GULF COAST REGION - Houston-Galveston Area Council · Gulf Coast Region Water Quality Management Plan Update: 2001-2002 “To promote the preservation, protection, and enhancement

Gulf Coast Region Water Quality Management Plan Update: 2001-2002

“To promote the preservation, protection, and enhancement of ground water and surface water quality through coordination and integration of water quality

programs in the 13-county Gulf Coast Region.” – H-GAC Water Quality Management Program Mission Statement

REVISED – November 26, 2002

PREPARED IN COOPERATION WITH THE TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION AND

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

The preparation of this report was financed through grants from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission

H-GAC—07/22/02

2002 H-GAC BOARD OF DIRECTORS

AUSTIN COUNTYCounty Judge Carolyn C. Bilski Commissioner James Duke

BRAZORIA COUNTYCounty Judge John Willy Commissioner Jack Harris

CHAMBERS COUNTYCounty Judge Jimmy Sylvia Commissioner Buddy Irby

COLORADO COUNTYCommissioner Darrell Gertson Commissioner Doug Wessels

FORT BEND COUNTYCommissioner Andy Meyers Commissioner James Patterson

GALVESTON COUNTYCommissioner Eddie Janek Commissioner Steve Holmes

HARRIS COUNTYCounty Judge Robert EckelsCommissioner El Franco Lee

LIBERTY COUNTYCommissioner Todd Fontenot Commissioner Melvin Hunt

MATAGORDA COUNTYCounty Judge Greg Westmoreland Commissioner Percy Carroll

MONTGOMERY COUNTYCommissioner Craig Doyal Commissioner Mike Meador

WALKER COUNTYCommissioner B.J. Gaines, Jr Commissioner James Reynolds

WALLER COUNTYCounty Judge Glenn Taylor Commissioner Leroy Singleton

WHARTON COUNTYCounty Judge Lawrence Naiser Commissioner Chris King

CITY OF BAYTOWNCouncilman Donald Murray Mayor Pete C. Alfaro

CITY OF CONROENo Designate

CITY OF DEER PARKCouncilman Denton McDugle

CITY OF FRIENDSWOODCouncilmember Jerry Ericsson Councilmember Tracy Goza

CITY OF GALVESTONCouncilman Joe Jaworski CITY OF HOUSTONCncl Mbr Carroll RobinsonCouncil Member Bert Keller Council Mbr Gabriel Vasquez

CITY OF HUNTSVILLECouncilmember Steed Smith

CITY OF LA PORTECouncilman Chuck Engelken, Jr. Councilman Peter E. Griffiths

CITY OF LEAGUE CITYCouncilman Hamid Kantara Councilwoman Darlene Anene

CITY OF MISSOURI CITYCouncilwoman Eunice Reiter Councilman Buddy Jimerson

CITY OF PASADENACouncilman Bill Welch Councilman Jim Barker

CITY OF PEARLANDMayor Tom Reid Councilman Larry Marcott

CITY OF SUGAR LANDCouncilman James Thompson Councilman J. Brian Gaston

CITY OF TEXAS CITYCommissioner Linson Landrum, Jr.

HOME RULE CITIESMayor R.P. "Bobby" Barrett Mayor H.G. “Hap” HarringtonMayor James Barnett, Jr. Councilman Floyd Myers

GENERAL LAW CITIESCouncilwoman Kay Mudd Councilwoman Natalie OngAlderman Terry Henley

ISDsTrustee Charles Cupples Trustee Peggy Smith

Note: Names of Alternates are Indented

KEY H-GAC STAFF

Jack Steele, Executive DirectorSteve Howard, Director of Program OperationsJim White, Communications ManagerBill Comstock, Manager, Office ServicesRodney Bradshaw, Manager, Human ResourcesDeidre Schueler Vick, Manager, Public ServicesAlan Clark, Manager, TransportationJeff Taebel, Manager, Community and Environmental PlanningMax Samfield, Manager, Data ServicesNancy Haussler, ControllerCharles Hill, Manager, Internal Audit

August 2002

NRAC Natural Resources Advisory Committee 2000-2002 Roster

Jim Adams River Authorities Rob Barrett Harris Co. Pollution Control Teresa Battenfield City of Houston Richard Bottos Waller County Don Brandon Chambers County Glenda Callaway Galveston Bay Foundation Dennis Caputo Industry Wendell Daniel Soil & Water Conservation Jim Dannenbaum Chambers of Commerce Dan Gerken Fort Bend County Mike Isermann Other Cities Buddy Jimerson Other Cities Robert Johnson Consulting Engineers Jim Joyce Professional Organization Carole Lenz Harris County Donald Mudd Brazoria County

Mark Muhich Galveston County Jerry Nemec Walker County David Parkhill Environmental Groups Ellis Pickett Liberty County Lori Roussel Gulf Coast Waste Disposal Authority Harlan Schrader Austin County Brian Schmaefsky Citizen Cathy Sisk Environmental Groups Jon Strange Builders/Developers Jim Strong Montogomery County Mike Talbott Harris Co. Flood Control Dist. Kerry Whelan Electric Utilities Natalie Woodruff Chambers of Commerce Jean Wright Public Health Maryann Young Citizens William Younger Matagorda County

Houston

Conroe

Bay City

Galveston

Baytown

Katy

Rosenberg

Huntsville

Pasadena

LibertyTomball

Hempstead

Bellville

El Campo

Lake Jackson

Humble

Wharton

Alvin

Missouri City

Sugar Land

Texas City

Eagle Lake

Angleton

Sealy

Freeport

League City

Cleveland

Anahuac

Columbus

MatagordaBay

Galveston

Bay

WHARTON

COLORADO

AUSTIN WALLER

MONTGOMERY

WALKER

LIBERTY

CHAMBERS

GALVESTON

BRAZORIA

MATAGORDA

FORT BEND

HARRIS

Palacios

JerseyVillage

Waller

The Woodlands

Dayton

East Bernard ManvelDickinson

Mont Belvieu

LakeConroe

LakeHouston

East MatagordaBay

WestBay

Riverside

Pearland

Stafford

Needville

Richmond

Montgomery

New Waverly

Weimar Bellaire

StowellWinnie

East Bay

La Porte

Seabrook

SouthHouston

0 10 20 Miles

H-GAC 13 CountyGulf Coast

Planning Region

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Report

Overview ………………..………………………………………….. 1

Water Quality Management Agencies ……………………………. 2

Goals and Action Recommendations …………………………….. 5

Domestic Wasteload Forecasts for the San Jacinto –Brazos Coastal Basin …………………………………………………….. 12

Report Tables ……………………………………………………………. 18

Table 2 - 2001-2002 Domestic Forecast (Permit Values) 18 Table 3 - Basin Compound Annual Growth Rate and Plant Capacity 28 Table 4 - 2001-2002 Domestic Forecast (Base Year Values) 32 Table 5 - Clear Lake Domestic Wasteloads: Forecast vs. Actual 44 Appendix I – Acronyms …………………………………………….. 46 Appendix II – Methodology …………………………………………….. 48 Appendix III – How Can I Use Wasteload Forecasts?

Insight and Analysis …………………………………… 69 Appendix Table 1 – Domestic Wasteload and Forecast (Permit) 90 Appendix Table 3 – Basin Compound Annual Growth Rate and Plant Capacity 100 Appendix Table 6 – Domestic Forecast (Base Year Values) 104 Appendix Table 7 – Comparison Base Year and Permit Value Formulas by Stream Segment 116 Appendix Table 8 – Domestic Wasteload Projections for 2001: 118 Actual vs. Permit - Made in 1992, 1995, 1998

2001-2002 WQMP Plan Update 1

Water Quality Management Plan Update for 2001-2002

OVERVIEW Humans have always been drawn to water. Almost without exception they build their cities in close proximity to water features as the world’s great cities attest– the Seine River in Paris, San Francisco Bay, and the Chicago Lakefront are just a few examples. Historically cities developed along rivers or coastal areas because of their economic functions as transport mediums and for fisheries. While these functions are still important, water resources are increasingly seen as recreational and aesthetic amenities that add to the quality of life of residents and attractions for visitors. The H-GAC region is rich in water resources with an extensive 16,000-mile network of rivers, streams and bayous, feeding into several reservoirs and one of the nation’s most important estuarine systems - Galveston Bay. These water bodies provide a home for a wide variety of freshwater and saltwater fish and also support a diverse vegetative habitat along their corridors for an incredible array of other wildlife. Unfortunately, the pressures of population growth and economic activity have put a strain on these resources. Data from the Texas Clean Rivers water quality assessment program show that nearly half the stream segments in the region show elevated levels of bacteria. There are also elevated levels of certain toxic substances present in the Houston Ship Channel and associated side bays, as well as nutrient enrichment, which leads to algal blooms and negative impacts on aquatic flora and fauna. Both are a concern in several area waterways. Without effective water quality management, the strain on our waterways will only increase. According to the U.S. Census, the region’s population grew from 3.9 million to 4.8 million people from 1990 – 2000 and forecasters anticipate the population could be as high as 7.6 million people by the year 2025. This growth will require construction of new housing, businesses and transportation facilities, consuming land and increasing urban stormwater runoff. Water consumption and wastewater discharges will also increase accordingly. Hence, it will be more important than ever in the coming decades to seek integrated solutions that balance these competing demands on our aquatic systems. H-GAC has a number of water quality related responsibilities that include:

• Review of projects that have potential impact on the region’s water resources and associated habitats;

• Assessment of water resource assets and impairments;


• Providing assistance to local governments in their efforts to protect water quality, conserve water resources and meet EPA Clean Water Standards; and

• Providing assistance to local governments to devise a long term water strategy to preserve the vitality of our diverse aquatic and estuarine habitats while sustaining population growth and economic development in the region.

Through its annual Water Quality Management Plan update, H-GAC sets water quality goals and makes recommendations, both broad and specific, to guide its own water quality programs, successfully carry out its water quality responsibilities and to achieve better coordination in water quality management among government agencies within the region. The Plan updates also include forecasts of domestic wasteloads from municipal wastewater treatment plants. These forecasts give a forward look at the potential impact of human generated waste on water quality based on the growth and concentration of future population. The forecasts use recent data showing the quality of treated wastewater, the geographic boundaries of wastewater treatment service areas, estimated and projected populations by service areas, and permitted levels of pollutants allowed by state regulation.

WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT AGENCIES In addition to its own water quality management (WQM) planning efforts, H-GAC coordinates with various local, regional, state and federal agencies/entities to identify water quality and related issues and work toward finding solutions. The following thumbnail sketches are intended to provide the reader with a feeling for the number and types of agencies working for improved water quality in the region. Joint Stormwater Task Force (JTF) was formed by the City of Houston, Harris County, Harris County Flood Control District and Texas Department of Transportation in response to EPA’s requirement for large communities to submit stormwater permits. The permit provides the Joint Task Force an opportunity to propose appropriate management programs to control pollutants in discharges from its municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4). For more information go to the JTF web site at www.cleanwaterclearchoice.org. Trinity Bay Conservation District (TBCD) provides drinking water, wastewater treatment and storm drainage for most of East Chambers and part of West Jefferson Counties in far Southeast Texas. The TBCD service area lies to the north of Galveston Bay. For more information go to www.tbcd.org. Chambers-Liberty Navigation District (CLND) provides water for drinking and agriculture in Chambers and Liberty Counties. It also is home to the Upper Texas Coast Water Borne Education Center, which can be reached at 409.267.3547. CLND anticipates having its web site up and running by late fall 2002.

http://www.cleanwaterclearchoice.org/

http://www.tbcd.org/


Gulf Coast Waste Disposal Authority (GCA) was created by the legislature in 1969 and is a non-tax-supported unit of local government dedicated to waste management activities. H-GCA’s primary area of jurisdiction is comprised of Harris, Chambers and Galveston Counties. The Authority may provide services in any part of the State of Texas but coordinates its activities with any other authorities or districts in those areas, which may also be able to provide environmental assistance. For more information contact the GCA web site at www.gcwda.com. Galveston Bay Estuary Program (GBEP), with completion of The Galveston Bay Plan, the organization has transitioned from planning to implementing the Plan. This is primarily a state and local effort augmented by federal demonstration grant funds. The major issues addressed through the Plan are habitat, water quality, fish and wildlife, freshwater inflow, shoreline management and most recently invasive species. For more information visit the GBEP website at http://gbep.tamug.tamu.edu. River Authorities for the most part are responsible for developing and managing water supplies and sometimes more depending on the specific legislation that created them. In the H-GAC region there are five river authorities of varying size and powers. These are, east to west, the Lower Neches Valley Authority (LNVA/ www.lnva.dst.tx.us), Trinity River Authority (TRA/www.trinityra.org), San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA/ www.sjra.net), Brazos River Authority (BRA/www.brazos.org) and Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA/www.lcra.org). H-GAC works with these river authorities in the Texas Clean Rivers Program. The TRA manages Lake Livingston while the SJRA manages Lakes Conroe and Houston. Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) is the primary state agency that regulates water quality via water quality standards and wastewater discharge permits. TNRCC oversees the state water quality management planning efforts and Total Maximum Daily Load studies. On September 1, 2002, TNRCC will change its name to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). For more information visit the TNRCC web site at www.tnrcc.state.tx.us. Texas Parks & Wildlife Department (TPWD) is the primary agency responsible for protection and conservation of our water associated wildlife habitats as well as regulating fishing and hunting. For more information visit the TPWD web site at www.tpwd.state.tx.us. Texas General Land Office (GLO) is the oldest state agency in Texas. GLO is responsible for the management of state lands and mineral-right properties totaling 20.3 million acres. Included in that portfolio are the beaches, bays, estuaries and other "submerged" lands out to 10.3 miles in the Gulf of Mexico. For more information visit the GLO web site at www.glo.state.tx.us. Texas Railroad Commission (TRRC) regulates oil and gas production and pipeline safety among other duties. For more information visit the RRC web site at www.rrc.state.tx.us.

http://www.gcwda.com/

http://gbep.tamug.tamu.edu/

http://www.lnva.dst.tx.us/

http://www.trinityra.org/

http://www.sjra.net/

http://www.brazos.org/

http://www.lcra.org/

http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/

http://www.glo.state.tx.us/

http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/


United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is the federal water quality management agency with oversight of TNRCC programs and the major funding source for water quality management planning in Texas. The H-GAC 13-county region is in EPA’s Region 6 that covers Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and New Mexico. For more information visit EPA web site at www.epa.gov. United States Geological Survey (USGS) monitors water quality and performs water quality studies throughout the region. USGS works closely with H-GAC in the Clean Rivers Program. For more information visit the USGS web site at www.usgs.gov. Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), formerly the Soil Conservation Service, works with private landowners through an intensive technical assistance program to achieve conservation of farm and ranch lands as well as environmental benefits. For more information visit the NRCS web site at www.nrcs.usda.gov. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is the federal agency that manages the nation’s marine fisheries. Its goals are to rebuild and maintain sustainable fisheries, promote the recovery of protected species, and protect and maintain the health of coastal marine habitats. For more information visit the NMFS web site at www.nmfs.noaa.gov. Regional Water Planning Groups H and K Regional Water Planning Groups were created through Senate Bill 1 (1997) to put in place a "bottom up" water planning process designed to ensure that the water needs of all Texans are met. SB 1 allowed individuals representing 11 interest groups to serve as members of Regional Water Planning Groups (RWPG) to prepare regional water plans for their respective areas. These plans will map out how to conserve water supplies, meet future water supply needs and respond to future droughts in the planning areas. There are two of these regional groups in the H-GAC 13-county region. H-GAC counties in Group H include Austin, Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend Galveston, Liberty, Harris, Montgomery, Walker, and Waller. H-GAC counties included in Group K are Colorado, Matagorda and Wharton Counties. More information on these and other planning groups can be found at the Texas Water Development Board web site at http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/assistance/rwpg/main-docs/rwpg-main.htm.

http://www.epa.gov/

http://www.usgs.gov/

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/

http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/assistance/rwpg/main-docs/rwpg-main.htm


WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT IMPLEMENTATION GOALS AND ACTION RECOMMENDATIONS

H-GAC recognizes that water quality and quantity are bound together, that our water resources possess an intrinsic value beyond drinking and that water resource protection is best done through a watershed-based approach. Based on this recognition, H-GAC has identified the following goals and recommendations to assist member and allied agencies in developing specific programs to protect our water resources. Goal: Achieve a better understanding of the ecological and economic

value of our region’s water resources and the relationship of one to the other:

• Encourage and assist local governments to develop comprehensive approaches to

developing multiple uses for the region’s waterways. • Advocate actions that increase the “quality of life” of the region through multiple

beneficial uses of its water resources. Goal: Prevent pollution of the region’s waterways from “nonpoint” and

“point” sources: Nonpoint Sources of Pollution • Continue to collect additional water quality data to identify sources and extent of the

nonpoint source pollution problems in the region. • Inform and educate policy officials, local government staff, and the public at large on

nonpoint source pollution issues and “best management practices.” • Encourage the use of alternative technologies to septic tanks and identify financial

resources to help low income communities replace failing septic systems. • Provide technical assistance and identify financial sources to help local governments • Combat illegal dumping and illicit discharges into the region’s waterways. • Advocate tracking individuals as well as companies with regard to illegal dumping. • Advocate the use of appropriate erosion control techniques in all projects reviewed

by H-GAC under the Texas Review and Comment System.


• Work with communities through the Phase II Storm Water Permit Program to facilitate implementation of nonpoint source pollution prevention measures, including household hazardous waste.

• Assess local government implementation of nonpoint source pollution prevention

measures. Point Sources of Pollution • Support the development of “regional” wastewater collection and treatment systems. • Assess new, expansion and/or remediation proposals for consistency with

regionalization, cost effectiveness, engineering, and feasibility, such that they enhance water quality, as well as promote judicious use of the resource.

• Promote the development of alternative treatment mechanisms, such as constructed

wetlands, in small communities and rural areas. • Continue to collect and assess wasteload data for watersheds so as to produce

projections for future wasteloads, which are consistent with the actual, not theoretical, potential impact on water quality.

• Collect “real world” water quality data to reduce the use of assumptions in

wastewater treatment discharge permits. • Support the continued involvement of volunteer monitors through the Texas Watch

and Clean Rivers Programs. • Work with communities and appropriate regional, state and federal agencies to

facilitate implementation of point source pollution prevention measures. • Assess local government implementation of pollution prevention measures and

promote responsible management & monitoring. Goal: Ensure an adequate Drinking Water Supply through source

water protection and conservation: • Advocate the conservation of ground and surface water supplies, with attention to

reducing the per capita usage. • Promote the use of source water protection techniques to ensure the health, quality

and safety of the region’s water supply.


• Provide support for communities in coordinating long-range water supply planning under the Texas Water Plan.

• Promote the beneficial use of reclaimed water in areas where freshwater use is high. • Encourage Regional Water Planning Groups H and K (see Management Agencies

above) to develop a good pipeline inventory (water distribution and materials that could impact water supply).

• Protect water supplies from external impacts and incidents. Goal: Conserve and Protect Aquatic, Riparian and Wetland Habitats: • Collect data on the biological health of the region’s waterways. • Provide information and training to local officials on habitat protection methods. • Promote watershed management programs that develop and implement BMPs for

protecting wetlands and sea grasses. • Develop information resources documenting water quality and flood buffer values of

wetlands • Encourage wetlands mitigation banking • Develop information on financial incentives for wetlands conservation • Promote coordination among the various entities that enforce habitat protection

regulations. • Support research on how to deal with invasive species that threaten native aquatic,

riparian and wetland habitat. Goal: Promote stormwater management strategies that also yield water

quality, habitat preservation and open space benefits: • Provide assistance to communities in complying with the requirements of the

National Flood Insurance Program. • Support land use planning and other management techniques to reduce the potential

for flood damage and negative water quality impacts.


• Provide information to local governments on buyouts as a means of alleviating flood hazards, reducing nonpoint source pollution and conservation of habitats through creation of open space.

• Advocate consideration of water quality impacts and support coordination in the

planning of major drainage projects. • Encourage consideration of alternatives to channelization to preserve riparian habitat

and abate nonpoint source pollution. • Advocate design of stormwater management facilities for both flood damage

reduction and water quality benefits.

SUMMARY OF 2001-2002 ACTIVITIES

The following is a brief summary of H-GAC’s efforts towards implementation of Goals and Action Recommendations for the years 2001-2002. The different types of environmental activities appear in parentheses. (PR/NPS = polluted runoff/nonpoint sources; PS = point sources; FPM = floodplain management; WS = water supply; HP = habitat protection; MBU = multiple beneficial uses) • Provided technical assistance to local governments on environmental issues including

wastewater collection/treatment and on-site wastewater disposal options. (PS, PR/NPS)

• Maintained the Natural Resources Advisory Committee as a regional issues forum and initiated panel discussions of topical situations as part of meeting format. (PR/NPS, PS, FPM, HP)

• Maintained the Clean Rivers Program Steering Committee as a regional water quality forum among local governments, resource agencies, business and industry, agriculture and forestry interests, conservation groups, and other basin interests. (PR/NPS, PS, HP)

• Continued participation in the Armand Bayou Watershed Working Group to address TMDL-related and other water quality/habitat issues in the watershed.

• Conducted public participation activities with TNRCC and local partners for watershed stakeholder groups to participate in TMDL studies of dioxin and bacteria.

• Conducted workshops to familiarize local governments with the Phase II Storm Water Permit Program, bringing together speakers from the private sector and state and local agencies.


• Conducted six (6) training sessions and three (3) quality control sessions for Texas Watch water quality monitoring volunteers. (PS)

• Continued efforts to encourage the use by local governments of the Non point Source Book prepared by the Texas Public Works Association. (PR/NPS)

• Documented for the Galveston Bay Estuary Program various H-GAC activities under CRP which are helping to implement action recommendations in the Galveston Bay Plan (including monitoring coordination, data access, special studies of bay segments and tributaries, and public outreach efforts.) (PR/NPS)

• Maintained the Clean Rivers Program Regional Monitoring Group to coordinate federal, state, local and volunteer monitoring activities and develop means for exchanging and archiving water data through a “regional clearinghouse” approach. (PR/NPS, PS, HP)

• Maintained coordination with major water quality and environmental programs including Galveston Bay Estuary Program and Marine Extension Service, Texas Coastal Management Program, City of Houston Brownfields Project, Houston Environmental Foresight, Trans-Texas Program, and Senate Bill 1 Regional Water Planning Program. (PR/NPS, PS, HP, MBU)

• Continued to add to the H-GAC regional clearinghouse for water quality data and information. (PR/NPS, PS)

• Continued to apply "user-friendly" software applications that will make water quality and other environmental data more accessible by linking GIS technology with the Internet. (PR/NPS, PS)

• Reviewed and resolved inconsistencies between project application data and wasteload forecasts for four wastewater collection/treatment projects. (PS)

• Continue to provide assistance upon request to community groups and other volunteers who are arranging local pollution prevention activities. (NPS)

• Continued participation in annual Bay Day (2000 & 2001) as a public education activity. Demonstrated watershed puzzle and nonpoint source pollution models.

• Continued to work with local partners to identify the boundaries of selected watersheds. Signs have been placed along roadways at the boundaries of the Dickinson Bayou, Buffalo Bayou, Greens Bayou and White Oak Bayou Watersheds.

• Continued studies of Christmas Bay, Greens Bayou, and the Panther Branch tributary to Spring Creek, leveraging significant matching dollars from H-GAC's local and federal project partners. (PR/NPS, PS)


• Continued a successful project in the Clear Creek watershed with the Galveston County Health District to track down and eliminate illicit sewer connections and other sources of raw sewage by working with local cities and utility districts. (PR/NPS, PS)

• Completed a public education video on bacteria-related public health concerns related to contact recreation area waterways (swimming, skiing, etc.). (PR/NPS, PS)

• Updated multi-agency Regional Quality Assurance Project Plan for monitoring under the Clean Rivers Program. (PR/NPS, PS, HP)

• Completed targeted monitoring activities to address permitting and water quality standards issues (including a follow-up round of “ultra-clean” trace metals sampling in the Houston Ship Channel). (PS)

• Continued assessment of the biological health of area waterways. (WS, HP)

• Continued a special project in the Dickinson and Armand Bayou Watersheds with local partners to investigate the interconnectedness of wetlands with water quality and aquatic health for tidally influenced segments on the State List of Impaired Waters (303)(d) list. The study is also providing the TNRCC with data required conducting a Use Attainability Analysis. (PR/NPS, HP)

• Completed a special project in Whiteoak and Buffalo Bayou Watersheds to use molecular biology to separate anthropogenically induced and natural strains of E. coli. (PR/NPS)

• Initiated Aquatic Life Use study in 11 tributaries of the Houston Ship Channel to determine if aquatic life use impairment listing is accurate.

• Completed audit of regional monitoring personnel to ensure requirements of Regional QAPP are being met.

• Participating in Wasteload Evaluation Study of the Houston Ship Channel. Overseeing collection and analysis of sediment data for project.

• Continued special study in Texas City Ship Channel to verify low Dissolved Oxygen concentrations.

• Continued to develop watershed delineation capabilities within Geographical Information System. (PR/NPS, PS, HP, MBU)

• Continued GPS verification of selected items (solid waste facilities, water quality monitoring sites) to improve accuracy of GIS coverage. (PR/NPS, PS, HP, MBU)


• Completed domestic wasteload estimates and forecasts for the San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal Basin; continued GIS automation of this effort. (PS)

• Continued Hydrologic feature correction of water bodies within the H-GAC region using Digital Ortho Quarter Quads (DOQQs). (NPS/PS/HP/FPM)

• Worked with the City of Seabrook to prepare a Wetlands Conservation Plan and prepare the City to pursue funding for various wetland conservation and reclamation projects. (NPS; FPM; HP, MBU).

• Conducted two (2) local government workshops to encourage communities to

conserve wetlands and open space. As a result, the City of Huntsville and the Legacy Land Trust are partnering on a project.


DOMESTIC WASTELOAD FORECASTS FOR THE SAN JACINTO-BRAZOS COASTAL BASIN

Overview

‘Domestic’ wastewater is wastewater generated by people, collected by sanitary sewer systems, treated at wastewater treatment plants (WWTP), and discharged into waterways. The amount of pollutants discharged by each WWTP is called a ‘wasteload’. The Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission (TNRCC) is the state agency that regulates wasteloads through wastewater discharge permits.

TNRCC conducts domestic wasteload evaluations to assess water quality and help determine what discharge permit limits would be needed to meet state surface water quality standards. Part of the wasteload evaluation is a look at future wasteloads through water quality simulation models. This is an aid to planning facilities needs because TNRCC has a rule that when a WWTP reaches 75% of its design capacity, it should begin planning to determine if an expansion or new facilities will be needed. If a WWTP reaches 90% capacity it needs to be in the construction phase or have plans to join a regional system. H-GAC, through its water quality management program, assists TNRCC by forecasting wasteloads for wastewater treatment service areas in the 13-county H-GAC region. The current effort encompasses the San Jacinto – Brazos Coastal Basin (map). Included in this Coastal Basin are both urbanized (Clear Lake watershed) and rural (Christmas Bay watershed) areas. There are twenty-two (22) water quality segments in the Basin study area (Table 1) contained in parts of Brazoria, Galveston, Fort Bend and Harris Counties. Upper Galveston Bay (Segment 2421) is included because of its proximity and functional relationship to other segments and the cities of Morgan’s Point, La Porte and Seabrook (Figure 2).

TABLE 1

San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal Basin Wasteload Stream Segments ___________________________________________

Stream Segment

____________________________________________________

Clear Creek Tidal 1101 Clear Creak Above Tidal 1102 Dickinson Bayou Tidal 1103 Dickinson Bayou Above Tidal 1104 Bastrop Bayou Tidal 1105 Chocolate Bayou Tidal 1107 Chocolate Bayou Above Tidal 1108 Oyster Creek Tidal 1109 Oyster Creek Above Tidal 1110 Old Brazos River Channel 1111 Armand Bayou 1113 Upper Galveston Bay 2421


West (Galveston) Bay 2424 Clear Lake 2425 Moses Lake 2431 Chocolate Bay 2432 Bastrop Bay 2433 Christmas Bay 2434 Drum Bay 2435 Texas Ship Channel 2437 Bayport Channel 2438 Lower Galveston Bay 2439

Findings There is information that can be gleaned from the wasteload evaluation study valuable to those responsible for water quality management. This information includes: density of population centers; fastest growing areas in numbers of people and rate of growth; wastewater treatment plants (WWTP) that need to begin engineering studies or construction of new facilities; and more. Key findings from this study are:

1. Approximately fifty percent (50%) of the San Jacinto – Brazos Coastal Basin (SJB) population resides in the Clear Creek and Armand Bayou watersheds. These watersheds contribute eighty percent (80%) of the basin population and wastewater flow. (Table 2, at the end of the Wasteload discussion section)

2. The fastest growing areas of the SJB basin are in Northern Brazoria County, Northern and Eastern Galveston County, and Southeastern Fort Bend County. (Table 3, at the end of the Wasteload Discussion section)

3. By the year 2005 nine (9) facilities will need to begin engineering planning activities, one (1) will need to begin construction, and two (2) will need to have facilities completed. (Table 3)

4. Eight (8) of the twenty two (22) water quality segments in the basin receive the most significant wasteloads. (Table 2)

5. Regionalization of wastewater collection and treatment is happening in the SJB basin. Participants in regionalization include the Cities of Friendswood, League City, Houston, and Pearland. Also, Brazoria County MUD 1 and Clear Lake City Water Authority practice regionalization. (Table 2)

1017

1109

1110

1102

1101

1113

1104 1103

1108

1107

1105

24392431

2437

2424

2432

2433

2434

2435

2438

2425

1111

2421

1017

1109

1110

1102

1101

1113

1104 1103

1108

1107

1105

24392431

2437

2424

2432

2433

2434

2435

2438

2425

1111

2421

Map Source: H-GAC, 2002Data Source: TNRCC, 1999

HARRIS COUNTY

BRAZORIACOUNTY

MATAGORDACOUNTY

LIBERTYCOUNTY

WHARTONCOUNTY

COLORADOCOUNTY

GRIMESCOUNTY

WALKERCOUNTY

MONTGOMERYCOUNTY

FORT BENDCOUNTY

CHAMBERSCOUNTY

GALVESTONCOUNTY

AUSTINCOUNTY

WALLERCOUNTY

SAN JACINTOCOUNTY

STREAM, RESERVOIR AND BAYSEGMENTS FOR

SAN JACINTO-BRAZOS COASTAL BASIN

STREAM, RESERVOIR AND BAYSEGMENTS FOR

SAN JACINTO-BRAZOS COASTAL BASIN

1101 Clear Creek Tidal1102 Clear Creek1103 Dickinson Bayou Tidal1104 Dickinson Bayou1105 Bastrop Bayou1107 Chocolate Bayou Tidal1108 Chocolate Bayou1109 Oyster Creek Tidal1110 Oyster Creek1111 Old Brazos River Channel1113 Armand Bayou2421 Upper Galveston Bay2424 West Bay2425 Clear Lake2431 Moses Lake2432 Chocolate Bay2433 Bastrop Bay2434 Christmas Bay2435 Drum Bay2437 Texas City Ship Channel2438 Bayport Channel2439 Lower Galveston Bay

0000


Discussion Data Acquisition

Each applicant for a new wastewater discharge (or major amendment to an existing permit) is required by TNRCC to submit a map of the wastewater service area for review during the permit approval process. Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTP) with permits are required to supply flow and wastewater constituent data to TNRCC in the form of data monitoring reports (DMR). The maps and data are critical to forecasting wasteloads. Unfortunately, data acquisition has not been a smooth process because of computer software problems and an apparent lack of a central repository for service area maps. TNRCC attempted to solve the software problems by transferring data to the EPA’s data management system. However, the result was incompatible data formats and the inability to query the DMR database electronically. Both EPA and TNRCC anticipate updated software to be in place, but not before the year 2004.

The only path left to H-GAC was to retrieve the data directly from discharge permit holders, manipulate the data by hand, and enter it into H-GAC’s Geographic Information System (GIS). The permit holders were very cooperative providing both data and maps to H-GAC. This was somewhat of a burden for them as it meant duplicating data they already had submitted to TNRCC.

This hands-on process was not successful with private domestic dischargers. Private domestic discharges typically represent commercial centers, mobile home parks and recreation areas. These entities change hands frequently, making it extremely difficult to identify the responsible party from which to obtain Data Monitoring Reports. So far, H-GAC has been unable to obtain a master list of these discharges for the San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal Basin. However, while these discharges do contribute to the total wasteload of the basin, their contribution is relatively small when compared with the municipal domestic discharges. When H-GAC is able to obtain the necessary information on private domestic discharges, they will be added to the wasteload forecast report.

H-GAC’s Natural Resources Advisory Committee (NRAC), through its Point Source Subcommittee, worked with H-GAC staff to try and resolve the data acquisition problems. In order for H-GAC to have access to the information and data needed to perform wasteload forecasting, the NRAC agreed that the following recommendations be submitted to TNRCC:

1. Applications for new permits or major amendments not be considered administratively complete until the applicant has submitted service area boundary maps both to TNRCC and H-GAC.


2. Until such time as TNRCC and EPA resolve data management problems, copies of permit holders’ data monitoring reports are submitted to H-GAC when they are submitted to TNRCC.

Regionalization

Regionalization is a general concept that encourages the orderly, local planning of wastewater treatment facilities and service areas. The goal of regionalization is to limit the number of point source discharges and resultant pollutant loads in waterways through the use of larger, more efficient wastewater treatment plants. H-GAC’s current position of supporting regional wastewater collection and treatment is optimistic in that its basic premise assumes wastewater systems and services can be planned across political boundaries in the absence of a strong regional authority and financial incentives.

Why are larger regional wastewater treatment plants (WWTP), typically with flows greater than 3.0 million gallons per day (MGD) important to the region’s water quality? First, they provide an economy of scale over small and intermediate plants. Smaller plants are typically unmanned, which leads to a critical lack of responsiveness when operational problems arise. During high flows (storm events) these smaller plants are more susceptible to overloading and may have to “pass through” untreated wastewater to receiving water bodies. With a larger service area and customer base, a regional WWTP has the financial resources to provide efficient operations/management and minimize the effects of upsets and high-flow conditions that would overload a smaller plant.

Regionalization can occur in two ways – planned or retroactive. Planned regionalization occurs prior to development of an area and involves agreements and contracts between political subdivisions, businesses, and property owners. This method allows for pre-development planning and proper sizing of treatment facilities and sites, collection/ conveyance systems, and service areas. This can be a valuable development tool to promote sustained growth.

Retroactive regionalization is the consolidation of interim/small plants at a later date in the development of an area. This type of regionalization is the prevalent type in the San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal Basin. The major disadvantage of using retroactive regionalization to greatly enhance water quality, is the expense of the process which might be cost-prohibitive because of physical barriers, lack of planning, and costly diversion infrastructure such as pump stations and force mains.

As noted in Finding #5, a number of communities in the Basin are actively involved in regionalization. They have done so voluntarily because that is the current policy of the TNRCC. Regardless of the type of regionalization present in the Basin, water quality improvements can be achieved and H-GAC will continue to support regionalization – regional plants offer a better option for wastewater treatment needs of the region.


For more details on regionalization, contact Carl Masterson ([email protected]) or Kathleen Ramsey, Ph.D. ([email protected]) of H-GAC for a copy of H-GAC’s Regionalization White Paper.

Wasteload Forecasting Key factors in projecting future wasteload forecasts from a particular domestic municipal service area are (1) the current population of the area, (2) the existing rate of waste generation, measured in gallons per capita per day (GPCD), and (3) the compound annual growth rate (CAGR) for the service area. Other important considerations are the current flow discharge volume from the treatment plant, measured in millions of gallons per day (MGD), permit limitations for the various constituents (e.g., BOD, CBOD5, TSS and NH3-N in mg/l), set by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, and the amount of each constituent actually discharged, measured in lb./day. Using this information, the following items can be projected for future years; in this case five-year intervals from 2000 to 2020:

• Future service area population • Future discharge flow, measured in MGD, for the service area's

treatment plant • Future theoretical maximum design levels of regulated constituents

(BOD5, TSS, NH3-N and CBOD5) in wastewater treatment plant effluent, measured in pounds per day (lb. /day)

Wasteload forecasts are presented in Table 2 (found at the end of the Discussion section). These wasteload forecasts are based on permitted flows and constituents. In Table 4 (found at the end of the Discussion section), forecasts presented are based on current actual discharge records submitted by dischargers to the TNRCC. Finally, Table 5 shows a comparison of the forecast values prepared in 1992, 1995 and 1998) versus the actual values for the year 2000 in the Clear Lake watershed and Surrounding Area. A list of anachronyms used in this report is found in Appendix I. A detailed discussion of the methodology – general considerations, requirements, general assumptions and limitations, procedures plus example, and method limitation - is found in Appendix. II. The finally, Appendix III - “How Can I Use Wasteloads?”- is an analysis of wasteload forecasts, including, water quality management planning triggers (plant construction and maintenance), compound annual growth rates, a comparison of permit versus actual value modeling, and forecast accuracy and applicability.

mailto:[email protected]


TABLE 2

San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal Basin: 2001 - 2002 Domestic Wasteload and Forecast (Keys for acronyms and notes are found at the bottom of page 6 of this table.)

PERMITTED 2000 2005 2010FLOW # GPCD* POP FLOW BOD 5** TSS** NH3-N** CBOD5** POP FLOW BOD 5 TSS NH3-N CBOD5 POP FLOW BOD 5 TSS NH3-N CBOD5

ENTITY PERMIT (mgd) (months) (mgd) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (mgd) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (mgd) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) STREAM SEGMENT 1101

FRIENDSWOOD, CITY OF 11571.001 9.2500 12 112 40,367 4.5027 NR 68.74 10.26 83.23 48,744 5.4370 NR 544.14 90.69 226.72 57,120 6.3714 NR 637.65 106.27 265.69(GCWDA Blackhawk Region) LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.003 0.6600 12 27 14,267 0.3830 NR 19.60 1.50 22.68 16,137 0.4332 NR 43.35 7.23 18.06 18,007 0.4834 NR 48.38 8.06 20.16

(Countryside) LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.005 6.0000 12 194 20,098 3.9000 NR 20.68 1.50 21.93 28,169 5.4662 NR 547.05 91.18 227.94 36,240 7.0323 NR 703.80 117.30 293.25

(Dallas-Salmon Plant)

NASSAU BAY, CITY OF 10526.001 1.3300 12 177 4,163 0.7370 NR 6.13 2.27 11.34 4,365 0.7727 NR 77.33 12.89 32.22 4,567 0.8084 NR 80.91 13.48 33.71

WEBSTER, CITY OF 10520.001 1.6500 8 186 5,730 1.0672 NR 15.11 2.10 19.87 6,158 1.1468 NR 114.77 19.13 47.82 6,585 1.2264 NR 122.74 20.46 51.14

TOTAL for Clear Creek Tidal 18.8900 696 84,625 10.5899 0.00 130.26 17.63 159.05 103,572 13.2560 0 1326.66 221.11 552.77 122,518 15.9220 0 1593.47 265.58 663.95

STREAM SEGMENT 1102

BC MUD 1 12332.001 1.0000 12 108 6,005 0.6500 NR 9.73 1.14 10.08 10,205 1.1046 NR 110.55 46.06 46.06 14,405 1.5592 NR 156.05 26.01 65.02(Southwyck + BC MUD 2)

BC MUD 2 12705.001 0.1000 WATER ONLY WW DIVERTED TO BC NO. 1

BC MUD 5 12295.001 0.7000 12 66 5,742 0.3813 NR 9.70 1.50 7.60 13,918 0.9242 NR 92.50 15.42 38.54 22,094 1.4672 NR 146.83 24.47 24.47(BC MUD 4 & 5)

BC MUD 6 13784.001 0.1000 12 81 1,274 0.1027 NR 4.56 0.55 2.70 3,060 0.2466 NR 24.68 4.11 10.28 4,845 0.3906 NR 39.09 6.51 16.29 (divert to BC MUD 1 in 2001)

BC MUD 19 14135.001 0.2250 OPENNED IN JULY 2001

HC WCID 89 12939.001 0.1000 12 59 931 0.0551 NR 2.99 0.88 1.63 947 0.0561 NR 5.61 0.94 2.34 964 0.0570 NR 5.71 0.95 2.34(Morningside)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.020 1.4000 DIVERT TO SE(Gulf Meadows- Diverted in 1998)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.075 6.1400 12 89 23,220 2.0696 NR 42.00 15.60 53.20 23,117 2.0604 NR 206.20 34.37 85.92 23,013 2.0512 NR 205.28 34.21 85.53(Sagemont)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.079 5.3300 8 103 26,069 2.6729 NR 54.50 12.54 51.88 28,779 2.9507 NR 295.31 49.22 123.04 31,488 3.2285 NR 323.11 53.85 134.63(Southeast + Gulf Meadow) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.002 2.2500 12 135 7,724 1.0455 NR 24.35 1.65 23.61 9,776 1.3232 NR 132.42 22.07 55.18 11,827 1.6009 NR 160.22 26.70 66.76(Barry Rose Plant No. 2) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.003 2.5000 12 60 13,895 0.8397 NR 88.37 7.10 38.02 17,994 1.0874 NR 108.83 18.14 45.35 22,094 1.3352 NR 133.62 133.62 55.68(Longwood Plant No. 3) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.005 0.5000 INACTIVE INACTIVE INACTIVE

(Coward Creek Plant) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.006 0.0000 INACTIVE INACTIVE INACTIVE

(Garden Road Plant) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.007 2.0000 12 44 21,325 0.9342 NR 34.77 6.24 35.19 31,267 1.3697 NR 137.08 22.85 57.12 41,209 1.8053 NR 180.67 30.11 75.28

(S.W. Environ)PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.008 0.2500 UNDER CONSTRUCTION FEBRUARY 2002 - Population in 2000 is 834

(Far Northwest)PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.009 0.3700 INACTIVE INACTIVE INACTIVE

(Cullen)TOTAL for Clear Creek Above-Tidal 22.9650 746 106,185 8.7510 0.00 270.97 47.20 223.91 139,062 11.1230 0.00 1113.19 213.17 463.83 171,938 13.4950 0 1350.58 336.45 525.99

STREAM SEGMENT 1103

GC WCID 1 10173.001 3.6000 12 125 19,395 2.4226 NR 122.45 23.41 99.33 20,911 2.6120 NR 326.76 43.57 217.84 22,428 2.8014 NR 350.45 46.73 233.64(Dickenson, City of)

LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.007 0.1500 12 8 8,833 0.0750 NR 47.54 5.59 21.43 12,379 0.1051 NR 13.15 2.63 8.77 15,925 0.1352 NR 16.92 3.38 11.28(formerly Permit No. 11169.01 BayRidge closed 2001)

TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Tidal 3.7500 133 28,228 2.4976 0.00 169.99 29.00 120.76 33,290 2.7171 0 339.91 46.20 226.61 38,352 2.9366 0 367.37 50.11 244.91

TABLE 2



ENTITY PERMIT (mgd) (months) (mgd) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (mgd) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (mgd) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day)

STREAM SEGMENT 1104

FRIENDSWOOD, CITY OF 10175.003 0.4000 DIVERT TO SEGMENT 1101.00 PERMIT (BLKHAWK) IN 1995 (Towers Estate)

TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Above-Tidal 0.4000 0.00 0 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

STREAM SEGMENT 1105

ANGLETON, CITY OF 10548.002 0.2500 12 310 632 0.1958 4.06 13.93 NR NR 667 0.2065 17.22 25.83 NR NR 701 0.2172 18.11 27.17 NR NR(Brush Bayou Pit)

DANBURY, CITY OF 10158.001 0.5040 12 122 1,576 0.1919 NR 7.59 0.80 3.34 1,662 0.2023 0.00 25.31 1,748 0.2128 NR 21.30 5.32 17.75(Towers Estate)

TOTAL for Bastrop Bayou Tidal 0.7540 432 2208 0.3877 4.06 21.52 0.80 3.34 2,328 0.4088 17.22 51.14 0 0 2449 0.4300 18.11 48.46 5.32 17.75

STREAM SEGMENT 1107

MANVEL, CITY OF 11251.001 0.0300 8 85 146 0.0124 1.03 2.11 NR 334 0.0284 3.55 2.37 523 0.0444 5.56 3.70 NR NR

TOTAL for Chocolate Bayou Tidal 0.0300 84.93 146 0.0124 1.03 2.11 0.00 0.00 334 0.0284 3.55 2.37 0 0 523 0.0444 5.56 3.70 0 0

STREAM SEGMENT 1108

ARCOLA, CITY OF 13367.001 0.1250 12 71 1,008 0.0716 NA 3.00 0.27 1.09 1,295 0.0920 0 11.50 2.30 7.67 1,581 0.1123 NR 14.05 2.81 9.37

MANVEL, CITY OF 13872.001 0.1000 12 158 146 0.0231 0.69 1.36 NR NR 162 0.0256 4.27 4.27 NR NR 178 0.0281 4.69 4.69 NR NR

OAK MANOR MUD 10700.001 0.0800 12 109 335 0.0366 NR 1.98 0.03 2.12 401 0.0438 0.00 0.66 NR NR 468 0.0511 NR 6.39 1.28 4.26

TOTAL for Chocolate Bayou Above Tidal 0.3050 338.50 1489 0.1313 0.69 6.34 0.30 3.21 1,858 0.1614 4.27 16.43 2.30 7.67 2226 0.1915 13.52 7.66 4.09 13.63

STREAM SEGMENT 1109

COMMODORE COVE ID 10798.001 0.0600 11 155 237 0.0367 1.44 4.55 NR NR 278 0.0430 7.18 7.18 NR NR 318 0.0493 8.22 8.22 NR NR

TOTAL for Oyster Creek Tidal 0.0600 155.00 237 0.0367 1.44 4.55 0.00 0.00 278 0.0402 6.71 6.71 0.00 0.00 2987 0.0437 7.28 7.28 0.00 0.00

STREAM SEGMENT 1110

ANGLETON, CITY OF 10548.001 3.6000 12 61 17,501 1.0600 NR 57.17 9.45 25.30 18,882 1.1436 NR 143.07 28.61 95.38 20,263 1.2273 NR 153.53 30.71 102.36(Oyster Creek)

FBCMUD No. 23 11999.001 0.2500 12 80 2,001 0.1593 NR 12.93 0.90 5.35 2,570 0.2046 NR 25.59 5.12 17.06 3,139 0.2499 NR 31.26 6.25 20.84

FBCMUD Nos. 47,48,60 12701.001 0.3500 12 125 1,155 0.1446 NR 5.93 0.42 2.46 1,458 0.1826 NR 22.84 4.57 15.23 1,762 0.2205 NR 27.59 5.52 18.39 (Vicksberg Joint Powers)SIENNA PLANTATION 13854.001 0.2500 12 135 1,042 0.1409 NR 3.52 0.41 2.55 1,338 0.1810 NR 22.64 5.53 20.84 1,635 0.2210 NR 27.65 5.53 18.43

MUD No. 2 & 3TOTAL for Oyster Creek Above Tidal 4.4500 400.59 21,699 1.5048 0.00 79.55 11.18 35.66 24,248 1.7117 0 214.14 43.83 148.51 26,798 1.9187 0 240.03 48.01 160.02

STREAM SEGMENT 1111

CLUTE, CITY OF 10044.001 4.0000 12 163 12,826 2.0890 NR 99.56 31.95 110.24 13,574 2.2108 NR 276.57 55.31 184.38 14,322 2.3327 NR 291.82 58.36 194.54(Brazos River Auth.+ Richwood)

OYSTER CREEK, CITY 11837.001 0.5000 12 149 1,439 0.2140 5.50 17.66 NR NR 1,703 0.2533 42.24 42.24 NR NR 1,967 0.2925 48.79 48.79 NR NR(plus Surfside Beach)

TOTAL For Old Brazos River Channel 4.5000 312 14,265 2.3030 5.50 117.22 31.95 110.24 15,277 2.4641 42.24 318.82 55.31 184.38 16,289 2.6252 48.79 340.61 58.36 194.54

TABLE 2




STREAM SEGMENT 1113

CLEAR LAKE CITY W.A. 10539.001 9.0000 12 36 59643 2.1477 NR 81.14 4.41 58.45 93,835 3.3789 NR 338.16 817.70 140.90 128,028 4.6102 NR 461.39 76.90 192.24(Clear Lake)

CLEAR LAKE CITY W.A. 10106.001 0.0000 OUT OF SERVICE DIVERT TO MAIN PLANT(Diverted in 1995)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.136 5.0000 12 71 14983 1.0596 NR 25.00 6.14 23.60 18,318 1.2954 NR 129.65 21.61 54.02 21,652 1.5312 NR 153.25 25.54 63.85(Metro Central)

TOTAL for Armand Bayou 14.0000 107 74,626 3.2073 0.00 106.14 10.55 82.05 112,153 4.6744 0.00 467.81 839.31 194.92 149680 6.1414 0.00 614.63 102.44 256.10

STREAM SEGMENT 2424

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.002 3.7500 12 157 14,190 2.2222 46.99 135.64 NR NR 16,280 2.5495 425.25 425.25 NR NR 18,370 2.8767 479.84 479.84 NR NR(Airport WWTP)

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.005 0.2500 12 147 491 0.0724 1.77 3.43 NR NR 616 0.0908 15.15 15.15 NR NR 741 0.1093 18.23 18.23 NR NR(Terramar Beach WWTP)

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.006 0.1500 HOLDING TANK ONLY TRANSPORT TERRAMAR BEACH (Point San Luis)

GCFWSD No. 6 10879.001 0.2500 13 124 1,016 0.1262 1.30 2.39 NR NR 1,126 0.1398 23.32 23.32 NR NR 1,235 0.1534 25.59 25.59 NR NR(Tiki Island)

GCMUD No. 1 11477.001 0.3000 POPULATION IN 2000 WAS 653(Pirates Beach) Recycle to Golf ClubGCMUD No. 12 10435.001 NOT IN SERVICE

GCMUD No. 12 10435.002 0.4000 12 174 2,087 0.3640 60.85 60.85 NR NR 2,102 0.3666 61.14 61.14 NR NR 2,117 0.3691 61.57 61.57 NR NR(Bayou Vista)

GCWCID No. 8 10174.001 1.5000 12 140 2,962 0.4136 NR 9.22 0.43 6.33 3,273 0.4571 NR 57.18 11.44 38.12 3,585 0.5005 NR 62.62 12.52 41.74(Santa Fe)

HITCHCOCK, CITY OF 10690.001 3.0000 12 184 5,459 1.0071 NR 69.25 6.76 52.62 5,892 1.0870 NR 181.32 72.53 181.32 6,326 1.1670 0.00 194.65 77.86 194.65

JAMAICA BEACH, CITY 11033.001 0.1800 12 116 1,074 0.1244 5.68 9.09 NR NR 1,133 0.1312 21.88 21.88 0.00 0.00 1,191 0.1380 23.01 23.01 0.00 0.00

LA MARQUE, CITY OF 10410.001 0.0000 NO LONGER IN SERVICE

LA MARQUE, CITY OF 10410.003 3.0000 11 162 13,573 2.2000 NR 108.97 6.17 50.62 14,018 2.2722 0.00 379.00 56.85 379.00 14,464 2.3443 0.00 391.04 391.04 391.04(Westside)

TREASURE ISLAND UD 13816.001 0.0000 PLANT NEVER CONSTRUC TED

TOTAL for West (Galveston) Bay 12.7800 1,205 40,852 6.5299 116.59 398.84 13.36 109.57 44,439 7.0941 546.74 1,164.24 140.81 598.43 48,027 7.6583 608.23 1,256.53 481.42 627.43

STREAM SEGMENT 2421

BACLIFF MUD 10627.001 1.0300 12 98 5,320 0.5198 20.70 20.13 NR NR 6,123 0.5983 99.79 99.79 NR NR 6,926 0.6767 112.88 112.88 NR NR

BAYVIEW MUD 10770.001 0.2500 12 68 1,420 0.0963 2.08 1.87 NR NR 1,634 0.1108 18.49 18.49 NR NR 1,849 0.1254 20.91 20.91 NR NR

GALVESTON CO. WCID 12 12039.001 0.5000 12 106 3,430 0.3648 NR 11.71 2.37 8.27 4,667 0.4964 NR 82.79 12.42 82.79 5,904 0.6279 NR 104.74 15.71 104.74 (Kemah)

LA PORTE, CITY OF 10206.001 7.5600 12 109 31,279 3.4200 NR 125.69 8.30 71.75 32,801 3.5864 NR 448.66 89.73 299.11 34,324 3.7529 NR 469.49 93.90 312.99

SAN LEON MUD 11546.001 0.9500 12 126 4,403 0.5528 20.48 20.71 NR NR 5,068 0.6363 106.13 106.13 NR NR 5,733 0.7197 120.05 120.05 NR NR

SEABROOK, CITY OF 10671.001 2.5000 12 91 9,443 0.8618 31.33 50.16 NR NR 10,767 0.9826 163.90 163.90 NR NR 12,091 1.1035 184.06 184.06 NR NR

TOTAL for Upper Galveston Bay 12.7900 598 55,295 4.2818 31.33 175.85 10.67 80.02 61,060 6.4108 388.31 919.76 102.15 381.90 66,826 7.0061 437.89 1012.12 109.61 417.73

TABLE 2




STREAM SEGMENT 2425

HC WCID 50 10243.001 0.5400 12 87 2,969 0.2597 NR 7.28 1.80 10.26 3,385 0.2961 0.00 29.63 4.94 12.35 3,801 0.3325 0.00 33.27 5.55 13.86(El Lago Plant)HC WCID 75 10106.001 0.1500 TO CLEAR LAKE WATER AUTHORITY 1993

TOTAL for Clear Lake 0.6900 87 2,969 0.2597 0.00 7.28 1.80 10.26 3,385 0 0 29.63 4.94 12.35 3,801 0.3325 0 33.27 5.55 13.86

STREAM SEGMENT 2427

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for San Jacinto Bay

STREAM SEGMENT 2431

TEXAS CITY, CITY OF 10375.001 12.4000 12 132 42,037 5.5664 153.49 187.43 NR NR 47,241 6.2554 1043.41 1043.41 NR NR 52,444 6.9445 1158.34 1158.34 NR NR

TOTAL for Moses Lake 12.4000 132 42,037 5.5664 153.49 187.43 0.00 0.00 0 6.2554 1043.41 1043.41 0.00 0.00 52,444 6.9445 1158.34 1158.34 0.00 0.00

STREAM SEGMENT 2432

ALVIN, CITY OF 10005.001 0.5000 12 107 21,668 2.3130 2.85 3.77 0.20 NR 24,931 2.6613 443.90 443.90 0.00 NR 28,194 3.0096 502.00 502.00 NR NR

HILLCREST VILLAGE 10420.001 0.1500 12 42 569 0.0238 0.39 0.79 NR NR 631 0.0264 4.40 4.40 NR NR 693 0.0290 4.83 4.83 NR NRCITY OF

TOTAL for Chocolate Bay 0.6500 149 22,237 2.3368 3.24 4.56 0.00 0.00 25,562 2.6877 448.30 448.30 0 0 28,886 3.0385 506.83 506.83 0.00 0

STREAM SEGMENT 2433

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for Bastrop Bay

STREAM SEGMENT 2434

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for Christmas Bay

STREAM SEGMENT 2435

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for Drum Bay

STREAM SEGMENT 2437

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for Texas City Ship Channel

STREAM SEGMENT 2436

MORGANS POINT, CITY OF 10779.001 0.2000 12 182 336 0.0637 NR 2.03 0.12 1.08 328 0.0597 0 7.46 2.49 4.97 320 0.0581 0.00 7.27 2.42 4.85

TOTAL for Barbours Cut 12 182 336 0.0637 0.00 2.03 0.12 1.08 328 0.0597 0 7.46 2.49 4.97 319.5 0.0581 0.00 7.27 2.42 4.85

TABLE 2




STREAM SEGMENTS 2438

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for Bayport Channel

STREAM SEGMENT 2439

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.001 10.0000 12 168 40,079 6.7168 144.89 224.88 NR NR 40,056 6.7129 1119.71 1119.71 NR NR 40,032 6.7089 1119.05 1119.05 NR NR(Main WWTP)

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.004 0.0050 City Park(Seawolf Park)

TOTAL for Lower Galveston Bay 10.0050 168 40,079 6.7168 144.89 224.88 0.00 0.00 40,056 6.7129 1119.71 1119.71 0.00 0.00 40,032 6.7089 1119.05 1119.05 0.00 0.00

GRAND TOTAL 119.4190 5924.55 537,513 55.1768 462.26 1,909.52 174.56 939.15 607,228 66.1016 3,620.47 8,589.69 1,671.62 2,776.34 774,093 75.4953 3,923.60 9,667.21 1,469.35 3,140.75

"#" = number of months of self-reporting data available for the year 2000 GPCD = gallons per capita per day POP = population; Year 2000 figures are from Census 1990 data unless otherwise noted. In some cases population information was obtained by survey of permit holders in the year 2000. These are indicated with an "S" following their permit number. Service area boundaries used in the population projections are from 1991 unless otherwise indicated FLOW = discharge measured in million gallons per day BOD 5 = biochemical oxygen demand TSS = total suspended solid NH3-N = ammonia nitrogen CBOD5 = carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand, 5 day NR = Not Required to Report Parameter

Data Source: Self-reporting data submitted by permitted dischargers to the TNRCC or H-GAC. The data presented in the annual mean of monthly reported levels for 2000.

DISCLAIMERS: 1) The information and data presented in this table is based on information submitted to H-GAC. Accuracy is not independently varifiable and may not accuratly reflect total flows,pollutant loadings, or population figures for the watershed basin or the individual stream segments for the current year, or future years.

2) Special handling of Service Area Boundaries was required in three cases:

Case 1: The City of Manvel was unable to submit SA boundary data for its two treatment plants prior to completion of the draft report. Data will be included in the final report. In the draft, the city limits were used as the service area boundary. Population was apportitioned to each permit based on RAZ data.

Case 2: We we unable to enter electronic AutoCAD data into our GIS system for the City of Alvin. We used the city limits as the service area boundary for the permit.

Case 3: Clear Lake City Water Authority Service Area Boundary was included in the AutoCAD service area provided for the City of Houston Metro Central Plant. We excluded the Clear Lake service area from Houston Metro Central.

TABLE 2


Continued from previous page 2015 2020 PERMITTED VALUES NO. POPULATION

POP FLOW BOD 5 TSS NH3-N CBOD5 POP FLOW BOD 5 TSS NH3-N CBOD5 BOD5 TSS NH3-N CBOD 5 CAGR 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

ENTITY PERMIT (mgd) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (mgd) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) POLYGONS (entered)

STREAM SEGMENT 1101

FRIENDSWOOD, CITY OF 11571.001 65,497 7.3057 NR 731.16 731.16 304.65 73,873 8.2401 NR 824.67 137.44 343.61 12 2 5 6 40367 48744 57120 65497 73873(GCWDA Blackhawk Reg. Plant) LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.003 19,876 0.5336 NR 53.40 8.90 22.25 21,746 0.5838 NR 58.42 9.74 24.34 12 2 5 6 14267 16137 18007 19876 21746

(Country Plant) LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.005 44,311 8.5985 0.1728 860.54 143.42 358.56 52,382 10.1647 NR 1017.28 169.55 423.87 12 2 5 5 20098 28169 36240 44311 52382


NASSAU BAY, CITY OF 10526.001 4,768 0.8442 NR 84.48 14.08 35.20 4,970 0.8799 NR 88.06 14.68 36.69 12 2 5 1 4163 4365 4566.5 4768 4970

WEBSTER, CITY OF 10520.001 7,013 1.3061 NR 130.71 21.79 54.46 7,440 1.3857 NR 138.68 23.11 57.78 12 2 5 4 5730 6158 6585 7013 7440

TOTAL for Clear Creek Tidal 141,465 18.5881 0 1860.29 919.35 775.12 160,411 21.2541 0 2127.11 354.52 886.30 84625 103572 122518 141465 160411

STREAM SEGMENT 1102

BC MUD 1 12332.001 18,605 2.0139 NR 201.55 33.59 83.98 22,805 2.4685 NR 247.05 41.17 102.94 12 2 5 2 6005 10205 14405 18605 22805(Southwyck/Silver Lake)

BC MUD 2 12705.001 0 WATER ONLY

BC MUD 5 12295.001 30,270 2.0101 NR 201.17 33.53 83.82 38,446 2.5530 NR 96.33 42.58 106.46 12 2 5 2 5742 13918 22094 30270 38446(BC MUD 4 & 5)

BC MUD 6 13784.001 6,631 0.5345 NR 53.49 8.92 22.29 8,416 0.6784 NR 67.90 11.32 28.29 12 2 5 1 1274 3060 4845 6631 8416

BC MUD 19 14135.001 OPENED IN JULY 12 2 5 0 0 0 0 0

HC WCID 89 12939.001 980 0.0580 NR 5.80 0.97 2.42 996 0.0589 NR 5.90 0.98 2.42 12 2 5 1 931 947 963.5 980 996(Morningside)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.020 DIVERT TO SOUTHWEST 12 2 5 0 0 0 0 0(Gulf Meadows - Diverted to SE in 1998))

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.075 22,910 2.0419 NR 204.36 34.06 85.15 22,806 2.0327 NR 203.43 33.91 84.76 12 2 5 1 23220 23117 23013 22910 22806(Sagemont)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.079 34,198 3.5063 NR 350.91 58.49 146.21 36,907 3.7841 NR 378.72 63.12 157.80 12 2 5 8 26069 28779 31488 34198 36907(Southeast + Gulf Meadow) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.002 13,879 1.8786 NR 188.01 31.33 78.34 15,930 2.1562 NR 215.80 35.97 89.92 12 2 5 3 7724 9776 11827 13879 15930(Barry Rose Plant No. 2)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.003 26,193 1.5829 NR 158.41 26.40 66.01 30,292 1.8306 NR 183.21 30.53 76.34 12 2 5 3 13895 17994 22093.5 26193 30292(Longwood Plant No. 3)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.005 INACTIVE 12 2 5 0 0 0 0(Cowart Creek Plant)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.006 INACTIVE 12 2 5 0 0 0 0(Garden Road Plant)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.007 51,151 2.2408 NR 224.26 37.38 93.44 61,093 2.6763 NR 267.85 44.64 111.60 12 2 5 2 21325 31267 41209 51151 61093(SW Environmental)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.008 UNDER CONSTRUCTION 2002 12 2 5 0 0 0 0 0(Far Northwest)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.009 INACTIVE 12 2 5 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL for Clear Creek Above-Tidal 204,815 15.8669 0 1587.96 264.66 661.65 237,691 18.2389 0 1666.17 304.23 760.52 106185 139062 171938 204815 237691

STREAM SEGMENT 1103

GC WCID 1 10173.001 23,944 2.9908 NR 374.15 49.89 249.43 25,460 3.1802 NR 397.84 53.05 265.23 15 2 10 7 19395 20911 22427.5 23944 25460(Dickenson)

LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.007 19,470 0.1653 NR 20.68 4.14 13.79 23,016 0.1954 NR 24.45 4.89 16.30 15 3 10 3 8833 12379 15924.5 19470 23016(formerly Permit No. 11169.01)

TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Tidal 43,414 3.1561 0 394.83 54.02 263.22 48,476 3.3756 0 422.29 57.93 281.52 28228 33290 38352 43414 48476

TABLE 2





STREAM SEGMENT 1104

FRIENDSWOOD, CITY OF 10175.003 DIVERT TO BLACKHAWK REGIONAL PLANT 15 3 10

(Towers Estate) TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Above-Tidal

STREAM SEGMENT 1105

ANGLETON, CITY OF 10548.002 736 0.2279 19.00 28.51 NR NR 770 0.2386 19.90 29.84 NR NR 10 15 1 632 667 701 736 770

(Brush Bayou Pit) DANBURY, CITY OF 10158.001 1,833 0.2232 NR 0.00 5.59 18.62 1,919 0.2337 NR 29.23 5.85 19.49 15 3 10 1 1576 1662 1748 1833 1919

(Towers Estate) TOTAL for Bastrop Bayou Tidal 2569 0.4511 19.00 28.51 5.59 18.62 2,689 0.4722 19.90 59.07 5.85 19.49 2,208 2,328 2,449 2,569 2,689

STREAM SEGMENT 1107

MANVEL, CITY OF 11251.001 711 0.0604 7.56 5.04 NR 900 0.0764 9.56 6.37 NR 15 10 3 2 146 334 523 711 900

TOTAL for Chocolate Bayou Tidal 711 0.0604 7.56 5.04 0.00 0.00 900 0.0764 9.56 6.37 0.00 0.00 146 334 523 711 900

STREAM SEGMENT 1108

ARCOLA, CITY OF 13367.001 1868 0.1327 NR 16.59 3.32 11.06 2,154 0.1530 NR 19.14 3.83 12.76 15 3 10 1 1008 1295 1581 1868 2154

MANVEL, CITY OF 13872.001 194 0.0306 5.11 5.11 NR NR 209 0.0331 5.53 5.53 NR NR 20 20 3 146 162 178 194 209

OAK MANOR MUD 10700.001 534 0.0583 0.00 7.30 NR NR 600 0.0656 0.00 8.20 NR NR 15 3 10 1 335 401 467.5 534 600

TOTAL for Chocolate Bayou Above Tidal 2595 0.2216 5.11 29.00 3.32 11.06 2963 0.2517 5.53 32.87 3.83 12.76 1489 1858 2226 2595 2963

STREAM SEGMENT 1109

COMMODORE COVE ID 10798.001 359 0.0556 9.27 9.27 NR NR 399 0.0619 10.32 10.32 NR NR 20 20 1 237 278 318 359 399

TOTAL for Oyster Creek Tidal 359 0.0556 9.27 9.27 0.00 0.00 399 0.0619 10.32 10.32 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0

STREAM SEGMENT 1110

ANGLETON, CITY OF 10548.001 21,644 1.3109 NR 164.00 32.80 109.33 23,025 1.3946 NR 174.46 34.89 116.31 15 3 10 2 17501 18882 20263 21644 23025

(Oyster Creek) FBCMUD No. 23 11999.001 3,707 0.2951 NR 7.38 7.38 7.38 4,276 0.3404 NR 28.39 2.84 28.39 15 3 10 1 2001 2570 3138.5 3707 4276

FBCUMD Nos. 47,48,60 12701.001 2,065 0.2585 NR 32.34 6.47 21.56 2,368 0.2965 NR 37.09 7.42 24.72 15 3 10 1 1155 1458 1761.5 2065 2368

(Vicksberg Joint Powers)

SIENNA PLANTATION 13854.001 1,931 0.2611 NR 32.66 6.53 21.77 2,227 0.3011 NR 37.67 7.53 25.11 15 3 10 1 1042 1338 1634.5 1931 2227MUD No. 2 & 3

TOTAL for Oyster Creek Above Tidal 29,347 2.1256 0 236.38 53.18 160.05 31,896 2.3326 0 277.61 52.68 194.54 21699 24248 26798 29347 31896

STREAM SEGMENT 1111

CLUTE, CITY OF 10044.001 15,070 2.4545 NR 307.06 61.41 204.70 15,818 2.5763 NR 322.30 64.46 214.86 15 3 10 4 12826 13574 14322 15070 15818(Brazos River Auth. + Richwood) OYSTER CREEK, CITY 11837.001 2,231 0.3318 55.34 55.34 NR NR 2,495 0.3710 61.89 61.89 NR NR 20 20 1 1439 1703 1967 2231 2495

( plus Surfside) TOTAL For Old Brazos River Channel 17,301 2.7863 55.34 362.40 61.41 204.70 18,313 2.9474 61.89 384.19 64.46 214.86 14,265 15,277 16,289 17,301 18,313

TABLE 2





STREAM SEGMENT 1113

CLEAR LAKE CITY W.A. 10539.001 162,220 5.8414 NR 584.61 97.43 243.59 196,412 7.0726 NR 707.83 117.97 294.93 12 2 5 5 59643 93835 128028 162220 196412

(Clear Lake) CLEAR LAKE CITY W.A. 10106.001 OUT OF SERVICE 0 0 0 0

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.136 24,987 1.7670 NR 176.85 29.47 73.69 28,321 2.0029 NR 200.45 33.41 83.52 12 2 5 6 14983 18318 21652 24987 28321

(Metro Central) TOTAL for Armand Bayou 187,206 7.6085 0.00 761.45 126.91 317.27 224733 9.0755 0.00 507.38 151.38 378.45

14983 18318 21652 24987 28321STREAM SEGMENT 2424

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.002 20,459 3.2040 534.42 534.42 NR NR 22,549 3.5312 589.01 589.01 NR NR 20 20 2 14190 16280 18369.5 20459 22549

(Airport WWTP) GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.005 866 0.1277 21.30 21.30 NR NR 991 0.1461 24.37 24.37 NR NR 20 20 2 491 616 741 866 991

(Terramar Beach WWTP) GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.006 HOLDING TANK ONLY 10 15 0 0 0 0 0

(Point San Luis) GCFWSD No. 6 10879.001 1,345 0.1670 27.86 27.86 NR NR 1,454 0.1806 30.12 30.12 NR NR 20 20 3 1016 1126 1235 1345 1454

(Tiki Island) GCMUD No. 1 11477.001 RECYCLE TO GOLF COARSE 20 20 0 0 0 0 0(Pirates Beach)

GCMUD No. 12 10435.001 NOT IN SERVICE 0 0 0 0

GCMUD No. 12 10435.002 2,131 0.3717 62.00 62.00 NR NR 2,146 0.3743 62.43 62.43 NR NR 20 20 1 2087 2102 2116.5 2131 2146(Bayou Vista)

GCWCID No. 8 10174.001 3,896 0.5440 NR 68.05 13.61 45.37 4,207 0.5874 NR 73.49 14.70 48.99 15 3 10 1 2962 3273 3584.5 3896 4207(Santa Fe)

HITCHCOCK, CITY OF 10690.001 6,759 1.2469 NR 207.98 83.19 207.98 7,192 1.3268 0.00 221.31 88.52 221.31 20 8 20 1 5459 5892 6325.5 6759 7192

JAMAICA BEACH, CITY 11033.001 1,250 0.1447 24.14 24.14 0.00 0.00 1,308 0.1515 25.27 25.27 0.00 0.00 20 20 1 1074 1133 1191 1250 1308

LA MARQUE, CITY OF 10410.001 NO LONGER IN SERVICE 0 20 3 20 0 0 0 0 0

LA MARQUE, CITY OF 10410.003 14,909 2.4165 0.00 403.07 60.46 403.07 15,354 2.4887 0.00 415.11 62.27 415.11 20 3 20 6 13573 14018 14463.5 14909 15354(Westside)

TREASURE ISLAND UD 13816.001 PLANT NEVER CONSTRUCTED

TOTAL for West (Galveston) Bay 51,614 8.2225 669.72 1,348.83 157.26 656.42 55,201 8.7867 731.21 1,441.13 165.49 685.42 40,852 44,439 48,027 51,614 55,201

STREAM SEGMENT 2421

BACLIFF MUD 10627.001 7,729 0.7552 125.96 125.96 NR NR 8,532 0.8336 139.05 139.05 NR NR 20 20 1 5320 6123 6926 7729 8532

BAYVIEW MUD 10770.001 2,063 0.1399 23.33 23.33 NR NR 2,277 0.1544 25.76 25.76 NR NR 20 20 1 1420 1634 1849 2063 2277

GALVESTON CO. WCID 12 12039.001 7,141 0.7595 NR 126.68 19.00 126.68 8,378 0.8910 NR 148.63 22.29 148.63 20 3 20 2 3430 4667 5904 7141 8378(Kemah)

LA PORTE, CITY OF 10206.001 35,846 3.9193 NR 490.31 98.06 326.87 37,368 4.0858 NR 511.13 102.23 340.75 15 3 10 4 31279 32801 34324 35846 37368(Plant 1)

SAN LEON MUD 11546.001 6,397 0.8032 133.97 133.97 NR NR 7,062 0.8866 147.89 147.89 NR NR 20 20 1 4403 5068 5733 6397 7062

SEABROOK, CITY OF 10671.001 13,415 1.2243 204.21 204.21 NR NR 14,739 1.3451 224.37 224.37 NR NR 20 20 3 9443 10767 12091 13415 14739

TOTAL for Upper Galveston Bay 72,591 7.6014 487.48 1104.47 117.06 453.55 78,356 8.1966 537.07 1196.82 124.52 489.38 55295.0 61060 66826 72591 78356

TABLE 2





STREAM SEGMENT 2425

HC WCID 50 10243.001 4,217 0.3689 0.00 36.92 6.15 15.38 4,633 0.4053 0.00 40.56 6.76 16.90 12 2 5 1 2969 3385 3801 4217 4633

(El Lago Plant) HC WCID 75 10106.001 DIVERTED TO CLEAR LAKE WA

TOTAL for Clear Lake 4,217 0.3689 0 36.92 6.15 15.38 4,633 0.4053 0 40.56 6.76 16.90 2,969 3,385 3,801 4,217 4,633

STREAM SEGMENT 2427

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2431

TEXAS CITY, CITY OF 10375.001 57,648 7.6335 1273.27 1273.27 NR NR 62,851 8.3225 1388.20 1388.20 NR NR 20 20 17 42037 47241 52444 57648 62851

TOTAL for Moses Lake 57,648 7.6335 1273.27 1273.27 0.00 0.00 62851 8.3225 1388.20 1388.20 0.00 0.00 0

STREAM SEGMENT 2432

ALVIN, CITY OF 10005.001 31,456 3.3579 560.09 560.09 NR NR 34,719 3.7062 618.19 618.19 NR NR 20 20 3 21668 24931 28194 31456 34719

HILLCREST VILLAGE,CI 10420.001 754 0.0315 5.26 5.26 NR NR 816 0.0341 5.69 5.69 NR NR 20 20 1 569 631 693 754 816

TOTAL for Chocolate Bay 32,211 3.3894 565.35 565.35 0.00 0.00 35,535 3.7403 623.88 623.88 0 0 22,237 25,562 28,886 32,211 35,535

STREAM SEGMENT 2433

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2434

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2435

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for Drum Bay

STREAM SEGMENT 2437

TOTAL for Barbours Cut

STREAM SEGMENT 2436

MORGANS POINT, CITY 10779.001 311 0.0566 NR 7.09 2.36 4.72 303 0.0551 0 6.90 2.30 4.60 0 15 5 10 1 336 328 320 311 303

TOTAL for Texas City Ship Channel 311 0.0566 0 7.09 2.36 4.72 303 0.0551 0 6.90 2.30 4.60 336 328 320 311 303

TABLE 2





STREAM SEGMENT 2438

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2439

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.001 40,009 6.7050 1118.39 1118.39 NR NR 39,985 6.7010 1117.73 1117.73 NR NR 20 20 2 40079 40056 40032 40009 39985

(Main WWTP) GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.004 10 15

(Seawolf Park) TOTAL for Lower Galveston Bay 40,009 6.7050 1118.39 1118.39 0.00 0.00 39985 6.7010 1117.73 1117.73 0.00 0.00 40079 40056 40032 40009 39985

GRAND TOTAL 888380 84.8974 4210.67 10729.44 1771.28 3541.78 1005335 94.2939 4505.28 11308.61 1293.94 3944.74 420613 494798 568983 643167 717352.27


TABLE 3San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal Basin Year 2001 - 2002: Growth Rate and Plant Capacity

PERMIT Growth Growth Plant CapacityFLOW Rate Rate (Per Cent)

ENTITY PERMIT (mgd) Ave.(%) Range 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

STREAM SEGMENT 1101

FRIENDSWOOD, CITY OF 11571.001 9.2500 3.0 2.7 - 3.5 48.5 58.7 68.9 76.9 86.7(GCWDA Blackhawk Region)

LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.003 0.6600 3.0 58.0 65.1 73.2 80.2 88.5(Countryside)

LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.005 6.0000 5.0 65.0 91.1 117.7 143.3 169.4(Dallas-Salmon Plant)

NASSAU BAY, CITY OF 10526.001 1.3300 0.9 55.0 57.8 60.8 63.5 66.2

WEBSTER, CITY OF 10520.001 1.6500 1.0 0.9 - 2.7 64.6 69.7 74.5 82.4 84.0

TOTAL or AVERAGE for Clear Creek Tidal 18.8900 2.6 56.0 70.1 79.0 89.3 100.0

STREAM SEGMENT 1102

BC MUD 1 12332.001 1.0000 9.9 65.0 110.0 155.9 201.4 246.9(Southwyck/Silverlake)

BC MUD 2 12705.001 0.1000 9.9BC MUD 5 12295.001 0.7000 9.9 54.3 134.6 210.0 287.2 364.7

(BC MUD 4 & 5)BC MUD 6 13784.001 0.1000 9.9 102.7 247.0 390.6 534.5 680.0

(divert to BC MUD 1 in 2001)

HC WCID 89 12939.001 0.1000 0.3 55.0 56.0 58.0 58.0 58.9(Morningside)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.020 1.4000 2.9(Gulf Meadows) (Divert to SE 1998)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.075 6.1400 -0.1 33.7 33.6 33.4 33.2 33.1(Sagemont)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.079 5.3300 0.6 -0.1 to 2.9(Southeast + Gulf Meadow)) 1.2 50.1 55.3 60.6 65.8 71.0

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.002 2.2500 3.4 -0.1 to 4.3 46.2 58.7 71.1 83.5 95.8(Barry Rose Plant No. 2)PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.003 2.5000 3.5 -0.1 to 4.3 33.4 43.6 53.6 63.3 73.2(Longwood Plant No. 3)PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.007 2.0000 5.0 4.4 - 9.9 46.5 68.5 90.0 83.5 95.8

(S.W. Environ)TOTAL or AVE. for Clear Creek Above-Tidal 21.6200 4.7 38.1 48.3 58.8 156.7 191.0

STREAM SEGMENT 1103

GC WCID 1 10173.001 3.6000 1.1 67.2 72.5 77.8 83.1 88.3(Dickenson, City of)

LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF(formerly Permit No. 11169.01 10568.007 0.1500 5.0 50.0 73.3 90.0 110.2 130.3

BayRidge closed 2001)

TOTAL or AVE. for Dickinson Bayou Tidal 3.7500 3.1 66.6 72.4 78.4 96.7 109.3

STREAM SEGMENT 1105

ANGLETON, CITY OF(Brush Bayou Pit) 10548.002 0.2500 1.0 78.5 82.4 86.8 91.2 95.4

DANBURY, CITY OF(Towers Estate) 10158.001 0.5040 1.0 38.1 40.1 42.3 44.3 46.4

TOTAL or AVE. for Bastrop Bayou Tidal 0.7540 1.0 51.4 54.2 57.0 67.8 70.9




STREAM SEGMENT 1107

MANVEL, CITY OF 11251.001 0.0300 9.9 41.3 94.6 146.7 201.3 254.7

TOTAL or AVE. for Chocolate Bayou Tidal 0.0300 8.2 41.3 94.6 146.7 201.3 254.7

STREAM SEGMENT 1108

ARCOLA, CITY OF 13367.001 0.1250 3.8 56.8 73.6 89.6 106.2 122.4

MANVEL, CITY OF 13872.001 0.1000 1.8 23.0 25.6 28.1 30.6 33.1(Expanded from 0.028 in 2000; flow 2000 = 0.023 mgd)

OAK MANOR MUD 10700.001 0.0800 3.0 45.8 54.8 63.9 72.9 82.0

TOTAL/AVE. or Chocolate Bayou Above Tidal 0.3050 5.6 41.9 51.3 60.5 69.9 79.1

STREAM SEGMENT 1109

COMMODORE COVE ID 10798.001 0.0600 2.6 61.7 76.6 82.1 92.7 103.2

TOTAL or AVE. for Oyster Creek Tidal 0.0600 2.6 61.7 76.6 82.1 92.7 103.2

STREAM SEGMENT 1110(Candidate for Regionalization)

ANGLETON, CITY OF 10548.001 3.6000 1.4 29.4 31.8 34.1 36.4 38.7(Oyster Creek)

FBCMUD No. 23 11999.001 0.2500 3.9 63.6 82.0 100.0 118.0 136.2

FBCMUD Nos. 47,48,60 12701.001 0.3500 3.9 41.3 52.0 63.1 73.9 84.7 (Vicksberg Joint Powers)

SIENNA PLANTATION 13854.001 0.2500 3.9 56.4 72.4 88.4 104.4 120.4MUD No. 2 & 3

TOTAL or AVE. for Oyster Creek Above Tidal 4.4500 3.3 33.8 38.5 43.1 83.2 95.0

STREAM SEGMENT 1111

CLUTE, CITY OF 10044.001 4.0000 1.0 52.2 55.3 58.3 61.4 64.4(Brazos River Auth.+ Richwood)

OYSTER CREEK, CITY 11837.001 0.5000 2.8 42.8 50.6 58.4 66.4 74.2(plus Surfside Beach)

TOTAL or AVE. for Old Brazos River Channel 4.5000 1.9 47.5 53.0 58.4 63.9 69.3

STREAM SEGMENT 1113

CLEAR LAKE CITY W.A. 10539.001 9.0000 2.8 0.9 - 4.0 23.8 37.5 51.2 64.9 78.6(Clear Lake)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.136 5.0000 3.0 -0.1 t0 4.0 21.2 25.9 30.6 35.3 40.1(Metro Central)

TOTAL or AVE. for Armand Bayou 14.0000 2.9 22.9 33.4 43.9 50.1 59.4




STREAM SEGMENT 2424

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.002 3.7500 2.0 59.3 68.0 76.7 85.4 94.2(Airport WWTP)

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.005 0.2500 3.1 29.0 36.3 43.7 51.1 58.4(Terramar Beach WWTP)

GCFWSD No. 6 10879.001 0.2500 1.6 0.1 - 3.2 50.5 55.9 61.4 66.8 72.2(Tiki Island)

GCMUD No. 12 10435.002 0.4000 0.1 91.0 91.6 92.3 92.9 93.6(Bayou Vista)

GCWCID No. 8 10174.001 1.5000 1.7 27.6 30.5 .33.3 36.2 39.2(Santa Fe)

HITCHCOCK, CITY OF 10690.001 3.0000 1.4 33.6 36.2 38.9 41.6 44.2

JAMAICA BEACH 11033.0001 0.1800 1.0 69.1 72.9 76.7 80.0 84.2

LA MARQUE, CITY OF 10410.003 3.0000 1.5 73.3 75.7 78.1 80.0 83.0(Westside)

TOTAL or AVE. for West (Galveston) Bay 12.3300 1.6 54.2 59.1 63.3 66.8 71.1

STREAM SEGMENT 2421

BACLIFF MUD 10627.001 1.0300 2.4 50.5 58.1 65.7 73.3 80.9

BAYVIEW MUD 10770.001 0.2500 2.4 38.5 44.3 50.2 56.0 61.8

GALVESTON CO. WCID 12 12039.001 0.5000 4.5 2.4 - 5.0 73.0 99.3 125.6 151.9 178.2 (Kemah)

LA PORTE, CITY OF 10206.001 7.5600 0.8 - 0.5 to 2.5 45.2 47.4 49.6 51.8 54.0

SAN LEON MUD 11546.001 0.9500 2.4 58.2 67.0 75.8 84.5 93.3

SEABROOK, CITY OF 10671.001 2.5000 2.2 34.4 39.3 44.1 48.9 53.8

TOTAL or AVE. for Upper Galveston Bay 12.7900 2.5 50.0 59.2 68.5 77.7 87.0

STREAM SEGMENT 2425

HC WCID 50 10243.001 0.5400 2.2 48.1 54.8 61.5 68.3 75.1(El Lago Plant)

TOTAL or AVE. for Clear Lake 0.5400 2.2 48.1 54.8 61.6 68.3 75.1

STREAM SEGMENT 2431

TEXAS CITY, CITY OF 10375.001 12.4000 1.7 - 1.3 to 3.4 44.9 50.4 56.0 61.5 67.1

TOTAL for Moses Lake 12.4000 1.7 44.9 54.8 61.6 61.5 67.1

STREAM SEGMENT 2432

ALVIN, CITY OF 10005.001 5.0000 2.3 46.3 53.2 60.2 67.2 74.1

HILLCREST VILLAGE,CI 10420.001 0.1500 1.8 15.9 17.6 19.3 21.0 22.7

TOTAL for Chocolate Bay 5.1500 2.1 31.1 35.4 39.8 44.1 48.4




STREAM SEGMENT 2436

MORGANS POINT, CITY OF 10779.001 0.2000 -0.5 31.2 29.8 29.1 28.3 27.6

TOTAL for Barbours Cut 0.2000 -0.5 31.2 29.8 29.1 28.3 27.6

STREAM SEGMENT 2439

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.001 10.0000 -0.8 67.2 67.1 67.0 67.0 67.0(Main WWTP)

TOTAL for Lower Galveston Bay 10.0000 67.2 67.1 67.0 67.0 67.0

GRAND TOTAL 121.7690 46.3 56.0 64.6 81.5 92.7

TABLE 4

San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal Basin: 2001 - 2002 Domestic Wasteload Forecasts Using Base Year Data(Keys for acronyms and notes are located at the bottom of page 6 of this table.)








TOTAL for Clear Creek Tidal 18.8900 696 84,625 10.5899 0.00 130.26 17.63 159.05 103,572 13.2560 0.00 156.82 20.82 190.13 122,518 15.9220 0.00 183.38 24.02 221.21

STREAM SEGMENT 1102









HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.079 5.3300 8 103 26,069 2.6729 NR 54.50 12.54 51.88 28,779 2.9507 NR 60.16 13.84 57.27 31,488 3.2285 NR 65.83 15.15 62.66(Southeast + Gulf Meadow)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.002 2.2500 12 135 7,724 1.0455 NR 24.35 1.65 23.61 9,776 1.3232 NR 30.82 2.09 29.88 11,827 1.6009 NR 37.28 2.53 36.15(Barry Rose Plant No. 2) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.003 2.5000 12 60 13,895 0.8397 NR 88.37 7.10 38.02 17,994 1.0874 NR 114.44 9.19 49.24 22,094 1.3352 NR 140.51 11.29 60.45(Longwood Plant No. 3) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.005 0.5000 INACTIVE INACTIVE INACTIVE(Coward Creek Plant)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.006 0.0000 INACTIVE INACTIVE INACTIVE(Garden Road Plant)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.007 2.0000 12 44 21,325 0.9342 NR 34.77 6.24 35.19 31,267 1.3697 NR 50.98 9.15 51.60 41,209 1.8053 NR 67.19 12.06 68.00 (S.W. Environ)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.008 0.2500 UNDER CONSTRUCTION FEBRUARY 2002 - Population in 2000 is 834(Far Northwest)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.009 0.3700 INACTIVE INACTIVE INACTIVE(Cullen)

TOTAL for Clear Creek Above-Tidal 22.9650 746 106,185 8.7510 0.00 270.97 47.20 223.91 139,062 11.1230 0.00 352.26 57.60 284.64 171,938 13.4950 0.00 433.54 67.99 345.38

TABLE 4




STREAM SEGMENT 1103



TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Tidal 3.7500 133 28,228 2.4976 0.00 169.99 29.00 120.76 33,290 2.7171 0.00 198.65 33.07 137.13 38,352 2.9366 0.00 227.30 37.15 153.50

STREAM SEGMENT 1104



STREAM SEGMENT 1105


DANBURY, CITY OF 10158.001 0.5040 12 122 1,576 0.1919 NR 7.59 0.80 3.34 1,662 0.2023 #REF! 8.00 1,748 0.2128 NR 8.42 0.00 0.00(Towers Estate)

TOTAL for Bastrop Bayou Tidal 0.7540 432 2208 0.3877 4.06 21.52 0.80 3.34 2,328 0.4088 #REF! 22.69 0.00 0.00 2449 0.4300 4.50 23.87 0.00 0.00

STREAM SEGMENT 1107

MANVEL, CITY OF 11251.001 0.0300 8 8 1,613 0.0124 1.03 2.11 NR 3,098 0.0238 1.98 4.05 0.00 4,583 0.0352 2.93 6.00 0.00 NR

TOTAL for Chocolate Bayou Tidal 0.0300 7.69 1613 0.0124 1.03 2.11 0.00 0.00 3,098 0.0238 1.98 4.05 0.00 0.00 4583 0.0352 2.93 6.00 0.00 0.00

STREAM SEGMENT 1108

ARCOLA, CITY OF 13367.001 0.1250 12 71 1,008 0.0716 NA 3.00 0.27 1.09 1,295 0.0920 NR 3.85 0.35 1.40 1,581 0.1123 NR 4.71 0.42 1.71

MANVEL, CITY OF 13872.001 0.1000 12 9 2,482 0.0231 0.69 1.36 NR NR 5,596 0.0521 1.56 3.07 NR NR 8,711 0.0811 2.42 4.77 NR NR

OAK MANOR MUD 10700.001 0.0800 12 109 335 0.0366 NR 1.98 0.03 2.12 401 0.0438 NR 2.37 0.04 NR 468 0.0511 NR 2.76 0.04 NR


STREAM SEGMENT 1109



TABLE 4




STREAM SEGMENT 1110


FBCMUD No. 23 11999.001 0.2500 12 80 2,001 0.1593 NR 12.93 0.90 5.35 2,570 0.2046 NR 16.61 1.16 6.87 3,139 0.2499 NR 20.28 1.41 8.39


MUD No. 2 & 3TOTAL for Oyster Creek Above Tidal 4.4500 400.59 21,699 1.5048 0.00 79.55 11.18 35.66 24,248 1.7117 0.00 90.29 12.41 40.55 26,798 1.9187 0.00 101.04 13.64 45.44

STREAM SEGMENT 1111




STREAM SEGMENT 1113





TABLE 4




STREAM SEGMENT 2424











LA MARQUE, CITY OF 10410.003 3.0000 11 162 13,573 2.2000 NR 108.97 6.17 50.62 14,018 2.2722 NR 112.54 6.37 52.28 14,464 2.3443 0.00 116.12 6.57 53.94(Westside)


TOTAL for West (Galveston) Bay 12.7800 1,205 40,852 6.5299 116.59 398.84 13.36 109.57 44,439 7.0941 124.84 430.91 14.14 116.07 48,027 7.6583 133.09 462.98 14.93 122.57

STREAM SEGMENT 2421








TABLE 4




STREAM SEGMENT 2425

HC WCID 50 10243.001 0.5400 12 87 2,969 0.2597 NR 7.28 1.80 10.26 3,385 0.2961 NR 8.30 2.05 11.70 3,801 0.3325 9.36 9.32 2.30 13.14(El Lago Plant)HC WCID 75 10106.001 0.1500 TO CLEAR LAKE WATER AUTHORITY 1993

TOTAL for Clear Lake 0.6900 87 2,969 0.2597 0.00 7.28 1.80 10.26 3,385 0.2961 0.00 8.30 2.05 11.70 3,801 0.3325 9.36 9.32 2.30 13.14

STREAM SEGMENT 2427

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2431



STREAM SEGMENT 2432

ALVIN, CITY OF 10005.001 0.5000 12 107 21,668 2.3130 2.85 3.77 0.20 NR 24,931 2.6613 3.28 4.34 0.23 NR 28,194 3.0096 3.71 4.91 0.26 NR


TOTAL for Chocolate Bay 0.6500 149 22,237 2.3368 3.24 4.56 0.00 0.00 25,562 2.6877 3.71 5.21 0.23 0.00 28,886 3.0385 4.18 5.87 0.26 0

STREAM SEGMENT 2433

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2434

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2435

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for Drum Bay

STREAM SEGMENT 2437

(NO DISCHARGES)


TABLE 4




STREAM SEGMENT 2436

MORGANS POINT, CITY OF 10779.001 0.2000 12 182 336 0.0637 NR 2.03 0.12 1.08 328 0.0597 NR 1.90 0.11 1.01 320 0.0581 NR 1.85 0.11 0.99

TOTAL for Barbours Cut 12 182 336 0.0637 0.00 2.03 0.12 1.08 328 0.0597 0.00 1.90 0.11 1.01 319.5 0.0581 0.00 1.85 0.11 0.99


(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2439




GRAND TOTAL 119.4190 5698.39 541,316 55.1768 462.26 1,909.52 174.56 939 615,426 66.1263 #REF! 2,259.67 201.01 1,106.60 784,017 75.54 598.58 2,555.47 228.06 1,279.56

"#" = number of months of self-reporting data available for the year 2000 GPCD = gallons per capita per day POP = population; Year 2000 figures are from 2000 Census Service area boundaries used in the population projections were obtained directly from permit holders in 2002. FLOW = discharge measured in million gallons per day BOD 5 = biochemical oxygen demand TSS = total suspended solid NH3-N = ammonia nitrogen CBOD5 = carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand, 5 day NR = Not Required to Report Parameter

Data Source: Self-reporting data submitted by permitted dischargers to the TNRCC or H-GAC. The data presented in the annual mean of monthly reported levels for 2000 and/or 2001. DISCLAIMERS: 1) The information and data presented in this table is based on information submitted to H-GAC. Accuracy is not independently varifiable and may not accuratly reflect total flows,pollutant loadings, or population figures for the watershed basin or the individual stream segments for the current year, or future years.

2) Special handling of Service Area Boundary:

Clear Lake City Water Authority Service Area Boundary was included in the AutoCAD service area provided for the City of Houston Metro Central Plant. We excluded the Clear Lake service area from Houston Metro Central.

TABLE 4


Continued from previous page 2015 2020 NO. POPULATION

POP FLOW BOD 5 TSS NH3-N CBOD5 POP FLOW BOD 5 TSS NH3-N CBOD5 CAGR 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

ENTITY PERMIT (mgd) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (mgd) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) (lb/day) POLYGONS (entered) (calculated)

STREAM SEGMENT 1101

FRIENDSWOOD, CITY OF 11571.001 65,497 7.3057 NR 111.53 16.65 135.04 73,873 8.2401 NR 125.80 18.78 152.31 6 40367 48744 57120 65497 73873(GCWDA Blackhawk Reg. Plant) LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.003 19,876 0.5336 NR 27.31 2.09 31.60 21,746 0.5838 NR 29.87 2.29 34.57 6 14267 16137 18007 19876 21746

(Country Plant) LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.005 44,311 8.5985 NR 45.59 3.31 48.35 52,382 10.1647 NR 53.90 3.91 57.16 5 20098 28169 36240 44311 52382


NASSAU BAY, CITY OF 10526.001 4,768 0.8442 NR 7.02 2.60 12.99 4,970 0.8799 NR 7.32 2.71 13.54 1 4163 4365 4566.5 4768 4970

WEBSTER, CITY OF 10520.001 7,013 1.3061 NR 18.49 2.57 24.32 7,440 1.3857 NR 19.62 2.73 25.80 4 5730 6158 6585 7013 7440

TOTAL for Clear Creek Tidal 141,465 18.5881 0.00 209.95 27.21 252.30 160,411 21.2541 0.00 236.51 30.41 283.38 84625 103572 122518 141465 160411

STREAM SEGMENT 1102

BC MUD 1 12332.001 18,605 0.0000 NR 18.49 16.65 135.04 22,805 2.4685 NR 125.80 2.73 1.40 2 6005 10205 14405 18605 22805(Southwyck/Silver Lake)


BC MUD 5 12295.001 30,270 2.0101 NR 51.14 7.91 40.06 38,446 2.5530 NR 64.95 10.04 97.11 2 5742 13918 22094 30270 38446(BC MUD 4 & 5)

BC MUD 6 13784.001 6,631 0.5345 NR 23.73 2.86 14.05 8,416 0.6784 NR 30.12 3.63 33.75 1 1274 3060 4845 6631 8416

BC MUD 19 14135.001 OPENED IN 0 0 0 0 0

HC WCID 89 12939.001 980 0.0580 NR 3.15 0.93 1.72 996 0.0589 NR 3.20 0.94 1.75 1 931 947 963.5 980 996(Morningside)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.020 DIVERT TO SOUTHWEST 0 0 0 0 0(Gulf Meadows - Diverted to SE in 1998))

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.075 22,910 2.0419 NR 41.44 15.39 52.49 22,806 2.0327 NR 41.25 15.32 52.25 1 23220 23117 23013 22910 22806(Sagemont)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.079 34,198 3.5063 NR 71.49 16.45 68.06 36,907 3.7841 NR 77.16 17.75 75.13 8 26069 28779 31488 34198 36907(Southeast + Gulf Meadow) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.002 13,879 1.8786 NR 43.75 2.96 42.42 15,930 2.1562 NR 50.22 3.40 53.69 3 7724 9776 11827 13879 15930

(Barry Rose Plant No. 2) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.003 26,193 1.5829 NR 166.58 13.38 71.67 30,292 1.8306 NR 192.65 15.48 92.81 3 13895 17994 22094 26193 30292

(Longwood Plant No. 3) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.005 INACTIVE 0 0 0 0

(Cowart Creek Plant) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.006 INACTIVE 0 0 0 0

(Garden Road Plant) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.007 51,151 2.2408 NR 83.40 14.97 84.41 61,093 2.6763 NR 99.61 17.88 123.76 2 21325 31267 41209 51151 61093

(SW Environmental)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.008 UNDER CONSTRUCTION 2002 0 0 0 0 0(Far Northwest)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.009 INACTIVE 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL for Clear Creek Above-Tidal 204,815 15.8669 0.00 404.81 91.50 509.92 237,691 18.2389 0.00 685.16 77.13 531.63 106185 139062 171938 204815 237691

TABLE 4





STREAM SEGMENT 1103

GC WCID 1 10173.001 23,944 2.9908 NR 151.17 28.90 122.63 25,460 3.1802 NR 160.74 30.73 132.21 7 19395 20911 22428 23944 25460

(Dickenson) LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.007 19,470 0.1653 NR 104.79 12.32 47.24 23,016 0.1954 NR 123.87 14.57 66.20 3 8833 12379 15925 19470 23016(formerly Permit No. 11169.01)

TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Tidal 43,414 3.1561 0.00 255.96 41.22 169.86 48,476 3.3756 0.00 284.62 44.09 198.41 28228 33290 38352 43414 48476

STREAM SEGMENT 1104

FRIENDSWOOD, CITY OF 10175.003 DIVERT TO BLACKHAWK REGIONAL PLANT (Towers Estate)

TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Above-Tidal

STREAM SEGMENT 1105

ANGLETON, CITY OF 10548.002 736 0.2279 4.72 16.21 NR NR 770 0.2386 4.95 16.97 0.00 0.00 1 632 667 701 736 770(Brush Bayou Pit)

DANBURY, CITY OF 10158.001 1,833 0.2232 NR 8.83 0.00 0.00 1,919 0.2337 NR 9.24 0.00 0.00 1 1576 1662 1748 1833 1919(Towers Estate)

TOTAL for Bastrop Bayou Tidal 2569 0.4511 4.72 25.04 0.00 0.00 2,689 0.4722 4.95 26.21 0.00 0.00 2,208 2,328 2,449 2,569 2,689

STREAM SEGMENT 1107

MANVEL, CITY OF 11251.001 6,068 0.0466 3.87 7.94 0.00 NR 7,553 0.0581 4.82 9.88 0.00 0.00 2 1613 3098 4583 6068 7553


STREAM SEGMENT 1108

ARCOLA, CITY OF 13367.001 1868 0.1327 NR 5.56 0.50 2.02 2,154 0.1530 NR 6.41 0.58 2.59 1 1008 1295 1581 1868 2154

MANVEL, CITY OF 13872.001 11825 0.1101 3.29 6.48 NR NR 14,939 0.1390 4.15 8.19 3 2482 5596 8710.5 11825 14939

OAK MANOR MUD 10700.001 534 0.0583 0.00 3.15 0.05 600 0.0656 0.00 3.55 0.05 0.00 1 335 401 467.5 534 600


STREAM SEGMENT 1109

COMMODORE COVE ID 10798.001 359 0.0556 2.18 6.88 NR NR 399 0.0619 2.42 7.66 NR 1 237 278 318 359 399


TABLE 4





STREAM SEGMENT 1110

ANGLETON, CITY OF 10548.001 21,644 1.3109 NR 70.70 11.69 31.29 23,025 1.3946 NR 75.22 12.43 33.76 2 17501 18882 20263 21644 23025

(Oyster Creek) FBCMUD No. 23 11999.001 3,707 0.2951 NR 23.96 1.67 9.91 4,276 0.3404 NR 27.63 1.92 12.73 1 2001 2570 3138.5 3707 4276

FBCUMD Nos. 47,48,60 12701.001 2,065 0.2585 NR 10.60 0.75 4.40 2,368 0.2965 NR 12.16 0.86 5.55 1 1155 1458 1761.5 2065 2368


SIENNA PLANTATION 13854.001 1,931 0.2611 NR 6.52 0.76 4.72 2,227 0.3011 NR 7.52 0.88 6.07 1 1042 1338 1634.5 1931 2227MUD No. 2 & 3

TOTAL for Oyster Creek Above Tidal 29,347 2.1256 0.00 111.78 14.87 50.32 31,896 2.3326 0.00 122.53 16.31 58.11 21699 24248 26798 29347 31896

STREAM SEGMENT 1111

CLUTE, CITY OF 10044.001 15,070 2.4545 NR 116.98 37.54 129.53 15,818 2.5763 NR 122.78 39.40 137.08 4 12826 13574 14322 15070 15818(Brazos River Auth. + Richwood) OYSTER CREEK, CITY 11837.001 2,231 0.3318 8.53 27.38 NR NR 2,495 0.3710 9.54 30.62 1 1439 1703 1967 2231 2495


STREAM SEGMENT 1113

CLEAR LAKE CITY W.A. 10539.001 162,220 5.8414 NR 220.69 11.99 158.97 196,412 7.0726 NR 267.20 14.52 250.11 5 59643 93835 128028 162220 196412


HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.136 24,987 1.7670 NR 41.69 10.24 39.36 28,321 2.0029 NR 47.26 11.61 48.12 6 14983 18318 21652 24987 28321


TABLE 4





14983 18318 21652 24987 28321STREAM SEGMENT 2424

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.002 20,459 3.2040 67.75 195.57 NR NR 22,549 3.5312 74.67 215.54 2 14190 16280 18370 20459 22549

(Airport WWTP) GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.005 866 0.1277 3.12 6.05 NR NR 991 0.1461 3.57 6.92 2 491 616 741 866 991

(Terramar Beach WWTP) GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.006 HOLDING TANK ONLY 0 0 0 0 0

(Point San Luis) GCFWSD No. 6 10879.001 1,345 0.1670 1.72 3.16 NR NR 1,454 0.1806 1.86 3.42 3 1016 1126 1235 1345 1454

(Tiki Island) GCMUD No. 1 11477.001 RECYCLE TO GOLF COARSE 0 0 0 0 0(Pirates Beach)


GCMUD No. 12 10435.002 2,131 0.3717 62.14 62.14 NR NR 2,146 0.3743 62.57 62.57 1 2087 2102 2116.5 2131 2146(Bayou Vista)

GCWCID No. 8 10174.001 3,896 0.5440 NR 12.13 0.57 8.33 4,207 0.5874 NR 13.10 0.61 9.20 1 2962 3273 3584.5 3896 4207(Santa Fe)

HITCHCOCK, CITY OF 10690.001 6,759 1.2469 NR 85.74 8.37 65.15 7,192 1.3268 91.23 8.91 70.32 1 5459 5892 6325.5 6759 7192

JAMAICA BEACH, CITY 11033.001 1,250 0.1447 6.61 10.58 0.00 0.00 1,308 0.1515 6.92 11.07 0.00 0.00 1 1074 1133 1191 1250 1308

LA MARQUE, CITY OF 10410.001 NO LONGER IN SERVICE 0 0 0 0 0 0

LA MARQUE, CITY OF 10410.003 14,909 2.4165 0.00 119.69 6.78 55.60 15,354 2.4887 8.59 123.27 7.00 57.43 6 13573 14018 14464 14909 15354(Westside)


TOTAL for West (Galveston) Bay 51,614 8.2225 141.34 495.05 15.71 129.08 55,201 8.7867 158.18 527.12 16.52 136.94 40,852 44,439 48,027 51,614 55,201

STREAM SEGMENT 2421

BACLIFF MUD 10627.001 7,729 0.7552 30.07 29.25 NR NR 8,532 0.8336 33.20 32.28 NR NR 1 5320 6123 6926 7729 8532

BAYVIEW MUD 10770.001 2,063 0.1399 3.02 2.72 NR NR 2,277 0.1544 3.34 3.00 NR NR 1 1420 1634 1849 2063 2277

GALVESTON CO. WCID 12 12039.001 7,141 0.7595 NR 24.38 4.93 17.22 8,378 0.8910 NR 28.60 6.71 23.43 2 3430 4667 5904 7141 8378(Kemah)

LA PORTE, CITY OF 10206.001 35,846 3.9193 NR 144.04 9.51 82.23 37,368 4.0858 NR 150.16 9.97 86.23 4 31279 32801 34324 35846 37368(Plant 1)

SAN LEON MUD 11546.001 6,397 0.8032 29.76 30.09 NR NR 7,062 0.8866 32.85 33.22 NR NR 1 4403 5068 5733 6397 7062

SEABROOK, CITY OF 10671.001 13,415 1.2243 44.51 71.26 NR NR 14,739 1.3451 48.90 78.29 NR NR 3 9443 10767 12091 13415 14739


TABLE 4





STREAM SEGMENT 2425

HC WCID 50 10243.001 4,217 0.3689 13.30 10.34 2.56 14.57 4,633 0.4053 9.16 11.36 2.91 16.61 1 2969 3385 3801 4217 4633


TOTAL for Clear Lake 4,217 0.3689 13.30 10.34 2.56 14.57 4,633 0.4053 9.16 11.36 2.91 16.61 2,969 3,385 3,801 4,217 4,633

STREAM SEGMENT 2427

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2431

TEXAS CITY, CITY OF 10375.001 57,648 7.6335 210.49 257.03 NR NR 62,851 8.3225 229.49 280.23 NR NR 17 42037 47241 52444 57648 62851


STREAM SEGMENT 2432

ALVIN, CITY OF 10005.001 31,456 3.3579 4.14 5.47 NR NR 34,719 3.7062 4.57 6.04 NR NR 3 21668 24931 28194 31456 34719

HILLCREST VILLAGE,CI 10420.001 754 0.0315 0.52 1.05 NR NR 816 0.0341 0.56 1.13 NR NR 1 569 631 693 754 816

TOTAL for Chocolate Bay 32,211 3.3894 4.65 6.52 0.00 0.00 35,535 3.74 5.13 7.17 0.00 0.00 22,237 25,562 28,886 32,211 35,535

STREAM SEGMENT 2433

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2434

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2435

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for Drum Bay

STREAM SEGMENT 2437


TABLE 4





STREAM SEGMENT 2436

MORGANS POINT, CITY 10779.001 311 0.0566 NR 1.81 0.11 0.96 303 0.0551 0.00 1.76 0.09 0.90 1 336 328 320 311 303

TOTAL for Barbours Cut 311 0.0566 0.00 1.81 0.11 0.96 303 0.0551 0.00 1.76 0.09 0.90 336 328 320 311 303

STREAM SEGMENT 2438

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2439

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.001 40,009 6.7050 144.64 224.48 NR NR 39,985 6.7010 144.55 224.35 NR NR 2 40079 40056 40032 40009 39985

(Main WWTP) GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.004

(Seawolf Park) TOTAL for Lower Galveston Bay 40,009 6.7050 144.64 224.48 0.00 0.00 39985.00 6.7010 144.55 224.35 0.00 0.00 40079 40056 40032 40009 39985

GRAND TOTAL 905368 84.9630 644.37 2741.25 267.94 1556.33 1026718 94.3814 690.67 3236.12 271.03 1773.54 424416 502996 581576 660155 738735

TABLE 5

Clear Lake Watershed and Surrounding Area: Domestic Wasteloads for 2000 Projections Made 1992 - 2000 vs Actual Values

PERMITTED 2000 Population Population Year 2000 FLOW (MGD) FLOW

FLOW Projected in Actual in Year Projected in Actual in Year

ENTITY PERMIT (mgd) 1992 1995 1998 1992 1995 1998 2000 1992 1995 1998 1992 1995 1998 2000

STREAM SEGMENT 1101

FRIENDSWOOD, CITY OF 11571.01 9.2500 32,899 32,889 32,889 28,459 30,124 31,789 40,367 4.6388 4.7327 4.8942 4.0300 4.3335 4.7291 4.5027

(GCWDA Blackhawk Reg. Plant)

LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.03 0.6600 N/A 3,017 3,017 N/A 2,763 2,915 14,267 N/A 0.4118 0.3938 0.4200 0.3771 0.3805 0.3830

(Country Plant)

LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.05 6.0000 13,533 13,533 13,533 11,602 12,326 13,050 20,098 4.4657 4.5012 4.0754 3.8400 4.1000 3.9301 3.9000


NASSAU BAY, CITY OF 10526.01 1.3300 5,005 5,005 5,005 4,330 4,583 4,836 4,163 0.8057 1.0242 0.8371 0.7000 0.9380 0.8089 0.7370

WEBSTER, CITY OF 10520.01 1.6500 5,261 5,261 5,261 4,552 4,818 5,084 5,730 1.2740 1.1265 1.1336 1.1100 1.0316 1.0954 1.0672

TOTAL for Clear Creek Tidal 18.8900 56,698 59,705 59,705 48,943 54,614 57,674 84,625 11.1842 11.7964 11.3341 10.1000 10.7802 10.9440 10.5899

STREAM SEGMENT 1102

BC MUD 1 12332.01 1.0000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6,005 N/A N/A N/A 0.1400 0.2566 0.5210 0.6500

(Southwyck)

BC MUD 2 12705.01 0.1000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3000 0.0300 N/A N/A

BC MUD 5 12295.01 0.7000 2,633 2,633 2,633 2,239 2,366 2,534 5,742 0.2343 0.2953 0.3526 0.2000 0.2676 0.3394 0.3813

(BC MUD 4 & 5)

BC MUD 6 13784.01 0.1000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1,274 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.0104 0.1027

HC WCID 89 12939.01 0.1000 N/A 200 200 166 183 193 931 N/A 0.0541 0.0627 0.0800 0.0496 0.0606 0.0551

(Morningside)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.75 6.1400 9,898 9,898 9,898 8,564 9,064 9,564 23,220 3.3256 2.7521 2.3982 2.8800 2.5204 2.3174 2.0696

(Sagemont)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.79 5.3300 18,633 18,633 18,633 16,122 17,064 18,005 26,069 2.9253 2.4601 2.9606 2.5400 2.2520 2.8609 2.6729

(Southeast)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.02 2.2500 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 7,724 1.8400 N/A N/A 1.8400 2.2000 2.1703 1.0455

(Barry Rose Plant No. 2)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.03 1.7500 7,933 7,933 7,933 6,736 7,184 7,633 13,895 1.2300 1.1704 1.1168 1.2300 1.0600 1.0747 0.8397

(Longwood Plant No. 3)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.05 0.5000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

(Cowart Creek Plant)


(Pearland Tract)

TOTAL for Clear Creek Above-Tidal 18.3400 39,297 39,297 39,297 33,827 35,861 37,929 84,860 9.5552 6.7320 6.8909 9.2100 8.6362 9.3547 7.8168

STREAM SEGMENT 1103

GC WCID 1 10173.01 3.6000 19,719 19,719 19,719 16,897 17,956 19,013 19,395 4.0423 3.1729 2.8450 3.4800 2.8893 2.7433 2.4226

(Plant No. 1)


(formerly Permit No. 11169.01)

TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Tidal 3.7500 21,110 21,110 21,110 18,088 19,222 20,354 28,228 4.1466 3.2970 2.95 3.5700 3.0023 2.8450 2.4976

STREAM SEGMENT 1104

FRIENDSWOOD 0.4000 2,514 2,514 N/A 2,135 2,514 N/A N/A 0.3293 0.2313 N/A 0.2800 0.2095 N/A N/A

(Tower Estates)

TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Above-Tidal 2,514 2,514 0 0 2,514 0 0 0.3293 0.2313 0.0000 0.2800 0.2095 0.0000 0.0000

TABLE 5





STREAM SEGMENT 1113

CLEAR LAKE CITY W. AUTH. 10539.01 9.0000 50,409 50,409 50,409 43,618 46,165 48,711 59,643 6.2020 6.3332 6.8032 5.3600 5.8000 6.5741 2.1477

(Clear Lake)

HC MUD 67/BAYFIELD PUD 10495.136 5.0000 N/A N/A 8,972 N/A N/A 8,669 14,983 N/A N/A 1.6743 N/A 1.6494 1.6179 1.0596

(Metro Central Plant)

TOTAL for Armand Bayou 14.0000 50,409 50,409 59,381 43,618 46,165 57,380 74,626 6.2020 6.3332 8.4775 5.3600 7.4494 8.1920 3.2073

STREAM SEGMENT 2421

BACLIFF MUD 10627.01 1.0300 5,128 5,128 5,128 4,395 4,670 4,944 5,320 0.9178 0.7840 0.8923 0.7900 0.7840 0.8604 0.5198

BAYVIEW MUD 10770.01 0.2500 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,157 1,229 1,301 1,420 0.2213 0.2006 0.1679 0.1900 0.2006 0.1619 0.0963

GALVESTON CO. WCID 12 12039.01 0.5000 2,742 2,742 2,742 2,351 2,497 2,644 3,430 0.3839 0.3973 0.5028 0.3300 0.3973 0.4849 0.3648

(Plant 1)

LA PORTE, CITY OF 10206.01 7.5600 30,785 30,785 30,785 26,637 28,193 29,748 31,279 4.1559 3.5100 3.6135 3.6000 3.5100 3.4918 3.4200

(Plant 1)

SAN LEON MUD 11546.01 0.7500 3,920 3,920 3,920 3,359 3,569 3,779 4,403 0.8271 0.6500 0.7126 0.7100 0.6500 0.6871 0.5528

SEABROOK, CITY OF 10671.01 2.5000 7,803 7,803 7,803 6,751 7,146 7,540 9,443 1.1392 1.3600 1.0903 0.9900 1.3600 1.0536 0.8616

TOTAL for Upper Galveston Bay 12.5900 51,728 51,728 51,728 44,650 47,304 49,956 55,295 7.6452 6.9019 6.9794 6.6100 6.9019 6.7397 5.8153

STREAM SEGMENT 2425

HC WCID 50 10243.01 0.5400 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2,969 N/A N/A N/A 0.2600 0.3105 0.3105 0.2597

(El Lago Plant)

TOTAL for Clear Lake 0.5400 0 0 0 0 2,969 0 0.2600 0.3105 0.3105 0.2597

STREAM SEGMENT 2438

(No Discharges)

TOTAL for Bayport Channel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0000 0 0

GRAND TOTAL 68.1100 221,756 224,763 231,221 189,126 205,680 223,293 330,603 39.0625 35.2918 36.6324 35.3900 37.2900 38.3859 30.1866

SOURCE: Self-reporting data (1992, 1995, 1998) submitted to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission by permitted dischargers. The data presented in the table is the annual mean of monthly levels from January to December in each year.

The majority of the Self-reporting data for 2000 was obtained directly from the permit holders.

GPCD = gallons per capita per day lb/day = pounds per day NH3-N = Ammonia NitrogenPOP = service area population BOD = Biochemical Oxygen Demand CBOD5 = Carbonaceous BODFLOW = treatment plant effluent TSS = Total Suspended Solids N/A = data not availablemgd = million gallons per day

NOTES:

1. Where no numerical value appears for a parameter, either it is a non-permitted parameter and the potential discharge level was not estimated/projected or the data was not available.

2. Data for the years 1992, and 1998 were taken from H-GAC Water Quality Management Reports (Clear Lake Watershed) for those years. The 1995 projections were taken from the 1996 Clear Lale Watershed Wasteload Report.

TABLE 5


2000 BOD 5 (lb.day) BOD5 2000 TSS (lb/day) TSS NH3-N (lb./day) in 2000 ACTUAL NH3-N CBOD 5 (lb./day) in 2000 ACTUAL CBOD5Projected in Year Actual in Year Projected in Actual in Year Projected in Projected in

ENTITY PERMIT 1992 1995 1998 1992 1998 2000 1992 1995 1998 1992 1995 1998 2000 1992 1995 1998 1992 1995 1998 2000 1992 1995 1998 1992 1995 1998 2000

STREAM SEGMENT 1101

FRIENDSWOOD, CITY OF 11571.01 193.44 NA NA 48.81 48.81 NA 464.25 473.65 489.10 70.21 44.34 59.04 68.74 77.37 78.94 81.64 4.19 9.94 6.67 10.26 N/A NA 204.90 N/A 73.19 78.67 83.23


LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.03 N/A NA NA N/A NA NA N/A 41.21 39.41 4.26 4.54 5.92 19.61 N/A 6.87 6.57 0.54 0.42 0.28 1.51 N/A NA 16.42 6.34 7.30 6.82 22.68

(Country Plant)

LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.05 ? NA NA 62.70 62.70 NA 446.93 450.48 407.87 4.13 156.20 90.48 20.68 74.49 75.08 67.98 9.27 23.91 18.44 6.53 N/A NA 169.94 N/A 90.05 91.63 21.93


NASSAU BAY, CITY OF 10526.01 N/A NA NA N/A NA NA 80.64 102.50 83.78 5.13 28.01 11.98 6.13 13.44 17.08 13.96 1.07 0.85 2.64 2.27 N/A NA 34.91 16.15 16.80 13.22 11.34

WEBSTER, CITY OF 10520.01 N/A NA NA N/A NA NA 127.94 112.74 113.45 21.38 32.02 19.69 15.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.36 2.52 3.21 2.10 N/A NA 47.27 14.05 19.38 20.82 19.87

TOTAL for Clear Creek Tidal 193.44? 0.00 0.00 111.51 0.00 0.00 1119.76 1180.58 1134.31 105.11 265.11 187.11 130.27 165.3 177.97 170.14 16.43 37.64 31.24 22.67 0 0.00 472.63 36.54 206.72 211.16 159.05

STREAM SEGMENT 1102

BC MUD 1 12332.01 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6.83 6.26 8.40 9.73 N/A N/A N/A 1.76 0.49 2.28 1.14 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4.96 11.69 10.08

(Southwyck)

BC MUD 2 12705.01 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.47 1.47 N/A N/A N/A 0.04 0.04 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.35 N/A

BC MUD 5 12295.01 9.77 12.31 7.79 N/A 23.45 29.55 35.29 4.59 9.52 6.90 9.70 3.91 4.93 5.88 5.36 4.60 1.21 1.50 N/A N/A 14.70 N/A 22.06 6.63 7.60

(BC MUD 4 & 5)

BC MUD 6 13784.01 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.49 4.56 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.02 0.55 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.14 2.70

HC WCID 89 12939.01 N/A 0.00 N/A N/A N/A 5.42 6.28 7.39 2.91 1.57 2.99 N/A 0.90 1.05 0.24 0.10 0.41 0.88 N/A N/A 2.61 N/A 1.40 0.84 1.63

(Morningside)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.75 138.68 N/A 51.75 51.75 332.82 275.43 240.01 22.20 34.29 65.09 42.00 55.47 45.90 40 15.16 9.27 7.94 15.60 N/A N/A 100 N/A 52.87 44.64 53.20

(Sagemont)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.79 N/A N/A 50.33 50.33 292.76 246.21 296.30 51.50 28.71 87.45 54.50 48.79 41.03 49.38 7.53 4.14 17.46 12.54 N/A N/A 123.46 N/A 48.43 58.64 51.88

(Southeast)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.02 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 50.59 83.12 44.36 24.35 N/A N/A N/A 2.30 1.99 2.34 1.65 N/A N/A N/A N/A 53.14 40.09 23.61


PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.03 N/A N/A N/A N/A 144.50 117.13 111.77 47.38 71.01 182.90 88.37 24.08 19.53 18.63 1.56 1.14 3.12 7.10 60.21 48.81 46.57 60.21 28.94 27.07 38.02


PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.05 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A



(Pearland Tract)

TOTAL for Clear Creek Above-Tidal 148.45 12.31 0.00 109.87 102.08 0.00 793.53 673.74 689.65 191.95 237.29 398.16 236.20 132.25 112.29 114.94 33.95 21.77 34.78 40.96 60.21 48.81 287.35 60.21 212.15 189.74 188.72

STREAM SEGMENT 1103

GC WCID 1 10173.01 N/A N/A 254.45 254.45 506.69 396.94 356 138.09 476.89 350.33 122.45 67.43 59.92 47.46 12.19 46.62 22.13 23.41 0.00 264.62 237.38 N/A 124.04 93.89 99.33

(Plant No. 1)

LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.07 N/A N/A N/A N/A 13.05 15.53 13.20 3.14 9.75 3.99 47.54 2.61 3.11 2.64 1.19 2.64 1.05 5.59 8.70 10.35 8.80 N/A 3.19 2.40 21.43


TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Tidal 0 0.00 0.00 254.45 254.45 0.00 519.74 412.47 369.11 141.23 486.64 354.32 169.99 70.04 63.03 50.09 13.38 49.26 23.18 29.00 8.70 274.97 246.18 0.00 127.23 96.29 120.76

STREAM SEGMENT 1104

FRIENDSWOOD N/A N/A N/A N/A 41.20 28.93 12.05 10.71 8.24 5.79 12.05 0.46 0.00 N/A N/A 4.42

(Tower Estates)

TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Above-Tidal 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.20 28.93 0.00 12.05 10.71 0.00 0.00 8.24 5.79 0.00 12.05 0.46 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.42 0.00 0.00

TABLE 5


2000 BOD 5 (lb.day) BOD5 2000 TSS (lb/day) TSS NH3-N (lb./day) in 2000 ACTUAL NH3-N CBOD 5 (lb./day) in 2000 ACTUAL CBOD5Projected in Year Actual in Year Projected in Actual in Year Projected in Projected in

ENTITY PERMIT 1992 1995 1998 1992 1998 2000 1992 1995 1998 1992 1995 1998 2000 1992 1995 1998 1992 1995 1998 2000 1992 1995 1998 1992 1995 1998 2000

STREAM SEGMENT 1113

CLEAR LAKE CITY W. AUTH. 10539.01 N/A N/A 131.39 N/A 620.52 633.82 680.86 169.14 280.74 179.40 81.14 103.42 105.64 113.48 169.14 56.63 4.41 0.00 264.09 283.69 N/A 283.31 200.45 58.45

(Clear Lake)

HC MUD 67/BAYFIELD PUD 10495.136 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 167.56 N/A 49.00 40.18 25.00 0.00 N/A 27.93 N/A 2.92 8.54 6.14 N/A N/A 69.82 N/A 32.00 34.00 23.60


TOTAL for Armand Bayou 0? 0.00 0.00 131.39 0.00 0.00 620.52 633.82 848.42 169.14 329.74 219.58 106.14 103.42 105.64 141.41 169.14 58.55 8.54 10.55 0 264.09 353.51 0.00 315.31 234.45 82.05

STREAM SEGMENT 2421

BACLIFF MUD 10627.01 153.09 143.59 148.83 12.40 17.66 20.70 N/A N/A N/A 25.97 41.15 29.46 20.13 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

BAYVIEW MUD 10770.01 N/A N/A 28.00 3.03 4.28 2.08 36.90 36.73 28.00 35.75 14.17 6.57 1.87 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/a N/A N/A N/A N/A

GALVESTON CO. WCID 12 12039.01 64.03 72.75 19.40 19.40 64.03 72.75 62.90 35.75 18.82 7.16 11.71 N/A N/A 12.58 N/A 2.26 2.37 N/A N/A 41.94 N/A 7.06 7.50 8.27

(Plant 1)

LA PORTE, CITY OF 10206.01 N/A 639.29 126.54 115.79 693.21 639.29 452.05 156.53 113.58 209.82 125.69 N/A N/A 90.41 N/A N/A N/A 8.30 N/A N/A 301.36 N/A N/A 86.69 71.75

(Plant 1)

SAN LEON MUD 11546.01 137.96 119.06 118.86 13.03 14.50 20.48 137.96 119.06 118.86 25.21 19.58 39.58 20.71 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

SEABROOK, CITY OF 10671.01 190.02 247.70 181.87 13.11 30.17 31.33 190.02 247.70 181.87 30.78 68.00 81.40 50.16 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

TOTAL for Upper Galveston Bay 545.10 1,222.39 477.56 187.51 201.80 74.59 1122.12 1115.53 843.68 309.99 275.30 373.99 230.27 0 0.00 102.99 0.00 2.26 0.00 10.67 0 0.00 344.30 0.00 7.06 94.19 80.02

STREAM SEGMENT 2425

HC WCID 50 10243.01 N/A N/A 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A N/A N/A 8.08 9.62 9.62 7.28 N/A N/A N/A 0.38 0.35 1.80 N/A N/A N/A N/A 6.90 6.90 10.26

(El Lago Plant)

TOTAL for Clear Lake 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 8.08 9.62 9.62 7.28 0 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.00 1.80 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.90 6.90 10.26

STREAM SEGMENT 2438

(No Discharges) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

TOTAL for Bayport Channel 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

GRAND TOTAL 1234.70 477.56 794.73 558.33 74.59 4216.87 4045.07 3885.17 937.55 1614.41 1542.78 880.15 479.25 464.72 579.57 245.33 169.94 97.74 115.65 68.91 587.87 1703.97 96.75 879.79 832.73 640.86

46

APPENDIX I

ACRONYMS

47

ACRONYMS

BC Brazoria County

BOD5 Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 day CAGR Compound Annual Growth Rate CBOD5 Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 day COG Council of Governments FB Fort Bend County GC Galveston County GPCD Gallons Per Capita, Per Day GIS Geographic Computer Imaging System HC Harris County H-GAC Houston-Galveston Area Council lb./day Pounds per Day MGD Million Gallons per Day mg/ml Milligrams per milliliter MUD Municipal Utility District NH3-N Ammonia Nitrogen RAZ Regional Analysis Zone –Transportation SA Boundaries Service Area Boundaries SJB Basin San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal River Basin TAZ Transportation Analysis Zone TMD Value Theoretical Maximum Design Value TNRCC Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission TSS Total Suspended Solids WCID Water Conservation Improvement District WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plants

48

APPENDIX II

METHODOLOGY

49

METHODOLOGY

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS Basin Particulars There are six major river and associated coastal basins in the Houston-Galveston Area Council 13-county region: Trinity-San Jacinto Coastal Basin, Trinity River Basin, San Jacinto River Basin, San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal Basin, the Brazos River Basin, and the Brazos-Colorado Coastal Basin. The San Jacinto-Brazos (SJB) Coastal Basin is located in parts of Brazoria, Galveston, Fort Bend, and Harris Counties, and is comprised of 22 stream segments. Stream Segment 2421 (Upper Galveston Bay) is not part of the SJB Basin according to state agency definition, but we have included it in this evaluation because of its proximity, and functional relationship to other stream segments in the basin (Table 1). The wasteload forecast procedure measures and projects flow and constituent levels for municipal domestic wastewater treatment plants (WWTP) in the basin. Municipal domestic WWTPs provide wastewater service to particular small geographic areas and are generally owned and operated by municipalities or various types of utility districts. The latter include:

UD Utility District ID Improvement District MUD Municipal Utility District WCID Water Conservation & Improvement District FWSD Fresh Water Supply District PUD Planned Unit Development

TNRCC permits are also required for private domestic discharges. These are primarily commercial or public operations, such as mobile home parks, strip shopping centers, and schools, which typically produce “domestic” wastewater in small quantities.

50

TABLE II-1

SJB Coastal Basin Wasteload Stream Segments Plus Stream Segment 2421

___________________________________________

Stream Segment ____________________________________________________

Clear Creek Tidal 1101 Clear Creak Above Tidal 1102 Dickinson Bayou Tidal 1103 Dickinson Bayou Above Tidal 1104 Bastrop Bayou Tidal 1105 Chocolate Bayou Tidal 1107 Chocolate Bayou Above Tidal 1108 Oyster Creek Tidal 1109 Oyster Creek Above Tidal 1110 Old Brazos River Channel 1111 Armand Bayou 1113 Upper Galveston Bay 2421 West (Galveston) Bay 2424 Clear Lake 2425 Moses Lake 2431 Chocolate Bay 2432 Bastrop Bay 2433 Christmas Bay 2434 Drum Bay 2435 Texas Ship Channel 2437 Bayport Channel 2438 Lower Galveston Bay 2439

Constituent Definitions The primary constituents of wastewater effluent regulated by TNRCC for domestic treatment plants, both municipal and private are:

♦ Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 day (CBOD5) ♦ Total Suspended Solids (TSS) ♦ Ammonia Nitrogen (NH3-N) ♦ Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)

Constituents in wastewater effluent can affect the flora, fauna and water quality of receiving water bodies. Determining the relative oxygen requirements of wastewater effluent is helpful in designating the usefulness of the stream for aquatic life and/or human activity. One of the effluent characteristics useful in this regard is Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) which assesses the amount of organic waste in water, as it is

51

decomposed by aerobic microorganisms. In decomposition, organic matter serves as food for the bacteria, and energy results from food oxidation. Technically, BOD is the rate at which bacteria use oxygen in wastewater, while decomposing organic matter under aerobic conditions. BOD is a composed of two parts: carbonaceous and nitrogenous rates of oxygen demand. Decomposition occurs in two stages. The first is carbonaceous, when bacteria use dissolved oxygen to change carbon compounds to carbon dioxide. The second phase of decomposition occurs when microorganisms use dissolved oxygen to change nitrogenous compounds (ammonia and organic nitrogen) into oxidized nitrogen (usually nitrate). For technical reasons, it is more accurate to measure each decomposition stage separately. First Stage decomposition is described as Carbonaceous Biological Oxygen Demand (CBOD5), a quantitative measure of the amount of dissolved oxygen required for the biological oxidation of carbon-containing compounds in the sample, after a five day incubation period. It is followed by Second Stage decomposition measured by the biological oxidation of nitrogen–containing compounds as Ammonia Nitrogen (NH3-N). To determine CBOD5, an inhibitor is added to the sample, which prevents decomposition from progressing to its second stage. The analysis of CBOD5 for stream wasteload assessment has largely replaced the use of BOD in recent years because CBOD5, when used in conjunction with NH3-N analysis, provides a more accurate picture of the individual components of decomposition. Another constituent of wastewater effluent, which is useful to examine, is Total Suspended Solids (TSS). Wastewater plant effluent contains solid matter, both particulate (suspended) or dissolved. TSS is separated from dissolved solids by collection on a fine mesh filter. The Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) are obtained by evaporating the filtrate, and weighing the remaining residue. The sum and total of each of these constituent parameters, the flow from the treatment plant, and the population of the permit area served provide the actual amount of waste conveyed or “loaded” into a particular stream segment or waterway in a given year. TNRCC uses wasteload evaluations to assess current water quality. Wasteload forecasts build upon this initial “base year” data. They incorporate projected population growth and the geographic area served by the wastewater treatment facility with base year wasteload and population data. Forecasts provide guidance for future development in the watershed and are used in water quality simulation models when the TNRCC must decide:

• Whether to allow an increase in a treatment plant’s permitted flow. • Whether to approve a discharge application for a new treatment

facility. • Whether the potential exists for certain plants to exceed their permitted

flows in the future. • Whether construction of a particular plant encourages regionalization.

52

FORECAST METHODOLOGY Requirements The key factors in projecting future wasteloads (forecasting) from a particular domestic municipal service area are (1) the current population of the area, (2) the existing rate of waste generation, measured in gallons per person (capita) per day (GPCD), and (3) the compound annual growth rate for the service area. Other important considerations are the current volume of discharge flow from the treatment plant, measured in millions of gallons per day (MGD), permit limitations for the various constituents (e.g., BOD, CBOD5, TSS and NH3-N in mg/l), set by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, and the amount of each constituent actually discharged. Using this information, the following items can be projected for future years, in this case five-year intervals from 2000 to 2020:

• Future service area population. • Future discharge flow measured in MGD, for the service area's

treatment plant. • Future maximum levels of regulated constituents (BOD5, TSS, NH3-N

and CBOD 5) in wastewater treatment plant effluent, measured in pounds per day (lb. /day).

General Assumptions The wasteload projection method requires the following assumptions: 1. Service area boundaries do not change over time. 2. Population ratios (between the region and county population, the county and census

tract population, and the census tract and service area population) remain constant at the same level as in the base year.

3. The future per capita waste generation rate (GPCD), also known as the unit flow,

remains constant at the same level as in the base year. 4. Future permitted levels for discharge flow and the regulated constituents remain

constant at the same levels as in the base year. General Assumption Limitations The validity of the wasteload projections is affected by the following limitations inherent in the basic assumptions:

53

1. Service areas do change with time, particularly in areas with high growth rate, and

should be updated on a regular basis. 2. Population growth rates over a 20-year period may not remain constant at the same

level as in the base year. 3. The future per capita waste generation over a 20-year period may not be constant,

particularly in service areas experiencing high growth rates. Procedure 1. The list of permitted dischargers, by individual stream segments in the watersheds, is

updated based on H-GAC files and data from TNRCC. 2. Service area boundaries are obtained for each permitted discharge, and entered into

H-GAC’s GIS system for the base-year, the year 2000. 3. Population data from the 2000 Census are allocated to individual service areas by

overlaying GIS service area boundaries, with census tract data. A base-year 2000 population is estimated for each service area.

4. Average base-year wastewater treatment plant flows and constituent discharge levels

(TSS, NH3-N, BOD, and/or CBOD) are obtained for each service area either from TNRCC's database where available, or directly from Data Monitoring Reports (DMR) supplied by permit holders. This average is calculated by averaging 10 to 12 months of monthly data.

5. Base-year 2000 unit flow (gallons per capita per day, GPCD) is calculated for each

permit holder with the following formula

Unit Flow2000 = GCPD2000 = Flow2000 (MGD) X 1,000,000

Population2000 6. A growth model is used to calculate population projections (POP) for the years 2005

through the year 2020, in five-year increments. To do so it is first necessary to project the 2020 population from the base year population. Separate compound annual growth rates (CAGR), with individually associated Regional Analysis Zone (RAZ) populations, were calculated for each RAZ or portion within a particular Service Area (SA) Boundary. In the case where there was more than one RAZ component within the SA Boundary, the RAZ were totaled for the 2020 population (Appendix II, Table 1).

54

7. In the case where more than one CAGR occurs within a Service Area Boundary, a weighted, average Compound Average Growth Rate (CAGR) was determined, based on the relative size of each RAZ’s associated population (Appendix II, Table 2).

8. In order to determine the 2020 population, each Service Area CAGR is applied in

turn to the 2000 base year population according to the formula below:

Example: Service area: Sweet Smelling Wastewater District No. 00 2000 Population: 3,010 CAGR: 2.68 1.0268^20th (3,010) = 5,108 population for 2020

7. To obtain the remaining 5-year intervals (2005, 2010 and 2015), the following linear

equation is applied:

Example: 2005 projection (proj.)

((2020 Pop – 2000 Population)/20*5) + 2000 Population = 2005 Proj.

((5,108 – 3,010)/20*5) + 3,010 = 3,535 8. Projected flows for the five-year intervals 2005, 2010 and 2015, and 2020) are

calculated using the following formula, with the appropriate projection year population substituted as needed. Calculations for the year 2005 are shown here.

Flow2005 = Population2005 X GPCD2000

1,000,000 9. Constituent levels in pounds per day (lbs./day) are projected using the formula listed

below. Use of permitted constituent levels, rather that actual 2000 base year data, is required by TNRCC in this model.

[Projected flow in year 20YY X permitted constituent level (mg/liter)] x 8.34

where permitted constituent level is for TSS, NH3N, BOD or CBOD5 in mg/l, and 8.34 is the conversion factor to change from milligrams per liter (mg/l) to lbs./day when flow is measured in MGD.

55

Example of Procedure An example of this calculation for the TSS in the City of Friendswood for the year 2005 is as follows: 1. Examine data for the City of Friendswood Plant (Stream segment 1101) in the Main Report, Table 2. We will calculate the maximum projected amount of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) the plant will discharge in the year 2005. Initially what we have to work with is baseline data from the year 2000, some directly available, some calculated. 2. Directly available data from the year 2000 obtained from Population. (POP), DMR and permit as follows

Year 2000 Available Data Population (POP) 37,104 Flow 2000 (MGD) 4.507 TSS Max. (mg/l) allowed by permit 12.00 TSS Actual (lb/day) 68.74 3. Calculated data from the Year 2000 is found using the following formulas:

Year 2000 Calculated Data GCPD = Million Gallons per Capita per Day = (Flow 2000)(1000000)/POP = (4.507) (1000000)/37,104 = 121 TSS Max. (lb/day) = TSS Max. (mg/L) x 8.34*

= 12 x 8.34 = 100.00 *Conversion Factor from mg/liter to lb./day = 8.34 1 gallon = 8.34 lb. 1 mg = 0.0000022lb 1 Liter = 0.264 gallons

1mg = .00000834 lbs = 8.34 lbs gal. million gallons

56

4. From these data, we can calculate the amount of TSS entering the stream segment in 2005.

a. Using the following formula

TSS 2005 (lb./day) = Flow in 2005 (MGD) x (permitted constituent level (mg/l) x 8.34

Where Flow 2005 = (POP in 2005) (GCPD) in million gallons or (MGD)

day Permitted level of TSS = 12 mg/liter

Conversion from MGD mg/liter to lb./day = 8.34

b. We calculate TSS in lb./day for the year 2005 as follows:

TSS 2005 = Flow 2005 x Permit TSS x conversion = 4.881 MGD x 12 mg x 8.34 liter = 488.49 lb./day

Method Limitations Aside from some of the obvious limitations to this method suggested by the General Assumptions, the following limitations also should be taken into account when reviewing the projection results: 1. This method deals only with domestic wastewater permits. Industrial permitees are

not included in the study, and contribute significantly to the wasteload in the basin. 2. Service area boundaries and RAZ projections assume a uniform land use, and

vacancy rate across the entire service area. In actuality, neither land use or vacancy rate is uniform. Census data is more precise within smaller areas within the Service Area Boundaries. The smaller Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZ) unit might be more applicable. Unfortunately, their use is time prohibitive.

3. The projected levels of the regulated constituents are based on the maximum

permitted level allowed under the discharge permit. A plant's actual discharge level is generally well below the maximum permitted level. Projections should be viewed as a "worst-case scenario," in which all dischargers generate the maximum amount allowed by their permits all at the same time. This is reflected in the steep increase in constituent values from the base year (2000) to the first projection year (2005). While single dischargers can and sometimes do exceed their maximum permitted

57

levels, the likelihood of all permit dischargers exceeding their maximum permit levels at the same time is remote at best. While a margin of safety is necessary, there is considerable discussion between stakeholders as to whether or not this model is overly burdensome to development.

9. This model uses mixed classes of data. Current year (2000) wasteload values are

calculated using reported values. For the years 2005 through 2020, flow is projected based on actual flow in the year 2000. However, all other constituents are calculated using maximum permit values. A more consistent, uniform modeling would base projections for constituents on the base year constituent level, as is currently done only with flow. This would give more reality-based wasteload constituent projections.

10. At some point, Service Areas reach maximum population because all the land

available has been utilized. It would be “built out.” A “straight linear’ projection model is not valid as the service area approaches or achieves build out. H-GAC’s forecasts which generate Regional Analysis Zone numbers from which the Compound Annual Growth Rates is derived, does take land availability into account. However, this factor may breakdown at smaller levels of geography, such as wastewater treatment plant service areas.

11. In the past 10 years, service area boundaries in the region have been updated only

once. This frequency of updating does not adequately address population increases in areas of significant and/or rapid growth and development. The accuracy of the projections decreases incrementally as the forecasts become farther removed from the service area update.

Appendix IITABLE 1

San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal Basin Year 2001 - 2002: CAGR and Population Projection Calculations for 2020

POP RAZ POPENTITY PERMIT FLOW RAZ RAZ 2,000 POP 2020

(mgd) CAGR POP (Actual) 2,020 TOTAL

STREAM SEGMENT 1101

FRIENDSWOOD, CITY OF 11571.001 9.2500 1.0340 7 40,367 14 73873(GCWDA Blackhawk Region) 1.0431 7 16

0.9991 1383 1,3581.0271 15865 27,0831.0349 22495 44,6741.0089 610 728

LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.003 0.6600 1.0495 2116 14,267 5,561 27146(Countryside) 1.0116 52 65

1.0116 31 391.0116 864 1,0881.0271 5 91.0304 11199 20,384

LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.005 6.0000 1.0116 195 20,098 246 52382(Dallas-Salmon Plant) 1.0089 20 24

1.0271 2 31.0304 175 3191.0495 19706 51,790

NASSAU BAY, CITY OF 10526.001 1.3300 1.0089 4163 4,163 4,970 4970

WEBSTER, CITY OF 10520.001 1.6500 1.0495 23 5,730 60 74401.0304 1 21.0271 1103 1,8831.0089 4603 5,495

TOTAL for Clear Creek Tidal 18.8900 84,625 165811

STREAM SEGMENT 1102

BC MUD 1 12332.001 1.0000 1.0999 3396 6,005 22,805 40325(Southwyck) BC MUD 2 12705.001 0.1000 1.0999 2609 17,520 -

BC MUD 5 12295.001 0.7000 1.0034 20 5,742 21.40 38446

(BC MUD 4 & 5) 1.0999 5722 38,425

BC MUD 6 13784.001 0.1000 1.0990 1274 1,274 8,416 8416 (divert to BC MUD 1 in 2001)

HC WCID 89 12939.001 0.1000 1.0034 931 931 996 996(Morningside)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.020 1.4000 1.0292 6517 11,589 12538(Gulf Meadows- Added to SE) 0.9991 784 770

1.0431 67 1561.0431 2 5

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.075 6.1400 0.9991 23220 23,220 22,806 22806(Sagemont)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.079 5.3300 1.0292 1119 26,069 1,990 24369(Southeast) 1.0292 6425 11,425

0.9991 11110 10,9121.0431 17 401.0431 1 2

Appendix IITABLE 1




PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.002 2.2500 1.0431 6211 7,724 14,444 15,930(Barry Rose Plant No. 2) 0.9991 2 2

0.9991 1511 1,484

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.003 2.5000 0.9910 2131 13,895 1,779 30,292(Longwood Plant No. 3) 1.0431 11760 27,348

0.9991 4 4

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.007 2.0000 1.0431 18705 21,325 43,499 61093 (S.W. Environ) 1.0999 2620 17,594

TOTAL for Clear Creek Above-Tidal 21.6200 106,185 255211

STREAM SEGMENT 1103

GC WCID 1 10173.001 3.6000 1.0116 14655 19,395 18,457 25460(Dickenson, City of) 1.0495 4 11

1.0495 3 81.0342 1022 2,0021.0304 3362 6,1191.0342 314 6151.0177 35 50

0

LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.007 0.1500 1.0116 30 8,833 38 23,016(formerly Permit No. 11169.01 BayRidge closed 2001) 1.0116 109 137

1.0495 8691 22,841

TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Tidal 3.7500 28,228 48476

STREAM SEGMENT 1104

FRIENDSWOOD, CITY OF 10175.003 0.4000 0.0000 0 0 0 0(Towers Estate)

TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Above-Tidal 0.4000 0.0000 0 0 0 0

STREAM SEGMENT 1105

ANGLETON, CITY OF 10548.002 0.2500 1.0099 632 632 770 770(Brush Bayou Pit)

DANBURY, CITY OF 10158.001 0.5040 1.0099 1576 1,576 1,919 1919(Towers Estate)

TOTAL for Bastrop Bayou Tidal 0.7540 2208 2689

STREAM SEGMENT 1107

MANVEL, CITY OF 11251.001 0.0300 1.0182 18 134 900 1.0296 1

1.0990 115

TOTAL for Chocolate Bayou Tidal 0.0300 134 900

Appendix IITABLE 1




STREAM SEGMENT 1108

ARCOLA, CITY OF 13367.001 0.1250 1.0387 1008 1,008 2,154 2154

MANVEL, CITY OF City Boundary 1.0431 1 2,482 2 149391.0296 350 6271.0999 2131 14,310

MANVEL, CITY OF 13872.001 0.1000 1.0182 146 146 209

OAK MANOR MUD 10700.001 0.0800 1.0296 335 335 600 600

TOTAL for Chocolate Bayou Above Tidal 0.3050 3971 17902

STREAM SEGMENT 1109

COMMODORE COVE ID 10798.001 0.0600 1.0264 237 237 399 399

TOTAL for Oyster Creek Tidal 0.0600 237 399

STREAM SEGMENT 1110

ANGLETON, CITY OF 10548.001 3.6000 1.0192 6987 17,501 10,221 23,025(Oyster Creek) 1.0099 10514 12,804

FBCMUD No. 23 11999.001 0.2500 1.0387 2001 2,001 4,276 4276

FBCMUD Nos. 47,48,60 12701.001 0.3500 1.0387 1155 1,155 2,468 2468 (Vicksberg Joint Powers)

SIENNA PLANTATION 13854.001 0.2500 1.0387 1042 1,042 2,227 2227MUD No. 2 & 3

TOTAL for Oyster Creek Above Tidal 4.4500 21,699 31996

STREAM SEGMENT 1111

CLUTE, CITY OF 10044.001 4.0000 1.0099 22 12,826 27 15818(Brazos River Auth.+ Richwood) 1.0064 10813 12,285

1.0192 371 5431.0294 1660 2,963

OYSTER CREEK, CITY 11837.001 0.5000 1.0279 1439 1,439 2,495 2495(plus Surfside Beach)

TOTAL For Old Brazos River Channel 4.5000 14,265 18313

STREAM SEGMENT 1113

CLEAR LAKE CITY W.A. 10539.001 9.0000 1.0395 31495 59643 68,349 106412(Clear Lake) 1.0204 7398 11,080

1.0204 8 121.0225 6019 9,3931.0089 14723 17,578

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.136 5.0000 1.0395 9577 14983 20,784 28321(Metro Central) 1.0156 5 7

0.9991 86 841.0271 2520 4,3020.9991 911 8951.0089 1884 2,249

TOTAL for Armand Bayou 14.0000 74,626 134733

Appendix IITABLE 1




STREAM SEGMENT 2424

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.002 3.7500 14,190 0 22540(Airport WWTP) 0.9937 4006 3,530

1.0317 10184 19,010

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.005 0.2500 1.0317 486 491 907 911(Terramar Beach WWTP) 0.9937 5 4

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.006 0.1500(Point San Luis)

GCFWSD No. 6 10879.001 0.2500 1.0014 528 1,016 543 1,454(Tiki Island) 1.0317 265 495

1.0317 223 416

GCMUD No. 12 10435.002 0.4000 1.0014 2087 2,087 2,146 2146(Bayou Vista)

GCWCID No. 8 10174.001 1.5000 1.0177 2962 2,962 4,207 4207(Santa Fe)

HITCHCOCK, CITY OF 10690.001 3.0000 1.0139 5450 5,459 7,183 7,1921.0177 1 11.0014 8 8

JAMAICA BEACH, CITY 11033.001 0.1800 1.0099 1074 1,074 1,308 1308

LA MARQUE, CITY OF 10410.003 3.0000 1.0177 2047 13,573 2,907 15354(Westside) 1.0139 4054 5,343

0.9897 5 40.9943 4224 3,7681.0014 3227 3,3190.9897 16 13

TOTAL for West (Galveston) Bay 12.4800 40,852 55112

STREAM SEGMENT 2421

BACLIFF MUD 10627.001 1.0300 1.0239 5320 5,320 8,532 8532

BAYVIEW MUD 10770.001 0.2500 1.0239 1420 1,420 2,277 2277

GALVESTON CO. WCID 12 12039.001 0.5000 1.0495 2809 3,430 7,382 8378 (Kemah) 1.0239 621 996

LA PORTE, CITY OF 10206.001 7.5600 1.0250 175 31,279 287 373681.0061 11396 12,8700.9949 8918 8,0511.0204 10790 16,160

SAN LEON MUD 11546.001 0.9500 1.0239 4403 4,403 7,062 7062

SEABROOK, CITY OF 10671.001 2.5000 1.0225 9358 9,443 14,603 14739 1.0239 85 136

TOTAL for Upper Galveston Bay 12.7900 55,295 78356

Appendix IITABLE 1




STREAM SEGMENT 2425

HC WCID 50 10243.001 0.5400 1.0225 2969 2,969 4,633 4633(El Lago Plant)

TOTAL for Clear Lake 0.5400 2,969 4633

STREAM SEGMENT 2427

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for San Jacinto Bay 0.0000 0.0000 0 0 0 0

STREAM SEGMENT 2431

TEXAS CITY, CITY OF 10375.001 12.4000 1.0116 2182 42,037 2,748 628511.0322 3 61.0322 1 21.0342 16284 31,9041.0322 2 41.0322 2042 3,8491.0028 5466 5,7801.0116 31 391.0116 2 31.0177 2716 3,8581.0304 1 21.0322 403 7601.0014 7672 7,8901.0322 26 490.9897 3027 2,4611.0239 2174 3,4871.0304 6 11

TOTAL for Moses Lake 12.4000 42,037 62,851 63851

STREAM SEGMENT 2432

ALVIN, CITY OF 10005.001 0.5000 1.0431 4083 21,668 9,495 34719 1.0349 1 2

1.0182 17584 25,222

HILLCREST VILLAGE,CI 10420.001 0.1500 1.0182 569 569 816 816

TOTAL for Chocolate Bay 0.6500 22,237 35535

STREAM SEGMENT 2433

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for Bastrop Bay 0.0000 0.0000 0 0 0 0

STREAM SEGMENT 2434

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for Christmas Bay 0.0000 0.0000 0 0 0 0

Appendix IITABLE 1




STREAM SEGMENT 2435

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for Drum Bay 0.0000 0.0000 0 0 0 0

STREAM SEGMENT 2437

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for Texas City Ship Channel 0.0000 0.0000 0 0 0 0

STREAM SEGMENT 2436

MORGANS POINT, CITY OF 10779.001 0.2000 0.9949 336 336 303 303

TOTAL for Barbours Cut 336 303


(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for Bayport Channel 0.0000 0.0000 0 0 0 0

STREAM SEGMENT 2439

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.001 10.0000 0.9937 30339 40,079 26,737 39985(Main WWTP) 1.0155 9740 13,248

TOTAL for Lower Galveston Bay 10.0000 40,079 39985

GRAND TOTAL 117.6190 539,983 954,205

Appendic IITABLE 2

San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal Basin Year 2001 - 2002: Growth Rate and Plant CapacityPERMIT Growth Growth Plant CapacityFLOW Rate Rate (Per Cent)


STREAM SEGMENT 1101





WEBSTER, CITY OF 10520.001 1.6500 1.0 0.9 - 2.7 64.6 69.7 74.5 82.4 84.0


STREAM SEGMENT 1102


BC MUD 2 12705.001 0.1000 9.9BC MUD 5 12295.001 0.7000 9.9 54.3 134.6 210.0 287.2 364.7

(BC MUD 4 & 5)BC MUD 6 13784.001 0.1000 9.9 102.7 247.0 390.6 534.5 680.0








STREAM SEGMENT 1103





STREAM SEGMENT 1105




Appendic IITABLE 2



STREAM SEGMENT 1107

MANVEL, CITY OF 11251.001 0.0300 9.9 41.3 94.6 146.7 201.3 254.7


STREAM SEGMENT 1108

ARCOLA, CITY OF 13367.001 0.1250 3.8 56.8 73.6 89.6 106.2 122.4


OAK MANOR MUD 10700.001 0.0800 3.0 45.8 54.8 63.9 72.9 82.0


STREAM SEGMENT 1109





FBCMUD No. 23 11999.001 0.2500 3.9 63.6 82.0 100.0 118.0 136.2




STREAM SEGMENT 1111




STREAM SEGMENT 1113




Appendic IITABLE 2



STREAM SEGMENT 2424







JAMAICA BEACH 11033.0001 0.1800 1.0 69.1 72.9 76.7 80.0 84.2



STREAM SEGMENT 2421

BACLIFF MUD 10627.001 1.0300 2.4 50.5 58.1 65.7 73.3 80.9

BAYVIEW MUD 10770.001 0.2500 2.4 38.5 44.3 50.2 56.0 61.8



SAN LEON MUD 11546.001 0.9500 2.4 58.2 67.0 75.8 84.5 93.3

SEABROOK, CITY OF 10671.001 2.5000 2.2 34.4 39.3 44.1 48.9 53.8


STREAM SEGMENT 2425



STREAM SEGMENT 2431



STREAM SEGMENT 2432

ALVIN, CITY OF 10005.001 5.0000 2.3 46.3 53.2 60.2 67.2 74.1



Appendic IITABLE 2



STREAM SEGMENT 2436



STREAM SEGMENT 2439



GRAND TOTAL 121.7690 46.3 56.0 64.6 81.5 92.7

This page left blank intentionally.

San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal Basin Wasteload Forecast 2001 – 2002

69

APPENDIX III

HOW CAN I USE WASTELOAD FORECASTS?

Insight and Analysis


70

INTRODUCTION

The San Jacinto-Brazos (SJB) Wasteload Forecasts for 2001 – 2002 includes a “How To” - Insight and Analysis section this year for several reasons. First and foremost we wanted to provide insight into how wasteload data and forecasts can be used as a management tool, not only for regulatory agencies, but also for domestic wastewater producers (cities, utility districts, and private entities), and the general public. We have identified specific examples of how the report can be used including: examining growth rates to determine population density, plant capacity and the timing for expansion; comparisons of Gallons Per Capita per Day (GPCD) by population for enhanced system management; and possible opportunities for regionalization. Secondly, in light of comments made at public meetings, we have prepared forecasts using two different methods – actual constituent vs. permit values to (1) evaluate what wasteload values might actually be expected in forecast years, and (2) to determine if there is a sufficient safety factor built into discharge permit constituent values. We have also compared forecasts for the year 2000 made over the past 10 years, with actual reported values to determine the validity of our forecast model.

GENERAL ANALYSIS

Population, Annual Growth Rate, and Plant Capacity Population. Service area (SA) boundaries for the SJB Basin are based on data obtained directly from the permit holders. These were entered into ArcView GIS and are shown in map form in Appendix III, Figure 3. Accompanying Map Keys are listed by numeric (Key 1), alphabetic (Key 2), and Stream Segment (Key 3) order. It is worth noting that service areas do not necessarily correspond to city limits. Several of the municipalities have more than one permit in this basin: League City (3), Houston (3), Pearland (7), Angleton (2), Manvel (2), Galveston (5), and La Marque (2). Additionally, several municipalities have permits in more than one Stream Segment: League City (Segments 1101 and 1103), Houston (Segments 1102 and 1113), Angleton (Segments 1105 and 1110), Manvel (Segments 1107 and 1108), and Galveston (Segments 2424 and 2439). The base year 2000 population and the projected population for the year 2020 are used to calculate the population for interval years 2005, 2010, and 2015 (Appendix III, Table 1, found at the end of the Appendix.)


71


72


73


74


75

Population within the service areas in the SJB Basin in the year 2000 is 537,513. It is projected to almost double to 1,005,335 in the year 2020. Based on the data obtained by H-GAC (Appendix III, Table 1 at the end of this Appendix), the fastest growing areas in the SJB Basin are:

• Northern Brazoria County

1. Silver Lake/Southwick area (Brazoria County MUDs 1, 5 and 6) 2. City of League City 3. City of Pearland

• Northern and Eastern Galveston County

1. Kemah (Galveston County WCID No. 12) 2. City of Manvel

• Northeastern Fort Bend County

1. Vicksberg 2. Sienna Plantation

Compound Annual Growth Rates. CAGR are useful in determining how rapidly a particular SA is growing. While municipalities with a loss or a low rate of growth may not significantly affect water quality in the year 2020 than in the year 2000, the impact of entities with very rapid growth rates can be considerable. The relative significance a CAGR is a function of its range is shown in Appendix III, Table 2 following.

APPENDIX III -TABLE 2

COMPOUND ANNUAL GROWTH RATES (Actual and Projected)

Significance

Rate (Percent)

Type of Growth Comment

Zero Loss

Mature Area

0 to 1 Low Growth May be Limited by Boundaries

1 to 2 Moderate Typical of Houston-Galveston Area

2 to 4.9 Significant Need to Evaluate WWTP Capacity

5 and Above Very Significant May not be Sustainable


76

Growth rates for the SJB Basin are shown in Appendix III, Table 3 at the end of the Appendix. Growth rates vary widely throughout the SJB Basin. A growth rate of approximately 1.5 percent is fairly typical for most service areas in the H-GAC region. H-GAC is in the process of updating forecasts, including growth rates.The highest individual service area growth rates in the SJB Basin, shown by segment number in are:

• Average CAGR: 9.9%

1. Southwick/Silver Lake – BC MUDs 1, 5, and 6 (Seg. 1102) 2. City of Manvel (Seg. 1107)

• Average CAGR: 4.5 - 5.0%

1. City of League City - Dallas-Salmon Plant (Seg. 1101) 2. City of League City-Bay Ridge Plant (Segment 1103) diverted to the

Dallas-Salmon plant late in 2001. 3. City of Pearland - SW Environment Treatment Plant (Seg. 1102). 4. Galveston County WCID No. 12, serving Kemah (Seg. 2421)

• Average CAGR: 3.0 – 3.9

1. City of Friendswood (Seg. 1101) 2. City of League City – Countryside Plant (Seg. 1101) 3. City of Pearland – Barry Rose Plant (Seg. 1102) 4. City of Pearland – Longwood Plant (Seg. 1102) 5. City of Arcola (Seg. 1108) 6. Oak Manor MUD (Seg. 1108) 7. Fort Bend Co. MUD No. 23 (Seg. 1110) 8. Vicksberg (Fort Bend Co. MUD Nos. 47, 48, 60) (Seg. 1110) 9. Sienna Plantation MUD No. 2 & 3 (Seg.1110) 10. City of Houston – Metro Plant (Seg. 1113) 11. City of Galveston – Terramar Beach Plant (Seg. 2424)

The lowest rates, which actually showed negative growth were found in Segment 2436 (City of Morgan’s Point), and Segment 2439 (City of Galveston, Main Plant). Plant Capacity. The data in the SJB Basin Wasteload Appendix III, Table 1 at the end of this Appendix, can be used for a variety of water quality management planning purposes. The scope of this report is not intended to address all of these purposes, but rather to put forth ideas as to how the data might best be utilized by individual permit holders and the general public. For example, wastewater treatment plants are built to serve a certain maximum population, receiving a permit with a “maximum daily flow rate” from TNRCC. Agency guidelines provide two triggers to aid in water quality management planning. When a plant reaches 75% of its maximum capacity, the permit holder should begin engineering studies to expand the current plant, build a new one, or look for opportunities for regionalization. At 90% of plant capacity, a permit holder should either have begun construction for a new or expanded facility, or have an agreement for some


77

type of regionalization option. A permit holder can determine when these trigger points will occur by flow rates and CAGR (Appendix III, Table 3 at the end of the Appendix). In the first Stream Segment (1101) in Appendix III, Table 3, data show that the first permit holder, the City of Friendswood’s Blackhawk Regional Plant has a maximum permitted flow of 9.5 MGD and a moderately high average annual compound annual growth of 3.0% [range from 2.7 to 3.5% depending on individual Regional Analysis Zones (RAZ) within SA Boundary]. In the year 2000, its plant capacity was 48.5%, and we project that it will reach 76.9% of capacity in the year 2015, at which time the City of Friendswood should begin planning for an expansion or newly constructed plant. League City’s Countryside Plant and the City of Webster will reach that threshold in 2010. League City’s Dallas-Salmon Plant capacity is currently at 65% capacity, but its service area CAGR is high at 5.0 %. Engineering plans should be well under way because it is projected to reach the construction threshold in 2005. Nassau Bay, which is essentially land/water locked and has a lower growth rate, will not need to consider plant expansion until after 2020. Based on the year 2000 and 2005 plant capacity plus individual service area CAGR (Appendix III, Table 3, at the end of the Appendix) plants which are expected to reach the engineering, build, or completion thresholds by 2005, are listed below by Stream Segment, and illustrated in Appendix III - Figure 2.

• Begin Engineering Phase in 2005: 75% Threshold 1. City of Dickinson (Galveston Co. WCID No. 1) Seg. 1103 2. City of Angleton – Brush Bayou Plant (Segment 1105) 3. City of Manvel (Seg. 1107) 4. City of Arcola (Seg. 1108) 5. Commodore Cove ID (Seg. 1109) 6. Fort Bend Co. MUD No. 23 (Seg. 1110) 7. Sienna Plantation MUD No. 2 & 3 (Seg. 1110) 8. City of La Marque – Westside Plant (Seg. 2424)

• Begin Construction or Regionalization in 2005: 90% Threshold

League City – Dallas Salmon Plant (Seg. 1101)

• Complete Construction or Regionalization in 2005: 100% Threshold 1. Silver Lake/Southwick

- Brazoria Co. MUD No. 1 (Seg. 1102) - Brazoria Co. MUD No. 6 (regionalized with BC MUD No. 1, Seg. 1102) - BC MUD No. 5 (Seg. 1102)

2. Kemah (Galveston WCID No. 1, Seg. 2421)


78


79

Technically, Bayou Vista (Galveston County MUD No. 12, Segment 2424) should also be in the “complete construction phase” in 2005. However, Bayou Vista has a CAGR of only 0.1 percent, having essentially reached maximum build out. Since it is not possible for our model to assess this factor within very small geographic areas, the threshold figure is probably not relevant in this case. Compound Annual Growth Rates can also be used to examine population growth in entire watersheds. Significant growth is located along Clear Creek both in (Segment 1101), and above (Segment 1102) the Tidal area - City of League City, Friendswood, Silver Lake and Pearland; and along Armand Bayou (Segment 1113) - Clear Lake City. Similarly, rapid commercial and residential growth in the Kemah area (GC WCID No. 12, Segment 2421) makes it an increasing wasteload contributor to Upper Galveston Bay. Significant growth also occurs along Oyster Creek, Above Tidal (Segment 1110) - Vicksberg and Sienna Plantation where creek flow has been restricted by development, and along Chocolate Bayou, both Above Tidal (Segment 1110), and in the Tidal area (Segment 1108) – City of Manvel, City of Arcola and Oak Manor. In areas where significant growth is projected, it is reasonable to ask the question, “Can the particular service area accommodate the projected increase in population?” For example, the City of Friendswood’s population in the year 2000 was 40,367. Because of a CAGR of 3.0%, population is projected to reach 73,873 by the year 2020. Does the city have sufficient land within its service area boundaries to accommodate almost twice its current population? Examination of the City’s website (http://www.ci.friendswood.tx.us/) shows that the City of Friendswood currently is comprised of 6,759 acres of developed land (80 percent of which is residential), 5,473 acres of undeveloped land and 1,184 acres of publicly held land. Based on these figures, it is likely the City of Friendswood can accommodate this growth. Similar types of evaluations can be made for other cities and utility districts using SJB projections (Appendix III, Tables 1 and 3, both at the end of this Appendix). It should be noted that H-GAC’s population forecast formula for the projected year 2020 includes a land allocation module that should keep us from “overbuilding” an area. Population, Flow, Consumption. Examination of variations in population, plant flow and consumption (GPCD) can be a useful tool for water quality management planning. When different permit holders are grouped by population, we find that GPCD is variable (Appendix III, Table 4). For example, three municipal service areas have populations of approximately 40,000: Friendswood, Texas City and Galveston – Main Plant. Plant flows range from 4.5 to approximately 6.7 MGD. Other comparisons are provided for service areas with populations of approximately 21,000, 5,700 and 2,900.


80

APPENDIX III - TABLE 4

Population, Flow and Usage (GPCD)

Entity Plant Segment Population Flow (MGD) GPCD

City of Friendswood 1101 40,367 4.5027 112City of Galveston Main 2439 40.279 6.7168 168City of Texas City 2431 42,037 5.5664 132

GC WCID 8 Sant Fe 2424 2,962 0.4136 140HC WCID No. 12 El Lago 2425 2,969 0.2597 87City of Manvel 1108 2,482 0.0231 90

BC MUD No. 5 1102 5,742 0.3813 66City of Hitchcock 2424 5,459 1.0071 184BC MUD No. 1 1102 6,006 0.6500 108

City of League City Dallas-Salmon 1101 20,098 3.9000 194City of Houston Sagemont 1102 23,220 2.0696 89City of Pearland SW Environ. 1102 21,325 0.9342 44City of Alvin 2432 21,668 2.313 107

Factors such as stormwater infiltration, large commercial areas, plant capacity and age, and sewer line age and maintenance can make a plant less effective, creating an artificially high GPCD. Improperly sealed manhole covers allow rainwater to enter the sewer system, which increases plant flow. Large commercial establishments discharging significant quantities of plant effluent can also inflate the GPCD. Smaller plants, or those running at low capacity are less efficient than larger plants, or those running at higher capacity, causing variable GPCD. Sewer lines require periodic maintenance, more so when the lines are old, and prone to cracking or breaking thereby allowing groundwater or stormwater to infiltrate the lines. Allowing excess non-wastewater flow to be processed by the plant is costly. Entities with high GPCD (Appendix III, Table 1, at the end of the Appendix) should evaluate these parameters as they consider their water


81

quality management plans. Treatment Plants with the highest GCPD for the year 2000 are shown below, by stream segment, alphabetically (Table 5, following).


Basin GPCD (Gallons Per Capita per Day)

E n tity P lan t S egm en t G P C D

C ity o f L eague C ity D allas-S alm on 11 01 194C ity o f N assau B ay 11 01 177C ity o f W ebste r 11 01 186C ity o f A n ge lton B ru sh B ayou 11 04 310G C M U D N o . 12 B ay ou V ista 24 24 174C ity o f H itch cock 24 24 184C ity o f M o rg an 's P o in t 24 36 182C ity o f G a lveston M ain 24 39 168

Regionalization In conversations with plant operators, it became apparent that regionalization is occurring in the SJB basin without outside prompting (Appendix III, Table 1, found at the end of the Appendix). The City of Friendswood's Blackhawk Plant is a regional one, receiving flows from five previous permit holders in the area. The City of League City closed its Bay Ridge Plant, diverting flow to another of its plant. Brazoria County MUD No. 1 has become a regional plant, acquiring flow from BC MUD No. 2 and BC MUD No. 6. The City of Houston has diverted flow from its now closed Gulf Meadows Plant to its Southeast Plant. The City of Pearland has reduced the number of its active treatment plants from six to three, with an additional plant, Far Northwest, under construction in 2002 to accommodate projected growth and development in the area. In fact, the City of Pearland has accepted flow from 18 utility districts into its three major wastewater treatment plants over the past 20 years. Clear Lake City has closed one of its plants, diverting flow to the Clear Lake City Water Authority Plant. This latter plant also accepts flow from Harris County WCID 75, which began diverting flow to it in 1995. In the case of Brazoria County (BC) MUD Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6, there has been considerable regionalization with diversion of flow from several plants. The WWTP for BC MUD NO. No. 5 receives flow from BC MUD 4, and BC MUD No. 1 receives flow from BC MUDs No. 2 and 6. However, while the total number of discharges has decreased over the years in this watershed, it is anticipated that plant numbers will increase because of the rapid growth in the Silver Lake area. In the year 2000, BC MUD Nos. 1 and 6 had a combined population of 7,279, and a combined plant capacity around


82

75%. Because of projected rapid growth rate (Average CAGR, 9.9%), a new or expanded plant should be constructed, or regionalization pursued before 2005. Additionally, these MUDs are projected to have a combined population of 31,221 in 2020. Since each of the currently operating plants in the area of these MUDs is relatively small in size, this area would be an excellent candidate for one or more larger regional plants. In fact, informal discussions have begun between BC MUD No. 1 and the City of Pearland concerning possible regionalization. In other parts of the SJB Basin, Fort Bend County MUDs Nos. 47, 48 and 60 share one plant, and Sienna Plantation MUDs Nos. 2 and 3 share another. The City of Clute’s plant also serves Richwood, and the City of Oyster Creek’s plant serves Surfside Beach. The City of La Marque has closed and diverted one plant. It should also be noted that Pirates Beach (Galveston County MUD No. 1) recycles its wastewater to a golf course.

WASTELOAD FORECAST INSIGHTS There are four major Tables to consider when comparing forecast values and method models - Appendix III, Tables 1, 6, 7, and 8. Appendix III, Table 1 contains population and wastewater constituents for the years 2000 to 2002, as well as five-year forecasts, for the SJB Basin for the years 2005 through 2020. These forecasts were prepared using the traditional “theoretical maximum design value” method which is based on permitted constituent values. In Appendix III, Table 6, we performed forecasts which substituted actual reported values for the theoretical permitted ones (Appendix III, Table 6 found at the end of the Appendix). This enabled us to develop wasteload values we might actually expect to see in forecast years. These two methods are then compared side by side, by Stream Segment, in Appendix III, Table 7 (found at the end of the Appendix). This table not only provides comparison of the different model/methods, but also aids in determining whether there are sufficient safety factors built into the discharge constituent values. Finally, we compared 10-year historical population and constituent forecasts (prepared in the years 1992, 1995, and 1998) for the year 2000 with actual 2000 values to evaluate the accuracy of the forecasts. These are found in Appendix III, Table 8, at the end of the Appendix. For further information contact Kathleen Ramsey, at [email protected]. Year 2000. Wasteload values for constituents for the year 2000, including BOD5, TSS, NH3-N and CBOD5, all in lb./day, are seen in Appendix III, Table 1 (found at the end of the Appendix). Total Basin contributions are highlighted in Appendix III, Table 9, following.



83


Total Basin Population, Consumption and Constituent Contributions ___________________________________________________________

Constituent Value (MGD or lb./day)

___________________________________________________________

Population 537,513 GPCD (Gal./Capita/Day) 5,924 Flow (MGD) 55 BOD5* 462 TSS* 1909 NH3-N* 175 CBOD5* 939 * Listed in lb./day

___________________________________________________________ Examination of the individual Stream Segments shows that 8 of the 24 segments contribute approximately 80 percent of the Basin Population and Flow (Table 10, following). It is reasonable to assume that if a segment’s flow contributes 20% to the total flow of the Basin, each of its constituents (BOD5, TSS, NH3-N, or CBOD5) should contribute approximately 20% to the constituent wasteload of the Basin. This is true in most segments for TSS, with notable exceptions being Segments 1103, and 2424 where TSS levels are twice as high as their respective flows. This differs with NH3-N constituent levels where the relative percent of NH3-N levels only in Segments 1113, 2424, and 2421 approximate those of their flow. In Segment 1102, NH3-N percentage is almost twice the flow component, while in Segments 1103 and 1111 they are 4 to 5 times as high. For CBOD5, Segments 2424 and 2121 approximate the relative flow contribution, Segments 1102 and 1103 are almost double, and Segments 1103 and 1111 are three times as high as the relative flow contribution. In summary, Segments 1102, 1103 and 1111 are considerably above their relative flow with regard to NH3-N and CBOD5, while Segments 1103 and 2424 are considerably above relative values for TSS. Segment 1103 may show improvement in the future since the City of League City’s Bay Ridge Plant was closed in late 2001, and flow diverted to a more efficient plant in segment 1101. Constituents in Segments 1101, 1113 and 2421 are most consistent – either below or equal to the relative contribution of their flows.


84

APPENDIX III - TABLE 10 San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal Basin: Significant Segment Contribution 2001-2002

Basin Total (percent)

Segment Location Population Flow BOD5 TSS NH3-N CBOD5

1101 Clear Creek Tidal 15.6 18.9 - 6.8 10.1 16.9

1102 Clear Creek Above Tidal 19.6 15.6 - 14.8 27.9 25.4

1103 Dickinson Bayou Tidal 5.2 4.5 - 8.9 16.1 12.8

1111 Old Brazos River Channel 2.6 4.1 - 6.4 19.2 12.5

1113 Armand Bayou 13.8 5.7 - 5.8 6.3 9.3

2424 West (Galveston) Bay 7.5 11.7 25.2 21.8 8.0 12.4

2421 Upper Galveston Bay 10.2 7.6 6.8 9.6 6.4 9.2

2439 Lower Galveston Bay 7.4 11.9 31.4 12.3 - -

Totals 81.9 80.0 63.4 86.4 94.0 98.5

Five-year Projections. Wasteload Forecasts for the SJB Basin for the years 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2020 are shown in Appendix III, Table 1, found at the end of the Appendix. These forecasts use maximum permit (theoretical maximum design) values for formulary calculations. Forecasts were also prepared for these years using actual constituent data in place of maximum permit values (Appendix III, Table 6 found at the end of the Appendix). This latter method is consistent with the methodology used for flow forecasting model used in Appendix III, Table I. Comparison of the two sets of data show a dramatic increase in projected wasteloads, when maximum permit values are used instead of base year values, both for particular segments as well as individual permit holders. Method Comparisons. A comparison of forecast methods by Stream Segment for the years 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2020, is shown in Appendix III, Table 7, found at the end of this Appendix. The difference (percent) between the two methods varies depending on segment, but the permit value method always produces significantly higher wasteload


85

forecasts than the actual value method. The permit value forecast method is the most excessive for ammonia nitrogen. For the total basin, the difference ranges from 140 percent to 780 percent higher using the permit value method rather than the actual value. The extent of this overage begs the questions, “Why is this difference so large?” and How Does this impact what the forecasts used for?” If wasteload forecasts are used to estimate actual, future wasteloads for water bodies, the permit value formula appears faulty to the point of excess. If on the other hand, one uses the wasteload forecasts to provide a factor of safety for the water bodies, then the permit value method is not adequate. A safety factor of 10 is often considered a starting point for protecting generic biological systems. A determination of safety factors for forecast years (2005, 2010, 2015, and 2020) for each of the constituents shows safety factors of 2.4 to 8.7 (Appendix III, Table 7, found at the end of the Appendix). A comparison between the actual values for the year 2000 (population, flow, BOD5, TSS, NH3-N, CBOD5), and values forecast for the Year 2000 prepared in the years 1992, 1995, and 1998 is shown in Appendix III, Table 8 (Clear Lake Watershed and surrounding area). With regard to population, two findings are notable: (1) all figures projected for the year 2000 are considerably lower than actual figures for 2000, by factors of 25% to 400%, and (2) there is considerable homogeneity for all population forecasts for a particular permit holder. There are several possible explanations for this. First, the actual population figures for the year 2000 are determined from 2000 Census data and current service area boundaries. The other yearly forecast figures for the year 2000 (prepared in 1992, 1995, or 1998) are actually an enhanced projections based on 1990 Census data, and regional analysis zones (RAZ) projection figures, updated annually beginning in 1995. Additionally, the population calculated for each of the three (3) years is based on service area boundaries that date from the early 1990s. No updates were performed after 1992. Considerable growth has taken place in the SJB Basin, especially in the Clear Lake watershed and surrounding area. Henceforth, the farther from the census year, and service area boundaries, the less accurate the forecasts. These data emphasize how essential it is for service area boundaries to be updated every time we perform forecasting. The second portion of Appendix III, Table 8 compares actual parameter data for BOD5, TSS, NH3-N, and CBOD5 (all in lb./day) in the Year 2000 to forecast values for the Year 2000 projected in 1992, 1995, and 1998. The projected values are based on extrapolations using maximum permitted values for the constituents, rather than actual constituent levels. Clearly the Year 2000 values forecast in 1992, 1995, and 1998, bear little resemblance to those actually reported. Both total segment and total basin wasteload values for the Year 2000 forecast in 1992, 1995, and 1998, appear inflated.


86

DISCUSSION

Data Acquisition Each applicant for a wastewater effluent permit, either new or renewal, is required by TNRCC to submit Service Area Boundary maps for review in the permitting process. Once the permit has been granted, there are requirements to supply daily values plus a monthly summary of flow and monitored constituents to regulatory authorities in the form of Data Monitoring Reports (DMR). Consequently, all the information required to perform wasteload forecast should be readily available from the Agency. Unfortunately wasteload data acquisition has always been problematic because of computer software problems. H-GAC maintains permit files, but not DMR data, on all domestic municipal wastewater permit holders in its region. In order to complete this forecast report, H-GAC contacted the permit holders directly by telephone in most cases.

Regionalization Concept Regionalization is a general concept that encourages orderly local planning of wastewater treatment facilities and service areas. Its goal is to limit the number of point source discharges and resultant wasteloads in waterways through the use of larger, more efficient wastewater treatment plants. H-GAC’s current recommendations regarding regionalization are optimistic in that the basic premise assumes wastewater systems and services can be planned across political boundaries in the absence of a strong regional authority and financial incentives. Why are Regional Treatment Plants, with flows greater than 3 MGD, so important to the water quality of the region? First, they overcome deficiencies associated with small and intermediate plants due to economy of scale. Smaller plants are typically unmanned, which leads to a critical lack of responsiveness when operational problems arise. During high flow conditions (e.g. rain events) these plants are more susceptible to overloading and may have to “pass through” untreated wastewater into receiving streams or other bodies of water. With larger service areas and customer bases, regional facilities have the financial resources to provide more efficient plant operation and management, which minimize the effects of upsets and high-flow conditions that overload smaller plants. Secondly, Regional Treatment Plants generally have more restrictive operating requirements resulting in fewer pollutants being released into receiving streams on a gallon per day basis. Finally, Regional Treatment Plants have the financial base to make improvements and upgrade treatment processes when necessary, without placing an undue burden on customers.


87

Types Proactive regionalization. Proactive regionalizartion occurs prior to development of an area and involves agreements and contracts between political subdivisions, businesses, and property owners. This is the preferred method of regionalization as it allows for pre-development planning and proper sizing of treatment facilities and sites, collection/conveyance systems, and service areas. Regional wastewater treatment plants, like most plants, are normally phased and upgraded as development and growth dictates. Therefore a proactive approach can be a valuable development tool to promote sustained growth. It is unfortunate, that considering the rapid growth in new development in certain areas of the SJB Basin, most notably northern Brazoria and eastern Fort Bend Counties; proactive regionalization has not been used more widely. Small wastewater treatment plants continue to proliferate. Retroactive regionalization. Retroactive regionalization the other hand, is consolidation of interim/small plants at a later date. This type of regionalization is prevalent in the SJB Basin, most notably in the City of Friendswood (Blackhawk Regional Plant, 9.25 MGD), the City of Houston (Metro Central, 5 MGD and Southeast, 5.33 MGD), City of League City (Dallas-Salmon, 6 MGD), and Clear Lake City Water Authority (9 MGD). There are inherent disadvantages to relying on a retroactive approach to greatly enhance basin water quality. Physical barriers, a lack of planning and costly infrastructure (e.g., pump stations, and force mains) may prevent diversion of existing plants or make the process cost-prohibitive. Concerns From a regulatory standpoint, the use of regional plants reduces the number of point source discharges that state and local agencies must regulate. It has been noted that with the vast number of wastewater treatment plants in the region in relation to the number of state inspectors, it can be a decade or more between inspections. Fewer plants equates with better monitoring of each plant. Stream Segments are a fundamental unit for state and federal water quality planning purposes. All Stream Segments in this basin are on the state’s list of impaired waterways. The Clean Water Act requires that impaired waterways (consolidated on what is termed the “303(d)” list, so named for the applicable section of the Clean Water Act) enact Total Daily Maximum Load (TMDL) projects to reduce pollutant loads. Based on a stream’s “designated use”, a determination will be made on its assimilative capacity (what level and type of pollutants a stream can accept before its recreational and/or economic uses are affected). Both point source and nonpoint source types of pollution are listed as contributing to Stream Segment impairment for a specific use. Point source pollution is pollution that is attributable to readily identifiable sources (i.e. a pipe or ditch discharge) which includes wastewater treatment plants. Nonpoint source pollution refers to runoff


88

(e.g., paved parking lots) that picks up pollutants along its drainage path and deposits those pollutants in waterways. While it is the general consensus that nonpoint source pollution introduces the lion’s share of pollutants to the region’s waterways, it is also believed that the cumulative effect of wastewater treatment plant effluent has an adverse impact on water quality. Based on the current 303(d) list and impairments, it appears that the vast number of wastewater discharges and pollutant loads in the region will need to be addressed under the Total Daily Maximum Load (TMDL) process. Because TMDLs are initiated on a watershed by watershed (Stream Segment by Stream Segment) basis, little consideration is given to political boundaries during the process laying out remedial steps to improve water quality in these impacted Stream Segments. TMDLs for these segments will likely involve more stringent treatment requirements (stricter permit limits) for wastewater discharges. Due to limited service areas and customer bases, smaller plants and their customers may not be able to afford the improvements necessary to bring these plants into compliance. The TMDL process serves to reinforce that regionalization may not be optional, and regional cooperation will be essential in meeting TMDL goals. The TMDL team at the TNRCC has a ten-year timeframe in mind to bring all of the states 147 impaired waterways into compliance. Conclusions Regional Wastewater Authority. Currently regionalization occurs on a voluntary basis, and can be severely hampered by lack of funding. A regional wastewater authority with taxing authority is a viable option. A regional authority would not own or operate any treatment works but could coordinate the effort, making Texas Water Development Board assistance contingent upon meeting requirements of an approved regionalization policy. The authority could provide additional financial assistance for over-sizing sewer lines, treatment plants, and pump stations for proactive efforts, as well as assist existing utility districts and cities with retroactive efforts. In addition to financial incentives, a regional wastewater authority may need to establish disincentive fees, similar to those prescribed by the Harris-Galveston Coastal Subsidence District for groundwater extraction, to discourage the proliferation of small astewater treatment plants. Practice Retroactive Regionalization Increased public awareness for developers and municipal utility district professionals is essential to promote retroactive regionalization wherever possible. It is worth reinforcing that regionalization does not involve annexation - only


89

wastewater treatment will be turned over to a central operator, not self-determination or control of internal infrastructure systems. Work Cooperatively State Regulatory agencies and local elected officials need to come to agreement on the importance of regionalization. The current system of wastewater treatment in the H-GAC region (with over 1,200 domestic plants) takes an environmental toll on the region’s water bodies, and may present difficulties in meeting the future regulatory requirements imposed by the TMDL process. For the future, regional plants offer a better option for wastewater treatment needs of the region. Public funds required to consolidate many of the small and intermediate plants in the region would appear to be a better long term investment than constantly upgrading and improving the hundreds of non-regional plants that currently serve the area. For further information contact Kathleen Ramsey, Ph.D. ([email protected]).

mailto:[email protected])

Appendix IIITABLE 1

San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal Basin: 2001 - 2002 Domestic Wasteload and Forecast








TOTAL for Clear Creek Tidal 18.8900 696 84,625 10.5899 0.00 130.26 17.63 159.05 103,572 13.2560 0 1326.66 221.11 552.77 122,518 15.9220 0 1593.47 265.58 663.95

STREAM SEGMENT 1102









HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.079 5.3300 8 103 26,069 2.6729 NR 54.50 12.54 51.88 28,779 2.9507 NR 295.31 49.22 123.04 31,488 3.2285 NR 323.11 53.85 134.63(Southeast + Gulf Meadow) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.002 2.2500 12 135 7,724 1.0455 NR 24.35 1.65 23.61 9,776 1.3232 NR 132.42 22.07 55.18 11,827 1.6009 NR 160.22 26.70 66.76(Barry Rose Plant No. 2) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.003 2.5000 12 60 13,895 0.8397 NR 88.37 7.10 38.02 17,994 1.0874 NR 108.83 18.14 45.35 22,094 1.3352 NR 133.62 133.62 55.68(Longwood Plant No. 3) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.005 0.5000 INACTIVE INACTIVE INACTIVE

(Coward Creek Plant) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.006 0.0000 INACTIVE INACTIVE INACTIVE

(Garden Road Plant) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.007 2.0000 12 44 21,325 0.9342 NR 34.77 6.24 35.19 31,267 1.3697 NR 137.08 22.85 57.12 41,209 1.8053 NR 180.67 30.11 75.28

(S.W. Environ)PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.008 0.2500 UNDER CONSTRUCTION FEBRUARY 2002 - Population in 2000 is 834

(Far Northwest)PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.009 0.3700 INACTIVE INACTIVE INACTIVE

(Cullen)TOTAL for Clear Creek Above-Tidal 22.9650 746 106,185 8.7510 0.00 270.97 47.20 223.91 139,062 11.1230 0.00 1113.19 213.17 463.83 171,938 13.4950 0 1350.58 336.45 525.99

STREAM SEGMENT 1103



TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Tidal 3.7500 133 28,228 2.4976 0.00 169.99 29.00 120.76 33,290 2.7171 0 339.91 46.20 226.61 38,352 2.9366 0 367.37 50.11 244.91

Appendix IIITABLE 1




STREAM SEGMENT 1104



STREAM SEGMENT 1105


DANBURY, CITY OF 10158.001 0.5040 12 122 1,576 0.1919 NR 7.59 0.80 3.34 1,662 0.2023 0.00 25.31 1,748 0.2128 NR 21.30 5.32 17.75(Towers Estate)

TOTAL for Bastrop Bayou Tidal 0.7540 432 2208 0.3877 4.06 21.52 0.80 3.34 2,328 0.4088 17.22 51.14 0 0 2449 0.4300 18.11 48.46 5.32 17.75

STREAM SEGMENT 1107

MANVEL, CITY OF 11251.001 0.0300 8 85 146 0.0124 1.03 2.11 NR 334 0.0284 3.55 2.37 523 0.0444 5.56 3.70 NR NR

TOTAL for Chocolate Bayou Tidal 0.0300 84.93 146 0.0124 1.03 2.11 0.00 0.00 334 0.0284 3.55 2.37 0 0 523 0.0444 5.56 3.70 0 0

STREAM SEGMENT 1108

ARCOLA, CITY OF 13367.001 0.1250 12 71 1,008 0.0716 NA 3.00 0.27 1.09 1,295 0.0920 0 11.50 2.30 7.67 1,581 0.1123 NR 14.05 2.81 9.37

MANVEL, CITY OF 13872.001 0.1000 12 158 146 0.0231 0.69 1.36 NR NR 162 0.0256 4.27 4.27 NR NR 178 0.0281 4.69 4.69 NR NR

OAK MANOR MUD 10700.001 0.0800 12 109 335 0.0366 NR 1.98 0.03 2.12 401 0.0438 0.00 0.66 NR NR 468 0.0511 NR 6.39 1.28 4.26


STREAM SEGMENT 1109



STREAM SEGMENT 1110


FBCMUD No. 23 11999.001 0.2500 12 80 2,001 0.1593 NR 12.93 0.90 5.35 2,570 0.2046 NR 25.59 5.12 17.06 3,139 0.2499 NR 31.26 6.25 20.84


MUD No. 2 & 3TOTAL for Oyster Creek Above Tidal 4.4500 400.59 21,699 1.5048 0.00 79.55 11.18 35.66 24,248 1.7117 0 214.14 43.83 148.51 26,798 1.9187 0 240.03 48.01 160.02

STREAM SEGMENT 1111




Appendix IIITABLE 1




STREAM SEGMENT 1113





STREAM SEGMENT 2424











LA MARQUE, CITY OF 10410.003 3.0000 11 162 13,573 2.2000 NR 108.97 6.17 50.62 14,018 2.2722 0.00 379.00 56.85 379.00 14,464 2.3443 0.00 391.04 391.04 391.04(Westside)


TOTAL for West (Galveston) Bay 12.7800 1,205 40,852 6.5299 116.59 398.84 13.36 109.57 44,439 7.0941 546.74 1,164.24 140.81 598.43 48,027 7.6583 608.23 1,256.53 481.42 627.43

STREAM SEGMENT 2421








Appendix IIITABLE 1




STREAM SEGMENT 2425

HC WCID 50 10243.001 0.5400 12 87 2,969 0.2597 NR 7.28 1.80 10.26 3,385 0.2961 0.00 29.63 4.94 12.35 3,801 0.3325 0.00 33.27 5.55 13.86(El Lago Plant)HC WCID 75 10106.001 0.1500 TO CLEAR LAKE WATER AUTHORITY 1993

TOTAL for Clear Lake 0.6900 87 2,969 0.2597 0.00 7.28 1.80 10.26 3,385 0 0 29.63 4.94 12.35 3,801 0.3325 0 33.27 5.55 13.86

STREAM SEGMENT 2427

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2431



STREAM SEGMENT 2432

ALVIN, CITY OF 10005.001 0.5000 12 107 21,668 2.3130 2.85 3.77 0.20 NR 24,931 2.6613 443.90 443.90 0.00 NR 28,194 3.0096 502.00 502.00 NR NR


TOTAL for Chocolate Bay 0.6500 149 22,237 2.3368 3.24 4.56 0.00 0.00 25,562 2.6877 448.30 448.30 0 0 28,886 3.0385 506.83 506.83 0.00 0

STREAM SEGMENT 2433

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2434

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2435

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for Drum Bay

STREAM SEGMENT 2437

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2436

MORGANS POINT, CITY OF 10779.001 0.2000 12 182 336 0.0637 NR 2.03 0.12 1.08 328 0.0597 0 7.46 2.49 4.97 320 0.0581 0.00 7.27 2.42 4.85

TOTAL for Barbours Cut 12 182 336 0.0637 0.00 2.03 0.12 1.08 328 0.0597 0 7.46 2.49 4.97 319.5 0.0581 0.00 7.27 2.42 4.85

Appendix IIITABLE 1





(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2439




GRAND TOTAL 119.4190 5924.55 537,513 55.1768 462.26 1,909.52 174.56 939.15 607,228 66.1016 3,620.47 8,589.69 1,671.62 2,776.34 774,093 75.4953 3,923.60 9,667.21 1,469.35 3,140.75

"#" = number of months of self-reporting data available for the year 2000 GPCD = gallons per capita per day POP = population; Year 2000 figures are from Census 1990 data unless otherwise noted. In some cases population information was obtained by survey of permit holders in the year 2000. These are indicated with an "S" following their permit number. Service area boundaries used in the population projections are from 1991 unless otherwise indicated FLOW = discharge measured in million gallons per day BOD 5 = biochemical oxygen demand TSS = total suspended solid NH3-N = ammonia nitrogen CBOD5 = carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand, 5 day NR = Not Required to Report Parameter

Data Source: Self-reporting data submitted by permitted dischargers to the TNRCC or H-GAC. The data presented in the annual mean of monthly reported levels for 2000.

DISCLAIMERS: 1) The information and data presented in this table is based on information submitted to H-GAC. Accuracy is not independently varifiable and may not accuratly reflect total flows,pollutant loadings, or population figures for the watershed basin or the individual stream segments for the current year, or future years.

2) Special handling of Service Area Boundaries was required in three cases:


Case 2: We we unable to enter electronic AutoCAD data into our GIS system for the City of Alvin. We used the city limits as the service area boundary for the permit.

Case 3: Clear Lake City Water Authority Service Area Boundary was included in the AutoCAD service area provided for the City of Houston Metro Central Plant. We excluded the Clear Lake service area from Houston Metro Central.

Appendix IIITABLE 1





STREAM SEGMENT 1101

FRIENDSWOOD, CITY OF 11571.001 65,497 7.3057 NR 731.16 731.16 304.65 73,873 8.2401 NR 824.67 137.44 343.61 12 2 5 6 40367 48744 57120 65497 73873(GCWDA Blackhawk Reg. Plant) LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.003 19,876 0.5336 NR 53.40 8.90 22.25 21,746 0.5838 NR 58.42 9.74 24.34 12 2 5 6 14267 16137 18007 19876 21746

(Country Plant) LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.005 44,311 8.5985 0.1728 860.54 143.42 358.56 52,382 10.1647 NR 1017.28 169.55 423.87 12 2 5 5 20098 28169 36240 44311 52382


NASSAU BAY, CITY OF 10526.001 4,768 0.8442 NR 84.48 14.08 35.20 4,970 0.8799 NR 88.06 14.68 36.69 12 2 5 1 4163 4365 4566.5 4768 4970

WEBSTER, CITY OF 10520.001 7,013 1.3061 NR 130.71 21.79 54.46 7,440 1.3857 NR 138.68 23.11 57.78 12 2 5 4 5730 6158 6585 7013 7440

TOTAL for Clear Creek Tidal 141,465 18.5881 0 1860.29 919.35 775.12 160,411 21.2541 0 2127.11 354.52 886.30 84625 103572 122518 141465 160411

STREAM SEGMENT 1102

BC MUD 1 12332.001 18,605 2.0139 NR 201.55 33.59 83.98 22,805 2.4685 NR 247.05 41.17 102.94 12 2 5 2 6005 10205 14405 18605 22805(Southwyck/Silver Lake)


BC MUD 5 12295.001 30,270 2.0101 NR 201.17 33.53 83.82 38,446 2.5530 NR 96.33 42.58 106.46 12 2 5 2 5742 13918 22094 30270 38446(BC MUD 4 & 5)

BC MUD 6 13784.001 6,631 0.5345 NR 53.49 8.92 22.29 8,416 0.6784 NR 67.90 11.32 28.29 12 2 5 1 1274 3060 4845 6631 8416

BC MUD 19 14135.001 OPENED IN JULY 12 2 5 0 0 0 0 0

HC WCID 89 12939.001 980 0.0580 NR 5.80 0.97 2.42 996 0.0589 NR 5.90 0.98 2.42 12 2 5 1 931 947 963.5 980 996(Morningside)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.020 DIVERT TO SOUTHWEST 12 2 5 0 0 0 0 0(Gulf Meadows - Diverted to SE in 1998))

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.075 22,910 2.0419 NR 204.36 34.06 85.15 22,806 2.0327 NR 203.43 33.91 84.76 12 2 5 1 23220 23117 23013 22910 22806(Sagemont)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.079 34,198 3.5063 NR 350.91 58.49 146.21 36,907 3.7841 NR 378.72 63.12 157.80 12 2 5 8 26069 28779 31488 34198 36907(Southeast + Gulf Meadow) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.002 13,879 1.8786 NR 188.01 31.33 78.34 15,930 2.1562 NR 215.80 35.97 89.92 12 2 5 3 7724 9776 11827 13879 15930(Barry Rose Plant No. 2)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.003 26,193 1.5829 NR 158.41 26.40 66.01 30,292 1.8306 NR 183.21 30.53 76.34 12 2 5 3 13895 17994 22093.5 26193 30292(Longwood Plant No. 3)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.005 INACTIVE 12 2 5 0 0 0 0(Cowart Creek Plant)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.006 INACTIVE 12 2 5 0 0 0 0(Garden Road Plant)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.007 51,151 2.2408 NR 224.26 37.38 93.44 61,093 2.6763 NR 267.85 44.64 111.60 12 2 5 2 21325 31267 41209 51151 61093(SW Environmental)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.008 UNDER CONSTRUCTION 2002 12 2 5 0 0 0 0 0(Far Northwest)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.009 INACTIVE 12 2 5 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL for Clear Creek Above-Tidal 204,815 15.8669 0 1587.96 264.66 661.65 237,691 18.2389 0 1666.17 304.23 760.52 106185 139062 171938 204815 237691

STREAM SEGMENT 1103

GC WCID 1 10173.001 23,944 2.9908 NR 374.15 49.89 249.43 25,460 3.1802 NR 397.84 53.05 265.23 15 2 10 7 19395 20911 22427.5 23944 25460(Dickenson)

LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.007 19,470 0.1653 NR 20.68 4.14 13.79 23,016 0.1954 NR 24.45 4.89 16.30 15 3 10 3 8833 12379 15924.5 19470 23016(formerly Permit No. 11169.01)

TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Tidal 43,414 3.1561 0 394.83 54.02 263.22 48,476 3.3756 0 422.29 57.93 281.52 28228 33290 38352 43414 48476

Appendix IIITABLE 1





STREAM SEGMENT 1104

FRIENDSWOOD, CITY OF 10175.003 DIVERT TO BLACKHAWK REGIONAL PLANT 15 3 10

(Towers Estate) TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Above-Tidal

STREAM SEGMENT 1105

ANGLETON, CITY OF 10548.002 736 0.2279 19.00 28.51 NR NR 770 0.2386 19.90 29.84 NR NR 10 15 1 632 667 701 736 770

(Brush Bayou Pit) DANBURY, CITY OF 10158.001 1,833 0.2232 NR 0.00 5.59 18.62 1,919 0.2337 NR 29.23 5.85 19.49 15 3 10 1 1576 1662 1748 1833 1919

(Towers Estate) TOTAL for Bastrop Bayou Tidal 2569 0.4511 19.00 28.51 5.59 18.62 2,689 0.4722 19.90 59.07 5.85 19.49 2,208 2,328 2,449 2,569 2,689

STREAM SEGMENT 1107

MANVEL, CITY OF 11251.001 711 0.0604 7.56 5.04 NR 900 0.0764 9.56 6.37 NR 15 10 3 2 146 334 523 711 900


STREAM SEGMENT 1108

ARCOLA, CITY OF 13367.001 1868 0.1327 NR 16.59 3.32 11.06 2,154 0.1530 NR 19.14 3.83 12.76 15 3 10 1 1008 1295 1581 1868 2154

MANVEL, CITY OF 13872.001 194 0.0306 5.11 5.11 NR NR 209 0.0331 5.53 5.53 NR NR 20 20 3 146 162 178 194 209

OAK MANOR MUD 10700.001 534 0.0583 0.00 7.30 NR NR 600 0.0656 0.00 8.20 NR NR 15 3 10 1 335 401 467.5 534 600


STREAM SEGMENT 1109

COMMODORE COVE ID 10798.001 359 0.0556 9.27 9.27 NR NR 399 0.0619 10.32 10.32 NR NR 20 20 1 237 278 318 359 399


STREAM SEGMENT 1110

ANGLETON, CITY OF 10548.001 21,644 1.3109 NR 164.00 32.80 109.33 23,025 1.3946 NR 174.46 34.89 116.31 15 3 10 2 17501 18882 20263 21644 23025

(Oyster Creek) FBCMUD No. 23 11999.001 3,707 0.2951 NR 7.38 7.38 7.38 4,276 0.3404 NR 28.39 2.84 28.39 15 3 10 1 2001 2570 3138.5 3707 4276

FBCUMD Nos. 47,48,60 12701.001 2,065 0.2585 NR 32.34 6.47 21.56 2,368 0.2965 NR 37.09 7.42 24.72 15 3 10 1 1155 1458 1761.5 2065 2368


SIENNA PLANTATION 13854.001 1,931 0.2611 NR 32.66 6.53 21.77 2,227 0.3011 NR 37.67 7.53 25.11 15 3 10 1 1042 1338 1634.5 1931 2227MUD No. 2 & 3

TOTAL for Oyster Creek Above Tidal 29,347 2.1256 0 236.38 53.18 160.05 31,896 2.3326 0 277.61 52.68 194.54 21699 24248 26798 29347 31896

STREAM SEGMENT 1111

CLUTE, CITY OF 10044.001 15,070 2.4545 NR 307.06 61.41 204.70 15,818 2.5763 NR 322.30 64.46 214.86 15 3 10 4 12826 13574 14322 15070 15818(Brazos River Auth. + Richwood) OYSTER CREEK, CITY 11837.001 2,231 0.3318 55.34 55.34 NR NR 2,495 0.3710 61.89 61.89 NR NR 20 20 1 1439 1703 1967 2231 2495


Appendix IIITABLE 1





STREAM SEGMENT 1113

CLEAR LAKE CITY W.A. 10539.001 162,220 5.8414 NR 584.61 97.43 243.59 196,412 7.0726 NR 707.83 117.97 294.93 12 2 5 5 59643 93835 128028 162220 196412


HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.136 24,987 1.7670 NR 176.85 29.47 73.69 28,321 2.0029 NR 200.45 33.41 83.52 12 2 5 6 14983 18318 21652 24987 28321


14983 18318 21652 24987 28321STREAM SEGMENT 2424

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.002 20,459 3.2040 534.42 534.42 NR NR 22,549 3.5312 589.01 589.01 NR NR 20 20 2 14190 16280 18369.5 20459 22549

(Airport WWTP) GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.005 866 0.1277 21.30 21.30 NR NR 991 0.1461 24.37 24.37 NR NR 20 20 2 491 616 741 866 991

(Terramar Beach WWTP) GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.006 HOLDING TANK ONLY 10 15 0 0 0 0 0

(Point San Luis) GCFWSD No. 6 10879.001 1,345 0.1670 27.86 27.86 NR NR 1,454 0.1806 30.12 30.12 NR NR 20 20 3 1016 1126 1235 1345 1454

(Tiki Island) GCMUD No. 1 11477.001 RECYCLE TO GOLF COARSE 20 20 0 0 0 0 0(Pirates Beach)


GCMUD No. 12 10435.002 2,131 0.3717 62.00 62.00 NR NR 2,146 0.3743 62.43 62.43 NR NR 20 20 1 2087 2102 2116.5 2131 2146(Bayou Vista)

GCWCID No. 8 10174.001 3,896 0.5440 NR 68.05 13.61 45.37 4,207 0.5874 NR 73.49 14.70 48.99 15 3 10 1 2962 3273 3584.5 3896 4207(Santa Fe)

HITCHCOCK, CITY OF 10690.001 6,759 1.2469 NR 207.98 83.19 207.98 7,192 1.3268 0.00 221.31 88.52 221.31 20 8 20 1 5459 5892 6325.5 6759 7192

JAMAICA BEACH, CITY 11033.001 1,250 0.1447 24.14 24.14 0.00 0.00 1,308 0.1515 25.27 25.27 0.00 0.00 20 20 1 1074 1133 1191 1250 1308

LA MARQUE, CITY OF 10410.001 NO LONGER IN SERVICE 0 20 3 20 0 0 0 0 0

LA MARQUE, CITY OF 10410.003 14,909 2.4165 0.00 403.07 60.46 403.07 15,354 2.4887 0.00 415.11 62.27 415.11 20 3 20 6 13573 14018 14463.5 14909 15354(Westside)


TOTAL for West (Galveston) Bay 51,614 8.2225 669.72 1,348.83 157.26 656.42 55,201 8.7867 731.21 1,441.13 165.49 685.42 40,852 44,439 48,027 51,614 55,201

STREAM SEGMENT 2421

BACLIFF MUD 10627.001 7,729 0.7552 125.96 125.96 NR NR 8,532 0.8336 139.05 139.05 NR NR 20 20 1 5320 6123 6926 7729 8532

BAYVIEW MUD 10770.001 2,063 0.1399 23.33 23.33 NR NR 2,277 0.1544 25.76 25.76 NR NR 20 20 1 1420 1634 1849 2063 2277

GALVESTON CO. WCID 12 12039.001 7,141 0.7595 NR 126.68 19.00 126.68 8,378 0.8910 NR 148.63 22.29 148.63 20 3 20 2 3430 4667 5904 7141 8378(Kemah)

LA PORTE, CITY OF 10206.001 35,846 3.9193 NR 490.31 98.06 326.87 37,368 4.0858 NR 511.13 102.23 340.75 15 3 10 4 31279 32801 34324 35846 37368(Plant 1)

SAN LEON MUD 11546.001 6,397 0.8032 133.97 133.97 NR NR 7,062 0.8866 147.89 147.89 NR NR 20 20 1 4403 5068 5733 6397 7062

SEABROOK, CITY OF 10671.001 13,415 1.2243 204.21 204.21 NR NR 14,739 1.3451 224.37 224.37 NR NR 20 20 3 9443 10767 12091 13415 14739


Appendix IIITABLE 1





STREAM SEGMENT 2425

HC WCID 50 10243.001 4,217 0.3689 0.00 36.92 6.15 15.38 4,633 0.4053 0.00 40.56 6.76 16.90 12 2 5 1 2969 3385 3801 4217 4633


TOTAL for Clear Lake 4,217 0.3689 0 36.92 6.15 15.38 4,633 0.4053 0 40.56 6.76 16.90 2,969 3,385 3,801 4,217 4,633

STREAM SEGMENT 2427

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2431

TEXAS CITY, CITY OF 10375.001 57,648 7.6335 1273.27 1273.27 NR NR 62,851 8.3225 1388.20 1388.20 NR NR 20 20 17 42037 47241 52444 57648 62851


STREAM SEGMENT 2432

ALVIN, CITY OF 10005.001 31,456 3.3579 560.09 560.09 NR NR 34,719 3.7062 618.19 618.19 NR NR 20 20 3 21668 24931 28194 31456 34719

HILLCREST VILLAGE,CI 10420.001 754 0.0315 5.26 5.26 NR NR 816 0.0341 5.69 5.69 NR NR 20 20 1 569 631 693 754 816

TOTAL for Chocolate Bay 32,211 3.3894 565.35 565.35 0.00 0.00 35,535 3.7403 623.88 623.88 0 0 22,237 25,562 28,886 32,211 35,535

STREAM SEGMENT 2433

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2434

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2435

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for Drum Bay

STREAM SEGMENT 2437

TOTAL for Barbours Cut

STREAM SEGMENT 2436

MORGANS POINT, CITY 10779.001 311 0.0566 NR 7.09 2.36 4.72 303 0.0551 0 6.90 2.30 4.60 0 15 5 10 1 336 328 320 311 303

TOTAL for Texas City Ship Channel 311 0.0566 0 7.09 2.36 4.72 303 0.0551 0 6.90 2.30 4.60 336 328 320 311 303

Appendix IIITABLE 1





STREAM SEGMENT 2438

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2439

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.001 40,009 6.7050 1118.39 1118.39 NR NR 39,985 6.7010 1117.73 1117.73 NR NR 20 20 2 40079 40056 40032 40009 39985

(Main WWTP) GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.004 10 15

(Seawolf Park) TOTAL for Lower Galveston Bay 40,009 6.7050 1118.39 1118.39 0.00 0.00 39985 6.7010 1117.73 1117.73 0.00 0.00 40079 40056 40032 40009 39985

GRAND TOTAL 888380 84.8974 4210.67 10729.44 1771.28 3541.78 1005335 94.2939 4505.28 11308.61 1293.94 3944.74 420613 494798 568983 643167 717352.27


Appendic IIITABLE 3



STREAM SEGMENT 1101





WEBSTER, CITY OF 10520.001 1.6500 1.0 0.9 - 2.7 64.6 69.7 74.5 82.4 84.0


STREAM SEGMENT 1102


BC MUD 2 12705.001 0.1000 9.9BC MUD 5 12295.001 0.7000 9.9 54.3 134.6 210.0 287.2 364.7

(BC MUD 4 & 5)BC MUD 6 13784.001 0.1000 9.9 102.7 247.0 390.6 534.5 680.0








STREAM SEGMENT 1103





STREAM SEGMENT 1105




Appendic IIITABLE 3



STREAM SEGMENT 1107

MANVEL, CITY OF 11251.001 0.0300 9.9 41.3 94.6 146.7 201.3 254.7


STREAM SEGMENT 1108

ARCOLA, CITY OF 13367.001 0.1250 3.8 56.8 73.6 89.6 106.2 122.4


OAK MANOR MUD 10700.001 0.0800 3.0 45.8 54.8 63.9 72.9 82.0


STREAM SEGMENT 1109





FBCMUD No. 23 11999.001 0.2500 3.9 63.6 82.0 100.0 118.0 136.2




STREAM SEGMENT 1111




STREAM SEGMENT 1113




Appendic IIITABLE 3



STREAM SEGMENT 2424







JAMAICA BEACH 11033.0001 0.1800 1.0 69.1 72.9 76.7 80.0 84.2



STREAM SEGMENT 2421

BACLIFF MUD 10627.001 1.0300 2.4 50.5 58.1 65.7 73.3 80.9

BAYVIEW MUD 10770.001 0.2500 2.4 38.5 44.3 50.2 56.0 61.8



SAN LEON MUD 11546.001 0.9500 2.4 58.2 67.0 75.8 84.5 93.3

SEABROOK, CITY OF 10671.001 2.5000 2.2 34.4 39.3 44.1 48.9 53.8


STREAM SEGMENT 2425



STREAM SEGMENT 2431



STREAM SEGMENT 2432

ALVIN, CITY OF 10005.001 5.0000 2.3 46.3 53.2 60.2 67.2 74.1



Appendic IIITABLE 3



STREAM SEGMENT 2436



STREAM SEGMENT 2439



GRAND TOTAL 121.7690 46.3 56.0 64.6 81.5 92.7

Appendix III, TABLE 6

San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal Basin: 2001 - 2002 Domestic Wasteload Forecasts Using Base Year Data(Keys listing acronyms and notes are found on page 6 of this table.)








TOTAL for Clear Creek Tidal 18.8900 696 84,625 10.5899 0.00 130.26 17.63 159.05 103,572 13.2560 0.00 156.82 20.82 190.13 122,518 15.9220 0.00 183.38 24.02 221.21

STREAM SEGMENT 1102









HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.079 5.3300 8 103 26,069 2.6729 NR 54.50 12.54 51.88 28,779 2.9507 NR 60.16 13.84 57.27 31,488 3.2285 NR 65.83 15.15 62.66(Southeast + Gulf Meadow)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.002 2.2500 12 135 7,724 1.0455 NR 24.35 1.65 23.61 9,776 1.3232 NR 30.82 2.09 29.88 11,827 1.6009 NR 37.28 2.53 36.15(Barry Rose Plant No. 2) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.003 2.5000 12 60 13,895 0.8397 NR 88.37 7.10 38.02 17,994 1.0874 NR 114.44 9.19 49.24 22,094 1.3352 NR 140.51 11.29 60.45(Longwood Plant No. 3) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.005 0.5000 INACTIVE INACTIVE INACTIVE(Coward Creek Plant)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.006 0.0000 INACTIVE INACTIVE INACTIVE(Garden Road Plant)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.007 2.0000 12 44 21,325 0.9342 NR 34.77 6.24 35.19 31,267 1.3697 NR 50.98 9.15 51.60 41,209 1.8053 NR 67.19 12.06 68.00 (S.W. Environ)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.008 0.2500 UNDER CONSTRUCTION FEBRUARY 2002 - Population in 2000 is 834(Far Northwest)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.009 0.3700 INACTIVE INACTIVE INACTIVE(Cullen)

TOTAL for Clear Creek Above-Tidal 22.9650 746 106,185 8.7510 0.00 270.97 47.20 223.91 139,062 11.1230 0.00 352.26 57.60 284.64 171,938 13.4950 0.00 433.54 67.99 345.38





STREAM SEGMENT 1103



TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Tidal 3.7500 133 28,228 2.4976 0.00 169.99 29.00 120.76 33,290 2.7171 0.00 198.65 33.07 137.13 38,352 2.9366 0.00 227.30 37.15 153.50

STREAM SEGMENT 1104



STREAM SEGMENT 1105


DANBURY, CITY OF 10158.001 0.5040 12 122 1,576 0.1919 NR 7.59 0.80 3.34 1,662 0.2023 #REF! 8.00 1,748 0.2128 NR 8.42 0.00 0.00(Towers Estate)

TOTAL for Bastrop Bayou Tidal 0.7540 432 2208 0.3877 4.06 21.52 0.80 3.34 2,328 0.4088 #REF! 22.69 0.00 0.00 2449 0.4300 4.50 23.87 0.00 0.00

STREAM SEGMENT 1107

MANVEL, CITY OF 11251.001 0.0300 8 8 1,613 0.0124 1.03 2.11 NR 3,098 0.0238 1.98 4.05 0.00 4,583 0.0352 2.93 6.00 0.00 NR

TOTAL for Chocolate Bayou Tidal 0.0300 7.69 1613 0.0124 1.03 2.11 0.00 0.00 3,098 0.0238 1.98 4.05 0.00 0.00 4583 0.0352 2.93 6.00 0.00 0.00

STREAM SEGMENT 1108

ARCOLA, CITY OF 13367.001 0.1250 12 71 1,008 0.0716 NA 3.00 0.27 1.09 1,295 0.0920 NR 3.85 0.35 1.40 1,581 0.1123 NR 4.71 0.42 1.71

MANVEL, CITY OF 13872.001 0.1000 12 9 2,482 0.0231 0.69 1.36 NR NR 5,596 0.0521 1.56 3.07 NR NR 8,711 0.0811 2.42 4.77 NR NR

OAK MANOR MUD 10700.001 0.0800 12 109 335 0.0366 NR 1.98 0.03 2.12 401 0.0438 NR 2.37 0.04 NR 468 0.0511 NR 2.76 0.04 NR


STREAM SEGMENT 1109







STREAM SEGMENT 1110


FBCMUD No. 23 11999.001 0.2500 12 80 2,001 0.1593 NR 12.93 0.90 5.35 2,570 0.2046 NR 16.61 1.16 6.87 3,139 0.2499 NR 20.28 1.41 8.39


MUD No. 2 & 3TOTAL for Oyster Creek Above Tidal 4.4500 400.59 21,699 1.5048 0.00 79.55 11.18 35.66 24,248 1.7117 0.00 90.29 12.41 40.55 26,798 1.9187 0.00 101.04 13.64 45.44

STREAM SEGMENT 1111




STREAM SEGMENT 1113









STREAM SEGMENT 2424











LA MARQUE, CITY OF 10410.003 3.0000 11 162 13,573 2.2000 NR 108.97 6.17 50.62 14,018 2.2722 NR 112.54 6.37 52.28 14,464 2.3443 0.00 116.12 6.57 53.94(Westside)


TOTAL for West (Galveston) Bay 12.7800 1,205 40,852 6.5299 116.59 398.84 13.36 109.57 44,439 7.0941 124.84 430.91 14.14 116.07 48,027 7.6583 133.09 462.98 14.93 122.57

STREAM SEGMENT 2421












STREAM SEGMENT 2425

HC WCID 50 10243.001 0.5400 12 87 2,969 0.2597 NR 7.28 1.80 10.26 3,385 0.2961 NR 8.30 2.05 11.70 3,801 0.3325 9.36 9.32 2.30 13.14(El Lago Plant)HC WCID 75 10106.001 0.1500 TO CLEAR LAKE WATER AUTHORITY 1993

TOTAL for Clear Lake 0.6900 87 2,969 0.2597 0.00 7.28 1.80 10.26 3,385 0.2961 0.00 8.30 2.05 11.70 3,801 0.3325 9.36 9.32 2.30 13.14

STREAM SEGMENT 2427

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2431



STREAM SEGMENT 2432

ALVIN, CITY OF 10005.001 0.5000 12 107 21,668 2.3130 2.85 3.77 0.20 NR 24,931 2.6613 3.28 4.34 0.23 NR 28,194 3.0096 3.71 4.91 0.26 NR


TOTAL for Chocolate Bay 0.6500 149 22,237 2.3368 3.24 4.56 0.00 0.00 25,562 2.6877 3.71 5.21 0.23 0.00 28,886 3.0385 4.18 5.87 0.26 0

STREAM SEGMENT 2433

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2434

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2435

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for Drum Bay

STREAM SEGMENT 2437

(NO DISCHARGES)






STREAM SEGMENT 2436

MORGANS POINT, CITY OF 10779.001 0.2000 12 182 336 0.0637 NR 2.03 0.12 1.08 328 0.0597 NR 1.90 0.11 1.01 320 0.0581 NR 1.85 0.11 0.99

TOTAL for Barbours Cut 12 182 336 0.0637 0.00 2.03 0.12 1.08 328 0.0597 0.00 1.90 0.11 1.01 319.5 0.0581 0.00 1.85 0.11 0.99


(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2439




GRAND TOTAL 119.4190 5698.39 541,316 55.1768 462.26 1,909.52 174.56 939 615,426 66.1263 #REF! 2,259.67 201.01 1,106.60 784,017 75.54 598.58 2,555.47 228.06 1,279.56

"#" = number of months of self-reporting data available for the year 2000 GPCD = gallons per capita per day POP = population; Year 2000 figures are from 2000 Census data. Service area boundaries used in the population projections were obtained directly from the permit holders in 2002. FLOW = discharge measured in million gallons per day BOD 5 = biochemical oxygen demand TSS = total suspended solid NH3-N = ammonia nitrogen CBOD5 = carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand, 5 day NR = Not Required to Report Parameter

Data Source: Self-reporting data submitted by permitted dischargers to the TNRCC or H-GAC. The data presented in the annual mean of monthly reported levels for 2000.DISCLAIMERS: 1) The information and data presented in this table is based on information submitted to H-GAC. Accuracy is not independently varifiable and may not accuratly reflect total flows,pollutant loadings, or population figures for the watershed basin or the individual stream segments for the current year, or future years.

2) Special handling of Service Area Boundary:

Clear Lake City Water Authority Service Area Boundary was included in the AutoCAD service area provided for the City of Houston Metro Central Plant. We excluded the Clear Lake service area from Houston Metro Central.






STREAM SEGMENT 1101

FRIENDSWOOD, CITY OF 11571.001 65,497 7.3057 NR 111.53 16.65 135.04 73,873 8.2401 NR 125.80 18.78 152.31 6 40367 48744 57120 65497 73873(GCWDA Blackhawk Reg. Plant) LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.003 19,876 0.5336 NR 27.31 2.09 31.60 21,746 0.5838 NR 29.87 2.29 34.57 6 14267 16137 18007 19876 21746

(Country Plant) LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.005 44,311 8.5985 NR 45.59 3.31 48.35 52,382 10.1647 NR 53.90 3.91 57.16 5 20098 28169 36240 44311 52382


NASSAU BAY, CITY OF 10526.001 4,768 0.8442 NR 7.02 2.60 12.99 4,970 0.8799 NR 7.32 2.71 13.54 1 4163 4365 4566.5 4768 4970

WEBSTER, CITY OF 10520.001 7,013 1.3061 NR 18.49 2.57 24.32 7,440 1.3857 NR 19.62 2.73 25.80 4 5730 6158 6585 7013 7440

TOTAL for Clear Creek Tidal 141,465 18.5881 0.00 209.95 27.21 252.30 160,411 21.2541 0.00 236.51 30.41 283.38 84625 103572 122518 141465 160411

STREAM SEGMENT 1102

BC MUD 1 12332.001 18,605 0.0000 NR 18.49 16.65 135.04 22,805 2.4685 NR 125.80 2.73 1.40 2 6005 10205 14405 18605 22805(Southwyck/Silver Lake)


BC MUD 5 12295.001 30,270 2.0101 NR 51.14 7.91 40.06 38,446 2.5530 NR 64.95 10.04 97.11 2 5742 13918 22094 30270 38446(BC MUD 4 & 5)

BC MUD 6 13784.001 6,631 0.5345 NR 23.73 2.86 14.05 8,416 0.6784 NR 30.12 3.63 33.75 1 1274 3060 4845 6631 8416

BC MUD 19 14135.001 OPENED IN 0 0 0 0 0

HC WCID 89 12939.001 980 0.0580 NR 3.15 0.93 1.72 996 0.0589 NR 3.20 0.94 1.75 1 931 947 963.5 980 996(Morningside)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.020 DIVERT TO SOUTHWEST 0 0 0 0 0(Gulf Meadows - Diverted to SE in 1998))

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.075 22,910 2.0419 NR 41.44 15.39 52.49 22,806 2.0327 NR 41.25 15.32 52.25 1 23220 23117 23013 22910 22806(Sagemont)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.079 34,198 3.5063 NR 71.49 16.45 68.06 36,907 3.7841 NR 77.16 17.75 75.13 8 26069 28779 31488 34198 36907(Southeast + Gulf Meadow) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.002 13,879 1.8786 NR 43.75 2.96 42.42 15,930 2.1562 NR 50.22 3.40 53.69 3 7724 9776 11827 13879 15930

(Barry Rose Plant No. 2) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.003 26,193 1.5829 NR 166.58 13.38 71.67 30,292 1.8306 NR 192.65 15.48 92.81 3 13895 17994 22094 26193 30292

(Longwood Plant No. 3) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.005 INACTIVE 0 0 0 0

(Cowart Creek Plant) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.006 INACTIVE 0 0 0 0

(Garden Road Plant) PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.007 51,151 2.2408 NR 83.40 14.97 84.41 61,093 2.6763 NR 99.61 17.88 123.76 2 21325 31267 41209 51151 61093

(SW Environmental)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.008 UNDER CONSTRUCTION 2002 0 0 0 0 0(Far Northwest)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.009 INACTIVE 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL for Clear Creek Above-Tidal 204,815 15.8669 0.00 404.81 91.50 509.92 237,691 18.2389 0.00 685.16 77.13 531.63 106185 139062 171938 204815 237691






STREAM SEGMENT 1103

GC WCID 1 10173.001 23,944 2.9908 NR 151.17 28.90 122.63 25,460 3.1802 NR 160.74 30.73 132.21 7 19395 20911 22428 23944 25460

(Dickenson) LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.007 19,470 0.1653 NR 104.79 12.32 47.24 23,016 0.1954 NR 123.87 14.57 66.20 3 8833 12379 15925 19470 23016(formerly Permit No. 11169.01)

TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Tidal 43,414 3.1561 0.00 255.96 41.22 169.86 48,476 3.3756 0.00 284.62 44.09 198.41 28228 33290 38352 43414 48476

STREAM SEGMENT 1104

FRIENDSWOOD, CITY OF 10175.003 DIVERT TO BLACKHAWK REGIONAL PLANT (Towers Estate)

TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Above-Tidal

STREAM SEGMENT 1105

ANGLETON, CITY OF 10548.002 736 0.2279 4.72 16.21 NR NR 770 0.2386 4.95 16.97 0.00 0.00 1 632 667 701 736 770(Brush Bayou Pit)

DANBURY, CITY OF 10158.001 1,833 0.2232 NR 8.83 0.00 0.00 1,919 0.2337 NR 9.24 0.00 0.00 1 1576 1662 1748 1833 1919(Towers Estate)

TOTAL for Bastrop Bayou Tidal 2569 0.4511 4.72 25.04 0.00 0.00 2,689 0.4722 4.95 26.21 0.00 0.00 2,208 2,328 2,449 2,569 2,689

STREAM SEGMENT 1107

MANVEL, CITY OF 11251.001 6,068 0.0466 3.87 7.94 0.00 NR 7,553 0.0581 4.82 9.88 0.00 0.00 2 1613 3098 4583 6068 7553


STREAM SEGMENT 1108

ARCOLA, CITY OF 13367.001 1868 0.1327 NR 5.56 0.50 2.02 2,154 0.1530 NR 6.41 0.58 2.59 1 1008 1295 1581 1868 2154

MANVEL, CITY OF 13872.001 11825 0.1101 3.29 6.48 NR NR 14,939 0.1390 4.15 8.19 3 2482 5596 8710.5 11825 14939

OAK MANOR MUD 10700.001 534 0.0583 0.00 3.15 0.05 600 0.0656 0.00 3.55 0.05 0.00 1 335 401 467.5 534 600


STREAM SEGMENT 1109

COMMODORE COVE ID 10798.001 359 0.0556 2.18 6.88 NR NR 399 0.0619 2.42 7.66 NR 1 237 278 318 359 399







STREAM SEGMENT 1110

ANGLETON, CITY OF 10548.001 21,644 1.3109 NR 70.70 11.69 31.29 23,025 1.3946 NR 75.22 12.43 33.76 2 17501 18882 20263 21644 23025

(Oyster Creek) FBCMUD No. 23 11999.001 3,707 0.2951 NR 23.96 1.67 9.91 4,276 0.3404 NR 27.63 1.92 12.73 1 2001 2570 3138.5 3707 4276

FBCUMD Nos. 47,48,60 12701.001 2,065 0.2585 NR 10.60 0.75 4.40 2,368 0.2965 NR 12.16 0.86 5.55 1 1155 1458 1761.5 2065 2368


SIENNA PLANTATION 13854.001 1,931 0.2611 NR 6.52 0.76 4.72 2,227 0.3011 NR 7.52 0.88 6.07 1 1042 1338 1634.5 1931 2227MUD No. 2 & 3

TOTAL for Oyster Creek Above Tidal 29,347 2.1256 0.00 111.78 14.87 50.32 31,896 2.3326 0.00 122.53 16.31 58.11 21699 24248 26798 29347 31896

STREAM SEGMENT 1111

CLUTE, CITY OF 10044.001 15,070 2.4545 NR 116.98 37.54 129.53 15,818 2.5763 NR 122.78 39.40 137.08 4 12826 13574 14322 15070 15818(Brazos River Auth. + Richwood) OYSTER CREEK, CITY 11837.001 2,231 0.3318 8.53 27.38 NR NR 2,495 0.3710 9.54 30.62 1 1439 1703 1967 2231 2495


STREAM SEGMENT 1113

CLEAR LAKE CITY W.A. 10539.001 162,220 5.8414 NR 220.69 11.99 158.97 196,412 7.0726 NR 267.20 14.52 250.11 5 59643 93835 128028 162220 196412


HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.136 24,987 1.7670 NR 41.69 10.24 39.36 28,321 2.0029 NR 47.26 11.61 48.12 6 14983 18318 21652 24987 28321







14983 18318 21652 24987 28321STREAM SEGMENT 2424

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.002 20,459 3.2040 67.75 195.57 NR NR 22,549 3.5312 74.67 215.54 2 14190 16280 18370 20459 22549

(Airport WWTP) GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.005 866 0.1277 3.12 6.05 NR NR 991 0.1461 3.57 6.92 2 491 616 741 866 991

(Terramar Beach WWTP) GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.006 HOLDING TANK ONLY 0 0 0 0 0

(Point San Luis) GCFWSD No. 6 10879.001 1,345 0.1670 1.72 3.16 NR NR 1,454 0.1806 1.86 3.42 3 1016 1126 1235 1345 1454

(Tiki Island) GCMUD No. 1 11477.001 RECYCLE TO GOLF COARSE 0 0 0 0 0(Pirates Beach)


GCMUD No. 12 10435.002 2,131 0.3717 62.14 62.14 NR NR 2,146 0.3743 62.57 62.57 1 2087 2102 2116.5 2131 2146(Bayou Vista)

GCWCID No. 8 10174.001 3,896 0.5440 NR 12.13 0.57 8.33 4,207 0.5874 NR 13.10 0.61 9.20 1 2962 3273 3584.5 3896 4207(Santa Fe)

HITCHCOCK, CITY OF 10690.001 6,759 1.2469 NR 85.74 8.37 65.15 7,192 1.3268 91.23 8.91 70.32 1 5459 5892 6325.5 6759 7192

JAMAICA BEACH, CITY 11033.001 1,250 0.1447 6.61 10.58 0.00 0.00 1,308 0.1515 6.92 11.07 0.00 0.00 1 1074 1133 1191 1250 1308

LA MARQUE, CITY OF 10410.001 NO LONGER IN SERVICE 0 0 0 0 0 0

LA MARQUE, CITY OF 10410.003 14,909 2.4165 0.00 119.69 6.78 55.60 15,354 2.4887 8.59 123.27 7.00 57.43 6 13573 14018 14464 14909 15354(Westside)


TOTAL for West (Galveston) Bay 51,614 8.2225 141.34 495.05 15.71 129.08 55,201 8.7867 158.18 527.12 16.52 136.94 40,852 44,439 48,027 51,614 55,201

STREAM SEGMENT 2421

BACLIFF MUD 10627.001 7,729 0.7552 30.07 29.25 NR NR 8,532 0.8336 33.20 32.28 NR NR 1 5320 6123 6926 7729 8532

BAYVIEW MUD 10770.001 2,063 0.1399 3.02 2.72 NR NR 2,277 0.1544 3.34 3.00 NR NR 1 1420 1634 1849 2063 2277

GALVESTON CO. WCID 12 12039.001 7,141 0.7595 NR 24.38 4.93 17.22 8,378 0.8910 NR 28.60 6.71 23.43 2 3430 4667 5904 7141 8378(Kemah)

LA PORTE, CITY OF 10206.001 35,846 3.9193 NR 144.04 9.51 82.23 37,368 4.0858 NR 150.16 9.97 86.23 4 31279 32801 34324 35846 37368(Plant 1)

SAN LEON MUD 11546.001 6,397 0.8032 29.76 30.09 NR NR 7,062 0.8866 32.85 33.22 NR NR 1 4403 5068 5733 6397 7062

SEABROOK, CITY OF 10671.001 13,415 1.2243 44.51 71.26 NR NR 14,739 1.3451 48.90 78.29 NR NR 3 9443 10767 12091 13415 14739







STREAM SEGMENT 2425

HC WCID 50 10243.001 4,217 0.3689 13.30 10.34 2.56 14.57 4,633 0.4053 9.16 11.36 2.91 16.61 1 2969 3385 3801 4217 4633


TOTAL for Clear Lake 4,217 0.3689 13.30 10.34 2.56 14.57 4,633 0.4053 9.16 11.36 2.91 16.61 2,969 3,385 3,801 4,217 4,633

STREAM SEGMENT 2427

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2431

TEXAS CITY, CITY OF 10375.001 57,648 7.6335 210.49 257.03 NR NR 62,851 8.3225 229.49 280.23 NR NR 17 42037 47241 52444 57648 62851


STREAM SEGMENT 2432

ALVIN, CITY OF 10005.001 31,456 3.3579 4.14 5.47 NR NR 34,719 3.7062 4.57 6.04 NR NR 3 21668 24931 28194 31456 34719

HILLCREST VILLAGE,CI 10420.001 754 0.0315 0.52 1.05 NR NR 816 0.0341 0.56 1.13 NR NR 1 569 631 693 754 816

TOTAL for Chocolate Bay 32,211 3.3894 4.65 6.52 0.00 0.00 35,535 3.74 5.13 7.17 0.00 0.00 22,237 25,562 28,886 32,211 35,535

STREAM SEGMENT 2433

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2434

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2435

(NO DISCHARGES)

TOTAL for Drum Bay

STREAM SEGMENT 2437







STREAM SEGMENT 2436

MORGANS POINT, CITY 10779.001 311 0.0566 NR 1.81 0.11 0.96 303 0.0551 0.00 1.76 0.09 0.90 1 336 328 320 311 303

TOTAL for Barbours Cut 311 0.0566 0.00 1.81 0.11 0.96 303 0.0551 0.00 1.76 0.09 0.90 336 328 320 311 303

STREAM SEGMENT 2438

(NO DISCHARGES)


STREAM SEGMENT 2439

GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.001 40,009 6.7050 144.64 224.48 NR NR 39,985 6.7010 144.55 224.35 NR NR 2 40079 40056 40032 40009 39985

(Main WWTP) GALVESTON, CITY OF 10688.004

(Seawolf Park) TOTAL for Lower Galveston Bay 40,009 6.7050 144.64 224.48 0.00 0.00 39985.00 6.7010 144.55 224.35 0.00 0.00 40079 40056 40032 40009 39985

GRAND TOTAL 905368 84.9630 644.37 2741.25 267.94 1556.33 1026718 94.3814 690.67 3236.12 271.03 1773.54 424416 502996 581576 660155 738735

Appendix III

TABLE 7

San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal Basin: Comparison of Base Year and Maximum Permit Value Forecast Formulas

2000 (from DMR) 2005 2010SEGMENT ENTITY BOD 5 TSS NH3-N CBOD5 BOD5 TSS NH3-N CBOD5 BOD5 TSS NH3-N CBOD5

(lb./day) Actual Permit Actual Permit Actual Permit Actual Permit Actual Permit Actual Permit Actual Permit Actual Permit

1101 Clear Creek Tidal 0.00 130.26 17.63 159.05 0.00 0.00 156.82 1326.66 20.82 221.11 190.13 552.77 0.00 0.00 183.38 1593.47 24.02 265.58 221.21 663.95

1102 Clear Creek Above Tidal 0.00 270.97 47.20 223.91 0.00 0.00 352.26 1113.19 57.6 213.17 284.64 463.83 0.00 0.00 433.54 1350.58 67.99 336.45 345.38 525.99

1103 Dickenson Bayou 0.00 169.99 29.00 120.76 0.00 0.00 198.65 339.91 33.07 46.2 137.13 226.61 0.00 0.00 227.3 367.37 37.15 50.11 153.5 244.91

1104 Dickenson Bayou Above-Tidal 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1105 Bastrop Bayou 4.06 21.52 0.80 3.34 4.28 17.22 22.69 51.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.50 18.11 23.87 48.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1107 Chocolate Bayou 1.03 2.11 0.00 0.00 1.98 2.98 4.05 1.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.93 4.41 6.00 2.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1108 Chocolate Bayou Above Tidal 0.69 6.34 0.30 3.21 1.56 8.69 9.29 20.85 0.36 2.3 1.40 7.67 2.42 13.52 12.24 7.66 0.46 4.09 1.71 13.63

1109 Oyster Creek Tidal 1.44 4.55 0.00 0.00 2 6.71 5.33 6.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.93 7.28 6.11 7.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1110 Oyster Creek Above Tidal 0.00 79.55 11.18 35.66 0.00 0.00 90.29 214.14 12.41 43.83 40.55 148.51 0.00 0.00 101.04 240.03 13.64 48.01 45.44 160.02

1111 Old Brazos River Channel 5.50 117.22 31.95 110.24 6.51 42.24 128.27 318.82 33.81 55.31 116.67 184.38 7.52 48.79 135.31 340.61 35.68 58.36 123.1 194.54

1113 Armand Bayou 0.00 106.14 10.55 82.05 0.00 0.00 158.22 467.81 14.44 839.31 120.81 194.92 0.00 0.00 210.3 614.63 18.34 102.44 159.57 256.1

2424 West (Galveston) Bay 116.59 398.84 13.36 109.52 124.84 546.74 430.91 1164.24 14.14 140.81 116.07 598.43 133.09 608.23 462.98 1256.53 14.93 481.42 122.57 627.43

2421 Upper Galveston Bay 31.33 175.85 10.67 80.02 85.51 388.31 254.09 919.76 11.93 102.15 86.49 381.9 96.44 438 277.91 1012.12 13.19 109.61 92.97 417.73

2425 Clear Lake 0.00 7.28 1.80 10.26 0.00 0.00 8.30 29.63 2.05 4.94 11.70 12.35 0.00 0.00 9.32 33.27 2.30 5.55 13.14 13.86

2431 Moses Lake 153.49 187.43 0.00 0.00 172.49 1,043.41 210.63 1043.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 191.49 1,158.34 233.83 1158.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2432 Chocolate Bay 3.24 4.56 0.00 0.00 3.71 448.30 5.21 448.30 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.18 506.83 5.87 506.83 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00

2436 Barbours Cut 0.00 2.03 0.12 1.08 0.00 0.00 1.90 7.46 0.11 2.49 1.01 4.97 0.00 0.00 1.85 7.27 0.11 2.42 0.99 4.85

2439 Lower Galveston Bay 144.91 224.94 0.00 0.00 144.81 1,119.71 224.75 1119.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 144.72 1,119.05 224.62 119.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Grand Total 462.28 1909.58 174.56 939.10 547.38 3624.31 2261.66 8593.73 200.97 1671.62 1106.60 2776.34 589.22 3922.45 2555.47 8666.44 228.07 1464.04 1279.58 3123.01

Difference Between Two Formulas (percent) 562..12 298.22 779.47 169.51 565.87 257.31 580.93 163.50

Safety Factor (percent) 6.60 3.98 8.76 2.69 6.65 3.57 6.81 2.63

GRAND TOTAL Notes:

"Difference between formulas (percent)" is calculated using the formula ((Total Permit Value - Total Actual Value) /Total actual Value) X 100.

"Safety Factor" is calculated using the equation: Total Permit Value/Total Actual Value.

Appendix III

TABLE 7

San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal Basin: Comparison of Base Year and Maximum Permit Value Forecast Formulas

2015 2020SEGMENT ENTITY BOD5 TSS NH3-N CBOD5 BOD5 TSS NH3-N CBOD5

Actual Permit Actual Permit Actual Permit Actual Permit Actual Permit Actual Permit Actual Permit Actual Permit

1101 Clear Creek Tidal 0.00 0.00 209.95 1860.29 27.21 919.35 252.30 775.12 0.00 0.00 236.52 2127.11 30.41 354.52 283.38 886.30

1102 Clear Creek Above Tidal 0.00 0.00 404.81 1587.96 91.5 264.66 509.92 661.65 0.00 0.00 685.16 166.17 77.13 304.23 531.63 760.52

1103 Dickenson Bayou 0.00 0.00 225.96 394.83 41.22 54.02 169.86 263.22 0.00 0.00 284.62 422.29 44.09 57.93 198.41 281.52

1104 Dickenson Bayou Above-Tidal 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1105 Bastrop Bayou 4.72 19.00 25.04 28.51 0.00 5.59 0.00 18.62 4.95 19.90 26.21 59. 07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1107 Chocolate Bayou 3.87 5.84 7.94 3.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.82 7.26 9.86 4.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1108 Chocolate Bayou Above Tidal 3.29 18.36 15.19 42.25 0.55 3.32 2.02 11.06 4.15 23.19 18.14 50.53 0.65 3.83 2.59 12.76

1109 Oyster Creek Tidal 2.18 9.27 6.88 9.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.42 10.32 7.66 10.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1110 Oyster Creek Above Tidal 0.00 0.00 111.78 236.38 14.87 53.18 50.32 160.05 0.00 0.00 122.53 277.61 16.31 52.68 58.11 195.54

1111 Old Brazos River Channel 8.53 55.34 144.36 362.4 37.54 61.41 129.53 204.7 9.54 61.89 153.40 384.19 39.71 64.46 137.08 214.86

1113 Armand Bayou 0.00 0.00 262.38 761.45 22.23 126.91 196.33 317.27 0.00 0.00 314.46 507.38 26.52 151.38 298.23 378.45

2424 West (Galveston) Bay 141.34 669.72 495.05 1348.83 15.71 157.26 129.08 656.42 149.59 731.21 527.12 1441.13 16.52 165.49 136.94 685.42

2421 Upper Galveston Bay 107.36 487.48 301.73 1104.47 14.45 117.06 99.00 453.55 118.28 537.07 325.55 1196.82 16.69 124.52 109.65 489.38

2425 Clear Lake 0.00 0.00 10.34 36.92 2.56 6.15 14.57 15.38 0.00 0.00 11.36 40.56 2.91 6.76 16.61 16.90

2431 Moses Lake 210.49 1,273.27 257.03 1273.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 229.49 1,388.20 280.23 1388.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2432 Chocolate Bay 4.65 565 6.52 565.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.13 623.88 7.17 623.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2436 Barbours Cut 0.00 0.00 1.81 7.0900 0.11 2.36 0.96 4.72 0.00 0.00 1.76 6.9000 0.90 2.30 0.90 4.60

2439 Lower Galveston Bay 144.64 1,118.39 224.48 1118.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 144.55 1,117.73 224.35 1117.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

GRAND TOTAL 631.07 4222.02 2711.25 10741.55 267.95 1771.27 1553.89 3541.76 672.92 4520.65 3236.10 9765.66 271.84 1288.10 1773.53 3926.25

Difference Between Two Formulas (percent) 569.09 315.35 602.77 145.70 572.62 220.43 407.08 142.47

Safety Factor (percent) 6.69 4.15 7.02 2.45 6.71 3.20 5.06 2.42


Clear Lake Watershed: Domestic Wasteloads for 2000 Projections Made 1992 - 2000 vs Actual Values




STREAM SEGMENT 1101

FRIENDSWOOD, CITY OF 11571.01 9.2500 32,899 32,889 32,889 28,459 30,124 31,789 40,367 4.6388 4.7327 4.8942 4.0300 4.3335 4.7291 4.5027


LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.03 0.6600 N/A 3,017 3,017 N/A 2,763 2,915 14,267 N/A 0.4118 0.3938 0.4200 0.3771 0.3805 0.3830

(Country Plant)



NASSAU BAY, CITY OF 10526.01 1.3300 5,005 5,005 5,005 4,330 4,583 4,836 4,163 0.8057 1.0242 0.8371 0.7000 0.9380 0.8089 0.7370

WEBSTER, CITY OF 10520.01 1.6500 5,261 5,261 5,261 4,552 4,818 5,084 5,730 1.2740 1.1265 1.1336 1.1100 1.0316 1.0954 1.0672

TOTAL for Clear Creek Tidal 18.8900 56,698 59,705 59,705 48,943 54,614 57,674 84,625 11.1842 11.7964 11.3341 10.1000 10.7802 10.9440 10.5899

STREAM SEGMENT 1102

BC MUD 1 12332.01 1.0000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6,005 N/A N/A N/A 0.1400 0.2566 0.5210 0.6500

(Southwyck)

BC MUD 2 12705.01 0.1000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3000 0.0300 N/A N/A

BC MUD 5 12295.01 0.7000 2,633 2,633 2,633 2,239 2,366 2,534 5,742 0.2343 0.2953 0.3526 0.2000 0.2676 0.3394 0.3813

(BC MUD 4 & 5)

BC MUD 6 13784.01 0.1000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1,274 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.0104 0.1027

HC WCID 89 12939.01 0.1000 N/A 200 200 166 183 193 931 N/A 0.0541 0.0627 0.0800 0.0496 0.0606 0.0551

(Morningside)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.75 6.1400 9,898 9,898 9,898 8,564 9,064 9,564 23,220 3.3256 2.7521 2.3982 2.8800 2.5204 2.3174 2.0696

(Sagemont)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.79 5.3300 18,633 18,633 18,633 16,122 17,064 18,005 26,069 2.9253 2.4601 2.9606 2.5400 2.2520 2.8609 2.6729

(Southeast)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.02 2.2500 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 7,724 1.8400 N/A N/A 1.8400 2.2000 2.1703 1.0455


PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.03 1.7500 7,933 7,933 7,933 6,736 7,184 7,633 13,895 1.2300 1.1704 1.1168 1.2300 1.0600 1.0747 0.8397





(Pearland Tract)

TOTAL for Clear Creek Above-Tidal 18.3400 39,297 39,297 39,297 33,827 35,861 37,929 84,860 9.5552 6.7320 6.8909 9.2100 8.6362 9.3547 7.8168

STREAM SEGMENT 1103

GC WCID 1 10173.01 3.6000 19,719 19,719 19,719 16,897 17,956 19,013 19,395 4.0423 3.1729 2.8450 3.4800 2.8893 2.7433 2.4226

(Plant No. 1)



TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Tidal 3.7500 21,110 21,110 21,110 18,088 19,222 20,354 28,228 4.1466 3.2970 2.95 3.5700 3.0023 2.8450 2.4976

STREAM SEGMENT 1104

FRIENDSWOOD 0.4000 2,514 2,514 N/A 2,135 2,514 N/A N/A 0.3293 0.2313 N/A 0.2800 0.2095 N/A N/A

(Tower Estates)

TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Above-Tidal 2,514 2,514 0 0 2,514 0 0 0.3293 0.2313 0.0000 0.2800 0.2095 0.0000 0.0000






STREAM SEGMENT 1113

CLEAR LAKE CITY W. AUTH. 10539.01 9.0000 50,409 50,409 50,409 43,618 46,165 48,711 59,643 6.2020 6.3332 6.8032 5.3600 5.8000 6.5741 2.1477

(Clear Lake)

HC MUD 67/BAYFIELD PUD 10495.136 5.0000 N/A N/A 8,972 N/A N/A 8,669 14,983 N/A N/A 1.6743 N/A 1.6494 1.6179 1.0596


TOTAL for Armand Bayou 14.0000 50,409 50,409 59,381 43,618 46,165 57,380 74,626 6.2020 6.3332 8.4775 5.3600 7.4494 8.1920 3.2073

STREAM SEGMENT 2421

BACLIFF MUD 10627.01 1.0300 5,128 5,128 5,128 4,395 4,670 4,944 5,320 0.9178 0.7840 0.8923 0.7900 0.7840 0.8604 0.5198

BAYVIEW MUD 10770.01 0.2500 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,157 1,229 1,301 1,420 0.2213 0.2006 0.1679 0.1900 0.2006 0.1619 0.0963

GALVESTON CO. WCID 12 12039.01 0.5000 2,742 2,742 2,742 2,351 2,497 2,644 3,430 0.3839 0.3973 0.5028 0.3300 0.3973 0.4849 0.3648

(Plant 1)

LA PORTE, CITY OF 10206.01 7.5600 30,785 30,785 30,785 26,637 28,193 29,748 31,279 4.1559 3.5100 3.6135 3.6000 3.5100 3.4918 3.4200

(Plant 1)

SAN LEON MUD 11546.01 0.7500 3,920 3,920 3,920 3,359 3,569 3,779 4,403 0.8271 0.6500 0.7126 0.7100 0.6500 0.6871 0.5528

SEABROOK, CITY OF 10671.01 2.5000 7,803 7,803 7,803 6,751 7,146 7,540 9,443 1.1392 1.3600 1.0903 0.9900 1.3600 1.0536 0.8616

TOTAL for Upper Galveston Bay 12.5900 51,728 51,728 51,728 44,650 47,304 49,956 55,295 7.6452 6.9019 6.9794 6.6100 6.9019 6.7397 5.8153

STREAM SEGMENT 2425

HC WCID 50 10243.01 0.5400 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2,969 N/A N/A N/A 0.2600 0.3105 0.3105 0.2597

(El Lago Plant)

TOTAL for Clear Lake 0.5400 0 0 0 0 2,969 0 0.2600 0.3105 0.3105 0.2597

STREAM SEGMENT 2438

(No Discharges)

TOTAL for Bayport Channel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0000 0 0

GRAND TOTAL 68.1100 221,756 224,763 231,221 189,126 205,680 223,293 330,603 39.0625 35.2918 36.6324 35.3900 37.2900 38.3859 30.1866

SOURCE: Self-reporting data (1992, 1995, 1998) obtained directly from permit holder or submitted to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission by permitted dischargers. The data presented in the table is the annual mean

GPCD = gallons per capita per day lb/day = pounds per day NH3-N = Ammonia NitrogenPOP = service area population BOD = Biochemical Oxygen Demand CBOD5 = Carbonaceous BODFLOW = treatment plant effluent TSS = Total Suspended Solids N/A = data not availablemgd = million gallons per day

NOTES:

1. Where no numerical value appears for a parameter, it is a non-permitted parameter and the potential discharge level was not estimated/projected.

2. Data for the years 1992, and 1998 were taken from H-GAC Water Quality Management Reports (Clear Lake Watershed) for those years. The 1995 projections were taken from the 1996 Clear Lake Watershed Report.



2000 BOD 5 (lb.day) BOD5 2000 TSS (lb/day) TSS NH3-N (lb./day) for 2000 ACTUAL NH3-N CBOD 5 (lb./day) for 2000 ACTUAL CBOD5Projected in Year Actual in Year Projected in Actual in Year Projected in Projected in

ENTITY PERMIT 1992 1995 1998 1992 1998 2000 1992 1995 1998 1992 1995 1998 2000 1992 1995 1998 1992 1995 1998 2000 1992 1995 1998 1992 1995 1998 2000

STREAM SEGMENT 1101

FRIENDSWOOD, CITY OF 11571.01 193.44 NA NA 48.81 48.81 NA 464.25 473.65 489.10 70.21 44.34 59.04 68.74 77.37 78.94 81.64 4.19 9.94 6.67 10.26 N/A NA 204.90 N/A 73.19 78.67 83.23


LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.03 N/A NA NA N/A NA NA N/A 41.21 39.41 4.26 4.54 5.92 22.68 N/A 6.87 6.57 0.54 0.42 0.28 1.50 N/A NA 16.42 6.34 7.30 6.82 22.86

(Country Plant)

LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.05 ? NA NA 62.70 62.70 NA 446.93 450.48 407.87 4.13 156.20 90.48 21.93 74.49 75.08 67.98 9.27 23.91 18.44 1.50 N/A NA 169.94 N/A 90.05 91.63 21.93


NASSAU BAY, CITY OF 10526.01 N/A NA NA N/A NA NA 80.64 102.50 83.78 5.13 28.01 11.98 6.13 13.44 17.08 13.96 1.07 0.85 2.64 2.27 N/A NA 34.91 16.15 16.80 13.22 11.34

WEBSTER, CITY OF 10520.01 N/A NA NA N/A NA NA 127.94 112.74 113.45 21.38 32.02 19.69 15.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.36 2.52 3.21 2.10 N/A NA 47.27 14.05 19.38 20.82 19.87

TOTAL for Clear Creek Tidal 193.44? 0.00 0.00 111.51 0.00 0.00 1119.76 1180.58 1134.31 105.11 265.11 187.11 134.59 165.3 177.97 170.14 16.43 37.64 31.24 17.63 0 0.00 472.63 36.54 206.72 211.16 159.23

STREAM SEGMENT 1102

BC MUD 1 12332.01 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6.83 6.26 8.40 9.73 N/A N/A N/A 1.76 0.49 2.28 1.14 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4.96 11.69 10.08

(Southwyck)

BC MUD 2 12705.01 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.47 1.47 N/A N/A N/A 0.04 0.04 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.35 N/A

BC MUD 5 12295.01 9.77 12.31 7.79 N/A 23.45 29.55 35.29 4.59 9.52 6.90 9.70 3.91 4.93 5.88 5.36 4.60 1.21 1.50 N/A N/A 14.70 N/A 22.06 6.63 7.60

(BC MUD 4 & 5)

BC MUD 6 13784.01 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.49 4.56 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.02 0.55 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.14 2.70

HC WCID 89 12939.01 N/A 0.00 N/A N/A N/A 5.42 6.28 7.39 2.91 1.57 2.99 N/A 0.90 1.05 0.24 0.10 0.41 0.88 N/A N/A 2.61 N/A 1.40 0.84 1.63

(Morningside)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.75 138.68 N/A 51.75 51.75 332.82 275.43 240.01 22.20 34.29 65.09 42.00 55.47 45.90 40 15.16 9.27 7.94 15.60 N/A N/A 100 N/A 52.87 44.64 53.20

(Sagemont)

HOUSTON, CITY OF 10495.79 N/A N/A 50.33 50.33 292.76 246.21 296.30 51.50 28.71 87.45 54.50 48.79 41.03 49.38 7.53 4.14 17.46 12.54 N/A N/A 123.46 N/A 48.43 58.64 51.88

(Southeast)

PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.02 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 50.59 83.12 44.36 24.35 N/A N/A N/A 2.30 1.99 2.34 1.65 N/A N/A N/A N/A 53.14 40.09 23.61


PEARLAND, CITY OF 10134.03 N/A N/A N/A N/A 144.50 117.13 111.77 47.38 71.01 182.90 88.37 24.08 19.53 18.63 1.56 1.14 3.12 7.10 60.21 48.81 46.57 60.21 28.94 27.07 38.02





(Pearland Tract)

TOTAL for Clear Creek Above-Tidal 148.45 12.31 0.00 109.87 102.08 0.00 793.53 673.74 689.65 191.95 237.29 398.16 236.20 132.25 112.29 114.94 33.95 21.77 34.78 40.96 60.21 48.81 287.35 60.21 212.15 189.74 188.72

STREAM SEGMENT 1103

GC WCID 1 10173.01 N/A N/A 254.45 254.45 506.69 396.94 356 138.09 476.89 350.33 122.45 67.43 59.92 47.46 12.19 46.62 22.13 23.41 0.00 264.62 237.38 N/A 124.04 93.89 99.33

(Plant No. 1)

LEAGUE CITY, CITY OF 10568.07 N/A N/A N/A N/A 13.05 15.53 13.20 3.14 9.75 3.99 47.54 2.61 3.11 2.64 1.19 2.64 1.05 5.59 8.70 10.35 8.80 N/A 3.19 2.40 21.43


TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Tidal 0 0.00 0.00 254.45 254.45 0.00 519.74 412.47 369.11 141.23 486.64 354.32 169.99 70.04 63.03 50.09 13.38 49.26 23.18 29.00 8.70 274.97 246.18 0.00 127.23 96.29 120.76

STREAM SEGMENT 1104

FRIENDSWOOD N/A N/A N/A N/A 41.20 28.93 12.05 10.71 8.24 5.79 12.05 0.46 0.00 N/A N/A 4.42

(Tower Estates)

TOTAL for Dickinson Bayou Above-Tidal 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.20 28.93 0.00 12.05 10.71 0.00 0.00 8.24 5.79 0.00 12.05 0.46 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.42 0.00 0.00



2000 BOD 5 (lb.day) BOD5 2000 TSS (lb/day) TSS NH3-N (lb./day) for 2000 ACTUAL NH3-N CBOD 5 (lb./day) for 2000 ACTUAL CBOD5Projected in Year Actual in Year Projected in Actual in Year Projected in Projected in

ENTITY PERMIT 1992 1995 1998 1992 1998 2000 1992 1995 1998 1992 1995 1998 2000 1992 1995 1998 1992 1995 1998 2000 1992 1995 1998 1992 1995 1998 2000

STREAM SEGMENT 1113

CLEAR LAKE CITY W. AUTH. 10539.01 N/A N/A 131.39 N/A 620.52 633.82 680.86 169.14 280.74 179.40 81.14 103.42 105.64 113.48 169.14 56.63 4.41 0.00 264.09 283.69 N/A 283.31 200.45 58.45

(Clear Lake)

HC MUD 67/BAYFIELD PUD 10495.136 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 167.56 N/A 49.00 40.18 25.00 0.00 N/A 27.93 N/A 2.92 8.54 6.14 N/A N/A 69.82 N/A 32.00 34.00 23.60


TOTAL for Armand Bayou 0? 0.00 0.00 131.39 0.00 0.00 620.52 633.82 848.42 169.14 329.74 219.58 106.14 103.42 105.64 141.41 169.14 58.55 8.54 10.55 0 264.09 353.51 0.00 315.31 234.45 82.05

STREAM SEGMENT 2421

BACLIFF MUD 10627.01 153.09 143.59 148.83 12.40 17.66 20.70 N/A N/A N/A 25.97 41.15 29.46 20.13 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

BAYVIEW MUD 10770.01 N/A N/A 28.00 3.03 4.28 2.08 36.90 36.73 28.00 35.75 14.17 6.57 1.87 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/a N/A N/A N/A N/A

GALVESTON CO. WCID 12 12039.01 64.03 72.75 19.40 19.40 64.03 72.75 62.90 35.75 18.82 7.16 11.71 N/A N/A 12.58 N/A 2.26 2.37 N/A N/A 41.94 N/A 7.06 7.50 8.27

(Plant 1)

LA PORTE, CITY OF 10206.01 N/A 639.29 126.54 115.79 693.21 639.29 452.05 156.53 113.58 209.82 125.69 N/A N/A 90.41 N/A N/A N/A 8.30 N/A N/A 301.36 N/A N/A 86.69 71.75

(Plant 1)

SAN LEON MUD 11546.01 137.96 119.06 118.86 13.03 14.50 20.48 137.96 119.06 118.86 25.21 19.58 39.58 20.71 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

SEABROOK, CITY OF 10671.01 190.02 247.70 181.87 13.11 30.17 31.33 190.02 247.70 181.87 30.78 68.00 81.40 50.16 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

TOTAL for Upper Galveston Bay 545.10 1,222.39 477.56 187.51 201.80 74.59 1122.12 1115.53 843.68 309.99 275.30 373.99 230.27 0 0.00 102.99 0.00 2.26 0.00 10.67 0 0.00 344.30 0.00 7.06 94.19 80.02

STREAM SEGMENT 2425

HC WCID 50 10243.01 N/A N/A 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A N/A N/A 8.08 9.62 9.62 7.28 N/A N/A N/A 0.38 0.35 1.80 N/A N/A N/A N/A 6.90 6.90 10.26

(El Lago Plant)

TOTAL for Clear Lake 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 8.08 9.62 9.62 7.28 0 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.00 1.80 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.90 6.90 10.26

STREAM SEGMENT 2438

(No Discharges) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

TOTAL for Bayport Channel 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

GRAND TOTAL 1234.70 477.56 794.73 558.33 74.59 4216.87 4045.07 3885.17 937.55 1614.41 1542.78 884.47 479.25 464.72 579.57 245.33 169.94 97.74 110.61 68.91 587.87 1703.97 96.75 879.79 832.73 641.04

Documents

GULF COAST REGION - Houston-Galveston Area Council · Gulf Coast Region Water Quality Management Plan Update: 2001-2002 “To promote the preservation, protection, and enhancement