r
V_.
WATER QUALITY
MANAGEMENT PLAN
c CAMPBELL COUNTY
• JOHNSON COUNTY
• SHERIDAN COUNTY
PREPARED BY
THE POWDER RIVER AREAWIDE PLANNING ORGANIZATION
-------
WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOR
CAMPBELL COUNTY, JOHNSON COUNTY AND
SHERIDAN COUNTY
Prepared by
The Powder River Areawide
Planning Organization
with
technical assistance provided
by
Obiinger-Smith Corporation
Denver, Colorado
assisted by
TSP Wyoming
Sheridan, Wyoming
Camp, Dresser, McKee, Inc.
Denver, Colorado
August, 1978
This report was financed through a grant from
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to the
Powder River Areawide Planning Organization.
-------
POWDER RIVER AREAWIDE PLANNING BOARD
Campbell County
Michael Enzi - Chairman
Alton Backes
Joe Racine
Johnson County
Virginia Purdy - Vice Chairperson
Melvin Adami
Lee Keith
Sam Rosenthal
Sheridan County
William Laya - Treasurer
Eldon Buell
Les Jayne
Mel Logan
Dave Palmerlee
Tex Taylor
POWDER RIVER AREAWIDE PLANNING STAFF
Richard She!ton -
Roger Burton
Kathy Newton
Project Director
DEQ Water Quality
Specialist
Receptionist/
Secretary
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i
Water Quality Goals i
Organization of PRAPO i
Major Study Concerns i
Future Development Trends ii
Coal Development ii
Recreational Development ii
Agricultural Activities ii
Land Use - Water Quality Relationships iii
Summary of Ma3or Water Quality Problems iii
Meeting of Water Quality Standards v
Water Quality Related to Solid W'as'te
Management and Air Quality vi
Non-point Source Pollution Assessment vi
Point Source Assessment x
Designation of Management Agencies xii
Public Involvement xv
Chpater I - INTRODUCTION 1
BACKGROUND STATEMENT 1
PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF WATER QUALITY
MANAGEMENT PLANNING 3
WORK PROGRAM REVIEW 5
Organization of PRAPO 5
Work Program Efforts 5
REVIEW OF WORK EFFORT PRIORITIES 9
PLANNING BOUNDARIES 10
OVERALL WATER QUALITY GOALS FOR CAMPBELL,
JOHNSON AND SHERIDAN COUNTIES 11
Chapter II - ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS, WATER
QUALITY AND FORECASTS OF FUTURE IMPACTS 12
CURRENT AND PROJECTED POPULATION 12
Introduction 12
Population Trends and Projections -
Campbell County, Wyoming 13
Population Trends and Projections -
Johnson County, Wyoming 13
Population Trends and Projections -
Sheridan County, Wyoming 15
EXISTING" AND PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS 17
Urban Development and Future Service Areas — 17
Mineral Resources and Mining Development" 19
Power and Synthetic Fuel Development and"
Other Industrial Development — 20
Forested Land Activity 2 3
-------
TITLE PAGE
Agricultural Activity 30
WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT AND NEEDS 33
Land Use - Water Quality Relationships 33
Identification of Existing Water Resources — 42
Historic and Projected Water Uses 47
Identification and Extent of Present
Water Quality Problems —• 54
Groundwater Quality — 90
Summary of Major Water Quality Problems 9 3
STREAM SEGMENT ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDED WATER
QUALITY STANDARDS 95
Surface Water Quality Summary 95
Point Source Review 96
Meeting of Water Quality Standards 115
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AND AIR QUALITY RELATED
TO WATER QUALITY 116
Potential Water Pollution From Solid Waste
Disposal :— -"rZT 1X6
Solid Waste Management Practices in the
Three County Area 116
Summary Comments 119
Recommendations Pertaining to Maintenance
of Water Quality 119
Air Quality 119
Chapter III - NON-POINT ASSESSMENT AND NEEDS 122
INTRODUCTION —' 12 2
MINED LANDS ASSESSMENT 12 3
Mineral Exploration 124
Mine Initiation 126
Mining Phase — 12 8
Post-Mining Phase 132
Mined" Lands Program 137
FORESTED LAND ACTIVITY ASSESSMENT 140
Introduction 140
Recreation 142
Silviculture 146
Livestock and Wildlife Management 151
Mineral Development —1 154
Transportation Development 155
Fire and Post-Fire Management 157
Forested Lands Program 159
SALINITY* ASSESSMENT ~ 16 2
Introduction ~ 162
Pollution Assessment 16 2
Salinity Management Programs 163
URBAN RUNOFF ASSESSMENT 166
Introduction ¦ 16 6
General Characteristics of Urban Runoff 166
Existing Sheridan System 168
Existing Buffalo System 16 9
-------
TITLE
PAGE
Existing Gillette System 170
Water Quality Data 171
Water Quality Runoff Assessment 179
Suggested Management Guidelines 183
Programmatic Activities 183
HIGHWAY AND ROAD CONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENT 187
Introduction 187
Best Management Practices Process 188
ON-SITE WASTE DISPOSAL ASSESSMENT 19 0
Introduction 190
Programmatic Recommendations 191
Chapter IV - POINT SOURCE ASSESSMENT AND NEEDS 19 3
INTRODUCTION 19 3
WASTEWATER SYSTEMS AND ASSESSMENT 194
Buffalo 19 4
Clearmont 200
Dayton 20 7
Gillette 212
Kaycee 219
Ranchester 225
Sheridan 2 31
Bi^~Horn and Story 241
Private Sewerage Systems in Unincorporated
Areas 2 48
WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM TRUNK LINE STUDIES — 251
Introduction 251
Buffalo 251
Sheridan 253
Chapter V - MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION 256
INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 256
Management Agencies Recommended for
Designation 256
Description of Alternative Institutional
Management Arrangements 263
Analysis of Alternative Areawide Institutional
Management Arrangements 267
Examination of State/Local Agency Designations
to Implement the Water Quality Plan - Point
Sources 270
Examination of State/Local Agency Designations
to Implement the Water Quality Plan - Non-
Point Sources 273
Summary of Recommendations Pertaining to
Local Management Agencies 275
Summary of Recommendations Pertaining to
State Management Agencies 284
-------
TITLE
PAGE
Summary of Recommendations Pertaining to
Federal Management Agencies 2 86
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 288
Existing Financial Framework 288
Financial Needs and Alternative
Financial Strategies • 291
Financing Recommendations 297
Chapter VI - PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 29 8
INTRODUCTION 298
PRAPO PARTICIPATION PROGRAM 300
APPENDICES 30 3
APPENDIX A - WATER QUALITY CRITERIA 30 4
APPENDIX B - WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
1974 AND 1977 308
APPENDIX C - SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 315
-------
LIST OF MAPS
MAP NUMBER TITLE FOLLOWS PAGE
1 PRAPO Location Map 10
2 Growth Areas 17
3 Major Mineral Deposits 19
4 Active and Proposed Coal Mines
by 19 85 19
5 Forested Lands 2 3
6 U.S. Forest Service Lands 24
7 Surface Land Ownership 25
8 Major Recreational Areas -
Bighorn N.F. 26
9 Major Timber Harvest Areas -
Bighorn N.F. 26
10 Major Grazing Areas - Bighorn
N.F. 27
11 Mineral Extraction Areas -
Bighorn N.F. 2 8
12 Major Stream Segments and Systems 4 3
13 Powder River Areawide Planning
Organization Water Quality Stations 46
14 Storm Drains and Sample Sites
Sheridan, Wyoming 16 8
15 Storm Drains and Sample Sites
Buffalo, Wyoming 170
16 Sample Sites Gillette, Wyoming 179
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NUMBER TITLE PAGE
1 Fecal Coliform Distribution:
Tongue River 5 8
2 Salinity Distribution: Tongue
River 5 9
3 Total Salts: Tongue River at
State Line 61
4 Fecal Coliform Distribution:
Little Goose Creek 62
5 Fecal Coliform Distribution:
Big Goose Creek 6 4
6 Fecal Coliform Distribution:
Goose Creek 6 5
7 Salinity Distribution: Little
Goose Creek 6 6
8 Salinity Distribution: Big
Goose Creek 6 7
9 Salinity Distribution: Goose
Creek 6 8
10 Total Salts: Goose Creek Below
Sheridan 70
11 Sediment Distribution: Middle
Fork Powder River 76
12 Schematic Profile - Tributary
Salt Loads to Powder River 78
13 Total Salts: Powder River near
Kaycee 80
14 Total Salts: Powder River at
Arvada 81
15 Total Salts: Clear Creek near
Arvada 8 3
16 Salinity Distribution: Clear
Creek 8 7
17 Fecal Coliform Distribution:
Clear Creek 88
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Water Quality Goals
The 1972 Federal Water Pollution Act Amendments established
national water quality goals and specific implementation
procedures and schedules to achieve these goals. The over-
all goal of the Act is to "restore and maintain the chemical,
physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters."
To achieve this objective, "it is the national goal that
wherever attainable an interim goal of water quality which
provides for the protection and propagation of fish, shell-
fish, and wildlife and provides for recreation in and on the
water be achieved by July 1, 1983." The purpose of this
planning process was to systematically evaluate alternative
means of achieving water quality goals and formulate a plan
that could be implemented by agencies identified during
the program.
Areawide waste treatment planning integrates various federal
pollution abatement requirements (including municipal, in-
dustrial, residual wastes, runoff, and groundwater pollution
abatement) and places a responsibility for planning and
implementing these requirements with local, regional and
state agencies.
Organization of PRAPO
In order to undertake this effort, the Powder River Areawide
Planning Organization (PRAPO) was designated by the governor
of Wyoming to administer a federal grant for areawide waste
treatment planning funded under Section 298 of the 1972
Federal Water Pollution Act Amendments. PRAPO consists of
executive board members representing all incorporated muni-
cipalities and the County governments of Campbell, Johnson,
and Sheridan Counties. On June 13, 1975, an Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) grant was awarded to PRAPO and work
was initiated on the project on August 11, 1975.
Major Study Concerns
The major study areas of concern included: 1) potential
water pollution from mined land; 2) water quality problems
pertaining to residential growth in unincorporated communities
and in rural portions of the counties focusing on the problem
of contaminants leaching out of septic tank systems; 3)
assessment of water quality pertaining to waste treatment
facilities in the three county area; and 4) potential pollution
problems associated from agircultural activities. The overall
study goal for the three county included the improvement
i
-------
and maintenance of water quality at a point compatible with
present uses and insurance of comformance with Wyoming's Water
Quality Standards.
Future Development Trends
In order to forecast future water quality problems, it is
important to analyze existing population and development
trends in the counties as well as project these trends
forward for the twenty-year planning period. Population
projections were prepared by a number of study partici-
pants. All projections indicate that the population in
all three counties will more than double by the year 2000
primarily provided by the impetus of future energy extrac-
tion/production in the three county area. With these pop-
ulation increases, all of the urban areas in the three
counties will increase with Gillette and Sheridan recording
the greatest amount of population and new development in the
three county area. Due to mining extraction/production
activities there will also be considerable pressure to develop
rural land for residential uses in Sheridan and Campbell
Counties.
Coal Development
Campbell County contains 49 percent of Wyoming's coal re-
sources and will experience a great amount of coal extraction
in the county over the next twenty to sixty years. Existing
and future mining operations will be focused in the north
portions of Sheridan County near the Wyoming, Montana state
line and mining activities in Johnson County will probably be
located near the Lake DeSmet area north of Buffalo. It is
a possibility that Texaco may construct a coal gasification
plant in the Lake DeSmet area. In the near future a coal
fired electric generation plant will be in operation five
miles east of Gillette.
Recreational Development
As population increases in the three counties, there will
be a tremendous increase in recreation in the Bighorn
National Forest west of Sheridan and Buffalo. Specifi-
cally, recreation areas will be greatly impacted from
increased usage which must be balanced with the development
of grazing areas, lumber products, minerals and water
resources. It is imperative that the variety of natural
resources and the usage of forested areas encourages
preservation of this natural resource.
Agricultural Activities
Historically, agricultural activities have provided the
major key economic support in the three counties, and
ii
-------
will continue to provide a strong economic support for the
three counties. Campbell County contains the greatest
amount of crop land farming with only a small amount
occurring in irrigated farming. Sheridan and Johnson
Counties respectively contain 60,801 acres and 45,133
acres of irrigated crop land. The goals of the three
counties are to protect their agricultural economic base
and to discourage prime irrigated agricultural lands from
becoming developed for urban purposes.
Land Use - Water Quality Relationships
Land and water resources are totally interrelated and
maintain direct impact on one another as well as on
economic development. Therefore, water quality manage-
ment requires land use planning in conjunction with all
elements of the planning process. Land use/water quality
relationships become particularly focused in urban devel-
opment areas. Pollution sources occur from urban runoff,
unpaved roads, development in flood plains, construction
activities, solid waste disposal and from subdivision
development and mobile home parks which do not contain
adequate sewage disposal systems.
Summary of Major Water Quality Problems
In order to facilitate the water quality analysis in the
three county area, the major streams were divided into
segments of varying lengths. The analysis was conducted
over 27 segments utilizing 158 water quality stations
to evaluate the segments.
The most important hydrologic factor in the three county
area is the variation in water avaliability between the
eastern and western portions of the study area. Sheridan
and Johnson counties receive surface run off from accum-
ulated snow pack in the Bighorn Mountains. Streams are
generally clear and cold and satisfy most water demands
in the two county area, including providing municipal
water for Sheridan and Buffalo. On the other hand, surface
waters in Campbell County are practically nonexistent.
Municipal as well as domestic demands are met by ground
water in Campbell County.
Based on the water quality analysis the most pressing water
problems appear to be the following: 1)In relation to point
source pollution, it appears that dissolved oxygen concentra-
tions will probably be maintained at acceptable levels by
applying 19 77 standards. However, the recommended sewage
treatment alternatives for Buffalo and Sheridan, as they now
stand, will probably be incapable of reducing ammonia concen-
trations below non-toxic levels in Clear Creek and Goose Creek.
The two cities, the Environmental Protection Agency, the
-------
Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality and project
consultants are now working to develop a solution to these
problems. 2) Potential salinity problems exist in Prairie
Dog Creek, the Middle and North Forks of Powder River, Crazy
Woman Creek and Clear Creek if TDS levels in these drainages
were to record any consistent sharp increases. Little Powder
River, Salt Creek, South Fork of Powder River and Mainstem of
Powder River between Sussex and Arvada all have TDS levels
which would impair irrigated agriculture in those drainages;
however, very little irrigated agriculture occurs in those
drainage areas. 3) In relationship to forested lands, it
appears that potentially the greatest water quality problems
will be from erosion, activities on forest land, and potential
water quality degradation from increased recreational use in
forested areas. Water quality degradation may also occur from
over grazing and timbering. 4) Due to an increase in resident-
ial growth in unincorporated areas and unincorporated communi-
ties, many problems have occurred from contaminants leaching
out of septic tank systems. In the future, ineffective septic
systems may lead to greater contamination of surface waters as
well as groundwater quality in various development areas.
5) With increased mining in the three-county area, there will
be greater potential for water quality degradation occurring
from mining operations. Water quality problems will occur
from sedimentation, disturbance of aquifers, and the introd-
uction of saline or toxic materials into the aquifers.
In reviewing stream segments for their ability to meet the 1983
fishable-swimmable criteria, it was necessary to consider all
stream segments, whether or not they were able to hydraulically
support those uses.
The following stream segments will be unable to meet 19 83 fish-
able-swimmable criteria because of natural sources of pollution;
Little Powder River
Mainstem Powder River near Arvada
South Fork Powder River
Trace metals in the Little Powder River, Mainstem Powder River
and South Fork Powder River, as well as periodically low dis-
solved oxygen levels in the Mainstem Powder River, will prevent
these stream segments from meeting the 19 83 goals.
The following stream segments will be unable to meet 19 83 fish-
able-swimmable criteria, unless action is taken to eliminate
man-caused sources of pollution:
Goose Creek below Sheridan
Clear Creek below Buffalo
Stonepile-Donkey Creek below Gillette
iv
-------
These segments presently will not meet the 1983 goals because
of excessive levels of ammonia and fecal coliform bacteria.
Upgrading of sewage treatment facilities in Sheridan, Buffalo
and Gillette is required to eliminate these sources of pol-
lution .
Little Goose Creek below its confluence with McCormick Creek
and Big Goose Creek from above Sheridan to its confluence with
Little Goose Creek have also recorded high numbers of coliform
bacteria. Not enough data have been collected in these seg-
ments, however, to determine whether they are unable to meet
the 1983 criteria at this time.
Meeting of Water Quality Standards
When the water standards proposed by the Department of
Environmental Quality become finalized, they should prove
sufficient to effectively protect Wyoming's waters if
accompanied by satisfactory enforcement and planning. The
proposed standards contain language dealing with salinity
considerations. If backed by effective analysis and en-
forcement, these should prove sufficient to address these
problems. In terms of the other parameters of consideration,
the proposed water quality standards appear to adequately
address potential problem areas.
A major change in the proposed standards calls for expansion
of stream classifications from three to four, with the new
Class I streams being those of unique value which will be
maintained at their existing quality. Other changes include
the establishment of specific limits for unionized ammonia
and chlorine in Class II and III waters, as well as expansion
of the number of streams which must meet primary contact
recreation limits for fecal coliform bacteria.
In the 303e basin plan for Northeast Wyoming, Goose Creek was
designated as effluent limited for its entire length and Clear
Creek was listed as doubtful subject to further analysis.
Based upon simulation modeling, it appears as if both streams
can meet water quality standards for dissolved oxygen and
coliform with properly constructed and operating secondary
waste treatment facilities. Within the Goose Creek drainage
this effort will also require that illegal septic tank dis-
charges be eliminated. In both stream systems it appears
unlikely that secondary treatment will remove sufficient
ammonia to prevent toxic concentrations in receiving streams
at the design flow (07,10). In each instance, toxic concen-
trations could be observed in the reaches immediately down-
stream of the outfalls. Although this has occurred, it is
recommended that Goose and Clear Creeks be considered effluent
limited subject to additional analyses at a date when fac-
ilities construction is completed and operational.
v
-------
Water Quality Related to Solid Waste
Management and Air Quality
It is believed that there are no siginificant water pollution
problems occurring in land fill site areas in the three
county area. However, all areas surrounding the land fills
should be observed and monitored raring run off events to
determine whether there is any possibility of contaminants'
reaching surface waters. .
Also at the present there does not seem to be any conflicts
between air quality maintenance planning and water quality
management planning in the study area.
Non-Point Source Pollution Assessment
The major potential non-point pollution sources in the three
counties originate from urban run off, mineral extraction,
forest land activities and urban types of development in rural
areas. Additional assessment should be undertaken to deter-
mine whether agriculture is or is not a significant pollutant
source.
The major pollution sources associated with mineral
exploration include erosion from disturbed surface areas
surrounding drilled areas,from aquifer degradation
associated with the use of drilling fluids and improper
methods employed in drilling. The pollution potentials
associated with the initial mining phase include,
sedimentation, salinity and the possible release of
toxic elements previously locked in underlying strata.
The activities associated with the mining phase of mine
operations that possess the most severe water pollution
potentials are continued road building and maintenance,
continued stream channelization, continued stripping
and storage, accelerated use of sanitary facilities, and
any procedures necessary to prepare the coal for shipping
at load out facilities.
During the post-mining phase, water pollution may occur
from sedimentation and salinity in connection with
storage areas and closed basins. There is also the possible
creation of highly toxic ground water in reclaimed
areas.
After utilization of specific best management practices
to control water pollution during mining activities, it
is recommended that a formal water resource evaluation be
undertaken and reported for specific mining efforts in the
three county area.
This evaluation should include the acquisition of necessary
data required for the program, the formulation of pollution
control plans and periodic and thorough inspections of
each mining effort.
vi
-------
The primary goal is the establishment of a programmatic
approach to water pollution assessment and control for
which various levels of government, mining companies and
concerned citizenry could utilize to maintain or improve
water quality.
Six components of forest land activities were identified
as having the greatest water pollution potential in the
forested lands of the three county area. These included:
1) Recreation, 2) Silviculture, 3) Livestock and wildlife
management, 4) Mineral development, 5) Transportation develop-
ment, and 6) Fire and post-fire management.
Virtually all accessible portions of the forested lands in
Johnson, Sheridan and Campbell counties are utilized to
various degrees for recreational activities, such as
camping, picnicking, hunting, fishing, hiking, and recrea-
tional vehicle driving. Increased bacterological and
erosion/sedimentation contamination may result from recre-
ational activities. Resorts, summer home groups, special-
use camps and popular campgrounds potentially contribute
to bacterological contamination of streams and groundwater
through direct discharge and septic tank leakage.
Water quality monitoring in several forested areas in the
past few years indicates that very little or no water pol-
lution is occurring from recreation activities at the pre-
sent time.
In relationship to silvicultural activities, sedimentation,
chemical alteration, and debris accumulation are considered
the prime potential pollutant sources originating directly
from this activity.
Bacterological contamination from wildlife and livestock
wastes is a major concern in the Bighorn National Forest
watershed. Soil compaction and erosive action by water can
be increased due to lack of ground cover and increased over-
land flow of water. Increased runoff makes these areas
highly susceptable to sedimentation and erosion.
Full scale mineral development on forested lands in the
study area has not taken place due to location of profit-
able deposits in other areas with easier access. If these
materials are extracted in forested areas, sedimentation
and dissolved solids may be the main pollution source
related to this activity.
Erosion and sedimentation comprise the major potential pol-
lutants with the construction of highways and improved roads
in forested areas. Chemical and petroleum waste drainage,
if riot properly controlled during road construction, could
create problems with the aquatic habitat of streams.
vii
-------
Forest burned areas may provide residue and chemical
sources for water quality degradation. Also, burned areas
are susceptible to erosion due to the destruction of
ground cover. In order to control water quality degradation
in forested areas, future management and planning efforts
should be centered around Federal Unit plans and state
management programs specific to the particular agency
administering the forested lands.
Six stream segments in the study area, Prairie Dog Creek,
the Powder River, Clear Creek, Crazy Woman Creek, Salt Creek,
and the South Fork of the Powder River record either immediate
or potential salinity problems. Although limited data were
available to describe the water quality in Prairie Dog Creek,
it appears as if the most potentially severe water quality
problem is salinity present in the lower reaches of the drain-
age. The concentrations observed caused sharp increases in
the salinity levels of the mainstem of the Tongue River below
the Prairie Dog Creek Confluence. Sources of salinity in this
drainage are primarily natural in origin.
Salinity in the Powder River is essentially a function of the
salinity contributions of its tributaries. The contributions
of Salt Creek and South Fork cause the mainstem concentrations
to increase while Crazy Woman Creek and Clear Creek contri-
butions have the opposite effect. Mean salinity concentrations
in Clear Creek are below 700 mg/1. However, occasional peaks
during late summer months reach levels which may prove detri-
mental to irrigation use if prolonged over extended periods
of time. Irrigation exists throughout the entire length of
the drainage and could possibly contribute up to 2 8 percent
of the salinity load during the irrigation season.
Salinity concentrations on Crazy Woman Creek average over 1100
mg/1. Upper reaches of the drainage, near the confluence of
the forks, contain 25 percent to 40 percent saline and alkaline
soils. This area also contains most of the irrigated lands in
the drainage. A possible 26 percent of the salinity load dur-
ing the irrigation season may be caused by irrigation.
Salt Creek provides 26 percent of the total salt load in the
Powder River at the State line. Except during runoff periods,
the entire salt load in the creek is attributable to point
source discharges from oil well treaters. Irrigation is almost
non-existent in the drainage.
The South Fork Powder River maintains very high salinity
concentrations which are primarily attributable to saline
geology and soils. Point source discharges account for about
14 percent of the salt load in the drainage. Irrigation use
of the waters is negligible.
viii
-------
The salinity levels in the Tongue River and Powder River
drainage do not appear to be presently affecting the bene-
ficial uses of waters in the State.
If the need for salinity control programs exists in the future,
four general types of management programs are available to con-
trol salinity in these and other drainages; they include:
1. Implementation of on-site control programs for new develop-
ment in the drainage.
2. Implementation of retroactive on-site control program for
existing land uses in the drainage.
3. Establish salt allocation systems where an allowable basin-
wide loading is determined.
4. Decrease salt discharge to a drainage by consumptive use
of all or part of a tributary flow or flows.
Implementation of specific control programs should be left to
those agencies with mandated responsibility. Irrigation pro-
grams would be implemented by the local Conservation Districts
with technical assistance from the Soil Conservation Service
and Soil Conservation Commission. Water resource program con-
trols will be implemented by the State Engineer's Office and
the Board of Control and the Water Quality Division of the
Department of Environmental Quality. Salinity occurring from
mining activities would be controlled by the Land and Water
Quality Divisions of the Department of Environmental Quality
at the state level and by the Bureau of Land Management and
United States Geological Survey at the federal level.
Most urban runoff pollution arises from street surface
contamination including: 1) Pavement decomposition 2) Pol-
lutants from motor vehicles, and 3) Contaminants from veg-
etation and runoff from adjacent land areas.
Study data were not sufficient to determine overall and long
range impacts of storm water runoff in Goose Creek and Clear
Creek. Generally speaking, minimal impact was observed in
both Creeks from study runoff samples. Storm drains along
Goose Creek contained high concentrations of suspended solids
and total dissolved solids. However, down stream concentrations
were lower probably due to the processes of dilution and sed-
imentation. A higher concentration of nitrates and phosphates
were also observed at Sheridan. Snowmelt from Buffalo carried
into Clear Creek also contained high concentrations of suspended
solids. The increase in total dissolved solids can almost
entirely be attributed to road salts. Similar problems and
patterns were also observed at Gillette in Donkey Creek. Since
this stream is epheremal in character, water pollution from
urban runoff is probably important only during flood stages of
the creek.
-------
Techniques to reduce urban storm runoff pollution would be
constructural land management techniques (i.e., improved sur-
face sanitation, chemical use control and better urban plan-
ning in new housing districts).
Highway and road construction projects consist of high risk
activities with regard to their potential for contributing
sediments and other pollutants to surface and groundwaters
in Wyoming. To a large extent, good highway design practices
protect water quality.
Since the Wyoming State Highway Department conducts the largest
road construction program in the state, this department in
conjunction with the Department of Environmental Quality has
developed a state highway construction best management prac-
tices process, which outlines a procedure to accomplish con-
struction pollution abatement at the state level.
Adherences to this procedure will assure that the planning,
design, construction and maintenance of highways will meet
water quality goals and standards.
The use of on-site disposal systems in the three county area
is basically limited to the standard septic tank and leach
field system. Some use is also made of aerobic tanks for
solids removal in conjunction with the standard leach field.
Utilization of on-site disposal systems provides for a
number of potential pollution problems which must be recog-
nized and evaluated. These problems consist of groundwater
pollution, leach field failure, non-point stream pollution
and septage disposal.
A major recommendation concerning on-site disposal systems
is that the counties should adopt on-site disposal regulations
which would assure proper site selection, construction and
maintenance of on-site disposal systems.
Point Source Assessment
Public Law 92-500 provides that the analysis of waste treat-
ment alternatives must include an evaluation of the following:
1) Regional solutions. 2) Alternative waste treatment methods,
or 3) No action. Regional solutions for waste treatment needs
of communities in the three counties are not feasible due to
geographic location and distance between communities. Each of
the plans for the incorporated areas analyzed alternative treat-
ment methods, provided an environmental assessment, selected
an alternative treatment method and preliminarily designed and
costed each facility.
x
-------
Six wastewater management systems were analyzed for improve-
ment of the Buffalo wastewater treatment facility. Of these
six, the selected alternative included improvements to the
system described as an aerated lagoon system. This recom-
mended alternative was phased into a 3 stage construction
program.
Five basic alternative wastewater treatment methods were
considered for the Town of Clearmont. It was recommended
that Clearmont proceed with implementating of a plan to
upgrade the existing waste water facility to provide a 3-
cell aerated lagoon.
Five basic alternative wastewater treatment methods were
also considered for the Town of Dayton. The recommended
alternative was to upgrade existing wastewater treatment
facilities to provide a 3-cell aerated lagoon over a two
stage time frame.
Seven wastewater treatment processes and improvements were
analyzed for upgrading the Gillette waste treatment facility.
Based on these analyses, it was recommended that the existing
activated sludge plant should be improved and upgraded.
Five alternative waste treatment alternatives were analyzed
for Kaycee including the conventional stablization pond,
aerated lagoon, extended aeration plant, land application
and control discharge pond. It was recommended' that the
Town continue to utilize and upgrade its existing waste
treatment facilities and provide a 3-cell aerated lagoon.
Five treatment alternatives were also considered for the
Town of Ranchester. Of the five alternatives considered,
the aerated lagoon was recommended as the most cost ef-
fective alternative.
The Sheridan facility plan addressed two basic processes
for the improvement of wastewater treatment including the
trickling filter system and eight alternatives were con-
sidered related to the construction of a' new activated
sludge system. The recommended alternative for the City
of Sheridan consisted of, upgrading the present unit treat-
ment process and converting the present trickling filter
process to the activated sludge method of treatment. It
was also recommended that a infiltration-inflow correction
program be undertaken to improve the existing collection
system.
xi
-------
The unincorporated communities of 3ig Horn and Story maintain
no central waste water facilities collection or treatment
systems and depend entirely on private disposal systems such
as septic tanks and leach fields. These communities were
analyzed utilizing five basic methods for waste water
treatment as well as a sixth alternative defined as no action,
which consisted of the continuing use of privately owned
waste disposal systems. The evaluation for both communities
indicated that recognizing environmental and social
considerations, the most cost effective means of meeting
the established water quality objectives was to upgrade
the existing private systems and control the construction
of new systems in order to assure compliance with water
quality standards.
Wastewater collection system trunk line studies were
also undertaken during the course of the water quality
management program for Buffalo and Sheridan. These
analyses indicated that Buffalo should procede with
a program of constructing a future service area trunk
line system utilizing maximum use of existing facilities.
The recommendation for Sheridan indicated that the
first step was to initiate a program of infiltration-
inflow rehabilitation, and a second step recommended that
the City procede to develop a basic trunk line system.
Designation of Management Agencies
One of the end products of this phase of the water quality
management planning process for the three county area is
to recommend the designation of management agencies to
implement the Plan. Management agencies should include
state and local agencies as well as federal agencies, due
to the fact that there are major federal land holdings in
the Powder River area. It is essential that the roles of
federal agencies in implementing the plan are carefully
coordinated with the roles of local and state designated
agencies. It should also be recognized that the State of
Wyoming maintains a regulatory role relative to requiring
federal agencies to meet state water quality standards and
best management practices.
Five general criteria were applied in the development of
recommendations for insitutional arrangements for manage-
ment of water quality in the three county area. These
criteria included: 1) Authority and capability/ 2)
Acceptability, 3) Accountability, 4) Efficiency, and 5)
Equity
xii
-------
In reviewing possible alternative areawide institutional
management arrangements, thirteen subcategories of alter-
native institutional structures were analyzed. In review-
ing and analyzing these alternatives it was recommended
that the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality be
delegated the overall responsibility, supervision, coord-
ination and continued planning role in the three county area.
However, it may be beneficial for PRAPO or an advisory body
to continue in an advisory capacity at the local level to
assist the Department in this continuing planning and imple-
mentation process.
At the federal level it is recommended that the Bureau of
Land Management and the United States Forest Service be des-
ignated as management agencies pertaining to agricultural
and grazing activities, silvicultural activities and mining
activities for controlling non-point source pollution on
federal lands under their respective jurisdictions. The only
exception to this is that the Wyoming Department of Environ-
mental Quality should be designated as the management agency
for surface coal mining operations on both federal and private
lands based on the adoption of the Cooperative Agreement
between the State of Wyoming and the United States Department
of the Interior for the Enforcement and Administration of
Surface Coal Mine Regulation Standards.
The Environmental Protection Agency should provide technical
assistance to these designated federal agencies and their
activities on federal lands related to non-point pollution
sources. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency
should provide funding for planning and construction of gen-
eral public wastewater systems in incorporated and unincorp-
orated areas.
At the state level, the Department of Environmental Quality
and its respective divisions should be designated as the
basic management agency for water pollution control in the
three county area. The only exceptions to this at the state
level is the recommendation that the local conservation
districts in cooperation with the Wyoming State Conservation
Commission be designated as the management agency related to
water pollution programs pertaining to agricultural and grazing
activities on non-federal lands. The State Forestry should be
designated as the management agency pertaining to silvicultural
activities on state and private lands and the State Engineers'
office should manage activities related to hydrologic mod-
ifications. Please refer to Table 87 on page 261 for additional
detail on recommended management agencies.
x iii
-------
At the local level, respective counties should be designated
to manage on-site sanitary waste disposal, residual waste
disposal, and construction activities pertaining to their
jurisdictions. The municipalities should be designated as
management agencies pertaining to construction activities,
urban run-off, operation and management of public waste
water systems and residual waste disposal in their juris-
dictions. In several instances individual water and sewer
districts should be designated over the short range as manage-
ment agencies for general public waste water systems in
unincorporated areas. However, over the long range it is
recommended that the several existing operating water and
sewer districts would be served by appropriate municipalities.
Subsequently, the management function should be undertaken
at a later time by the respective municipalities involved.
Sheridan County should consider the possibility of estab-
lishing a county-wide water and sewer district to assist in
meeting the sanitary waste treatment needs in unincorporated
areas in the future.
One recommendation among many is that the Department of
Environmental Quality provide water quality staff in
Sheridan to assist the three counties in implementation
of the plan and to more ably permit the Department of
Environmental Quality to perform all of their necessary
functions.
As pertaining to the existing wastewater facility financial
framework, direct county participation has not existed. How-
ever, the counties, through their public health and land use
planning roles, have made a financial contribution in the
regulatory area. State financial efforts have also been
primarily limited to the regulatory area.
Local long-range wastewater facility planning, except for
3uffalo, Sheridan, and Gillette, has previously been funded
from federal sources. On the other hand, short-range plan-
ning (i.e., sewer line extensions) has been completely borne
as a local cost. There is, as a result of the recent fac-
ilities planning effort, an expectation that construction of
needed additional waste treatment facilities will be partially
funded by the federal government. However, to date, only
several local jurisdictions have received such grants.
DEQ cannot delegate the regulatory function pertaining to
on-site disposal but can develop cooperative agreements with
counties to implement a local program.
xiv
-------
Past capital outlay funding has been accomplished by the incor-
porated entities through the creation of debt (revenue and
general obligation bonding). In some cases, significant
amounts of this debt remain to be paid. Operation and main-
tenance costs have been borne solely by the localities. In
some cases these consist of user charges and in others the tax
base has provided needed financing. In general, the utility
concept of full-costing the service and obtaining needed
revenues through charges based on use is not followed.
Financing is intertwined with the types of institutional
arrangements finally agreed upon and implemented. Further,
those financing techniques finally adopted must conform, in
the case of federal grant-funded facilities, with the require-
ments imposed by federal law. It is important to realize that
for those communities accepting federal construction grants,
reliance on the ad valorem tax base for operation and main-
tenance costs will no longer be allowed. Further, some form
of user charge system based on both sewage volume and amounts
of pollutants (biochemical oxygen demand and suspended solids)
will have to be adopted in order that the full amount of a
federal grant may be received.
Based on the financial analysis, the following financial stra-
tegies and techniques should be considered:
1. Use of short-term (10 years or less) debt for phased
facilities construction and long-term (20 years of
more) debt otherwise.
2. Use of separate funds and full cost recovery user
charges in larger municipalities.
3. State acceptance and bearing of costs of the monitor-
ing, regulatory, and planning functions.
4. Local funding of land use and building code enforce-
ment (presently utilized in some instances).
5. Use of the assessment district form of debt cost shar-
ing in developed (or nearly developed) areas.
6. State and federal financing of non-point source controls.
Public Involvement
Public involvement activities must be maintained during the
continuing planning process. Strong efforts are required
to involve the public in implementation of various phases
of the plan. The public must be made aware of the process
and be involved in annual plan updates. They must be aware
of their responsibilities in preserving the quality of the
water in the area.
xv
-------
Chapter I
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND STATEMENT
The 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments established national
water quality goals and specific implementation procedures and schedules to
achieve these goals. Four planning requirements were outlined in the Act:
1. The provisions for the preparation of 20 year areawide waste treatment
management plans by local regional planning agencies. Areawide plan-
ing produces local strategies for water quality improvement. This plan
was prepared under the provisions of this Section.
2. The provisions for the development of a wastewater facilities plan leading
to design and construction of a cost effective, environmentally sound
municipal waste treatment facility. All construction grants and discharge
permits must conform with this locally prepared 208 plan.
3. The provision for the development of an annual program plan by State
Water Pollution Control Agencies. Progress in abating water pollution
is checked against this plan on a semi-annual basis.
4. The provision for the preparation of overall water quality management plans
for river basins by State Water Pollution Control Agencies. These plans
provide the basis for priority lists for construction of wastewater treat-
ment facilities.
Areawide waste treatment planning integrates various federal pollution abate-
ment requirements (including municipal, industrial, residual wastes, runoff and
groundwater pollution abatement) and places the responsibi1ity for planning and
implementing these requirements with local, regional, and state agencies.
The major purpose of waste treatment planning is to meet 1983 water quality goals
by:
A. Developing a plan.
B. Selecting a management agency to implement the plan.
C. Demonstrating that the plan will allow the area to meet 1383 standards.
1
-------
This planning effort concentrated on the most serious pollution problems over
the two year study period. With annual plan updates and implementation of the
Plan, water quality in the three counties should be maintained at present or
higher levels.
2
-------
PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANNING1
The overall objective of the Act is to "restore and maintain the chemical,
physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's waters" (Section 101(a)).
To achieve this objective, "it is the national goal that wherever attainable,
an interim goal of water quality which provides for the protection and propa-
gation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and provides for recreation in and on
the water be achieved by July 1, 1983" (Section 101(a)(2)). To enable meeting
the Act's objectives, "it is the national policy that areawide waste treatment
management planning processes be developed and implemented to assure adequate
control of sources of pollutants in each State" (Section 101(a)(5)).
The purpose of the planning process is to systematically evaluate alternative
means of achieving water quality goals where obtainable and to formulate a
plan that can be implemented by a 208 management agency. The planning process
must integrate technical needs for pollution abatement and management arrange-
ments capable of implementing the abatement measures, and provide for public
participation in plan development.
The technical planning portion of the planning process involves identifying
the priority water quality problems of the area, recognizing any constraints
in dealing with the problems, and developing alternatives to achieve water
quality goals.
Management planning, which concerns selection of a management agency or
agencies and development of appropriate institutional arrangements for plan
implementation, should be conducted concurrently and in coordination with
technical planning. Management planning should identify water quality manage-
ment problems, and analyze the capability of existing agencies and arrange-
ments to carry out the regulatory and management requirements of Section 208.
^Guidelines for Areawide Waste Treatment Management Planning, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, p. 1-1 and 3-1.
-------
Institutional problems, lack of authority, or lack of financial capacity for
meeting Section 208 requirements should be identified. Alternative means to
acquire proper authority, financial capacity and effective institutional
arrangements for plan implementation should be developed. Finally, alternative
management agency(s) and institutional arrangements should be evaluated and with
subsequent selection of appropriate agencies and institutional arrangements.
Developing alternative technical and management plans and selection of an
areawide waste treatment management plan require public participation through-
out the planning process. Public participation and means for ensuring adequate
participation are required at each stage in the planning process.
It is stressed throughout this planning and management process that local
elected officials and agencies provide the leadership in directing the process
and program due to the fact that they are major implementors of the Management
Plan.
4
-------
WORK PROGRAM REVIEW
Organization of PRAPO
The Powder River Areawide Planning Organization (PRAPO) was designated by the
Governor of Wyoming to administer a federal grant for areawide waste treatment
management planning funded under Section 208 of the 1972 Federal Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments. Authority for the organization of PRAPO is provided
under Wyoming Statutes Chapter 1, General Provisions, Section 9-18-7 "Local
Governmental Units Empowered to Cooperate with Each Other and with the United
States," and Chapter 21, Wyoming Joint Powers Act, which allows for the forma-
tion of areawide planning organizations.
Executive board members of the Powder River Areawide Planning Organization
represent all incorporated municipalities and the County governments of Campbell
County, Johnson County, and Sheridan County.
Work Program Efforts 1
A total of $415,000 was allotted on April 4, 1975 by the Environmental Protection:
Agency to be used by the Powder River Areawide Planning Organization for water
quality management planning. On June 13, 1975, the grant was awarded and work
was initiated on the project on August 11, 1975.
The work program was divided into four principal sections. The first section
dealt primarily with the need for new or updated municipal wastewater systems.
The basic work elements for this section involved the preparation of wastewater
treatment facilities plans for eight incorporated and unincorporated communities
in the planning area. Authority for such planning comes from Section 201 of
the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA). Facility plans were
prepared for the City of Gillette, the Towns of Clearmont, Dayton, Kaycee and
Ranchester, and the unincorporated communities of Acme, Big Horn and Story.
Future trunk line feasibility studies were also completed for the cities of
Buffalo and Sheridan to aid in determining future growth patterns and needs.
In Gillette, the lack of accurate drawings and related material left the City
lPrepared from information developed by the staff of the Powder River Area
Planning Organization.
5
-------
without proper knowledge of the present sewage collection system. An element
of the study was to determine the present trunk lines in the City. The final
work element within the engineering section of the program was the prepara-
tion of aerial maps for Gillette, Buffalo and Story. These maps have and will
assist local governments in implementing water quality related land use con-
trols.
All work elements within the engineering section of the work program, except
for the Gillette facilities study and trunk line study, were undertaken by the
consulting engineering firm of VTN Wyoming, Inc. The Gillette work elements
were completed by Plains Engineering.
The University of Wyoming's Water Resources Research Institute (WRRI) was con-
tracted by PRAPO to undertake the work elements of the second section of the
work plan, concerning water quality determinations. This effort contained the
core of the areawide planning program covering a wide variety of tasks encom-
passing the three-county area. A reconnaissance level monitoring program along
the major stream drainages in the Powder River Basin was performed to locate
water quality problem areas. A limited program pertaining to groundwater
was also undertaken in the Story and South Sheridan areas.
A water quality data base was established utilizing the Wyoming Water Resources
Data System at the Water Resources Research Institute. All surface and ground-
water data were then combined into a water quality assessment of the Powder
River Basin.
Along with this assessment, a number of specific work elements were performed.
A water quality waste allocation model was used to evaluate the effects of
municipal discharges on three streams in the planning areas to assist the
State in determining discharge permit parameter levels for these streams. Drink-
ing well monitoring programs were performed in areas of high septic tank density
to determine the effects of high septic tank usage on private drinking water sup-
plies.
A study of present water usage and estimated future water needs from surface
and groundwater sources was conducted using the Powder River Economic Simula-
tion Model adopted by the Water Resources Research Institute. In a cooperative
6
-------
effort with the U.S. Forest Service, WRRI and PRAPO conducted a water quality
survey and monitoring program within the Bighorn National Forest. Utilizing
these data and data supplied by the Forest Service, a report on water quality
determination on forested lands in the planning area was prepared. WRRI also
completed a monitoring program and report on urban runoff in Sheridan, Buffalo
and Gillette. The Institute's final work element involved conducting a water
quality monitoring program in mining areas and utilizing the data collected,
and techniques developed for the control of mining pollution, to make recom-
mendations for a program to control mining non-point pollution.
The Wyoming Highway Department, at the State level, prepared a report on high-
way and road construction best management practices. This report was developed
to be utilized in the areawide plans as well as the statewide plan.
PRAPO staff, in addition to working with consultants, has prepared a report on
on-site disposal use in the planning area. Along with this, the staff surveyed
and reported on sites and the interrelationship of water quality with solid
waste disposal and air quality maintenance.
The third section of work was involved primarily with land use considerations.
These work elements were carried out in the three counties by the three respec-
tive county planning offices under contract with PRAPO. The work elements
included inventories of existing planning and implementation activities, soils
suitability, natural environmental conditions related to water quality, mobile
home parks and other high density unincorporated growth areas. Population,
economic, social, cultural, industrial and land use trends and growth charac-
teristics were estimated for five, ten and twenty-year planning periods. Land
use and water quality relationships were also investigated. These work elements
were then combined to formulate alternative land use plans with an emphasis on
water quality aspects.
The final phase of the work program involved utilizing the work elements from
the first three sections of the work program to prepare a 208 plan which is
capable of being implemented. This involved identifying and evaluating all
public and private agencies or organizations concerned with water quality and
their roles, responsibilities and capabilities of implementing the plan. Exist-
ing laws were reviewed and analyzed for the specific legal authority necessary
7
-------
to implement the plan. Necessary economic considerations to implement were
evaluated. Alternatives were then developed and analyzed to determine impacts
on water quality, reliability, costs, environmental effects, implementation
feasibility and public acceptance.
Throughout the two year planning effort a public participation program was
carried out to inform the public of efforts being undertaken to improve waters
in the three-county area and to solicit public input to be utilized in the
program.
8
-------
V
REVIEW OF WORK EFFORT PRIORITIES
At the outset of the program, four major areas were considered to be the
water quality management planning priorities in the three-county area. These
four priorities are as follows:
1. Water pollution from mined lands;
2. Water quality problems pertaining to residential growth in unincorporated
communities and in rural portions of the counties focusing on the problem
of contaminants leaching out of septic tank systems;
3. The potential pollution problems associated from agricultural return
flows and an assessment of the problem if present in the three-county
area;
4. Assessment of water quality pertaining to waste treatment facilities in
the three-county area.
As the study progressed over the two-year period, these work elements and con-
siderations remained the important priorities for analyses and recommendations
for the control of degradation of water quality in the three-county area. Other
important water quality concerns analyzed during the program included water
pollution from forested lands and urban runoff and the salinity problem occur-
ring in several watershed areas.
Also during the course of the study, the total issue of non-point sources of
pollution occurring from secondary growth impacts (i.e., construction of
dwelling units in unincorporated areas and in rural areas) became an increase-
ingly important study priority. Lack of or less than adequate enforcement of
non-point source controls potentially will lead to additional degradation of
water quality in the streams in the counties.
In reviewing these water quality study priorities, the most important results
of the total effort is the formulation of a systematic approach to water qua-
lity management in the study area.
9
-------
PLANNING BOUNDARIES
The Executive Board of PRAPO consists of members representing all incorporated
municipal governments and County governments within Campbell, Johnson and
Sheridan Counties. Consequently the PRAPO planning area consists of the
total area in Johnson, Campbell, and Sheridan Counties, and jurisdictions within.
Map 1 shows the location of these counties, with respect to the State of
Wyoming and the United States. The most important physical landmarks in the
counties consist of the Big Horn Mountain Range which forms the western
boundary of the study area, and the Tongue and Powder River drainages which
dissect the area. The largest economic and social centers consist of the in-
corporated municipal areas of Sheridan, Gillette, and Buffalo, which comprise
the county seats of Sheridan, Campbell, and Johnson Counties, respectively.
The incorporated municipalities by County are as follows:
In Campbell County:
1. City of Gillette
In Johnson County:
1. City of Buffalo
2. Town of Kaycee
In Sheridan County:
1. City of Sheridan
2. Town of Dayton
3. Town of Ranchester
4. Town of Clearmont
10
-------
PRAPO LOCATION MAP
-------
OVERALL WATER QUALITY GOALS FOR
CAMPBELL, JOHNSON AND SHERIDAN COUNTIES
Within the framework of Section 208 of the Federal Pollution Control Act
of 1972 (P.L. 92-500), the overall national water quality goals are "to
achieve, wherever attainable, water quality which provides for the protection
and propagation of fish, shellfish and wildlife, and recreation in and on
the water." These are often referred to as the "fishable-swimmable" goals of
the Act. Goals recommended for the three-county area include the improvement
or maintenance of the area's water quality at a point compatible with present
uses and insurance of conformance with Wyoming's Water Quality Standards.
Unlike many other 208 planning areas, the PRAPO planning effort is primarily
concerned with water quality maintenance in the three county area. Those
stream reaches which require water quality improvement in order to meet these
goals are identified in Chapter II. In most cases, the necessary regulations
and/or programs are already in existence which could correct these problems.
The data analyzed in Chapter II suggest that with the exception of a few
site specific pollution problems, the area's water quality is good.
Other program goals include the formulation of pollution control management
programs for specific activities or pollutant types expected to present addi-
tional problems in the future. The need for the following programs has been
identified and was addressed in the total work program.
1. Salinity management;
2. Forested lands management;
3. Mined lands management;
4. Urban runoff management;
5. Waste treatment facilities management.
11
-------
Chapter II
ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS,
WATER QUALITY AND
FORECASTS OF FUTURE IMPACTS
CURRENT AND PROJECTED POPULATION
Introduction
An analysis and projection of population for the three counties were under-
taken by various study participants during the water quality planning program.
Trends and projections were formulated in the individual facilities planning
efforts, by the counties and by the Water Resources Research Institute in
developing wasteload allocations and water demand projections for the three-
county area. The projections were coordinated as closely as possible through-
out the total planning program.
In reviewing these projections and the efforts in the program, it was decided
to utilize target population projections prepared in the facilities plans due
to the fact that projected capital construction costs and operating and manage-
ment costs for facilities were based upon the population projections formulated
in those studies. A review of population projections by study participants
is shown in this section of the report.
At the present time, the State Department of Economic Planning and Develop-
ment is in the process of initiating a program in conjunction with the counties
to update population projections on a quarterly or semi-annual basis. It is
very clear, due to the rapid expansion of the energy extraction and production
industry, that population projections in these impacted areas are very difficult
to predict for any extended period of time. In short, population analyses and
projections must be undertaken on a short term periodic continuing basis.
12
-------
Population Trends and Projections
- Campbell County, Wyoming
The population of Campbell County increased at an average annual rate of 11.3
percent between 1960 and 1975. As of 1975, 45.6 percent of the population of
the County was residing in locations outside the City of Gillette, with approxi-
mately 54.3 percent located within the City limits.
Much of the impetus for new population growth in Campbell County will be in-
fluenced by coal mining and related activities due to the occurrence of huge
amounts of coal resources located in a north/south direction in the County near
Gillette. The population projections shown in Table 1 take into consideration
the potential energy development in the County. Although the target years
varied somewhat by study participants, the population projections were based
quite consistently upon an average of the high and low estimates prepared
during the formulation of a detailed economic base study for the County.
TABLE 1
Population Projections - Campbell County, Wyoming
Comprehensive Plan Facilities Plan WRRI
Projections Projections Projecti ons
Jurisdiction 1976 1980 1990 1980 1997 1980 1997
Campbell
County . 20,620 33,500 46,325 -- -- 24,861 55,212
Gillette1 15,720 26,500 37,430 26,560 40,000 19,143 44,169
^Urbanizing area
Sources: Analysis of the Economic Base and Growth Potentials 1976-1990,
Gladstone Associates, assisted by Oblinger-Smith Corporation, p. 70.
EPA 201 Facilities Plan for the City of Gillette, Wyoming, Plains
Engineering, p. IV-5
Population and Water Demand Projections 1982 and 1997, Water
Resources Research Institute, p. 74.
Population Trends and Projections - Johnson County, Wyoming
Since 1930, Johnson County has sustained an overall increase in population
through each decade except from 1940 to 1950. In this decade population in
13
-------
the County decreased by 5.5 percent. Most dramatically, Buffalo has recorded
population increases since 1930. Kaycee also gained additional population
each decade other than from 1960 to 1970 in which a siight decrease had occurred.
Johnson County, as well as Campbell and Sheridan Counties maintains a potential
for rapid growth based on coal development within the County. The projections
shown in Table 2 were formulated by various study participants, but all utilized
estimates of future development levels based on best expectations of future
events as determined by announced and anticipated economic activity, national
and state energy demands, and other regional factors. Particularly the most
significant impact from growth in Johnson County may be the development of
synthetic coal processing (gasification and 1iquification).
TABLE 2
Population Projections - Johnson County, Wyoming
Comprehensive Plan Facilities Plan WRRI
Projections Projections Projections
Jurisdi ction 1976 1980 2000 1980 2000 1980 1997
Johnson County 6,590 10,370 14,000 -- -- 10,011 23,399
Buffalo 4,200 6,700 10,600 6,500 17.5131 7,280 19,889
Kaycee 350 540 875 540 1,020
^1995 projection
Sources: PRAPO, EPA 208 Wastewater Faci1ity Planning, Johnson and Sheridan
Counties 201 Facilities Plans - Interim Report, VTN Engineers.
Planners, Surveyors, p. III-2.
Buffalo, Wyoming Wastewater Facility Plan, Step 1, VTN Engineers,
Planners, Surveyors, p. IV-8.
Population and Water Demand Projections - 1982 and 1997, Water
Resources Research Institute, p. 78.
Johnson County Land Use Plan, Buffalo-Johnson County Planning Office,
p. 6.
This growth would particularly be focused at the Lake DeSmet area north of
Buffalo. Texaco maintains extensive coal and water holdings in this area.
In 1976, Texaco completed a major water diversion storage project on the lake.
14
-------
If a gasification plant is constructed in that area, this will tremendously
impact and accelerate the growth, particularly in the Buffalo area.
Recent oil and gas discoveries in southeast Johnson County and the possible
initiation of a uranium operation in the Kaycee area may induce additional
growth in the County. Large scale coal developments in Campbell and Sheridan
Counties will also to a degree impact Johnson County. The population pro-
jections shown in Table 2 illustrate dramatic increases in population in
the County as well as the two communities.
Although the projections prepared by these agencies incorporated potential
energy developments that might be occurring in the Johnson County area, it
should be noted that the population projections prepared in the Johnson County
plan did not take into consideration the population increase that would be
associated with a potential gasification plant.
Population Trends and Projections - Sheridan County, Wyoming
In 1976 it was estimated that Sheridan County contained a population of 20,800
persons, which amounted to the highest population ever recorded in the County.
Although this is the highest recorded number of people living in the County,
decreases were experienced from 1920 to 1930, and from 1950 to 1970. The
City of Sheridan recorded population increases through the decades except for
1920 to 1930 and 1960 to 1970.
As shown in Table 3 > it is expected that the population will continue to
increase basically due to the nation-wide energy crisis and the resultant
demands for the increased production of domestic cost of fuel resources and
location of these resources in Sheridan County, southern Montana, and adja-
cent Johnson and Campbell Counties. The population projections prepared in ¦
the Comprehensive Plan are based on average increases in population from 1970
to 1976. The Comprehensive Plan projections did not take into consideration
mineral-related activities due to the fact that those figures were not availa-
ble at the time the Comprehensive Plan was drafted. The facilities plan
population projections for the City of Sheridan, however, reflected potential
energy development increases in the north portions of the County.
15
-------
TABLE 3
Population Projections - Sheridan County, Wyoming
Comprehensive Plan
Facilities Plan
WRRI
Projections
Projections
Projections
Jurisdiction
1976
1980
2000
1980
2000
1980
1997
Sheridan
County
20,800
22,734
32,584
26,3251
26,033
47,428
Sheridan
13,200
14,763
22,583
16 ,552
16,921
33,200
Clearmont
182
209
345
209
345
--
--
Dayton
550
654
1,170
655
1 ,170
--
Ranchester
420
550
1,260
560
1,260
--
--
Bi g Horn
386
510
1 ,130
510
1 ,130
--
Story
500
565
898
565
898
--
Acme
137
--
—
--
--
^1995 projection
Sources: A Comprehensive Plan for Sheridan County, Sheridan County Planning
Commission, p. 37.
Sheridan Wyoming Wastewater Facility Plan - Step 1, VTN Engineers,
Planners, Surveyors, p. 3-6.
A Population Study of Sheridan County,Wyoming, Sheridan Area Planning
Agency, p. 28-A.
Powder River Areawide Planning Organization Population and Water
Demand Projections 1982 and 1997, Water Resources Research Institute,
p. 81.
PRAPO, EPA 208 Wastewater Facility Planning, Johnson and Sheridan
Counties - 201 Facilities Plans, Interim Report, VTN Engineers,
Planners, Surveyors, pp. V-2, VI-2, VII-2, VI11-2, IX-2.
16
-------
EXISTING AND PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS
Urban Development and Future Service Areas
Campbell County
Campbell County and Gillette, the only urbanized municipality in Campbell County,
are experiencing rapid growth due to the development of the coal extraction
industry in the County. Employment and population growth in the County may
more than double by 1990. It is expected that much of this growth will be in
and near the urbanized area of Gillette and at urban densities. Approximately
10 to 20 percent of the growth may occur outside of the planning district
surrounding Gillette. Consequently urban types of development have and will
continue to occur near the location of the coal mining effort.
The major urban growth in the Gillette area is forecasted to locate south and
southwest of the present developed area in and near the City of Gillette. This
is based to a major degree, on the availability of land that can be provided
sanitary sewer services connecting into the City of Gillette central system.
Urban growth will also occur in other quadrants surrounding Gillette.
Residential growth will continue to consist of mobile home courts and conven-
tional subdivisions. The general configuration of the growth and service area
of Gillette is shown on Map 2, along with the secondary growth areas tending
toward urban densities in other portions of the County. These secondary growth
areas contain housing located near mining areas.
Johnson County
Based on population and economic projections, it appears that Johnson County
and the City of Buffalo's growth may also more than double by year 2000 over
1976 levels. The greatest impetus to encourage growth in Johnson County will
probably be the development of coal and water holdings in the Lake DeSmet area
north of Buffalo.
Areas of urban concentration in Johnson County will continue to occur in
Buffalo and Kaycee and near environs. It is anticipated that the largest
amount of growth will occur in and contiguous to Buffalo. The second largest
amount of growth will probably occur in and around the Kaycee area. It is a
17
-------
clear policy of the County that urban growth should be in and contiguous to
these communities rather than in prime agricultural land areas and stream
valleys.
There are growth pressures in the rural part of the County northwest of Buffalo
between French and Rock Creeks. Other areas that are experiencing urban types
of development are north of Buffalo and the area west of Buffalo in the Clear
Creek Valley. In fact, the area west of Buffalo in the Clear Creek Valley
has been identified by the County as an area of critical concern. It is im-
perative that this area continues to be protected as a source of Buffalo's
municipal water supply.
As much as possible future urban land uses in the FRAPO area should be located
in existing urban development areas.
Sheridan County
The County encompasses an area of 2,532 square miles. Of the 2,532 square
miles, 28 percent (709 square miles) is under Federal ownership, 8.6 percent
(217.7 square miles) is under state and local government ownership, and 63.4
percent (1,605.3 square miles) is under private ownership.
The urban areas in the County account for approximately 27,225 acres or 1.7
percent of the total land use in the County. This amount of land includes
a number of acres of agricultural land at the present time, but the possi-
bilities for urban development are very high in these areas.
It is estimated that 535 acres of land are occupied for residential uses in
the rural areas of the County amounting to approximately .03 percent of the
total acreage of Sheridan County.
Most of the commercial development has occurred in urban areas. Extraction of
coal, oil, gas, gravel and scoria are the major industrial uses in rural
Sheridan County. An area north and northeast of Sheridan contains a heavier
concentration of this type of development than other areas in the County.
Agriculture is the predominant use of land in Sheridan County.
All of the incorporated and unincorporated communities in Sheridan County are
expected to experience increased population and land use development other than
-------
Acme, which is a privately owned community. It is understood that the owners
of Acme will not maintain residential living units in that area beyond the
Autumn of 1977. The City of Sheridan will probably receive the greatest
amount of urban growth in the County.
There has been and continues to be development in the rural parts of the County,
particularly in the Little Goose and Big Goose Creek Valley floors. This type
of urban growth at low densities in these areas could potentially promulgate
a moderate water quality degradation problem with respect to the uncontrolled
construction of individual wells and septic systems. These growth areas are
shown on Map 2.
Mineral Resources and Mining Development
The major mineral deposits in the three-county area are shown on Map 3. Although
continued development of all the resources shown is expected, a surface extrac-
tion of strippable coal deposits appears to offer the most potential for develop-
ment. Map 4 illustrates the location of possible coal mining operations in the
three counties by 1985.
Campbell County
Mines currently in production in Campbell County include: Wyodak, Rawhide,
South Belle Ayr, and Cordero.
The identifiable coal reserves in Campbell County account for 49 percent of
Wyoming's coal resources and 5.5 percent of the nation's coal reserves. The
advantages of low sulphur coal found in Campbell County are that it is:
1) strippable with 23 billion tons under less than 200 feet of overburden; and
2) it is low in sulphur content. The full magnitude of coal development in
the County is uncertain at this time. It appears that mining could occur for
a period of not less than 60 years, and potentially up to 250 years, before
recoverable resources are depleted.
Campbell County presently produces 25 percent of the state's production of
natural gas and oil. Oil and natural gas reserves in Campbell County are not
as extensive as coal resources. As of 1975 oil and natural gas reserves
amounted to only 2 to 3 percent of the nation's reserves.
19
-------
M
1"
-------
M 0 N T A N
Ash Creek
Welch
¦* Whitney Strip
Big Horn No. 1 Strip
— Thornebury Stri
SHERIDAN
14 alt!
67
Texaco Strip
BUFFAIJ
Falcon Str
Thunderbird
90
87
25
KAYCEE
I
SCALE r 500,000
10 20
JO
50 Kilometofi
Source: WGS, 1977
Bucksk
n Strip
North Rawhide Strip
Eagle Butte Strip
East (jillette Strip
East* Gillette No.
LETTE^ Wyopak Strip
I
Peabody Strip
CobalKo Strip
Belle Ayr Strip
Prong Horn Strip
Cordeiro Strip
Coal Creek Strip
16
Jacobs Ranch
Strip
J Black Thunder
Strip
-Rochelle Strip
MAP 4
ACTIVE AND PROPOSED
COAL MINES BY 1985
OftAWN BY ZlMMERGRAPHiCS
OAT £ 6-16-77
-------
Johnson County
Mining development in Johnson County most probably will be focused at the Lake
DeSmet area north of Buffalo. In 1976, Texaco completed a major drainage and
water storage project near the lake. Recent announcements from Texaco indicate
that they intend to construct a coal gasification plant on their property.
Other coal mining development may occur approximately 30 miles east of Buffalo
near Barber Creek east of Johnson County.
As related to other mineral production, there could be uranium operations
occurring in the Kaycee area and oil and gas production continuing in the
southeast part of Johnson County. It appears that the major mining/energy
production area will be near Lake DeSmet in the Buffalo area.
Sheridan County
As indicated on Map 4 mining development in Sheridan County will occur north
of Sheridan near the Montana-Wyoming state line. Current development includes
mining operations in the Bighorn strip mine north of Sheridan. Strip mining
in this area is estimated to increase over the future years, with the result of ;
increased employment activity from these mines which will certainly impact the
cities of Sheridan and towns of Ranchester and Dayton. Map 4 also indicates the:
location of coal mines anticipated to be active by 1985 in Sheridan County.
%
Power and Synthetic Fuel Development and Other Industrial Development
Campbell County
In the near future a coal-fired electric generation plant will be in operation
five miles east of Gillette. An electric generating plant located near a
mine mouth or a coal gasification or 1iquification plant located in a mining
area could increase the attractiveness of mining additional coal in Campbell
County.
At the present time many industrial activities occur in the Gillette urbanized
area. A number of these industries have supported the oil production indus-
try in the past and will continue to support these and the other extraction
industries in the future. From existing industrial land use patterns and trans-
20
-------
portation networks, it appears that industrial activities should occur south
of Interstate 90 in the vicinity of State Highway 59. Future industrial areas,
due to transportation and rail access, should probably be located at the west
and east edges of the Gillette urbanized area. It is more difficult to serve
industrial areas in the north Gillette area due to the fact that drainage
north of the Gillette urban area flows in the opposite direction of the natural
gravity flow of the sewage collection system and treatment plant. Individual
treatment plants or lift stations would be required if a substantial amount of
development occurs north of the urbanizing area of Gillette.
As indicated above, there will be a considerable amount of industrial activity
supporting energy extraction industries. With this impetus for new industrial
growth, there also will be the need for additional warehousing space, or what
might be referred to as light industrial types of activities.
Johnson County
As indicated in a previous section, it appears that Texaco may develop a
synthetic coal operations process near Lake DeSmet. Additional oil and gas
discoveries in southeast Johnson County may stimulate continued drilling and
production activity in this area. There may be development of a small uranium
operation in the Kaycee area, as well as a uranium leaching process in the same
area. Another mining operation which is considered an industrial land use is
the continuation of the mining of bentonite. Johnson County ranks fourth in
bentonite production in the state of Wyoming. Also sand, gravel and aggregate
production apparently will continue to increase in the County. The County
contains high-calcium limestone resources which may be marketable in the future.
Other industrial activities should be located in industrial parks as much as
possible in the Buffalo and Kaycee areas and served by central sewage facilities
if possible.
Sheridan County
Based on present information, the Pacific Power and Light Company is considering
the construction of a large coal-fired power plant in Sheridan County. If
a coal gasification plant is developed in the Lake DeSmet area or the south part
of Sheridan County, Sheridan itself will be impacted by development of those
faci1i ties.
-------
Major industrial development in the County other than present mining opera-
tions are concentrated in the Sheridan area. Industrial land uses have
devloped contiguous to the Burlington Northern railroad tracks, near the central
business district, and approximately one mile southeast of the central business
district. However, the amount of industrial activity in the City is less than
in other cities of that population range.
The proposed community development plan for the City of Sheridan shows expan-
sion of industrial activities in the northeast quadrant of the City contiguous
to existing industrial development, and to the southeast part of the urbanizing
area. Both of these larger areas are contiguous to the Interstate highway.
The plan also delineates the continuation of industrial activities east of the
Burlington Northern railroad tracks, near the core area of the city, and con-
tinuing northward to the north edge of the anticipated urban area boundary
of the city. It is recommended that major industrial activities locate in
those areas which can be readily served by central water and sewer facilities
as well as adequate public improvements of all types.
There is very little or no industrial development in the Town of Ranchester
at the present time. The Comprehensive Plan developed for Ranchester indi-
cates an industrial growth area south of U.S. Highway 14 near the present
developed area of the City.
There is very little industrial activity in Clearmont at the present time.
This activity is located between Highway 14-16 and the railroad tracks near
Clear Creek Avenue. The proposed Comprehensive Plan indicates an industrial
growth area to the southwest edge of the city between the rail trackage and
U.S. 14-16 .
The Town of Dayton does not contain industrial land within its corporate
limits; however, approximately three acres of industrial land use is located
at the fringe area of the community. The Comprehensive Plan Map delineates
future industrial development east of Broadway and north 4th Avenue and a
tract west of the present developed area south on County Road north of U.S. 14.
22
-------
The unincorporated area of Big Horn does not contain industrial activities at
the present time. The plan for this unincorporated area does not anticipate
future industrial uses.
The unincorporated area of Story contains very small amounts of industrial
land and its corresponding Comprehensive Plan for growth does not indicate
future uses of an industrial nature in that community.
Forested Lands Activities
Land Ownership and Management
Forested lands management in the three counties is the responsibi1ity of the
United States Forest Service (USFS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and
the Wyoming State Forestry Division. United States Forest Service Unit Plans
and Management Framework Plans (MFP) define each agency's goals and efforts
for a specified period of time in the future.
Forested land is primarily located along the western border of Johnson and
Sheridan Counties, but additional acreages are dispersed elsewhere. Map 5
indicates the approximate location of all the forested lands in the three
counties.
The three-county area supports a variety of livelihoods such as ranching,
coal mining, petroleum recovery, farming, timber harvesting, minor manufac-
turing, and supportive businesses for economic vitality. Forested lands are
affected by all of these activities.
Land development on forested land is managed by private enterprise, local
governments, the State, the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land
Management. Table 4 shows the administrative breakdown by acreage in the
three-county area.
forested Lands Administration
The bulk of the forested lands in the three-county study area is located in
Johnson and Sheridan Counties. Several small areas in Campbell County are
forested and provide excellent wildlife habitat and range supplement.
23
-------
SCAtC i 300.000
FORESTED LANDS
-------
TABLE 4
Approximate Forested Land
PRAPO Planning Area
Total Forest State-
County; Acres Servi ce BLM Local Private
Campbell 3,043,840 158,4841 14,490 4,028 31,610
Johnson 2,674,560 327,312 31,425 17,862 42,899
Sheridan 1,620,480 395,536 1,800 2,217 47,392
^Thunder Basin National Grasslands administered by USDA-Forest Service.
Source: Water Quality Management Considerations, Forested Lands Areas,
Northeastern Wyoming, Water Resources Research Institute, p. 4.
Most commercially developed timber stands are located on federal land admin-
istered by the U.S. Forest Service within the boundaries of the Bighorn National
Forest and on non-federal forest lands. Map 6 shows the Bighorn National Forest
in Johnson and Sheridan Counties and the Thunder Basin National Grasslands of
Campbell County, which is also administered by the U.S. Forest Service.
The Bighorn National Forest contains 1,107,342 acres of which 688,283 acres (68%)
are comprised of actual forested land. Approximately 542,052 acres (48%) are
suitable for timber management. This total includes the amount of National Forest
in the three-county area. The water resources within the Bighorn National Forest
cover approximately 53,840 acres or 5 percent of the total. The U.S. Forest Ser-
vice administers the Bighorn National Forest through five district offices shown
in Table 5.
District rangers and management specialists in each district carry out manage-
ment programs which are coordinated by the Forest Supervisor's office in
Sheridan. Five and ten-year plans are developed by considering specialist
evaluations based on present and future needs, suitability of resources, inten-
sity of the particular usage or activity and social-environmental conflict fac-
tors.
24
-------
stoics:
^ *¦ '-
I" >1>\ • V
' *i"f«l
5u>3£iV
r* «
• :MZr~
\ . <>/v v
MAP 6
U.S. FOREST SERVICE
LANDS
-------
TABLE 5
Bighorn Range Districts
Di stri ct
Location
Tongue i
Buffalo
Paintrock
Tensleep
Northwestern Sheridan County
Northwestern Johnson County
East-central Bighorn County
Southeastern Bighorn - northeastern
Washakie County
Medicine Wheel
Northeastern Bighorn County
^Located within the three counties.
Snnrrp* Watpr Qua! ity Considerations, Forested Lands Areas,
Northeastern Wyoming, Water Resources Research Institute, p. 8.
The Bureau of Land Management administers approximately 50,000 acres of forested
lands in Johnson, Sheridan and Campbell Counties. Substantial stands of pon-
derosa pine, spruce and lodgepole pine are available for harvest in the south-
west part of Johnson County. At least six timber sales are under contract or
proposed through 1982 in a five-year harvest plan within the BLM Buffalo Resource
area. Future plans project harvests designed to rehabilitate mature timber stands
and speed natural recovery toward higher use capacity. The BLM administration
includes specialists to conduct multiple use programs in forestry, water resources,
recreation, range management, mineral development, archaeology and land use plan-
ning. The Federal lands indicated on Map 7 consist of BLM-administered lands
in the tri-county study area.
State, Local and Private Administration
Many acres of forested lands are state-owned and are administered through the
State Forester's office in Cheyenne, and administrative districts located
throughout the State. Map 7 shows the locations of surface land ownership
and administration throughout the three-county area. Coordination between
state, federal and private individuals has enabled the Wyoming State Forestery
Division to negotiate cooperative agreements designating economically feasible
land owners and resource managing agencies. Study plots and revegetative
programs aid in regenerating areas of silviculture disturbance.
25
-------
LCCC\0
1?3 'EDIOAL LANDS
¦ STATE LANDS
~ PRIVATE LANDS
O 10
MAP 7
SURFACE LAND
OWNERSHIP
ct<-*s &¦» z Mm s ^ cml *> *?
5h{- win A
¦
N J ¦ 4 ¦
V.- M
1
fij
A
TrtUNOt-H
BASIN
NATIONAL
CHASStANDS
THUNO€ R
8AS«N
S NAT iONAl
grasslands
-------
The state is presently responsible for bringing state forested lands into
full production, assisting private and county forest owners with management
plans and coordinating with federal agencies on resource and conservation
projects. The state is also responsible for fire management programs on non-
federal forested and range lands and insect and disease control programs on
non-federal forested lands.
Private, state and federal timber development and management programs must
meet water quality standards developed by the Wyoming Department of Environ-
mental Quality (DEQ) and maintenance classifications of the Wyoming Game and
Fish Commission.
Forest Activities
The Water Resources Research Institute has identified six components of forest
activities which have the greatest relationship to water pollution potential
in the forested lands in the three-county area. These six activities include:
1) recreation; 2) silviculture; 3) livestock and wildlife management; 4) trans-
portation development; 5} mineral development; and 6) fire management.
Recreation -
Nearly all accessible portions of the forested lands in Johnson, Sheridan,
and Campbell Counties are utilized in varying degrees for recreational
activities such as camping, picnicking, hunting, fishing, hiking, and re-
creational vehicle driving.
With increased population growth in the three-county study area, additional
accomodations for recreationists can be projected along with increased wild-
erness activities and hunting and fishing activities. The major recreational
areas are shown on Map 8 •
Silviculture -
"Silviculture" is defined by the Environmental Protection Agency to include
all forest and management activities. The major timber harvest areas within
the three-county area are managed by the U.S. Forest Service. These areas
are shown on Map 9 . Other areas also however, offer the potential for
26
-------
< y -«?.
W
i / / y
j
J
jC
MAP 8
5C«Lt I 300 OvO
MAJOR RECREATIONAL
AREAS
-------
i^lsS^SrK ;W
*
J A\"'**
i
v'v;y
. £fv
wf;t '
'"
a
>.u >'^ v
C-" ^ ¦ ¦
MAP 9
SC*t.£ • 500 QOO
MAJOR TIMBER HARVEST
AREAS
Z'trz&A&c Vlui
-------
economically sound timber harvesting. The Bureau of Land Management is
initiating large-scale timber harvest programs in the southern Bighorn Range.
The State has been conducting sustained yield timber harvesting in the South-
ern Bighorn Mountains for the past 20 years. The U.S. Forest Service has
classified the Bighorn National Forest by land use areas for timber management.
Approximately 68 percent of the land mass is suitable for timber harvest,
while only 21 percent is ideally feasible for immediate development. Federal
agencies have adopted ten-year plans projecting harvest forecasts, areas to be
developed, reforestation projects, and road system completions, utilizing
forest inventory surveys and various specialists' evaluations.
Livestock and Wildlife Management -
The forested lands in the three-county area provide summer range for cattle
and sheep. Based on information from the U.S. Forest Service in 1975, at
least 194 livestock grazing permits were issued to accommodate approximately
32,000 cattle and 52,000 sheep. Major grazing areas on federal forested lands
are shown on Map 10 .
Specialists from state and federal agencies continually analyze the impact of
interactions between livestock, wildlife, and habitat. The State of Wyoming
has initiated a range of development programs particularly in southwestern
Johnson County to include range evaluation, sagebrush control, herbicide and
pesticide application, and private leasing of land to produce sustained yield
from the range. Competition for range and habitat among deer, moose, elk,
bighorn sheep, cattle, and domestic sheep presents problems related to mi-
gration, foliage distribution and grazing.
Transportation Development -
The major highways crossing the Bighorn Range include U.S. Highways 14,
14 Alternate, and 16. Access roads connect these major highways to provide
access to lumber camps, timber sale areas, summer home groups, wilderness
areas, camping sites, livestock camps, resorts, construction sites, fire
lookouts, ski areas, and communication installations. Most unimproved roads
in the Bighorn Range were originally constructed for livestock, recreational ,
and logging purposes, but presently are being utilized seasonally by camping
parties, hunters,and livestock.
27
-------
MAJOR GRAZING AREAS
S'g'aL^c "A"A -- •"
-------
Public utility routes exist across portions of the forested lands in the three-
county area and petroleum pipelines are located along the flanks of the Bigr-
horns and throughout Campbell County.
Mineral Development -
Full scale mineral development on forested lands in the three-county area has
not taken place at the present time due to profitable deposits located in
other areas with easier access. Approximate locations of active and non-active
mineral development sites near forested regions are shown on Map 11 .
Favorable deposits of industrial material such as bentonite, gypsum, and high
calcium limestone are located along the eastern flanks of the Bighorn Range
and throughout southwest Johnson County. Mining operations are occurring in
isolated sites and proposals for mining along the flanks of the Bighorn are
being considered by private construction and industrial groups.
Bentonite and gypsum pit mining operations are occurring near small pits
contiguous to the southern face of the Bighorn Range.
Construction materials are readily available in most areas of the forested
lands of the Bighorn Range. Roads and maintenance of roads utilize most of
the materials in the form of gravel, base materials and sands. Sand and
gravel sources are available along the flanks of the Bighorns. Crushable
aggregates are widely distributed in the Bighorn Mountains. Mineral deposits
of gold, uranium, copper, manganese, and rare earth metals are found in
precambrian granite and cambrian sandstones. Explorations for petroleum,
coal and uranium have not indicated commercially developable deposits in the
forested areas.
Future development of various mineral deposits could be economically feasible
especially for construction and industrial materials. Nearly all of these
deposits are located on the flanks of the Bighorn Mountains.
Fire Management -
Forest fires and activity can potentially be very destructive in forested
areas. Fire fighting is proposed for all fires on federal lands which may
28
-------
LEGEND
0 Construction or
Industrial Materials
V Metals
MAP 1 1
MINERAL EXTRACTION
AREAS
St -jjzc'XI I"" —- "»
-------
endanger timber stands and property on the Bighorn Range. The Bureau of
Land Management exercises its discretion concerning range fires. As an example,
if no potential for loss of life or property is present the fire may be allowed
to burn itself out. The Wyoming State Forestry Division encourages suppression
of all fires burning on or threatening all State and private lands. Forest
fires have historically played an important role in natural regeneration main-
tenance of preferred three species. Consequently, prescribed fire in specific
areas may be necessary and feasible.
Controlled burning of slash piles resulting from timber harvests is undertaken
generally after a snow cover has accumulated in the fall and winter. The
majority of forest fires occur in late summer or early fall in the three-county
area when dryness and increased usage potentially increase fire hazards.
Table 6 presents a general percentage breakdown of frequent causes of wild-
fi re.
TABLE 6
Causes of Wi1dfi re
Cause Percentage of Total ^
Lightning
35
Incendiary
21
Debris Burning
16
Campfi res
3
Mi seel 1aneous
7
Smoking
6
Equipment Use
6
Railroads
0.5
Children
0.5
Total:
100.0
Mote: Does not correctly apply to State and private lands where lightning,
debris burning, and railroads are the three leading fire causes.
Source; Water Quality Management Considerations, Forested Lands Areas,
Northeastern Wyoming, Water Resources Research Institute, p.54.
In summary, future forest activities may steadily increase to meet the growing
social and economic needs of the population of the three counties and surround-
ing counties. Specifically, recreational areas will be more greatly impacted
29
-------
from increased usage. The forested lands are suitable for development of
recreational facilities, grazing areas, lumber products, minerals and water
resources. The variety of natural resources and the usage of this potential
area encourages preservation of the region. The natural resources in the
three-county area are great and if properly managed, can provide desirable
social, economic and environmental benefits in the future.
Agricultural Activity
Introduction
Historically, agricultural activity has been the major key economic support in
the three counties. Although in the future there will be an influx of popula-
tion to work in the energy extraction/production areas, agricultural activities
will continue to provide strong economic support for the three counties. It is
the citizens' goals within the three counties to maintain their agricultural
resources and lands as much as possible.
Agricultural Land in Campbell County
Agriculture in the economy of Campbell County has changed from the principal
economic support to a stable component of a diversified economy. Although
coal, petroleum, and natural gas employment has increased, the role of agri-
culture as a component of the economic base remains strong.
The number of farms and ranches located in Campbell County is indicative of the
continuing dominance of agriculture. The overall trend in Campbell County agri-
culture is toward large operations. Eighty-five percent of all agricultural
operations in Campbell County were larger than 260 acres and 60 percent were lar-
ger than 2,000 acres in 1969. These percentages are considerably above statewide
averages for that year with the State recording that only 30 percent of all agri-
culture operations were larger than 2,000 acres. Livestock and crop production
are the two predominant types of agricultural operations existing in Campbell
County.
30
-------
In 1969, it was reported 3,069,561 acres of land were in farms and ranches in
Campbell County, with the average size of operation amounting to 6,408 acres.
Of the three counties, Campbell County contains the greatest amount of cropland
farming, with only a negligible amount in irrigated farming. Dry cropland farm-
ing is located throughout the county with major amounts near Gillette, in north-
west portions of the County and in the south portion of the County. The remain-
ing lands consist of rangeland or similar types.
In summary, from all available indicators, agriculture will continue to be a
dominant force in the Campbell County economy. Although coal mining will intrude
upon potential agricultural land, available information suggests that useable
land resources in the County are extensive enough to support the continuation
of a healthy agricultural sector.
Agricultural Land in Johnson County
The agricultural economy in Johnson County is extremely stable and will continue
to be a stable economic force in the County in the years ahead. The average
size of farms in Johnson County amounted to 7,803 acres in 1969, which amounts
to 3,780 acres larger than the average size of farms in Wyoming as a whole.
Total agricultural lands in the county amounted to 1,737,941 acres with crop-
land amounting to 50,993 acres- There were 1,624,339 acres in rangelands, 6Q,761
acres in forest lands and 1,848 acres in other classifications. Of the total
acreage in cropland production, 45,133 acres consisted of irrigated cropland.
This indicates that there are only 5,860 acres of non-irrigated cropland in
the county. The irrigated croplands are located along the stream valleys east
of the Big Horn Mountains. The dryland crop farming is located basically north
of Kaycee in a north-south direction extending to the Buffalo area. The remain ini
portions of the county outside of forested areas consist of rangeland.
Agricultural lands will be affected to a lesser degree by coal mining in
Johnson County than the other two counties due to the fact that the county does
not contain any vast amount of strippable coal reserves which are located in th©
other two counties.
31
-------
Agricultural Lands in Sheridan County
Sheridan County also enjoys the advantages of a strong agricultural base in
its healthy economy. Other strong supports are tourism, education, and the
mining extraction/production industry.
Agriculture is a predominant use of land in Sheridan County. Total land in
farms and ranches in the County amounted to 1,508,873 acres in 1969 which
amounted to 93.1 percent of the total land in the County.
The irrigated croplands are located in the stream valleys east of the Bighorn
Mountain Range. Of the harvested cropland amounting to 67,245 acres, 60,801
acres were under irrigation. The east portion of the county basically con-
sists of rangeland with some dry land crop fanning in some locations. The
goals of the citizens of Sheridan County are to preserve the agricultural base
of the economy, to discourage prime irrigated agricultural lands from becoming
developed and to encourage future urban growth areas in dry land areas.
Although the economic base of Sheridan County may be somewhat more diversified
than Campbell or Johnson Counties, agricultural activities will continue to be
a strong economic support in the county, if agricultural lands are protected
from development for other purposes.
32
-------
WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT AND NEEDS
Urban Land Use - Water Quality Relationships
Water quality management planning calls for an evaluation of the environ-
mental impact of alternative and physical land use controls on water quality
management. Areal sources as well as discharges from treatment plants need
to be considered. Facility planning under Section 201 and Section 208 of the
Public Law 92-500 has been concerned primarily with treatment plants and major
interceptors.
Land and water resources are interrelated. Therefore, water quality manage-
ment requires land use planning in conjunction with transportation planning,
recreation planning, industrial development planning, preservation and con-
servation planning, public facility planning, as well as water resources
and water quality planning.
Local land use decisions take place in an arena where certain groups
show strong concern for the environmental impact and for the potential over-
utilization of an existing infrastructure. By arriving at an impact of area-
wide development as well as local development given for existing pollution
control standards, water quality professionals can determine if these impacts
are undesirable relating to existing standards. Policies can then be designed
to alleviate any undesirable impacts which may be revealed.
Studies and research have attempted to provide a balanced characterization
of the effects of urban land on instream conditions. In order to define
the water quality aspects of particular non-point sources, there must
be an analysis of existing water quality data, and the collection of additional
water quality data through well structured sampling programs and analysis tech-
niques. In the report "Planning Methodologies for Analysis of Land Use/Water
Quality Relationships" prepared by the Environmental Protection Agency, it is
suggested that the proposed approaches be undertaken in attempting to describe
33
-------
the water quality aspects of non-point sources: "1) Determine what kinds of
non-point problems exist, their extent and severity; 2) Rank non-point problems
based upon water quality impairment and probability control; 3) Recommend gen-
eral 'Best Management Practices' for selected sources; 4) Present site-speci-
fic recommendations on significant non-point sources; 5) Develop a long-term
program for further study of unresolved non-point problems along with a speci-
fic monitoring problem to aid future analysis and help gauge pollution control
progress."
This approach focuses on the reaction of the receiving water to non-point
loads and does not necessarily concentrate on analyzing loads delivered to
the receiving waters. If a structured water quality monitoring and analysis
program indicates no significant water quality problems due to non-point
sources, it does not appear appropriate to commit resources in developing esti-
mates of pollution from land uses and watersheds.
The following discussion of land use/water quality relationships will focus
on urban land use/water quality relationships, basically related to non-point
sources.
Water pollution in the three counties may originate from discrete, localized
operations which generate point pollutional discharges easily isolated and
amenable to treatment, or from sources which can be considered non-point.
Table 7 summarizes some of the information which is available on urban areal
and non-point source emission rates for BOD, CO, NO^-N, Total N, Total P,
and sediment. The data are appropriate for order of magnitude analysis, but
cannot be used for predicting pollution levels. A detailed analysis must
be made of the soils, topography, climate and other such features of a site
to derive emission factors for any given locality.
Campbell County^
When evaluating existing or potential water pollution problems, it must be
"'land Use-Water Quality Relationships, Campbell County, Wyoming, City/ County
Department of Planning and Development, p. 1,2, 3, 5, 7, and 10.
34
-------
TABLE 7
Non-Point Source and Urban Stormwater Emission Rates (lb/acre/.yr)
COD BOD Total N0~-N Total N Total P Sediment
__ _ (1 b/A/Yr) (lb/A/Yr) (lb/A/Yr^) (Ib/A/Yr) (lb/A/Yr) (1 b/A/Yr)
Forest
Range
Active Cropland
Irrigation in Western U.S.
,62-7.8
.62
2.7-11.6
.09-11.6
.027-.27
.07
.05-2.6
@75
0750
015,000
a. Surface Drainage
b. Sub-surface Drainage
Cropland Tile Drainage
Urban
3 Du/Acre Sewage Treated*
3 DU/Acre Untreated
Construction
196-276 27-45
240. 95.9
1598.1 639.3
2.7-24
74. 37.4-166
.27-11.6
6.2-8
63.4 63.4
0.0 127.8
.89-3.92
2.7-8.9
.009-.26
.98-5.8 @16,000
12.8 31.9
3l\ 9 213.1
3,000-375,000
* Standard Secondary Treatment, 60% P Removal, 85% BOD Removal, 50% Nitrification. DU defined as dwelling unit.
@ is the symbol being used to mean "approximately".
Source: Land Use-Water Quality Relationships, Environmental Protection Agency, p. 5-19
Land Use-Water Quality Relationships, Campbell County, Wyoming, City-County Department of Planning and
Development, p. 2.
CO
(_n
-------
recognized that there are few perennial streams in Campbell County. Thus, water
pollution originating from urban sources may be serious only during flood stages
of the ephemeral Donkey Creek/Stonepile Creek drainage system. Unless the sedi-
ment (or other pollutant) is transported to perennial streams or lakes, the
national goal of habitable water for wildlife and water suitable for recrea-
tional purposes by 1983 is unaffected. Quantities of sediments deposited in
the Belle Fourche River and Keyhole Reservoir could be increased by urban devel-
opment in the Gillette area. With ninety percent (90% 1 of the County's residen-
tial growth forecasted to be in this area, these perennial waterways are the
only ones anticipated at this time to be affected by urban development.
Urban Development -
Urban land use in Campbell County has occurred within the several categories
in a variety of ways, and depending upon the type, location, physical factors,
and quality of the development, has contributed to water pollution at varying
levels and has originated from many practices. The following is an analysis of
some of the more salient sources of water pollution in and near the City of
Gillette.
Urban Runoff -
According to recent estimates, the population of Campbell County has increased
approximately fifty-five percent since the 1970 U.S. Census. Many residential
developments are not constructed in phases and consequently large areas are
denuded of vegetation. They therefore contribute to water pollution, especially
sedimentation, at a higher rate than would normally be expected.
It has been demonstrated that urban runoff produces about the same order of
magnitude of pollutant as secondary effluent from separately treated sanitary
sewage, with the exception that it is somewhat lower in total nitrogen and
higher in sediment. Primarily, the increase in runoff in urban areas is a
product of the creation of impervious surfaces, such as rooftops, streets,
sidewalks, etc. The pollution is a function of the accumulation of pollutants
on impervious surfaces, and the transport of pollutants from these areas by
the runoff. In addition, increased runoff may cause an increase in the rate of
water induced erosion.
36
-------
The U.S. Weather Bureau has calculated quantities of rainfall which nay be
expected during storms of varying magnitude in the City of Gillette. The fol-
lowing is a list of rainfall intensities and the frequency in which the storm
level may be expected to occur.
An area near Gillette, mostly in grassland, may be expected to produce from ten
to thirty percent of the rainfall accumulation as runoff. The downtown business
areas may yield from seventy percent to as much as ninety-five percent.
With these considerations in mind, runoff yields have been determined for six
(6) drainage areas in the Gillette area, and yields have been projected for
each area for that time in the future when development has been completed.
Additional information is provided in the report "Land Use-Water Quality Re-
lationship" prepared by the Gillette/Campbell County Department of Planning and
Development.
An increase in the amount of runoff produced in a given area does not necess-
arily indicate that there will be a corresponding or resulting increase in
water pollution. It does, however, signify that the pollutant transport
mechanism has developed an expanded load capacity. In an area such as Gillette
where perennial streams are nonexistent, such an increase could be of con-
siderable importance. Measures which could be directed at reducing the gross
land area developed as impervious surfaces include mandatory park land dedi-
cation, encouraging maximum oDen space by utilizing the Planned Unit Development
method of development, and reducing pavement widths required by street standards.
A limited urban runoff assessment was undertaken for Sheridan, Gillette and
Buffalo during the indicated performance of the overall study. These findings
are in Chapter III.
Storm Frequency
Preci pi tation
Inches oer Hour
2 years
5 years
10 years
25 years
50 years
100 years
0.7
1.1
1.2
1.4
1.6
2.0
37
-------
Unpaved Roads -
While pavement increases the amount of impervious surface in an area and
results in an increase in runoff, the alternative of not paving street sur-
faces and thus allowing for a greater pervious surface area would likely
cause an even greater increase in water pollution in the form of sediment.
The majority of the unpaved streets or roads in the City and County have been
surfaced with scoria (a clinker-like material) which has a tendency to separate
after about one year's time with moderate traffic. At that time, much of the
material is of small particle size and with traffic or wind, often becomes
airborne in the form of dust. The dust may then accumulate on impervious
surfaces or other areas where water can transport it to streams, thus pro-
ducing sediment.
Where residential densities are low, streets are further separated from one
another, traffic volumes are much lower, and sediment production is minimal.
The majority of the land subdivisions without paved streets in Campbell County
are of low density and pavement is not necessary. Subdivisions with a proposed
density in excess of one unit per acre are now required to have their streets
paved with a bituminous substance. There are, however, a few subdivisions
which were approved prior to the adoption of this requirement. In the future,
any subdivision which is approved without pavement will be of a low density and
maintain relatively light traffic. At this time the one exception would consist of
mobile home parks, where pavement is not required in unincorporated areas.
Many of these parks must be considered temporary only, and pavement may not be
necessary in short-term developments.
Floodplain Development -
Much of the City of Gillette has developed within the boundaries delineated
on the "Flood Hazard Boundary Map for the City of Gillette, Wyoming", which
was a quick, cursory study of the flood boundary prepared in order that the
City might participate in the National Flood Insurance Program. As a partici-
pant, the City has adopted a restrictive ordinance which will not allow residen-
tial uses, dumping, filling, and sheltering of animals in the areas designated
as "Floodplain Areas Having Special Flood Hazards."* Structures may not be
Hhe "Floodplain areas having special flood hazards" are defined as that
maximum area of the floodplain that, on the average, is likely to be flooded
once every 100 years.
38
-------
constructed unless the applicant for a building permit can show that the
structure will not impede drainage and will not substantially reduce the flood-
water storage capacity of the floodplain. Any structures that are allowed
will be flood-proofed above the level of the one hundred year flood, 'lone
of the nonconforming uses of the floodway will be allowed to expand, but will
be allowed to be repaired for flood-proofing.
The Subdivision Resolution of Campbell County requires a drainage report with
the Subdivision Application, and the dedication of any necessary drainage
easements. The land will be set aside for uses "which will not aggrevate
the danger of flood hazard, will not endanger the general health, safety, or
welfare of the community".
These positive steps taken by the City and County will ensure that floodplain
development will be minimal, and flood-related pollution likewise minimized.
The task is to decrease the flood potential in those areas where development
has already taken place, maintain water quality where development has already
taken place, maintain water quality by removing certain uses from the flood-
way, constructing a storm sewer system, and minimizing inflow and infiltration
into the sanitary sewer system during storm periods.
Construction -
Removal of vegetation and excavating land for residential, highway, and other
projects, has had an adverse affect on air quality in the windy Gillette area,
and with deposition of some of the airborne particulates in stream channels
or on impervious street surfaces, it could have an affect on water quality.
The Uniform Building Code, adopted by and enforced in the City of Gillette,
maintains provisions for minimizing erosion occurring from a completed grading
project. In Campbell County, the major erosion problem is during construction
phases, not so much after completion.
Quantitative data concerning the increased amount of sediments generated
during construction phases of land development in Campbell County are lacking.
A few published data on the relationship between construction activities
and pollutant accumulation exist; however, their use for general application
is highly questionable. Table 7 , which provided general non-point emission
39
-------
rates by land use type, indicates that construction can result in sediment
production ranging from 3,000 to 375,000 pounds/acre/year. Although this is
an extremely wide range, it shows that if areas are denuded of vegetation and
soils are not properly anchored, severe erosion can occur.
Johnson County1
Urbanization -
Areas of dense urban concentration in Johnson County are limited to Buffalo,
Kaycee, and to a lesser degree, Linch. A growth area of potential concern is
northwest of Buffalo between French and Rock Creeks and consists of a number of
subdivided tracts which average 5 acres in size. These tracts contain indivi-
dual water and sewer systems. This situation may lead to many interrelated
problems such as depletion and/or contamination of the groundwater source and
the potential contamination of the existing free flowing streams.
A monitoring of stream quality is necessary to provide effective information
to local officials who will prepare and revise future guidelines for control of
growth in moderate or low density rural areas. If water quality is not being
affected, then more stringent requirements or regulations will not be needed.
On the other hand, if water quality is being adversely affected, then a mechan-
ism is available to prevent the situation from further degradation.
Buffalo and Kaycee will continue to experience dense urban type growth in the
forthcoming years. Urbanization brings with it a number of factors which can
affect water quality as land use changes occur. Some of these factors will
be only minor while others could be more serious and require extensive treat-
ment or other considerations if water quality i$ to be maintained.
As land is converted to urban uses the amount of soil which can absorb mois-
ture is reduced. This is due to the fact that the area will be covered with
paving, sidewalks, buildings, and other types of developments. This in turn
reduces groundwater supplies in the immediate area. However, neither Buffalo
Relationships Between Variations in the Physical-Social Environment and its
Capability to Assimilate Growth and Development, Johnson County, Buffalo-
Johnson County Planning Office, p. 53-55.
-------
nor Kaycee rely on groundwater for municipal water. In contrast, runoff waters
are increased and greater volumes of water reach streams which are usually
used as the termination point for storm sewers or municipal runoff.
Storm waters also pick up materials from various locations and in some cases
will deposit them in either Clear Creek (Buffalo) or Powder River (Kaycee).
The lack of an extensive storm sewer system in either town results in a slower
transport of these materials into a live body of water. A greater concern,
however, should be raised for any snow and ice removal chemicals that may
reach Clear Creek or the Powder River. This is notably the situation due to
the fact that storm drains are installed on the two heaviest travelled arterial
streets in Buffalo. In Kaycee the problem is less severe as there are few
direct runoff paths to the Creek.
Sand is used for traffic safety on ice and packed snow. Some of this material
may also reach bodies of water. However, in Kaycee this amount of material is
limited because of street locations, limited paved streets and the topography.
In Buffalo the sand is swept and recovered for reuse whenever possible.
Other Factors -
The discussion concerning unpaved roads, stormwater floodplain problems as
applicable, and construction in Campbell County apply in general terms to
Johnson County and Sheridan County as pertaining to urban land use/water
quality relationships.
Sheridan County'*'
To obtain an overview of land use/water quality relationships iri Sheridan
County, it is necessary to review the urban development patterns in the County.
Nearly all of the urban development and the majority of all rural residential
development has occurred in the stream valleys in the County. The valleys con-
tain irrigated croplands and the principal location of all mining activities,
as well as providing a major component of the County's wildlife habitat and
fisheries. This indicates that the land use/water quality relationships are
focused basically in the valleys of the County.
*Land Use-Water Quality Relationships, Sheridan Area Planning Agency, po. 1 6
10, 11, 12, and 13.
41
-------
The concentration of many residences mainly in the valleys poses the question
of whether septic tanks and leach fields are adequate to accommodate the sewage
disposal needs of the residents. The effluent of inadequately constructed
septic tanks mixing with surface runoff may flow into nearby streams. The
effluent can also percolate into improperly constructed water wells and contam-
inate sources of domestic water.
Urbanization, whether at urban densities, or lower rural densities, produces
increased amounts of runoff and sedimentation. Typical subdivision con-
struction is initiated by removal of vegetation and grading of the land to
desired surfaces and contours. This practice causes problems if construction
is delayed or if a large area of land is involved, resulting in possible
large-scale erosion. Increase in sedimentation does not decrease after con-
struction, but will continue due to the impervious nature of roofs, sidewalks,
etc. Petrochemical levels in runoff are higher in urban areas than in rural
areas. A higher concentration of automobiles is the main cause for an increase
in runoff pollutants under cold weather conditions.
Identification of Existing Water Resources
Surface Water
The total area of the three counties is located in the Upper Missouri River
Basin of Wyoming. Map 12 illustrates the location of the major streams of
the area. Table 8 lists these rivers and presents general watershed charac-
teri sti cs for each.
Table 9 presents a review of the historical flow patterns at the major gauoinn
stations in the planning area. To facilitate the water quality analyses,
these rivers were divided into segments of varying lengths. These divisions
were made to isolate the current or expected water use in each segment. Com-
parisons of the water quality for the period of record with various criteria
or standards can determine the acceptability of the water for a specific
proposed use.
42
-------
TABLE 8
Watershed Areas and Elevations:
PRAPO Planning Area
Watershed
Surface Area
'square mi 1es'
Elevati ons
Maximum
Mi nimum
Powder River at Moorehead
Montana
8,088
10,555
3,334
Tongue River at Decker,
Montana
1 ,477
9,581
3,430
Goose Creek at mouth
435
10,915
3,701
Clear Creek at mouth
1 ,110
12,281
3,506
Crazy Woman Creek at mouth
1 ,070
10,555
3,750
Prairie Dog Creek at USGS gage
358
4,400
3,450
Belle Fcurche River
670
4,800
4,600
Cheyenne River
1 ,716
4,820
4,560
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area, WRRI, p. 8
TABLE 9
Stage-Pischarge Relationships:
Major PRAPO Watersheds
Maximum
Gage
Hei ght
Watercourse (years) Avg. Max. Min. ( feet)
Period of n• i_ / r \ Gaqe
Record _01schiraejcfs.l_
Powder River at
Moorehead, Montana
44
458
23,000
0
12.8
Tongue River at
Decker, Montana
15
514
7,480
3
10.9
Goose Creek in Sheridan
34
184
5,450
4.0
7.3
Clear Creek near Arvada
36
183
9,600
0
10.5
Prairie Dog Creek near
Acme
5
45.6
738
6.6
6.0
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area, WRRI, p. g
43
-------
N
A
DONKEY CREEK
MAJOR STREAM SEGMENTS
AND SYSTEMS
MAP 12
nifAnto tr: okinom-smith co»po«AnoN
Prtpo/td tor WR*l
>r w qMaphic a*t$
DATC MOPCA 1977
-------
There are no perennial streams within the study area for either the Belle
Fourche or Cheyenne River drainage basins. A series of ephemeral or inter-
mittent draws carry seasonal runoff which has insignificant volume when com-
pared to the other river systems in the region.
The most important hydrologic factor in the three-county area is the variation
in water availability between the eastern and western portions of the study
area. Sheridan and Johnson Counties receive surface runoff from the accumu-
lated snowpack in the Big Horn Mountains. The streams are generally clear,
cold and in the past, contained adequate water to satisfy most demands. Sur-
face sources provide Sheridan and Buffalo with municipal water. Groundwater
development is not as critical as it is in other parts of the study area or the
state.
Surface waters in Campbell County are rare. Less than 0.01 percent of the
total county area is comprised of water surface. Municipal as well as domes-
tic demands are met by groundwaters. Surface waters where present usually
result from the interception of water tables or the impoundment of seasonal run-
off. These waters are usually more saline, maintain higher temperatures and pro-
vide less uses than do the surface resources in other parts of the study area.
A total of 158 water quality stations were used to evaluate the stream seg-
ments identified in Table 10. Map 12 shows a delineation of the stream seg-
ments and Map 13 illustrates the locations of each of these stations.
TABLE 10
Stream Segments: PRAPO Planning Area
River/Stream
Segment
Use(s)
Tongue
1. Source to Dayton
Drinking water/secondary contact/
recreati on/agricultur/wildlife
and livestock watering/fishery
2. Dayton to Monarch
Drinking water/primary contact/
recreati on/agri culture/wildli fe
and livestock watering/fishery
3. Monarch to below Goose
Creek
Body contact recreation/agricul-
ture/wildlife and livestock
wateri ng/fishery
44
-------
TABLE 10 Continued
Ri ver/Stream Segment Uses(s)
4.
Youngs 5.
Goose 6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Little Goose 11.
12.
13.
Prairie Dog 14.
Powder 15.
16.
17.
18.
Little Powder 19.
Salt 20.
Below Goose Creek to
State Line
Entire length
Source to inlet
Inlet to Sheridan
Through town to con-
fluence to sewage
outfall
Sewage outfal1 to
Plachek Pit
Plachek Pit to con-
fluence
Source to Big Horn
Big Horn to South
Sheridan
South Sheridan to
confluence
Entire length
Middle Fork
South Fork
North Fork
Mainstem (Sussex to
Montana)
Entire length
Entire length
Body contact recreation/agricul-
ture/wiIdlife and livestock
wateri ng/fishery
Agriculture/wildlife & livestock
wateri ng/fi shery
Dri nki ng water/recreation/agri cu 1 -
ture/wi 1 dl ife & livestock watering;
fishery
Recreati on/agri culture/wi1dli fe
& livestock watering/fishery
Body contact recreation/ agri-
cul ture
Recreation/agriculture/wiIdli fe
& 1i vestock wateri ng
Recreati on/fi shery
Recreation/agriculture/wiIdlife
& livestock watering/fishery
Recreation/agriculture/wiIdlife
& livestock watering/fishery
Body contact recreation/wiIdlife
& livestock watering/agricul ture
Agriculture/wildlife & livestock
wateri ng/i ndustry
Recreation/agriculture/wiIdli fe
& livestock watering/industry/
drinking water
Agriculture/wiIdlife & livestock
wateri ng
Recreation/agriculture/wi Idl i fe
& livestock watering/fishery
Recreation/agriculture/wi Idl i fe
& livestock watering
Agriculture/wildlife & livestock
wateri ng
Agriculture/industry/wiIdlife &
1i vestock wateri ng
45
-------
TABLE 10 Continued
River/Stream
Segment
Use(s)
Crazy Woman
CI ear
21. Entire length
22. In forest
Recreation/agricu 1 ture/wi "Id! lfe
and livestock watering/fishery
Recreation/wiIdlife and live-
stock watering/fishery/drinking
water
23. Above Buffalo
24. In Buffalo
Drinking water/recreation/wiId-
life and livestock watering/fish-
ery/agriculture
Body contact recreation/agri-
culture
Pi ney
25. Below Buffalo to
Texaco Dam
26. Texaco Dam to mouth
27. Entire length
Recreation/agriculture/wild-
life and livestock watering/
fishery/i ndustry
Recreation/agriculture/wiId-
life and livestock watering/
fishery/industry
Recreati on/agri culture/i n-
dustry/wildlife and live-
stock watering/fishery
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area, WRRI, p. 10.
46
-------
Groundwater
Groundwater information in the three counties is more limited than are surface
water data. A total of 263 water quality well records from the tri-county area
are currently stored on the WRDS system. Other data are available in the liter-
ature. Table 11 presents some of the known groundwater sources in northeastern
Wyomi ng.
Additional groundwater data are described in companion documents, "Water
Quality Determinations Mined Lands Areas, Northeastern Wyoming" and "Drinking
Water Survey, Story, Wyoming" prepared by WRRI.
TABLE 11
Groundwater Sources: Northeastern Wyoming
Common
Geologic
Peri od
Aqui fer/
Formati on
Range
Depth
(ft. )
Common Range
Well Yield (gpm )
Common Range
TDS (gpm )
Terti ary
Wasatch
40 -
1000
1
40
160 - 6620
Fort Union
150 -
600
1
-
30
484 - 3250
Cretaceous
Lance
150 -
1200+
1
.
50
450 - 3060
Fox Hills
200 -
2300
20
-
70
1240 - 3290
Pennsylvani an
Tensleep
240 -
6500
25
250
255 - 3620
Minnelusa
240 -
6500
25
-
250
to 200,000 1
Mi ssi ssi ppi an
Madison
1
o
o
LO
7600
100
-
2000
290 - 3290
* Oi1 test waters.
Source: Department of the Interior, 1974
Historic and Projected Water Uses
Historic Uses
During the course of the two-year planning program the Water Resources Research
Institute prepared projections concerning population and water demand in the
three-county area for 1982 and 1997. Within this work effort, past water use
estimates were undertaken for the various employment sectors as indicated
47
-------
in Table 12 . These estimates were developed by determining the AFW/E (acre
feet of water divided by the number of employees) ratios. These AFW/E ratios
combined with manufacturer's data for the years 1954, 1959, 1964, and 1968
were utilized to prepare estimated historic water use in acre feet for the
three-county area.
TABLE 12
Water Use by Employment Sector in Acre Feet - PRAPO Area
Sector
1954
1959
1964
1968
Concrete-Gypsum Plaster
27,616
36,821
52,163
53,698
Fabricated Metal Products
346,732
135,011
159,558
208,653
Food and Kindred Products
1 ,390,150
1 ,914,698
2,332 ,004
2,488,493
Lumber and Wood Products
408,101
429,580
463,332
362,074
Furniture & Fixtures
21,479
9,205
9,205
12,274
Machinery Except Electrical
349,801
524,701
484,811
579,933
Electrical Equipment
and Supplies
349,801
285,364
312,979
389,690
Transportation Equipment
708,806
797,791
742,559
960,417
Instruments and Related
Producti vi ty
58,300
70,574
88,984
116,600
Miscellaneous Manufacturing
Industries
64,437
42,958
39,890
42,958
Source: Powder River Areawide Planning Organization, Population and Water
Demand Projections for 1982 and 1997, Water Resources Research
Institute, pp. 51-62, and Obiinger-Smith Corporation.
This same type of methodology was utilized to estimate the water consumption
in the petrochemicals sector, the coal-energy sector, the synthetic fuels
sector, steam electric generation sector and unit train transportation of
coal out of the state. The AFW/E ratios when utilized with the number of
employees in these various sectors, indicated that the water consumed in the
petrochemicals industry had risen from 18,200 acre feet in 1967 to 23,000 acre
feet by 1972 in the total Powder River Basin. A similar analysis indicated
that there was no water consumed in the uranium industry in 1967; however,
there were 868 acre feet of water consumed in 1972 for the same industry,
In 1968, it was estimated that 3,000 acre feet of water was utilized for elec-
tric steam generation in the basin. Historically, no water has been utilized
48
-------
for synthetic fuels production in the Powder River Basin and negligible amounts
have been used for the mining of bentonite, gypsum and cement. It is also
estimated that trains have used only a negligible quantity of water in the
transportation of coal outside of the state.
Future Water Demands
Demands were projected based on an analysis of the employment sector and pro-
jections in employment by sector. The water sector needs were then developed
by determining future AFW/E ratios for the various sectors. The analysis and
projection process was applied to three growth scenarios as follows.
Scenario I was defined as the zero growth scenario. The projections in this
scenario assumed no additional growth in the coal-energy sector after 1975
and all other input data would remain unchanged.
Scenario II was defined as the "most likely" level of coal-energy growth which
would occur during the study period. The basis for determining the most likely
level of growth was left primarily with the city and county planners in their
respective areas. After it was determined which developments seemed most
probable, the base coal-energy employment figures associated with these develop-
ments were entered into the "Powder River Economic Simulation Model" and the
appropriate population and water demand figures were obtained. In each instance,
an attempt was made to outline the individual development involved, its time
schedule, and the number and location of both construction and permanent em-
ployees. The individual projects were then summarized to arrive at the overall
employment figures for the area, allowing for population and water demand
figures to be estimated.
Scenario III was defined as a "high range" of development alternatives. This
scenario generally portrayed the high level of development which was believed
to be the highest possible development pattern under any normal set of circum-
stances, in the absence of war, etc.
49
-------
The researchers indicated that the Powder River Economic Simulation Model was
useful only at the aggregate county level. The estimates of population and
water demands at the city level were obtained by making some estimates of the
percent of the total county population living in a respective city or town. The
remaining portions of this section indicate the projections utilizing Scenario
II which appears to be the most logical or likely set of circumstances to
occur in the three counties over the next 20 years.
Campbell County -
The domestic water demand for the City of Gillette was projected to amount to
8,898 acre feet of water by 1997 plus another 2,225 acre feet in the remaining
portions of the County for a total county domestic water demand of 11,123
acre feet as shown in Table 13 . The total water demand for mining, manu-
facturing and domestic uses was estimated to amount to 193,392 acre feet for
Gillette and Campbell County by 1997 as indicated in Table 14 .
TABLE 13
Scenario II
Domestic Water Demand - Campbell County
(Ac
re Feet)
1980
1982
1990
1995
1997
Gi1lette
Remainder of County
3,860
1 ,152
4,668
1,394
6,948
1,960
8,293
2,204
8,898
2,225
Total Campbell County:
5,013
6,062
8,908
10,497
11,123
% Gi1lette
77
77
78
79
30
Source: Powder River Areawide Planning Organization, Population and Water
Demand Projections for 1982 and 1997, Water Resources Research
Institute, p. 74.
50
-------
TABLE 14
Scenario II
Total Domestic, Mining, and Manufacturing
(A'
ere Feet)
1980
1982
1990
1995
1997
Gi1lette
3,860
4,663
6,948
8,293
8,898
Remainder of County
108,990
141 ,312
166,674
179,493
184,494
Total Campbell County:
112,850
145,980
173,622
187,786
193,392
Source: Powder River Areawide Planning Organization, Population and Water
Demand Projections for 1982 and 1997, Water Resources Research
Institute, p. 75.
Johnson County -
As shown in Table 15 , the domestic water demand for the City of Buffalo
would amount to 3,978 acre feet and 4,680 acre feet totally for Johnson County
by 1997. In adding the mining and manufacturing water demand projected to
amount to 68,781 acre feet for Johnson County, a total water demand of 73,461
acre feet by 1997 will be required (See Table 16 ).
TABLE 15
Scenario II
Domestic Water Demand - Johnson County
(Acre Feet)
1980
1982
1990
1995
1997
Buffalo
1,441
1 ,646
2,834
3,652
3,978
Remainder of County
561
609
709
696
702
Total Johnson County
2,002
2,255
3,543
4,348
4,680
% Buffalo
72
73
80
84
85
Source: Powder River Areawide Planning Organization, Population and Water
Demand Projections for 1982 and 1997, Water Resources Research
Institute, p. 78.
51
-------
TABLE 16
Scenario II
Total Domestic, Mining, and Manufacturing
Water Demand - Johnson County
(Acre Feet)
1980
1982
1990
1995
1997
Buffalo
Remainder of County
1,441
12,518
1 ,646
10,661
2,834
62,575
. 3,652
68,326
3,978
69,483
Total Johnson County
13,959
12,307
65,409
71,978
73,461
Source: Powder River Areawide Planning Organization, Population and Water
Demand Projections for 1982 and 1997, Water Resources Research
Institute, p. 79r
Sheridan County -
The domestic water demands for 1997 for the City of Sheridan are estimated to
amount to 6,850 acre feet as indicated in Table 17 . The remainder of the
County will demand 2,935 acre feet of water for a total County demand of 9,785
acre feet by 1997. The mining and manufacturing water demand is estimated to
amount to 27,771 acre feet in the County, resulting in a total estimated demand
of 37,556 acre feet by 1997 as shown in Table 18. Of the three counties,
Campbell County will require by far the most acre feet of water, based on
Scenario II.
TABLE 17
Scenario II
Domestic Water Demand - Sheridan County
(Acre Feet)
1980
1982
19 90
1995
1997
City of Sheridan
Remainder of County
3,385
1,822
3,856
1,987
5,188
2,555
6,340
2,849
6,850
2,935
Total Sheridan County:
5,207
5,843
7,743
9,189
9,785
% City of Sheridan
65
66
67
69
70
Source: Powder River Areawide Planning Organization, Population and Water
Demand Projections for 1982 and 1997, Water Resources Research
Institute, p. 81.
-------
TABLE 18
Scenario II
Total Domestic, Mining, and Manufacturing
Water Demand - Sheridan County
(Acre Feet)
1980
1982
1990
1995
1997
City of Sheridan
Remainder of County
3,385
22,733
3,856
19,950
5,188
25,265
6,340
29,364
6,850
30,706
Total Sheridan County:
26,118
23,806
30,453
35,704
37,556
Source: Powder River Areawide Planning Organization, Population aid Water
Demand Projections for 1982 and 1997, Water Resources Research
Institute, p. 82.
The total amount of water available for irrigated agriculture will depend
somewhat on those waters diverted for industrial and coal-energy development.
Data are inadequate on the total water supply,although some estimates have
been made. In projecting irrigated crop distribution and production, consider-
ation was given to competition for water by the mineral sector. It was pre-
sumed in arriving at the irrigated lands projections that effeciency in irriga-
tion practices will offset water losses to industry. Consequently, a near
constant irrigated acreage was projected.
TABLE 19
Irrigated Agriculture Water Use
(Acre Feet)
1980 1982 1990 1_995 1997
Campbell County
(2.1%) 3,617 3,620 3,641 3,655 3,661
Johnson County
(35.3%) 60,793 60,851 61,210 61,442 61,535
Sheridan County
(55.5%) 95,581 95,673 96,237 96,602 96,748
Source: Powder River Areawide Planning Organization, Population anh
Demand Projections for 1982 and 1997, Water Resnnr'rpc —-
Institute, p. 95.
53
-------
In summarizing the projections for water use for irrigation, it is expected
that water use in acre feet would remain relatively constant through 1997
as indicated in Table 19 .
In summary, the research undertaken by WRRI indicates that coal-energy
development will cause a greater demand for domestic water use and a much
greater water demand for mining and manufacturing. Specifically, the
greatest amount of water will be used for coal-gasification plants and coal-
fired electric steam generating plants if these facilities are developed. As
the water demand for industrial and domestic uses increases, there will be
greater pressure placed on controlling the expansion of irrigated agriculture.
Identification and Extent of Present Water Quality Problems
Definition of Criteria and Standards
Water quality goals were described in Chapter 1 and are useful as an overview
in maintaining water quality in the three counties. However, in an assessment
of water quality, more precise criteria and standards must be utilized to
undertake this task. The criteria or standards against which the water quality
in these streams was measured can be found in Appendix A and B, respectively.
Criteria differ from standards in that they represent suggested constituent
limits for specified water uses, while standards are regulatory limits on a
particular segment or parameter. The criteria list used in this evaluation
was prepared from Quality Criteria for Water (EPA, 1976) and Water Quality
Criteria (EPA, 1972). The recommended concentrations are designed to protect
various organisms, community structures and/or a prescribed water use.
Two lists of water quality standards are included in Appendix B. The first is
that list which was in effect as of July, 1977, while the second list was pre-
pared from the recommended water quality standards provided by the Water Quality
Division of the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). With possible
changes, this second list will be submitted to the State's Environmental Quality
Council, If accepted, this list will become the water quality standards of the
State.
54
-------
Water Quality Assessment by Stream Segment
As indicated previously in this chapter, a total of 158 water quality stations
was used to evaluate the stream segments in the three counties. Three dif-
ferent data storage and retrieval systems were used in the stream segment anal-
ysis. These were the Environmental Protection Agency's STORET system, Water
Resources Data System (WRDS) and the data system established in conjunction with
WRDS for the Powder River Areawide Planning Organization. Seasonal data re-
trieval from STORET allowed for comparisons of wet and dry periods for each of
the years assessed. In order to minimize errors due to changes in laboratory
techniques, only data collected since 1970 were used in this evaluation. The
wet period was established as March to September of each year. Differences
between seasons were assumed to result from nonpoint runoff during wet periods.
Groups contributing data to STORET and Water Resources Data Systems include the
United States Geological Survey, United States Forest Service, Department of
Environmental Quality, Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, and the Environmental
Protection Agency, among others. The Powder River Areawide Planning Organiza-
tion's system consists of data collected by either Powder River Areawide
Planning Organization or Wyoming Resources Research Institute personnel for
this investigation. Focus was given to fecal coliforms sediment and salinity
in the data collection. These were believed to be the dominant pollutants in
the PRAPO area.
The results obtained in the survey of the 158 data stations can be found tabu-
larized by stream segment, year and season in Appendix D of the Assessment
Report and Recommendations prepared by WRRI. Descriptions of the water quality
data for each basin follow.
Tongue River -
Water quality in the source to Dayton segment is among the best in the study
area. A few criteria excesses were noted during the wet period but appear only
occasionally. Only the raw water supply and aquatic life criteria are ever
exceeded. These are the most restrictive of the possible uses. Natural sources
and sampling error could account for the observed excesses. During the dry
season the situation is similar for criteria excesses. A single criterion
excess for fecal coliform was observed during the period of record. It appears
that this observation represents an anomalous condition. Violations of the pH
55
-------
standard were observed in this segment as well as the other three segments of
the stream. The origin of these violations are natural and do not exceed the
federal criteria limits which are not as restrictive.
The Dayton to Monarch segment maintains generally similar water quality as the
preceding segment. The collected data occasionally exceed specific criteria
values for raw water and aquatic life. A single boron value in excess of
agricultural criteria was observed.
An important potential pollution source in this segment is the backwash from
the water treatment facilities at Ranchester. Recent samples collected by
DEQ's Water Quality Division showed 11 mg/1. of aluminum in this effluent.
At this time no definitive data are available to adequately describe the pos-
sible effects of this effluent upon the river.
Total dissolved solids indicated some increase through the first two segments,
with low values of less than 100 mg/1. occurring in the first segment, usually
during the month of June. High readings ranking between 300 to 400 mg/1.
occurred in the second segment during the late winter months. In the Monarch
segment, increases of suspended solids beyond the criteria level deemed accept-
able for a good fisheries have been observed. These excesses generally occur
during April and May and are believed to be caused by the flushing effect at
the outset of spring runoff. Although the flushing action causes short duration
excesses of the suspended solids criteria, the overall effect is probably bene-
ficial since it removes accumulated solids from the stream bottom.
The Monarch to below Goose Creek segment is similar to prior segments. During
the wet period the river meets all applicable criteria except aquatic life.
Between Goose Creek and the state line the water quality in the river changes
rapidly. Increases in salts and coliforms as well as the specific criteria
parameters were observed in this segment. With present data, it appears that
Goose and Prairie Dog Creeks are mainly responsible for this alteration. Data
obtained from USGS stations at Dayton, Monarch and Decker over a long period
of time show increases in parameter concentrations of salt in the downstream
56
-------
direction. Figures 1 and 2 illustrate the relative locations of the major
sources for coliforms as well as salts. The coliform data presented in Figure
1 confirm other reports which state that the majority of these organisms orig-
inate in Sheridan's sewage treatment plant. This figure also shows additional
sources on the Tongue River itself in the vicinity of the State Route 338
bridge. These sources appear to be improperly operating septic systems and
possibly some concentrated runoff from winter feeding pastures.
Figure 2 presents the approximate locations of the various salt sources along
the river. This information indicates a sharp increase in total salts in the
last segment of the Tongue River in the study area.
USGS data indicate that the average salinity concentration increases approx-
imately 200 mg/1. in the Tongue River between Monarch and Decker. Salt loads
increase approximately 345 percent in this reach while flow almost doubles.
Salinity levels at the state line, however, have averaged less than 500 mg/1.
since 1970 and have shown no tendency to increase during that period. Such
levels do not cause impairment of any of the beneficial uses considered on
this stream.
Table 20 compares the contributions of the various salt sources along the
river. This table was prepared from USGS data and data collected for Prairie
Dog Creek during the PRAP0 monitoring program. It indicates that salt load
contributions to the drainage from the Tongue River above Goose Creek and
Prairie Dog Creek are approximately equal.
TABLE 20
Salt Sources; Tongue River
Background
Yield
Level
Percent of Total
Contributors
(T/D)
(T/D)
At Decker
Tongue River at
Monarch
141
Same
29
Goose Creek
146
141
30
Prairie Dog Creek
128
287
27 approximately
Mainstem NPS
68
415
14
Tongue River at
State Line
483
Source: Assessment Report and
Recommendati ons,
PRAP0 Planning Area, Water Resr
Research
Institute, p
. 17.
57
-------
Figure 1 - Fecal Coliform Distribution: Tongue River
1500
£ 1350
O
O
- 1200
- 1050
0c
Ui
£ 900
<
® 750
2
§ 600
u.
300
_l
<
o
UJ
U-
50
75
25
20
TONGUE RIVER -STREAM MILES
-+-MEAN • MAXIMUM • MINIMUM DENOTES T.N TC ( Too Numerous To Count)
Note- The coliform and salinity data that were utilized in this analysis and
illustrated on this figure and others in this section were obtained by
PRAPO or WRRI over a two-year period. However, for this time period they
are valid and representative.
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area, Water
Resources Research institute, p. is.
According to USGS records, Goose Creek provides 36 percent of the average
annual flow to the Tongue River at Decker, while Prairie Dog Creek provides
nine percent. It would appear that while Goose Creek contributes significant
salts to the Tongue River system, the percent contribution is approximately
equivalent to the amount of flow added. This, however, is not true of Prairie
Dog Creek. Its contribution of approximately 27 percent of the salt load is
carried in only 9 percent of contributing flow. This would account for the
sharp increase noted between the last two sampling points in Figure 2.
58
-------
Figure 2 - Salinity Distribution: Tongue River
%
CO
CO
UJ
H
UJ
UJ
UJ
UJ
O "J
-J
UJ C£
ea U
ca
600
cr>
E 450
00
150
0
20
30
25
TONGUE RIVER - STREAM MILES
-f-Mean • Maximum •Minimum
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPQ Planning Area, Water
Resources Research Institute, p. 16.
Although the primary contributors of soluble salts to the river are Prairie Dog
and Goose Creeks, additional salts are contributed by other small tributaries and
by coal mine discharges into the river. Sources of salinity along these tribu-
taries are primarily of natural origin. The underlying geological formations
are the Fort Union and Wasatch which are saline. Added to this is the fact
that much of the area through which the tributaries pass has previously been
mined and abandoned with little attempt at reclamation.
59
-------
Tongue River Summary
Water quality in the mainstem of the Tongue River is generally good. Excessive
concentrations of fecal coliforms and ammonia concentrations in excess of the
criteria levels for acquatic life originating from Sheridan's sewage treatment
plant, from improperly operating individual sanitary systems and possibly from
field runoff were observed in the Goose Creek to state line segment.
Nearly 60 percent of the salt load within the drainage was found to be contributed
by Goose Creek and Prairie Dog Creek. Sources of salinity within those drain-
ages will be discussed in following sections. The major source of salinity
along the mainstem of the Tongue River and its smaller tributaries is of natural
origin. The underlying geological formations of the drainage from Dayton to the
state line are the Lance Formation and Foxhilis Sandstone, as well as the Fort
Union and Wasatch Formations. Ground waters within these formations generally
range between 500 and 1,500 mg/1. TDS. Runoff from and tributaries passing
through spoil areas of the numerous abandoned mine sites are another source of
salinity in the drainage. Studies conducted by the USGS on waters contained
within abandoned mine pits in the area have shown TDS levels ranging from as
low as 93 mg/1. to a high of 3,670 mg/1. Soil Conservation Service personnel
indicate that the amounts of saline soils in Sheridan County are negligible.
Irrigation is not considered a significant source of salinity in the drainage.
Figure 3 substantiates that belief by graphically showing that in four of the
six years considered, the total dissolved solids levels were higher during the
periods of base flow in the winter months than they were during the low flow
portions of the agricultural irrigation season in late summer. Salt concentra-
tions are well below levels where an impairment of current uses (generally
agriculture) were observed. Any future development of these waters should be
carefully evaluated, however, to provide adequate protection for each possible
use.
Goose Creek
The upper segments of Big and Little Goose Creeks maintain generally good water
quality. Alkalinity concentrations less than the recommended minimum for aquatic
life were observed but are expected in these waters, particularly during spring
runoff when water has minimal contact with carbonate-bearing strata. A number
of fecal coliform excesses were noted in the Big Goose segment above Sheridan.
60
-------
TONGUE RIVER FIT STATE LINE, NEAR DECKER, MONTANA
CS STATION NO. 6306300
1029
800.00
i~rTn~nTTi^n_rrrTTi~rrT"rn^rrTT"i"rTTTT ri i i i i i i n i i i [tttti ri rn rp f rn rrr rn
LU
ZD
cn
CK
-------
Water quality in Big Goose Creek changes in the segments near Sheridan, while
similar trends in Little Goose Creek begin to occur in the segment near Big
Horn. Fecal coliform criteria excesses were observed in the vicinity of Big
Horn. Degradation of both streams occur as they approach Sheridan. Increases
in fecal coliform numbers and frequency were observed. Pollution sources
appear to be improperly operating septic systems along the mainstems and in
tributaries, and possibly some non-point source contribution from concentrated
animal feeding areas. Figure 4 presents the approximate locations of coliform
sources along the upper segments of Little Goose Creek.
Figure 4- Fecal Coliform Distributuion: Little Goose Creek
5000
2000
- 1000
§ 500
200
<
cr
UJ
h"
o
<
CD
100
50
s
cr
o
u.
_j
o
o
<
O
UJ
u.
2
4
6
0
8
10
LITTLE GOOSE CREEK-STREAM MILES
-f MEAN ? MAXIMUM ft MINIMUM
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area,
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 19.
62
-------
Figure 4 shows that organism concentrations exceed swimmable criteria of 200
organisms/100 milliliters (mis) for the entire stream length from Big Horn to
Sheridan. Faulty or nonexistent septic tanks along the mainstem and tributaries
are primarily responsible for these organism concentrations but non-point source
runoff from fields and small feedlots may have some effect during the wet per-
i ods.
Associated decreases in dissolved oxygen concentrations along these same seg-
ments were also observed. Data collected during field reconnaissance studies
revealed instances when dissolved oxygen concentrations in Little Goose Creek
were between 2 and 3 mg/1. less than in Big Goose Creek, when measurements were
made at the confluence. Dissolved oxygen levels in Big Goose Creek were above
theoretical saturation during daylight hours, while Little Goose Creek was
under-saturated. This appears to be due to the release of oxygen consuming
effluents along the stream and the absence of various plant species in the chan-
nelized sections which could produce oxygen during daylight hours. Other re-
search of the Water Resources Research Institute revealed a water quality stand-
ard dissolved oxygen violation for Goose Creek between the confluence and the
city's sewage outfall. Dissolved oxygen levels of 5.0 mg/1. above the treatment
plant were observed, while concentrations as low as 2.9 mg/1. were noted down-
stream from the sewage treatment plant.
Figure 5 presents similar data for Big Googe Creek above Sheridan. This figure
shows that this section of the system is also adversely affected by fecal co11—
form concentrations resulting from similar situations experienced on Little
Goose Creek.
Figure 6 presents the fecal coliform data for Goose Creek in and below Sheridan
and indicates that the river segment below Sheridan is strongly influenced by
the sewage treatment plant. Diurnal oxygen sags below water quality standards
were commonly observed during this study, while fecal coliform violations re-
sulting from the sewage treatment plant were common. Potentially toxic ammonia
concentrations were also observed during wet and dry periods. Fish kills of
carp and various sucker species were observed twice during summer, 1976. It is
not known whether these kills resulted from decreased dissolved oxygen concen-
trations, toxic ammonia or some other unidentified problem. On one of those
occasions, dead fish were observed in the stream between the Little-Big Goose
confluence and the sewage treatment plant.
63
-------
Figure 5. - Fecal Coliform Distribution: Big Goose Creek
UJ
V)
oo
UJ
UJ
UJ
u.
UJ
u.
__ 1000
E
§ 800
< 700
-------
standards. These organisms persist at levels violating water quality standards
for a considerable distance in the Tongue River. Based on data from the USGS
gage in Sheridan, the highest concentrations of total salts were observed
during August. However, concentrations in late winter months approacned those of
late summer suggesting that the most important contributors to salinity are
natural conditions.
Figure 6 - Fecal Coliform Distribution: Goose Creek
20,000
E
o
o
s
10,000
<
a:
UJ
h-
O
<
CO
5000
S
a:
o
U-
i
o
a
1000
_i
<
CJ
UJ
500
u.
100
0
uu UJ>.
UJ £*<
ACME
GOOSE CREEK-STREAM MILES
•4-memn
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 21.
Planning Area,
65
-------
Figure 7 illustrates the spatial salt contributions for Little Goose Creek.
This graph shows that the majority of the salts enter the river around Big
Horn and that average salt contributions level off at a point compatible wi
all water uses for the last six channel miles.
Figure 7 - Salinity Distribution: Little Goose Creek
800
C7>
600
UJ 400
-J 200
8
10
6
2
4
0
LITTLE GOOSE CREEK-STREAM MILES
-f-Mean i Maximum •Minimum
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPQ Planning Area,
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 24.
66
-------
Figure 8 presents similar data for Big Goose Creek. Most of the salts are
associated with the upper reaches of the river and appear to be natural in
origin. Figure 9 presents the salinity profile for Goose Creek in and below
Sheridan. The mean salinity concentrations stabilize at a point compatible
with all uses. The highest concentrations observed appeared in most cases
due to seasonal base flows compounded to some extent by irrigation return
f 1 ows.
•• III
c*
o
I
800
o>
£
cn
Q
_i
O
CO
Q
UJ
>
O
-
<
o
z
D
o
CO
z
o
h-
u
UJ
CO
UJ
>
o
CO
<
Bi9
Goose
Z
Z
<
<
Q
Q
C£
E£
LU
UJ
r
X
00
400
200
_L
2 4 6 8
BIG GOOSE CREEK-STREAM MILES
LL)
u_
Z
- K°
§
Z
UJ
3
10
+ MEAN
• MAXIMUM
• MINIMUM
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area,
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 24.
67
-------
Figure#. - Salinity Distribution: Goose Creek
N
CT>
E
_j
o
CO
CO
_J
<
h-
O
h-
uj uj>_
™ -c
UJO 5
UJ ££<
UJ cz
I 2 3 4 5 6
GOOSE CREEK - STREAM MILES
+ MEAN i MAXIMUM £ MINIMUM
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area,
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 25.
Goose Creek Summary
The addition of treated and untreated sewage to the Goose Creek system is the
biggest problem of the drainage. The largest source of this pollution is the
Sheridan Sewage Treatment Plant, however improperly functioning or non-existent
septic systems are also significant sources, especially along Little Goose Creek,
These pollution sources cause high levels of fecal coliforms and ammonia. In
some instances they also can cause reduced oxygen levels below the level nec-
essary to maintain aquatic life.
68
-------
Sharp increases in salinity were also reported in this stream system although
even at the highest concentrations they are well below levels which would
impair current beneficial uses of the water, particularly irrigation use. The
sharp increases occur, in the cases of both Little Goose Creek and Big Goose
Creek, close to the foot of the mountains. In both streams the increases range
from approximately 100 mg/1. TDS to 400 mg/1. TDS over a distance of less than
five miles. It is at this point that these streams pass through a number of
saline geological formations such as the Cody Shales and Frontier, Lance and
Chugwater formations. As the streams flow towards Sheridan, salinity levels
remain approximately the same.
Figure 10 presents the yearly distribution of total salts at the USGS station
in Sheridan. High salinity concentrations occur twice during the year, during
the winter base flow period and during low flow period of the irrigation season.
The winter peak values from 1970 through 1975 averaged 528 mg/1. TDS while con-
centrations during the summer low flow period averaged 587 mg/1. TDS. The winter
base flow concentrations are considered to be from natural sources. The dif-
ference between the two peaks of 59 mg/1. TDS could be from irrigation return
flows, although the higher evaporation rate during the summer months should als0
be taken into consideration.
Prairie Dog Creek
Very little data are available to describe the overall water quality in this
river system. From what data are available, indications are that high salinity
levels have the greatest potential for creating water quality problems in this
drainage. At present, concentrations have not reached a level which would cause
use impairment. The lack of data makes it impossible to determine trends within
the drainage but concentrations are high enough that concern must be raised. An
insufficient data base also prevents analysis of salinity levels over a yearly
distribution pattern. However, monitoring completed by USGS, at their gage
station in August, 1976 showed a concentration of 1,040 mg/1. TDS, while PRAP0
collected samples at the same station in December, 1976 contained 1,250 mg/1.
TDS. This tends to indicate that most of the salinity is of natural origin.
Underground recharge through the saline Fort Union and Wasatch Formations is
believed to be the largest contributor. The mainstem of Prairie Dog Creek and
its tributaries rise in the foothills and plains rather than the mountains and
receive most of their flow from ground waters.
69
-------
--4
o
Ul
ZD
I
CE
iY.
LU
I—
LU
-------
During the irrigation season waters from Piney Creek are diverted into Prairie
Dog Creek. Addition of these waters may result in the dilution of salinity con-
centrations in Prairie Dog Creek during the irrigation season rather than raising
the concentrations.
Tributaries provided 43 percent of the total salt load, while non-point sources
along the mainstem contributed 57 percent during PRAPO scheduled sampling events.
Table 21 itemizes the approximate tributary and mainstem non-point source salt
yields within this watershed.
TABLE 21
Salt Contributors: Prairie Dog Creek
Background
Yield Level Percent of Total
Contributors (T/D) (T/D) at Mouth Flow
Jenks Creek 51 27 21 42%
Meade Creek 7 78 3 7%
Wildcat 26 85 11 7%
Dutch 20 111 8 4%
non-point source 114 131 47 35%
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area, Water
Resources Research Institute, p. 26.
Although Jenks Creek provided 21 percent of the salt load, it also provided
42 percent of the flow. Total dissolved solids concentrations were three to
four times higher for Wildcat Creek and Dutch Creek than they were for Jenks
Creek and Meade Creek. Both Wildcat and Dutch Creek are located in the plains
area of the drainage and except during storm events derive all their waters
from groundwater sources.
Prairie Dog Creek Summary
Although limited data are available to describe the water quality in this stream
system, it appears as if the most potentially severe water quality problem is
salinity present in the tributaries and lower reaches of the drainage. The
present levels, however, are not now impairing the beneficial uses of the water.
71
-------
Groundwater recharge through naturally saline geological formations is believed
to be the major contributor to the high salinity levels in the Prairie Dog
Creek drainage. The lack of a proper data base on this drainage hinders the
opportunity to conduct a proper analysis of the problem. A more intensive and
extended monitoring program is needed before trends can be detected.
Powder River
Very little data are available to describe the water quality in the North and
Middle Forks of the Powder River. Generally, waters of excellent quality can be
found in the upper reaches of each watershed. These areas are underlain by
Paleozoic and Pre-Cambrian strata which are highly resistant to erosion. No
water quality excesses were observed in the examined data for the upper reaches
of either stream.
Areas bordering the mountains are underlain by Mesozoic rocks. These areas
are subject to natural channel erosion and contribute much of the suspended
sediment discussed in the basin. Earlier studies (1952) indicate a five-fold
salinity increase in Middle Fork waters between Barnum and Kaycee. Sulfate
replaces bicarbonate as the predominant ion. The available data, however, report
no water quality standard violations (except pH for 1974 standards) or criteria
excesses in the source to Kaycee stream segment of the Middle Fork and the North
Fork of the Powder River.
Below Kaycee criteria excesses and standards violations have been recorded. Ex-
cesses of boron (1), ammonia (1) and iron (2) were recorded in 1976 while five
excesses of the fecal coliform criteria have been recorded in the years 1974, 75
and 76. Three of these excesses also violated the Wyoming Water Quality Stand-
ard for fecal coliform bacteria. Excesses of iron and boron are believed to be
of natural origin. Ammonia and fecal coliform bacteria excesses are caused by
the discharge of improperly treated sewage from Kaycee1s sewage treatment fac-
ility.
The waters of the South Fork Powder River have on a number of instances exceeded
the criteria levels for body contact recreation, stock watering and aquatic life.
Of the nine separate criteria exceeded, only three were exceeded more than one
time. They included the aquatic criteria for mercury (2) and iron (3). The
72
-------
six criteria excesses which were found only once are believed to be of natural
origin and anomalous occurrences. The mercury and iron excesses are also be-
lieved to be from natural sources but are believed to be capable of recurring.
The body contact criteria for fecal coliform bacteria was exceeded a total of
three times. Only one of these excesses violated the 1974 Wyoming Water Quality
Standards. The excesses are believed to be caused by livestock and/or wildlife
grazing near the stream.
Salinity levels in the South Fork drainage are very high, averaging 2,742 mg/1.
TDS from 1974 through 1976, based on USGS water quality records. These high
values do not presently effect any beneficial use of these waters. Irrigation
is negligible in the South Fork drainage and most of the water used for irriga-
tion along the mainstem Powder River is diverted prior to the confluence of
the South Fork and Main Stem. Flows in the South Fork during the months of
August, September and October are often less than one cubic foot per second.
Approximately 81 tons of salts per day, based on USGS records 1974 through 1976,
flow from the South Fork. Of this amount, 14 percent or 11 tons per day are
contributed by the seven point source discharges in the drainage located at
various petroleum production facilities. The remaining 86 percent is contribut-
ed by natural sources. The South Fork drainage contains 40 to 50 percent saline
and alkaline soils and exposed shales. About 72 percent of the drainage is under
lain with the very highly saline Frontier formation and Cody shale. The rest is
underlain by other highly saline formations such as Chugwater, Mowrey and Ther-
mopolis shales.
Salt Creek rises in Natrona County and flows northward to enter the Powder River
just west of Sussex. It is by nature an ephemeral stream, however extensive
petroleum production activities in the drainage area discharge enough water to
maintain a flow in the stream below the town of Midwest. Criteria excesses in
this drainage include boron (6), iron (3), ammonia (3), pH (1), and dissolved
oxygen (1). The greatest problem however is the extremely high levels of total
dissolved solids as well as dissolved solids constituents such as chlorides and
flourides. Very high sodium absorption ratios were also observed which would
73
-------
interfere with irrigation, however there is very little irrigation in this
drainage. Currently the waters of Salt Creek are suitable for wildlife and
stockwatering only and have very often shown excesses of dissolved solids
criteria for this beneficial use.
There are presently over forty point source discharges from oil treaters in the
drainage that are under the national point source discharge elimination system
permitting program. Discharge monitoring data show that these point sources dis-
charge a total of 41.35 cubic feet per second at an average total dissolved
solids concentration of 4,535 mg/1. The salt load from these discharges equals
460 tons per day. The average results from data collected at the USGS station
on Salt Creek, however, are quite different. Average flow from 1974 through 1976
equaled 30 cubic feet per second with a total dissolved concentration of 4,405
mg/1. and a salt load of 336 tons per day. The point source discharges account
for well over 100 percent of the discharge and salt load. The difference between
the two sets of figures can be attributed to two things, the first of which is the
possibility of error in sampling results caused by many different people under-
taking the sampling of the various point source discharges. The second reason
which probably accounts for most of the difference is the fact that the discharges
average less than one cubic foot per second and are usually discharged into dry
draws, where much of the water percolates into the ground or evaporates into the
atmosphere.
The Sussex to Montana segment of the Powder River records the highest number of
different parameters (16) which were in excess of criteria levels or in violation
of Wyoming Water Quality Standards. The water uses, which the various parameters
were in excess of the criteria limits include, aquatic life, irrigation, stock
and wildlife watering and primary contact recreation. Of the sixteen parameters
in excess, eleven of them maintain only one or two excesses recorded over the
eight year period examined. These include flouride (1), boron (2), arsenic (1),
radium 226 (2), cadmium (2), lead (2), manganese (1), aluminum (2), cyanide (1),
and pH (2). Natural sources are believed to be the origin of these criteria
excesses, as well as the three iron criteria excesses and the six mercury crit-
eria excesses. A total of five dissolved oxygen criteria, ten ammonia criteria
and thirteen fecal coliform criteria excesses were also reported for this stream
segment during the same eight year period. Exact sources of these excesses are
74
-------
unknown, however, it is believed that inoperable or non-existent septic systems
at household units located along the stream, especially in the area of Arvada,
and livestock and wildlife grazing along the stream are the most likely sources
of the fecal coliform and ammonia excesses. The hydraulic parameters of the lower
Powder River and the climatic conditions during the summer months are the primary
reasons for the low dissolved oxygen levels observed. These low levels may
also be aggravated by the amount of organic material entering the stream from the
sources previously mentioned. The excesses of pH, radium 226, dissolved oxygen
and six of the thirteen fecal coliform bacteria excesses were in violation of
Wyoming Water Quality Standards.
The Wyoming Game and Fish Commission manages this lower segment as channel cat-
fish fishery. Other warm water fish species are located in this segment which
require warm turbid waters. Reservoir projects on other drainages have elim-
inated these species.
Figure 11 presents suspended sediment data collected to evaluate the sediment
yields from active and abandoned bentonite mine pits along the river. Examination
of the area revealed that most of the pits are located at a sufficient distance
from the river to make increased sedimentation unlikely.
Downstream settling and dilution are observed in the section between the Beaver
Creek confluence and Kaycee. Table 22 presents approximate tributary and non-
point contributions for sediments in this segment.
These data were collected during the later stages of runoff events and appear to
be respresentative of the general condition. Total tributary contributions
equal 49 tons of sediment/day. The amount measured at Kaycee amounted to 103
tons/day. The unaccounted 54 tons/day appear to arise from channel erosion as
no sheet or unconfined runoff was observed anywhere in the study area during
sampli ng.
75
-------
Figure 11 - Sediment Distribution: Middle Fork Powder River
Lu o»
Source:
5 10 15
MIDDLE FORK POWDER RIVER - STREAM MILES
-f WEAN
Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area,
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 30.
TABLE 22
Sediment Sources: Middle Fork Powder River
Contributor
Sediments:
Buffalo Creek
Sheep Creek
Beaver Creek
Red Fork
Non-Point Sources
Yield
Background
Percent of Total
(T/D)
Level (T/D)
at Kaycee
4.0
4.0
4
0.2
8.0
4
25.0
33.2
24
16.0
49.2
16
54.0
103.2
52
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area, Water
Resources Research Institute, p. 31.
76
-------
Based on data concerning long-term sediment concentrations at the USGS gage at
Arvada, the greatest concentrations of suspended sediment in the Powder River
occur during runoff seasons. If sediment concentrations in this drainage were
lowered to a point compatible with other drainages in the PRAPO planning area,
it is possible that various fish species which have evolved in the warm, turbid
waters would be lost.
Figure 12 schematically diagrams the salinity profile of the Powder River and its
tributaries. The six major tributaries to the river account for 915 tons of salt
per day or 71 percent of the 1,299 tons per day average measured at the USGS
station at Moorhead, Montana, based on USGS water quality records for the years
1974 through 1976. Salt Creek and Clear Creek contribute the greatest amounts
of salts to the river, 26 percent and 19 percent respectively. Salt Creek's
load of 336 tons/day is carried by an average flow of 30 cfs at a mean con-
centration level of 4,405 mg/1. TDS, which increases the concentration level
in the Powder River from 993 mg/1. to 1,628 mg/1. total dissolved solids based
on tributary contribution only. Clear Creek has the opposite effect on the
Powder River. Its 249 tons/day salt load is carried by a mean discharge of
216 cfs at a concentration level of 697 mg/1., dropping the average total
dissolved solids concentration in the Powder River at Moorhead, Montana to
1,375 mg/1. Between Kaycee and Arvada, non-point sources along the mainstem
and ungaged tributaries account for 297 tons of salts per day, while the same
sources account for 87 tons per day between Arvada and Moorhead. The drain-
age area south of Arvada has the greatest impact on high salinity levels in the
Powder River. Natural sources, and man-related point and non-point sources
are all contributors to the salt load in this section of the Powder River. Of
the 417 tons of salt per day contributed by South Fork and Salt Creek, approx-
imately 347 tons per day come from oil treater point source discharges. The
remaining 70 tons per day are from natural sources in the South Fork drainage.
The North Fork and Middle Fork of Powder River contribute an average of 163
tons of salt per day carried in a flow of 119 cubic feet per second at a con-
centration of 817 mg/1. total dissolved solids. This information is based on
data collected at the USGS water quality station on the Powder River near
Kaycee, Wyoming. The gage station, however, is located immediately below the
headgate for the Sussex Irrigation Canal and does not reflect the irrigation
waters which are diverted from the river and re-enter as return flows below
the gage station.
11
-------
Figure 12 - Schematic Profi le-Tributary Salt Loads to Powder River
Q-455-1375-1299
-(513-1 457- 1212)
216-697-249-^
O- 297-2009-963
-(207-1514-666)
46-1115-88-
QC
UJ
QL
LU
SUSSEX, iRRlGjATlON _CANAL
— (161- 1628-578)
(131-993-242)
119-817-163
-12-2742-79
— 30-4405-336
Of,
NOTE: Number sequences indicate: mean instantaneous flow in c.f.s. -
total dissolved solids concentration in mg/1 - mean salinity in
tons/day. The number sequences in parentheses are derived, based on
tributary contributions only.
O- U.S.G.S. water quality station
78
-------
There are five point source discharges from oil treaters in the North Fork
drainage; they account for 10 tons of salts per day. Natural sources and ir-
rigation return flows account for the remaining contribution. Figure 13
represents the yearly distribution of total dissolved solids at the water
quality station on the Powder River near Kaycee. During the winter base flow
period, TDS peak concentration averaged approximately 925 mg/1. while peak
concentrations during the late irrigation season averaged approximately 1,175
mg/1. The difference of 250 mg/1. is a 27 percent increase over the winter
base flows. The increase is believed to be primarily attributable to higher
TDS concentrations in irrigation return flows along the Middle and North Forks
of the Powder River, and the higher evaporation rate during the summer months
which would have a concentration effect on TDS levels in the streams.
The waters of Crazy Woman Creek, although they add an average of 88 tons of
salt per day to the Powder River, have an overall dilution effect on the total
dissolved solids concentration of the river. Since 1972, the peak concentration
of total dissolved solids has averaged 1,468 mg/1. while the peak concentration
during the irrigation season has averaged 1,848 mg/1., for an increase of 26 per-
cent. The increase of 380 mg/1. is again reflective of the use of the waters for
irrigation, as well as the higher evaporation rate during the summer months.
Between 25 percent and 40 percent of the alluvial soils in the upper portions
of the drainage, including portions of the North, Middle and South Forks of
Crazy Woman Creek and Poison Creek are saline or alkaline. It is in this
area where the largest amount of irrigation in the drainage is found.
Figure 14 shows the same type of relationship between winter peak concentra-
tions and summer peak concentrations on the Powder River at Arvada as exists
on the North and Middle Forks of the Powder and on Crazy Woman Creek. Con-
centrations average 21 percent higher during the summer. The increase per-
centage-wise is lower than on the tributaries because of the buffering effect
caused by the more constant salt loads from Salt Creek.
Between Kaycee and Arvada a salt load of approximately 300 tons per day enters
the river from sources unaccounted for. This is based on data which show an
average of 963 tons per day has been measured at Arvada while average salt loads
from tributaries total only 666 tons per day. The sources of this contribution
are believed to be very similar to those found in the tributaries.
79
-------
POWDER RIVER NEHR KflYCEE, WYOMING
GS ST W ICjN NO. 6312500
1040
2000.0(1
TTrrrrm u j i i mn r rrrprn ittttt ii | i 11 i ( i i 11 11 j i i i n i 11 m rpn mm ittt
leoo.oo
1600.00
LlJ 1400.00
oo
o
oc
>
QZ
LU
I—
IxJ
CT
QC
a:
Cl
1200.00
1000.00
600.00
600.00
400.00
200.00
.00 11 I M M M M I
I M M I M I 1 1 I I I I M 1 M M M I I I M M M I I I I M M M M I I _
1870.00
1971.00
1972.00
DATE
1973.00
1974.00
1975.00
19T7b.Oa
Figure 13. Total Salts: Powder River near Kaycee
A
DISS. SOLIDS
SUM Of CONST
IIUENTS «C/L
-------
CO
CK
LU
t—
LU
5~.
en
CK
a:
o_
POWDER RJVER (If flRVROfl, WYOMING
GS STHTION MO. 6317000
1046
5000.00
titti rr i rnr p rr i rni i it i n itt i t rr n rrrrnrrni rrrrrrrrrrrn p i rrr rrniT
V
r1-
4500.00
4000.00
l-L! 3500.00
ZD
3000.00
2500.00
2000.00
1500.00 .
1000.00
500.00
.00 I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I I II M I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
1970. OU 1971.00 1972.UO 1973.00 1974.00 1975.00 1976. UO
DATE
Figure 14: Total Salts: Powder River at Arvada
DISS. SOL I OS
sum of rreisT
HUtNlS nr,/t
-------
The salt load contributed by Clear Creek is the second highest among the moni-
tored tributaries. However, it also contributes nearly half of the total flow.
The effect of nearly doubling the flow in the river with water containing an
average concentration of 697 mg/1. total dissolved solids, the lowest concentra-
tion of all tributaries, is to dilute the total dissolved solids concentration
in the river. Figure 15 again shows the same relationship between winter peak
concentrations and summer peak concentrations that exists in the other portions
of the drainage which contain irrigated lands. An increase of about 28 percent
is recorded during the summer season. This increase can again be attributed
to irrigation return flows and the higher summer evaporation rate.
Between Arvada and Moorhead, Montana, 87 tons of salt per day are contributed
by unknown sources. Since there is little irrigation along this section of the
river and there are no point source discharges, the contribution can be at-
tributed to natural non-point sources.
Assuming that the percentage increase of total dissolved solids at periods of
peak concentration are proportional at all concentration levels during the
irrigation season, the contribution from irrigation should equal approximately
25 percent of the total salt load during the months May through September.
However, since the increase is only reflected over a five month period and
the average daily salt load figures are representative of a 12 month period,
the salt load attributable to irrigation on the Powder River equals 25 percent
x 5/12 x 1,299 tons/day (at Moorhead, Montana) or 135 tons per day.
Table 23 represents a rough estimation of the salt load allocation for the
Powder River Drainage, based on the data developed in this section. These
figures are not purported to be a comprehensive analysis of the salinity issue
in the Powder River drainage. They do, however, give a general idea of the
major sources in the drainage and some estimation of what effect man's activi-
ties maintain on salinity levels in the Powder River.
82
-------
2000.00
CLERR CREEK NEAR flRVROfi. WYOMING 104?
CS STHTION NO. 6324000
rm iti iTi"rj rTTnrrTTi rr 1 | i t i i i n il n j i T rn Ti ii~n |T[_T iT iT7Tr rp
Lli
ZD
_J
cn
>
Ckl
LU
h-
CT
Ctl
CC
Q_
I BOG.00
1600.00
1400.00
1200.00
1000.00
800.00
600.00
400.00
200.00
mm
.00 I I I t I I ' I ' ' ' I ' I I I I I I ' ' I ' I I ' II I ' I I I ' I I ' ' I I ' I ' I I ' I I ' 1 I I II ' I I I I I 1 I t l I I ' I 1 I '
1970.00 1971.00 1972.00 1973.00 1974.00 1975.00 1976.00
DRTE
Figure 15. Total Salts: Clear Creek near Arvada
DISS. SOlIDS
slim of i nnsr
jriltfJI'i MC/L
-------
TABLE 23
Major Salt Sources - Powder River
Sources
Load (Tons/Day)
Percent of Total
Natural
Point Sources
807
357
62.1
27.5
(Oil Treaters)
Irrigated Agriculture
135
10.4
Totals
1,299
100.0
Source: PRAP0 Generated Data.
The estimation of the salt load from irrigated agriculture is believed to be
conservative, since no attempt was made to define what portion of the summer
increase was related to a higher evaporation rate. Approximately 66,300 acres
of land are irrigated in the Powder River Basin. Based on 135 tons of salt
per day, the average annual salt yield for these lands would equal 0.74 tons
per acre per year. Petroleum production is the activity which has the greatest
effect on increasing the natural salinity load in the Powder River. Salt Creek
accounts for 26 percent of the total load. However, total dissolved solids
concentrations in Salt Creek have shown a decline in the last four years as more
oil treater facilities comply with discharge effluent limitations. Natural
sources are and will remain the largest contributor to the salt load in the
Powder River.
Powder River Summary
The tributaries and the mainstem of the Powder River have the greatest number of
water quality excesses in the three county area. In almost all cases, the sources
are of natural origin and maintain little effect on the beneficial uses of the
waters. The man-made sources pertaining to water quality excesses comes from
increased total dissolved solids concentrations and increased organic and bact-
erial concentrations. Swimmable and fishable criteria are most often violated,
yet the very nature of the Powder River creates its own swimming and fishing
limitations. Salinity levels in the river below Sussex would probably limit
its use for widespread irrigation. However, it is not salinity levels which
limit irrigation below Sussex, but rather the topography of the area which would
84
-------
require the water to be pumped rather than gravity fed. The dilution effect
of Crazy Woman Creek, and especially Clear Creek, return TDS concentrations in
the river to levels where they are once again capable of being used for irrigation
as the waters enter Montana. The stricter limitations being placed on point
source discharges in Salt Creek and others, as well as the stability of the
number of irrigated acres in the drainage limit the possibility of large salt
load increases in the Powder River to occur.
Clear Creek
The Clear Creek segment in the Bighorn National Forest includes the North,
Middle and South Forks as well as a section of the mainstem below the confluences.
Water quality data are very limited. These limited data indicate that the water
quality is generally good. Isolated fecal coliform violations were noted and
appear to result from various recreational activities. Water quality standard
(1974) violations for pH were also observed while criteria excesses consist of
insufficient alkalinities during runoff events. Neither of these two observa-
tions are indicative of pollution problems in this segment.
Between Forest Service land and Buffalo there are insufficient data to derive
a definitive statement about the water quality in the segment. Data collected
for PRAPO indicated no water quality standard violations or criteria excesses.
The in-Buffalo segment exhibited pH violations for the 1974 water quality stand-
ards and one criteria excess each for boron (agriculture and stock water) and
cyanides (aquatic life). These criteria excesses are believed to be from
natural sources.
The Buffalo to Texaco Dam segment shows sharp increases in water quality stand-
ard violations for fecal coliform and pH determinations, while increases in
criteria excesses, ammonia (2) and mercury (1), were also noted. Buffalo's
sewage treatment plant appears to be the primary source of problem in this
segment.
85
-------
The Texaco Dam to north segment is characterized by an occasional pH and fecal
co1ifonn violation and by water quality criteria excesses for aquatic life,
agriculture and primary contact recreation. Parameters which were in excess
of criteria levels include boron (2), iron (2), mercury (3), and ammonia (4).
Natural conditions are believed to be the source of boron, iron and mercury.
Ammonia excesses are probably from improperly functioning individual wastewater
systems and runoff from livestock grazing areas. None of these criteria
excesses have shown to be consistent and are not believed to have caused sus-
tained use impairment. The predominant problem appears to be the sharp increases
in salinity in this segment. Based on USGS data obtained near Arvada, the
periods of highest constituent concentrations occur in July and August.
Figure 16 presents spatial salinity data collected during the past two years.
Downstream concentrative increases are diluted by a series of tributaries from
Forest Service land to approximately Clearmont. From Clearmont to the confluence
with the Powder River a sharp increase in total dissolved solids was observed.
The probable sources for this have been previously discussed in the Powder River
Salinity section.
Figure 17 illustrates fecal coliform concentrations from above Buffalo to the
confluence with the Powder River. This figure corroborates the previously
described data which show excessive coliform concentrations only in the below
Buffalo segment.
Piney Creek is a tributary to Clear Creek, contributing nearly fifty percent of
the total flow in Clear Creek. Only a few water quality criteria excesses were
noted in this drainage, other than the naturally predominant characteristics of
low alkalinity and high pH. Natural sources account for criteria excesses of
selenium (2) and mercury (1). Two fecal coliform excesses and four ammonia
excesses were recorded. These are believed to be caused by individual waste-
water systems and livestock and wildlife near the stream. None of these criteria
excesses are a constant problem and little if any use impairment is noted.
86
-------
Figure 16- Salinity Distribution: Clear Creek
UJ
UJ
CL
UJ
UJ
UJ
UJ
BUFFALO
800
01
o
600
o
CO
O
UJ
>
_J
o 400
en
CO
o
-J
<
h-
200
O
I-
20
30
40
50
60
CLEAR CREEK-STREAM MILES
-f-MEAN i MAXIMUM • MINIMUM
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area,
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 38.
Clear Creek Summary
At the present time, the greatest water quality problems in Clear Creek occur
in the segment between Buffalo and the Texaco Dam. Buffalo's wastewater treat-
ment facility is the major source of these problems. The proposed upgrading
of the facility should eliminate most of the problems, however there may be a
need for advanced treatment to eliminate toxicity problems from ammonia and
87
-------
Figure 17- Fecal Coliform Distribution: Clear Creek
2,000
1,000
500
2i 200
o
o 2 ioo
O uj 50
o Q_
—' 20
10
0
30
20
40
50
60
CLEAR CREEK-STREAM MILES
-f- mean
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area,
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 39.
chlorine. Whether this in fact will be necessary has yet to be determined. Use
impairment for aquatic life and primary contact recreation at present do exist
in portions of this segment, primarily below the municipal wastewater discharge.
On occasion salinity concentrations in Clear Creek may peak at levels which if
maintained could pose a potential problem to irrigation. However, the present
mean concentration in Clear Creek is well below that point and has shown no
prolonged tendency to increase. In fact, TDS concentrations since 1974 have
been well below those in the first part of the decade.
88
-------
Area ranchers and conservation personnel have noted that since the completion of
Healy Reservoir on Clear Creek at the point of Texaco's diversion to Lake DeSmet,
the groundwater levels along Clear Creek appear to be higher. These high ground- .
water levels are leaching salts from the soils and depositing them on the sur-
face in draws and gulleys. This potential problem should be carefully monitored
on Clear Creek and on Piney Creek as Texaco begins to raise the level of Lake
DeSmet.
Donkey Creek
Donkey Creek in Campbell County drains an area which includes most of the City of
Gillette. Point source discharges into the drainage include the Gillette waste-
water treatment facility, Wyodak Mine and Neil Simpson Power Plant. The stream
in this area is a Class III stream but is upgraded to a Class II stream near the
county line. Criteria for aquatic life, stock watering, agriculture, and primary
contact recreation are in excess in this stream, however, in most cases, they
include only a single excess. Iron, mercury, pH, fluoride and boron fall into
this category. Excesses of criteria levels for dissolved oxygen (7), fecal col-j-
form bacteria (9), and ammonia (6) are greatest problems in the drainage. All
of these can be traced to the inability of Gillette's sewage treatment facility
to adequately treat the wastewaters generated by the greatly expanded population
of Gillette.
Little Powder River
The Little Powder River drains most of the northern portions of Campbell County
including the northern edges of the City of Gillette. The waters of this river
contain numerous excesses of various criteria for aquatic life, stock water,
agriculture and primary contact recreation. Natural deposits of iron create
the largest problem with this drainage, having a total of eighteen excesses in
the period of record. Other parameters whose sources are generally of natural
origin include fluoride (1), mercury (2), pH (4), boron (5), lead (4) and chlo-
rides (2). Man-related excesses include fecal coliform bacteria (2), and
ammonia (7). Sources of these violations are probably livestock grazing near
the stream. Dissolved oxygen levels have been reported below criteria and
standards levels; climate and the stream morphology are the causes of these
violations. Total dissolved solids levels in the drainage are very high due to
the generally saline geology underlying the area and the fact that approximately
25 percent of the alluvial soils in the drainage are alkaline or saline.
89
-------
The average number of irrigated acres in the drainage is less than 2,500.
This low number of acres has little effect on the water quality.
Point source discharge permits in the drainage number ten, four oil well
treaters, two mine discharges and four domestic discharges. Of these, only
six are actively discharging at a total flow of less than 1 cubic foot per
second.
Groundwater Quality
Groundwater information is limited for the three-county area. Water quality
data are even more limited. Data were basically obtained from studies concerning
mining operations, two groundwater studies undertaken by the Water Resources
Research Institute in the South Sheridan area, the unincorporated community of
Story, and the United States Geological Survey. Table 24 contains data compiled
fromavariety of groundwater sources in the Powder River Basin. These wells,
when sampled, were not affected by ongoing mining activities. These data show
the range of concentrations observed in soluble salts concentrations. As
observed, there is much variation in the naturally occurring groundwater quality
of the Powder River Basin.
TABLE 24
Area Groundwater Quality: Mined Lands Areas
TDS
Iron
Sodium
Sulfate
Aauifer
(mq/1.)
PH
(mq/1.)
(mg/1.)
mg/1.)
SAR
Overburden
4800
7.1
0.02
1355
1320
51.3
Coal Cutout
5800
7.2
0.3 0
720
3120
4.7
Coal
520
7.4
0.40
135
182
4.7
Coal
1600
8.4
0.10
430
4.0
50.7
Source: Water Quality Determinations, Mined Lands Areas, Northeastern Wyoming,
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 23.
Table 25 was prepared from different sources and presents discharge data collected
from active mines including the Belle Ayr Mine in Campbell County, the Ash Creek
and Big Horn Mines in Sheridan County, and the Decker Mine in Montana. These
data are taken to be respresentative of the regional water quality information
90
-------
currently available. These mines have not been very successful in meeting the
NPDES discharge requirement of 30 mg/1. for the total suspended solids. The
values listed for the first Belle Ayr Mine sample result from coal fines present
in mist waters utilized to keep the coal moist in loadout facilities. This
water source, though low in volume (1.0 cfs), provided special treatment problems
according to recent information. Installation of a sand filter has apparently
rectified the problem.
TABLE 25
Water Quality Data: NPDES Sites, PRAPO Planning Area
TDS
Iron
TSS
Sulfate
Si te
Sample
(mg/1.)
pH
(mg/1.)
(mg/1.)
(mq/1.)
Decker Mi ne
1
2343
8.5
0.26
«a >m «•
550
2
1689
8.9
0.11
362
Belle Ayr Mine
1
804
8.5
0.36
300
380
2
866
8.4
0.54
76
200
Big Horn Mine
1
2987
8.0
0.64
25
_ _ _
2
2750
9.0
0.49
64
- - —
Ash Creek Mine
1
340
8.3
0.80
140
57
Source: Water Quality Determination, Mined Lands Areas, Northeastern Wyoming,
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 31.
Alteration of groundwater quality in affected aquifers has not accompanied mining
at AMAX Coal Company's Belle Ayr Mine in Campbell County based on long term moni-
toring data for these wells. Proper continuous sampling techniques will provide
reliable information for analysis purposes at all mine sites in the three-county
area.
Data are scarce pertaining to water quality in reclaimed pit areas in Wyoming.
Table 26 presents data collected at two abandoned mine sites in Sheridan County.
Statistical comparisons between the concentrations observed in these abandoned
spoils and nearby unaffected groundwaters indicate that 5 of 18 analyses revealed
statistically significant concentration increases in waters associated with aban-
doned spoils. Similar tests comparing the spoil waters with nearby surface sour-
ces showed that higher concentrations were observed in 6 of 15 spoil samples. in
a control test 3 of 15 determinations revealed significant differences when suf-
31
-------
face and unaffected groundwaters were compared. The parameters differing in
concentration for the first series of analyses were: TDS, hardness, calcium,
magnesium, and sulfate while TDS, hardness, pH, calcium, sulfate and nitrate
differed in the second test. For the unaffected sources there were differences
in pH, calcium and silica (SiC^). Accompanying analyses for trace metals revealed
only cadmium concentrations in excess of drinking water criteria. It should be
mentioned that these mines were abandoned over twenty years ago. Modern reclam-
ation methods should produce more environmentally acceptable results.
TABLE 26
Water Quality Data; Reclaimed Pit Areas
TDS TSS Iron Total Hardness
Si te Sample (mq/1.) pH ¦ (mg/1.) (rog/1.) (mq/1.)
Hidden Waters Mine 1 5210 5.8 21 3134 3392
2 5906 5.9 30 3133 3434
Plachek Spoils 1 2548 8.6 30 1020 1647
Big Horn Mine 2 2372 8.7 26 1262 1221
Source: Water Quality Determination, Mined Lands Areas, Northeastern Wyoming,
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 37
Two special groundwater studies were initiated in the South Sheridan and Story
areas. These areas were chosen for investigation because they utilize individual
drinking water wells and septic systems. Wells are often constructed to the
depth of septic tank installations.
No confirmed water-borne diseases have been reported at either location, but
considerable population growth is predicted for both areas. Table 27 presents
data collected during this investigation. Only one well showed an elevated fecal
coliform concentration; a second sample of this site was within normal limits.
At other sampled wells, total bacterial counts or nitrates appeared questionable.
In-depth bacteriological testing at these locations could reveal no strictly
pathogenic organisms in the isolates evaluated. Several common bacterial forms
were found which could cause discomfort to susceptible individuals.
92
-------
TABLE 27
Groundwater Quality Investigation
Story and South Sheridan, Wyoming
Fecal Fecal Total Count
No. of Coliform Streptococci Coliform PCA (35C) Nitrate TDS
Location Samples (/'100 ml) (/100 ml) (/100 ml) (/ml) (mg/1) (mg/1)
Story 81 0-1 0-7 0-13 0-8000 0-3.9 34-336
South 11 0-133 0-298 0-920 11-2360 0-7.6 58-801
Sheri dan
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area,
Water Resource Re.search Institute p. 52
Summary of Major Water Quality Problems
The most pressing water quality problems appear to be as follows in the three-
county area:
1. In relation to point source pollution, it appears that dissolved oxygen
concentrations will probably be maintained at acceptable levels by applying 1977
standards. However, the recommended sewage treatment alternatives for Buffalo
and Sheridan, as they now stand, will probably be incapable of reducing ammonia
concentrations below non-toxic levels in Clear Creek and Goose Creek. The two
cities, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Wyoming Department of Environ-
mental Quality and the project consultants are now working to develop a solution
to these problems.
2. Potential salinity problems exist in Prairie Dog Creek, the Middle and North
Forks of Powder River, Crazy Woman Creek and Clear Creek if TDS levels in these
drainages were to record any consistent sharp increases. Little Powder River,
Salt Creek, South Fork of Powder River and Mainstem of Powder River between
Sussex and Arvada all have TDS levels which would impair irrigated agriculture
in those drainages; however, very little irrigated agriculture occurs in those
drainage areas.
93
-------
3. In relationship to forested lands, it appears that potentially the greatest
water quality problems will be from erosion, activities on forest land, and po-
tential water quality degradation from increased recreational use in forested
areas. Water quality degradation may also occur from over-grazing and tim-
bering.
4. Due to an increase in residential growth in unincorporated areas and unin-
corporated communities, many problems have occurred from contaminants leaching
out of septic tank systems. In the future, ineffective septic systems may lead
to greater contamination of surface waters as well as groundwater quality in
various development areas.
5. With increased mining in the three-county area, there will be greater po-
tential for water quality degradation occurring from mining operations. Water
quality problems will occur from sedimentation, disturbance of aquifers, and
the introduction of saline or toxic materials into the aquifers.
94
-------
STREAM SEGMENT ANALYSIS AND
RECOMMENDED WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Surface Water Quality Summary
In general, the surface water quality in the PRAPO study area is good. Waters
in and around the mountains are excellent. As water flows into the plains areas,
the quality deteriorates. Natural conditions contribute a great deal to this
trend. Such factors as climate, geology, soi1s, and topography all influence the
natural quality of the water. Man's influence also plays a key part in the deter-
mination of water quality in the basin, especially those waters which are located
close to populated areas.
In reviewing stream segments for their ability to meet the 1983 fishable-swim-
mable criteria, it was necessary to consider all stream segments, whether or not
they were able to hydraulically support those uses.
The following stream segments will be unable to meet 1983 fishable-swimmable cri-
teria because of natural sources of pollution:
Little Powder River
Mainstem Powder River near Arvada
South Fork Powder River
Trace metals in the Little Powder River, Mainstem Powder River and South Fork
Powder River, as well as periodically low dissolved oxygen levels in the main-
stem Powder River, will prevent these stream segments from meeting the 1983
goals.
The following stream segments will be unable to meet 1983 fishable-swimmable
criteria, unless action is taken to eliminate man-caused sources of pollution:
Goose Creek below Sheridan
Clear Creek below Buffalo
Stonepi1e-Donkey Creek below Gillette
95
-------
These segments will not presently meet the 1983 goals because of excessive
levels of ammonia and fecal coliform bacteria. Upgrading of sewage treatment
facilities in Sheridan, Buffalo and Gillette is required to eliminate these
sources of pollution.
Little Goose Creek below its confluence with McCormick Creek and Big Goose
Creek from above Sheridan to its confluence with Little Goose Creek have also
recorded high numbers of coliform bacteria. Not enough data has been collected
in these segments, however, to determine whether they are unable to meet the 1983
criteria at this time.
A basic problem with the coliform data collected in this program, as well as the
coliform data reported by USGS, is that the frequency of collection was at best
one sample per month. Both the Federal water quality criteria and the Wyoming
water quality standards for fecal coliform bacteria are based on a logarithmic
mean of not less than five samples in a 30-day period. Therefore, any refer-
ence to coliform excesses in this plan must be conditioned - that they are
based on instantaneous samples and do not conform to standard monitoring pro-
cedures. Because of the very high coliform numbers in the creeks below the
sewage outfalls at Sheridan, Buffalo and Gillette and because effluent sampling
at those sewage treatment plants does follow standard procedure, those three
stream segments are the only ones which can be readily identified as not pre-
sently meeting the 1983 swimmable goal.
Table 28 summarizes the water quality information discussed previously in this
chapter.
Point Source Review
The Water Resources Research Institute undertook this work effort in two phases.
The first contained an assessment of the municipal point source pollution prob-
lems associated with the sewage treatment plants in Sheridan, Buffalo and Gil-
lette. This consisted of applying mathematical models to determine present and
future water quality conditions associated with sewage discharge from the three
cities. The second work item was a review of the NPDES program in the three-
county area.
96
-------
TABLE 28
WATER QUALITY SUMMARY: PRAPO PLANNING AREA
Stream Segment
Season
U-Uet
D-Dry
Water Quality Excess
4 Number
Type
Source
Impaired Use
Recommended
Control Action
Remarks
Tongue River
(Source to Dayton)
vO
Tongue River
(Dayton to Monarch)
U
D
W
D
W
D
W
W
D
W
W
Lead
It
pH
II
Mercury
H
Alkalinity
Iron
II
Kirganese
Ammonia
PH
Ammonia
Fecal Collform
Iron
l^ead
it
t-torganese
Chromium
Silver
Merc ury
(2)
(3)
(2)
(2)
O)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
Fecal Coliform (1)
(2)
(2)
(1)
(1)
(2)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
EPA
M
WWQS
It
EPA
Natural
WWQS
EPA
Natural or
Agriculture
Natura 1
Raw Water
II
Aquatic Life
M
II
It
II
Raw Water
II
Aquatic Life
II
Primary Contact
Aquatic Life
None
Municipal or
Agriculture
Nat ura 1
Primary Contact
Raw Water
Aquatic Life
Upgrade Ranchester
Sewage Treatment Plant
II
None
A total of 17 excesses were
noted ; of these only pH
violated Wyoming water
quality standards. Source
of ammonia excess was
probably wildlife or live-
stock. Because of season,
wildlife was probable cause
of fecals excess.
A total of 17 excesses were
noted. Again, pH was the
only WWQS violation. Total
suspended solids levels roae
sharply during early spring,
possibly due to flushing of
stream cliannel.
Tongue River
(Monarch to Goose
Creek)
W
D
W
D
PH
«l
Mercury
Fecal Coliform
(1)
u>
(2)
(1)
WWQS
H
EPA
Agriculture Primary Contact
This short section has only
5 excesses. Fecal excess
is probably from winter
graziig activities.
-------
Streaw Segment
Season
W-Wet
D-Dry
Water Quality Excess
& Number
Type
Tongue River
(Goose Creek
to State line)
<43
CO
North Fork
Powder River
Middle Fork
Powder River
South Fork
Powder fliver
Powder River
(Kaycee to Sussex)
W
D
W
D
W
D
W
D
U
U
W
pll
M
, Mercury
n
Ammonia
II
Fecal Coliform
H
No Excesses
pll
Ammonia
Iron
It
Mercury
Chromium
Aluminum
Arsen ic
Cadmium
Lead
Ammonia
Iron
Boron
(2)
(1)
(2)
(1)
(3)
(3)
(6)
(5)
(A)
Fecal Coliform (2)
<1>
(1)
(1)
(2)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
Fecal Coliform (4)
(1)
(1)
(2)
(1)
WWQS
m
EPA
EPA &
WWQS
EPA
WWQS
EPA
Source Impaired Use
Recoianended
Control Action
Renarks
Natura 1
Municipal &
Domestic
Aquatic Life
None
Upgrade Sheridan
Sewage Treatment Plant
A total of 21 excesses in
this segment. Four of the
fecal coliform excesses
were above water quality
standard .
Primary Contact
Natural
Aquatic Life
None
Natural &
Agriculture
Natural
Primary Contact
Aquatic Life
A total of M excesses are
recorded. Wildlife and
livestock are probable
sources of high coliform
counts.
Municipal Primary Contact Upgrade Kaycee
Sewage Treatment Plant
A total of 9 excesses were
recorded.
Natural
Aquatic Life
None
-------
Season
W-Wet Water Quality Excess
Stream Segment D-Dry 4 Number Type
Powder River
(Sussex to MonLaria)
pH (2)
Fecal Coliform (8)
WWUS
EPA 4
WWQ.S
r>
w
D
W
D
U
D
U
D
D
W
W
U
w
w
(5)
Ammonia (6)
-------
Stream Segment
Season
W-Wet
D-Dry
Water Quality Excess
& Number
Type
Uig Goose Creek W
(Fork Confluence W
to Water Supply D
Inlet)
Alkalinity
ptl
(2)
(1)
(1)
EPA
WWQS
Big Goose Creek W
(Inlet to above W
Town)
pU
Fecal Coliforra
(1)
(1)
EPA
Big Goose Creek U
(Above Town to D
Sewage Outfall) U
PH
Fecal Coliforra
(3)
(1)
(7)
WWQS
II
EPA &
WWQS
Ammonia
Boron
(1)
(1)
(1)
EPA
Goose Creek W pit (1) WWQS
(Sewage Outfall to D " (2) "
Plactiek Pit) W Fecal Coliforra (M EPA &
WWQS
D '• (8)
W Ammonia (5) EPA
D " (ti) «
W Mercury (3) "
W Iron (1) "
D Aluminum (1) "
Goose Creek D pH (2) WWQS
(Plachek Pit to w Fecal Coliforin {>,) EPA 4
Confluence) WWQS
D •• (2) "
Source Impaired llae
Recommended
Control Action
Remarks
Natural
Aquatic Life
None
Agriculture Primary Contact
Natural
H
Domestic
Sewage
Aquatic Life
n
Primary Contact
" High fecal coliform counts
" caused by illegal dis-
Enforcement of Adequate charges from septic sya-
On-Site Disposal System terns is the most pressing
Program problem in this segment.
Natura 1
Aquatic Life
Irrigation
None
Municipa1
Natura 1
Aquatic Life
It
Primary Contact
II
Aquatic Life
Upgrade Sheridan
Sewage Treatment Plant
None
Sheridan's Sewage Treatment
Plant is worst source of
pollution in segment .
Treatment greater than sec-
ondary may be needed to
correct amnonia toxicity
problems.
Stockwater
Natural Aquatic Life "
Municipal Primary Contact Upgrade Slieridan
Sewage Treatment Plant
-------
Stream Segment
Season
W-Uet
D-Dry
Water Quality Excess
4 Number
Type
Little Goose Creek
W
D
U
U
Alkalinity (5)
(3)
pll (6)
Dissolved Oxygen (1)
Fecal Coliform (51
EPA
II
WWQS
EPA &
WWQS
EPA
(2)
Prairie Dog Creek
Iron
(1)
Clear Creek
(In forest)
Alkalinity (0) "
pH (3) WWQS
(2)
Fecal Coliform (1) EPA
Clear Creek
(Above Buffalo)
No Excesses
Clear Creek
(In Buffalo)
pit
Cyanide
Bor on
(1)
(1)
(1)
WWQS
EPA
Clecr Creek
(Eelow Buffalo to
Texaco Dam)
D
W
D
W
D
D
PH
Fecal Coliform
Ammonia
Mercury
iM
(5)
(7)
(3)
(1)
(1)
(1)
WWQS
EPA 4
WWQS
EPA
Source Impa ired Use
Recommended
Control Action
Remarks
Natural Aquatic Life None Illegal septic system
" " " discharges are the
" " " critical problem in
" " " this drainage.
Domestic Primary Contact Enforcement of
Septic System
Program
II H It
Natural Aquatic Life None
H II II
II II II
II II II
Recreation Primary Contact "
Natural Aquatic Life "
ir m it
" Stcckwater "
Municipal Aquatic Life Upgrade Buffalo A new sewage treatment
Sewage Treatment Plant facility will correct
" " " most of the problems in
" Primary Contact " this segiient . Miy need
treatment higher than
" " " secoixiary to eliminate
" Aquatic Life " ammonia toxicity.
II II H
Natural M None
-------
Stream Segment
Season
W-Uet
D-Ory
Water Quality Excess
& Number
Clear Creek D
(Texaco Dam to W
Confluence) U
0
U
U
W
D
Crazy Woman Creek W
W
Pi ney Creek U
D
W
W
U
W
D
W
14
Salt Creek U
D
W
0
M
D
W
D
pH (1)
Fecal Coliform (1)
Ammonia (2)
" (2)
Boron (2)
Iron (2)
Mercury 12)
" (1)
Alkalinity (11)
Iron (1)
Alkalinity (9)
(3)
pll (5)
Ammonia (2)
(2)
Fecal Coliforra (1)
(1)
Mercury (1)
Selenium (2)
Dissolved Solids (4)
(2)
Chlorides (8)
(7)
Fluorides (7)
(7)
SAR (5)
-------
Stream Segment
Season
W-Wet
D-Dry
Water Quality Excess
4 Number
11t Creek (cont'
-------
Stream Segment
Season
W-Wet
D-Dry
Water Quality Excess
& Number
Type
Source
Impaired Use
Recommended
Control Action
Little Powder-
W
Dissolved Oxygen
(1)
WWOS «
Natural
Aquatic Life
Wane
River (cont'd I
EPA
*
D
m
M)
N
M
•t
If
W
Iron
(15)
II
N
H
It
D
M
(3)
fl
M
M
M
W
Mercury
(2)
It
H
fl
M
W
Boron
(S)
n
tt
Irrigation
II
D
Chlorides
(2)
ti
M
Stockwater
1*
W
Fluorides
(1)
H
M
II
n
W
Lead
(2)
ft
it
II
it
D
II
(2)
n
II
II
(i
Remarks
Stream Segment : Describes reach of stream; see Map 12 for corresponding listing of segments.
t—1
2 Season: Wet season = March 1 through September 30; Dry season = October 1 through March 1. These seasons were determined after inspectiig USGS flow
records for the PfiAPQ plannirg area.
Water Quality Excess and Number: The particular parameter observed in excess of either published Environmental Protection Agency criteria (Quality
Criteria for Water, 1976 or Water Quality Criteria, 1972), or the Wyoming Water Quality Standards! 197*t) is identified.
Also, the nunber of excess samples observed are given.
Type: Identifies whether the parametric excess exceeds the abovementioned EPA criteria or Wyoming Standards.
Impaired Use: Identifies the instream use which is impaired correspondir»5 to the parameter mentioned under Water Quality Excess. Use impairment is
listed in the table when the uater quality criteria is exceeded for any one of the stream uses identified in Table 10 or when the criteri
for aquatic life or primary recreation is exceeded.
Recommended Control Action: For those instream excesses which are not caused by natural sources and do demonstrate a persistent tendency of exceediig
the criteria, the control action as articulated in the text is identified. Not all control actions discussed in the text
are included in this table since the purpose of some of the control programs is to prevent water quality problems where
excesses are not currently being observed.
Kemarks: Self explanatory.
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area, Uater Resources Research Institute, p. 41 - 42 and PRAPO Staff.
-------
TABLE 29
Present and Expected Waste Loads: Goose Creek, Sheridan County
Facility Plan Design Population for 1995 25.325
Waste Loads
Year
Population
Flow
(cfs)
CBOD
(mfc/l)
Comments
1S76
13,200
3.1
96
Present conditions
1982
-16,000
3.7
96
Average expected value
19,200
4.5
96 "
Average expected value
19,800
4.5
96
Average expected value
16,000
3.7
115
No additional treatment
19,200
4.5
115
No additional treatment
19,800
4.5
115
No additional treatment
16,000
3.7
15
95/20 reduction
19,200
4.5
15
95/20 reduction
19,800
4.5
15
95/20 reduction
16,000
3.7
15
95/95 reduction
19,200
4.5
15
95/95 reduction
19,800
4.5
15
95/95 reduction
16,000
3.7
45
NPDES standard
19,200
4.5
45
NPDES standard
19,800
4.5
45
NPDES standard
1995
25,000
5.8
96
Average expected value
. 31,700
7.5
96
Average expected value
33,300
7.5
96
Average expected value
25,000
5.8
115
No additional treatment
31,700
7.5
115
No additional treatment
33,300
7.5
115
No additional treatment
25,000
5.8
15
95/20 reduction
31,700
7.5
15
95/20 reduction
33,300
7.5
15
95/20 reduction
25,000
5.8
15
95/95 reduction
31,700
7.5
15
95/95 reduction
33,300
7.5
15
95/95 reduction
25,000
5.8
45
NPDES standard
31,700
7.5
45
NPDES standard
33,300
7.5
45
NPDES standard
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area,
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 45.
105
-------
TABLE 3Q
Goose Creek Dissolved Oxygen Response
Ultimate
Waste
Loads
Maximum
DO Level at
CBOD
NBOD
DO Deficit
Maximum Deficit
Year
(mg/l)
(oir/1)
(rag/1)
(ms/1)
Comments
1982
96
33
5.3
3.2
Average effluent
115
41
5.4
31
Surveyed effluent
45
12
3.7
4.8
NPDES effluent
45
0.75
3.7
4.8
NPDES effluent*3
15
12
5.0
3.5
95/20 reduction
15
0.75
4.9
3.6
95/95 reduction
15
12
3.5
5.0
Low lnstream demand
15
0.75
3.4
5.1
Low lnstream demand
45
12
2.4
6.2
NPDES effluent3
45
0.75
2.3
6.3
ITPDES effluenta,b
1995
96
33
5.8
2.7
Average effluent
115
41
5.9
2.6
Surveyed effluent
45
12
4.4
4.2
NPDES efflue.-t
45
0.75
4.4
4.2
NPDES effluentb
15
12
5.4
3.1
95/20 reduction
15
0.75
5.3
3.2
95/95 reduction
15
12
4.0
4.5
• Low lnstream demand
15
0.75
3.9
4.6
Low lnstrenn demand
45
12
2.4
6.2
NPDES effluent3
45
0.75
2.3
6.3
NPDES cffluenta,b
aEffluent DO " 6.0 ^Additional ammonia removal
Source; Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area,
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 47.
Municipal Point Sources
The analyses and findings concerning municipal point sources were described in
the document, "Water Quality Model Applications: Johnson, Sheridan and Camp-
bell Counties, Wyoming" by Water Resources Research Institute. The major
features addressed in that study were the type and sophistication of the models
used, the severity of the present and expected problems and the amount and type
of treatment necessary to achieve "fishable-swimmable" waters, Tables 29, 31
and 33 present the current and expected waste loads utilized during the model
evaluations. The most limited Nitrogeneous Biochemical Oxygen Demand (NBOD)
values listed resulted from calculations provided by the Department of Environ-
mental Quality and represent the allowable ammonia concentration with no toxic
effects. Tables 30, 32, 34 and 35 present the results of the model evaluations.
These data show that dissolved oxygen concentrations will probably be maintained
196
-------
TABLE 31
Present and Expected Waste Loads:
Clear Creek, Buffalo, Wyoming
Facility Plan Design Population for 1995 17,513
Waste Loads
Flow
CBOD
Year
Population
(cfs)
(mg/1)
Comments
1976
4,200
1.00
59.0
Present conditions
1982
5,800
1.35
59.0
No additional treatment
8,200
1.90
59.0
No additional treatment
8,300
1.90
59.0
No additional treatment
5,800
1.35
45.0
NPDES standard
8,200
1.90
45.0
NPDES standard
8,300
1.90
45.0
NPDES standard
5,800
1.35
5.7
95/20 reduction
8,200
1.90
5.7
95/20 reduction
8,300
1.90
5.7
95/20 reduction
5,800
1.35
5.7
95/95 reduction
8,200
1.90
5.7
95/95 reduction
8,300
1.90
5.7
95/95 reduction
8,200
1.90
140.0
Winter values
1995
10,600
2.45
59.0
No additional treatment
18,300
4.30
59.0
No additional treatment
18,900
4. 30
59.0
No additional treatment
10,600
2.45
45.0
NPDES standards
18,300
4.30
45.0
NPDES standards
18,900
4.30
45.0
NPDES standards
10,600
2.45
5.7
95/20 reduction
18,300
4.30
5.7
95/20 reduction
18,900
4.30
5.7
95/20 reduction
10,600
2.45
5.7
95/95 reduction
18,300
4.30
5.7
95/95 reduction
18,900
4.30
5.7
95/95 reduction
18,300
4.30
140.0
Winter values
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area,
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 46.
107
-------
TABLE 32
Clear Creek Dissolved Oxygen Response
Ultimate
Waste Load
Mux!mum
DO Deficit
(mg/1)
DO Level at
Maximum Deficit
(hik/1)
Year
CBOD
(rass/l)
NHOD
(mg/1)
Comments
1982
59
12
2.8
5.5
Surveyed effluent
45
7.6
2.8
5.5
NPDES effluent
45
7.6
3.2
5.0
NPDES effluent*
5.7
20
2.a
5.5
95/20 reduction
5.7
1.25
2.8
5.5
95/95 reduction
5.7
20
1.2
7.1
Low instream demand
5.7
1.25
1.1
7.2
Low instream demand
1995
59
12
2.5
5.8
Surveyed effluent
45
7'. 6
2.5
5.8
NPDES effluent
45
7.6
3.4
4.9
NPDES effluent3
5.7
20
2.5
5.8
95/20 reduction
5.7
1.25
2.5
5.8
95/95 reduction
5.7
20
1.0
7.2
Low instream demand
5.7
1.25
0.9
7.4
Low instream demand
140
21
3.0
7.8
Winter values
aEf£luenC DO » 3.0
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area,
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 48.
TABLE 33
Waste Loads to Donke.y Creek with Secondary Treatment
Facility Plan Design Population for 1997 40,000
Source
Design
Population
Flow
(MGD)
BOD 5
(#/day)
KHj - N
(#/dav)
UBOD*
(tf/day)
NH3 - N*
(#/day)
UBOD*
(#/dav)
Gillette,
1976
13,000
1.00
87.5
124.5
212
14.5
102
Gillette,
1977
18,540
1.92
168.0
239.0
407
27.0
195
Gillette,
1978
20,450
2.12
185.0
264.0
449
34.0
219
Gillette,
1979
33.240
2.41
211.0
300.0
511
39.0
250
Gillette,
1985
28,540
2.96
259.0
368.0
627
42.0
301
Gillette,
1995
34,200
3.54
309.5
• 440.5
750
50.5
360
*Wich nitrification.
Lcjrco: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area,
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 47.
108
-------
TABLE 34
Critical Deficit (Dc) with Secondary Treatment: Stonepile-Donkey Creek
Source
Design
Population
Op Flow
(MGO)
Ka
Kd
Kb
* - £d
Lo -
UBOD
Ql x 8.34
Dc ¦
Lo
Cs - Dc
Gillette
1976
13,000
1.00
12.50
3.94
3.94
25.4
4.70
3.12
Gillette
1977
18,540
1.92
3.24
3.94
.8223
25.4
10.27
0
Gillette
1978
20,450
2.12
2.63
3.94
.6690
25.4
11.27
0
Gillette
1979
23,240
2.41
2.03
3.94
.5152
25.4
13.90
0
Gillette
1985
28,540
2.96
1.32
3.94
.3350
25.4
14.64
0
Gillette
34,200
3.54
.9160
3.94
.2325
25.4
16.32
0
Source:
Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area,
Water Resources Research Institute
, p. 48.
TABLE 35
Critical Deficit (Dc) With Secondary Treatment Plus Nitrification:
Stonepile-Donkey Creek
Source
Design
Population
Op now
(MGD)
Ka
Kd
a Ka
* " Kd
Lo "
UBOD
Qt x 8. 34
Dc -
Lo
CS - Dr-
Gillette
1976
13,000
1.00
12.50
3.94
3.17
12.20
2.26
5.56
Gillette
1977
18,540
1.92
3.24
3.94
.8223
12.20
4.93
2.89
Gillette
1978
20,450
2.12
2.63
3.94
.6690
12.20
5.41
2.41
Gillette
1979
23,240
2.41
2.03
3.94
.5152
12.20
5.86
1.96
Gillette
1985
28,540
2.96
1.32
3.94
.3350
12.20
7.03
.79
Gillette
1995
34.200
3. 54
.9360
3.94
.2325
12.20
7.84
0
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area,
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 49.
109
-------
at acceptable levels by applying 1977 standards, but that some form of
advanced treatment may be required before ammonia concentrations can be
lowered to nontoxic levels. At the present time, the toxicity problem is
being studied by various governmental agencies and cities of Sheridan and
Buffalo to determine what level of treatment will be necessary.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit is the tool to
ensure that effluent limitations and instream water quality goals are met.
It is illegal to discharge any pollutant into the nation's water without
an NPDES permit. Failure to comply with the limitations of the permit may
lead to fines of up to $10,000 per day.
A total of 77 NPDES permits were issued through February, 1978, in Sheridan,
Johnson and Campbell Counties as identified by the Department of Environmental
Quality. In addition, an Environmental Protection Agency printout was also
obtained to compare the limitation stated in the permit to discharge compliance
by permit holders. The seventy-seven permits from the three counties were
separated into one of three classifications ("agriculture, domestic or in-
dustrial) and analyzed for compliance. Additionally, each category was sub-
divided into the following categories:
Aqri culture
Feedlots and fish hatcheries
Domestic
Commercial
Muni cipal
Federal
State
110
-------
Industri al
Oil wells
Coal mines
Gas plants
Electric generators
Water treatment plants
Sand and gravel processors
Table 36 presents permit totals by county, category and drainage basin while
Table 37 itemizes the overall NPDES program in the Powder River Areawide Planning
Organization planning area.
A review of discharge data for those point sources permitted under the NPDES
system reveals two categories of discharges which have a continuing effect on
the water quality of receiving streams. These two categories are oil well
treaters in the Powder River drainage, especially Salt Creek, and discharges
from municipal wastewater treatment facilities.
Oil and grease most frequently violate the discharge limitations on oil well
treaters; however, high levels of total dissolved solids in the discharges have
the greatest effect on instream water quality. Effluent limitations are gen-
erally set at 5000 mg/1. TDS. Salt Creek, which derives all of its continuous
flow from produced water discharges, accounts for the largest man-related soarce
of pollution in the Powder River drainage. Over forty oil well discharges are
located on Salt Creek, the majority of them located in Natrona County. These
point sources discharge an average of 42 cfs of water, which carries 457 tons
of salts per day. About 30 cfs and 336 tons per day reach the Powder River,
which amounts to 26 percent of the salt load in the river. Elimination of all
discharges on Salt Creek would theoretically reduce the total dissolved solids
concentration in the Powder River, at the state line, from 1375 mg/1. to 840
mg/1. Reduction of the salt load from these discharges by 50 percent while
flow remained the same, would reduce the total dissolved solids concentration
from 1375 mg/1. to 920 mg/1. Local agricultural representatives have indicated
that the loss of water from the discharges would prove more detrimental to
their operations than the high salinity load now does. Oil well treater dis-
111
-------
TABLE 36
Summary Table: NPDES Program, PRAPO Planning Area
Category
CAMPBELL COUNT*
RIVEN BASINS
Belle
Powder Fourche
River River
Cheyenne
River
Little
Missouri
River Total
SHERIDAN COUMTY
RIVER BASINS
Big
Powder Tongue Horn
River River River Total
JOHNSON COUNTY
POWDER RIVER BASIN
Powder
River TOTAL
Agriculture
Feed lots and
fish liatcheries
Domestic
Cownerc ia I
Municipal
Federa1
State
TOTAL
Industrial
Oil well
Coal inine
Gas plant
ElecLric generation
Water treatment
SanJ and gravel
TOTAL
12
1
21
18
5
3
3
29
28
11
1
1
tt
1
A6
TOTALS
11
1A
30
1 13
1 15
32
77
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area, Water Resources Research Institute, p. bO.
-------
TABLE 37
NPOES Results: PRAPO Planning Area
Percent of
Compll unce
Percent of
Missing Data
X
SD
Data Available
X
SD
Data Available
Category
(7.)
(X)
(X)
co
(X)
Agricultural
100
0
100
0
0
100
Domestic
92.11
5.8
39
.93
2.58
65
Ind. ollwell
89.74
11.82
82
4.64
7.82
100
Ind. coal mine
92.00
4.58
30
2.78
5.95
90
Ind. misc.
81.83
17.75
100
0
0
100
Total x
91.14
7.99
70.20
1.67
3.27
91.00
SD
6.50
6.90
33.56
2.01
3.53
15.17
Source: Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area,
Water Resources Research Institute, p. 51.
charges on the South Fork and North Fork of the Powder River also contribute
to the salt load in the mainstem. However, their total contribution amounts
to only 20 tons per day or about 2 percent of the Powder River salt load.
Discharges from municipal wastewater facilities are the second category of
point sources which have the greatest influence on water quality. In the three
county area there are five municipal wastewater discharges; they include the
cities of Gillette, Buffalo and Sheridan, as well as the towns of Ranchester and
Kaycee. These municipalities, except Gillette, although permitted under NPDES
and required to monitor their effluent, are not yet required to meet secondary
treatment standards. Gillette's sewage treatment facility was constructed
with Federal funds and is therefore required to meet the standards. In the last
two years, the efficiency of this plant has deterioated due to the large pop-
ulation influx. At present, the system is no longer capable of meeting its
effluent limitations.
The facilit'ies at Ranchester and Kaycee are limited in size. Monitoring at
Ranchester indicates that the system is functioning properly and meeting
secondary treatment limitations. Kaycee's system, however, is not capable of
113
-------
meeting the secondary treatment limitations. Organic material and fecal co1i-
form bacteria are the major problems with this system. Both Ranchester and
Kaycee are experiencing increased population growth which will cause overloading
of the present systems.
Sheridan and Buffalo.,ar'? the two facilities which have the greatest effect on
instream water quality due to their ineffectiveness, the larger population that
they serve, and both discharge into Class I streams. High concentrations of
organic material and suspended solids in their discharges create limitations
on aquatic life below the discharge points, while high concentrations of fecal
coliform bacteria limit primary contact recreation. Questions have been raised
as to whether enforcement of secondary treatment standards on these two systems
will be sufficient. Federal and state agencies along with the cities are now
studying the problem to determine whether advanced treatment will be required
to lower ammonia and chlorine concentrations below toxic levels.
All five of these communities have taken the first step in upgrading their
facilities. As additional Federal funds become available these facilities will
be upgarded and effluent limitations will then be applied to the permits.
Other point sources in the planning area do not create the same impact as do
oil well treaters and municipal dischargers. There are a number of private
sewage systems, as well as systems operated by Federal and state agencies, in
the planning area. These systems are required to meet secondary treatment
standards at their inception. Except for occasional violations, these systems
discharge effluent which meets their permit limitations. There are a total of
eleven coal mines in the planning area which have discharge permits issued to
them. In 1977, only four of these mines were actually discharging. Other than
a few suspended solids violations, the mines were able to meet their permit
1 imitations.
In general, the point source problems are not caused by violation of permit
limitations, but rather by the lack of limitations on permits or by effluent
limitations which are established at a high level.
114
-------
Meeting of Water Quality Standards
The Water Resources Research Institute prepared an evaluation of the effect-
iveness of the State's proposed water quality standards and recommended alter-
ations in tiie stream segment classifications listed in the 303e basin plan for
Northeast Wyoming.
The proposed water quality standards are shown in Appendix B of this report.
Changes may be made in these standards due to the fact that they had not
been fully approved at the time this report was written.
A major change in the proposed standards calls for expansion of stream class-
ifications from three to four, with the new Class I streams being those of
unique value which will be maintained at their existing quality. Other changes
include the setting of specific limits for unionized ammonia and chlorine in
Class II and III waters, as well as expansion of the number of streams which
must meet primary contact recreation limits for fecal coliform bacteria. The
change which will probably have the greatest impact on land management agencies
is the one which states that, where water quality is impacted by various land
use practices, best management practices to protect the water quality will be
developed in accordance with the State Continuing Planning Process. Certifica-
tion of the best management practices will be the responsibi1ity of the Admin-
istration of the Water Quality Division.
In the 303e basin plan for Northeast Wyoming, Goose Creek was designated as
effluent limited for its entire length and Clear Creek was listed as doubtful
subject to further analysis. Based upon the simulation modeling effort pre-
viously reported in this document, it appears as if both streams can meet water
quality standards for dissolved oxygen and coliform with properly constructed
and operating secondary waste treatment facilities. Within the Goose Creek
drainage this effort will also require that illegal septic tank discharges be
eliminated. In both stream systems it appears unlikely that secondary treat-
ment will remove sufficient amnonia to prevent toxic concentrations in receiving
streams at the design flow (Q7 1Q). In each instance, toxic concentrations could
be observed in the reaches immediately downstream of the outfalls. Although
this has occurred, it is recommended that Goose and Clear Creek be considered
effluent limited subject to additional analyses at a date when facilities con-
struction is completed and operational.
115
-------
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AND AIR QUALITY RELATED TO WATER QUALITY
Potential Water Pollution From Solid Waste Disposal
Solid waste land disposal sites can be sources of groundwater contamination due
to the generation of leachate caused by water percolating through concentrations
of refuse and waste materials. Precipitation falling on a site either becomes
runoff, returns to the atmosphere via evaporation and transpiration, or infil-
trates the landfill. Contamination problems are more likely to occur in humid
areas, where the moisture available exceeds the ability of the waste pile to
absorb water.
Problems presently associated with existing or abandoned dumps and landfills
should not be considered in the same category as potential problems at new,
properly designed sanitary landfills because there are methods available for
minimizing environmental effects and managing leachate production. Proper
siting in locations where potential contamination of groundwater is limited is
one method. Reduction of leachate formation by use of selected cover materials
and surface grading of the refuse pile consists of another method. Others
which are costly include pre-treatment capable of reducing the volume or solu-
bility of the waste, detoxification of hazardous wastes prior to disposal, and
collection of the leachate by means of impermeable barriers or liners, followed
by treatment.
At the present time there is no effective Federal regulatory control of land
disposal of solid waste except as it may enter navigable waters.
Solid Waste Management Practices
In the Three County Area*
In rural agricultural counties similar to those in the Powder River area,
solid waste management is a relatively simple procedure. Basically, it consists
of solid waste generation, collection, and disposal. There are none of the
116
-------
complex practices of waste disposal which are found in large metropolitan
areas. Systems such as recycling and energy recovery are expensive and
require large quantities of solid waste which make them impractical in the
three counties. The most effective system of solid waste disposal for agri-
cultural counties is the sanitary landfill. In the three-county area, there
are three major landfills, one each in Buffalo, Gillette and Sheridan. These
landfills serve those communities and most of the county-wide areas which
surround them. The towns of Clearmont in Sheridan County and Kaycee in
Johnson County maintain their own landfills.
Buffalo
The City of Buffalo and its surrounding area generate approximately 2,900
tons of solid waste annually. Since the population of the Buffalo area
amounts to approximately 5,000, the solid waste generation amounts to three
pounds per capita per day.
The landfill used for general solid waste disposal is located southeast of
the City on a site of 49.5 acres. It is not used for the disposal of sewage
sludge or septage.
The north end 6f the facility contains an embankment to prevent accumulated
waters within the landfill area from flowing into nearby draws and possibly
reaching surface waters. The groundwater level is known to be greater than
sixty feet deep in the area. The remaining life expectancy for the landfill
is approximately twenty years.
Sheridan
The City of Sheridan landfill is the major site serving the City of Sheridan
and the County. Approximately 72 tons of solid waste are deposited at the site
daily. Based on an estimated population of 18,000 utilizing the facility, the
per capita generation of solid waste for the area is approximately eight pounds
per person per day.
*This section and the Summary comments section are based on material prepared
by the staff of the Powder River Areawide Planning Organization.
117
-------
The landfill site is located due east of the City. It is used for general
solid waste disposal from the surrounding area. In the first four months
of 1977 , 33.75 tons of dewatered sludge from the Sheridan sewage treatment
plant was deposited in trenches at the landfill. Septage is not directly
deposited at the landfill.
The groundwater level in the area is about 110 feet below the surface. The
geology is predominantly shale, sandstone and coal. Drainage pipe is installed
throughout the landfill to remove accumulated waters. There are no surface
waters in close proximity, but the landfill is located upslope from Little
Goose Creek which is one-half to one mile from the site. There are
a number of residences with private wells located down gradient from the land-
fill. The remaining life expectancy of the Sheridan landfill site is ten years.
Gi1lette
Gillette maintains a landfill southwest of the City. It is the primary landfill
serving the City and surrounding areas in the County. Approximately 100 tons
of solid waste material are deposited within the landfill daily. The population
served by the landfill is estimated to be approximately 20,000 persons. Based
on these figures, per capita generation of solid waste in the Gillette area
amounts to approximately ten pounds per person per day.
The landfill is utilized for the disposal of general solid waste as well as
most material, other than radioactive, which would generally be disposed of in
a hazardous waste disposal area. Septage and petroleum are also disposed in
the landfill site.
The groundwater level is estimated to be approximately ten feet below the bottom
of the site. The geological formations in the area contain large amounts of
scoria and coal and there are no surface waters in the vicinity. The life
expectancy of the Gillette landfill is estimated to be approximately two
years.
113
-------
Summary Comments
It is believed that no significant water pollution problems are experienced
in the area of the landfill sites. However, data pertaining to water quality
around the landfills is very minimal.
There are, however, potentials for water quality problems at the Sheridan land-
fill for the-foil owing three reasons:
1. High volumes of waste generation;
2. The existence of private domestic wells in close proximity to the
landfill site;
3. The site Is located at a higher elevation than Little Goose Creek
and is in fairly close proximity to the Creek and the outlying
portions of the City.
Due to the geologic formations within the area contiguous to the Gillette
landfill and the close proximity of the groundwater level to the bottom of
the landfill pit, the potential for the leaching of contaminants into the
groundwater is high.
Recommendations Pertaining to •Maintenance of Water Quality
Groundwaters around the Sheridan and Gillette landfill sites should be moni-
tored to determine whether there are any adverse effects caused by the land-
fill operation. This could primarily be accomplished in the Sheridan area by
monitoring existing domestic wells in the area.
The areas surrounding all of the landfills should be observed and monitored
during runoff events to determine whether there is any possibility of con-
taminants reaching surface waters.
Air Quality*
One-third of the Powder River Basin 208 triumvirate is included in another
federally funded environmental planning program. Campbell County, along with
1This section is based on material prepared by the staff of the Powder River
Area-wide Planning Organization.
119
-------
Converse County, is classified as an air quality maintenance area (AQMA) for
which an air quality maintenance plan (AQMP) must be completed. Under the
Federal regulations, water quality plans and AQMP's must be compatible.
An emissions inventory and projections report has been prepared by the Wyoming
Department of Environmental Quality - Air Quality Division. This report con-
siders two basic pollutants, hydrocarbons and particulates.
It is estimated that hydrocarbon emissions in Campbell County will increase
from 2,210 tons per year in 1975 to 2,763 tons per year in 1980, with decreases
to 2,105 tor.s by 1985. The greatest source of hydrocarbon pollutants is cur-
rently and will continue to be highway travel which will average 71 percent of
the total hydrocarbons emitted through 1980. This is estimated to decrease to
57 percent by 1985.
Particulate emissions in Campbell County account for the greatest source of
air pollution. In 1975 over 41,192 tons of particulates were emitted. This
level is estimated to increase to 62,541 tons by 1980 and 74,824 tons by
1985. The greatest source of particulate emissions amounts to fugitive dust
from unpaved roads. In 1975, 79 percent of the total occurred from this source
By 1980 and through 1985, it is projected that 91 percent of particulate
pollution will be generated by fugitive dust from unpaved roads. Reasons for
this are related to growth factors and the development of the energy industry
in the rural areas of the County served by unpaved roads.
It is believed that these factors will not produce any great implications
affecting water quality management planning. Indirect effects on water quality
could develop if air quality planning determined that large amounts of water
were needed to control dust on unpaved roads. These may be a slight change in
water quality of surface waters due to airborne particles settling on the waters
However, due to the scarcity of surface waters within Campbell County, this
cannot really be considered a problem.
-------
At present there do not appear to be any conflicts between air quality main-
tenance planning and water quality management planning. Recommendations within
this plan have both positive water quality and air quality implications. In
Campbell County, particulate emissions around mine sites have reached the
problem stage. The implementation of more stringent mining reclamation guide-
lines as outlined in the mining assessment will help in the protection of
water quality, as well as reduce air carried particulates. Unpaved road traf-
fic has shown a large increase in the planning area because of the increased
number of rural subdivisions and increased travel to mine sites. Paving of
roads in subdivisions with a density of one dwelling per acre or less will
decrease sediment and particulate problems. The requirement that mining
companies pave major access roads to mine sites would also have a positive
effect on these problems. In urban areas, the recommendations for increased
street cleaning will also help in the control of urban runoff pollution and
the reduction of airborne particulates. Because of the uncertainty of develop-
ment within the energy and power generation industry, it is unrealistic to
try to project any conflicts between air quality and water quality.
121
-------
Chapter III
NON-POINT SOURCE ASSESSMENT AND NEEDS
INTRODUCTION
The cost of wastewater management increases rapidly as higher levels of treat-
ment are required; the ultimate national goal of zero discharge will require
public investment many times present levels. Even with zero discharge of muni-
cipal and industrial wastes (point sources), national goals for water quality
may not be achieved in some areas because of pollution from non-point sources.
Areas receiving 208 designation are required to carefully evaluate non-point
pollutant sources, or sources not related to a point discharge such as sewage
treatment plants. An evaluation of non-point sources hopefully leads to the
determination of the relative quantity and quality of all pollutant sources with-
in the area. Non-point source pollution is released from urban, agricultural,
rural, and forested land uses. The main potential non-point pollutant sources
in the three counties originate from urban runoff, mineral extraction, forest
land activities, and urban types of development in rural areas.
One of the major aspects in the prevention of non-point source pollution is
the development of guidelines or best management practices to assist in the
prevention of pollution before it actually occurs. The intent of this section
is to recommend preventative guidelines many of which are also being utilized
by the Department' of Environmental Quality and various Federal agencies.
122
-------
MINED LANDS ASSESSMENT
Introduction
One of the primary reasons that the Powder River Basin was selected as a 208
planning area was the rapid expansion of energy development in the area. At
the time this planning effort was begun, environmental controls on surface
mining in the west were not yet fully developed. The program was designed to
look at two impacts on water quality from increased mining activities, the
indirect impact on social institutions caused by the increased work force and
the direct impact caused by the mining operations. This section will deal with
the direct impact of mining.
Using data collected previously at ongoing mining operations and supplementing
it with data collected during the planning effort, a mined lands assessment
was developed, covering mining from the exploration phase through the post
mining phase. Suggested management practices, to protect water quality, were
developed for each phase of the operation.
During the period in which 208 planning was being undertaken, the Federal
government and the State government were taking measures to tighten environ-
mental controls on mining. The Federal government enacted the Surface Mining
and Reclamation Act of 1977, which included, among others, provisions for
the protection of alluvial valleys and water quality. During the same period,
the Land Quality Division of Wyoming's Department of Environmental Quality
developed preventive guidelines for surface mining and has taken steps to
amend their rules and regulations to conform with the provisions of the new
Federal surface mining act. Many of the suggested management practices
listed in this text were also developed as preventive guidelines by the DEQ/
LQD, and are now being adopted in their revised rules and regulations.
Two things are required by DEQ to fully accomplish their program. First, to
ensure that each mining permit application is processed properly and that
mining companies adhere to the provisions of their mining permits, additional
personnel are needed in the Land Quality Division. Secondly, since the Water
Quality Division's new rules and regulations propose that "best management
123
-------
practices" designed to protect water quality must be certified by the WQD
Administrator, an intradepartmental cooperative policy must be developed to
coordinate the two programs.
Mineral Exploration
Pollution Assessment
The primary activities associated with this phase of a mining operation are
the drilling and logging of exploration holes in the areas of interest. The
major pollution sources associated with mineral exploration include erosion
from the disturbed surface areas surrounding drilled areas and from aquifer
degradation associated with the use of drilling fluids and improper methods
employed in drilling. Erosion from these sites.can constitute a significant
problem if drilling activities are initiated during wet periods of the year
and are located at sites bordering surface drainages.
Groundwater pollution problems associated with drilling can be more sign-
ificant. Problems result from the introduction of foreign substances con-
tained in drilling fluids into drinking water aquifers and from techniques
which leave drill holes open and do not isolate separate water-bearing
strata. Together these practices can introduce foreign and often toxic sub-
stances into aquifers serving as the major source of drinking water for an
area. This problem is magnified in the Powder River Basin where coal seems
often offer the most readily accessible source of water.
At the federal level, control of exploratory drilling rests with the Bureau
of Land Management and the United States Geological Survey. At the state
level, the Land Quality Division of the Department of Environmental Quality
is responsible for regulating the plugging and capping holes and restoration
of the drill sites in the exploratory drilling phase.
Recommended Management Practices
Table 38 itemizes recommended practices. Due to regulatory mechanisms cur-
rently operable, the most important of these practices is proper inspection
of drill sites supported by adequate data collection and evaluation.
-------
TABLE 38
Management Practices: Exploration Phase
Activity
Management Practice
Result
Water Quality Effect
Location building
r\i
cn
Dri11ing
Inspection
1. Schedule events for times
when surface disturbance
can be minimal
2. Use existing roads where
possible
3. Require that bonds be
posted before exploration
begins
1. Register drillers
2. Pump drilling fluids from
holes
3. Isolate drinking water
aquifers
4. Plug wells at the surface
5. Establish well data
network
6. Drill holes sealed for
uranium mining
1. Create enough positions
to insure compliance
1. Reduce erosion
2. Protect future uses of
groundwater
3. Establish better control
over resource
1. Protect future water uses
2. Control groundwater data
3. Identify present or future
problem areas
1. Protect future water uses
1. Reduce sedimentation
2. Reduce salinity
3. Reduce groundwater
pollution
1. Eliminate or reduce
groundwater pollution
1. Reduce surface and
groundwater pollution
Source: Water Quality Determinations, Mined Lands Areas, Northeastern Wyoming, Water Resources Research
Institute, p. 17.
-------
Mine Initiation
Pollution Assessment
Following the issuance of the various permits needed to mine, and preliminary
to actual mineral removal, an extended period of general construction activity
occurs at a mine site. This activity maintains a certain level of water pollu-
tion potential.
The construction of roads, railroads and shelters removes vegetation which can
cause increased erosion. Available information indicates that road building is
potentially the most significant source of sediment at a mine site. Yields of
over 57,000 tons/square mile/year have been observed from information obtained
by the Environmental Protection Agency. This is over 2,000 times the amount
of sediment produced at an unmined watershed and about 30 times the amount of
sediment produced from the remainder of the mined area. Table 39 itemizes the
relative rates of erosion from various land uses.
TABLE 39*
Metri c^tons
Tons 2
per km
per miles
Relative to
Land Use
per year
per year
forest = 1
Forest
8.5
24
1
Grassland
85.0
240
10
Abandoned surface mines ¦
850.0
2,400
100
Cropland
1,700.0
4,800
200
Harvested forest
4,250.0
12,000
500
Active surface mines
17,000.0
48,000
2,000
Construction
17,000.0
48,000
2,000
Source: Water Quality Determinations, Mined
Lands Areas, Northeastern Wyoming,
Water Resources
Research Institute,
p. 21.
While this table was prepared from data collected in the Eastern United States
and these figures cannot be applied directly to the three-county planning area,
they are useful as comparative indicators of land use-erosion relationships in
the mined area.
126
-------
The pollution potentials associated with the initial stripping and storage of
soil and overburden materials include increased sedimentation, salinity and the
possible release of toxic elements previously locked in underlying strata.
Toxic problems which might be expected to occur with mining in Wyoming include
excessive salt concentrations and the presence of heavy metals.
Blasting preparations used in fragmenting the overburden in this phase of
activities and the overburden and the coal during the mining phase can contain
ammonia and nitrate-nitrogen. Ammonia can be toxic to aquatic life if found in
excess of 0.02 mg/1 in the unionized form (NH^). Nitrate can cause problems if
found in excess of 45 mg/1 (as NO^) in water regularly consumed by infants.
Further, as a nutrient, nitrate often contributes to the eutrophication of lakes
and reservoirs. These latter problems are considered to be minor at mine sites
when compared to the pollution potentials from municipal waste treatment facili-
ties .
Sanitary wastes at a building site offer potential public health problems.
Water-borne diseases can spread rapidly in areas of improper waste treatment.
Additionally, nitrates and phosphates are associated with sanitary and wash-
room facilities. These nutrients can induce algal blooms and eutrophication
in lentic receiving waters. This area of pollution control is the best under-
stood and most highly regulated of the categories described. Due to the ease
of regulation of this pollutant situation, it is believed that this category
offers the least potential for severe pollution.
Recommended Management Practices
The Bureau of Land Management, the United States Forest Service and the United
States Geological Survey directly regulate mining operations at the federal
level. The Environmental Protection Agency has responsibility for the review
of impact statements and can indirectly affect mining activities. At the state
level, the Department of Environmental Quality's Land Quality Division exerts
the primary agency control over mining in Wyoming. The Land Quality Division
is assisted by the Water and Air Quality Divisions within the Department of
Environmental Quality and by the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission. If stream
channel relocations are necessary, the State Engineer's Office is involved ,
although primary control is retained in the Land Quality Division.
127
-------
The management practices suggested for this phase of the mining effort are
recommended below.
- Insure that mine plans are being properly implemented.
- Reevaluate the entire site for suitability of mine plan specifics.
- Evaluate specific areas within the mine plan based on newly acquired data.
Specifically, management practices include field inspections, coordinated data
collection programs and comprehensive data analysis efforts to verify assump-
tions promulgated when the mine, reclamation and pollution control plans were
formulated. Based on these practices , improvements can be implemented during the
mining operational phase.
Table 40 itemizes recommended management practices for the mine initiation phase.
Mining Phase
Pollution Assessment
The transition between the mine initiation and mining phase is not dramatic.
Construction of buildings, roads and railroads will decrease but will not be
halted completely. Coal production which started in the initiation phase will
be accelerated. Stripping activities will continue, but at a lower rate, pro-
gressing to the point of occurring directly ahead of mining. Reclamation of
initial pits and cuts can be initiated, depending upon the type of mine and the
amount of time devoted to preliminary operations.
The activities associated with this phase of mine operations that possess the
most severe water pollution potentials are continued road building and mainten-
ance, continued stream channelization, continued stripping and storage, acceler-
ated use of sanitary facilities, and any procedures necessary to prepare the
coal for shipping at loadout facilities. Additionally, several potential
pollution sources related to groundwater quality could exist. These include
the interception and ultimate discharge of naturally occurring groundwaters of
poor quality, the introduction of saline or toxic materials into surface aquifers
through recharge from sedimentation basins and the creation of toxic or saline
waters in spoil storage areas. Pollution from this last source can seep from
128
-------
TABLE 40
Management Practices: Mine Initiation Phase
Activity
Management Practice
Result
Mater Quality Effect
Building Construction
1. Minimize size of disturbed
area at any one time
2. Proper sanitary facilities
3. Temporary sediment basins
or structures
4. Establish filter or buffer
zones
1. Reduce erosion
2. Maintain public health
1. Reduce sedimentation
2. Reduce salinity
3. Lower BOD
4. Lower coliform
concentrati on
5. Maintain DO
6. Lower NH^ concentration
Road and Railroad
Construction
Stream Channel
Alteration
1. Minimize size of disturbed
area at any one time
2. Establish grades (less
than 10% recommended)
3. Establish filter or
buffer zones
4. Reevaluate surface
materials (roads and
roadbeds) for erosion
potential
5. Construct temporary or
permanent sediment basins
1. Maintain grade
2. Reduce velocities
3. Evaluate basement materials
for toxicity, salinity,
erosion
1. Reduce erosion
2. Lower velocities
3. Retain sediment
4. Alter mine plans
1. Reduce erosion
2. Reduce flooding
3. Reduce leaching
1. Reduce sedimendation
2. Reduce salinity
1. Reduce sedimentation
2. Reduce salinity
3. Prevent toxic substance
di scharge
(Table continued)
-------
TABLE 40 * continued
Activity Management Practice Result Water Quality Effect
Stripping, Soil and 1. Minimize size of disturbed 1. Reduce erosion 1. Reduce sedimentation
Overburden Storage area 2. Retain sediment 2. Reduce salinity
2. Construct temporary and
permanent sediment basins
and structures
3. Reevaluation of storage sites
for proximity to water
sources as well as grade
and slope length
4. Reevaluation of storage
materials for toxic, saline
or erosion materials as
well as reclamation
potential
5. Segregate all toxic, saline
or highly erosive materials
6. Stabilize stored materials
7. Maintain or establish
buffer or filter zones
Source: Water Quality Determinations, Mined Lands Areas, Northeastern Wyoming, Water Resources Research
Institute, p, 28-29.
-------
the spoil piles to pollute nearby surface waters or can remain in storage.
The chemical quality of this source is indicative of future water quality
conditions which could be expected in reclaimed pits and cuts.
Generally, pollution yields decrease as the mine reaches full production.
This results from the stabilization of exposed surfaces with the associated
decrease in the number of sites open to erosion and discharge. Exceptions
to this include those operations undertaken at the loadout facilities and
the discharge of produced waters from pits completed in the coal seam.
Produced waters discharged from active pits can differ chemically from waters
produced during initial stripping operations. The interception and subsequent
discharge of groundwaters of poor quality can occur.
Produced waters from active pits differ also in terms of the type of suspended
solids they can carry. Coal fines replace overburden materials as mining
progresses and are generally more difficult to remove through sedimentation.
Groundwater alteration through recharge in strata underlying sedimentation
basins is possible. Currently available information would indicate that
this will not represent a severe water quality problem in the PRAPO planning
area. The only available data base, however, is the National Pollutant Dis-
charge El ir.iination System data and various studies which characterize the
discharge from these basins. This information indicates that groundwater
alteration will not be an important pollution source.
The last source of potential groundwater pollution during this phase of mining
activity is that originating in spoil storage areas. Water in storage in these
areas can contact highly toxic or saline materials. Seepage from these areas
can pollute surface sources, while the establishment of hydraulic connections
with other aquifers can introduce pollutants into existing or potential water
sources. Monitorinq these sources and column leaching experiments at higher
temperatures can serve as a barometer of future groundwater quality in reclaimed
pits and cuts.
Recommended Management Practices
The recommended activities for this phase of the mining effort include:
131
-------
- Expansion and reevaluation of the data base.
- Reevaluation of the reclamation plans.
- Implementation of those pollution control practices included in the mine
plan or supplementary documents.
- Proper inspection and enforcement to insure compliance.
Specifically, these recommendations take the form of continuation and expan-
sion, if necessary, of basic monitoring networks. Information should be ob-
tained for water as well as soils and overburden prior to the actual mining
operations. These data should yield information about potential erosion and
salinity problems. Additionally, the amount and quality of groundwaters to
be encountered should be described. This information can assist in reevaluating
mining, reclamation and pollution control plans if necessary.
The second management activity in this phase is to insure that those practices
agreed to in the Mine Plan or in subsequent documents are being implemented.
Mine configurations change daily, and it is important to insure that the best
possible pollution control practices are properly implemented with each stage
of alteration. To be undertaken properly this requires that sufficient numbers of
well trained individuals make frequent unscheduled inspections. The expansion
of the Department of Environmental Quality's field offices to include water
quality personnel is recommended.
Other management practices are suggested in Table 41 . During the mining
phase it is important for the mining operator and the regulatory agencies
to implement a framework which not only addresses specific problems, but also
evaluates each site in terms of its short and long term pollution potentials.
While it is important to collect problem specific monitoring data, it is more
important to establish procedures and programs which are reflective of the long
term conditions at the mine site.
Post-Mining Phase
Pollution Assessment
Actual reclamation of a mining operation begins when the mining of a pit area
is completed. As the mining operation expands to new locations, backfilling,
grading, and contouring of the old pit area is initiated. Depending upon the
-------
TABLE 41
Management Practices: Mining Phase
Activity Management Practice
Result
Water Quality Effect
Road Building
1. Minimize size of disturbed area
at any one time
2. Proper grade control
3. Establish filter or buffer zones
4. Construct temporary or permanent
sediment basins and/or structures
as necessary
1. Reduce erosion
2. Retain sediment
1. Reduce salinity
2. Reduce sedimentation
Stripping and
Storing
CO
Ui
i
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
8.
Minimize size of disturbed area
at any one time
Construct temporary or permanent
sediment basins and/or structures
as necessary
Segregate toxic, saline or highly
erosive materials
Stabilize stored materials
Establish filter zones
Establish monitoring programs
to collect soil, overburden and
water data at ahead-of-mining
si tes
Reevaluate reclamation and
pollution control plans
Reevaluate seed and plant
materials selection
1. Reduce erosion
2. Retain sediment
1. Reduce salinity
2. Reduce sedimentation
3. Prevent toxic substance
discharge
4. Enhance reclamation
potentials
Source: Water Quality Determinations, Mined Lands Areas, Northeastern Wyoming, Water Resources Research
Institute, p. 35.
-------
size of the initial cuts and the intensity of effort at the mine, the events
can begin within a few years of mine initiation.
Reclamation of final pits, cuts, roads, if necessary, and all other disturbed
areas begins at the conclusion of mining activities. This process is essen-
tially simpler than continuing reclamation practices previously attempted in
that there are no concomitant mining efforts which require synchronous planning
and implementation. The ultimate goal of these and all other reclamation
activities is to restore the land to a level of equal or improved use.
In addition to potential sources of sediment and salinity in connection with
storage areas, and continuing reclamation efforts practiced during mining, two
other potential pollution sources exist. These are the possible creation of
highly saline or toxic groundwaters in the reclaimed areas and the potential
for the establishment of closed basins from which there is little or no surface
drainage.
The establishment of saline or toxic groundwaters in reclaimed pit areas occurs
when chemical substances are leached from the materials used to reclaim the pit
area. These chemical substances can be simple salts or can consist of exotic trace
elements and metals. Their presence in a water can render it unuseable or even
dangerous to animals and humans.
The second major potential source of pollution which exists for this phase of
mining activity is the salinity problem associated with closed basins which
result from insufficient materials being present to reestablish premining
gradients along surface drains following mining. To reclaim the deep pits
with adequate materials following mining can present problems. Either a large
amount of fill will have to be borrowed from nearby hillsides or a lake will
have to be established in the final cut.
If water is present in an area and if a lake on the property falls within
criteria for a higher post-mine land use, then this alternative is a viable
one. The water quality problems associated with this option are evaporative
concentration within the system. However, if sufficient water is present
evaporative concentration will not occur over the long run. The creation of
a closed basin will result if insufficient water is present, presenting pro-
blems more severe than those previously discussed.
134
-------
Recommended Management Practices
The Bureau of Land Management and the Land Quality Division of the Department
of Environmental Quality will retain reclamation bonds, which were posted when
the mine permit was granted, until satisfactory reclamation is achieved. There
are no time limits involved in retaining these bonds.
The recommended course of action for insuring proper reclamation and pollution
control for this phase of mining operations should be formulated during con-
tinuing reclamation programs undertaken during the mining phase.
To insure that materials obtained from nearby areas to establish adequate
grades in a reclaimed pit are not potential sources of pollution themselves,
standard chemical and physical evaluations should be conducted. If these
materials or any other fill materials produce severe salinity or toxicity
problems they should be segregated from all sources of water. Additionally,
accurate records of the location of these areas should be maintained.
Prevention of closed drainage basins and the associated evaporative concen-
trations requires that proper surface drainage through the site be accomplished.
Final gradients and proper stream meanders must be established in order to
allow efficient drainage while minimizing erosion.
Table 42 presents these and other management practices which should be em-
ployed during this phase of the mining effort.
135
-------
TABLE
Management Practices:
42
Post-Mining Phase
Activi ty
Management Practice
Result
Water Quality Effect
Reclaim pit areas,
roads, and other
affected areas
1. Evaluate fill materials
2. Establish proper gradients
3. Reestablish proper meander system
4. Control velocities and depths
5. Select proper plant materials
6. Establish temporary sediment
basins or traps if necessary
1. Protect ground
2. Reduce erosion
3. Retain sediment
4. Collect valuable
future data
5. Protect future water
uses
1. Generates new
pollution control
measures
2. Reduce sediment
3. Reduce surface and
subsurface salinity
7. Continue monitoring programs
8. Retain bonds until reclamation
complete
Source: Water Quality Determinations, Mined Lands Areas, Northeastern Wyoming, Water Resources Research
Institute, p. 37.
-------
Mined Lands Program
The previous sections provided an overview of pollution problems and
recommendations pertaining to site specific best management practices. On a
programmatic level, a recommendation is that a formal water resource evalu-
ation be undertaken and reported for each proposed mining effort in the
three county area. Data collection for this evaluation would be undertaken
in conjunction with the exploration and permit application phases and would
be the responsibility of the operator. The necessary data required for this
program would be of the amount and type already being provided by responsible
operators. These data should be included with other materials comprising the
mine permit application. Specifically, the required materials should include:
1. An identification of all water sources on the property to be
affected or within its sphere of influence. This should include
determinations of quantity and quality of each surface and ground
water source as well as acquifer properties.
2. An identification of those chemical and physical properties of the
soil, overburden and mineral materials which will be affected by
mining. These analyses should include indexes of erodibility, salin-
ity and toxic substance production.
3. A description of the effects of mining on each water source.
This information would be presented in the water resources
section of the mining plan.
The degree to which the mining operator should be required to develop
a pollution control plan is dependent upon the site's potential for pollu-
tion generation and the susceptibility of the site and surrounding areas to
the pollutants produced. This can only be determined by a site evaluation
conducted after the data collection programs are completed. The site evalua-
tion should be conducted by federal and state personnel with the results
subjected to the same type of public review as are the mine permit applica-
tions. If the site evaluation identifies areas of severe oollution noten-
tial or essentiallv vulnerable sites or areas within sites, then a major
pollution control effort is warranted. This effort should identify the impor-
tant pollution problems to be controlled and then proceed with the necessary
management programs.
137
-------
Following the formal identification and announcement of these or other
potential problems by the regulatory groups, the operator would be required
to develop a pollution control program to mitigate potential damages. This
program would be developed simultaneously in conjunction with the mine permit
application, and be subject to the same type of public review and input. The
program should be broad based and offer alternative and backup management
practices for the most severe pollutants and susceptible sites.
After a pollution control plan has been formulated, periodic and thorough
inspections of each mining effort should be conducted in the area. These
inspections are required in the recently enacted Federal strip mine law and
should be structured to evaluate compliance with and the effectiveness of the
mine plan. The investigations should be used in conjunction with the recom-
mended monitoring data to reevaluate the mining, pollution control and recla-
mation plans.
In summary, the primary goal is the establishment of a programmatic
approach to water pollution assessment and control through which the various
levels of government, mining companies and concerned citizenry could work to
maintain or improve an area's water quality. It is recommended that a six-part
program be established involving governmental as well as industrial contri-
butions. Public or local involvement is assured through similar mechanisms
and at similar times as are the mining and reclamation portions of the effort.
Additionally, by requiring the regulatory agencies to itemize the pollution
potentials and site susceptibilities of a property before it is mined the con-
cerned public is in a position to better evaluate the proposed development
and provide more substantive contributions to the process. Table 43 itemizes
the recommended program in the approximate chronological sequence through which
it develops.
-------
Table 43 Mined Lands: Water Quality Management Program
Program
Item
Responsible
Contributor
Program
Output
Public
Contributions
1 Preliminary Data
Collection
2 Water Resources
Evaluation
a. Site-Area Evaluations
b. Pollutant Evaluations
3 Pollution Control Plan
a. Sediment Control
b. Salinity Control
C. Toxic Controls
4 Mine Inspections
5 Supplementary Monitoring
Programs
6 Reevaluation Programs
Operator
Regulatory Agencies
Operator
Regulatory Agencies
Agencies and Operator
Agencies and Operator
Identify Potential
Problems
Water Resources Section
of the Mining Plan
Protect Surface and
Ground Waters
Compliance Assurance
Reevaluate Controls
Data Base for Future
Decisions
1. Reevaluate Plans
A. Mining
B. Reclamation
C. Pollution Control
Alter Plans
1. Mining
2. Reclamation
3. Pollution Control
Review and
Input
Review and
Input
Review and
Input
Review and
Input
None
Review and
Input
Source: Water Quality Determinations Mined Lands Areas, Northeastern Wyoming, Water Resources Research
Institute, p. 47.
-------
FORESTED LAND ACTIVITY ASSESSMENT
Introducti on
The following six components of forested land activities have been identified
as having the greatest water pollution potential in the forested lands under
study. These include: 1) recreation; 2) silviculture; 3) livestock and
wildlife management; 4) mineral development; 5) transportation development;
and 6) fire and post-fire management.
Each of these six components, if improperly managed, will offer significant
water pollution potential. This section attempts to assess the pollution
potential and to recommend best management practices for maintenance of water
quality on forested lands.
Water chemistry, suspended sediment, water discharge and bacteriological con-
centrations are sampled at long-term baseline or benchmark sites, which are
carefully selected on major streams below known activity sites so problems can
be isolated to insure quality management of the water resources. Monitoring
programs have been established to collectively measure water quality and
quantity. Certain activities such as timber sales or specific types of recrea-
tion warrant on-site analyses upstream and downstream over given periods of
time. Data from on-site and downstream monitoring can offer evidence to
support or alter management plans. Physical observations of stream channels
and the surrounding area are also part of the analysis procedure.
The United States Forest Service and the Geological Survey maintain monitoring
programs. Future hydrological monitoring by the State and the Bureau of Land
Management should supplement individual watershed analyses. The basic analysis
procedure for site preparation concerning forested land utilization is contained
in Table 44 .
140
-------
TABLE 44
ANALYSIS PROCEDURE
INVESTORS
STRF-.M CHANNEL EVALUATION
Channel Stability Evaluation
Weighted Average Stability
by Scream Reach
Streaa Disturbance Factors
REGIONAL WATER YIELD ANALYSIS PROCEDl"RE
LAND TYPE ANALYSIS
Soil Type, Depth
Landforas
Surface Erosion Hazard
Landforxa Stability
Slope Gradient, Shape
Slope Dissection,
Drainage Density
Productivity
VEGETATION ISVL:iTORY
Habitat 1/pes
Vegetative Cover (X)
Recovery Potential
WATERSHED RESPONSE UNIT
(Homogeneous Land Units,
RCUs, ELUs, etc.)
Stratified by:
—Land Type
—Vegetatloo
—Slope Hydrology
EXISTING WATER YIELD INCREASE
WATERSHED CONDITION
Existing Equivalent Clear-
cut Condition
Road Density
Number of Stream Crossings
Recovery froa Past Activity
(land and Streams)
WATERSHED RESPONSE RATING
SYSTEM
ON-SITE WATERSHED
DAMAGE POTENTIAL
WATER qi.Al.ITY
Sediment Production
Stream Discharge
Turbidity
Other Physical and
Cherlcal Constituents
Biological
WATER ISIS
fisheries Habitat
Dooestic Uses
Irrigation or Other
Diversion
Specific On-Slte Protection Prescriptions
Microclimate Evaluation
SUvicultural Applications
Specific Management Prescriptions
—Logging He t hoda
— Road Design Criteria
—Duffer Strips
Restoration or Rehabilitation Needs
—Road Closures
—St rean Channel Improvement
OFF-SITE WATERSHED
DAMAGE POTENTIAL
.. , . , «,r«r Sunrjarv of Off-Site
Weighted Average Off- ... - . .
„ . , • Values x Acres in lalt
Site Damage Potential : r— :
Acres in SubJraina^e
Sediment/Discharge Relationship
4
E
Sediment Production Factor
ALLOWABLE WATER YIELD INCREASE BASED ON VF1GKTED
AVERAGE OFF-SITE DAMAGE POTENTIAL AXO
SEDIMEMT/DISCHARCE RELATIONSHIP
Relationship to Existing Conditions,
Water Uses, Water Quality,
Watershed Protection Criteria and Water Vaiues
ALTERNATIVES
Dcsynchroniz.iC ion of Flows Through
Aspect/Elevation Considerations.
Peak Flow Evaluation
Varied Silvicultural Treatsencs
Source: Water Quality Management Considerations, Forested Lands Areas, Northeastern Wyominq,
Water Resources Research Institute p. 24.
-------
Variations and modifications from this procedure should be undertaken to
accommodate specific projects and problems.
Recreati on
Pollution Assessment
Virtually all accessible portions of the forested lands in Johnson, Sheridan
and Campbell Counties are utilized to various degrees for recreational activi-
ties such as camping, picnicking, hunting, fishing, hiking and recreational
vehicle driving. The major recreational areas are identified on Map 8 following
page 26 . The Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service have developed
management programs emphasizing a balance between utilization and conservation
of the habitat to accommodate the influx of population on forested lands.
Designing facilities to accommodate concentrated population impacts are high-
priority projects. Construction of self-contained sanitation facilities,
improvements in campground sophistication and development of adequate water
supplies will minimize pollution potential due to recreation-related activities.
These activities are addressed in unit and project plans of federal and state
agencies.
Increased bacteriological and erosion/sedimendation contamination may result
from recreational activities. Hiking, vehicle misuse and horses used for
packing/outfitting can induce ground disturbances, especially over periods of
years on the same trails. Under specific conditions high erosion potential
may exist. Bacteriological contamination of the habitat is possible through
excretion of waste from humans and animals.
When federal and state agencies plan for recreational developments several
physical analyses are performed by specialists to evaluate construction.
Construction controls are also monitored to minimize land deformation,
sedimentation potential, stream damage and other watershed impacts.
Potential point pollution contributors can be linked directly to increased
population impacts. Resorts, summer home groups, special-use camps and popular
campgrounds potentially contribute to bacteriological contamination of streams
and groundwater through direct discharge and septic tank leakage. Bacterio-
142
-------
logical injection by humans into water systems results from lack of or inade-
quate sewage disposal facilities in developed or undeveloped areas.
As part of the 1976 PRAPO-Forest Service cooperative agreement, a bacterio-
logical study was conducted in the Cloud Peak Primitive Area near Seven Brothers
Lakes to investigate possible contamination due to heavy use in the wilderness.
Table 45 shows the results of the fecal coliform study. The control sites
netted one coliform out of eight samples, indicating low levels of natural
pollution. The counts never exceeded four coliforms per 100 ml at any one
site. Twenty-two (22) samples from camping areas produced nine coliforms, an
insignificant basis to conclude that these areas are contributing factors.
TABLE 45
Cloud Peak Primitive Area Fecal Coliform Study
Seven Brothers Lakes
Minimum Maximum Total Mean
Number Colonies Colonies Colonies Colonies
Site Samples Per Site Per Site All Sites Per Sample
Control area 8 0 1 1 0.125
Camp area 22 0 4 9 0.4
Trail area 33 0 4 13 0.4
Lake inlet
and outlet 8 0 2 2 0.25
Source: Water Quality Management Considerations, Forested Lands Areas, North-
eastern Wyoming, Water Resources Research Institute, p. 27.
The most fecal colonies were found on August 12, 1976 when sites around horse
fecal material on trails were sampled. Eight samples taken at lake inlets and
outlets netted two colonies, indicating pollution of one lake probably does not
contribute to the pollution of another.
Bacteriological and chemical sampling was also conducted at sub-basin locations
isolating several resorts and lodges as part of the PRAPO-Forest Service contract.
Noted increases in bacteriological concentration were observed near heavy use
areas (Table 46 ). Possible bacterial sources could be livestock corrals at
the resorts.
143
-------
TABLE 46
Chemical and Bacterial Examination of Select Lodges and Picnic Areas
Bighorn National
Forest
Total
Fecal
Fecal
Hardness TDS
Sulfates Nitrates
Coliforms
Coli forms
Streps
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(per ml)
(per 100 mis)
(per 100 mis)
FC/FS
TONGUE DISTRICT:
Above Burgess
180
170
3.3
0.4
.45
14
64
.21:1
Picnic Ground
Below Burgess
170
172
3.3
0.3
.79
14
41
.44:1
Picnic Ground
Above Spear-0-
13
30
0.0
0.2
.14
44
4
11:1
Wigwam
Below Spear-0-
13
30
0.8
0.1
3.5
261
44
5.93:1
Wigwam
Above Bear Lodge
170
194
7.4
1.0
.49
25
22
1.13:1
Below Bear Lodge
180
190
6.6
0.2
1.1
73
55
1.32:1
Above Arrowhead
130
146
2.5
3.5
.79
14
5
2.8:1
Lodge
Below Arrowhead
130
146
2.5
0.2
3.5
172
315
.54:1
Lodge
BUFFALO DISTRICT:
Above Johnson Co.
15
36
0.0
0.1
5.4
43
113
.38:1
Day Camp
Below Johnson Co.
15
30
0.0
0.1
1.6
226
153
1.47:1
Day Camp
Above So. Fork Inn
13
36
0.0
0.6
.49
2
62
.03:1
Below So. Fork Inn
13
36
0.0
0.6
.33
4
81
.04:1
Above Pines Lodge
18
36
0.8
0.1
1.3
25
88
.28:1
Below Pines Lodge
15
34
0.0
0.2
2.8
19
94
.20:1
Source: Water Quality Management Considerations, Forested Lands Areas, Northeastern Wyoming, Water Resources
Research Institute, p. 29.
-------
Table 47 summarizes fecal coliform concentrations measured by the Forest Service
near recreational areas on forested lands.
TABLE 47
Fecal Coliform Concentration Related to Recreational Areas
Concentrations
Per 100 ML Samples
No. of Fecal
No. of
Coli form
No. of Excesses*
Si te
Samples
Occurrences
200 colonies/100 ml
Marcum Ck.
14
14
3
Little Willow Ck.
18
18
0
South Tongue R.
3
3
0
Owen Ck.
4
4
0
Prune Ck.
4
4
0
Middle Clear Ck.
7
7
0
North Clear Ck.
5
3
0
South Clear Ck.
10
10
0
Clear Ck.
9
8
0
Powder at Kaycee
26
26
4
Sibley Res.
8
4
0
Rock Ck.
8
8
2
Little Bighorn
4
4
0
Tongue
26
19
1
Little Goose
9
8
0
W.F. Big Goose
5
4
0
N. Piney
4
3
1
Source: Water Quality Management Considerations, Forested Lands Areas, North-
eastern Wyoming, Water Resources Research Institute, p. 30.
With increased population growth in the three counties, additional accommoda-
tions for recreationists can be projected, along with increased wilderness
activity and increased hunting and fishing activities. Recent wilderness
impact studies have indicated that domestic animals and population concentra-
tions have minimal effect on bacteriological contamination, but usage concen-
tration increases may contribute to future problems. Limiting access into
heavily used areas could assist in the control of concentration of distinguishable
point sources. Specifying distance limits for camping near streams may require
enforcement to prevent sewage interception by streams.
145
-------
Local erosior, problems could occur on the forested lands, particularly on
trails. Due to the geological nature of the soil, depth of the soil bank
and limited groundcover in certain areas, land disturbance from off-road
vehicles often combines with livestock and nature, resulting in meadow rut-
ting and hillside gullying. Areas throughout the Bighorn Mountains are
scarred from such disturbances. Certain areas are capable of natural rehab-
ilitation if erosion potential is minimized.
Suggested Management Guidelines
Suggested management guidelines related to recreation are concerned with
erosion control, water chemistry and bacteriological contamination:
1. Continue bacteriological monitoring above and below resorts, summer home
groups and heavy use areas. Concentrated and consistent sampling could
provide valid data to aid in installation of adequate facilities to minimize
contamination.
2. Enforce off-road driving laws and restrict camping in undeveloped areas.
These measures could reduce potential land disturbance and possible bacterial
injection into streams.
3. Continue environmental conservation programs to educate the public. The
Environmental Education Workshops offered by the Forest Service, for example,
have stimulated public awareness of conservation problems and their prevention.
4. Utilize sound engineering practices when constructing facilities and access
roads. It is also necessary to insure nonerosive velocities and grades, and
to scarify or harden existing sites as necessary.
5. Maintain buffer or filtration zones between facilities and streams. Such
zones could further reduce sediment erosion potential in susceptible areas.
SiIviculture
Pollution Assessment
Silviculture has been interpreted by the Environmental Protection Agency as
defining all forest management activities. The major timber harvest areas in
the three counties are managed by the Forest Service and are located on Map 9
following page 26.
146
-------
Other areas, however, also offer the potential for economically sound timber
harvests.
Proper land management practices and activities must comply with standards
established for individual site inspections generally compiled by the Environ-
mental Protection Agency.
The Bureau of Land Management is initiating large-scale timber harvest pro-
grams in the southern Bighorn Range following basic management criteria for
sustained yield and continuation of multiple-use programs as practiced by the
Forest Service. The Bureau of Land Management and state efforts are contained
in their similar Management Framework Plans (MFP). The State Forestry Division
has conducted timber harvesting in the southern Bighorn for the past 20 years
and multiple-use programs and harvests will continue on state lands under sus-
tained yield resource management plans.
The Forest Service has classified the Bighorn National Forest by land use areas
for timber management. Approximately 68 percent of the land mass is suitable
for timber harvest, while only 21 percent is ideally feasible for immediate
development.
Federal and state management programs are designed to provide quality timber,
improve the landscape, expand recreational possibilities, conserve the water-
shed and improve range forage. Preharvest planning includes soil surveys and
hydrologic determinations, silviculture analysis, range evaluation and road
engineering analyses. Timber stands are inventoried and evaluated to determine
the economic and environmental feasibility of a proposed timber sale.
Generally, sedimentation, chemical alteration and debris accumulation are
considered the main pollutant sources originating directly from timber removal.
The major impact from timber harvest is generally increased erosion or sedi-
mentation resulting from increased runoff. In the three-county area spring
runoff is attributed to snowmelt. Snowmelt, i.e., runoff, generally occurs
earlier in harvest areas due to increased sunlight exposure attributed t.o canopy
removal. This results in slightly earlier peak flow (some streams peak 5 to 7
147
-------
days earlier). However, peak runoff generally does not appreciably increase >
but high water is extended over a longer period of time. This implies that
less water is available for percolation and interflow. However, significantly
higher increases in sediment have not been observed following timber harvests
in the Bighorn National Forest.
Sediment loads and dissolved nutrients in surface runoff and possibly in
streams could increase due to runoff in harvested areas. In the Big Horn
National Forest, runoff is not expected to change significantly as a result
of timber harvest. A study conducted by the U.S. Forest Service on Prune
Creek in the Tongue River drainage reached the conclusions that:
1. The reduction in interception loss (plant absoption of moisture) from
thinning was compensated for by increased evaporation from the snow
surface.
2. A 50 percent canopy reduction would not significantly reduce the
amount of water utilized by the remaining forest.
3. The effect of water yield and snowmelt timing when select cutting
is employed is not large.
Many factors influence erosion including depth of soil, slope gradient, vege-
tation cover, soil disturbance, soil structure and the impact of raindrops.
Soil characteristics of the Bighorn Mountains are such that infiltration or
moisture absorption is reduced where excessive soil disturbance takes place.
As a general rule, if there is less compaction and disturbing contact with the
forest floor, there is less watershed damage resulting from logging and skidding
operations. Table 48 compares possible tendencies for on-site erosion before
and after clearcutting of timber. Interpretation of this table indicates slope,
ground cover and ground disturbance are signigicant to sediment quantity.
Timber areas that have been harvested can be susceptible to surface
erosion due to the compacting action of heavy equipment used in logging
operations. Normally, absorbent soils lose their ability to infiltrate
water when compacted. Roads and trails tend to accelerate erosion due to
148
-------
TABLE 48
Estimated On-Site Erosion Before and After Clearcutting^
Estimated Total
Ground Cover
Before Harvest
Estimated
On-Site Erosion
Tons/ac Inches/
Ayr ac/yr
Estimated Total
Ground Cover
Following Timber
Harvest & Treated
w/Rolling Chopper
Estimated
On-Site Erosion
Tons/ac Inches/
/yr ac/yr
Estimated Total
Ground Cover
Following Timber
Harvest & Dozer
Pi 1ing
Estimated
On-Site Erosion
Tons/ac Inches/
/yr ac/yr
GRANITIC SOILS:
10 70 0.4 0.0026 70 0.4 0.0026 50 1.0 0.0064
20 70 0.9 0.0058 70 0.9 0.0058 50 2.1 0.0134
30 70 1.3 0.0083 70 1.3 0.0083 50 3.0 0.0192
40 70 1.6 0.0102 70 1.6 0.0102 50 4.0 0.0256
SOILS DEVELOPING IN FINER TEXTURED IGNEOUS AND METAMORPHIC BEDROCK:
j —— —
10 85 0.2 0.0013 75 0.4 0.0026 70 0.4 0.0026
20 85 0.5 0.0032 75 0.8 0.0051 70 0.9 0.0058
&0 85 0.7 0.0045 75 1.1 0.0070 70 1.4 0.0090
40 85 0.9 0.0058 75 1.4 0.0090 70 1.8 0.0116
May or may not reach live water depending on a variety of conditions.
Source: Water Quality Management Considerations, Forested Lands Areas, Northeastern Wyoming, Water Resources Research
Institute, p. 39.
-------
the general increase of slope gradient on cut and fill slopes, collection
of overland flow on the road surface and, in some cases, interception of sub-
surface springs crossing cut areas. Mass erosion potential increases as
seasonal or excessive hydrologic factors contribute to the erosive process.
Logging near surface waters exposes part of an area to increased sunlight,
resulting in higher water temperature and increased algae growth. The chance
for organic debris entering stream channels is also increased, resulting in
higher bank erosion, channel alterations, leaching of toxic compounds, bio-
degradation of organic matter and reduction of dissolved oxygen levels.
Physical deposits of organic materials on stream bottoms may affect bottom
habitat and aquatic life. Change in water color, taste, chemical composition
and odor may also occur.
Revegetation is important to establish soil stability in harvest areas. Where
soils are particularly subject to disturbance, ground cover regeneration is
necessary immediately. Road and trail rehabilitation includes reseeding cross
drainage construction, contour ditching and restoring roads to the natural
ground contour.
Suggested Management Guidelines
Recommended management guidelines related to silviculture include the following
suggest!ons:
1. Maintain adequate filtration and buffer zones along streams to minimize
interference with fish and aquatic life to reduce the deposition of
dissolved organic and inorganic materials in the riparian zone, and to aid
in maintaining consistent natural water temperature vital to aquatic life.
2. Revegetate harvest areas quickly with soil holding vegetation. Prompt
vegetation of exposed soil may reduce erosion potential.
3. Fall trees and skid parallel to slope contours in an effort to reduce
slope disturbance.
4. Monitor pertinent locations above and below harvest areas for sediment,
discharge and water chemistry.
150
-------
5. Liberally construct waterbars, diversion ditches and sediment traps.
Such features can minimize surface erosion on skid trails and reduce
massive soil movement from cut and fill slopes on access roads.
6. Remove slash from draws and stream channels where there is high potential
from channel erosion.
7. Collect chemical and oils from equipment maintenance.
8. Follow sound engineering and construction practices for trails and roads.
9. Cross-contour landings, trails and roads by scarification and utilizing
mulches and fertilizers; utilize reversal ditches and velocity controls
to overland flow and sediment.
10. Minimize soil compaction from equipment by limiting activity to dry or
frozen areas.
11. Plan roads and trails efficiently.
12. Restrict equipment operation to slopes of 35 percent or less.
13. Utilize practical harvest methods for individual areas. Logging in
unstable areas should be limited to methods which do not disturb duff or
upper organic layer.
14. Follow tops and south-facing ridges when practical for trails and roads.
15. Stockpile topsoil for later use when constructing roads.
16. Select proper plant species for revegetation programs.
17. Restrict activity in the area until production-recovery has stabilized.
18. Continue to require special permits for rock crushing, gravel washing,
log sorting and log storage, with operations being responsible for water
quality limits.
19. Monitor suspended sediment, stream flow variations, chemical composition
and erosive patterns before and after timber harvesting to determine the
effectiveness of management practices.
Livestock and Wildlife Management
Pollution Assessment
Forested lands in the three-county area provide summer range (July, August
and September) for thousands of cattle and sheep. At least 194 livestock
grazing permits are issued each year on national forest land for a total of
approximately 32,000 cattle and 52,000 sheep. The major grazing areas on
federal forested lands are shown on Map 10 following page 27.
151
-------
Competition for range and habitat among elk, deer, moose, bighorn sheep,
cattle and domestic sheep presents problems of migration, forage, distribu-
tion and grazing.
Bacteriological contamination from wildlife and livestock wastes is a major
concern in the Big Horn watershed. Distribution of wildlife and livestock
presents bacteriological problems. Livestock concentrate near riparian zones
of streams and lakes since food supplies are generally found in these areas.
Livestock concentrations in particular drainage basins at certain times of the
year may contribute to the concentration of bacteria in streams. In late
June and early July, concentrations are generally rising. August and September
bacteria concentrations also are high possibly due to the distribution of live-
stock herds during roundup.
Table 49 shows fecal coliform concentration related to the seasonal influx
of animals, particularly livestock, on forested lands.
TABLE 49
Historical Water Quality Considerations:
Grazing Practices, Bighorn National Forest
Approximate Number of Excesses of
Drainage Number of Fecal Coliform 200 colonies/
Areas Season Samples Occurrences 100 ml
Big Willow
Little Willow
North Tongue
Spring
Fall
15
15
15
15
0
1
Sibley
Marcum
South Tongue
Spring
Fall
10
10
10
6
2
1
West Fork Big
Goose
Big Goose
Little Goose
Spring
Fall
11
11
10
9
1
0
North Piney
Rock
Clear
Spring
Fall
21
21
20
19
1
2
Inconsistency and lack of valid data indicates further investigation is
necessary for justifiable conclusions to be made.
Source: Water Quality Management Considerations, Forested Lands Areas, North-
eastern Wyoming, Water Resources Research Institute, p. 46.
15?
-------
Desirable areas for grazing are susceptible to eventual degradation. Riparian
zones along streams, particularly, are easily overgrazed, or soil compaction
on trails and banks occurs. Erosive action by water could be increased due
to lack of ground cover and increased overland flow of water. Areas around stock
ponds, salting sites, bedding grounds, fence lines and stock driveways are often
heavily compacted due to the concentration of animals year after year. Heavy
runoff or overland flow makes these areas highly susceptible to sedimentation,
gullying and slope change.
Range improvement by use of controlled burning and herbicide and pesticide
treatment may present minor water quality problems depending on location and
soil characteristics.
Suggested Management Guidelines
The following management guidelines related to wildlife and livestock are
centered around soil compaction, trail erosion and bacteriological contaimina-
ti on:
1. Maintain adequate monitoring programs. Continuous and consistent stream
monitoring is recommended,
2. Distribute herds evenly and redistribute at pertinent intervals to avoid
concentrations and overgrazing. Frequent redistribution of herds to new
areas may reduce concentrated use along riparian zones and minimize waste
injection directly into streams.
3. Select locations for salting sites, fences and driveways carefully to
avoid constant compaction.
4. Utilize waterbars or diversion facilities on existing trails and driveways
to avoid future erosion problems.
5. Fence and cattleguard recreational facilities.
6. Enforce existing regulations related to herd size, distribution, and
grazing time.
7. The need for potable water for domestic use may require necessary closure
of the drainage area to grazing.
153
-------
Mineral Development
Pollution Assessment
Full-scale mineral development on forested lands in the study area has not taken
place due to location of profitable deposits in other areas with easier access.
The approximate locations of active and non-active mineral development sites
near forested regions are shown on Map 11 following page 28.
Favorable deposits of industrial materials such as bentonite, gypsum, and
high-calcium limestone are sited along the eastern flanks of the Big Horn Range
and throughout southwestern Johnson County as reported by the Wyoming Geological
Survey. Mining operations are under development at isolated sites and proposals
for mining along the flanks of the5ig Horns are being considered by private con-
struction and industrial groups.
Water quality may be affected by increased total dissolved solids, hardness
change or sedimentation from underground mining of high-calcium limestone.
Economic and geological factors affect the ability to extract this mineral
due to the outcropping characteristics of the producing formation.
Bentonite and gypsum pit mining has yet to establish i'tself on forested lands
due to the quality of materials available elsewhere. Some mining operations
are spreading by small pits along the southern face of the Big Horn Range.
Local erosion due to land disturbance has been isolated and minimal in most
cases.
Construction materials are readily available in most areas of the forested
lands in the Big Horn Range. Economics and availability of suitable materials
govern the location of crushing sites and borrow pits. Road development and
maintenance utilize most of the materials in the form of gravel, base material
and sands with resulting major physical damage to the landscape.
Small deposits of gold, uranium, copper, manganese and rare earth metals are
found in forested areas. Several small gold mines have been abandoned which
have had little impact on the watershed. Numerous exploratory locations for
154
-------
uranium in southwestern Johnson County have not produced deposits suitable for
large commercial development at this time. Exploration for petroleum and coal
has not indicated the presence of commercially developable deposits at this time
on forested lands.
Future development of various mineral deposits could be economically feasible
especially for construction and industrial materials. Most of the deposits
lie along the flanks of the Righorn Mountains and could create isolated
erosion problems. Development of these materials should be preceded by a
careful site evaluation. In the end result, sediments and dissolved solids
may be the main pollution source related to mineral developments.
Suggested Management Guidelines
Recommended guidelines include:
1. Installation of adequate drainage facilities such as diversion ditches,
waterbars and reversal ditches.
2. Monitoring water quality before and during development activity. Chemical
alterations from limestones and other sedimentary minerals could create
future problems if runoff and stream exposure is not diverted away from
susceptible areas.
3. Contouring, revegetation and reclamation of the area to a state equal to
or better than the original state.
4. Future management plans should include revegetative and adequate drainage
facilities to minimize sedimentation and reduce direct leaching action
through stockpiles or exposed areas into stream channels, thus minimizing
or eliminating chemical alterations of the water.
Transportation Development*
Pollution Assessment
Major highways and improved roads are susceptible to various types of problems
related to water quality. Sedimentation should be carefully considered in
development of slope gradients, culverts, right-of-ways , cuts and fills, and
Please refer to p. 187 concerning the State-wide Highway and Road Construction
Assessment process for additional information.
155
-------
borrow pits. Revegetation and stabilization of topsoil should be established
as soon as possible after disturbances. Stream channel disturbance for
crossings and bridge construction produces sedimentation but is generally not
a continuing problem. Chemical and petroleum waste drainage into streams could
create problems with the aquatic habitat if not properly controlled.
Most unimproved roads in the Bighorn Range were originally constructed for
livestock, recreational and logging purposes, but many are now utilized
seasonally by camping parties, hunters and livestock. The major problem
associated with unimproved roads is recreational misuse where a combination
of moisture, soil type, ground cover and vehicles compound the initial ground
disturbance. Natural erosion proceeds as new exposures are created.
Road closure evaluations are conducted by state and federal agencies con-
sidering existing erosion and future potential, economic factors for mainten-
ance or reconstruction, usage, road necessity, public safety, sediment traps
and diversion possibilities and public opinion.
Various public utility routes cross portions of forested lands in the study
area. Land disturbance is the major problem resulting from construction of
utility lines. Petroleum pipelines are located along the eastern flanks of
the Bighorns and throughout Campbell County. Only isolated timber stands in
northern Campbell County are potentially susceptible to petroleum spillage,
resulting in eventual water quality degradation.
Major emphasis should be given to reduce erosion of roads and trails
built to facilitate logging or other forest uses.
Suggested M?nagement Guidelines
Pollution related to transportation development can be minimized by relating
the following best management guidelines to construction and engineering projects:
1. Sound engineering and construction practices could reduce impact on the
watershed due to degeneration of materials and sedimentation.
2. Careful surveillance of slope gradient, geologic formations, water sources,
ground cover and drainage characteristics could reduce future maintenance
problems.
156
-------
3. Revegetation of road side slopes, buried line routes and abandoned roads
and trails could be enhanced by scarification, contouring, mulching and
fertilizer application, Revegetation of slide slopes and closed roads is
recommended to help stabilize the topsoils.
4. Staggering utility line routes through forested areas provides greater
aesthetic beauty for the area and could reduce trenching. Utility lines
and facilities should be revegetated to help stabilize topsoil.
5. Sound road construction practice should provide excellent access with
minimal maintenance.
Fire and Post-Fire Management
Pollution Assessment
Fire control, rehabilitation and recovery is a major part of the forest con-
servation program. Many components of the forest are affected by fire, in-
cluding soils, streams, vegetation, wildlife and downstream facilities.
Forest burned areas may provide residue and chemical sources for water quality
degradation. Generally, burn areas are small in, the Big Horns in comparison to
watershed size so nitrate and phosphate release is diluted into background
levels. Nitrogen in particular is reintroduced into an area by leguminosae
plants which are usually first to revegetate after a burn. Losses in a fire
can generally be considered short-term depending on intensity of the burn,
soil types, reseeding or regeneration potential, and leaching potentials.
After a fire, erosion susceptibility in isolated areas may be high due to
destruction of the ground cover. Access roads may be constructed in a salvage
area; therefore, the timber sale contract water quality clauses should be
followed to minimize sedimentation potential and hasten soil stability through
revegetation programs. Progressive erosive potential is evaluated at intervals
to detect problems so necessary preventive measures can be immediately ini-
tiated to reduce extensive erosion conditions.
Forest fires have played an important role in natural regeneration and mainten-
ance of preferred tree species. Controlled burnings in certain areas are
157
-------
necessary and economically feasible. Studies concerning the watershed impacts
of fire on the Teton-Bridger National Forest were conducted to compare spring
versus fall burning. In the spring, soils were cooler.containing more moisture,
and minor effects on grasses and herbaceous vegetation were noted from spring
burning. By contrast, fall burning occurred under drier conditions, fires
burned hotter and vegetation recovery was slowed by 1 to 3 years. The differ-
ence in vegetation recovery may be explained by the fact that various growth
and food storage portions of the plants are protected in the spring; therefore,
recovery of ground cover is faster. The following year nitrate and phosphate
levels increased below the fall burn area due to hot burning during a drier period.
Most forest fires occur in late summer and early fall in the three-county area,
when dryness and increased usage increase fire hazards. Residue and slash
burning from timber harvest increase the possibility of watershed pollution.
Controlled burning of slash piles resulting from timber harvest generally
occurs after sufficient snow cover is accumulated in the fall or winter.
Specific burn spots contain concentrations of ash residues, and subsoil
becomes crusted due to heat. Generally, minimal adverse conditions are ex-
perienced at these burn sites due to winter conditions and swift revegetation
of grasses in the spring.
Some wildfires require aerial application of fire-retardant chemicals. No
certain documentation indicates adverse effects from fire retardants on water
quality, but it is apparent that the reaction of the retardants in nitrate and
ammonia concentrations could occur in streams or lakes. Drop zones usually
occur away from live and standing water.
Suggested Management Guidelines
Suggested management guidelines for fire and post-fire management include
the following:
1. Evaluate the physical conditions of burned areas related to the original
conditions, i.e., soils, hydrology, available range and recovery potential.
Fire management can be aided by soil, hydrologic and range evaluations.
2. Install preventive erosion measures if needed, such as waterbars on fire-
lines, sediment traps in gullies and diversion facilities.
158
-------
3. Fertilize and revegetate the area with fast-growing but desirable plant
species for surface stabilization. Fast and reliable implementation of
revegetation programs minimizes long-term consequences related to fire.
4. Include frequent water chemistry, sediment and discharge analyses as part
of the physical-hydrologic evaluation in support of favorable management
programs.
5. Apply slurry (fire retardant chemicals) at or near crests of ridges,
avoiding streams and lakes when possible.
Forested Lands Program
Future social, economic and ecological developments in the Powder River
Basin will be dependent on population growth. A balance between utilization of
forested lands and desirable habitat will eventually be needed to favorably
conserve and protect renewable natural resources in the forested areas. The
existence of quality water is part of the environmental cycle necessary for
preservation of the natural habitat. Future management and planning efforts
will be centered around Federal Unit Plans and State Management Programs
specific to the particular agency.
These plans and programs are the responsibility of the United States
Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, Wyoming State Forestry Division
and private interests. The United States Forest Service and the State
Department of Environmental Quality also review construction of individual
disposal systems on U.S. Forest Service lands. The Department of Environ-
mental Quality and the Environmental Protection Agency provide standard
criteria for the agencies mentioned above to implement agency plans and
programs.
The following list contains a review of recommended management guide-
lines which contain site specific recommendations in some instances. How-
ever, this list contains practices which are more program oriented which
serves as an overall guide.
-------
Recreation*
1. Enforce existing regulations.
2. Provide sufficient and efficient facilities.
3. Develop educational conservation programs for the public.
4. Undertake careful site selection.
5. Conduct comprehensive and consistent physical and hydrological monitoring
of streams and facilities.
SiIviculture
1. Supervise and enforce timber sale contract water quality and physical
parameter preservation clauses.
2. Maintain buffer zones for temperature stabilization, sedimentation, debris
traps and habitat security.
3. Utilize correct harvest methods and equipment for given areas.
4. Use good road construction and trail practices and construct on stable land.
5. Clear slash from gullys and draws; burn in piles or spread where necessary
for decay.
6. Utilize seasonal factors, i.e., frozen ground or dry areas when feasible.
7. Revegetate abandoned roads, landings and trails.
8. Conduct comprehensive water quality and quantity analyses.
Livestock and Wildlife
1. Follow range and hydrologic evaluations.
2. Distribute and limit herds to prevent concentrations.
3. Fence and utilize cattleguards around campgrounds and other recreational
facilities.
4. Selectively determine salting, fencing and access"sites to reduce erosion
and compaction.
5. Continue bacteriological and physical observation of continuous livestock
usage areas.
6. Enhance habitats by evaluating overmature areas for possible rehabilitation.
*Local and state recreation agencies and the Wyoming Recreation Commission
should be involved in the continuing water quality management program.
160
-------
Mineral Development
1. Plan physical, chemical and hydrological monitoring programs.
2. Utilize conservative extraction means.
3. Contour sites to favorable conditions.
4. Revegetate with suitable plant species.
Transportation Development
1. Adequate planning for roads, utility rights-of-ways and sewage systems.
2. Plan physical, chemical and hydrological monitoring programs.
3. Utilize soils and hydrological evaluation.
4. Utilize conservative construction practices on slopes and stream crossings
and revegetate vital areas.
5. Stagger routes to enhance the aesthetic appeal of the area.
Fi re
1. Utilize solid and hydrologic evaluation.
2. Revegetate if necessary.
3. Provide sediment traps, waterbars or diversion facilities to prevent
downstream and hillside damage.
4. Follow timber sale contract water quality clauses if salvage timber is
avai1 able.
5. Utilize sound construction practices if roads are built.
6. Conduct water quality, sedimentation and physical analyses regularly to
isolate possible problems and help speed recovery.
161
-------
SALINITY ASSESSMENT
Introduction
Chapter II of this document described the instream salinity increases ob-
served in drainages throughout the PRAPO planning area. The proposed Water
Quality Standards recognize the potential severity of increasing salt loads
in the State's rivers and streams. Within the PRAPO planning area, the fol-
lowing stream segments record potential salinity problems: Prairie Dog Creek,
Powder River, Clear Creek, Crazy Woman Creek, Salt Creek and South Fork Powder
River.
Pollution Assessment
Although limited data were available to describe the water quality in Prairie
Dog Creek, it appears as if the most potentially severe water quality problem
is salinity present in the lower reaches of the drainage. The concentrations
observed caused sharp increases in the salinity levels of the mainstem of the
Tongue River below the Prairie Dog Creek Confluence. Sources of salinity in
this drainage are primarily natural in origin. Piney Creek waters diverted
into the drainage for irrigation use may have a dilution effect on the natural
salinity levels.
Salinity in the Powder River is essentially a function of the salinity con-
tributions of its tributaries. The contributions of Salt Creek and South
Fork cause the mainstem concentration to increase while Crazy Woman Creek
and Clear Creek contributions have the opposite effect.
Mean salinity concentrations in Clear Creek are below 700 mg/1. However, oc-
casional peaks during late summer months reach levels which may prove detri-
mental to irrigation use if prolonged over extended periods of time. Irrigation
exists throughout the entire length of the drainage and could possibly con-
tribute up to 28 percent of the salinity load during the irrigation season.
Salinity concentrations on Crazy Woman Creek average over 1100 mg/1. Upper
reaches of the drainage, near the confluence of the forks, contain 25 percent
-------
to 40 percent saline and alkaline soils. This area also contains most of
the irrigated lands in the drainage. A possible 26 percent of the salinity
load during the irrigation season may be caused by irrigation.
Salt Creek provides 26 percent of the total salt load in the Powder River at
the State line. Except during runoff periods, the entire salt load in the
creek is attributable to point source discharges from oil well treaters.
Irrigation is almost non-existent in the drainage.
South Fork Powder River has very high salinity concentrations which are pri-
marily attributable to saline geology and soils. Point source discharges
account for about 14 percent of the salt load in the drainage. Irrigation
use of the waters is negligible.
Neither the salinity levels in the Tongue River drainage nor the salinity
levels in the Powder River drainage appear to be presently affecting the bene-
ficial uses of the waters in Wyoming. In both the lower Tongue River drain-
age and the Powder River drainage, irrigation is the most restrictive use of
the water. Local conservation district personnel and Soil Conservation
Service personnel have indicated that salinity concentrations in waters used
for irrigation have not reached a level where salt buildup is occurring in
irrigated soils. Also, the predominant irrigated crops in the area, alfalfa,
hay and grains, have relatively high salinity tolerances. An irrigation
salinity study completed by the Yellowstone-Tongue 208 agency in Montana
indicated that generally salinity levels in the Powder River were not affect-
ing crop yields as of this time.
Salinity Management Programs
In instituting any management program, a need for that program must first
exist. That need is dependent upon whether beneficial uses of the water are
being impaired or the quality of the water is approaching the point where
impairment is predicted. Although this has not been a comprehensive salinity
study, from analysis of the available data and information from those people
who would be most affected (agricultural people) it appears no need exists
at the present time for a formal salinity management program in either the
Tongue River drainage or the Powder River drainage.
163
-------
However, this does not take into consideration the effect that future develop-
ment in these drainages may have. If the need'for control programs does exist
in the future, four general types of management programs are available to con-
trol salinity in these and other drainages; they include:
1. Implementation of on-site control programs for new development in the drain-
age.
2. Implementation of retroactive on-site control program for existing land
uses in the drainage.
3. Establish salt allocation systems where an allowable basin-wide loading
is determined.
4. Decrease salt discharge to a drainage by consumptive use of all or part of
a tributary flow or flows.
Along the Powder River mainstem, little irrigation occurs downstream of the
Sussex Irrigation District because of topographic restrictions. In the future
if these restrictions can be overcome and irrigated lands are developed in
that area, it will be necessary to institute salinity control programs which
would reduce the Powder River salinity levels between Sussex and the Clear
Creek confluence. The single source category which contributes mainly to
salinity levels in that segment of the Powder River is discharges from oil
well treaters on Salt Creek. This source is also the most receptive to con-
trol measures in the drainage. Complete elimination of oil well point source
discharges into Salt Creek would reduce mean salinity levels in the Powder
River at Arvada from 2009 mg/1. to 930 mg/1. A second alternative of placing
more restrictive effluent limitations on these discharges to reduce the
salinity load by 50 percent, while not reducing the amount of water discharged,
would reduce the mean Powder River salinity level at Arvada to approximately
990 mg/1.
Future development on the Tongue River is a greater possibility than on the
Powder River. A number of coal mining operations as well as large power
generating plant are now being considered for the drainage. Existing data
on coal mine discharges indicate that individual mines probably would not
have a significant effect on salinity levels in the drainage, however the
cumulative effect of a number of mines may cause a noticeable increase in
salinity levels. If a power generating plant were to be constructed on
164
-------
Prairie Dog Creek, as presently being considered, and its waters used for
cooling and steam generation, the consumptive use of those waters would in-
crease the already high salinity concentration of Prairie Dog Creek. The
combined effect of the mine discharges and the power plant discharge entering
the Tongue River could have a significant effect on Tongue River salinity levels.
If levels are increased to the point where use impairment is a possibility, the
need for on-site control programs for the new developments or the establishment
of a salt load allocation system in the drainage may exist.
The possible need for these control measures are all dependent on future devel-
opment in the drainage. At present, there is no need for control action to
protect beneficial uses of the waters. Consideration must be given, however,
to the proposed changes in Montana's stream classification system and water
quality standards. If adopted, the proposed changes would classify the Tongue
River as a raw drinking water source. The instream total dissolved solids
standard for the river would be set consummate with that use. Efforts may
then be undertaken by Montana to force Wyoming to meet these standards at the
State line. If successful, the need for salinity control actions on the Wyoming
portion of the Tongue River would become immediate, since the mean salinity
level on the Tongue River at the State line is now approximately 500 mg/1.
The implementation and regulation of specific program outputs is relegated
to those existing agencies with mandated control over related programs or
activities. However, no single agency at the state, federal, county or local
level controls all of the required areas of a salt management program.
Implementation of specific control programs should be left to those agencies
with mandated responsibility. Irrigation programs would be implemented by
the local Conservation Districts with technical assistance from the Soil
Conservation Service and Soil Conservation Commission. Water resource pro-
gram controls will be implemented by the State Engineer's Office and the
Board of Control and the Water Quality Division of the Department of Environ-
mental Quality. Salinity occurring from mining activities would be controlled
by the Land and Water Quality Divisions of the Department of Environmental
Quality at the state level and by the Bureau of Land Management and United
States Geological Survey at the federal level.
165
-------
URBAN RUNOFF ASSESSMENT
Introduction
This section presents urban storm runoff chemical data collected from
Sheridan, Buffalo and Gillette in an effort to identify adverse water quality
effects to the receiving streams from urban storm runoff. The data were
analyzed by comparing data collected by the Water Resources Research Institute
during periods of non-storm runoff with data collected during runoff events.
Because of the relative size of the urban areas being considered, as well
as the limited amounts of time, manpower and funding available for this work
element, it was given a low priority within the total program. The most
visible problem related to urban runoff occurs in the late winter and early
spring. During the winter months, public works crews in the cities apply
large amounts of sand or scoria material, mixed with de-icing chemcials, to
the city streets for safety purposes. Over a long winter period, large amounts
of this material accumulates on the streets and in the snow removed from the
streets. In the case of Sheridan, this snow is piled along the stream banks
of Little Goose Creek and Big Goose Creek. In the late winter or early spring,
rising daytime temperatures cause the accumulated snow and ice in the cities to
melt, carrying with it large quantities of road de-icing material. Public
interest in the problem has been vocal and for that reason the work element
centered around it. Due to the above mentioned limitations, no attempt was
made to do a complete urban runoff study. As future funding for water quality
planning becomes available in Wyoming, a more thorough approach for urban
runoff assessment should be undertaken in the three cities.
General Characteristics of Urban Runoff
Storm discharges must be considered in terms of their shock-loading effects on
receiving streams. A total of 94 to 99 percent of the organic load and almost
all settleable solids in such streams are attributed to wet weather flow. Storm
wastewater has been characterized by the Environmental Protection Agency as
having solids concentrations equal to or greater than those of secondary
effluent.
166
-------
The sources of stormwater pollution are many and mixed, and are a function of
factors such as land use, geography, weather, traffic volumes and character, and
local public works factors. However, most stormwater pollution is considered as
street surface contamination, which is comprised primarily of particulate matter
but also can include non-particulate soluble and suspendable matter. Among the
sources of street surface contamination are the following:
Pavement
Pavement contaminants consist of asphaltic and Portland cement, their various
products of decomposition, aggregate materials, small amounts of road marking
paints and crack fillers. The rate of generation of these types of pollutants
depends on the age and condition of street surfaces, the local climate, and
leaks and spills of solvents which aid in degradation of asphaltic pavements.
Motor Vehicles
A broad range of street surface contaminants can be attributed to the auto-
mobile, including:
1. Leakage of fuel and lubricants-,
2. Fine particles worn off tires;
3. Particulate exhaust emissions and leaded compounds. Sulfur compounds
removed by catalytic converters may combine with water and produce
sulfuric acid;
4. Dirt, rust, and paint coatings which drop off motor vehicles;
5. Glass, plastic, and metals which are deposited on streets after collisions.
These types of materials vary in their potential as harmful water pollutants.
Fuels and lubricants increase inorganic loadings, and also cause films which
hinder oxygenation. Most fuels contain lead, nickel, and zinc compounds which
may be harmful to biological forms.
Vegetation
Leaves, bark, grasses, etc., which collect on the street or are purposefully
placed there are important as water pollutants because they contribute to the
167
-------
biochemical oxygen demand when entering surface streams. The demand may be
immediate if they accumulate in catch basins or long-term if the organic mater-
ials become a benthic deposit. Nutrients and pesticides are also associated
with vegetation.
Runoff from Adjacent Land Areas
The major violators in this category are construction projects which increase the
erosion process by stripping vegetation that would usually detain and reduce the
velocity of runoff water.
Sheri dan
CIimate
The average annual precipitation in Sheridan amounts to 16 inches. Total pre-
cipitation is divided fairly evenly between rain and snow with average annual snow-
fall amounting to 69 inches, The coldest month is January, maintaining an aver-
age daily maximum temperature of 33.5 degrees and an average daily minimum tem-
perature of 21 degrees. The warmest month is July, with an average daily maxi-
mum temperature of 86.1 degrees and an average daily minimum temperature of
70.4 degrees. A summary of the mean monthly precipitation for Sheridan appears
in Table 50.
TABLE 50
Mean Monthly Precipitation, Sheridan
Month Precipitation (inches) Month Precipitation (inches)
January .74 July 1.05
February .77 August .92
March 1.19 September 1.30
April 2.19 October 1.08
May 2.36 November .89
June 2.85 December .69
Source: Urban Runoff Study, Sheridan, Buffalo, and Gillette, Wyoming, Water
Resources Research Institute, p. 6.
16ft
-------
gagtW MILES NORTH OF SHE Rl OANI
eg a
IT T* V
IS T*
IS TM
12 TM ST
OUNNUCK
LEWIS
fAiRWAl
trrrrr
ictoria
PlO*
MTV
MOPAllL 5
GRINNELL
BRUftDAGE
MT VlE* 0
6iiampio*i
LOuCKS
^TONEG
WORKS
iTBlA
flURXIfT S
ftitM&l
HILLCRE^zPL
Win^J ST
P€«KIN«
URNf
colLegeI^v
HEALO
0ut«CWS
Gil l£t
NtBfiASfc*
AThERINE
C^LUMCT
A 1*
MtfilOlAN •—IsT
COL.3AAOO
1
MONTATA
herbe^t t| -
Mtnl
r| t ImuNTINCTON
n
ChEYEN
SOUTHEAST OF SHt*»DAN]
S^OSMONti*
absaraka
NAvAjC
ARAPAhOE
AiRPOPT £
A/fiPOfir
2 HO 4VE 1
3 90 AVE E
S rH avC i
6 Th AVE E
A©0®
A
Q]< TWO MILE s
MAP 1 4
(T)(FlVE MluES SOUTh
OF Sh{*iOAN>
Q-rom cwhsan?
SAMPLE SITES
6H6WONH, WYOMING
(I * STORM OftAiN
(T)-LiTrLE GOOSE CREEM WAT**
QUALITY sample sitc
A- little goosc RuNorr
SAMPLE StTt
(J3 -«»o soose & ooosc cmcr
WATC* OUALITT SAM»Lt
•910 GOOSE a OOOSC C*CCn4
RUNOFf SAMPLE Sirt
-------
Storm Drainage System
The present storm drainage system in Sheridan consists of surface and subsurface
facilities and is described as inadequate, especially on the east side of the city.
Identified needs include construction of flood-prevention structures in some areas,
and adding curbs, gutters, and paving in unimproved areas to cw-tl in surface
drainage.
A total of 26 drains carry runoff into Goose Creek, 13 into Little Goose, 6 into
Big Goose, and 7 drains carry runoff below the confluence of the two forks. The
major drains are listed in Table 51 and shown on Map 14.
TABLE 51
Storm Drain Locations
i ittle Goose Creek
Big Goose Creek
Goose Creek
State Highway 334
Kurtz Place
Coffeen Ave.
Heald St.
Park St.
Works St.
Custer St.
Scot St.
Alley between Gould &
Main Sts.
Main St.
Brooks St.
Cleveland St.
Burkitt St.
Loucks St. (west side)
Loucks St. (east side)
Kendrick Park Rd. (south)
Kendrick Park Rd. (north)
Marion
5th St.
5th St.
7th St.
8th St.
16th St.
Fort Rd.
St.
(east
(west
side)
side)
Source: Urban Runoff Study, Sheridan, Buffalo, and Gillette, Wyoming, Water
Resources Research Institute, p. 7.
Buffalo
rlimate
Buffalo's climate is semiarid in nature. The mean annual precipitation is approxi-
mately 13 inches with the mean annual temperature amounting to approximately 46
degrees. Mean monthly precipitation figures for Buffalo appear in Table 52.
169
-------
TABLE 52
Mean Monthly Precipitation, Buffalo
Month
Precipitation (inches) Month
Precipitation (inches)
January
February
March
Apri 1
May
June
.63
.57
.75
1.86
1.98
2.67
July
August
.97
.81
1.25
.99
.72
.41
September
October
November
December
Source: Urban Runoff Study, Sheridan, Buffalo, and Gillette, Wyoming, Water
Resources Research Institute, p. 7.
Storm Drainage System
Due to the topography of the City, storm sewer systems have not been a major
factor in Buffalo's development. The comnunity essentially contains two opera-
ting storm drain systems. One system drains Fort Street east to South Burritt
Street, then south on Burritt Street to Clear Creek. The other major system
drains Main Street,which was recently completed in the reconstruction of Main
Street. Additional street drains provided by reconstruction should assist in the
alleviation of the occasional flooding that has occurred in the downtown area. Minor
street drains that also flow into Clear Creek are located in the city park and on
Lobban Avenue. Storm drain locations are shown on Map 15.
The Gillette area records a semiarid climate characterized by wide variations in
annual temperature and seasonal precipitation. The mean annual precipitation
amounts to 15.57 inches, with 72 percent of this amount occurring mainly during
April and September. The mean yearly temperature is 45.5 degrees. A summary of
the mean monthly precipitation for Gillette is presented in Table 53 .
Gillette
Climate
170
-------
C*athTE
-------
TABLE 53
Mean Monthly Precipitation, Gillette
Month
Precipitation (inches)
Month
Precipitation (inches)
January
.53
July
1.49
February
.59
August
1.02
March
.83
September
1.39
Apri 1
1.91
October
.98
May
2.91
November
.76
June
3.33
December
.55
Source: Urban Runoff Study, Sheridan, Buffalo, and Gillette, Wyoming, Water
Resources Research Institute, p. 8.
Storm Drainage System
At present, Gillette does not maintain existing storm drain facilities other than
underground drains that are located at Gillette Avenue. Various drainage ditches
located in the City serve to carry away stormwater.
Water Quality Data
The following narrative presents a review of water quality information and urban
runoff chemical data pertaining to Goose Creek at Sheridan, Clear Creek at
Buffalo, and Stonepile-Donkey Creek at Gillette. In the State of Wyoming there
are three classes of water (DEQ, 1974):
Class I. Those waters which, based on information supplied by the Wyoming
Game ana Fish Department, are determined to be presently support-
ing game fish or have the hydrologic and natural water quality
potential to support game fish.
Class II. Those waters which, based on information supplied by the Wyoming
Game and Fish Department, are determined to be presently support-
ing nongame fish or have the hydrologic and natural water quality
potential to support nongame fish.
Class III. Those waters which, based on information supplied by the Wyoming
Game and Fish Department, are determined not to have the hydro-
logic or natural water quality potential to support fish.
171
-------
Goose Creek
Goose Creek arises as two forks, Big and Little Goose Creeks, on the eastern
slope of the Bighorn Mountains. The confluence of the two forks occurs within
the city limits of Sheridan near the intersection of Brooks and First Streets.
Goose Creek is presently classified as a Class I stream.
Water Quality -
The water quality of the mainstem of Goose Creek is generally good. Salinity
is the major problem, and can mostly be attributed to nonpoint sources, including
irrigation return flows. Septic systems apply domestic stresses on the upper
reaches of Big Goose and Little Goose. An additional stress is applied on Little
Goose Creek as it flows through South Sheridan due to inadequate septic systems.
The major stress on the stream occurs at the Sheridan sewage treatment plant.
Increases in salinity and nutrients and a marked decrease in dissolved oxygen
in the stream occur after this point in the stream.
Water Quality Sample Sites -
The data presented for water quality base information are from samples collected
throughout the 208 study area in the Powder River Basin. The sampling sites for
Little Goose, Big Goose, and Goose Creeks are illustrated on Map 14 and the base
data appear in Table 54 . The data are presented in upstream to downstream order,
beginning above Sheridan and continuing through and below the city.
-------
CO
CD
cn
o
o
l/>
o
w
•J.
to
CD
O
o
to
a>
o
o
o
in
fD
Table 54
Little Goose, Big Goose and Goose Creek
Water Quality Data*
Cal-
Si te ciun
Magne-
S 1 JX
Sodlua
Potas-
sium
Car-
bonate
Bicar-
bonate
Sulfate
Chloride
Nitrate
Fluo-
ride
TDS
PH
(SU)
Ec
(limhos)
Hard-
ness
Sodium
I
Borcn
Silica
TSS
Total
°J
Flow
Ufa)
1
67
40
23
2.1
0
370
69
3
.2
.4
394
8.2
660
330
13.10
2.1
8.5
13
181
2
45
29
19
1.9
18
220
73
5.4
.1
.3 .
318
8.9
506
230
15
.6
7.1
16
126
68
3
23
16
10
1.2
9
130
38
1.8
.2
.3
188
8.9
291
130
14
.4
9.5
52
72
131
4
58
58
45
3.3
15
310
120
3.7
.2
.5
466
8.6
700
330
15
1.2
11
4
167
46
Above and
Through Sheridan
I 48
122
17
1.9
0
170
110
1.9
.1
.3
328
8.3
478
220
14
.6
9.7
16
83
2 51
30
22
2.1
12
190
130
5.4
.1
.3
390
8.9
580
250
16
.6
7.4
12
105
51
3 5<.
36
20
3
9
200
140
3.7
0
.4 .
400
8.5
600
280
13
.8
8.8
16
107
4 15
6.5
4.1
1.2
0
67
19
1.9
.3
.2
106
8.2
147
65
12
.3
6.8
44
33
5 54
39
26
4
0
260
140
5.6
1.1
.4
416
8.3
645
290
16
1.1
10
68
128
6 16
6.1
6.4
.9
3
61
18
1.9
.4
.3
118
8.6
136
66
18
.5
6.7
100
33
Below Sheridan
7 51
33
23
2.3
9
230
110
7.2
.6
.4
382
8.6
598
260
16
.8
7.6
28
122
137
8 15
O.J
4.7
.9
0
67
19
1.9
.4
.2
104
8.1
150
65
14
.3
6.8
44
33
9 58
42
27
4.2
0
280
140
3.7
1.6
.4
456
8.2
686
320
16
1.0
11
64
138
250
1 *All concentrations are In ®g/l unless noted.
Source: Urban Runoff Study, Sheridan, Buffalo, and Gillette, Wyoming, Water Resources Research
Institute, p. 11 & 13.
-------
Storm Drain Sample Sites -
A preliminary reconnaissance was conducted by PRAPO personnel on Goose Creek on
June 6, 1976, during rain events. Thirty-six (36) storm drain and instream sam-
ples were collected during the study and analyzed for conductance and turbidity.
Another sample run was conducted during the week of February 2-7, 1977, for snow
runoff. Twenty-six (26) samples were collected during this study and were anal-
yzed for various chemical constituents. The sample sites are labeled on Map 14
and data from these sites are contained in Tables 55 and 56.
near Creek
Clear Creek also rises on the eastern slope of the Bighorn Mountains. The
stream proceeds through Buffalo in a northeasterly direction, confluencing with
piney 3nd Buffalo Creeks prior to emptying into the Powder River approximately
ten miles from Montana.
Water Quality -
Buffalo's single-celled lagoon is the only major point source of pollution on
Clear Creek leading to and through Buffalo. A minor point source exists immed-
iately west of Buffalo at the Soldiers and Sailors home. Nonpoint sources such as
septic tank seepage affect the upper reaches of the stream. Clear Creek is
classified as a Class I stream, and therefore must conform to the standards
developed for this type of stream.
Water Quality Sample Sites -
Limited base data (three samples above Buffalo and three samples below) were
obtained by the Water Resources Research Institute. Sample sites are repre-
sented on Map 15 and the chemical data are presented in Table 57.
Storm Drain Sample Sites -
A total of 15 urban runoff samples during snowmelt runoff were collected along
Clear Creek on February 8, 1977, by PRAPO personnel. The sample sites are also
labeled on Map 15 and the chemical data are presented in Table 58.
174
-------
Table 55
Little Goose Creek storm runoff data (collected Feb. 2, 1977)1
Site
Cal-
c tun
Jlagne-
slura
Sodium
Potas-
sium
Car-
bonate
Blcar-
bonace
Sulfate
Chloride
Nitrate
Fluo-
ride
TDS
pll
(SU)
Ec
(vimhos)
Hard-
ness
Sod luin
X
Eoron
Silica
Total
TSS C0i
Phosphate
Orcho/tocal
Flow
(c is)
1
51
37
21
1.9
0
300
66
2.8
2.6
.4
400
8.2
636
280
14
.08
12
12
150
.03/.06
t.41
2
86
34
35
1.9
0
200
210
33
1.6
.3
586
7.7
836
360
17
.07
11
52
96
.1/.13
3
66
37
21
1.9
0
340
70
2.7
2.4
.4
402
8.2
655
320
14
.07
12
8.0
170
-.04/.05
4
89
19
36
4.9
0
220
120
55
3.8
.4
496
7.3
761
300
20
.05
8.4
412
110
.42/.50
5
63
36
21
2.1
0
340
69
3.4
2.6
.4
422
8.2
655
310
13
.07
12
8.0
170
.05/.07
6
19
5.0
4.7
1.4
0
60
9.0
12
1.6
.2
108
7.4
188
67
13
.05
11
0
29
.11/.13
7
67
9.2
13
5.6
0
120
110
23
8.9
.4
368
7.4
523
200
12
,08
4.7
548
53
.56/.58
8
82
5.3
17
6.3
0
160
75
38
5.4
.1
366
7.2
549
230
14
.09
6.0
380
78
.32/.39
9
94
6.1
100
6.1
-0
130
110
180
6.4
.1
612
7.1
1020
260
45
.13
4.4
283
63
.26/.33
10
84
5.8
19
6.3
0
160
99
38
.2
.2
386
7.4
595
230
14
.10
7.2
552
78
.37/.40
11
92
6.1
25
4.4
0
130
120
42
14
.3
414
7.7
637
260
17
.07
6.4
1080
66
.60/.61
12
120
9.2
36
8.4
0
120
180
73
28 '
588
7.7
842
330
19
.09
6.4
360
60
.37/.41
13
68
39
23
2.1
0
330 .
94
3.5
438
8.2
690
330
13
.1
11
24
160
.03/.04
1 Ail concentrations are In ng/1 unless noted.
S°UrCe: —ban Runoff Stud^> Sheridan, Buffalo, and Gillette, Wyoming. Water Resources Research Institute
p. 15.
-------
Table 56
Big Goose and Goose Creek storm runoff data (collected Feb. 7, 1977)1
Site
CaJ-
c :i:~
,'lasne-
Si 'j 11
Sc-d'n.-.
Potas-
sium
Car-
bonate
Bicar-
bonate
Sul f .ire
Chloride
Nitrate
Fluo-
t lie
TDS
pll
u.hos)
Hard-
ness
Sod iuo
*
Boron
Silica
TSS
Total
CO-,
Phosphate Fiou
Ortho/total (cfs)
1
81
40
26
2.3
0
270
180
2.4
2.1
.5
506
8.3
7 54
370
13
.1
12 ¦
4
130
.01/.02 -Ol
2
95
31
28
4.7
0
220
210
29
12
.4
608
7.6
855
360
.11
10
452
110
.29/.30
3
81
46
27
3.0
0
250
200
14
7.7
.6
574
8.1
303
390
13
.1
11
64
120
.08/.13
4
91
6.9
35
7.9
0
99
150
64
8.4
0
47 6
7.2
723
260
23
.09
6.9
176
49
.37/.42
5
110
25
35
7.2
0
180
220
51
7.8
.4
624
7.5
878
380
16
.09
7.1
248
87
.31/.39
6
76
39
26
2.8
0
270
180
2.7
2.2
512
8.2
756
350
14
.09
12
8
130
.02/.03
7
120
8.8
39
7.0
0
150
210
66
.2
.4
580
7.7
874
340
20
.09
8.9
2050
75
.86/.87
8
72
7.3
23
5.4
0
150
85
44
0
.3
378
7.7
586
210
19
.04
6.6
500
76
.68/.74
9
47
5.7
21
5.4
. 0
98
67
33
1.9
.3
282
7.0
431
140
24
0
5.6
120
48
.23/.35
10
57
5.1
15
5.4
0
68
35
2.3
.3
304
7.3
453
160
16
0
6.3
210
' 51
.31/.41
11
32
33
25
.7
0
230
81
3.6
.9
.5
352
8.3
527
210
20
. .03
13
96
: 110
t
.05/.11
12
80
8.7
20
4.9
0
160
110
34
2.5
.4
416
7.7
612
240
15
.02
5.2
570
78
.45/.46
13
61
7.2
35
4.4
0
150
57
58
.6
.3
350
7.8
552
180
29
.01
64
490
72
.49/.53
•All concentration® in »g/l unless noted.
Source: »rban Runoff stud.y> Sheridan. -Buffalo, and "Gillette, Wyoming. Water Resources Research Institute
p. 17.
-------
Table 57
Clear Creek water quality data^
Site
c..:- .v^snc-
c':T Si -l i
Sod inn
?UC.'IS-
s iun
Car-
bonate
Bicar-
bonate
Sulf.ite
Chloride
X11 rn L e
Fluo-
ride
TDS
[•"
(S V)
Ec
(limbos)
Hni'd-
ncss
Sod iuc\
X
fio ron
Silica
TSS
Toe.1.1
C0i
Above
B'i f f alo
1
12 3.5
7
1.2
0
58
12
1.1
0
.2
72
7.8
115
44
26
.3
9.8
8
28
2
9.3 1.7
3.5
.7
0
31
9.9
1.9
0
.1
54
7.7
64
30
20
0
7.8
12
15
3
17 4.3
9.4
.9
0
70
19
1.5
0
. .2
92
8.0
148
59
25
0
11
8
34
Be low
Buf f.ilo
4
6.1 1.1
1.6
.2
0
31
0
1.9
.4
.1
58
8.3
52
20
17
.1
6
8
15
5
9.3 1.8
3.5
.7
0
27
15
1.9
0
.1
58
7.1
66
31
20
0
7.7
12
13
6
15 3.9
8.8
1.2
0
67
19
1.2
0
.2
86
7.9
139
55
26
0
10
4
33
i ;;os:mi.K
.02
^1
*-«4
1.
All concentrations ii\ tng/1 unless noted.
Source: Urban Runoff Study, Sheridan, Buffalo, and Gillette, Wyoming, Water Resources Research Institute,
p. 19.
-------
Table 58
Clear Creek storm runoff data (collected Feb. 8, 1S77)*
i f o
Cal-
cium
ir.l.tno-
ium
Set! i-:r
i'oc.is-
s Jun*
Car-
bonate
Bicar-
bonate
Sul fate
Chloride
Nitrate
Fluo-
ride
TDS
Pit
(Stl)
r.c
(yir.hOS)
ll.irJ-
ncss
SoJ luu
X
Boron
Silica
TSS
Total i
«v
1
36
9.5
16
.9
0
130
57
1.8
.2
.3
226
8.3
348
130
21
0
12
16
66
.01/.2.!
2
39
9.2
110
1.6
0
110
52
170
.4
.2
496
7.3
874
130
64
0
1.4
64
55
.06/. 11
3
32
9.1
19
1.2
0
130
51
.9
.8
.2
216
7.6
336
120
26
0
12
12
63
.01/.01
4
32
9.0
20
1.2
0
130
53
1.8
.9
.2
222
8.0
351
120
27
.01
12
12
66
.03/. 03
5
57
8.6
72
4.2
0
190
52
97
.1
.2
436
7.6
733
170
46
0
5.7
780
94
.41/.57
6
52
9.9
220
6.1
0
190
14
350
0
.3
840
7.7
1520
170
73
.03
9.6
4400
93
.11/.11
7
SO
7.4
130
S.6
0
180
13
200
0
.2
556
7.7
1020
160
64
.01
6.3
1500
£6
•S6/.92
8
50
6.7
120
3.5
0
) 60
9.0
210
.4
.2
512
7.9
953
150
63
.23
4.5
2000
77
.56/.5S
9
43
6.5
150
3.3
0
140
8
230
•S
.1
520
7.7
904
130
70
.03
4.7
1220
71
. 53/.A3
10
110
12
190
5.1
0
360
0
310
0
.3
994
7.2
1620
330
56
.09
17
3000
ISO
.06/.13
11
37
9.6
20
1.6
0
140
54
7.3
.2
.2
236
8.0
371
130
24
.06
12
48
68
.03/.07
12
59
11
200
3.7
0
180
16
350
.1
.3
818
7.6
1470
190
*9
.06
5.8
780
E7
.36/.49
13
65
14
310
8.4
0
210
16 .
530
0
• .3
1160
7.7
1970
.220
75
.19
9.3
6SOO
110
.15/.17
14
56
9.7
280
3.5
0
190
25
440
.3
.4
986
7.8
1810
180
77
0
6.3
5900
93
.29/.27
15
38
9.7
22
1.4
0
190
53
12
.2
.2
238
8.0
385
140
26
0
11
120
70
.09/.14
•All concentrations In ag/l unless noted.
Source: Urban Runoff Study, Sheridan, Buffalo", and Gillette, Wyoming, Water Resources Research Institute
-------
Stonepi!e-Donkey Creek
Stonepile- Donkey Creek is a Class III stream until itflowsto the Campbell-
Crook County line, where it becomes a Class II stream. During drought flow
conditions, the only flow observed in the drainage is treated sewage from
Gillette's wastewater treatment plant. An elaborate presentation on the impact
of urban runoff on Stonepi1e-Donkey Creek was not undertaken since it is a
Class III stream. However, street samples were collected in Gillette at the
sites shown on Map 16 and samples results are presented in Table 59.
Water Quality Runoff Assessment
The data analyzed by the Water Resources Research Institute were not sufficient
to determine overall and long-range impacts of stormwater on Goose Creek and Clear
Creek. If a complete and accurate study is desired, more comprehensive sampling
techniques should be employed. This would include the use of automatic samplers
to sample runoff events during rising and rescinding limbs of the hydrograph.
Modeling could also be utilized to estimate downstream effects of urban runoff.
Generally speaking, minimal impact is observed on both Goose Creek and Clear
Creek from the runoff events sampled for this study. The following is a descrip-
tion of the impact of stormwater on these streams.
Goose Creek
As expected, storm drains along this waterway contain high concentrations of
suspended solids and total dissolved solids. Suspended solids are consistently
higher than stream levels in drains sampled on both forks of Goose Creek. However,
extremely high downstream concentrations were not observed. Two processes opera-
ting together are probably responsible for this result. One is dilution, which
decreases total dissolved solids concentrations. The other is sedimentation,
which causes an immediate dropout of the heavier street particles observed in
urban runoff. The reconnaissance conducted on June 6, 1976, supports this ob-
servation. During this study conductance and turbidity were observed to decrease
in value from immediately below the confluence of Big Goose and Little Goose
Creeks to the Fort Road Bridge. A comparison*of sampling sites 1 and 5 on Little
Goose Creek (Table 55 ) also indicates a decrease of suspended solids from 12
mg/1 to 8 mg/1. A three-fold increase is observed at site 13 as compared to site
5; however, the drains between these two sites contain suspended solids concentra-
tions up to 135 times higher than stream levels. A comparison of Table 55 with
179
-------
«|LAKESIDE CT
liwqqln
•1 ST
Tni
ST
ST
ST
ST
ST
IQTM
ST
ST
OfrCLC
PRAlRie fvu^v »
0*
MAP 16
SAMPLE GXVSfo
GILLETTE, WYSMlN©
RUNOFF SAMPLC S»TE LOCATION
-------
Table 59
Gillette storni runoff data (collected February 5, 1"977)*
C:.l-
il «liT.
>'n (,nc-
s I j'?
So-1 Inn
Polas-
s ium
Cnr-
I'on.-itc
Btcar-
bon.it c
Sulface
Chloride
Nit rate
Fliio-
riJe
TDS
PH
(S'J)
Ec
(u:n!los)
Hard-
ness
Sodium
X .
Roron
Silica
TSS
1 o t a 1
COj
On ho/: ft a
1
52
5.1
89
8.4
0
180
25
130
.1
.3
454
7.1
750
150
55
.17
8.4
616
86
.6971.17
1
¦U
3.6
40
6.1
0
180
13
120
.1
.2
466
7.3
697
240
26
.06
7.1
84}
S6
.277.59
3
70
13
130
16
0
280
140 .
100
1.8
1.2
678
7.5
1010
230
54
.19
16
5760
140
.11/.70
4
70
7.3
270
9.5
0
200
59
400
.1
.5
936
7.3
1590
210
73
.09
13
5170
100
.05/.12
5
130
20
70
8.8
0
150
350
72
.1
.6
842
7.2
1080
400
27
,11
6.8
952
75
.45/.65
6
73
7.4
210
11
0
300
0
320
0
. .4
814
7.3
1370
210
67
.31
13
1810
150
.02/.06
7
74
5.8
100
8.4
0
170
73
84
1.3
.4
550
7.5
923
210
51
.01
9.1
1500
84
.51/.60
8
62
5.6
77
9.3
0
140
69
120
4.3
.3
460
7.2
730
180
47
.03
6.4
2 Q0
70
.62/.69
10
SI
12
39
5.8
0
120
160
47
2.9
.4
462
7.4
683
250
24
.01
6.2
604
60
.34/.42
11
85
3.7
430
8.6
0
190
33
720
.1
.3
1360
7.3
2380
230
80
.04
8.0
1100
95
.44/.64
12
62
4.7
280
8.4
0
200
47'
420
.1
.4
922
7.5
1690
170
77
.06
9.1
3000
99
.03/.16
*¦ All concentracions in rng/1 unless noted.
S0Urce: Runoff Study, Sheridan, Buffalo, and Gillette, Wyoming. Water Resources Research Institute,
-------
Table 54 for Little Goose Creek and Table 56 with Table 54 for Big Goose and
Goose Creek indicates that suspended solid concentrations are somewhat com-
parable between wet weather flows and dry weather flows. However, consideration
must be given to instantaneous discharges in arriving at these conclusions. The
high concentrations of suspended solids in storm runoff is most probably due to
fine solids and silts being washed off the streets.
The major components of total dissolved solids that were observed in Little
and Big Goose Creeks appeared to be higher in concentrations than in storm run-
0ff from Goose Creek. These components included calcium, sodium, potassium,
sulfate, chloride, and, to a limited extent, nitrate. Sodium, calcium, and
chloride concentrations are probably a result of highway de-icing salts being
washed off the streets. These salts, when ionized in water, are not usually a
serious water quality threat. Sodium also does not combine readily with other
elements in water, and therefore will not precipitate out of solution; thus,
sodium concentrations tend to remain high in water systems. The chemical be-
havior of chlorides in water is quite neutral, as they commonly form
solute complexes with other ions, do not form salts of low solubility, are not
significantly absorbed on mineral surfaces, and maintain insignificant biochemical
roles. Calcium is the principle cation in most natural fresh waters, due to the
fact that it is abundantly distributed in common minerals of the soil.
Sources of potassium in runoff are more difficult to trace than other elements.
Potassium is a major component of sedimentary rocks, but it is also an important
plant nutrient. The nutrient is removed from the soil by the plant, but is
returned to the soil when the plant dies. The effect of plants and addition of
fertilizers to the soil may be important factors in the circulation of potassium
in the runoff of Sheridan.
Nitrates are most commonly attributed to mammalian wastes that enter the water,
but it is also an important plant nutrient; therefore, soil leaching is another
important source of nitrates. Most probably, the nitrates observed in runoff in
Sheridan are a combination of animal feces entering the water and soil leaching
of lawns in the area.
-------
Sulfate concentrations may be attributed partly to the combustion of fuels that
are discharged through exhaust pipes of automobiles. However, another signifi-
cant source is precipitation itself. Concentrations of 1 mg/1 of sulfate in
rainwater is common with concentrations of 10 mg/1 being reported.
Minor elevations in phosphates were also observed in the snowmelt runoff at
Sheridan, with the majority being in the form of ortho-phosphates. Ortho-
phosphates are used as "builders" in many fertilizers applied to lawns.
Clear Creek
Snowmelt runoff from Buffalo into Clear Creek also contains high concentrations
of suspended solids. Table 58 indicates that suspended solids increase by 104
mg/1 after the Creek passes through the storm drain area of Buffalo. The major
contributors of suspended solids seem to be sites 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, and 14. These
sites drain two major streets in Buffalo including Main Street (sites 6 and 7) and
Lobban Avenue (site 14). Additional pollution seems to originate in parking lots
and alleys located in the central business district of Buffalo (sites 8, 10, and
13). Fine solids on street surfaces are possible causes of high suspended solids
concentrations from storm drain runoff.
The increase in total dissolved solids can be almost entirely attributed to road
salts. This is most dramatically demonstrated at the Main Street drains (sites
6 and 7) and the Lobban Avenue drain at site 12. A marked increase in sodium,
chloride, and calcium is observed at these sites. Other constituents (magnesium,
sulfate, nitrate, and fluoride) actually decrease from site 1 to site 15, indica-
ting dilution is overcoming the loading effect for these constituents.
Stonepile-Donkey Creek
Gillette's storm runoff data were previously presented in Table 59 . The same
problems and patterns are observed in the data as observed in Sheridan and Buffalo
Urban runoff is not a significant pollutant source based on the results of
observed water quality data and the ephemeral character of Stonepile-Donkey
Creek.
182
-------
Suggested Management Guidelines
Table 60 suggests best management practices (BMPs) for the types of pollutants
observed in the Sheridan, Buffalo, and Gillette areas. The practices presented
in Table 60 are basically excerpts from the Environmental Protection Agency's
"Urban Runoff Pollution Control Technology Overview". The Water Resources
Research Institute suggests that these are possible practices, but not absolute
solutions for treatment of total and suspended solids in urban runoff. It should
be recognized that the Environmental Protection Agency has conducted their studies
for larger metropolitan areas than are located in Wyoming. The larger cities
maintain a broader financial base for construction or urban pollution control
structures. It is doubtful that the benefits obtained from expensive pollution
control techniques in Wyoming would be greater than the cost of applying the
techniques.
Programmatic Activities
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (Public Law, 92-500)
made discharges of pollutants into navigable waters illegal without a permit.
However, most storm sewers and agricultural irrigation return flows were excluded
from the requirement of having a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit. This exclusion was challenged in court; as a result, the
Environmental Protection Agency was ordered to propose and promulgate regulations
extending the permit program to previously excluded categories.
The proposed general permit program will include storm drains. The "General
Permit Program Area" (GPPA) would consist of a designated geographical area
in which all owners or operators of separate storm sewers, exclusing those
covered by individual permits, are subject to the same general permit. De-
pending on the situation, a permit area could be as large as an entire state
or as small as a local political or organizational division.
Under the proposed regulations, the States that have been delegated the NPDES
permit program would be given an opportunity to develop a general permit pro-
gram. The State would have a choice of using a general permit and/or individual
permits for permitting "separate storm sewers". To be considered a "separate
storm sewer", the storm sewer must be within an urbanized area (not SMSA) or
designated as a significant source of pollution.
13?
-------
TABLE 60
Suggested Management Guidelines for Urban Storm Runoff
RMP
Distributive Effects
Water Quality Effects
LAND MANAGEMENT (STRUCTURAL/SEMI-STRUCTURAL)
On-site storage Multi benefits of aesthetics, recreation,
recharge, and irrigating reduces erosion.
Overland flow modification
Lower cost than subterranean sewer con-
struction, allow vegetative cover and
soil infiltration.
LAND MANAGEMENT (NON-STRUCTURAL)
Improved surface sanitation Aesthetics.
Chemical use control
Urban development resource
planning
Use of natural drainage
Erosion and sediment
control
STORAGE
Storage - concept is to cap-
ture wet-weather flow and
blend it back into the
treatment plant during dry
weather. Essentially
storage chops the top off
a storm hydrograph.
Public health could increase if the public
was educated in economical and nonwasteful
methods of applying fertilizers and pesti-
cides. Economic benefit could be gained
from using less salt for de-icing highways.
Better urban planning and reduction in
erosion and sedimentation.
Reduces drainage costs, enhances aesthe-
tics. Groundwater supplies and flood
protection.
Enhance aesthetics through seeding and
sodding.
Probably most cost-effective method for
reducing pollution from treatment plant
overflows.
Reduction in TDS, sediments. Poten-
tial groundwater pollution should b«
considered. Reduces instream
scouring.
Reduction in finer solids concentra
tion, reduction in TDS and organic
loadings.
Reduction in complex inorganic load-
ings which do not degrade through
natural stream cleansing, reduction
in nutrients.
Reduction in TDS and sediments.
Reduction in TDS, sediments, and
nutrients.
Reduces instream scouring by
reducing flows.
Reduction in sediments and elimi-
nates shock loadings.
-------
With uncertainty pertaining to regulations concerning storm drains, it would be
worthwhile for the appropriate agencies to be aware of certain urban pollution
control techniques for future urban development policies. The most feasible
techniques for smaller cities would be constructural land management techniques.
These include improved surface sanitation, chemical use control, and better
urban planning in new housing districts.
The data evaluated pertaining to urban runoff are not sufficiently thorough for
an accurate evaluation of the effects of urban runoff in the Sheridan, Buffalo,
and Gillette areas. The data lack many key parameters such as BOD, metals, oil
and grease, and bacterial determinations for the samples collected. Additionally,
it is also pertinent to measure the quantity of water being discharged into the
receiving streams which requires an instantaneous discharge measurement at each
storm drain. Composite samples during the runoff event should also be obtained.
This procedure would require sampling of each storm sewer at the beginning, mid-
point, and at the end of the runoff event. Use of automated samplers would provide
much better results than manual collection of the samples. Lastly, it is impor-
tant to determine the loading factors by sampling runoff from a number of rain
and snowstorms throughout the year.
The following conclusions and program features were based on the data presented
in the Urban Runoff Study:
1. The major pollutant problems observed in the Sheridan, Buffalo, and Gillette
areas are dissolved and suspended solids. The major portion of dissolved
solids occur from road de-icing salts, while the suspended solids are
attributable mostly to the fine solids and silts present on the street surface.
2. Metals are associated with suspended solids as they adhere to mineral surfaces;
therefore, it is suggested that metal analyses be conducted on those drains
which have high suspended solids concentrations.
3. The most practical approach to reducing the urban pollution potential in
these areas is improved street sweeping procedures. The Environmental
Protection Agency has observed that a broom and vacuum combination street
135
-------
cleaner can reduce dry weight solids by 93 percent, volatile solids by 80
percent, BOD by 67 percent, COD by 84 percent, total P04-P by 85 percent,
and heavy metals by 83-98 percent at the street surface.
Urban runoff from these areas exhibits a short term effect on the receiv-
ing streams. However, downstream effects, such as nutrient buildups in
the Tongue River Reservoir, should be investigated.
-------
HIGHWAY AND ROAD CONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENT1
Introducti on
Highway and road construction projects consist of high risk activities
with regard to their potential for contributing sediments and other pollutants
to surface and ground waters in Wyoming. This primarily results from the high
susceptibility of disturbed soils, drainages, or stream channels to erosion due
to a number of factors. Consequently, uncontrolled road construction activities
can generate large amounts of sediments from relatively small areas.
1. Although Wyoming climate is basically arid, effective precipitation
tends to occur in the form of intense thunderstorms and snowmelt, both
of which result in rapid surface runoff.
2. Soils in many areas of the state are noncohesive, with poor structural
stability, low organic content, shallow depth of topsoil. Consequently,
they are highly susceptible to both wind or water erosion.
3- Once disturbance occurs, re-establishment of vegetative cover is diffi-
cult to achieve because of the arid climate and poor soil and conditions.
4. In many areas of the State, high winds blow continually and over long
distances during much of the year, greatly increasing the potential
for wind erosion.
5. In some areas, natural erosion significantly impacts water quality; in
these areas any disturbances may significantly increase the problem.
6. In many areas, soil texture is such that soils are susceptible to pack-
ing by heavy machinery; this may cause pan formation with irreversible
puddling and runoff, thereby increasing erosion potential in adjacent
areas.
Wyoming's water resources are limited and warrants that measures be included
in road construction projects and maintenance activities to ensure that water
quality goals and standards are met. Technology currently is available to con-
trol, within reasonable limits, the erosion and sedimentation that may originate
at road construction sites, both during and following construction.
To a large extent, good highway and road design practices protect water qua-
lity by incorporating erosion control efforts that protect highway structures and
reduce maintenance costs. In this respect, highway departments have design stan-
dards and construction specifications which incorporate many protective measures
that eliminate or reduce runoff and erosion. In most cases, erosion control
*Based on information developed by the Wyoming Highway Department and the Wyoming
Department of Environmental Quality
187
-------
measures currently prepared for most highway projects are adequate to limit
erosion and sedimentation problems to reasonable levels. However, erosion con-
trol and water quality protection measures are effective only if they are imple-
mented and enforced. Their need and importance must be recognized by planning,
design, administrative, and construction personnel* i.e., they must be installed
properly, in the right places at appropriate times and then adequately maintained.
In general, the implementation of effective erosion controls during a construc-
tion project not only protects water quality, but also reduces post construction
control requirements and costs.
The Wyoming State Highway Department conducts by far the largest road con-
struction program in the State. Included in the program are improvements to
state highways in rural and urban areas, county roads and city streets. Other
road building entities include Federal agencies, counties, cities and private
industry; however, the construction programs of these entities are rather minor
and virtually insignificant when compared to the State Highway Department's pro-
gram.
Best Management Practices Process
The Highway Department, in conjunction with the Department of Environmental
Quality,has developed a State Highway Construction Best Management Practices
Process which outlines a procedure to accomplish construction pollution abate-
ment at the State level. This procedure will be implemented through the
Wyoming Highway Department Action Plan, which outlines the organizational arrange-
ment, responsibilities, and procedures to be followed in developing highway pro-
jects. These procedures and guidelines will be applicable to federal, county,
local and private projects, and will be integrated into local Wyoming Water Qua-
lity Management Plans. Adherence to this procedure will assure that the planning,
design, construction and maintenance of highways and streets will meet water qua-
lity goals and standards.
188
-------
Specifically, this process includes:
1. Procedures and Methods of Developing Control Plans.
2. Administrative Procedures and Responsibilities for Developing, Review-
ing, Approving and Implementing Management Practies.
3. Guidelines and Criteria for Developing Site Specific Best Management
Procedures.
Under 3. above, the Guidelines and Criteria provide consideration for:
Planning and Design.
Erosion Controls and Protection of Water Quality.
Protection of Aquatic Life.
Recreation and Aesthetics.
Post-Construction Activities.
Legal Restrictions.
139
-------
ON-SITE WASTE DISPOSAL ASSESSMENT1
Introduction
The use of on-site disposal systems in the three county area is basically limited
to the standard septic tank and leach field system. Some use is also made of
aerobic tanks for solids removal in conjunction with the standard leach field.
Utilization of on-site disposal systems provides for a number of potential
pollution problems which must be recognized and evaluated. These problems are
groundwater pollution, leach field failure, non-point stream pollution and sep-
tage disposal.
In the three county area, improperly functioning or non-existent septic systems
affect three major stream segments:
Little Goose Creek
Big Goose Creek
Powder River near Arvada
Other segments undoubtedly have occurrences of contamination caused by leaching
from septic systems also.
In portions of the three counties, high densities of septic systems and potable
water wells occur in areas with high groundwater levels, increasing the hazards
to public health.
Enforcement of regulations governing the construction of septic systems and
water wells has been minimal under State programs. The Counties of Campbell and
Sheridan are developing or have developed local programs for permitting and
inspecting septic systems and water wells based on State regulations. This is
the initial step in developing a more comprehensive and efficient program.
Major recommendations concerning the construction of on-site disposal systems and
water wells and the regulations controlling construction are presented below.
^Based on information developed by the staff of the Powder River Areawide Plan-
ning Organization.
190
-------
Programmatic Recommendations
1. Development, adoption and enforcement of water well construction regula-
tions which would take into account all aspects of a program needed to
assure proper site selection and proper construction of domestic water
wel1s.
2. Development, adoption and enforcement of on-site disposal regulations
which would take into account all aspects of a program needed to assure
proper site and system selection, proper construction and continuing
maintenance of on-site disposal systems.
3. Establishment of a system of charges for filing of permits and conducting
inspections. Fees collected will be used to help defray the costs of run-
ning such programs.
4. Employment of the necessary personnel needed to carry out such programs,
including a sanitarian with a soils background or, if the work load war-
rants, a county soils scientist.
5. A process in which existing on-site disposal systems which have failed
and are found to be incapable of meeting existing standards be brought
into compliance.
6. Requirement making it mandatory that homeowners have their small waste-
water system inspected once every three years for standard septic tanks
and once every year for mechanical systems by a qualified county official.
7. Requirement that the use of soil absorption fields be limited in sensitive
land areas. These areas include floodplains, wetlands, lands with a slope
of more than 20 percent, lands with high groundwater, lands with severe
soil limitations as shown on the SCS-Soils-5 form and aquifer recharge
areas.
8. Requirement that new homes utilizing on-site disposal systems should
designate two leach field sites on the approved lot plan. One site to
be constructed in conjunction with the new home and an alternate site
equal in area to be the primary site for future use.
191
-------
9. Requirement for detailed field investigations to be conducted by the
developer in conjunction with the local regulatory official for all new
sewage disposal systems. The field observations should include the fol-
lowing steps:
a) an observation of groundwater depth during wet months of the
year or the criteria in the Soil Taxonomy - "mottles of value
2 or less above 30 inches" that will show saturation levels
during the wet season even if the soil is extremely dry;
b) a standard percolation test run on saturated soils;
c) a detailed soil report of the soils which extend three feet
below the bottom of the leach field trenches;
d) an evaluation of the need for more detailed site investigation
in the presence of restrictive geologic conditions.
10. Requirement that leaching area for elevated leach fields, determined in
accordance with the percolation rate, should be based on the bottom area
of the drain field trenches.
11. Provisions for the continued role of the local soil conservation districts
in interpreting soils information for determining system design require-
ments .
12. Preparation by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service of complete soils map-
ping for the entire planning area.
13. Co-sponsorship by local and State level agencies of legislation which
would provide State level financial assistance to the counties for
instituting management programs regulating water well construction and
on-site disposal system construction,
14. County participation in conjunction with the respective city governments
of Gillette, Buffalo and Sheridan in the development and implementation
of methods for the proper disposal of septic tank solids.
192
-------
Chapter IV
POINT SOURCE ASSESSMENT AND NEEDS
INTRODUCTION
Public Law 92-500 provides that the analysis of waste treatment alternatives
shall include an evaluation of the following:
1. Regional Solutions
2. Alternative Waste Treatment Methods
3. No Action
Regional solutions for the wastewater treatment needs of communities in the
three counties are not feasible because of geographic location and distance
between communities. It is physically possible to provide a centralized treat-
ment facility to serve the communities of Dayton and Ranchester in Sheridan
County, but does not appear economically feasible.
Alternative waste treatment methods must, under the provisions of P.L. 92-500,
be further evaluated for the following technologies:
1. Biological or physical-chemical treatment and discharge to receiving
waters.
2. Treatment and reuse.
3. Land Application Techniques.
Each of the facilities plans for the incorporated areas analyzed these treat-
ment methods with some degree of thoroughness. The facilities plans at the
time of printing of this report were not yet approved by EPA and DEQ. Changes
to these documents might occur prior to final approval. This chapter reviews
existing wastewater treatment systems, treatment alternatives investigated for
each community, their comparative assessments, and the selected alternative.
This chapter also contains a summary of the wastewater collection system trunk
line studies for the Cities of Buffalo and Sheridan.
193
-------
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS AND ASSESSMENT
Buffalo
Existing Wastewater Facilities
Existing Collection System -
The City of Buffalo's wastewater flows by gravity into a 1-cell oxidation lagoon
located immediately east of Interstate Highway 25. The collection system is con-
structed in two major drainage areas. The smaller drainage area, the south col-
lection area, serves the higher area of town in the southeastern corner of the
City. This area outfalls through a 10" gravity main and presently serves approx-
imately 910 people.
The northern collection area services the remainder of the Buffalo population.
This area outfalls through a 15" vitrified clay pipe (V.C.P.) line which joins
with the 10" outfall just prior to entering the lagoon. Portions of the waste-
water collected in the northern area cross Clear Creek seven times before being
delivered to the lagoon.
There are approimxately 17.3 miles of line in the collection system. The system
is adequately equipped with manholes at most line termini and at changes in line
and grade. The total system is comprised of over 60 percent 6" diameter pipe,
27 percent 8" diameter pipe and the remaining 13 percent of 10" to 15" diameters.
Existing Treatment System -
Sewage is carried to the one-cell lagoon by two interceptor sewers which join in
a common manhole immediately west of the lagoon site. The pond itself is described
as a facultative1 pond, which is formed into a hillside with earth dikes around
the east, west, and north sides. The earth embankments are constructed with 3:1
interior slopes and 2:1 outside slopes. The treated water discharges into a
ditch which directs the discharge around the south end of the lagoon to the
point of discharge into Clear Creek. Other physical characteristics of the
lagoon are:
^Facultative - Facultative organisms are those which have the ability to survive
with or without free oxygen.
194
-------
Depth varies 3.0 - 13.5 feet
Capacity 42,800,000 gallons
Surface Area 20.0 Acres
Detention 40 days minimum at a flow of 1 MGD
and average depth
Evaporation rate 44 inches/year
Projected Wastewater Loads
As shown in the Wastewater Facility Plan, the projected population for the City
of Buffalo amounts to 17,513 persons by 1995 resulting in the following projec-
ted wastewater flows (with and without infiltration/inflow (I/I) rehabilitation).
Table 61 shows the projected wastewater flows for Buffalo.
TABLE 61
Projected Wastewater Flows
ATt.ernate Flow Conditions Quantity
Annual Average Daily Flow (AADF)
1. With I/I Rehabilitation
2. Without I/I Rehabilitation
2.22 MGD
2.85 MGD
Annual Peak Daily Flow (APDF)
1. With I/I Rehabilitation
2. Without I/I Rehabilitation
2.75 MGD
3.54 MGD
Instantaneous Peak Flows (IPF)
1. With I/I Rehabilitation
2. Without I/I Rehabilitation
4.27 MGD
5.67 MGD
Design BOD
5-20
300 mg/1
Design Suspended Solids
Effluent B0Ds
300 mg/1
30 mg/1
Effluent Suspended Solids
30 mg/1
Source: (Projected Wastewater Flows) Buffalo, Wyoming Wastewater Facility Plan,
Step 1, Exhibit 1, VTN Engineers, Planners, Surveyors, p. XII-3.
A1 terna ti ves
Public Law 92-500 specifies a study of reuse potentials for wastewater as well
as treatment and disposal alternatives. In order to fully explore these
wastewater management alternatives for Buffalo, the following six wastewater
management systems were conceptualized, preliminarily designed, and costed:
195
-------
1. Conventional Activated Sludge Plant - Consists of primary clarifiers, aera-
tion basins, secondary clarifiers, chlorine contact chamber and sludge
beds as well as pretreatment listed in 2.
2. Extended Aeration Pond - Activated sludge utilizing earthen basins, sec-
ondary clarifier, chlorine contact chamber, sludge drying beds and nec-
essary pretreatment facilities such as grit removal, bar screens and flow
metering.
2a. Extended Aeration Racetrack - Includes normal pretreatment processes listed
above along with a brush aerated circulating racetrack, secondary clarifier
and sludge drying bed.
3. Aerated Lagoon - Includes costs for grit removal, bar screen and flow
meter, aeration to provide oxygen for B.O.D. reduction in the first lagoon,
a secondary polishing pond, flotation thickener, and chlorine contact
chamber.
4. Biological Contractor (Biosurf Process) - Includes the normal pretreatment
components of grit removal, bar screen, flow meter and splitter box. After
the above pretreatment bio-surf units, secondary clarifier chlorine contact
chamber, and sludge beds are included.
5. Irrigation - Costs include a second cell to the present lagoon, chlorination
a storage reservoir located in Center draw 3.5 miles east of the present
lagoon, irrigation by center pivot sprinklers on land southeast of Buffalo.
Assessment of Alternatives
All of the six preliminary design alternatives were costed for two different
flow criteria as follows:
1. With infiltration/inflow remaining in the wastewater collection system.
This amounts to 2.85 MGD (Average Dai ly Flow) in 1995.
2. With 60 percent of the infiltration/inflow removed from the wastewater
collection system. This amounts to 2.22 MGD (Average Daily Flow) in
1995.
196
-------
Cost comparisons are shown
in Table 52 excluding the
irrigation treatment process
TABLE 62
Buffalo
Wastewater Treatment Alternatives
Ranking of Present Worth
20-Year Treatment
20-Year Treatment
Present Worth Cost
Present Worth Cost
Treatment Process
With I & I Rehab.
Without I & I Rehab.
Aerated Lagoon
2,202,000
1,988,000
Extended Aeration
2,745,000
2,560,000
Biological Contractor
2,812,000
2,993,000
Conventional Activated
Sludge Plant
3,167,000
3,388,000
*Not including land costs.
Source: Buffalo, Wyoming Wastewater Facility Plan, Step 1, January, 1977,
VTN Engineers, Planners, Surveyors.
Environmental Assessment
The following is a list of expected effects on the local environs caused by Buffalo
and its proposed wastewater treatment system by 1985.
a. Approximately 17,500 people are expected to reside in the immediate
vicinity of Buffalo.
b. The above 17,500 people are expected to utilize 5.7 cubic feet per
second (cfs) of domestic water.
c. Wastewater flows from the above population will reach 4.3 cfs or 7 per-
cent of the average yearly stream flow in Clear Creek.
d. A pollutant load of approximately 4750 pounds/day of 5-day biological
oxygen demand (B.O.D.) will be received at the treatment facility in 1985.
e. At the proposed treatment level of 30/30/200 approximately 713 pounds/
day of B.O.D.5 or 15 percent of the above pollutant load will be passed on
to the stream.
f. The coliform count will be reduced to acceptable levels through the
use of chlorination or other means of disinfection.
g. Attraction of population and commercial growth.
h. Improved stream water quality.
i. Improved groundwater quality.
197
-------
j. Reduced nuisance odors
k. Improved aquatic and wildlife habitat.
Selection of Alternative
Major conclusions reached in the Facility Plan were as follows:
1. I and I rehabilitation is not cost effective.
2. Aerated lagoons are the recommended treatment.
3. A3 stage constriction plan is recommended:
Stage 1 - (immediate) construct a 3-cell aerated lagoon
Stage 2 - Upgrade the 3-cell lagoon system to provide storage and
intermittent discharge for the purposes of algae control.
Stage 3 - Expand all of the treatment systems to provide for the
ultimate design population.
4. Plant relocation shows no definite cost advantage. Therefore, the final
decision for plant relocation would be at the descretion of the City.
The selected alternate and phasing program, as recommended, is shown in Table 63
TABLE 63
Aerated Lagoon System
Estimated Construction Costs by Stage
Unit Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Total
Preliminary Treatment 14,000 0 4,000 18,000
Aeration Ponds i Equipment 224,000 188.000 238,000 650,000
Chlorine Basin i Equipment 0 89,000 25,000 114,000
Lab-office -i£>J282. —2— —2_ JM20
T t , 288,000 277,000 267,000 832,000
TOtcl I
*'Not including land costs.
Source: Buffalo, Wyoming Wastewater Facility Plan, Step 1, January, 1977. VTN
Engineers, Planners, Surveyors, p. 24.
198
-------
The estimated operation and maintenance costs during Stage 1 is $13,200 an-
nually during Stage 2, $53,000 annually and during Stage 3, $78,400 annually.
199
-------
Clearmont
Existing Wastewater Facilities"
Collection Facilities -
The existing wastewater collection system for the Town of Clearmont consists
of 8-inch gravity lines carrying sewage to the treatment facility.
Existing Treatment Facilities -
The existing wastewater treatment facility consists of a two-cell conventional
stabilization pond (lagoon) located south of the Town of Clearmont. The physical
characteristics of the facility are as follows:
TABLE 64
Treatment Facility Characteristics
Berm Elevation 3885.0
Water Surface Elevation 3882.0 (max.)
Bottom Elevation 3877.0
Berm Width
Side Slopes
Inner
Outer
Surface Area
Operating Depth
Design Capacity
10 feet
3:1
2:1
1.5 acres
5.0 feet (max.)
150 people
Source: EPA 208 Wastewater Facility Planning, Johnson and Sheridan Counties,
201 Facilities Plan, Interim Report, VTN Engineers, Planners, Surveyors,
p. VI-4
It should be noted that, with the present population of 182 people, the facility
is undersized according to the standards of the Department of Environmental
Quality pertaining to surface area per capita. Even if the facility met this
design criterion it would not be capable of producing an effluent that could
continually meet the applicable discharge standards.
The wastewater treatment facility of the Town does not presently discharge,
but it has been concluded that the pond is probably percolating into the ground-
water table.
200
-------
The elevation of the berm of the pond is approximately seven feet above the level
of the surrounding flood plain adjacent to Clear Creek. It appears highly un-
likely that the facility would be subject to flooding.
Projected Wastewater Loads
The Town of Clearmont has a projected year 2000 population amounting to 345
persons. The per capita design flow utilized for analysis amounts to 125
gallons per capita per day (GPCD) plus an infiltration/inflow rate of 29,100
gallons per day, resulting in a total projected wastewater flow of 72,300 gallons
per day.^
Alternatives
Five basic alternative wastewater treatment methods were considered for this
incorporated community. These methods were as follows:
Alternative 1 - Conventional Stabilization Pond -
The 3-cell conventional stabilization pond was analyzed on the basis of design
of providing a surface area of 0.01 acre per capita for the first cell and a
detention volume of 30 days each for the second and third cells. The first
requirement is the standard for a conventional pond to achieve secondary treat-
ment and the latter is to provide for algae control with intermittent discharge.
The Environmental Protection Agency has recognized the economic advantages of
stabilization ponds (lagoons) for small communities. Although algae produced
in lagoons prohibits the effluent from meeting secondary treatment standards,
the algae has substantially different characteristics than solids from other
treatment processes and are not environmentally objectionable. As a result of
this, the Environmental Proection Agency has amended their effluent quality
standards for suspended solids to permit the use of properly designed stabiliza-
tion ponds by communities having a wastewater discharge of less than two million
gallons per day. Due to this, the conventional stabilization pond is considered
as an alternative herein, although it should be noted that a facility of this
type cannot provide efficient organic removal during the cold winter months in
this area. The system is, however, evaluated for comparison purposes.
1PRAPQ, EPA Wastewater Facility Planning, Johnson and Sheridan Counties,
201 Facilities Plans - Interim Report, VTN Engineers, Planners, Surveyors,
p. V1-6.
201
-------
Alternative 2 - Aerated Lagoon -
The basis of design for the 3-cell aerated lagoon was for a three-day detention
time in the first cell for aeration, nine days detention in the second cell for
sedimentation, and a third cell consisting of two parallel cells of 30 days
detention each for polishing and algae control by intermittent discharge.
Alternative 3 - Extended Aeration Plant -
The extended aeration (package) plant is comprised of a factory fabricated
waste treatment plant which can be shipped intact to the site, installed on a
constructed foundation and be made operational with the necessary exterior
piping and electrical service connections.
Alternative 4 - Land Application -
Land application (irrigation) as an alternative would require a two-cell
facility, the first consisting of a conventional pond to provide biological
treatment and sedimentation and the second being a storage basin with a six-
month detention volume for the non-irrigating season. Effluent from the
facility would be pumped to the area to be irrigated. Irrigation water could
be sold to nearby agricultural users.
Alternative 5 - Controlled Discharge Pond -
The 3-cell controlled discharge pond was analyzed on the basis of design of
providing a surface area of 0.01 acres per capita for the first cell and
a detention volume of 90 days each for the second and third cells. The first
requirement is the standard for a conventional pond to achieve secondary
treatment and the latter is to provide storage for the winter months when
secondary treatment cannot be achieved as well as to provide for algae
control by intermittent discharge.
Assessment of Alternatives
The alternatives for Clearmont were first assessed for present worth value
without land costs as shown in Table 65. The aerated lagoon is recommended
as the most cost-effective alternative recognizing that while the conven-
tional stabilization pond is economically more feasible, it has inherent
limitations in its treatment effectiveness which would lead to adverse envi-
ronmental effects and that it cannot consistently meet effluent standards. The
controlled discharge pond is equally cost-effective to the aerated lagoon when
land costs are considered , but maintains aesthetic problems.
-------
TABLE 65
Present Worth of Treatment Alternatives^
A1 ternative Costs
3-cell Conventional Stabilization Pond
Capital Cost
Construction Cost $ 105,000
Incidental Costs 26,300
131,300
Present Worth of operation & maintenance cost 90,800
Total Present Worth: $ 222,100
3-cell Aerated Lagoon
Capital Cost
Construction Cost 152,000
Incidental Costs 38,000
190,000
Present Worth of operation & maintenance cost 191,900
Total Present Worth: $ 381,900
Land Application
Capital Cost
Construction Cost 158,000 (avg.)
Incidental Costs 39,500
$ 197,500
Present Worth of operation & maintenance cost 186,100
Total Present Worth: $ 383,600
Extended Aeration
Capital Cost
Construction Cost 133,600
Incidental Costs 33,400
$ 167,000
Present Worth of operation & maintenance cost 381,500
Total Present Worth: $ 548,500
3-Cell Controlled Discharge Pond
Capital Cost
Construction Cost 177,200
Incidental Cost 44,300
$ 221,500
Present Worth of operation & maintenance cost 138,500
Total Present Worth: $ 360,000
1 Not including land costs
Source: PRAPO EPA 208 Eastewater Facility Planning, Johnson and Sheridan
Purveyors ^ ^an"*n^enm ^eport» VTN Engineers, Planners,
' P" " 203
-------
Implementation of the Clearmont wastewater management program can be undertaken
in two stages. This program of implementation is briefly defined as follows:
Stage 1 - 1st Priority (Near Future) -
Upgrade the existing facility to provide a three-day detention aeration basin,
a nine-day detention sedimentation basin and utilize the remaining volume
of the pond to provide a 24-day detention polishing pond. The detention times
given are based on the ultimate design flow of 127,500 gallons per day. This
construction would provide adequate treatment for future effluent standards
until such time that limitations on algae control are reinstated which is
expected to be in 1985.
Stage 2 - 2nd Priority (Future) -
Expand the upgraded facility to provide an additional 36-day detention volume
for two 30-day polishing ponds to accommodate the ultimate design flow and
add chlorination facilities for disinfection. This stage will provide a treat-
ment facility capable of meeting the projected growth requirements until the
year 2000.
Financing -
Financing of the proposed wastewater treatment facilities program, as discussed
below, relates to the preparation of contract documents and to the construction
of the facilities.
The estimated financial requirements for the program are as follows;
1. Capital Investment
Stage 1 $ 114,000
Stage 2 76,000
Stages 1 & 2 $ 190,000
2. Annual Operation and Maintenance
Stage 1 $ 14,300
Stage 2 16,900
Stages 1 & 2 $ 31,200
3. Bond Debt Service
Annual payment of 25 percent of capital investment at 6 1/8 percent for
20 years
Stage 1 $ 2,500
204
-------
Stage 2
Stages 1 & 2
$ 4,200
1,700
The estimated bond debt service costs are based on a program of federal funding
whereas the Town's share of the capital costs amounts to 25 percent of the total.
Land acquisition costs have not been included in this evaluation because they
are not eligible costs under an Environmental Protection Agency grant program.
Land acquisition would not be required for the extended aeration plant. Addi-
tional land required for the aerated lagoon would amount to approximately 1.5
aCres while both the conventional pond and controlled discharge pond would
require about 10.5 additional acres. The land application process would require
-land acquisition of approximately 14 acres. Using a land cost of $3,250, which
an average value for transactions which have taken place in this area, the
relative rankings and the present worth of the alternatives including land
acquisition are as follows:
It should be noted that the costs for the aerated lagoon and the controlled
discharge pond are within a range of two percent which, for the accuracy ex-
pected at this level of estimating, make them virtually economically identical.
Table 66 provides a relative ranking of the alternatives.
Environmental Assessment
The impact of the treatment alternatives in all cases results in an improvement
to the environment with an increase in both surface and groundwater quality and
a decrease in odor pollution. The exceptions are that during periods of extreme
cold the conventional stabilization pond would not produce an effluent meeting
EPA standards and the stabilization pond and land application processes would
periodically produce odors.
Conventional Stabilization Pond
Aerated Lagoon
Controlled Discharge Pond
Land Application Process
Extended Aeration Plant
$ 256,200
386,800
394,100
429,100
548,500
205
-------
TABLE 66
Relative Ranking of Alternatives
Concept
Conventional
Stabi1i zation
Pond
Aerated
Lagoon
Extended
Aeration
Land
Application
Control 1ed
Qi scharge
Pond
Economics
5
4
1
2
3
Adaptability
3
4
5
1
2
Envi ronmental
Concepts
3
5
5
4
4
Public Input
~
~
*
*
*
Composi te
3.7
4.3
3.7
2.3
3.0
* Public input had not been substantially evaluated at this point in the Facility
Planning Process.
NOTE: A ranking of 5 is best.
Source: PRAPO EPA 208 Wastewater Facility Planning, Johnson and Sheridan Counties.
201 Facilities Plan-Interim Report, VTN Engineers, Planners, Surveyors
p. VI-18.
Selection of Alternative
It is recommended that the Town of Clearmont proceed with implementation of a plan
to upgrade the existing wastewater treatment facilities to provide a 3-cell
aerated lagoon and, with acceptable administrative and operational staffs, to
provide the operation and maintenance functions necessary to meet the Environmental
Protection Agency's effluent quality standards. Administrative and operations
and maintenance staff requirements are estimated to be about 920 man-hours
per year which is slightly less than one-half time for one person.
206
-------
Existing Wastewater Facilities
Dayton
Existing Collection Facilities -
The existing wastewater collection system of the Town of Dayton consists of
approximately 25 percent 6-inch and 75 percent 8-inch gravity lines and an 8-
inch gravity line from the Town to the treatment facility.
Existing Treatment Facilities -
The existing wastewater treatment facility consists of a two-cell conventional
stabilization pond (lagoon) located east of the Town of Dayton. The physical
characteristics of the facility are as follows:
TABLE 67
Treatment Facility Characteristics
Bertn Elevation 4644.0
Water Surface Elevation 4641.0 (max.)
Bottom Elevation 4636.0
Berm Width 8 feet
Side Slopes
Inner 5:1
Outer 3:1
Surface Area 2.5 acres
Operating Depth 5.0 feet (max.)
Design Capacity 250 people
Source: EPA 208 Wastewater Facility Planning, Johnson and Sheridan Counties,
201 Facilities Plans - Interim Report, vTN Engineers, planners,
Surveyors , p. VI11-4. !
With the present population of 550 people, the facility is undersized according
to the standards of the Department of Environmental Quality pertaining to surface
area per capita. However, even if the facility met this design criterion it
would not be capable of producing an effluent that could continually meet the
standards previously discussed. The wastewater treatment facility of the Town
does not presently discharge but probably percolates into underlying groundwaters.
The elevation of the berm of the pond is approximately 16 to 20 feet above the
normal water level of the Tongue River and six to eight feet above the south
bank of the river. It appears highly unlikely that the facility would be subject
to flooding. ?n7
-------
Projected Wastewater Loads
It is projected that the Town of Dayton will record a projected population of
1,170 by the year 2000. In utilizing a projected rate of flow of 125 gallons
per capita per day by 1995, it is projected that a design flow of 143,600
gallons per day will be recorded.
Alternatives
The alternatives proposed for Dayton were the same as those for Clearmont. These
included: Conventional Stabilization Pond, Aerated Lagoon, Extended Aeration
Plant, Land Application, and Controlled Discharge Pond.
Assessment of Alternatives
The present worth of the Dayton treatment alternates are listed in the following
tab!e.
TABLE 68
Present Worth of Treatment Alternatives*
Alternatives Costs _
3-eel 1 Conventional Stabilization Pond
Capital Cost
Construction Cost $ 133,600
Incidental Costs 33,400
167,000
Present worth of operation & maintenance cost 121,500
Total Present Worth: $ 288,500
3-cell Aerated Lagoon
Capital Cost
Construction Cost 208,400
Incidental Costs 52,100
$ 260,500
Present worth of operation & maintenance cost 191,900
Total Present Worth: $ 452,400
Land Application
Capital Cost
Construction Cost $ 195,900 (avg.)
Incidental Costs 49,000
244,900
Present worth of operation & maintenance cost 216,900
Total Present Worth: $ 461,800
208
-------
Table 68 continued
Extended Aeration
Capital Cost
Construction Cost $ 198,800
Incidental Costs 49,700
248,500
Present worth of operation & maintenance cost 381,500
Total Present Worth: $ 630,000
3-cell Controlled Discharge Pond
Capital Cost
Construction Cost $ 243,500
Incidental Costs 60,900
$ 304,400
Present worth of operation & maintenance cost 211,200
Total Present Worth: $ 515,600
^ Not including land costs.
Source: PRAPO EPA 208 Wastewater Facility Planning, Johnson and Sheridan Counties,
201 Facilities Plan-Interim Report, VTN Engineers, Planners, Surveyors,
p. V11-12.
Another method of evaluating the relative ranking of the alternatives as related
to the selection of the recommended wastewater management plan is summarized in
Table 69.
TABLE 69
Relative Ranking of Alternatives
Conventional Controlled
Stabilization Aerated Extended Land Discharge
Concept Pond Lagoon Aeration Application Pond
Economics 5 4 13 2
Adaptability 3 4 5 1 2
Environmental
Concepts 3 5 5 4 4
Public Input * * * * *
Composite 3.3 4.3 3.7 2.7 2.7
* Public input had not been substantially evaluated at this point in the Facility
Planning Process.
NOTE: A ranking of 5 is best.
Source: PRAPO EPA 208 Wastewater Facility Planning, Johnson and Sheridan Counties,
201 Facilities PlaTMnterim Report. VTN Engineers. Planners. Surveyors,
p. V11 - 7.
-------
This ranking is based on a rating of five for the most desirable alternative and
a descending order of ratings for the less desirable alternatives. The method
does not allow for a weighting of the relative values of the various concepts.
Environmental Assessment
The environmental assessment for Dayton is identical to that presented for
Clearmont; all of the alternatives would result in an improved environment, how-
ever, the stabilization pond and land application would periodically produce odors.
Selection of Alternative
It is recommended that the Town of Dayton proceed with implementation of a plan
to upgrade the existing wastewater treatment facilities to provide a 3-eel 1
aerated lagoon and, with acceptable adminstrative and operational staffs, to
provide the operation and maintenance functions necessary to meet the Environmen-
tal Protection Agency's effluent quality standards. Administrative and operations
and maintenance staff requirements are estimated to be approximately 920 man-hours
per year which is slightly less than one-half time for one person.
The aerated lagoon is recommended as the most cost-effective alternative recog-
nizing that while the conventional stabilization pond is economically more
feasible, it has inherent limitations in its treatment effectiveness which would
lead to adverse environmental effects and that it cannot consistently meet
effluent standards. The land application process and controlled discharge pond
are also less desirable environmentally. Economic comparabi1ity is also less
favorable for the latter two when land acquisition costs are considered.
Implementation of the Dayton wastewater management program can be undertaken in
two stages. This program of implementation is briefly defined as follows:
Stage 1 - 1st Priority (Near Future) -
Upgrade the existing facility to provide a three-day detention aeration basin,
a nine-day detention sedimentation basin and utilize the remaining volume of the
pond to provide a 45-day detention polishing pond. The detention times given
are based on the ultimate design flow of 146,300 gallons per day. This construction
would provide adequate treatment for future effluent standards until such time
that limitations on algae control are reinstated. This is expected to be in the
year 1985.
210
-------
Stage 2 - 2nd Priority (Future) -
Expand the upgraded facility to provide an additional 15-day detention volume for
two 30-day polishing ponds to accommodate the ultimate design flow and add
chlorination facilities for disinfection. This stage will provide a treatment
facility capable of meeting the projected growth requirements until the year 2000.
Financing -
Financing of the proposed wastewater treatment facilities program, as discussed
herein, relates to the preparation of contract documents and to the construction
of the facilities.
The estimated financial requirements for the program are as follows:
1. Capital Investment
Stage 1 $ 183,100
Stage 2 77,400
Stages 1 & 2 $ 260,500
2. Annual Operation and Maintenance
Stage 1 $ 14,300
Stage 2 16,900
Stages 1 & 2 $ 31,200
3. Bond Oebt Service
Annual payment on 25 percent of capital investment at 6 1/8 percent for
20 years
Stage 1 $ 3,700
Stage 2 2,200
Stages 1 & 2 $ 6,900
The estimated bond debt service costs are based on a program of Federal funding
whereas the Town's share of the capital costs is estimated to amount to 25 per-
cent of the total.
211
-------
Gi11ette
Existing Wastewater Facilities
Existing Collection System -
The central collection system for the City of Gillette consists of approximately
23.4 miles of 8-inch main, 3.3 miles of 10-inch main, 1.6 miles of 12-inch main,
212 miles of 15-inch main, 0.3 miles of 18-inch main, and 2.5 miles of 21-inch
sanitary sewer mains. One lift station serves a portion of the northwest
quadrant of the City. Several small privately owned lift stations also pump
sewage to the pub 1 ic system. There are approximately 800 manholes in the public
system. The original collection system was installed prior to 1940 and is
composed primarily of vitrified clay pipe (VCP) with brick manholes.
The capacity of the existing outfall system is limited by the size of the gravity
outfall installed after 1972. Based on the least slope installed, the full flow
capacity is calculated as 2801.4 gallons per minute. Based on 100 gallons per
day per capita and a peak flow 2.5 times the average, the design flow per capita
is .17 gallons per minute and the outfall capacity is equivalent to about 16,500
persons.
The capacity of the new Donkey Creek Interceptor line from the wastewater treat-
ment plant to its junction amounts to 5821 gallons per minute. The branch lines
entering here will carry a flow in excess of that, consequently, 5821 gallons per
minute is the limiting flow condition. The interceptor maximum capacity is equiv-
alent to about 33,500 persons.
Existing Treatment Plant -
The existing wastewater treatment plant for the City of Gillette commenced
operation in March, 1974. This facility utilizes the activated sludge processes
and discharges to Stonepile Creek which lies in the Belle Fourche River Basin.
Raw wastewater enters the plant through a hand-cleaned bar screen. After screen-
ing, the flow passes through two inoperative comminutors, installed in parallel.
A Parshall flume is utilized to measure the flow after comminution. Supernatant
from the digesters and return sludge from the secondary clarifiers are gaged
through similar flumes prior to joining the raw influent. This composite flow is
then divided between duplicate aeration tanks each equipped with a fixed-mounted
surface turbine aerator. The treatment plant does not include separate grit
removal facilities. Instead, each circular aeration basin contains a hopper
212
-------
bottom and grit sump at the center from which grit can be pumped periodically
to a grit pit. Effluent from the aeration basins flows to two circular center-
feed secondary settling basins. The sludge is forced to a center well from which
it is pumped to the headworks of the plant where it is combined with the influent.
Although flow through the previously-described units is by gravity, effluent from
the secondary clarifiers must be pumped to the polishing pond which is the final
unit of the treatment system.
The process waste sludge and scum from the final clarifiers are discharged to the
aerobic digesters where, through long-term aeration, they are decomposed to an
inert, humus-like material. Sludge can be either pumped to a temporary sludge
lagoon or hauled away and spread over land adjacent to the plant site.
Projected Wastewater Loads
The projected 1997 design population for the City of Gillette amounts to 40,000
persons. Based upon data from existing treatment plant records, an average waste-
water hydraulic loading of 100 gallons per capita per day (GPCD) was utilized
in calculating design flows. This unit value includes domestic as well as infil-
tration, inflow, commercial and industrial flows. Also from an evaluation of
existing data it would appear that flows could be expected to vary from 60 to
250 percent of the average. Therefore, the treatment plant should be sized for
an average unit flow of 100 GPCD and be capable of handling peak flows of up to
250 GPCD. Accordingly, the nominal capacity of the wastewater treatment facil-
ities would be 4.00 million gallons per day (MGD). The estimated peak and
minimum flows along with the design average flows for 1977, 1987, and 1997 are
presented in Table 70.
TABLE 70
Design Wastewater Loadings, Gillette, Wyoming
1977 1987 1997
Estimated Population 18,500 36,000 40,000
Hydraulic Loading mgd
24-hour Average^ 1.85 3.60 4.00
Peak - 4.63 9.00 10.00
Minimum 1.11 2.16 2.40
BODr Loading, lb/day
4
24-hour average 3,145 6,120 6,300
SS Loading, lb/day
213
-------
5
24-hour average
Table 70 continued
3,700 7,200 8,000
^Based on unit flow of 100 gallons/capita/day
9
Based on 250 percent of average flow
3
Based on 60 percent of average flow
4Based on 0.17 lb B0D5/capita/day
^Based on 0.20 lb SS/capita/day
Source: EPA 201 Facilities Plan for the City of Gillette, Wyoming, Plains
Engineering, p. IV-9.
Alternatives
Based on findings in the Gillette Facilities Plan, several wastewater treatment
processes are capable of producing an effluent meeting the limitations set
forth in the Gillette discharge permit. These methods are summarized as follows:
Land Application -
Three general methods have been used to apply raw or treated wastewater to the
land: 1) irrigation; 2) infiltration-percolation; and 3) overland flow.
Stabilization Ponds (STP) -
This method of wastewater treatment consists of relatively shallow ponds through
which sunlight can readily penetrate. Waste stabilization is carried out by a
mutually - beneficial relationship between bacteria and algae.
Trickling Filters (TrF) -
This process consists of a fixed bed of either course stone or plastic sheets
engineered to provide a large quantity of surface area per unit volume along
with enough clear openings to insure adequate ventilation for micro-organisms
which grow on the media and degrade the organic materials in wastewater.
Rotating Biological Contactors (RBC) -
This treatment method consists of a series of closely-spaced vertical discs
mounted on a horizontal shaft. The discs are submerged to a depth of about
one-half their diameter in a basin containing wastewater. As the discs rotate,
the biomass adhering to the surface is alternately wetted and aerated. This
allows aerobic bacteria to thrive by feeding on the organic matter in the waste-
water.
214
-------
Activated Sludge (AS) -
The activated sludge (AS) process utilizes bacteria in liquid suspension to
oxidize the carbonaceous matter in wastewater.
Effluent Reuse -
Based on the limitations stipulated for Gillette, the treatment plant effluent
should be suitable for reuse as cooling water, groundwater recharge and
irrigation. A contract does exist between the Black Hills Power and Light
Company and the City of Gillette in which the Company has agreed to purchase
the effluent from the treatment plant for use as cooling water. This arrange-
ment represents an almost ideal beneficial use of the effluent.
Upgrading Existing Treatment Plant -
Although it has experienced certain operational problems, the existing waste-
water treatment plant is only approximately two years old. Consequently,
incorporating any future treatment system with the existing system should
represent a significant economic asset in construction of future improvements.
There are several alternative methods by which the existing plant could be
utilized in meeting future increases in loading and simultaneously produce an
effluent within prescribed limitations.
Assessment of Alternatives
All of the previously discussed treatment methods for Gillette are capable
of producing an effluent meeting the prescribed limitations. Additionally,
these alternatives are generally comparable in ease of operation, ability to
withstand shock loadings, and effluent variability. Based on these factors,
preliminary selection of the most suitable treatment alternative can be
made primarily on the basis of cost.
The following table compares the costs of four alternative methods of treating
the wastes emanating from the Gillette area. Each alternative utilizes the
activated sludge method of liquid treatment, one for a new plant and two for
upgrading the existing plant. Activated sludge was chosen as the best method
of liquid treatment based upon its comparative low cost, excellent treatment
performance, flexibility to accept different modes of operation if necessary, and
its familiarity to plant operators.
215
-------
A
Treatment Alternate
TABLE 71
Treatment Alternative Cost Comparisons*
B C
2
Capital Cost Capital Recovery
D
Annual 0 & M
Total (C + D)
New Activated Sludge Plant
With Aerobic Sludge Digestion
$ 4,751,300
$ 414,220
$ 304,000
$ 718,220
Upgrade Existing Plant and Use
Aerobic Sludge Digestion
4,197,920
365,980
304,000
669,980
Exclusive of land costs
?
"Twenty years at 6 percent interest, CRF = .08718
Source: EPA 201 Facilities Plan for the City of Gillette, Wyoming, Plains Engineering, p. IX-3.
-------
Environmental Assessment
The degree of treatment and methods of final disposal for each alternate are
consistent with State and Federal requirements, and any effluent discharged
during or after construction of the facility should not deteriorate the clas-
sification of the adjacent surface waters. The proposed location of the fac-
ility does not present a nuisance, is not in a designated flood zone, will
not interfere with other activities, nor is the project expected to be con-
troversial .
The appearance of the plant site will be improved aesthetically, and any area
disrupted by construction will be restored to an equal or better condition.
The present plant location and the areas adjacent to it have no near term
potential for residential or commercial activities. In addition, this proposed
project will not displace any person, nor will it significantly disrupt an
existing sewer system, transportation system, or other necessity.
Selection of Alternative
From preceding Table 71, it can be seen that upgrading the existing
activated sludge plant, utilizing existing units, is the least expensive al-
ternative by $13,380 in annual costs and $6,300 in capital costs.
The selected alternate is comprised of the following treatment units:
1. New Preliminary Treatment: Screening, Grit Removal, Comminution, and Flow
Gaging.
2. Two (2) New Primary Clarifiers, each 65' Dia x 8' SWD.
3. Two (2) New Rectangular Aeration Basins, each 75' x 60' x 15' deep.
4. One (1) New Secondary Clarifier, 75' Dia x 12' SWD. Conversion of two
(2) Aeration Tanks and Alteration of Two (2) Clarifiers, each 50' Dia
x 12' SWD.
5. One (1) Chlorine Contact Basin, 65' x 33' x 8' Liquid Depth.
6. Alteration of two (2) Aerobic Digestors to two (2) Thickeners, 50* Dia.
7. Abandon One (1) Thickener (Could be utilized later).
8. Two (2) New Aerobic Digestion Units, each 20' by 92'x 16' Deep.
9. Five (5) New Sand Drying Beds, each 20' x 200'.
The existing polishing pond will be used as a Dechlorination Pond. Also,
217
-------
preliminary reviews of the hydraulic profile indicate the necessity of
pumping, possibly between preliminary and primary treatment. A more detailed
site investigation would be required to establish the location of a pumping
facility. The treated liquid waste, up to 1.6 million gallons per day, will be sold
to Black Hills Power and Light in accordance with the existing City contract
with BHP & L Company.
Sludge Hand!inq
Several methods of sludge treatment and disposal were analyzed in the facilities
plan. Sludge thickening to reduce the total volume of sludge by removing some
of the water prior to digestion improves not only the digester performance, but
also improves clarifier efficiency. Sludge digestion, which can be either aerobic
or anaerobic, follows thickening. The choice of the type of digestion to be uti-
lized is dependent upon several factors presently being analyzed by the City of Gillette
but aerobic digestion is the preferred option. After digestion, sludge may be
spread on land as a soil conditioner, sand dryed and disposed of in a land fill,
or filtered and disposed of. Vacuum filtration is a costly system as well as
being difficult to operate. Thus, it was not considered.
-------
Kaycee
Existing Wastewater Facilities
Existing Collection Facilities -
The existing wastewater collection system of the Town of Kaycee consists of
approximately 40 percent 6-inch and approximately 60 percent 8-inch gravity
lines, and an 8-inch outfall line from the Town to a lift station located on
the south bank of the Middle Fork of the Powder River. The wastewater is pumped
from this location into the treatment facility.
Existing Treatment Facilities -
The existing wastewater treatment facility consists of a single-cell conventional
stabilization pond (lagoon) located south of the Town of Kaycee. Effluent from
the lagoon is discharged into the Middle Fork of the Powder River. The physical
characteristics of the facility are shown in Table 72.
TABLE 72
Treatment Facility Characteristics
Berm Elevation 4644.0
Water Surface Elevation 4641.0 (max.)
Bottom Elevation 4636.0
Berm Width 8 feet
Side Slopes
Inner 5:1
Outer 3:1
Surface Area 2.5 acres
Operating Depth 5.0 feet (max.)
Design Capacity 250 people
Source: EPA 208 Wastewater Facility Planning, Johnson and Sheridan Counties,
201 Facilities Plans- Interim Report, VTN Engineers, Planners, Surveyors
p. 111-4.
With the present population of 390 persons, the facility is undersized relative
to the standards of the Department of Environmental Quality pertaining to surface
area per capita. Even if the facility met this design criterion it would not
be capable of producing an effluent that could continually meet the applicable
discharge standards.
219
-------
Projected Wastewater Loads
The facilities plan for Kaycee projects a year2OQ0 design population of 1,020
for the community of Kaycee. Design flows for the evaluation of wastewater
treatment consisted of a contribution of 125 gallons per day, including allow-
able infiltration/inflow. This results in an ultimate average daily flow of
127,500 GPD anticipated by the year 2000.
Alternatives
The alternatives suggested for Kaycee are the same as for those presented for
Clearmont including: Conventional Stabilization Pond, Aerated Lagoon, Extended
Aeration Plant, Land Application, and Controlled Discharge Pond.
Assessement of Alternatives
The present worth method of economic assessment of each treatment alternative
is shown in Table 73.
TABLE 73
Present Worth of Treatment Alternatives1
Alternative Cost
3-cell Conventional Stabilization Pond
Capital Cost
Construction Cost $ 134,200
Incidental Costs 33,600
167,800
Present worth of operation and maintenance cost 119,200
Total Present Worth: $ 287,000
3-cell Aerated Lagoon
Capital Cost
Construction Cost $ 188,000
Incidental Costs 47,000
235,000
Present worth of operation and maintenance cost 193,000
Total Present Worth: $ 428,000
Land Application
Capital Cost
Construction Cost $ 188,800 (avg.)
Incidental Csots 47,200
236,000
Present worth of operation and maintenance cost 214,600
Total Present Worth: $ 450,600
220
-------
Table 73 continued
Extended Aeration
Capital Cost
Construction Cost $ 187,000
Incidental Costs 46,800
233,800
Present worth of operation and maintenance cost 381,5J0
Total Present Worth: $ 615,300
3-eel 1 Controlled Discharge Pond
Capital Cost
Construction Cost $ 231,100
Incidental Cost 57,800
288,900
Present worth of operation and maintenance cost $ 193,000
Total Present Worth: $ 481,900
1
Not including land costs.
Source: PRAPO EPA 208 Wastewater Facility Planning, Johnson and Sheridan
Counties, 201 Facilities Plan-Interim Report, VTN EngineersPlanners ,
Surveyors, p. 111-12 & 13.
A combined method of evaluating the relative ranking of the alternatives as
related to the selection of the recommended wastewater management plan is
summarized in Table 74.
TABLE 74
Relative Ranking of Alternatives
Conventional Controlled
Stabilization Aerated Extended Land Discharge
Concept
Pond
Lagoon
Aeration
Application
Pond
Economics
5
4
1
3
2
Adaptability
3
4
5
1
2
Envi ronmental
Concepts
3
5
5
4
4
Public Input
*
~
*
*
~
Composite
3.3
4.3
3.7
2.7
2.7
*Public input had not been substantially evaluated at this point in the Facility
Planning Process.
NOTE: A ranking of 5 is best.
Source: PRAPO EPA 208 Wastewater Facility Planning. Johnson and Sheridan
Counties, 201 Facilities Plan-Interim Report, VTN Engineers, Planners,
Surveyors, p. 111-17. ~
221
-------
This ranking is based on a rating of five for the most desirable alternative and
a descending order of ratings for the less desirable alternatives. The method
does not allow for a weighting of a relative value of the various concepts.
Environmental Assessment
The environmental assessment for Kaycee is the same as that presented for
Clearmont and concludes that all alternates would be an environmental improve-
ment over the existing facility, but the stabilization pond and land application
would periodically produce odors.
Selection of Alternative
It is recommended that the Town of Kaycee proceed with implementation of a plan
to upgrade the existing wastewater treatment facilities to provide a 3-cell
aerated lagoon and, with acceptable administrative and operational staffs, to
provide the operation and maintenance functions necessary to meet the Environ-
mental Protection Agency 1 s effluent quality standards. Administrative and
operations and maintenance staff requirements are estimated to be about 920
man-hours per year which is slightly less than one-half time for one person.
The aerated lagoon is recommended as the most cost-effective alternative recog-
nizing that, while the conventional stabilization pond is economically more
feasible, it has inherent limitations in its treatment effectiveness which would
lead to adverse environmental effects in that it cannot consistently meet
effluent standards. The land application process and controlled discharge pond
are also less desirable environmentally. Economic comparability is also less
favorable for the latter two when land acquisition costs are considered.
The existing wastewater collection system can be expanded to accommodate the
anticipated growth of the Town although the Department of Environmental
Quality will probably require that the six-inch diameter mains be replaced with
eight-inch pipe. Eight-inch lateral collection lines constructed on the minimum
allowable slope maintain the capacity to serve a population of approximately
1,200 people. The Department of Environmental Quality regulations allow for a
design capacity of about 1,950 people for eight-inch trunk and outfall lines, not
recording extraordinary infiltration/inflow. In either case, the eight-inch
wastewater lines are more than adequate for the projected design population. The
present lift station will require modification at such time that its capacity
will be reached. This can probably be accomplished merely by pump replacement
and should be a consideration in the maintenance program for the system.
222
-------
Implementation of the Kaycee wastewater management program can be undertaken in
two stages. This program of implementation is briefly defined as follows:
Stage 1 - 1st Priority (Near Future) -
Upgrade the existing facility to provide a three-day detention aeration basin,
a nine-day detention sedimentation basin and utilize the remaining volume of the
pond to provide a 40-day detention polishing pond. The detention times given
are based on the ultimate design flow of 127,500 gallons per day. This construc-
tion would provide adequate treatment for future effluent standards until such
time that limitations on algae control are reinstated. This is estimated to be
in the year 1985.
Stage 2 - 2nd Priority (Future) -
Expand the upgraded facility to provide an additional 20-day detention volume
for two 30-day polishing ponds to accommodate the ultimate design flow and
add chlorination facilities for disinfection. This stage will provide a
treatment facility capable of meeting the projected growth requirements until
the year 2000.
Financing -
Financing of the proposed wastewater treatment facilities proqram includes
the preparation of contract documents and the construction of the facilities.
The estimated financial requirements for the program are as follows:
1. Capital Investment
Stages I & 2
2. Annual Operation and Maintenance
Stage 1
Stage 2
$ 156,100
78,900
$ 235,000
Stage 1
Stage 2
Stages 1 & 2
$ 14,300
16,900
$ 31,200
3. Bond Debt Service
Annual payment of 25 percent of capital investment at 6 1/8 percent
for 20 years
Stage 1
Stage 2
$ 3,400
1,800
223
-------
Stages 1 & 2 $ 5,200
The estimated bond debt service costs are based on a program of federal funding
whereas the Town's share of the capital costs is estimated to amount to 25 per-
cent of the total.
224
-------
Ranchester
Existing Wastewater Facilities
Existing Collection Facilities -
The existing wastewater collection system of the Town of Ranchester consists of
8-inch gravity collection lines and a 10-inch outfall line from the Town to the
treatment facility. A trailer park at the west edge of the Town is served by
a lift station which pumps into the gravity system.
Existing Treatment Facilities -
The existing wastewater treatment facility consists of a two-cell conventional
stabilization pond (lagoon) located east of the Town of Ranchester. Effluent
from the lagoon is discharged into the Tongue River. The physical characteristics
of the facility are shown in Table 75 .
TABLE 75
Treatment Facility Characteristics
Berm Elevation 99.0
Water Surface Elevation 95.7 (max.)
Bottom Elevation 91.5
Berm Width 10 feet
Side Slopes
Inner 3:1
Outer 2:1
Surface Area 3.2 acres
Operating Depth 4.2 feet (max.)
Design Capacity 320 people
Source: EPA 208 Wastewater Facility Planning, Johnson and Sheridan Counties,
201 Facilities Plans- Interim Report, VTN Engineers, Planners, Surveyors,
p. VI11-4.
With the present population of 420 people, the facility is undersized according
to the standards of the Department of Environmental Quality pertaining to
surface area per capita. However, even if the facility met this design criterion,
it would not be capable of producing an effluent that could continually meet
the standards previously discussed.
225
-------
The elevation of the berm of the pond is somewhat higher than the level of the
stream and the surrounding flood plain. Because of the extent of this flood-
plain, it appears unlikely that the facility would be subject to flooding.
Projected Wastewater Loads
The Ranchester facilities plan projects a year 2000 population amounting to
1,260 persons. Design flows for the evaluation of wastewater treatment alterna-
tives were based on a per-capita domestic wastewater contribution of 125 gallons
per day, plus an infiltration/inflow rate of 256,000 GPD. This results in an
ultimate average daily design flow of 414,100 GPD which is anticipated by the
year 2000.
A1ternatives
The treatment alternatives for Ranchester are the same as those explained for
Clearmont, including the following: Conventional Stabilization Pond, Aerated
Lagoon, Land Application, and Controlled Discharge Pond, and Extended Aeration.
Assessment of Alternatives
The financial assessment of the proposed alternatives, at estimated present worth,
is depicted in the following table:
TABLE 76
Present Worth of Treatment Alternatives^"
Alternative Cost
3-Cell Conventional Stabilization Pond
Capital Cost
Construction Cost
Incidental Costs
Present worth of operation and maintenance cost
Total Present Worth:
3-Cell Aerated Lagoon
Capital Cost
Construction Cost
Incidental Costs
S 166,500
41,600
208,100
146,500
$ 355,600
$ 248,600
62,200
310,800
226
-------
Table 76 continued
Present worth of operation and maintenance cost 211,200
Total Present Worth: $ 522,000
Land Application
Capital Cost
Construction Cost $ 235,000 (avg.)
Incidental Costs 58,800
293,800
Present worth of operation and maintenance cost 241,800
Total Present Worth: $ 535,500
Extended Aeration
Capital Cost
Construction Cost $ 302,700
Incidental Costs 75,800
378,500
Present worth of operation and maintenance cost 404,100
Total Present Worth: $ 782,500
3-Cell Controlled Discharge Pond
Capital Cost
Construction Cost $ 324,400
Incidental Costs 81,100
405,500
Present worth of operation and maintenance cost 265,700
Total Present Worth: $ 671,200
*Not including land costs
Source: PRAPO EPA 208 Wastewater Facility Planning, Johnson and Sheridan
Counties, 201 Facilities Plan-Interim Report, VTN Engineers, Planners,
Suveyors, P. VI11-12.
The present worth values of the treatment alternatives are shown in Table 76
and result in the following relative ranking of the alternatives in ascending
order:
1. The conventional stabilization pond;
2. The aerated lagoon;
3. The land application process;
4. The controlled discharge pond;
5. The extended aeration plant.
227
-------
The conventional stabilization pond is notably the most economical for both
capital cost and operation and maintenance costs. The aerated lagoon, land
application process and controlled discharge pond are within a relatively close
cost range.
A comprehensive method of evaluating the relative ranking of the alternatives
as related to the selection of the recommended wastewater management plan is
summarized in Table 77 .
TABLE 77
Relative Ranking of Alternatives
Conventional Controlled
Concept
Stabili zation
Pond
Aerated
Laqoon
Extended
Aeration
Land
Application
Discharge
Pond
Economics
5
4
1
3
2
Adaptability
3
4
5
1
2
Envi ronmental
Concepts
3
5
5
4
4
Public Input
~
~
~
~
~
Composite
3.3
4.3
3.7
2.7
2.7
*Public input had not been substantially evaluated at this point in the Facility
Planning Process.
NOTE: A ranking of 5 is best.
Source: PRAPO EPA 208 Wastewater Facility Planning, Johnson and Sheridan
Counties, 201 Facilities Plan-Interim Report, VTN Engineers, Planners,
Surveyors, p. VIII-18. '
This ranking is based on a rating of five for the most desirable alternative
and a descending order of ratings for the less desirable alternatives. The
method does not allow for a weighting of the relative value of the various
concepts.
Environmental Assessment
The environmental assessment for Ranchester concludes the same as that given
for Clearmont. All alternates would result in an improved environment but
stabilization ponds and land disposal would periodically produce odors.
Selection of Alternative
The aerated lagoon is recommended as the most cost-effective alternative recog-
228
-------
nizing that, while the conventional stabilization pond is economically more
feasible, it has inherent limitations in its treatment effectiveness which
would lead to adverse environmental effects in that it cannot consistently
meet effluent standards. The land application process and controlled discharge
pond are also less desirable environmentally. Economicalcomparabi1ity is also
less favorable for the latter two when land acquisition costs are considered.
The existing wastewater collection system can be expanded to accommodate the
anticipated growth of the Town although a program of rehabilitation will probably
be required to eliminate the infiltration/inflow and assure sufficient capacity
for future growth. Eight-inch internal collection lines constructed on the minimum
allowable slope have the capacity to serve a population of approximately 1,200
persons. The Department of Environmental Quality regulations allow for a
design capacity of about 1,950 persons for eight-inch trunk and outfall lines, not
maintaining extraordinary infiltration/inflow. In either case, the eight-inch
wastewater lines are more than adequate for the projected design population if
extraneous flows are eliminated.
Implementation of the Ranchester wastewater management program can be undertaken
in two stages. This program of implementation is briefly defined as follows:
Stage 1 - 1st Priority (Near Future) -
Upgrade the existing facility to provide a three-day detention aeration basin,
a nine-day detention sedimentation basin and utilize the remaining volume of the
pond to provide a 6-day detention polishing pond. The detention times given are
based on the ultimate design flow of 146,500 gallons per day. This construc-
tion would provide adequate treatment for future effluent standards until such
time that limitations on algae control are reinstated. This is expected to be
in the year 1985.
Stage 2 - 2nd Priority (Future) -
Expand the upgraded facility to provide an additional 54-day detention volume
for two 30-day polishing ponds to accommodate the ultimate design flow and add
chlorination facilities for disinfection. This stage will provide a treatment
facility capable of meeting the projected growth requirements until the year
2000.
229
-------
Financing-
Financing of the proposed wastewater treatment facilities program includes the
preparation of contract documents and the construction of the facilities.
The estimated financial requirements for the program are as follows:
1. Capital Investment
Stage 1 $ 179,500
Stage 2 131,300
Stages 1 & 2 $ 310,800
2. Annual Operation and Maintenance
Stage 1 $ 14,600
Stage 1 18,900
Stages 1 & 2 $ 33,500
3. Bond Debt Service
Annual payments on 25 percent of capital investments at 6 1/8 percent
for 20 years
Stage 1 $ 4,000
Stage 2 2,900
Stages 1 & 2 $ 6,900
The estimated bond debt service costs are based on a program of federal funding
whereas the Town's share of the capital costs is estimated to amount to 25
percent of the total.
230
-------
Existing Wastewater System
Sheri clan
Collection System Description -
The sanitary wastewater collection system operates primarily by gravity. Lift
stations and force mains have been constructed in several locations within
the collection system to serve low lying areas.
The servfce area wastewater is collected from two major tributary areas. An 18-
inch diameter trunk line serves the western portion of the City and is approximately
7,000 feet in length. The larger of the two tributary areas is collected on a
24-, 21-, and 18-inch diameter trunk line. This line is approximately 18,000
feet in length and serves the eastern and southern portions of the City. Both
sewer mains serving the two major tributary areas discharge to the treatment plant
utilizing a 36-inch outfall main, 280 feet in length.
The existing service area collection system consists of nearly 58 miles of sewer
mains varying from 6- to 36- inches in diameter. Of the 58 miles of sewer mains,
only 3,500 feet consist of force mains, most of which are located in the South
Side Sewer District. Over 73 percent of the collection system is 8-inch
diameter pipe, 2 percent is 6-inch diameter and smaller; the remaining 25
percent is 10-inch to 36-inch in diameter. Four major lift stations serve the
system.
Wastewater Treatment Plan-
The Sheridan municipal wastewater treatment plant is situated on the east bank
of Goose Creek north of State Highway 337. The original plant, constructed in
1939, was considered to be one of the most advanced treatment plants at that time.
In 1966 the treatment facilities were expanded and improved. The plant design
was upgraded to secondary treatment, with capacity to accommodate average daily
biological loads in flows of 2.1 million gallons per day (MGD), and was designed
with a hydraulic capacity of 5 million gallons per day. Secondary treatment was
achieved by the addition of primary clarifiers and single stage trickling filters.
These improvements added the necessary processes to provide an effluent of accept-
able quality based on late 1960 water quality standards. The following indicates
the unit processes at the plant as it now exists.
*This alternative is considered to obtain advanced treatment (nitrification)
above and beyond secondary treatment.
-------
1. Grit Chamber
2. Primary Settling Basins - 2 each
3. Trickling Filters - 2 each
4. Final Settling Basin
5. Sludge Digestion Tanks - nonoperative
The grit chamber unit includes a mechanically cleared screen and screening grinder,
grit removal equipment and parshall flume.
Existing equipment at the plant has been well maintained over the years and is in
very good condition with the possible exception of the sludge digester. The sludge
digester has been converted and used as a sludge holding tank.
Projected Wastewater Loads
The Wastewater Facility Plan for the City of Sheridan indicated that the City
will reach a population of approximately 26,000 by the year 1995. This popula-
tion figure was utilized as a basis for the projected design flows shown in Table
73.
TABLE 78
Projected Wastewater Flows
Alternate Flow Conditions Quantit.y
Annual Average Daily Flow (AADF)
1. With 1/1 Rehabilitation
2. Without I/I Rehabilitation
2.875 MGD
4.1 MGD
Annual Peak Daily Flow (APDF)
1. With I/I Rehabilitation
2. Without I/I Rehabilitation
3.65 MGD
5.21 MGD
Instantaneous Peak Flow (IPF)
1. With 1/I Rehabilitation
2. Without I/I Rehabilitation
6.88 MGD
14.03 MGD
Design BOD^
300 mg/1
Design SS
300 mg/1
Source: Sheridan, Wyoming Wastewater Facility Plan, Step 1, VTN Engineers,
Planners, Surveyors, p. 9-5
232
-------
AT ternatives
The Sheridan Facility Plan addresses two basic processes for improvement of
wastewater treatment, including trickling filter and activated sludge improve-
ments. Several alternates have been developed for each of these processes and
are shown in accompanying Tables 79 and 80.
TABLE 79
Alternatives for Expansion of Trickling Filtration
Design
A1 ternative Flow (MGD)
1-1
2.875
Expand all unit processes, add effluent
filtration. Sludge holding, vacuum
filtration.
1-2
4.1
Expand all unit processes, add effluent
chlorination and effluent filtration.
Sludge holding, vacuum filtration.
1-3
2.875
Expand all unit processes, add chlorina-
tion and effluent filtration, delete sludge
storage, add aerobic diqestion and
vacuum filtration of sludge.
1-4
4.1
Expand all unit processes, add chlorina-
tion and effluent filtration, delete sludge
storage, add aerobic digestion and vacuum
filtration of sludge.
1-5
2.875
Expand all unit processes, add chlorina-
tion and effluent filtration, delete
sludge storage, add composting.
1-6
4.1
Expand all unit processes, add chlorina-
tion and effluent filtration, delete
sludge storage, add composting.
Source:
Sheridan, Wyominq Wastewater
Facility Plan, Step 1, VTN Engineers,
Planners, Surveyors, p. 9-3
233
-------
TABLE 80
A1ternatives for Construction of New Activated Sludge System
Design
Alternative Flow (MGD) Description
2-1 2.875 Remove trickling filters and sludge holding
tank, expand all remaining processes, add
aerobic digestion and sludge, activateu sludgt
process arid chlorination.
2-2 4.1 Remove trickling filters and sludge holding
tank, expand all remaining processes, add
aerobic digestion and sludge, activiated sludge
process and chlorination.
2-3 2.875 Remove trickling filters and sludge holding
tank, expand all remaining processes, add
activated sludge process chlorination, efflu-
ent and vacuum filtration, and aerobic
digestion of sludge.
2-4 4.1 Remove trickling filters and sludge holding
tank, expand all remaining processes, add
activated sludge process chlorination, efflu-
ent and vacuum filtration, and aerobic
digestion of sludge.
2-5 2.875 Remove trickling filters and sludge holding
tank, expand all remaining processes, add
activated sludge process chlorination, and
composting. Remove existing vacuum filter
system.
2-6 4.1 Remove trickling filters and sludge holding
tank, expand all remaining processes, add
activated sludge, chlorination, and composting.
Remove existing vacuum filter system.
2-7 2.875 Remove trickling filters and sludge holding
tank, expand all remaining processes, add
activated sludge, chlorination, effluent
filtration, and composting. Remove existing
vacuum filter system.
2-8 4.1 Remove trickling filters and sludge holding
tank, expand all remaining processes, add
activated sludge, chlorination, effluent
filtration, and composting. Remove
existing vacuum filter system.
Source: Sheridan, Wyoming Wastewater Facility Plan, Step 1, VTN Engineers,
Planners, Surveyors, p. 9-4
-------
Assessment of Alternatives
Table 81 shows a complete cost assessment for all proposed alternatives, as
present worth of capital cost and operation and maintenance.
An alternative of relocating the plant site approximately 2 miles north
of the existing site was also explored. The following cost assessments were
formulated for relocation of the plant site:
Relocation Alternative #1
Trickling filter plant located two miles north of
present plant
Capital Cost of Treatment Plant Items $ 3,104,140
Capital Cost of two miles 36" Outfall 475,000
Capital Cost of 10 Acres of Land 10,000
Present Worth of 20 Years Operation & Maintenance 1,263,903
Total Present Worth Cost: $4,853,043
Relocation Alternative #2
Activated sludge plant located two miles north of
present plant
Capital Cost of Treatment Plant Items $ 2,872,280
Capital Cost of two miles 36" Outfall 475,000
Capital Cost of 10 Acres of Land 10,000
Present Worth of 20 Years Operation & Maintenance 1,760,692
Total Present Worth Cost: $ 5,117,972
A comparison of the relocated trickling filter plant with the expanded
trickling filter process at the present plant site (Alternative 1-5) yields
an additional $610,809 (present worth basis) for the relocated trickling
filter plant on a present worth basis. The cost difference amounts to
$1,084,809, considering only the initial capital costs. This one million
dollar difference is spread almost equally between transmission line and
plant cost.
235
-------
TABLE 81
Preliminary Total Project Cost Estimates
Alternative Description
Present Worth Present Worth
For Design for Design
Without Infiltration With Infiltration
2.875 MGD
4.1 MGD
Cost
Di fference
Annual
Maintenance
Total
Capital
Cost
1-1
Expand present unit processes,
adci chlorination & effluent
filtration. Use present sludge
handling. Convert anerobic
digestion to sludge holding
tank.
1-2
Same as above
1-3
Expand present unit processes,
add chlorination & effluent
filtration, add aerobic digestion
of sludge, delete sludge storage
1-4
Same as above
1-5
Expand present unit processes,
add cnlorination & effluent
filtration, delete sludge storage
add composting.
($3,790,181)
Two
4,102,131
Four
(3,699,234)
One
$4,592,886
4,905,882
$ 802,705
803,751
$110,421
137,795
120,895
148,268
110,192
$2,524,86
3,013,89
2,716,79
3,206,81
2,435,3
802,431
1-6
Sone.as above
t
4,501,665
2,924,0
-------
TABLE 81 1 „ Continued
Preliminary Total Project Cost Estimates
Present Worth^ Present Worth
For Design For Design Total
Without Infiltration With Infiltration Cost Annual Capital
Alternative Description 2.875 MGD 4.1 MGD r Difference Maintenance Cost
2-1
Remove trickling filters and
sludge holding tank, expand
remaining process. Add aerobic
digestion, activated sludge,
and chlorination.
2-2
Same as above
$4,531,389
$164,248
$371,291
$4,902,680
200,526
$2,649,26
2,604,85
2-3
Remove trickling filters and
sludge holding tank, expand
all remaining processes, add
activated sludge, chlorination,
filtration anu aerobic digestion.
4,956,671
142,669
733,544
3,321,82
2-4
Same as above
2-5
Remove trickling filters and
sludge holding tank, expand all
remaining processes, add activated
sludge, chlorination and com-
posting. Remove existing vacuum
filter systcr-i.
2-6
Same as above
5,690,215
172,444
4,126,388
Five
153,651
-(41,570)
(4,084,818)
153,651
3,714,1/
2,365,6?
2,324,1
Three
-------
T/\OLE 81 , continued
Preliminary Total Project Cost Estimates
Alternative Description
Present Worth
For Design
Without Infiltration
2.875 MGD
Present Worth
For Design
With Infiltration
4.1 MGD
Cost
Difference
Annual
Maintenance
Total
Capital
Cost
2-7
Remove trickling filters and
sludge holding tank, expand all
remaining processes, add activated
sludge, chlorination and effluent
filtration and composting, remove
existing vacuum filter system.
2-8
Same as above
$4,553,504
$132,072
$3,040,08
$730,910
$5,284,414
161,848
3,429,80
1
Includes $531,000 rehabilitation cost for I/I.
'Costs include 20-year operation and maintenance costs.
Source: Sheridan, Wyoming Wastewater Facility Plan, Step 1, VTN Engineers, Planners, Surveyors, p. 10-7.
-------
In comparing the above relocated activated sludge plant with the activated
sludge plant (Alternative 2-6) designed for the existing site yields an
additional $1,033,154 on a present worth basis. On an initial capital cost
basis the relocated activated sludge plant would cost an additional $1,033,154.
As noted above, the one million dollar difference is spread equally between-
transmission line cost and plant cost.
As noted from the two cost comparisons, relocating a treatment plant two miles
north of its present location involves an additional one million dollars in either
case.
Environmental Assessment
Alternatives considered included no action, biological treatment and discharge,
treatment and reuse, and land application techniques. No action, of course,
precludes conformance with existing and future regulatory constraints and allows
the continuance of the present adverse effects of the existing plant. Biolo-
gical treatment and discharge to a receiving stream has been considered for
both the trickling filter and activatedsludge methods of treatment. Their
evaluation has previously been discussed. Treatment and reuse and land appli-
cation techniques have been evaluated and dismissed as being cost prohibitive.
Selection of Alternative
The economic evaluation shows that the activated sludge process has a lower
capital cost but a higher capital cost plus 20 years present worth
of operation and managment than the trickling filter process. Thus, there is
not a clearly defined cost advantage of one system over the other. It is
shown, however, that rehabilitation for infiltration/inflow is cost effective.
The evaluation indicates that it is not desirable to construct a new treat-
ment facility at a location farther north.
Adaptability of the processes, both for staged construction and upgrading
for future effluent standards, clearly favors activatedsludge over the
trickling filter method of treatment.
Environmental considerations, as with adaptability, also show that the acti-
vated sludge method of treatment is the most effective.
The recommended wastewater management
of the following:
plan
239
for the City of Sheridan consists
-------
InfiItration/Inflow-
The City should initiate a request for an EPA grant increase for infil-
tration/inflow corrections to the existing collection system. Upon appro-
val of the grant increase, a Step 1 (Phase 2) program would be conducted.
This program would be completed in two parts - (1) physical research and
investigation, television inspection and cleaning; and (2) physical
rehabilitation, television inspection and sealing.
Wastewater Treatment and Disposal -
The City should proceed with a program to expand the present wastewater
treatment facility. This program should consist of upgrading the present
unit treatment process and converting the present trickling filter process
to the activated sludge method of treatment. The present sludge disposal
system should be replaced with the composting system. The feasibility
and reliability of the composting system is based on the recommendations
of Western Minerals, Inc. in their report "Sludge Study for the City of
Sheridan, Wyoming," August 8, 1975, which was prepared by them in conjunc-
tion with this study.
Sludge Handling Alternatives
Sludge handling alternatives considered in the course of the Sheridan study
were as follows:
Vacuum filtration of primary and final clarifier, sludge, disposal to land
fill, (existing mode of operation)
Capital Cost = $201,000
Annual 0 & M Cost = $ 41,450
Aerobic digestion of primary and final clarifier sludge, vacuum filtra-
tion and disposal to land fill.
Capital Cost = $370,000
Annual 0 & M Cost = $ 51,900
Construct sludge holding tank for primary and final clarifier sludge,
vacuum filtration and disposal to land fill.
Capital Cost = $221,000
Annual 0 & M Cost = $ 41,450
Direct composting of primary and final clarifier sludge, sell or
distribute to consumer.
Capital Cost = $151,000
Annual 0 & M Cost = $ 41,325
240
-------
Big Horn and Story
Existing Wastewater Systems
The unincorporated communities of Big Horn and Story .maintain no central waste-
water facilities, collection or treatment, and depend entirely on private
disposal systems, such as septic tanks and leach fields.
Alternatives - Big Horn and Story
The unincorporated communities of Big Horn and Story were analyzed utilizing
the same five basic methods for wastewater treatment as used for Clearmont,
Dayton, Kaycee, and Ranchester, as well as a sixth alternative of no action.
This alternative considered the continuing use of privately owned waste disposal
systems. Inasmuch as the groundwater level in the communities is near the ground
surface, this program is vulnerable from the standpoint of potential ground-
water contamination. In fact, the Department of Environmental Quality's stan-
dards prohibit the use of subsurface tile drain fields in soils where the
groundwater table is less than four feet below the surface of the ground. It
is believed that the groundwater table at Big Horn and Story is generally more
than four feet below the surface. The continuing use of private disposal systems
would, therefore, be an acceptable course of action provided that the systems
are in conformance with the requirements of the Department of Environmental
Quality.
Assessment of Alternatives for Big Horn
The economic evaluation of the centralized waste treatment alternatives is
made on the twenty-year present worth of the alternatives for total capital cost
and annual operation and maintenance costs. The relative economic rankings of
treatment alternatives are shown in Table 82.
241
-------
TABLE $2
Present Worth of Treatment Alternatives''
Alternatives Cost
3-Cell Conventional Stabilization Pond
Capital Cost
Construction Cost $ 144,100
Incidental Costs 36,000
$ 180,100
Present Worth of operation & maintenance cost 121,400
Total Present Worth: $ 301,500
3-Cell Controlled Discharge Pond
Capital Cost
Construction Cost $ 240,300
Incidental Costs 60,100
$ 300,400
Present worth of operation & maintenance cost 204,400
Total Present Worth: $ 504,800
3-Cell Aerated Lagoon
Capital Cost
Construction Cost 178,700
Incidental Costs 44,700
$ 223,400
Present v/orth of operation & maintenance cost 191,900
Total Present Worth: $ 415,300
md Application
Capital Cost
Construction Cost 194,000 (avg
Incidental Costs 48,500
$ 242,500
Present worth of operation 5 maintenance cost 185,000
Total Present Worth: $ 427,500
Extended Aeration
Capital Cost
Construction Cost 197,500
Incidental Costs 49,400
$ 246,900
Present worth of operation & maintenance cost 381,500
Total Present Worth: $ 628,400
1
Land costs not included
Source: PP.APO EPA 203 Wastewater Facility Planning, Johnson and Sheridan
Counties, 201 Facilities Plan Interim Report, pp. V-ll and 12.
$42
-------
The cost of constructing a wastewater collection and trunk line system is
equally relevant to each of the centralized treatment alternatives considered.
This cost will not, therefore, affect the rankings of the five treatment
processes analyzed but must be considered in the evaluation of continued use
of private facilities. Inasmuch as it was beyond the scope of work of the
facilities plan to provide a detailed collection system layout plan, an ideal-
ized equivalent system with collection mains serving the area at 600-foot intervals
along the trunklines was utilized. The estimated costs for constructing a
wastewater collection system are as follows:
TABLE 83
Estimated Capital Costs
Big Horn Wastewater Collection System
Line Costs
Little Goose Trunk
Line
$ 162,500
Trunk Line A
87,500
Trunk Line B
18,800
Trunk Line C
81,200
Trunk Line D
31,200
Trunk Line E
62,500
Trunk Line F
37,500
Trunk Line G
68,800
Trunk Line H
43,800
Col 1ection Mains
2,828,200
Total Construction
Cost
$3,442,000
Incidental Costs
684,000
Total Capital Cost
$4,106,000
Source: PRAPQ EPA 208 Wastewater Facility Planning, Johnson and Sheridan
Counties, 201 Facilities Plan Interim Report, VTN Engineers, Planners,
Surveyors, p. V-10
Environmental Assessment
The impact of the treatment alternatives in all cases results in an improvement
to the environment by alleviating the potential of deterioration of both surface
and ground water quality. The exceptions are that during periods of extreme cold
the conventional stabilization pond would not produce an effluent meeting EPA
standards and both the stablization pond and land application processes would
periodically produce odors. The alternative of upgrading individual facilities
243
-------
to assure compliance with water quality standards would definitely have a
positive impact upon the environment.
Selection of Alternative for Big Horn
The evaluation shows that, recognizing environmental and social considerations,
the most cost-effective means of meeting the established water quality objectives
is to upgrade the existing private systems and control the construction of new
systems in order to assure compliance with water quality standards. The cost of
such a program could range from no cost to $1,500 or more per residence for
upgrading existing systems and up to $2,500 per residence for new construction.
With the present unincorporated status of the community, Big Horn residents
will be compelled to finance any wastewater facilities individually. If a
majority of the residents elect to incorporate, form a water and sewer district,
or become part of a county-wide district, funding for wastewater treatment
facilities could be from bonds or governmental assistance programs which might
be available.
The costs whereby individual owners would upgrade their present facilities as
required and new construction would be controlled to meet water quality standards
range from zero to 31,500 each for existing facilities and up to $2,500 for new
facilities. For comparison purposes, the maximum cost situation is evaluated,
i.e., considering all existing facilities as being upgraded at a cost of $1,500
per residence and all new facilities being constructed at a cost of $2,500 each.
The following tabulation compares the costs of such a program with the cost of
the lowest ranking treatment alternative.
Alternative 1 - Conventional Stabilization Pond
Treatment Facility
Collection Facility
$ 180,100
4,106,000
$4,286,100 or $3,800 per capita
Alternative 6 - No Action
Upgrade Existing Facilities
(386/3.5) @ 1,500
$ 165,400
Construct New Facilities
(744/3.5) @ 2,500
531,400
$ 696,800 or $600 per capita
244
-------
Assessment of Alternatives for Story
The economic evaluation of the centralized waste treatment alternatives was
formulated on the twenty-year present worth of the alternatives for total
capital cost and annual operation and maintenance costs. The present worth
of annual operation and maintenance costs is based on an interest rate of 6 1/8
percent for a term of twenty years. The relative economic rankings of treatment
alternatives are shown in Table 84.
The cost of constructing a wastewater collection and trunk line system is
equally relevant to each of the centralized treatment alternatives considered.
This cost will not, therefore, affect the rankings of the five treatment processes
analyzed but must be considered in the evaluation of continued use of private
facilities. The subsurface soil conditions for the Story area are complex
and highly erratic, thus making it extremely difficult to plan a wastewater
collection system without an exceptionally detailed study. For the purposes
of this study, a trunk line system to serve a centralized waste treatment con-
sisting of a north and south trunk line was evaluated. An idealized system with
collection mains serving the area at 500-foot intervals along the trunk lines
was utilized. Due to the subsurface soils conditions previously described,
estimating construction costs of a wastewater collection system with any degree
of accuracy is all but impossible. Therefore, for comparison purposes, a factor
of 167 percent was applied to known costs for similar construction under
difficult conditions in the area. The resulting cost estimate is shown in Table
85.
245
-------
TABLE 84
Present Worth of Treatment Alternatives^
Alternatives Cost
3-Cell Conventional Stabilization Pond
Capital Cost
Construction Cost $ 134,400
Incidental Costs 33,600
$ 168,000
Present worth of operation & maintenance cost 82,900
Total Present Worth: $ 250,900
3-Cell Controlled Discharge Pond
Capital Cost
Construction Cost " 220,400
Incidental Costs 55,100
$ 275,500
Present worth of operation & maintenance cost 182,800
Total Present Worth: $ 458,300
3-Cell Aerated Lagoon
Capital Cost
Construction Cost 170,000
Incidental Costs 42,500
$ 212,500
Present worth of operation & maintenance cost 191,900
Total Present Worth: $ 404,400
Land Application
Capital Cost
Construction Cost 183,400 (avg.)
Incidental Costs 45,900
$ 229,300
Present worth of operation & maintenance cost 178,200
Total Present Worth: $ 407,500
Extended Aeration
Capital Cost
Construction Cost 177,800
Incidental Costs 44,700
$ 222,500
Present worth of operation & maintenance cost 381 ,500
Total Present Worth: $ 504,000
1.,
:;ot including land costs.
Source: PRAPO EPA 203 Wastewater Facility Planning, Johnson u[pn
Counties> 201 FacPlities Plan-Interim Report, p. IX-11. ~
246
-------
TABLE 85
Estimated Capital Costs
Story Wastewater Collection System
Line Cost
North Trunk Line
$ 465,000
South Trunk Line
330,000
Collection Mains
3,264,000
Total Construction Cost
$4,059,000
Incidental Costs
812,000
Total Capital Cost
$4,871,000
Source: PRAFO EPA 208 Wastewater Facility Planning, Johnson and Sheridan
Counties, 201 Facilities Plan Interim Report, VTN Engineers, Planners,
Surveyors, p. IX-10-
Environmental Assessment
The impact of the treatment alternatives in all cases results in an improvement
to the environment by alleviating the potential of deterioration of both surface
and groundwater quality. The exceptions are that during periods of extreme
cold the conventional stabilization pond would not produce an effluent meeting
EPA standards and both the stabilization pond and land application processes would
periodically produce odors. The alternative of upgrading individual facilities
to assure compliance with water quality standards would definitely have a
positive impact upon the environment.
Selection of Alternate for Story
The evaluation shows that, recognizing environmental and social considerations,
the most cost-effective means of meeting the established water quality object-
ives is to upgrade the existing private systems and control the construction
of new systems in order to assure compliance with water quality standards. The
cost of such a program could range from no cost to $5,500 or more per residence
247
-------
for upgrading existing systems, and up to $6,500 for new construction. For
comparison purposes, the maximum cost situation is evaluated, i.e., considering
all existing facilities as being upgraded at a cost of $5,500 per residence
and all new facilities being constructed at a cost of $6,500 each. These costs
are based on evapo-transpiration fields for the ultimate disposal of effluent.
These types of fields utilize considerable amounts of construction material
(sand and gravel). The following tabulation compares the costs of such a pro-
gram with the cost of the lowest ranking treatment alternatives.
Alternative 1 - Conventional Stabilization Pond
Treatment Facility $ 168,000
Collection Facility 4,871,000
$5,039,000 or $5,600 per capita
Alternative 6 - No Action
Upgrade Existing Facilities $ 785,700
(500/3.5) $ 5,500
Construct New Facilities 739,100
(398/3.5) 0 6,500 $1,524,800 or $1,700 per capita
The cost of the collection system is that required to serve the entire 2-year
service area as defined by the Sheridan Area Planning Agency.
Private Sewerage Systems in Unincorporated Areas
Campbell County
Small treatment facilities serve approximately 475 residents in Campbell County.
These systems, with the exception of one, have been issued National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System permits. A brief summary of each of these systems
follows.
248
-------
Hidden Valley Estates -
The Hidden Valley Estates sewage treatment system is an extended aeration type
which consists of an aeration tank, settling tank, and chlorine contact tank to
discharge. It was designed to accommodate a 25,000 gallon per day flow with a
biological oxygen demand (BOD) loading of 45 lb/day. The effluent is discharged
into the Donkey Creek Basin.
Anderson Addition -
The Anderson Addition sewage treatment system consists of an extended aeration
system. Basic units include an aeration tank, final settling chamber, and a
chlorine contact tank. This systemwas designed to handle a flow of 12,000
gallons per day with a biological oxygen demand loading of 19 lb/day.
Heritage Village -
The Heritage Village sewage treatment system consists of a sedimentation tank,
bio-disc tank, clarifier tank and contact chlorination tank. It was designed
to accommodate an inflow of 80,000 gallons per day with loads of BOD^, 250 mg/1
and suspended solids (SS) mg/1. It discharges a flow of 80,000 gallons per day
with BOD, 30 mg/1 and SS, 30 mg/1.
Carson's Mobile Home Park -
The Carson Mobile Home Park sewage treatment system consists of a lift station
to the plant, an aeration tank, final settling tank, contact chlorination tank,
and a settling pond. The system was designed to accommodate a flow of 30,000
gallons per day with BOD loading 12-1/2 lb. per 1,000 gallons. The system dis-
charges to a settling pond at 30,000 gallons per day. From this pond the
effluent empties into Donkey Creek Basin.
Valley View -
The Valley View Addition sewage treatment system consists of a bar screen,
and aeration tank, settling chamber, a chlorination tank, and a settling pond.
The system was designed to accommodate 135 houses based on a 3 person occupancy
and a 150 gallons GPCD wastewater flow. The current wastewater load in this
area is 45 equivalent houses. This sytem does not maintain a discharge
permit since the effluent is reported to be hauled by tanker truck from the
settling pond.
249
-------
System in the Wright Area -
The unincorporated Town of Wright, in Campbell County, contains a central
sewage collection system and treatment plant. Sewage is collected by a gravity
flow system with pipes ranging in size from 8 inches in diameter to 12 inches
in diameter. The sewage is conveyed by this system to a main lift station lo-
cated immediately north of Highway 387, which in turn delivers it to the sewage
treatment plant located just north of the lift station.
The treatment facilities consist of an aerated 2-cel1 lagoon measuring approxi-
mately 290 feet long and 210 feet wide at the surface with a depth of 10 feet.
Aeration is provided in the first cell of the lagoon by means of a 2800 CPM
turbine which feeds a system of submerged grid diffusers. After passing through
the second cell for settling, the sewage is chlorinated in a separate contact
chamber prior to its discharge into Hay Creek.
Any of the private systems serviceable by the Gillette system should be con-
sidered for inclusion into this central system.
Johnson County
Linch -
The private Town of Linch has an existing sewage collection system which pre-
sently discharges untreated wastewater. This problem is being resolved with
the construction of a total containment lagoon which is now under construction.
The lagoon is scheduled to be completed by early fall, 1978, at which time the
Town of Linch will no longer maintain a discharge.
Sheridan County
Fort Mackenzie Veterans Administration Hospital -
The V.A. Hospital maintains a private trickling filter secondary treatment
plant comprised of the following processes: grinding, primary clarifier,
trickling filter, secondary clarifier, and chlorination. The discharge is
into a ditch which ultimately reaches Goose Creek north of Sheridan. The
facility records a current NFDES permit, and plant improvements are pre-
sently being considered in an operation and maintenance study now being
performed.
250
-------
WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM
TRUNK LINE STUDIES
Introducti on
The purpose of the future service area plans for the Cities of Sheridan and
Buffalo was to establish basic wastewater trunk line systems for the projected
five, ten and twenty year future service areas of the cities. The future
service area plans, in conjuction with the wastewater treatment facility plans,
provide a comprehensive twenty year wastewater system plan for the two communities.
Buffalo
Future System
The future wastewater collection facilities are divided into three basic
trunk line systems. The north and south trunk line systems serve those
areas of the City which are located west of Interstate 25. These facilities
will be expanded as required to serve the five* ten and twenty year popula-
tion growth of the community. The east trunk line system, which will serve
the area east of Interstate 25, should be developed simultaneously with the
construction of the third stage of the wastewater treatment facility plan.
This is expected to occur in about 1990. The wastewater treatment facility
plan recommends a three-stage program of upgrading the present treatment fac-
ilities to provide a three-cell aerated lagoon system which will serve the
projected future growth of the community. The first two stages provide for ex-
pansion of the facility at the present site while the third stage provides for
a new facility to serve the east trunk line system.
Imp!ementation
The concept of the five, ten and twenty year service area plans is to
accommodate the projected population and land use planned for those periods.
Implementation of the plans can readily be geared to accommodate fluctuations
in both population growth and densities. The program of implementation anti-
cipates a fairly uniform outward expansion for the present service area to
the limits of the five, ten and twenty year service areas lying north of U.S.
Highway 16. The future service areas lying south of U.S. Highway 16 are ex-
pected to be almost completely developed by the end of the five year period.
The wastewater treatment facility plan recommends the construction of treatment
251
-------
works to accommodate the future service area east of Interstate 25.
This precludes development in that area until the facility plan is implemented.
This is expected to be near 1990.
Estimated Costs
The estimated project costs of the future service area plan include the cost
of construction as well as incidental costs for administration, engineering,
fiscal and legal services and a factor for contingencies. The estimated costs
are based on present day prices and do not reflect any escalation resulting
from future inflation.
Future Service Area Plan
Estimated Future Project Costs
Future Service Area Plan
5 Year 10 Year 20 Year Total
$647,200 $177,100 $116,700 $9417000
143,100 38,600 — 181,700
— 214,300 214'300
$790,300 $215,700 $337,000 $173377000
Service Area Designation
North Trunk Line System
South Trunk Line System
East Trunk Line System
Financing
Financing of the development of the future wastewater collection systems will be
accomplished with both public and private funds. The costs to the City of Buffalo
will be those incurred for additional outfall and interceptor lines to serve the
future developed areas. The remaining costs will be borne by the developers in
accordance with the subdivision ordinances of the City. Estimated costs to the
Ci ty are as foilows :
2
City of 3uffalo
Estimated Project Cost
North Trunk Line System $ 42,600
South Trunk Line System -0-
East Trunk Line System 214,300
$256,900
The City's share of the costs of constructing the future trunk line facilities
can be funded by the issuance of sewer revenue bonds. The amount of the City's
share of the financing can be reduced by the amount of funding available from
any program(s) of assistance which might be in effect at the time of the ex-
pansion.
^Future Service Area Plan - Buffalo, VTN Engineers, Planners, ^"rvt'/ors p. 2
21bid, p. 2.
-------
Recommendations
It is recommended that the City of Buffalo proceed with a program of imple-
mentation of construction of the future service area trunk line systems.
The recommended program makes maximum use of existing facilities. The pro-
gram should include a constant assessment of the changing needs of the com-
munity so that implementation may be undertaken in an efficient and orderly
manner.
The first step of the implementation program is to provide such modifica-
tions to the present collection system as are necessary to accommodate the
future design flows.
Sheri dan
Future System
The future wastewater collection facilities are divided into four basic trunk
line systems. These facilities will be expanded as necessary to serve the
five, ten and twenty year population growth of the community. The East Sheri-
dan and Little Goose trunk line systems serve the future service areas lying
south and east of the present service area. That area lying northwest of the
present service area will be served by the Northwest Sheridan trunk line system.
This system will be an entirely new system. Two alternative plans are considered
for the areas lying west of the City. Under alternative plan A, this area
would be served by the Big Goose trunk line system. Because of constraints on
routing the Big Goose trunk line through the City to the existing treatment plant,
plan A calls for construction of a new treatment facility located in Big Goose
Creek at the western limits of the present service area. Plan B contemplates
extending the proposed Northwest Sheridan trunk line to serve the upper terrace
levels overlooking Big Goose Creek, Three lift stations would be required for
plan B. The lower areas adjacent to Big Goose Creek would not be served with
alternative plan B. Plan B appears to be the most feasible of the two alternatives.
However, this is a decision which need not be made immediately, inasmuch as it
will not be implemented until the final ten year planning period.
Imp 1ementation
The concept of the five, ten and twenty year service area plan is to accom-
modate the projected population and land use plans for those periods. Imple-
mentation of the plans can readily be geared to accommodate fluctuations in
253
-------
both population growth and densities. The program of implementation anticipates
a fairly uniform outward expansion from the present service area to the limits
of the five, ten and twenty year service areas. It is not anticipated that the
growth east of Interstate 90 will occur until the final ten years of the plan-
ning period. Similarly, it is not expected that the Big Goose service area
will develop until the same period. Improvements to expand the municipal water
system to serve these areas will be a prerequisite to constructing additional
wastewater facilities.
The first steps in the implementation program will be the development of the
lower reaches of the East Sheridan and Little Goose trunklines and con-
struction of a major portion of the Northwest Sheridan trunk line system.
Estimated Costs
The estimated project costs of the future service area plan include the cost
of construction as well as incidental costs for administration, engineering,
fiscal and legal services and a factor for contingencies. The estimated costs
are based on present day prices and do not reflect any escalation resulting
from future inflation. The following tabulations reflect the estimated costs
for both the total systemandfor those costs anticipated to be borne by the City.
Alternative Plan
Plan A
Plan B
Future Service Area Plan
Estimated Project Costs
(Total System Cost)
Future Service Area Plan
1
5 Year
$1,684,950
1,776,850
10 Year
$887,500
887,500
20 Year
$2,393,650
1,480,100
Total
$4,966,100
4,144,450
Alternative Plan
Plan A
Plan B
FUTURE SERVICE AREA PLAN
ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS
(City of Sheridan Cost)
5 Year
$1,485,150
1,550,050
10 Year
$695,300
631,550
20 Year
$1,389,750
422,950
Total
$3,570,200
2,604,550
The estimated annual cost to the City of Sheridan is as follows. These costs
include the cost of capitalization as well as annual operation and maintenance
costs. Bond debt service is based on a rate of 6 1/8 percent for 20 years.
^Future Service Area Plan - Sheridan, VTN Engineers, Planners, ,'iurveyorr, p. 2.
21bid, Pg. 3 . 254
-------
Future Service Area Plan^
Estimated Annual Cost
(City of Sheridan Cost)
Future Service Area Plan
Alternative Plan
Plan A
Plan B
5 Year
$193,900
$203,100
10 Year
$288,400
$292,000
20 Year
$529,900
$389,500
Fi nanci ng
The financing of the development of the future wastewater collection systems
should be accomplished with both public and private funds. The costs to the City
of Sheridan will be those incurred for additional trunk lines to serve the
future developed areas. The remaining costs will be borne by the developers
in accordance with the subdivision ordinances of the City. The City's share
of the costs of constructing the future trunk line facilities can be funded
by the issuance of sewer revenue bonds. The amount of the City's share of
the financing can be reduced by the amount of funding available from any pro-
grants) of assistance which might be in effect at the time of the expansion.
Recommendations
The first step of the implementation program is to initiate a program of in-
filtration/inflow rehabi1itation in conformance with the recommendations of
the wastewater treatment facility plan. This would establish, in detail, the
extent to which the capacity of the present trunk line system could be utilized
to accomodate future flows. It is additionally recommended that the City pro-
ceed to develop the basic trunk line systems outlined in alternative
plan B. In consideration of both treatment and collection system costs, plan
B represents the least cost per person served for the total twenty year program.
^Ibid, p. 3
255
-------
Chapter V
MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION
INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Management Agencies Recoranended for Designation
This subsection describes the basic recommendations for governmental institu-
tions which should be designated by the Governor of Wyoming as the management
agencies for the Powder River Water Quality Plan, These recommendations are
summarized in two tables. Table 86 shows all levels of governmental agencies
that have actual or potential planning, administrative, monitoring, or regu-
latory responsibilities for water quality planning in the PRAPO area, inclu-
ding those Federal agencies whose full cooperation must be formally sought.
The drafting of intergovernmental agreements within and among the three levels
of government to implement the management plan is a necessary work item for
the future.
Table 87 contains the proposed management agencies for water quality control
programs in the three county area. A management agency is considered the
focal point for water quality control in a specified geographical area. Once
a management agency is designated by the Governor it has the responsibility
to implement point sources or non-point source control programs or assure that
these control programs will be implemented.
A basic recommendation of this effort concerns the assignment of overal1 respon
sibility for the supervision and coordination of the water quality management
programs and the continuous updating and refinement of the water quality manage
ment plan of the PRAPO area. For reasons that will be explained later in this
institutional analysis section, it is recommended that this coordination and
planning responsibility be assigned to the Wyoming Department of Environmental
Quality. It may be beneficial, however, for PRAPO to continue as an advisory
-------
TABLE 86
Type of Activity
A. NON-POINT SOURCES
Planning
Authorities and Responsibilities for Direct Pollution Control Activi ties
In PRAPO Area~Ey Pollution Category
Administration
and Oversight
Funding
Construction
Operating
Moni toring
Regulatory/
Enforcement
Agricultural
Activi ties
Silviculture
Activi ties
(Federal Lands)
Individuals with
assistance of SCC,
LCD, FhMa, SCS.
PRAPO, SOA and IDWC
PRAPO, BLM, and FS
Individuals, SCC, LCD,
SDA, FhMA, and SCS
BLM and FS
Individuals,
FhMA and SCS
BLM and FS
Individuals with
assistance of SCC,
LCD and SCS
BLM, FS, and
Operators
Individuals
BLM, FS, and
Operators
SCC, LCD. DEQ
SOA, SCS, and
DEQ
BLM, FS, and BLM, FS, and
DEQ DEQ
(\> Silviculture
^ Activi ties
(Noil-federal
Lands)
Individuals with
assistance from SFD,
SCC, and LCD
Indi viduals or SED
Individuals or
SED
Individuals with
assistance from
SFD, SCC, or LCD
Individuals
or SFO
SFD, SCC, DEQ
LCD, and
SFD
Graznig
Act iv i ties
(Federal Lands)
PkAPO, BLM, and FS
Grazers, BLM, and FS
BLM and FS
BLM, FS, and
Grazers
BLM, FS, and BLM. FS, and BLM, FS, and
Grazers DEQ DEQ
Grazing
Act ivities
(Non-federal
Lands)
Individuals with
assistance of SCC,
LCD, SCS, SOA, FhMa,
and PRAPO
Individuals or Wyoming
State Land Office and
SCC, LCD, SCS, FhMA,
AND SDA
Individuals or
Wyoming State
Land Office,
FhMA and SCS
Individuals or
Wyoming State
Land Office with
assistance of SCC
LCD and SCS
Individuals
or Wyoming
State Land
Office
SCC, LCD. SCS, DEQ
SDA, and DEQ
Mining
Activities
(Federal Lands)
Operators with
assistance of BLM,
USGS, EPA, FS, DEQ1
and CEQ
Operators, BLM, USGS,
FS and DEQ1
BLM, FS and
DEQ1
BLM, FS, Opera-
tors and DEQ1
BLM, FS. Opera- BLM FS, USGS, DEQ1, BLM,
tors and DEQ1 0EQrand Opera- FS, USGS.
tors and SE
-------
TABLE 36 Continued
Authorities and Responsibilities for Direct Pollution Control Activities
Resp
In P
RAPQ Area by Pollution Category
Type of Activity
Planning
Administration
arid Oversight
Funding
Construction
Operating
Moni toring
Regulatory
Enforcement
Mining
Activities
(Non-federal
Lands)
Construction
Activities
(Federal Lands)
Construction
Activities
(State and
rvj Local Govern-
or mental Lands)
Individuals with assist-
ance of PRAPO, approval
of reclamation plans by
LCD and DEQ
Leasees,
or FS
EPA, and BLM
State or local agency
involved and PRAPO
DEQ
Leases and BLM or FS
State or local agency
involved
Individual or
DEQ
Leasees and BLH
or FS
State or local
agency involved
Individuals or
DEQ with assis-
tance of LCD
and SCS
Leasees and BLM
of FS
State or local
agency involved
Individuals or
DEQ
Leasees and
BLM or FS
LCD, SCS. and DEQ1
DEQ SE
State or local DEQ
agency involved
and
BLM, FS, and DEQ, BLM
DEQ and FS
DEQ
Construction
Activities
(Private Lands)
Urban Runoff
Hydrologic
Modifications
Individuals with assist-
ance of PRAPO and
municipality or county
PRAPO and municipal-
i ties
PRAPO, BLM, FS, LCD, SCC,
SE, SCS, C of E, BR,
state and local agencies
causing modifications,
arid individuals
Individuals
Municipalities3
BLM, FS, SCC, LCD, SE,
SCS, C of E, BR, state
and local agencies
causing modifications,
and individuals
Individuals
Individuals
Individuals
Municipality Minicipality
o 3 '
Municipalities-^ Municipalities'3 Municipalities"
BLM, FS, SE, SCS,
C of E, BR, state
and local agen-
cies causing mod-
ifications, and
individuals
BLM, FS, SCC, LCD,
SE, SCS, Cof E,
BR, state and lo-
cal agencies caus-
ing modifications,
and individuals
BLM, FS, SCC,
LCD, SE, SCS,
C of E, BR,
state and local
agencies caus-
ing modifica-
tions and indi-
viduals
or county and
DEQ
DEQ and Game
and Fish
Division
or county
and DEQ
OEQ
Municipalities, Municipal-
SCC, LCD, coun- jties, coun-
ties, DEQ, and ties, and
Game and Fish DEQ
Division
-------
TABLE 86 Continued
Authorities and Responsib11 ities for Direct Pollution Control Activities
I" PRAPO ^rea by Pollution Category
Type of Acti vi ty _
Individual On-
site Sanitary
Waste Disposal
Faci1i ties
Residual Waste
Disposal
B.POINT SOURCES
Genera) Public
Wastewater Sys-
tems (incorpor-
ated areas)
General Public
Wastewater Sys-
tems (unincor-
porated areas)
Individual
Industrial Waste-
water Facilities
Planning
Individuals with
assistance of PRAPO
and OEQ
PRAPO arid
municipalities'
HUD. EPA, il£W PRAPO,
DEQ, ind uiunicipal-
tiesH
PRAPO and special
districts
Individuals with
assistance of PRAPO
and OEQ
Administration
and Oversight
Funding
Construction
Operating
Reyulatory /
Moni toring Enforcement
Municipalities,
counties, and DEQ"
DEQ?
Individuals
Individuals
Individuals Counties, Counties
municipalities municipal)-
and DEQ ties and DEQ
Municipalities7 Municipalities' Municipalities' DEQ?
DEQy
DEQ and municipalities® Minicipalities8, MinicipalitiesS
EDA, EPA, OEQ,
FhMA, HUD, and
SCS9
Special Districts*1
DEQ and ISA12
Special
districts*!
Individuals
Special
distri cts
11
Individuals
Municipali ties® Municipal i ties® Muni cipali-
DEQ^attd EPA ties and DEQ
Special Counties, Counties
districts*' DEQ^and EPA and OEQ
Individuals DEQ and EPA DEQ
-------
TABLE 86 Continued
FOOTNOTES AND ABBREVIATIONS TO TABlE 86
^Pertaining to surface coal mining based on agreement between the State of Wyoming and the U.S. Department of the Interior. Apparently DEQ does not
have authority to regulate or abate pollution from inactive or abandoned mining sites.
?lf a stream location change or a water storage facility is involved in mining operation.
31 (ie respons ibi 1 i ties for towns with less than 5,000 are with state or county highway departments.
4
The decisions on jurisdiction were still pending.
BLM and FS have solid waste management responsibilities on their lands.
^The counties have the same authorities as municipalities.
\oans and grants from SCS are indicated to be possible.
'*The Wyoming Department of Helath and Social Services assists DEQ by testing and analyzing water samples,
g
Special districts include "water and sewer districts"."sanitary and improvement districts", and "improvement and services districts" which are all
en authorized by Wyoming law.
'^The Industrial Siting Administration is involved in large generating and conversion sites and other large industrial facilities with expected con-
struction costs over 150,000 {W.S. 35-502.76).
BLM
BR
C of E =
CEQ
0EQ
EPA
FS
FtiMA
IfJWC
ISA
(U.S.) Bureau of Land Management
v'.J.S.) Bureau of Reclamation
(U.S.) Army Corps of Engineers
Council on Environmental Quality
(Wyoming) Department of Environmental Quality
(U.S.) Environmental Protection Agency
(U.S.) Forest Service
(U.S.) Farmers Home Administration
Interdepartmental Water Conference
(Wyoming) Industrial Siting Administration
SCO
SCS
SOA
SE
SFD
USGS
PRAPO
LCD
O&G
Local Conservation District
(Wyoming) Oil and Gas Conmission
Powder River Areawide Planning Organization
(Wyoming) State Conservation Conmission
(U.S.) Soil Conservation Service
(Wyoming) State Department of Agriculture
(Wyoming) State Engineer
(Wyoming) State Forestry Division
United States Geological Survey
Source: Oblinger-Smitti Corporation, 1977
-------
TABLE 87
Recommended Federal/State/Local Management Agencies
By Water Pollution Category
A. NON-POINT POLLUTION SOURCES
Agricultural and Grazing Activities -
Non-Federal Lands"
Agricultural and Grazing Activities -
Federal Lands
Silvicultural Activities - Non-Federal
Lands
Silvicultural Activities - Federal
Lands
Mining Activities - Non-Federal
Lands
Mining Activities - Federal Lands
Construction Activities - Non-Federal
Lands
Construction Activities - Federal
Lands
Urban Runoff
Hydrologic Modification
Residual Waste Disposal
g
On-Site Sanitary Waste Disposal
PROPOSED MANAGEMENT AGENCIES
FOR WATER QUALITY CONTROL
PROGRAMS
Regulatory - N/A .
Non-Regulatory - LCD
Regulatory -BLM & FS
Non-Regulatory - N/A
Regulatory - (State Lands) State
Forestry Division^
Non-Regulatory - (Private Lands)
State Forestry Division2
Regulatory - BLM & FS
Non-Regulatory - N/A
Regulatory - DEQ3
Non-Regulatory - N/A
Regulatory - DEQ4, BLM & FS5
Non-Regulatory - N/A
Regulatory - Municipalities and
Counties^
Non-Regulatory - N/A
Regulatory - Applicable Federal
Land Management Agency"
Non-Regulatory - N/A
Regulatory - N/A
Non-Regulatory - Municipalities
Regulatory - N/A
Non-Regulatory - State Engineers Office
Regulatory - N/A
Non-Regulatory - Municipalities
and Counties
Regulatory - DEQ^
Non-Regulatory - Counties
261
-------
TABLE 87 Continued
B. POINT POLLUTION SOURCES
General Public Wastewater Systems
Incorporated Areas)
General Public Wastewater Systems
(Unincorporated Areas)
Regulatory - DEQ
Non-Regulatory - Municipalities
Regulatory - DEQ
Non-Regulatory - Water and Sewer
District^
Individual Industrial Wastewater
Faci 1 i ti es
Regulatory - DEQ
Non-Regulatory - Individual Industry
2
State Forestry Division has responsibility for silvicultural programs and
related water quality efforts on state-owned lands and is designated by
Statutes to provide technical forest management assistance to private land-
owners .
¦3
Mining reclamation plans reviewed by local conservation districts.
^DEQ is recommended as the designated agency pertaining to surface coal min-
ing operations based on the adoption of the Cooperative Agreement between the
State of Wyoming and the United States Department of the Interior for the
Enforcement and Administration of Surface Coal Mine Regulation Standards. How-
ever, the agreement can be terminated by the State and the Federal government
or when the law is no longer authorized by federal laws and regulations.
^If located on lands administrated by the United States Forest Service.
^Wyoming Highway Department and county highway departments have a major res-
ponsibility and impact through their highway construction activities.
^If pertains to construction concerning surface coal mining, DEQ is recom-
mended as the designated agency.
^Municipalities have certain responsibilities for those remaining incorporated
areas served by septic systems. See Footnote 9.
9DEQ cannot delegate the regulatory function for this activity but can develop
cooperation agreements with local governments for specific administrative
functions.
Supported by technical and financial assistance from EPA and other Federal
agencies as applicable.
262
-------
TA.Blfc 87 Continued
11
»: possible, the construction, tl droit!1 si rat io,s, and operation o ?- *1 I public
was tewater treatment systems In jni, co- f: jvated areas should be the raspon-i i •
b»1 it.y of the "v;:ter ana ?.ewer distr^ci:' variety of spec^a* districts
(authority by Section 4i.~4?9,1 thr-:\jgii •:• t-479,57), furthermore, an attempt
shi/jld be- made to 1 imU the creat-un of such districts to one per county.
However, no more -.nan'we addition-., 1 water and sewtr 1istrict should ba
cv"e-!i;eci in counties where one or mure such districts alrt-ady exist. Debt
fina.'cino in such water and sewer cislH-jt? shguld he limited to special
assessment debt so as not to discourage the late^ enlargement of the dist^c?.
:i :w areas are to. be served_
' ¦ . Oblinqer-Snith Corporation., 1978
to the state agency for purposes of: 1). citizen and governmental
• iwi the local levels 2) local agency caordina-tion and contract; and 3}
^itk . i service and data col lection for local > state and f ederal agencies.
Aoc ogly, in review of this preliminary p4*n ^ocuwant, PRAPO and the Depart-
ment r Environmental! Quality should consider- the desirability of sucti a con-
tinuing role for PRAPG, and whether or mt the support exists to fund a small
professional staff for the pursuit of such functions. If such a role-for
PRAPO is not desired or deemed feasible, the Department of Envtrownenul
Qu? "; v might provide such- functions through: 1} the creation of some other
, :. '/-iil or formal forum for interaction among the affected levels and agencies
vi governmental» ci t' z«sr.and bu. • ss if-.wrests; and 2) an augjpntatiq,n of
it; o-w/1 flaki
The-lias is ti?d of f.ht§« reconventions are^xpljtfiHj*!. to the following
¦section.
pi "\ I IfPi'r*!I~ r:t'- t* wf* '• "
fi.gn of, ***• ',afa*' *A$ **»»•*% v,-< „* r-v
¦ M&'uzr area. Thay are. as f&H'-sws.t
-------
Authority and Capability
Do the governmental entities that would be major components in any given
areawide institutional management arrangement have the statutory author-
ity to successfully pursue responsibilities that could be assigned, or,
judgmentally, are they likely to be expeditiously granted such authority
by the Wyoming Legislature (state or local entity) or Congress (federal
agency) if such a recommendation is offered? If the governmental enti-
ties have the statutory authority, are they likely to have or acquire the
administrative and financial capability to effectively use such authority?
These two interrelated questions sharply limit the alternative institu-
tional arrangements that need to be evaluated under the following four
cri teria.
Acceptability
Are the component philosophies, policies, and intergovernmental relation-
ships in an alternative institutional arrangement likely to be politically
or culturally acceptable to the citizens in the PRAPO area and to the
governmental leadership at the local, state, and national level? Are
citizens' rights protected? This question is crucial, as the type of
citizen, financial, and intergovernmental support will determine the level
of plan implementation which can be achieved.
Accountability
To what extent are the component governmental units and agencies in a
particular alternative institutional arrangement accessible to, account-
able to, and controlled by the affected citizenry (and their elected
officials) in proportion to their stake in the outcome of governmental
decisions?
Effi ciency
To what extent does a particular alternative institutional arrangement
achieve its water quality management responsibilities efficiently and,
therefore, economically?
264
-------
Equi ty
To what extent does a particular alternative institutional arrangement
equitably distribute the costs and benefits over the affected citizenry?
Are external costs and adverse impacts on other services and social
objectives minimized?
The Guidelines for Areawide Waste Treatment Management Planning (August, 1975),
published by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, provide initial assis-
tance in narrowing the range of feasible alternative institutional arrange-
ments by suggesting that generally there are only three basic, practical types
of institutional arrangements for most areas:
1. A Single Planning and Management Agency
2. A Single Planning Agency and A Single Management Agency
3. A Single Planning Agency and Plural Management Agencies
Upon reflection, this categorization does seem appropriate not only generally,
but specifically for Wyoming and the PRAPO area. Adherence to both tested prin-
ciples of public administration and good planning theory strongly supports the
designation of a single agency for overall planning responsibilities within a
sub-state area. Fragmentation of planning responsibilities on a functional
basis creates many difficulties. Fragmenting the primary planning responsi-
bility among several agencies for one type of functional planning (water qua-
lity management) within the planning area would probably be administratively
inefficient. Then too, Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act of 1972 calls for a single areawide planning agency in each designated
planning area.
On the other hand, a decentralized, but coordinated management structure is a
common and acceptable institutional arrangement. The U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency specifically recognizes the legitimacy of such an arrangement
by noting that "In some geographical areas and in some governmental situations
where the number of local units involved is small," (certainly a description of
the PRAPO area) "water quality management may be decentralized...with only a
coordinator at the areawide level acting as a planning and administrative
mechanism to integrate local units.
lij.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Management Agencies Handbook for Section
208 Areawide Waste Treatment Management, Washington, D.C.: Government Printina
Office, 1975, p.4. a
265
-------
With the acceptance of the aforementioned three-part categorization of insti-
tutional arrangements for planning and management agencies, it is now possible
to subdivide that categorization into a somewhat more specific range of insti-
tional arrangements. The following alternative structures will be analyzed
in the next section of this chapter:
1. A state agency acting as the single planning and management agency .
2. A "statutory" (a general type authorized by state statute) local agency.
3. A "joint" (meaning an agency or contractual arrangement under the Wyoming
Joint Powers Act) local agency acting as the single planning and manage-
ment agency.
4. A state agency acting as the single planning agency and another state agency
acting as a single management agency.
5. A state agency acting or the single planning agency and a local (statu-
tory or joint) agency acting as a single management agency.
6. A local (statutory or joint) agency acting as the single planning agency
and a local (statutory or joint) agency acting as a single management
agency.
7. A local (statutory or joint) agency acting as the single planning agency
and a state agency acting as a single management agency.
8. A state agency acting as the single planning agency with plural state
management agencies.
9. A state agency acting as a single planning agency with plural state
management agencies.
10. A state agency acting as a single planning agency with a combination of
state and local (statutory and/or joint) management agencies.
11. A local (statutory or joint) agency acting as a single planning agency
with plural state management agencies.
12. A local (statutory or joint) agency acting as a single planning agency
with plural local (statutory and/or joint) management agencies.
13. A local (statutory or joint) agency acting as a single planning agency
with a combination of state and local (statutory and/or joint) management
agencies.
266
-------
Analysis of Alternative Areawide Institutional Management Arrangements
At first glance, a consideration of the thirteen sub-categories of alternative
institutional structures may seem like an overwhelming analytical task,
especially when it is recognized that there are almost limitless combinations
of local and state agencies that could be employed in a variety of ways under
these subcategories. Actually, however, the number of practical possiblities
can be sharply and quickly reduced when they are evaluated according to the
five criteria established for that purpose indicated earlier in this section.
While EPA might prefer a single areawide planning and management agency, it
is also acutely aware that political acceptability of the plan is essential
for implementation. Adaptations must be made for local attitudes and con-
ditions. The philosophy in Wyoming and other portions of the Great Plains
and Rocky Mountain West indicates that a single agency choice is not accep-
table in the PRAPO area or anywhere in Wyoming. One need not move beyond the
"acceptability" criterion to the possible problems under the "accountability"
:efficienc/ or "authority" criteria. Subcategories No. 1, 2, and 3 are not
viable for this reason.
Even though the relatively small number of local governmental units might
seem to encourage the selection of a single management agency, that approach
also fails to be politically acceptable in the PRAPO area for the foreseeable
future. The relative isolation of population centers and the resultant lack
of inter-urban governmental complexity also suggests a more decentralized
approach is yet appropirate. Subcategories 5,6, and 7 fail for these reasons.
Furthermore, insistence on local control of many management functions by
Wyoming citizens end no resultant State of Wyoming push to supplement such
local control ruU out any single or exclusive state management function.
Stated in another way, primary problems under the "accountability" criterion
and secondary problems under the "accountability" and "equity" criteria cause
a rejection of No. 4, 7, 8, and 11.
Measuring the subcategories against the "authority" aspects of the "authority
and capabilities" criterion, it can be observed that there are various manage-
ment functions (i.e., operation of wastewater treatment facilities) where no
single type of local governmental unit has areawide authority, nor are they
-------
likely to receive it soon. Subcategories 5, 6, and 9 can be discarded for
that reason. Furthermore, statutory authorization for certain management func-
tions (i.e., approval of private wastewater treatment facilities in certain
areas) are now given exclusively to a state agency with no authority for the
delegation of such powers. Subcategories 9 and 12 are ruled out for that reason.
Conversely, certain management functions are authorized strictly at the local
level under Wyoming law (e.g., most forms of direct local land use regulatory
powers) and this constitutes another reason for rejecting those subcategories
with an exclusively state management role - No. 1, 4, 8, and 11.
The five major criteria could be utilized in more complex analysis to provide
further reasons for rejecting most of the subcategories already eliminated, but
it hardly seems necessary. Already the choice of subcategories still available
for consideration has been reduced to two - No. 10 and No. 13. They have one
feature in common - the reliance on multiple management agencies from both
the local and state levels. The differences are that one has a state agency
acting as a single planning agency and the other one looks to local government
to fill that role. Since no single type of local governmental unit is given
such planning authority for all portions of a county, not to mention the three-
county PRAPO area, a local planning effort to be sufficient necessarily
involves the joint action of all significant local governmental units as autho-
rized by the Wyoming Joint Powers Act (W.S. Sections 9-18.7 to 9-18.20).
The decision between the two subcategories is reduced to a choice between a
state or joint local agency acting as a single planning agency for a combina-
tion of local and state management agencies that implement the planning. Alter-
native No. 10 is recommended with the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality
delegated the responsibi1ity for the supervision and coordination of the water
quality management programs within, and continued planning role for, the PRAPO
area.
At the present time there is no general or umbrella multi-county planning agency
for the PRAPO area. Indeed, the creation of such planning organizations has
not been a priority in Wyoming. The relatively few, large counties in the
state, sparse population, and few and widely scattered municipalities may be
cited as reasons why no urgency for such organizations has developed. The coun-
ties, or major county/city operation, is viewed (with some justification) as
a reasonable alternative approach.
268
-------
With no umbrella planning organization to assume the areawide water quality plan-
ning responsibilities, the only immediate, locally-based alternative is a single-
function organization for that purpose and agency similar to PRAPO or a successor
to it. Yet the support for such an organization among local officials and civic
leaders does not appear to be present. Among some, it may be that the need for
water quality planning ranks as a relatively low priority, but the primary con-
cerns probably center around the costs to local governments and area citizens
for maintaining a full, adequately-staffed, technically competent, continuing
water quality planning function at the regional level in a sparsely settled area
where growth problems are already straining local budgets and institutional
arrangements.
On the other hand, indications are that leadership by the Department of
Environmental Quality pertaining to the planning function, would not be mis-
trusted any more than any other organization treading in this very sensitive
area, particularly if some sort of locally-based advisory group representing
elected officials, citizen groups, and affected industries is created. This
solution is recognized as a sound adaptation to areawide conditions and forms
the basis for the recommendations on future role of PRAPO or its successor
which are found on pages 256 and 253 of this section. The broad and adequate
enabling legislation and technical expertise of its staff makes the Department
of Environmental Quality the consensus selection and only logical choice as
the state agency to pursue water quality planning in the Powder River area.
As indicated in the first section of this chapter, it may be beneficial for
PRAPO to continue in an advisory capacity to assist the Department of Environ-
mental Quality in the maintenance of water quality management planning in the
three counties. This local function could be performed by PRAPO-or an establish-
ment of another committee by local elected officals.
As an option, Johnson and Sheridan Counties may desire to continue advisory
efforts with a two county committee due to the fact that the two counties exper-
ience similar types of water quality problems. These two counties must deal
with surface water problems much more extensively than Campbell County. Also,
Johnson and Sheridan Counties contain more irrigated cropland. Campbell County ,
on the other hand, contains more strippable coal deposits than the other two
counties. In short, due to similarity of water quality problems and topography in
269
-------
Johnson and Sheridan Counties, these two counties may desire to provide an advi-
sory group to assist the Department of Environmental Quality. Of course ,
Campbell County may also desire to provide an advisory function to this process
with or without Sheridan or Johnson Counties.
The next task will be the identification of the proper combination of local
and state agencies to designate the point and non-point pollution manage-
ment responsibilities in this evolving areawide water quality plan. The next
section will explain the recommendations for such designations.
Examination of State/Local Agency Designations to Implement the Water
Quality Plan - Point Sources
Table 86,page 257, identifies local, state, and federal agencies that have some
related responsibilities, in general or particular situations, and whose cooper-
ation must be secured. Table 87*page 261, has previously summarized the recom-
mendations for designated management agencies by pollution categories.
Quite naturally a primary concern expressed by EPA and state officials is the
control and treatment of point pollution sources. For this reason it is appro-
priate to first turn to the recommended institutional arrangement for control-
ling point pollution sources through wastewater treatment facilities.
All classes of Wyoming municipalities have been granted the necessary statu-
tory authority to design, construct, and operate wastewater treatment works;
accept and use grants for wastewater treatment programs; raise revenues and
assess waste treatment charges; incur short and long-term indebtedness;
establish reasonable pre-treatment standards for waste and refuse to accept
waste not meeting such standards; and effectively manage waste treatment works
and related facilities. These tasks are requirements of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act. Municipalities are the only governmental entities in
Wyoming with the authority to implement wastewater treatment programs within
incorporated portions of Wyoming and have long demonstrated the adequacy of
their enabling legislation.
The capability of very small municipalities to effectively use such legis-
lation is another matter. Financial assistance from the state or Federal
government is an absolute necessity for the small municipaltities (and of
270
-------
great benefit to all sizes). Intergovernmental arrangements for the manage-
ment and technical expertise of expensive and complex treatment facilities
is also necessary, or at least highly desirable, for small municipalities.
The Wyoming Joint Powers Act would permit the creation of joint operations
among municipalities for management or any other wastewater treatment
function, or the provision of such services from another municipality on a
contractual basis.
The choice is more complex for operating wastewater treatment operations in
unincorporated portions of Wyoming, for there are three types of special dis-
tricts from which to choose. One type, the "Improvement and Service District"
(18-339 to 18-377), is untested, having been authorized by the Wyoming Legisla-
ture only effective May 27, 1977. The other two types " Water and Sewer Dis-
trict" (41-479.1 to 41-479.57) and "Sanitary and Improvement District" (35-141
to 35-165), were both originally authorized by 1959 legislation; examples of
both are found in the PRAPO area and throughout the state. None of the three
types may serve incorporated areas. Thus, it is obvious that municipalities
and special districts are both necessary under existing law to meet wastewater
treatment requirements in Wyoming.
Combined functions may be possible with municipalities under the Joint Powers
Act. Their general powers relating to wastewater treatment are quite similar,
but they are authorized to serve different areas (incorporated vs. unincorporated).
Therefore, a legal test may be necessary on this issue. (Section 35-148 spe-
cifically authorizes the "sanitary and improvement districts" to contract with
corporations or municipalities for disposal of sewage and use of existing sewer-
age improvements.)
All three types of these special districts seem to statutorily meet the basic
requirements of the Federal Act for constructing, operating, and maintaining
wastewater treatment facilities and the related water and sewer systems. Again,
management of such facilities is or will likely be beyond the capabilities of
many such districts in the long run. Incorporation into a municipal system,
if the district debt is not prohibitive, is both likely and a long term solu-
tion for some of the districts.
271
-------
While the "Improvement and Service District" law permits that type of district
to plan, construct, finance, and operate the full range of improvements required
in a modern subdivision and wastewater treatment facilities, the use of the
"Water and Sewer District" type is recommended wherever possible. The petition
requirements for its creation are less stringent, range of debt finance alter-
natives broader, and unlike the other two, multi-county service areas with non-
contiguous parcels are specifically authorized.
Given the absence of enabling legislation for county government, an appro-
priate goal might be the existence of a single "water and sewer district" in
each county or even a single water and sewer district for the entire three-
county PRAPO area. Of course, it would include only those portions of the
county or counties requiring such point pollution control of wastewater, and
such a district would surrender territory to municipal systems at the time of
annexation.
Authority for incurring debt through the special assessment technique (as well
as through general obligation and revenue bonds) is also given to Water and
Sewer Districts (and Improvement and Sewer Districts). Thus, if the "assess-
ment" finance technique is consistently utilized where appropriate, the expan-
sion of a single district to encompass new urban growth throughout a county
or region should be possible. Incoming property owners would not be deterred
from joining by a debt-ridden district. Any existing general obligation or
revenue bond indebtedness that did exist would be for the basic treatment sys-
tem they too will utilize - not for the basic distribution or collection sys-
tems. (Incidently, moving towards a single "water and sewer district" should
be aided by existing statutory authority for the reorganization of a "sanitary
and improvement district" or a "water and sewer district.")
Finally, any discussion about controlling point sources of pollution must also
designate agencies for monitoring or enforcement (regulations). Through
its statutory permit, approval, and monitoring responsibilities, the Wyoming
Department of Environmental Quality apparently has adequate regulatory autho-
ity to oversee the treatment facilities throughout the state. Furthermore,
it has adequate powers to regulate industrial discharges occurring outside
a public system through its discharge permits and standards.
272
-------
Care must be taken that an adequate staff is maintained to assist and monitor
the municipal and special district personnel who have the initial responsibi1ity
within their respective jurisdictions. Municipalities and special districts
may require reasonable pre-treatment conditions for sewer users to protect sys-
tem facilities.
Municipalities also have related enforcement powers within their boundaries.
Through zoning (W.S. Sections 15.1-83 to 15.1-91) and subdivision (W.S. Sections
15.1-80 to 15.1-82)regulatory powers, municipalities can avoid approving develop-
ments which cannot be conveniently served by sewers. County governments have
similar powers in unincorporated areas if they choose to use them. Through
zoning (W.S. Sections 18-289.1 to 18-289.9), subdivisions (W.S. Sections
18-289.10 to 289.24), and sanitary district zoning (W.S. Sections 18-281 to
18-289), counties can avoid authorizing developments which would require pub-
lic sanitary sewerage systems, but which cannot be readily provided at a par-
ticular time. Their approval authority is the keystone power for implementing
a single, county-wide or multi-county "water and sewer district."
Examination of State/Local Agency Designations to Implement the Water
Quality Plan - Non-Point Sources
The ultimate non-Federal authority for controlling all non-point sources of
pollution to Wyoming waters is the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality.
Table 87 recognizes that primary responsibility. While the Department may
and does involve some of the state's political subdivisions in its regulatory
programs, the basis for such regulation traces back to W.S. Section 35-502.18.
That section, enacted as a Part of the (Wyoming) Environmental Quality Act
of 1973, authorizes the department to require every person to seek a depart-
mental permit whenever such person shall:
"(i) Cause, threaten or allow the discharge of any pollution or waste into
the waters of the state;
(ii) Alter the physical, chemical, radiological, biological or bacteriologi-
cal properties of any waters of the state;
273
-------
(iii) Construct, install, modify or operate any sewage system, treatment works,
disposal system or other facility, capable of causing or contributing to pol-
lution ;
(iv) Increase the quantity or strength of any discharge;
(v) Construct, install, modify or operate any public water supply."
The Department has begun to implement such broad statutory authority by
enacting rules and regulations covering such areas as basic water quality
standards; control of active mining operations (including provisions that
relate to surface and groundwater quality); certification of water and waste-
water systems operators; spillage of oil and hazardous material; surface
water protection in gas and oil production operations; solid waste manage-
ment (including provisions that relate to surface and groundwater quality);
construction, installation, or modification of public water supplies and
wastewater facilities; and point source waste discharges.
Again, it should be noted that having the authority to control and effectively
utilizing such power may be two different things. This is especially diffi-
cult in the area of non-point source pollution control where regulation is;
1) often the most difficult to monitor and enforce; and 2) the least accept-
able to the affected property owners. The regulation of individual septic
systems is generally as efficient or.inefficient as county building inspec-
tion (if in existence) or the subdivision regulatory system.
Pollution control from agricultural and grazing activities is a particularly
difficult problem to assess and address - both because of the enormity of the
task and attitudes toward regulation of such activities. As in most states,
for the immediate future, Wyoming will probably rely almost exclusively on
increased educational and technical assistance programs delivered through the
State Conservation Commission with the assistance of local conservation dis-
tricts, the U.S. Soil Conservation Service, the Wyoming Department of Agri-
culture, and DEQ staff. Silvicultural source management is also difficult to
implement. The State Forestry Division, with cooperative assistance from the U.S.
Forest Service, the State Conservation Commission and local conservation dis-
tricts, is the primary agency source for water pollution control implementation.
274
-------
Early detection and monitoring of innumerable general locations where non-
point pollution is occurring constitutes a totally impossible task for the
Department of Environmental Quality or any other enforcement agency without
energetic cooperation and support from a host of local, state, and federal
agencies that have related responbi1ities. As Table 86 indicates, this is
certainly true of such non-point pollution categories as construction activ-
ities, hydrologic modification, groundwater pollution, residual waste dis-
posal, mining activity, and urban runoff.
The first effort in any pollution control program should consist of a "pre-
vention" element with emphasis to avoid creating sources of pollution wherever
possible. Land use regulations and the adoption and enforcement of building
codes are extremely important. These powers provided to municipalities and
counties in Wyoming, if utilized, can do a great deal to minimize urban runoff
construction pollution, inappropriate hydrologic modification, residual waste
disposal problems, and septic system difficulties. This is especially true
in the rural portions of an area and the urbanizing fringe of communities,
both of which are subject to county zoning and subdivision control if a county
chooses to use such tools.
Zoning can be utilized to guide land uses to compatible, pollution-minimizing
locations and to phase appropriate development for the economical and effective
provision of water and sewer services. Proper subdivision control is a cru-
cial process if new development is to: 1) minimize urban runoff, ground-
water pollution, and inappropriate hydrologic modifications; and 2) be served
by adequate sewage treatment systems.
Summary of Recommendations
Pertaining to Local Management
Agencies
Based on the previous analysis in this chapter, this section summarizes recom-
mendations pertaining to controlling major sources of point and non-point source
pollution on a county by county basis.
275
-------
Campbell County
Table 88 shows the recommended management agency responsibilities and imple-
mentation schedule for controlling point source pollution through the utiliza-
tion of wastewater treatment facilities.
TABLE 88
Campbell County Designated Agencies for
Point Source Management
of Public Wastewater Treatment Systems
System ' Responsibi 1 ity
Management Regulatory
1977 1977-1983 1995-2000 1977 1977-1983 1995-2000
Gi1lette Waste- Gillette . Gillette Gillette DEQ DEQ DEQ
treatment
Faci1ities
South Gillette S.Gillette Gillette Gillette DEQ DEQ DEQ
Water and Sewer W&S Dist.
Distri ct
Faci1ities*
Wright Water Wright Wright2
and Sewer Dis- W&S Dist. W&S Dist.
trict Facilities
Wright2 DEQ DEQ DEQ
W&S Dist.
^"Do not presently maintain collection or treatment system.
2
If Wright becomes incorporated as a municipality, it should be designated as the
management agency.
Source: Obiinger-Smith Corporation, 1977
276
-------
As indicated in Table 88, the City of Gillette should be designated as the
agency to construct improvements and operate and manage waste treatment
facilities in the Gillette area. In the very near future a trunk sewer line
will be constructed to serve an incorporated area south of the City of Gillette
encompassed by the South Gillette Water and Sewer District. The district is
planning to construct a collection system which will feed into the trunk line
and, in turn, carry sewage into the Gillette treatment facility.
It is recommended that the South Gillette Water and Sewer District be designated
as the management agency for the short range. However, by the year 1983 the
system should be incorporated into the existing system of Gillette. This unin-
corporated area could be annexed to the City of Gillette by that time. Consequently,
it is recommended that Gillette be designated as the management agency after a period
of 4 to 5 years. The Department of Environmental Quality would be designated as
the regulatory agency.
The recently established Wright Water and Sewer District is recommended to be
designated as the management agency pertaining to the improvement, operation and
management of their facilities at the present time and in the future. The
Department of Environmental Quality should perform monitory and regulatory func-
tions pertaining to this district's facilities.
The non-point sources that the City should logically control are urban runoff,
pollution from residual waste disposal (solid waste management) and construction
activities. As related to other non-point sources, the City and County maintain
a number of implementation tools that control land uses which in turn lead to
maintenance of water quality in the City and the County. The City and County
have adopted 2oning regulations applicable in the City of Gillette and a planning
district surrounding the City. Subdivision regulations are applicable to the
total area within the City and the County.
The City and County have adopted a uniform plumbing code which provides com-
prehensive regulations concerned with private sewage systems. This code is
effective within the planning district and all platted subdivisions in the
remainder of the County. Mobile home park regulations are effective in the
unincorporated portions of the county with permits being issued for mobile home
277
-------
parks in the City. The City has adopted regulations relating to floodplain
management which controls development in the 100-year floodplain.
All of these tools will assist the maintenance of water quality from non-point
sources of pollution in the City and county. These local governments should
continue to be the management agencies for controlling land uses and construc-
tion on the land. In the maintenance of land use controls, the City and County
should update zoning and subdivision regulations and consider enforcement of
zoning and regulations in all portions of the unincorporated areas of the County.
The County should cov.ider the adoption of a sediment control ordinance and
regulations pertaining to water well construction and inspection.
The establishment of new regulations mentioned above and updating of existing
regulations should be undertaken as soon as possible, but no later than 19S3.
Johnson County
The Cities of Buffalo and Kaycee are the only public jurisdictions that main-
tain waste treatment facilities in the county. These two municipalities
respectively should be designated as management agencies for improving, opera-
ting, and managing their waste treatment facilities. The Wyoming Department of
Environmental Quality should be designated as the monitoring and regulatory
agency pertaining to the regulation of municipal waste treatment facilities. These
recommendations are shown in Table 89.
As related to non-point sources, it is recommended that the incorporated municipal-
ities also should be designated as the management agencies as related to pollution
from urban runoff, residual waste disposal (solid waste management) and construc-
tion activities within their respective jurisdictions. With respect to potential
pollution from solid waste management, this may also be a county responsibi1ity.
-------
TABLE 89
Johnson County
Designated Agencies
Point Source Management
of Public Wastewater Treatment Systems
System Responsibility
Management Regulatory
1977 1977-1983 1995-2000 1977 1977-1983 1995-2000
Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo DEQ DEQ DEQ
Wastetreatment
Facilities
Kaycee Waste- Kaycee Kaycee Kaycee DEQ DEQ DEQ
treatment
Faci1i ties
Source: Obiinger-Smith Corporation, 1977
As related to other non-point sources in Johnson County and in the two muni-
cipalities, adoption and implementation of a number of land use and related con-
trols would provide assistance in the maintenance of water quality. The County
maintains an adopted subdivision resolution and a mobile home park development
resolution at the present time. The County could adopt and maintain zoning controls,
floodplain management controls, plumbing/sanitation codes (controlling septic
tank construction and maintenance), and building codes. It appears that one
279
-------
of the pressing needs in the County at the present time is the establishment
of controls concerning the construction and maintenance of septic tanks, and
possibly regulations concerning water well construction and maintenance. This
is probably the top priority Item in controlling non-point source pollution in
the County.
A plumbing/sanitation code should be adopted and enforced in the near future.
The municipalities and the County should consider adopting the other regula-
tions mentioned above prior to 1983.
In the end result, the two municipalities and the County are the logical manage-
ment agencies for controlling non-point sources of pollution through the adop-
tion and enforcement of a number of local regulations.concerning land use and
construction activities.
Sheridan County
The incorporated municipalities in Sheridan County should be designated to
improve, manage, and operate their respective waste treatment facilities. At
the present time the Southside Water and Sewer District maintains a collection
system but does not maintain sewage treatment facilities. Sewage generated
in the Southside Water and Sewer District is treated at the Sheridan waste treat-
ment facility.
It is recommended that during a short range time period the District be desig-
nated as the management agency. Over a five year period the City of Sheridan
should become the management agency for the present system and the District
system should be incorporated into the City system.
The Department of Environmental Quality would be the designated agency pertain-
ing to the regulatory functions in the management process. These recommendations
are shown in Table 90.
Point pollution sources generated from individual industrial waste water facil-
ities are controlled by the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality. Conse-
quently, this Department should be designated as the management and regulatory
agency pertaining to these activities.
2CO
-------
TABLE 90
Sheridan County
Designated Agencies
Point Source Management
of Public Wastewater Systems
System
Responsi bi1i ty
STieridan Waste-
treatment
Faci1ities
Management
1977
1983
1995-
2000
Regulatory
1977 1977-1983 1995-2000
Sheridan Sheridan Sheridan DEQ
DEQ
DEQ
Clearmont Waste-
treatment
Faci1ities
Clearmont Clearmont Clearmont DEQ
DEQ
DEQ
Dayton Waste-
treatment
Facilities
Dayton Dayton Dayton DEQ
DEQ
DEQ
Ranchester Waste-
treatment
Faci1i ties
Ranches- Ranches- Ranches- DEQ
ter ter ter
DEQ
DEQ
Southside Water
and Sewer Dis-
trict
Faci1ities
S.Side Sheridan Sheridan DEQ
Water &
Sewer
Di strict
DEQ
DEQ
^Maintains collection system only-sewage treated at the Sheridan Treatment
Faci!ity.
Source: Obiinger-Smith Corporation, 1977
281
-------
In relation to the operation and maintenance of the municipal waste treatment
facilities in Sheridan County, it was projected in the facilities plan that
approximately one half man-year would be required to operate and maintain each
of the treatment facilities of Ranchester, Dayton, and Clearmont. It is recom-
mended that Ranchester and Dayton consider employing one full-time person to
oversee the operation and maintenance of both municipalities' waste treatment
facilities. This could be accomplished through a joint inter-governmental
agreement established between the two Towns for this purpose.
If a half-time position is required to oversee the operation and maintenance
of the treatment facility at Clearmont, the community could employ a person
on a one half time basis or perhaps by inter-governmental agreement could
obtain the services from the City of Sheridan. It may be more feasible to
obtain the services from the City of Sheridan due to the fact it may be diffi-
cult to obtain a part-time operator for Clearmont.
These incorporated municipalities also should be the designated agencies per-
taining to controlling pollution occurring from urban runoff, residual waste
disposal (solid waste management), and construction activities within their
jurisdictions. Potential pollution from solid waste disposal should be con-
trolled by Sheridan County if that activity occurs in unincorporated areas.
The unincorporated communities of Big Horn and Story are served by private
waste disposal systems, mainly including septic tank systems and drainage
fields. Due to the fact that these communities are unincorporated and with
individual systems, there is no present management agency approving, operating
or managing waste treatment facilities on a unified basis in these communities.
Although the facilities plans for Big Horn and Story recommended improvement
of individual systems, it may be desirable in the long run to provide public
wastewater treatment facilities for these two communities.
Options for providing public waste treatment systems for Big Horn and Story
include incorporation of these communities or forming sewer districts under
the water and sewer district laws of the State of Wyoming.
As another option, the two communities of Big Horn and Story might be served
through a county-wide sewer district or a combined county-wide water and sewer
282
-------
district, with the district being designated as the management agency for con-
trolling point sources of pollution in these two unincorporated communities.
As related to control of non-point sources of pollution related to development
in the County, it appears that the County should consider adopting a plumbing/
sanitation code for control of septic tanks.
This appears to be advantageous due to the fact that the County could provide
the permits and provide maintenance of septic tank systems in these two small
unincorporated areas and also undertake this function for other unincorporated
areas in the County if a county-wide code is adopted and enforced on a county-
wide basis. This option should be considered where unincorporated development
in Sheridan County is involved.
The County maintains subdivision and mobile home regulations. Other types of
activities that would aid in controlling non-point sources of pollution would
be the adoption and enforcement of building codes, a sediment control ordinance,
county zoning regulations, or a land use guidance system of one type or another.
It appears that with the growth pressures in the unincorporated portions of
Sheridan County that the County needs to take a lead role as a management agency
in controlling non-point sources of pollution. The municipalities should also
consider adopting these types of regulation tools where applicable pertaining
to their respective jurisdictions.
As related to a time frame for these implementation activities, it is recom-
mended that Sheridan County immediately pursue adoption of a plumbing/sanitation
code for unincorporated areas. The County should consider forming a county-wide
water arid sewer district if public wastewater facilities are required in Big
Horn, Story, or other urbanizing areas of the county. The County and municipal-
ities should attempt to establish and enforce the other regulatory mechanisms
that assist in non-point source pollution controls over the next 5 years.
Local Conservation Districts
The local conservation district in the three counties would be mainly involved
in non-point source water pollution problems and most specifically in the areas
of agriculture and grazing on non-federal lands, silviculture on non-federal
lands in cooperation with the State Forestry Division, miring on non-federal lands,
and hydrologic modification. These local districts maintain authority to review
mining reclamation plans and applicants seeking to operate a mine, must seek a
-------
review of a reclamation plan from the applicable conservation district.
The local conservation districts could provide data and perform advisory assis-
tance on water quality related matters pertaining to the activities mentioned
above and provide an assistance role to the State Conservation Commission.
Specifically the local conservation districts are recommended to be designated
as the management agency in cooperation with the State Conservation Commission
pertaining to agricultural and grazing activities on non-federal lands.
Summary of Recommendations
Pertaining to State Management
Agenci es
Table 87 in this chapter recommended state management agencies which should be
designated to manage water pollution control in the three county area. The
Department of Environmental Quality and its respective divisions should be
designated the overall responsibility for the supervision, coordination and
continuous updating and refinement of the water quality management plan in the
three county area. The only exceptions to this at state level would be the
designation of the local conservation district in cooperation with the State
Conservation Commission to perform the management functions for agricultural
and grazing activities on non-federal lands, the designation of the State For-
estry Division to manage silvicultural activities on State and private lands
and the designation of the State Engineers office to manage hydrologic modifi-
cation activities.
In addition to its current activities related to the water quality management
planning process in Wyoming, it is recommended that the Department of Environ-
mental Quality undertake the following:
1. Provide the administrative procedures and reviews and to follow through the
process to assure that the PRAPO Areawide Water Quality Management Plan is
adopted as a segment of the State Water Quality Management Plan;
2. Annually review and update the PRAPO Plan;
3. Establish a mechanism specifying that all agencies designated as management
agencies in the plan report annually to the Department in order to maintain
an up-to-date program;
284
-------
4. After five annual plan reviews and updates, the Department of Environmental
Quality should prepare a five-year report concerning implementation leading
toward the overall long range water quality management planning program of
the state;
5. Strongly exercise its powers specified in the Adoption of the Cooperative
Agreement Between the State of Wyoming and the United States Department of
the Interior pertaining to controlling surface coal mining operations in
the three county area. The Department should take a lead role in assuring
that all mining operations on private and federal lands be regulated con-
sistently to protect the waters in the three county area;
6. Establish procedures concerning irrigation discharge permits if that
becomes a requirement in future years;
7. Provide strong leadership in assisting with public participation in the
three county area related to water quality management problems, especially
if PRAPO is not in existence after the initial planning effort or if an
advisory committee does not continue in assisting in the on-going planning
function for the area;
8. Continue or sponsor a strong water quality data collection and monitoring
program in the three county area. The monitoring program should focus
on stream segments with the greatest water quality problems and priority
given to monitoring groundwater in mining areas. Permanent stations
should be established or monitored on a scheduled periodic basis;
9. Clarify, either through new legislation or regulations of the Department,
the continuing responsibility for maintenance of private waste water facil-
ities (package treatment plants).
These recommendations should be considered for implementation over the next
five year time frame.
285
-------
Other recommended activities that may require new legislation include the fol- -
lowing:
1. The provision of water quality staff in the three county area (preferably
Sheridan) to assist the three counties in protecting their surface and
groundwater;
2. The registration of or the establishment of water testing laboratories
in Sheridan for both bacterial and chemical testing purposesi
3. Action leading to state licensing of well drillers in the State of Wyoming;
4. New legislation in Wyoming authorizing State grants and loans for improve-
ments to general public wastewater treatment systems. This program has
been utilized in other states and is particularly useful when emergency
improvements are needed for waste treatment facilities or when EPA funding
is not necessarily available at certain times when improvements are required.
Summary of Recommendations
Pertaining to Federal Management
Agencies
As indicated in Table 87, it was recommended that the Bureau of Land Management
and the United States Forest Service be designated as the Federal Agencies direc-
tly responsible for pollution control activities on federal lands in the three
county area. With respect to federal forest lands, the Forest Service prepares
Unit plans which define this agency's efforts and goals for each national forest
for a specified time in the future. Cooperative agreements among EPA, BLM, and
the U.S. Forest Service indicate that water quality planning is similar in design
and scope to the unit and State management framework planning process. The
Bighorn National Forest Unit Plan should contain water quality sections consistent
with the three county Water Quality Management Plan and the continuing planning
efforts of the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality. The Unit Plan for
the Bighorn National Forest should be completed within five years or earlier and
should be coordinated directly with the five-year report of the Department of
Environmental Quality pertaining to water quality management planning in the State.
286
-------
The Bureau of Land Management maintains a major responsibility for water pol-
lution control activity in lands administered by that agency. The multi-pur-
pose land use planning of BLM should be coordinated closely with the planning
and enforcement of DEQ pertaining to mined land areas. This agency as well as
the Forest Service mentioned above should schedule their planning programs and
coordinate them as closely as possible with program outputs of the Department
of Environmental Quality. Section 313 of P.L. 92-500 requires that the Federal
government having jurisdiction over any property or facility or engaged in any
activity resulting or which may result in the discharge or runoff of pollutants
shall comply with Federal, State, interstate and local requirements respecting
control and abatement of pollution. As a note, cooperative signed agreements
exist at the present time between the U.S. Forest Service, the Bureau of
Land Management and the County Commissioners in Johnson County.
The Environmental Protection Agency should provide funding for water pollution
control and grants for construction of general public wastewater systems in
incorporated and unincorporated areas. It is imperative that the Federal
agencies involved in the three county area, particularly EPA, BLM, and United
States Forest Service, work closely together on planning for pollution control
as well as program implementation for this activity. EPA should be as respon-
sive as possible to the Department of Environmental Quality in providing tech-
nical and financial assistance in carrying out its responsibilities.
-------
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Existing Financial Framework
The existing wastewater facility financial framework, for each of the three
counties and the cities and towns therein, is reviewed in terms of the
sources of funds and the types of costs to be borne. Table 91 describes
the current situations with regard to each of these parameters:
TABLE 91
Existing Financial System
Source of Funds
Federal State Local
Jurisdiction Planning Capital O&M Planning Capital O&M Planning Capital Q&M
Johnson County
X
Buffalo
X
X
X
X
Kaycee
X
X
X
X
Sheridan County
X
Sheridan
X
X
X
X
Clearmont
X
X
X
Dayton
X
X
X
X
Ranchester
X
X
X
Big Horn
X
Story
X
Campbell County
X
Gi1lette
X x
X
x
X
Source: Camp, Dresser, McKee, Inc.,
1977
A review of the
above Table and local budget and planning documents
leads to
the following conclusions:
1. Direct county participation, on
the financial level, has not existed.
However, the
counties, through
their public health and land use
planning
roles, have made a financial contribution in the regulatory area.
2. State efforts have also been primarily limited to the regulatory area,
though through the state grant priority systems, there has been some plan-
ning contribution.
288
-------
3. Local long-range wastewater facility planning, except for Buffalo, Sheridan,
and Gillette, has previously been funded from Federal sources. On the other
hand, short-range planning (i.e., sewer line extensions) has been completely
a local cost.
4. There is, as a result of the recent facilities planning effort, an expec-
tation that construction of needed additional waste treatment facilities
will be partially funded by the Federal government. However, to date, only
Gillette has received such grants.
5. Past capital outlay funding has been accomplished, by the incorporated
entities, through creation of debt (revenue and general obligation bonding).
In some cases, significant amounts of this debt remain to be paid.
6. Operation and maintenance costs are borne solely by the localities. In
some cases these consist of user charges; in others the tax base is the
same. In general, the utility concept of full-costing the service and
obtaining needed revenues through charges based on use is not followed.
Table 92 presents the latest available financial data relative to the sewer-
age systems in the 208 planning area.
The current financial data, as shown by a review of Table 92, are neither
voluminous nor well-detailed. However, several basic conclusions can be
reached:
1. The larger communities appear to be suffering significant revenue short-
falls.
2. Two of the smaller jurisdictions, for which data are available, appear
to be developing current surpluses from sewerage system charges.
3. Current sewerage system debt burdens do not appear onerous (with the
possible exception of Sheridan).
289
-------
TABLE 92
Financial Data
Jurisdiction
1
0 & M
Debt
Costs
Revenues
Amount
Payment
Buffalo^
Sheri dan-
Gillette4
Clearmpnt
Dayton^
Ranchester^
South
Sewer and Water
District
Kaycee
20,000
323,800
267,625
N.A.
29,000
12,000
47,902
8,000
26,000
180,000
183,036
N.A.
15,868
30,000
47,752
N/A
3,000
1,150,000
520,000
N.A.
160,000
None
345,000
N/A
3,090
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
10,525
None
2,124
N/A
^Includes only incorporated jurisdictions with public sewerage systems.
^Date are for Calendar Year 1977.
3Cost is a departmental request for FY 77-78 (with collection and general
expenses equally shared by water and sewer). Revenue is for 1976-1977.
Debt is for 1976-1977.
40 & M data are for FY 77-78. Cost data include one-half of account 240
(Water/WW Maintenance).
^Includes both water and sewer (budget does not separate revenues or costs).
Data are for May 1, 1977 to April 30, 1978.
^Includes water, sewer and garbage. Revenue for the latter is estimated to
be $10,000. Data are for July 1, 1977 to June 30, 1978.
7FY 76-77 budgeted.
®Data consist of amount of debt from Bonded Indebtedness, State of Wyoming,
December 31, 1976. Payment amounts, where available, from budget documents
of jurisdictions.
Source: Camp, Dresser, McKee, Inc., 1977
290
-------
Financial Needs and Alternative Financial Strategies
The facilities plans developed as an element of the PRAPO 208 program
describe the financial goals shown in Table 93.
TABLE 93
Future Financial Needs^
Juri sdi cti on
Total
Local Share^
Time of Request
0&M Requirements
(annual)
Buffalo
Kaycee
$ 398,000
356,000
378,000
none
$ 100,000
89,000
94,500
current
1980
1990
$ 13,200
53,000
75,400
Sheri dan
2,324,000
581,000
current
110,200
Gi1lette
4,191,200
1,047,800
current
219,200
Clearmont
114,000
76,000
28,500
19,000
current
1985
14,300
16,900
Dayton
183,100
77,400
45,775
19,350
current
1985
14,300
16,900
Ranchester
179,500
131,300
44,875
32,825
current
1985
14,600
18,900
Story
None
Big Horn
None
*From PRAPO 201 studies, in 1977 dollars with the exception of Sheridan (1975
dollars) and Gillette (1976 dollars).
^Based on Federal grant funding at 75 percent of planning, design and construc-
tion costs. In practice, this funding level, for total costs, is rarely
reached. Accordingly, the amounts shown should be increased by at least
15-20 percent.
Source: Camp, Dresser, Mckee, Inc., 1977
The above figures, standing alone, are not indicative of the burden which the
proposed program would place on the communities. Table 94 presents the local
share capital costs (those recommended plus those in existence) and operation
and maintenance costs on a per capita basis (using existing and future popula-
tion figures shown in respective facilities plans).
291
-------
TABLE 94
Projected Per Capita Costs^-
Population Capital Costs Annual 0 & M Costs
Jurisdiction
No.
Year
Local Share
Per Capita
Total
Per Capita
Buffalo
5,400
1977
$ 100,000
$ 18.52
33,200?;
$ 6.15
6,500
1980
89,000
13,69
73,000^
11.23
13,000
1990
94,500
7.27
95,4002
7.34
Sheridan
13,900
1977
581,000
41,80
361,4003
26.00
Gillette
18,500
1977
1,047,800
56.64
344,7363
18.63
Clearmont
190
1977
28,500
150.00
14,300
75.26
243
1985
19,000
78.19
16,900
69.55
Dayton
590
1977
45,775
77.58
19,348
32.79
780
1985
19,350
24.81
21,948
28.14
Ranchester
450
1977
44,875
99.72
20,6004
45.78
735
1985
32,825
44.66
24,900
33.88
*In 1977 dollars with the exceptions shown in the notes to Table 93.
^Assumes new facility costs are totally additive.
^Present treatment plant costs have been deducted.
^Assumes present water/sewer 0 & M costs are equally divided.
Source: Camp, Dresser, McKee, Inc., 1977
A number of conclusions can be drawn from a study of the above table, the
most important of which are:
1. In those communities where capital costs are recommended to be staged,
population growth effects a significant reduction in per capita capital
costs.
2. Ina number of the smaller communities (Clearmont, Dayton and Ranchester)
high per capita operation and maintenance costs can be expected.
3. Where significant new-term growth is anticipated (Sheridan and Gillette),
spreading of capital costs (including even "ballooning" of debt) may be
the preferred strategy.
292
-------
Based on the previous discussion, a number of potential financial strategies
can be identified. It is proposed that the following be given thorough con-
sideration:
1. Short-term (e.g., 10 years or less) debt be increased to finance treat-
ment works improvements in those communities where the construction is
staged.
2. Operation and maintenance cf public wastewater treatment facilities in
Sheridan County as recommended on page 259, thus obtaining economies of
scale and reducing these costs to the minimum for several of the smaller
incorporated communities.
3. The local share of costs of facilities in the larger communities be
funded through long-term {e.g., 20 + years) debt thereby placing some of
the cost burden on those who cause the need for system expansion.
4. Sewerage systems in the larger communities be operated through separate
funds, with charges designed to recover full costs ("full cost" financing
of wastewater treatment by structuring tax fees to pay for costs).
5. Costs of planning (e.g., feasibility studies) for point source control
be borne by the state.
6. A single water and sewer district be considered in Sheridan County for
the purpose of designing, constructing and operating publicly-owned point
source control facilities if these needs occur in the future.
7. The assessment district method of financing of treatment works be used
by water and sewer district.
8. The State of Wyoming (Department of Environmental Quality) finance moni-
toring of effluents and enforcement of point source standards.
9. The state and the federal government finance educational and technical
assistance activities designed to control non-point pollution sources.
293
-------
10. Land use regulation and building code enforcement costs be shared by
the counties and the municipalities.
11. Include debt service in ad valorem tax base.
12. Include all costs (debt service, other capital, and operations and main-
tenance) in a user charge system.
Each of these strategies is evaluated in Table 95.
TABLE 95
Evaluation of Alternative Financing Strategies
Financing Strategy
Evaluation
Use of short-term debt to
finance staged treatment
works improvements.
Times costs with need; permits those
who caused the need to pay the associated
capital costs; prevents layering of debt
service payment. However, requires rela-
tively high debt service payments.
2. Combined agency operation
and maintenance of public
treatment facilities in
Sheridan County, (in
several instances)
Reduces overhead costs; maximizes produc-
tivity of staff by reducing slack time
(small plants may require only fractional
manpower); reduces training time and costs
(the small plants use similar technology).
Requires significant travel between plants
thereby adding to costs and reducing emer-
gency response capability.
3. Funding of local share of
capital costs in larger com-
munities be handled through
long-term debt.
Reduces current debt service payments there-
by minimizing initial (post-construction)
user charge increases; postpones a portion
of the capital payments to the time when new
residents/industries can assist in paying
for facilities. Increases total debt service
costs because of normally higher interest
costs due to longer debt terms.
294
-------
TABLE 95 Continued
4. Larger communities operate
treatment works through
separate funds, with new
charges recovering full
costs.
Reduces pressure on tax base; identified
specifically the costs of waste treatment;
places burden of costs on those who cause
them and not on existing residents. Can
bring about large and abrupt changes in the
way costs of government are passed on to the
public with possible adverse reactions.
5. State government bearing
the costs of planning.
6. Single agency in Sheridan
County for designing, con-
structing and operating
treatment works (if needed
for the future).
Available, trained and qualified staff capa-
bility; can provide a consistent approach
state-wide. Sources of income, therefore,
may not be identified and the availability
of organizations for providing needed local
input has not been properly studied.
Provides a potential for economies of scale;
reduces potential for municipality/suburban
unincorporated area conflicts; provides
expanded financial base;:provides an institu-
tional and financial base for meeting unan-
ticipated facilities needs. May not be feas-
ible in view of the current situation and
the wide variances in projected costs among
the various jurisdictions.
7. Use of assessment district
method.
Makes possible equal sharing of capital costs
over time. Not always practicable in areas
where land uses are mixed and a large percent-
age of the land is not expected to be placed
in uses requiring public sewers.
8. State financing of moni-
toring and enforcement,
9. State and federal financ-
ing of non-point source
educational and technical
assistance.
Sole available source; has statutory authority;
provides for state-wide approach.
Sole available capability (little is known
about cost-effective technical methods or
about proper control techniques).
295
-------
TABLE 95 Continued
10. Land use regulation and Traditionally power reserved to local govern-
building code enforcement ments; now being accomplished, in varying
costs be shared by counties degrees,
and municipalities.
11. Include capital facilities
debt service in ad valorem
tax base.
Reduces size of user charges; spreads costs
of facilities over those who now use them
and those who may use them in the future.
However, sometimes place these costs
inequitably in that use, or potential use,
is often not positively related to property
values.
12. Include all costs of treat-
ment facilities in the user
charge.
Probably, the most equitable approach, but
often requires a high user charge. If debt
service requirements change appreciably from
year to year, can cause wide fluctuations in
user charge rates.
Source: Camp, Dresser, McKee, Inc., 1977
As is evident from Table 95, the subject of financing is intertwined with the
types of institutional arrangements finally agreed upon and implemented. Further,
those financing techinques finally adopted must conform, in the case of federal
grant-funded facilities, with the requirements imposed by federal law. These
include:
Imposition of user charges which fully recover costs of operation and
maintenance (including replacement) from each user on the basis of use.
Recovery of the federal grant portion of construction costs from indus-
trial users (industrial cost recovery).
The details of the federal requirements are developed, in depth, in EPA rules,
regulations, and guidelines. Thus, they need not be repeated here. However,
296
-------
the important factor is that, for those communities accepting federal construc-
tion grants, reliance on the ad valorem tax base for operation and maintenance
costs will no longer be allowed. Further, some form of user charge system based
on both sewage volume and amounts of pollutants (biochemical oxygen demand and
suspended solids) will have to be adopted in order that the full amount of the
federal grant may be received.
An additional need is for the development and implementation of the federal
grant industrial cost recovery systems. Since sanitary waste (normal house-
hold sewage) discharges are exempt from this requirement, it can be anticipated
that this will be a minimal requirement in the three counties.
Financing Recommendations'
Based on the analysis conducted in the previous sections, it is recommended
that the following financial strategies and techniques be adopted:
1. Use of short-term debt for phased facilities construction and
long-term debt otherwise.
2. Use of separate funds and full cost user charges in municipalities.
3. State acceptance and bearing of costs of the monitoring, regulatory,
and planning functions.
4. Local funding of land use and building code enforcement.
5. Use of the assessment district form of debt cost sharing in developed
(or nearly developed) areas.
6.
State and federal financing of non-point source controls.
-------
Chapter VI
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
INTRODUCTION1
Any planning and management program, no matter how well prepared, will prove
useless unless it is first accepted by the people within the area affected.
The 208 planning program was initiated with this realization in the minds of
all the participants involved. Section 101(e) of Public Law 92-500 states
that "public participation...shall be provided for, encouraged, and assisted"
at Federal, State and local levels. The purpose of public participation in
the water quality management process is to aid public education, create a
plan sensitive to local needs and values, and build support for plan imple-
mentation. Development and emphasis of the particular public participation
programs were relegated to the individual agencies; however, Federal Regulations
specify that at least eight requirements be met in order to carry out the
intent of Section 101(e).^ These requirements include:
1. Making available technical and procedural materials, which will allow
citizens adequate time and opportunity to study the information and
make timely and informed input into the decision-making process.
2. Providing assistance to public groups for citizen education and/or
training which will assist the average citizen to participate effec-
tively in the planning program.
3. Consulting with interested citizens throughout the planning program
to receive their views and opinions during all phases and prior to
the formulation of any decisions.
^Prepared from information developed by the Powder River Areawide Planning
Organization
^Public Participation Handbook for Water Quality Management, U.S. Envrion-
mental Protection Agency, p. 3-5.
298
-------
4.
Providing notification of key developments, meetings and other im-
portant dates through the use of newsletters, bulletins and the media.
5. Maintaining records of specific citizen input and agency response
to it which will ensure that information and evidence from citizens
gets proper consideration.
6. Providing information about legal proceedings being taken involving
the planning and the ramifications of that litigation.
7. Conducting public hearings to allow the public a formal opportunity
to be heard prior to any decision-making.
8. Forming advisory committees which include representatives of appro-
priate Federal, State and local agencies as well as the general
public.
These requirements consist of minimum requirements and do not guarantee the
effectiveness of a public participation program. An effective program re-
quires that initiative be undertaken to insure that the public is fully informed
of all aspects of the planning program. This includes public involvement, begin-
ning with the preliminary discussions of the needs for a planning program, con-
tinuing through the final plan designation and into the various phases of imple-
mentation.
-------
PRAPO PARTICIPATION PROGRAM
Within the Powder River 208 planning program, public participation was initiated
at the outset with a series of public meetings in various communities to discuss
the need for water quality planning in the three county area. From these meet-
ings evolved the formation of the Powder River Areawide Planning Organization,
the 208 grant application and the preliminary work plan for the two year pro-
ject. News coverage by local newspapers was used throughout the preliminary
phases of the project to keep the public informed. This news coverage con-
tinued throughout the life of the planning effort.
Due to budget constraints, public participation for the first six months of
the project was undertaken by the project director and the water quality spe-
cialist.
In November, 1975 a Technical Advisory Committee was formed. Membership included
representatives from involved Federal, State and local agencies and concerned
citizens groups. The functions of this committee were to review the approach
taken in instituting programs, coordinate ongoing programs within the respective
agencies of members of the Technical Advisory Committee with the 208 program,
and evaluate outputs of the program for technical and management feasibility.
A Citizens' Advisory Committee consisting of concerned citizens was also formed
to assist in making the planning group aware of the views of the general public
and reviewing outputs for their comprehensibi1ity and acceptability by the pub-
lic.
Soon after the early planning phases were initiated, a part-time public aware-
ness coordinator was employed and the public participation program was formally
organized. The public participation program included a number of different
phases. A general mailing list of people who might have some interest in water
quality planning in the Powder River Basin was established. Periodic newsletters
were printed and distributed. These newsletters were utilized to explain the
208 program and to provide synopses of the various activities being carried out.
Comments were solicited and forms were included to expand the mailing list.
The planning staff participated in local radio talk shows and Bicentennial
300
-------
celebrations. The staff distributed literature and visited with anyone inter-
ested in seeking additional information concerning the program. Radio and
television public service announcements, specifically designed to acquaint the
public with the program, were distributed to the various broadcast media out-
lets servicing the planning area.
There were two noteworthy accomplishments of the public participation program.
The first was the production of a 23 minute slide presentation which was shown
to various organizations and groups. The slide presentation, accompanied by
a narrative, depicted the waters of the region, pollution problems, the various
potential impacts which may degrade water and the steps being taken by PRAPO
to find solutions to present and potential problems.
The second major accomplishment of the public participation program consisted
of the publication of a newspaper supplement which was distributed in four
different newspapers throughout the three county region. The supplement
was formulated by PRAPO staff, with the aid of a member of the League of
Women Voters. It contained articles on the impacts on water quality caused
by mining, agriculture, forestry, increased urban growth, increased rural growth
and the impacts from development on federal lands. The supplement also contained
a section on the suggested general approach to implementation of the water qua-
lity management program. A series of public meetings were conducted after pub-
lication of the supplement to obtain comments by the citizenry on the topics
outlined in the supplement and the suggested approach undertaken by PRAPO in
implementing corrective actions.
Technical and advisory committee meetings and citizens advisory committee meet-
ings have been conducted at various times throughout the project to discuss
the development of the program and the outputs generated from it. In addition,
public meetings and meetings with local officials were held at various times
during the two year period at different locations to discuss and receive com-
ments on portions of the planning effort which were specific to those areas.
These meetings included public hearings on facilities plans for a number of
communities and meetings in Story to discuss the drinking water survey conducted
by PRAPO.
301
-------
Another series of public meetings will be held following publication of the
draft plan, one of which will be conducted as a public hearing in conjunction
with the Wyoming Environmental Quality Council.
Throughout the life of the program a library of water quality related mater-
ials has been acquired and maintained for use by the planning agency, other
governmental units and concerned citizens.
Financial constraints did not allow the public participation portion of the
planning effort to be as comprehensive as desired. Under these constraints,
the preceding pages have related a number of different approaches utilized to
obtain information from the public concerning water quality managment planning.
Although results have been limited, there has been intensive citizen involve-
ment in one or more instances. The citizens of Story participated effectively
in a drinking water well survey due to their concern over the possibility that
water wells were polluted by septic tank effluent.
The completion of the water quality management plan does not mean that public
involvement activities are also completed. Strong efforts are required to
involve the public in the implementation of the various phases of the plan.
This program consists of a twenty year program which necessitates an annual
updating of the plan. The public must be made aware of this and be involved
in these annual updates. The public must continue to be made fully aware of
their responsibilities in preserving the quality of the area's waters.
302
-------
APPENDICES
303
-------
APPENDIX A
WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
304
-------
SUKFAOK WftlEfi QUALITY CfUTKKIA HY USE
Secondary Primary
Contact Contact Stream
Coiijt ii'iBiil Recreat ion Recreat ion Ae.sthet ic
A Jkaliiuty
Aftiinotiid , un-ionizod
(as M)
Arsenic
barium
Beryllium
Huron
Cadmium
oo
o
cn
Chloride
Chl-a'ine
Clu'uiiiiiiu
(4 ) jf (5) *
Coliform, Fecal 1,000 200
(///100ml)
Copper
Cyani de
Fluor icJe
I run
Lead
fit n^anc.-je
Murcury
Wi ldl it'e
Industrial and Public
Water Agricultural Livestock Water
Supply Irrigation Watering Supply
0.10
0.50
0.75
0.01
0.5
1.0
5.0
2.0
0.20
5.0
0.05
2,000
1.0
1.0
2.0
0. 1
0.00005
0.05
1
0.01
250.00
0.05
1 .0
0.2
2 2(7)
0.3
0.05
0.05
0.002
Fishery
>20.O0
0.02
O.OlKsofi?'
1.100(hard)
o.ooo'. (sorlP
0.003 (hard)
0.002
0. Hi
0.005
1.00
0.01 x"
U,00005
-------
Constituent
Secondary
Contact
Recreation
Primary
Contact
Recreation
Stream
Aesthetics
Nickel
flitrate = Nitrite
(as N)
Oxygen, Dissolved Aerobic
pi I (units)
Phenol
Radioactivity (pCi/1)
CO
o
Selenium
Silver
Sodium Adsorption
Ratio
Solids, Total Dissolved
Solids, Total Suspended
Sulfate
Temperature (Max. charge in
Degrees C.)
Turbidity (Max. increase in JTU)
Zinc
•Wyoming Water Quality Standards M97M
Industrial
Water
Supply
flgr icultura 1
Irrigation
0. 1
Wildlife
and
Livestock
Water irg
Public
Water
Supply
10
F ishory
0. 1
0.05
0.05
0.001
6.0* (game)
5.0 (non-game
6.5-8.5"
6.5-9.0
0.001
3 Ra226»
10 Sr 90*
15 gross a lpha
0.01
0.05
0.01 x
0.01 x
(9)
(9)
15
(10) (11) 5,000
25-80
3,000 250
1.1 "cold ll20
2 .2 "warm ll20
10* (gan*; )
15* (non-gaine
5.0 25.0 5.0 0.01 x (9)
-------
(1) All criteria are in n«/l. except for pM, sodium adsorption ratio, and where specified.
<2> Agricultural irrigation criteria apply only to the May 1 - September 30 period.
(3) Soft water is defined as having 0-75 ng/1. of CaCt^. Hard water Is defined as greater than 75 ng/1. CaOo-j.
(4) During the recreation season May 1 to September 30, based ori a minimum of not leas than five samples taken over
a thirty day period, the fecal coliforra bacterial level should not exceed a geometric mean of 1000/100 ml., nor
should more than 10 percent of the total samples taken during any thirty day period exceed 2,000 per 100 ml.
(5) EPA swimmable criteria to be used in considering all streams as well as those streams with primary contact recrea-
tion during the recreation season of May 1 to September 30. Based on a minimum of not less than five samples
taken over a thirty day period, the fecal conform bacterial level should not exceed a geometric mean of
200/100 ml., nor should more than 10 percent of the total samples taken during any thirty day period exceed
2,000 per 100 ml.
(6) A 96-hour IjC^o as determined tlrough nonaerated bioassay usirg a sensitive aquatic resident species.
>7) Fluoride criteria is based on the annual average of the maximum daily temperature.
(8) The 96-hour LC^0 value, using the receiving or comparable water as the diluent and soluble lead measurements
(non-filterable lead using an 0.<>5 micron filter), for sensitive freshwater resident species.
(9) The 96-hour LC^0 as determined through bioassay using a sensitive resident species.
<101 Industrial requirements for T0S content of raw water is quite variable. The economics of de-ionization are the
limiting factor for industry.
(11)
Irrigation requirements for TDS are variable depending on soils, geology, irrigation practices, climate and types
of crops raised.
-------
APPENDIX B
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
1974 and 1977
308
-------
VJYCMPin VJYTER QUALITY STANDARDS - 197A
Dissolved oxygen
pll
Fecal coliform
Oil and grease
Dissolved solids
Ra
-------
Class II. Those waters which, based on information supplied by the Wyoming Game and Fish Department,
are determined to be presently supporting game fish or have the hydrologic and natural water quality
potential to support game fish.
Class III. Those waters which, based on information supplied by the Wyoming Game and Fish Department,
are determined to be presently supporting non-game fish or have the hydrologic and natural water quality
potential to support non-game fish.
Class IV. Those waters which, based on information supplied by the Wyoming Game and Fish Department,
are determined as not having the hydrologic or natural water quality potential to support fish.
-------
PROPOSED WYOMIMG WATER QUALITY STANDARDS - 1977
Dissolved oxygen
p!l
Fecal coniform
Oil am] grease
Radioactive material
I In-ionized arrmonia
(As N) (2)
Chlorine (3)
Temperature
Turbidity
Total dissolved gases
CLASS I*
WATERS
CLASS II*
WATERS
CLASS III*
WATERS
CLASS IV*
WATERS
Waters in which the
existing quality must
be maintained; no new
point source dis-
charges will be al-
lowed; no existing
point source dis-
charges will be al-
lowed to increase
amounts of pollut-
ants.
6 mg/L or more
- 8,
(1)
10 mg/L
5pCi/L of total
Radium 226 plus
Radium 228
8pCi/L of total
Strontium 90
5 mg/L or more
6.5 - 8.5
(1)
10 mg/L
5pCi/L of total
Radium 226 plus
Radium 228
3pCi/L of total
Strontium 90
6.5 - 8.5
(1)
10 ing/l
5pCi/L of total
Radium 226 plus
Radium 228
8pCi/L of total
Strontium 90
0.02 mg/1
0.02 mg/L
0.002 mg/L
2° F (1. 1* C)
increase (A)
4° F (1.1° C)
increase (5)
10 NTU's
increase (6)
110% of satura-
tion value
0.01 rng/L
2° F (1.1aC)
increase (A)
4° F (1. 1° C)
increase (5)
15 NTlJ's
increase (6)
110% of satura-
tion value
-------
APPENDIX C
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
314
-------
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Analysis of the Economic Base and Growth Potentials, 1976-1990, Gladstone
Associates and Obiinger-Smith Corporation, 1976
Assessment Report and Recommendations, PRAPO Planning Area, Water Resources
Research Institute, 1977
Bighorn National Forest Water Quality Survey Report, Water Resources Research
Institute, 1976
Buffalo, Wyoming Wastewater Facility Plan, January, 1977, VTN Engineers,
Planners, Surveyors, 1977
Buffalo, Wyoming Wastewater Facility Plan, Step 1, VTN Engineers, Planners,
Surveyors, 1977
A^Comprehensive Plan for Sheridan County, Sheridan County Planning Commission,
Drinking Water Survey, Story, Wyoming, Water Resources Research Institute, 1977
EPA 201 Facilities Plan for the City of Gillette, Wyoming, Plains Engineering,
Future Service Area Plan - Buffalo, VTN Engineers, Planners, Surveyors, 1977
Future Service Area Plan - Sheridan, VTN Engineers, Planners, Surveyors, 1977
Guidelines for Areawide Waste Treatment Management Planninq. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1975
Highway and Road Construction Assessment, A Working Paper Prepared by the
Wyoming Highway Department, 1977
Johnson County Land Use Plan, Buffalo-Johnson County Planning Office, 1977
Land Use - Water Quality Relationship, Environmental Protection Agency, 1976
Land Use - Water Quality Relationship, Campbell County, Wyoming. City/County
Department of Planning and Development, 1976
Land Use - Water Quality Relationship, Sheridan Area Planning Agency, 1976
Management Agencies Handbook for Section 208 Areawide Waste Treatment Manage-
ment, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1975
Qn-Site Disposal in the Powder River Basin, Powder River Areawide Planning
Organization, 1977
Population and Water Demand Projections, 1982 and 1997, Water Resources
Research Institute, 1976
315
-------
A Population Study of Sheridan County, Wyoming, Sheridan Area Planning
Agency, 1976
PRAPQ, EPA 208 Wastewater Facility Planning, Johnson and Sheridan Counties
201 Facilities Plans - Interim Report, VTN Engineers, Planners, Surveyors,
1977
Public Participation Handbook for Water Quality Management, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1976
Quality Criteria for Water, Environmental Protection Agency, 1975
Relationships Between Variations in the Physical-Social Environment and its
Capability to Assimilate Growth and Development, Johnson County, Buffalo-
Johnson County Planning Office, 1976
Sheridan, Wyoming Wastewater Facility Plan - Step 1, VTN Engineers, Plan-
ners, Surveyors, 1977
Urban Runoff Study, Sheridan, Buffalo, and Gillette, Wyoming, Water Resources
Research Institute, 19/5
Water Quality Determinations, Mined Lands Areas, Northeastern Wyoming,
Water Resources Research Institute, 1977
Water Quality Management Considerations, Forested Lands Areas, Northeastern
Wyoming, Water Resources Research Institute, 1977
316
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
7"f5ePORT NO. 2.
EPA-908/3-78-003
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4 TITLE AND SUBTITLE
'WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR CAMPBELL COUNTY,
JOHNSON COUNTY, AND SHERIDAN COUNTY
5. REPORT DATE
Auaust. 1978
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7;authoais)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME ANO AOORESS
Oblinger-Smith Corporation
Denver, CO
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME ANO AOORESS
Powder River Areawide Planning Organization
P3 Box 28
Sheridan, Wyoming 82801
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final draft
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
The Powder River Areawide Planning Organization (PRAPO) was designated by the
Governor of Wyoming to administer a federal grant for areawide waste treatment plannin?
funded under Section 208 of the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments.
The major study area covered Campbe11, Johnson and fheridan Counties in Wyoming.
Primary focuses of the study included 1) potential water pollution from mined land,
2) water quality problems pertaining to residential growth in unincorporated communi-
ties and in rural portions of the counties, especially contaminants leaching out of
septic tank systems, 3) assessment of Wcter quality as affected by waste treatment
facilities in the 3-county area, and 4) potential pollution problems associated with
agricultural activities. The overall study goal for the 3-county area was the
improvement and maintenance of water quality at a point compatible with present
uses and insurance of conformance with Wyoming's Hater Quality Standards.
17. KEY WOROS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a. DESCRIPTORS
b. IDENTIF IE RS/OPEN ENDEOTERMS
c. COSati Field/Croup
Regional planning
Water quality management
Rural areas
Local government
Powder River Basin
208 Plans
Sheridan County
Johnson County
Campbell County
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Distribution unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
20. SECURITY CLASS iThis page)
unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (R«*. 4-77) previous edition is objolete
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
1. REPORT NUMBER
Insert the EPA report number as it appears on the cover of the publication.
2. LEAVE BLANK
3. RECIPIENTS ACCESSION NUMBER
Reserved for use by each report recipient.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Title should indicate clearly and briefly the subject coverage of the report, and be displayed prominently. Set subtitle, if used, in smaller
type or otherwise subordinate it to main title. When a report is prepared in more than one volume, repeat the primary title, add volume
number and include subtitle for the specific title.
5. REPORT DATE
Each report shall carry a date indicating at least month and year. Indicate the basis on which it was selected (e.g., date of issue, date of
approval, date of preparation, etc.).
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
Leave blank.
7. AUTHORIS)
Give name(s) in conventional order (John R. Doe, J. Robert Doe, etc.). List author's affiliation if it differs from the performing organi-
zation.
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER
Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Give name, street, city, state, and ZIP code. List no more than two levels of an organizational hirearchy.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
Use the program element number under which the report was prepared. Subordinate numbers may be included in parentheses.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NUMBER
Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Include ZIP code.
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Indicate interim final, etc., and if applicable, dates covered.
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
Insert appropriate code.
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Enter information not included elsewhere but useful, such as: Prepared in cooperation with, Translation of, Presented at conference of,
To be published in. Supersedes, Supplements, etc.
16. ABSTRACT
Include a brief (200 words or less) factual summary of the most significant information contained in the report. If the report contains a
significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
(a) DESCRIPTORS - Select from the Thesaurus of Engineering and Scientific Terms the proper authorized terms that identify the major
concept of the research and are sufficiently specific and precise to be used as index entries for cataloging.
(b) IDENTIFIERS AND OPEN-ENDED TERMS - Use identifiers for project names, code names, equipment designators, etc. Use open-
ended terms written in descriptor form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists.
(c) COSATI HELD GROUP • Field and group assignments are to be taken from the 1965 COSATI Subject Category List. Since the ma-
jority of documents are multidisciplinary in nature, the Primary Field/Group assignment(s) will be specific discipline, area of human
endeavor, or type of physical object. The application(s) will be cross-referenced with secondary Field/Group assignments that will follow
the primary posting(s).
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Denote reusability to the public or limitation for reasons other than security for example "Release Unlimited." Cite any availability to
the public, with address and price.
19. & 20. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
DO NOT submit classified reports to the National Technical Information service.
21. NUMBER OF PAGES
Insert the total number of pages, including this one and unnumbered pages, but exclude distribution list, if any.
22. PRICE
Insert the price set by the National Technical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, if known.
"wn 2220—1 (Rev. 4 — 77) (Rever»«)
------- |