Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />002577 <br /> <br />Protection Agency, 1977), there has been a large variation in the population <br />projections ~or the Steamboat Springs area, both in terms o~population and o~ <br />the per-capita use of water. For the study reported here, the peak-daily <br />population was used for the December modeling condition and the permanent <br />population projection was used for the September modeling condition. <br /> <br />The population projections considered in this analysis (Gathers and Asso- <br />ciates, 1976; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1977) are considered only <br />as indications of future growth. Because of the uncertainty of population <br />projections, estimates for 2010 were used for the entire,analysis. This pro- <br />moted a maximum loading viewpoint of the stream reach from the proposed re- <br />gional wastewater-treatment plant (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, <br />1977). <br /> <br />MODEL SIMULATIONS <br /> <br />Effluents from Existing Wastewater-Treatment Plants and <br />7-Day, 10-Year Streamflow <br /> <br />Model simulations were conducted using the U.S. Geological Survey model <br />for effluents from existing wastewater-treatment plants in the study reach, <br />assuming low-flow conditions and population projections for 2010, The <br />nonaugmented Q7,10 flow of 28 ft3/s (0.78 m3/s) was considered. ,Also con- <br />sidered was a flow augmentation of 20 ft3/s (0.56 m3/s) from the proposed <br />Yamcolo Reservoir. The analysis assumed the same effluent conditions measured <br />during the September 23-24, 1975, sampling period. The results of this <br />analysis using both flow conditions for selected water-quality variables are <br />shown on figures 24 to 27. For the simulation phase, it was,assumed that all <br />model parameters were only temperature dependent. Therefore, for example, the <br />simulation for December basically assumed the same biologic and pH conditions <br />as in September. The amount of error induced because of this and other <br />assumptions is not known. <br /> <br />The traveltime through the system, for the simulation phase of the study <br />only, was estimated using a procedure described by Boning (1974). This <br />procedure utilizes a technique of estimating traveltime as a function of <br />discharge and mean streambed slope. After the traveltime data were computed, <br />they were used in computations of subreach transit times and, also, of the <br />stream-reaeration rates. A subsequent study of the traveltime and reaeration <br />rates for the Yampa River has been completed (D. P. Bauer, R. E. Rathbun, and <br />H. W. Lowham, written commun., 1977). Traveltime determined in the subsequent <br />study is within 5 percent of the traveltime used in this study. <br /> <br />Simulated profiles for concentrations of CBODU are shown on figure 24. <br />The largest concentrations, as expected, occur immediately downstream from the <br />main wastewater-treatment plant at Steamboat Springs. No criteria concerning <br />in-stream concentrations of this constituent have been proposed to date. <br /> <br />42 <br />