

-------
concerns the authority of states or municipalities to
transfer legal interests at least as substantial as a
temporary easement.

Without a comprehensive review of all the states and
municipalities which own potential surveillance sites in
the three river basins under consideration, a definitive
answer for each particular situation is impossible.  How-
ever, as a general rule, states and municipalities possess
the authority to grant legal interests in real property
which they own.Z/
7/  The following state statutes are representative of the
    authority granted by the states for the acquisition of
    state or private lands:

    Florida - The United States may purchase, acquire, hold,
    own, occupy and possess such lands within the limits of
    this state as they shall seek to occupy and hold as sites
    on which to erect and maintain forts, magazines, arsenals,
    dockyards, and other needful buildings or any of them,
    as contemplated and provided in the constitution of
    the United States; such land to be acquired either by
    contract with owners, or in the manner hereinafter
    provided.  F.S.A. p. 6.02.  See also F.S.A. p. 6.03 and
    F.S.A. p. 589.10.
    Pennsylvania - Specific legislation appears to be
    necessary, but is by no means unprecedented.
    West Virginia - The State of West Virginia authorizes
    the United States to acquire lands in the State by
    purchase, lease, condemnation, or otherwise for the
    purpose inter alia, of constructing works of public
    improvement, or for any other purpose for which the
    land may be needed by the United States.  1 W.V.C.
    p. 1-3.  See also 20 W.V.C. p. 5A-4.
    Tennessee - The State of Tennessee authorizes the
    United States to acquire, by purchase or otherwise,
    lands within the state as in the opinion of the
    Federal government, the State Forester, and the
    Governor, concurring, may be necessary for, inter
    alia, the improvement and development of the Tennessee
    River Basin.  11 T.C.A. p. 1001.  See also 11 T.C.A.
    p. 1401, p. 1416 and 12 T.C.A. p. 201.
    Colorado - The State of Colorado authorizes the State
    Board of Land Commissioners to sell any State land in
    such parcels as they shall deem for the best interest
    of the State.  112 C.R.S. 3-25.  See also, 66 C.R.S.
    28-3(5).
                          64

-------
As with Federal parklands, cases of potential  incompati-
bility of uses may arise when surveillance sites  are  sought
on state or municipal parklands.  Unless accommodations
can be made allowing the establishment of the  stations in
such areas, alternative sites must be chosen.

The acquisition of sites from state or local governments
will require consultation with the officials responsible
for the management of those areas.  In the case of state
governments, the state park commission or comparable
authority will often be the responsible agency.   Other
possibilities include the state highway department and
the state public utility commission.  In all cases involving
the acquisition of state-owned sites, the state water
pollution control agency should be consulted and  advised
as to the site selection and acquisition process.  The
same process should be followed with respect to the
governor and the state legislature, at least as to those
legislators who represent districts within which  the
stations are to be placed.

In the case of municipalities,  the local city  council
will, in most instances, be vested with sufficient
authority for the granting of appropriate easements or
permits.  They, too, should be kept fully informed of the
site selection process and the nature of the surveillance
program.

It is likely that in site acquisition from state  or
local governments, it will be necessary to make formal
presentations to the appropriate agencies and officials
regarding the feasibility and necessity of the proposed
sites.  In any such presentations, legal counsel  from
the Office of the Solicitor,  Department of the Interior
should be present or fully consulted in order to  effectuate
the proper agreements.  The agreement should authorize a
relatively long term use of the site and provide  for
suitable access.  It is not necessary that it provide for
exclusive use if other uses are compatible with the
purposes for which the station is established and operated.

The establishment of surveillance stations on privately-
owned lands may prove considerably more troublesome than
on Federal lands.  It involves two problems which are not
as acute with the use of Federal lands - payment  for use of
the lands and the necessity" for statutory authority to
acquire the lands.  Both problems exist in the acquisition
of state and municipal lands, and the following discussion
is equally applicable to them.
                          65

-------
     Authority of the United States to Acquire Lands for
     the Establishment of a Surveillance System	

The statutory authority of the Secretary of the Interior
or the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration to
acquire lands for the location of surveillance stations is,
at best, unclear.  At least four potential avenues for
acquisition of lands exist if the requisite statutory
authority is present.  These include acceptance of sites
by donation, or acquisition of lands by purchase, con-
demnation or exchange.
           Acceptance of Sites by Donation

There is apparently authority for the acceptance of sites
by donation under existing law.  In a situation involving
the acceptance of a site for a proposed water research
laboratory in Oklahoma, the Associate Solicitor for Water
Resources and Procurement, Department of the Interior,
concluded that the Act of July 14, I960, 74 Stat. 506,
(1960); 43 U.S.C. p. 1364 (1964), provided the necessary
authority for such acceptance.  That Act reads in part that:

          The Secretary of the Interior may accept
          contributions or donations of...property,
          real, personal or mixed for the improvement,
          management, use, and protection of the public
          lands and their resources under his juris-
          diction. . ..

The Associate Solicitor concluded, in a memorandum of
November 5, 1968, to the Assistant Commissioner for
Administration, Federal Water Pollution Control Administra-
tion , that:

          ... the authority of the Secretary to accept
          donations of land under the cited statute is
          predicated upon the benefits that will accrue
          to the public lands as defined in the Act.
          The authority does not require that the
          acquisition become a part of the public lands,
          but only that it will be beneficial in the
          "improvement, management, use, and protection
          of the public lands".  The conservation and
          development of water resources is directly
          related and of vital concern to the public
          lands and the improvement and management of
          those lands depends to a high degree upon
          the appropriate development of the water
                           66

-------
          resources serving them.   The purpose of the
          laboratory.  ...  is to conduct "research,
          investigations,  experiments, field demon-
          strations and studies and training relating
          to the prevention and control of water
          pollution".  33  U.S.C. 466(c)(e).  This
          water conservation purpose has a direct
          relation to the  development and use of the
          public lands and, accordingly, it is within
          the jurisdiction of the  Secretary pursuant to
          the cited statute to accept the donation of
          land. ...

Clearly, then, the Secretary may accept donations of land
to be used for the construction of facilities having a
general impact upon the "improvement, management, use, and
protection of the public lands and their resources under
his jurisdiction...."  The laboratory in Oklahoma was such
a facility.

While there is no specific ruling  on the question, it
would appear that water quality surveillance stations
established in areas which monitor the flow of water
arising on or directly related to  the public lands would
have a general impact upon the "improvement, management,
use, and protection of the public  lands and their re-
sources...."  At very least, a strong argument can be made
that the research developments generated by surveillance
stations and equipment, wherever located, will be of
ultimate benefit to all the water  resources of the nation,
including those on the public lands.  Thus, since the
Secretary is authorized to accept  donations of property
for the improvement of the water resources of the public
domain and since the benefits derived from the surveil-
lance stations, wherever located,  will contribute generally
to such improvement, it would appear that the Secretary can
accept donations of land for these purposes.

It must be recognized, however, that such a conclusion
tends to stretch the authority vested by the statute
beyond what was initially  contemplated.  That being the
case, specific legislative authority empowering the
Secretary of the Interior  to accept donations of property
for general purposes relating to the control of water
pollution would be desirable.
                           67

-------
            Acquisition of Sites by Exchange

In the State of Colorado and Wyoming (and other public
land states of the West), it would appear possible for the
Secretary to acquire surveillance sites by exchange of public
lands under his jurisdiction.  In this regard, Section 8 of
the Taylor Grazing Act, 48 Stat. 1272  (1934), as amended,
43 U.S.C. p. 315g (1964), provides that:

          When public interests will be benefited
          thereby the Secretary is authorized to
          accept on behalf of the United States
          title to any privately owned lands within
          or without the boundaries of a grazing
          district, and in exchange therefor to
          issue patent for not to exceed an equal
          value of surveyed grazing district land
          or of unreserved surveyed public land in
          the same state or within a distance of not
          more than fifty miles within the adjoining
          state nearest the base lands.

Under this authority and upon a finding by the Secretary
that the "public interests will be benefited" by an
exchange of lands in order to establish surveillance
stations, his authority to acquire private lands by ex-
change is clear.  However, the statute is of limited
application since it applies only in states in which public
lands are located.  In the context of the present study,
the authority would be applicable only in the states of
Colorado and Wyoming.


     Acquisition of Sites by Purchase or Condemnation

The statutory authority for the purchase or condemnation of
property is much more tenuous than that for the exchange
of property or the acceptance of donated property.  Indeed,
in a memorandum prepared by the Assistant Solicitor, Water
Pollution Control, Department of the Interior, dated
March 10, 1967, it was concluded that  "(t)he Secretary of
the Interior does not have authority to acquire real
property for purpose of his functions and responsibilities
under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act...."

As pointed out in that memorandum, the Secretary of the
Interior does not have general legislative authority for
the purchase of real property.  Such authority must be
set out  for each specific purpose by statute.  See 41
U.S.C. p. 14  (1964).
                            68

-------
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C.A.
p. 466 et s_eq_.  (1969 pocket part), authorizes the
Secretary to "establish, equip, and maintain field
laboratory and research facilities" in certain designated
areas of the country, and other areas as he may determine.
33 U.S.C.A. p. 466c(e).  While such authority may subsume
the authority to purchase lands for the facilities  (see
22 Op. Atty. Gen.  665  (1899)), it is unlikely that the
authority would extend to the purchase of sites for
surveillance stations.

It should be noted that the Assistant Solicitor for
Water Pollution Control, in his memorandum of March 16,
1967, supra, concluded that site acquisition for surveil-
lance stations was not authorized by the Act.  The basis
for this conclusion was apparently the fact that surveillance
stations are, essentially, enforcement facilities rather
than "field laboratory and research facilities".

The Assistant Solicitor's conclusion appears to be incon-
sistent with the relevant language of the section which
provides that the Secretary "shall establish...laboratory...
facilities...for the conduct of.. .investigations...relat-
ing to the prevention and control of water pollution".
(Emphasis added.)

Since surveillance facilities are directly related to
the "control" of water pollution,  it would seem more
logical to conclude that they are intended for both
enforcement and research purposes.  This position is
strengthened by the fact that the surveillance stations
are not themselves the enforcement mechanism of the act
but are, rather, merely the monitoring unit which conducts
investigations relating to the control of water pollution.
However, in view of the more general language of the
section and the prevailing opinion of the Department's
Solicitor, it would appear extremely hazardous to rely
on the section for the authority to purchase sites for the
establishment of surveillance stations.8/
/ Indeed, as pointed out hereinbefore, the general
   authority of the Secretary to establish a Federal Water
   quality surveillance system is not explicit in this
   section or in the enforcement provisions of the Act,
   but probably can be inferred from other language of the
   Act.  As in other cases mentioned, however, specific
   legislative authorization would be preferable.  See
   Section II, supra.
                           69

-------
Moreover, since the Act contemplates that "facilities"
are to be "located near institutions of higher learning",
it appears that the section was probably intended to
authorize the establishment of pure research facilities
rather than surveillance facilities.  It is doubtful,
therefore, that the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
affords the necessary authority for site acquisition for
surveillance facilities.

A second possibility for the requisite authority is the
statute authorizing the Secretary to acquire lands for
"gaging streams and underground water resources".  56
Stat. 1086 (1942); 43 U.S.C. p. 36b (1964).  The statute
provides that:

          The Secretary of the Interior may, on behalf
          of the United States and for use by the
          Geological Survey in gaging streams and
          underground water resources, acquire lands
          by donation or when funds have been ap-
          propriated by Congress by purchase or
          condemnation, but not in excess of ten acres
          for any one stream gaging station or obser-
          vation well site.  For the same purpose the
          Secretary of the Interior may obtain easements,
          licenses, rights-of-way, and leases limited
          to run for such a period of time or term of
          years as may be required for the effective
          performance of the function of gaging
          streams and underground water resources....

The legislation clearly provides for the acquisition of
sites for the gaging of streams.  However, the real question
is whether the language, "for use by the Geological Survey"
precludes the acquisition of sites for use in a surveillance
system to be administered by the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration.  The answer appears to be in the
affirmative.

The legislative history of the statute clearly indicates
that the sites are to be used by the Geological Survey
in their activities relating to the measurement of stream-
flow and water supply.  (See H. Rept. No. 1847, 77th Cong.,
2d Sess., Feb. 28, 1942 and the transmittal letter of the
Interior Department contained therein.)  Nothing in the
language of the statute or its legislative history indicates
that the authority is broad enough to empower the Secretary
to acquire lands for water pollution surveillance sites.
                           70

-------
While it would not be necessary for Congress to have
anticipated the need for such sites in the 1942 statute,
the specificity of the language tends to limit the
usefulness of the statute to the acquisition of sites
for use by the Geological Survey.

In this regard, we may quaere/ whether the sites
acquired for use by the Geological Survey under this Act
may also be used for water quality surveillance by the
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration.  Again,
the specific language of the statute would appear to
preclude such use, since the acquired sites are "for use
by the Geological Survey in gaging streams and underground
water resources...."

It would appear inconceivable that such sites could be
used for other Federal purposes as, e.q. , for military
purposes by the Department of Defense or for housing
purposes by the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
The same logic would appear to apply to any joint use by
the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, even
though its use of the sites would be similar to the stream
gaging functions performed by the Geological Survey.

Since Congress has required specifically that the sites
be used by the Geological Survey for the purposes mentioned
in the statute, an intradepartmental transfer of juris-
diction to the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
would appear to contradict the intent of Congress.

Moreover, it is relevant to point out that serious problems
would inevitably arise in the appropriations process in
Congress if the Federal Water Pollution Control Administra-
tion were to acquire lands under this statute.  It is not
likely that Congress would appropriate funds for site
acquisition by the Geological Survey, only to have the
sites then used by or transferred to the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration.  Indeed, it is unlikely
that the Geological Survey itself would be willing to
seek and disburse appropriated funds in order to provide
survillance sites for another Federal agency in the
Department of the Interior.
   Quaere - question.
                           71

-------
The 1950 Reorganization Plan No. 3  (15 Fed. Reg. 3174,
64 Stat. 1262), does not alter the conclusion that authority
is lacking under 43 U.S.C., p. 36b to acquire surveillance
sites for the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration.
The Reorganization Plan merely transferred all functions of
Departmental agencies, officers and employees, to the
Secretary of the Interior and vested in him with the
authority to delegate their performance to the various
agencies, officers or employees in the Department.  Inter-
preted broadly, the Reorganization Plan would authorize
the Secretary to transfer the stream gaging functions of
the Geological Survey to the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration.  It would not authorize him,
however, to expand the scope of those activities to
include water quality surveillance, or to acquire lands
for such an expanded program.  It is quite likely that
Congress would view such an attempted transfer and program
expansion as a mere subterfuge designed to circumvent
the lack of authority to acquire sites for water quality
surveillance.

In summary, it is reasonable to conclude that no statutory
authority presently exists for the acquisition of sites
for the establishment of a water quality surveillance
system.
Site Acquisition under H.R. 4148 and S. 7 and Recommended
Legislation	

Legislation which has been introduced in the current
session of Congress does not appear to provide the
necessary authority for surveillance site acquisition.
H.R. 4148, an amendment to the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act which has passed the House of Representatives,
and S. 7, a substantially similar Senate bill, provide
that:

          In carrying out the provisions of sub-
          sections (a) through (j) of this section
          relating to the conduct by the Secretary
          of demonstration projects and the develop-
          ment of field laboratories and research
          facilities, the Secretary may acquire land
          and interests therein by purchase, with
          appropriated or donated funds, by donation,
          or by exchange for acquired or public lands
          under his jurisdiction which he classifies
          as suitable for disposition.  The values of
          the properties so exchanged either shall be
                           72

-------
          approximately equal, or if they are not
          approxiirately equal, the values shall be
          equalized by the payment of cash to the
          grantor or to the Secretary as the circum-
          stances require.  H.R. 4148, p. 5  (i),
          91st Cong., 1st Sess.  (1969).

Essentially, the amendment would clarify the authority
of the Secretary to acquire sites for the "field laboratory
and research facilities" authorized by section 5(e) of the
Federal Water Pollution Control  Act.  33 U.S.C.A. p. 466c
(e) (1969 pocket part), and for  the demonstration projects
also authorized by section 5 of  the Act.

As discussed, supra, the authority to acquire sites for
"field laboratory and research facilities" probably would
not be construed to encompass the acquisition of surveil-
lance station sites.  Consequently, H.R. 4148 and S.7, if
enacted as presently drafted, would be of little assistance
in the implementation of a Federal water quality surveil-
lance program.

One possible exception involves  the authority granted to
the Secretary to acquire lands for "demonstration projects".
In this regard, section 5 of the Act authorizes demonstration
projects relating to the development of "(i)mproved methods
and procedures to identify and measure the effects of
pollutants on water uses, including those pollutants
created by new technological developments..."  43 U.S.C.A.
p. 466c  (d)  (B)  (1969 pocket part) .  Assuming, arquendojJV,
that this language is broad enough to include surveillance
stations, H.R. 4148 as presently proposed would authorize
the acquisition of land for the  stations.  However, the
language does not appear to be sufficiently encompassing
since the authorization is clearly for a "demonstration
project" rather than a system for surveillance and enforce-
ment of water quality standards, and since the language
relates to the identification and measurement of "the ,
effects of pollutants on water uses" rather than the
continuous surveillance and monitoring water quality
itself.
     Arquendo - For the sake of argument or discussion.
                           73

-------
For these reasons it appears that neither H.R. 4148 nor
S. 7 would provide the necessary authority for the acquisi-
tion of sites for water quality surveillance facilities.
Therefore, it is recommended that additional legislation be
introduced to provide specifically for the establishment of
a water quality surveillance system and for the acquisition
of necessary sites for surveillance stations.  A draft of
proposed legislation designed to achieve these objectives
is set forth in the Appendix hereto.  Such an amendment to
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act would provide
specific authority for the establishment of a Federal water
quality surveillance system, and would authorize the
Secretary to acquire the necessary land for the surveillance
stations and the necessary equipment for their operation.
ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE COLLECTED BY SCIENTIFIC EQUIPMENT
AND TRANSMITTED BY TELEMETRY DEVICES	

As mentioned in the Introduction of the legal portion
of this study, the establishment of an efficient water
quality surveillance system will assist Federal and State
officials in determining compliance and non-compliance with
water quality standards established by the various States
with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior.  More-
over, within the limitations hereinafter described and
analyzed, data developed by surveillance facilities may
provide early warning of water quality deteriorations and
valuable documentation of violations and evidentiary
support for enforcement and abatement proceedings.

The use of the surveillance system facilities to detect
water quality deterioration and provide informational
data respecting complaince, vel nonll/, with established
water quality standards, poses no real legal problems beyond
those involved in location and site acquisition mentioned
hereinbefore.  On the other hand, use of the scientific
data products of such facilities and the introduction
of such data as evidenced in abatement proceedings present
additional legal considerations.  Section 10(c)  (5) of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C.A. p. 466g(c)
(5), provides that:

          In any suit brought under the provisions
          of this subsection the court shall receive
    Vel non - or not.
                           74

-------
          in evidence a transcript of the proceedings
          of the conference and hearing provided for
          in this subsection,  together with the
          recommendations of the conference and Hearing
          Board and the recommendations and standards
          promulgated by the Secretary, and such
          additional evidence, including that relating
          to the alleged violation of the standards, as
          it deems necessary to a complete review of
          the standards and to a determination of all
          other issues relating to the alleged violation.
          The court, giving due consideration to the
          practicability and to the physical and economic
          feasibility of complying with such standards,
          shall have jurisdiction to enter such judgment
          and orders enforcing such judgment as the public
          interest and the equities of the case may require.

It is clear from this language that the Act makes no pro-
visions for the admissibility  or inadmissibility of parti-
cular data gathered and transmitted by automatic devices.
Moreover, until specific information is available with
regard to the installation and operation of the proposed
collection and transmission system, it is not possible to
say conclusively that data collected by such a method would
be admissible in evidence in pollution abatement and enforce-
ment proceedings.  However, the general evidentiary require-
ments and qualifications which must be met before data
collected by scientific instrument may be admitted as
evidence, and the corresponding difficulties which may
be encountered or anticipated, are hereinafter described
and analyzed.
General

Absent the establishment by statute of specific evidentiary
requirements applicable to compliance and enforcement pro-
ceedings under the Water Pollution Control laws, the general
rules of evidence would apply.   Such rules are well es-
tablished in the common law applicable in all State and
Federal Courts in this country  and will generally be rigidly
applied.  For this reason, any  surveillance facilities in-
stalled and operated for the purpose of developing useable
evidence in judicial proceedings brought pursuant to the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (see specifically
Sections 10(g), (1)  & (2)), should be designed and operated
in such a way as to meet the technical legal requirements
discussed hereinafter.
                          75

-------
It is relevant to point out here that the quantum and
quality of proof required in judicial proceeding (e.g./
enforcement and abatement suits) are generally considerably
higher than in administrative proceedings.  In this regard,
the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C., Sees. 551 ejt
se.), which would be applicable to all administrative
hearings authorized and conducted pursuant to the Water
Pollution Control Act (e.g., conferences convened pursuant
to Section 10), specifically provides for the relaxation
of the rules of evidence in administrative proceedings.12/
Thus, it may be assumed that data produced by the surveil-
lance system may be useful and admissible in administrative
hearings and review proceedings although not competent for
introduction in a judicial proceeding.

As a general proposition, admissibility of evidence is,
in the first instance, a question to be decided by the
trial judge or hearing examiner.  He must determine whether
the evidence is relevant, material, competent, and not
subject to some exclusionary rule of evidence.

Evidence collected or produced by scientific instruments
most often must surmount the barrier of competency.  Simply
stated, competent evidence is that which is fit for the
purpose for which it is introduced.  Thus, in considering
whether data gathered by scientific instrumentation is
competent evidence, the trial judge or hearing examiner
must determine whether the collected data reliably proves
those facts which it purports to prove.
Specific Requirements

The burden of showing the requisite competency is upon the
party offering the material in evidence.  To meet that
burden in the introduction of data collected by scientific
instruments, the following qualifications must be met:
(1) The type of apparatus must be accepted as dependable
     Section 7(c) provides, inter alia;
     Any oral or documentary evidence may be received, but
     every agency shall as a matter of policy provide for
     the exclusion of irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly
     repetitious evidence and no sanction shall be imposed
     or rule or order be issued except upon consideration of
     the whole record or such portions thereof as may be
     cited by any party and as supported by and in accordance
     with the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence.
                            76

-------
for the purpose for which it has been used by the profession
concerned in that branch of science or art;  (2) The particu-
lar apparatus used must be one constructed according to an
accepted type and must be in good condition for accurate
work; (3) The person using the apparatus must be one quali-
fied for its use by training and experience. Wigmore, The
Science of Judicial Proof, 450 (1937).

To satisfy the first requirement, the offering party
must show that the device or method used has gained general
acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs as
a trustworthy procedure, which is reliably so in all cases.
Lindsey v. United States.  237 F. 2d 893, 896  (9th Cir.
1956) .  This showing may be made in one of the two ways:
     Judicial Notice

If the accuracy and reliability of the device is notorious
and well established, the judge may take judicial notice
of this fact and no further proof is necessary.   (See State
v. Dantonio, 18 N.J. 50, 115 A. 2d 35  (1955)).
     Qualification by Expert Witnesses

This method, which is used when accuracy and reliability  is
not generally known, requires the presentation of witnesses,
who are experts in the particular field and who will
testify to the necessary general scientific acceptance and
reliability of the device in question.  Since, as far as  is
known,, the proposed monitoring and transmission system is
novel in many aspects, it would seem that general
scientific acceptance could not be shown and would have to
be proved by the second method.

The second qualification can be established only by
means of expert testimony.  An expert in the particular
field must offer sufficient evidence to show that the
particular apparatus is constructed according to an
accepted type.  It must also be shown that the apparatus
was in good condition for accurate work at the time the
data in question was developed.  That is, it must be
shown that the accuracy of the apparatus was duly tested
before, or immediately after, its use.  See State v.
Dantonio, supra.  Generally, this means that the system
must be tested for accuracy on the date of the charged
violation.  See State v. Dantonio, supra; State v.
Moffitt, 100 A. 2d 778  (Del. Super. Ct. 1953); and,
                           77

-------
Carrier v. Commonwealth, 242 S.W. 2d 633  (Ken. Ct. App.
1951) .

Under these circumstances, it would appear that some
provision must be made for conducting an immediate test
for accuracy after the system records a violation, since,
unless the system were tested daily, it would be only
coincidental that the system was tested on the same day
that a violation occurred.  This technical legal require-
ment may, therefore, render remote, unattended surveillance
stations unusable for the purpose of providing competent
evidence of non-compliance.

The third qualification set forth above would require a
showing that the person interpreting the data was duly
qualified by training and experience.  This may be ac-
complished by testimony demonstrating the witnesses'
training and experience.  The judge must determine
whether the witness is duly qualified as an expert to
testify concerning the data collected and his analysis
or interpretation thereof.

Before this evidence would be admitted, however, one
additional qualification, applicable to all evidence, must
be met; i.e., it must be shown that the evidence does in
fact relate to that to which it purports to relate.  For
example, when intoxication is charged, it must be shown
that the sample from which the chemical analysis was made
is the sample taken from the one charged with intoxication.
The evidence must be traced from its gathering point to
its presentation at trial.  In the context of a pollution
abatement proceeding, it would have to be shown that the
data recorded can be traced back to the source of pollution,
Again, lack of specific information as to the devices and
methods used in developing data renders it impossible to
state unequivocally that this requirement can be met.

Moreover, once the surveillance system detects measurable
increases in pollution at the metering points, the source
of the pollutant must be traced and isolated and the
responsible party identified.  Samples of discharges must
be taken at the source and properly preserved as evidence
in connection with abatement and enforcement proceedings.

The identification of the source and the collection of
water quality samples from private sewer outfalls or dis-
charge points.may raise questions respecting the authority
of Federal officials to enter upon private lands for this
purpose.
                           78

-------
Where such discharges may be measured and adequate  samples
taken from the river itself or within the boundaries of
the navigation servitude, no special problem arises.

However, where discharge occurs on private land and samples
cannot be obtained without access to private property,
enforcement and abatement will be hampered by the lack of
adequate statutory authority to enter upon private  lands
for the purpose of obtaining evidence of supposed violations,
Since our Constitution and laws have historically respected
and protected private property rights against unwarranted
invasion by the Government and since individual rights are
similarly protected against encroachment except under cir-
cumstances where a countervailing public interest requires
subordination of such private rights, this limitation cannot
be lightly regarded.

Short of amending the applicable water pollution control
laws to expressly provide for access to private property
where Federal officials have reasonable cause to believe a
violation has occurred, it will be necessary for such
officials to observe the rather cumbersome procedures re-
quired in criminal investigations, i.e. , obtaining a
warrant pursuant to order of the cognizant United States
District Court permitting such access.

Since neither the Water Pollution Control Act, 70 Stat.
498 (1956), as amended 33 U.S.C., see 466 et seq. nor
related legislation (Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1961, 75 Stat.  204 (1961); Water Quality
Act of 1965, 79 Stat.  903 (1965); Clean Water Restoration
Act of 1966, 80 Stat.  1246 (1966));  or the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act  of 1970,  84 Stat.  91 (1970) impose
criminal sanctions or  penalties for  violations, the resort
to criminal procedures for enforcement and abatement is
probably not warranted under this legislation.

However, it should be  noted that the Refuse Act of 1899
(Act of March 3, 1899, 30 Stat. 1152, 33 U.S.C., sec.
407)  does impose criminal liability  for the deposit of
refuse in navigable waters.   While there have been a number
of prosecutions under  the Refuse Act over the years, the
statute has fallen into disuse  until recently.

Nonetheless, the statute does provide a possible vehicle
for the development of procedures to enter upon private
lands  for the purpose  of investigating apparent violations
of the Refuse Act.  Assumedly,  if there is reasonable
cause  to believe that  a violation of that Act is occurring,
                           79

-------
Federal officials, working in cooperation with  the  local
United States Attorney, should be  able to secure  the
necessary warrants which would admit  them to private
property.  The samples and other evidence of violations,
would be useful in abatement and enforcement proceedings
as well as in any prosecution initiated pursuant  to the
Refuse Act.

Admittedly, these procedures are cumbersome and somewhat
circuitous.  But again, short of specific authorization
to enter upon private lands by amendment to existing
water pollution control laws, such authority appears not
to exist.
Suggestions

Examine the possibilities of legislation making data
collected by such a system admissible in evidence in an
abatement proceeding in Federal Court.

Consider the possibility and efficacy of using the
automatic surveillance system as a warning system,
following up all violations reported by the system with
an on-site manual verification.
MISCELLANEOUS

It is likely that a number of legal problems will arise
subsequent to the establishment of the surveillance
system.

One problem which may be anticipated involves the liability
for damages arising from the operation of the surveillance
system.  Legal problems could arise in at least two con-
texts:  (1) the liability of the United States to private
individuals for damages caused by the facilities and
equipment, and (2) the liability of individuals to the
United States for damage to the stations and equipment.

Actions by private individuals against the United States
would be brought pursuant to the authority of the Federal
Tort Claims Act,  62 Stat. 982 (1948) as amended, 28 U.S.C.A.
pp. 2671 et seq.   (1969 pocket part).  See also 28 U.S.C.A.
p. 1346 (b) (1962 ed.).  In general, the Federal Tort Claims
Act makes the United States liable for damages occasioned
by the negligent or wrongful conduct of its employees while
acting within the scope of their employment.  It is necessary
                           80

-------
that negligence by proved; absolute liability alone is not
sufficient to sustain a claim.  Allison v. United States,
264 F. Supp. 1021 (D.C. 111. 1967) .

Without a lengthy discussion of the various situations
which could arise under the surveillance program subject-
ing the United States to liability, suffice to say that
continual precautionary measures should be taken to warn of
the existence of the surveillance stations and equipment.
Such measures should include regular inspections, fences,
signs, adequate lighting, and navigational warning devices.
The provision of adequate navigational warning devices
should be coordinated with the United States Coast Guard
and the various river and harbor authorities of the states
and municipalities within the purview of this study.

Regarding the general liability of the United States for
damage to vessels caused by obstructions on navigable
waters, see Cornell Steamboat Co. v. United States, 247
F. 2d 275 (2d Cir. 1957); Russell, Poling & Co. v. United
States, 252 F. 2d 167  (2d Cir. 1958); Pioneer S.S. Co. v.
United States, 176 F. Supp. 140  (D.C. Wis. 1959); Otness
v. United States, 178 F. Supp. 647  (D.C. Alaska 1959).  For
the measure of damages in such cases, see Thompson v.
Consolidated Gas Electric Light & Power Co. , 111 F. Supp.
719  (D.C. Md. 1953).

A case involving the duty of inspection owed by the United
State is Adams v. United States, 239 F. Supp. 503 (D.C.
Okla. 1965).  Regarding the necessity for signs and warning
devices, see Molohan v. United States, 206 F. Supp. 388
(D.C. Mont.  1962).  As to the necessity for adequate
lighting, at least in cases in which trespass is not
involved, see Korel v. United States, 246 F. 2d 424  (4th
Cir. 1957) and Grant v. United States, 271 F. 2d 651  (2d
Cir. 1959).   In the only reported case involving the
duty of the United States to trespassers, it was held that
no action could be maintained.  Benson v. United,States,
235 F. Supp. 495 (D.C. Alaska 1964) .

In cases in which the surveillance stations or equipment
are damaged by negligent or wrongful activities of private
individuals, the United States has the same right of
recovery as a private individual.  Jurisdiction is afforded
under the general jurisdictional statute authorizing the
United States to bring actions in the Federal District
Courts.  28 U.S.C.A. p. 1345  (1962 ed.) .
                            81

-------
The United States Supreme Court has affirmed the right
of the United States to sue for theft or destruction of
its property.  Rex Trailer Co. v. United States, 350
U.S. 148, 151 (1956); Colton v. United States, 52 U.S.
228  (1851).

Other legal problems may arise from what commonly are
termed "Acts of God".  For example, if the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration were to lease the
equipment necessary for monitoring pollutants in the
streams, and the equipment were to be damaged or destroyed
by flood or other acts of God, the question of liability
to the lessor would arise.

Since the Federal Tort Claims Act establishes the
liability of the United States only on the basis of
negligence or wrongful act, it is doubtful that liability
would ensue as the result of an act of God.  See discussion,
supra.  However, liability could be predicated on the terms
of the lease.  Consequently, it would appear advisable, in
most instances,  for the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration to purchase the surveillance equipment
rather than obtaining it on a lease basis.

One final legal problem involves the authority of the
Secretary to purchase equipment and supplies necessary for
establishing, maintaining and operating the surveillance
system.

By virtue of the fact that the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, 33  U.S.C. p466 et seq., impliedly authorizes
the establishment of a Federal water quality surveillance
system (see discussion above) , it also provides the
general authority for procuring equipment and supplies
necessary for the system.  While contracting authority
is sometimes delineated specifically, see, e.g. , section
105 (h)  of the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970,
general procurement authority for equipment and supplies
is subsumed within the authority to undertake a project
or activity.  This is the recognized practice within
Federal agencies, and is followed consistently in procure-
ment of equipment and supplies.  As an example, the
Bureau of Reclamation, another procurement and contracting
agency within the Department of the Interior, follows this
procedure in acquiring equipment and supplies for reclama-
tion projects.  They neither rely upon specific legislative
authority nor line-item appropriations for such procurement.
It follows that  the Federal Water Quality Administration
possesses similar authority for the purchase of equipment
                            82

-------
and supplies necessary for water quality surveillance
stations.

The general procurement authority of the Department of the
Interior derives from Title 41, Chapter 1 and 14 of the
Code of Federal Regulations.  Section 14-1.401 states
that:

          Except as may otherwise be specifically
          prescribed, the head of each procuring
          activity has full responsibility for the
          procurement of supplies, services and
          construction, including all related
          matters, under the cognizance of his
          activity.

Clearly the authority would extend to the Commissioner of
the Federal Water Quality Administration and his designated
agents, usually referred to as "contracting officers."
See 41 CFR p 14-1.404-2 et seq.

In most circumstances, procurement must be carried out
pursuant to the procedures for competitive bidding.  See
Title 41 CFR, Chapter 1, p 1-2.000 et seq. entitled
"Procurement by Formal Advertising."  As stated in
p 1.2.102:

          Procurement shall be made by formal
          advertising whenever such method is
          feasible and practicable under the
          existing circumstances even though
          such conditions and circumstances
          would otherwise satisfy the require-
          ments of Subpart 1-3.2.  In accord-
          ance with this requirement, procure-
          ments shall generally be made by
          soliciting bids from all qualified
          sources of supplies or services
          deemed necessary by the contracting
          officer to assure full and free
          competition consistent with the
          procurement of the required property
          or services.

Certain exceptions, however, are recognized to allow
procurement by negotiation.  These exceptions are set out
in Subpart 1-3.2 of 41 CFR, Chapter 1.  These exceptions
include as authorized by the Federal Property and
Administrative Services Act of 1949:  (1) National
                           83

-------
emergency p 1-3.201;  (2) Public exigency p 1-3.202;  (3)
Purchases not in excess of $2500 p 1-3.203;  (4) Personal
or professional services p 1-3.204;  (5) Services of
educational institutions p 1-3.205;  (6) Purchases outside
the United States p 1-3.206;  (7) Medicines or medical
supplies p 1-3.207; (8) Property purchased for authorized
resale p 1-3.208;  (9)  Subsistence supplies p 1-3.209;
(10) Impracticable to secure competition by  formal
advertising p 1-3.210;  (11) Experimental, developmental
or research work p 1-3.211; (12) Purchases which are not
to be publicly disclosed p 1-3.212;  (13) Technical
equipment requiring standardization and interchange-
ability of parts p 1-3.213; (14) Negotiation after failure
of advertising p 1-3.214;  (15) Otherwise authorized by
law p 1-3.215.  Subpart 1-3.3 sets out the requirements
for determinations and findings necessary in order to
establish one of the exceptions to competitive bidding
listed above.

It is likely, with respect to procurement for a Federal
water quality surveillance system, that the  exceptions
to competitive bidding most susceptible of use are:
(1) Purchases not in excess of $2500;  (2) Services of
educational institution; (3) Impracticability of acquir-
ing by competitive bidding; (4) Experimental, developmental
or research work; and  (5) Technical equipment requiring
standardization and interchangeability of parts.

The specific rules for contract negotiation pertaining to
the Department of the Interior are set out in Part 14-3
of 41 CFR.
SUMMARY OF LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

Based upon the foregoing considerations and authorities,
we may conclude that the establishment of a Federal water
quality surveillance system is necessary and useful in
implementing the objectives of the Water Pollution Control
laws.  Moreover, we may conclude that, although not
specifically authorized by the existing laws, the
establishment of surveillance facilities is authorized
in the general context of the applicable statute.  At the
same time, we offer the caveat that the existing statute
is deficient in several important respects  (e.g., specific
authority for site acquisition, procurement of materiel,
and statutory authority for the admissibility of data
developed in enforcement and abatement proceedings) and
should be augmented by supplemental legislation.
                          84

-------
In light of the fact that the existing law places much
of the initial responsibility for enforcement and abatement
on State water pollution control agencies, the Federal
water pollution surveillance system should be developed
in close consultation with cognizant State agencies and
officials to minimize the duplicity of facilities and
surveillance activities.  In this connection, it is
suggested that any new legislation proposed should
clarify the relative roles of Federal and State officials
in the enforcement and abatement process and specifically
assign responsibility or provide for coordination of
activities in the operation of surveillance facilities.

With respect to the use of data and information developed
by surveillance facilities in administrative and judicial
proceedings for abatement and enforcement, we have con-
cluded that the applicable evidentiary requirements pose
no insuperable barrier to the introduction of such data and
information in evidence.  At the same time, we have
advised herein that the applicable evidentiary require-
ments should be carefully considered in the design,
construction and operation of Federal water quality surveil-
lance facilities.

While the legal portion of this study has been conducted
with reference to the three River-Basins delineated in
the study proposal and contract, a number of the con-
clusions, observations and recommendations herein set
forth will have general applicability in the establishment
of a Federal water quality surveillance program on all
interstate waters in the United States.
SUGGESTED AMENDMENT

Section 10.  Section 10 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, as amended (33 U.S.C. 466(g)), is amended:

           (a)  by redesignating sub-subsections  (6)
               and  (7)  of subsection  (c) as (8) and
               (9);

           (b)  by inserting after sub-subsection  (5)
               of subsection (c) two new sub-subsections
               to read as follows:

                    "(6)  In carrying out his duties
                    under this section, the Secretary
                    is authorized to establish, equip,
                    and maintain a water quality
                           85

-------
surveillance system for the purpose
of monitoring the water quality
of interstate waters or portions
thereof and detecting the existence
and nature of pollutants therein.
"(7)  The Secretary is authorized,
on behalf of the United States
and for use by the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration
in carrying out the duties under
this section, to acquire land or
interests therein and necessary
access rights by purchase, with
appropriated or donated funds,
by condemnation, by donation,
or by exchange for acquired or
public lands under his juris-
diction which he classified as
suitable for disposition.  The
values of the properties so
exchanged either shall be ap-
proximately equal, or if they
are not approximately equal,
the values shall be equalized
by the payment of cash to the
grantor or to the Secretary as
the circumstances require."
       86

-------
                      SECTION 5

              SYSTEMS ANALYSIS APPROACH
           TO SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM DESIGN
To accomplish the objectives of this study, the project
team developed a systems analysis framework to guide all
activities.   Before presenting the specifics of the
structure, it will be useful to discuss the rationale and
procedures inherent to the systems approach.

The systems approach is the application of the scientific
method to problems involving organized systems so as to
provide solutions which best serve the purposes of the
organization as a whole.  The organized system may be an
aircraft, a state health-care program, an Air Force Base
or a water pollution surveillance system.

Most practitioners of the related disciplines associated
with the systems approach would be the first to detail
inherent limitations.  It is not a cure-all.  Rarely do
participants agree on whether the approach should be
identified as Systems Engineering or Systems Analysis.

The Systems Approach is a more descriptive term in the
sense that "engineering" has a hardware connotation and
"analysis" implies the separation into parts or elements
of something which is already in existence.

The most significant attribute of the Systems Approach is
that it can be applied with equal effectiveness to prob-
lems of a hardware nature (with well defined boundaries)
as to the process of delineating the boundaries of a
dilemma such that it can be focused into a problem and
then be solved.
THE SYSTEMS APPROACH CONCEPT

The Systems Approach is an orderly way of appraising a
situation.  Its application results in answers to questions
such as:

   - How many elements are there to the problem of concern?

   - What cause and effect relationships exist among the
     elements?
                          87

-------
   - What trade-offs may be required among resources, once
     they are defined?

   - What functions need to be performed?

It has been stated that the approach is appropriate to the
broad definition of a system.  The majority of previous
applications has been to aerospace problems.  Here,
applications have been characterized by programs with the
following orders of difficulty:

   - A complex goal involving a major system composed of
     hardware, computer programs, facilities, personnel,
     and data.

   - A dynamic environment in which changes affect identi-
     fied objectives, constraints and criteria.

   - Limited resources for development which encompass
     funds, manpower, facilities and time.

For programs such as those above, application of the
Systems Approach early in the conceptual phase helps to
minimize the probability of oversight or the occurrence
of what is often called "appraisal gaps."  This is
achieved by using a structured technique to continuously
identify and assess the impact of changing objectives,
constraints, and hardware criteria on required resources,
i.e., technologies, personnel and facilities.

The Systems Approach is a process which involves a series
of steps:

   - Define the purpose of the system.

   - Establish specific objectives for the system-
     objectives against which the performance of the
     system can be measured.

   - Identify the constraints which limit freedom in try-
     ing to achieve the objectives.

   - Propose alternative means of attaining the objectives.

   - Formalize the criteria for evaluating the alterna-
     tives.

   - Compare the alternatives and choose the best one
     according to the accepted criteria.
                          88

-------
   - Implement the selected alternative.

   - Check to see if the objectives have been reached.

Briefly stated, the logic of the Systems Approach is
"deductive/inductive."  The thinking path is in the form
of a closed loop that has distinct .stages for timely
inputs and continuous feedback.  Thinking evolves in
cyclic fashion, as it progresses from general objectives
to plans, then back to refining objectives and to detail-
ing plans further.

Figure 6 illustrates the steps to be taken within each
cycle of the approach.  It is significant to note the
iterative nature of the procedure as well as the inter-
facing nature of the specific individual cycles.

The direction and intent of this project was to study
current situations existing within the three river basins,
FWPCA standards, state standards, present surveillance
measures, and projected requirements and integrate all
into one comprehensive interrelated system.  Applying the
rationale discussed above to describe the interrelated
system, measurements of the impact of variations in any
of those elements noted above can be made.

Before describing the development of the analysis frame-
work, attention should be given to the sequence of cycles
illustrated at the top of Figure 6.  Therefore, four
cycles are identified and consist of:

   - Mission Definition Cycle

   - System Definition Cycle

   - System Elements Definition Cycle

   - Advanced Planning Cycles for Technologies, Personnel
     and Facilities

This project addresses itself to the delineation of the
first cycle - the mission.  The analysis framework with all
of its inherent parameters and considerations is geared to
guiding the definition of the water quality surveillance
mission.  It is general and is equally applicable to any
river basin which might be considered.
                          89

-------
     CONSTRAINTS

 PHYSICAL. FINANCIAL

   TIMING. & POLICY
    RESTATEMENT
   OF OBJECTIVES ft
   CONSTRAINTS IN
   TERMS SUITABLE
    FOR ANALYSIS
    DEVELOP
POSSIBLE APPRO-
ACHES TO ATTAI-
NING THE OBJEC
     TIVES
   TRADE-OFF
      STUDY
 APPLY SELECTION
CRITERIA TO CHOOSE
 THE APPROACHES
   OR TASKS TO
  BE IMPLEMENTED
   FEEDBACK TO PREVIOUS CYCLES
fro INVESTIGATE THE POSSIBILITY
     OF REVISING THE OBJECTIVES
    SYNTHESIS


   INTEGRATE THE
SELECTED APPROACHES
  OR TASKS INTO A
   SYSTEM MODEL
  OR DEVELOPMENT
     PROGRAM
                                                          ITERATE AS NECESSARY
                                                             TO IMPROVE THE
                                                          SYSTEM OR DEVELOP-
                                                             MENT PROGRAM
                                                             CHECK BALANCE
                                                          EVALUATE SENSITIVITY
                                                            EVALUATE BACKUPS
        	I
                                      EVALUATION
                          DETERMINE THE DEGREE OF EFFECTIVENESS
                           OF THE SYSTEM IN MEETING OBJECTIVES
                                      FIGURE 6
                       STEPS WITHIN THE SYSTEMS APPROACH
                                       90

-------
Cycles 2, 3 and 4 are not addressed within this report.
Phase II of the study specifically is oriented toward
defining the water quality surveillance system to be
implemented within one river basin.  It is defined by
qualitatively and quantitatively implementing the analysis
framework for the environment and conditions to be found
in that basin.  Because the framework is general, certain
portions will not be applicable to a specific circumstance.
The ultimate result of Cycle 2 is a specific water quality
surveillance system tailored to a prescribed environment.
Cycles 3 and 4 sequentially serve to define the system in
succeedingly greater detail.
SYSTEMS ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK FOR SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS
PROGRAMS	

The systems analysis framework was formulated in three
phases:
Phase One

With prescribed objectives and a discipline of approach in
mind, the initial task involved a literature search.  This
was accomplished to identify as many considerations and
parameters as possible which contribute to the selection,
placement and operation of a water quality surveillance
system.

In the interest of defining considerations and parameters
which could be separated and analyzed as a group, ten
categories were established.  The titles for these categories
were rather arbitrarily established and are considered
relatively unimportant.  However, of significance, is the
grouping of like and closely interrelated considerations
and parameters.  It was found that natural and logical
patterns developed which became, in part, the rationale for
the systems analysis frameworks submitted within this
report.

   - Lifetime Operational Concept

   - System Design and Performance Characteristics

   - Development and Test Concept

   - Training Concept
                           91

-------
   - Facilities Survey

   - Manufacturing Concept

   - Threat Concept

   - Stress Conditions and Emergency Buildup Concept

   - System Effectiveness

   - Logistic Support Concept


Phase Two

With a glossary of parameters and considerations completed,
Phase Two involved the preparation of a functional flow
block diagram.  Figure 7 illustrates the results.  The
objectives of this study as previously set forth in Figures
1, 2, 3 and 4 served as milestones to accomplishment.  They
were integrated with and expanded by the content of the key
word Indexing Guide developed in the literature search.

It is significant to note that Figure 7 incorporates a form
of decision logic in that evaluations are required at
specific stages of the analysis.  Where decisions are
required, alternative paths are indicated dependent upon
the result.

At any point in the analysis illustrated in Figure 7,
expansion of content may be located in the supporting text.


Phase Three

Figure 7 together with the supporting text comprises an
integrated analysis in that all pertinent considerations
inherent to the establishment of a water quality surveil-
lance system are sequentially evaluated.

To illustrate how the broad analytical framework as
represented by Figure 7 is implemented, the determination
of the location of water quality surveillance stations
within a river basin has been detailed.  Those considera-
tions pertinent to the problem of location have been
isolated and keyed by number to the framework.  (See
Figure 8.)
                           92

-------
 PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
The water quality surveillance station location analysis
is presented as an example.  Comparable treatment of
other specific areas of concern is similarly accomplished.

The project team has addressed itself to the area of pro-
gram plans and the development of data and procedures for
the identification of water quality surveillance goals and
objectives.  These then, when systematically developed,
will ultimately provide the basis for the establishment of
a consistent program policy.

The requirement for a consistent policy for the fulfillment
of FWPCA areas of responsibilities, as charged by the
Congress, remained constantly superimposed over the design
of a systems analysis framework.  In review, these areas
are:

   - The monitoring of interstate streams and the provision
     of reliable data from which to measure and assess
     compliance with interstate water quality standards.

   - The provision of reliable data from which to define
     long-term trends and overall changes in water quality.

   - To provide data to the Congress which will enable the
     assessment of current and proposed legislative pro-
     grams in a manner which will provide for the optimum
     utilization of appropriated funds.

Accordingly, all developed procedures and techniques
remained general so as to be compatible with any eventual
and specific area of geographical interest.  Alternately
stated, a common basis for analysis was established.  The
results of such analysis is strictly dependent upon the
specifics of the geographical area under study.

In addition to the obvious benefit of being able to compare
the needs, goals, and objectives for varying pollution
environments, the analysis framework would establish the
following:

   - Justification for Federal facility expenditures

   - The most appropriate areas for research studies

   - Water quality trends

   - Compliance with established water quality standards

   - Surveillance system performance implications
                          95

-------
To understand the needs and objectives of a system, its
purpose must be clearly understood.  The project team
strove to develop the means to identify what a surveillance
system must do for a variety of possible situations and
environments.  The developed framework will subsequently
guide the quantification of the correct parameters which,
in turn, may be amalgamated into a firm set of requirements
for implementation of the system.
Generalized Framework
     Lifetime Operational Concept

The Operational Concept is a statement pertaining to a
water quality surveillance system which outlines:  the
guidance necessary to define system support requirements,
installations and staffing concepts and requirements, and
the manner with which the system would be operated.
Further, this category of considerations would address;
the description of the system and its application, the
organizational structure where applicable, operational
capabilities, the geographical area of intended operations
and its intended use.

For the most part, this category of considerations would
guide the selection of areas for additional study where the
information for decision-making is not available.  Such
studies, would not be conducted independently of each
other.  Many areas of overlap exist and information feed-
back and transfusion among these supporting studies must
occur if the results are to be technically compatible,
valid and credible.

Identification of bodies of water in each basin.   (See
categories 1., 2., and 3. in the Indexing Guide.)  (p. 36 -
41)

Classification of the stretches of water within each basin
by type:

   - Estuaries

   - Impoundments

   - Lakes

   - Reservoirs
                          96

-------
   - Saltwater intrusions

   - Streams

Overall description of each basin in terms of factors which
determine present and potential water use of various kinds.

   - Population (detailed by such factors as age and
     income levels)

   - Industry composition

   - Agriculture

   - Mineral production

   - Manufacturing

   - Production

   - Forests and recreation areas

   - Economic parameters

   - Other

Identification and quantification of water quality and
environmental parameters for specific areas of each basin.

   - Biological water quality parameters  (See Category 8.
     in Indexing Guide)

   - Chemical water quality parameters  (See Category 9. in
     Indexing Guide)

   - Physical water quality measurements  (See Category 10.
     in Indexing Guide)

   - Meteorological measurements (See Category 10. in Index-
     ing Guide)

Additional descriptive factors for specific areas of each
basin.

   - Location of political boundaries

   - Location and size of municipalities

   - Neighboring soil characteristics
                          97

-------
   - Type, location, and size of land uses that affect
     runoff

           Highways and urban areas

           Mining

           Stock feed lots

           Crop farming

           Lumbering

   - Type, location, and quantification of water uses (See
     Category 4. in Indexing Guide)

   - Type, location, and size of dams

           Flood control dams

           Hydro-power dams

           Navigation dams

           Flow augmentation dams

   - Type, location, and extent of water controls and
     stream channel maintenance

           Maintenance dredging

           Controlled discharge (irrigation canals, naviga-
           tion, recreation, industrial supply)

Identification and quantification of the threat of potential
pollution sources.

   - Types of potential pollution sources (See Category 13.
     in Indexing Guide)

   - Location of potential sources

   - Magnitude of the threat of potential pollution

Identification and quantification of pollution abatement
facilities

   - Type of pollution abatement (See Category 14. in
     Indexing Guide)
                          98

-------
   - Location of pollution abatement facilities

   - Water quality parameters which are affected

   - Amount of water treated

Identification and quantification of water quality
standards

   - Water quality parameters for which standards are set

   - Type and status of standards (See Category 11. in
     Indexing Guide)

   - Quantified values for the identified standards

Geography of the sampling stations, operational bases,
maintenance facilities, laboratories, and data handling
facilities.

Description of system operations plans and the role of
each of the major subsystems in the total surveillance
system structure

   - Intended activities of each subsystem

   - Interfaces between activities of different subsystems

   - On-site analysis vs. sample shipping

   - Form of data to be transmitted

   - Data transmission facilities

   - Type of analysis in local lab vs. analysis in central
     lab, etc.

   - Intended utilization and activity rates for major
     subsystems and equipment

Organizational structures and size of operating units,
direct support, indirect support, and other logistics
support

   - Number of instrument stations

   - Number of manual sampling stations

   - Number of local laboratories
                          99

-------
   - Number of central laboratories

   - Number and type of supporting organizations

Staffing concepts for the various operating, direct support,
indirect support, and other logistic support organizations
during normal and emergency operations.

   - Number, skill mix, and rank  (or experience level) of
     collection personnel

   - Number, skill mix, and rank of automatic monitoring
     station maintenance personnel

   - Number, skill mix, and rank of analytical personnel

   - Number, skill mix, and rank of data handling personnel

   - Number, skill mix, and rank of administrative and
     support personnel

   - Salaries and other expenses for specific skills

Identification of the various surveillance agencies and
their activities, personnel, and other resources involved
(See Category 12. in Indexing Guide).

Quantification of the size of the production buys of
primary mission equipment

   - Production quantities

Identification and quantification of inherited assets to
be utilized for the system.

   - Type, size, and dollar value of inherited facilities

   - Number of personnel and types of skills inherited

   - Type, quantity, and dollar value of inherited equip-
     ment
     System Design and Performance Characteristics

This category of considerations and parameters would include
those necessary to select the appropriate system configura-
tion and operational requirements given that we know the
demands to be imposed upon the system.  Treatment is at a
level which enables the analyst to direct his attention to
                          100

-------
subsystems and individual components.  It is essential that
sufficient data exist to enable a decision as to whether
the system of concern is an existing system, a modified
existing system, new state-of-the-art system, or an advanced
configuration.

Overall system design characteristics

   - Types of sampling stations (automatic, manual,
     composite)

   - Types of laboratories (national, regional, local,
     mobile)

   - Modes of data transmission

   - Types of data handling

   - Design features

   - Types of major equipment

          Types of sampling instruments, analytical equip-
          ment, data handling equipment and the level of
          technology incorporated in the design including
          identification of elements that are off-the-
          shelf, state-of-the-art, or require research and
          development

   - State-of-the-art

          Measured by the greater or lesser number of
          engineering man-hours which must be expanded
          because the system is highly advanced or in the
          state-of-the-art

          Identification of purchased parts and fabricated
          parts

          Types and quantities of raw material for fabrica-
          tion

          Physical size of major equipment

          Three view drawings of system configurations

          Mobility, servicing, and storage requirements

          Personnel required and the required skills
                          101

-------
          Environmental conditions the system is designed
          to withstand

Overall system performance characteristics

   - Water quality parameters that are to be monitored

   - Sampling frequency

   - Sample preparation and handling capacity

   - Sample shipping capacity and time

   - Data analysis capacity and time

   - Data transmission capacity and time

   - Data handling and dissemination capacity and time

   - Accuracy of measurements

   - Expected service life of components total number of
     operational hours

   - Design reliability

       -  Mean time between failures of major equipment and
          probability of equipment successfully accomplish-
          ing its assigned function

   - Parts failure rates

   - Design repairability and maintainability

       -  Mean time to restore major equipment to opera-
          tional status; personnel and other resources
          required to maintain specified number of
          operational equipment

   - Design serviceability

   - Major overhaul requirements and schedule

   - Inherent deterioration rates

          Percent of total stocks and spares lost yearly
          due to inherent deterioration (caused by failure
          to be used within life expectancy of the item)
                          102

-------
Subsystem identification and design description

Subsystem performance characteristics

Subsystem component identification and design descriptions

Identification and design description of any specialized
equipment required for system operation or support

Estimate of number of engineering man-hours for system
design


     Development and Test Concept

The development and test category of information addresses
a Validation and Verification of system/subsystem configura-
tions superimposed over system operational requirements.
In terms of cost and the level of support required to main-
tain an operational system, quality control during develop-
ment and subsequent testing is significantly important.
Specifically, the following would guide and detail the
analysis which identifies the nature, complexity and
composition of a development and test program.  In part,
information accumulated would address the nature and level
of technology that must be developed during a potential
Research and Development program, and an assessment of the
risk involved in achieving identified technology goals.

Length of R&D program

Information on the nature and level of technology that must
be developed during the R&D program and an assessment of
the risk involved in achieving the technology goals on
schedule

   - Follow-on or substantially new and advanced system

   - Identification of the system elements that are state-
     of-the-art

   - Identification of the system elements that require
     substantial R&D

Testing

   - Type, number, and duration of major development tests
     required by standards, regulations, or otherwise
     planned in the development program such as:
                          103

-------
          Component tests

          Subsystem tests

          Integrated system tests under controlled environ-
          ment

          Integrated system tests in operating environment

   - Location of test sites

   - Number of systems and subsystems needed to conduct test
     program

   - Identification of test program management

   - Type and quantity of test instrumentation

   - Kinds and quantities of test data, data reduction, data
     analysis

   - Identification of any special equipment for the test
     program

   - Identification of any special facility requirements for
     the development and test program

Inherited assets that can be used in the development and test
program

   - Type of development and testing facilities inherited
     and number of square feet of each type of facility

   - Number and type of test instruments and instrument
     packages inherited (e.q., recording devices)

   - Number and type of electrical, electronic, mechanical/
     structural, and other test support equipment inherited
     (e.q., power supplies and generators)

Sequence and relative schedule for development items and
tests

Estimated number of engineering man-hours for development
                          104

-------
     Training Concept

An analysis of system operation, maintenance, and human
factors are required to define the skill levels providing
for efficient system operation and maintenance.  Studies
designed to determine training requirements would take into
account the quantity and type of resources required.
Emphasis is directed, within this category, to men, skills
and equipment.

Skill requirements

   - List of skills required

   - Appropriate mix of skills needed

   - Appropriate mix of ranks (or experience levels)
     needed

Personnel turnover rates associated with the various
personnel ranks (or experience levels) and/or skill cate-
gories

Initial and replacement training plan and curricula

   - Type and number of courses to bring new personnel up
     to required skill levels

   - Duration of initial training program  (in months)

   - Length of courses (in weeks)

   - Number of personnel that can be trained in a given
     time period

   - Type and quantity of training equipment, simulators,
     and nonconsumable aids needed in course

   - Type and quantity of consumables (manuals, workbooks,
     etc.) needed for each trainee

Transitional training plan and curricula

   - Type and number of courses to bring existing personnel
     up to required skill levels

   - Duration of transitional training program

   - Length of courses (in weeks)
                          105

-------
   - Number of people that can be trained in a given time
     period

   - Type and quantity of training equipment, simulators,
     and nonconsumable aids needed in course

   - Type and quantity of consumables needed for each
     trainee

Kinds, quantity, and frequency of any annual training
needed to maintain skill proficiency

   - Number of training activities

   - Time involved (hours per month or year)

   - Resources consumed

Training facilities requirements

   - Type, size, and number of training facilities

   - Any special requirements on the geographic location
     and environment for training facilities

Identification and quantification of any direct or indirect
support needed for the training program

   - Type of support needed for the training program

   - Quantity and cost of support needed for the training
     program

Kind and amount of training that must be contracted for

   - Type of training to be contracted for

   - Amount and cost of training to be contracted for


     Facilities Survey

Substantial facilities would be required to support a water
quality surveillance system which incorporates the full
range of capabilities considered within this report.  Data
transmission, data and sample analysis, data storage,
sample acquisition and maintenance all require facilities
                          106

-------
which heavily affect system acquisition and operating cost.
Total benefits to accrue to the public from the installation
of a water quality surveillance system would be assessed in
recognition of total costs.  The largest portion of these
costs are incurred in personnel, equipment and facilities.
Following considerations would scope the facilities
required.

Extent of available existing usable facilities

   - Type and number of facilities inherited

   - Size of each facility inherited (sq. ft.)

   - Dollar value of inherited facilities

Amount and cost of modification, augmentation, and moderni-
zation of existing facilities for use in the new system

Nature and extent of new and replacement facilities that
need to be built for the operation and support of the new
system

   - Type, size, number, and cost of new and replacement
     facilities

Nature and extent of shared facilities

   - Type, size, number, and cost of facilities, equipment,
     and personnel that are shared

   - Dollar value of savings due to sharing

Evaluation of alternative facility sites and determination
of cost factors for various site alternatives

   - Alternative sites for various types of facilities

   - Effectiveness factors associated with alternatives -

   - Cost factors associated with alternatives

Factors relating to site activation and refurbishment

Requirements for specialized support equipment

   - Type and amount of specialized support equipment needed
     at various types of facilities

   - Cost estimates for such equipment
                          107

-------
Requirements for temporary facilities  for time-limited
emergency periods

   - Type, duration, location, and frequency of stress
     conditions under which temporary  facilities are
     needed

   - Type, size, and location of temporary  facilities

Facilities deterioration  and facilities  deterioration and
obsoles cence

   - Life expectancy of facilities

   - Rate at which major  repairs of  facilities are
     needed-percent of initial investment per year

   - Percent depreciation per year
     Manufacturing Concept

In the past,  surveillance agencies have  for  the most part
limited  their efforts  towards  surveillance instrumentation
to the writing of performance  specifications.  They had
not supported research and  development efforts in this
area to  any  large degree.   Leadership has not been
generated  at the Federal level to insure that suitable
equipment  and facilities can be produced as  needed.  This
is particularly true for currently unmonitorable parameters.

Such a commercially marginal market  should receive guidance
and support  from its largest potential user.  Currently
available  water quality surveillance equipment has not been
developed  under any general guideline, but has been
assembled  from units developed for other specific uses.

Within the range of data categories  included within this
report,  manufacturing  considerations fall sequentially
later in the  overall rationale.  The plan for system
implementation, system design  and performance characteristics,
development and test,  and training are factors to be con-
sidered  in evaluating  the impact of  production abilities.
The information presented in the following pages would guide
an evaluation of production implications.  This project team
maintains  a position that manufacturing, as  a category of
consideration,  has a significant impact  on the acquisition
of a surveillance system which exhibits  the  greatest
                          108

-------
effectiveness for the least cost.  This is particularly true
when we contemplate water quality surveillance systems which
are pushing or advancing beyond the current state-of-the-
art.

For example, the range of considerations include:  the
identification of a schedule for development, test, produc-
tion, training, total program milestones, program planning
and budgeting leadtimes, contract dates, production and
contract leadtimes, comparative pricing, first configura-
tion completion date and initial operational capability
data.

Cumulative procurement quantity

   - Total number of units of primary system equipment to
     be procured

Possible production rates, production buildup, and duration
of production run

   - Number of units of primary mission equipment produced
     each month at various points in the production run

   - Length of time needed to produce total procurement
     quantity (months, weeks)

Production delivery schedule and buildup of units in the
system.

Quantification of number of procurement sources required
(if applicable)  and description and cost of tooling
required for development and production.

Analysis of adequacy of available production facilities in
the time period of concern.

Analysis of producibility of system to be costed and
analysis of impact of state-of-the-art fabrication
techniques needed for manufacture of system.

Lead times for procurement of replacement equipment and
supplies.

Additional appropriate quantitative data must then be added,
by assumption, on such items as:

   - Labor cost per hour

   - Raw material cost per Ib., ft2, or ft3 -
                          109

-------
   -  Other direct costs (e.g./ travel, perdiem, repro-
     duction, etc.)

   -  Direct cost burden rates

   -  Contractor fees, profits


     Threat Concept

The category of threat includes considerations which pertain
to the identification of conditions which threaten damage to
the primary system or other equipment or in some other way
threaten normal operation.  Included are:  the suppressibility
of threats, time periods of stress, and the extent of the
degradations.  In addition to serving as a vital input to the
system design analysis, the parameters itemized on the
following pages are factors to be considered in; cost
analysis, determination of maintenance requirements, system
redundancy analysis, and others.

Probabilities of occurrence of the threat conditions

Nature and extent of threatened damage

   - Type of possible damage  from each threat condition

   - Expected degradation of  performance of the system due
     to threat conditions

Probability of damage given the occurrence of threat
conditions

Repair factors

   - Time required to restore system to normal performance

   - Resources and cost required to restore system to
     normal performance


     Stress Conditions and Emergency Buildup Concept

Identification and quantification of the nature and capacity
of the LOG (line-of-communication) needed to support the
operational system.  Data would be needed on the LOG
capacity level maintained under normal conditions, the
capacity level required to support activities under stress
conditions, the source of necessary surge capacity to con-
vert from normal to emergency operations, and the rate of
increasing the LOG pipeline capacity.
                          110

-------
   - Modes of transmission

   - Geographic locations

   - Capacity for transmitting samples and data during
     normal conditions

   - Capacity for transmitting samples and data under
     stress conditions

   - Capacity for moving supplies and other resources
     under normal conditions

   - Capacity for moving supplies and other resources
     under stress conditions

   - Source of necessary surge to support emergencies

   - Rates of increasing capacities during surge
     buildup

Identification and quantification of amount and rate of
increase of logistic support required to convert from
normal to emergency operations.

Quantification of staffing and skill factors for normal
and stress levels, the rate of increase in staffing
during conversion from normal to stres's levels, and the
source of personnel for the surge buildup.

   - Number, skills, and experience levels of personnel
     utilized during normal conditions

   - Number, skills, and experience levels of additional
     personnel needed due to increase of activity rates
     during stress conditions

   - Rate of increase in personnel during surge buildup

   - Source of additional personnel during surge buildup

   - Training requirements and rates for additional
     personnel

Quantification of the expected utilization rates of
operating personnel and direct and indirect support
personnel during normal operations, buildup, and emergency
operations.
                           Ill

-------
   - Number of shifts per day

   - Available manhours per week per man

Quantification of the expected utilization rates during
normal operations, surge buildup, and emergency operations
for primary and specialized equipment.

   - Operating hours per week for primary and specialized
     equipment during normal conditions

   - Additional equipment to be used under emergency
     operations (type and quantity)

   - Operating hours per week for existing equipment during
     surge buildup

   - Operating hours per week for equipment during
     emergency operations

Quantification of the expected changes in consumption rates
of supplies, parts, etc., when converting from normal to
emergency operations.

   - Consumption rates  (quantity and cost per day) during
     normal operations

   - Consumption rates  (quantity and cost per day) during
     emergency operations

Quantification of the emergency reserve plans for setting
aside equipment, material, and supplies to use in an
emergency or during surge buildup activities.

   - Equipment held in reserve as a percent of equipment
     in the operational system

   - Number of days of stock of material and supplies held
     in reserve
     System Effectiveness

The category of system effectiveness addresses; the ability
of the system to perform defined tasks and to attain
specific objectives (capability), the ability of the system
to remain operational for the required period (depend-
ability) , and the probability that the system will be
operational and ready for service when a demand is placed
upon it.  (Availability)  The ability to assess a water
                           112

-------
quality surveillance system for these factors involves an
integration of information derived from most of the other
categories discussed within this report.  More than any
other category, system effectiveness provides the basis
for the assessment of alternative systems, the degrees of
suitability for a given system and the ability to perform
a comparative analysis.

Force size during normal conditions.

   - Number and type of stations

   - Number of associated personnel

Force size during emergencies.

   - Number and type of stations

   - Number of associated personnel.

Information on achievable utilization rates during both
normal and emergency operations.

   - Continuous or periodic monitoring

   - Frequency and duration of sampling if periodic

   - Ratio of operating time to downtime if continuous

Quantification of estimated attrition rates for primary
system equipment during normal and emergency operations
and under threat conditions.

Quantification of equipment reliability during normal and
emergency operations.

   - Meantime between failure for various equipment and
     components

   - Reliability (probability of being operational) of
     equipment and components vs operating time

   - Probability of equipment successfully accomplishing
     its assigned function  (detecting pollution, measur-
     ing flow rate, temperature, depth, etc.)

Quantification of system availability under normal and
stress conditions
                           113

-------
   - Number or percent of total primary mission equipment
     and personnel available to perform their assigned
     task at any point in time

Quantification of survivability under threat conditions

Quantification of equipment damage rates during normal and
emergency operations and under threat conditions.

   - Type, quantity, and seriousness of damage to primary
     system equipment per increment of time under specific
     environmental conditions

Maintenance float

   - Average number of units of primary mission equipment
     needed in maintenance activities to keep specified
     number of units operationally ready

   - Average number of units of other equipment needed in
     maintenance to keep specified number of such equip-
     ment available for use

Expected effectiveness

   - Probability of detecting significant change in any
     of the various water quality parameters

   - Time after significant change before it is detected

   - Probability of determining the source of pollution
     Logistic Support Concept

Emphasis within the logistic support category of factors is
directed to water quality surveillance system maintenance.
For this system, as for any other we might contemplate,
system maintenance requirements are an important input to
system availability and dependability - two of the
attributes of system effectiveness.  The entire range of
considerations which fall within this category contribute
significantly to system acquisition and operational costs.
Included are spares and repair parts, service - both
periodic and random, and others.  It should be noted that
factors itemized within the following pages relate not
only to sensors and data acquisition equipment but the
laboratories, data analysis equipment and data transmission
components as well.
                           114

-------
         Maintenance and Other Direct Support

Identification and quantification of the kind and number
of maintenance and other direct support organizations
required.

   - Types of maintenance organizations, i.e., field
     station, office or laboratory

Identification and quantification of personnel and
personnel skills required for maintenance, servicing, and
inspection of the primary equipment.

   - Maintenance personnel skills required

   - Number of personnel for each skill

Identification and quantification of any specialized
maintenance equipment required for servicing and
inspection.

   - Types of special maintenance equipment required

   - Amount and cost of special equipment needed

Identification and quantification of other equipment and
vehicles needed for direct support, such as watercraft,
landcraft, aircraft, general purpose maintenance equipment,
special clothing and similar individual equipment, and
other unit and organizational equipment.

   - Types of direct support equipment required

   - Amount and cost of such equipment

Identification and quantification of:  initial inventories
of stocks; the prorata share of supplies; the amount of
supplies in the pipeline from the manufacture to the
depot.  Initial stocks would include initial ready supplies
of parts, materials, lubricants, etc. required.

   - Type, quantity, and cost of initial inventories

   - Type, quantity, and cost of supplies in the pipeline

   - Number of months or days of supply at expected con-
     sumption rate
                            115

-------
Identification and quantification of long leadtime spares
for primary, specialized, and other equipment must be
specified

   - Identify those spares which require a long leadtime
     for procurement

   - Length of leadtime in months

   - Quantity and cost of such spares held in reserve

   - Number of spares consumed per unit time under normal
     conditions

Mechanical policy to account for routine scheduled and
unscheduled maintenance, minor and major overhauls, and
inspections.

   - Type of maintenance and servicing performed on-site

   - Type of maintenance performed at local maintenance
     stations

   - Frequency of on-site inspections and servicing

   - Preventive maintenance plan

   - Overhaul schedule

   - Type, number, extent and frequency of system
     component replacement modules as opposed to component
     repair

Deterioration and lost rates for stocks and spares

   - Percent of total stocks and spares lost yearly due to
     environmental conditions

   - Percent of total stocks and spares lost yearly due to
     other causes

Quantification of annual consumption of labor and material
used or equivalent contracted services for maintenance
and repair of the operating units primary, specialized, and
other equipment
                           116

-------
   - Maintenance manhours per year

   - Quantity and cost of parts consumed per year

   - Maintenance manhours per overhaul

   - Quantity and cost of parts consumed per overhaul


                   Indirect Support

The items falling under the indirect support category are
also part of "Logistics Support."  However, for convenience
they are treated separately in this discussion.  If the
indirect support organizations and associated staffing have
not already been identified in the "Lifetime Operational
Concept," the cost analyst will be seeking quantitative
information on this subject.  Depending on the size, nature
and locations of the system operating units and bases, the
following type information is pertinent.

Identification and quantification of indirect support
organizations and services such as laboratory administra-
tion, supply operations and facilities maintenance.

Quantification of staffing, skills, and rank or experience
level for indirect support and/or ratio of direct manpower
to indirect support manpower.


                Other Logistic Support

The remaining elements of logistic support that are of
interest to the cost analyst involve the following items.

Quantification of warehouse facilities, inventory manage-
ment personnel, and other associated inventory storage
and management expenses (including personnel training),
which are associated with the system's supply of replace-
ment equipment, maintenance materials, operating
supplies, etc.

Identification of the resupply geography and means of
transportation for replacement equipment, stocks, spares,
parts, and other supplies.

   - Location of supplies
                           117

-------
   - Modes of transportation

Identification and quantification of equipment and supplies
to be purchased through local business as opposed to regular
supply system acquisition.

   - Type of supplies purchased through local business

   - Quantity and cost of supplies purchased through local
     businesses
Surveillance Station Locations Selection

The activity list on the following pages describes a frame-
work for the analysis to select the optimum locations for
surveillance stations.  This framework identifies a
sequential step-by-step series of activities which, when
accomplished will yield the optimum locations for surveil-
lance stations.  The accompanying diagram indicates the
flow of information in the analysis.   (See Figure 9)

The key to the analysis is that approximate locations are
first determined by factors such as basin characteristics,
water quality conditions and standards, intended data
uses, and surveillance objectives.  More specific alterna-
tive sites (within the approximate location for each
station) are then compared through a cost-effectiveness
analysis of additional considerations such as resources,
performance characteristics, accessibility, and existing
facilities.
Activity List


     Activity 1

Identify and classify the bodies of water in each basin

   Identify the bodies of waters (see categories 1., 2. ,
   and 3. in the Indexing Guide)

   Classify the bodies of water or portions of -the bodies
   of water into the following categories:

   - Estuaries

   - Impoundments
                           118

-------
 PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
   - Lakes

   - Reservoirs

   - Saltwater intrusions

   - Streams

   (See Category 15 of the Indexing Guide)


     Activity 2

Give an overall description of each basin under study.  This
description should indicate the particular types of water
problems to be found in the basin and should also allow
classification of the basin so as to facilitate comparison
with other basins in future studies.  The description
should include information on characteristics such as:

   - Population

   - Climate

   - Industry composition

   - Agriculture

   - Mineral production

   - Power production

   - Forests and recreational areas

   - Economic parameters

   (See Categories 10, 15 and 16 of the Indexing Guide)


     Activity 3

Identify and quantify water quality and environmental
parameters which are pertinent for specific areas of each
basin.
                          120

-------
   Identify the water quality and environmental parameters
   which are pertinent.   These parameters should fall into
   the following four categories:

   -  Water quality biological parameters (See Category 8.
     in the Indexing Guide for list of these parameters)

   -  Water quality chemical parameters (See Category 9.  in
     the Indexing Guide for list of these parameters)

   -  Water quality physical measurements (See Category 10.
     in the Indexing Guide for list of these parameters)

   -  Meteorological measurements (See Category 10.  in the
     Indexing Guide for list of these parameters)

   Quantify the parameters that have been identified for
   each basin.   This quantification should include  the
   average, variation, extremes, and any other statistics
   which are needed to describe the present values  of the
   parameters.


     Activity 4

Identify and quantify additional descriptive factors for
specific areas of each basin.  These factors should
include the following:

   Locations of state and other political boundaries

   Information on municipalities

   -  Locations and size

   -  Source of potable water supply and rate of usage

   -  Sewage treatment facilities and the amount (rate) and
     quality of treated water put into streams

   Neighboring soil characteristics

   Information on water uses which are either affected by
   or affect the quality of water that they use


   -  Types of water uses:  these types of usage should fall
     irito the following categories
                          121

-------
  - Agriculture (e.g., irrigation)

  - Industrial water supply (e.g., cooling water for
    nuclear power plant)

  - Potable water supply

  - Commercial fishing (indicate the species of fish)

  - Sport fishing (indicate the species of fish)

  - Commercial navigation

  - Pleasure boating

  - Body-contact sports

  - Esthetic

  - Other

- Location of these uses

- Does the use affect water quality or is it affected
  by the water quality (or both)

- Water quality parameters critical to each use or
  which are affected by the use

- Critical value of each parameter critical to each
  use

- Volume rate of use where applicable

- Other quantitative factors which describe the amount
  of use (e.g./ number of sport fishermen)

Information on land uses which affect the runoff water
conditions

- Types of and uses (e.g., mining and stock feedlots)

- Location of these uses

- Size of these uses

- Water quality parameters affected by these uses

- Pollution threat from these uses
                      122

-------
   Information on water controls

   - Types of water controls (e.g., flood control dams/
     hydro-power dams, navigation dams, dredging
     operations, levies, dikes and breakwaters)

   - Location of these water controls

   - Size of these water controls

   - Effects on water conditions

   Information of pollution abatement facilities

   - Types of abatement facilities

   - Location of these facilities

   - Size of these facilities

   - Effect on water quality of these abatement operations

   (See Categories 4, 15 and 16 in the Indexing Guide)


     Activity 5

Acquire information on the water quality standards and plans
of implementation and enforcement for each of the basins.

   Review documented information on FWPCA, state, and
   local water quality standards and plans

   Acquire supplemental information on standards and plans
   through interviews and site inspections in the basins

   (See Category 11 in the Indexing Guide)


     Activity 6

Identify and quantify water quality standards for specific
areas of each basin

   Identify the parameters for which standards are set

   Identify the type or level of each standard as follows:
                          123

-------
     - Interstate
     - Intrastate
     - Local
     - Compact
     - Other
     Identify the status of each standard as follows:
     - Approved
     - Tentative
     - Recommended (specify who recommended it)
     - Other
     Identify the quantitative value of each standard
     (See Category 11 in the Indexing Guide)

     Activity 7
Identify and quantify present problematical conditions and
sources
   Identify the types of potential pollution (i.e.,
   the water quality parameters whose values are in
   danger of exceeding limits of standards)
   Identify the locations of potential pollution
   sources
   - Difference between actual values and standards
   - Conditions or changes in basin characteristics that
     can cause adverse changes in water quality parameters
   - Probabilities of occurrence of these conditions
   (See Category 13 in the Indexing Guide)
                         124

-------
     Activity 8

Identify and quantify projected future changes in the
descriptive factors for the specific areas of each basin.

   For all the descriptive factors that were covered in
   Activity 4 project future changes..  (For example,
   this might include the location and quantitative
   factors which will obtain condenser-cooling water from
   a river or it might include the quantification of the
   increasing volume rate of treated sewage water dumped
   into a steam by a rapidly growing city.)

   Develop a chronological schedule of the projected
   future changes in the descriptive factors

   (See Categories 13, 15, and 16 in the Indexing Guide)
     Activity 9

Estimate the changes in the quantitative values of the water
quality parameters as a result of the projected changes in
the descriptive factors.

   These estimates should include the average, variation,
   extremes and any other statistics which are needed to
   describe the future water conditions.

   A chronological schedule of the estimated changes in the
   water quality parameters should be developed from the
   projected schedule of changes in the descriptive factors.
     Activity 10

Identify and quantify potential future pollution problems
and sources

   Identify the types of potential future pollution
   (i.e., the water quality parameters whose values are
   in danger of exceeding the limits of standards)

   Identify the locations of potential future pollution
   sources
                          125

-------
   Quantify the threat of potential future pollution

   - Difference between estimated values and standards

   - Conditions or changes in basin characteristics that
     can cause adverse changes in water quality parameters

   - Probabilities of occurrence of these conditions

   Develop a chronological schedule of the projected future
   pollution problems.


     Activity 11

Identify the data users and their needs.

   Identify the data users (list of agencies and their
   organizational units which wil-l use data)

   Identify the data needs of the user agencies  (the
   purposes for which data is needed)

   (See Categories 11 and 12 in the Indexing Guide)


     Activity 12

Identify the intended use of the data and the types and
quantity of data that should thus be collected to
accommodate this use.  Included within this activity will
be a quantification of the measurement frequency required
to achieve statistically significant conclusions.

Define the objectives of the surveillance system.

   The general objectives of the surveillance system at
   any point in time should include at least the following:

   - Detect and measure critical changes in the character
     of the water; (a time factor might also be included
     here, e.g., time to detect after pollution occurs)

   - Determine the source of any pollution

   - Establish base conditions from which to measure future
     change so that one can:
                         126

-------
     - Learn the actual value of proposed future pollution-
       control measures

     - Be able to detect and measure changes in the future

   (See Categories 11, 12 and 16 in the Indexing Guide)


     Activity 14

Identify or formulate water quality criteria for specific
areas of each basin.  These criteria should include cause-
effect relationships for each parameter, the specific
parameters to be measured, measurement frequency require-
ments, acceptable techniques for measuring each parameter,
and any other information pertinent to a description of
the water quality conditions.


     Activity 15

Catalog stretches of water according to the likelihood of
need by measurement of relationship to water uses.  In
sequence, the steps to the accomplishment of this task are
as follows:

   - Identify and classify the bodies of water for the
     basin(s)  under analysis

   - Identify and quantify the water quality and environ-
     mental parameters pertinent to the geographical area
     of interest

               . Biological parameters
               . Chemical parameters
               . Meteorological parameters
               . Physical parameters

   - Identify additional parameters which need to be
     measured in the future for each stretch of water on
     the basis of identifiable future uses.  Additional
     consideration should be given to the measurement of
     currently unmonitorable parameters.

     Attach a chronological schedule as to when the future
     measurements will be needed
                          127

-------
- Identify and scope the variations to be expected in
  terms of the water quality and environmental parame-
  ters identified

- Identify and quantify other factors descriptive of
  the basin(s) under study and pertinent to the
  establishment of water quality requirements

            .  Types r locations and quantities of water
              uses

              . Agriculture
              . Sports
              . Esthetics
              . Fishing
              . Industrial water supply
              . Potable water supply
            .  Political boundaries
            .  Location and quantification of any
              existing pollution abatement facilities
            .  Type, location and size of land use which
              affect runoff conditions
            .  Types, locations and extent of water con-
              trols and stream channel maintenance

              . Dams
              . Navigation
              . Dredging
              . Discharge controls
            .  Others

Of those factors previously listed, identify those
affected by or contributing to the biological, chemical,
physical, or meteorological environment.  These condi-
tions may currently exist or represent a potential
problematical condition.

   Rank the water uses threatened by existing or projected
   water quality conditions, recognizing the related values
   placed on a specific use

Identify the applicable FWPCA, state and local water
quality standards.

For the water quality and environmental parameter selected,
determine the standard values.  Consider potential changes
to these levels.
                       128

-------
   Formulate a water quality criteria which addresses those
   constituents with the greatest impact on water use with-
   in the geographical area under study.

   With an established water criteria which addresses sig-
   nificant water uses within the geographical area under
   study, determine sample measurement requirements to
   monitor compliance.

Consider near term and projected water uses and constituent
pollutants on the basis as such considerations as:

   The population affected

   To what extent will a water use be impaired by a water
   quality change

   The economic consequences of water use impairment

   The utility of data for enforcement purposes

   The utility of data for long term prediction purposes

   The utility of data for evaluation of legislative
   actions
     Activity 16

Identify the various surveillance agencies and identify and
quantify the existing and planned sampling activities of
each agency.

   Identify the surveillance agencies  (see category 12. in
   the Indexing Guide for a list of agencies)

   Identify the existing sampling stations of each agency

   Identify the planned sampling stations of each agency
   and the expected dates when they will become operational

   Identify the parameters that are measured at each
   station

   Identify the sampling techniques and equipment that are
   used at each station

   Quantify the intensity of sampling at each station as
   to:
                          129

-------
   - Frequency in time

   - Quantity of data

   (See categories 5 and 12 of the Indexing Guide)


     Activity 17

Identify additional data sources and the data that is avail-
able from these sources.

   Identify additional sources of data

   Identify the type of data available from these sources

   Identify the quantity of each type of data that is
   available


     Activity 18

Specify the desirable number and approximate locations of
sampling stations along with the parameters to be measured
at each station for near-term water quality monitoring

   Specify the number and approximate locations of sampling
   stations which are needed at the present time.   (The
   term approximate location refers to the specification of
   a stretch of water within which sampling would allow the
   detection and measurement of change and the determination
   of the source of such change.)

   Identify the parameters to be measured at each station


     Activity 18A

Resources availability with respect to time  (near-term,
future)

   Are resources (funds, personnel, etc.) for total program
   currently available

   If not, what portion of the total resources are currently
   available

   Establish future resource requirements and prepare future
   budgetary requests
                          130

-------
     Activity 18B

Review legal status of methods

   Review status of sampling methods and analytical
   techniques, etc., with respect to legal precedents

   Consider possible test court cases


     Activity 19

Specify the additional types of data to be collected at the
near-term sampling stations for the purpose of establishing
base conditions from which to measure future changes in
water quality

   Identify the additional parameters to be measured at
   each station for this purpose

   Develop a schedule of when the measurement of these
   parameters should begin, and the frequency with which
   they should be measured, and the data volumes necessary
   to assure statistically accurate conclusions.
     Activity 20

Specify the desirable number and approximate locations of
additional future sampling stations along with the
parameters to be measured and the schedule of when the
stations are needed for future water quality monitoring.

   Specify the number and approximate  locations of
   additional sampling stations needed in the future.
   (Approximate location refers to the specification
   of a stretch of water within which  sampling would
   allow the detection and measurement of change  and
   the determination of the source of  such change.)

   Identify the parameters to be measured at each station

   Develop a schedule of when these future stations will be
   needed
                          131

-------
     Activity 21

Specify any differences among more specific alternative sites
(within the approximate location for each station) with
respect to:

   Design and performance characteristics (characteristics
   related to the collection system are included under
   System Design and Performance Characteristics in Check
   List)

   Operating plans

   - Intended activities

   - Interfaces with activities of other subsystems

   - Intended utilization rates

   Threat (environmental and vandalism) and security factors
   (these factors are included under Threat Concept in
   Check List)

   Accessibility

   - Time requires to reach sampling stations

   - Vehicles required in reaching the sampling stations

   - Environmental conditions under which the stations
     cannot be reached

   Legal considerations (See section on legal aspects for
   specific considerations)

   Availability of existing sampling station

   Availability of other existing facilities or structures
   that might be utilized

   Availability of other facilities/structures, distinguish-
   ing between bridges, intakes, etc.


     Activity 22

Resource Analysis

   Identify differences in resource requirements and
   factors among more specific alternative sites  (within
                          132

-------
   the approximate location for each station)  for each of
   the following resource categories:

   - Sampling equipment

   - Specialized support equipment  (e.q., aircraft and
     watercraft)

   - Facilities (see the Facilities Survey category in
     Check List)

   - Personnel  (number, skill mix, experience level, and
     training requirements)

   - Logistic support  (see the Logistic Support Concept
     category in Check List)

   Order of magnitude estimates of the total resources
   required for the collection system may also be needed
   (e.q., to determine if the total resources required
   are within the constraints of available resources)

   (See Category 5 in the Indexing Guide)
     Activity 23

Effectiveness Analysis

   Compute differences in the measures of effectiveness
   among more specific alternative sites  (within the
   approximate location for each station).   (See the
   System Effectiveness category in Check List)

   Combine the various measures of effectiveness for each
   alternative into a single measure of effectiveness for
   the alternative.   (The techniques for  combining the
   various measures can include the use of mathematical
   expressions of laws of a discipline and also judgmental
   weighing factors.)

   Order of magnitude estimates of the various measures of
   effectiveness may be required to determine if they are
   within acceptable limits.
                           133

-------
     Activity 24

Life Cycle Cost Analysis

   Estimate differences in life cycle costs among more
   specific alternative sites  (within the approximate
   location for each station).  Estimates should be
   included for all differences identified in costs in
   all of the following categories:

   - Development and test costs

   - Acquisition costs

   - Other investment costs

   - Annual operations and support costs

   Order of magnitude estimates of total costs in each of
   the above categories and a schedule of when dollars
   are needed may also be required to determine if the
   costs are within available funding resources.


     Activity 24A

Cost Data

   Assemble cost data for

   - Equipment

   - Personnel

   - Operations

   Consider projected cost increases and effect on planning
   needs


     Activity 25

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

   Make comparisons between the more specific sites (within
   the approximate location for each station) on the basis
   of both life cycle cost and effectiveness.  The basic
   idea is to determine the additional cost required for
   incremental improvements in effectiveness.
                          134

-------
     Activity 26

Analysis of additional considerations to select more specific
locations  (within the approximate location for each station)
for the future sampling stations.

   Iteration of activities analygous to 21-25 so as to select
   the more specific locations for each of the project future
   sampling stations.
Data Flow in Surveillance Programs

A second major series of separable considerations in the
design of a surveillance program relates to the flow of data
from the surveillance stations.  These considerations are
shown in the diagram of Figure 9, and may be grouped in the
following manner:

Collection stations are divided into two general categories.
The usual mode is for the collection of water samples where-
as an alternant is the utilization of data from other
sources either public or private which will complement the
system.  This is particularly true in areas where surveil-
lance data is sparse.  Historical data acquisition has
merit for projecting long term trends.  Data of this type
should be sought after and utilized where at all practical.
Often format changes are necessary to use such data.

Analytical system data flow is critical at each step.  The
accuracy and precision of measurements if of extreme
importance.  The use of standardized methods of analysis
and quality assurancy is mandatory.  The use of significant
data units begin here as does the use of uniform statisti-
cal techniques.  The proper identity of the analytical data
and the checks to assure the accuracy are repeated at each
level.

Decisions on the flow of data relates to a need-to-know in
certain instances, whereas a familarity with the usual
results and patterns is of great value.  The quality of data
assurance is most effective at the local level and more
difficult at each succeeding broader level.  The use of
common formats is encouraged.

Data transmission priorities have to be established.  The
considerations are of the critical need of the data in a
proper time frame, and the ability of various transmission
systems to accomplish the task with full knowledge of the
                          135

-------
true cost and time involved.  The quality assurance of
various transmission systems has to be evaluated.  The
ability to have feedback checks of the data is of value.

Data handling and dissemination systems are the final step
in placing data into the proper need-to-know categories.
The ability to react to critical water quality threats
from spills and acts of nature are of the highest priority.
The ability to compare the data with standards, to provide
data of the quality necessary for enforcement, for the use
of legislative bodies, for the use of planners, for the
evaluation of projects, for long term planning goals all
have an individual weight.  The systems as developed have
to transmit the data to the proper users in a reasonable
time frame.

The numbers and types of data users continue to grow in
proportion to the critical needs for water of quality in
respect to the population and economic growth of the
nation.  The formats should be of such a nature that data
can be extracted for a variety of broad or specialized
uses.   The weight of various users' needs in respect to a
time framework is a combined need/economic value decision.
Frequency of Measurement

The frequency of measurement required to monitor and assure
statistically viable conclusions with respect to water
quality surveillance is considered by this project team to
be of significant importance.

The solidification of a frequency of measurement require-
ment involves an interrelated consideration of; the water
uses in their relative criticality; the water quality and
environmental parameters; federal, state, and local
standards; data requirements; sample acquisition
techniques and others.

Figure 10 delineates the sequential steps appropriate to
the determination of a frequency of measurement requirement.
It is presented in general terms such that it may be
implemented for any river basin.  It remains for the analyst
to tailor the procedure to fit the specific circumstance
existing within the river basin under study.  A review of
the items listed in Activity 15 will aid in the tailoring
needed at each monitoring site.
                          136

-------
      NMNTIFY AND CLAB*FV
       TWE MOID OF WATER
           MFACHIASIN
IITAtm T
|| OVERALL DESCRIPTION
II    OF EACH BASIN
|    UNDER STUDY
                                                                                                             IFVTHE VARIOUS SURVEILLANCE
                                                                                                        AGENCIES ACTIVE IN THE GEOGRAPHICAL
                                                                                                              AHA UNDER ANALYSIS
                IDENTIFY ADO QUANTIFY WATER
                QUALITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL
                  PARAMETERS FOR SPECIF 1C
                     AREAS OF INTEREST:
                 IHJLOBICAL PARAMETERS
                 CHEMICAL PARAMETERS
                 PHYSICAL PARAMETER)
                 METEOROLOGICAL
                	PARAMETERS
                TAK4 I
                TKNTIFYA
                        r AND QUANTIFY TIDE
                 OIK MINT VARIATIONS TO It
                 EXKCTED I" THE PARAMETERS
                     DISCUSSED IN STEP 1
u>
TAMI I
 IDENTIFY AND QUANT** ADDITIONAL
 DESCRIPTIVE FACTOM FOB VECIFIC
  AREAS OF EACH Am PERTINENT
  TO THE ESTAILISHMENT OF NATE*
 DUALITY DATA SAMPLING FREQUENCY
           REQUIREMENTS.
 POLITICAL MJUNORIEI
 TYPES LOCATIONS AND QUANTIFICATION
  OF WATER USES
      -MRICULTURE
      -MOV CONTACT SPORTS
      -INDUSTRIAL WATER SUPPLY
       POTABLE WATER SUPPLY
      -SPORT FISHING
 TYPES, LOCATIONS. AND SIZE OF LAND
  Ma THAT AFFECT RUNOFF CONDITION!
 TYPES. LOCATIONS. AND EXTENT OF
  WATER CONTROLS AND STREAM
  CHANNEL MAINTENANCE
      DAMS IFLOOO, HYDRO-POWER
      NAVIGATION FLOW AUGMENTATION!
      MAINTENANCE
      DREDGING
      CONTROLLED DISCHARGE
 LOCATION AND QUANTIFICATION OF
  POLLUTION AlATEMtNT FACILITIES
                                                OF THE FACTO US LUTED IN STEPS. IDENTIFY THOSE
                                            AFFECTED IY OR CONTRIIUTING TO THE StOLOBICAL. CHEMICAL.
                                              PHYSICAL. METEDROLOQICAL ENVIRONMENT. THE CONDITION
                                           MAY CURRENTLY EXIST OR REPRESENT A POTENTIAL PROBLEMATICAL
                                               CONDITION. RANK At TO IMPORTANCE AND IDENTIFY KNOWN
                                                WATER QUALITY VARIATIONS WHICH ARE TIME RELATED
                                                                                                       TASK I? I
                                                                                                         IDENTIFY THE EXISTING OR PLANNED
                                                                                                       SURVEILLANCE STATIONS OF EACH AGENCY
                                                                                                        AND QUANTIFY THE SAMPLING AT EACH
                                                                                                                    STATION
                                                                                                           EXISTING STATIONS
                                                                                                           PARAMETERS MEASURED
                                                                                                           SAMPLING TECHNIQUES/EQUIPMENT
                                                                                                           INTENSITY OF SAMPLING
                                                                                                               -FREQUENCY IN TIME
                                                                                                               -DATA QUANTITIES
                                                                                                      TASK 11|
                                                                                                      IDENTIFY OR FORMULATE WATER
                                                                                                           QUALITY CRITERIA
                                                                                                          FOR EACH PARAMETER
               I ASK I I
                RE VIEW DOCUMENTED INFORMATION
                ON FWPCA. STATE ANO LOCAL WATER
                      QUALITY STANDARDS
                                H
                                                                                                        TAt12l
                                                                                                       IDENTIFY THE PARAMETERS OF STEPJWHICH
                                                                                                        Hit RECOMMENDED FOR MEASUREMENT
                                                                                                         THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTITUENTS
                                                                                                            SHALL CURRENTLY EXIST AND/HI
                                                                                                        REPRESENT A POTENTIAL THREAT-OETAIl
                                                                                                         THE QUANTITY OF THE CONSTITUENT
                                                                                                         POLLUTANTS AS THEY VAIIY IN TIM
                                                                                                        TA3HI3I
                                                                                                              SPECIFY DATA COLLECTION
                                                                                                              HEOUIHEIIENTSOF Exisrmi)
                                                                                                               ADO PHOXCTEO WATE*
                                                                                                             QUALITY HIIIVEILLANCE SITES
                                                                                                               PAMHETtM TO BE MEASURED
                                                                                                               INTENSITY OF SAMFIINO
                                                                                                                -FREQUENCY OF HEASUNEWIIT
                                                                                                                -AMOUNT OF DATA TO IE
                                                                                                                 COLLECTED
                                                                                                                                       TASK 14 |
                                                                                                                                           IDENTIFY ALTERNATIVE SAMf LE
                                                                                                                                            COLLE CTIOR TECHNIQUES AND
                                                                                                                                          EQUIPMENT ALONS WITH ASSOCIATED
                                                                                                                                               FACILITIES. STAFF AND
                                                                                                                                            OTHER RESOURCES REQUIRED
                                                                                                                                            FOR OfERATION AND SUPFORT
                      JTASMI
                        ACQUINE SUPPtEMENTAL INFORMATION
                       ON NEOUIRED AND PERTINENT STANDARDS
                       THROUGH INTERVIEWS AND INSPECTIONS
                                                                              ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK FOR DETERMINING
                                                                                  THE FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT
                                                                                                                           TASK 18 I

                                                                                                                                  DEFINE THE IMPACT AND
                                                                                                                                   IEQUIREMENTSOIITHE
                                                                                                                                   VARIOUS STATISTICAL/
                                                                                                                                MATHMATICAL DATA ANALYSIS
                                                                                                                                TECHNIQUES COMPATIBLE WITH
                                                                                                                              ALTERNATIVE SAMPLE COLLECTION
                                                                                                                                    SYSTEMS: RELATE TO:
                                                                                                                                    FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT
                                                                                                                                    QUANTITY OF DATA TO IE
                                                                                                                                     COLLECTED
                                                                                                                                                                  TASK ll|

                                                                                                                                                                     DEFINE ALTERNATIVE SAMPLE COLLECTION
                                                                                                                                                                     SYSTEMS FOP. THE SPECIFIC GEOGRAPHICAL
                                                                                                                                                                          AREA UNDER CONSIDERATION.
                                                                                                                                                                             DETAIL REQUIREMENTS
                                                                                                                                                                      IN VARIANCE FROM EXISTING OR PLANNED
                                                                                                                                                                   FACILITIES NOTED IN TASK 17. QUANTIFIED DATA
                                                                                                                                                                     SHALL SE A FUNCTION OF: THE ENVIRONMENT
                                                                                                                                                                              FOUND OR PROJECTED
                                                                                                                                                                   IN TERMS OF THE PARAMETERS NOTED IN TASK 3:
                                                                                                                                                                  THE WATER USES AND THEIR RELATIVE CRITICALITY.
                                                                                                                                                                        THE IMPORTANCE OF TE DEPENDENT
                                                                                                                                                                        VARIATIONS AND DATA STANDARDS.
                                                                                                                                                                        THE FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT
                                                                                                                                                                        QUANTITY OF DATA TO IE COLLECTED
                                                                                                                                                                   TASK III

                                                                                                                                                                  SELECT FROM THE ALTERNATIVE SYSTEMS DEFINED
                                                                                                                                                                    IN TASK II THAT SYSTEM WHICH PROVIDES THE
                                                                                                                                                                            SUFFICIENT FREOUENCY OF
                                                                                                                                                                              MEASUREMENT AND THE
                                                                                                                                                                   QUALITY OF DATA TO IE COLLECTED IN RELATION
                                                                                                                                                                           TO THE AVAILAILE RESOURCES.
                                                                                                                                                                             (COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS'
                                                                                                                                                                                                       OPRIATE FREQUENCY I
                                                                                                                                                                                              ./OF MEASUREMENT NECESSARY /
                                                                                                                                                                                              (TO OITAIN THE SPECIFIC WATER /
                                                                                                                                                                                                  DUALITY OBJECTIVES    /
                                                                                                                                                                                                         DOUBLE BLOCKS REPRESENT ORIGINATING DATA
                                                                                                                                                                                                         INPUTS FROM! PRIOR ACTIVITIES ARE NOT REOUIREO
SLANTED BOXES REPRESENT ANALYSIS OUTPUT
                                                                                                                                                                                                         THE NUMBER IN THE UPPER LEFT CORNE R HiYSTHE
                                                                                                                                                                                                         ACTIVITY TO SEQUENTIAL ACCOMPLISHMENT

-------
The sampling frequency necessary to quantitatively define
the quality dynamics in a body of water is related to
periods of cyclic occurrences which control quality and
to random influences.  The latter are, for the most part,
associated with meteorologic, manufacturing, and hydrologic
events.

The tailoring procedure with respect to the generalized
framework presented in Figure 10 involves the consideration
of numerous time-dependent factors which are a function of:

        Type of water body in question

        The constituent wastes present

        The specific parameters of interest

        The major water uses

The number of samples required for a given river basin to
fully define water quality involves a variability of
parameters in the final analysis.  Statistically speaking,
foreknowledge of the variability of the parameters to be
sampled and the precision desired must be understood.
Intensive field studies may be necessary.

Samples collected must define the resultant water quality
caused by influencing factors at a specific level of
significance.  Influencing factors include; the pollutant
loads, manipulation of stream flow, sunlight, and others.
                          138

-------
                      SECTION 6

             SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS DESIGN
The design of a surveillance program must take into account
general considerations relating to the program objectives,
the constraints imposed by resources and information avail-
ability, and the sensitivities of various factors which
influence the choices between alternatives.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SYSTEMS APPROACH

The considerations to be taken into account in the design
of a surveillance program may all be considered in an
intuitive manner by an individual experienced with such
programs.  The systems approach simply insures that all
elements will be considered in an orderly and efficient
manner.  Reference to Figure 7 reveals the vast amount of
data that would be required for the optimum design of a
surveillance program for a particular river basin.  It is
apparent that sophisticated means of data handling and
machine computation would be required in order to make use
of such an analytical framework.  A narrative discussion
of such a complicated system is not practical; one can,
however, profitably consider a portion of this system as
an example.  Figure 8,. which details the process of
selecting surveillance station locations, can serve as a
purpose.  This portion of the complete analytical frame-
work will be considered in discussing input information
requirements and the sensitivities of design considerations,
Input Information Requirements

In Figure 8, input information is identified by the content
of the double-lined blocks as follows:

Block No. 1   - Identification and classification of bodies
                of waters.

Block No. 2   - Overall description of the river basin(s).

Block No. 5   - Water quality standards and plans of
                implementation and enforcement.

Block No. 16  - Surveillance agencies; existing and planned
                activities.
                           139

-------
Block Wo. 13  - Objectives of the surveillance system.

Block No. 11  - Data users and their needs.

Block No. ISA - Resources availability in the near and far
                terms.

Block No. 24A - Cost data.

Such information will typically be available in a wide
variety of formats ranging from memos from data users voic-
ing their needs, to the statistical data on water quality
within the STORET system.  The first step in implementing
the systems approach is to acquire the pertinent mass of
data available; the second step is to format this informa-
tion in such a way that it is readily identifiable with
the various other elements of the system and readily usable
for analytical purposes.

To the extent that the volume of input information can be
reduced, the analytical process is greatly aided.  For
example, if one can initially determine that surveillance
stations will only be located near interstate boundaries
for purposes of determining general compliance with the
water quality standards, the volume of input data on the
characteristics of the basin, historical water quality
data, water uses, etc.  can be greatly reduced from that
available for the entire basin.  Similarly, if available
resources dictate that only a limited number of stations
can be specified, the input data can be further reduced
to consider only major interstate stream locations or
those known to be particularly sensitive due to pollution
incidents, extensive recreational uses, population density,
etc.

The format of input information will vary widely depending
upon the available data and the purposes of the surveil-
lance program.  The data format should seek to present
information in as concise a manner as possible consistent
with the objectives of the program.  Water quality data,
for example, should be available as yearly means, maxima,
and minima for a parameter at a particular location if
such information is sufficient for the purpose, rather than
as lists of daily figures for several years; water quality
standards should briefly list the critical parameters,
keyed to specific locations.  For iteration of analytical
steps necessary to select among a few initially chosen
locations or to determine specific parameters or sampling
frequencies, more detailed data may be needed than was used
in the initial analyses.
                           140

-------
Sensitivities of Design Considerations

Figure 8 indicates no differences in the relative
importance of the various considerations in the selection
of station locations.  This, of course, in a practical
case is of utmost concern.  These sensitivities will vary
from one problem to another, but some general observations
can be made.  It is most likely that a surveillance pro-
gram will be primarily limited by available resources,
particularly funds for equipment and operation.  In other
cases, the needs of data users may be such that surveil-
lance stations are to be established without regard to the
cost entailed; this may be particularly true when a legal
obligation dictates the need for data.  The water quality
standards may specify conditions beyond the capabilities
of available monitoring instruments and this may impose a
primary limitation, as may other technological considera-
tions.

In some instances, sampling stations might be required
immediately with little time available for specification
and selection on the basis of a comprehensive analysis of
the situation.  Input information may not be available
in some cases to implement a systems analysis framework.
Available analytical time or lack of input information
could well impose the primary constraints on the design
of a program.

Specification of the relative importance or sensitivities
of the various design considerations must be a matter of
concern early in the analytical process and made an
integral part of the analysis.  Such sensitivities will
vary from one case to another and are, to a large extent,
matters of judgment on the part of the analyst.
Criteria for the Selection of Water Quality Surveillance
Stations	

It should be pointed out that water quality surveillance
station locations were selected only for those streams
specified for study in this project.  These selections
should not be construed as a sophisticated implementation
of the systems analysis framework.

The following water quality surveillance stations have
been selected as the most immediate needs of those streams
studied.  The techniques outlined in the Systems Analysis
                           141

-------
Framework have been utilized manually to assemble all of
the information and data necessary to decide the priorities
for immediate implementation.  A particular ranking system
has been utilized which, although simple, still encompasses
the needs and priorities.  It is concluded that the first
rank selections should enable the FWPCA to evaluate
compliance with the Interstate Water Quality Standards
particularly at the interstate borders.  If these Interstate
Water Quality Standards are being met at those locations,
there will be less need for surveillance stations at other
locations.  That is, meeting the Interstate Water Quality
Standards at the state borders will likely provide the
promised performance sought.  It is recognized that placing
all of the water quality surveillance stations at the
interstate borders does not provide protection from threats
of pollution sources within a state's borders.

It is of prime importance that some water quality surveil-
lance stations be placed in such a way as to protect those
waters which are used for potable water sources.  Here
again, a rank can be applied since the populations served
by various water companies are known.  Therefore, strictly
on a population basis, it is possible to compute a rank
for the protection of the greatest number of persons.  A
major city would thus out-rank a smaller city in the need
for protection for its source of potable water.

The third highest rank in the assignment of water quality
surveillance stations would be to monitor major pollution
sources.  This is of particular value when the pollution
source is not amenable to immediate treatment or when con-
struction schedules are lagging.  Additional surveillance
of the situation may be necessary during an interim
period before adequate treatment can be installed.  Thus,
highly polluted areas will need surveillance of the levels
of pollution at its sources.  This type of surveillance,
when maintained properly, allows the proper authority
adequate warning as to particularly bad situations and may
indicate the need for action in order to protect down-
stream water users.

Additional ranking can also be provided for waters that
are utilized for recreation such as body contact sports,
hunting, and fishing; agriculture, both farmstead and
irrigation; and the wide variety of industries.

Using the above ranking considerations, Class I Water
Quality Surveillance Stations were assigned to locations
on the basis of their relation to (1) Interstate borders,
(2) Potable water supplies of major population centers,
(3) Major pollution sources.
                           142

-------
Class II Water Quality Surveillance Stations were assigned
to locations such that they would monitor the quality of
streams tributary to those considered in this project.
These will include both interstate and intrastate streams.
Parameters and Frequency of Measurements

Rather than go through the procedure of listing for each
proposed water quality monitoring site the parameters to
be measured, the following procedure has been selected.
First, the Class I water quality monitors should have con-
tinuous water quality monitors installed at the sites.
The monitors should meet the current FWPCA specifications
and should have telemetry capabilities.  They should
monitor the following parameters hourly:  pH, dissolved
oxygen, dissolved chlorides, conductivity, water tempera-
ture, and turbidity.  Each of these monitors should have
the ability to collect a composite water sample over a
24-hour period.  The composite sampler should be actuated
24 hours before the routine maintenance visit.  This
composite sample should be collected semi-monthly.  This
composite sample should be analyzed at one of the state
or regional laboratories.

Other than the six measurements previously mentioned, there
are other measurements which should be accomplished on all
samples.  They should be analyzed semi-monthly for:
plankton, radioactivity, total organic carbon, and pesti-
cides.  These data are necessary for long-term predictions
in overall water quality.  The balance of the measurements
made at each of the Class I sampling stations should be
determined for each location by referring to that section
of the Appendix in which the standards for that site are
listed.

At many sites, there is a common border between two states;
or in other cases, the river may be the interstate border.
The standards for all states applying  to a particular
point on the stream should be consulted.  The standards are
listed for each of the points where placement of water
quality monitors have been suggested.   In certain cases,
one or more monitors may fall within one area.  The analyses
to be accomplished on each sample should be  the total  to
satisfy all of the water quality standards for each of the
states concerned at that sampling point.  To have listed
them for each point would be rather repetitious and was not
done in order to conserve space.
                            143

-------
For the Class II water quality monitoring sites, the
analysis should be identical to the Class I stations with
the exception of the continuous recording of the six
parameters.  However, these six should be analyzed for on
the sample collected monthly.  These monthly samples
would be best collected by automatic composite samplers
that are mounted permanently.  They could be actuated one
day and collected the next.  If this is not feasible,
they could be collected manually as a grab sample recogniz-
ing the limitations of such sampling.  It will not be
possible to analyze for carbon under these conditions
using the carbon filter technique.

The general site selection for a water quality surveillance
station can be accomplished by using the methods outlined
in the systems analysis framework.  However, the final site
selection would need additional field measurements at
various points within the selected area.  The analysis of
such chemical and physical measurements will allow the
final selection of the site to be made.  It may require
that these measurements be repeated under a variety of flow
conditions before sufficient data can be assembled for
proper j udgments.

Particular attention should be given to the two general
approaches to site selection.  One school of thought
utilizes sites where large volumes of water are withdrawn
such as potable or cooling water users.  There are draw-
backs from the effects of velocity and passage through
cribs and the like.  Others prefer sites which use
submersible pumps at a single point in the stream.  Here
again, there are distinct advantages and disadvantages.
The decision cannot be generalized and each site must be
judged on its own merits.

Attention should be given to the historical flood data
for the area to prevent damage to the equipment and to
insure access to the site.  In sites where stage height is
variable, care should be given to the selection of the
intake depth.  In certain cases, a multi-depth intake with
proper switching is recommended.  Floating platforms have
been used to alleviate this problem quite effectively.

The sampling frequencies specified were made on the basis
of the needs to protect the various water uses considering
the response time for specific pollutants for the Class I
stations.  The Class II station frequency was selected
only to provide the necessary information for future
evaluation.
                           144

-------
Selection of Water Quality Surveillance Stations
     Class I Water Quality Surveillance Stations for the
     Ohio River Basin and the Tennessee River Basin	

They are listed by number which corresponds to a site
number on Figure 12.

 1.  The Ohio River at Mounds City Lock and Dam.

 2.  The Tennessee River at the Kentucky-Tennessee State
     Line.

 3.  The Tennessee River at the Pickwick Landing Lock and
     Dam to monitor the Tennessee-Alabama-Mississippi
     State Line.

 4.  The Tennessee River at the Tennessee-Alabama State
     Line at Nickajack Dam, which also monitors wastes
     downstream of Chattanooga.

 5.  The Ohio River at the Indiana-Illinois-Kentucky State
     Line near the junction of the Wabash River.

 6.  The Wabash River near its mouth at the Ohio River;
     this is also between the Indiana-Illinois State Line.

 7.  The Wabash River near Terre Haute, Indiana at the
     Illinois-Indiana State Line.

 8.  On the Cheat River near the Pennsylvania-West Virginia
     State Line.

 9.  On the Ohio River upstream of Louisville, Kentucky to
     monitor the potable water intake.

10.  On the Ohio River downstream of Cincinnati, Ohio at
     the Indiana-Ohio State Line and wastes from the city.

11.  On the Ohio River upstream of Cincinnati, Ohio to
     monitor the potable water supply for Cincinnati.

12.  On the Ohio River at the West Virginia-Kentucky-Ohio
     State Line near Ashland, Kentucky.

13.  On the Kanawha River near its mouth at the Ohio River
     downstream of the industrial outfalls of Charleston,
     West Virginia at the Winfield Dam.
                           145

-------
14.   On the Ohio River near the Ohio-West Virginia-
     Pennsylvania State Line, possibly at the New
     Cumberland Dam or ORSANCO station at Stratton, Ohio.

15.   On the Ohio River downstream of Pittsburgh, Pennsyl-
     vania at the Dashshields Lock and Dam to monitor
     Pittsburgh and the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers.

16.   On the Allegheny River at Oakmont, Pennsylvania,
     this would protect the potable water quality for
     Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.  ORSANCO currently has a
     station at this point which should be utilized.

17.   On the Allegheny River at the Allegheny Reservoir Dam
     near the New York-Pennsylvania State Line.

19.   On the Monongahela River near Pittsburgh, possibly
     at one of the ORSANCO stations.

20.   On the Monongahela River at Morgantown Lock and Dam
     near the Pennsylvania-West Virginia State Line.
     Class II Water Quality Surveillance lists for the
     Ohio and Tennessee River Basins	

They are listed by number which corresponds to a site
number on Figure 12.

18.  Allegheny River at New York-Pennsylvania State Line
     at Portville, New York.

21.  Mahoning Creek at its mouth near Mile Point 65 of the
     Allegheny River.  There is a bridge and a dam in the
     vicinity.

22.  Red Bank Creek near its mouth at Mile Point 64 of the
     Allegheny River.  There is a bridge near the mouth.

23.  On the Clarion River near its mouth on the Allegheny
     River.

25.  French Creek near its mouth on the Allegheny River.

26.  Oil Creek near its mouth on the Allegheny River.

27.  Turtle Creek at its mouth as it enters the Monongahela
     River near Mile Point 11.
                           146

-------
28.   The Youghiogheny River near its mouth as it enters the
     Monongahela River at Mile Point 16.

29.   The Tygart River near its mouth where it joins to form
     the Monongahela River.

30.   The West Fork River near its mouth where it joins to
     form the Monongahela River.

31.   The Kiskiminetas River near its mouth at the Allegheny
     River at Mile Point 30.

32.   Crooked Creek near its mouth on the Allegheny River at
     Mile Point 40.  The Crooked Creek Dam could be used as
     the site.

33.   The Gauley River near its mouth where it joins to form
     the Kanawha River.

34.   The New River near its mouth where it joins to form
     the Kanawha River.

35.   The Cumberland River near its mouth where it joins the
     Ohio River.

36.   The Saline River near its mouth where it joins the
     Ohio River.

37.   The Tradewater River near its mouth where it joins the
     Ohio River.

38.   The Green River near  its mouth where it joins the Ohio
     River.

39.   The Salt River near its mouth where it joins the Ohio
     River.

40.   The Kentucky River near its mouth  where it  joins the
     Ohio River.

41.   The Mill Creek near its mouth where it joins the Ohio
     River.

42.   The Miami River near  its mouth  at  the Ohio  River.

43.   The Licking River near its mouth where it joins the
     Ohio River.

44.   The Little Miami River near its mouth where it joins
     the Ohio River.
                            147

-------
45.   The Scioto River near its mouth where it joins the Ohio
     River.

46.   The Hocking River near its mouth where it joins the
     Ohio River.

47.   Big Sandy River near its mouth at the Ohio River.

48.   The Little Kanawha River near its mouth where it joins
     the Ohio River.

49.   The Muskingum River near its mouth where it joins the
     Ohio River.

50.   The Beaver River near its mouth where it joins the Ohio
     River.

51.   The Duck River near its mouth where it joins the
     Tennessee River.

52.   The Bear River near its mouth where it joins the
     Tennessee River.

53.   The Elk River near its mouth where it joins the
     Tennessee River.

54.   The Hiwassee River near its mouth where it joins the
     Tennessee River.

55.   The Clinch River near its mouth where it joins the
     Tennessee River.

56.   The Little Tennessee River near its mouth where it joins
     the Tennessee River.

57.   The French Broad River where it joins to form the
     Tennessee River.

58.   The Holston River near its mouth where it joins to form
     the Tennessee River.

59.   The Tennessee River at the nearest bridge downstream of
     Knoxville, Tennessee.
                            148

-------
     Class I Water Quality Monitors for the Southeastern
     Basins	

They are listed by a number which corresponds to a site
number on Figure 13.

 1.  On the Escambia River below its confluence with the
     Conecuh River.  Monitor Station No. 55035 is located
     here and should be upgraded.

 5.  At Pensacola Bay and U. S. Highway Bridge 98 for the
     Escambia-Pensacola Bay area.

 9.  The Choctawhatchee River at the Alabama-Florida State
     Line.  There is an existing sample station 50015 in
     this vicinity.

12.  The exit from the Choctawhatchee Bay there is a bridge
     across the bay exit across Santa Rosa Island.  Locate
     the monitor with the intake near the channel entrance.

16.  The Ochlockonee River south of the Florida-Georgia
     State Line on Highway Bridge No. 27.

20.  U. S. Highway Bridge Route 98 as it crosses Ochlockonee
     Bay.

21.  The Pascagoula River below the confluence of the Leaf
     River and Chickasawhay Rivers at highway No. 26
     bridge.  This is downstream of the Alabama-Mississippi
     State Line.

25.  The east branch of the Pascagoula River on Highway
     Bridge U. S. 90.

26.  The Mobile River below the junction of the Alabama
     and Tombigbee Rivers.  There are no structures across
     the river in this zone.  Most probably will have to
     have a submarine entrance, which is protected from
     shipping.

30.  The Mobile River at U. S. Highway 90 and 98 bridge
     crossing near the City of Mobile.

36.  The Tombigbee River at the Mississippi-Alabama
     border.  There is an existing FWPCA station at this
     point, its number is 56660.

37.  The Tombigbee River at the Demopolis Lock and Dam.
                           149

-------
43.  The Alabama River below Selma, Alabama.

49.  The Pearl River at Highway Bridge Route 26 near
     Bougelousa, Louisiana.  The Pearl is the common
     border between Louisiana-Mississippi.  This is the
     first bridge south of the northern border of
     Louisiana and Mississippi.

50.  The Pearl River at its entrance into Lake Borgne at
     the Louisville and Nashville railroad bridge.  This
     is the entrance of the East or the main branch of the
     Pearl River into Lake Borgne and later to Mississippi
     Sound.

52.  The Perdido River at bridge on Highway No. 31 at the
     Alabama-Florida border,

54.  On Route 42 Highway bridge in Perdido Bay.

59.  The Chattahoochee River at the Georgia-Alabama State
     Line at the West Point Dam.

61.  The Chattahoochee River at the Alabama-Georgia-
     Florida State Line, Highway Bridge Route 2 and 91 of
     the State Line.

62.  The Jim Woodruff Dam exit of Lake Seminole at the
     Georgia-Florida State Line at the junction of the
     Chattahoochee, the Flint, and Spring Creek to form
     the Apalachicola River.
                                                *
63.  The Apalachicola Bay at the John Gorrie Memorial
     Bridge on the left side near the intercoastal channel,
     near the City of Apalachicola.
     Class II Water Quality Monitoring Stations in the
     Southeastern River Basins	

They are listed by a number which corresponds to a site
number on Figure 13.

 2.  The Escambia River at US-90A Highway Bridge near the
     entrance to Escambia Bay.

 3.  Pensacola Bay on a Highway Bridge crossing Bayou
     Chico.
                           150

-------
 4.   The Blackwater River at U.  S.  Highway 90  Bridge near
     the entrance to Blackwater  Bay.

 7.   The Yellow River at Highway Bridge on Route 2.
     Station No.  63840 should be upgraded.

 8.   The Yellow River near its mouth.   At Highway No. 87
     Bridge.

10.   The Choctawhatchee River below the confluence with
     Wrights Creek at U. S. 90 Highway Bridge.  Sampling
     Station No.  53278 should be upgraded.

11.   The Choctawhatchee River below the confluence with
     Holmes Creek at Highway No. 20 Bridge.  Sampling
     Station No.  61943 should be upgraded.

13.   Ochlockonee River downstream of Moultrie.

14.   Ochlockonee River at Highway Bridge Route No. 93
     below Thomasville.

18.   Ochlockonee River at Highway Bridge Route No. 267
     below Lake Talquin.

24.   Escatawpa River at Highway Bridge No. 63 before it
     enters the Pascagoula Bay.

28.   Chickasaw Creek at its mouth on the Mobile River at
     a L&N Railroad Bridge.

29.   Three Mile Creek at its mouth on  the Mobile River
     at a L&N Railroad Bridge.

32.   Highway Bridge Route No. 163 crossing Dog River at  its
     mouth in Mobile Bay.

33.   Tombigbee River south of Aberdeen, Mississippi.

34.   Tombigbee River below the  junction of the East  and
     West Forks near Amory, Mississippi at Monitor  Station
     No. 56838 which needs upgraded.

35.   Tombigbee River below the  entrance of Town Creek.

38.   Tombigbee River below the  confluence of  Sucarnoochee
     Creek.
                          151

-------
40.   Tombigbee River at U. S. No. 43 Highway Bridge.
     Near Jackson.

44.   Alabama River at U. S. No. 82 Highway Bridge down-
     stream of Montgomery, Alabama at 54571 which needs
     upgraded.

45.   Alabama River at the Claiborne Lock and Dam.

48.   Pearl River at Route No. 15 Highway Bridge downstream
     of Bogue Chitto.

48.   Pearl River at Route No. 28 Highway Bridge downstream
     of Jackson.

51.   Rigolets at Route 90 Highway Bridge downstream of
     Lake Pontchartrain.

53.   Eleven Mile Creek at Route 90 Highway Bridge before
     it enters Perdido Bay.

55.   Conecuh River at Route No. 41 Highway Bridge near East
     Brewton.  Before Alabama-Florida State Line.

57.   Chatahoochee River at the Buford Dam.

58.   Chatahoochee River at Route No. 20 Highway Bridge
     downstream of Atlanta.

60.   Chatahoochee River at the Water F. George Lock and Dam.

64.   Flint River at Route No. 37 Highway Bridge South of
     Albany.

65.   Spring Creek at Route No. 82 Highway Bridge.
     Class I Water Quality Monitoring Sites in the Lower
     Missouri River J3asj.n	

They are listed by number which corresponds to a site
number on Figure 14.

 1.  On the Missouri River at St. Louis, Missouri.  This is
     one of the old network stations.  It monitors the
     effect of the Missouri River on the Mississippi River.
     It also monitors the potable water supply for St.
     Louis, Missouri.  Data are being collected at two water
     plants of the city and county of St. Louis.  These
     should be upgraded and the station centralized in one
     of the plants.
                          152

-------
 2.   The Osage River at Osage City, Missouri near its
     mouth at the Mississippi River.  There are several
     bridges to choose from for the final site.  This
     station can monitor the effect of the Osage River
     on the Missouri River.

 3.   The Marais des Cygnes River near the Missouri-Kansas
     State Line.

 4.   The Missouri River at Missouri City, Missouri.   This
     is an old network station which monitors the effect
     of pollution from Kansas City crossing interstate
     lines between Missouri and Kansas.

 5.   On the Missouri River at Kansas City, Kansas to
     monitor the potable water supply for Kansas City.
     This again, is an old network station.

 6.   The Kansas River at Kansas City or possibly at DeSoto,
     Kansas.  The latter is an old network station to
     monitor the effect of the Kansas River watershed on
     the Missouri River.

 7.   The Smoky Hill River at Enterprise, Kansas near its
     mouth at the Kansas River.  Here the USGS Station
     No. 50250 can be upgraded.

 8.   The Republican River at the Kansas-Nebraska border
     near Hardy, Nebraska.  Both the States of Kansas and
     Nebraska have sampling stations here.  They should be
     upgraded and combined into a single station.

 9.   On the South Fork of the Republican River near
     Benkelman, Nebraska.  Here again, both Nebraska and
     Kansas have monthly stations which should be combined
     and upgraded.

10.   The Missouri River at the Kansas-Nebraska-Missouri
     State Line.  This site should be at the Bridge near
     Rulo, Nebraska.  This bridge is eight miles upstream
     from the state line.  This should replace the existing
     old network station at St. Joseph, Missouri which is
     38 miles downstream from the state line.

11.   The Missouri River at the Nebraska-Kansas-Iowa State
     Line.  This site should be at a bridge near Nebraska
     City, Nebraska which is 10 miles upstream from the
     state line.  This would monitor the effect of wastes
     from Omaha, Nebraska and mineral wastes from the
     Platte River.
                          153

-------
12.  The Platte River at Plattesmouth, Nebraska.  This is
     an old network station located upstream of the mouth
     of the Platte before it joins the Missouri River.
     This should be upgraded.

13.  The South Platte River at Julesburg, Colorado near
     the Colorado-Nebraska State Line.  This is an old
     network station which should be upgraded.

14.  On the South Platte River downstream of the City of
     Denver, Colorado to monitor local municipal and
     industrial wastes.

15.  On the South Platte River at the municipal water
     intakes for the City of Denver.  Although this is
     only a portion of the supply, it should be monitored
     since it is a potable supply for a large population.

16.  On the North Platte River at Henry, Nebraska.  This
     again is an old network station which should be
     upgraded.

17.  The old network station at Yankton, South Dakota.
     This is located seven miles below Gavin's Point Dam
     at the municipal water treatment plant.  This station
     should be upgraded.

In the Missouri Basin, it was observed that many interstate
streams which when crossing interstate lines present no
problems.  For the most part, they are either of very good
quality, or they are very small or intermittent streams.
Therefore, even though standards may have been written, no
surveillance at this time would be justified other than
brief intermittent sampling.  This is true of the Smoky
Hill River and the South Fork of the Republican River as
they pass from Kansas into Colorado.  A similar situation
occurs where the North Platte flows from Colorado into
Wyoming and where the Niobrara flows from Wyoming into
Nebraska.
     Class II Water Quality Monitoring Sites for the Lower
     Missouri River Basin	

They are listed by a number which corresponds to a site
number on Figure 14.
                          154

-------
18.   The Niobrara River near its mouth as it enters the
     Missouri River near the Louis and Clark Lake upstream
     from Yankton and the Gavin's Point Dam.  There is a
     railroad bridge and highway bridge which can serve as
     monitoring point locations.

19.   On the North Platte River, additional monitoring
     points should be established just upstream of the
     mouth of the North Platte River near North Platte,
     Nebraska, to monitor the effect of the North Platte
     on the Platte River.

20.   North Platte River downstream of the Casper, Wyoming
     to monitor oil processing plants.  Although there
     were no apparent discharges, the housekeeping of
     these plants was such that pollution would occur
     during high water periods.

21.   North Platte River at the Colorado-Wyoming border.

22.   Niobrara River at Box Butte Reservoir.  This is in
     the headwaters area of the Niobrara River and could
     serve to monitor these temporary streams which come
     from the general area and from across the state line
     in Wyoming.

23.   The City of Denver maintains a water quality station
     at the Discharge of the Eleven Mile Canyon Reservoir
     near the headwaters of the South Platte River.

24.   South Platte River downstream of the Arapahoe Power
     Plant and the municipal sewage disposal plant.
     There are several bridges to be selected from here.
     The sanitary discharge is especially inadequate.  It
     definitely pollutes the stream and is somewhat
     stratified.

25.   South Platte River near Sam Creek.  Upstream of this
     point there are refineries and other waste treatment
     facilities.

26.   South Platte River downstream of the City of Greeley,
     Colorado where the world's largest cattle feed areas
     are located.  Waste treatment facilities are there
     but don't seem to be that adequate.  The odor is  so
     intense that it was very much in evidence in 2,000
     feet above the cattle pens.  There is a bridge at
     Route 37 which would be a suitable point.
                          155

-------
27.  Platte River at Brady, Nebraska.  The USGS maintains
     a monitoring station No. 50369 which is downstream of
     the City of North Platte.  This is a monthly sampling
     station which should be upgraded.

28.  Loup River near its mouth on the Platte River.  The
     State of Nebraska maintains water quality station
     No. 61596 on the diversion canal from the Loup River
     which should be upgraded to a monthly station and
     more parameters should be measured.

29.  The Republican River at its mouth.  There are several
     monitoring points maintained here already.  There
     should be a culmination of the efforts into a good
     monthly station.

30.  The mouth of the Little Osage River or possibly back
     at the Kansas-Missouri border before it joins the
     Marais des Cygnes River to form the Osage River.

31.  The mouth of the Gasconade River as it enters the
     Missouri River.  A possible site would be on a highway
     bridge for Route 100 which crosses near the mouth.
     There is also Missouri Pacific railroad bridge in the
     vicinity.

32.  The Lamine River near its mouth at Mile Point 202 in
     the Missouri River.  There are highway and railroad
     bridges in the vicinity.

33.  The Chariton River near its mouth at Mile Point 239
     on the Missouri River.  There is a bridge about six
     miles back upstream that could serve as a monitoring
     point.

34.  The Grand River near its mouth at Mile Point 250 on
     the Missouri River.  There are two highway bridges
     near Brunswick, Missouri which can serve as monitor-
     ing points.

35.  The Big Blue River near its mouth at Mile Point 358
     on the Missouri River.

36.  The Missouri River at a bridge near Mile Point 353.
     It carries Highway No. 71 to monitor industrial and
     municipal effluents upstream of this point.
                          156

-------
37.   The Floyd River near its mouth at River Mile 731.
     There are highway and railroad bridges in the
     vicinity.

38.   The Big Sioux River near its mouth at Mile Point 734
     on the Missouri River.  There's a highway bridge in
     the vicinity.
                          157

-------
                      SECTION 7

                   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The support of the Project Officer, Mr. William T. Sayers
of the Pollution Surveillance Branch -is acknowledged with
sincere thanks.  He was aided in his task by Mr. James H.
McDermott, and Mr. Phillip L. Taylor of the Pollution
Surveillance Branch/ Operations Program, and by Dr. Roger
D. Shull of the Pollution Control Analysis Branch,
Research and Development Program, Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration.

Additional aid and cooperation was provided by Messrs.
Irwin L. Dickstein, Robert L. Markey, Dale B. Parke,
Keith O. Schwab, and Lee B. Tebo, Jr., of the three
Regional Offices of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration which were studied.

The Project Manager was Mr. Paul V. Morgan, Cyrus Wm. Rice
Division - NUS CORPORATION.  He was aided by Mr. Brownie
R. Johnson, Consultec, Inc.; Dr. Henry C. Bramer, Gurnham
Bramer, and Associates, Inc.; and Mr. Wallace L. Duncan,
Jennings, Strouss and Salmon.  They, in turn, were
supported by the staffs of the respective groups.
                           158

-------
                      SECTION 8

                      REFERENCES
"Acid Mine Drainage Pollution Study - Chartiers Creek Water-
shed - Allegheny and Washington Counties - Phases 1 and 2,"
Prepared by A. C. Ackenheil and Associates for the Pennsyl-
vania Dept. of Mines and Mineral Industries,(1968).

"Amendments to the Rules and Regulations/1 Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania Department of Public Health,.  (1968) .

"Appendix B to Municipal Waste Report," Metropolitan Denver
Area, South Platte River Basin," Public Health Service,
U. S. Dept. of HEW, (1965).

"Aquatic Life Criteria - First Progress Report," Ohio River
Valley Water Sanitation Commission, Sewage and Industrial
Wastes, (1955).                    '

"Aquatic Life Resources of the Ohio River," Ohio River Valley
Water Sanitation Commission, (1962).

"Aquatic Life Water Quality Criteria - Second Progress
Report," Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission,
Sewage & Industrial Wastes, Vol. 28:5, pp. 678-90,  (1955).

"Aquatic Life Water Quality Criteria - Third Progress
Report," Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Comm., Journal
Water Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 32:1,  (1960).

"Aquatic Life Water Quality Criteria - Fourth Progress
Report," Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Comm.,
Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 1:11,  (1967).

"Asiatic Clam (Corbicula)," Gruver, Merle., American Iron
and Steel Institute, (1966).

"Bacterial - Quality Objectives for the Ohio River," Ohio
River Valley Water Sanitation Commission,  (1951).

"Barr Lake and Its Odor Relationships," Public Health Service,
U. S. Dept. Of HEW, (1965).,
"The Beet Sugar Industry  The Water Pollution Problem on
Status of Waste Abatement and Treatment," Federal Water
Pollution Control Adm., U.S. Dept. of Interior,  (1967).

"Big Sioux River Drainage Basin:  A Cooperative State-Federal
Report on Water Pollution October, 1951, Water Pollution
Series No. 21," Public Health Service, Federal Security
Agency, (1951).

                            159

-------
"1961 Budget," Joe G. Moore, Jr., Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1969).

"Catalog of Federal Pesticide Monitoring Activities in Effect
July, 1967," Federal Committee on Pest Control, Department of
Agriculture, Department of Defense, Department^ of HEW, U. _S._
Dept. of the Interior, (1968).

"Central Missouri River Drainage Basin.  A Cooperative State-
Federal Report on Water Pollution, June, 1952.  Water
Pollution Series No. 24," Nebraska Department of Health,
North Dakota Department of~Health, South Dakota Department
of Health, Wyoming Department of Health, Public Health
Service, Federal Security Agency^  (1952).

"Certification of Administrative Rules Filed with the
Secretary of State," Florida Air & Water Pollution Control
Commission, (1969).

"Chemical Quality of Surface Water in the Allegheny River
Basin, Pennsylvania and New York," E. F. McCarren, Water-
Supply Paper 1835, U. S.  Geological Survey, (1967).

"Chemical Quality of Surface Waters in Pennsylvania," C. N.
Durfor and P.  W. Anderson, Water-Supply Paper 1619, U. S.
Geo1ogical Survey,  (1963).

"Chemical Water Quality of the Lower Kansas River Basin,"
Walter J. O'Brien and Ernest E. Angino, Univ.  of Kansas,
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, (1966) .

"Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to
the Surface Waters of North Carolina," Board of Water and
Air Resources, Department of Water and Air Resources, (1968).

"Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Pesticides in Major River Basins,
1957-65," A. W. Breidenbach, C. G. Gunnerson,  F. K. Kawahara,
J. J. Lichtenberg, R. S.  Green, Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1967).

"Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Pesticides in Major U. S. River
Basins," Leo Weaver, G. Gunnerson, W. Breidenbach, and
James J. Lichtenberg, Public Health Service, U. S. Dept. of
HEW,  (1965).

"Compendium of Department of the Interior Statements on Non-
degradation of Interstate Waters," Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1968).
                            160

-------
"A Comprehensive Program for Control of Water Pollution,
Missouri Drainage Basin:  A Cooperative State-Federal Report
on Water Pollution, July, 1953.  Water Pollution Series No.
56," Public Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW,  (1953).

"Conference at St. Joseph, Missouri on Interstate Pollution
in the Missouri River," Public Health Service, U. S.  Dept.
of HEW, (1957).

"Conference in the Matter of Pollution of the Interstate
Waters of the Chattahoochee River and its Tributaries,
from Atlanta, Georgia to Fort Gaines, Georgia,"  Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration, U. S. Dept.  of the
Interior, (1966~~~

"Conference in the Matter of Pollution of the Interstate
Waters of the North Platte River, Third Session," U.  S. Dept.
of HEW, (1963).

"Conference in the Matter of Pollution of the South Platte
River Basin," Public Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW,
(1963) .

"The Cost of Clean Water - State and Major River Basin
Municipal Tables," Volume IV, Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1968) .

"The Cost of Clean Water - Summary Report," Vol. I, Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration, U. S. Dept. of the
Interior, (1968).

"Data Report Youghiogheny River Survey November 1960-
January, 1963," Thomas C. Hopkins, Jr., Maryland Water
Pollution Contro]^ Commission^  (1963).

"Definite Plan Report on Tower, Greenv/ood, and Yankton Units,"
Missouri Oahe Projects Office, Bureau of Reclamation, U.  S.
Dept. of the Interior,  (1963).

"Development of Water Resources in Appalachia, 2nd Draft,"
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, U. S. Dept.
of the Interior, (1968)

"Effects of Pollution on Aquatic Life Resources of the South
Platte River Basin in Colorado," Volumes I and II, Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration, U. S. Dept. of the
Interior, (1967).
                          161

-------
"Establishment of Water Quality Standards and Classifications
for Interstate Waters in the State of Georgia," Georgia Water
Quality Control Board, (1967.

"FWPCA Presentations ORSANCO Engineering Committee Seventieth
Meeting," Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, U.
S. Dept. of the Interior, (1969).

"The Federal Water Pollution Control Program -- In Retrospect
and in Prospect," John T. Barnhill, Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1968).

"Final Report on Kansas City Pollution Survey Using IR
Detection Techniques," E. C. Cannard and J. G. Hogan,
HRB-Singer, Inc.," (1961) .

"Fish Kills by Pollution 1966," Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, U.S. Dept.  of the Interior,  (1967) .

"Further Studies on the Introduced Asiatic Clam (Corbicula)
in Tennessee," R. M. Sinclair and B. S. Isom, Tennessee
Dept. of Public Health, (1963) .

"The Future of Instrumentation in Water Pollution Control,"
J. H. McDermott, D.  H. Ballinger and W. T. Sayers, Instru-
ment Society of America, (1968).

"Future Water Requirements for Municipal Use - Water Resources
in the U. S.," Select Committee on Natural Water Resources, S.
Res. 48 Eighty-Sixth Congress, (1960).

"General Water Quality Criteria for the Definition and Control
of Pollution in the Waters of Tennessee,"  Tennessee Stream
Pollution Control Board, (1967) .

"Generalized Streamflow Probabilities High Flow Plains Snow
Region," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee, (1967).

"Generalized Streamflow Probabilities  High Flows, Sub-Basin
4, Eastern Dakota Tributaries," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency
Committee, (1967) .

"Generalized Streamflow Probabilities -- High Flows, Sub-Basin
5, Platte-Niobrara Basins,"  Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committes,
(1967) .
                          162

-------
"Generalized Streamflow Probabilities  High Flows, Sub-Basin
7, Kansas Basin," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee, (1967).

''Generalized Streamflow Probabilities  High Flows, Sub-Basin
6, Middle Missouri River Tributaries," Missouri Basin Inter-
Agency Committee, (1967) .

"Generalized Streamflow Probabilities  High Flows, Sub-Basin
8, Lower Missouri River Tributaries," Missouri Basin Inter-
Agency Committee, (1966).

"Ground-Water Pollution in the South Platte River Valley
Between Denver and Brighton Colorado," Public Health Service,
U. S. Dept. of HEW,  (1965).

"Ground-Water Pollution in the Middle and Lower South Platte
River Basin of Colorado," Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1967).

"Heated Discharges - Their Effect on. Streams," Publication
No. 3, Pennsylvania Dept. of Health,  (1962).

"High-Flow Volume-Frequency Curves for Selected Durations
Eastern Dakota Tributaries," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency
Committee, (1967).

"High-Flow Volume-Frequency Curves for Selected Durations
Kansas Basin," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee, (1967).

"High-Flow Volume-Frequency Curves for Selected Durations
Lower Missouri River Tributaries," Missouri Basin Inter-
Agency Committee, (1966).

"High-Flow Volume-Frequency Curves for Selected Durations
Missouri River Main Stem," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency
Committee, (1967) .

"High-Flow Volume-Frequency Curves for Selected Durations
Middle Missouri River Tributaries," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency
Committee, (1967).

"High-Flow Volume-Frequency Curves for Selected Durations
Platte-Niobrara Basins," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency
Committee, (1967) .

"Highlights of Report:  Water Quality and Management Snake
River Basin," Federal Water Pollution Control Administration,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1968).
                          163

-------
"Houseboat Waste Characteristics and Treatment," Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration, U. S. Dept.  of
the Interior, (1967).

"Illinois Sanitary Water Board Rules & Regulations SWB-9
Water Quality Criteria Interstate Waters Wabash River and
Tributary Streams Crossing into Indiana, Critera and
Implementation," State of Illinois Sanitary Water Board,
(1966-1967).

"Illinois Sanitary Water Board Rules & Regulations SWB-10
Water Quality Criteria Interstate Waters Ohio River and
Saline River, Criteria and Implementation," State of Illinois
Sanitary Water Board,  (1966-1967).

"Indiana Water Quality Monitor Station Records - Rivers and
Streams, 1957-1966,"  Indiana State Board of Health and Stream
Pollution Control Board, (1957-1967).

"Industrial Plants Visited and Not Sampled Supplement to the
Basic Report - A Study of Industrial Waste Pollution in the
South Platte River Basin," Appendix A and B, Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration, U. S. Dept. of the Interior,
(1966) .

"Infiltration Data,"  Soil Conservation Service, U. S. Dept.
of Agriculture, (1966).

"Information Bulletin for Public Hearings on Proposed Revisions
of Water Quality Standards for Interstate and Intrastate
Waters of Nebraska,"  Nebraska Water Pollution Control Council,
State Dept.  of Health,  (1968).

"Instrumentation for Water Quality Management in the Ohio
Valley," W.  L. Klein,  D. A. Dunsmore and R. K. Horton,
Forum on the Control of Water Quality, American Society
for Testing and Materials, (1965) .

"Intensive Study of the Water at Critical Points on the
Monongahela, Allegheny and Ohio Rivers in the Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania Area," Report to the FWPCA No. PH-86-64-124,
by Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh,
(1966) .

"James River Basin Water Pollution Investigation," State of
North Dakota, State of South Dakota, and Public Health Service
of Missouri,  (1952).
                          164

-------
"Kansas River Basin, Planning Status Report, Water Resource
Appraisals for Hydroelectric Licensing," Federal Power
Commission, Bureau of Power, (1966).

"Kansas Streamflow Characteristics,  Base Flow Data," Tech-
nical Report Number 6A, Busby, M. W. and Armentrout, G.  W.,
Kansas Water Resources Board, (1965).

"Kansas Streamflow Characteristics Part 2 Low-Flow Fre-
quency," Technical Report Number 2,  Furness, L.  W. ,  Kansas
Water Resources Board  (1960).

"Kansas Streamflow Characteristics,  Part 3, Flood Fre-
quency," Technical Report Number 3,  Ellis, W.,  and Edelen,
W.,  Jr., Kansas Water Resources Board,  (1960).

"Kansas Streamflow Characteristics,  Part 5, Storage Reauire-
ments to Control High Flow," Technical Report Number 5,
Furness, L. W., Burns, C. V. and Busby, M. w.,  Kansas Water
Resources Board, (1964).

"Kansas Water Resources Development,"  U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers, (1967).

"Kentucky Water Quality Standards for Interstate Waters
Ohio, Mississippi,  Tennessee, Cumberland and Big Sandy
Rivers," Kentucky Water Pollution Control Commission, (1967).

"A Limnological Study of the Upper Ohio River Hydromechanics
and Radiation Phase of the Study," Final Report to the
Atomic Energy Commission, Graduate School of Public Health,
University of Pittsburgh, (1962).

"A Limnological Study of the Upper Ohio River, Progress
Report to the Atomic Energy Commission," Graduate School of
Public Healjth, University of Pittsburgh,  (1961)  .

"Lower-Missouri River Basin Water Pollution Investigation;
A Cooperative State-Federal Report on Water Pollution, Oct-
ober, 1952," Water Pollution Series No. 47," Iowa Dept.  of
Health, Kansas Board of Health, Minnesota Dept.  of Health,
South Dakota Dept.  of Health and Federal Security Agency,
Public Health Service, (1952).

"Main Stem Reservoir Effects on Water Quality in the Central
Missouri River," J. Neel, H. P. Nicholson and Allan Hirsch,
Public Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW,  (1963) .
                           165

-------
"Man and the Waters of the Upper Ohio River Basin,"  Special
Publication No. 1, Pymatuning Laboratory of Field Biology,
University of Pittsburgh, (1965).

"Meat Industry Waste Study Supplement to the Basic Report -
A Study of Industrial Waste Pollution in the South Platte
River Basin," Appendix D, Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, U. S. Dept.  of^ the Interior, (1966).

"Meeting the Challenge of Water Pollution," Joe G. Moore,
Jr., Dickey Data, (1968).

"Mississippi Water Quality Standards, Part 1 of 2" Missis-
sippi Air and Water Pollution Control Commission, (1967).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Analysis
of Freeze-Thaw Dates Missouri Basin Streams," Missouri Basin
Inter-Agency Committee,  (1967).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Evapora-
tion Estimates for the Missouri River Basin," Missouri Basin
Inter-Agency Committee (1966).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Gener-
alized Streamflow Probabilities High Altitude Snow Region,"
Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee,  (1967).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Multi-
Annual Precipitation Probabilities Eastern Dakota Tribu-
taries," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee,  (1967).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Multi-
Annual Precipitation Probabilities Kansas Basin," Missouri
Basin Inter-Agency Committee, (1967).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Multi-
Annual Precipitation Probabilities Lower Missouri River
Tributaries," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee, (1966).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Multi-
Annual Precipitation Probabilities Middle Missouri River
Tributaries," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee, (1967).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Multi-
Annual Precipitation Probabilities Missouri River Basin and
the Drainage Above Sioux City, Iowa," Missouri Basin Inter-
Agency Committee, (1967).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Multi-
Annual Precipitation Probabilities Platte-Niobrara Basins,"
Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee,  (1967).
                          166

-------
"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Precipi-
tation Probability Levels and Durations of 1, 2, 4, and 8 W
Weeks," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee,  (1967).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Prelim-
inary Economic Projections for the Eastern Dakota Tribu-
taries Subregion," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee,
(1967).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Prelim-
inary Economic Projections for the Kansas River," Missouri
Basin Inter-Agency Committee, (1967).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Prelim-
inary Economic Projections for the Lower Missouri River,"
Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee,  (1967).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Prelim-
inary Economic Projections for the Middle Missouri River,"
Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee,  (1967).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Sedimen-
tation Eastern Dakota Tributaries," Missouri Basin Inter-
Agency Committee,  (1968).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Sedimen-
tation Lower Missouri River Tributaries," Missouri Basin
Inter-Agency Committee,  (1967).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Sedimen-
tation Middle Missouri  River  Tributaries," Missouri Basin
Inter-Agency Committee,  (1968).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Selected
Climatic Maps," Missouri  Basin Inter-Agency  Committee,
(1967).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Stream-
flow Characteristics in the Eastern Dakota Tributaries  Flow-
Duration, High-Flow and Low-Flow  Tables for  Selected  Stations
Through 1963," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee,  (1967).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Stream-
flow Characteristics in the Kansas  Basin Flow-Duration,
High-Flow and Low-Flow  Tables for Selected Stations Through
1963," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency  Committee,  (1966).

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Stream-
flow Characteristics in the Platte-Niobrara  Basins Flow-
Duration, High-Flow and Low-Flow  Tables for  Selected  Sta-
tions  Through 1963," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee,
(1966) .
                           167

-------
"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Stream-
flow Characteristics in the Western Dakota Tributaries
Flow-Duration, High-Flow and Low-Flow Tables for Selected
Stations Through 1963," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Commit-
tee, (1967) .

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Stream-
flow Characteristics Lower Missouri River Tributaries Flow-
Duration, High-Flow and Low-Flow Tables for Selected Sta-
tions Through 1963," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee,
(1966) .

"Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study Stream-
flow Characteristics Upper Missouri River Tributaries Flow-
Duration, High -Flow and Low-Flow Tables for Selected Sta-
tions Through 1963," MjLssouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee,
(1966) .

"Missouri River Basin Sioux City to Mouth, Planning Status
Report,  Water Resource Appraisals for Hydroelectric Licen-
sing,"  Federal Power Commission, Bureau of Power, (1966) .

"Missouri River Hydrographic Survey, 1967, Omaha District,"
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers,  (1967) .

"1967 Missouri River Hydrographic Survey, Rulo, Nebraska to
the Mouth,"  Corps of Engineers, Dept. of the Army, (1967).

"Missouri River Basin - Conservation, Control, and Use of
Water Resources of the Missouri River Basin in Montana,
Wyoming, Colorado, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska,
Kansas,  Iowa, and Missouri," Bureau of Reclamation, U. S.
Dept. of the Interior, (1944) .

"Missouri River Main Stem Reservoirs , Summary of Actual
1967-68  Operations and Annual Operating Plan for 1968-69,"
Reservoir Control Center, U. S. Army Engineer Division,
(1968) .

"Monitoring Water Quality for Pollution Control," Richard S.
Green,  Federal^ Water Pollution Control Administration, U. S.
Dept. of the Interior, (1966) .

"Monthly Streamflow Tables and Depletion Estimates," Mis-
      Basin Inter-Agency Committee,  (1966) .
"Municipal, Industrial and Quality Control Water Demands for
the Missouri Basin, Subbasin 5," Missouri^ ^Basin Inter- Agency
Committee,  (1967) .
                           168

-------
"Municipal, Industrial and Quality Control Water Demands for
the Missouri Basin, Subbasin 6," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency
Committee, (1967).                                       	

"Municipal, Industrial and Quality Control Water Demands for
the Missouri Basin, Subbasin 7," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency
Committee, (1967).

"Municipal, Industrial and Quality Control Water Demands for
the Missouri Basin, Subbasin 8," Missouri Basin Inter-Agency
Committee, (1968).

"Municipal Waste Report, Metropolitan Denver Area, South
Platte River Basin," Public Health Service, U.  S. Dept.  of
HEW, (1965).          	

"Municipal Water Facilities Communities of 25,000 Population
and Over United States and Possessions as of January 1,
1964," Public Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW, (1964).

"National Estuarine Inventory Handbook of Descriptors,"
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, U. S. Dept.
of the Interior, (1968).

"National Water Quality Network - Annual Compilation of
Data," Public Health No. 663, U. S. Dept. of HEW, (1957-1963).

"Niobrara, Lower Platte and Kansas River Basins, 1967 Oper-
ations, 1968 Outlook," Bureau of Reclamation, U. S. Dept.  of
the Interior, (1968).

"The Ohio River Basin," League of Women Voters Educational
Fund, (1964).

"Ohio River Basin Comprehensive Survey, Volumes I-XV," U.  S.
Army Engineer Division, Ohio River, Cincinnati, Ohio, (1964-
1969) .

"Ohio River Markland Pool," Ohio River Division of Engineers,
U. S. Army,  (1968).

"Ohio River Pollution Control - Three Volumes, Report of the
Ohio River Committee,  78th Congress, 1st Session," House Doc-
ument No. 266,  (1943).

"Ohio Water Pollution Control Board Annual Report for 1968,"
Ohio Dept. of Health,   (1969).

"Optimum Sampling Interval for Water Quality Monitoring in
Tidal Estuaries," Charles G. Gunnerson, Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Administration, U. S. Dept. of the Interior,
(1965) .
                           169

-------
"ORSANCO - Annual Reports, First to Twentieth, Ohio River
Valley Water Sanitation Commission, (1949-1968).

"ORSANCO Quality Monitor, Monthly Report of Water Quality
Conditions," Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission,
(1968-1969).

"Osage-Gasconade River Basins, Planning Status Report,  Water
Resource Appraisals for Hydroelectric Licensing," Federal
Power Commission, Bureau of Power, (1966).

"Outfall Study - Location and Sampling Results - Supplement
to the Basic Report - A Study of Industrial Waste Pollution
in the South Platte River Basin," Appendix C, Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration, U.  S. Dept. of the Inter-
ior, (196Tn

"Pennsylvania Surface Water Quality Network," Pennsylvania
Department of Health, (1962-1969).

"Personal Communications Re Certification of Administrative
Rules Filed with the Secretary of State," Florida Air and
Water Pollution Control Commission, (1968).

"Personal Communications to Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, Attachment, Status of Sewage Treatment
Facilities for Various Interstate Waters," State of West
Virginia, (1968).

"Personal Communications to Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration," Mississippi Air and Water Pollution Con-
trol Commission, (1967) .

"Personal Communication to Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration," State of Georgia State Water Quality Con-
trol Board, (1967).

"Personal Communication to Governor of Colorado," U. S. Dept.
of the Interior, (1968).

"Personal Communications to U. S. Dept. of the Interior,"
Kentucky Water Pollution Control Commission,  (1967).

"Pesticides in Water," R. S. Green and S. K. Love, Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration, U. S. Dept. of the
Interior, (1967) .

"Physical and Chemical Water Quality from the Effects of
Mine Drainage in Western Maryland," Thomas C. Hopkins, Jr.,
Maryland Dept. of Water Resources, (1967) .
                            170

-------
"Plan of Implementation Covering Municipal and Industrial
Wastes," State of Wyoming, (1968).

"Plan of Implementation for Water Quality Control and Pol-
lution Abatement Kansas," Kansas State Boctrd of Health,
(1967) .

"Platte River Basin, Planning Status Report, Water Resource
Appraisals for Hydroelectric Licensing," Federal Power Com-
mission, Bureau of Power,  (1966).

"Pollution Abatement - Water Resources in the United States,"
Select Committee on Natural Water Resources, S. Res. 48
86th Congress,  (1960).

"Pollution Caused Fish Kills 1967," Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1968).

"Pollution of Interstate Waters, Missouri River, Volume 1
and 2, Transcript of Hearing," Publ'ic Health Service, U. S.
Dept. of HEW, (1959).

"Pollution of Interstate Waters of  the Mississippi River in
the St. Louis Metropolitan Area," Division of Health, State
of Missouri, Public Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW,
Sanitary Water Board, State of Illinois, Bi-State Develop-
ment Agency of the Missouri-Illinois Metropolitan Area,
(1958).

"Pollution of Interstate Waters, Transcript of Conference,
Missouri River, River Miles 846.5  - 642.3 Inclusive," Public
Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW,  (1958).

"Pollution Surveillance  and Water  Quality Monitoring in the
United States," Richard  S. Green,  Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration,  U. S. Dept. of the  Interior,  (1966) .

"A Preliminary Appraisal  - Pollutional Effects of Stormwater
and Overflows from Combined Sewer  Systems," Public  Health
Service, U. S. Dept. of  HEW,  (1964).

"Preliminary  Economic Projections  for the Platte Subregion,"
Missouri Basin  Inter-Agency Committee,  (1966).

"The  Present  and Projected Agricultural  Economy  of  Selected
Counties of the Mobile-Tambigbee-Warrior River Basins,"
Federal Water Pollution  Control  Administration,  U.  S. Dept.
of the  Interior,  (1967) .
                            171

-------
"Present Temperature Conditions,"  Keith 0.  Schwab,  FWPCA
Presentations ORSANCO Engineering  Committee,  Federal  Water
Pollution Control Administration,  U.  S. Dept.  of the
Interior, (1969).

"Problems of Combined Sewer Facilities and Overflows,"
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration,  U.  S. Dept.
of the Interior,  (1967) .

"Proceedings - Conference in the Matter of Pollution  of
the South Platte  River Basin in the State of  Colorado -
Second Session,"  Volumes I, II, and III, Federal Water  Pol-
lution Control Administration,  U.  S.  Dept.  of the Interior,
(April, 1966) .

"Proceedings Conference in the  Matter of Pollution of the
South Platte River Basin in the State of Colorado,  Second
Session, Denver,  Colorado Reconvened, Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Administration, U. S. Dept. of the Interior/
(November, 1966).

"Proceedings of Svmposium on Waste Stabilization Lagoons:
Review of Research and Experience  in the Design, Construc-
tion, Operation,  and Maintenance of Waste Stabilization
Lagoons," Public  Health Service, (1960).

"Progress Evaluation Meeting in the Matter of Pollution of
the Interstate Waters of the Missouri River,  Omaha, Nebras-
ka, Area  (Nebraska-Iowa-Missouri-Kansas)," Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration,  U.  S. Dept.  of the  In-
terior, (1967).

"Quality of Surface Waters in Illinois. Bulletin 45," T. E.
Larson and B. O.  Larson, Illinois  State Water Survey, (1957)

"Quality of Surface Water in Illinois, 1956-1966, Bulletin
54," Robert H. Harmeson and T.  E.  Larson, Illinois State
Water Survey, (1969).

"Quality of Surface Waters of the  United States, Part 1-4,"
Geological Survey, Dept. of the Interior, (1948-60).

"Quality of Surface Waters of the  United States, Part 5-6,"
Geological Survey, Dept. of the Interior, (1950-60).

"Radioactive Waste Disposal in  the Upper Ohio River Basin
with Emphasis Upon the Shippingport Atomic Power Station,"
A report  to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of
Health, Graduate School of Public  Health, University  of
Pittsburgh,  (1962T!
                           172

-------
"Regional Inventories - Municipal Waste Facilities," Public
Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW, (1962).

"Regional Inventories - Municipal Water Facilities," Public
Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW, (1963), plus computer
printout of 1968 data.

"Regulatory Actions for the Control of Sewage, Industrial
Wastes, and Other Substances," Ohio River Valley Water Sani-
tation Commission,  (1964).

"Report of Chattahoochee  River Investigation Proposed Colum-
bia Reservoir Project/1 Public Health Service, U. S. Dept.
of HEW, (1959).

"Report of Covsa River System Georgia-Alabama," Public
Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW, (1963).

"Report of Supplemental Survey North Platte River Torrington,
Wyoming - Bridgeport, Nebraska," Nebraska Dept. of Health -
Wyoming Dept. of Public Health,  (1963).

"Report Survey North Platte River Torrington, Wyoming -
Bridgeport, Nebraska," Nebraska  Dept. of Health, Wyoming
Dept. of Public Health,  (1962).

"A Report of Water Pollution in  the Grand-Chariton Drainage
Basins," Iowa Dept. of Health, Missouri Div. of Health and
Public Health Service of  Missouri,  (1952).

"A Report of Water Pollution in  the Kansas River Basin,"
Colorado Dept. of Public  Health, Kansas State Board of
Health, Nebraska Dept. of Health, and  Public Health Service
of Missouri,  (1953).

"A Report of Water Pollution in  the Osage  (Marais des
Cygnes) - Gasconade Drainage Basins,"  Kansas State Board
of Health, Missouri Div.  of Health, Public Health Service
of Missouri,  (1952) .         "  ~~                       ~~

"A Report of Water Pollution in  the South  Platte River
Basin," Colorado Dept. of Public Health,  Nebraska Dept. of
Health, Wyoming Dept. of  Public  Health and Public Health
Service of Missouri,  (1953).~

"A Report of Water Pollution in  the Yellowstone Drainage
Basin," Montana Board of  Health, North Dakota Dept. of
Health, Wyoming Dept. of  Public  Health and Public Health
Service of Missouri,  (1952) .     ~~~~~~~
                            173

-------
"Report on Interstate Pollution of the Missouri River Yank-
ton, South Dakota, to Omaha, Nebraska, Supplemental to Water
Pollution Series No. 47 and Water Pollution Series No. 56,"
Public Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW,  (1958).

"Report on North Platte River Survey Wyoming-Nebraska Sep-
tember and November, 1961," Public Health Service, Robert
A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Center, U_. S. Dept. of HEW,
(1962).

"Report on Pollution of Interstate Waters of the Mouth of
the Savannah River, Georgia - South Carolina," West,
W.W., C.E. Runas, J.M. Fairall, T. A. Wastler and F. W.
Kittrell, U. S. Dept. of HEW, (1964).

"Report on Pollution of the Chattahoochee River Alabama-
Georgia," A. W. West, Federal Water Pollution Control Admin-
istration, U. S. Dept. of HEW, (1966).

"Report on Pollution of the Interstate Waters of the Monon-
gahela River System," A. D. Sidio, K. M. Mackenthun, Public
Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW,  (1963).

"Report on Pollution of Interstate Waters of the North Fork
Holston River and of Holston and Tennessee Rivers Virginia-
Tennessee," Public Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW,
(1960).

"Report on Pollution of Interstate Waters of the North
Platte River, Torrington, Wyoming to Bridgeport, Nebraska,"
Public Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW,  (1960).

"Report on Pollution of Interstate Waters of the Pearl and
East Pearl Rivers Louisiana-Mississippi," Public Health
Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW, (1963).

"A Report on Pollution of the Nation's Water by Oil and
Other Hazardous Substances," Requested by President Johnson,
Secretary of the Interior and Secretary of Transportation,
(1968) .

"Report on the South Platte River Basin," Bureau of Reclama-
tion, U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1959).

"Report on the South Platte River Basin Colorado-Wyoming-
Nebraska," Bureau of Reclamation, Region 7, U. S. Dept. of
the Interior, (1959).
                           174

-------
"Report on Water Quality Criteria and Plan for Implementa-
tion the Indiana Waters of the Main Stem of the Ohio River
and Its Indiana Tributary Basins," Stream Pollution Control
Board of the State of Indiana, (1967).

"Report on Water Quality Criteria and Plan for Implementa-
tion Main Stem of the Ohio River Contiguous to Ohio and
Kentucky Excluding the Waters of the Licking and Big Sandy
Rivers Proposed by Kentucky Water Pollution Control Com-
mission," Kentucky Water Pollution Control Commission,
(1967).

"Report on Water Quality Criteria and Plan for Implementa-
tion Patoka River Basin and the Indiana Waters of the Lower
Wabash River Basin Excluding the Waters of the White River
Basin, State of Indiana," Stream Pollution Control Board
of the State of Indiana,  (1967).

"Report on Water Quality Criteria and Plan for Implementa-
tion Upper and Middle Wabash River' Basins  (Down to Terre
Haute) State of Indiana," Stream Pollution Control Board
of the State of Indiana,  (1967).

"Resolution Regarding Amended Criteria of Stream-Water
Quality for Various Uses Adopted by  the Board on October
10, 1967," Water Pollution Control Board Ohio Department of
Health,  (1967).

"River Basin Water Quality Criteria, Kansas," Kansas State
Board of Health,  (1967).

"River-Quality Conditions during a 16-week Shutdown of
Upper Ohio Valley Steel Mills," Ohio River Valley Water
Sanitation Commission,  (1961).

"Rules of State Water Quality Control Board," Georgia Water
Quality Control Board,  (1965).

"Satilla-St. Marys Basin-Technical Memoranda  for Water
Supplies Pollution Abatement  and Public Health," U. S.
Dept. of HEW,  (1962) .

"Savannah Basin-Technical Memoranda  for Water Supplies
Pollution Abatement  and Public Health," U. S. Dept. of
HEW,  (1962).
                            175

-------
"Second Conference and Interstate Pollution of North
Fork Holston River," Division of Water Supply and Pollution
Control, U. S. Public Health Service, (1962).

"Sewage and Industrial Waste Treatment Requirements and
Effluent Criteria," Personal Communications and Technical
Release, State of Illinois Sanitary Water Board, (1967).

"Sewer and Sewage Treatment Plant Construction Cost Index,"
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, U. S. Dept.
of the Interior, (1967).

"Showdown for Water," Federal Water Pollution Control Admin-
istration, U. S. Dept of the Interior, (1968).

"Snow Survey and Soil Moisture Data in the Mountainous
Portions of the Missouri River Basin," Missouri Basin Inter-
Agency Committee, (1967).

"South Platte River Basin Irrigation of Vegatables with
Sewage-Polluted Water," Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, U.  S. Dept. of the Interior, (1967).

"South Platte River Basin, River Mileage Index," Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration, U. S. Dept. of
the Interior, (1966).

"State of Georgia Water Quality Control Act - Act No. 870
(H. B. 730) as Amended Through 1966," State of Georgia,
(1966).

"State of Ohio Water Quality Standards and Plan of Imple-
mentation ," Water Pollution Control Board, Ohio Dept.
of Health, (1967).

"State of Virginia Water Quality Standards," State Water
Control Board, (1967).

"Statement Water Quality Management & Pollution Control
Program in Iowa, Kansas, Missouri & Nebraska," Volume I,
Public Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW, (1964).

"Statement Water Quality Management & Pollution Control
Program in Iowa, Kansas, Missouri and Nebraska," Volume II,
Public Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW, (1964).
                            176

-------
 "Statewide Water Quality  Surveillance Network 1968 Survey
 Results," John R. Longwell and Richard L. Sharpless, Mary-
 land Dept. of Water Resources, (1969).

 "Stream Pollution by Coal Mine Drainage in Appalachia, '
 Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, U. S. Dept.
 of the Interior,  (1967).

 "Storet Data for Ohio, Tennessee, Missouri and Southeastern
 River Basins," U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1957-1969).

 "Stream Classification for Surface Waters of Colorado In-
 cluding Stream Quality Standards, Plan of Implementation,
 Enforcement Procedures,"  Colorado State Dept. of Public
 Health, (1967).

 "Stream Pollution by Coal Mine Drainage in Appalachia,"
 Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, U. S.
 Dept. of the Interior,  (1969).

 "Streamflow Characteristics  in the Middle Missouri River
 Tributaries," Work Group  on  Hydrologic Analyses and Pro-
 jections, Missouri Basin  Inter-Agency Committee,  (1967).

 "Stream flow Characteristics Missouri River Main Stem,"
 Missouri Basin Inter-Agency  Committee,  (1966).

 "Study and Interpretation of the Chemical Characteristics
 of Natural Water," John D. Hem, Water-Supply Paper 1473,
 U. S. Geological Survey,  (1959).

 "Study of Omaha, Nebraska Meat-Packing Wastes," Public Health
 Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW,  (1965).

 "A Study of the Pollution and Natural Purification of the Ohio
 River, IV.  A Resurvey of the Ohio River Between Cincinnati,
 Ohio, and Louisville, Ky. , Including a Discussion of the
 Effects of Canalization and  Changes in the Sanitary Conditions
 Since 1915-1916," H. R. Crohurst, Public Health Bulletin No.
 204, U. S. Public Health  Service,  (1933).

 "A Study of the Pollution and Natural Purification of the
 Ohio River, I.  The Plankton and Relation Organisma," Purdy,
 Public Health Bulletin No. 131, Public Health Service,  (1922).

 "A Study of the Pollution and Natural Purification of the
Ohio River, II.   Report on Surveys and Laboratory Studies,"
W. H. Frost, Public Health Bulletin No. 143, U. S. Public Health
 Service, (1924) .
                            177

-------
"A Study of the Pollution and Natural Purification of the
Ohio River, III.  Factors Concerned in the Phenomena of
Oxidation and Reaeration,"  Streeter and Phelps, Public
Health Bulletin No. 146, U. S. Public Health Service, (1925).

"Studies on the Aquatic Ecology of the Upper Ohio River System,"
Special Publication No. 3 Pymatuning.Laboratory of Ecology,
University of Pittsburgh,  (1965).

"Summary Report on Quality of Interstate Waters Little Sioux
River  (Minnesota-Iowa)," Public Health Service, U. S. Dept.
Of HEW, (1961).

"Surface Water Supply of the United States - Part 2 - South
ATlantic Slope and Eastern Gulf of Mexico Basins," Geological
Survey, Dept. of the Interior,  (1930-1959).

"Surface Water Supply of the United States Part 3 - Ohio River
Basin," Geological Survey, Dept. of the Interior, (1930-59) .

"Surface Water Supply of the United States Part 6 - Missouri
River Basin," Geological Survey, Dept. of the Interior,  (1930-
1959).

"Surveillance Operations in the Control of Water Pollution on
a National Scale," James H. McDermott, Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1967).

''Technical Memoranda for Water Supplies Pollution Abatement
and Public Health," Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint Basin,
Public Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW, (1962).

"Technical Memoranda for Water Supplies Pollution Abatement
and Public Health," Ochlockonee Basin, Public Health Service,
U. S. Dept.  of HEW, (1962) .

"Choctawhatchee-Periodido Basins Technical Memoranda for
Water Supplies Pollution Abatement and Public Health, Public
Health Service, U. S.  Dept. of HEW, (1962).

"Technical Programs,"  Clean Water Fact Sheet, Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration,  U.  S. Dept. of the Interior,
(1968) .
                            178

-------
"Trace Metals in Waters of the United States:  A Five Year
Summary of Trace Metals in Rivers and Lakes of the United
States (October 1, 1962-September 30, 1967)," John F. Kopp
and Robert C. Kroner, Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, Dept. of the Interior, (1969).

"Transcript of Conference - Pollution of Interstate Waters,
Missouri River, Kansas City Metropolitan Area," Public Health
Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW, (1957).

"Transcript of Conference on Pollution of Interstate Waters
of the North Platte River," Wyoming-Nebraska, U. S. Dept. of
Hew, (1961-1962).

"Transcript of Hearing Pollution of Interstate Waters Missouri
River," Public Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW, (1959).

"Transcript of Hearing Pollution of Interstate Waters, Missour
River and Connecting or Tributary Waters in or Adjacent to the
Kansas City's Metropolitan Area," Public Health Service, U. S.
Dept. of HEW, (1960) .

"Transcript of Proceedings Progress Evaluation Meeting of Con-
ferees in the Matter of Pollution of the Interstate Waters of
the Missouri River-Omaha Area February, 1965 and Appeided
Summaries of First Session of Conference 1957 and Second Ses-
sion of Conference 1964," U. S. Dept. of HEW,  (1965).

"Transcript of Proceedings Progress Evaluation Meetings of
Conferees in the Matter of Pollution of the Interstate
Waters of the Missouri River-Omaha Area Januarv and March,
1966," U. S. Dept. of HEW,  (1966).

"Transcript of Proceedings Progress Evaluation Meeting in
the Matter of Pollution of the Interstate Waters of the Missouri
River and Tributary Waters, Kansas City's Metropolitan Area and
Appended Summary of Conference December, 1957," U. S. Dept.
of HEW, (1965).

"Unpublish Data," - Upper Ohio Basin Office, Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration, U. S. Dept. of the Interior,
(1962-1969).

"Virginia Water Quality Standards Addendum Sheet-Clarification
of Board Policies and Procedures with Respect to Adoption and
Implementation of Interstate Standards of Water Quality,"
State Water Control Board,  (1967).
                            179

-------
"Water Quality Criteria for Interstate and Coastal Waters
State of Mississippi," Mississippi Air and Water Pollution
Control Commissiojiy (1968) .

"Water Quality Criteria and Plan for Implementation and En-
forcement for the Surface Waters of Iowa," Iowa Water Pollution
Control Commission, State Dept. of Health, (1967).

"Water Quality Criteria and Plan for Implementation Interstate
Streams, Report on," State of West Virginia,  (1967).

"Water Quality Data for Streams and Reservoirs in the Tennessee
River Basin," Tennessee Valley Authority, (1969).

"Water Quality Middle Basin Tributary Streams South Platte
River Basin Summer 1965," Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, U. S.  Dept. of the Interior,  (1967).

"Water Quality Management - Water Resources Activities in the
U. S.," S Res". 48 Eighty-Sixth Congress,  (1960).

"Water Quality Management in Transition," Joe G. Moore, Jr.,
Civil Engineering, (1968).

"Water Quality Standards Conference, State of Iowa, Iowa
Interstate Waters of the Missouri River Basin, Council
Bluffs, Iowa," Federal Water Pollution Control Administration,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1969).

"Water.Quality StandardsCurrent Policy  Issues," Max N. Edwards,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1968).

"Water Quality Standards:  The Federal Perspective  Progress
Toward Objectives," Allan Hirsch, L. Agee, and Burd, Water
Pollution Control Federation,  (1967).

"Water Quality Standards for Waters of Alabama and A Plan
for Implementation," State of Alabama Water Improvement
Commission, (1967).

"Water Quality Standards for Colorado," Federal Water Pollution
Control Federation, Colorado Department of Public Health, (1968) .

"Water Quality Standards for Interstate Waters in Wyoming,"
Wyoming Department of Health,  (1968).

"Water Quality Standards Minor Missouri Riber Tributaries,
Missouri River Basin," Missouri Water Pollution Board,  (1968).
                             180

-------
"Water Quality Standards Mississippi River, Upper Mississippi
and Southwest-Lower Mississipp," Missouri Water Pollution
Board, (1968).

"Water for the Future of Kansas-Kansas Basins Project Interim
Report No. 1," Bureau of Reclamation, U. S. Dept. of the
Interior, (1968).

"Water Pollution Control 1969-1973, The Federal Costs, A Re-
port to the Congress," Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1968).

"Water Pollution Control and Quality Management Programs of
the States of Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi and Tennessee,"
Volume II, Public Health Service, U. S. Dept. of HEW, (1964).

"Water Pollution Surveillance in the United States, Report
Number 1, Missouri River Study," Public Health Service,
U. S. Dept. Of HEW,  (1964).

"Water Quality Basic Data  - Southeastern River Basins,"
Public Health" Service, U.  S. Dept. of HEW,  (1961).

"Water Quality Criteria,"  Report of  the National Technical
Advisory Committee to the  Secretary  of the  Interior, Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration,  (1968).

"Water Quality Standards Missouri River, Missouri  River
Basin," Missouri Water Pollution Board,  (1968).

"Water Quality Standards Osage  & Gasconade  Rivers  and Tir-
butaries, Osage-Gasconade  River Basin - Missouri River
Basin," Missouri Water Pollution Board,  (1968).

"Water Quality Standards for Pennsylvania's Interstate
Streams, Excerpt from a Report  by the Pennsylvania Sanitary
Water Board," Division of  Sanitary Engineering,  Bureau of
Environmental Health, Pennsylvania Dept. of Health^  (1967).

"Water Quality Standards for the Surface Waters  of South
Dakota," The South Dakota  Committee  on Water Pollution, South
Dakota State Dept. of Health,  (1967).

"Water Quality Surveillance in  Water Resource  Development and
Control," H. McDermott, Federal Water Pollution  Control
Administration, U. S. Dept. of  the  Interior,  (1968).
                              181

-------
"Water Quality and Flow Variations, Ohio River and Tributaries
1956-57,Tl Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Coironission,  (1959).

"Water Quality and Flow Variations in the Ohio River 1951-1955,"
Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission, (1957).

"Water Quality and Time of Travel Investigations in the Lower
Kansas River Basin," Kansas State Dept. of Health, Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration,  (1967).

"Water Quality of Tennessee Surface Streams 1960-1967,"
Tennessee Stream Pollution Control Board, Tennessee Dept. of
Public Health, (1960-1967).

"Water Resources Data for Alabama, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1960-1968) .

"Water Resources Data for Colorado, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1960-1968) .

"Water Resources Data for Florida, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Qualtiy Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. 'Dept. of the Interior, (1960-1968) .

"Water Resources Data for Georgia, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1960-1968).

"Water Resources Data for Illinois, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1960-1968) .

"Water Resources Data for Indiana, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey^
U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1960-1968).

"Water Resources Data for Iowa, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1960-1968) .

"Water Resources Data for Kansas, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1960-1968).

''Water Resources Data for Kentucky, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey
U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1960-1968).
                            182

-------
"Water Resources Data for Louisiana, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1960-1968).

"Water Resources Data for Maryland, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Qualty Records," Geological Survey',
U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1960-1968).

"Water Resources Data for Mississippi, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1960-1968).

"Water Resources Data for Missouri, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2 , Water Quality Records," ^eological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1960-1968).

"Water Resources Data for Nebraska, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1960-1968).

"Water Resources Data for New York, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1960-1968).

"Water Resources Data for Ohio, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1960-1968).

"Water Resources Data for Pennsylvania, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1960-1968).

"Water Resources Data for South Dakota, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1960-1968).

"Water Resources Data for Tennessee, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1960-1968).

"Water Resources Data for Virginia, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1960-1968).

"Water Resources Data for West Virginia, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior,  (1960-1968).
                            183

-------
"Water Resources Data for Wyoming, Part 1, Surface Water
Records, Part 2, Water Quality Records," Geological Survey,
U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1960-1968).

"Water Resources Development in Missouri," U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, (1967).

"Water Resources of the Pittsburgh Area, Pennsylvania,"
Noecker, Greeman and Beamer, Geological Survey Circular No.
315, Geological Survey, U. S. Dept. of the Interior, (1954).

"Water Resources of West Virginia," W. L. Doll, G. Meyer and
R. J. Archer, U. S. Geological Survey and West Virginia Dept.
of Natural Resources, (1963) .

"Water Resources Development by the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers in Colorado," Missouri River Division, Corps of
Engineers, U. S. Dept. of the Army, (1967).

"Water Resources Development by the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers in Iowa," North Central Division, Corps of Engineers,
U. S. Dept. of the Army,  (1967)

"Water Resources Development by the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers in Nebraska," Missouri River Division, Corps of
Engineers, U. S. Dept. of the Army, (1967).

"Water Resources Development by the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers in South Dakota," Missouri River Division, Corps
of Engineers, U. S. Dept. of the Army,  (1967).

"Water Resources Regulation 4.8, General Water Quality Criteria
and Specific Water Quality Standards for All Maryland Waters,"
Maryland Water Resources Commission, (1969) .

"West Virginia Water Quality Network 1960-1963," State of
West Virginia Department of Natural Resources,  (1960-1963).
                            184

-------
                      SECTION 9

                      APPENDICES

            RIVER BASIN DATA AND STANDARDS
The following section contains a description of each of the
river basins studied in this project.  Also included are
interstate water quality standards for each particular site
at which water quality monitors are suggested.  If two
interstate state standards apply due to border sharing, each
is listed.  The standards as presented herein were those
currently under submission at the time of this project.

Each State has listed a general criteria which are usually
quite long and all inclusive.  Rather than list each of
these, the general water quality criteria for Pennsylvania
is presented as typical.  It follows:

Pennsylvania General Criteria - The water shall not contain
substances attributable to municipal, industrial, or other
waste discharges in concentration or amount sufficient to
be inimical or harmful to the water uses to be protected to
human, animal, plant, or aquatic life.  Specific substances
to be controlled include, but are not limited to, floating
debris, oil, scum, and other floating materials:  toxic
substances:  substances that produce color, taste, odors or
settle to form sludge deposits.
APPENDIX I - OHIO RIVER BASIN


River Basin Descriptions

     Ohio River

The Ohio River is formed at the junction of the Monongahela
and the Allegheny Rivers at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and
flows southwest for 981 miles to its confluence with the
Mississippi River at Cairo, Illinois.  Rainfall in this area
averages forty inches per year.  The Ohio River is the
second largest tributary of the Mississippi River.  Naviga-
tion is maintained by a series of locks and dams.  This
river has caused a number of disastrous floods, necessitat-
ing flood control projects which have been initiated on its
tributaries.  The Ohio River drains an area containing acid
mine, industrial, municipal and agricultural wastes.
                           185

-------
The Ohio River is affected by municipal, industrial and acid
mine wastes at its headwaters in the Greater Pittsburgh
region to the state line with Ohio and West Virginia.  There
are intermittent areas between the many small communities in
which the stream recovers to a better quality.

In the Ohio-West Virginia region, there are temporary
effects from the cities of East Liverpool, Weirton, Wheel-
ing, Steubenville, Parkersburg, ancl Huntington.  Downstream
of each of these cities the river recovers from these local
effects.

There are quite a number of new industrial plants outside of
the cities which have been attracted to the benefits of the
Ohio River.  For the most part, these are well controlled
from a pollution standpoint.  This is true for the entire
basin.

In the Ohio-Kentucky section of the Ohio River, the pollu-
tion problems occur at Portsmouth, Ohio where the Scioto
River enters.  Here, there is evidence of oil pollution
from industrial sources which extends for a great distance
downstream.  The Little Miami and Miami River enter in the
Greater Cincinnati region.  These, along with the city,
contribute inadequately treated industrial and municipal
wastes to the Ohio River.

In the section of the Ohio River between Kentucky and
Indiana-Illinois, the only large city is Louisville.  The
stream increases in width with more islands and is more
sluggish than upstream.  The terrain is less rugged and the
flatness affects the stream.

The affect of the Kanawha and the Wabash Rivers will be
discussed elsewhere in this report.

Pollution problems in the Ohio River main stem and minor
tributaries include septic conditions, elevated water
temperature, oxygen depletion, floating oil and grease,
acid mine drainage, high total solids, and degradation
of aesthetic qualities.  These result in damages to
propagation of fish life, municipal and industrial water
supplies, and recreation uses.  Pollution sources include
municipal, industrial, and coal mines.  Flow regulation
is primarily the responsibility of the Corps of Engineers.

There are presently many tributaries and sections of the
Ohio River Basin that have water pollution control needs
requiring immediate action.  These needs include domestic
waste treatment, industrial waste treatment, and coal mine
drainage contro1.
                          186

-------
Immediate control of industrial pollution is needed at
steel mills, power plants, and other industrial areas dis-
charging miscellaneous wastes.  Steel mills are known to
discharge wastes containing high amounts of oil, scum,
grease, and other floating matter.

Thermal pollution from steam-powered electric generating
plants in the basin have produced intermittent fish kills.
Improved operating techniques or cooling facilities can pre-
vent recurrences.

Several other miscellaneous industrial pollution sources
exist including chemical plants, railroad engine oil dis-
charges , phenol discharges, and large quantities of acid and
oxidizable wastes.

Coal mine drainage and effluents from related coal
washeries have caused severe problems in the area for a
number of years.

The confluence of the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers at
Pittsburgh presents a complex mixing condition because of
the high acid content of the Monongahela.  The proposed
construction of two multi-purpose reservoirs in the Monon-
gahela Basin, the Stonewall Jackson Reservoir on the West
Fork and the Rowlesburg Reservoir on the Cheat River, will
help eliminate shock acid loads in the Monongahela River
which affect the quality of the Ohio River at Pittsburgh.

Pollution from commercial and pleasure watercraft is often
severe.  This is particularly true from boats tied up at
docks and during loading or unloading procedures.

The present water quality problems in the area include
high coliform counts, low pH, high acidity, hardness, iron,
manganese, surface matter, total solids, and oxidizable
matter.

The uses of the Ohio River from Fosters, Kentucky to the
mouth include municipal and industrial water supply,
navigation, recreation, fishing, and of the assimilative
capacity in transporting treated waste effluents.  Water
quality in the reach immediately above Cincinnati appears
to be generally good; however, below Cincinnati there are
various degrees of degradation.  This is especially true
in the Markland pool and the area below Louisville, where
the dissolved oxygen concentration often falls below 4.0
mg/liters.  The coliform bacteria density increases down-
stream from Cincinnati and remains high to Evansville,
Indiana.
                          187

-------
In addition to the municipalities, there are many diversi-
fied industries located along the river that discharge their
wastes directly into the river.  These include chemical,
power, coal, distillery, food processing, petroleum refin-
ing, detergents, fertilizer, and aluminum industries.

Through the efforts of ORSANCO and the state agencies, a
major program of pollution control and surveillance is being
undertaken in the Ohio River Basin.  Through these efforts,
all major communities on the Ohio River provide at least
primary treatment for their wastes.

The basic data available for evaluation of water quality is
provided by water quality monitor station records of
ORSANCO, FWPCA, and the respective State Boards of Health
or Sanitary Water Boards.
     Tennessee River

The Tennessee River is the largest tributary of the Ohio
River.  It is approximately 652 miles long and joins the
Ohio River at Paducah, Kentucky.  The Tennessee River
drains areas of Kentucky, Tennessee and Alabama.  It is an
important source of power.

The Tennessee River is noted for being unusually free of
sediment and having a steady flow of water.  This basin con-
tains facilities of the Tennessee Valley Authority.

To understand the problem of control and abatement of pollu-
tion in the main stem of the Tennessee River, it is neces-
sary to consider the river as a series of impoundments
created by nine dams, from about 51 miles below Knoxville
and to Kentucky, 22 miles above its mouth at Paducah.  Five
of the dams are in Tennessee, three in Alabama, and one in
Kentucky.

Bacterial pollution from inadequately treated municipal and
industrial wastes discharged into the main stem have
rendered several reaches of the main stem unsafe for bath-
ing, fishing, and recreational uses and undesirable for
sources of domestic water supply.  Bacterial pollution prob-
lems also exist in the vicinity of sanitary wastes dis-
charged from floating vessels and associated shore facili-
ties.

Industrial waste discharges with high calcium chloride con-
tent have increased the hardness of the water.  Industrial
as well as municipal wastes have placed an oxygen demand
on the stream.
                          188

-------
Waste discharges containing high nutrient concentrations
have caused excessive aquatic growths and created undesir-
able water for recreational, domestic, and industrial
uses.

Water with low dissolved oxygen concentration is released
from all nine dams on the main stem of the Tennessee during
the summer months.

Most industrial complexes are discharging polluting wastes
that are often inadequately treated.  Major pollution prob-
lems within the basin have been recognized.  The polluters
have been identified and corrective action either initiated
or polluters notified that corrective measures must be
taken.

The TVA has lead the way in the development of methods to
improve the reaeration of streams  (especially impounded
water).  They have also been a leader in structures to
prevent thermal pollution from power plants.
     Wabash River

The Wabash River drains the southern portions of Illinois
and Indiana.  It is 475 miles long and enters the Ohio
River approximately 35 miles below Evansville, Indiana.
This river receives effluents from primary treated munici-
pal wastes.  In addition, it receives wastes from chemical,
meat packing, paper mills, wood treatment and food process-
ing industries.

A wide variety of measures are needed to control existing
and potential water pollution in the Wabash River and its
headwater tributaries, so as to enhance its quality and
provide for unimpaired use of the water.  These measures in-
clude not only needed additional treatment but also such
needs as flow regulation, institutional measures, financial
assistance, and research.  There are some areas where
studies of potential problems are required to determine if
further needs exist and, if so, what additional measures may
be required.  Many of the pollution problems along the main
stem of the Wabash River could be greatly reduced, if not
entirely eliminated, by the installation of new or addi-
tional waste treatment facilities.

A higher degree of waste treatment should be provided for
many industrial wastes discharged in the main stem of the
Wabash River and its tributaries.
                          189

-------
The Wabash River receives drainage from one of the richest
and most intensely farmed agricultural areas of the
country.  Silt from eroded farmlands and agricultural
residues, such as fertilizers and pesticides, pose
potential water quality problems.  To minimize these prob-
lems there is a need to speed up the development of soil
conservation programs and agricultural land management.

Through the efforts of the state regulatory agencies and
ORSANCO, much progress had been made to abate pollution
along the main stem of the Wabash River.

There is a need in Indiana and Illinois for improved control
and surveillance of oil field practices to prevent both
oil pollution and brine pollution of surface and ground
waters in the oil field areas.  The source or sources of
lead which have caused concentrations in excess of 0.05
mg/1 at New Harmony, Indiana, are unknown.

Further studies are needed regarding the problems caused by
algae in the river and to determine if additional nutrient
removal will be required beyond that which will be provided
by meeting the immediate waste treatment needs.

There are producing oil wells on Mink Island and Greyville.
These all have associated ponds, etc., which can be sources
of oil and brine wastes.

The Wabash does not seem to be used extensively for recrea-
tional boating.  Few small craft were in evidence.

Most all of the drainage area is heavily farmed.  There are
few areas with trees except for wind breaks around housing
and fence lines.  The stream has its banks lined with trees
and there is vegetation on the islands.  There are multi-
purpose dams on the Wabash River which offer flood control,
low flow augmentation and recreation benefits.

The section of the Wabash River which is in the State of
Ohio does not appear to be large enough that a major moni-
toring point need be established.  The drainage is from a
general farming area with no problems that are different
from the nearby Indiana farms.
     Kanawha River

The Kanawha River flows through the west central half of
West Virginia for 97 miles and joins the Ohio River at
Point Pleasant, Ohio.  Into it drains organic, inorganic,
and thermal wastes from a large chemical industrial
                         190

-------
complex.  It also drains a coal mining, lumbering, and
agricultural area.  The Kanawha is navigable to Montgomery,
West Virginia and provides water power to the area.

Within the Kanawha River Basin, the four major sources of
water pollution result from improperly treated domestic
wastes, industrial wastes, acid drainage from an inactive
coal mining operation, and brine wastes from oil explora-
tions.  The water uses to be protected are those of domestic
and industrial waters, agricultural uses, water-oriented
recreation, the support and propagation of fish and aquatic
life, and maintenance of general aesthetics and property
values.  Many communities in the Kanawha River Basin have
inadequate or no sewage treatment facilities.  Wastes from
the chemical and related industries are the major problem
in the Kanawha River Basin.

There are many stream reaches within the Kanawha River
Basin which have water quality problems.  There are  common
problems of pollution from active and  inactive coal mining
activities.  Other areas have municipal and industrial
waste discharges.  Present waste loads have caused a dis-
solved oxygen depletion to nearly zero in this area during
about seven months a year, in the period from early May to
late November.

The Kanawha River is in a very steep,  walled river valley.
The small flood plain is  lined in the .Charleston, West
Virginia area with chemical industrial  complexes.  The
balance of the land is given over to small towns.  There
is very little land available for adequate industrial
waste treatment facilities.  The section above the head-
waters of the Kanawha in  the Gauley River and the New
River are affected severely by acid mine drainage.  This
compounds the problems of adequate industrial waste
treatment.  The reach of  the river downstream from the
Winfield Lock and Dam has a few  small  towns and almost no
industry.


     Monongahela  River Basin

Within  the Monongahela River Basin, the major water pollu-
tion problems result  from drainage from active  and inactive
coal mining operations,  and from municipal wastes with no
treatment or with inadequate treatment.  Various  pollution
control measures  are  needed to  abate  septic  conditions,
increase the dissolved oxygen  content, reduce  concentrations
of  acidity, iron, manganese, hardness, sulfate,  and other
mineralizing elements, increase  the pH,  and  reduce bacteria,
solids  concentration  and resulting  sludge  depositions,
                          191

-------
nutrients, toxic substances and taste and odor producers.
Principle uses of the Monongahela River are for navigation,
municipal, industrial, agricultural supply, body contact
recreation, support and propagation of fish and other
aquatic life, general aesthetics and property values.
Mine drainage contributes the most damaging and widespread
pollution problem in the basin.

Domestic pollution is the second most serious problem in
the basin, even though the acid content of many streams
masks the effects of municipal wastes.  Needs range from
construction of sewage treatment facilities at towns and
communities to upgrading existing facilities to secondary,
and, in some cases, more advanced treatment measures.
Chlorination of the final treatment effluent is necessary
in all cases.  Many communities have chlorination facilities
which are used improperly, when at all.

The third general type of wastes are of industrial origin.
In that section of the Monongahela River which is in the
Greater Pittsburgh region, there are industrial wastes.
The State of Pennsylvania and ORSANCO have done much to
reduce these wastes.  There are efforts now to reduce these
industrial wastes while at the same time applying great
effort to reduction of municipal and coal mining wastes.

Sewage pollution including garbage and litter from commer-
cial tow boats on navigable waterways and from pleasure
craft on rivers and lakes is becoming a recognizable prob-
lem.

Extensive studies and cooperative demonstation research
projects are underway to determine the technological and
economic feasibility of various methods of eliminating the
pollution arising from inactive or abandoned mines.  The
State of Pennsylvania enacted a strong new mine drainage
control law in 1966.  West Virginia enacted in March, 1967,
a new strip mine control law which has been described as
very strict.  The West Virginia legislature also enacted in
March, 1967, certain amendments to the State Water Pollution
Control Law which are intended to make the law easier to
enforce.  Federal grants-in-aid under Public Law 660, have
probably been the greatest single factor contributing to
increased construction of municipal waste treatment facili-
ties in the basin.  Although industrial waste treatment has
not matched the rate of municipal treatment plant construc-
tion, the problems are admittedly more difficult to solve.
The outlook is good for increased activity in the construc-
tion of industrial waste treatment facilities.
                         192

-------
The industrialized section begins at Pittsburgh and extends
south to Allenport at river mile 46.  The next industrial
region of any magnitude is at Morgantown, West Virginia.
The entire river and most all of its tributaries are
affected by acid mine drainage or other mine related
activities.  This basin contains the largest deposits of
bituminous coal in the world.

The Monongahela River is navigable  for its entire length.
This is made possible through a series of locks and dams
built and operated by the Corps of  Engineers.  Some of the
tributary streams contain multi-purpose reservoirs.
These provide flood control, low flow augmentation for
waste dilution and navigation, and  recreation.

The major tributary of the Monongahela River is the
Youghiogheny River.  This stream has similar problems due
to municipal, industrial and acid mine wastes.  Its head-
waters arise in West Virginia and flow through Maryland
into Pennsylvania.  A portion of the Youghiogheny River
is protected under the  "Wild Rivers Act".  This section
has excellent "White Water" which is only suitable for
rubber rafts, kayaks, and canoes.

The Monongahela River is formed by  the junction of the
Tygart River and  the West Fork Rivers.   Both of these
streams  are affected over their entire  lengths by  acid
mine drainage; they have local problem  areas with
industrial and municipal wastes.

Even with  these waste problems,  these  rivers  are  used  as
sources  of potable water and  sections  are  used  for boating.
There  is some fishing,  but  few  species  abound waters
affected by acid  mine  drainage.

There  are  plans under way  to  provide  additional  multi-
purpose  dams  in the  upstream portions  of some  of  the
Monongahela Rivers  tributary  streams.   This will  aid  in
providing additional  dilution waters.   However,  the
 first  order of business is  still the effective  solution
to the acid mine  drainage  problems.

The section  of  these streams  in the Greater Pittsburgh area
 drain  rolling hills which have many towns and industrial
 plants,  with  some wooded areas and farms.   However,  the
 headwater regions drain some of the more beautiful country
 of the nation.   The area is mountainous and forest covered.
 The elevations  are steep in the river valley to enhance
 their beauty.
                           193

-------
     Allegheny River

The Allegheny River is one of the streams of which portions
shall be protected to place it in the "Wild Rivers" Act.

Up stream of the navigable section, the number of islands
and sandbars increase.  The water is very shallow with
vegetation growths on stream bottom,.  Only canoes can
navigate certain portions of this stream.  In addition to
the navigation dams which extend up about half the length
of the stream, there are several multi-purpose dams.
These provide flood control, low/flow augmentation for
waste dilution and navigation, and recreation.  These dams
are all on tributary streams except the newest one called
Allegheny Reservoir which is on the main stream at the
Pennsylvania-New York State Line.

Within the Allegheny River Basin, the four major sources
of water pollution result from improperly treated domestic
wastes, industrial wastes, brine wastes from oil and gas
exploration, and acid drainage from active and inactive
coal mining operations.  The water uses to be protected are
those of navigation, recreation, domestic and industrial
waters, agricultural uses for fish, aquatic life, general
aesthetics, and property values.

Several municipalities within the Allegheny River Basin
presently provide no treatment for their sanitary wastes
prior to discharge.  All of these municipalities are under
orders to do so.  Some municipalities within the basin are
presently providing inadequate domestic waste treatment.
Industries which are discharging wastes include oil refin-
ing, pulp and paper, steel, tanneries, and organic dyes
producers.

A water quality problem which has received minor attention
is the untreated waste discharge from tow boats and larger
private boats.  There have been many fish kills as the
result of acid mine drainage in the Allegheny and its
tributaries.  Much effort by the State of Pennsylvania has
been devoted to cleaning up and controlling these acid
mine discharges.  Acid mine drainage interferes with the
standard test for BOD.  A standard procedure for the BOD
analysis of water polluted by acid mine drainage should
be developed.

The State of Pennsylvania recognizes that acid drainage
from active and inactive coal mining operations is the
single most important pollution control problem in the
state.  A major step in the control of acid drainage was
taken by Pennsylvania in the passage of amendment to the
                          194

-------
Clean Streams Law in January, 1966, which classified drain-
age from active coal mining operations as an industrial
waste.  All industrial waste discharges must be approved by
a permit from the Sanitary Water Board of Pennsylvania.
The Board has placed the following restrictions on dis-
charges from active coal mining operations:

They should have zero acidity and some alkalinity with a pH
between 6 to 9 and the maximum total iron concentration
should not exceed 7.0 mg/liter.

The coal industry was given one year from the passage of
the act to submit applications for permits approving the
proposed drainage and waste disposal plan.

The State of Pennsylvania has been active in field source
investigations and demonstration projects with respect
to the problems of acid mine drainage.  The most recent
agreement was made between the State and the FWPCA for
cooperative source investigations in the major acid mine
drainage problem areas within the 'Allegheny River Basin.

There are several reaches of interstate and intrastate
streams within the Allegheny River Basin which have
water quality problems.  In the Pittsburgh region, there
is some industrial pollution.  There are spots of pollution
in the Ford City, Kittanning, Oil City, and Franklin areas.
Many of the tributaries are affected by acid mine drainages,

The Kiskiminetas River is the chief tributary of the
Allegheny River.  It is very badly polluted by acid mine
drainage through its length and most of its tributaries.
It is not uncommon to have pH values of 2.5 and very
rarely does it ever reach 5.5.  There  are also industrial
wastes which enter the Kiskiminetas in the Johnstown
region.


Interstate Water Quality Standards


     Ohio River

Main Stem Between the States of Kentucky and  Illinois  from
River Mile 848 to its Mouth at River Mile 981.
                       Kentucky

 Interstate Water Quality Standards for all Streams are as
 follows:
                           195

-------
Minimum Conditions Applicable to all Waters Here Considered
at all Places and at all Times:
Regardless of the stream use classifications which follow
for specific use, the following minimum conditions shall
apply to that portion of the rivers which are a part of
this report.

Free from substances attributable to municipal, industrial
or other discharges that will settle to form putrescent
or otherwise objectionable sludge deposits.

Free from floating debris, oil, scum and other floating
materials attributable to municipal, industrial or other
discharges in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or
deleterious.

Free from materials attributable to municipal, industrial
or other discharges producing color, odor or other condi-
tions in such degree as to create a nuisance.

Free from substances attributable to municipal, industrial
or other discharges in concentrations or combinations which
are toxic or harmful to human, animal, plant or aquatic
life.
Public Water Supply
Bacteria - Coliform group not to exceed 5,000 per 100 ml
as a monthly arithmatical average value  (either MPN or MF
count); nor exceed this number in more than 20 percent
of the samples examined during any month; nor exceed
20,000 per 100 ml in more than five percent of such samples.

Threshold Odor Number - After normal treatment to be less
than 3, generally the value will be less than 24 in the raw
water.

Dissolved Solids - Not to exceed 500 mg/1 as a monthly
average value, nor exceed 750 mg/1 at any time.  (Values of
specific conductance of 800 and 1,200 micromhos/cm  (at
25C.) may be considered equivalent to dissolved solids
concentrations of 500 and 750 mg/1.)

Radioactive Substances - Gross beta activity (in the
known absence of Strontium-90 and alpha emitters) not
to exceed 1,000 micromicrocuries per liter at any time.
                           196

-------
Chemical Constituents - Not to exceed the following speci-
fied concentrations at any time:

     Constituent              Concentration mg/1

     Arsenic                       0.05
     Barium                        1.0
     Cadmium                       0.01
     Chromium (hexavalent)         0.05
     Cyanide                       0.2
     Fluoride                      1.0
     Lead                          0.05
     Selenium                      0.01
     Silver                        0.05
Industrial Water Supply


p_H - Not less than 5.0 nor greater  than  9.0  at  any time.

Temperature - Not to exceed  95F  at any  time.

Dissolved Solids - Not to exceed  750 mg/1  as a  monthly
average value nor exceed 1,000 mg/1 at any time.   (Values
of specific conductance of 1,200  and 1,600 micromhos/cm
 (at 25C.) may be considered equivalent  to dissolved
solids concentrations of 750 and  1,000 mg/1.)


Aquatic Life


Dissolved Oxygen - Not  less  than  5.0 mg/1  during at  least
 16 hours of any 24 hour period, nor less than 3.0 mg/1
 at any time.

pjH - No values below  5.0 nor above 9.0  and preferably
between 6.5 and 8.5.

Temperature - Not to  exceed  93F  at any  time during  the
months of May through November,  and not  to exceed 73F
 at any time during the months of  December through April.

 Toxic Substances - Not to  exceed  one-tenth of the 48
 hour median tolerance limit, except that other limiting
 concentrations may be used in specific cases when
 justified on the basis of  available evidence and approved
 by the appropriate regulatory agency.
                           197

-------
Recreation
Bacteria - Coliform group not to exceed 1,000 per 100 ml
as a monthly arithmatical average value (either MPN or
MF count); nor exceed this number in more than 20 percent
of the samples examined during any month; nor exceed
2,400 per ml (either MPN or MF count) on any day.
Agricultural - Crop Use
Sodium Adsorption Ratio  (SAR) - Will be less than 10
for agricultural uses.

Total Dissolved Solids - Will be less than 1,000 and
preferably under 500 ppm.
Agricultural - Livestock Use
Chemical Constituents - The following values shall not be
exceeded:

     Constituent              Concentration mg/1

     Nitrates                     45.0
     Arsenic                       0.05
     Chloride                    250
     Fluoride                      1.0
     Barium                        1.0
     Sulfate                     250
                      Illinois

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Main Stem of
the Ohio River.


Public Water Supply and Food Processing Industry
Bacteria - Coliform group not to exceed 5,000 per 100
ml as a monthly average value (either MPN or MF count);
nor exceed this number in more than 20 percent of the
samples examined during any month; nor exceed 20,000
per 100 ml in more than 5 percent of such samples.
                         198

-------
Dissolved Solids - Not to exceed 500 mg/1 as a monthly
average value; nor exceed 750 mg/1 at  any time.

Radioactive Substances - Gross beta activity  (in the
known absence of strontium -90 and alpha emitters)
not to exceed 1,000 micro-microcuries  per liter at
any time.
Chemical Constituents: Not to exceed:

     Constituent              Concentration mq/1

     Arsenic                       0.05
     Barium                        1.00
     Cadmium                       0.01
     Chromium (Hexavalent)         0.05
     Cyanide                       0.025
     Fluoride                      1.00
     Lead                          0.05
     Selenium                      ,0.01
     Silver                        0.05


Aquatic Life Sectors
p_H - No values below 6.0 nor above 9.0, and daily
average preferably between 6.5 and 8.5.

Dissolved Oxygen - Not less than 5.0 mg/1 during at least
16 hours at any 24 hour period, nor less than  3.0 mg/1 at
any time.

Temperature - Not to exceed 93F at any time during the
months of May - November and not to exceed 73F at any time
during December to April.

Toxic Substances - Not to exceed 1/10 of the 48 hour
median tolerance limit.

Taste and Odor - Waters shall be free of substances from
other than natural origin and will result in impairment
of taste, odor, or other factors which would reduce the
acceptability of fishes for human consumption.
Recreation Sector


Bacteria - Number per 100 ml by MF Techniques.
                         199

-------
Number of bacteria shall be the arithmetic average of the
last 5 consecutive samples.

Satisfactory area if MF coliform are less than 1,000 and
MF fecal streptococci are less than 100.

Satisfactory area if MF coliforms are from 1,000 to 5,000
and MF fecal streptococci are less than 20.

A single sample result of over 100,000 coliforms shall
require immediate investigation as to the cause.
Industrial Water Supply Sector
pH - Not less than 6.0 nor greater than 9.0 at any time.

Dissolved Oxygen - Not less than 3.0 mg/1 during at least
16 hours of any 24 hour period, nor less than 2.0 mg/1
at any time.

Temperature - Not to exceed 95F at any time.

Dissolved Solids - Not to exceed 750 mg/1 as a monthly
average value, nor exceed 1,000 mg/1 at any time.
     Ohio River

Main Stem Between the States of Kentucky and Indiana from
River Mile 491 to 848.
                      Kentucky

Interstate Water Quality Standards are found in pages  195
to 198 of this report.


                      Indiana

Interstate Water Quality Standards are as follows:
Minimum Conditions Applicable to all Waters at All Places
and at all Times:
Free from substances attributable to municipal, industrial,
agricultural or other discharges that will settle to form
putrescent or otherwise objectionable deposits.
                        200

-------
Free from floating debris, oil, scum and other floating
materials attributable to municipal, industrial, agricul-
tural or other discharges in amounts sufficient to be
unsightly or deleterious.

Free from materials attributable to municipal, industrial,
agricultural or other discharges producing color, odor
or other conditions in such degree as to create a nuisance.

Free from substances attributable to municipal, industrial,
agricultural or other discharges in concentrations or
combinations which are toxic or harmful to human, animal,
plant or aquatic life.


For Public Water Supply and Food Processing Industry


Bacteria - Coliform group not to exceed 5,000 per 100 ml
as a monthly average value (either MPN or MF count); nor
exceed this number in more than 20 percent of the samples
examined during any month; nor exceed 20,000 per 100 ml in
more than five percent of such samples.

Threshold Odor Number - Taste and odor producing substances,
other than naturally occurring, shall not interfere with
the production of a finished water by conventional treatment
consisting of coagulation, sedimentation, filtration and
chlorination.  The threshold odor number of the finished
water must be three or less.

Dissolved Solids - Other than from naturally occurring
sources not to exceed 500 mg/1 as a monthly average value,
nor exceed 750 mg/1 at any time.  Values of specific
conductance of 800 and 1,200 micromhos/cm (at 25C.) may
be considered equivalent to dissolved solids concentrations
of 500 and 750 mg/1.

Radioactive Substances - Gross beta activity (in the known
absence of Strontium-90 and alpha emitters)  not to exceed
1,000 picocuries per liter at any time.

Chemical Constituents - Not to exceed the following
specified concentrations at any time:
                          201

-------
      Constituent              Concentration mg/1

      Arsenic                        0.05
      Barium                         1.0
      Cadmium                        0.01
      Chromium  (hexavalent)          0.05
      Cyanide                        0.025
      Fluoride                       1.0
      Lead                           0.05
      Selenium                       0.01
      Silver                         0.05
For Industrial Water Supply


Dissolved Oxygen - Not less than 2.0 mg/1 as a daily
average value, nor less than 1.0 mg/1 at any time.

pH - Not less than 5.0 nor greater than 9.0 at any time,

Temperature - Not to exceed 95F at any time.

Dissolved Solids - Other than from naturally occurring
sources not to exceed 750 mg/1 as a monthly average
valuet nor exceed 1,000 mg/1 at any time.  Values of
specific conductance of 1,200 and 1,600 micromhos/cm
(at 25C.) may be considered equivalent to dissolved
solids concentrations of 750 and 1,000 mg/1.


For Aquatic Life
Dissolved Oxygen - Not less than 5.0 mg/1 during at least
16 hours of any 24 hour period, nor less than 3.0 mg/1 at
any time.

pH - No values below 6.0 nor above 9.0 and daily average
(or median) values preferably between 6.5 and 8.5.

Temperature - Not to exceed 93F at any time during the
months of April through November, and not to exceed 60F
at any time during the months of December through March.

Toxic Substances - Not to exceed one-tenth of the 96 hour
median tolerance limit obtained from continuous flow bio-
assays where the dilution water and toxicant are continuously
renewed, except that other application factors may be used
in specific cases when justified on the basis of available
evidence and approved by the appropriate regulatory agencies.
                          202

-------
Taste and Odor - There shall be no substances which impart
unpalatable flavor to food fish, or result in noticeable
offensive odors in the vicinity of the water.

Trout Streams - In addition, the following criteria are
applicable to those waters designated for put-and-take
trout fishing:

Dissolved Oxygen - Not less than 6.0 mg/1 as a daily
average value, nor less than 4.0 mg/1 at any time.

pjl - Not less than 6.5 nor greater than 8.5 at any time.

Temperature - Not to exceed 65F.   (However, slightly
higher temperatures may be tolerated with higher
dissolved oxygen content than specified.)
For Recreation
Whole Body Contact - Coliform group not to exceed  1,000 per
100 ml as a monthly average value  (either MPN or MF count)
during any month of the recreational season; nor exceed this
number in more than 20 percent of  the samples examined
during any month of the recreational season; nor exceed
2,400 per 100 ml (either MPN or MF count) on any day during
the recreational season.  The months of April through
October, inclusive, are designated as the recreational
season.

Partial Body Contact - Coliform group not to exceed 5,000
per 100 ml as a monthly average value  (either MPN  or MF
count); nor exceed this number in  more than 20 percent of
the samples examined during any month; nor exceed  20,000
per 100 ml in more than five percent of such samples.


For Agricultural or Stock Watering


Criteria are the same as those shown for minimum conditions
applicable to all waters at all places and at all  times.


      Ohio River

Main Stem Between the States of Ohio and Kentucky  from River
Mile 317 to 491.
                            203

-------
                         Ohio

Interstate Water Quality Standards for this Section will be
found on pages 206 to 208 of this report.
                       Kentucky

Interstate Water Quality Standards for this Section will be
found on pages 195 to 198 of this report.
      Ohio River

At the Pennsylvania-Ohio-West Virginia State Border.
                     Pennsylvania

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the mouth of the Ohio
River to the Pennsylvania State Border.
pH - Not less than 6.0; not to exceed 8.5.

Dissolved Oxygen - Minimum daily average 5.0 mg/1;
no value less than 4.0 mg/1.

Iron - Total Iron  - Not to exceed 1.5 mg/1.

Temperature - Not to exceed 5F rise above ambient
temperature or a maximum of 87F, whichever is less; not to
be changed by more than 2F during any one hour period.

Dissolved Solids - Not to exceed 500 mg/1 as a monthly
average value; not to exceed 750 mg/1 at any time.

Bacteria (Coliforms/100 ml) - For the period 5/15 - 9/15
of any year; not to exceed 1,000/100 ml as an arithmetic
average value; not to exceed 1,000/100 ml in more than two
consecutive samples; not to exceed 2,400/100 ml in more
than one sample.

Threshold Odor Number - Not to exceed 24 at 60C.

Total Manganese - Not to exceed 1.0 mg/1.

Fluoride - Not to exceed 1.0 mg/1.

Phenol - Not to exceed .005 mg/1.
                           204

-------
                        West Virginia

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Main Stem of the
Ohio River from the Ohio-Pennsylvania-West Virginia State
Border to the Ohio-Kentucky-West Virginia State Border.

pjl - No values below 5.5 nor above 9.0, and daily average  (or
median) values preferably between 6.5 and 8.5.

Dissolved Oxygen - Not less than 5.0 mg/1 during at least 16
hours of any 24 hour period, nor less than 3.0 mg/1 at any
time.

Temperature - Not to exceed 93F at any time during the
months of May through November, and not to exceed 73F at
any time during months of December through April.

Threshold Odor - Not to exceed 24  (at 60C as a daily
average).

Toxic Substances - Not to exceed 1/10 of the 48 hour median
tolerance limit, except that other limiting concentrations
may be used in specific cases when justified on the basis of
available evidence and approved by the appropriate regula-
tory agency.

Bacteria - The coliform group is not to exceed 1,000 per 100
ml as a monthly average value; nor exceed this number  in 20
percent of the samples examined during any month; nor
exceed 2,400 per ml on any day.

Radioactivity - Gross beta activity not to exceed 1,000
picocuries per liter  (pCi/1) nor shall activity from
dissolved strontium 90 exceed  10 pCi/1, nor shall activity
from dissolved alpha emitters exceed 3 pCi/1.

Heavy Metals - Not to exceed:

       Constituents             Concentration mg/1

      Arsenic                        0.01
      Barium                         0.50
       Cadmium                        0.01
       Chromium  (Hexavalent)          0.05
       Lead                           0.05
       Silver                         -05
                           205

-------
Other Compounds;
      Constituents             Concentration mg/1

      Nitrates                     45.0
      Phenol                        0.001
      Cyanide                       '0.025
      Fluoride                      1.000
      Selenium                      0.010
                         Ohio

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the entire reach of
the Main Stem of the Ohio River.
Minimum Conditions Applicable to all Waters at all Places
and at all Times:
Free from substances attributable to municipal, industrial
or other discharges that will settle to form putrescent or
otherwise objectionable sludge deposits;

Free from floating debris, oil, scum and other floating
materials attributable to municipal, industrial or other
discharges in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or
deleterious;

Free from materials attributable to municipal, industrial,
or other discharges producing color, odor or other condi-
tions in such degree as to create a nuisance;

Free from substances attributable to municipal, industrial
or other discharges in concentrations or combinations which
are toxic or harmful to human, animal or aquatic life.
For Public Water Supply
Bacteria - Coliform group not to exceed 5,000 per 100 ml as
a monthly average value; nor exceed this number in more than
20 percent of the samples examined during any month; nor
exceed 20,000 per 100 ml in more than 5 percent of such
samples.

Threshold Odor Number - Not to exceed 24 (at 60C) as a
daily average.
                           206

-------
Dissolved Solids - Not to exceed 500 rag/1 as a monthly
average value, nor exceed 750 mg/1 at any time.

Radioactivity - Gross beta activity not to exceed 1,000
picocuries per liter  (pCi/1) nor shall activity from dis-
solved strontium -90 exceed 10 pCi/1, nor shall activity
from dissolved alpha emitters exceed 3 pCi/1.

Chemical Constituents - Not to exceed at any time.

      Constituents             Concentration mg/1

      Arsenic                       0.05
      Barium                        1.00
      Cadmium                       0.01
      Chromium  (Hexavalent)         0.05
      Cyanide                       0.025
      Fluoride                      1.00
      Lead                          0.05
      Selenium                      0.01
      Silver                        0.05
For Industrial Water Supply


p_H - Not less than 5.0 nor greater  than  9.0  at  any  time.

Dissolved Oxygen - Not less  than 2.0  mg/1  as a  daily  average
value, nor less than 1.0 mg/1  at any  time.

Temperature - Not to exceed  95F at any  time.

Dissolved Solids - Not to exceed 750  mg/1  as a  monthly
average value, nor exceed 1000 mg/1 at any time.
                                    *,. 'f

For Aquatic Life


p_H - No values below 5.0 nor above  9.0,  and daily average
values preferably between 6.5  and 8.5.

Dissolved Oxygen - Not less  than 5.0  mg/1  during at least
16 hours of any 24 hour period, nor less than 3.0 mg/1  at
any time.

Temperature - Not to exceed  93F at any time during the
months of May through November, and not to exceed 73F  at
any time during the months of December through April.
                            207

-------
Toxic Substances - Not to exceed one tenth of the 48 hour
median tolerance limit.


For Recreation
Bacteria - Coliform group not to exceed 1,000 per 100 ml as
a monthly average value; nor exceed this number in more than
20 percent of the samples examined during any month; nor
exceed 2,400 per 100 ml on any day.
      Tennessee River
At the Kentucky-Tennessee State Line.
                       Kentucky

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Tennessee River
from its mouth to the Kentucky-Tennessee State Line are the
same as those for the Ohio River which can be found on
pages 206 to 208 of this report.
                       Tennessee

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Tennessee River
from River Mile 49.3 at the Kentucky-Tennessee State Line
to River Mile 215.2.
Base Parameters


p_H - 6.5 - 8.5.

Dissolved Oxygen - 5.0 mg/1.

Temperature - 93F.

Total Dissolved Solids - 500 mg/1.

Coliform Group - 10,000 per 100 ml

Fecal Coliform - 1,000 per 100 ml.
                           208

-------
Domestic Raw Water Supply


Dissolved Oxygen - There shall always be sufficient dissolved
oxygen present to prevent odors of decomposition and other
offensive conditions.

p_H - The pH value shall lie within the range of 6.0 to 9.0 and
shall not fluctuate more than 1.0 unit in this range over a
period of 24 hours.

Hardness or Mineral Compounds - There shall be no substances
added to the waters that will increase the hardness or
mineral content of the waters to such an extent to appreciably
impair the usefulness of the water as a source of domestic
water supply.

Total Dissolved Solids - The total dissolved solids shall at
no time exceed 500 mg/1.

Solids, Floating Materials and Deposits - There shall be no
distinctly visible solids, scum, foam, oily slick, or the
formation of slimes, bottom deposits or sludge banks of such
size or character as may impair the usefulness of the water
as a source of domestic water supply.

Turbidity or Color - There shall be no turbidity or color
added in amounts or characteristics that cannot be reduced
to acceptable concentrations by conventional water treatment
processes.

Temperature - The temperature of the water shall not exceed
93F and the maximum rate of change shall not exceed 3F
per hour.

Microbiological Coliform - Coliform group shall not exceed
10,000 per 100 ml. as a monthly average value  (either MPN
or MF count) ; nor exceed this number in more than 20 percent
of the samples examined during any month; nor exceed 20,000
per 100 ml. in more than five percent of such samples.
These values may be exceeded provided the organisms are
known to be of nonfecal origin.  No disease producing
bacteria or other objectionable organisms shall be added
to surface waters which will result in the contamination
of said waters to such an extent as to render the water
unsuitable as sources of domestic water supply after conven-
tional water treatment.

Taste or Odor - There shall be no substances added which
will result in taste or odor that prevent the production
                            209

-------
of potable water by conventional water treatment processes.

Toxic Substances - There shall be no toxic substances added
to the waters that will produce toxic conditions that
materially affect man or animals or impair the safety of
a conventionally treated water supply.

Other Pollutants - Other pollutants shall not be added to the
water in quantities that may be detrimental to public health
or impair the usefulness of the water as a source of domestic
water supply.

Industrial Water Supply - All parameters are the same except
that they refer to impairment of use as an industrial water
supply.  There is no standard for coliform.
Fish and Aquatic Life
Dissolved Oxygen - The dissolved oxygen shall be maintained
at 5.0 mg/1 except in limited sections of the stream
receiving treated effluents.  In these limited sections,
a minimum of 3.0 mg/1 dissolved oxygen shall be allowed.
The dissolved oxygen content shall be measured at mid-depth
in waters having a total depth of ten  (10) feet or less and
at a depth of five (5) feet in waters having a total depth
of greater than ten  (10) feet.  A minimum dissolved oxygen
content of 6.0 mg/1 shall be maintained in recognized trout
streams.

pH - The pH value shall lie within the range of 6.5 to
8.5 and shall not fluctuate more than 1.0 unit in this
range over a period of 24 hours.

Other Parameters - Are all the same as listed for a domestic
water supply, except the wording refers to fish and aquatic
life.
Recreation


Temperature - The temperature of the water shall not exceed
93F.

Microbiological Coliform - The fecal coliform group shall
not exceed 5,000 per 100 ml. as a monthly average value
nor exceed this number in more than 20 percent of the samples
examined during any month; nor exceed 20,000 per 100 ml. in
more than five percent of such samples.  In those waters that
                           210

-------
are physically suitable and available to the public for
water-contact recreation the fecal coliform concentration
shall not exceed 1,000 per 100 ml. in any two consecutive
samples collected during the months of May through September,
Water areas near outfalls of domestic sewage treatment
plants are not considered suitable for water-contact recrea-
tion.

Other Parameters - Are all the same as used for domestic
water supply, except the wording  substitutes recreation.
There is also no standard listed  for hardness.
Irrigation
Temperature - The temperature of  the water  shall not be
raised or lowered to such  an extent as  to interfere with its
use for irrigation purposes.

Other Parameters - Are  all the  same as  listed  for domestic
water supply with the wording substituted for  irrigation.
There are no standards  listed for Total Dissolved Solids,
Turbidity, Coliform, or Taste and Odor.

Livestock Watering and  Wildlife - Are  the same as those for
irrigation except the wording changed  to livestock, etc.

Navigation - Are the same  as those for irrigation with the
wording changed to navigation.   There  is not a standard
for pH.


      Tennessee River

At River Mile  215 where the State Lines of  Mississippi,
Alabama, and Tennessee  intersect.


                      Tennessee

Interstate Water Quality Standards for this location  are
listed  on pages 208  to  211 of  tnis report.


                        Alabama

Interstate Water  Quality Standards for the  Tennessee  River
from the Alabama-Tennessee-Mississippi State Line to  the
Lower End  of  Seven Mile Island at River Mile 247.
                            211

-------
Public Water Supply


pJH - Should not deviate more than one unit from normal
pH nor be less than 6.0 nor greater than 8.5.

Temperature - The ambient temperature of receiving waters
shall not be increased by more than 10 percent nor shall the
temperature of the receiving waters exceed 90F except that
the temperature may be as high as 93F for not more than
8 hours during any 24 hour period.

Dissolved Oxygen - Shall not be less than 4.0 mg/1 at a depth
of five feet in waters ten feet or greater in depth and at
mid-depth in waters less than 10 feet in depth.

Bacteria - Bacteria of the fecal coliform group not to exceed
5,000 per 100 ml as a monthly average value nor exceed this
number in more than 20 percent of the samples examined during
any month; nor exceed 20,000 per 100 ml in more than 5 per-
cent of the samples examined during one month.


Swimming and Body Water Contact Sports
Bacteria - Bacteria of the fecal coliform group not to exceed
1,000 per 100 as a monthly average value during the months of
May through September, nor exceed this value in any two con-
secutive samples collected during these months.

Other Parameters - The Standards for pH, temperature, and
dissolved oxygen are the same as for a Public Water Supply.
Shellfish Harvesting, Fish and Wildlife
Toxic Substances - Only such amounts that will not exceed
l/10th of the 48 hour median tolerance limit.

Other Parameters - The Standards for pH, temperature, and
dissolved oxygen are the same as for Public Water Supply.
                     Mississippi

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Tennessee River
at the Mississippi-Alabama-Tennessee State Line.
                          212

-------
Free from substances attributable to municipal, industrial,
agricultural or other discharges that will settle to form
putrescent or otherwise objectionable sludge deposits.

Free from floating debris, oil, scum and other floating
materials attributable to municipal, industrial, agricultural
or other discharges in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or
deleterious.

Free from materials attributable to municipal, industrial,
agricultural or other discharges producing color, odor,
or other conditions in such degree as to create a nuisance.

Free from substances attributable to municipal, industrial,
agricultural or other discharges in concentrations or
combinations which are toxic or harmful to humans, animal
or aquatic life.

Municipal wastes, industrial wastes, or other wastes  shall
receive effective treatment or control  (secondary or
equivalent) in accordance with the latest practical techno-
logical advances and shall be approved by the Commission.
A degree of treatment greater than secondary will be
required when necessary to protect legitimate water uses -


Public Water Supply


Dissolved Oxygen - There  shall be  no  oxygen  demanding sub-
stances added which will  depress the  D.O.  content below
4.0 mg/1.

pH  - The pH shall not be  caused  to vary more  than 1.0 unit
above or below normal pH  of  the  waters  and lower  value
shall be not less than  6.0  and upper  value not more than
8.5.

Temperature -  Shall  not be  increased  more  than ten  degrees
F  (10F)  above the  natural  prevailing background  tempera-
tures,  nor  exceed  a  maximum of  93F  after  reasonable  mixing.

Bacteria  -  Fecal  coliform not to exceed 5,000 per 100 ml. as
a monthly  average  value (either  MPN or MF  count); nor to
exceed  this number  in more  than twenty percent (20%)  of  the
samples examined  during any month; nor to  exceed 20,000  per
100 ml.  in  more than five percent (5%)  of  such samples.
                           213

-------
Chlorides - There shall be no substances added which will
cause the chloride content to exceed 250 mg/1 in fresh
water streams.

Specific Conductance - There shall be no substances added
to the waters to cause the dissolved solids to exceed
500 micromhos/cm for fresh water streams.

Dissolved Solids - There shall be no substances added
to the waters to cause the dissolved solids to exceed
500 mg/1.

Threshold Odor - There shall be no substances added which
will cause the threshold odor number to exceed 24  (at 60C)
as a daily average.

Phenolic Compounds - There shall be no substances added
which will cause the phenolic content to be greater than
0.001 mg/1 (phenol).

Radioactive Substances - There shall be no radioactive
substances added to the waters which will cause the gross
beta activity (in the known absence of Strontium-90 and
alpha emitters)  to exceed 1,000 micromicrocuries at any
time.

Chemical Constituents - Not to exceed the following concen-
tr at ions at any time :

      Constituent              Concentration mg/1

      Arsenic                       0.05
      Barium                        1.0
      Cadmium                       0.01
      Chromium (hexavalent)         0.05
      Cyanide                       0.2
      Fluoride                      0.7 - 1.2
      Lead                          0.05
      Selenium                      0.01
      Silver                        0.05
      Tennessee River

At the Tennessee-Alabama State Line at River Mile 416.5.
                       Alabama

Interstate Water Quality Standards for this Section from
Roseberry Creek  (River Mile 382.5) to the Alabama-Tennessee
                          214

-------
State Line (River Mile 416.5) are the same as those found on
pages 211 to 212 of this report.


                      Tennessee

Interstate Water Quality Standards for this Section at the
Alabama-Tennessee State Line  (River Mile 416.5) to the
confluence of the French Broad  and the Holston Rivers  (River
Mile 652) are the same as those found on pages 208 to 211
of this report.
      Wabash River

Between the Borders of Indiana  and  Illinois  from  its mouth.
                        Illinois

Interstate Water Quality  Standards  for the  Wabash  River  are
the same as those  for the Ohio River  as found on pages  198
to 200 of this report.
                        Indiana

Interstate Water Quality  Standards  for the Wabash River are
the same as those  for  the Ohio River as found on pages  200
to 203 of this report.
      Wabash River

At the Indiana-Ohio  State  Line.
                        Indiana

 Interstate Water  Quality Standards for the Upper Wabash
 River at the Ohio-Indiana State Line are the same as those
 found on pages 200  to 203 of this  report.


                         Ohio

 Interstate Water  Quality Standards for the Upper Wabash
 River at the Ohio-Indiana State Line are similar to those
 found on pages 206  to 208 of this  report.
                            215

-------
      Kanavha River

Near its mouth as it enters the Ohio River.
                    West Virginia

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Section of the
Kanawha River from its mouth to River Mile 72.
Dissolved Oxygen - Not less than 3 mg/1 at any time.

pH - Values normal for the waters in the area in questions,
however, generally held between 6.0 and 8.5.

Temperature_ - Not to exceed 93F in any case or 10F above
ambient stream temperature, whichever is limiting.

Threshold Odor - Threshold odor not to exceed a threshold
odor number of 64 at 60C as a daily average.

Toxic Substances - Not to exceed 1/10 of the 48 hour median
tolerance limit.

Bacteria - The coliform group is not to exceed 5,000 per 100
ml as a monthly average nor exceed this number in more than
20 percent of the samples examined during the month; nor
exceed 20,000 per 100 ml in more than 5 percent of the
samples.

Radioactivity - Gross beta activity not to exceed 1,000
picocuries per liter (pCi/1) nor shall activity from dis-
solved strontium-90 exceed 10 pCi/1 nor shall activity from
dissolved alpha emitters exceed 3 pCi/1.

Heavy Metals - Not to exceed the following, regardless of
flow:

      Constituent              Concentration mg/1

      Arsenic                       0.01
      Barium                        0.50
      Cadmium                       0.01
      Chromium (hexavalent)         0.05
      Lead                          0.05
      Silver                        0.05
                           216

-------
Other Compounds

      Constituent              Concentration mq/1

      Nitrates                     45
      Chloride                    200
      Sulfate                     200
      Phenol                        0.001
      Cyanide                       0.025
      Fluoride                      1.0
      Selenium                      0.01


      Allegheny River

Near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.


                     Pennsylvania

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Allegheny River
from its mouth to the Kiskiminetas River.


pjH - Not less than 6.0:  not to exceed 8.5.

Dissolved Oxygen - Minimum daily average 5.0 mg/1; no value
less than 4.0 mg/1.

Iron - Total iron - Not to exceed 1.5 mg/1.

Temperature - Not to exceed 5.0 F rise above ambient tempera-
ture or a maximum of 87F, whichever is less:  not to be
changed by more than 2F during any one hour period.

Dissolved Solids - Not to exceed 500 mg/1 as a monthly
average value:  not to exceed 750 mg/1 at any time.

Bacteria (Coliform/lOO ml) - For the period 5/15-9/15 of any
year:  not to exceed 1000/100 ml as arithmatic average value;
not to exceed 1000/100 ml in more than two consecutive
samples:  not to exceed 2400/100 ml in more than one sample.

Threshold Odor No. - Not to exceed 24 at 60C.

Total Manganese - Not to exceed 1.0 mg/1.
                            217

-------
      Allegheny River

At the Pennsylvania-New York State Border near the Allegheny
Reservoir.
                     Pennsylvania

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Allegheny River
between Redbank Creek and the Pennsylvania-New York State
Line.
pH - Not less than 6.0; not to exceed  8.5.

P.O. - Minimum daily average 5.0 mg/1; no value less than
4.0 mg/1.

Iron - Total Iron - Not to exceed 1.5 mg/1.

Temperature - Not to exceed 5F rise above ambient tempera-
ture or a maximum of 87F, whichever is less; not to be
changed by more than 2F during any one hour period.

Dissolved Solids - Not to exceed 500 mg/1 as a monthly
average value; not to exceed 750 mg/1 at any time.

Bacteria - For the period 5/15 - 9/15 of any year; not to
exceed 1000/100 ml as an arithmetic average value, not to
exceed 1000/100 ml in more than two consecutive samples; not
to exceed 2400/100 ml in more than one sample.

Threshold Odor Number  - Not to exceed 24 at 60C.

Methylene Blue Active Substance - Not to exceed 0.5 mg/1.

Chlorides - Not to exceed 150 mg/1.
                       New York

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Allegheny River
from the Pennsylvania-New York State Line to Tributary
No. 9 in New York. State.
Floating Solids; Settleable Solids; Sludge Deposits - None
which are readily visible and attributable to sewage,
industrial waste, or other wastes or which deleteriously
increase the amounts of these constitutents in receiving
waters after opportunity for reasonable dilution and mixture
with the waste discharged thereto.
                            218

-------
Sewage or Waste Effluents - None which are not effectively
disinfected.

p_H - Range between 6.5 and 8.5.

Dissolved Oxygen - For trout waters, not less than 5.0 ppm:
for non-trout waters not less than 4.0 ppm.

Toxic Wastes, Oil, Deleterious Substances, Colored or Other
Wastes, or Heated Liquids - None alone or in combination
with other substances or wastes in sufficient amount at such
temperature as to be injurious to fish life, make the waters
unsafe or unsuitable for bathing or impairing the water for
any other best usage as determined for the specific waters
which are assigned to this class.

With reference to certain toxic substances in affecting fish
life, the establishment of any single numerical standard
for waters of New York State would be too restrictive.
There are many waters, which because of poor buffering
capacity and composition will require special study to deter-
mine safe concentrations of toxic substances.  However,
based on non-trout waters of approximately medium alkalinity
(80 ppm) or above for the State, in which groups most of the
waters near industrial areas in this state will fall, and
without considering or decreased toxicity from possible
combinations, the following may be considered as safe stream
concentrations for certain substances to comply with the
above standard for this type of water.  Waters of lower
alkalinity must be specifically considered since the
toxicity effect of most pollutants will be greatly increased.

Ammonia or ammonium compounds - Not greater than 2.0 ppm
(NH3) at pH of 8.0 or above.

Cyanide - Not greater than 0.1 ppm  (CN).

Ferro or Ferrocyanide - Not greater than 0.4 ppm  (Fe(CN)6).

Copper - Not greater than 0.2 ppm  (Cu).

Zinc - Not greater than 0.3 ppm  (Zn).

Cadmium - Not greater than 0.3 ppm  (Cd).


      Allegheny River

At the Pennsylvania-New York State Border Near Portville,
New York.
                            219

-------
                        New York

Interstate Water Quality Standards for Allegheny River from
Tributary No. 43 in N.Y. to the New York-Pennsylvania
Border.
Water Use - Fishing recreation.

Floating Solids, Settleable Solids; Sludge Deposits - None
which are visible and attributable to sewage, industrial
wastes or which deleteriously increase the amounts of these
constituents in receiving waters after opportunity for
reasonable dilution and mixture with the wastes discharged
thereto.

pH - Range between 6.5 and 8.5.

Dissolved Oxygen - For trout waters, not less than 5.0
ppm; for non-trout waters, not less than 4.0 ppm.

Toxic Wastes, Oil, Deleterious Substances, Colored or
Other Wastes, or Heated Liquids - Not alone or in
combination with other substances or wastes in sufficient
amount at such temperature as to be injurious to fish
life, make the waters unsafe or unsuitable for bathing or
impairing the water for any other best usage as determined
for the specific waters which are assigned to this class.

With reference to certain toxic substances in affecting fish
life, the establishment of any single numerical standard for
waters of New York State would be too restrictive.  There
are many waters, which because of poor buffering capacity
and composition will require special study to determine safe
concentrations of toxic substances.  However, based on
non-trout waters of approximately medium alkalinity (80 ppm)
or above for the State, in which groups most of the waters
near industrial areas in this state will fall, and without
considering or decreased toxicity from possible combinations,
the following may be considered as safe stream concentrations
for certain substances to comply with the above standard for
this type of water.  Waters of lower alkalinity must be
specifically considered since the toxicity effect of most
pollutants will be greatly increased.

Ammonia or ammonium compounds - Not greater than 2.0 ppm
(NH~3~) at pH of 8.0 or above.

Cyanide - Not greater than 0.1 ppm (CN).
                           220

-------
Ferro or Ferrocyanide - Not greater than 0.4 ppm (Fe(CN)e).

Copper - Not greater than 0.2 ppm  (Cu).

Zinc - Not greater than 0.3 ppm  (Zn).

Cadmium - Not greater than 0.3 ppm  (Cd).


                      Pennsylvania

Interstate Standards for Allegheny  River from the Pennsyl-
vania-New York Border to its source.  Zone  08.040.


pH - Not less than 6.0; not to exceed 8.5.

Dissolved Oxygen - Minimum daily average 6.0 mg/1; no value
less than 5.0 mg/1.

Iron - Total Iron - Not to exceed  1.5 mg/1.

Temperature - Not to be increased  by more than  5.0 F above
natural temperatures; not to be  increased above  58F.

Dissolved Solids - Not to exceed 500 mg/1 as a  monthly
average value; not to exceed 750 mg/1 at any time.

Bacteria  (Coliform/100 ml) - For the period 5/15-9/15 of  any
one year; not to exceed 1,000/100  ml  as an  arithmetic average
value; not to exceed 1,000/100 ml  in more than  two consecu-
tive samples; not to exceed  2,400/100 ml in more than one
sample.

Threshold Odor Number - Not  to exceed  24 at 60C.

Methylene Blue Active Substance  (MBAS)  - Not to exceed  0.5
mg/1.

Chlorides - Not to exceed  150 mg/1.


      Monongahela  River

At  the  Pennsylvania-West Virginia  State Border.


                     Pennsylvania

 Interstate Water Quality  Standards from its mouth  to  the
Pennsylvania-West  Virginia State Border.
                           221

-------
pH - Not less than 6.0; not to exceed  8.5.

Dissolved Oxygen - Minimum daily average  5.0 mg/1; no value
less than 4.0 mg/1.

Iron - Total Iron - Not to exceed 1.5  mg/1.

Temperature - Not to exceed 5F rise above ambient tempera-
ture or a maximum of 87F, whichever is less; not to be
changed by more than 2F during any one hour period.

Dissolved Solids - Not to exceed 500 mg/1 as a monthly
average value; nor to exceed 750 mg/1  at  any time.

Bacteria (Coliform/100 ml) - For the period 5/15 - 9/15 of
any year; not to exceed 1000/100 ml as an arithmetic average
value; not to exceed 1000/100 ml in more  than two consecu-
tive samples; not to exceed 2400/100 ml in more than one
sample.

Threshold Odor Number - Not to exceed  24  at 60C.

Total Manganese - Not to exceed 1.0 mg/1.

Phenol. - Not to exceed .005 mg/1.
                   West Virginia

Interstate Water Quality Standards from the Pennsylvania-
West Virginia State Border to the confluence of the Tygart
Valley and the West Fork Rivers.
pH - Values normal for the waters of the area in question,
however, generally held between 6 and 8.5.

Dissolved Oxygen - Not less than 5 mg/1 at any time.

Temperature - Not to exceed 87F at any time during the
months of May through November and not to exceed 73F at
any time during the months of December through April.

Threshold Odor - Not to exceed a threshold odor number of
8 at 60C as a daily average.

Toxic Substances - Not to exceed 1/10 of the 96 hour
median tolerance limit.

Bacteria - The coliform group is not to exceed 1000 per 100
ml as a monthly average nor exceed this number in more than
                           222

-------
 20 percent of the samples examined during any month;  nor
 exceed 2400 per 100 ml on any day.

 Radioactivity - Gross beta activity not to exceed 1 000
 picocuries per liter (pCi/1)  nor shall activity from dis-

 fvir^TT^Vu90 6XCeed  10 pCi/1' nor sha11 activity
 from dissolved alpha emitters exceed 3 pCi/1.

 Heavy Metals;  Not to exceed the following:

      Constituent              Concentration mg/1

      Arsenic                       0>01
      Barium                        0>50
      Cadmium                       0.01
      Chromium (Hexavalent)          0*. 05
      Lead                           0>05
      Silver                        0.05

 Other Compounds

      Constituents             Concentration mg/1

      Nitrates                       45
      Chlorides                     100
      Sulfates                      200
      Phenol                          0.001
      Cyanide                         0.025
      Fluoride                        1.0
      Selenium                        0.01


      Youghiogheny  River

At the Maryland-Pennsylvania  State Border.


                     Pennsylvania

Interstate Water  Quality  Standards from Youghiogheny Dam
to Pennsylvania-Maryland  State  Border.


pH - Not less than  6.0; not to  exceed  8.5.

Dissolved Oxygen  -  Minimum daily average  5.0  mg/1; no value
less than 4.0 mg/1.

Iron - Total Iron -  Not to exceed  1.5 mg/1.

Temperature - Not to be increased  by more  than 5F above
natural temperatures nor  to be  increased  above 58F.
                           223

-------
Dissolved Solids - Not to exceed 500 mg/1 as a monthly
average value; not to exceed 750 mg/1 at any time.

Bacteria  (Coliform/100 ml) - For the period 5/15-9/15 of
any year; not to exceed 1,000/100 ml as an arithmetic
average value; not to exceed 1,000/100 ml in more than two
consecutive samples; not to exceed 2,400/100 ml in more
than one sample.
                      Maryland

Interstate Water Quality Standards for Youghiogheny River
from the Maryland-Pennsylvania State Border to the Little
Youghiogheny River.
pH - Not less than 6.0 nor greater than 8.5.

Piss o1yed Oxygen - Concentration must not be less than 5.0
mg/1 at any time, with a minimum monthly average of not
less than 6.0 mg/1.

Temperature - Temperature must not exceed 72F at any time.

Bacteria - Fecal coliform organism density not to exceed
240 MPN per 100 ml.
     Youghiogheny River

At the Maryland-West Virginia State Border.


                   West Virginia

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Youghiogheny
River from the Maryland-West Virginia State Border to the
source.


Dissolved Oxygen - Not less than 5 mg/1 at any time.

pH - 6.0 to 8.5.

Temperature - Not to exceed 87F at any time during the
months of May through November and not to exceed 73F at
any time during the months of December through April.

Threshold Odor - Threshold odor not to exceed a threshold
odor number of 8 at 60C as a daily average.
                           224

-------
Toxic Substances - Not to exceed 1/10 of the 96 hour median
tolerance limit.

Bacteria - The coliform group is not to exceed 5,000 per
100 ml as a monthly average nor exceed this number in more
than 20 percent of the samples examined during the month;
nor exceed 20,000 per 100 ml in more than 5 percent of the
samples.

Radioactivity - Gross beta activity not to exceed 1000
picocuries per liter  (pCi/1) nor shall activity from dis-
solved strontium 90 exceed 10 pCi/1, nor shall activity
from dissolved alpha emitters exceed 3 pCi/1.

Heavy Metals

     Constituents             Concentration mg/1

     Arsenic                       0.01
     Barium                        0.50
     Cadmium                       0.05
     Chromium (Hexavalent)         0.05
     Lead                          0.05
     Silver                        0.05

Other Compounds

     Constituents             Concentration mg/1

     Nitrates                      45
     Chlorides                   100
     Sulfates                    200
     Phenol                        0.001
     Cyanide                       0.025
     Fluoride                      1.000
     Selenium                      0.010
                      Maryland

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Youghiogheny
River from the Little Youghiogheny River to the Maryland-
West Virginia State Border.


p_H - Not less than 6.0 nor greater than 8.5.

Dissolved Oxygen - Concentration not  less than 5.0 mg/1 at
any time, with a minimum monthly average of not less than
6.0 mg/1.
                            225

-------
Temperature - Temperature must not exceed 72F at any time,

Bacteria - Monthly average value  (either MPN or MP count)
of coliform organisms not to exceed 5,000 per 100 ml of
sample; nor to exceed this number in more than 20% of the
samples examined during any month; nor exceed 20,000 per
100 ml in more than 5% of such samples.  Fecal coliform
organism density should not exceed 240 MPN per 100 ml.
     Cheat River

At the Pennsylvania-West Virginia State Line.
                    Pennsylvania

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Cheat River from
the mouth to the Pennsylvania-West Virginia State Line.
pH - Not less than 6.0; not to exceed 8.5.

Dissolved Oxygen - Minimum daily average 5.0 mg/1; no value
less than 4.0 mg/1.

Iron - Total Iron - Not to exceed 1.5 mg/1.

Temperature - Not to exceed 5F rise above ambient tempera-
ture or a maximum of 87F whichever is less; not to be
changed by more than 2F during any one hour period.

Dissolved Solids - Not to exceed 500 mg/1 as a monthly
average value; not to exceed 750 mg/1 at any time.

Bacteria (Coliforms/100 ml) - For the period 5/15-9/15 of
any year; not to exceed 1,000/100 ml as an arithmetic
average value; not to exceed 1,000/100 ml in more than
two consecutive samples; not to exceed 2,400/100 ml in
more than one sample.
                      West Virginia

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Cheat River from
the Pennsylvania-West Virginia State Line to its Source.


pH - 6.0 to 8.5.

Dissolved Oxygen - Not less than 5 mg/1 at any time.
                           226

-------
Temperature - Not to exceed 87F at any time during the
months of May through November and not to exceed 73F at
any time during the months of December through April.

Threshold Odor - Threshold odor not exceed a threshold
odor number of 8 at 60C as a daily average.

Toxic Substances - Not to exceed 1/10 of the 96 hour median
tolerance limit.

Bacteria - The coliform group is not to exceed 1,000/100
ml as a monthly average value; nor exceed this number in
more than 20 percent of the samples examined during any
month; nor exceed 2,400 per 100 ml on any day.

Radioactivity - Gross beta activity not to exceed 1000
picocuries per liter  (pCi/1) nor shall activity from
dissolved alpha emitters exeecd 3 pci/1.

Heavy Metals - Not to exceed the following:

     Constituent              Concentration mg/1

     Arsenic                       0.01
     Barium                        0.50
     Cadmium                       0.01
     Chromium  (Hexavalent)         0.05
     Lead                          0.05
     Silver                        0.05

Other Compounds

     Constituent              Concentration mg/1

     Nitrates                      45
     Chlorides                    100
     Sulfates                     200
     Phenol                         0.001
     Cyanide                        0.025
     Fluoride                       1.000
     Selenium                       0.010
                           227

-------
APPENDIX II - SOUTHEASTERN RIVER BASIN


River Basin Descriptions


     Ochlockonee River

The Ochlockonee River drains part of southwest Georgia and
the "Big Bend" portion of north Florida.  The economy is a
combination of agriculture and industry with slightly more
farming.  Land resources in Georgia are generally devoted
to crops such as cotton, tobacco, fruits, and vegetables.
Most of the land resources in Florida are used for forestry
products.  Industrial development is related to lumber and
wood products and food processing.  The balance of indus-
trial endeavor is in textiles, apparel, and minerals.
Pollution sources are generally localized from sewage dis-
charges into the Ochlockonee River or its tributaries.  In
addition, there are several meat packing and rendering
plants which cause pollution in the upper reaches of the
Ochlockonee River in Georgia.  Most of the water use is
devoted to body contact sports and fishing; very little
surface water is used for domestic supplies.  High densities
of fecal coliform, increased BOD, and depressed DO are
common below Moultrie and Thomasville, Georgia.  In the
Moultrie area, most of the pollution comes from an open
dump which receives garbage, rubbish, and dead animals.
The dump is separated from the Ochlockonee River by a small
drainage area.  Wastes from a sewage treatment plant enter
the river below the dump; increased organic and bacterio-
logical pollution result.  A packing company farther down-
stream also contributes to localized pollution.  Industrial
wastes on the reaches of the Ochlockonee River just over
the state line from Cairo, Georgia, and Havana, Florida,
apparently have no major effect on the stream below Thomas-
ville, Georgia.  Again, high coliform densities were
observed.  Occasional high chloride concentrations originate
in a tributary known as Tired Creek, which apparently has
a pickle plant.  An automatic water monitor has been
installed on the Ochlockonee River by the FWPCA.  Data are
collected by the Florida State Board of Health.  This
monitor is on Florida Highway 12, just over the Georgia-
Florida state line and continuously monitors DO, temperature,
pH, chloride, and conductivity.  This monitor was installed
in 1965 and since then no abnormal conditions have been
reported.  The Ochlockonee eventually runs into Lake Tal-
quin, then is joined by Telogia Creek and flows through
swampy land, and eventually empties into Apalachee Bay
through the Ochlockonee Bay.  Proposed multi-purpose
impoundments on several reaches of the river will more than
                          228

-------
likely reduce any localized pollution.  The effect of Lake
Talquin as a holding and stabilizing basin is also evident,
since DO levels are generally much higher below the lake
than above.  Other impoundments upstream will improve the
water quality in the Cairo, Georgia area  and the Tallahassee-
Quincy, Florida area.  A sanitary land fill project has been
planned in the Moultrie, Georgia area to eliminate runoff
from the open dump.

The Ochlockonee River is very dark in color.  It drains an
area which is heavily forested and has many swampy areas.
Thus / there are considerable organic contributions such as
lignins, tannins, and the variety of breakdown products
they produce.  These contribute to increased color and
turbidity, increases in taste and odor problems, as well
as oxygen depletion.

The stream is very shallow  and meanders quite a  lot.  The
slope is very shallow and the topography very flat.  This
region receives a large amount of rainfall  and is subject  to
flooding and hurricanes.  There is considerable  debris  in
the stream along with fallen trees and brush.  The stream
deposits a quantity  of dark, muddy water to the  Ochlockonee
Bay and later Apalachee Bay.  In the bay area there  are mud
flats covered with tall grasses.  The stream bottom  is  a
white sand in contrast to its dark organic  color.


     Apalachicola River Basin

The Chattahoochee River,  the Flint River and  Spring  Creek
join together to form the Apalachicola  River which drains
into Apalachicola Bay and  finally  the Gulf  of Mexico.
All three  of these  streams  have  their origins  in North-
western Georgia.  The Apalachicalla  River  is  approximately
90 miles  long, whereas  the  Chattahoochee  River  is some
600 miles  long,  and  is  one  of  the  larger  rivers  of Georgia.
The Chattahoochee  River rises  in the Blue  Ridge  Mountains
of the Appalachian  group.   The  Chattahoochee  River is  a
potential  source  of  water power and  is  navigable for small
boats,  as  far  as  Columbus,  Georgia.   It drains  an area
used  for  agriculture and  forest cover.   The Flint River is
approximately  285 miles in length,  and  is  located primarily
in the  State of  Georgia.   The  Flint River drains an  area
which  receives  rainfall in the amounts  of  40  to 60  inches,
and  is  predominantly an agricultural region.   It is  also
a source  of  water power and is navigable by small boats up
to Albany, Georgia.

This  basin is  located in north and west Georgia, east
Alabama,  and northwest Florida.   The Chattahoochee and
                           229

-------
Flint Rivers drain the northwest and west-central areas
of Georgia and east Alabama.  Both rivers flow into Lake
Seminole which is located on the Georgia-Florida state
line.  Spring Creek drains an area between these two rivers
and also enters Lake Seminole.  The Apalachicola River flows
from Lake Seminole at the Jim Woodruff Dam into and through
Florida, then into Apalachicola Bay, which enters the Gulf
of Mexico.  Several impoundments in -this basin aid in
assimilation of wastes.  Primary sources of waste in this
basin are from the larger cities of Atlanta, Columbus,
Albany, and Bainbridge, Georgia.  Other sources are indus-
trial, coming from airlines, auto plants, textiles and the
fish meal industry.  Wastes from the auto and airline
plants are primarily chromates, cyanides, and residual
acids.  The general problem throughout the basin is again
one of inadequate domestic waste treatment, which results
in high BOD, low DO, and high coliform counts in the rivers.
Oyster beds in the Apalchicola Bay area, which normally
produce 70% of the annual harvest, have been closed
periodically due to high coliform counts.  Sizeable portions
of the beds are closed permanently.  Only one portion of the
main stem of the Chattahoochee has few pollution problems.
Several quality data stations have been established
throughout the basin.  Parameters measured are:  flow,
temperature, BOD, DO, and coliform bacteria.  However,
these sites seem to be quite appropriate and need only up-
grading to include other vital parameters to serve as water
quality stations.

The Apalachicola Bay contributes a muddy discharge which
extends into the Gulf of Mexico for over two and one-half
miles.  The bay is patchy with some areas muddy and others
green.  There are mud flats in sections of the bay.

The Apalachicola River is very muddy with a medium dark
brown color.  It meanders through this flat country.
The terrain is very flat.  There are many oxbow cutoffs
which have growths of algae.  There are a few small farms
but most of the land is tree covered.

The Flint River has a brownish-gray color near the mouth,
however, at the headwaters it is more of a red color due
to the soil in the region.  In the headwaters, the stream
is very shallow with rapids in some sections with large
rocks and boulders in the stream.  The Flint River has an
impoundment in the headwaters region which is multi-
purpose.  The river is very small where it begins in the
Atlanta region.  There are industrial and municipal wastes
in specific sections.  However, the soil, farming and
forest areas, contribute more to the overall quality of
the stream.
                          230

-------
sPring creek drains a region between the Flint and Chatta-
hoochee Rivers.  its mouth drains into Lake Seminole.  Its
importance as an interstate stream is that its drainage
into Lake Seminole then passes across the Georgia-Florida
state line.  The stream drains an agricultural region,
although the immediate area is tree covered along the banks
of the stream.  The soils are either sandy or are red in
color.  The stream is dark brown in one area and dark green
in others.

The Chattahoochee River drains an area where the soil is
very red in color which causes the turbidity and color of
the stream to be high.  It serves as the border between
Alabama and Georgia for about half of their common border.
The Chattahoochee River has five impounded areas which are
multi-purpose and hydroelectric dams.  The three closest
to the mouth have locks for navigation.  New construction
within this basin contributes large amounts of sediment to
the streams.  There are industrial and municipal effluents
which cause local pollution problems.  However, the
agriculture, forests, and soil tend to be the major values
in controlling stream quality in this region.


     Choctawhatchee River

The Choctawhatchee River rises in southeast Alabama and flows
generally southward through Alabama and northwest Florida
to empty into the Choctawhatchee Bay, an arm of the Gulf of
Mexico.  In the Alabama portion of the basin, there are
several medium sized cities and some mining operations.
The Florida portion of the basin has many larger cities and
more diversified industry, including several pulp and paper
mills and two chemical plants.  In the Alabama area, sources
of pollution are generally localized and consist of untreated
or treated sewage discharges into intermittent streams.  The
aggregate of these wastes increases bacteriological counts
below the Alabama-Florida state line.  Industrial use of the
water is limited to iron-ore washing and generation of
electricity.  Limited use is made of water for agricultural
purposes.  Most of the Alabama portion of the Choctawhatchee
River is made available for fishing and, at its discharge
point in the Choctawhatchee Bay, sport fishing is highly
developed as is shellfish harvesting.

The river is a dark color with banks that are either red in
color or sandy.  The river becomes more turbid as it flows
downstream.  The area that it drains is mostly forested with
some farming.  There are a number of specific points where
industrial waste treatment should be improved.  The bay
contains a delta with mud flats covered with grasses.  The
                          231

-------
bay tends to hold back much of the sediment and silt which
passes into it.
     Yellow River

It has its headwaters in Southeastern Alabama.  It flows
southwest to cross into the Florida panhandle.  It flows
into Blackwater Bay and then to Pensacola Bay and finally
to the Gulf.  This region is heavily forested.  The drain-
age is shallow, twisting and narrow.  The water is dark
brown in color due to the drainage areas high lignin and
tannin wastes.  These wastes have high oxygen demands.  The
mouth has a delta area with several channels.  The discharge
is turbid with mud.  The bottom of the river is a white
sand.

Data on the type of wastes discharged to the Yellow River
are very sparse.  The wastes presumably come from primary
and secondary sewage treatment plants of nearby cities
and towns, and from the Eglin Air Force Base, which lies
just to the south of the Yellow River into which many
small tributaries flow.
     Escambia River Basin

The Escambia River and its major tributary, the Conecuh
River, drain the area of Florida just north of Pensacola.
The river flows south and east into Escambia Bay at
Pensacola.  Industrial wastes from the Conecuh River,
originate mostly in Alabama from paper manufacture and
mining operations.  The Alabama portion of the basin is
largely agricultural.  The Florida portion of the basin is
dominated by the Pensacola metropolitan area.  The economy
is dependent on several large industries, operation of the
port, the tourist industry, and on the military bases in
the metropolitan area.  The industrial wastes in the lower
Escambia River and Escambia Bay are principally chemical
and are highly nitrogenous materials.  Sanitary sewage
arising in the Conecuh River alters the bacteriological
quality of the Escambia River below the Alabama-Florida
state line.  Many of the small communities in this basin
have no treatment facilities or only primary treatment.
The major interstate pollution problems in the Escambia
River are high bacterial density and color.  High color is
attributed to industrial wastes from a container manu-
facturer.  However, most all of this region is covered with
trees and the area is somewhat swampy.  Thus, some of the
color originates from the decaying vegetation.  Color levels
do not interfere with any use of the water.  There are
                          232

-------
sources of thermal and phosphorous wastes.  Both of these
would encourage high biological growths.  A manufacturer of
nylon fibre has been injecting strong organic and slightly
acidic wastes into two deep rock strata injection wells,
which apparently eventually discharge into the Gulf of
Mexico.  Most of the industries are providing at least par-
tial waste treatment, either through in-plant changes or by
improving the level of waste treatment.  Regulated dis-
charges from several plants, diffusion in deep water, and
neutralization in holding ponds have been successful.  The
naval air station at Pensacola operates a primary sewage
treatment plant, but also receives periodic discharges of
industrial wastes, principally plating and engine cleaning
wastes.  One of the serious problems in the Pensacola area,
while not directly on the Escambia River, is the Bayou Chico
which receives a considerable load from many of the local
industries and sewage discharges.  Since the Bayou is almost
totally enclosed, flow into the Gulf is highly restricted.
The Conecuh River, while a major tributary to the Escambia
River, was not covered in any of our original plans.  Some
mention is made of the pollutional contribution of the
Conecuh River in the Escambia River summary.  The major
sources of pollution in the Conecuh River are from paper
and mining.  The many small towns situated on the Conecuh
River contribute to localized pollution problems, largely
domestic sewage, the aggregate of which influences the
bacteriological quality of the Escambia River.  Some of the
small towns have no treatment, others have only primary
treatment.
     Perdido River

This river was not  included  in  our  original  scope  of  the
study.  It is an interstate  water since  it forms most of  the
boundary between Florida  and Alabama before  its entry into
the Gulf of Mexico.  The  river  rises near the  town of
Bay Minette in Alabama, flows generally  south  60 miles to
Perdido Bay.  The principal  pollution problems arise
largely from primary treated sewage from Bay Minette  and
also organic chemicals  and paper mill wastes.   Occasional
phenolic wastes have been observed.

The waters of Perdido Bay and River are  used for sport and
commercial fishing, and recreation.  Apparently none  of the
river itself is used for  municipal  water supply.   Ground
water is used primarily for  this source.
                          233

-------
     Mobile River Basin

The Mobile River Basin drains one of the largest areas in
the Southeast region, with water coming from Alabama, Georgia,
Mississippi, and Tennessee.  The average annual precipitation
is almost 58 inches, one of the highest of any of the south-
east basins.  The Mobile River is formed by junction of the
Alabama and the Tombigbee River, 40 miles north of Mobile.
The large drainage area and unregulated flows on the two
major tributaries cause highly variable flows, from dry
conditions in the fall to spring floods.  The upper three
quarters of the Mobile River delta is a maze of rivers, bays,
bayous and swamps with thick tree growth.  The lower portion
is treeless, with grass covered islands, marshes, and
shallow bays.  The delta is hemmed in on both sides by high
land which is not typical of most deltas.  The tidal effect
in the bay is felt only once daily.  Mobile Bay is in that
portion of the Gulf coast where there is only one tide
daily with a cycle of 25 hours.  Water elevations in the
bay are also affected by strong north winds which cause
drops as much as 2 to 3 feet.  The major pollution problems
in the Mobile River Basin are from primary sewage discharge
or industrial wastes of various types, such as from paper
mills, meat packing plants, container manufacturers, and
mineral industries.  A considerable amount of untreated
sewage is discharged directly into the Mobile River from
the Mobile downtown area and from the Alabama State Docks.
There is also industrial waste discharges from Blakeley
Island which lies just across the Mobile River to the east
of the main part of the city.  Several small suburbs also
have incomplete sewage treatment and are discharging wastes
into several of the tributaries to the Mobile River.  One
of these streams is the Dog River which has been classified
in the past as prime recreational water, but because of the
pollution load, is now becoming unsafe for water contact
sports.  There was a major fish kill in the Dog River in
1968.  The general quality of waters in the Mobile Basin is
extremely variable.  It ranges from grossly to moderately
polluted waters in the Mobile metropolitan area to waters
relatively pollution free in the outlying areas.  This
basin has been studied more than any other basin in Alabama.

The Mobile Bay area contributes a large volume of muddy
water to the Gulf of Mexico.  The bay is very wide and the
average low mean water depth is 10 feet.  The Corps of
Engineers maintains a ship channel which is 40 by 400 feet
down the bay from the dock and river area.  There are
shipping, building and other shipping activities.  There
are a number of industries in the upper bay region and its
tributaries which have serious waste problems.  Three Mile
Creek and Chickasaw Creeks are particularly bad.  The
                          234

-------
Mobile River is navigable to commerical tow boats for its
entire length.

The Alabama River is one of the largest rivers in the
southeast region.  It is formed by the junction of the
Coosa and Tallapoosa Rivers north of Montgomery, then flows
west and southwest to its junction with the Tombigbee River.
The total length of the river is about 313 miles.  The
major sources of pollution on this river are domestic wastes
from two large cities, two Air Force bases, industrial
wastes from three paper mills, and occasional spills from
an oil field.  The water quality is generally good, except
for bacteriological concentrations in the immediate vicinity
of discharges of raw wastes.  Several meat packing plants
also discharge raw wastes into the river.  Commercial and
sport fishing, and in certain locations, recreation are the
main uses of the river.  The completion of several locks
and dams on the river will also increase recreation.  The
river is not used as a source of public water supply.
Several impoundments in the planning stage will also
increase the use of the river for power generation and
navigation.

Both the Coosa and Tallapoosa Rivers contain large amounts
of mud.  This is increased as the Alabama River flows toward
the Mobile River.  There are many sand bars in the stream.
Each tributary stream creates a new one.  The soil of the
region is such to contribute to this type of erosion.  The
area is divided  about half farms and half trees.  The farm-
ing practices and soil characteristics both contribute.
When the Alabama River joins the Tombigbee River to form
the Mobile River, the mud load it carries engulfs the
Tombigbee waters.


     Tombigbee River

The Tombigbee River is formed by the  junction of the east
and west forks near Amory, Mississippi,  it then  flows south
to southeast  across Mississippi, and  crosses the .Alabama
state line between Columbus, Mississippi  and Gainesville,
Alabama.   It  eventually  is  joined by  the  Black Warrior
River at Demopolis, Alabama.  The basin  is primarily rural,
sparsely populated, and  has  few  sizeable  towns.  Flow in
the Upper Tombigbee is not  regulated;  a  dam  at  Demopolis
impounds water  from the  mouth upstream to Gainesville,
Alabama, approximately  60 miles.  Very little water quality
data  are available on the Upper  Tombigbee River, particularly
for the sections of the  river  in Mississippi.   A surveillance
station of FWPCA is  located  near  the  Alabama-Mississippi
state line downstream from  Columbus,  Mississippi.  As in
                          235

-------
many other rivers in the southeast basin, the main stem of
the Tombigbee River is generally of good quality.  The
tributaries, however, are responsible for much of the
pollution load which has resulted in periodic fish kills
extending into the Tombigbee River.  A wide variety of
industrial wastes, consisting of chemical, meat packing,
sand and gravel, food, and paperboard wastes, as well as
poorly and inadequately treated domestic wastes, are
responsible for the waste problems in this watershed.
Since the main stem of the Upper Tombigbee is generally
considered to be prime commercial and sport fishing water,
these periodic fish kills are quite serious.

The Upper Tombigbee River drains a forested area.  The
stream soon picks up a dark reddish brown color and high
turbidity levels.  Later this color becomes a creamy brown
and later green, south of Columbus, Mississippi.

The Black Warrior River joins the Tombigbee River as a
tributary stream at Demopolis, Alabama.  There is commercial
navigation on the Black Warrior and Tombigbee Rivers.  There
are proposals to extend the navigation area in the Upper
Tombigbee River.  This would include locks and dams with an
added connection up to the Tennessee River.  This may well
be good for navigation.  However, the effect of this on
water quality should be carefully evaluated.

Downstream from Demopolis there is a paper plant which has
inadequate treatment facilities since the discharge is still
visible for over a mile downstream.  This discharge also
colored the river much darker than previously.  Further
downstream there is another paper plant which obtains a
higher degree of treatment but the effluent still discolors
the stream.  The Tombigbee River drains a region which is
heavily forested.  Only about 10% of the land is not tree
covered.  This would also be responsible for some portion
of the dark color of the river.  It would appear that there
are both natural and pollutional sources of the dark almost
black color of this stream.

The Tombigbee River is used by both commerical river traffic
and pleasure boats.  The latter use is the lesser.  The
river has many bends so that the length of the tows are
shorter than those on the Ohio River for instance.

The Lower Tombigbee River is that portion from its juncture
with the Black Warrior River to the juncture with the
Alabama River.  The Lower Tombigbee River receives the bulk
of the pollutional load from the Black Warrior River.  There
are three chemical firms, three paper mills, and two
municipalities discharging wastes into the Lower Tombigbee
                         236

-------
 River.   Organic  chemicals,  pesticides,  oils,  tars,  and
 untreated  domestic wastes  are the major sources  of  pollution,
 Fish  kills  have  been observed and commercial  fishing  in
 certain  areas  of the stream has been seriously curtailed
 or  abandoned entirely.   The Black Warrior  River  flows
 through  the most populous  and industrialized  section  of
 Alabama  and brings a considerable amount of pollution from
 this  area  into the Tombigbee River at Demopolis.  Both of
 these rivers are important  for navigation, sources  of
 industrial  water supply, recreation, and both sport and
 commercial  fishing.

 There is a  paper plant  and  steam plant south  of  Jackson,
 Mississippi.   The paper plant wastes are visible  for
 several miles  downstream.   Further south at several points
 there are  chemical wastes discharged after treatment which
 still has visible effluents.  These were quickly  assimilated
 into the stream  however.  Some of these chemical  plants are
 discharging effluents to tributaries which then  enter the
 Tombigbee.
     Pascagoula  River

The Pascagoula River is  in  part  an intrastate  stream.  It
is formed by the juncture of  Leaf  and  Chickasawhay Rivers.
From this point  at Merrill, Mississippi,  into  the estuary
north of Pascagoula, the river flows in  a meandering fashion
and has numerous tributaries  along its path.   As the river
proceeds southward, it flows  through an  area rich with bayous,
oxbows, and swamps.  The area is tree  covered  and the turbid
water has a dark brown color.  About ten  miles north of
Pascagoula, the  river splits  into  an east and  west branch.
Both of these branches continue  through  rich bayou regions
into the estuary where the  Pascagoula  River is joined by
one of its major tributaries, the  Escatawpa River at Moss
Point.  The Escatawpa joins the  east branch of the
Pascagoula River.  The river  then  flows  past the town of
Gautier and Pascagoula into Pascagoula Bay, which joins
the Mississippi  Sound.   The mouth  has  a  delta  area with
many grass covered islands.   From  the  estuary, which
extends approximately 6  to  10 miles north and  northwest of
Pascagoula, tidal action is observed to  at least River Mile
42 but not past  River Mile  53.  At this point, the classifi-
cation of the Pascagoula River as  an interstate stream ends.
The major sources of pollution of  the  Pascagoula River
appear to come from its  main  tributaries.  In  the estuary
region, localized municipal and  industrial wastes coupled
with the severe  load from the Escatawpa River  are the main
sources of pollution.  The effects of  the  two  northern
tributaries are  apparently not felt severely in the main
                          237

-------
stem of the Pascagoula River.  The wastes in the tributaries
are organic from municipal wastes and occasional high
chlorides coming from oil field operations.  Other tribu-
taries such as the Black Creek have sources of pollution on
their watersheds, but the effects on the main stem are
minimal.  The gross pollution in the bay area up into the
estuary proper makes this water unsuitable for any commer-
cial fishing, body contact sports and domestic supply.
Shellfish harvesting has been seriously limited or halted
in the estuary region because of gross pollution.
     Pearl River

The Pearl River rises in east central Mississippi, flows
southwest to Jackson, then south-southeast with the latter
third of the stream being the boundary between the states
of Mississippi and Louisiana.  The river splits into a
east and west branch.  The east branch enters Lake Borgne,
an arm of the Gulf of Mexico.  The West Pearl enters the
Rigolets passage between Lake Pontchartrain and Lake
Borgne.  The river is typically a southeast region river
as the two branches flow through wooded bottoms and marsh
lands.  The two main stems are connected by a maze of
bayous and small creeks.  The waters of the basin are
presently used for municipal and industrial supplies,
recreation, commercial and sport fishing, navigation, and
waste assimilation.  The major problems of pollution are
those arising from inadequately treated municipal wastes,
pulp and paper mills, meat packing, chemicals, lumber,
wood preserving, and occasional discharge of brines from
oil fields.  One plant discharges wastes containing zinc
and phosphates.  Occasional fish kills have been observed
and the suspected source was land runoff containing
pesticides.  A pollution load imposed upon the stream
makes certain stretches of the Pearl River marginal for
fish propagation and undesirable for body contact sports.
The characteristic problem with high coliform counts
occasionally affects the shellfish industry in the lower
reaches of the basin in Lake Borgne and in the Gulf
Area.

The water discharged by the Pearl River in the Rigolet
region is so high in organics that it foams due to wind
and wave action.  These organics most probably are due to
natural sources.  The delta region has filled up with mud
flat islands which are grass covered.  There is a NASA
test facility which is connected by a short channel to the
Pearl River.  This could be a source of potential pollu-
tion to the Pearl River.
                          238

-------
The lower section of the river, where the river forms the
Louisiana-Mississippi state line, is for the most part
heavily forested, whereas the section within Mississippi
is more heavily farmed.  The crops are cotton and sugar
cane.
Interstate Water Quality Standards


     Ochlockonee River

From Ochlockonee Bay to Lake Talquin Dam.


                      Florida

Interstate Water Quality Standards  for the  Ochlockonee River
from the Bay to Lake Talquin Dam.   See Class  III Waters on
pages 248 to 250 of this report.


     Ochlockonee River

From Upper Lake Talquin to the Florida-Georgia State  Line.
See Class III  Waters on pages  248  to   250 of this report.


     Ochlockonee River

From Georgia-Florida  State Line to its headwaters.


                       Georgia

Water  Interstate Water Quality Standards for the  Ochlockonee
River  from  the Georgia-Florida State  Line to its  headwaters.


General Criteria  for all  Waters


All waters  shall  be free from materials associated with
municipal or domestic sewage, industrial waste or any
 other  waste which will settle to form sludge deposits and
become putrescent, unsightly or otherwise objectionable.

 All waters  shall be free from oil, scum, and floating debris
 associated with municipal or domestic sewage, industrial
 waste  or other discharges in  amounts  sufficient to be
 unsightly or to interfere with legitimate water uses.
                            239

-------
All waters shall be free from material related to municipal,
industrial, or other discharges which produce turbidity,
color, odor, or other objectionable conditions which
interfere with legitimate water uses.

All water shall be free from toxic, corrosive, acidic, and
caustic substances discharged from municipalities, industries,
or other sources in amounts, concentrations, or combinations
which are harmful to human, animal, or aquatic life.

The maximum permissible concentration of radionuclides in
the waters of the State must conform to the limits which
are cited in Chapter 270-5-20 "Control of Radioactive
Materials," of the Rules and Regulations of the Georgia
Department of Public Health.


Criteria:  Fishing, Propagation of Fish, Shellfish, Game,
and Other Aquatic Life


Dissolved Oxygen - A minimum of 5.0 mg/1 at all times for
streams designated as trout waters by the State Game and
Fish Commission:  a minimum of 4.0 mg/1 at all times for
waters supporting warm water species of fish.

pH - Within the range of 6.0 - 8.5.

Bacteria - Fecal coliform not to exceed a mean of 5,000/100
ml (MPN) based on at least 4 samples taken over a 30 day
period and not to exceed 20,000/100 ml in more than 5%
of the samples in any 90 day period.

Temperature - Not to exceed 93.2F  (34.0C.) at any time
and not to be increased more than 10F. above intake
temperature.  In streams designated as trout waters by
the State Game and Fish Commission, there shall be no
elevation or depression of natural stream temperatures.

Toxic Wastes, Other Deleterious Materials - None in concen-
trations that would harm man, fish, and game or other
beneficial aquatic life.


     Apalachicola River

From Apalachicola Bay to Jim Woodruff Dam.
                           240

-------
                       Florida

State Water Quality Standards.  Classification Class III,
Recreation, Propagation  and Management of Fish and Wildlife
see pages  248 to  250 of  this report.


     Chattahoochee River

From Jim Woodruff Dam  (Lake Seminole) to Georaia Highway
91  (Neal's Landing).
                       Georgia

Interstate Water Quality Standards


Recreation
Bacteria - Fecal coliform not to exceed a mean of 1,000 per
100 ml  (MPN) based on at least  4 samples taken over a 30
day period, and not to exceed 4,000 per 100 ml in more than
5% of the samples taken in any  90 day period.

Dissolved Oxygen - Not less than 4.0 mg/1 except that those
streams designated as trout waters by the State Game and
Fish Commission must have a minimum of 5.0 mg/1 at all
times.

pH - Within the range of 6.0 -  '8.5.

Toxic Wastes, Other Deleterious Materials - None in concen-
trations that would harm man, fish and game or other
beneficial aquatic life.

Temperature - Not to exceed 93.2%F.  (34.0C.) at any time
and not to be increased more than 10F. above intake
temperature.  In streams designated as trout wa'ters by
the State Game and Fish Commission, there shall be no
elevation or depression of natural stream temperatures.


     Chattahoochee River

From Neal's Landing to Great Southern Division of Great
Northern Paper Company.
                          241

-------
                       Georgia

Interstate Water Quality Standards.
Fishing, Propagation of Fish, Shellfish, Game and Other
Aquatic Life, See pages 248 to 250 f this report.
                       Alabama

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification Fish and
Wildlife, see pages 251 to 252 of this report.
     Chattahoochee River

From Great Southern Division of Great Northern Paper Company
to Cowikee Creek.
                       Georgia

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification Recrea-
tion, see page 241 of this report.


Drinking Water Supplies


Those waters approved by the Georgia Department of Public
Health and requiring only approved disinfection and meeting
the requirements of the latest edition of "Public Health
Service Drinking Water Standards"; or waters approved by the
Georgia Department of Public Health for human consumption
and food-processing or for any other use requiring water
of a lower quality.
Bacteria - Fecal coliform not to exceed a mean of 50 per
100 ml (MPN) based on at least 4 samples taken over a 30
day period and not to exceed 200 per 100 ml in more than
5% of the samples in any 90 day period.

Floating Solids - Settleable solids, sludge deposits or
any taste, odor or color producing substances:  None
associated with any waste discharge.
                          242

-------
Sewage, Industrial or Other Wastes - None


Those raw water supplies requiring approved treatment to
meet the requirements of the Georgia Department of Public
Health Service Drinking Water Standards" or which are
approved by the Georgia Department of Public Health for
human consumption and food-processing or for any other
use requiring water of a lower quality.


Bacteria - Fecal coliform not to exceed a mean of 5,000
per 100 ml (MPN) based on at least four samples taken over
a 30 day period and not to exceed 20,000 per 100 ml in more
than 5% of the samples taken in any 90 day period.

Dissolved Oxygen - Not less than 4.0 mg/1 at any time; a
minimum of 5.0 mg/1 at all times for waters designated as
trout streams by the State Game and Fish Commission.

p_H - With the range of 6.0 - 8.5.

No material or substance in such concentration that, after
treatment, would exceed the requirements of the Georgia
Department of Public Health and the latest edition of
"Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards."

Temperature - Not to exceed 93.2F.  (34.0C.) at any time
and not to be increased more than 10F. above intake
temperature.  In streams designated as trout waters by the
State Game and Fish Commission, there shall be no elevation
or depression of natural stream temperatures.


                        Alabama

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification Public
Water Supply, Swimming, Fish and Wildlife, see pages
251 to 253 and 256 to 257.
     Chattahoochee  River

From Osanippa  Creek to West  Point  Manufacturing Company.


                        Georgia

Interstate Water  Quality  Standards,  classification Fishing,
see page  240 of this report.
                           243

-------
                       Alabama

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification Fish
and Wildlife, see pages 251 to 252 of this report.
     Chattahoochee River

From West Point Manufacturing Company to Alabama-Georgia
State Line.
                       Georgia

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification, Drinking
Water, see page 240 of this report.
                       Alabama

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification, Public
Water Supply, Fish and Wildlife, see pages 251 to 253.
     Chattahoochee River

From West Point Dam (Alabama-Georgia State Line) to Frank-
lin, Georgia.
                       Georgia

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification, Recrea-
tion, see pages 242  to  243 of this report.
     Chattahoochee River

From Franklin, Georgia to Cedar Creek.
                       Georgia

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification, Fishing,
see pages  242 to  243 of this report.
     Chattahoochee River

From Cedar Creek to Atlanta, Georgia.
                           244

-------
                       Georgia

Interstate Water Quality Standards


Industrial
For Processing and cooling water with or without special
treatment; or for any other use requiring water of a lower
quality.
Dissolved Oxygen - A daily average of 3.0 mg/1 and not
less than 2.5 mg/1 at any time.

pH - Within the range of 6.0 - 8.5.

Toxic Substances; Other Deleterious Materials - None in
amounts or concentrations that would prevent fish survival
or interfere with legitimate and beneficial industrial
uses.

Temperature - Not to exceed 93.2F.  (34.0C.) at any time
and not be increased more than 10F. above intake
temperature.


     Chattahoochee River

From Atlanta, Georgia to Buford Dam.


                       Georgia

Interstate Water Quality Standards,  classification, Drinking
Water, see pages 242  to 243  of this report.


     Chattahoochee River

From Buford Dam to Head waters.


                       Georgia

Interstate Water Quality Standards,  classification, Recrea-
tion, see pages 242  to  243 of this report.
                          245

-------
     Flint River

From Jim Woodruff Dam  (Lake Seminole) to Bainbridge U.S.
Highway 84.
                       Georgia

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification, Recrea-
tion, see pages 242  to 243  of this report.
     Flint River

From Bainbridge to Albany, Georgia Power Company Dam at
Lake Worth.
                       Georgia

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification, Fishing,
see pages 243 of this report.


     Flint River

(Upper) from Lake Worth Power Dam to Georgia Highway 27.


                       Georgia

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification, Recrea-
tion, see pages  242 to 243  of this report.
     Flint River

From Georgia Highway 27 to Georgia Highway 16.


                       Georgia

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification, Fishing,
see pages 243 of this report.


     Flint River

From Georgia Highway 16 to S1061, Woolsey Road.
                          246

-------
                       Georgia

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification, Drinking
Water, see pages 242  to  243 of this report.


     Flint River

From Woolsey Road to Georgia Highway No. 54.
                       Georgia

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification, Fishing,
see pages  242 to  243 of this report.


     Flint River

From Georgia Highway No. 54 to Head Waters.


                       Georgia

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification, Indus-
trial, see page  245 of this report^
     Choctawhatchee River

From Choctawhatchee Bay to Alabama-Florida  State Line.


                       Florida

Interstate Water Quality Standards  for  the  Choctawhatchee
River from Choctawhatchee Bay to  the Alabama-Florida State
Line.

The Standards for this reach of the river,  which, is
classified as a Class III  (Recreation,  Fish,  and Wildlife)
are given on pages 249  to 250  of  this report.


     Choctawhatchee River

From the Alabama-Florida State  Line to  its  Source.
                           247

-------
                       Alabama

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Choctawhatchee
River from the Alabama-Florida State Line to its source.
See Fish and Wildlife Classification on pages 251  to
253  of this report.
     Yellow River

From Blackwater Bay to Shoal River.
                       Florida

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Yellow River
from its Mouth to the Shoal River.  See pages 249  to
250  of this report for Classification III (Recreation,
Propagation, and Management of Fish and Wildlife.)
     Yellow River

From the Shoal River to the Alabama-Florida State Line,
also Class III, see pages 249  to 250  of this report.
     Yellow River

From Alabama-Florida State Line to its Source,
                       Alabama

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Yellow River
from the Alabama-Florida State Line to its Source.
This reach of the Yellow River is classified in Alabama
as Fish and Wildlife.  These Standards may be found on
pages  251 to 253  of this report.


     Escambia River

From Escambia Bay to the Alabama State Line.


                       Florida

Interstate Water Quality Standards for that portion of the
Escambia River from its Mouth to the Florida-Alabama State
Line.
                          248

-------
The Escambia throughout this reach is classified as a
water applied to Recreation, Propagation and Management
of Fish and Wildlife.

The following minimum conditions apply to all waters, at
all times and places.

With the State all waters shall be free from:

Settleable Substances - Substances attributable to municipal,
industrial, agricultural or other discharges that will
settle to form putrescent or otherwise objectionable sludge
deposits.

Floating Substances  - Floating debris, oil, scum, and
other floating materials attributable to municipal,
industrial, agricultural, or other discharges in amounts
sufficient to be unsightly or deleterious.

Deleterious Substances - Materials attributable to
municipal, industrial, agricultural  or other discharges
producing color, odor, or other conditions in such degree
as to create a nuisance.

Toxic Substances - Substances attributable to municipal,
industrial, agricultural, or other discharges in concen-
trations or combinations which are toxic or harmful to
human, animal, plant or aquatic life.

Waste Waters Discharged to Coastal Waters will receive
the best practicable treatment.


Criteria:  Class III Waters - Recreation, Propagation and
Management of Fish and Wildlife


pj^ - Of receiving waters shall not be  caused to vary more
than 1  (1.0) unit above or below  normal pH of the waters:
lower values shall not be less than  6.0 and upper values
shall not be more than 8.5.  In cases  where pH may be
due to natural background or causes  outside  limits stated
above, approval of the regulatory agency  shall be secured
prior to introducing such material in  waters of the  State.

Dissolved Oxygen - Shall not be artificially depressed  below
the values of 4.0 ppm  (unless background  information
available to the regulatory agency indicates prior
existence under unpolluted  conditions  of  lower values).
In such cases, lower limits may be utilized  after  approval
by the regulatory authority.   (Waters  of  the open ocean
                           249

-------
shall be maintained at a DO of not less than 5 ppm.
Streams specifically listed in section entitled, "Special
Stream Classification/" shall similarly be maintained at
a minimum DO of 5 ppm.)

Bacteriological - Coliform group not to exceed 1,000/100
ml as a monthly average.   (Either MPN or MF counts); nor
to exceed this number in more than 20% of the samples
examined during any month; nor exceed 2,400/100 ml  (MPN
or MF count) on any day.  This criterion shall apply
only to waters used for body contact activities.

Toxic Substances - See definition above under Minimum
Conditions.

Deleterious Substances - See definition above under
Minimum Conditions.

Turbidity - Shall not exceed 50  (50 J.T.U.) as related to
standard candle turbidimeter above background.

Temperature - Shall not be increased so as to cause any
damage or harm to the aquatic life or vegetation of the
receiving waters or interfere with any beneficial use
assigned to such waters.

A portion of Escambia Bay is classified as a Class  II
Water, suitable for Shellfish Harvesting.  The bulk of the
Bay is classed as Class III, as  is the river.


     Escambia Bay

From Pensacola Bay east of county line and south of L&N
Railroad.
Criteria:  Class II Waters - Shellfish Harvesting


Bacteriological Quality, Coliform Group - Areas classified
for shellfish harvesting, the median coliform MPN of water
cannot exceed 70/100 ml and not more than 10% of the samples
ordinarily exceed an MPN of 230/100 ml in those portions of
areas most probably exposed to fecal contamination during
most unfavorable hydrographic and pollutional conditions.

p_H - See definition under Class III Waters, pages     to
     of this report.

Temperature - See definition under Class III Waters, pages
     to      of this report.
                           250

-------
Dissolved Oxygen - See definition under Class III Waters,
pages 249  to 250  of this report.

Toxic Substances - See definition under Class III Waters,
pages 249  to 250  of this report.

Odor - Threshold odor number not to exceed 24 at 60C as a
daily average.
The Conecuh River is classified throughout its length
from the Alabama-Florida State Line through Point A Dam and
Lake to its source as a Fish and Wildlife stream.  Point
A Dam to the head of Gantt Lake is also classified as a
water suitable for Swimming.
     Conecuh River

From Alabama-Florida State Line to Point A Dam.
                       Alabama

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the portion of the
Conecuh River from the Alabama-Florida State Line to Point
A Dam.
pH - Sewage, industrial wastes or other wastes shall not
cause the pH to deviate more than one unit from the normal
or natural pH nor be less than 6.0 nor greater than 8.5.

Temperature - The ambient temperature of receiving waters,
in degrees F., after reasonable mixing, shall not be
increased by more than 10% by the addition of domestic,
industrial or other wastes nor shall these wastes cause
the temperature of the receiving waters to exceed 90 degrees
F., except that the temperature may be as high as 93 degrees
F. for not more than eight hours during any 24 hour period.

Dissolved Oxygen - Sewage, industrial wastes or other wastes
shall not cause the dissolved oxygen to be less than 4.0
ppm as measured at a depth of 5 feet in water 10 feet or
greater in depth and at mid-depth in waters less than 10
feet deep.

Toxic Substances Attributable to Sewage, Industrial
Wastes, or Other Wastes - Only such amounts, whether
alone or in combination with other substances, as will
not:  be injurious to fish and aquatic life including
                            251

-------
shrimp and crabs in estuarine or salt waters or the
propagation thereof; not to exceed one-tenth of the
48-hour median tolerance limit for fish and aquatic life
including shrimp and crabs in salt and estuarine waters
except that other limiting concentrations may be used
when factually justified and approved by the Commission.

Taste, Odor and Color Producing Substances Attributable
to Sewage, Industrial Waste and Other Wastes - Only such
amounts, whether alone or in combination with other sub-
stances as will not be injurious to fish and aquatic life
including shrimp and crabs in estuarine and salt waters
or adversely affect the propagation thereof:  impair the
palatability or marketability of fish and wildlife or
shrimp and crabs in estuarine and salt waters; unreasonably
affect the aesthetic value of waters for any use under
this classification.
     Conecuh River

From Point A Lake to Head of Gantt Lake.
Alabama Water Quality Standard Criteria  (Swimming and
Other Whole Body Water-Contact Sports)
pH - See Fish and Wildlife classification above, pages
249  to 250 of this report.

Temperature - See Fish and Wildlife classification above,
pages 249 to 250 of this report.

Dissolved Oxygen - See Fish and Wildlife classification
above, pages 249 to 250 of this report.

Toxic Substances; Color Producing Substances; Odor Producing
Substances; or Other Deleterious Substances Attributable
to Sewage, Industrial Wastes or Other Wastes - Only such
amounts, whether alone or in combination with other
substances or wastes, as will not:  render the water
unsafe or unsuitable for swimming and water-contact
sports:  be injurious to fish, wildlife and aquatic life
or, where applicable, shrimp and crabs; impair the
palatability of fish, or, where applicable, shrimp and
crabs; impair the waters for any other usage established
for this classification or unreasonably affect the aesthetic
value of waters for any use under this classification.
                           252

-------
Bacteria - Waters in the immediate vicinity of discharges
of sewage or other wastes likely to contain bacteria
harmful to humans, regardless of the degree of treatment
afforded these wastes are not considered acceptable for
swimming or other whole body water-contact sports.  In
the event there are discharges of sewage or other wastes
likely to contain bacteria harmful to humans to waters
within the watershed above the point of use for swimming
and other whole body water-contact sports, the following
bacteriological criteria are to apply:  bacteria of the
fecal coliform group not to exceed 1,000 per 100 milli-
liters  (MPN or MF count) as a monthly average value during
the months of May through September, nor exceed this value
in any two consecutive samples collected during these
months.  In the event a sanitary survey reveals no
discharges of sewage or other wastes likely to contain
bacteria harmful to humans within the watershed above
the point of use for swimming and other whole body water-
contact sports, these bacteriological criteria, at the
discretion of the Commission, may not apply.

This reach of the Conecuh River is also classified suitable
for Fish and Wildlife.  The criteria in the lower reach of
the river would apply as well.  See pages      to
of this report.
     Conecuh River

From the Head of Gantt Lake to its source.


This reach of the Conecuh River is also classified as Fish
and Wildlife.  See page 252 of this report.


     Perdido River

From Perdido Bay to its Source.
                       Alabama

Interstate Water Quality Standards classification, Fish and
Wildlife, see pages 249  to  250 of this report.
     Perdido River

From Perdido Bay to Florida-Alabama State Line.
                           253

-------
                       Florida

Interstate Water Quality Standards, Classification III,
Recreation, Propagation and Management of Fish and Wildlife,
see pages 249  to 250  of this report.
     Mobile River and Mobile Bay

 (Mobile Bay is divided into three portions, all of which
are suitable for Fish and Wildlife.  The Fish and Wildlife
classifications for Alabama have been given, see pages
251  to 252 of this report.
     Mobile Bay

That portion lying south of a line extending in an easterly
direction from the south bank of East Fowl River at its
Mouth through a lighted beacon  (SL 2 sec.) to lighted
beacon  (FLG 4 sec. "23") at the Mobile Ship Canal, then in
a northeasterly direction to Daphne.  Alabama Interstate
Water Quality Standards Shellfish Harvesting and Fish and
Wildlife.  For Fish and Wildlife classifications see pages
251  to 252 of this report.
Shellfish Harvesting
pH - Sewage, industrial wastes or other wastes shall not
cause the pH to deviate more than one unit from the normal
or natural pH nor be less than 6.5 nor greater than 8.5.

Temperature - The ambient temperature of receiving waters,
in degrees F., after reasonable mixing, shall not be
increased by more than 10 percent by the addition of
domestic/ industrial or other wastes nor shall these wastes
cause the temperature of the receiving waters to exceed 90
degrees F.f except that the temperature may be as high as
93 degrees Fahrenheit for not more than 8 hours during any
24 hour period.

Dissolved Oxygen - Sewage, industrial wastes or other
wastes shall not cause the dissolved oxygen to be less
than 4.0 ppm as measured at a depth of 5 feet in waters
10 feet or greater in depth and at mid-depth in waters
less than 10 feet in depth.
                           254

-------
Toxic Substances Attributable to Sewage/ Industrial Waste
or Other Wastes - Only such amounts, whether alone or in
combination with other substances, as will not:  be
injurious to fish and aquatic life, including shrimp and
crabs; affect the marketability of fish and shellfish,
including shrimp and crabs; exceed one-tenth of the 48 hour
median tolerance limit for fish, aquatic life or shellfish
including shrimp and crabs.

Color, Taste and Odor Producing Substances and Other
Deleterious Substances Attributable to Sewage, Industrial
Wastes or Other Wastes - Only such amounts, whether alone
or incombination with other substances, as will not:
be injurious to fish and shellfish, including shrimp and
crabs; adversely affect marketability or palatability of
fish and shellfish, including shrimp and crabs; unreason-
ably affect the aesthetic value of waters for any use under
this classification.

Bacteria - Not to exceed the limits specified in the latest
edition of the National Shellfish Sanitation Program
Manual of Operations, Sanitation of Shellfish Growing Areas,
published by the Public Health  Service, U. S. Department
of Health, Education and Welfare.
     Mobile Bay

South of the  line  drawn  due  east  from  the  Mouth of Dog
River and east of  the  line drawn  due south from the western
shore of Chacaloochee  Bay and all other  portions of Mobile
Bay.


Fish and Wildlife  -  See  pages 2$1  to  252   of  this report.

Swimming - See pages 252 to 253   of this  report.


     Mobile Bay

West of a line drawn due south from the  western shore of
Chacaloochee  Bay to  a point  due east of  the mouth of Dog
River.


Fish and Wildlife  -  See  pages 251  to  253   of  this report.


     Mobile River

From its Mouth to  Spanish River.
                            255

-------
Agricultural and Industrial Water Supply
pH - Sewage, industrial waste or other wastes shall not
cause the pH to deviate more than one unit from the normal
or natural pH nor be less than 6.0 nor greater than 8.5.

Temperature - The ambient temperature of receiving
waters, in degrees F. , after reasonable mixing, shall not
be increased by more than 10% by the addition of domestic,
industrial or other wastes nor shall these wastes cause
the temperature of the receiving waters to exceed 90F.,
except that the temperature may be as high as 93F. for
not more than 8 hours during any 24 hour period.

Dissolved Oxygen - Sewage, industrial waste or other
wastes shall not cause the dissolved oxygen to be less
than 2.0 ppm as measured at a depth of 5 feet in waters
10 feet or greater in depth and at mid-depth in waters
less than 10 feet in depth.

Color, Odor and Taste Producing Substances, Toxic
Substances, and Other Deleterious Substances, Including
Chemical Compounds, Attributable to Sewage, Industrial
Wastes and Other Wastes - Only such amounts as will not
render the waters unsuitable for agricultural irrigation,
livestock watering, industrial cooling, industrial process
water supply purposes and fish survival.
     Mobile River

From Barry Steam Plant to Tensaw River.
Fish and Wildlife - See pages 251  to 252  of this
report.
Public Water Supply
pH - Sewage, industrial waste or other wastes shall not
cause the pH to deviate more than one unit from the
normal or natural pH nor be less than 6.0 nor greater
than 8.5

Temperature - The ambient temperature of receiving waters,
in degress F., after reasonable mixing, shall not be
increased by more than 10% by the addition of domestic,
industrial or other wastes nor shall these wastes cause
                           256

-------
the temperature of the receiving waters to exceed 90F,
except that the temperature may be as high as 93F. for not
more than 8 hours during any 24 hour period.

Dissolved Oxygen - Sewage, industrial waste or other
wastes shall not cause the dissolved oxygen to be less than
4.0 ppm as measured at a depth of 5 feet in waters 10 feet
or greater in depth and at mid-depth in waters less than
10 feet in depth.

Toxic Substances; Color Producing Substances; Heated
Liquids; or Other Deleterious Substances Attributable to

Sewage, Industrial Wastes or Other Wastes - Only such
amounts, whether alone or in combination with other
substances, and only such temperatures as will not render
the waters unsafe or unsuitable as a source of water
supply for drinking or food-processing purposes, or
injurious to fish, wildlife and aquatic life, or adversely
affect the aesthetic value of waters for any use under
this classification.

Taste and Odor Producing Substances Attributable to Sewage,
Industrial Wastes, or Other Wastes - Only such amounts,
whether alone or in combination with other substances or
wastes, as will not, cause taste and odor difficulties
in water supplies which cannot be corrected by treatment
as specified under "Conditions Related to Best Usage,"
or impair the palatability of fish.

Bacteria - In the event there are discharges of sewage, or
other wastes likely to contain bacteria harmful to humans,
to waters within the watershed above the point of taking
water for purposes of public water supply or waters for
food-processing purposes, after conventional treatment,
the following bacteriological criteria are to apply:
bacteria of the fecal coliform group not to exceed 5,000
per 100 ml (either MPN or MF count) as a monthly average
value; nor exceed this number in more than 20% of the
samples examined during any month; nor exceed 20,000 per
100 ml in more than 5% of the samples examined during one
month.
     Alabama River

From Mobile River to Claiborne Lock and Dam.
                           257

-------
                       Alabama

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the above reach.


Fish and Wildlife - see pages  251 to 252 of this report.


     Alabama River

From Claiborne Lock and Dam to Frisco Railroad Crossing.


                       Alabama

Interstate Water Quality Standards.


Swimming - See pages 252 to 253 of this report.

Fish and Wildlife - See pages  251 to 252 of this report.


     Alabama River

From-Frisco Railroad Crossing to Miller's Ferry Lock and
Dam.


                       Alabama

Interstate Water Quality Standards.


Fish and Wildlife - See pages 251 to 252 of this report.


     Alabama River

From Miller's Ferry Lock and Dam to Blackwell Bend  (Six Mile
Creek).


Swimming - See pages  252to 253 of this report.

Fish and Wildlife - See pages 251 to 252 of this report.


     Alabama River

From Blackwell Bend to Jones Bluff Lock and Dam.
                           258

-------
Fish and Wildlife - See pages 251 to 252 of this report.


     Alabama River

From Jones Bluff Lock and Dam to Pintlalla Creek.


Swimming - See pages 252 to 253 of this report.

Fish and Wildlife - See pages 251 to 252 of this report.


     Alabama River

From Pintlalla Creek to its Source.


Fish and Wildlife - See pages 251 to 252 of this report.


     Tombigbee River

From the Mobile River to One Mile Downstream from U.S. High-
way 43 .


                      Alabama

Interstate Water Quality Standards.


Fish and Wildlife - See pages  251 to 252 of this report.


     Tombigbee River

One Mile Downstream from U.S. Highway 43 to Five Miles Up-
stream from U.S. Highway 43.
Public Water Supply, Swimming, Fish and Wildlife - See pages
256   to 257 and 251  to 253  of this report.
     Tombigbee River

Five Miles Upstream from U.S. Highway 43 to Jackson Lock and
Dam.
                           259

-------
Fish and Wildlife - See pages  251 to  252 of this report.


     Tombigbee River

From Jackson Lock and Dam to Beach Bluff.
Swimming, Fish and Wildlife - See pages 251  to 253  of this
report.
     Tombigbee River

From Beach Bluff to Demopolis Lock and Dam.


Fish and Wildlife - See pages  251 to 252  of this report.


     Tombigbee River

From Demopolis Lock and Dam to Warrior River.


Swimming, Fish and Wildlife - See pages 251 to 253 of this
report.


     Upper Tombigbee River

From Junction with Warrior River to Cobb Creek.


                      Alabama

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Upper Tombigbee
River from Warrior River to Cobb Creek.  Classification
Swimming, Fish and Wildlife - See pages 251  to 253  of this
report.


     Upper Tombigbee River

From Cobb Creek to Alabama-Mississippi State Line.


Fish and Wildlife - See pages 251  to 253  of this report.
                            260

-------
     Upper Tombigbee River

From Mississippi-Alabama State Line to its Headwaters (East
Fork).
                    Mississippi

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification Fish and
Wildlife - See pages 262 to 263 of this report.  See also
minimum condition applicable to all waters, page 261 of this
report.

     P as c agou1a River

Basin and Pascagoula Bay.


Minimum Conditions Applicable to All Waters
Free from substances attributable to municipal, industrial,
agricultural or other discharges that will settle to form
putrescent or otherwise objectionable sludge deposits.

Free from floating debris, oil, scum and other floating
materials attributable to municipal, industrial, agricultural
or other discharges in amounts sufficient to be unsightly
or deleterious.

Free from materials attributable to municipal, industrial,
agricultural or other discharges producting color, odor,
or other conditions in such degree as to create a nuisance.

Free from substances attributable to municipal, industrial,
agricultural or other discharges in concentrations or
combinations which are toxic or harmful to humans, animal,
or aquatic life.

Municipal wastes, industrial wastes, or other wastes shall
receive effective treatment or control  (secondary or
equivalent) in accordance with the latest practical
technological advances and shall be approved by the
Commission.  A degree of treatment greater than secondary
will be required when necessary to protect legitimate water
uses.
                    Mississippi

Interstate Water Quality Standards for Pascagoula Bay.
                            261

-------
Criteria:  Agricultural and Industrial Water Supplies

Waters in this classification will be suitable for
agricultural irrigation and livestock watering, industrial
cooling and process water supplies, fish survival and other
uses, except fish and wildlife propagation, water contact
sports and source of potable water supply.
Dissolved Oxygen - There shall be no oxygen demanding sub-
stances added which will depress the dissolved oxygen
content below 3.0 mg/1.

pH - The pH shall not be caused to vary more than 1.0
unit above or below normal pH of the waters and lower
value shall be not less than 6.0 and upper value not more
than 8.5.

Temperature - Shall not be increased more than ten degrees
F (10F) above the natural prevailing background tempera-
tures, nor exceed a maximum of 93F after reasonable
mixing.

Specific Conductance - There shall be no substances added
to increase the conductivity above 1,000 micromhos/cm
for fresh water streams.

Dissolved Solids - There shall be no substances added to
the waters to cause the dissolved solids to exceed 750
mg/1 as a monthly average value, nor exceed 1,500 mg/1
at any time.
     Pascagoula River

From Pascagoula Bay to Confluence of Escatawpa River.  See
Agricultural and Industrial Classification, pages 261 to
262.
     Pascagoula River

From Confluence of Escatawpa River to River Mile 53.


                    Mississippi

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Pascagoula River
from the Confluence of the Escatawpa River to River Mile 53,
                            262

-------
Fish and Wildlife

Waters in this classification are intended for fishing,
propagation of fish, aquatic life and wildlife and any
other uses requiring water of lesser quality.

Dissolved Oxygen - There shall be no oxygen demanding sub-
stances added which will depress the D.O. content below
4.0 mg/1.

g>H - See Agricultural and Industrial Uses, pages 261
to 262   of this report.

Temperature - See Agricultural and Industrial Uses, pages
261    to 262   of this report.

Specific Conductance - See Agricultural and Industrial
Uses, pages  261  to  262  of this report.

Dissolved Solids - See Agricultural and Industrial Uses,
pages  261  to  262  of this report.

Toxic Substances - There shall be no substances added to
the waters to exceed one-tenth  (1/1Oth) of the 48 hour
median tolerance limit.

Taste and Odor - There shall be  no substance added, whether
alone or in combination with other substances, that will
impair the palatability of fish  or unreasonably affect the
aesthetic value of the water.

Phenolic Compounds - There shall be no substances added
which will cause the phenolic  content to  exceed 0.05 mg/1
 (phenol).
     Pearl  River

From its mouth  at  Lake  Borgne  to  a point ten miles down-
stream from Jackson,  Mississippi.


                      Mississippi

Interstate  Water Quality Standards, classification Recrea-
tion.
                            263

-------
Recreation

Waters in this classification are to be used for recrea-
tional purposes, including such water contact activities
as swimming and water skiing.  The waters shall also be
suitable for use for which waters of lower quality will be
satisfactory.

In assigning this classification to waters intended for
water contact sports, the Commission will take into
consideration the relative proximity of discharge of wastes
and will recognize the potential hazards involved in locat-
ing swimming areas close to waste discharges.  The Commission
will not assign this classification to waters, the bacterial
quality of which is dependent upon adequate disinfection of
waste and where the interruption of such treatment would
render the waters unsafe for water contact sports.

Dissolved Oxygen - There shall be no oxygen demanding sub-
stances added which will depress the D.O. content below
4.0 mg/1.

pH - The pH shall not be caused to vary more than 1.0 unit
above or below normal pH of the waters and lower value shall
be not less than 6.0 and upper value not more than 8.5.

Temperature - Shall not be increased more than ten degrees F
(10F) above the natural prevailing background temperatures,
nor exceed a maximum of 93F after reasonable mixing.

Bacteria - Fecal coliform not to exceed 1000 per 100 ml as
a monthly average value (either MPN or MF count); nor
exceed this number in more than twenty percent  (20%) of the
samples examined during any month; nor exceed 2,400 per 100
ml (MPN or MF count) on any day.

Specific^ Conductance - There shall be no substances added
to increase the conductivity above 1000 micromhos/cm for
fresh water streams.

Dissolved Solids - There shall be no substances added to the
waters to cause the dissolved solids to exceed 750 mg/1 as a
monthly average value, nor exceed 1500 mg/1 at any time.

Toxic Substances, Color, Taste and Odor Producing Substances -
There shall be no substances added, whether alone or in
combination with other substances, that will render the waters
unsafe or unsuitable for water contact activities, or impair
the use of waters requiring lesser quality.
                           264

-------
                      Louisiana

Interstate Water Quality Standards.

This portion of the Pearl River, which forms the border
of Louisiana and Mississippi is divided into two zones and
by Louisiana Stream Control Commission.

Zone One - That portion of the Pearl River above the upper-
most point of influx of marine water with tidal action.

General Criteria - Wastes after discharge to the Pearl
River shall not create conditions which will adversely
affect public health or use of the water for the following
purposes:  domestic or industrial water supply, propagation
of aquatic life, agricultural water, recreation, and other
legitimate uses .

Specific Criteria

   - With the range of 6.0 - 8.5.
Dissolved Oxygen - Not less than 50% of saturation at exist-
ing water temperature.

Temperature - Not to be raised more than 3C above normal
ambient water temperature nor exceed a maximum of 36C.

Oils - There shall be no slicks of free or floating oil
present in sufficient quantities to interfere with the
designated uses, nor shall emulsified oils be present in
sufficient quantities to interfere with the designated
uses.

Toxic Materials - None present in quantities that alone or
in combination will be toxic to animal or plant life.  In
all cases, the level shall not exceed TLM48/10.

Taste and Odor - Below levels of detection following normal
water treatment and below levels that will produce objection-
able odor in food fish and seafood.

Col i forms (MPN/100 ml) - The monthly median shall not exceed
1,600/100 ml nor shall this count exceed 5,420/100 ml in
more than 10% of the samples in any one month.

Foaming or Frothing Materials - None of a persistent
nature .
                           265

-------
Floating, Suspended, and Settleable Solids - None that
will produce floating masses, sludge banks, or beds on
the bottom either organic or inorganic of other than
natural origin.

Other Materials - Limits on other substances not hereto-
fore specified shall be in accordance with recommendations
set by the Louisiana Stream Control Commission and/or the
Louisiana State Board of Health for municipal raw water
sources.

Zone Two - The estuarine area from Lake Borgne to the
uppermost point of influx of marine waters with tidal action

General Criteria - The waters in Zone Two are not suitable
for municipal water supply and most industrial applications
because of their high salt content, a result of tidal
influx of marine waters.  Therefore, it is anticipated
that water use in this zone will be limited to recreation
and propagation of aquatic fauna including shellfish; all
discharges will be such as to assure water of a quality
that is adequate for these purposes.
Specif-ic Criteria

Pjl - Within the range of 6.0 - 9.5.

Dissolved Solids - Not less than 50% of saturation at
existing water temperature.

Temperature - Not to be raised more than 3C above normal
ambient water temperature, nor to exceed a maximum of
36C.

Oils - There shall be no slicks of free or floating oil
present in sufficient quantities to interfere with the
designated uses nor shall emulsified oils be present in
sufficient quantities to interfere with the designated
uses.


     Pearl River

From point ten miles downstream to City of Jackson.


                     Mississippi

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification Fish
and Wildlife, see pages  262  to  263  of this report.
                           266

-------
     Pearl River
From City of Jackson to Barnett Reservoir,
                     Mississippi

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification Public
Water Supply.
Public Water Supply

Water in this classification is for use as a source of raw
water supply for drinking and food processing purposes.
The water treatment process shall be approved by the
Mississippi State Board of Health.  The raw water supply
will be such that after approved treatment process it will
meet the Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards
(latest edition).

Dissolved Oxygen - There shall be no oxygen demanding
substances added which will depress the D.O. content below
4.0 mg/1.

p_H - The pH shall not be caused to vary more than 1.0 unit
above or below normal pH of the waters and lower value shall
be not less than 6.0 and upper value not more than 8.5.

Temperature - Shall not be increased more than ten degrees
F  (10F) above the natural prevailing background tempera-
tures, nor exceed a maximum of 93F after reasonable mixing.

Bacteria - Fecal coliform not to exceed 5,000 per 100 ml as
a monthly average value  (either MPN or MF count); nor to
exceed this number in more than twenty percent  (20%) of the
samples examined during any month; nor to exceed 20,000 per
100 ml in more than five percent  (5%) of such samples.

Chlorides  (Cl~) - There shall be no substances added which
will cause the chloride content to exceed 250 mg/1 in
fresh water streams.

Specific Conductance - There shall be no substances added
to increase the conductivity above 500 micromhos/cm for
fresh water streams.
                           267

-------
Pissolved Sedicts - There shall be no substances added to the
waters to cause the dissolved solids to exceed 500 mg/1.

Threshold Odor - There shall be no substances added which
will cause the threshold odor number to exceed 24  (at 60C)
as a daily average.

Phenolic Compounds - There shall be no substances added
which will cause the phenolic content to be greater than
0.001 mg/1 (phenol).

Radioactive Substances - There shall be no radioactive
substances added to the waters which will cause the gross
beta activity (in the known absence of Strontium-90 and
alpha emitters)  to exceed 1000 micromicrocuries at any
time.

Chemical Constituents - Not to exceed the following concen-
trations at any time:
      Constituent

      Arsenic
      Barium
      Cadmium
      Chromium  (Hexavalent)
      Cyanide
      Fluoride
      Lead
      Selenium
      Silver
Concentration  (mg/1)
0.05
1.0
0.01
0.05
0.2
0.7 -
0.05
0.01





1.2


       0.05
     Pearl River
From Barnett Reservoir to Head Waters.
                     Mississippi

Interstate Water Quality Standards, classification Fish and
Wildlife, see pages 262    to 263    of this report.
                           268

-------
 APPENDIX III - MISSOURI RIVER BASIN


River Basin Descriptions


     Lower Missouri River

The rivers and tributaries to be included in those of the
Lower Missouri River Basin are as follows:

The Lower Missouri River drains Southeastern Wyoming,
Northeastern Colorado, all of Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri,
and Western Iowa.  The Missouri River undercuts its banks
and carries a great amount of silt.  It normally floods
during the spring, dwindles the rest of the year, and
deposits its load as shifting sandbars.  The Missouri River
is a valuable source of hydroelectric power and water for
irrigation.

The area of interest in the present project begins at its
mouth at the Mississippi River and goes upstream to the
Niobrara River, which joins the Missouri River at Niobrara,
Nebraska.  This is approximately 35 miles upstream from the
Gavin's Point Dam on which forms  the Lewis & Clark on the
main stem of the Missouri River.

The section of the river between Kansas City and St. Louis
has manufacturing and related services as the major economic
activity.  The major pollutants are untreated municipal and
industrial wastes.

Over half of the basin population is concentrated in cities.
Agriculture and manufacturing are the major economic
activities in the basin; 45% of the manufacturing activity
is attributed to food processing.  The major pollutant
sources are:  irrigation return flows which is characterized
by nitrates, phosphates, insecticides, suspended sediment,
and organic pollution; feedlot runoff which is characterized
by organic, bacterial pollution, and floating solids; and
municipal wastes which is characterized by bacterial pollu-
tion.

Incoming flows of the Missouri River upstream from Kansas
do not meet quality standards due primarily to large quanti-
ties of untreated meat packing wastes from the city of
Omaha, Nebraska, and uncontrolled land drainage.  There are
construction schedules which should diminish this problem.
                           269

-------
The quality of the water in the Lower Missouri River Basin
does not meet objectives of the basin standards from the
standpoint of dissolved oxygen, coliform bacteria, grease,
and debris.

The cities of Kansas City, Kansas, and Kansas City,
Missouri have recently constructed was,te treatment plants.
Thus, essentially all municipal and industrial wastes of
the Missouri River common to both Kansas and Missouri will
have the equivalent of primary treatment.  It will be
necessary to monitor treated waste discharges from Kansas
City for wastes not amenable to primary treatment.

The Missouri River as it enters the Mississippi River is
very muddy, and discolors the entire river within a short
distance.  The Missouri River is broad with wide curves.
Tne banks of these curves tend to be undercut.  The Corps
of Engineers has built many dikes to protect these banks.
Some are just wood piles whereas others are rock covered
to protect them.  These dikes are built out at an angle
from the bank, especially at the curves.  For flood control,
there are many miles of levees along the banks.

There are many cut-offs which are called sloughs in this
part o'f the country.  These may support high algae
populations.  The Missouri River has some commercial
navigation but very little pleasure boating when compared
to other rivers in this country.  Only two pleasure boats
were observed in use on the lower 500 miles.

There are limestone quarries and mines along the banks in
the section near the Gasconade River.  These could
contribute some alkalinity to the stream.

There are a number of power stations of which some evidence
thermal discharge problems.  Some industrial wastes come
in from the Big Blue River.  There are steel mills and
refineries in this area which have a definite industrial
waste.

There is a nuclear power station being constructed at river
mile 532.5 which could be monitored at least for radiologi-
cal at the proposed Rulo sampling station.

Above river mile 753, the river is considered to be not
navigable at least to commercial craft.  This upper portion
has many islands which are almost mud flats with mud ponds
and channels in them.
                          270

-------
Lewis & Clark Lake has some recreational boating and fish-
ing.  The upper end of this lake at the mouth of the
Niobrara River was the upper limit of the river observed.
    Qsage River

The Osage River is navigable over the lower 200 miles during
high flow.  This river contains large organic loads, high
coliform densities, and floating solids with oxygen deple-
tion and low pH in places.

The channel of the Osage River is deeper than the other
tributaries of the Missouri Rivers.  It does not have the
sandbars or islands that are usually present, and its banks
are straighter and cleaner.  The Osage River is more turbid
than most of its tributaries.

The Bagnel Dam is a hydroelectric structure that also forms
a large recreation area called Lake of the Ozarks.  This
area has many recreational homes and small boats.  Some
pollution is in evidence near the marinas.

The Morais des Cygnes River joins with the Little Osage
River to form the Osage River.  The area drained by the
Morais des Cygnes River is all agricultural with a few small
towns.  There are acid mine drainages periodically, however,
the high turbidity of the river masks these discharges.

The Little Osage River drains an area which is more heavily
wooded than the rest of the Lower Missouri River Basin.
Approximately 40-50% of the land is covered by trees with
the balance in farms.  This small, narrow stream meanders
over these flat lands with banks that are tree-lined.
    Kansas River Basin

The Kansas River receives  effluents  from the  municipal
drainages of  several  cities  and is also a source of  potable
water.  The farm crops  are varied and there are  many
irrigation diversions.   The  lower reach of the river
receives industrial wastes.   In this basin, agriculture,
food processing and agricultural industry services are  the
primary economic activities.   The largest population center
contains only 16%  of  the total basin population  and  major
pollutants are contributed by irrigation return  flows,  feed-
lot runoff, food processing/  and municipalities. Pollution
problems are  indicated  by  oxygen depletion, turbid waters,
                           271

-------
and floating solids.  The one unusual pollution source is
located near DeSota, Kansas, and contributes undesirably
nigh concentrations of lead, nitrates, and sulfates.

All river basins in Kansas are subject to pollution from
agricultural sources.  The primary pollutants in order of
importance are livestock wastes, silt, nutrients, and
pesticides, all of which are associated with uncontrolled
land surface drainage during periods of rainfall.

There are many oxidation lagoons with varieties of
successful treatment.  There are a number of cattle feedlot
operations with and without treatment.  Topeka, although it
is mainly a grain center, has municipal and industrial
wastes.  There are industrial wastes in the Delaware River
and some petrochemical and municipal wastes near Lawrence,
Kansas.  In the Kansas City area, there are more municipal
and industrial wastes.

The Republican River is one of the streams which joins to
form the Kansas River; it contributes low concentrations
of dissolved solids.  The river drains a vast agricultural
area.  Bank erosion is controlled by the use of abandoned
automobile bodies.  The river is navigable to small boats.

In the Nebraska area of the Republican River, there are
some irrigation diversions.  There are small cattle feedlots
and many oxidation lagoons.  The sections of the river in
Nebraska and downstream in Colorado have the characteristics
noted in the Platte, North Platte, and South Platte Rivers.
It is a shallow meandering stream with lush growth near the
stream and sparse growth away from it.  The section within
Colorado is considered to be a temporary stream.  The state
of Colorado has not issued Water Quality Standards for it
specifically; it would, however, be treated under their
general statutes.

The Smoky Hill River joins with the Republican River to form
the Kansas River.  It drains an agricultural area.  The
water quality of the Smokey Hill River exceeds the water
quality standards due to natural chlorides, sulfates, and
total dissolved solids.  There are irrigation returns which
add to the increased mineralization of the stream.  The
portion in Colorado is considered a temporary stream and
drains a praire.  There are places where occasionally the
stream is completely dry with improved roads built over it.
                          272

-------
There are a number of reservoirs which have combined flood
control and irrigation storage capacities.  There is an oil
field near Russell, Kansas which could contribute some waste
problems.  The Saline River contributes to the mineralization
of the Smoky Hill River.
     Platte River Basin

This river basin is similar to the Niobrara River Basin, in
that the major economic activity is agriculture and the
largest population center contains only 13% of the basin
population.  The dissolved solids contributed in the South
Platte subbasin will be diluted somewhat by the North Platte
River.  The Platte River does not appear to be navigable
except to small craft  in a few areas.  These areas are
located on some of the reservoirs and near its mouth.

Pollution problems are indicated by oil, grease, bacteria,
pesticides, soil minerals, and fertilizers which result
in tastes and odors in water supplies withdrawn from the
stream.

There is a major rail  yard in North Platte, Nebraska, and
also a stock yard which seems to have adequate treatment
facilities installed.  There are many irrigation diversions
with considerable sediment and dissolved minerals in the
return flows.  The terrain results in spring floods up to a
mile wide.  The river  channel is filled with sandbars and
islands; these and the banks are tree-lined.  The river
basin is green as are  the irrigated  areas, but the rest of
the land is praire and sand hills.

There are many sugar beet processes  and cattle feedlot
areas.  The adequacy of treatment  is varied.  The eastern
portion of the river basin is farmed to a greater extent
than is the western section.

There are many new lakes  adjacent  to the Platte River which
were formed when sand  and gravel was dredged for use as raw
materials in the construction of an  Interstate Highway
which parallels the stream.  These have a beneficial effect
on the quality of the  stream and provide good recreation
areas.
                            273

-------
     South Platte River Basin

In this basin, 70% of the population is concentrated in
Denver, Colorado.  The major economic activity is food
processing and related services.  A portion of the Denver
municipal water supply is taken from the South Platte
River.  The headwaters originate high .in the mountains
above Denver.  There are some mineral contributions from
old drift and strip mines in the area which contribute
some minerals to the water.

The major pollutants have a high oxygen demand, indicated
by high coliform densities, with floating and suspended
solids.  Pollution problems are indicated by measurable
grease, oil, phenol, and chromium in the stream.

There are 26 municipal sewage treatment plants in the
Metropolitan Denver area.  Four of these plants are for
Federal Institutions.  A large percentage of these
treatment plants are approaching design capacity or have
already exceeded it.

The chief source of recharge to the aquifer is from
seepage of South Platte River water diverted to the
irrigation ditches.  Approximately 50% of this diverted
river water enters the aquifer.  Much of the valley-fill
aquifer in Sand Creek Valley is contaminated by petroleum
waters.

ABS is found through most of the valley-fill aquifer.  The
principle source is sewage-laden recharge water from the
South Platte River, Sand Creek, and Clear Creek.  High
nitrate concentrations occur in and near irrigated low-
land areas.

Approximately 12 square miles in the vicinity of the Rocky
Mountain Arsenal has been contaminated by wastes discharged
into unlined holding ponds and First Creek.  Contaminants
in the aquifer are chloride, fluoride, arsenic, chlorate,
the herbicide 2, 4-D, and the pesticides aldrin and
dieldrin.  Saline water from the shallow contaminated
zone in this vicinity has likely entered the underlying
bedrock aquifers through defective deep wells.  Of the
industrial plants within the South Platte River Basin, over
two-thirds are in the Denver Metropolitan Area.

The meat industry includes many separate plants and the
Denver Union Stockyard Company.  The paunch discharges are
over 125 tons/day.  Some of the paunch are discharged to
the sanitary sewers, and some to the local fertilizer com-
panies and farmers.  There are problems created by the paunch
                           274

-------
going to municipal treatment plants.  New treatment plants
are being built to help out.

Manure in the livestock holding pens in the Denver area,
exclusive of feedlot operations, accumulates at 200 tons/
day.  This waste material is collected and delivered to
local fertilizer companies or to farmers.  Spent livestock
drinking water is discharged to the South Platte River.

Three companies with rendering facilities dispose of part
or all of their wastes from this operation to the South
Platte River.  Most all of meat plants provide some form
of grease removal and recovery.  Some of these facilities
are marginal with excess grease released to the sanitary
sewers or to the South Platte River.

There are two railroad maintenance  yards in the Metropolitan
Denver area that, although they use oil separators before
discharging to the river, contribute substantial quantities
of oil to the river.

Beet sugar wastes are the largest source of pollution with-
in the study area.  Sugar factories are dispersed through-
out the region and affect the water quality in over 300
miles of basin streams.

There are many cattle feedlots along the South Platte River.
These can contribute high BOD  loading as well as high
bacteria counts.

There are a number of reservoirs adjacent to the river
which have water diverted to them,  especially in high flow
periods.  These then supply  low flow augmentation to the
irrigation canals.

Total withdrawals of ground water are estimated at about
1.22 million acre-feet/year.   Agricultural  irrigation is
the largest user of ground  water; withdrawals were approxi-
mately 1.17 million acre-feet  in 1966 and comprised 96%
of the total ground water pumpage in the area.

The South Platte River  is very similar  to the North Platte
and Platte Rivers in stream topography.  It is  a wide
meandering green river  with multi-channels  and many
islands.  The land  is green near the river  and brown else-
where.

The cattle feedlots at  Greeley, Colorado are  among the
largest in the world.   There  is definite evidence  of
increases  in algae  in the  stream below  Greeley.
                            275

-------
The chief source of recharge to the valley-fill aquifers
is from river water delivered to the irrigated lands and
resulting mineral and nutrient seepage from farms, canals,
and reservoirs.  The oil and gas fields produce saline
waste waters which are held or stored in unlined pits.
Seepage from these pits is adversely affecting the quality
of water in unconfined aquifers.

Widespread pollution by ABS exists in the valley-fill
aquifers in the upper part of the main South Platte River
Valley and its southern tributary valleys.  The principle
source of ABS is sewage-laden recharge from the South
Platte River; a major part of the sewage treatment plant
effluents originating in the Denver Metropolitan area.
Septic tanks also contribute ABS to unconfined aquifers.
Manufacture of ABS was discontinued in 1965, but ABS
pollution will continue in the shallow aquifers for
several decades.  Nitrates are contributed by fertilizers,
sewage plant effluents, and feedlots.
     North Platte River Basin

Forty-three percent of the population of this basin is
concentrated in Casper, Wyoming.  Economic activity is
about equally divided among agriculture, manufacturing,
mining, and construction.  The major oxygen-demanding
pollutants originate in population centers.

There is an oil field and a number of processing plants
in the Casper, Wyoming section of the stream which con-
tribute wastes to the stream in places.  There also are
alkali ponds in this section.

In the area of the North Platte River between Torrington,
Wyoming and Bridgeport, Nebraska, the sources of pollution
are municipalities and beet sugar plants.  The pollution
load of the river fluctuates with the beet sugar crops.
Although most of the plants have constructed holding ponds,
levee failures are frequent.

Many areas which were badly polluted have made efforts to
clean up.  There are many recently constructed pollution
control facilities.  There are many cattle feedlots through-
out the basin.  Some of these feedlots have good pollution
control whereas others have none at all.
                           276

-------
There are sections of the river as it passes through Wyom-
ing which are very turbid.  In some of the reservoirs,
there is evidence of phosphates which have increased the
plankton content of the stream.

There are diversions for irrigation and reservoirs for
irrigation storage flows.  These increase the mineraliza-
tion and silting of the water in return flows to the
stream.

The river contains many islands covered with vegetation.
The treelined banks and the area close to the stream are
green.  The land otherwise is very brown with sparse
vegetation.  There are many new oxidation lagoons in
evidence which have heavy algae covers.  There is much
available low-cost land to support this economical method
of treatment.  The headwaters section in Colorado is
devoted to small ranches and resorts.  It drains a valley
at the edge of the Rocky Mountains.


    Niobrara River Basin

This river is included among those protected by the "Wild
Rivers" Act.  It is navigable only by canoe or similar
craft.  In this basin, agriculture and agricultural industry
service are the primary economic activities.  The largest
population center contains only 12% of the total basin
population.  The major pollutants are contributed by irriga-
tion return flows and feedlot runoff and include soil
minerals, fertilizers, pesticides, plant and animal wastes,
and bacteria.  The area near the mouth is farmed whereas
the area in the headwaters contains many cattle ranches.
This stream is shallow with built up islands.  Many of the
bridges are protected at  their bases by abandoned cars and
tires which are held in place by steel cables.
Interstate Water Quality  Standards

    Missouri River

With the borders of  the State  of  Missouri.


                       Missouri

Interstate Water Quality  Standards  for  the Missouri River
from" its mouth  to the Missouri-Kansas State  Line  (River
Mile 367.5).
                           277

-------
Public Water Supply
Bacteria - Fecal Coliform:  MPN shall be less than 2,000/
100 ml.

Dissolved Oxygen - Shall not be less than 4 mg/1.

Temperature - Shall be less than 90F.  The temperature of
the stream shall not be increased or decreased more than
5F.

pH - Shall be between 6.5 and 9.0.

Oil and Grease - Virtually free of oil and grease.

Solids - No noticeable man-made deposits of organic solids.
Free of floating debris, scum, etc., in amounts sufficient
to be unsightly.

Taste and Odor Producing Substances - Shall be limited to
concentrations in the stream that will not interfere with
the production of potable water, or impart unpalatable
flavor to food fish.

Color - No color of other than natural origin that will
cause substantial visible contrast with the natural
appearance of the stream.

Toxic or Detrimental Substances - Shall be limited to non-
toxic or non-detrimental concentrations in the stream.

Radioactive Material - RadiuitT226 shall not be greater than
3 picocuries/1, Strontium~90 shall not be greater than 10
picocuries/1; gross beta concentration (in absence of Sr-90
and alpha emitters) shall not be greater than 1,000 pc/1.

Fluorides - Soluble fluoride less than 1.2 mg/1.


    Missouri River

Between the States of Kansas and Missouri.
                       Missouri

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Missouri River
Between Rj.ver Mile 367.5 and 489.7 are the same as those
found on page 278 of this report.
                          278

-------
                        Kansas

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Missouri River
Between River Mile 367.5 and 489.7.
Public Water Supply


Bacteria - Drinking Water:  MPN shall be less than 20,000/
100 ml.  Body Contact:  MPN shall be less than 1,000/100 ml,

Dissolved Oxygen - Shall not be less than 4 mg/1.

Temperature - Shall be less than 90F.

p_H - Shall be between 6.5 and  8.5.

Oil and Grease - Essentially free of visible oil and
grease.

Solids - No man-made deposits  of solids in the river.  Free
of floating debris, scum, and  other floating materials.

Turbidity - No visible turbidity increase, of other than
natural origin.

Taste and Odor Producing Substances - Shall be limited to
concentrations in the river that will not interfere with
the production of potable water or impart unpalatable
flavor to fish.

Color - Shall be limited to concentrations which will not
be detrimental.


     Missouri River

Between the States of Missouri and Nebraska.


                       Missouri

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Missouri River
Between River Mile 489.7 and 552.8 are the same as those
found on page 278 of this report.
                            279

-------
                       Nebraska

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Missouri River
Between River Mile 489.7 to 552.8 are Class A.
Domestic Water Supply - Class A


pH - The pH shall be between 6.5 and 9.0 and shall not be
changed more than 1.0 unit.

Dissolved Oxygen - Shall be 5.0 mg/1 or greater.

Temperature - Allowable change 5F, May through October;
10F, November through April.  Maximum limit 90F, maximum
rate of change limited to 2 per hour.

Toxic or Detrimental Substances - None alone or in combina-
tion with other substances or wastes in concentration of
such nature as to render the receiving water unsafe or
unsuitable for the designated use.  Raw water shall be of
such quality that after treatment by coagulation, filtra-
tion, sedimentation, the water will meet Public Health
Drinking Water Standards.

Ammonia nitrogen concentrations shall not exceed 3.5 mg/1
in warm water streams where the pH in these streams does
not exceed a pH value of 8.3.  If the pH of a stream
exceeds 8.3, the undissociated ammonium hydroxide as
nitrogen shall not exceed 0.25 mg/1 in warm water streams.

For irrigation use, the boron concentration shall not
exceed 0.75 mg/1.

For toxic materials not specified bioassay methods accept-
able to Nebraska Water Pollution Control Council and FWPCA
will be used.

Bacteria - Coliform group and fecal coliform organisms shall
not exceed a geometric mean of 10,000 total, or 2,000 fecal
coliform bacteria per 100 ml, based on at least 5 samples
per 30 day period.  No more than 20% of samples shall exceed
20,000 total, or 4,000 fecal coliform bacteria.

Taste and Odor Producing Substances - Concentration of sub-
stances shall be less than that amount which would degrade
the water quality for the designated use.  Phenols concen-
tration shall not exceed 0.001 mg/1.
                           280

-------
Shall not contain concentrations of substances which will
render an undesirable taste to fish flesh, or in any other
way make such fish flesh inedible.

Color - No evidence of matter that creates nuisance condi-
tions or is offensive to the senses of sight, touch, smell,
or taste, including color.

Oil and Grease - No residue attributable to waste water or
visible film of oil or globules of grease shall be present.

Solids - None from wastewater sources which will permit
objectionable deposition or be deleterious for the designated
uses.  In no case shall turbidity caused by waste water
impart more than a 10% increase in turbidity to the receiving
water.

TDS shall be less than 600 mg/1 and shall not be changed
more than 10%.

Radioactive Material - Radiological limits shall be in
accordance with the Radiological Health Regulations, 1st
edition, State of Nebraska, 1966.
     Missouri  River

Between the States of  Nebraska and  Iowa.
                        Nebraska

Interstate Water  Quality  Standards  (Class  A)  for  the
Missouri River  Between  River Mile  552.8  and River Mile
734.1 are the same  as those  found  on  pages  280   to
281    of this  report.
                          Iowa

 Interstate Water Quality Standards for the  Missouri  River
 Between  River  Mile 552.8 and River Mile 734.1  are  as
 follows:
Public Water  Supply
                            281

-------
Bacteria - Sanitary survey indicates no presence of sewage,
Bacteriological survey using coliform or other indices
indicates concentrations no higher than those normally
found in these waters when free from pollution by sewage.

Radioactive Substances - Beta activity  (in absence of
Sr-90 and alpha activity) shall be less than 1,000 micro-
microcuries/1.
Chemical Constituents
     Constituent
Concentration (mg/1)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Fluoride
Lead
Phenols
(hexavalent)
Shall
Shall
Shall
Shall
Shall
Shall
Shall
be
be
be
be
be
be
be
less
less
less
less
less
less
less
than
than
than
than
than
than
than
0.
1.
0.
0.
2.
0.
0.
05 mg/1
0 mg/1
0 mg/1
05 mg/1
0 mg/1
05 mg/1
001 mg/1
Aquatic Life
Toxic and Deleterious Substances - All substances toxic
or detrimental to aquatic life shall be limited to non-
toxic or non-detrimental concentrations in the surface
water.
Chemical Constituents
     Constituent

     Ammonia nitrate
     Arsenic
     Barium
     Cadmium
     Chromium  (hexavalent)
     Chromium  (trivalent)
     Copper
     Cyanide
     Lead
     Phenols
Concentration mg/1
Shall
Shall
Shall
Shall
Shall
Shall
Shall
Shall
Shall
Shall
be
be
be
be
be
be
be
be
be
be
less
less
less
less
less
less
less
less
less
less
than
than
than
than
than
than
than
than
than
than
2.
1.
5.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0
0
05
05
0
02
025
10
20
                           282

-------
     Constituent           Concentration mg/1

     Zinc                  Shall be less than 1.0
     Heavy Metals          Shall be less than 5.0
     Temperature           Shall be less than 93F (May -
                             November) shall be less than
                             73F  (December - April)

Dissolved Oxygen - Shall be more than 5 mg/1 during 16 hr./
24 hr. period, shall not be less than 4 mg/1 in any sample.

p_H_ - The pH shall be between 6.8 and 9.0


     Missouri River

Between the States of Nebraska  and South Dakota.


                       Nebraska

Interstate Water Quality Standards  (Class A) for the
Missouri River Between River Mile  734.1 and the Gavins
Point Dam are the same as those found on pages 280 to
281 of this report.


                    South Dakota

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Missouri River
Between River Mile 734.1 and the Gavins Point Dam are as
follows:


Domestic Water Supply and Other Water Uses


Bacteria - MPN shall be less than  1,000/100 ml as a monthly
mean average, shall be less than 2,400/100 for any sample.

Dissolved Oxygen - Shall not be less  than  4 mg/1.

pjl - the pH shall be between 6.5 and  8.8 and shall not be
changed more than 1.0 unit.

Turbidity - Shall be less than  50  J.C.U.
                            283

-------
Temperature - Shall be less than 85F.  The temperature of
the stream shall not be increased or decreased more than
4F.

Dissolved Solids - Shall be less than 1,000 mg/1.

Visible Pollution - No wastes shall be discharged which pro-
duce floating solids, scum, oil slicks, material discolora-
tion, undesirable odors, visible gassing, sludge deposits,
slimes, fungus growth, etc.

Suspended Solids - Shall be less than 90 mg/1.

Toxic Materials - No materials shall be discharged which
produce concentrations of chemicals toxic or humans,
animals, or the most sensitive stage or form of aquatic
life greater than 0.1 times the 96-hour TLm for short
residual compounds or 0.01 times the 96-hour TLm for
accumulative substances.

Radioactive Material - Shall not be permitted in the stream
unless these materials are readily soluble or dispersible.

Nitrates - Shall be less than 45 mg/1.

Alkalinity - Shall be less than 750 mg/1.

Cyanides - Shall be less than 0.02 mg/1.

Hydrogen Sulfide - Shall be less than 0.5 mg/1.

Iron - Total Iron - Shall be less than 0.2 mg/1.


     Marais des Cygnes River

At the Missouri-Kansas State Line.


                       Missouri

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Osage and
Marais des Cygnes Rivers from the Mouth at the Missouri
River to the Missouri-Kansas State Line.
Public Water Supply
                            284

-------
Bacteria - Fecal coliform shall not exceed 200/100 ml
(either MPN or MF) .  Not more than 10% of the total samples
in a month should exceed 400/100 ml (MPN or MF).

Dissolved Oxygen - Shall not be less than 5 mg/1.

Temperature - Shall not be greater than 90F.

pH - Shall be between 6.5 and 8.5.

Oil and Grease - Virtually free of oil and grease.

Solids - a) No noticeable man-made deposits of either
organic or inorganic solids on the stream bed.  b)  Free
of floating debris, scum, etc., in amounts sufficient to
be unsightly.

Taste and Odor Producing Substances - Shall be limited to
concentrations in the stream that will not interfere with
the production of potable water or impart unpalatable
flavor to food fish.

Turbidity - No turbidity of other than natural origin that
will cause substantial visible contrast with the natural
appearance of the stream.

Color - No color  of other than natural origin that will
cause substantial visible contrast with the natural
appearance of the stream.

Toxic or Detrimental Substances - Shall be limited to non-
toxic or non-detrimental concentrations in the stream.

Radioactive Material - Radium-226 shall not be greater
than 3 pico curies/1.  Strontium-90 shall not be greater
than 10 pico curies/1 gross beta  concentrations  (in
absence of Sr-90  and alpha emitters)  shall not be greater
than 1,000 pc/1.

Fluorides - Soluble fluoride shall not be greater than
1.2 mg/1.
                         Kansas

Interstate Water  Quality Standards  for the  Marais des
Crygnes River.
                            285

-------
Public Water Supply


Bacteria - a)  Drinking water:  MPN shall not be greater
than 20,000/100 ml.  b)  Body contact:  MPN shall not be
greater than 1,000/100 ml.

Dissolved Oxygen - Shall be less than 5 mg/1.

Temperature - Shall be greater than 90F.

p_H - Shall be between 6.5 and 8.5.

Oil and Grease - Essentially free of visible oil and
grease.

Solids - a)  No man-made deposits of solids,  b)  Free of
floating debris, scum, and other floating materials.

Taste and Odor Producing Substances - Shall be limited to
concentrations in the river that will not interfere with
the production of potable water or impart unpalatable
flavor to fish.

Turbidity - No visible turbidity increase of other than
natural origin.

Color - Shall be limited to concentrations which will not
be detrimental.
     Kansas River

All of which is within the State of Kansas.
                        Kansas

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Kansas River
from its Mouth at the Missouri River to the Confluence of
the Republican and the Smokey Hill Rivers.
Public Water Supply, etc.
                           286

-------
Bacteria - Drinking water:  MPN shall not be greater than
20,000/100 ml.  Body contact:  MPN shall not be greater
than 1,000/100 ml.

Dissolved Oxygen - DO shall be 5 mg/1 or above.

Temperature - Temperature shall not be above 90F.

pH - Shall be between 6.5 and 8.5.

Oil and Grease - Essentially free of visible oil and grease.

Solids - No man-made deposits of solids in the river.  Free
of floating debris, scum, and other floating materials.

Turbidity - No visible turbidity increase, of other than
natural origin.

Taste and Odor Producing  Substances - Shall be limited to
concentrations in the river that will not interfere with
the production of potable water or impart unpalatable flavor
to fish.

Color - Shall be limited  to concentrations which will not
be detrimental.


     Smokey Hill River

Within the State of Kansas.


                        Kansas

Interstate Water Quality  Standards for the Smokey Hill
River within Kansas.


Public Water Supply


Bacteria - Drinking water MPN shall be less than  20,000/
100 ml.  Body contact MPN shall be less than 1,000/100 ml.

Dissolved Oxygen - Shall  be  5 mg/1 or greater.

Temperature - Shall be less than  90F.
                           287

-------
pH - Shall be between 6.5 and 8.5.

Oil and Grease - Essentially free of visible oil and grease.

Solids - No man-made deposits of solids.  Free of floating
debris, scum, and other floating materials.

Taste and Odor Producing Substances - Shall be limited to
concentrations in the river that will not interfere with the
production of potable water or impart unpalatable flavor to
fish.

Turbidity - No visible turbidity increase of other than
natural origin.

Color - Shall be limited to concentrations which will not
be detrimental.
     Lower Republican River

At the Kansas-Nebraska State Line near Hardy, Nebraska.


                        Kansas

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Lower Republican
River from its Mouth at the Kansas River to the Kansas-
Nebraska State Line.


Public Water Supply


Bacteria - Drinking water shall be less than 20,000/100 ml.
Body contact shall be less than 1,000/100 ml.

Dissolved Oxygen - Shall be greater than 5 mg/1.

Temperature - Shall be less than 90F.

pjl - Shall be between 6.5 and 8.5.

Oil and Grease - Essentially free of visible oil and grease.

Solids - No man-made deposits of solids in the river.  Free
of floating debris, scum, and other floating materials.
                           288

-------
Turbidity - No visible turbidity increase of other than
natural origin.

Taste and Odor Producing Substances - Shall be limited to
concentrations in the river that will not interfere with
the production of potable water, or impart unpalatable
flavor to fish.

Color - Shall be limited to concentrations which will not
be detrimental.
                       Nebraska

Interstate Water Quality Standards  (Class "C") for the
Republican River as it flows within Nebraska.
Agricultural, Industrial, etc.
Bacteria - Coliform group  and  fecal coliform organisms
shall not exceed  a geometric mean  10,000 total or 2,000
fecal coliform bacteria per 100 ml, based on at least 5
samples per  30 day period.  No more than 20% of samples
shall exceed 20,000 total  or 4,000 fecal coliform
bacteria.

Dissolved Oxygen  - Oxygen  consuming waste shall not lower
the dissolved oxygen  in the receiving  stream lower than
5 mg/1 in warm water  streams and 6 mg/1 in a trout stream.

Temperature  - Allowable change 5F, May through October;
10F, November through April.  Maximum limit 90F, maximum
rate of change limited to  2 per hour.

p_H_ - Hydrogen ion concentrations expressed as pH shall be
maintained between 6.5 and 9.0 with a  maximum total change
of 1.0 pH unit from the value  in the receiving stream.

Oil and Grease -  No residue attributable to wastewater or
visible film of oil or gloubles of grease shall be present.

Solids - A point  source discharge  shall not increase the
total dissolved solids concentration of a receiving water
by more than 20%, this value shall not exceed 100 mg/1,
and in no case shall  the  total dissolved solids of a stream
exceed 1,500 mg/1.  For irrigation use, the SAR value and
                            289

-------
conductivity shall not be greater than a C3-S2 class irriga-
tion water as shown in Figure 25 of Agricultural Handbook
60.

Turbidity - None from wastewater sources which will permit
objectionable deposition or be deleterious for the designated
uses.  In no case shall turbidity caused by wastewater impart
more than a 10% increase in turbidity to the receiving water.

Taste and Odor Producing Substances - Concentration of sub-
stances shall be less than that amount which would degrade
the water quality for the designated use.  Phenols concentra-
tion shall not exceed 0.001 mg/1.  Shall not contain concen-
tration of substances which will render an undesirable taste
to fish flesh, or in any other way make such fish flesh
inedible.

Aesthetic Considerations - No evidence of matter that creates
nuisance conditions or is offensive to the senses of sight,
touch, smell, or taste, including color.

Toxic and Deleterious Substances - None alone or in combina-
tion with other substances or wastes in concentration of
such nature as to render the receiving water unsafe or
unsuitable for the designated use.  Raw water shall be of
such quality that after treatment by coagulation, filtration,
sedimentation, the water will meet Public Health Drinking
Water Standards.  Radiological limits shall be in accordance
with the Radiological Health Regulations, 1st Edition, State
of Nebraska, 1966.  Ammonia nitrogen concentrations shall
not exceed 3.5 mg/1 in warm water streams where the pH in
these streams does not exceed a pH value of 8.3.  If the
pH of a stream exceeds 8.3, the undissociated ammonium
hydroxide as nitrogen shall not exceed 0.25 mg/1 in warm
water streams.  For irrigation use, the boron concentration
shall not exceed 0.75 mg/1.  For toxic materials not speci-
fied bioassay methods acceptable to Nebraska Water Pollution
Control Council and FWPCA will be used.
     Upper Republican River

At the Nebraska-Kansas State Line near Benkelman, Nebraska.


                       Nebraska

Interstate Water Quality Standards  (Class "C") for the
Republican River as it flows within Nebraska can be found
on pages 289   to 290   of this report.
                           290

-------
                        Kansas

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the Upper Republican
River as it flows from the Nebraska-Kansas State Line to
the Kansas-Colorado State Line.
Agricultural, Aquatic Life


Bacteria - MPN shall not be greater than 1,000/100 ml.

Temperature - Shall not be above 90F.

pH - Shall be between 6.5 and  8.5.

Oil and Grease - Essentially free of visible oil and grease.

Solids - No man-made deposits  of solids in the river.  Free
of floating debris, scum, and  other floating materials.

Turbidity - No turbidity other than natural origin.

Taste and Odor Producing Substances -  Shall be limited to
concentrations in  the receiving water  that will not inter-
fere with the production of potable water or impart
unpalatable flavor to fish.


     Upper Republican River

At the Kansas-Colorado State Line.


                        Kansas

Interstate Water Quality Standards  for the Upper Republican
River as it flows  to the Kansas-Colorado State Line are
found on page 290  of this report.


                       Colorado

Interstate Water Quality Standards  for the Republican  River
from the Kansas-Colorado State Line to its Source.


Fish and Wildlife., Irrigation


Temperature -  Shall be  less  than  90F.
                             291

-------
ph - Shall be between 6.5 and 8.5.

Oil and Grease - Free from floating debris, oil, grease,
scum, etc.

Solids - Shall not exceed 3,000 mg/1.

Turbidity - No turbidity in concentration that will impair
natural or developed fisheries.

Taste and Odor Producing Substances - Free from materials
attributable to controllable sources that will produce off-
flavor in the flesh of fish.

Dissolved Oxygen - Shall not be less than 5 mg/1.

Toxic Material - Free from biocides', toxic, or other
deleterious substances attributable to controllable sources
in concentrations or combinations which are harmful to
aquatic life and crop life.
     Platte River
Within the State of Nebraska.
                       Nebraska

Interstation Water Quality Standards for the Platte River
to the Confluence of the North Platte and the South Platte
Rivers can be found on pages 289   to 290   of this
report.
     South Platte River

At the Nebraska-Colorado State Line.
                       Nebraska

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the South Platte
River from the Mouth at the Platte River to the Nebraska-
Colorado State Line.
Industrial, Irrigation


Dissolved Oxygen - D.O. shall be  5 mg/1 or greater,
                            292

-------
pH - The pH shall be between 6.5 and 9.0 and shall not be
changed more than 1.0 unit.

Turbidity - None from wastewater sources which will permit
objectionable deposition or be deleterious for the desig-
nated uses.  In no case shall turbidity caused by wastewater
impart more than a 10% increase in turbidity to the receiv-
ing water.

Temperature - Allowable change 5F, May through October;
10F,November through April.  Maximum limit 90F; maximum
rate of change limited to  2F per hour.

Total Dissolved Solids - TDS shall not exceed 1,500 mg/1
in the stream.  TDS shall  not be increased more than 20%
or raised by 100 mg/1.

Toxic Material - None alone or in combination with other
substances or wastes in concentration of such nature so as
to render the receiving water unsafe or unsuitable for the
designated use.  Raw water shall be of such quality that
after treatment by coagulation, filtration, sedimentation,
the water will meet Public Health Drinking Water Standards.
Radiological limits shall  be in accordance with the Radio-
logical Health Regulations, 1st Edition, State of Nebraska,
1966.  Ammonia nitrogen concentrations shall not exceed
3.5 mg/1 in warm water streams where the pH in these streams
does not exceed a pH value of 8.3.  If the pH of a stream
exceeds 8.3, the undissociated ammonium hydroxide as nitro-
gen shall not exceed 0.25  mg/1 in warm water streams.  For
irrigation use, the boron  concentration shall not exceed
0.75 mg/1.  For toxic materials not specified bioassay
methods acceptable to Nebraska Water Pollution Control
Council and FWPCA will be  used.

Bacteria - Coliform group  and fecal coliform organisms shall
not exceed a geometric mean  10,000 total or 2,000 fecal
coliform bacteria per 100  ml, based on  at  least 5 samples
per 30 day period.  No more  than  20% of samples shall exceed
20,000 total of 4,000 fecal  coliform bacteria.

Taste and Odor Producing Substances - Concentration of  sub-
stances shall be less than that amount which would degrade
the water quality for the  designated use.   Phenols concen-
tration shall not exceed 0.001 mg/1.  Shall not contain
concentrations of substances which will render an undesirable
taste to  fish flesh, or in any  other way make such fish  flesh
inedible.
                             293

-------
Residue Oil and Floating Substances - No residue attribut-
able to wastewater or visible film of oil or globules of
grease shall be present.
                       Colorado

Interstate Water Quality Standards for.the South Platte
River at the Nebraska-Colorado State Line.
Fish and Wildlife (Warm Waters)


Dissolved Oxygen - Shall not be less than 5 mg/1.

gH - Shall be between 6.5 and 8.5.

Turbidity - No turbidity shall exist in concentrations that
will impair natural and developed fisheries.

Temperature - Shall not be above 90F.

Toxic Material - Free from biocides, toxic, or other
deleterious substances attributable to controllable sources
in concentrations or combinations which are harmful to
aquatic life.

Taste and Odor Producing Substances - Free from materials
attributable to controllable sources that will produce
odor, in the water, or produce an appreciable change in the
existing color, taste, turbidity.

Residue Oil and Floating Substances - Free from floating
debris, oil, grease, scum, etc.


     North Platte River

At the Nebraska-Wyoming State Line.


                       Nebraska

Interstate Water Quality Standards (Class "C") for the North
Platte River from its Mouth at the Platte River to the
Nebraska-Wyoming State Line can be found on pages 289
to 290   of this report.
                             294

-------
                       Wyoming

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the North Platte
River from the Nebraska-Wyoming State Line to the outlet
of the Alcova Reservoir.
Settleable Solids - Essentially free from substances of
other than natural origin that will settle to form sludge,
bank or bottom deposits.

Floating Solids - Essentially free from floating debris,
oil, grease, scum, and other floating materials of other
than natural origin in amounts sufficient to be unsightly.

Taste, Odor, Color - Essentially free from substances of
other than natural origin which produce taste, odor, or
color that would:  a) impart an unpalatable or off-flavor
in fish flesh.  b) visibly after the natural color of the
water, or impart color to skin, clothing, vessels, or
structures.  c) produce detectable odor at the site of
use.  d) through interaction with chemicals used in the
existing water treatment process, result in undesirable
taste or odor of the finished water.

Toxic, Radioactive - Water quality will be such that after
conventional water treatment the treated water will meet
Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards.

Turbidity -  (a) When turbidity is 150 units or less,
increase in turbidity shall not be greater than 15 units.
(u) When turbidity is greater than 150 units, increase
in turbidity shall not be greater than 10%.

Dissolved Oxygen - Shall be 6 mg/1 or greater.

Temperature -  (a) When  temperature is 70F or less,
increase in temperature shall not be greater than 2F.
(b) When temperature is greater 70F increase in tempera-
ture  shall not be greater  4F.

Bacteria - MPN shall be less  than  240/100 ml as a geometric
mean  of the  last  five consecutive  samples; MPN shall be less
than  750/100 ml any  sample.

pH  -  The pH  shall be between  6.5  and  8.5.
                             295

-------
     North Platte River

At the Wyoming-Colorado State Line.
                       Wyoming

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the North Platte
River from the Bridge on Highway No. 87 at Douglas/
Wyoming to the Wyoming-Colorado State Line as the same
as those listed on pages 295 of this report.
                       Colorado

Interstate Water Quality Standards for the North Platte
River from the Wyoming-Colorado State Line to its source.
Fish and Wildlife (Cold Water)


Settleable Solids - Free from substances attributable to
controllable sources that will settle to form bottom
deposits.

Floating Solids - Free from unsightly floating debris, oil,
grease, scum, etc., attributable to controllable sources.

Taste, Odor, Color - Free from materials attributable to
controllable sources that will produce off-flavor in the
flesh of fish, or produce an appreciable change in the
existing color, taste turbidity of the water.

Toxic, Radioactive - Free from biocides, toxic, or other
deleterious substances attributable to controllable
sources in concentrations harmful to aquatic life.

Turbidity - No turbidity shall exist in concentrations that
will impair natural and developed fisheries.

Dissolved Oxygen - Shall not be less than 6 mg/1.

Temperature - Shall not be greater than 70F.

pH - The pH shall be between 6.5 and 8.5.
                            296

-------
     Niobrara River

Between the States of Nebraska and Wyoming.
                       Nebraska

Interstate Water Quality Standards (Class A, Trout Fishing)
for the Niobrara River are from its mouth at the Missouri
River to the Nebraska-Wyoming State Line.
Domestic Water Supply, Trout Fishing


Settleable Solids - None from wastewater sources which will
permit objectionable deposition or be deleterious for the
designated uses.  In no case shall turbidity caused by
wastewater impart more than a 10% increase in turbidity to
the receiving water.

Floating Solids - No residue attributable to wastewater or
visible film of oil or globules of grease shall be present.

Taste, Odor, Color - Concentration of substances shall be
less than the amount which would degrade the water quality
for the designated use.  Phenols concentration shall not
exceed 0.001 mg/1.  Shall not contain concentrations of
substances which will render an undesirable taste to fish,
flesh, or in any other way make such fish flesh inedible.
No evidence of matter that creates nuisance conditions or
is offensive to the senses of .sight, touch, smell, or
taste, including color.

Toxic Radioactive - None alone or in combination with other
substancesor wastes in concentration of such nature so as
to render the receiving water unsafe or unsuitable for the
designated use.  Raw water shall be of  such quality that
after treatment by coagulation,  filtration, sedimentation,
the water will meet Public Health Drinking Water Standards.
Radiological limits shall be in  accordance with the Radio-
logical Health Regulations,  1st  Edition, State of Nebraska,
1966.  Ammonia nitrogen concentrations  shall not exceed
1.4 mg/1 in trout streams where  the pH  in these streams
does not exceed  a pH value of  8.3.  If  the pH of a stream
exceeds 8.3, the undissociated  ammonium hydroxide as
nitrogen shall not exceed one-tenth mg/1 in trout streams.
For irrigation use,  the boron  concentration shall not
exceed 0.75 mg/1.  For  toxic materials  not specified bio-
assay methods acceptable  to  Nebraska Water Pollution
Control County  and FWPCA will  be used.
                            297

-------
Turbidity - Increase in turbidity shall not be greater than
10%.

Dissolved Oxygen - Shall be greater than 6 mg/1.

Temperature - Allowable change 5F, maximum limit 65F,
maximum rate of change limited to 2 per hour.

Bacteria - Coliform group and fecal coliform organisms shall
not exceed a geometric mean 10,000 total or 2,000 fecal
coliform bacteria per 100 ml, based on at least 5 samples
per 30 day period.  No more than 20% of samples shall
exceed 20,000 total or 4,000 fecal coliform bacteria.

pH - The pH shall be between 6.5 and 9.0 and shall not be
cEanged more than 1.0.

Total Dissolved Solids - A point source discharge shall not
increase the total dissolved solids concentration of a
receiving water by more than 20%, and in no case shall the
total dissolved solids of a stream exceed 600 mg/1.  For
irrigation use the SAR value and conductivity shall not be
greater than a C3-S2 class irrigation water as shown in
Figure 25 of Agricultural Handbook 60.
                       Wyoming

Interstate Water Quality Standards are listed and applied
here to the Niobrara River.  This stream in Wyoming is
considered an intermittent stream.
Domestic Water Supply, Trout Fishing
Settleable Solids - Essentially free from substances of
other than natural origin that will settle to form sludge,
bank or bottom deposits.

Floating Solids - Essentially free from floating debris,
oil, grease, scum, and other floating materials of other
than natural origin in amounts sufficient to be unsightly.

Taste, Odor, Color - Essentially free from substances of
other than natural origin which produce taste, odor, or
color that would:  a) impart an unpalatable or off-flavor
in fish flesh; b) visibly after the natural color of the
water, or impart color to skin, clothing, vessels, or
structures; c) produce detectable odor at the site of use;
                            298

-------
d) through interaction with chemicals used in the existing
water treatment process, result in undesirable taste or
odor of the finished water.

Toxic, Radioactive - Water quality will be such that after
conventional water treatment the treated water will meet
Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards.

Turbidity -  (a) When turbidity is 150 units or less,
increase in temperature shall not be greater than 15 units.
(b) When temperature is greater than 150 units, increase in
temperature shall not be greater than 10%.

Dissolved Oxygen - Shall be 6 mg/1 or greater.

Temperature -  (a) When  temperature is 70F or less, increase
in temperature  shall not be greater than 2F.  (b) When
temperature is  greater  than 70F increase in temperature
shall not be greater than  4F.

Bacteria - MPN  shall not be less than 2,000/100 ml as a
geometric mean  of the last five consecutive samples; no
sample shall exceed the 95% confidence  limit of historical
average.

p_H - The pH shall be between  6.5 and 8.5.
                             299

-------
 '
, ,
                                             FIGURE 11

                                       MAP OF THE STUDY AREA

-------
 PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
1

5
Accession Number
2

06A
06B
Subject
Field Ik Group
07A 07C
07B
SELECTED WATER RESOURCES ABSTRACTS
INPUT TRANSACTION FORM
Organization
            Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
   Title
       DESIGN OF WATER QUALITY SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS - PHASE I -
         Systems Analysis  Framework
10

22
Authorfs)
Morgan, Paul V.
Johnson, Brownie R.
Bramer, Henry C.
Duncan, Wallace L.
11
Date
February, 19 70
16

12

Pages
303
Project Number
16090DBJ
21

, ,r ! Contract Number
14-12-476
Note
Citation
Ponort- No. IfiOQfi DRtT fi9/7D Wa-t-or- Pol 1 n-H rm rrnThi-nl Roooa-rr-h SOT-IOC
                                                                     F.W.P.C.A.
 23
   Descriptors (Starred First)
       *Systems Analysis,  *Water  Quality,  *Monitoring, *Legal Aspects, *Water
       Pollution, *Water Measurement,Water Quality Act, Water Quality Control,
       Water Quality Standards, Water  Quality Criteria, Information
       Retrieval, Surveillance
25J identifiers (starredFirst)  *ohio River Basin,  *Tennessee River Basin, Missouri River
       Basin, *Southeastern  River  Basins,  *Systems Analysis Framework, Water
         Quality  Mon i Lor s		
 27
 Abstract
'in order to accomplish the goals of the Water Quality Act of 1965,  it  is
necessary to establish water quality surveillance systems throughout the
nation.   It is  highly imperative that the individual systems developed
by the various  Federal, state,  and interstate agencies be compatible and
their data systems  be interconnected.  The various inputs and decisions
necessary to accomplish this task are so complex that modern systems
analysis techniques should be applied to insure that each of these  water
quality  surveillance systems are developed, and designed utilizing the
same  criteria.   This study is the initial effort to apply systems analysis
techniques to the solution of this problem.  Three major river basins  were
selected for this study in order to identify the parameters common  to  any
basin throughout the nation.   The three basins were studied by:  (1) re-
viewing  the  literature associated with their water quality characteristics;
(2) on-site  visits  to the  river basin areas; (3) comparative review of the
interstate water quality standards and plans of implementation; and (4) legal
considerations  in surveillance  program design.  These tasks provided the
input material  to develop  a systems analysis framework.  The systems anal-
ysis  framework  was  applied manually to select sites for water quality  sur-
veillance  stations  on the  major streams studied within the three river
basins.  This report was submitted in fulfillment of Program No. 16090DBJ
and Contract No. 14-12-476 between the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration  and  the Cyrus  Wm.  Rice Division, NUS CORPORATION.
                                    Abstractor
                                    Institution
                                          Paul V. Morgan
                                          C. W. Rice  Div.-NUS  CORPORATION
 WR;!02 (REV. OCT. 1968)
 WRSIC
                                         SEND TO: WATER RESOURCES SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION CENTER
                                               U S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
                                               WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240
 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1970 O - 403-762
                                                                      * CPO: 1969-324-44

-------