Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
By LAURA MEDALIE
U.S. Geological SurveyWater-Resources Investigations Report 95-4144
Prepared in cooperation with theCONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONMAINE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICESMAINE GEOLOGICAL SURVEYMASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENTMASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONNARRAGANSETT BAY COMMISSIONNEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICESPROVIDENCE WATER SUPPLY BOARDRHODE ISLAND DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENTVERMONT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
Bow, New Hampshire 1996
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director
For additional information write to:
Chief, New Hampshire-Vermont District U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Division 525 Clinton Street Bow, N.H. 03304
Copies of this report may be purchased from:
U.S. Geological SurveyEarth Science Information CenterOpen-File Reports SectionBox 25286, MS 517Federal CenterDenver, CO 80225
CONTENTS
Glossary..................................................................................................................^ VAbstract ..............................................................................................................................................................^ 1Introduction........................................................^ 1
Purpose and Scope ...................................................................................................................................................... 2Description of Study Area........................................................................................................................................... 3Acknowledgments.............................................................................................................................................^ 3
Wastewater Component of Water Use................................................................................................................................... 6Methods of Data Compilation and Analysis......................................................................................................................... 9
Sources and Description of Data................................................................................................................................. 9Organization of Data................................................................................................................................................... 12Estimation of Sewered Populations............................................................................................................................. 12Quality Control...........................................................................................................................................^ 13
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State................................................................................................................ 17Connecticut....................................................................................................................................................^ 18Maine........................................................................................................................................................................... 23Massachusetts..................................................................................................................................................^ 23New Hampstore..................................................................... 39Rhode Island..........................................................................^ 46Vennont.....................................................................^ 49
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England.................................................................................................... 55Wastewater Collection and Return Flow by Drainage Basin................................................................................................ 57Summary .................................................................................................................................................................^ 58References Cited ..............................................................................................................................................................^ 59Appendix 1. Summary of Municipal Wastewater-Treatment Facilities and Mean Daily Return
Flows by Subregional Drainage Basins and Subbasins in New England, 1990 ....................................................... 63
FIGURES
1. Map showing location of subregional drainage basins and subbasins in the New England States............................ 42,3. Diagrams showing:
2. Generalized water-use-flow system................................................................................................................... 73. Detailed water-use and design-related factors of wastewater collection, treatment,
and return flow................................................................................................................................................... 84-9. Map showing locations of Minor Civil Division boundaries, drainage-subbasin boundaries, and municipal
wastewater-treatment facilities in:4. Connecticut..............................................................^ 185. Maine.........................................................................^ 256. Western and Eastern Massachusetts .................................................................................................................. 317. New Hampshire................................................................................................................................................. 418. Rhode Island...................................................................................................................................... 479. Vermont.................................................................................................................................... 51
10. Bar graph showing sewered and unsewered populations in the New England States for 1990................................. 5611. Diagram showing monthly variations in total return flows from municipal wastewater-treatment facilities
in New England, 1990................................................................................................................................................ 57
Contents III
TABLES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6-11.
Subregional drainage basin code and name; and code, name, location, and area of drainage subbasins in New England.........................................................................................................................................Sources and description of water-use data in New England .....................................................................Summary of statistical difference in percent between data sets for sewered populationsin New England, 1990...............................................................................................................................Contingency-table analysis for association between per capita return flows and two anomaly causing factors (industrial contributions and high infiltration and inflow) for municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in New England..........................................................................................................................Summary of data about municipal wastewater-treatment facilities and median per capita return flow in New England, by State..........................................................................................................................Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in:
510
14
16
17
12.
6. Connecticut, 1990... .................7. Maine, 1990.............................8. Massachusetts, 1990 ................9. New Hampshire, 1990 .............
10. Rhode Island, 1990 ..................11. Vermont, 1990..........................Summary of return-flow data for the sewered and unsewered Dooulation in New Eneland. bv State. 1990........
..... 19
..... 263243
..... 4852
..... 55
CONVERSION FACTORS AND ABBREVIATIONS
CONVERSION FACTORS
Multiply
inch (in.)foot (ft)
mile (mi)square mile (mi )
3
cubic foot per second (ft /s)gallon per day (gal/d)
million gallons per day (Mgal/d)
By25.40.30481.6092.5900.028320.003785
3,785
To Obtain
millimetermeterkilometersquare kilometercubic meter per secondcubic meter per daycubic meter per day
ABBREVIATIONS
CDEP Connecticut Department of Environmental ProtectionMaine DEP Maine Department of Environmental ProtectionMDEM Massachusetts Department of Environmental ManagementMDEP Massachusetts Department of Environmental ProtectionMWRA Massachusetts Water Resources AuthorityNHDES New Hampshire Department of Environmental ServicesUSBC U. S. Bureau of the CensusUSEPA U. S. Environmental Protection AgencyUSGS U. S. Geological SurveyVDEC Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation
IV Contents
GLOSSARY
The following are definitions of selected technical terms as they are used in this report; they are not necessarily the only valid definitions for these terms. Terms defined in the glos sary are in bold print where first used in the main body of this report.
Combined sewer. A sewer designed to carry sanitary wastewater and storm- or surface- water runoff.
Consumptive use. That part of water withdrawn that is evaporated, transpired, incorpo rated into products or crops, consumed by humans or livestock, or otherwise removed from the immediate water environment.
Conveyance. The systematic and intentional movement or transfer of water from one point to another. Conveyance types include water instream conveyance, water distribution, and wastewater collection.
Effluent. Wastewater or other liquid raw (untreated), partially, or completely treated flowing from a reservoir, basin, treatment process, or treatment plant.
Exfiltration. Water that leaks from a conveyance system or storage area into the surround ing and underlying materials. Water will leak out if the ambient ground-water pressure is less than the internal pressure of the conveyance system or storage area at a breach.
Ground-water disposal. Refers to wastewater that is disposed of through the ground either by infiltration or by injection. This disposal includes the following discharge methods: injection well, drain fields, percolation ponds, and spray fields (land application/ spreading). Reuse systems (such as the wastewater used to irrigate turf or crops) and land-disposal systems are considered a ground-water-disposal method.
Infiltration. Water that infiltrates into a conveyance system, such as a wastewater-collection system. Water will infiltrate if the ambient ground-water pressure exceeds the internal pressure of the conveyance system at a breach.
Inflow. Water discharged into the sewer system and service connections from sources other than regular connections. This includes flow from yard drains, foundation drains, and around manhole covers. Inflow differs from infiltration in that it is a direct discharge into the sewer rather than a leak in the sewer itself.
Interbasin transfer. Conveyance of water across a drainage or river-basin divide.Major municipal wastewater-treatment facility. A U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency designation for facilities with a design flow of at least 1 million gallons per day.
Minor Civil Division (MCD). Legal subdivisions of counties, called townships in many States, which serve as a basic compiling unit for many U. S. Bureau of the Census data products and reports.
Minor municipal wastewater-treatment facility. A U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency designation for facilities with a design flow of less than 1 million gallons per day.
Outfall. Refers to the outlet or structure through which treated effluent or reclaimed water is finally discharged to a receiving water body.
Primary treatment. A wastewater treatment process that takes place in a tank and allows those substances in wastewater that readily settle or float to be separated from the water being treated.
Reclaimed wastewater. Municipal or industrial wastewater-treatment facility effluent that has been diverted or intercepted for reuse before it reaches a natural waterway or aquifer.
Regional wastewater-treatment facility. A wastewater-treatment facility where collection and treatment of wastewater is from users in at least one other Minor Civil Division besides that in which the wastewater-treatment facility is located.
Glossary
Return flow. Water that is returned to surface or ground water after use or wastewater treat ment and becomes available for reuse. Return flow can go directly to surface water, directly to ground water through an injection well or infiltration bed, or indirectly to ground water through septic systems.
Reuse. Use of water that has undergone wastewater treatment and is delivered to a user as reclaimed wastewater.
Saline water. Water that contains more than 1,000 milligrams per liter of dissolved solids.Sanitary sewer. A pipe or conduit intended to carry wastewater or waterborne wastes from
homes, businesses, and industries to a wastewater-treatment facility. A separate system of pipes or conduits (storm sewers) also may be used to collect and transport storm runoff to natural watercourses.
Secondary treatment. A wastewater-treatment process used to convert dissolved or sus pended materials into a form more readily separated from the water being treated. The process commonly is a type of biological treatment process followed by secondary clarifiers that allow the solids to settle out from the water being treated.
Septic tank. Refers to a buried tank for the separation in the absence of oxygen of solids, grease, and liquid components of wastewater. The liquid fraction from the septic tank is discharged to a drain field for disposal.
Sewer. A pipe or conduit that carries wastewater or drain water. A set of linked pipes or conduits comprises a wastewater-collection system.
Sludge. The solids that can be separated from liquids during processing of wastewater.Stabilization. Conversion into a form that resists change. Organic material is stabilized by
bacteria, which convert the material to gases and other relatively inert substances. Sta bilized organic material generally will not give off obnoxious odors.
Surface-water disposal. Refers to wastewater that is disposed of directly into a surface water body or wetland. This does not include water discharged into ponds for holding or percolation purposes.
Wastewater-collection system. The set of pipes or conduits that carries postuser water and possibly storm runoff to a wastewater-treatment facility before release to surface or ground water as return flow.
Wastewater treatment. The processing of wastewater for the removal or reduction of con tained solids or other undesirable materials.
VI Glossary
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990By Laura Medalie
Abstract
Site-specific data on municipal wastewater- collection systems, municipal wastewater- treatment facilities, and wastewater return flows, organized by State and drainage basin provide information that can be used by State and municipal planners to develop water-resources models. This report includes a consistent set of population-served and return-flow data for the New England States, a description of all assumptions and methods, and quality-control techniques used on the data. Data are included for all municipal wastewater-treatment facilities and associated wastewater-collection systems that had a mean flow greater than 0.01 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) or that served a sewered population of greater than 150 people if a mean daily flow value was not available.
During 1990, about 1,725 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) of treated wastewater were discharged from 490 municipal wastewater- treatment facilities into surface and ground waters in New England. About 52 percent (905 Mgal/d) of this wastewater was generated in Massachusetts from a sewered population of 4.37 million people, or 73 percent of the State's total population. Connecticut's sewered population of 2.29 million people (70 percent of the State's total population) generated 417 Mgal/d of wastewater return flows. In Maine, a sewered population of 0.59 million (48 percent) generated 136 Mgal/d; in Rhode Island, a sewered population of 0.69 million (69 percent) produced 136 Mgal/d; in New Hampshire, a sewered population of 0.54 million
(48 percent) generated 82 Mgal/d; and in Vermont, a sewered population of 0.25 million (44 percent) generated 49 Mgal/d.
The Massachusetts-Rhode Island Coastal River Basins accounted for 47 percent (808 Mgal/d) of total daily return flows from municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in New England, 17 percent (292 Mgal/d) were in the Connecticut Coastal Basins, 17 percent (291 Mgal/d) were in the Connecticut River Basin, almost 8 percent (130 Mgal/d) were in the Merrimack River Basin, and 4 percent (68 Mgal/d) were in the Saco River Basin. Eight other partial or complete subregional drainage basins in New England comprised the remaining 7 percent (136 Mgal/d) of total daily return flows in 1990.
INTRODUCTION
Accurate data about the location of municipal wastewater-treatment facilities, their service areas, and their return flows is important in drainage-basin planning. From 1991 to 1993, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), New England Water-Use Program, in cooperation with the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, the Maine Geological Survey, the Maine Department of Human Services, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management, the Narragansett Bay Commission, the Providence Water Supply Board, and the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation, compiled and analyzed
Introduction 1
site-specific data on municipal wastewater collection and return flows for each of the six New England States. A standard procedure for obtaining annual updates has been coordinated with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and with the State agencies responsible for collecting and reporting return-flow data from municipal waste water-treatment facilities.
In proposed amendments to the Clean Water Act, the USEPA encouraged States to implement comprehensive watershed management programs for addressing water-quality issues (Browner, 1994). As a result, most of the New England States have either implemented, or are considering the implementation of, a water-resources planning and allocation approach based on drainage basins rather than politically defined areas, such as towns or counties. For example, the CDEP uses natural drainage basins as planning areas for addressing preventative and corrective strategies for surface- and ground-water- quality issues (Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, 1982). The MDEM was instructed by the Massachusetts Legislature to develop a water-resources management plan based on 28 drainage basins and 10 subbasins in Massachusetts through the Interbasin Transfer Act (Chapter 658, Acts of 1983). The NHDES has taken steps to set up basin planning studies for water resources in New Hampshire; direction was provided by the public water-rights legislative study committee, which authorized the development of a river-basin planning and assessment program in 1993 (Kenneth Stern, New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, oral commun., 1994). The Clean Water Strategy of the VDEC identifies 17 drainage basins and numerous small watersheds that are included in comprehensive drainage-basin planning programs (Stephan Syz, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation, oral commun., 1994). Maine does not currently (1994) use basin planning for water resources; however, the structure for such a plan has been developed and recommendations for implementation have been made to the Maine State Legislature (Maine Water Resources Management Board, 1991). Rhode Island is the only New England State that, except for a few
specific projects, does not do any type of water- resources planning by river basins (Elizabeth Scott, Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management, oral commun., 1994).
Purpose and Scope
The purpose of this report is to present information on the location and volume of return flows from municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in New England in 1990. The report provides a consistent set of data related to municipal wastewater- treatment facilities for all States, a description of all assumptions and methods, and quality-control techniques used on the data. Site-specific data, including facility name, USEPA discharge permit number, latitude, longitude, receiving water-body name, drainage basin, 1990 mean daily return flow, towns served, sewered population, and per capita use, are grouped by State and drainage basin to enable water-resources managers to analyze and model water-use processes according to the most appropriate compiling unit (for example, by State, town, or drainage basin). Supplemental analyses are presented for per capita return flows, interbasin transfers, estimates of aggregate return flows from unsewered populations by State, and estimates of return flows into saline and fresh ground and surface water. Data collected for this study are organized and stored by the USGS in a series of linked computer files called the New England Water-Use Data System.
The report includes data on all municipal wastewater-treatment facilities and associated wastewater-collection systems that had a mean flow greater than 0.01 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) or that served a sewered population of greater than 150 people if a mean daily flow value was not available. These data include facilities that were registered with a permit to discharge wastewater through the USEPA's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permitting program (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1990a), as well as those registered through the States with permits for disposal to ground water. Some facilities, such as high schools and hospitals, which were permitted through the National Pollutant
2 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
Discharge Elimination System program and had mean flows greater than 0.01 Mgal/d, were omitted from this report because they did not serve a resident (permanent) population. Other facilities like county nursing homes for the elderly, were included if the resident population was at least 150 people.
The data tables in this report contain mean daily flow and sewered population data as of 1990. For a few facilities (in Massachusetts and Vermont), flow data from 1991 or 1992 were more accessible from State agencies than 1990 data and are presented and noted in the data tables of this report.
The quality and the completeness of return-flow data between States can differ greatly because of the variable requirements between States in reporting data, the dedication of resources to monitoring compliance, and the quality-control procedures applied to the reported data. As a result, summaries of or comparisons between data, such as return flows or sewered populations across State or drainage-basin boundaries, are difficult to make and probably are not accurate without further analysis. Aggregated return- flow data and reported number of facilities could differ from previously published data for 1990 (Solley and others, 1993) because local needs for more detailed and accurate information were identified after the 1990 data compilation effort.
Description of Study Area
The study area covers the New England States of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont (fig. 1). Regional and subregional drainage-basin and subbasin designations used in this report are equivalent to hydrologic cataloging units that were delineated by the USGS in cooperation with the U.S. Water Resources Council (Seabar and others, 1987). All or parts of 13 subregional drainage basins are in the New England regional drainage area. Of these 13 basins, the following 11 have at least 50 percent of their land area in the New England States: the United States part of the St. John River Basin (0101, refers to the first 4 digits of the drainage-subbasin code shown in fig. 1), the Penobscot River Basin (0102), the Kennebec River Basin (0103), the Androscoggin River Basin
(0104), Maine Coastal Drainage (0105), the Saco River Basin (0106), the Merrimack River Basin (0107), the Connecticut River Basin (0108), Massachusetts-Rhode Island Coastal (0109), Connecticut Coastal (0110), and the United States part of the St. Francois River Basin (0111). Small sections of the Richelieu and Upper Hudson River Basins are in Vermont and Massachusetts (0201, 0202), and a narrow part of the Lower Hudson-Long Island River Basin (0203) is in Connecticut. These subregional drainage basins can be subdivided further into 60 drainage subbasins, designated in this report by 8- digit numerical codes (such as 01080101), 42 of which are contained entirely in New England (fig. 1 and table 1).
Most of the runoff from these subregional basins flows directly into the Atlantic Ocean. A large part of Vermont and small sections of western Massachusetts and Connecticut discharge into the Atlantic Ocean from the Hudson River in the Mid- Atlantic Region, and a small section of northern Vermont drains first into the St. Lawrence River before reaching the Atlantic Ocean.
Acknowledgments
The author wishes to thank the State and Federal agencies, town officials, and staff from the many municipal wastewater-treatment facilities throughout New England for providing data necessary for the completion of this report. Included are personnel from the following State agencies: Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Water Management Bureau; Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection; Maine Department of Human Services, Maine Geological Survey, and Maine Department of Environmental Protection; New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, Water Management Bureau, and Wastewater Engineering Bureau, Permits, and Compliance Division; Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management, Division of Water Resources; and the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation, Permits and Compliance and Protection Division. The USGS contribution to this project was generated through the National Water-Use Information Program.
Introduction
70°
68°
.J-! 101010003? '**" \1
/ { " <» f f 01010002 j 01010004 (
\ j (. **Y MAINE V- 'V,"~-r i
CANADA______.
j 01050003 ;/ /x;
^^
,S ) MASSACHUSETJS Y ° ""
»01080207£ ^ .
2 V / J 8 f o -. o . »-* o\
) y °\ i- ->? W "v ?TTCONNECJPCUT \°,y-J^ } ^..
) \A-A.- ^'01100004
. A -.
EXPLANATION
NATIONAL BOUNDARY
STATE BOUNDARY
_.._.._.._ SUBREGIONAL DRAINAGE-BASIN BOUNDARY
DRAINAGE-SUBBASIN BOUNDARY
011 ooooe DRAINAGE-SUBBASIN CODE-Shown in table 1. _ First four numbers indicate subregional basin and
last four numbers indicate subbasin
Base from U. S. Geological Survey digital data, Albers Equal Area Conic projection, 1992, Standard parallels 29°30' and 45°30', central meridian-96°. 1:250,000 scale
40I
80 MILES
40I
80 KILOMETERS
Figure 1. Location of subregional drainage basins and subbasins in the New England States. (Modified from Seabar and others, 1987.)
4 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
Table 1. Subregional drainage basin code and name; and code, name, location, and area of drainage subbasins in New England
[Data from Seabar and others, 1987]
Subregional drainage basin
Code Name
0101 St. John
0102 Penobscot
0103 Kennebec
0104 Androscoggin
0105 Maine Coastal
0106 Saco
0107 Menimack
0108 Connecticut
0109 Massachusetts-Rhode Island Coastal
Code
01010001 01010002 010100030101000401010005
010200010102000201020003 01020004 01020005
01030001 0103000201030003
01040001 01040002
010500010105000201050003
01060001 0106000201060003
01070001 01070002010700030107000401070005
01080101 01080102 0108010301080104 0108010501080106 0108010701080201010802020108020301080204 010802050108020601080207
0109000101090002 01090003
Drainage subbasin
Name
Upper St. John Allagash FishAroostookMeduxnekeag
West Branch PenobscotEast Branch PenobscotMattawamkeag Piscataquis Lower Penobscot
Upper Kennebec DeadLower Kennebec
Upper Androscoggin Lower Androscoggin
St. CroixMaine CoastalSt. George-Sheepscot
Presumpscot SacoPiscataqua-Salmon Falls
Pemigewasset MenimackContoocookNashuaConcord
Upper Connecticut PassumpsicWaitsUpper Connecticut-Mascoma WhiteBlack-OttauquecheeWestMiddle ConnecticutMillerDeerfieldChicopee Lower ConnecticutWestfieldFarmington
CharlesCape Cod Blackstone
State(s)
Maine Maine MaineMaineMaine
MaineMaineMaine Maine Maine
Maine MaineMaine
Maine, N.H. Maine, N.H.
MaineMaineMaine
Maine Maine, N.H.Maine, Mass., N.H.
N.H. Mass., N.H.N.H.Mass., N.H.Mass.
N.H., Vt.Vt. Vt.N.H., Vt. Vt.Vt. Vt.Mass., N.H., Vt.Mass., N.H.Mass., Vt.Mass. Conn., Mass.Conn., Mass.Conn., Mass.
Mass.Mass., R.I. Mass., R.I.
Area (square miles)
2,120 1,250
9082,420
634
2,1501,1301,510 1,460 2,360
1,570 878
3,450
1,470 2,060
9994,8801,250
1,240 1,6901,400
1,000 2,300
757525401
1,990 496441
1,460 703418 612999391658725
1,090505590
1,1302,220
451
Introduction
Table 1. Subregional drainage basin code and name; code, name, location, and area of drainage subbasins in New England Continued
Subregional drainage basin
Code Name
0109
0110 Connecticut Coastal
0111 St. Francois
0201 Richelieu
0202 Upper Hudson
0203 Lower Hudson-Long Island
Code
01090004 01090005
01100001 011000020110000301100004 01100005 01100006
01110000
02010001 02010002020100030201000502010007
02020003 02020006
02030101
Drainage subbasin
Name
Narragansett Pawcatuck-Wood
Quinebaug ShetucketThamesQuinnipiac Housatonic Saugatuck
St. Francois
Lake George OtterWinooskiLamoilleMissisquoi
Hudson-Hoosic Middle Hudson
Lower Hudson
State(s)
Mass., R.I. Conn., R.I.
Conn., Mass., R.I. Conn., Mass.Conn.Conn. Conn., Mass. Conn.
Vt.
Vt. Vt.Vt.Vt.Vt.
Mass., Vt. Mass.
Conn.
Area (square miles)
1,330 383
729 517381516
'1,756 '395
590
'509 1,0901,2201,130
707'622
] 32
'These calculated areas represent only the part of the drainage subbasin in New England.
WASTEWATER COMPONENT OF WATER USE
The water-use flow system represented in this report consists of a six-step process that includes withdrawal, water use, return flow, consumptive use, treatment, and conveyance (Horn and Craft, 1991). The term "water use" is used in the general sense to describe all of the processes as part of the system and in the specific sense to describe an explicit use of water. The relation between processes of wastewater collection, treatment, and return flow and the processes of water supply (withdrawal, treatment, and distribution) is diagramed in figure 2.
Additional factors related to the design of wastewater-collection, treatment, and disposal systems (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1991) that may be important in order to gain a more accurate and complete representation of this water-use system, are shown in figure 3. Ground water usually leaks into the wastewater-collection system (infiltration) when the
water table is above the sewer pipes. Wastewater usually leaks out of pipes (exfiltration) when the water table is below the sewer pipes. The magnitude of leakages are a function of age, condition, type, and position of collection-system pipes relative to the water table and the volume of flow. In areas with combined sewers, a significant volume of water could be added to collection systems during snowmelt runoff or rainstorms. Inflow includes storm runoff from combined sewers and through breaches in uncombined sanitary sewers, surface-water runoff from drains, and other non-service-connection sources of water. The volume of water added to collection systems from combined sewers and inflow may be greater than the volume of wastewater generated by domestic, commercial, or industrial water users. Estimates of these volumes are incorporated into the design flow of the wastewater-collection system and treatment facility.
6 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
WITHDRAWAL CONSUMPTIVE USE
WATER TREATMENT
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
WATER USE CONSUMPTIVE USE
WASTEWATER RECLAMATION
WASTEWATER-SYSTEM
COLLECTION
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
RETURN FLOW
CONSUMPTIVE USE
Figure 2. Generalized water-use-flow system. (Modified from Horn and others, 1993, fig-1.)
Inflated volumes of water in wastewater-collection systems can be the result of inflow from surface runoff and infiltration of ground water from leaks into sewer systems during spring snowmelt or other large-scale hydrologic events. Inflow and infiltration may explain the wide range of differences, 4 to 4,300 percent (appendix 1), between monthly minimum and maximum return-flow volumes for municipal wastewater-treatment facilities listed in this report. Exfiltration also can cause monthly fluctuations of flow volumes.
A brief introduction to wastewater-treatment processes can help to explain how differences in treatment processes relate to differences in wastewater return-flow volumes. Water conveyed by sewers into a
wastewater-treatment facility first undergoes primary treatment, which settles out large suspended materials. Most municipal wastewater- treatment facilities in New England also provide biological secondary treatment, a further separation and settling out of solids from the wastewater. If wastewater is stored in open air for extended periods of time, during or after treatment, its total volume may by reduced by evaporation.
One purpose of treating wastewater is to produce an effluent (treated liquid) that can be released safely into the environment, usually through an outfall into a surface-water body. Some treatment facilities in New England discharge effluent on land by use of one of the following ground-water disposal methods: injection or infiltration-percolation. Another alternative for effluent disposal is reuse. Reuse may involve reclamation, whereby the condition of the effluent is improved to attain a product suitable for particular uses, such as agricultural or golf course irrigation or industrial cooling water.
A by-product of effluent production is called sludge. Depending on the type or types of treatment, the volume of water contained in sludge can be significant. Primary and secondary treatments produce primary and secondary sludges. Typically, primary sludge contains 95 to 97 percent water by weight, and secondary sludge contains
Wastewater Component of Water Use
INFLOWS OUTFLOWS
Water use
Storm-water runoff
Infiltration
Combined Sanitary sewers sewers
11.Inflow
Wastewater collection
Wastewater treatment
On-site return flow Septic tanks
Exfiltration
Effluent disposal (may be a combination of the following): Surface-water return flow Ground-water return flow Wastewater reclamation Evaporation
Sludge disposal (may be a combination of the following): Sanitary landfill On-site dedicated land disposal Agricultural reclamation Permanent lagoon Evaporation
Figure 3. Detailed water-use and design-related factors of wastewater collection, treatment, and return flow.
greater than 97 percent water (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1991). Because of these high percentages of liquid, sludge undergoes further treatment to reduce its volume before disposal. Water removed from sludge during volume-reduction treatment is usually recycled back to the inlet of the treatment facility. All sludge undergoes the process of stabilization, which converts the organic material to a
relatively inert and nonodorous form with a reduced pathogen content. Stabilized sludge is concentrated during liquid storage to about 6 percent solids, or it could be treated for further volume reduction before disposal. Dewatering produces a sludge that is 20 to 60 percent solids by weight and composting produces a sludge that is 60 to 75 percent solids. Incineration of sludge removes almost all of the water from the dewatered sludge.
8 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
METHODS OF DATA COMPILATION AND ANALYSIS
Data for this report were compiled from several sources. Whenever possible, multiple sources for the same data element were used to fill in missing pieces or to provide a means of corroboration. This section of the report includes a description of data sources, how the data are organized, the procedure used to estimate sewered populations, and a discussion of the quality- control techniques that were employed. A thorough description of the analytical techniques is presented so that the limitations of the data can be evaluated. A description of the specific data elements collected is in table 2.
Sources and Description of Data
The USEPA Permit Compliance System, Needs Survey, and Industrial Facilities Discharge databases and the 1990 Census of Population and Housing database from the U.S. Bureau of the Census (USBC) provided much of the data for this report. Under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, the USEPA established the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permitting system for point sources of discharges into United States waterways. The Permit Compliance System database tracks permit information, permit compliance, and enforcement status data for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System program. The Permit Compliance System database contains descriptive information on municipal and industrial wastewater-treatment facilities, their location, treatment processes, return flows, and the chemical quality of their influent and effluent. In general, the Permit Compliance System database contained complete or nearly complete data for major municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in each State. Mean daily flow data are collected by and entered into the Permit Compliance System database by State agencies when States have petitioned the USEPA and been delegated the lead role (or "have primacy") in evaluating and approving National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits. Mean daily flow is reported on a monthly basis by all major and some minor municipal wastewater-treatment facilities directly to the USEPA in non-delegated States, or to the State, in States where the USEPA has
primacy. Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Vermont are delegated States; Maine, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire are non-delegated States.
The USEPA Needs Survey database consists of an inventory of existing and proposed publicly owned treatment works that need to be constructed to meet requirements of the Clean Water Act. Because the Needs Survey database is designed to project future needs, it contains data on wastewater conveyance and treatment facilities, including populations served. The Industrial Facilities Discharge database contains a listing of industries that are permitted through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System program to directly or indirectly discharge wastewater to surface waters in the United States. For this report, the Industrial Facilities Discharge database provided names of industries that discharge wastewater to municipal wastewater-treatment facilities; this information was used qualitatively to evaluate per capita return-flow values and is discussed in the section titled "Quality Control."
The USBC collects data on population and housing. Several data elements from the 1990 Census of Population and Housing were used to calculate an estimate of sewered populations as described in the section titled "Estimation of Sewered Population."
State agencies also supplied data on municipal wastewater-treatment facilities. Most of the data from State agencies were provided in the form of paper files, with the exception of return-flow data from the NHDES, which was provided on a computer diskette. Data from the MDEP were only available by visiting the four regional offices and copying data from paper files. Data for the minor municipal wastewater- treatment facilities usually came from State agencies rather than the Permit Compliance System database because they are not required to report to the USEPA.
Wastewater-collection and return-flow data collected for this study, as well as data on water withdrawals, distribution, and water use, are stored by the USGS in the New England Water-Use Data System database. These computer files were designed so that all of the components of a water-use system are linked together to allow the tracking of water from withdrawals to returns, in either a forward or a backward direction.
Methods of Data Compilation and Analysis
Table 2. Sources and description of water-use data in New England
[Auxiliary data: Available in the U.S. Geological Survey, New England Water-Use Data System database. Abbreviations: USEPA PCS, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Permit Compliance System; NPDES, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System; USBC, U.S. Bureau of the Census; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey]
Data element Sources of data Description of water-use dataDATA PRESENTED IN THIS REPORT
Wastewater-treatment facility name.
NPDES number................................
Latitude/longitude............................
Receiving water body.
Subbasin code....
1990 return flow.
Town (Minor Civil Division) served.
Sewered population.
Per capita return flow..........
Per capita return-flow code.
USEPA PCS database, State agencies
USEPA PCS database
USEPA PCS database, USGS topo graphic maps, telephone interviews
USEPA PCS database, USGS topo graphic maps, telephone interviews, State agencies
USGS (From Seabar and others, 1987).
USEPA PCS database, State agency, or estimated
State agencies, USEPA Needs Survey database
USBC, USEPA Needs Surveydatabase, State agencies, telephone interviews
Calculated (equation 5)
Assigned by author
Wastewater-treatment facility name
Nine-digit NPDES permit number
Latitude and longitude of wastewater-treatment facility
Common name of surface-water body (or the words "ground-water discharge") that receives effluent from the wastewater-treatment facility
Eight-digit hydrologic cataloging-unit code
Sum of reported monthly average daily flows divided by number of months of reported data
Name of Minor Civil Division with wastewater-collection system served by the regional wastewater- treatment facility
Resident number of people served by the wastewater collection system
Average volume of water used per person per day
Code based on evaluation of possible anomaly-causing factors
AUXILIARY DATA
County................................
Pipe latitude and longitude.
Facility address..................
Contact person....................
Telephone number..............
Treatment type...................
Sludge disposal method.....
Pretreatment indicator........
USBC
USEPA PCS database
USEPA PCS database
USEPA (1990c)
USEPA (1990c)
USEPA (1990c)
USEPA (1990c)
USEPA (1990c)
Design flow............................................ USEPA (1990c)
Authority/Facility number..................... USEPA Needs Survey database
Three-digit county code
Latitude and longitude of discharge pipe at outfall
Facility street and mailing address
Name of wastewater-treatment facility contact person
Telephone number of wastewater-treatment facility
Codes for type of wastewater-treatment process
Codes for method of sludge disposal
Yes or no for whether industrial pretreatment program is in effect
Maximum discharge for which wastewater-treatment facility was designed
Database site-identification number
10 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
Sources and descriptions of specific water-use data elements that are in data tables in the "Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State" section of this report are shown in table 2. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System data element is included in this report to maintain a useful link between the USEPA-Permit Compliance System and Needs-Survey databases and the New England Water-Use Data System, where wastewater data are stored. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System number is a unique nine-digit USEPA-designated code that begins with the two-letter State abbreviation, followed by the digits "010" (an indicator for permitted municipal wastewater-treatment facilities), then by a 4-digit number.
Latitude and longitude are included in the data tables in the "Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State" section of this report to provide an accurate geographic-referenced product that can be used in a computerized Geographic Information System (GIS). In order to create a GIS file, or "coverage" (a set of digital data that is related to a given map projection) of wastewater-treatment facilities, an existing coverage of wastewater-treatment facilities, a set of latitudes and longitudes, or a set of maps with points to identify the location of wastewater-treatment facilities is needed. Although the Permit Compliance System database contains fields for latitude and longitude data, these data frequently were missing and the geographic data in the Permit Compliance System database were incomplete. These locational data were verified or derived if missing.
About one-half of the missing latitudes and longitudes for wastewater-disposal sites were derived by digitizing the sites from USGS 7.5 minute topographic maps. These locations are accurate to the nearest second of latitude or longitude, or about 75 ft. Locational data on the remaining sites were obtained from telephone interviews with town officials or wastewater-treatment-facility operators who described the location to within an estimated 10 seconds of latitude or longitude, or about 750 ft. Information such as resident population served by the collection system, the number of large non-residential customer
connections, and the name of the receiving water body was requested during the telephone interview along with the locational data.
Return-flow data are the quantitative water-use numbers valuable to water-resources planners. These values must be accurate and used with consistent units in order to be meaningful. Return flow is reported in millions of gallons per day by wastewater-treatment- facility operators. Flows are usually measured by a continuous recorder at the headworks or inlet of the treatment facility, although a weir or a meter also is commonly used (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1990b). The return-flow values presented in this report are mean daily values, calculated by totalling the monthly-reported mean daily flows and dividing by the number of months of reported data. The monthly return-flow values presented in appendix 1 are the mean daily return flows for each month of reported data.
Return flows for some or all minor facilities in Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont were obtained from State agencies because the data were not present in the Permit Compliance System database. With the exception of New Hampshire, these data were not computerized. Data from paper files for more recent years (1992 for Vermont and 1991 for Massachusetts, table 2) were more readily available and are, therefore, presented in this report. When return-flow data were not available, they were estimated by multiplying the per capita water-use coefficient of 65 gal/d by population served; this coefficient is based upon the average self-supplied per capita domestic use of 76 gal/d in New England, less 14 percent consumptive use (Solley and others, 1993).
Sewered populations were estimated by use of three different methods. Depending on the methodology, data collected and published by the USBC on Population and Housing Characteristics, included in the USEPA Needs Survey database, and from certain State agencies (CDEP, Maine DEP) supplied estimates of populations served. In addition, telephone calls to facilities or town offices provided some information on the number of service connections or sewered populations. A description of the three estimating methods used is included in the section "Estimation of Sewered Populations."
Methods of Data Compilation and Analysis 11
Data that have been compiled on municipal wastewater-treatment facilities, but are not discussed in this report, are listed as auxiliary data in table 2. These data are stored in the USGS New England Water-Use Data System. Examples of auxiliary data, obtained from USEPA, Region I (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1990c), include county, telephone number, treatment type, sludge-disposal methods, and design flow.
Organization of Data
Data in this report are organized by geographic area and include return- flow volumes from municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in New England for 1990. One anticipated application of the data is to use the return-flow values compiled by drainage basins and subbasins in basin-wide water-use analyses. Water-use data assessments are also commonly done on a county basis. Therefore, a small compiling unit will facilitate calculation of return-flow volumes either on the basis of drainage basins or counties. The USBC Minor Civil Division (MCD) was chosen to represent the geographic area for data compilation. MCDs are a logical choice for the compiling unit because Federal, State, and local agencies accept and use MCDs, and the USBC has formally delineated the MCD and uses it as the basis for compiling population data, which are essential in developing water-use estimates. In this report, a return- flow value is presented for each facility, rather than for each MCD, because flows are reported by facility to the State or to the USEPA.
For most municipal wastewater systems in New England (77 percent of the systems), wastewater is collected from sewered users and conveyed to wastewater-treatment facilities, treated, and discharged as effluent all within the same MCD, as diagramed below:
For regional wastewater-treatment facilities, wastewater is collected from users in at least one other MCD besides that in which the wastewater- treatment facility is located. A schematic representation of a regional wastewater-treatment facility is shown below:
Identifiers unique to the original data from State and Federal agencies were maintained for easier cross-referencing with the data sources. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System identification number preserves a link to the Permit Compliance System and the Needs Survey databases. The Authority/Facility (A/F) number, which is the Needs Survey
database unique collection- system identifier, has been maintained with the data stored in the New England Water-Use Data System database. If a particular State has its own system of identification, then these numbers are also incorporated into the New England Water-Use Data System database. In addition, the location of return-flow outfall pipes to surface or ground water is registered in the USGS National Water Information System database, a master database for the coordinating of collection, storage, processing, and disseminating of water- resources data.
Estimation of Sewered Populations
Estimates of sewered population of MCDs served by municipal wastewater- treatment facilities are a valuable evaluation tool when divided into return flow to yield an average per capita return- flow value. Estimates of per capita return flow that are higher than average indicate one or more of the following: (1) wastewater from one or many industrial or commercial enterprises is treated at the facility in addition to domestic customers, (2) data are incorrect, (3) an assumption used in the estimation is not valid for that particular case, or (4) infiltration or inflow into the system is significant. Estimates of per capita return flow that are lower than average indicate one or more of the following: (1) the
12 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
data are incorrect, (2) an assumption used in the estimation is not valid for that particular case, or (3) exfiltration from the system is significant. In many cases, the cause of excessively high or low per capita return-flow values can be investigated and explained. Total sewered population for each MCD also can be used to determine unsewered population when subtracted from the USBC population. For water-use analyses, the volume of wastewater returned to ground water through septic tanks may be important as an aggregate return flow to ground water if there is a large unsewered population.
Sewered populations listed in the data tables of this report are rounded to the nearest 10 people. The following equations were used to calculate the estimates of sewered population based on USBC data:
Population in households =(total population) - (population in group quarters) (1)
Population sewered in households = (percentage ofhouseholds sewered) X (population in households) (2)
Population sewered in group quarters = (percentage of households sewered) X (population in group quarters) 1 (3)
Total sewered population = (population sewered inhouseholds) + (population sewered in group quarters) (4)
where population in households includes all people who occupy a housing unit (house, apartment, or mobile home) and population in group quarters includes all people not living in households, such as people living in institutions (prisons, boarding schools, colleges, or military bases) (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 199 la).
Total population and population in group quarters are available by MCD from the 1990 Summary Population and Housing Characteristics (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991a-f). Percentage of households sewered is available by MCD from the 1990 Summary Social, Economic, and Housing Characteristics (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991g-l), but total sewered population for this report incorporates an estimate for the sewered population in group quarters (not in households).
lrThis formula is not strictly used in every case. When a single, known institution constitutes most or all of the USBC value for population in group quarters, and it is known to be sewered, then the total sewered population of the remainder of the MCD is just the population sewered in households from equation 4.
When separate areas of a single MCD are served by different municipal wastewater-treatment facilities, the 1990 estimate of sewered population for that MCD (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991g-l) has to be split between populations served by the separate facilities because the estimate of households sewered provides one sewered population number for every MCD. In these cases, the sewered population for each facility is assigned a proportion based on the average discharge or population data from the Needs Survey database or on information from a telephone call to the facility, the town office, or the State.
Households not connected to a collection system have septic tanks or other on-site disposal systems to process wastewater. An aggregate unsewered population for each State is calculated as the difference between that State's USBC population and the total sewered population. Just as the estimated return flow for some minor facilities that discharge to ground- water systems was based on an average per capita coefficient of 65 gal/d per person, the same coefficient was multiplied by the unsewered population to estimate the aggregate amount of wastewater discharged from on-site household septic systems.
Quality Control
Quality control is a series of steps performed on a set of data to provide assurance that the data are accurate or reliable to a specified degree of confidence. Several different methods of quality control were used on the data contained in this report.
Wastewater-Treatment-Facility Locations
Incorrect latitudes and longitudes were identified by overlaying a GIS-produced map of wastewater- treatment-facility point locations onto a map of MCD boundaries for each State. If the facility plotted outside of the town where it was supposed to be located, the latitude and longitude were assumed to be wrong; the location was then corrected by use of data from topographic maps or telephone interviews with facility operators. A similar check on drainage-subbasin delineations was made by overlaying plots of facility locations with subbasin boundaries to verify that the table values for facilities and subbasin codes are correct.
Methods of Data Compilation and Analysis 13
Return-Flow Data
Data were corroborated in several different ways for this study. In New Hampshire and Vermont, return- flow data for all major municipal wastewater-treatment facilities were obtained from State agencies and compared with those that were available in Permit Compliance System. Only small discrepancies as a result of rounding or unit-conversion differences were noted in the data from the two sources.
An evaluation of the temporal consistency of return-flow data is another method for quality control of data. Most of the return-flow data were obtained from the Permit Compliance System database. These monthly data are entered into the USEPA database as reports are received from wastewater-treatment-facility operators. Quality control on the accuracy of the data, such as comparisons with previous data, was not done. As part of the analysis for this report, monthly return- flow data for each facility were examined and decimal points were shifted on values that differed from the other months by an order of magnitude. For this evaluation, 7 out of the 354 facilities in New England with 1990 monthly flow data in the Permit Compliance System database had values that were adjusted for 1 or 2 months.
Sewered-Population Estimates
Some of the estimates of sewered population were checked by comparing the estimates derived from the data provided by the USBC against data provided by the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) for the 43 MCDs served in Massachusetts (J.A. Riccio, Massachusetts Water Resources Authority, written commun., 1993). A comparison of data from these two sources indicates that the values differ by less than 10 percent in 95 percent of the cases.
Estimates of sewered populations also were compared by use of a statistical summary. The absolute value of the differences in percentage of sewered population for each wastewater-collection system, as determined by the USBC estimate and the USEPA Needs Survey, were compared and are presented as "comparison number 1" in table 3. The data sets corroborate one another when the median percent difference between the data sets is small. For example, in Connecticut, there were 87 facilities with similar data from the USBC and the USEPA Needs Survey. The calculated percentage difference between the two estimates of sewered population for each facility
Table 3. Summary of statistical difference in percent between data sets for sewered populations in New England, 1990
[Comparison No.: Represents a comparison of population values derived from: 1, USBC and the USEPA Needs Survey database; 2, USEPA Needs Survey database and a State agency; and 3, USBC and a State Agency. Data sets: Based on sewered population data from either the U.S. Bureau of the Census (USBC), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Needs Survey database, or a State agency]
State
Connecticut................
Maine.........................
Massachusetts ............New Hampshire.........Rhode Island..............Vermont.....................
Com pari son No.
12 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 1
Num ber of data sets com pared
87 76 94
109 93 86
175 90 23 69
Statistical difference in percent between
data sets
Median
18 4
16 18 16 25 19 17 24 24
Mini mum
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maxi mum
75 67 85 73 78 75 96 89 94 99
ranged from 1 to 75 percent, with a median difference of 18 percent. State agencies from Connecticut and Maine provided a third set of population data from their own records, which are similarly compared against the USEPA Needs Survey and the USBC estimates as "Comparison number 2 or 3", respectively (table 3). In Connecticut, the median difference between the estimate of sewered population based on the USEPA Needs Survey and the CDEP, a State Agency, was 4 percent, and between the USBC and the CDEP was 16 percent. In Maine, the median difference between the estimate of sewered population based on the USEPA Needs Survey and the Maine DEP, a State Agency, was 16 percent, and between the USBC and the Maine DEP was 25 percent.
The statistical comparisons presented in table 3 are useful to readers who are interested in having some measure of the relative accuracy of the population data presented in this report. No claim is made that any particular data set is more accurate than the others because only rarely were the data verified through telephone calls to the municipal wastewater-treatment facility operators. Except where noted as footnotes to the tables in the "Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State" section of this report, sewered populations based on USBC data are used because
14 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
these data are easily available and uniformly collected for every State in the country. Table 3 provides information on the extent of agreement between different sources of sewered population data.
Per Capita Return-Flow Analysis
The most rigorous check on the accuracy of return-flow and sewered-population data is the per capita return-flow analysis. Because of the large variation in per capita return-flow values among municipal wastewater-treatment facilities, a median value in the return-flow analysis represents a typical value that was used in the State sections of this report. The equation for per capita return flow is:
Return flow from municipal wastewater-treatment facility,in gallons per day
Total estimated sewered population from all MCDs with sewer connections to wastewater-treatment facility
(5)
Quality-control checks of the per capita estimates of return flow were based on a qualitative evaluation of the separate components that went into the estimate. Potential anomaly causing factors of the per capita analysis for each facility include the following: (1) a large seasonal population, (2) a large population in group quarters, (3) the presence of industrial connections to the collection system, (4) a system with combined-sewer overflows, and (5) a system with large infiltration and inflow. If one or more of these factors were associated with a collection system, that factor was given a special code in the per capita return-flow column of the data tables in the "Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State" section of this report.
The estimate of the USBC sewered populations, which is the denominator of per capita return-flow equation 5, can result in an abnormally large or small per capita estimate if seasonal population or population in group quarters is excessively large. Communities with large seasonal sewered populations can have an artificially large per capita estimate because the estimated sewered population is based on year-round residence and is, therefore, too small. A large population in group quarters also can affect the per capita estimate. Equation 3 shows that the population in group quarters is multiplied by the percentage of households sewered to calculate population sewered in group quarters. If most of the population in group
quarters is actually sewered, and the general population is not, or if the reverse is true, the estimate of total sewered population (equation 4) could be either artificially low or artificially high. To address these potential cases of artificially large or small per capita estimates, facilities where the number of seasonal households is greater than 10 percent of total households, or the population in group quarters is at least 10 percent of total population, were identified in the data tables.
Several other factors also can inflate the estimation of per capita use. Most municipal wastewater-treatment facilities, even in small rural towns, have service connections to nondomestic customers. These service connections could increase per capita return-flow values because they contribute to the return-flow volume but not to the user population; this is especially true if large industries or commercial establishments (for example, hotels, laundry facilities, or shopping centers) generate a large percentage of the total wastewater in a collection system. The Industrial Facilities Discharge file includes a listing of municipal wastewater-treatment facilities that accept industrial contributions as part of their collection system (U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992). If any industrial contributions were present, a code was placed in the per capita return-flow column in the data tables of the section: "Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State."
If a combined sewer system was present in a collection system, it was coded in the database. A list of combined sewer-overflow systems in New England was provided by the USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992). A determination of the extent of infiltration and inflow in a collection system was made by comparing return- flow values in March, April, and May with the remaining months of the year. These 3 months are important because in many parts of New England, streamflow and the water table are commonly higher than at other times due to snowmelt (U.S. Geological Survey, 1995). Large runoff volumes from snowmelt and a high water table can lead to increased inflow and infiltration. If return flows from two of the months from March to May exceeded return flows for the other months, infiltration and inflow was considered a factor in the per capita estimates.
Methods of Data Compilation and Analysis 15
A contingency-table analysis (table 4) was used to determine whether there was a statistical association between the presence of some of the potential anomaly causing factors and the value of the per capita return- flow estimate. An association indicates only that the variables share occurrence and that a more detailed investigation is suggested. The contingency-table analysis consisted of evaluating whether links exist between high per capita estimates and the presence of one or two anomaly causing factors. Large seasonal and group-quarters populations are not included as factors in the contingency-table analysis because they may cause either large or small per capita return-flow estimates. Both factors, combined sewer overflows and high infiltration and inflow, are not included because they are similar to one another and are not independent. Thus, one of the variables for the contingency-table
analysis is the presence of one or both of the following factors: (1) industrial contributions to collection systems and (2) high infiltration and inflow. The second variable is the range within which the per capita return-flow value falls: 0-99,100-199, and greater than or equal to 200 gallons per day per person. These ranges were chosen as a somewhat arbitrary attempt to separate low (less than 100) from high (greater than 200) per capita return-flow estimates. The number of municipal wastewater-treatment facilities for each State that falls into this two-factor contingency table is evaluated by use of the chi-square test statistic. An alpha (a) value of 0.05 was used for this analysis.
Table 4 shows that for Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Vermont, there is a statistical association between the absence or presence of anomaly causing factors (industrial contributions and
Table 4. Contingency-table analysis for association between per capita return flows and two anomaly causing factors (industrial contributions and high infiltration and inflow) for municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in New England
[Data represent number of facilities whose wastewater return flows are affected by (0) neither industrial contributions nor high infiltration and inflow, (1) either industrial contributions or high infiltration and inflow, or (2) a combination of industrial contributions and high infiltration and inflow. Null hypothesis (Ho) is that per capita values and explanatory factors are independent (not associated). Chi-square statistic was compared to a tabulated value of 9.488, which corresponds to four degrees of freedom at a = 0.05; >, greater than or equal to; n, number of cases analyzed]
Number of wastewater-treatment facilities for Number of given per capita range of return flow, Chi-square Acceptance or
factors in gallons per day statistic rejection of Ho0-99 100-199
Association Probability present value
>200Connecticut
0 12
1 0
2 0
32 20
3
610 3 } af 14.7993 Rejected
n = 86Yes 0.005
Maine
0 61 3 2 1
35 17
1
21 23 4 } - , , 6.488 Accepted n= 111 r No 0.166
Massachusetts0 13 1 1 2 0
44 19
1
8 17 8 } , 32.105 Rejected n= 111 J Yes 0.000
New Hampshire0 61 4 2 0
11 12 6
10 52 } 4.087 Accepted
n = 56No 0.394
Vermont
0 14 1 8 2 0
19182
611 5
> 11.332 Rejected Yes 0.023
16 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
high infiltration and inflow) and the magnitude of per capita return flows. Therefore, lower per capita return flows for those three States are associated with the absence of contributions from industries and with low infiltration and inflow. The reverse, that higher per capita return flows are associated with the presence of contributions from industries and (or) high infiltration and inflow, also is true. The contingency-table analysis is not intended to produce causal relations between factors. This qualitative analysis was done to propose possible explanations for high or low per capita return flows and to back up the hypothesis with a statistical procedure. Verification of these results is beyond the scope of this report. The results from table 4 complement the non-statistical discussions in the "Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State" section of this report that gives reasons for the variations in the magnitude of per capita return flows for the New England States.
WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND RETURN FLOW, BY STATE
The municipal-wastewater-treatment facility data are organized by State in this section of the report and include data tables that contain facility name, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System number, latitude, longitude, receiving water body, subbasin code, 1990 return flow, MCD served, sewered population, and per capita use and codes. A summary of the data on municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in New England is presented in table 5. The summary includes the year of the data used in this report, the number of major and minor municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in each State, the number of those facilities with 1990 return-flow data in the Permit Compliance System database, the number of facilities that discharge effluent to surface and to ground water, the number of regional municipal wastewater-treatment facilities, and the median per capita return flow for each State.
Table 5. Summary of data about municipal wastewater-treatment facilities and median per capita return flow in New England, by State
[USEPA classification: Municipal wastewater-treatment facilities with USEPA classifications of Major have design flows of at least 1 million gallons per day. Those classified as Minor have design flows that are less than 1 million gallons per day. Abbreviations: USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; PCS, Permit Compliance System; gal/d, gallon per day; , not applicable]
State
Connecticut ............
Maine .....................
Massachusetts.........
New Hampshire......
Rhode Island ..........
Vermont... ...............
New England..........
USEPA classification
Major Minor Major Minor Major Minor Major Minor Major Minor Major Minor Major Minor All facilities
Year of data used in this
report
1990 1990 1990 1990 1990 1991 1990 1990 1990 1990 1990 1992
Number of municipal wastewater- treatment facilities with
1990 return- flow data
in PCS database
6420 62 35 89
1 36
0 19
1 27
0 297
57 354
Return flows to surface water
64 19 63 47 88 22 38 29 19
1 28 53
300 171 471
Return flows to ground water
0 3 0 3 1 3 0 6 0 0 0 3 1
21 19
Number of regional facilities
25 2
14 0
29 1
13 3 7 0 8 4
96 10
106
Median per
capita return flow
(gal/d)
157
186
164
151
184
135
167
Total number of municipal
wastewater- treatment facilities
64 22 63 50 89 25 38 35 19
1 28 56
301 189 490
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State 17
Connecticut
In 1990, 86 municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in Connecticut operated to serve 2.291 million people, or about 70 percent of the State's population of 3.284 million (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991a).
These facilities were in 79 MCDs and served all or parts of 111 out of 171 MCDs in the State (fig. 4). Location, return-flow, and sewered-population data about each municipal wastewater-treatment facility in Connecticut for 1990 are contained in table 6.
73"30'
I _
._.__, ' AT North / . 42 00 I Salisbury £__ Canaan ̂ 5 V '
~~~: / /
73° 00'
I___MASSACHUSETTS ___
CONNECTICUT / 1 JJ
/ L-^
72°30'
~T--
.58; S .-Wi Norfolk*..'
r
\^ \ Somers Suffteld : EnfiekJ
/ Granby 7'S~^
l^^^^rm^^^T- ^ ... ,^g^ ^s ^f East \ f i i
jSimsburyX/ 33^ Vlfe Windsor | ; .' j
72°00'
I
5'>j '. Thompson |
; i > '* !\ : _J . j> _ Putnam I
\pA/ jb! 100002) | 01KJ0001*;.,/°._ i/ _^4 L __,_ .J...... ...A V u-iiii^.,.
LitohfieW
.26 I '
Kent
28 J
>Killingly
! ! J Brooklyn J
,60 i I /S^V--T""""4y"J J 62^/%w{- /Goshen/ JJ New*Cant0n ! J ^J Sou*1 . . _
/ Hartford , Q i J i " "7..B4 Windsor; Vemon <,. -- . .'Tornngton / ; / ^. J - f Bloomfield! /» ^,-1.* /T. ? ,77
s IWansfield ,
< i^-:'J' -~. ^ /
Morris \ / I \eo' Bristo1 Pi''--*' i I" \ ^jjW^-TGlastonbury _i " r--^ ^-"N^v i !' j "' ~<^n"~ '
\\. ..... N>01100005'I 74^!l| ^^'K^ 1̂ ?'v?2fti0iz"u^-i- -T""S \Hebran>̂ "'w ^v; VKs^rVv-'--"\ 0 .P~T ;c^.«,in^' Bertin -Cronj^elh; °rtl A \ | ^
il.,- iwoico^ ft5/^i'^ Hi53 / VA'~' :v\ h^T-^nrJ--"'\ \ ^"-Tv- "M. t^--J 5 East \ Colchester 1 -. YttonMnU.- \WaterV J30 -/ 1C|^; Meriden|r'i~x ^5 ^ Hampton^ ___,'\ ,> ( 4%r V^-.
ninkn«ni- \ ,-l 01100603--AV " ;01080205 i <. j _ >'__ ,n1lr»nn/
02030101^1^;') 01100005
41°00' -
~~ '-' fridge-*.'
', Wilton \ X Fairfield f port
10 20 MILES
10 20 KILOMETERS
Base from U.S. Geological Survey Digital Line Graphs from 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle maps Connecticut State Plane, Zone 3526 scale 1:24,000
LONG ISLAND SOUND
EXPLANATION
STATE BOUNDARY
MINOR CIVIL DIVISION BOUNDARY
_.._.._.._ DRAINAGE-SUBBASIN BOUNDARY
01100006 DRAINAGE-SUBBASIN CODE-Shown in table 1. First four numbers indicate subregional basin and last four numbers indicate subbasin
B40 WASTEWATER-TREATMENT FACILITY AND NUMBER-Shown in table 6
Figure 4. Locations of Minor Civil Division boundaries, drainage-subbasin boundaries, and municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in Connecticut.
18 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
Table 6. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Connecticut, 1990
[Wastewater-treatment facilities in bold print are Regional facilities. 1990 return flow: Average discharge determined from USEPA Permit Compliance System database, 1990 data (Ed Kim, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992). NPDES, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Sys tem. Sewered population: Estimated from USBC (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991a; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991g). Sewered population numbers are rounded to the nearest 10 people. Possible causes for high per capita use values are indicated by the following codes: F, infiltration and inflow; G, large popula tion in group quarters; I, contributions from industries; L, large seasonal population; and O, combined sewers. Mgal/d, million gallon per day; gal/d, gallon per day. --, not applicable]
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Bethel 1 ..... ...................
Bridgeport East1 .......
Bridgeport West1 ......
Bristol 1 ...... ............ ......Canaan Fire District ...
Danbury' ...................
Deep River .................
Derby 1 ........................
East Windsor1 .............
Enfield 1 .......................
Greenwich-Central ' . . . . Groton (City) 1 . ... .........Groton (Town) 1 ..........
Kent... ..................... ....KiUingly 1 .... ............ ....
Litchfield ...................
Metropolitan District Commission-
Refer ence No.
fig. 4]
1734
5
6
18 9
10
11
1?
n
141*5
16171819
?0
21112374
757677
7.8
79
30
NPDES No.
\
CT0100013CT0101061CT0100021CTO 100048
CT0101010
CTO 100056
CTO 100374CTO 100064 CT0100072
CTO 100081
CT0100145
CT0101745
CT0100161CT0024694
CTO 1001 96CT0100200
CT0101044CT0100218
CT0100226CTO 100234 CT0101184PT010O74'?
CT0101681
PT010O769
CT0100277CT0101257
CT0100803
PT010O793
CT0100307
Latitude
412012412548412248411549411020
410933
414004420145 414900
413153414557
412407
412357
411900413314
415507415802
410747414345
414221
410056 412114
412017412620
413556414334414740
414349
414610
413517
Long itude
730452730412732525724824
731029
731248
725514732010 725520
725213721806
732440
722609
730511723326
723713723623
731506724945
723641
733741 720503
720458715801
715835732832715312
731202
77340ft
723905
Receiving water body
Pequonnock River
Cedar Creek
Pequabuck RiverBlackberry River
Ground-waterdischarge
East Swamp Brook
Ground-waterdischarge
Greenwich Harbor
discharge
Sub- basin code .
01100005011000050110000501100004
01100006
01100006
0108020701100005 01080207
0110000401100002
01100005
01080205
01 i noons01080205
01080205
010802050110000601080207
0108020501100006 01100003niinnnm01100003
01 1OOOO1
0110000501 1OOOO1
01 IftftftftS
01080205
01080205
1990 return flow
Mgal/d)
2.67.19
1.082.62
10.87
23.57
10.76.23 .50
2.074 06
7.93
.07
1.74.96
1.12
4.917.573 24
1.89
9.83 1.992.815 .22
.55
.062.61
.61
5.84
18.32
Per capita return flow and codes
(gal/d)
147 F66 -
112 --115 F
239 I,O
200 I,O
190 --
190 F,L 126 --
154 --
65 -
182 --
93 --
149 F,O96 --
167 --
116 0172 F,I158 --
113 I
225 FI134 --121 G,I92 -
135 0
103 --245 F
236 -
123
126 I
Town (Minor Civil
Division) served(«g. 4)
Bethel
Bridgeport Stratford
Bridgeport Trumbull BristolNorth Canaan
Burlington
Coventry
DanburyBrookfield Deep River
Colchester
Hebron
Enfield
Avon
Greenwich
KentKillinglyBrooklyn
Morris
Berlin
Middletown
Sewered popula
tion
18,1802,8609,610
22,700
242,990 32,500
2 102,200
15,850 56,5202 1,210 3,590
370 13,460
970
41,9901,640
750
11,7105,6504,180
180 6,700
42,44044 040
16,980
33,500 16,74043,660 14,87023,270
2,400
4,060580
8,8101,850 3,090
490 47,390
10,67012,940
13,690
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State 19
Table 6. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Connecticut, 1990 Continued
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Refer ence No.
(fig. 4)
NPDES Latitude ^°"9~ No. ° ' " . " J
Receiving water body
Sub- basin code
1990 return flow
(Mgal/d)
Per capita return flow and codes
(gal/d)
Town (Minor Civil
Division) served(fig. 4)
Sewered popula
tion
Metropolitan District Commission- Cromwell Continued
Metropolitan District Commission-East Hartford1 ............... 31 CT0100170 414545 723901 Hockanum River 01080205 11.53 233
New Britain Newington Rocky Hill
East HartfordMetropolitan District
Commission- Hartford 1 ..............
Metropolitan District Commission- Windsor-
32 CTO 100251 414353 723923 Connecticut River 01080205 64.15 304 F,I,O HartfordBloomfield West Hartford
75,04028,6804,160
49,490
137,65016,70056,690
Meriden 1 .....................
Milford-Beaver
Milford
New Haven EastShore 1 ....................
New Milford 1 .............Norfolk.......................
Plainfield North 1 .......
Plainfield Village........ Plainville 1 . ..................Plymouth 1 ...................
33
3435
36
37
3839
4041
42
43
444546
47
4849
50 5152
CTO 100994
CT0100315CTO 100323
CT0100749
CT0101656
CTO 100935CTO 100641
CT0101273CTO 100331
CTO 100366
CTO 100382
CTO 100391CT0101231CTO 100404
CT0101249
CT0100412CTO 100447
CTO 100439 CTO 100455CTO 100463
415326
413050413329
411140
411340
412623412820
410821415206
411700
412031
413408415957412152
410608
413136414313
414007 414110414008
724007
724943723828
730643
730640
720609730313
732852725730
725358
720549
732432731355725222
732447
720511715508
715542 725159725932
Quinnipiac RiverConnecticut River
Housatonic River
Quinnipiac River
Fivemile River
New Haven Harbor
Housatonic RiverBlackberry River
Moosup River
Mill Brook
Peauabuck River
01080207
0110000401080205
01100004
01100004
0110000301100005
0110000601080207
01100004
01100003
011000050110000501100004
01100006
0110000301100001
01100001 0108020701100005
2.34
9.934.81
2.03
6.39
.986.66
1.35.07
38.72
5.11
.44
.353.60
12.58
7.36.67
.59 2.060.94
95
179188
158
220
119227
18383
191
176
61402170
186
274143
137 176108
East Granby F,I MeridenO Middletown
Middletield
Milford
F MilfordOrange
Middlebury
I,O New HavenEast Haven Hamden Woodbridge
East Lyme Waterfbrd New Milford
F,G,L Norfolk
North Branford
I,O NorwalkWilton
Plainfield Sterling Plainfield
I PlainvillePlymouth
23,900630
55,380225,290
240
12,810
28,500530
8,27027,5303 1,800 7,360
840
129,20025,050 47,510
1,050 28,150
1,470 10,820 7,230
87016,6204,510
65,7201,790
26,8904,310
370 4,310
16,3208.700
20 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
Table 6. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Connecticut, 1990 Continued
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Portland1 . ....................
Ridgefield Route 7 ..... Ridgefield Main
Rocky Hill 1 ................
Sharon ........................Shelton-Riverdale ......
Somers. .......................South Windsor1 ..........
Stafford 1 ....................
Stamford 1 ..................
Stonington-Borough . . . S tonington-My stic ...... Stonington-
Stratford1 ....................Suffield1 ......................Thomaston 1 ................
University of
Vernon1 .......................
Wallingford 1 ...............Waterbury 1 . ........ .......
Watertown Fire District 1 . .................
West Haven 1 ...............
Winchester- Winsted1 ..
Refer ence No.
(«g. 4]
5354
55
5657
58596061 62
6364
656667
68
6970
717273747576
7778
7980
81828384
85
NPDES No.
1
CT0101150CTO 100960
CT0101451
CTO 100854CTO 100480
CT0100498CT0100501CT0101052CT0100714 CT0100919
CT0101605CT0100510
CT0100536CT0100978CT0101214
CT0101087
CT0101281 CTO 100544
CT0101290CT0101036CT0100552CTO 100781CTO 100706CTO 100579
CT0101320CTO 100609
CT0100617CTO 100625
CT0100633CT0101079CTO 100684CT0101001
CT0101222
Latitude
413408415430
411853
411730414101
415757412158415302411844 415215
415855414929
413405413657415703
410241
412000 412059
412100411040415730413842415557414645
414833415150
412646413119
413526411602410715414252
415625
Long itude
723845715430
732800
732916723848
732550730519732917730500724754
722935723728
725259720400721817
733147
715415 715801
715015730736723730730448715346730658
721529722910
725017730236
7-1 0604
725557732151721137
730316
Receiving water body
Connecticut River
Norwalk River
Ridgefield Brook
Ten Mile RiverHousatonic River
Woods Stream
Quinnipiac River
Willimantic River
Long Island Sound
Pawcatuck River Mystic River
Hockaman River
Quinnipiac RiverNaugatuck River
Willimantic River
Still River
Sub- basin code ,
0108020501100001
01100006
0110000601080205
01100005011000050110000501100005 01080207
0108020501080205
011000040110000201100002
01100006
01100003 01100003
0110000301100005
010802050110000501 100001
01100005
0110000201080205
0110000401100005
0110000501 10OflO4
01100006
01100002
01080207
1990 return flow
Mgal/d)
.651.44
.01
.936.60
.371.62.06
1.92 1.79
.052.18
4.43.18
1.34
15.83
.19
.51
337.62
.961.10
.216.44
1.484.57
6.0822.69
.827.821.832.56
1.71
Per capita return flow and codes
(gal/d)
154 O185 -
100 --
194 F179 G
274 F,L160 -214 F,L108 O 139 -
45 G84 --
267 F118 F224 I
157 F,I
178 - 276 -
88 -167 I164 F186 --99 --
203 F,I
122 -163 I
168 F187 O
110 --147 I228 O126 G,I
203 --
Town (Minor Civil
Division) served(«g. 4)
Portland
Woodstock Ridgefield
Rocky HillWethersfield
Shelton
Avon Granby SomersSouth
Windsor
StaffordEllington
Darien Stonington Stonington
StratfordSuffield
Harwinton
Ellington
WaterburyMiddlebury Watertown Wolcott
Westport
Mansfield Winchester
Sewered popula
tion
4,2307,100
680 3 100
4,7903 1 1,80025,160
1,35010,130
28017,710 10,4003 1,200 1,250 1,110
25,920
16,5901,5305,180
3800 89,37011,630
1,070 1,850
3,770244,510
5,8405,9002,120
31,080680
2 12,140
26,2603 1,700 36,090
106,2401,060
37,600 6,440
7,46053,160
8,03016,8703,470 8,440
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State 21
Table 6. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Connecticut, 1990 Continued
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Total. ...................
Refer ence No.
(fig- 4)
86
NPDES No.
CT0101591
Latitude *" Receiving . , water body
415443 723749 Connecticut River
Sub- basin code
01080205
1990 return flow
(Mgal/d)
1.60
417.47
Per capita return flow and codes
(gal/d)
131 --
Town (Minor Civil
Division) served
Locks
Sewered popula
tion
12,190
2,290,940
'Classified as a major facility by the USEPA (Ed Kim, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992).Estimated from USEPA Needs Survey database (Larry MacMillan, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992).3Data provided by State of Connecticut database (Dennis Greci, Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, oral commun., 1992).4Average discharge estimated on the basis of sewered population times average self-supplied domestic per capita of 65 gal/d (Solley and
others, 1993).'Average discharge determined from USEPA Permit Compliance System database, 1991 data (Ed Kim, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written
commun., 1992).
The largest numbers of facilities are in the densely pop ulated central corridor that trends north to south along the Connecticut River that includes the greater Hartford and New Haven areas and the southwestern corner of the State from Greenwich to Stratford. These densely populated areas also accounted for the largest volumes of return flow.
Return flows from the 86 municipal wastewater- treatment facilities in Connecticut totalled more than 417 Mgal/d. There were 27 regional wastewater- treatment facilities that serviced areas in more than one MCD. The return flow from each of 23 of these regional facilities was greater than 1 Mgal/d. The Met ropolitan District Commission (MDC) treated more than 96 Mgal/d and served 0.431 million people in 1990. The State's largest municipal wastewater- treatment plant, the Hartford Wastewater-Treatment Facility, was under the jurisdiction of the MDC. This facility treated and discharged more than 64 Mgal/d to the Connecticut River during 1990 (table 6). The next largest municipal wastewater-treatment facilities were New Haven East Shore, Bridgeport West, and Water- bury.
Eighty-three of the 86 facilities served 2.287 mil lion people and discharged 417 Mgal/d of wastewater to surface water. The remaining three facilities (Coven try, Deep River and Highlands in Ledyard) served 0.004 million people and discharged less than 1 Mgal/d on a combined basis to ground water. In addition, about 0.993 million people in Connecticut were not served by
sewer systems; based on typical wastewater generation of 65 gal/d per person, disposal to ground water from this population was estimated to be almost 65 Mgal/d.
The Connecticut River drainage area subregion (0108) in Connecticut assimilated 153 Mgal/d of waste water-return flow from a population of 0.816 mil lion (calculated from table 6). Monthly return-flow volumes for 1990 by subregional drainage basin (for example, 0108) and by drainage subbasin (for example, 01080001) are presented in appendix 1. Ninety-one percent (265 Mgal/d) of return flows into the Connecti cut Coastal Basins subregion (0110), which includes the Quinebaug, Shetucket, Quinnipiac, and Housatonic Subbasins (table 1, fig. 1), were from municipal waste- water-treatment facilities in the State of Connecticut; the remainder were from facilities in Massachusetts.
Per capita return flow for municipal wastewater- treatment facilities in Connecticut ranged from 45 to 402 gal/d, with a median of 157 gal/d. Of the 19 facilities with per capita return flows greater than 200 gal/d, 15 had at least one potential anomaly- causing factor (table 6), of which the most important appeared to be high infiltration and inflow, industrial- wastewater contributions, and combined sewer overflows. Results of the contingency-table analysis confirm that, in Connecticut, high infiltration and inflow and the presence of industrial-wastewater contributions were statistically associated with the high per capita return-flow values (table 4).
22 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
Maine
Maine consists of a largely rural population except in the southern and southeastern sections of the State. During 1990, there were 113 municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in Maine in 111 MCDs that served all or part of 130 MCDs (fig. 5, table 7). Most of the facilities in Maine (73 percent) processed less than 1 Mgal/d on an average day. Sewered population in Maine for 1990 was 0.587 million people or about 48 percent of the State's total population of 1.228 million (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991b).
In 1990, return flows from municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in Maine were over 136 Mgal/d. Fourteen regional facilities served 0.232 million people or 38 percent of Maine's sewered population. The city of Portland treated more than 23 Mgal/d and served 0.081 million people in 1990 (table 7). This waste water was discharged to Casco Bay and the Presumpscot River. Other large facilities included the Lewiston-Auburn and the Kennebec Sanitary District facilities.
All but three of the 113 facilities in Maine discharged to surface water (136 Mgal/d) and served a sewered population of about 0.585 million (calculated from table 7). The Brownville, Kingfield, and Vassalboro Wastewater Treatment Facilities together served about 0.002 million people and discharged 0.15 Mgal/d of wastewater to ground water. About 0.641 million people in Maine were not connected to a wastewater collection system. This unsewered population generated almost 42 Mgal/d of wastewater (using a coefficient of 65 gal/d per person) that was returned to ground water through on-site septic systems. Thirty-eight percent of the municipal wastewater-return flow from facilities in Maine were in the Saco River Basin subregion (0106), predominantly from the Presumpscot (01060001) River Subbasin (Appendix 1).
Per capita return flows by municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in Maine ranged from 45 to 1,197 gal/d, with a median of 186 gal/d. In many cases, per capita return flows were greater if sewered population values from the USEPA Needs Survey database were used instead of estimates based on the USBC. Forty-eight facilities had per capita return
flows greater than 200 gal/d; for all but seven of these facilities, flows can be potentially explained by one or more of the following factors: presence of combined sewers, high infiltration and inflow, and (or) industrial contributions (table 7). However, results of the contingency-table analysis (table 4) indicate that per capita return flows greater than 200 gal/d were not statistically associated with industrial connections to collection systems and high infiltration and inflow. The statistical analysis does not reflect that large seasonal populations or combined sewer overflows in many of these facilities could help to explain the high per capita estimates.
Massachusetts
Massachusetts had more municipal wastewater- treatment facilities (114) than any other New England State. During 1990, these facilities served 4.366 million or almost 73 percent of a total population of 6.015 million (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991c). As shown in figure 6, these facilities were in 104 MCDs and were distributed evenly throughout the State. In Massachusetts, 200 of the 351 MCDs were served entirely or in part by sewer systems. Location, return flow, and sewered-population data about each of these facilities is included in table 8.
In 1990, total return flows from municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in Massachusetts were 905 Mgal/d. Eighty-one percent (3.54 million people) of the State's sewered population were connected to 32 regional facilities. The MWRA, an independent agency that sells water and provides sewer services to 43 cities and towns in the greater Boston area, is the largest wastewater system in New England (table 8). The two largest regional systems in the State, the Deer Island and Nut Island facilities, are part of the MWRA. These two facilities served 1.96 million people, or 45 percent of the State's sewered population; the 406 Mgal/d discharged from them accounts for 45 percent of return flows in Massachusetts. Another regional facility, the Greater Lawrence Sewer District, served over half of the population of Salem, New Hampshire (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 199 Id) as well as four communities in Massachusetts.
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State 23
I ! >' V-- \ fo J:\r-Pc.t j_J_JL-A \ijT-r-"l v>\
, i rT \ "T j-vt ; '-H
24 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
\ S.
W-T
> ^\U
A-i--
^
*4-»
* t
IX
Q>
0> i o o 3 3 o s
45C
44C
. - f
L
i-
-* "
"
i \
^V
""l
/_
-V-
'7^
. _J
.---
f""T
""
\ C
---4:
^]
0102
0005
r-"
w ^
V""
?""
" \
\^7T
"-"
1010
3000
3 ^
V.-
-!
\ ^
i-^
V^
^"\T
T.!?
ir4-
--"'-
X--
Vf~
'l
\
.^^ "
"'V
'1'
V H
arta
nd'-a
. ~
-~\ ~
~"\
'\
V,.
v-^
f "
6ro
noJ7
V
"'*
""»
i
>
-T-
"" /
\ U
nsgl
\^
"v-^
\
..i-r-
^xX
75 ^v
> ^
> I
5 in
son
f
M
» J-
\«»\
\,6
6X
r,.W
r
\Ba
n9
or \>
C;^
/ f
\- "
-t""" \
\ \
\ \ ̂
~^~
r&
\ V
~^T
n\
^ -iW
^-A
""\
* 01050002-"
t-"^
T^
/j ^.
.Anl
-i^^f
e;^n"
\ i\~r
\ A^V
^\
\ X
F^V
A
».A
.,4'^
'Urw
tr/'
B^«4
-^"u
'1^"^
'"^r
'' ^
V -
u ^"
=^Hi
pw
-\
\ J -
--i.
rn
rn
f t
, ^
y-H
Hrt
-TlQ
X
V
. f
\ i
>. \
_^
\»
f
"v
^-J
>\
>T.
55
Base
from
U.S
. Geo
logi
cal S
urve
y di
gita
l dat
a U
nive
rsal
Tra
nsve
rse
Mer
cato
r pro
ject
ion
Zone
19
1:25
0,00
0 sc
ale
20 I40
MIL
ES
_J
0106
0003
48
EX
PLA
NA
TIO
N
NA
TIO
NA
L B
OU
ND
AR
Y
STA
TE
BO
UN
DA
RY
MIN
OR
CIV
IL D
IVIS
ION
BO
UN
DA
RY
DR
AIN
AG
E-S
UB
BA
SIN
BO
UN
DA
RY
DR
AIN
AG
E-S
UB
BA
SIN
CO
DE
-Sho
wn
in t
able
1.
Firs
t fou
r num
bers
ind
icat
e su
breg
iona
l bas
in a
nd
last
fou
r nu
mbe
rs i
ndic
ate
subb
asin
WA
STE
WA
TE
R-T
RE
AT
ME
NT
FA
CIL
ITY
A
ND
NU
MB
ER
-Sho
wn
in t
able
7
20I 40
KIL
OM
ET
ER
S
Figu
re 5
. Loc
atio
ns o
f Min
or C
ivil
Div
isio
n bo
unda
ries,
dra
inag
e-su
bbas
in b
ound
arie
s, a
nd m
unic
ipal
was
tew
ater
-trea
tmen
t fac
ilitie
s in
Mai
ne.
Table 7. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Maine, 1990
[Wastewater treatment facilities in bold print are Regional facilities. 1990 return flow: Average discharge determined from USEPA Permit Compliance System database, 1990 data (Ed Kim, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992). NPDES, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Sewered population: Estimated from USBC (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991b; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991h). Sewered population numbers are rounded to the nearest 10 people. Possible causes for high per capita use values are indicated by the following codes: F, infiltration and inflow; G, large population in group quarters; I, contributions from industries; L, large seasonal population; and O, combined sewers. Mgal/d, million gallon per day; gal/d, gallons per day. , not applicable]
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Refer ence No.
(fig. 5)
NPDES No.
Latitude L°"g- , itude
Receiving water body
Sub- basin code
1990 return flow
(Mgal/d)
Per capita return flow and codes
(gal/d)
Town (Minor Civil
Division) served(fig. 5)
Sewered popula
tion
Anson-Madison 1 ..
Ashland... Augusta1 .
Baileyville 1 Bangor'.....
Bar Harbor Hulls Cove..................
Bar Harbor Main1 .. Bath 1 ......................Belfast 1 ..................Berwick1 ................
Bethel.
Biddeford 1 ............Bingham...............Blue Hill...............Boothbay Harbor1
Brewer1 ................Brownville............
Brunswick1
Bucksport1 .. Calais 1 ........Camden1 .....Canton........Caribou 1 .....Castine........Corinna 1 .....
Danforth ................
Dover Foxcroft......
East Machias.........
East Millinocket ...
1 ME0101389 444740 695312 Kennebec River 01030003 4.23 855 L,O
2 ME0101087 4638073 ME0100013 441832
4 ME0101320 4509095 ME0100781 444622
6 ME0101273 4424497 ME0101214 4423168 MEO100021 4355419 ME0101532 442542
10 ME0101397 431456
19202122232425
ME0100111 ME0100129 MEO 100137 MEO 102067 ME0100145 ME0101192 ME0100153
445457451117441235442650465045442339445510
26 ME0100161 454003
27 ME0100501 451102
28 ME0102156 444353
29 ME0100196 453706
682453 Aroostook River 694628 Kennebec River
672314 St. Croix River 684721 Penobscot River
681455681154694840690023705028
11 ME0101176 442453 704726
12 MEO 100048 432923 70263113 MEO 100056 450210 69515414 ME0101231 442432 68350415 ME0100064 435109 693810
16 MEO 100072 444623 68471117 ME0100099 452114 690303
18 MEO 100102 435453 695631
695651671605690349701835675659684724691535
675221
691106
Frenchman's Bay Frenchman's Bay Kennebec River Belfast Harbor Salmon Falls
River Androscoggin
River Saco River Jackson Brook Blue Hill Bay Booth Bay Harbor
Penobscot River Ground-water
discharge Androscoggin
RiverPenobscot River St. Croix River Camden Harbor Whitney Brook Aroostook River Penobscot Bay Sebasticook River
East Branch Baskahegan
Stream Piscataquis River
672349 East MachiasRiver
683401 Penobscot RiverWest Branch
0101000401030003
0105000101020005
0105000201050002010500030105000201060003
01040002
01060002010300030105000201050003
0102000501020004
01060001
01020005010500010105000201040002010100040105000201030003
01020003
01020004
01020005
01020001
Madison Anson
.27 325 F Ashland 4.55 197 I,O Augusta
Hallowell Manchester Monmouth Winthrop
.31 242 F Baileyville 37.61 219 F,I,O Bangor
Hampden
4.06 261 L Bar Harbor1.13 350 L,O Bar Harbor2.24 242 I,O Bath
.59 142 I,O Belfast
.73 270 F,I Berwick
.16 165
3.84.12
4 .03
.29
3.444 .03
237 1,0126 F125 -254 O
423 I,O45
Bethel
Biddeford Bingham Blue Hill Boothbay
Harbor Brewer Brownville
2.97 163 -- BrunswickTopsham
.38 179 O Bucksport
.53 166 O Calais
.78 245 I,L,O Camden".04 98 - Canton1.21 198 I,O Caribou
.15 197 F Castine
.61 587 F,I,O Corinna
.05 217 Danforth
3 .32 142 O Dover-Foxcroft
".08 151 -- East Machias
.50 233 F,O EastMillinocket
24,3702570
2830
16,2402,180
8001,0202,8001,280
31,4303,300
2230
23,2309,250
24,160
2,700
970
16,200950240
1,140
8,130660
14,1604,1102,1203,2003,190
4106,100
760
5 1,040
230
2,250
5530
2,150
26 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
Table 7. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Maine, 1990 Continued
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Ellsworth1 ...............Falmouth 1 ....... .......
Fort Fairfield1 .........Fort Kent 1 ...............Freeport1 .. ...............
Gardiner1 ..............
Refer ence No.
(«g. 5)
3031
32333435
36
NPOES No.
i
MEO 100889ME0100218
ME0101249MEO 100226MEO 100234ME0101036
ME0101702
Latitude
443207434231
443902464637
471515435009
441133
Long itude
682517701456
700821675028683507700602
694528
Receiving water body
Blue Hill Bay
River Estuary
HarraseeketEstuary
Kennebec River
Sub- basin code
0105000201060001
01030003010100040101000301060001
01030003
1990 return flow
[Mgal/d]
0.55.95
.47
.59
.28
.45
1.35
Per capita return flow and codes
1 (gal/d)
185 --168 --
109 --259 F96 F201 --
147 F.O
Town (Minor Civil !
Division) served (fig. 5)
Ellsworth
Cumberland
Fort Kent
Gardiner
Sewered popula
tion
2,9804,1301,510 4,3102,2802,9202,240
5.130
Great Salt Bay. 37 ME0101516 440313 693121
GuilfordSangerville1 .........
Hartland 1 Houlton 1 .
Islesboro....................Jackman.....................North Jay...................Kennebec Sanitary
District
Kennebunk 1 .............Kennebunkport1 ......
Kingfield.................
Kittery1 ...................
Lewiston Auburn 1
Limerick .................
Limestone1 Lincoln 1 ..... Lisbon 1 ......
Livermore Falls1 ...
Lubec ......................Machias 1 ..................Madawaska.............Maine Correctional. Mapleton ................
5556575859
Damariscotta River
01050003
Farmingdale Randolph
.17 138 -- Damariscotta
38 ME0102032 451014 692132 Piscataquis River 01030003 .44 143 F
39 ME0101443 445251 69270640 ME0101290 460923 674904
41 ME0100269 441541 68543542 ME0100978 453816 70153543 ME0101061 443250 701435
Sebasticook River Meduxnekeag
RiverPenobscot Bay Moose River Seven Mile Stream
0103000301010005
010500020103000101040002
44 ME0100854 443132 693922 Kennebec River 01030003
45 MEO 10093546 ME0101184
47 ME0101711
48 MEO 100285
49 ME0101478
50 MEO 100871
51 ME010109552 ME010179653 ME0100307
432057432133
445731
430521
440501
433955
465422452235435928
54 MEO 100315 442807
702847 Mousam River 01060003 702841 Kennebunk River 01060003
700908 Ground-water 01030003discharge
704535 Piscataqua River 01060003
701238 Androscoggin 01040002River
704324 Little Ossipee 01060002River
674845 Limestone Stream 01010004 683030 Penobscot River 01020005 700302 Androscoggin 01040002
River 701105 Androscoggin 01040002
River
ME0102016 445150ME0100323 444306ME0101681 472129
665914 Machias River 01050002 672704 Machias River 01050002 681931 St. John River 01010001
ME0101729 434519 702249 Presumpscot River 01060001 ME0101257 464101 680913 Presquelsle 01010004
Stream
Guilford Sangerville
.91 1,197 I,L Hartland 2.11 302 -- Houlton
.04 250 F,L4.07 88.04 100 --
4.23 .39 .66 .04 .14
Islesboro Jackman Jay
11.62 452 I,O Waterville Benton Fairfield Winslow
.90 199 I,L,O Kennebunk
.30 233 L Kennebunk-port
4.05 135 ~ Kingfield
I.29 228 G Kittery Eliot
II.78 207 F,I,O LewistonAuburn
.05 139 ~ Limerick
.33 57 F,G Limestone
.80 277 F,L,O Lincoln
.90 133 I Lisbon
.83 177 O
280 L212 G,O186 --167 --
264 F
LivermoreFalls
Jay Lubec Machias Madawaska Windham Mapleton
2,1701,870
2 1,300
2 1,0902 1,980
76026,980
2 160
8002400
16,200440
3,7505,3104,5301,290
370
4,3401,330
37,49019,430
360
5,7602,8906,750
2,310
22,390820
1,8403,550
4240
530
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State 27
Table 7. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Maine, 1990 Continued
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Mars Hill ...................Mechanic
Falls'.....................
\lillinocket1
Milo............ ...............Mount Desert
Town 1 . ............ .......
Northport Village......
Oakland 1 . ...................
Old Orchard Beach 1 ..
Old Town 1 ................
Paris 1 .........................
Passamaquaddy Pleasant Point.......
Passamaquoddy The Strip ......................
Penobscot Indian
Pittsfield 1 ............. ......Portland (City) 1 ......... Portland
(Westbrook) 1 . .......
Portland Water District
Refer ence No.
(fig. 5)
60
61
6263
64
6566
67
68
69 70
71
7273
74
7576
77
78
7980
8182
83
84
85
NPOES No.
I
ME0101079
MEO 100391
MEO 100404MEO 100803
MEO 100439
MEO 101 346MEO 100447
MEO 10 1885
ME0101907
ME0100901 ME0100455
ME0100463
ME0100986ME0101524
ME0100471
MEO 100498MEO 100951
MEO 100773
MEO 101737
ME0101311ME0101869
MEO 100528MEO 102075
MEO 100846
MEO 100561
ME0102121
Latitude
463100
440652
443207453812
451342
441727445001
431815
440736
442255 441231
443234
431613432955
445507
445241441244
445727
451403
445644435533
444535434012
434109
464202
433528
Long itude
675159
702315
675234684021
685812
681803691621
704417
685204
685803 703119
694312
703507702355
683756
684000703100
670222
673444
683901701550
692257701423
702100
680103
701248
Receiving water body
Prestile Stream
LittleAndroscoggin
Narragaugus RiverWest Branch
Penobscot River
East Branch The Great Works
River
Thoroughfare
Penobscot Bay Little Androscog
gin River
Stream Ogunquit RiverGoosefare Brook
Penobscot River
Penobscot River
gin River
Passamaquoddy Bay
Flowage
Penobscot River
Sebasticook RiverCasco Bay
Presumpscot River
Stream
Sub- basin code
01010005
01040002
0105000201020001
01020004
0105000201030003
01060003
01050002
01050002 01040002
01030003
0106000301060001
01020005
0102000501040002
01050002
01050001
0102000501060001
0103000301060001
01060001
01010004
01060001
1990 return flow
(Mgal/d)
0.18
.40
5 .04
1.53
4.29
.22
.47
.26
.04
.07
.36
.55
.511.33
1.02
1.77.32
.07
.02
.06
.18
1.2320.42
2.54
2.68
.33
Per capita return flow and codes
i (gal/d)
148 O
210 F,0
65 --224 -
169 --
206 L299 F,L
220 --
235 L
226 F,L 145 --
259 F,O
630 L186 L
119 O
207 F,O115 I
127 --
118 --
162 -900 F
319 --333 I,O
142 F,O
324 0
58 0
Town (Minor Civil !
Division) served (fig. 5)
Mars Hill
Falls
Milo
NorthBerwick
Northport
Oakland
Old Orchard Beach
Old TownMilford Orono
Perry
Old Town
Gloucester PittsfieldPortland
Westbrook Gorham
CapeElizabeth
Sewered popula
tion
1,220
1,900
2540
6,840
1,720
1,0701,570
1,180
170
310 2,480
2,120
8107,140
26,7701,780 8,5602,780
5550
2170
2370
^OO
23,85061,270
14,360 3,510 8,280
5,670
28 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
Table 7. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Maine, 1990 Continued
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Rumford-M exico l . . . .
Saco1 ..........................
South Portland 1 .........
Southwest Harbor1 ....
St. Agatha..................
Unity .........................
Wells 1 ........................Wilton 1 ......................
Winterport .................
Yarmouth1 .................York1 .........................
Total.....................
Refer ence NPDES No. No.
(fig. 5)
86 87 88 89
90 91 92 93 94 95 96
97
98
99 100 101
102 103
104 105 106 107 108 109
110 111 112 113
MEO 100579 ME0100587 ME0100595 ME01 00552
ME0101842 ME0101117 ME0100617 ME0102059 ME0101966 ME0100625 ME0100820
ME0100633
MEO 100641
ME0100609 ME0100668 ME0101150
ME0100684 ME0100692
MEO 100706 ME0100714 ME0101028 ME0100790 ME0101915 ME0100731
ME0100749 ME0100757 ME0100765 ME0101222
Latitude
445754 440455 440554
443226
440638 432927 432417 433137 442709 444608 431331
433840
441624
471426 440420 443755
470927 442918
6445045 440537 464625 431653 443509 442338
443759 440015 434729 431055
Long itude
703824 694802 690614 703120
700629 702609 704316 701838 685447 694246 704832
701717
681926
681818 691105 692309
675556 693734
6684243 692235 680919 703423 701355 680502
685043 693940 700956 703613
Receiving water body
Haley Pond Kennebec River Rockland Harbor Androscoggin
River
Sabattus River Saco River Mousam River Atlantic Ocean Searsport Harbor Kennebec River Salmon Falls
River Fore River and
Casco Bay Atlantic Ocean
Long Lake St. George River Twenty-Five Mile
Stream St. Johns River Ground-water
discharge Penobscot River Medomak River Aroostook River Saco River Wilson Stream Henry Cove
Penobscot River Sheepscot River Royal River Cape Neddick
River
Sub- basin code
01040001 01030003 01050003 01040002
01040002 01060002 01060003 01060001 01050002 01030003 01060003
01060001
01050002
01010003 01050003 01030003
01010001 01030003
01020005 01050003 01010004 01060003 01030003 01050002
01020005 01050003 01060001 01060003
1990 Per capita return return flow flow and codes
(Mgal/d) (gal/d)
0.12 .30
2.33 1.50
.11 1.82 2.50 1.06 .10
1.42 .25
6.71
.23
.04
.61
.23
.43
.07
5 .10 .14
3 .14 .62 .19 .13
.16
.17
.66 1.06
136.07
414 194 332 144
85 161 166 134 109 213 82
297
197
138 253 511
150 100
65 139 144 148 79 165
182 138 108253
F,L 0 I F
0 F,I,O I
F,0 F
I,O
G,O G,0
O
F,I
F,0
1,0
Town (Minor Civil
Division) served(«g. 5)
Rangely Richmond Rockland Rumford Mexico Dixfield Sabattus Saco Sanford Scarborough Searsport Skowhegan South
Berwick South Port
land Southwest
Harbor St. Agatha Thomaston Unity
Van Buren Vassalboro
Veazie Waldoboro Washburn Wells Wilton Winter
Harbor Winterport Wiscasset Yarmouth York
Sewered popula
tion
290 1,550 7,010 6,110 2,780 1,520 1,290
11,300 15,090 7,900
920 6,670 3,050
22,630
1,170
290 2,410
450
2,870 700
1,500 1,010
970 4,190 2,390
790
880 1,230 6,090 4,190
586,970
Classified as a major facility by the USEPA (Ed Kim, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992).Estimated from USEPA Needs Survey database (Larry MacMillan, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992).'Average discharge determined from USEPA Permit Compliance System database, 1991 data (Ed Kim, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written
commun., 1992).4Data provided by State of Maine database (Maine Department of Environmental Protection, written commun, 1992).'Average discharge estimated on the basis of sewered population times average self-supplied domestic per capita of 65 gallons per day (Solley and
others, 1993).""Facility latitude and longitude are estimated as the town centroid.
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State 29
o
o_ 5"
ft
o 3
D) Q.
3J 2. c n i m
*S.
D) Q.
73*0
0'
02020003^
K
i"
( J 0
11
0Q
00
5<
oi0
80
20
7r
V
\---
iIU
xb
rid
ge
' _.
.'(_
,/'
lDud,e
y /
f\.
18B
i1
n,
pH
«*-'
V.
Lu
^JA
'^91^
-!M
OD
E I
SLA
ND
Bas
e fro
m U
.S.
Geo
logi
cal S
urve
y di
gita
l dat
a U
nive
rsal
Tra
nsve
rse
Mer
cato
r P
roje
ctio
n S
cale
of c
oast
line
1:2
4.00
0 S
cale
of p
oliti
cal b
ound
arie
s 1:
100,
000
. Wes
tern
Mas
sach
uset
ts
EX
PL
AN
AT
ION
STA
TE B
OU
ND
AR
Y
MIN
OR
CIV
IL D
IVIS
ION
BO
UN
DA
RY
DR
AIN
AG
E-S
UB
BA
SIN
BO
UN
DA
RY
DR
AIN
AG
E-S
UB
BA
SIN
CO
DE
-Sho
wn
in ta
ble
1. Fi
rst f
our n
umbe
rs in
dica
te s
ubre
gion
al b
asin
and
la
st f
our n
umbe
rs i
ndic
ate
subb
asin
WA
STE
WA
TE
R-T
RE
AT
ME
NT
FA
CIL
ITY
A
ND
NU
MB
ER
-Sho
wn
in ta
ble
8
Figu
re 6
. Loc
atio
ns o
f Min
or C
ivil
Div
isio
n bo
unda
ries,
dra
inag
e-su
bbas
in b
ound
arie
s, a
nd m
unic
ipal
was
tew
ater
-trea
tmen
t fac
ilitie
s in
(A)
wes
tern
and
(B
) ea
ster
n M
assa
chus
etts
.
MASSACHUSETTS 71 71 °00'72'
I42'30'-/
EXPLANATION STATE BOUNDARY
42- 50 MILES
0 50 KILOMETERS 41'30'-
- - MINOR CIVIL DIVISION BOUNDARY
DRAINAGE-SUBBASIN BOUNDARY
01090004 DRAINAGE-SUBBASIN CODE-Shown in table 1. First four numbers indicate subregional basin and last four numbers indicate subbasin
WASTEWATER- TREATMENT FACILITY AND NUMBER-Shown in table 8
/ "7 ~V t *\ 8j.<N*2 S"
/"'&/$ (..> ^»*-Y V- '-Lynn" -on'_<J^ VY.j*iLtf&!JJ&. \AO Marblehead
Swampscott>Nahant
erett Chel
nthrop __
66 ATLANTIC OCEAN
Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data 4-) «3Q' _ Universal Transverse Mercator Projection Scale of coast line 1:24,000ouaie ui puiuiudi c
0 10I
I0 10
B. Eastern
raunaanes i:iuu,uuu ' AJ -s / ^ )\ .»,
20 MILES ^Cfi^ *" jy\ ' ^^ I ^ * ~i£*\
1 ' ^« ^\ r y* \1 X^ v Nantucket 1
20 KILOMETERS o ^^^-§i-^^
1
Massachusetts
Figure 6. Locations of Minor Civil Division boundaries, drainage-subbasin boundaries, and municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in (A) western and (B) eastern Massachusetts Continued.
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State 31
Table 8. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Massachusetts, 1990
[Wastewater treatment facilities in bold print are Regional facilities. 1990 return flow: Average discharge determined from USEPA Permit Compliance System database, 1990 data (Ed Kim, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992). NPDES, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Sys tem. Sewered population: Estimated from USBC (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991c; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991i). Sewered population numbers are rounded to the nearest 10 people. Possible causes for high per capita use values are indicated by the following codes: F, infiltration and inflow; G, large popula tion in group quarters; I, contributions from industries; L, large seasonal population; and O, combined sewers. Mgal/d, million gallon per day; gal/d, gallons per day. , not applicable]
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Amherst 1 .....................Athol 1 ..........................Attleboro 1 .. ..................
Billerica 1 .....................
Brockton Regional 1 ...
Charlton 1 .....................
East Fitchburg 1 ... .........
Easthampton 1 ..............
Fall River 1 ...................
Gloucester 1 ..................Grafton 1 .......................Great Barrington 1 ........
Refer ence No.
(«9- 6]
12
34567
89
10
11
12
13141516
171819
202122
2324
25
262728
NPDES No.
>
MAO 1003 15MA0101745
MA0100218MAO 100005MAO 100595MA0100013MA0102016
MAO 103 152MA0101711MAO 100641
MA0101010
MAO 102598
MA0101141MAO 101 508MAO 100285MAO 100668
MA0101605MA0101095MAO 100986
MA01 01478MA01 01052MA01 00765
MA01 00382MA0101729
MA01 00994
MAO 100625MA0101311MA0101524
Latitude
423841425026
422314423508415351423339414033
422235423530415943
420245
420835
420827420908421430422830
413524420440423249
421644423550413819
414036413312
423411
423645421030421123
Long itude
730634705539
723220721435712013713613702258
720700711722705804
710030
712300
715944723733704840712030
705933714240714511
723851722326705234
711140703639
720114
704050724100732129
Receiving water body
Back Rivers Connecticut River
Ten Mile River
discharge
Salisbury Plain
Cady Brook
Nashua RiverNorth Branch
Connecticut River
Mt. Hope Bay
discharge
Otter River
Housatonic River
Sub- basin code
0202000301070002
0108020101080202010900040107000401090002
010802040107000S
01090004
01090004
01090001
01100001010802040109000201070005
010900020109000301070004
010802010108020201090002
010900020100000?
01080202
010900010109000301100005
1990 return-
flow [Mgal/d)
2.341.85
4.651.565.351.42
3 14
2.58.79
14.97
3.60
.0912.58
3 .08
.98
1.87
8.10
2.471.902.50
30.88
3.32
3.341.102.99
Per capita return flow and codes
(gal/d)
253 I137 I
149 -174 F205 I242 -
65 -
84 -158 I126 -
168 I
139 -
73 -230 F.I.O
71 -153 -
133 -87 -
324 I,O
168 I2,676 I196 --
343 I,O65 --
167 I
194 I,O162 -372 G.I.L
Town (Minor Civil
Division) served
Adams
AmherstAtholAttleboro
Brockton Abington
Bellingham Franklin Millis Charlton
Easthampton
Mattapoisett Fall River
Templeton
Great
Sewered popu lation
9,24013,510
31,2308,980
26,1405,8708,820
1,67016,3106,270
87,960 4 1,340 5,3701,810
15,540 3,100
82054 590
1,1306,420
14,0501,720
25,000
14,690710
11,5401,190
89,9502 3SO
18,730
17,2206,790
48,030Barrington
32 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
Table 8. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Massachusetts, 1990 Continued
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Greater Lawrence Sewer District 1 ......
Greenfield 1 ..................
Hatfield........................Haverhill 1 ...................
Holyoke 1 .....................Hoosac 1 .......................
Hudson 1 .......................Hull 1 ............................
Indian Hill (Hadley).... Ipswich 1 ......................Lee 1 .............................
Lowell Regional 1 .......
Lynn 1 ..........................
Manchester 1 ................
Mansfield 1 ..................
Marlborough Easterly ..................
Refer ence No.
(fig. 6]
29
30313233
3435
3637383940 4142434445
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
NPDES No.
1
MA0100447
MA0101214MA0100102MA0101290MA0101621
MA0101630MA0100510
MA0102202MA0101788MA0101231MA0101265MA0100099 MAO 100609MA0100153MA0101796MAO 100935MAO 100943
MA0100617
MAO 100633
MAO 100552
MAO 100871
MA0101702
MAO 100030
MAO 100498
Latitude
424258
423417421800422318424535
421132424345
420720422401421843421355421945 424129421712421425422055421949
423246
423855
422711
423424
415720
414201
422101
Long itude
710748
723555721247723625710332
723650731246
713220713226715352725240723112 705019731429715507731450731450
714510
711720
705723
704620
710930
704644
712928
Receiving water body
Merrimack River
Green River
Connecticut RiverHoosic River
Mill RiverAssabet RiverAtlantic OceanWestfield RiverConnecticut River Greenwood Creek
River Merrimack River
Lynn Harbor(Broad Sound)
ManchesterHarbor
HOD Brook
Sub- basin code
01090001
01080203010802040108020101070002
0108020102020003
0109000301070005010900010108020601080201 010900010110000501100001
0110000501100005
01070004
01070002
01090001
01090001
01090004
01090002
01070005
1990 return-
flow (Mgal/d)
36.94
3.705.035 16
11.45
11.885.93
.442.331.533 .09
3 .31 1.02.90
3 143 653 .08
5.81
27.75
28.30
.61
2.06
.45
3.09
Per capita return flow and codes
(gal/d)
243 I,O
227 F,I125 -107 -241 I,O
283 I,O255 F,G,I
92 -165 --181 L134 L164 - 156 --
180 L42 --
191 -190 -
162 I
210 I,O
262 I,O
170 -
148 --
247 L
164 --
Town (Minor Civil
Division) served (fig. 6)
North Andover Andover Lawrence Methuen Salem, NH Greenfield
Hatfield
Groveland
WilliamstownClarksburg North Adams
HudsonHull
Hadley
Lee
Lowell Chelmsford Dracut Tewksbury Tyngsborough
Nahant Saugus Manchester
Foxborough
Marlboroueh
Sewered popu lation
16,650 18,290 68,430 35,410 13,420 16,270
4240
1,49045,630
1,900 41,970
6,870350
15,990
4,78014,1008,460
6701,890 6,5204,990
4 1,6203 4OO
420
3S 000
101,460 7,210
14,070 6,710 2,890
80,4703,730
23,690 3,590
9 340
4,570 1,820
18.790
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State 33
Table 8. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Massachusetts, 1990 Continued
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
MarlboroughWesterly1 ................
Marshfield 1 ................
Maynard 1 ...................
Massachusetts Correctional Institute(MCI)-Concord. ......
MCI Norfolk-Walpole 1
MCI-Bridgewater 1 ......Medfield 1 . ........ ............Merrimac .....................Middleborough 1 ..........Milford 1 .......................
Millbury 1 . ....................Millers Falls
Village 1 ...................Montague 1 . . ................
MWRA-Deer Island 1
Refer ence NPDES Latitude No. No.
(fig. 6)
53 MAO 100480 422029
54 MA0101737 420515
55 MA0101001 422627
56 MA0102245 42274257 MA0102253 420615
58 MA0102237 41572159 MA0100978 42112660 MA0101150 42494061 MA0101591 41543062 MAO 100579 420709
63 MA0100650 421100
64 MA0101516 42352665 MA0100137 423448
66 MA0102351 422303
Long itude
713651
703840
712629
712340711729
705732712003705910705346713032
714410
722937723421
704813
Receiving water body
Assabet River
Massachusetts Bay
Assabet River
Concord RiverStop River to
Charles RiverSaw Mill BrookCharles RiverCobblers BrookNemasket RiverCharles River
Blackstone River
Millers RiverConnecticut River
Boston Harbor
Town _ 1990 Per capita (Minor
" . return- return flow Civil ®m flow and codes Division)
coae (Mgal/d) (gal/d) served(«g. 6)
01070005 1.69 126 - MarlboroughNorthboro
01090002 .86 76 L MarshfieldDuxbury
01070005 1.02 93 I MaynardSudburyWayland
01070005 3 .27 152 -- Concord01090001 .30 194 -- Norfolk
01090004 .54 129 -- Bridgewater01090001 .84 207 -- Medfield01070002 3 .23 67 -- Merrimac01090002 1.28 164 -- Middleborough01090003 3.73 162 I Milford
01090003 .85 136 -- Millbury
01080202 .54 1,459 I Erving01080201 1.25 170 F,I,O Montague
Gill01090001 6269.66 238 I,O Boston
ArlingtonBedfordBelmontBrooklineBurlingtonCambridgeChelseaEverettLexingtonMaidenMedfordMelroseNewtonReadingRevereSomervilleStonehamWakefieldWalthamWatertownWilmingtonWinchesterWinthropWoburn
Sewered popu lation
10,2803,1209,9501,3209,630
640710
1,7801,550
4,2004,0603,4507,810
23,070
6,240
4370
6,940430
6286,850644,5856 10,007624,201627,22062 1,671695,706628,681635,665627,380653,830657,350628,12264 1,090620,736642,743676,13462 1,648623,708657,820633,251
6 1,589620,0646 18, 109634,505
34 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
Table 8. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Massachusetts, 1990 Continued
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
MWRA-Clinton 1 .......
MWRA-Nut Island 1 ..
Nantucket ....................
New Bedford 1 . ...... ......
Newburyport 1 ..............North Attleboro 1
North Brookfield 1
Northampton 1 ............
Northbridge 1 .. ............ ..
Northfield .................. ..Old Deerfield 1 . ............Orange 1 .......................Oxford-Rochdale .........
Palmer1 ... .................. ..
PeoDerell. .....................
Refer ence NPDES No. No.
(fig. 6)
67 MA0100404
68 MAO 103268
69 -
70 MA0100781
71 MAO 10 142772 MA0101036
73 MA0101061
74 MA0101818
75 MAO 100722
76 MAO 10020077 MA010194078 MA010125779 MA0100170
80 MA0101168
81 MA0100064
Latitude
422552
421644
411432
413531
424834415734
421458
421841
420644
423800423305423540421115
421053
424025
Long itude
714050
705717
700619
705406
705141711820
720435
723723
713806
722900723620721920715325
722157
723430
Receiving water body
Nashua River,South Branch
Boston Harbor,Quincy Bay
Ground- waterdischarge
Buzzards Bay
Merrimack RiverTen Mile River
Dunn Brook
Connecticut River
Blackstone River
Connecticut RiverDeerfield RiverMillers RiverFrench River
TributaryChicopee River
Nashua River
s 1990 Percapite return- return flow
Da®in flow and codes coae (Mgal/d) (gal/d)
01070004 2.40 164 ~
01090001 6 136.36 164 F
01090002 2 .23 65 -
01090002 28.30 287 I,O
01090001 2.24 146 I,O01090004 3.61 185 -
01080204 .47 147 -
01080201 5.27 201 F,I
01090003 1.19 127 --
01080201 3 .33 163 -01080201 .15 341 F01080202 1.17 272 -01100001 3 .16 68 -
01080204 3.58 271 O
01070004 3 .19 63 --
Town i (Minor v Civil i Division)
served (fig. 6)
ClintonLancasterQuincyAshlandBostonBraintreeBrooklineCantonDedhamFraminghamHinghamHolbrookMiltonNatickNeedhamNewtonNorwoodRandolphStoughtonWalpoleWellesleyWestwoodWeymouth
Nantucket
New BedfordAcushnetNewburyportNorth AttleboroPlainvilleNorth
BrookfieldNorthamptonWilliamsburgNorthbridge
NorthfieldDeerfieldOrangeOxford
PalmerMonsonPeDDerell
Sewered popu lation
12,9301,670
684,90066,878
6286,850632,922627,2206 13,52762 1,64266 1,090
65,06166,293
624,182624,713623,975641,090628,671629,1906 17,0036 11,319624,166
69,669649,738
3,480
96,5201,940
15,12016,1503,3503,200
25,280980
9 340S)J*T\J
42,0204440
4,3002,340
9,3303,8703.000
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State 35
Table 8. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Massachusetts, 1990 Continued
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Pittsfield 1 . .................. .
Plymouth 1 . ............... ....Rockland 1 . ..................
Russell....... ........ ..........
Scituate 1 ......................Shelburne Falls. .........
Somerset........ ...... ........South Deerfield 1 ..........
South Essex Sewer District 1 ..................
South Hadley 1 .............Southbridge 1 . ...............
Springfield Bondi Island 1 ................. ...
Taunton 1 . ....................
Temoleton3 . .................
Refer ence No.
(fig. 6]
82
8384
85868788
8990
9192
93
949596
97
9899
100101102
103
NPDES No.
>
MA0101681
MA0100587MA0101923
MA0100145MA0100161MAO 100960MA0102873
MA01 02695MA0101044
MA0100676MA0101648
MA0100501
MAO 100455MAO 100901MA0100919
MA0101613
MA0101087MAO 100421
MA0101079MA01 01907MA01 00897
MAO 100340
Latitude
414537
415750420627
423907423755421119425011
421034423540
414305422800
423152
421218420417421347
420508
421735420615
422645422803415224
423601
Long itude
704101
704012705359
703712720815725318705313
704345724400
711003723520
705316
723518720026720047
723514
731935720513
723510705412710554
720414
Receiving water body
Westfield RiverCreek to
Merrimack River
Taunton River
Connecticut,Chicopee, and Mill Rivers
Otter River
Sub- basin code
01100005
0109000201090002
01090001010802020108020601070002
0109000201080203
0109000401080201
01090001
010802040110000101080204
01080201
0110000501100001
0108020101090001
01090004
01080202
1990 return- flow
[Mgal/d)
14.62
2.361.75
.733 m3 n.38
1.203 ?1
2.50.91
28.01
3.452.48
.69
48.25
3,,
3 41
3 16
2.61
6.51
1.44
Per capita return flow and codes
(gal/d)
268 F,I
167 L121 -
131 L176 -159 -109 L
203 L104 -
164 --
291 F,I
175 I,O
223 F,I,O152 I106 -
195 I,O
197 L198 I
63 -191 -167 I,O
713 -
Town (Minor ( Civil
Division) served(«g. 6)
PittsfieldDalton Hinsdale Lanesborough
Abington
Salisbury
Shelburne Somerset
Beverly Danvers Marblehead Peabody South Hadley
AgawamEast
Longmeadow Longmeadow Ludlow Springfield West Springfield Wilbraham
Dighton Raynham
Temoleton
Sewered popu lation
46,9006,610
720 370
14,09011,2303,250 5,590
170820
3,500
5,9204990
4 1,020 15,23043,130
37,62036,180 22,560 19,420 44,520 15,45016,3506,500
24,59011,430
15,170 12,660
153,930 26,580
3,650 1,1702,070
2,52013 640
35,3301,280 2,420
42.020
36 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
Table 8. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Massachusetts, 1990 Continued
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Upper Blackstone3 .....
Upton 1 .........................Uxbridge 1 ..... ...............Ware 1 ...........................Wareham 1 ..................
Warren 1 .......................Webster 1 .....................
West Fitchburg1
WftcttiAmiioti
Westfield 1 ....................Winchendon 1 ...............
Total .......................
Refer ence NPDES No. No.
(fig. 6)
104
105106107108
109110
111
112
113114
MA0102369
MA0100196MA0102440MA0100889MA0101893
MA0101567MA01 00439
MA0101281
MA0100412
MA0101800MA0100862
Latitude
421255
420946420215421502422427
421234420210
423337
421651
420702424105
Long itude
714725
713717713700721506731428
721454715313
725045
713808
724356720451
Receiving water body
Blackstone River
West RiverBlackstone RiverWare RiverGround-water
discharge
Quaboag RiverFrench River
Nashua River,North Branch
Assabet River
Westfield RiverMillers River
Sub- basin code
01090003
01090003010900030108020401090002
0108020401100001
01070004
01070005
0108020601080202
1990 return- flow
(Mgal/d)
39.23
.17
.58
.76
.57
.584.43
4.61
4.11
3.24.71
904.73
Town Per capita (Minor return flow Civil and codes Division)
(gal/d) served (fig. 6)
212 I
104 -96 -
126 I63 L
205 I261 -
302 I
134 I
131 I153 -
AuburnHoldenRutlandSuttonWorcesterUptonUxbridgeWareWareham
BourneWarrenWebsterDudleyFitchburgWestminsterWestboroughHopkintonShrewsburyWestfieldWinchendon
Sewered popu lation
11,2104,9802,5801,060
165,2701,6306,0206,0307,220
1,8102,830
11,8405,130
14,1501,120
10,4201,630
18,51024,6804,650
4,365,705
'Classified as a major facility by the USEPA (Ed Kim, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992).2Average discharge estimated on the basis of sewered population times average self-supplied domestic per capita of 65 gallons per day (Solley and
others, 1993).3Average discharge determined from USEPA Permit Compliance System database, 1991 data (Ed Kim, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written
commun., 1992).4Estimated from USEPA Needs Survey database (Larry MacMillan, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992).5Average discharge determined from the State of Massachusetts database, 1991 data (Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, written
commun., 1993).6Data provided by Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (J.A. Riccio, Massachusetts Water Resources Authority, written commun., 1993).
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State 37
Return flows to surface water from 110 municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in Massachusetts that served 4.342 million people totalled 903 Mgal/d. The Barnstable, Falmouth, Nantucket, and Wareham Wastewater Treatment Facilities served 0.024 million people and discharged wastewater return flows of 1.52 Mgal/d to ground water. In addition, the unsewered population in Massachusetts of 1.650 million people discharged about 107 Mgal/d (based on 65 gal/d per person) to ground water.
Seventy-four percent of return flows from municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in Massachusetts were discharged to the Massachusetts- Rhode Island Coastal Basins subregion (0109), 13 percent flow to the Connecticut River Basin subregion (0108), and 9 percent flow to the Merrimack River Basin subregion (0107) (Appendix 1). Return flows from municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in Massachusetts comprised 83 percent (673 Mgal/d) of the total return flows to the Massachusetts-Rhode Island Coastal Basins subregion (0109); 62 percent (80 Mgal/d) of flows to the Merrimack River Basin subregion (0107); and 40 percent (116 Mgal/d) of flows to the Connecticut River Basin subregion (0108) (Appendix 1).
The wastewater-collection systems of three regional facilities in Massachusetts crossed drainage- basin divides. The entire sewered population of Lowell was served by the Lowell Regional Wastewater- Treatment Facility, which is in the Merrimack River Subbasin (01070002). The town, however, straddles two subbasins in almost equal land-area proportions, the Merrimack River Subbasin, and the Concord River Subbasin (01070005). The town of Ludlow, predominantly in the Chicopee River Subbasin
(01080204), has a sewer connection to the Springfield Regional Facility, Bondi Island, which is in the Lower Connecticut River Subbasin (01080205). Wastewater generated by about 0.013 million people in Ludlow crossed this drainage divide. Likewise, the town of Rutland straddles the Chicopee River and the Nashua River Subbasins (01080204 and 01070004, respectively), but is connected to the Upper Blackstone Facility in Millbury, which is in the Blackstone River Subbasin (01090003). Wastewater from the sewered population of 0.003 million people in Rutland crossed this drainage divide.
Per capita return flow for municipal wastewater- treatment facilities in Massachusetts ranged from 42 to 2,676 gal/d with a median of 164 gal/d (table 8). Of the 33 facilities with per capita return-flow values over 200 gal/d, 5 had values that were unexplained by any of the 5 possible anomaly-causing factors. The most important factors contributing to the high per capita return flows were the presence of industrial connec tions to municipal wastewater collection systems and combined sewers. An association between industrial contributions and infiltration and inflow and increasing per capita estimates was demonstrated by the contin gency-table analysis shown in table 4. Two extremely high per capita return flows (2,676 and 1,459 Mgal/d) were calculated respectively for the Erving Center and the Millers Falls Wastewater Treatment Facilities, in Erving. The USEPA Industrial Facilities Discharge file indicates that industries contribute wastewater to these facilities, which probably accounted for the high per capita return-flow values in Erving.
38 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
New Hampshire
In 1990, 73 municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in 70 MCDs (fig. 7) were operating in New Hampshire. These facilities had customers in 94 out of 260 MCDs in the State. Location, 1990 return flow, and sewered-population data about each municipal wastewater-treatment facility in New Hampshire are presented in table 9. Of the 1.109 million residents in the State (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991d), 0.536 million people or 48 percent were connected to a municipal sewer system.
In 1990, return flows from all municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in New Hampshire totalled nearly 83 Mgal/d. Sixteen regional systems served 0.349 million people in 41 towns, comprising 65 percent of the sewered population. The State's largest facility, the Manchester Regional Wastewater Treatment facility, served 0.104 million people from Manchester, Goffstown, Londonderry and Bedford, and discharged an average of 18 Mgal/d to the Merrimack and Piscataquog Rivers during 1990 (table 9). The Nashua and the Franklin Wastewater Treatment Facilities were the second and third largest facilities in New Hampshire. The Woodsville Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility in Haverhill served part of the population of Newbury, Vermont (fig. 9).
Sixty-four of the 73 facilities in the State served 0.533 million people and discharged 82 Mgal/d to surface water. The other seven facilities, the Canaan, Eastman Community Associates in Grantham, Newbury, Ossipee, Sandwich, Wakefield, and Wolfeboro Wastewater Treatment Facilities, discharged a total of 0.2 Mgal/d to ground water through municipal septic systems, sand filters, or spray irrigation. The unsewered population of New Hampshire (0.573 million people) generated about 37 Mgal/d of wastewater daily that was discharged from on-site septic systems to ground water.
Of total return flows from municipal wastewater- treatment facilities in New Hampshire, 50 Mgal/d, or 60 percent, were into the Merrimack River Basin subregion (0107); of this amount, 46 Mgal/d are from within the Merrimack River Subbasin (01070002). Almost 17 Mgal/d, or 20 percent of total flows from
New Hampshire facilities were discharged to the Saco River Basin subregion (0106), and 13 Mgal/d, or 16 percent of total flows, were discharged to the Connecticut River Basin subregion (0108). Return flows from municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in New Hampshire contributed 38 percent (50 Mgal/d) of total return flows to the Merrimack River Basin subregion (0107); 24 percent (17 Mgal/d) of total return flows to the Saco River Basin subregion (0106); and 4 percent (13 Mgal/d) of flows to the Connecticut River Basin subregion (0108) (Appendix 1).
Per capita return flow for municipal wastewater- treatment facilities in New Hampshire ranged from 49 to 1,000 gal/d with a median of 151 gal/d. Seventeen facilities in the State had a per capita return flow greater than 200 Mgal/d. The per capita use for all but the Colebrook, Lancaster, and Stratford Mill House Wastewater Treatment Facilities can be partially explained by at least one of the five possible anomaly- causing factors (table 9). The largest estimated per capita return flow (1,000 gal/d) was for the town of Waterville Valley. This estimate is based on resident sewered population (note the code "L" in table 9 for large seasonal population). The large reported per capita return flow was probably a result of the ski resort in town, which attracts thousands of people to Waterville Valley during the winter. Many people stay for several days or more at condominiums or hotels but are not residents of the town. A large number of these temporary housing units may be connected to the sewage-collection system but are not counted as sewered population in table 9. Lincoln, also the site of a ski resort, had a large per capita return-flow value of 364 Mgal/d, probably for the same reasons that the estimate for Waterville Valley was large.
Although the association was not statistically significant according to results from the contingency- table analysis (table 4), many of the municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in New Hampshire with per capita return flows greater than 150 gal/d generally had industrial contributions and large infiltration and inflow rates (table 9). In addition, of the 14 facilities in the State with large seasonal populations, 10 had per capita return-flow values greater than 150 gal/d.
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State 39
s\
f] 71<
-x-'
V
C
AN
AD
A f
|J
**,">
^. f
'X
^
%^^^""*
J 1N
EW
HA
MP
SH
IRE
& « 8 * 0 D) 3 Q.
3D cp c T I5' ! m (Q to a.
EX
PLA
NA
TIO
N
NA
TIO
NA
L B
OU
ND
AR
Y
OT
AT
TT
n/~
U I
Kir
» A
T>
VO
1 A
1 C
, B
VJU
IN1JA
K I
MIN
OR
CIV
IL D
IVIS
ION
BO
UN
DA
RY
/ \ / r * x-
45° - L
l ̂
f ~"
j I
X
,,
,^.-
. ( 7""
"i.....~
.~._
"*""
-» ^
^f
"
/\S
tew
arts
tow
n .~
i/~"~
~r"i
... .
- ""
_..
_..
_..
_
DR
AIN
AG
E-S
UB
BA
SIN
BO
UN
DA
RY
01 0
801 0
1 D
RA
INA
GE
-SU
BB
ASI
N C
OD
E-S
how
n in
tabl
e 1 .
Firs
t fou
r nu
mbe
rs in
dica
te s
ubre
gion
al b
asin
and
last
fou
r num
bers
indi
cate
sub
basi
n
8 W
AST
EW
AT
ER
-TR
EA
TM
EN
T F
AC
ILIT
Y
AN
D N
UM
BE
R-S
how
n in
tabl
e 9
g
0 10
20
MIL
ES0
1 1
1 1
V" -
\
r\
'\ y
\..
\ I
----
/ ?
i /
C
oleb
rook
j /
\ /
XS
g
/^^-^"
6Web
\
\
Stra
tford
\
t \
\, .
_ic"
rj
23p
*
i^-
Nor
th-j
Ml
........
-....
'." ~
~
': 2
. I
i t
-MS
i f
h-
i ^
! /
! =
hf 0
1 04
0001
'
~J
\ i
i
! _A
--L
- r
,/ \
,' -!
^ /
if *1 i i 4 i
1020
KIL
OM
ET
ER
SNh
umbe
rlb^d
,'''
/' __
..
/\
v"^,
,,>f
/ " ""
""';"
"_..!
/
/' a 3
4
| /
Ber
lin f
'
< La
ncas
ter.
j /
[
^V'0
1080101 J
/^-
72°
fSh
e,
Littl
eton
("\
Car
roll
\
-,,.
/Lis
bon/
/ '"--
^e
^ ^
-^ \(
Ir
^.- "/H
aver
hill^
^^
!Li
ncol
n
A
1 *
, /
v..
^ \ *
-- v
/---
_....
.
^ )
[ ^
0106
0002
\ "7
.
44° -
Woo
dsto
ck/
\
|_4
Con
way
i
\
/^/
^--,
1 \
-.'-~
"""
""I
^and
wic
hi
01
07
00
01
i
-*§7
\
Bas
e fro
m U
.S. G
eolo
gica
l Sur
vey
digi
tal d
ata
New
Ham
pshi
re S
tate
Pla
ne F
eet
Scal
e 1:
1 25,
000
/ 'O
ssip
ee X
. ...
v/
NC
anaa
n
h Le
bano
n ^
Enfie
ld
\ V
^ v
Ham
pton
J\B
ristoi
-£44
-^
1'
Wo,
febo
ro>
7 S
anbo
rHto
n>v
\ .
i-,ltn
n\
' '
\ /
Milt
on,
(fta
rem
ont,
.
(-63
/45V
Y
j j N
0wpo
rt
i /
^
/\-4
r\"
rr\r
\r\o
*---
._J...
!.'-
> .
\
Ol0
7000o
\ p
-~
~
j x
> t'
- \
/ /
""" -
r ^M
ewbu
iy,
%1 _\
I S
\ 0
10
80
10
4
\!
^r-'"
x ^F
\.
- ~
~r~
i x--
< --
-"
v
-"-"
"\
26-«
opki
nto(
j\
Wea
re
/ A
ntrim
)(
\ \~
~-
- c
-iK
a I
Den
y N
i
y E
ppin
gNew
mar
ket'"
- -i
iPor
tj]/N
ewca
stle
Figu
re 7
. Lo
catio
ns o
f M
inor
Civ
il D
ivis
ion
boun
darie
s, d
rain
age-
subb
asin
bou
ndar
ies,
and
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-t
reat
men
t fac
ilitie
s in
New
Ham
pshi
re.
1 fi
Table 9. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in New Hampshire, 1990
[Wastewater-treatment facilities in bold print are Regional facilities. 1990 return flow: Average discharge determined from the State of New Hampshire database (Frederick Chormann, New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, oral commun., 1992). NPDES, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Sewered population: Estimated from USBC (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991d; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991J). Sewered population numbers are rounded to the nearest 10 people. Possible causes for high per capita use values are indicated by the following codes: F, infiltration and inflow; G, large population in group quarters; I, contributions from industries; L, large seasonal population; and O, combined sewers. Mgal/d, million gallon per day; gal/d, gallon per day. --, not applicable]
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Antrim......................
Berlin 1 .......................
Bristol....... .................
Canaan (new in 1991)..... ................
Concord-HallStreet 1 ... ................
Concord-Penacook1 .
Deny 1 ....... .................Dover1 (new facility
1991).....................Durham1 ....................
Eastman Community
Epping.. ............... ......
Franklin 1 ..................
Franklin Pierce College.... ....... .......
Gorham .....................
Greenville..................
Refer ence No.
(«g. 7)
1
23
4
5
6
789
10
11
12
1314
15
16171819
20
21
22
NPDES No.
NH0100561
NHO 100005NH0100013
NHO 100501
NH0100021
NHO 100765NH0101257NH0100315
NH0100901
NH0100331
NHO 100056
NH0100064NHO 100455
NHO 100692NHO 100871NHO 100854NHO 100960
NH0101044
NHO 100927
NH0100919
Latitude
430144
434124442712
441806
433542
433845
431340432359445403
431054
431657
425146
431030430806
433030
430221425905432313432446
424615
442322
424619
Long itude
715602
713843711108
714056
714312
715955
722550722340713014
713111
713511
712010
705130705413
720645
710332705651710303713905
720330
710917
714824
Receiving water body
Contoocook River
River
River
River
discharge
Merrimack River
Estuary
discharge
Merrimack River
Lake
River Souheean River
Sub- basin code
01070003
0107000101040001
01080101
01070001
01080104
010801040108010401080101
01070002
01070002
01070002
0106000301060003
01080104
01060003010600030106000301070002
01080202
01040001
01070002
1990 return flow
(Mgal/d)
0.10
.33245
.21
.19
2.01
.121.57.34
4.06
.89
1.55
2.921.02
2.03
.161.934.25
45.60
2.03
.78
.10
Per capita return flow and codes
(gal/d)
81 F,L
340 I,L214 O
200 L
181 L
65 L
49 F152 F,I221 -
158 I
127 F,I
107 --
133 I143 G
65 --
95 --
183 F,I,O102 F177 I,L
65 -
321 F
79 F
Town (Minor Civil
Division) served(«g. 7)
AntrimBennington
Bristol
Bow Concord Boscawen
Epping
Belmont Center
Harbor Gilford Laconia Meredith Moultonboro Northfield Sanbomton Tilton
Greenville
Sew ered
popu lation
860370 970
11,470
1,050
1,050
150
2,46010,310
1,540
25,540100
5,600 1,420
14,460
21,9807,150
3490
1,68010,5602,4406,2702,470
210
2,730 14,590
1,680 100
1,830 190
1,480
520
2,430
1.270
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State 43
Table 9. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in New Hampshire, 1990 Continued
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Refer ence No.
(fig. 7)
NPDES Latitude "r.0"9" No. ' " '?U,d!
Receiving water body
Sub- basin code
1990 return flow
(Mgal/d)
Per capita return flow and codes
(gal/d)
Town (Minor Civil
Division) served(fig. 7)
Sew ered popu lation
Groveton-Northumberland.... 23
Hampton1 ................. 24
Hanover1 .................... 25Henniker1 .................. 26Hillsborough............. 27Hillsborough County
Home.................... 28Hinsdale 1 ................... 29Hooksett 1 ................... 30Hopkinton................. 31Jaffrey 1 ...................... 32Keene 1 ....................... 33
Lancaster1 Lebanon 1
Lincoln 1 ... Lisbon.....
3435
3637
Littleton 1 .................... 38
Manchester 1 ............. 39
Merrimack1 ................ 40Milford 1 .................... 41
Milton........................ 42
Nashua1 .................... 43
New Hampton 44 Village..................
Newbury.................... 45
Newmarket 1 ............... 46Newport 1 ................... 47North Conway 1 .......... 48Ossipee...................... 49
Peterborough 1 ............ 50Pittsfield 1 ................... 51
NH0100226 443538
NH0100625 425519
NHO100099 434145NH0100102 431033NH0100111 430910
NHO 100439 430045NHO 100382 424650NH0100129 430414NHO 100579 431323NH0100595 424923NH0100790 425454
NH0100145 442906NH0100366 433814
NH0100706 440214NH0100421 441205
NH0100153 441827
NH0100447 425630
NH0100161 NH0100471
NH0100676
NH0100170
NH0100358
NH0100196 NH0100200 NH0101354 NH0101125
NHO 100650 NH0100986
424838424938
432341
424446
433615
432200
430432432237440115434530
425440431730
713112 Ammonoosuc 01080101River
704913 Tide Mill Creek 01060003
721756 Connecticut River 01080104714901 Contoocook River 01070003715257 Contoocook River 01070003
713200 Piscataquog River 01070002722935 Ashuelot River 01080202712745 Merrimack River 01070002714247 Contoocook River 01070003715947 Contoocook River 01070003721554 Ashuelot River 01080201
713544 Connecticut River 01080101 721925 Mascoma River 01080104
714030 East Pemigewasset 01070001 715546 Ammonoosuc 01080101
River 714737 Ammonoosuc 01080101
River 712731 Merrimack and 01070002
PiscataquogRivers
712834 Merrimack River 01070002 713737 Souhegan River 01070002
705912 Salmon Falls 01060003River
712637 Merrimack and 01070002Nashua River
713930 Hatchery Brook 01070001
720222
705601721054710716710845
715547711930
Ground-waterdischarge
Lamprey River Sugar River Saco River Ground-water
discharge Contoocook River Suncook River
01080104
01060003010801040106000201060002
0107000301070002
0.24
42.30
1.44 .19.52
2.05
.32
.52
.05
.613.52
.86 1.70
.44 2.07
.87
18.34
3.231.08
.04
9.65
2.01
2.02
4.54
.722.132.03
.38
.31
140 --
202 L
221 F,G110 G278 F,L
65 -194 --
107 F78 -
210 F,I156 F,I
339 --
158 F,I,O
364 L65 -
194 -
177 LO
259 F,I114 F
71 L
113 I,O
65 -
Northumber land
Hampton RyeHanover Henniker Hillsborough
GoffstownHinsdaleHooksettHopkintonJaffreySwanzeyKeeneMarlboroughLancasterLebanonEnfieldLincolnLisbonLandaffLittleton
ManchesterGoffstownLondonderryBedfordMerrimackMilfordWiltonMilton
3 1,720
10,840540
6,5101,7201,870
7601,6504,860
6402,9105700
20,7901,1102,5409,5601,1801,2101,050
504,480
94,1106,3702,420
73012,4707,9101,560
560
Nashua 75,230Hudson 10,340New Hamp- 220
ton 65 - Newbury 3370
95 F Newmarket 5,660194 - Newport 3,71065 - Conway 1,94065 - Ossipee 410
138 I Peterborough 2,750136 F,I Pittsfield 2,280
44 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
Table 9. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in New Hampshire, 1990 Continued
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Plymouth Village 1 ....
Portsmouth-Pierce
Rockingham County
Strafford County
Stratford Mill House . Stratford Village........
Sunapee-New
Suncook-
Wakefield ..................
Warner Village Fire District ..................
Waterville Valley '......
Whitefield..................
Total.......................
Refer ence No.
(fig. 7
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60 61
62
63
64
65
66
6768
697071
72
73
NPDES No.
)
NHO 100242
NH0100234
NH0100668
NHO 100609
NHO 100251
NHO 100277
NH0100641
NH0101214 NH0100536
NH0101150
NHO 100544
NH0100714
NH0101052
NH01 00498NH01 00781
NH0100510NH0100404
NH0101273
NHO 100978
Latitude
434509
430423
431613
430100
431402
434830
431506
431300
444430 444505
425157
432246
430740
425000
433215
431634435645
442135424605433530
440012
Long itude
714108
704497
705822
710300
704902
712630
705030
705700
713715 713750721943
720650
712750
721123
710155
714841713043
713238722330711310
714050
Receiving water body
Pemigewasset River
River
discharge
River
Cochcco River
Kimball Brook
discharge
Mad River
discharge
River
River
Sub- basin code
01070001
01060003
01060003
0106O003
01060003
01070002
01060003
0106O001
01080101 01080101
01080201
01080104
01070002
01080201
01060003
0107000301070001
010801010108020101070002
01070001
01080101
1990 return flow
(Mgal/d)
0.42
4244
3.46
2.02
2.09
2.01
1.22
2.02
.02
.03
.05
.37
.57
.132.01
.06
.15
.11
.152.10
2.03
2.13
82.40
Per capita return flow and codes
(gal/d)
108 G
97 0
206 F
65 -.
65 -
65 -
149 I
65 ..
222 L 214 -
71 -
359 T
83
107 -65 --
109 F1,000 L
122 L115 F65 -
65 -
65 -
Town (Minor Civil
Division) served (fig- 7)
Plymouth Holderness
New Castle Rochester
Stratford Stratford
New London
Pembroke
Troy
Wakefield
Waterville Valley
Whitefield
Newbury, Vt.
Sew ered
popu lation
3,640 150
24,510530
16,790
5330
1,360
120
8,180
5310
90 140
5700
770260
2,860
4,010
1,210
150
550150
9001,3001,480
530
1,450
5540 536,200
'Classified as a major facility by the USEPA (Ed Kim, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992).2Average discharge estimated on the basis of sewered population times average self-supplied domestic per capita of 65 gallons per day (Solley and
others, 1993).Determined from telephone conversations with wastewater-treatment-facility or town personnel.4Determined from USEPA Permit Compliance System database, 1990 data (Ed Kim, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992).5Estimated from USEPA Needs Survey database (Larry MacMillan, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992).
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State 45
Rhode Island
Rhode Island had 20 municipal wastewater- treatment facilities in 18 different MCDs (fig. 8, table 10) in 1990. Twenty-nine of a total of 39 MCDs in the State were served entirely or in part by public sewer systems. The estimated total sewered population of the State was 0.689 million or 69 percent of the total population of 1.003 million in 1990 (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991e).
Return flows to rivers and the Atlantic Ocean in 1990 from municipal-treatment facilities totalled 136 Mgal/d. Seven regional facilities served 0.528 million people and accounted for 109 Mgal/d, or 80 percent of total daily return flows from municipal waste water-treatment facilities in Rhode Island. The largest facility, Fields Point in Providence, is administered by the Narragansett Bay Commission and served 0.210 million people in parts of Cranston, Johnston, Lincoln, and North Providence in addition to Providence. This facility treated and discharged more than 55 Mgal/d. The facility in Woonsocket served parts of Woonsocket, North Smithfield, and Blackstone, Massachusetts (fig. 6A).
All return flows from municipal wastewater- treatment facilities were to surface-water bodies. The 0.314 million unsewered population in Rhode Island generated approximately 20 Mgal/d of wastewater that was returned through septic systems to ground water.
The State of Rhode Island is contained within the Massachusetts-Rhode Island Coastal Basins subregion (0109). As this basin also includes return
flows from the Boston area, Rhode Island only accounted for 17 percent (136 Mgal/d) of total return flows in 1990 to the Massachusetts-Rhode Island Coastal Basins (Appendix 1). Ninety percent (122 Mgal/d) of the total wastewater-return flows generated in Rhode Island were from the Narragansett River Subbasin (01090004).
Like Massachusetts, Rhode Island had a regional facility with part of its collection system in a different subbasin than the facility. Rhode Island's second-largest facility, the Blackstone Valley District Commission, Bucklin Point Facility discharged 23 Mgal/d into the Narragansett River Subbasin (01090004). That facility had sewered customers in the town of Cumberland, which was entirely contained in the Blackstone River Subbasin (01090003) (fig. 8).
Per capita return-flow values for municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in Rhode Island ranged from 79 to 450 gal/d, with a median of 184 gal/d. Although six facilities in the State had per capita return-flow values greater than 200 gal/d, all of these high values can likely be explained by at least one of the five possible anomaly-causing factors. The most frequently identified factors were the presence of industrial contributions, a large seasonal population, and combined sewer overflows. Fourteen of the facilities had at least one industrial connection. No contingency-table analysis was done for Rhode Island because of an insufficient sample size.
46 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
71 °30'
42°00'- r--- MASSACHUSETTS^ _ _ RHODE ISLAND \
41°30'-
ATLANTIC OCEAN
EXPLANATION
STATE BOUNDARY
MINOR CIVIL DIVISION BOUNDARY
_.._.._ DRAINAGE-SUBBASIN BOUNDARY
01100001 DRAINAGE-SUBBASIN CODE-Shown in table 1. First four numbers indicate subregional basin and last four numbers indicate subbasin
Base from U.S. Geological digital data Universal Transverse Mercator projection Scale 1:24,000
JO WASTEWATER-TREATMENT FACILITY AND NUMBER-Shown in table 10
10I
20 MILES
10\
20 KILOMETERS
Figure 8. Locations of Minor Civil Division boundaries, drainage-subbasin boundaries, and municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in Rhode Island.
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State 47
Table 10. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Rhode Island, 1990
[Wastewater treatment facilities in bold print are Regional facilities. 1990 return flow: Average discharge determined from USEPA Permit Compliance System database, 1990 data (Ed Kim, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992). NPDES, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Sewered population: Estimated from USBC (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991e; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991k). Sewered population numbers are rounded to the nearest 10 people. Possible causes for high per capita use values are indicated by the following codes: F, infiltration and inflow; G, large population in group quarters; I, contributions from industries; L, large seasonal population; and O, combined sewers. Mgal/d, million gallon per day; gal/d, gallons per day. --, not applicable]
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Blackstone Valley District Commission Bucklin Point Facility1 .................
Bristol1 .....................Burrillville1 ..... ..........
East Greenwich1 ....... East Providence1 .....
Narragansett Bay Commission Fields Point Facility1 .... . ..........
Newport1 .................
Rhode Island Port Authority Quonsett Point1 ....
Smithfield1 ...... ........ ..
South Kingstown1 ...
Warren1 .....................
West Warwick1 .......
Westerly1 . .. ............. ..
Refer ence No.
(«g. 8]
1
2345 6
78
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
161718
19
NPDES No.
>
RI0100072
RIO 100005RIO 100455RI0100013RI0100030 RIO 100048
RI0100366RI0100081
RI0100315
RI0100196
RIO 100293
RIO 100404
RI0100188
RIO 100251
RIO 100374
RIO 100056RIO 100234RI0100153
RIO 100064
Latitude
415104
413942415742414509413930 414630
413037413317
414741
411017
413035
413523
419W7
415255
412529
414333414415414337
412134
Long itude
712207
711549713910712635712653 712158
712138713254
712324
713318
711908
712432
712837
712955
712831
711710712712712917
715010
Receiving water body
Greenwich Cove Seekonk River
Sound
Narragansett Bay
Sound
River Rhode Island
Sound
Pawtuxet River
Pawcatuck River
Sub- basin code
01090004
01090004010900030109000401090004 01090004
01000004
010QOOOS
01090004
01090005
01090004
01090004
010Q0004
01090004
01090005
010Q000401090004
01090004
01090005
1990 return flow
[Mgal/d)
22.83
233.57
12.27.82
4.53
.42
.05
55.14
.09
9.78
.77
.74
1.30
2.58
9 003.525.72
2.14
Per capita return flov and codes
(gal/d)
174 I,O
115 F,I79 --
184 I192 F,I 94 I
1Q4 T
294 -
263 I,O
450 L
219 I,O
209 I
289 I
96 -
174 I,L
198 F99 F,I
183 I
185 I.L
Town i (Minor * Civil i Division)
served(«g. 8)
Central Falls Cumberland Lincoln Pawtucket Bristol
CranstonEast Greenwich East Providence Barrington
Fxf»tpr
Cranston Johnston Lincoln North
Providence
Middletown
North Kingstown
Smithfield
Narragansett South
Kingstown
West Warwick Coventry Westerly
Sewered popu lation
16,33017,190 14,050 12,160 71,160 20,310
7,18066,8204,270
32,640 15,740 2,170
170
158,8401,850
16,940 640
31,540
200
27,67017,060
3,680
22 SfiO
13,610
6,020 8,850
10,08035,44027,620
3,720 11.560
48 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
Table 10. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Rhode Island, 1990 Continued
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Total ...................
Refer ence NPDES No. No.
(fig- 8)
20 RI0100111
Latitude Lt°"g- ' » itude
420000 712948
Receiving water body
Sub- basin code
01090003
1990 return flow
(Mgal/d)
7.93
135.53
Per capita return flow and codes
(gal/d)
164 I
Town(Minor Civil
Division) served(fig. 8)
Woonsocket
North Smithfield
Blackstone, Mass.
Sewered popu lation
42,840
2,880
2,490
689,220
Classified as a major facility by the USEPA (Ed Kirn, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992). ^Estimated from USEPA Needs Survey database (Larry MacMillan, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992).
Vermont
During 1990-92, there were 84 municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in 76 MCDs in Vermont (fig. 9). These facilities served all or parts of 86 MCDs in the State. Location, return flow, and sewered- population data about each municipal wastewater- treatment facility in Vermont is included in table 11. Total sewered population was approximately 0.248 million, or 44 percent of the State's population of 0.563 million (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991f). Like Maine, most of Vermont's residents lived in rural communities throughout the State where the majority of households are on individual septic systems.
Return-flow data for the minor municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in Vermont were only available for 1992 from the VDEC (table 11), so these data are presented along with 1990 data for the major facilities. Return flows from municipal wastewater- treatment facilities in Vermont totalled 49 Mgal/d. Twelve regional facilities in the State served 0.105 million people, or 42 percent of the total State sewered population. The Burlington area on Lake Champlain, which includes the towns of Colchester, Winooski, Burlington, and South Burlington, contained six facilities serving 0.057 million people, or 23 percent of the State's sewered population. Two regional facilities in Vermont (Canaan and Bellows Falls, table 11) had service connections in New Hampshire for the towns of Stewartstown, and Walpole (fig. 7), respectively.
Return flows from 81 municipal wastewater- treatment facilities in Vermont were into surface-water bodies. These facilities served 0.247 million people who generated 49 Mgal/d of wastewater. Three facilities in Vermont discharged 0.2 Mgal/d of wastewater to ground water: Hyde Park, Newport Center Town, and the North Branch Fire District 1 in
Dover. Return flows to ground water from unsewered homes in Vermont were about 20 Mgal/d (0.314 million unsewered population times 65 gal/d per person).
Return flows into the Richelieu-Lake Champlain River Basin subregion (0201) from municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in Vermont totalled 34 Mgal/d, or 69 percent of Vermont's total return flows. The Richelieu-Lake Champlain River Basin also includes parts of Canada and New York but does not include areas in any of the other New England States. Most of the return flow (19 Mgal/d) that was discharged from Vermont into this basin was from the Winooski River Subbasin (02010003), which included Burlington, Montpelier, and Barre. Nine Mgal/d, or 19 percent of Vermont's total return flows, was discharged from facilities in Vermont into the Connecticut River Basin subregion (0108). Three percent of the total return flow into the Connecticut River Basin from municipal wastewater-treatment facilities was from Vermont facilities.
Per capita return flow for municipal wastewater- treatment facilities in Vermont ranged from 29 to 484 gaVd, with a median of 135 gaVd. There were 22 facilities with per capita return flows greater than 200 gal/d, of which 3 were unexplained by any of the five possible anomaly-causing factors. St. Albans and Northfield, with per capita return flows of 471 and 484 gal/d, respectively, each had four possible causes for these high values. High per capita return-flow values were most influenced by the presence of combined sewers, high infiltration and inflow, industrial contributions, and high seasonal populations. Results from a contingency-table analysis (table 4) indicate that there is a statistically significant association in Vermont between high per capita return-flow values and industrial contributions and high infiltration and inflow.
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State 49
b<o ..|\- X^X\** S \.
I / *- i A^ o0/ ^ j^
I / /7 v)& i/^' \
-V
/A"V.
'>-, / -/-'V. /- ~"v/i.
^..^- 7^ V'^/\^/0)V"N
1 Xs
CM
i '^ ° ^! i \X N / "V :-i-i-iv^O-^v ^UJ^-AX s v vi ̂
! o .^ /i / o /- 8 / VCx A^p/g.8
i O/ / V V ~~j I
_ i ^ ^& ' ^ ^C 1 \
j I -^JOf.I .-' ^*r/
50 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
a> O o o
a> Q.
fA «
6 <
^-
«49̂
V-^Cv
f^I7
/N i
Hav
en
\
VE
RM
ON
T
/I
JJ5
"l
1 L /h
L __
f__ _
_ ij
"Whi
tingh
ara
j \
'
i*~
"M
AS
SA
CH
US
ET
TS
~
~
'-- J -- 1
_ | _
__
Base
from
U.S
. Geo
logi
cal S
urve
y G
IRA
S d
ata
Con
verte
d to
Ver
mon
t Sta
te P
lane
1:
250,
000
scal
e
10 I
EX
PL
AN
AT
ION
NA
TIO
NA
L B
OU
ND
AR
Y
STA
TE
BO
UN
DA
RY
MIN
OR
CIV
IL D
IVIS
ION
BO
UN
DA
RY
DR
AIN
AG
E-S
UB
BA
SIN
BO
UN
DA
RY
DR
AIN
AG
E-S
UB
BA
SIN
CO
DE
-Sho
wn
in ta
ble
1. Fi
rst f
our n
umbe
rs in
dica
te s
ubre
gion
al b
asin
and
la
st f
our n
umbe
rs in
dica
te s
ubba
sin
WA
STE
WA
TE
R-T
RE
AT
ME
NT
FA
CIL
ITY
A
ND
NU
MB
ER
-Sho
wn
in ta
ble
1 1
._
40
20 M
ILE
SI
\ \
10
20 K
ILO
ME
TE
RS
Figu
re 9
. Loc
atio
ns o
f Min
or C
ivil
Div
isio
n bo
unda
ries,
dra
inag
e-su
bbas
in b
ound
arie
s, a
nd m
unic
ipal
was
tew
ater
-trea
tmen
t fac
ilitie
s in
Ver
mon
t.
Table 11. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Vermont, 1990
[Wastewater treatment facilities in bold print are Regional facilities. 1990 return flow: Average discharge determined from USEPA Permit Compliance System database, 1990 data (Ed Kim, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992). NPDES, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Sewered population: Estimated from USBC (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991f; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 19911). Sewered population numbers are rounded to the nearest 10 people. Possible causes for high per capita use values are indicated by the following codes: F, infiltration and inflow; G, large population in group quarters; I, contributions from industries; L, large seasonal population; and O, combined sewers. Mgal/d, million gallon per day; gal/d, gallon per day. , not applicable]
... . . Refer- Wastewater- »,««,-,> x x x ence NPDES treatment .. . . .... No. number facility name (f jg g)
Alburg ................ ......
Barre City2..............
Bellows Falls2
Bethel .......................
Brattleboro2 ..............
Burlington Main ...
1
2
3
4
5 6 7 8 9
10 11
12 13
VTO 100005
VTO 100889
VTO 100641
VT0100013
VTO 100021 VTO 100498 VTO 100048 VTO 100803 VTO 100056 VTO 100064 VTO 100846
VTO 100072 VT0100153
Latitude
445754
441238
444454
430742
425455 434230 434930 435952 434723 425029 433511
444720 442818
Long itude
731810 723121
721036
722654
731532 731840 723725 720710 730529 723259 723712
714810 731318
Receiving water body
Lake Champlain
Stevens Branch
Barton River
Connecticut River
Walloomsac River Hubbardton River Connecticut River Waits River Neshobe River Connecticut River Ottauquechee
River Clyde River Lake Champlain
Sub- 1 »° . . returnbas!n flow code (Mgal/d)
02010005
02010003
01110000
01080104
02020003 02010001 01080105 01080104 02010002 01080104 01080106
01080101 02010003
! 0.07
3.12
'.10
.47
4.57 ! .01 '.07 ».06 '.31 1.87 ».01
».10 4.20
Per capita return flow and codes
(gal/d)
233
204
100
96
362 77
123 67
130 175 91
132 164
L
F,L,O
F
L F F,O
F,G,L O
Town (Minor Civil
Division) served(fig. 9)
Alburg
Barre City
Barre Town Berlin Barton Glover Rockingham Westminster Walpole, N.H. Bennington Benson Bethel Bradford Brandon Brattleboro Bridgewater
Brighton Burlington
Sewered popula
tion
300
9,460
5,710 150 820
3 180 3,280
380 1,220
12,610 130 570 900
2,380 10,690
110
760 25,430
BurlingtonRiverside2 ............
Burlington-NorthEn^........ .............
Canaan....................Castleton2 .. ...............Cavendish.................Chelsea.. ...................
Chester.....................Danville....................Enosburg Falls .........Essex Junction ......
Fairf ax... ................ ...Fair Haven2 ..... .........Hardwick .................Hartford-Quechee
Service ................
14
1516171819
20212223
242526
27
VTO 100307
VTO 100226VTO 100625VTO 100897VTO 100862VTO 100943
VTO 100081VTO 100633VT0100102VT0100111
VT0101087VT0100129VT0100137
VTO 100978
442915
443140445940433614432308435918
431540442450445407442830
443945433533443018
433940
731138
731557713220731238723602722700
723530720800724833730715
730055731646722224
722020
Winooski River
Winooski RiverConnecticut RiverCastleton RiverBlack RiverWhite River First
BranchWilliams RiverWater AndricMissisquoi River
Winooski River
Lamoille RiverCastleton RiverLamoille River
Ottauquechee
02010003
0201000301080101020100010108010602010005
01080107010801020201000702010003
020100050201000102010005
01080105
Hartford-White River Junction2
Hinesburg2 Hyde Park..
.83 165
South Burlington
Burlington
1.36 165 F,O Burlington.15 152 L Canaan.25 150 F,G,I,L Castleton
'.07 135 F,I,L Cavendish.03 83 F
J .08 '.03 ! .30 1.48
J .03 ! .24
74 F125 L214 I,O102 -
55 F105 -124 F,O
168 -
Chelsea
Chester Danville Enosburg Essex
Williston Fairfax Fair Haven Hardwick
HartfordRiver
28 VT0101010 01080104
2930
VTO 101028 VTO100838
433844 721855 White and Con necticut Rivers
441957 730731 Laplatte River 02010003 443515 723730 Ground-water 02010005
discharge
.91 169 F,O,L Hartford
.19 160 I Hinesburg4.03 65 -- Hyde Park
J 150
5,030
8,240580
1,670520360
1,080240
1,40012,0802,490
5502,2801,530
950
5,380
1,190370
52 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
Table 11. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Vermont, 1990 Continued
Wastewater-treatment
facility name
Refer ence NPDES No. number
(fig. 9)
Receiving water body
Sub- basin code
1990 Per capitareturn return flowflow and codes
(Mgal/d) (gal/d)
Town(Minor Civil Sewered
Division) popula- served tion (fig. 9)
Jeffersonville. 31 VT0101150 443835 725004 Lamoille River
Johnson................Ludlow ...............Lunenburg Fire
District 2..........Lyndonville .........Manchester Town. Marshfield ............Middlebury2 .........Milton2 .................
32 VT010090133 VTO 100145
34 VT010106135 VT010059536 VT010017037 VTO 10047138 VT010018839 VTO 100684
443806 724100 Gihon River 432330 724045 Black River
442445443143431008442052440105443802
714250720012730308722120731023730732
Montpelier2 ............. 40 VT0100196 441518 723602
Connecticut River Passumpsic River Bourne Brook Winooski River Otter Creek Arrowhead
Mountain Lake Winooski River
MorrisvilleVilllage.. Newport Center
Town.................... 42 VT0101036
Newport City2 .... ...... 43 VT0100200
41 VT0100480 443342 723607 Lamoille River
445739 721835 Ground-waterdischarge
445624 721200 Clyde River
North Branch Fire District 1 Dover. 44 VTO100218 425531 725022
North Troy............Northfield2 ...........Orleans Village.....Orwell ..................Pittsford................Plainfield.............
Poultney ...............Proctor...................Putney...................Randolph...............
Readsboro.............Richford...............Richmond Village. Rochester 1............
Rochester 2.
Rochester 3.
Royalton. Rutland (Main
plant)2\2
45 VT010023446 VT010024247 VT010025148 VTO 10067649 VT010069250 VT0100781
51 VTO 10026952 VT010052853 VT010027754 VTO 100285
55 VTO 10073156 VTO10079057 VT010061758
59
60
61 VTO 100854
62 VTO 100871
445938440952444858434820434230441640
433126433942425824435533
424540445924442412435230
435225
435215
434816
722355723927721215731740730140722530
731445730200723124723927
725620724051725951724844
724844
724844
723017
Ground-waterdischarge
Missisquoi River Dog River Barton River East Creek Furnace Brook Winooski River
Poultney River Otter Creek Sacketts Brook White River Third
BranchDeerfield River Missisquoi River Winooski River Ground-water
discharge Ground-water
discharge Ground-water
discharge White River
433614 725941 Otter and East Creeks
Saxtons River..........Shelburne Fire
District 2.............. 64 VT0100820
02010005
0201000501080106
010801010108010202020003020100030201000202010005
02010003
02010005
02010007
01110000
01080203
0201000702010003011100000201000102010002
02010003
02010001020100020108010401080105
0108020302010007
0201000301080105
01080105
01080105
01080105
02010002
63 VT0100609 430820 723020 Saxtons River 01080107
442259 731416 Laplatte River 02010003
0.02 57 --
0.14 93 G.43 328 F,I,O
.65 '.28
1.18
2.12
>.33
'.02
.90
>.06
1.24
'.02 '.05 '.06
.37
.22 1 .04 ! .26
'.02
.35'.084.01
4.01
4 01
>.03
5.56
'.04
'.26
200 F,L,O241 F,G,O188 L29 -
202 O94 F
253 F,0
147 F
48 L
173 I,O
.13 131
97 F471 F,G,I,O125 F105 L57 -
82 F
220 F,G,L,O121 F93 -
106 G,0
41 L233 F,O67 ~65 -
65 -
65 -
79 F
291 I,O
93 ~
190 --
Cambridge
Johnson Ludlow
LunenburgLyndonManchesterMarshfieldMiddleburyMilton
MontpelierBerlinMorristown
Newport Town
Newport City Derby
Dover
TroyNorthfieldBartonOrwellPittsfordPlainfieldMarshfieldPoultneyProctorPutneyRandolph
Readsboro Richford Richmond Rochester
Rochester
Rochester
Royalton
Rutland City Rutland Town Mendon Rockingham
Shelburne
350
1,5101,310
2502,700
1,4905340
5,8401,590
7,990380
2,250
420
4,300900
990
3620
2,630800190870
630100
1,6801,820430
2,460
4901,5001,190150
150
150
380
18,120670340430
1,370
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow, by State 53
Table 11. Description of municipal wastewater-treatment-facility sites, return flows, and sewered population in Vermont, 1990 Continued
Wastewater- treatment
facility name
Shelburne Crown Road Fire District 1 .............
Sheldon Springs ...... Sherburne Fire
District 1 .............South Burlington
Airuort2 .............
Refer ence No.
(fig. 9)
6566 67
68
NPDES number
VTO 100331VTO 100340 VT0101141
VTO 100366
Latitude
442421445300 433905
442854
Long itude
731317725636 724713
731017
Receiving water body
Missisquoi River Ottauquechee
Winooski River
Sub- basin code
0201000302010007 01080106
02010003
1990 return flow
(Mgal/d)
'0.28'.02 '.09
1.22
Per capita return flow and codes
(gal/d)
204 --82 --
225 --
129 F.G
Town (Minor Civil
Division) served (fig. 9)
Sheldon Sherburne
South Burlington
Sewered popula
tion
1,370245
3400
6.440
South Burlington (Bartlett)..........
Springfield(Clinton)2 ........,
StAlbans2 ...........,St. Johnsbury2 .....,Stowe...................Swanton Village2 , TVoy and Jay.......
Vergennes............Wallingford Fire
District 1.........Waterbury............West Pawlet.........West Rutland2 .....Whitingham
Jacksonville....Williamstown......Wilmington.........Windsor Main2 ....Windsor-Weston
Heights............Winooski ............Woodstock Main.
Total.
69 VT0100358 442544 731255 Lake Champlain 02010003
70 VT0100374 431901 723022 Black River 01080106
71 VT0100323 444947 730514 Lake Champlain 0201000572 VT0100579 442436 720100 Passumpsic River 0108010273 VTO 100455 442748 724118 Waterbury River 0201000374 VT0100501 445534 730805 Missisquoi River 0201000775 VT0100391 445640 722430 Missisquoi River 02010007
7677
VT0100404 VT0100552
441001 731534 Otter Creek 432855 725837 Otter Creek
78 VTO 10046379 VT010119280 VT010071481 VT0101044
82 VT010072283 VTO 10070684 VT010091985 VTO 100447
442042432115433526424720
440720425210432820432842
724607731513730219724913
723220725236722317722336
Winooski River Indian River Clarendon River North River East
BranchStevens Branch Deerfield River Connecticut River Connecticut River
87VT0100510 VTO 100757
442926 731151 Winooski River 433724 723118 Ottauquechee
River
0201000202010002
02010003020100010201000201080203
02010003010802030108010401080104
0201000301080106
Colchester .75 266 - South Burlington
1.70 264 F,I,O Springfield
3.45 470 F,I,L,O St. Albans1.06 125 O St Johnsbury'.13 131 G,L Stowe.77 216 F,I,L,O Swanton
'.06 240 F Troy Jay
.46 182 G,I Vergennesl .\\ 115 F,L Wallingford
'.02 .26
'.02
112 F69 L
125 --
74 L
'.06 70 F! .09 87 L,O.47 160 I,O
'.01 91 --
.98 '.25
48.94
148 F,O 156 F,L,O
Waterbury Pawlet West Rutland Whitingham
Williamstown Wilmington Windsor Windsor
Winooski Woodstock
3,0302,820
6,440
7,34038,500
9903,570
3210340
2,530960
2,060290
2,080270
8601,0302,930
110
6,6101,600
248,440
'Data provided by State of Vermont database, 1992 data (Virginia Little, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation, written commun., 1992). Classified as a major facility by the USEPA (Ed Kim, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992).
3Provided by a telephone conversation with wastewater-treatment-facility or town personnel.4Estimated on the basis of sewered population times average self-supplied domestic per capita of 65 gallons per day (Solley and others, 1993). 5Estimated from USEPA Needs Survey database (Larry MacMillan, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, written commun., 1992).
54 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND RETURN FLOW IN NEW ENGLAND
In New England, return flows of treated water from 490 municipal wastewater-treatment facilities totalled about 1,725 Mgal/d during 1990. A summary of the return-flow data described for each State is in table 12. These 490 facilities served 66 percent of the population (8.717 million) in the six States and discharged 1,723 Mgal/d of treated wastewater to surface water and 2 Mgal/d to ground water. Twenty- two percent (106 facilities) of these were regional facilities that served populations of more than one MCD. Four facilities had collection systems in two States. Six hundred and fifty-one out of 1,606 MCDs in New England were at least partially sewered. In New England, the two largest municipal wastewater- treatment facility return flows were from the Deer Island (270 Mgal/d) and the Nut Island (136 Mgal/d) facilities into Boston Harbor (table 8).
Median per capita return flow from municipal wastewater-treatment facilities for the New England States ranged from 135 gal/d in Vermont to 186 gal/d in Maine (table 5). The median per capita return-flow value for all municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in New England was 167 gal/d, which incorporates the net amount of wastewater that was conveyed through collection systems from domestic, commercial, industrial, infiltration and inflow, or combined sewers, and the loss of water through exfiltration.
The estimated aggregate volume of wastewater discharged to ground water from on-site septic systems for the unsewered population of New England was 291 Mgal/d in 1990 (table 12). Adding this amount to the volume of return flow from municipal wastewater- treatment facilities results in a total wastewater return- flow volume of 2,016 Mgal/d, of which 86 percent was treated at a public facility, and the remaining 14 percent was discharged directly to ground water from septic systems. This aggregate return-flow volume
Table 12. Summary of return-flow data for the sewered and unsewered population in New England, by State, 1990
[Total population: U.S. Bureau of the Census, (1991a-f). Estimated return flow from septic systems: Number reflects estimate of unsewered population calculated as the difference between the State total population and sewered population times 65 gal/d per person. Mgal/d, million gallons per day; <, less than; gal/d, gallon per day]
Sewered population
State
Maine.. ..............................Massachusetts.... ...............
Rhode Island...... ...............Vermont ............................New England ....................
Total population (millions)
3.2841.2286.0151.1091.003.563
13.203
1990 total return
flow (Mgal/d)
417 136 905
82 136 49
1,725
1990 sewered
population (millions)
2.291 .587
4.366 .536 .689 .248
8.717
Return flows to surface water
(Mgal/d)
417 136 903
82 136 49
1,723
Return flows to ground water
(Mgal/d)
<1 <1
2 <1
0 <1
2
Unsewered population
1990 unsewered population (millions)
0.993 .641
1.650.573 .314 .314
4.485
Estimated return
flow from septic
systems (Mgal/d)
6542
107 37 20 20
291
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England 55
does not include amounts contributed by unsewered commercial or industrial establishments. Further refinements to a water-use model would include estimates of return flows from unsewered commercial and industrial establishments.
A comparison of sewered and unsewered populations for the New England States is shown in figure 10. Each of the three mostly rural States (Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont) had nearly equal sewered and unsewered populations. Conversely, the three more densely populated States (Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island) had significantly larger sewered populations than unsewered populations because a larger percentage of people lived in urban areas than in rural areas.
Wastewater discharged into brackish or saline water (ocean or estuary) is unavailable for reuse as freshwater unless treated; however, wastewater discharged into freshwater becomes part of the instream flow of a river and can be withdrawn for reuse. Because populations tend to concentrate at or near coastal areas, many of the municipal waste water- treatment facilities in Maine and Rhode Island, and some in Connecticut and Massachusetts, discharged directly into the Atlantic Ocean or its bays, inlets, or estuaries. In New England, 61 facilities discharged into saline or brackish water, including tidal rivers, for a total return flow of 680 Mgal/d, or 39 percent of the total return flows from municipal wastewater-treatment
o 2 \7\
Sewered
Unsewered
CONNECTICUT MAINE MASSACHUSETTS NEW RHODE VERMONTHAMPSHIRE ISLAND
NEW ENGLAND STATES
Figure 10. Sewered and unsewered populations in the New England States for 1990.
facilities (Appendix 1). Return flows from facilities in Massachusetts were discharged into saline water at a rate of 533 Mgal/d or 78 percent of total return flows into saline water from municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in New England; 80 Mgal/d or 12 percent were discharged from Connecticut, 43 Mgal/d or 6 percent were discharged from Maine, 18 Mgal/d or almost 3 percent were discharged from Rhode Island, and 6 Mgal/d or less than 1 percent were discharged from New Hampshire.
A review of data on municipal wastewater- treatment facilities in New England shows some anomalies when comparing data among the States. For example, although Vermont had the lowest total sewered population of the six States (table 12), it had more municipal wastewater-treatment facilities (87) than Connecticut (86), New Hampshire (73) and Rhode Island (20). Similarly, Maine and Massachusetts had about the same number of facilities (115 and 113, respectively), yet the facilities in Massachusetts served more than seven times the population of those in Maine (table 12). Possible reasons why the number of facilities were significantly different from State to State include extent of urbanization, availability of State and Federal dollars to supplement local sources of funding for construction of a new facility, feasibility of tying into an existing nearby facility, local topography, and the present water quality of the receiving water body. Even if an existing facility in a nearby area has the design capacity to accept the additional load from a new wastewater-collection system, it could be more costly if the wastewater needs to be pumped to a high elevation for treatment. Thus, it is more common to see a few large facilities in flat areas and many but small facilities in areas of varying topography. For example, three facilities served the hilly, 10.5-mi2 city of Burlington, Vermont (table 11), whereas a single facility served the flat 68.3-mi2 glacial-outwash plain of Central Falls, Cumberland, East Providence, Lincoln, and Pawtucket, Rhode Island (table 10).
Monthly total return flows for all municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in New England ranged from 1,415 Mgal/d in September to 1,996 Mgal/d in April (fig. 11, Appendix 1). Inflows from surface runoff and infiltration of ground water from leaks into wastewater-collection systems during spring snowmelt contributed to the large volumes of water in the spring. Similarly, exfiltration which occurs when the water table is below sewer pipes during dry periods, contributes towards low return flows during the
56 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
2,500
>-Qo: 2,000aia.CO
O
|i.O
,500
2? 1,000
Ia:=? 500LUa:
JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC.
TIME, IN MONTHS
Figure 11. Monthly variations in total return flows from municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in New England, 1990.
summer and early autumn. Monthly fluctuations can also indicate seasonal differences in populations for small summer communities such as Old Orchard Beach in Maine (fig. 5) and Hampton in New Hampshire (fig. 7). In addition, return flows that were greater during September through June than during July or August probably represent an influx of students in small towns with large universities such as Amherst, Massachusetts (fig. 6A); Durham, New Hampshire; and Orono, Maine.
WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND RETURN FLOW BY DRAINAGE BASIN
Wastewater-collection and return-flow data are grouped by drainage basins and subbasins for easier use in the planning and allocation of water resources. States that are implementing watershed-management programs will be able to determine the total volume of return flow for entire drainage basins rather than just for drainage areas in the State. This total volume can be used to compare significant gains or losses of water through interbasin transfers to or from drainage basins. Water availability is affected by interbasin transfers because water can be withdrawn and discharged into different basins (water can be used in either the basin of withdrawal or discharge). This gain or loss has to be
included in any water-use analysis because the transfer represents a gain or loss to the volume of water available for use in either of the affected basins. There is also a loss of water to a basin if a large proportion of the total return flow from the basin is discharged into saline water. Although an analysis of unsewered total return flows by drainage basin, similar to the sewered analysis done in each State, would be useful (Marc Loiselle, Maine Geological Survey, written commun., 1994), population data are not available from the USBC by drainage basin and, therefore, was not included in this report.
The Massachusetts-Rhode Island Coastal Basins subregion (0109), with 67 municipal wastewater- treatment facilities each discharging more than 0.01 Mgal/d (Appendix 1), had the largest total return flow (808 Mgal/d) of all the subregional drainage basins inventoried for this report. More than half (406 Mgal/d) of the total return flows can be attributed to the two MWRA facilities (Deer Island and Nut Island) serving Boston and the surrounding area (table 8). About 201 Mgal/d of the wastewater return flows from these two facilities was withdrawn from a reservoir in the Connecticut River Basin subregion (0108), and about 114 Mgal/d was withdrawn from a reservoir in the Merrimack River Basin subregion (0107) (Bratton, 1991). This water, withdrawn from the Connecticut and Merrimack River Basins and discharged into the Massachusetts-Rhode Island Coastal Basins, constituted a large interbasin transfer of water.
Other large interbasin transfers (at the drainage subbasin level) were in Connecticut. Some of the water discharged in the Lower Connecticut River Subbasin (01080205) (fig. 1) from the Hartford area was withdrawn from reservoirs in the Farmington River Subbasin (01080207). Water discharged in the Shetucket River Subbasin (01100002) originated in the Lower Connecticut River Subbasin (01080205) (Howard Sternberg, Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, oral commun., 1993).
The Connecticut Coastal subregion (0110, 292 Mgal/d), the Connecticut River subregion (0108, 291 Mgal/d), and the Merrimack River subregion (0107, 130 Mgal/d) Basins produced the second, third, and fourth largest volumes of return flows, with 73, 113, and 48 municipal wastewater-treatment facilities discharging into these respective basins (Appendix 1). Sewered population in the remaining nine subregional basins in New England generated return flows of
Wastewater Collection and Return Flow by Drainage Basin 57
204 Mgal/d (Appendix 1). Each of the four drainage basins with the largest return flows are contained entirely or almost entirely in New England. Drainage subbasins with the largest volumes of return flows were the Charles River Subbasin (01090001), 516 Mgal/d; the Narragansett River Subbasin (01090004), 159 Mgal/d; and the Lower Connecticut River Subbasin (01080205), 130 Mgal/d (Appendix 1).
Eighty-one percent (551 Mgal/d) of return flows into saline water were from the Massachusetts-Rhode Island Coastal Basins subregion (0109), 12 percent (80 Mgal/d) were from the Connecticut Coastal Basins subregion (0110), 6 percent (42 Mgal/d) were from the Saco River Basin subregion (0106), and 1 percent (7 Mgal/d) were from the Maine Coastal Basins subregion (0105) (Appendix 1). Because all of the water originates as fresh water, the amount discharged into saline water is a loss to the freshwater hydrologic system.
SUMMARY
Site-specific data were compiled from Federal, State, and local sources for municipal wastewater- collection systems, treatment facilities, and return flows in New England. Methods of quality control were developed and are described in this report. The quality-control procedures included the use of GIS to verify facility locations, corroboration of return-flow and some sewered-population data from several sources, and calculation of a per capita return-flow value for each municipal wastewater-treatment facility. Municipal wastewater-treatment facilities with industrial contributions, high infiltration and inflow, combined sewer overflows, high seasonal populations, or populations in group quarters were identified. In addition, a contingency-table analysis was done to determine if there is a statistical association between industries or infiltration and inflow and increasing ranges of per capita wastewater-return-flow values. An association between these factors was identified in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Vermont. No statistical association was found in Maine and New Hampshire and the test was not done for Rhode Island because of insufficient sample size.
During 1990,490 municipal wastewater- treatment facilities served approximately 67 percent of New England's population; of these facilities, 106 were regional facilities that served more than 1 MCD and 4
served customers in more than 1 State. Return flows from the 490 facilities totalled nearly 1,725 Mgal/d. In 1990, Massachusetts accounted for the largest volume of return flows in 1990 (905 Mgal/d), followed by Connecticut (417 Mgal/d), Maine (138 Mgal/d), Rhode Island (136 Mgal/d), New Hampshire (83 Mgal/d), and Vermont (49 Mgal/d. The more densely populated States of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut had the highest percentage of population sewered in New England with 73,69, and 70 percent of their populations sewered, respectively.
In 1990, the Massachusetts-Rhode Island Coastal River Basins accounted for the largest return flow (808 Mgal/d), followed by the Connecticut Coastal Basins (292 Mgal/d), the Connecticut River Basin (291 Mgal/d), the Merrimack River Basin (130 Mgal/d), and the Saco River Basin (68 Mgal/d). Return flows from the eight other drainage basins in New England totalled 136 Mgal/d.
Several cases of interbasin transfers of water were present in the study area. In Massachusetts and Connecticut, large volumes of water were withdrawn by public suppliers from reservoirs, conveyed to users in other basins, and discharged to waters outside the basins containing the reservoirs. The two largest return-flow volumes in New England from individual municipal wastewater-treatment facilities (the MWRA facilities, Deer Island and Nut Island) were from the Massachusetts-Rhode Island Coastal Basins subregion (0109); these return flows predominantly were composed of water that was withdrawn from reservoirs in the Connecticut and Merrimack River Basins subregions (0108 and 0107). Also, the waste water- collection systems for the regional facilities of Lowell, Springfield, Upper Blackstone in Massachusetts, and Blackstone Valley District Commission in Rhode Island had customers in towns that were in different subbasins than the facilities.
Estimates of return flow from the aggregate unsewered residential population of each State were done to provide a more complete analysis of return flows in New England in 1990. Return flows from on- site septic systems in New England totalled about 291 Mgal/d. Combined return flows from septic systems and treated municipal wastewater return flows were 2,016 Mgal/d. This aggregate return flow, however, does not include amounts contributed by unsewered commercial or industrial establishments.
58 Wastewater Collection and Return Flow in New England, 1990
The volume of wastewater-treatment-facility return flows discharged into brackish or saline water was about 680 Mgal/d, or 39 percent of total return flows from municipal wastewater-treatment facilities in New England. Massachusetts discharged the largest volume (533 Mgal/d) of treated waste water into saline water in 1990, followed by Connecticut (80 Mgal/d), Maine (43 Mgal/d), Rhode Island (18 Mgal/d), and New Hampshire (6 Mgal/d). By drainage basin, the volume of return flows into saline water in New England in descending order was from the Massachusetts-Rhode Island Coastal Basins (551 Mgal/d), the Connecticut Coastal Basins (80 Mgal/d), the Saco River Basin (42 Mgal/d), and the Maine Coastal Basins (7 Mgal/d).
REFERENCES CITED
Bratton, Lisa, 1991, Public water-supply in Massachusetts, 1986: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 91-86, 108 p.
Browner, C.M., 1994, The administration's proposals: EPA Journal, v. 20, no 102, p. 6-9.
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, 1982, Water quality management priorities: Hartford, Conn., Water Compliance Unit, June 1982, 22 p.
Horn, M.A. and Craft, P.A., 1991, Plan for developing a water-use data program in Rhode Island: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 90-4207, 26 p.
Horn, M.A., Craft, P.A., and Bratton, Lisa, 1993, Estimation of water withdrawal and distribution, water use, and wastewater collection and return flow in Cumberland, Rhode Island, 1988: U.S. Geological Survey Water- Resources Investigations Report 93-4023, 54 p.
Maine Water Resources Management Board, 1991, Final Report Findings and recommendations: Augusta, Maine, 27 p.
Seabar, PR., Kapinos, P.P., and Knapp, G.L., 1987,Hydrologic unit maps: U.S. Geological Survey Water- Supply Paper 2294, 63 p.
Solley, W.B., Pierce, R.R., and Perlman, H.A., 1993, Estimated use of water in the United States in 1990: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1081, 76 p.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991a, 1990 Census ofpopulation and housing Summary population and housing characteristics: U.S. Department of Commerce, Connecticut 1990/CPH-1-8 64 p.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991b, 1990 Census ofpopulation and housing Summary population and housing characteristics: Maine 1990/CPH-1-21, 190 p.
1991c, 1990 Census of population and housing Summary population and housing characteristics: Massachusetts 1990/CPH-1-23, 174 p.
199Id, 1990 Census of population and housing Summary population and housing characteristics: New Hampshire 1990/CPH-1-31, 130 p.
1991e, 1990 Census of population and housing Summary population and housing characteristics: Rhode Island 1990/CPH-1-41, 82 p.
199If, 1990 Census of population and housing Summary population and housing characteristics: Vermont 1990/CPH-1-47 130, p.
1991g, 1990 Census of population and housing Summary social, economic, and housing characteris tics: U.S. Department of Commerce, Connecticut 1990/CPH-5-8, 197 p.
1991h, 1990 Census of population and housing Summary social, economic, and housing characteris tics: Maine 1990/CPH-5-21, 278 p.
199H, 1990 Census of population and housing Summary social, economic, and housing characteris tics: Massachusetts 1990/CPH-5-23, 260 p.
1991J, 1990 Census of population and housing Summary social, economic, and housing characteris tics: New Hampshire 1990/CPH-5-31, 198 p.
1991k, 1990 Census of population and housing Summary social, economic, and housing characteris tics: Rhode Island 1990/CPH-5-41, 134 p.
19911, 1990 Census of population and housing Summary social, economic, and housing characteris tics: Vermont 1990/CPH-5-47, 199 p.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1990a, Office of Water environmental and program information systems compendium FY 1990: EPA 500/9-90-002, 125 p.
1990b, Operation of wastewater treatment plants, (3d ed.): Sacramento, Calif., Hornet Foundation Inc., v. 1,504 p.
1990c, Municipal wastewater treatment facilities in New England: Boston, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region I, 92 p.
1991, Advanced waste treatment A field studytraining program (3rd ed.): Sacramento, Calif., Hornet Foundation Inc., 560 p.
U.S. Geological Survey, 1995, Current water resources conditions in Central New England: August 1995 (published monthly).
References Cited 59
APPENDIX 1
61
App
endi
x 1.
Sum
mar
y of
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-t
reat
men
t fac
ilitie
s an
d m
ean
daily
ret
urn
flow
s by
sub
regi
onal
dra
inag
e ba
sins
and
sub
basi
ns in
New
Eng
land
, 19
90
[Dat
a fr
om S
eaba
r an
d ot
hers
, 19
87. I
f the
ann
ual a
vera
ge d
aily
flo
w w
as e
stim
ated
on
the
basi
s of
pop
ulat
ion
(as
note
d in
tabl
es 6
-11)
, the
n ea
ch m
onth
's m
ean
daily
ret
urn
flow
s w
ere
assu
med
to b
e th
at
sam
e va
lue.
MW
RA
, Mas
sach
uset
ts W
ater
Res
ourc
es A
utho
rity
; MC
I, M
assa
chus
etts
Cor
rect
iona
l Ins
titut
e; M
DC
, Met
ropo
litan
Dis
tric
t Com
mis
sion
; M
gal/d
, Mill
ion
gallo
ns p
er d
ay. -
-, no
dat
a]
Dra
inag
e-
subb
asin
co
de
0101
0001
Tota
l
0101
0003
Tota
l
0101
0004
Tota
l
0101
0005
Tota
l Tota
0102
0001
Tota
l
0102
0003
To
tal
0102
0004
Tota
l
0102
0005
Was
tew
ater
- tr
eatm
ent
faci
lity
nam
e
Mad
awas
kaV
an B
uren
Fort
Ken
tSt
. Aga
tha
Ash
land
Sew
er D
istr
ict
Car
ibou
Fort
Fai
rfie
ldL
imes
tone
Sew
er D
istr
ict
Map
leto
n Se
wer
Dis
tric
t Pr
esqu
e Is
le
Was
hbur
n
Hou
lton
Wat
erM
ars
Hill
1 for
bas
in k
)101
....
......
.....
East
Mill
inoc
ket
Mill
inoc
ket
Dan
fort
h
Bro
wnv
ille
Dov
er-F
oxcr
oft
Milo
Wat
er D
istr
ict
Ban
gor
Bre
wer
Buc
kspo
rt
Eas
t Mac
hias
Lin
coln
Old
Tow
n
Stat
e
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
ne
Mai
ne
Mai
ne
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
ne
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
ne
Mai
ne
Mai
neM
aine
M
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Type
of
re
ceiv
in
g w
ater
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h Fr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
h Fr
esh
Fres
h Fr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Ave
r
age
daily
re
turn
flo
w
(Mga
l/d)
0.66 .4
3 1.
09 .28
.04
.32
.27
1.21 .5
9.3
3.1
4 2.
68
.14
5.36
2.11 .1
8 2.
29
9.06 .5
01.
53
2.03 .0
5 .0
5
.03
.32
.29
.64
7.61
3.
44 .38
.08
.80
1.02
Mea
n da
ily f
low
s, In
Mga
l/d
Jan 0.
36 .40
.76
.21
.02
.23
.12
.48
.39
.14
.04
1.41 .1
7 2.
75
1.00 .07
1.07
4.
82 .30
1.15
1.
45 .06
.06
.03
--
.29
.32
6.36
4.
33 .37
.08
.62
.87
Feb 0.
38 .41
.79
.23
.02
.25
.12
.51
.39
.14
.04
1.41
.1
42.
74
1.10 .08
1.18
4.
95 .36
1.11
1.47 .06
.06
.03
-
.29
.32
6.54
4.
53 .38
.08
.64
1.03
Mar 0.
69 .58
1.27 .3
4.0
3.3
7
1.18 .6
3.3
0.0
8 3.
19
.18
5.56
2.60 .1
9 2.
79
9.99 .6
51.
55
2.20 .0
6 .0
6
.03
-
.29
.32
11.9
9 3.
88 .44
.08
1.04
1.27
Apr 0.
94 .68
1.62 .47
.09
.56
.55
2.04
1.05 .8
7.1
8 4.
43
.25
9.36
2.90 .4
1 3.
31
14.8
4
.80
1.96
2.
76 .06
.06
.03
-
.29
.32
11.2
1 4.
08 .52
.08
1.14
1.38
May 0.
84 .42
1.26 .34
.04
.38
.34
1.15 .6
4.2
7.0
7 2.
86
.11
5.44
1.50 .20
1.70
8.
78 .60
1.82
2.
42 .05
.05
.03
-
.29
.32
7.92
3.
42 .44
.08
1.04
1.11
Jun
e 0.52 .2
6.7
8
.21
.02
.23
.21
1.01 .4
5.1
9.0
5 2.
07
.31
4.29
1.70 .12
1.82
7.
12 .44
1.72
2.
16 .04
.04
.03
.29
.32
5.68
3.24 .3
9 .0
8.6
9.9
3
July 0.
26
.26
.20
.02
.22
.21
.90
.41
.18
.04
1.86
3.58
1.20 .08
1.28
5.
34 .30
1.16
1.
46 .03
.03
.03
-
.29
.32
5.72
2.
71 .29
.08
.51
.87
Aug 0.
47 .29
.76
.23
.02
.25
.21
.92
.49
.17
.04
2.13
.0
6 4.
01
2.80 .1
0 2.
90
7.92 .3
31.
10
1.43 .03
.03
.03
.25
.29
.57
6.99
2.
56 .26
.08
.56
.78
Sept 0.
46 .28
.74
.23
.02
.25
.17
.74
.40
.14
.04
1.90
.0
5 3.
44
1.70 .03
1.73
6.
16 .27
1.04
1.
31 .03
.03
.03
.27
.29
.59
6.09
2.42 .2
1 .0
8.4
7.6
8
Oct 1.
00 .64
1.64 .32
.08
.40
.46
2.05 .8
0.6
1.1
13.
88
.17
8.07
2.40 .2
8 2.
68
12.7
9
.57
1.72
2.
29 .05
.05
.03
.40
.29
.72
6.65
2.85 .3
5 .0
8.8
0.9
0
Nov 0.
91 .53
1.44 .3
2.0
5.3
7
.31
2.10 .7
7.4
8.1
1 3.
86
.10
7.72
3.90 .3
4 4.
24
13.7
6
.73
2.07
2.
80 .06
.06
.03
.39
.29
.71
8.93
3.
42 .41
.08
1.00
1.07
Dec 0.
73 .37
1.10 .28
.04
.32
.30
1.50 .66
.42
.89
3.12
.0
8 6.
97
2.50 .2
6 2.
76
11.1
4
.67
1.99
2.
66 .06
.06
.03
.31
.29
.63
7.21
3.
86 .49
.08
1.05
1.33
2
App
endi
x 1.
Sum
mar
y of
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-tr
eatm
ent f
acili
ties
and
mea
n da
ily r
etur
n flo
ws
by s
ubre
gion
al d
rain
age
basi
ns a
nd s
ubba
sins
in N
ew E
ngla
nd,
19
90
Con
tinue
d
Wastewater
Collet CT o' 3 0.
X C i n i 5' z m CO.
a. « 0
Dra
inag
e-
Was
tew
ater
- su
bbas
in
treat
men
t co
de
faci
lity
nam
e
0102
0005
O
rono
Peno
bsco
t Ind
ian
Nat
ion
Vea
zie
Win
terp
ort
Tot
al...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.To
tal f
or b
asin
k)1
02 .
......
......
..
0103
0001
Ja
ckm
an S
ewer
Dis
tric
tT
otal
. ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
.....
0103
0003
A
nson
-Mad
ison
Aug
usta
Bin
gham
Cor
inna
Sew
er D
istr
ict
Farm
ingt
onG
ardi
ner
Gui
lfor
d-Sa
nger
ville
Har
tland
Ken
nebe
cK
ingf
ield
New
port
Oak
land
Pitts
field
Ric
hmon
dSk
owhe
gan
Uni
tyV
assa
lbor
oW
ilton
Tota
l ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
Tota
l for
bas
in '0
103
......
......
...
0104
0001
B
erlin
Gor
ham
Ran
gely
Tot
al...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.
0104
0002
B
ethe
lC
anto
nJa
y
Stat
e
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
ne
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
N.H
.N
.H.
Mai
ne
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
ne
Type
of
re
ceiv
in
g w
ater
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Ave
r ag
e da
ily
retu
rn
flow
(M
gal/d
)
1.77 .06
.10
.16
15.4
218
.14
.07
.07
4.23
4.55 .1
2.6
1.4
71.
35 .44
.91
11.6
2.0
5.4
7.5
51.
23 .30
1. 42 .2
3.0
7.1
928
.81
28.8
8
2.45 .7
8.1
23.
35 .16
.04
.04
Mea
n da
ily fl
ows,
in M
gal/d
Jan 1.
57 .06
.10
.17
14.5
316
.36
.07
.07
3.99
3.44 .0
8.4
5.4
91.
11 .42
.96
9.89 .0
5.3
1.4
61.
39 .29
.92
-
.07
.19
24.4
924
.56
2.42 .6
3.1
13.
16 .10
.04
.03
Feb 1.
99 .06
.10
.17
15.5
117
.36
.07
.07
4.15
4.48 .0
8.6
5.4
61.
38 .45
.98
10.7
9.0
5.4
1.5
31.
10 .26
1.11
--
.07
.19
27.1
427
.21
2.82 .7
5.1
23.
69 .12
.04
.03
Mar 2.
34 .06
.10
.23
21.4
424
.02
.07
.07
4.40
5.77 .1
3.8
2.5
81.
83 .52
1.03
12.8
8.0
5.5
7.6
91.
35 .38
1.82
--
.07
.22
33.1
033
.17
2.76 .9
5.1
53.
86 .20
.04
.04
Apr 2.
65 .06
.10
.25
21.4
724
.61
.07
.07
4.26
5.86 .2
2.7
8.5
51.
89 .51
1.04
12.9
6.0
5.7
2.7
31.
45 .38
1.97 .2
5.0
7.2
233
.89
33.9
6
3.48 .9
2.1
54.
55 .20
.04
.03
May 1.
84 .05
.10
.19
16.1
918
.98
.07
.07
4.30
5.07 .1
9.5
7.4
91.
83 .45
1.11
12.3
2.0
5.6
5.6
71.
09 .45
1.73 .19
.07
.22
31.4
331
.50
2.40 .8
0.1
43.
35 .15
.04
.03
June 1.
49 .05
.10
.16
12.8
115
.33
.07
.07
4.06
3.91 .0
8.6
5.4
01.
00 .46
.96
11.0
0.0
5.5
4.5
61.
08 .20
1.53 .2
5.0
7.1
826
.99
27.0
6
1.89 .7
3.1
22.
74 .15
.04
.03
July 1.
15 .05
.10
.11
11.5
813
.39
.07
.07
4.19
3.50 .0
6.4
2.3
9.8
0.3
4.7
29.
45 .05
.47
.42
1.11 .1
71.
38--
.07
.17
23.6
923
.76
.63
.11
.74
.12
.04
.03
Aug 1.
10 .05
.10
.10
12.5
714
.61
.07
.07
4.07
3.41 .0
8.6
6.3
8.8
7.3
41.
078.
96 .05
.30
.44
1.30 .15
1.08
--
.07
.17
23.3
923
.46
2.32 .8
3.1
33.
28 .18
.04
.04
Sept 1.
21 .05
.10
.07
11.3
813
.31 .07
.07
4.00
3.20 .0
7.4
9.3
8.8
9.3
7.8
28.
93 .05
.25
.39
1.03 .13
.87
--
.07
.16
22.1
022
.17
1.48 .5
5.0
92.
13 .12
.04
.03
Oct 1.
98 .06
.10
.16
13.9
316
.99
.07
.07
4.50
4.87 .1
4.5
9.4
91.
37 .47
.74
12.4
3.0
5.4
1.5
41.
12 .32
1.31
-
.07
.19
29.6
229
.69
2.44 .7
9.1
43.
37 .17
.04
.04
Nov 1.
70 .06
.10
- 16.7
620
.33
.07
.07
4.49
5.10 .1
7.5
4.5
51.
54 .47
.70
14.5
8.0
5.4
2.6
51.
14 .39
1.62
--
.07
.19
32.6
832
.75
2.49 .8
9.1
13.
49 .20
.04
.04
Dec 2.
24 .07
.10
-- 16.4
219
.77
.07
.07
4.40
5.94 .1
0.6
7.5
51.
71 .47
.75
15.2
9.0
5.5
5
1.54 .48
1.71
-
.07
.19
34.4
734
.54
2.43 .8
2.0
93.
34 .23
.04
.05
App
endi
x 1.
Sum
mar
y of
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-tr
eatm
ent f
acili
ties
and
mea
n da
ily r
etur
n flo
ws
by s
ubre
gion
al d
rain
age
basi
ns a
nd s
ubba
sins
in N
ew E
ngla
nd,
1990 C
ontin
ued
Q I Q. x" _i
«*
Dra
inag
e-
Was
tew
ater
- su
bbas
in
trea
tmen
t co
de
faci
lity
nam
e
0104
0002
L
ewis
ton-
Aub
urn
Lis
bon
Liv
erm
ore
Falls
Mec
hani
c Fa
llsN
orw
ayPa
risR
umfo
rd-M
exic
oSa
battu
sTo
tal .
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
...To
tal f
or b
asin
'010
4 ...
......
......
0105
0001
B
aile
yvill
eC
alai
sPa
ssam
aquo
ddy,
The
Str
ip
Tot
al...
......
......
......
... ..
......
......
......
..
0105
0002
B
ar H
arbo
r, H
ulls
Cov
eB
ar H
arbo
r, M
ain
Bel
fast
Blu
e H
illC
amde
nC
astin
eE
llsw
orth
Isle
sbor
oL
ubec
Mac
hias
Milb
ridg
eM
ount
Des
ert
Nor
th H
aven
Nor
thpo
rt V
illag
eC
orpo
ratio
n
Pass
amaq
uadd
y, P
leas
ant
Poin
t
Sear
spor
tSo
uthw
est H
arbo
rW
inte
r Har
bor
Tota
l ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
Stat
e
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
ne
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
ne
Mai
ne
Mai
ne
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
ne
Type
of
re
ceiv
in
g w
ater
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Salin
eSa
line
Salin
eFr
esh
Salin
eSa
line
Salin
eSa
line
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hSa
line
Fres
h
Salin
e
Salin
e
Salin
eSa
line
Salin
e
Ave
r
age
daily
re
turn
flo
w
(Mga
l/d)
11.7
8.9
0.8
3.4
0.3
6.3
21.
50 .11
16.4
419
.79
.31
.53
.02
.86
.06
1.13 .59
.03
.78
.15
.55
.04
.23
.39
.04
.22
.04
.07
.07
.10
.23
.13
4.85
Mea
n da
ily fl
ows,
in M
gal/d
Jan 10
.20
.52
.65
.24
.80
.36
1.09 .08
14.1
117
.27
.35
.30
.02
.68
.06
1.15 .5
2.0
3.7
6.1
6.5
6.0
5.2
3.4
3.0
4.2
8.0
6
.05
.06
.09
.26
.16
4.95
Feb 11.6
0.4
7.7
0.3
6.3
0.4
21.
24 .11
15.3
919
.08
.33
.31
.02
.66
.06
1.18 .55
.03
.83
.17
.54
.05
.23
.35
.04
.25
.05
.07
.06
.09
.25
.14
4.93
Mar 15
.41 .87
1.03 .60
.30
.42
1.92
-- 20.8
324
.68
.48
.48
.02
.98
.06
1.09 .7
0.0
3.9
2.1
7.6
2.0
6.2
3.4
1.0
4.2
7.0
3
.08
.07
.10
.21
.14
5.23
Apr 15
.11 .82
1.11 .6
5.3
0.3
82.
11 .12
20.8
725
49
£>u
,'-*£
,
.50
.71
.02
1.22 .06
1.10 .75
.03
1.14 .21
.69
.08
.23
.47
.04
.34
.03
.11
.09
.10
.24
.19
5.88
May 12
.62
.87
.97
.52
.30
.37
1.89 .1
317
.90
21.2
4
.42
.58
.01
1.01 .0
61.
26 .63
.03
.92
.16
.62
.03
.23
.46
.04
.23
.03
.09
.08
.09
.24
.16
5.36
June 11
.52
1.09 .81
.40
.30
.32
1.47 .1
316
.24
18.9
9
.18
.46
.01
.65
.06
1.17 .5
7.0
3.4
7.1
5.5
6.0
2.2
3.2
6.0
4.2
0.0
3
.06
.06
.09
.23
.12
4.35
July 9.
40 .90
.57
.27
.30
.23
1.09
-- 12.9
513
.69
.12
.38
.01
.51
.06
1.05 .4
4.0
3.5
9.1
0.4
2.0
2.2
3.2
8.0
4.1
4.0
3
.03
.05
.09
.23
.11
3.94
Aug 8.
77 .89
.52
.24
.30
.23
1.45 .0
812
.75
16.0
3
.08
.34
.01
.43
.06
1.19 .45
.03
.62
.11
.49
.02
.23
.27
.04
.15
.03
.07
.10
.24
.09
4.17
Sep
t 8.17 .8
8.4
8.1
9.3
0.2
31.
03 .09
11.5
613
.68
.13
.41
.01
.55
.06
.93
.38
.03
.46
.09
.41
.01
.23
.30
.04
.09
.03
.06
.09
.17
.05
3.44
Oct 11
.08
1.11 .8
3.3
2.3
0.2
91.
63 .11
15.9
219
.30
.28
.67
.02
.97
.06
.99
.62
.03
.63
.13
.50
.03
.23
.45
.04
.12
.03
.04
.07
.10
.19
.11
4.36
Nov 13
.29
1.44
1.10 .46
-
.28
1.59 .1
218
.56
22.0
5
.36
.85
.03
1.25 .0
61.
18 .71
.03
.77
.16
.55
.06
.23
.46
.04
.24
.04
.06
.08
.10
.23
.14
5.14
Dec 14
.26
-- 1.21 .5
4.4
5.3
61.
54 .13
18.8
022
.15
.47
.83
.04
1.33 .06
1.30 .81
.03
1.21 .1
6.6
4.0
0.2
3.5
1.0
4.3
7.0
5
.07
.10
.10
.25
.17
6.10
App
endi
x 1.
Sum
mar
y of
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-tr
eatm
ent f
acili
ties
and
mea
n da
ily r
etur
n flo
ws
by s
ubre
gion
al d
rain
age
basi
ns a
nd s
ubba
sins
in N
ew E
ngla
nd,
1990 C
ontin
ued
I o o 0) CL
ff m
<o_ o> a.
Dra
inag
e-
subb
asin
co
de
0105
0003
Tota
l
Was
tew
ater
- tr
eatm
ent
faci
lity
nam
e
Bat
hB
ooth
bay
Har
bor
Gre
at S
alt B
ayR
ockl
and
Tho
mas
ton
Wal
dobo
roW
isca
sset
Stat
e
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
ne
Type
of
re
ceiv
in
g w
ater
Fres
hSa
line
Fres
hSa
line
Fres
hSa
line
Salin
e
Tot
al f
or
hasi
n !0
1 O
S
0106
0001
Tota
l
0106
0002
Tot
al
0106
0003
Bru
nsw
ick
Falm
outh
Free
port
Mai
ne C
orre
ctio
nal
Cen
ter
Pine
land
Cen
ter
Portl
and
City
Port
land
, Wes
tbro
okPo
rtla
nd, C
ape
Eliz
abet
hSo
uth
Port
land
Yar
mou
th
Bid
defo
rdL
imer
ick
Nor
th C
onw
ayO
ld O
rcha
rd B
each
Oss
ipee
Saco
Scar
boro
ugh
Ber
wic
kD
over
Dur
ham
Epp
ing
Exe
ter
Farm
ingt
onH
ampt
on
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
ne
Mai
ne
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neM
aine
N.H
.M
aine
N.H
.M
aine
Mai
ne
Mai
neN
.H.
N.H
.N
.H.
N.H
.N
.H.
N.H
.
Fres
hSa
line
Salin
e
Fres
h
Fres
hSa
line
Fres
hSa
line
Salin
eSa
line
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hSa
line
Salin
e
Fres
hFr
esh
Salin
eFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Salin
e
Ave
r ag
e da
ily
retu
rn
flow
(M
gal/d
)
2.24 .2
9.1
72.
33 .61
.14
.17
5.95
11.6
6
2.97 .9
5.4
5
.04
.18
20.4
22.
54 .33
6.71 .6
635
.25
3.84 .0
5.1
31.
33 .03
1.82
1.06
8.26 .7
32.
921.
02 .16
1.93 .2
52.
30
Mea
n da
ily fl
ows,
in M
gal/d
Jan 2.
33 .23
.17
2.62 .7
1.1
4.1
86.
3912
.01
2.28 .7
5.2
5
.04
.16
16.4
92.
07 .29
6.08 .5
828
.98
3.41 .0
3.1
3.9
3.0
31.
51 .89
6.94 .7
52.
30 .60
.15
1.44 .22
1.91
Feb 2.
57 .26
.17
2.53 .7
9.1
5.1
86.
6512
74
1 ^
.^*T
2.52 .8
9.4
1
.04
.16
21.0
22.
59 .37
7.35 .6
535
.99
4.04 .0
3.1
31.
11 .03
2.01
1.01
8.36 .8
23.
051.
47 .20
2.48 .2
82.
19
Mar 2.
80 .22
.17
2.64 .7
2.1
5.1
86.
8913
.10
2.84
1.04 .54
.04
.22
21.2
53.
11 .38
7.76 .6
537
.81
4.14 .0
6.1
31.
10 .03
1.96
1.07
8.49 .8
32.
711.
30 .19
2.02 .3
51.
92
Apr 3.
04 .31
.17
2.93 .8
1.1
7.2
07.
6314
.73
3.58
1.24 .61
.04
.34
24.3
03.
59 .44
9.19 .8
544
.18
4.44 .0
8.1
31.
36 .03
2.39
1.16
9.59 .9
63.
341.
43 .24
2.53 .3
62.
24
May 2.
37 .25
.17
2.51 .7
1.1
3.1
76.
3212
.69
3.34
1.24 .4
4
.04
.33
24.2
62.
98 .36
8.06 .7
041
.73
4.23 .0
6.1
31.
33 .03
1.99
1.10
8.87 .7
63.
221.
26 .21
2.65 .3
52.
32
June 2.
00 .29
.17
2.15 .4
5.0
8.1
85.
3110
.31
3.33 .9
1.4
1
.04
.14
21.7
82.
13 .31
6.66 .6
436
.34
3.94 .0
8.1
31.
51 .03
1.78
1.07
8.54 .6
62.
56 .66
.17
1.79 .23
2.30
July 1.
43 .31
.17
1.52 .27
-
.15
3.85
8.29
3.50 .7
6.3
7
.04
.12
14.5
01.
74 .23
5.55 .5
927
.41
3.39
--
.13
1.93 .03
1.53
1.07
8.08 .4
6--
.54
.09
1.53 .18
2.77
Aug 1.
39 .34
.17
1.30 .31
.10
.15
3.77
8.37
2.48 .6
4.3
8
.04
.12
13.4
21.
85 .20
4.99 .5
424
.67
3.39 .0
4.1
31.
72 .03
1.57
1.03
7.90 .7
82.
28 .60
.10
1.82 .21
2.78
Sept 1.
13 .27
.17
1.51 .2
7.1
1.1
33.
597.
58
2.21 .6
1.3
5
.04
.12
15.8
11.
78 .18
4.20 .4
925
.79
3.31 .0
3.1
3.9
9.0
31.
13 .85
6.46 .6
12.
41 .88
.09
1.16 .19
2.01
Oct 2.
40 .32
.17
2.34 .4
9-
.16
5.88
11.2
1
2.49 .7
5.3
6
.04
.13
21.4
82.
70 .30
5.41 .6
334
.29
3.89 .0
5.1
31.
11 .03
1.41
1.03
7.66 .7
23.
211.
19 .15
1.65 .2
02.
38
Nov 2.
50 .31
.17
2.70 .6
5.1
5.1
86.
6613
.04
3.28
1.16 .63
.04
.14
24.5
22.
86 .40
7.16 .7
740
.96
3.78 .0
5.1
31.
38 .03
2.19
1.18
8.74 .6
93.
381.
13 .31
1.94 .22
2.46
Dec 2.
91 .36
.17
3.18
1.09 .19
.21
8.09
15.5
3
3.75
1.36 .71
.04
.15
26.1
83.
07 .49
8.10 .8
544
.71
4.10 .0
6.1
31.
46 .03
2.35
1.23
9.35 .7
03.
631.
13 .06
2.10 .2
52.
29
App
endi
x 1.
Sum
mar
y of
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-tr
eatm
ent f
acili
ties
and
mea
n da
ily r
etur
n flo
ws
by s
ubre
gion
al d
rain
age
basi
ns a
nd s
ubba
sins
in N
ew E
ngla
nd,
19
90
Con
tinue
d
a.
x"
Dra
inag
e-
subb
asin
co
de
0106
0003
Tota
l ,
Tola
0107
0001
Tota
l
0107
0002
Was
tew
ater
- tr
eatm
ent
faci
lity
nam
e
Ken
nebu
nkK
enne
bunk
port
Kitt
ery
Milt
onN
ewm
arke
tN
orth
Ber
wic
kO
gunq
uit
Port
smou
th, P
ierc
e Is
land
Roc
hest
erR
ocki
ngha
m C
ount
y H
ome
Rol
linsf
ord
Sanf
ord
Som
ersw
orth
Sout
h B
erw
ick
Stra
ffor
d C
ount
y H
ome
Wak
efie
ldW
ells
Yor
k
1 for
bas
in '
0106
.....
......
.....
Ash
land
Bri
stol
Lin
coln
New
Ham
pton
Vill
age
Plym
outh
Vill
age
Wat
ervi
lle V
alle
yW
oods
tock
Am
esbu
ryC
onco
rd, H
all S
tree
tC
onco
rd, P
enac
ook
Der
ryFr
ankl
inG
reen
ville
Hav
erhi
ll
Stat
e
Mai
neM
aine
Mai
neN
.H.
N.H
.M
aine
Mai
neN
.H.
N.H
.
N.H
.
N.H
.M
aine
N.H
.M
aine
N.H
.N
.H.
Mai
neM
aine
N.H
.N
.H.
N.H
.N
.H.
N.H
.N
.H.
N.H
.
Mas
s.N
.H.
N.H
.N
.H.
N.H
.N
.H.
Mas
s.
Type
of
re
ceiv
in
g w
ater
Fres
hSa
line
Salin
eFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Salin
eSa
line
Fres
h
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Salin
eSa
line
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Ave
r
age
daily
re
turn
flo
w
(Mga
l/d)
0.90 .3
01.
29 .04
.54
.26
.51
2.44
3.46 .0
2.0
92.
501.
22 .25
.02
.01
.62
1.06
24
.84
68.3
5
.33
.19
.44
.01
.42
.15
.03
1.57
1.85
4.06 .8
91.
555.
60 .10
11.4
5
Mea
n da
ily fl
ows,
in M
gal/d
Jan 0.
55 .20
1.21 .0
4.4
9.0
9.2
44.
602.
79 .02
.09
2.09
1.25 .2
4.0
2.0
1.3
0.5
8 22
.17
58.0
9
.42
.16
.37
.01
.20
.21
.03
1.39
1.41
3.61 .6
11.
254.
11 .08
10.5
4
Feb 0.
74 .28
1.61 .0
4.6
5.1
0.4
26.
203.
69 .02
.09
2.45
1.44 .27
.02
.01
.36
1.10
29
.99
74.3
4
.40
.17
.46
.01
.32
.23
.03
1.63
2.39
3.92 .8
91.
595.
56 .12
13.3
9
Mar 0.
79 .25
1.25 .0
4.5
6.2
4.3
61.
884.
20 .02
.09
2.80
1.28 .2
7.0
2.0
1.3
31.
14
24.8
4 71
.14
.53
.13
.49
.01
.49
.18
.03
1.86
2.10
4.36
1.17
1.65
6.86 .1
512
.39
Apr 1.
10 .29
1.35
-
.66
.26
.53
2.30
4.94 .0
2.0
92.
971.
41 .33
.02
.01
.46
1.07
28
.91
82.6
8
.50
.19
.42
.01
.55
.16
.03
1.86
2.58
4.24
1.07
1.95
--
.13
13.7
7
May 0.
90 .28
1.24 .05
.80
-
.60
2.20
4.46 .0
2.0
93.
141.
38 .31
.02
.01
.52
1.24
28
.04
78.6
4
.53
.22
.42
.01
.51
.12
.03
1.84
2.46
4.24
1.05
2.19
6.64 .1
112
.88
June 0.
93 .32
1.10 .04
.48
--
.55
2.00
1.41 .0
2.0
92.
741.
24 .23
.02
.01
.65
1.28
21
.48
66.3
5
.93
.23
.42
.01
.37
.08
.03
2.07
1.72
4.13 .7
7.5
35.
79 .08
10.9
9
July 0.
83 .36
.98
.03
.41
-
.70
1.50
2.42 .0
2.0
92.
321.
00 .20
.02
.01
1.27
1.35
19
.07
54.5
6
.01
.17
.53
.01
.30
.10
.03
1.16
1.11
3.86 .6
51.
305.
21 .08
9.75
Aug 0.
91 .37
1.23 .05
.44
-
.71
1.65
2.95 .0
2.0
92.
141.
08 .21
.02
.01
1.33
1.21
22
.99
55.5
6
.33
.25
.66
.01
.57
.17
.03
2.02
1.39
4.27 .9
51.
425.
82 .09
10.2
0
Sept 0.
96 .27
1.08 .0
4.4
2--
.44
1.60
2.57 .0
2.0
91.
801.
00 .19
.02
.01
.68
.78
19.3
251
.57
.00
.16
.38
.01
.42
.10
.03
1.10
1.31
3.89 .7
21.
424.
12 .07
9.32
Oct 0.
361.
67 .05
.51
.38
.63
1.90
3.38 .0
2.0
92.
061.
17 .22
.02
.01
.59
.85
23.4
1 65
.35
.00
.19
.43
.01
.50
.16
.03
1.31
2.02
4.08 .9
12.
205.
27 .07
11.5
6
Nov 1.
04 .27
1.41 .0
4.5
9.4
8.4
51.
704.
00 .02
.09
2.74
1.22 .27
.02
.01
.47
1.06
25
.99
75.7
0
.00
.21
.32
.01
.46
.14
.03
1.16
1.92
4.11 1.00
1.81
5.32 .0
711
.35
Dec 1.
16 .30
1.30 .05
.47
.29
.49
1.70
4.67 .0
2.0
92.
701.
24 .31
.02
.01
.46
1.03
26
.47
80.5
3
.32
.20
.40
.01
.41
.12
.03
1.50
1.76
4.00 .8
41.
236.
90 .10
11.2
8
App
endi
x 1.
Sum
mar
y of
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-tr
eatm
ent f
acili
ties
and
mea
n da
ily r
etur
n flo
ws
by s
ubre
gion
al d
rain
age
basi
ns a
nd s
ubba
sins
in N
ew E
ngla
nd,
19
90
Con
tinue
d
Dra
inag
e-
subb
asin
co
de
0107
0002
Tot
al
0107
0003
Tot
al
0107
0004
Tot
al
0107
0005
Was
tew
ater
- tr
eatm
ent
faci
lity
nam
e
Hill
sbor
ough
Cou
nty
Hom
e
Hoo
kset
tL
owel
l R
egio
nal
Man
ches
ter
Mer
rim
acM
erri
mac
kM
ilfor
dN
ashu
aPi
ttsfi
eld
Salis
bury
Sand
wic
hSu
ncoo
k-A
llens
tow
n
Wol
febo
ro
Ant
rim
Hen
nike
rH
illsb
orou
ghH
opki
nton
Jaff
rey
Pete
rbor
ough
War
ner
Vill
age
Fire
D
istr
ict
Aye
r
Eas
t Fitc
hbur
gL
eom
inst
er D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
MW
RA
, C
linto
n
Pepp
erel
lW
est F
itchb
urg
Bill
eric
aC
onco
rd
Hud
son
Stat
e
N.H
.
N.H
.M
ass.
N.H
.
Mas
s.N
.H.
N.H
.N
.H.
N.H
.M
ass.
N.H
.N
.H.
N.H
.
N.H
.N
.H.
N.H
.N
.H.
N.H
.N
.H.
N.H
.
Mas
s.
Mas
s.
Mas
s.
Mas
s.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.
Type
of
re
ceiv
in
g w
ater
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
h
Fres
h
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Ave
r ag
e da
ily
retu
rn
flow
(M
gal/d
)
0.05 .5
227
.75
18.3
4
.23
3.23
1.08
9.65 .3
1.3
8.0
1.5
7.1
087
.72
.10
.19
.52
.05
.61
.38
.05
1.90
1.42
8.10
5.81
2.40 .1
94.
6122
.53
2.58 .9
82.
33
Mea
n da
ily fl
ows,
in M
gal/d
Jan 0.
05 .46
23.7
014
.23
.24
3.13 .9
010
.16
.27
.26
.01
.41
.10
75.5
2
.07
.11
.46
.04
.51
.36
.05
1.59
1.24
8.10
4.50
2.14 .2
44.
57
20.7
9
2.47 .7
92.
14
Feb 0.
05 .56
34.1
022
.25
.23
3.25
1.23
10.1
9.3
3.3
3.0
1.5
0.1
0 10
0.99 .0
9.1
5.5
6.0
4
.66
.30
.06
1.85
1.64
10.4
0
7.90
3.13 .2
45.
34
28.6
5
3.27
1.07
2.90
Mar 0.
05 .59
29.8
020
.84
.23
3.53
1.31
12.1
2.3
7.2
9.0
1.5
9.1
0
98.5
1
.12
.19
.59
.05
.82
.37
.08
2.22
1.51
9.80
6.40
2.74 .1
85.
57
26.2
0
2.80 .8
52.
56
Apr 0.
05 .60
31.9
020
.67
.23
3.54
1.40
11.1
7.3
9.3
8.0
1.6
1.1
0 94
.78
.11
.23
.60
.06
.78
.46
.07
2.32
1.48
9.30
7.20
2.89 .1
75.
30
26.3
5
3.02
1.14
2.79
May 0.
05 .57
32.3
021
.07
.23
3.40
1.40
10.0
0
.36
.44
.01
.65
.10
100.
14 .12
.17
.57
.07
.74
.42
.07
2.16
1.56
9.60
7.80
2.80 .1
85.
04
26.9
8
2.90
1.14
2.82
June 0.
05 .46
25.4
0
17.1
3.2
33.
35 .93
10.3
9.3
1.4
4.0
1.4
9.1
0
83.3
0
.08
.19
.46
.06
.53
.42
.05
1.79
1.32
6.60
5.30
2.26 .1
75.
04
20.6
9
2.58
1.08
2.29
July 0.
05 .42
26.0
014
.29
.22
3.21 .8
16.
16 .23
.53
.01
--
.10
73.9
8
.20
.42
.05
.35
.40
.05
1.46
1.15
5.60
4.10
1.77 .1
63.
76
16.5
4
2.10 .8
51.
92
Aug 0.
05 .48
25.1
020
.10
.23
3.21 .9
47.
87 .31
.54
.01
.49
.10
83.5
4
.10
.25
.48
.06
.52
.40
.06
1.87
1.46
6.70
4.70
2.01 .1
84.
56
19.6
2
2.04 .9
21.
97
Sept 0.
05 .48
21.8
014
.53
.23
3.11
-- 8.47 .2
7
.36
.01
.49
.10
70.7
7
.07
.21
.48
.05
-
.35
.04
1.20
1.31
5.80
3.90
1.76 .19
4.33
17
.29
2.00 .8
91.
92
Oct 0.
05 .52
29.1
016
.55
.23
3.24 .9
1
8.97 .2
8
.39
.01
.58
.10
87.0
4
.09
.25
.52
.06
.50
.38
1.79
1.52
8.30
5.50
2.39 .1
74.
53
22.4
1
2.65
1.08
2.37
Nov 0.
05 .56
26.5
018
.47
.22
2.99 .9
7
9.22 .2
9.3
2.0
1.6
9.1
0 85
.96
.10
.21
.56
.05
.54
.37
1.83
1.43
8.40
5.90
2.41 .1
73.
51
21.8
2
2.66
1.08
2.09
Dec 0.
05 .58
27.3
019
.97
.24
2.85
1.03
11.0
3.3
0.3
0.0
1.7
4.1
0 90
.59
.10
.14
.58
.04
.71
.40
.00
1.97
1.39
8.60
6.50
2.48
-- 3.73
22
.70
2.44 .9
12.
19
App
endi
x 1.
Sum
mar
y of
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-tr
eatm
ent f
acili
ties
and
mea
n da
ily r
etur
n flo
ws
by s
ubre
gion
al d
rain
age
basi
ns a
nd s
ubba
sins
in N
ew E
ngla
nd,
19
90
Con
tinue
d
o I a. 5'
Dra
inag
e-
Was
tew
ater
- su
bbas
in
trea
tmen
t co
de
faci
lity
nam
e
0107
0005
M
arlb
orou
gh E
aste
rly
Mar
lbor
ough
Wes
terl
yM
ayna
rdM
CI-
Con
cord
Wes
tbor
ough
To
tal .
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.To
tal f
or b
asin
k)1
07 .
......
......
0108
0101
B
ethl
ehem
Bri
ghto
nC
anaa
nC
oleb
rook
Gro
veto
n-N
orth
umbe
rlan
dL
anca
ster
Lis
bon
Litt
leto
nL
unen
burg
, Fir
e D
istr
ict 2
Stra
tford
, Mill
hous
eSt
ratfo
rd, V
illag
eW
hite
fiel
dW
oods
ville
To
tal .
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.
0108
0102
D
anvi
lleL
yndo
nvill
eSt
. Joh
nsbu
ry
Tot
al. .
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
0108
0104
B
ello
ws
Falls
Bra
dfor
dB
rattl
ebor
oC
anaa
nC
harl
esto
wn
Cla
rem
ont
Eas
tman
Com
mun
ity
Ass
ocia
tes
Han
over
Stat
e
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.
N.H
.V
t.V
t.N
.H.
N.H
.
N.H
.N
.H.
N.H
.
Vt.
N.H
.N
.H.
N.H
.N
.H.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
N.H
.N
.H.
N.H
.
N.H
.
N.H
.
Type
of
re
ceiv
in
g w
ater
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
h
Ave
r ag
e da
ily
retu
rn
flow
(M
gal/d
)
3.09
1.69
1.02 .27
4.11
16
.07
129.
79 .21
.10
.15
.34
.24
.86
.07
.87
.05
.02
.03
.11
.13
3.18 .0
3.6
51.
06
1.74 .47
.06
1.87 .01
.12
1.57 .03
1.44
Mea
n da
ily fl
ows,
in M
gal/d
Jan 2.
901.
51 .95
.28
3.88
14
.91
114.
21 .12
.08
.14
.22
.17
.64
.07
--
.05
.03
.03
.11
.13
1.77 .0
3.4
9.8
0 1.
32 .44
.06
1.65 .01
.14
1.65 .0
31.
39
Feb 4.
301.
971.
17 .27
5.16
20
.11
153.
22 .11
.07
.13
.38
.31
.83
.07
-
.04
.02
.04
.10
.13
2.23 .0
3.5
7.9
0 1.
50 .53
.05
1.95 .01
.13
1.81 .0
31.
49
Mar 3.
601.
861.
07 .31
4.35
17
.39
146.
17 .16
.09
.17
.43
.31
1.17 .0
7-
.08
.02
.04
.12
.13
2.80 .0
4.8
21.
50
2.36 .5
4.0
62.
48 .01
.15
2.10 .0
31.
67
Apr 3.
941.
981.
19 .30
4.37
18
.73
144.
03 .14
.13
.16
--
.43
.95
.07
-
.09
.02
.04
.12
.13
2.29 .0
41.
221.
202.
47 .44
.08
2.27 .0
1.1
82.
00 .03
1.65
May 4.
002.
131.
22 .30
4.65
19
.15
150.
2 .16
.08
.15
-
.30
.95
.07
.91
.04
.02
.03
.12
.13
2.96 .0
4.6
0.8
0 1.
44 .49
.07
2.10 .0
1.1
71.
87 .03
1.70
June 2.
901.
911.
10 .20
3.98
16
.04
123.
89 .06
.12
.34
.19
.87
.07
--
.02
.02
.03
.13
.13
1.98 .02
.48
.90
1.39 .4
0.0
51.
71 .01
.10
1.37 .0
31.
30
July 2.
281.
51 .95
.04
3.32
12
.96
106.
10 .30
.07
.11
.34
.18
.00
.07
.92
.03
.02
.03
.11
.13
2.31 .0
3.4
4.9
0 1.
36 .35
.05
1.55 .01
.09
1.25 .03
1.23
Aug 2.
301.
52 .96
.21
3.26
13
.18
120.
23 .26
.07
.11
.32
.18
1.08 .0
71.
02 .04
.02
.03
.13
.13
3.44 .0
2.5
11.
10
1.63 .5
3.0
51.
83 .01
.15
1.61 .0
31.
36
Sept 2.
101.
41 .84
.36
3.30
12
.82
103.
18 .07
.11
.27
.13
.61
.07
.66
.04
- -
.09
.13
2.17 .0
4.3
0.8
0 1.
13 .43
.05
1.56 .01
.04
1.17 .03
1.22
Oct 2.
861.
61 .92
.33
4.24
16
.06
128.
62 .23
.07
.11
.38
.24
1.20 .07
.90
.04
-- --
.11
.13
3.48 .0
5.8
11.
20
2.06 .4
9.0
51.
73 .01
.11
1.27 .03
1.49
Nov 2.
801.
43 .96
.33
4.28
15
.63
126.
40 .26
.07
.12
.35
.20
.32
.07
.89
.07
.02
.03
.12
.13
2.66 .0
1.7
51.
18
1.94 .47
.06
1.75 .01
.11
1.33 .0
31.
50
Dec 3.
101.
40 .92
.35
4.53
15
.84
132.
61 .27
.06
.13
.34
.24
.95
.07
.81
.04
.03
.04
-
.13
3.11 .0
3.8
71.
41
2.31 .5
1.0
61.
88 .01
.14
1.45 .0
31.
28
App
endi
x 1.
Sum
mar
y of
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-tr
eatm
ent f
acili
ties
and
mea
n da
ily r
etur
n flo
ws
by s
ubre
gion
al d
rain
age
basi
ns a
nd s
ubba
sins
in N
ew E
ngla
nd,
19
90
Con
tinue
d
o
o. (0 2
5' 3
tO
3
Q.
30
c f m (O. o>
Dra
inag
e-
subb
asin
co
de
0108
0104
Tot
al
0108
0105
Tot
al
0108
0106
Tot
al
0108
0107
Tot
al
0108
0201
Was
tew
ater
- tre
atm
ent
faci
lity
nam
e
Har
tfor
d, W
hite
Riv
erJu
nctio
n
Leb
anon
New
bury
New
port
Putn
eySu
nape
e, N
ew L
ondo
nW
inds
or, M
ain
Win
dsor
, Wes
ton
Hei
ghts
Bet
hel
Har
tfor
d, Q
uech
eeSe
rvic
e
Ran
dolp
hR
oyal
ton
Bri
dgew
ater
Cav
endi
shL
udlo
w
Sher
burn
e, F
ire
Dis
tric
t 1
Spri
ngfi
eld,
Clin
ton
Woo
dsto
ck, M
ain
Che
ster
Saxt
ons
Riv
er
Am
hers
tE
asth
ampt
onH
atfi
eld
Hol
yoke
Indi
an H
ill, H
adle
yK
eene
Mon
tagu
e
Nor
tham
pton
Nor
thfi
eld
Stat
e
Vt.
N.H
.
N.H
.N
.H.
Vt.
N.H
.V
t.V
t.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.
Mas
s.M
ass.
N.H
.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Type
of
re
ceiv
in
g w
ater
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
h
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Ave
r ag
e da
ily
retu
rn
flow
(M
gal/d
)
0.91
1.70 .02
.72
.04
.37
.47
.01
9.81 .0
7
.16
.26
.03
.52
.01
.07
.43
.09
1.70 .25
2.55 .0
8.0
4
.12
4.65
2.47 .1
611
.88
.31
3.52
1.25
5.27 .3
3
Mea
n da
ily fl
ows,
in M
gal/d
Jan 0.
891.
41 .02
.52
.04
--
.56
.02
8.82 .0
7
.17
.20
.03
.47
.01
.08
.46
.13
1.46 .2
32.
37 .08
.03
.11
4.00
2.00 .1
8
10.6
0.2
82.
841.
234.
80 .32
Feb 0.
951.
69 .02
.71
.03
.40
.61
.01
10.4
3
.07
.14
.21
.03
.45
.01
.08
.56
.15
1.60 .21
2.60 .0
8
.03
.11
6.11
3.10 .1
814
.40
.29
3.60
1.33
5.80 .4
0
Mar 1.
122.
22 .02
1.17 .04
.44
.60
.01
12.6
7
.08
.14
.25
.04
.51
.01
.10
.69
.13
2.15 .3
03.
38 .09
.03
.12
5.52
2.90 .2
214
.80
.30
5.11
1.50
6.10 .4
4
Apr 1.
031.
94 .02
.57
.04
.38
.52
.02
11.1
8
.07
.17
.23
.04
.50
.01
.09
.65
.09
2.11 .2
83.
23 .09
.04
.13
5.76
3.30 .17
13.9
0
.29
4.66
1.41
6.40 .3
6
May 1.
102.
06 .02
.88
.04
.39
.52
.01
11.4
6
.06
.15
.31
.04
.55
.01
.08
.56
.05
2.06 .3
03.
05 .08
.04
.12
5.69
3.20 .1
714
.00
.30
4.11
1.29
6.80 .3
5
June 0.
991.
58 .02
.69
.03
.31
.42
.02
9.03 .0
5
.15
.30
.03
.52
.01
.08
.35
.05
1.78 .25
2.52 .0
8.0
4
.12
3.58
2.40 .1
211
.80
.27
3.44
1.19
5.80 .1
9
July 0.
85
1.26 .02
.62
.03
.33
.37
.02
8.05 .0
6
.15
.31
.03
.55
.01
.05
.24
.08
1.40 .25
2.03 .0
8.0
3
.11
3.48
1.90 .10
9.10 .2
82.
36 .93
5.30 .1
5
Aug 0.
88
1.75 .0
21.
08 .03
.47
.45
.01
10.2
6
.07
.17
.28
.03
.54
.01
.05
.34
.09
1.71 .2
72.
47 .07
.03
.10
4.02
2.30 .1
3
11.6
0.3
02.
271.
174.
70 .20
Sept 0.
781.
27 .02
.57
.04
.31
.39
.01
7.89 .0
7
.19
.28
.03
.58
.01
.05
.21
.07
1.36 .26
1.96 .0
7.0
4
.10
4.00
1.80 .14
9.30 .3
12.
411.
104.
20 .27
Oct 0.
781.
58 .02
.72
.04
.33
.41
.01
9.06 .0
8
.20
.25
.03
.56
.01
.05
.28
.08
1.65 .2
62.
34 .07
.04
.11
4.36
2.00 .1
7
10.6
0.3
43.
421.
264.
50 .47
Nov 0.
731.
72 .02
.61
.04
.33
.36
.02
9.08 .0
8
.17
.28
.03
.56
.01
.05
.34
.08
1.48 .2
02.
16 .07
.04
.11
4.50
2.30 .1
811
.20
.36
3.94
1.29
4.29 .4
1
Dec 0.
781.
90 .02
.53
.03
.35
.40
.01
9.37 .0
8
.15
.23
.02
.48
.01
.06
.49
.12
1.66 .19
2.51 .0
7
.03
.11
4.80
2.40 .2
011
.20
.36
4.10
1.34
4.54 .4
1
App
endi
x 1.
Sum
mar
y of
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-tr
eatm
ent f
acili
ties
and
mea
n da
ily r
etur
n flo
ws
by s
ubre
gion
al d
rain
age
basi
ns a
nd s
ubba
sins
in N
ew E
ngla
nd,
19
90
Con
tinue
d
> i Q. x" *
Dra
inag
e-
Was
tew
ater
- su
bbas
in
trea
tmen
t co
de
faci
lity
nam
e
0108
0201
O
ldD
eerf
ield
Sout
h D
eerf
ield
Spri
ngfi
eld,
Bon
di I
slan
dSu
nder
land
Swan
zey
Troy
Win
ches
ter
Tota
l ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
... ...
0108
0202
A
thol
Erv
ing
Cen
ter
Fran
klin
Pie
rce
Col
lege
Gar
dner
Hin
sdal
eM
iller
s Fa
lls V
illag
eO
rang
eR
oyal
ston
Tem
plet
onW
inch
endo
n To
tal .
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
...
0108
0203
G
reen
fiel
dN
orth
Bra
nch
Fire
Dis
tric
t 1 ,
Dov
er
Rea
dsbo
roSh
elbu
rne
Falls
Whi
tingh
am,
Jack
sonv
ille
Wilm
ingt
on
Tota
l ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
0108
0204
B
arre
Chi
cope
eH
ardw
ick
Nor
th B
rook
fiel
d Pa
lmer
Sout
h H
adle
ySp
ence
r
Stat
e
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
N.H
.N
.H.
N.H
.
Mas
s.M
ass.
N.H
.M
ass.
N.H
.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.
Vt.
Vt.
Mas
s.
Vt.
Vt.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.
Mas
s.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.
Typ
e of
re
ceiv
in
g w
ater
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h Fr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Ave
r
age
daily
re
turn
flo
w
(Mga
l/d)
0.15 .9
148
.25
.16
.05
.13
.15
79.6
4
1.56
1.90 .03
3.32 .3
2.5
41.
17 .03
1.44 .71
11.0
2
3.70 .1
3.0
2.2
1
.02
.09
4.17 .1
412
.58
.03
.47
3.58
3.45 .6
9
Mea
n da
ily f
low
s, in
Mga
l/d
Jan 0.
12 .62
46.5
0.1
6.0
4.1
0.1
1 73
.89
1.30
1.73 .0
32.
50 .25
.49
.89
.02
1.72 .41
9.33
2.83 .2
8.0
2.2
0
.02
.09
3.45 .1
311
.30
.03
.42
3.50
3.04 .5
8
Feb 0.
13 .89
51.9
0.1
7.0
6.1
0.1
3 88
.60
1.68
2.03 .0
34.
20 .35
.57
1.33 .0
31.
66 .88
12.7
6
3.94 .3
0.0
2.2
3
.01
.08
4.59 .1
413
.30
.03
.64
3.90
4.24 .8
6
Mar 0.
191.
1050
.70
.20
.05
.13
.19
89.4
5
1.97
1.78 .0
34.
20 .52
.53
1.61 .0
41.
69 .91
13.2
8
4.88 .1
6.0
3.3
0
.02
.11
5.49 .1
613
.90
.03
.53
3.60
4.38 .7
5
Apr 0.
271.
1653
.30
.17
.05
.16
.20
91.5
5
1.82
1.96 .03
4.21 .5
0.5
51.
31 .03
1.76 .8
9 13
.06
5.40 .0
9.0
3.2
7
.02
.09
5.90 .1
414
.90
.53
3.70
4.30 .8
7
May 0.
25 .87
54.5
0.1
7.0
5.1
6.1
8 92
.10
1.86
1.83 .0
34.
45 .43
.55
1.43 .0
41.
51 .91
13.0
4
4.89 .0
7.0
2.2
7
.02
.09
5.35 .1
614
.30
.03
.59
4.10
4.36 .7
1
June 0.
18 .86
47.7
0.1
4.0
3.1
6.1
4 78
.00
1.57
1.94 .03
3.23 .3
0.6
0.8
5.0
21.
47
10.0
2
2.87 .0
8.0
2.1
6
.02
.09
3.23 .1
212
.20
.03
.38
3.40
2.97 .5
2
July 0.
09 .86
42.1
0.1
3.0
4.1
0.1
2 67
.05
1.37
2.02 .0
32.
41 .17
.50
.77
.01
1.34 .3
9 9.
01
2.07 .0
9.0
2.1
3
.01
.08
2.40 .11
10.1
0.0
3 .2
9 2.
852.
39 .54
Aug 0.
10 .89
50.6
0.1
3.0
5.1
6.1
5 78
.77
1.47
2.02 .0
32.
74 .24
.58
1.24 .02
1.40 .5
5 10
.29
3.36 .0
9.0
3.1
5
.01
.08
3.72 .1
313
.10
.03
.30
3.90
3.02 .6
2
Sep
t 0.11 .9
043
.30
.15
.05
.13
.13
68.3
0
1.39
1.89 .0
32.
36 .21
.52
.60
.03
1.21 .9
8 9.
21
2.30 .0
7.0
2.1
6
.01
.08
2.64 .1
311
.10
.28
3.20
2.35 .5
7
Oct 0.
13 .89
46.1
0.1
7.0
6.1
3.1
2 74
.71
1.24
2.05 .0
32.
76 .24
.52
1.01 .0
41.
16 .61
9.65
3.60 .0
7.0
2.2
3
.01
.08
4.01 .1
312
.10
.03
.41
3.85
3.29 .7
5
Nov 0.
12 .90
45.2
0.1
7.0
6.1
5.1
8 75
.25
1.37
1.86 .0
32.
92 .33
.49
1.42 .04
1.27 .71
10.4
4
4.02 .0
9.0
3.2
0
.02
.08
4.43 .1
411
.40
.03
.57
3.33
3.41 .7
0
Dec 0.
11 .92
47.1
0.1
9.0
6.1
3
77.8
6
1.72
1.70 .03
3.81 .3
6.5
21.
54 .05
1.14 .59
11.4
5
4.20 .1
4.0
3.2
3
.02
.08
4.70 .1
613
.30
.03
.64
3.60
3.68 .7
8
App
endi
x 1.
Sum
mar
y of
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-t
reat
men
t fac
ilitie
s an
d m
ean
daily
ret
urn
flow
s by
sub
regi
onal
dra
inag
e ba
sins
and
sub
basi
ns in
New
Eng
land
, 1
99
0 C
ontin
ued
IB (0 O o I 5' 3
fi> Q.
X I 3 n
1 5'
z i m 5T Q.
(O °
Dra
inag
e-
Was
tew
ater
- su
bbas
in
treat
men
t co
de
faci
lity
nam
e
0108
0204
W
are
War
ren
Tota
l ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
..
0108
0205
D
eep
Riv
erE
ast H
ampt
onE
ast W
inds
or
Enf
ield
Gla
ston
bury
MD
C, H
artf
ord
Man
ches
ter
MD
C, C
rom
wel
lM
DC
, Eas
t Har
tfor
d M
iddl
etow
nPo
rtla
ndR
ocky
Hill
Som
ers
Sout
h W
inds
orSu
ffie
ldV
emon
Win
dsor
Loc
ks
Tota
l ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
..
0108
0206
H
untin
gton
Rus
sell
Wes
tfiel
d T
otal
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
0108
0207
B
rist
ol, M
ain
Can
ton
Farm
ingt
onN
ew H
artf
ord
Plai
nvill
eSi
msb
ury
Win
ches
ter
MD
C, W
inds
or/
Poqu
onac
k
Tot
al. .
......
......
......
......
......
......
....
Tota
l for
bas
in '0
108
......
.....
Stat
e
Mas
s.M
ass.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.
Con
n.
Con
n.C
onn.
C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.
Con
n.
Type
of
re
ceiv
in
g w
ater
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h Fr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h Fr
esh
Fres
h Fr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
h
Ave
r ag
e da
ily
retu
rn
flow
(M
gal/d
)
0.76 .5
8 22
.28
.07
.96
1.12
4.
911.
8964
.15
5.84
18
.32
11.5
3 4.
81 .65
6.60 .0
52.
18 .96
4.57
1.60
13
0.21 .0
9.1
33.
24
3.46
10.7
6.5
03.
24 .07
2.06
1.79
1.71
2.34
22
.47
29i. n
Mea
n da
ily fl
ows,
in M
gal/d
Jan 0.
65 .51
20.1
6
.95
.92
4.37
1.89
66.4
5 5.
45
19.1
911
.47
4.84 .6
37.
45 .05
2.36 .9
14.
751.
54
133.
23 .09
.14
2.86
3.
09
9.79 .4
53.
14 .08
1.93
1.64
1.37
1.99
20
.39
278.
39
Feb 0.
90 .54
24.5
5
1.17
1.22
5.
902.
0773
.60
6.43
22
.98
12.9
55.
42 .81
9.53 .0
62.
591.
185.
781.
79
153.
49 .09
.15
3.62
3.
86
12.4
4.5
63.
69 .08
1.99
2.14
1.84
2.44
25
.18
330.
35
Mar 0.
88 .64
24.8
6
1.00
1.20
4.74
1.95
70.0
0 6.
01
18.9
012
.40
4.70 .6
66.
52 .06
2.27 .9
85.
241.
66
138.
29 .11
.21
3.49
3.
81
11.3
5.5
33.
57 .08
2.91
2.13
1.83
2.30
24
.70
321.
69
Apr 0.
84 .61
25.8
9
1.12
1.25
5.
681.
9174
.70
6.55
21
.10
12.9
0 5.
60 .77
8.50 .0
62.
401.
205.
501.
75
150.
99 .10
.11
4.03
4.23
12.3
0.5
93.
70 .08
2.04
1.90
1.92
2.49
25
.02
336.
43
May 0.
95 .70
25.8
8
1.13
1.14
5.
312.
0676
.10
7.24
19
.18
12.8
0 5.
96 .78
8.42 .0
62.
351.
285.
541.
63
150.
97 .11
- 3.90
4.
00
11.7
2.5
63.
57 .08
2.07
1.84
1.83
2.71
24
.38
335.
31
June 0.
78 .69
21.0
8
.92
1.04
3.
991.
9367
.00
6.92
16
.75
12.0
1 4.
39 .63
6.38 .0
52.
101.
024.
411.
40
130.
94 .09
.08
3.01
3.
18
9.70 .5
03.
15 .07
1.60
1.76
1.65
2.29
20
.72
282.
74
July 0.
64 .62
17.5
6
.83
.91
3.61
1.71
48.4
5 5.
85
14.1
611
.30
3.99 .5
33.
80 .04
1.89 .7
03.
511.
20
102.
47 .08
.11
2.44
2.
63
7.75 .4
12.
81 .06
1.52
1.60
1.84
2.14
18
.13
233.
68
Aug 0.
80 .62
22.5
2
.85
1.17
5.
421.
8055
.48
4.47
17
.17
12.2
5 4.
35 .57
5.15 .0
62.
08 .92
4.16
1.64
11
7.54 .09
.08
3.46
3.
63
8.92 .5
22.
95 .07
1.52
1.70
1.79
2.57
20
.05
274.
97
Sept 0.
64 .53
18.7
9
.81
1.00
4.22
1.73
50.9
7 4.
60
14.3
611
.46
3.70 .5
44.
00 .04
1.87 .6
03.
761.
28
104.
94 .08
- 2.75
2.
83
14.4
0.4
22.
84 .07
2.24
1.62
1.48
1.90
24
.98
245.
53
Oct 0.
68 .58
21.8
2
.96
1.14
4.
971.
8657
.02
4.68
18
.44
10.9
1 4.
50 .62
6.26 .0
52.
11 .86
4.22
1.62
12
0.22 .08
- 3.14
3.22
9.34 .4
63.
07 .08
2.41
1.70
1.60
2.37
21
.02
272.
26
Nov 0.
66 .47
20.7
0
.89
1.17
5.
171.
8360
.50
4.85
18
.10
7.94
4.
24 .58
6.16 .0
52.
05 .85
3.90
1.83
12
0.11 .0
8-- 3.
10
3.18
10.5
8.4
73.
19 .08
1.73
1.70
1.64
2.50
21
.89
272.
52
Dec 0.
71 .43
23.3
2
.07
.86
1.25
5.
541.
9069
.56
6.98
19
.55
9.97
6.
08 .63
7.08 .0
52.
07 .98
4.09
1.88
13
8.54 .0
9-- 3.
08
3.18
10.8
8.5
13.
25 .08
2.70
1.80
1.73
2.40
23
.35
300.
29
App
endi
x 1.
Sum
mar
y of
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-t
reat
men
t fac
ilitie
s an
d m
ean
daily
ret
urn
flow
s by
sub
regi
onal
dra
inag
e ba
sins
and
sub
basi
ns in
New
Eng
land
, 1
99
0 C
ontin
ued
Dra
inag
e-
Was
tew
ater
- su
bbas
in
trea
tmen
t co
de
faci
lity
nam
e
0109
0001
C
harl
es R
iver
Glo
uces
ter
Gre
ater
Law
renc
e Se
wer
Dis
tric
t
Hul
lIp
swic
hLy
nnM
anch
este
rM
CI N
orfo
lk- W
alpo
leM
edfi
eld
MW
RA
, Dee
r Is
land
MW
RA
, Nut
Isl
and
New
bury
port
Roc
kpor
tSo
uth
Ess
ex S
ewer
Dis
tric
t
Swam
psco
tt To
tal .
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
...
0109
0002
B
amst
able
Coh
asse
tD
artm
outh
Fair
have
nFa
ll R
iver
Falm
outh
Mar
ion
Mar
shfi
eld
Mid
dleb
orou
ghN
antu
cket
New
Bed
ford
Plym
outh
£,
Roc
klan
d5
Sc
ituat
ea
War
eham
x"
To
tal .
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
...
Stat
e
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.
Mas
s.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.
Type
of
re
ceiv
in
g w
ater
Fres
hSa
line
Fres
h
Salin
eFr
esh
Salin
eFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Salin
eSa
line
Fres
hSa
line
Salin
e
Salin
e
Fres
hSa
line
Salin
eFr
esh
Salin
eFr
esh
Salin
eSa
line
Fres
hFr
esh
Salin
eFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Ave
r
age
daily
re
turn
flo
w
(Mga
l/d)
3.60
3.34
36.9
41.
531.
0228
.30
.61
.30
.84
269.
6613
6.36
2.24 .7
3
28.0
12.
61
516.
09 .57
.08
1.87
2.50
30.8
8.1
5.4
5.8
61.
28 .23
28.3
02.
361.
751.
20 .57
73.0
5
Mea
n da
ily fl
ows,
in M
gal/d
Jan 3.
323.
04
37.4
01.
43 .07
25.4
0.5
1.2
9.7
825
4.00
127.
702.
90 .40
26.9
72.
30
486.
51 .57
.11
2.06
3.00
35.2
0.1
5.5
5.9
11.
17 .23
29.8
82.
272.
101.
20 .27
79.6
8
Feb 4.
114.
33
41.9
01.
761.
3132
.90
.78
.34
.98
306.
0018
4.71
3.10 .6
4
- 3.60
58
6.46 .5
7.0
92.
483.
5836
.60
.15
.72
1.08
1.07 .23
31.8
02.
312.
901.
20 .30
85.0
8
Mar 3.
753.
23
37.9
01.
281.
1323
.50
.60
.31
.78
255.
0014
5.36
2.80 .5
0
28.3
02.
70
507.
14 .57
.10
2.01
2.67
36.8
0.1
5.5
5.8
71.
17 .23
30.6
02.
312.
301.
20 .42
81.9
5
Apr 4.
154.
60
40.4
01.
661.
4932
.20
.84
.33
.92
302.
0016
8.23
2.60 .8
0
28.2
73.
90
592.
39 .57
.08
2.35
3.16
40.7
0.1
5.6
8.9
51.
45 .23
30.3
02.
422.
501.
20 .53
87.2
7
May 3.
974.
30
42.7
01.
941.
2630
.20
.78
.31
.97
304.
9716
7.20
1.95 .80
28.1
84.
40
593.
93 .57
.06
1.92
2.70
40.7
0.1
5.5
81.
031.
60 .23
28.6
02.
492.
551.
20 .65
85.0
2
June 3.
403.
10
34.7
01.
49 .86
- - 0.30 .7
925
4.00
131.
872.
05 .90
28.0
73.
00
464.
53 .57
.06
1.52
2.00
36.7
0.1
5.4
01.
001.
38 .23
25.1
02.
501.
601.
20 .76
75.1
7
July 2.
972.
60
30.0
01.
48 .92
23.6
0.4
0.2
9.7
624
3.00
103.
741.
90 .90
28.1
01.
40
442.
06 .57
.06
1.48
2.09
30.4
0.1
5.3
1.9
41.
32 .23
25.2
02.
461.
101.
20 .85
68.3
5
Aug 3.
403.
30
33.9
01.
781.
3531
.20
.53
.34
.92
279.
0012
3.86
1.80 .90
28.4
22.
70
513.
39 .57
.07
1.85
2.25
22.4
0.1
5.2
9.9
31.
39 .23
29.4
02.
441.
201.
20 .93
65.3
1
Sept 3.
072.
40
29.8
01.
391.
1424
.00
.61
.30
.70
236.
0010
2.14
1.60 .67
28.4
51.
3043
3.57 .5
7.0
81.
621.
9021
.10
.15
.28
.80
1.23 .2
326
.60
2.35
1.10
1.20 .67
59.8
8
Oct 3.
723.
40
39.4
01.
47 .95
30.8
0.5
3.2
9.9
028
7.00
141.
892.
20 .80
28.2
82.
00
543.
62 .57
.08
1.59
1.92
22.9
0.1
5.2
9.8
21.
22 .23
27.3
02.
31 1.10
1.20 .51
62.1
9
Nov 3.
692.
88
37.3
01.
38 .82
28.7
0.5
4.2
8.8
326
0.00
118.
501.
60 .70
27.3
91.
80
486.
41 .57
.11
1.62
2.08
21.8
0.1
5.3
0.7
91.
18 .23
25.6
02.
231.
201.
20 .53
59.6
0
Dec 3.
652.
91
37.9
01.
34 .89
28.8
0.5
5.2
8.7
725
5.00
121.
122.
36 .70
27.6
92.
20
486.
16 .57
.10
1.90
2.60
25.2
0.1
5.3
8.2
11.
22 .23
29.2
02.
221.
301.
20 .43
66.9
1
App
endi
x 1.
Sum
mar
y of
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-t
reat
men
t fac
ilitie
s an
d m
ean
daily
ret
urn
flow
s by
sub
regi
onal
dra
inag
e ba
sins
and
sub
basi
ns in
New
Eng
land
, 1990 C
ontin
ued
Wastewater
Collet a
5' 3
0) 3
D. 5? c 3 3 5' n 1 m 3 (O
0) p. _L 0
Dra
inag
e-
Was
tew
ater
- su
bbas
in
trea
tmen
t co
de
faci
lity
nam
e
0109
0003
B
urril
lvill
e Se
wer
Com
mis
sion
Dou
glas
Gra
fton
Hop
edal
eM
ilfor
dM
illbu
ryN
orth
brid
geU
pper
Bla
ckst
one
Upt
onU
xbrid
geW
oons
ocke
tTo
tal .
......
......
......
.....
......
......
......
..
0109
0004
A
ttleb
oro
Bla
ckst
one,
Buc
klin
Poin
tB
ridge
wat
erB
risto
lB
rock
ton
Reg
iona
lC
rans
ton
East
Gre
enw
ich
East
Pro
vide
nce
Jam
esto
wn
Man
sfie
ldM
CI-
Brid
gew
ater
Nar
raga
nset
t Bay
Com
mis
sion
, Fie
lds
Poin
t
New
port
Nor
th A
ttleb
orou
ghQ
uons
et P
oint
Scar
boro
ugh
Smith
field
Sew
erA
utho
rity
Som
erse
tTa
unto
n
Stat
e
R.I.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.R
.I.
Mas
s.
R.I.
Mas
s.R
.I.M
ass.
R.I.
R.I.
R.I.
R.I.
Mas
s.M
ass.
R.I.
R.I.
Mas
s.R
.I.R
.I.
R.I.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Typ
e of
re
ceiv
in
g w
ater
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Salin
eFr
esh
Fres
hSa
line
Fres
hSa
line
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Salin
eFr
esh
Salin
eSa
line
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Ave
r
age
daily
re
turn
flo
w
(Mga
l/d)
0.57 .1
51.
10 .44
3.73 .8
51.
1939
.23
.17
.58
7.93
55.9
4
5.35
22.8
3.7
92.
3314
.97
12.2
7.8
24.
53 .42
2.06 .5
4
55.1
49.
783.
61 .77
.74
1.30
2.50
6.51
Mea
n da
ily fl
ows,
in
Mga
l/d
Jan 0.
54 .16
0.98 .4
33.
29 .87
1.00
36.1
0.1
5.5
77.
5151
.58
5.20
22.8
5.8
32.
30- 10
.75
.75
5.70 .6
21.
98 .34
56.9
910
.40
4.00 .8
7.8
3
1.40
2.96
7.40
Feb 0.
64 .13
1.35 .5
24.
991.
231.
4049
.30
.21
.74
9.78
70.2
9
5.66
25.0
2.9
72.
9020
.91
13.4
0.8
37.
20 .85
2.85 .4
7
62.3
012
.20
5.06
1.08 .81
1.60
3.90
8.80
Mar 0.
55 .20
1.19 .49
4.14
1.03
1.20
41.7
0.1
9.6
98.
0959
.47
5.40
22.9
7.8
22.
9016
.92
14.0
0.8
55.
30 .46
2.50 .4
2
52.6
09.
803.
72 .90
.67
1.36
2.80
7.20
Apr 0.
60 .18
1.22 .55
4.60 .9
71.
4446
.60
.21
.67
9.67
66.7
0
6.20
25.1
8- 4.
2019
.57
14.5
0.9
56.
40 .75
2.83 .3
7
59.6
012
.00
4.72
1.03 .83
1.50
3.37
7.70
May 0.
60 .14
1.27 .5
44.
391.
071.
5049
.60
.20
.67
9.40
69.3
8
5.90
24.3
0.8
43.
8018
.64
13.2
0.9
55.
30 .54
2.65 .3
4
59.9
211
.00
4.23 .9
3.81 1.33
3.02
7.30
June 0.
41 .13
1.01 .4
63.
29 .94
1.00
35.1
0.1
4.4
67.
1450
.09
5.20
22.3
8.6
92.
4014
.34
11.7
0.8
64.
90 .30
2.16 .4
7
53.4
78.
803.
29 .77
.65
1.18
2.53
6.50
July 0.
37 .12
0.84 .4
12.
69 .78
.80
29.3
0.1
2.4
65.
6741
.56
4.64
20.9
8.7
11.
7011
.12
10.4
0.8
13.
70 .28
1.60 .7
4
53.8
78.
502.
64 .72
.81
.94
1.96
6.30
Aug 0.
45 .15
0.97 .4
33.
59 .60
1.20
34.1
0.2
0.5
48.
0750
.29
5.25
22.6
6.6
91.
4014
.01
11.4
0.7
93.
40 .27
1.96 .7
4
60.8
86.
003.
79 .69
.80
1.15
1.86
6.10
Sept 0.
31 .16
0.95 .3
42.
41 .47
.90
29.2
0.1
5.4
75.
8341
.19
4.90
20.2
0.7
51.
1011
.62
11.5
0.7
43.
00 .22
1.54
1.27
48.1
29.
302.
66 .57
.67
1.19
1.60
5.00
Oct 0.
79 .15
1.12 .43
3.53 .5
91.
2041
.70
.17
.54
8.24
58.4
6
5.04
20.2
8.7
51.
4011
.52
11.9
3.7
43.
00 .22
1.51 .5
7
51.4
29.
602.
89 .53
.64
1.27
1.67
5.00
Nov 0.
74 .17
1.08 .3
33.
77 .72
1.30
38.3
0.1
6.5
77.
5454
.67
5.21
22.8
8.7
71.
5011
.85
12.2
0.7
63.
10 .23
1.54 .4
0
49.0
29.
402.
95 .55
.60
1.27
1.85
5.10
Dec 0.
84 .16
1.17 .3
74.
10 .88
1.30
39.7
0.1
8.5
98.
2157
.49
5.62
24.2
1 .86
2.30
14.2
012
.30
.76
3.40 .3
71.
63 .37
53.5
010
.40
3.35 .6
4.7
3
1.44
- 5.70
App
endi
x 1.
Sum
mar
y of
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-t
reat
men
t fac
ilitie
s an
d m
ean
daily
ret
urn
flow
s by
sub
regi
onal
dra
inag
e ba
sins
and
sub
basi
ns in
New
Eng
land
, 1990 C
ontin
ued
1 Q. x'
Dra
inag
e-
subb
asin
co
de
0109
0004
Tota
l
0109
0005
Tota
l
Was
tew
ater
- tr
eatm
ent
faci
lity
nam
e
War
ren
War
wic
kW
est W
arw
ick
Lad
d Sc
hool
New
Sho
reha
mSo
uth
Kin
gsto
wn
Wes
terl
y
Stat
e
R.I.
R.I.
R.I.
R.I.
R.I.
R.I.
R.I.
Type
of
re
ceiv
in
g w
ater
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
hSa
line
Salin
eFr
esh
Tot
al f
orh
asin
'01
09 .
......
......
......
......
......
......
.....
0110
0001
Tota
l
0110
0002
Tota
l
0110
0003
Cha
rlto
nJe
wet
t City
Kill
ingl
yL
eice
ster
Wat
er S
uppl
yO
xfor
d-R
ochd
ale
Plai
nfie
ld N
orth
Plai
nfie
ld V
illag
ePu
tnam
Sout
hbri
dge
Stur
brid
geT
hom
pson
Web
ster
Cov
entr
ySp
ragu
eSt
affo
rdU
nive
rsity
of C
onne
ctic
utW
illim
antic
Gro
ton
Tow
nG
roto
n C
ityH
ighl
ands
Mon
tvill
eN
ew L
ondo
nN
orw
ich
Mas
s.C
onn.
Con
n.M
ass.
Mas
s.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Con
n.M
ass.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Ave
r
age
dally
re
turn
flo
w
(Mga
l/d)
2.00
3.52
5.72
158.
50
0.05 .0
92.
582.
144.
8680
8.44 .0
9.5
52.
61 .14
.16
.67
.59
1.44
2.48 .4
1.2
14.
4313
.78
.06
.18
1.34
1.48
2.56
5.62
2.81
1.99 .22
.98
5.11
7.36
Mea
n da
ily fl
ows,
in M
gal/d
Jan 2.
593.
596.
4014
8.74 .0
6.0
42.
762.
235.
0977
1.60 .0
9.6
02.
25--
.19
.65
.48
1.28
2.34 .3
1.2
14.
0012
.40
.06
.16
1.30
1.00
2.52
5.04
2.89
2.16 .2
2.9
84.
728.
00
Feb 2.
733.
777.
7019
1.00 .0
8.0
43.
052.
605.
7893
8.60 .1
0.6
92.
74 .18
.19
.88
.58
1.58
3.16 .3
6.2
84.
0014
.74
.06
.17
1.58
2.10
2.94
6.85
3.31
2.42 .2
21.
065.
989.
80
Mar 1.
973.
636.
3016
3.48 .0
6.0
32.
652.
505.
2481
7.29 .0
9.5
82.
89 .21
.24
.67
.47
1.46
--
.43
.22
4.60
11.8
5
.06
.19
1.52
1.80
2.51
6.08
2.76
2.15 .2
2.8
95.
157.
60
Apr 2.
823.
847.
3018
5.66 .0
5.0
53.
112.
305.
5193
7.54 .0
9.6
22.
90 .15
.18
.82
.51
1.52
2.92 .4
3.2
34.
8015
.16
.06
.22
1.54
1.80
2.83
6.45
3.01
2.35 .2
2.8
96.
109.
80
May 2.
753.
847.
2017
8.79 .0
4.0
82.
822.
50S
44.j
.^fr
932.
56 .09
.63
3.09 .1
4.1
7.8
3.5
81.
643.
05 .43
.25
5.10
16.0
0
.06
.25
1.71
1.10
2.95
6.07
3.13
2.16 .2
21.
056.
009.
50
June 1.
993.
605.
6015
3.78 .0
4.1
22.
342.
104.
6074
8.17 .0
5.5
22.
72 .09
.10
.59
.51
1.54
2.15 .4
1.1
94.
2013
.08
.06
.17
1.44 .7
02.
414.
78
2.71
1.87 .2
2.8
94.
825.
40
July 1.
483.
334.
8014
2.02 .0
4.1
82.
161.
904.
2969
8.27 .0
3.4
62.
27 .07
.08
.44
.43
1.23
1.76 .43
.15
3.00
10.3
5
.06
.15
1.14 .30
2.10
3.75
2.56
1.78 .22
.90
4.68
5.00
Aug 1.
253.
405.
1015
3.59 .0
4.1
91.
831.
954.
0178
6.59 .0
3.5
12.
59 .10
.11 .61
.62
1.22
2.41 .4
6.1
75.
0013
.83
.06
.18
1.18
1.20
2.10
4.72
2.85
1.96 .22
1.01
5.44
5.90
Sept .9
63.
293.
6013
3.81 .0
6.1
32.
541.
604.
3267
2.77 .0
3.4
62.
28 .13
.13
.47
.69
1.13
2.11 .4
5.1
54.
0012
.02
.06
.15
.97
1.50
2.23
4.91
2.54
1.65 .2
2.9
14.
484.
50
Oct 1.
763.
384.
4013
9.52 .0
4.0
72.
722.
124.
9680
8.74 .4
1.5
12.
59 .15
.17
.69
.75
1.44
2.19 .4
8.2
05.
0614
.63
.06
.18
1.23
2.10
2.70
6.27
2.72
1.81 .2
21.
044.
756.
80
Nov 1.
843.
284.
8014
1.10 .0
4.0
52.
372.
084.
5574
6.33 .0
5.4
92.
42 .18
.19
.66
.71
1.59
2.08 .4
1.2
04.
8913
.87
.06
.17
1.14
2.20
2.64
6.21
2.51
1.69 .2
2.9
94.
276.
90
Dec 1.
913.
295.
4015
2.38 .0
52.
601.
844.
5076
7.44 .0
7.5
52.
59 .16
.18
.80
.74
1.67
3.10 .3
6.2
24.
5214
.96
.06
.19
1.29
2.00
2.82
6.36
2.76
1.86 .22
1.12
4.92
9.10
App
endi
x 1.
Sum
mar
y of
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-t
reat
men
t fac
ilitie
s an
d m
ean
daily
ret
urn
flow
s by
sub
regi
onal
dra
inag
e ba
sins
and
sub
basi
ns in
New
Eng
land
, 1
99
0 C
ontin
ued
Wastewater
Collet (7 5' 3
SO a. 3) c 3 Tl
i 5' 1 m (0 so P"
Dra
inag
e-
Was
tew
ater
- su
bbas
in
trea
tmen
t co
de
faci
lity
nam
e
01 1
0000
3 St
onin
gton
, Bor
ough
Ston
ingt
on, P
awca
tuck
Ston
ingt
on, M
ystic
Tot
al...
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
0110
0004
B
ranf
ord
Che
shir
eM
erid
enM
ilfor
d, B
eave
r B
rook
Milf
ord,
Hou
sato
nic
New
Hav
en, E
ast S
hore
Nor
th H
aven
Sout
hing
ton
Wal
lingf
ord
Wes
t Hav
enTo
tal .
......
......
......
......
......
......
.....
...
0110
0005
A
nson
iaB
eaco
n Fa
llsB
ethe
lC
anaa
n Fi
re D
istr
ict
Dan
bury
Der
byG
reat
Bar
ring
ton
Ken
tL
eeL
enox
Cen
ter
Len
ox 2
Litc
hfie
ldN
auga
tuck
New
Milf
ord
Nor
folk
Pitts
field
Plym
outh
Salis
bury
Seym
our
Shar
onSh
elto
n, R
iver
dale
Stat
e
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Mas
s.C
onn.
Mas
s.M
ass.
Mas
s.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.M
ass.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.
Type
of
re
ceiv
in
g w
ater
Fres
hSa
line
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hSa
line
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hSa
line
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Ave
r
age
daily
re
turn
flo
w
(Mga
l/d)
0.19 .3
3.5
119
.50
2.62
2.07
9.93
2.03
6.39
38.7
23.
604.
436.
087.
8283
.69
2.67 .1
91.
08 .23
7.93
1.74
2.99 .0
6.9
0.6
5.0
8.6
16.
66 .44
.35
14.6
2.9
4.3
71.
62 .06
1.92
Mea
n da
ily fl
ows,
in M
gal/d
Jan 0.
15 .33
.51
19.9
6
3.15
2.11
9.90
2.50
5.20
35.2
63.
124.
256.
317.
1078
.90
2.56 .2
31.
00 .13
8.10
1.74
2.55 .0
7.7
7.7
0.1
0.5
06.
59 .31
.29
11.3
0.8
8.3
51.
58 .04
1.99
Feb 0.
16 .33
.58
23.8
5
3.00
2.35
12.0
02.
206.
7035
.28
4.28
4.89
7.02
7.60
85.3
2
3.22 .2
41.
20 .21
9.10
2.07
3.31 .0
71.
01 .65
.09
.73
7.57 .3
6.4
515
.20
1.06 .42
1.78 .06
2.25
Mar 0.
14 .29
.52
19.7
1
2.48
2.08
10.1
01.
806.
2030
.30
4.36
4.50
5.98
9.30
77.1
0
2.92 .2
11.
10 .20
8.80
1.86
3.52 .0
6.9
5.8
0.1
0.7
37.
51 .35
.42
18.5
01.
01 .41
1.67 .1
51.
87
Apr 0.
19 .33
.52
23.4
1
3.40
2.13
12.6
02.
307.
4038
.00
4.18
5.30
7.31
8.50
91.1
2
3.34 .2
11.
20 .32
8.80
2.24
3.23 .0
7.9
7.6
6.0
9.7
67.
50 .45
.48
16.3
31.
04 .47
1.80 .0
71.
81
May 0.
22 .32
.49
23.1
0
3.30
2.39
12.9
02.
607.
7043
.80
3.82
5.30
7.30
8.80
97.9
1
3.68 .2
21.
20 .32
8.60
2.12
3.51 .0
81.
13 .67
.09
.81
8.20 .37
.52
18.6
61.
06 .47
1.90 .08
2.02
June 0.
23 .32
.49
16.9
5
2.52
2.02
9.40
2.20
6.60
39.6
73.
184.
605.
577.
3083
.06
2.75 .1
71.
10 .24
7.10
1.61
2.67 .0
5.8
8.5
5.0
7.5
26.
70 .34
.27
14.6
7--
.34
1.65 .0
51.
85
July 0.
19 .32
.59
16.2
3
2.34
1.75
7.30
1.80
6.00
39.4
92.
964.
004.
777.
7078
.11
2.22 .1
41.
00 .18
6.50
1.37
2.29 .0
5.7
9.5
2.0
5.4
15.
50 .27
.19
11.3
0.7
7.2
71.
48 .03
1.70
Aug 0.
24 .34
.50
18.4
6
2.54
1.94
8.90
1.80
6.40
44.8
03.
374.
005.
509.
6088
.85
2.07 .1
51.
10 .23
8.10
1 .41
3.33 .0
61.
01 .56
.05
.67
5.50 .7
7.3
114
.50
.87
.35
1.45 .0
41.
88
Sept 0.
20 .34
.48
15.3
1
2.13
1.80
6.90
1.70
5.60
37.2
73.
103.
704.
946.
2073
.34
1.81 .1
4.9
9.1
96.
601.
272.
52 .06
.75
.59
.07
.38
5.50
--
.16
12.3
0.8
0.3
01.
34 .02
1.64
Oct 0.
19 .34
.46
18.3
2
2.60
1.98
8.90
1.80
6.50
41.6
13.
394.
105.
917.
6084
.39
2.15 .1
71.
00 .23
7.30
1.51
3.16 .0
7.8
5.6
7.1
0.5
06.
20 .53
.28
14.2
0.8
8.3
61.
46- 1.
90
Nov ..
.32
.46
17.3
6
1.77
2.07
8.90
1.80
5.90
37.7
13.
534.
105.
566.
7078
.04
2.43 .1
81.
00 .24
7.70
1.65
2.89 .0
6.8
2.7
3.11 .5
76.
00 .52
.33
14.5
0.9
4.3
61.
68-- 2.
00
Dec _
.33
.50
20.8
1
2.26
2.26
11.4
01.
906.
5041
.43
3.98
4.40
6.84
7.40
88.3
7
2.94 .2
41.
10 .30
8.40
1.97
2.88 .0
5.8
9.7
7.1
1.7
87.
10 .55
.46
14.0
01.
04 .39
1.69 .04
2.19
App
endi
x 1.
Sum
mar
y of
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-tr
eatm
ent f
acili
ties
and
mea
n da
ily r
etur
n flo
ws
by s
ubre
gion
al d
rain
age
basi
ns a
nd s
ubba
sins
in N
ew E
ngla
nd,
19
90
Con
tinue
d
Q. x'
Dra
inag
e-
Was
tew
ater
- su
bbas
in
trea
tmen
t co
de
faci
lity
nam
e
0110
0005
St
ockb
ridg
eSt
ratf
ord
Tho
mas
ton
Torr
ingt
onW
ater
bury
Wat
erto
wn
Fire
Dis
tric
tT
otal
. ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
.. ..
0110
0006
B
ridg
epor
t Eas
tB
ridg
epor
t Wes
tFa
irfie
ldG
reen
wic
h, C
entr
alN
ew C
anaa
nN
orw
alk
Rid
gefie
ld, R
oute
7R
idge
field
, Mai
nSt
amfo
rdW
estp
ort
Tota
l ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
.....
Tota
l for
bas
in !
01 1
0....
.. ...
......
0111
0000
B
arto
nN
ewpo
rt C
ityO
rlea
ns V
illag
eTo
tal f
or b
asin
*01
11.
.. ....
......
..
0201
0001
B
enso
nC
astle
ton
Fair
Hav
enO
rwel
lPo
ultn
eyW
est P
awle
tTo
tal .
..... .
......
......
......
......
......
......
..
0201
0002
B
rand
onM
iddl
ebur
yPi
ttsfo
rdPr
octo
r
Stat
e
Mas
s.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Con
n.C
onn.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Type
of
re
ceiv
in
g w
ater
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Salin
eSa
line
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Salin
eFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Ave
r
age
daily
re
turn
flo
w
(Mga
l/d)
0.23
7.62
1.10
6.44
22.6
9.8
285
.01
10.8
723
.57
7.57
9.83
1.35
12.5
8.0
1.9
315
.83
1.83
84.3
729
1.97 .1
0.9
0.1
01.
10 .01
.25
.24
.02
.37
.02
.91
.31
1.18 .05
.22
Mea
n da
ily fl
ows,
in M
gal/d
Jan 0.
267.
23 .90
4.60
21.4
0.6
376
.79
13.9
023
.40
7.99
9.60
1.30
12.7
0.0
2.8
416
.00
2.50
88.2
528
1.34 .0
9.8
4.1
01.
04 .01
.26
.19
.02
.29
.02
.79
.28
1.00 .04
.18
Feb 0.
259.
001.
706.
8026
.57
.75
96.1
1
10.7
023
.90
8.75
10.3
02.
2013
.30
.01
1.01
16.0
02.
3088
.47
315.
34 .09
.81
.09
.99
.02
.20
.19
.01
.40
.02
.84
.28
1.13 .0
4.1
6
Mar 0.
277.
611.
187.
3024
.14
.75
94.3
8
9.85
21.8
08.
109.
901.
5013
.10
.01
1.40
17.0
01.
8084
.46
293.
59 .10
.96
.10
1.17 .01
.27
.21
.02
.48
.02
1.00 .3
01.
24 .06
.16
Apr 0.
239.
461.
207.
9025
.50
.89
97.0
2
12.0
024
.60
9.20
11.9
01.
6014
.70
.01
1.61
18.0
02.
0095
.62
328.
78 .12
1.00 .12
1.24 .01
.36
.26
.03
.52
.02
1.19 .38
1.45 .0
6.3
0
May 0.
2510
.18
1.20
8.09
25.4
0.8
201
ftd
\J 1
.L
^T
12.4
427
.80
9.70
13.8
01.
7015
.80
.01
1.50
17.0
02.
1010
1.85
346.
57 .11
.92
.12
1.15 .01
.30
.27
.03
.49
.02
1.12 .41
1.37 .0
6.2
8
Jun
e 0.24
6.80 .9
46.
1821
.60
.69
80.0
2
9.99
21.9
08.
009.
101.
1011
.80
.01
.97
14.0
01.
7078
.57
276.
46 .09
.83
.09
1.02 .01
.25
.27
.03
.30
.02
.87
.31
.94
.05
.26
July 0.
235.
211.
045.
2318
.69
.76
68.1
8
9.40
21.6
06.
707.
10 .90
10.6
0.0
1.4
412
.00
1.50
70.2
524
6.87 .1
0.9
2.0
91.
11 .00
.23
.25
.02
.21
.02
.73
.27
.93
.05
.22
Aug 0.
235.
661.
027.
4721
.52
1.00
81.3
5
10.2
023
.30
6.20
9.30
1.00
11.3
0.0
1.6
116
.00
1.60
79.5
228
6.73 .0
9.9
6.0
91.
13 .00
.24
.24
.03
.30
.01
.83
.27
1.18 .0
5.1
8
Sep
t 0.21
5.26 .9
35.
0518
.78
.88
68.5
4
9.59
21.2
85.
307.
500.
908.
90 .01
.45
16.0
01.
4071
.33
245.
45 .10
.77
.08
.95
.01
.27
.26
.02
.25
.01
.82
.28
.82
.05
.19
Oct 0.
217.
37 .99
5.85
21.5
6.8
480
.33
11.1
024
.50
7.10
9.00
1.10
11.3
0.0
2.6
016
.00
1.70
82.4
228
6.36 .0
81.
02 .09
1.19 .01
.16
.26
.02
.33
.02
.79
.27
1.37 .05
.18
Nov 0.
218.
051.
005.
9222
.58
.85
83.3
1
10.5
223
.19
6.60
9.10
1.30
12.1
0.0
2.7
716
.00
1.60
81.2
027
9.98 .0
9.8
9.1
01.
08 .01
.24
.26
.03
.41
.01
.96
.32
1.55 .0
6.2
2
Dec 0.
229.
611.
076.
9424
.57
1.02
91.3
2
10.8
025
.53
7.20
11.3
01.
6015
.40
.02
.99
16.0
01.
8090
.64
312.
45 .07
.88
.09
1.05 .0
1.2
0.2
4.0
2.4
1.0
1.8
9
.29
1.25 .0
6.2
8
App
endi
x 1.
Sum
mar
y of
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-tr
eatm
ent f
acili
ties
and
mea
n da
ily r
etur
n flo
ws
by s
ubre
gion
al d
rain
age
basi
ns a
nd s
ubba
sins
in N
ew E
ngla
nd,
19
90
Con
tinue
d
Wastewater
Collect
o' 3
V Q.
30 2. i 3
fl
i 5* 1 m <o » 3 Q.
<O
Dra
inag
e-
Was
tew
ater
- su
bbas
in
trea
tmen
t co
de
faci
lity
nam
e
0201
0002
R
utla
nd, M
ain
Ver
genn
esW
allin
gfor
d, F
ireD
istr
ict
1
Wes
t Rut
land
Tota
l ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.
0201
0003
B
arre
City
Bur
lingt
on, M
ain
Bur
lingt
on, R
iver
side
Bur
lingt
on, N
orth
End
Ess
ex J
unct
ion
Hin
esbu
rgM
arsh
fiel
dM
ontp
elie
rN
orth
fiel
dPl
ainf
ield
Ric
hmon
d V
illag
eSh
elbu
rne,
Fir
e D
istr
ict 2
Shel
burn
e, C
row
n R
oad
Fire
Dis
tric
t 1
Sout
h B
urlin
gton
, Air
port
Sout
h B
urlin
gton
,B
artle
tt's
Bay
Stow
eW
ater
bury
Will
iam
stow
nW
inoo
ski
Tota
l ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
.
Stat
e
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Typ
e of
re
ceiv
in
g w
ater
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
h
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Ave
r
age
daily
re
turn
flo
w
(Mga
l/d)
5.56 .4
6
.11
.26
8.15
3.12
4.20 .8
31.
361.
48 .19
.01
2.12
1.24 .06
.08
.26
.28
1.22 .75
.13
.23
.06
.98
18.6
0
Mea
n da
ily fl
ows,
in M
gal/d
Jan -- 0.
40 .11
.25
2.26
2.58
3.89 .71
1.03
1.26 .12
.01
2.26
1.15 .06
.07
.20
.25
1.02 .62
.13
.23
.07
.82
16.4
7
Feb ~ 0.
49 .11
.32
2.53
2.92
3.95 .8
91.
171.
40 .16
.02
2.34
1.20 .06
.06
.19
.23
1.12 .70
.13
.22
.06
1.06
17.8
4
Mar ~ 0.
49 .11
.32
2.67
3.48
4.45 .8
91.
451.
42 .17
.02
3.00
1.38 .07
.07
.26
.28
1.20 .77
.16
.27
.07
1.13
20.5
2
Apr - 0.
57 .13
.32
3.21
3.90
5.10 .9
71.
731.
63 .21
.02
3.10
1.36 .0
8.0
8.3
9
.37
1.30 .83
.18
.30
.08
1.33
22.9
5
May - 0.
44 .12
.35
3.02
3.34
4.38 .7
61.
511.
61 .18
.01
2.20
1.15 .06
.08
.23
.30
1.20 .80
.13
.27
.10
1.04
19.3
5
June -- 0.
45 .11
.24
2.36
2.88
4.08 .6
61.
281.
40 .16
.02
1.60
1.24 .05
.07
.23
.29
1.20 .69
.12
.21
.06
.90
17.1
2
July 4.
21 .47
.10
.18
6.43
2.72
3.89 .7
11.
291.
39 .19
.01
1.40
1.18 .05
.08
.20
.25
1.17 .67
.12
.21
.04
.71
16.2
9
Aug 5.
48 .45
.10
.20
7.90
3.24
4.21 .8
31.
371.
50 .23
.02
1.80
1.19 .05
.08
.24
.27
1.26 .76
.12
.21
.04
.78
18.2
0
Sept ~ 0.
46 .09
.19
2.07
2.49
3.43 .8
71.
121.
33 .18
.02
1.20
1.24 .05
.07
.25
.25
1.13 .62
.11
.24
.05
.64
15.2
7
Oct 5.
55 .47
.09
.24
8.22
3.08
4.32 .9
61.
331.
53 .20
.01
2.10
1.28 .05
.08
.27
.26
1.28 .79
.11
.22
.05
.98
18.9
1
Nov 5.
98 .46
.10
.26
8.95
3.36
4.45 .9
31.
551.
65 .24
.01
2.40
1.22 .06
.09
.34
.32
1.35 .86
.10
.21
.07
1.24
20.4
5
Dec 6.
60 .44
.11
.27
9.29
3.47
4.31 .8
11.
481.
60 .22
.01
2.00
1.30 .05
.10
.30
.27
1.38 .86
.10
.16
.05
1.16
19.6
3
App
endi
x 1.
Sum
mar
y of
mun
icip
al w
aste
wat
er-tr
eatm
ent f
acili
ties
and
mea
n da
ily r
etur
n flo
ws
by s
ubre
gion
al d
rain
age
basi
ns a
nd s
ubba
sins
in N
ew E
ngla
nd,
19
90
Con
tinue
d
Dra
inag
e-
Was
tew
ater
- su
bbas
in
trea
tmen
t co
de
faci
lity
nam
e
0201
0005
A
lbur
gC
hels
eaFa
irfa
xH
ardw
ick
Hyd
e Pa
rkJe
ffer
sonv
ille
John
son
Milt
onM
orri
s vill
e V
illag
eSt
. Alb
ans
Tota
l ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
....
0201
0007
E
nosb
urg
Falls
New
port
Cen
ter
Nor
th T
roy
Ric
hfor
dSh
eldo
n Sp
ring
sSw
anto
n V
illag
eT
roy-
Jay
Tota
l ....
......
......
......
......
......
......
....
Tota
l for
bas
in !
0201
....
......
..
0202
0003
A
dam
sB
enni
ngto
nH
oosa
cM
anch
este
rTo
tal f
or b
asin
!02
02 ..
......
....
Tota
l for
New
Eng
land
...
Stat
e
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Vt.
Mas
s.V
t.M
ass.
Vt.
Type
of
re
ceiv
in
g w
ater
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
h
Fres
hFr
esh
Fres
hFr
esh
Ave
r
age
daily
re
turn
flo
w
(Mga
l/d)
0.07 .0
3.0
3.1
9.0
2.0
2.1
4.1
50.
333.
454.
43 .30
.02
.06
.35
.02
.77
.06
1.58
33.6
7
2.34
4.57
5.93 .2
813
.12
1,72
5.14
Mea
n da
ily fl
ows,
in M
gal/d
Jan 0.
06 .03
.03
.24
.02
.03
.12
.14
0.31
3.27
4.24 .2
2.0
2.0
0.2
8.0
2.5
5.0
71.
1624
.92
2.24
3.52
5.22 .2
511
.23
1,61
5.84
Feb 0.
07 .03
.03
.20
.02
.02
.14
.13
0.31
3.75
4.71 .2
3.0
2.0
6.3
0.0
2.7
8.0
71.
4727
.39
2.75
4.81
7.63 .2
715
.46
1,93
6.54
Mar 0.
08 .04
.05
.33
.02
.02
.16
.15
0.37
4.12
5.33 .3
6.0
2.0
7.4
4.0
2.8
5.0
81.
8431
.37
2.85
5.31
8.55 .2
816
.99
1,80
4.36
Apr 0.
11 .04
.05
.29
.02
.03
.22
.18
0.41
4.60
5.96 .5
4.0
2.1
2.4
9.0
31.
29 .06
2.55
35.8
5
2.66
5.14
8.05 .3
116
.16
1,99
6.28
May 0.
07 .03
.03
.19
.02
.02
.14
.17
0.36
3.70
4.73 .3
0.0
3.0
6.3
3.0
2.8
4.0
61.
6229
.83
2.98
5.46
7.92 .3
016
.66
1,98
4.18
June 0.
06 .02
.04
.14
.02
.03
.09
.16
0.31
2.78
3.64 .2
2.0
2.0
5.2
8.0
1.6
8.0
51.
3125
.31
2.55
4.42
4.84 .2
612
.07
1,61
4.83
July 0.
05 .02
.01
.13
.02
.02
.11
.15
0.31
2.82
3.64 .2
1.0
2.0
5.2
8.0
1.5
3.0
51.
1528
.24
1.83
3.64
3.91 .3
19.
69
1,44
2.98
Aug 0.
05 .02
.04
.12
.02
.02
.12
.15
0.32
3.28
4.15 .2
1.0
2.0
5.3
1.0
2.6
7.0
61.
3432
.43
2.23
5.21
5.17 .2
212
.83
1,64
0.85
Sept 0.
06 .02
.02
.13
.02
.02
.16
.14
0.31
2.31
3.19 .2
5.0
2.0
5.4
0.0
3.6
3.0
51.
4322
.79
1.91
4.13
3.78 .2
510
.07
1,41
5.20
Oct 0.
05 .03
.01
.15
.02
.02
.15
.14
0.29
3.44
4.30 .3
1.0
2.0
5.3
7.0
3.8
3.0
61.
6733
.88
1.96
4.10
4.46 .2
510
.76
1,69
7.15
Nov 0.
08 .03
.04
.17
.02
.03
.16
.16
0.33
3.67
4.69 .4
5.0
2.0
7.3
9.0
4.8
3.0
61.
8536
.89
1.99
4.46
5.46 .3
312
.24
1,65
3.06
Dec 0.
07 .03
.02
.14
.02
.03
.14
.15
0.31
3.71
4.61 .3
1.0
2.0
6.3
0.0
3.7
9.0
31.
5435
.97
2.10
4.59
6.17 .3
113
.16
1,74
6.61
'Sub
regi
onal
dra
inag
e-ba
sin
nam
es a
re li
sted
in ta
ble
1.
o
1 Q.
X*