U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Scientific Investigations Report 2009–5096

National Water Availability and Use Program

Variations in Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 

of Water in Ohio and Indiana, with Selected Data From 

Wisconsin, 1999–2004
Central cover image: Great Lakes MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) image with hill shading, obtained from 

Great Lakes Information Center (http://gis.glin.net/maps/). Sources: NASA Geospatial Interoperability Office, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 

California Institute of Technology, U.S. Geological Survey; imaging by Pete Geincke.

Other photographs on cover and throughout report are by Kimberly H. Shaffer and Donna L. Runkle, U.S. Geological Survey;

and Patrick Shaffer, unless otherwise noted.
Variations in Withdrawal, Return Flow, 

and Consumptive Use of Water in Ohio 

and Indiana, with Selected Data From 

Wisconsin, 1999–2004

By Kimberly H. Shaffer

National Water Availability and Use Program

Scientific Investigations Report 2009–5096

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2009

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, 

natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1-888-ASK-USGS

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, 

visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov

Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to 

reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.

Suggested citation:

Shaffer, K.H., 2009, Variations in withdrawal, return flow, and consumptive use of water in Ohio and Indiana, with 

selected data from Wisconsin, 1999–2004: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2009–5096, 93 p.
iii

Contents

Abstract ..........................................................................................................................................................1

Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................2

Purpose and Scope ..............................................................................................................................3

Consumptive Use .................................................................................................................................4

Methods and Data Requirements ...............................................................................................................5

Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use .............8

Domestic ................................................................................................................................................9

Commercial..........................................................................................................................................10

Industrial...............................................................................................................................................19

Public Supply.......................................................................................................................................25

Thermoelectric Power.......................................................................................................................35

Irrigation...............................................................................................................................................39

Livestock...............................................................................................................................................47

Aquaculture .........................................................................................................................................50

Mining ..................................................................................................................................................51

Findings..........................................................................................................................................................57

Summary and Conclusions.........................................................................................................................65

Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................................66

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................66

Glossary.........................................................................................................................................................69

Appendixes ...................................................................................................................................................71

Figures

1. Map showing the Indiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin study area and the Great Lakes 

surface-water basin.....................................................................................................................3

2. Diagrams showing examples of consumptive use by a single facility ................................4

3. Graphs showing examples of different types of monthly water use ...................................7

4. Winter base-rate method, decision diagram for consumptive-use coefficients...............7

5–20. Graphs Showing—

5. Indiana and Ohio monthly commercial water withdrawals, aggregated for 

1999–2004 ............................................................................................................................11

6. Indiana and Ohio commercial water withdrawals, monthly, as a percentage 

of annual withdrawals for 1999–2004 .............................................................................12

7. Indiana and Ohio monthly industrial water withdrawals, aggregated for 

1999–2004 ............................................................................................................................20

8. Indiana and Ohio industrial water withdrawals, monthly, as a percentage of 

annual withdrawals for 1999–2004..................................................................................21

9. Public-supply withdrawals, public-supply return flow, and precipitation data 

for 2005, Darke County, Ohio............................................................................................26

10. Indiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin monthly public-supply water withdrawals, 

aggregated for 1999–2004 ................................................................................................28
iv

 11. Indiana, Ohio and Wisconsin public-supply water withdrawals, monthly, 

as a percentage of annual withdrawals for 1999–2004...............................................29

12. Wisconsin seasonal withdrawals for public-supply facilities, based on 

percentage of total withdrawals delivered to residential customers.......................30

13. Wisconsin public-supply withdrawals, 1999–2004, for facilities delivering 

more than 85 percent of withdrawals to domestic customers, facilities 

delivering more than 50 percent of withdrawals to industrial customers, 

and facilities delivering more than 50 percent of withdrawals to commercial 

customers ...........................................................................................................................31

14. Indiana, and Ohio monthly thermoelectric-power water withdrawals, 

aggregated for 1999–2004 ................................................................................................36

15. Indiana and Ohio thermoelectric-power water withdrawals, monthly, 

as percentage of annual water withdrawals for 1999–2004.......................................37

16. Indiana and Ohio monthly golf-course irrigation water withdrawals, 

aggregated for 1999–2004 ................................................................................................40

17. Indiana and Ohio monthly nursery, turf, and crop irrigation water withdrawals, 

aggregated for 1999–2004 ................................................................................................40

18. Indiana and Ohio golf-course-irrigation water withdrawals, monthly, 

as percentage of annual water withdrawals for 1999–2004.......................................41

19. Indiana and Ohio nursery-irrigation water withdrawals, monthly, 

as percentage of annual withdrawals for 1999–2004 ..................................................42

20. Indiana and Ohio crop-irrigation water withdrawals, monthly, 

as percentage of annual withdrawals for 1999–2004 ..................................................45

21. Map showing irrigated land acreage in Indiana and Ohio for 2002...................................46

22–30. Graphs Showing—

22. Indiana and Ohio monthly livestock water withdrawals, aggregated for 

1999–2004 ............................................................................................................................48

23. Indiana and Ohio livestock water withdrawals, monthly, as percentage 

of annual withdrawals for 1999–2004 .............................................................................49

24. Indiana and Ohio monthly aquaculture water withdrawals, aggregated for 

1999–2004 ............................................................................................................................51

25. Indiana and Ohio monthly mining water withdrawals, aggregated for 

1999–2004 ............................................................................................................................53

26. Indiana and Ohio monthly coal-mining water withdrawals, aggregated for 

1999–2004 ............................................................................................................................54

27. Indiana and Ohio monthly nonmetallic-mining water withdrawals, 

aggregated for 1999–2004 ................................................................................................55

28. Indiana and Ohio mining water withdrawals, monthly, as percentage of 

annual withdrawals for 1999–200....................................................................................56

29. Indiana and Ohio monthly water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004, 

by water-use category......................................................................................................60

30. Indiana and Ohio monthly water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004, 

by water-use category, excluding thermoelectric power production......................61

1–1 through 1–5. Maps Showing—

1–1. The Great Lakes surface-water basin, the Great Lakes States and Provinces, 

and states considered climatically similar. ...................................................................75

1–2. Domestic and public supply consumptive-use coefficients from various 

sources for Great Lakes States.......................................................................................76
v

1–3. Industrial consumptive-use coefficients from various sources for Great Lakes 

States...................................................................................................................................77

1–4. Thermoelectric power consumptive-use coefficients from various sources 

for Great Lakes States. .....................................................................................................78

1–5. Irrigation consumptive-use coefficients from various sources for Great Lakes 

States...................................................................................................................................79

Tables

1. State database sources and methods used to estimate consumptive-use 

coefficients ....................................................................................................................................5

2. Median withdrawals, by commercial group, for Ohio and Indiana, 1999–2004 ...............13

3. Median withdrawals, by commercial group, for facilities that may be classified 

as community water systems in Ohio and Indiana, 1999–2004 ...........................................14

4. Standard Industrial Classification codes for records used in the return-flow 

and withdrawal method.............................................................................................................15

5. Ohio commercial monthly consumptive-use coefficients statistics based on 

withdrawal and return-flow data for 1999–2004....................................................................17

6. Monthly, seasonal, and annual commercial consumptive-use coefficients for 

Ohio and Indiana, by commercial category and by year, computed by use of the 

winter-base-rate method...........................................................................................................18

7. Ohio commercial facilities type of water use, in decreasing order of number 

of facilities reporting type of water use..................................................................................18

8. Standard Industrial Classification codes (SIC) not used in the SIC-code method 

for estimating consumptive use ...............................................................................................20

9. Industrial consumptive-use coefficients based on SIC code method, 1999–2004 ..........22

10. Ohio industrial monthly and annual consumptive-use coefficients statistics 

based on withdrawal and return-flow data from 1999 through 2004 .................................23

11. Annual Industrial consumptive-use coefficients, by Standard Industrial 

Classification (SIC) code computed by use of withdrawal and return-flow data............23

12. Industrial withdrawals, by group, for Ohio and Indiana, 1999–2004 ..................................24

13. Percentage of water delivered to domestic, commercial, and industrial users 

and unaccounted-for uses for selected Ohio public suppliers in 2007 .............................27

14. Wisconsin public-supply seasonal and annual consumptive-use coefficient, 

computed with the winter-base-rate method by delivery group for 1999–2004...............30

15. Indiana public-supply seasonal and annual consumptive-use coefficients 

computed by use of the winter-base-rate method................................................................32

16. Ohio public-supply seasonal and annual consumptive-use coefficients 

computed by use of the winter-base-rate method................................................................32

17. Wisconsin public-supply seasonal and annual consumptive-use coefficients 

computed by use of the winter-base-rate method................................................................32

18. Monthly consumptive-use coefficients for Wisconsin, Ohio, and Indiana 

public supply computed by use of the winter-base-rate method.......................................33

19. Monthly state-averaged precipitation and temperature data for Wisconsin, 

Ohio, and Indiana for 1999–2004...............................................................................................34

20. Ohio thermoelectric monthly consumptive-use coefficients statistics based 

on withdrawal and return-flow data for 1999–2004 ..............................................................38
vi

21. Indiana and Ohio thermoelectric consumptive-use coefficients computed 

from Energy Information Administration data for 2005.........................................................38

22. Agricultural irrigation data for Ohio and Indiana in 2002.....................................................43

23. Nursery data for Ohio and Indiana in 2002.............................................................................44

24. Monthly average consumptive-use coefficients for golf course and nursery and 

crop irrigation based on Ohio withdrawal and return-flow data for 1999–2004...............45

25. Ohio irrigation monthly consumptive-use coefficient statistics, based on 

withdrawal and return- flow data for 1999–2004...................................................................46

26. Ohio aquaculture monthly consumptive-use coefficient statistics, based on 

withdrawal and return-flow data for 1999–2004....................................................................51

27. Ohio mining monthly consumptive-use coefficient statistics, based on 

withdrawal and return-flow data for 1999–2004....................................................................56

28. Summary of methods and major findings...............................................................................58

29. Average water withdrawals for Ohio and Indiana, 1999–2004............................................59

30. Water demand by water-use category and facility size for Ohio and Indiana, 

1999–2004 .....................................................................................................................................62

31. Monthly consumptive-use coefficients for Ohio, 1999–2004, computed by use 

of the return-flow and withdrawal method ............................................................................63

32. Monthly and seasonal consumptive-use coefficients for Ohio, Indiana, and 

Wisconsin, 1999– 2004, computed by use of the winter-base-rate method .....................64

1–1. Scope of work for initial U.S. Geological Survey study of consumptive-use 

coefficients in the Great Lakes and climatically similar areas ...........................................72

1–2. Consumptive-use coefficient statistics for Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin, the 

Great Lakes Basin, climatically similar areas, and the world, by water-use 

category .......................................................................................................................................73

2–1. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana 

and Ohio commercial facilities, 1999–2004.............................................................................82

2–2. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month by Indiana 

and Ohio industrial facilities, 1999– 2004 ................................................................................82

2–3. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month by Indiana 

public-supply facilities, 1999–2004...........................................................................................83

2–4. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month by Ohio 

public-supply facilities, 1999–2004, for all facilities and years and for facilities 

without records where February withdrawals were greater than July 

withdrawals .................................................................................................................................83

2–5. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month by 

Wisconsin public-supply facilities, 1999–2004.......................................................................84

2–6. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana 

and Ohio thermoelectric facilities, 1999–2004 .......................................................................84

2–7. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana 

and Ohio golf-course facilities, 1999–2004 .............................................................................85

2–8. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana 

crop and nursery irrigation facilities, 1999–2004...................................................................86

2–9. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana 

and Ohio livestock facilities, 1999–2004..................................................................................87

2–10. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana 

livestock facilities, 1999–2004, seasonal facilities and all-year facilities..........................87
vii

2–11. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana 

and Ohio aquacultural sites, 1999–2004..................................................................................88

2–12. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana 

and Ohio mining facilities, 1999–2004......................................................................................88

3–1. Commercial withdrawals by SIC code for Ohio and Indiana, 1999–2004 ..........................89

Conversion Factors and Abbreviations

Multiply By To obtain

Volume

gallon (gal) 3.785 liter (L) 

million gallons (Mgal) 3,785 cubic meter (m3

)

billion gallons (Ggal) 0.3785 cubic hectometer (hm3

)

Rate

cubic foot per second (ft3

/s) 0.02832 cubic meter per second (m3/s)

gallon per day (gal/d) 0.003785 cubic meter per day (m3

/d)

million gallons per day 

(Mgal/d)

 0.04381 cubic meter per second (m3

/s)

billion gallons per day (Ggal/d) 43.81 cubic meter per second (m3

/s)

Temperature in degrees Fahrenheit (°F) may be converted to degrees Celsius (°C) as follows:

 °C = (°F-32)/1.8

Electricity-generation rates are given in kilowatthours (kWh) and gigawatthours (GWh).

Additional abbreviations used in this report

GLC Great Lakes Commission

HUC Hydrologic Unit Code

IDNR Indiana Department of Natural Resources

IJC International Joint Commission

IQR Interquartile range

ODNR Ohio Department of Natural Resources

NAICS North American Industrial Classification System

Nonmetallic mining Mining and quarrying of Nonmetallic Minerals, except fuels

SIC Standard Industrial Classification

Summer months Months May through October

USGS U.S. Geological Survey 

Winter months Months November through April
viii
Variations in Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive 

Use of Water in Ohio and Indiana, with Selected Data 

From Wisconsin, 1999–2004

By Kimberly H. Shaffer 

Abstract 

This report contains an analysis of water withdrawal and 

return-flow data for Ohio and withdrawal data for Indiana 

and Wisconsin to compute consumptive-use coefficients and 

to describe monthly variability of withdrawals and consumptive use. Concurrent data were available for most water-use 

categories from 1999 through 2004. Average monthly water 

withdrawals are discussed for a variety of water-use categories, and average water use per month is depicted graphically 

for Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin (public supply only). 

For most water-use categories, the summer months 

were those of highest withdrawal and highest consumptive 

use. For public supply, average monthly withdrawals ranged 

from 1,380 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) (November) to 

1,620 Mgal/d (July) in Ohio, 621 Mgal/d (December) to 816 

Mgal/d (July) in Indiana, and 515 Mgal/d (December) to 694 

Mgal/d (July) in Wisconsin. Ohio and Indiana thermoelectric 

facilities had large increases in average monthly withdrawals in the summer months (5,520 Mgal/d in March to 7,510 

Mgal/d in August for Indiana; 7,380 Mgal/d in February to 

10,040 Mgal/d in July for Ohio), possibly because of increased 

electricity production in the summer, a need for additional 

cooling-water withdrawals when intake-water temperature 

is high, or use of different types of cooling methods during 

different times of the year. Average industrial withdrawals ranged from 2,220 Mgal/d (December) to 2,620 Mgal/d 

(August) in Indiana and from 707 Mgal/d (January) to 787 

Mgal/d (August) in Ohio. The Ohio and Indiana irrigation data 

showed that most withdrawals were in May through October 

for golf courses, nurseries, and crop irrigation. Commercial 

water withdrawals ranged from 30.4 Mgal/d (January) to 

65.0 Mgal/d (September) in Indiana and from 23.2 Mgal/d 

(November) to 49.5 Mgal/d (August) in Ohio; commercial 

facilities that have high water demand in Ohio and Indiana 

are medical facilities, schools, amusement facilities, wildlife 

facilities, large stores, colleges, correctional institutions, and 

national security facilities. Monthly livestock withdrawals 

were constant for Ohio but were more variable in Indiana 

and depended on whether the livestock facility operated on a 

seasonal schedule. Aquaculture withdrawals appeared to correlate with growing seasons and with aeration of ponds during 

the winter months. Mining withdrawals—specifically, those 

for nonmetallic mining—tended to be highest in April and 

may be related to dewatering. 

Consumptive use and consumptive-use coefficients were 

computed by two principal methods in this study: the returnflow and withdrawal method (RW; Ohio only) and the winterbase-rate method (WBR; Ohio, Indiana and Wisconsin). The 

WBR method was not suitable for the thermoelectric, industrial, irrigation, livestock, aquaculture, and mining water-use 

categories. The RW method was not used for public-supply 

facilities. A third method, the Standard Industrial Classification code method (SIC), was used only for certain industrial 

facilities. The public-supply annual average consumptive-use 

coefficient derived by use of the WBR methods ranged from 6 

to 8 percent among Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin; the summer average consumptive-use coefficient was considerably 

higher, ranging from 16 to 20 percent. The commercial annual 

consumptive-use coefficient for both Ohio and Indiana was 

30 percent by the WBR method, which fell within the Ohio 

annual median (17 percent) and annual average (42 percent) 

by the RW method. Thermoelectric consumptive use differs greatly by the type of cooling the facility uses; the Ohio 

annual median consumptive-use coefficient (RW method) was 

2 percent for all thermoelectric facilities and facilities with 

multiple types of cooling, but exclusively once-through-cooling facilities had a median of 0 percent and exclusively closedloop-cooling facilities had a median of 25 percent. Industrial 

consumptive-use coefficients varied by type of industry, 

as reflected by SIC code; overall, the median annual consumptive-use coefficient for Ohio was 10 percent by the RW 

method and 11 percent for Indiana and 12 percent for Ohio 

by the SIC code method. Irrigation consumptive-use coefficients were computed for Ohio golf course irrigation (annual 

median of 77 percent) and nursery and crop irrigation (annual 

median of 78 percent), but the number of records available for 

analysis represented only a small proportion of the total number of facilities. The RW method was also used for livestock, 

aquaculture, and mining water-use categories—but again, only 
2 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

relatively few records were available; the Ohio median annual 

consumptive-use coefficient for livestock was 76 percent (18 

records), for aquaculture was 0 percent (33 records), and for 

mining was 10 percent (418 records). 

In terms of maximum accuracy and minimal uncertainty, 

use of available withdrawal, return-flow, and consumptiveuse data reported by facilities and data estimated from similar 

facilities are preferable over estimates based on data for a particular water-use category or groups of water-use categories. If 

monthly withdrawal, return flow, and consumptive use data are 

few and limited, monthly patterns described in this report may 

be used as a basis of estimation, but the level of uncertainty 

may be a greater than for the other estimation methods.

Introduction 

Refinement of consumptive-use data and coefficients for 

estimating consumptive use is an area of great interest and 

value to water-supply managers in the United States and in the 

Great Lakes Basin1 in particular (Grannemann and Reeves, 

2005). Consumptive use is that part of water withdrawn that 

is no longer available because of evaporation, transpiration, product incorporation, incorporation into crops, human 

consumption, livestock consumption or is otherwise removed 

from the immediate water environment (such as a specific 

water body, a regional surface or groundwater source, or an 

entire basin). Water-resource planners and managers, who use 

data on withdrawal, return flows, and consumptive water use 

to understand the effect of human use of water on the hydrologic system, seek to further understand how they can use 

this information and what studies could be done to refine and 

remove some of the uncertainty about consumptive-use coefficients—thus resulting in improved management of water use. 

1

 Bolded terms defined in the glossary.

This report is one in a series by the U.S. Geological 

Survey’s National Water Availability and Use Program, a program designed to gain a better understanding of the water-use, 

land-use, and climatic trends that affect our Nation’s water 

resources. Patterns uncovered in this report for consumptive 

use and seasonal variations of withdrawals may be used where 

data on consumptive use or other estimation procedures are 

lacking. A previous report in the series (Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007) summarized previously published consumptive-use 

coefficients for the Great Lakes States and climatically similar 

states. In this report, information in databases of waterresource agencies in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin was used to 

examine monthly variation in consumptive use. All three states 

have collected monthly water-use data to some extent for 

facilities that have the capacity to withdraw at least 100,000 

gal/d (fig. 1). Ohio and Indiana have collected data in multiple water-use categories, whereas the Wisconsin data are for 

public supply only. In addition, Ohio has collected return-flow 

data as part of a statewide water-withdrawal monitoring program, making it possible to directly estimate consumptive-use 

coefficients from withdrawal and return-flow data. Consumptive-use coefficients determined/estimated in this report are 

compared to those of Shaffer and Runkle (2007) for the Great 

Lakes Basin (Appendix 1).

Two common methods of estimating consumptive use are 

application of a water-balance equation in which measured 

return flow is subtracted from measured withdrawals (returnflow and withdrawal method) and application of a consumptive-use coefficient if return-flow data are not available (fig. 

1). Shaffer and Runkle (2007) noted that a third method, the 

winter base-rate method, has been used in a few studies to 

estimate domestic consumptive use, and that method was used 

in this study where data were sufficient for its application. 

Consumptive use is water that is evaporated, transpired, incorporated into products or crops, consumed 

by humans or livestock, or otherwise removed from an immediate water environment. 

Consumptive use is water that is evaporated, transpired, incorporated into products or crops, 

consumed by humans or livestock, or otherwise removed from an immediate water environment.
Introduction 3

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to examine available data in 

the Great Lakes States to better understand monthly water use 

and consumptive use. Specifically, this report 

• summarizes variations in water withdrawal by wateruse category or groups of similar industries 

• compares estimated consumptive-use coefficients 

derived from the return-flow and withdrawal method 

in Ohio to the estimated consumptive-use coefficients 

derived from the winter-base-rate method used in Indiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin

• lists consumptive-use coefficients derived from waterwithdrawal and return-flow data for Ohio 

• summarizes the variability of consumptive use for 

water-use categories or groups of similar industries by 

month

Monthly water withdrawal data were compiled from 

Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin (public supply only) for 1999–

2004. Monthly water return-flow data were compiled from 

Ohio for 1999 to 2004. Commercial, industrial, public-supply, 

thermoelectric-power, irrigation, livestock, aquaculture, and 

mining withdrawal data were available for Ohio and Indiana. 

Data on self-supplied domestic water use for the study area are 

scarce and therefore were insufficient for analysis and discussion in this report. Instead, a brief discussion on previous 

domestic studies is included. In addition, consumptive-use 

coefficients estimated in this report are compared to those 

given in other reports (Appendix 1). 

Data availability—one of the limitations on assessing 

water-use trends in the Great Lakes States and in the Nation—

also is discussed. Understanding the data-collection processes 

and limitations of data is important when documenting current 

levels of withdrawals, return flows, and consumptive use and 

developing policies to optimize the use and reuse of water.

!

!

! !

!!

!

!

!!

!!

!!! ! !!

! !!! !

!

!!

!!

!!

!! !!

! !

! !

! !! !!

! !

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

! !

!!

!

!

!!

! !

!!

!

! !! !!

!

!

! !

!!

! !

!!

! ! ! !

! ! !!

!

! ! !

!

!

!! ! !

!!

!!! ! !

!!

!

! !

!

! !

! ! !!

!!

!!

! !

! !

! !

!!

!!

! !

!!

!!

!!

! !

! !

! !

!! ! ! ! !

! !

!!

!! ! !

!

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

!!

! ! !!

!

!

! !

!!

!

! ! !

! !

!!

!!

!!

!!

! !

!

! ! !

! !

!! ! !

! !

! !

!

!! ! !

! !

!!

! !

!!

! ! !!

! !

! !

!! !

! !

!

!!

! !

! ! !!

!!

!!

!!

! !

!

!

!! !!

! !

!!

!! !!

!! !

! !

!

!

! !

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!

!

! !

!!

!

!

!!

!!

! !

!

!

!

! ! !

! !

!

!

! !

!!

! !

!!

!!

! !!

!

!!

!!

!

!

!!

! !

!

!

! !

!!

! ! !!

!

!

! ! ! !

!! !

!

! !

!!

! !

!!

! !

!

!

! !

!!

!!

! !

!!

!

!

! !

!!

! ! !!

! !

!! !!

! !

!!

! !

!!

!

!

!! !

!

!!

!!

! !

!!

!

!

!!

!! !!

! ! ! ! !!

! !

! ! !!

! !

! !

!! ! ! ! !

! !

!!

!!

!!

90° 80°

50°

45°

40°

EXPLANATION

! !

! !

Great Lakes Basin

Study Area

Great Lakes

Other Great Lakes states

and provinces not studied

0 50 100 200 Miles

0 100 200 50 Kilometers

MINNESOTA

OHIO

INDIANA

MICHIGAN

WISCONSIN

ILLINOIS

PENNSYLVANIA

NEW YORK

CANADA

ONTARIO

QUEBEC

Base from U.S. Geological Survey 1:2,000,000 Digital Data; Albers Equal-Area 

Conic Projection, -5 rotation; standard parallels 29 30' and 45 30', central meridian -96 o o o o

Figure 1. Indiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin study area and the Great Lakes surface-water basin.

Figure 1. Indiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin study area and the Great Lakes surface-water basin.
4 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Consumptive Use 

The water-use process begins when water is diverted or 

withdrawn from surface-water or groundwater sources and 

conveyed to a place of use. A place of use can be a domestic, 

industrial, thermoelectric power, irrigation, livestock, commercial, or mining facility. Once the facility is done with 

the water, the remaining water is released and returned to 

a surface-water or groundwater source (fig. 2). The section 

“Public Supply” contains information on calculating consumptive use for public-supply facilities. For self-supplied users 

(who discharge to a stream and not to a wastewater-treatment 

plant), consumptive use can be calculated by use of the simplified equation

 Consumptive use = Withdrawals – Return Flows (1)

Consumptive use and water withdrawals vary by the 

water-withdrawal purpose and the time of year. There are three 

basic withdrawal and consumption patterns:

1. Constant consumptive-use rate and amount year round. An 

example would be an industrial plant that maintains constant production of the same product throughout the year. 

The withdrawals would be constant throughout the year.

2. Increase in total consumptive use due to an increase in 

water demand but not an increase in the consumptionto-withdrawal ratio. Examples are a bottling plant that 

increases production in order to meet summer demand, or 

a seasonal vegetable-processing plant. The withdrawals 

would increase to meet demand as well, and the consumptive-use coefficient would be the same, but the overall 

consumptive use would increase because of increased 

water withdrawals.

3. Increase in total consumptive use due to both an increase 

in demand and an increase in rate of consumptive use. An 

example is domestic use: outdoor water use increases the 

water withdrawals in the summer, and the consumptiveuse coefficient for outdoor use also increases because of 

evaporation and transpiration.

Data availability, time and areal variability aspects, 

water transfer, and water-quality aspects can make consumptive use complex. When consumptive-use data (often 

estimated by withdrawal and return-flow data) are not available, consumptive-use coefficients are necessary to determine 

consumptive use. Depending on water availability, the amount 

of consumptive use could indicate potential water-shortage 

areas or areas of water-quality stress on aquatic life. These 

periods tend to be in the summer and early fall, when water 

temperatures are at maximum and streamflows and groundwater levels are at minimum. Across states, water-withdrawal 

programs vary by what data are collected, how the data are 

organized, and how often the data are collected. This makes 

comparing data across state and basin boundaries difficult. 

For example, of the three states examined in this study, only 

Ohio collects return-flow data; therefore, only the Ohio dataset 

could be used to determine consumptive use by employing the 

return-flow and withdrawal method.

Consumptive

use (?)

1.0 Mgal/d 

withdrawal

Consumptive use (0.1 Mgal/d) = 

Withdrawal (1.0 Mgal/d) – 

Return flow (0.9 Mgal/d) 

Facility 

0.9 Mgal/d 

return flow

Cooling

 tower 

A B

Consumptive

use (?)

1.0 Mgal/d 

withdrawal

Consumptive use (0.1 Mgal/d) = 

Withdrawal (1.0 Mgal/d) × 

Consumptive-use coefficient (10/100)

Facility 

Return flow (?)

Cooling

 tower 

Consumptive-use coefficient = 10 percent

Figure 2. Examples of consumptive use by a single facility. A, Consumptive use is equal to withdrawal minus return flow 

(Mgal/d, million gallons per day). B, Consumptive use is equal to withdrawal multiplied by consumptive-use coefficient.
Methods and Data Requirements 5

Methods and Data Requirements

Indiana and Ohio data from 1999–2004 were used 

because self-supplied comparable data were available for all 

three states and the timeframe included years in which cities 

in Ohio experienced notable highs and lows for June, July 

and August precipitation. Wisconsin public supply data were 

also available and used. Data sources and methods used are 

listed in table 1. Data were divided into water-use categories 

according to Standard Industrial Classification code (SIC 

code). Commercial and industrial water-use data were further 

divided by major groups by SIC code for analysis. For each 

water-use category or industrial subcategory with a representative number of facilities, data were analyzed for monthly variability of water withdrawals and consumptive-use coefficients. 

Summary tables and figures are in the “Findings” section of 

this report. Tables and figures that compare consumptive-use 

coefficients in this report to findings of Shaffer and Runkle 

(2007) are in the appendixes, as are statistical tables on the 

percentage of annual water withdrawn by month and other 

extensive tables. 

As data were analyzed, they were selectively quality 

controlled to make sure that a facility was in the correct wateruse category based on USGS methods and that withdrawal 

and return-flow data seemed reasonable. Questionable data or 

classifications were discussed with state water-use specialists. 

Estimates in this report are based on individual registration 

data, which could vary in accuracy among the individual registered facilities depending on their estimation methods. 

The three state databases provided monthly data. These 

monthly data were used to (1) graph the average monthly 

water withdrawals (aggregated) and (2) compute statistics for 

the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month (individual facilities and years). This identifies periods of increased 

withdrawal for each water-use category and can identify 

periods of potential water shortages or stresses to aquatic life. 

The average water withdrawals were based on summing each 

month’s withdrawals and dividing the total by 6 (number of 

years of data). Six years of data were unavailable for some 

recently inactive, new, or nonreporting facilities. The monthly 

percentage of annual withdrawals was computed (eq. 2) and 

listed on the series of average monthly water withdrawal 

(aggregated data) figures. 

 Percentage of the annual withdrawals per month (%) =

(Monthly withdrawal ÷ Annual withdrawal) × 100 (2)

Each combination of year and facility constituted an 

individual value for statistical purposes when computing 

monthly statistics. The statistics were calculated by taking 

each individual record (record) and computing the percentage 

of annual withdrawals per month for each individual record. 

Then the average (statistical mean), 25th and 75th percentiles 

and median were calculated for all the individual records and 

listed in figures and Appendix 2.

The withdrawal data were also used to determine how 

much water is used by facilities by percentile. Records were 

compiled for Ohio and Indiana and divided by percentiles. The 

annual withdrawals were divided into facility size categories 

based on percentiles: small facilities were those at the 33d percentile and below, medium facilities were those between the 

33d and 66th percentiles, and large facilities were between the 

66th and 90th percentiles. The top 10 percent of withdrawal 

records for a water-use category were subdivided into the 

categories of extra large (the top 2 percent, or 98th percentile 

and above) and very large (90th to 98th percentile). Results of 

these categorizations are listed in the “Findings” section, and 

for more specific commercial and industrial facility groups, 

the “Commercial” and “Industrial” sections.

The Ohio Water Withdrawal Facilities Registration 

Program is not mandated to collect return-flow data, but facilities have the option to report this data element. Facilities that 

report return-flow data for Ohio vary by year. For those facilities that choose to report, it is not always known if the returnflow data are measured (by a meter) or estimated. The monthly 

return-flow and withdrawal data are reported for the facility on 

the same annual form used by facilities that have the capacity 

to withdraw 100,000 gal/d. A comparison of return flow-data 

provided to the Ohio Water Withdrawal Facilities Registration Program maintained by the Ohio Department of Natural 

Resources (ODNR) and to the National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) maintained by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA) in 2005 showed that 

the data were the same or similar for many facilities. Because 

these agencies have different program requirements, a facility 

that may be in ODNR’s database may not be in Ohio EPA’s 

database. 

Table 1. State database sources and methods used to estimate consumptive-use coefficients.

State Data source Methods

Indiana Indiana Department of Natural 

Resources, 2007

Winter base-rate method

SIC Code method (Industrial)

Ohio Ohio Department of Natural Resources, 

2008

Return flow method

Seasonal method

SIC code Method (Industrial)

Wisconsin Wisconsin Public Service Commission, 

2006

Winter base-rate method
6 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

For this report, three methods were used to estimate consumptive use and consumptive-use coefficients:

1. In the first method, withdrawal and return-flow data for 

self-supplied facilities (Ohio only) are used to determine consumptive use and consumptive-use coefficients 

(return flow and withdrawal method, noted as RW in 

Appendix 1). Only facilities with return-flow data available were used. The level of data accuracy varies by facility. A consumptive-use coefficient was computed by using 

the following equation for withdrawal and return-flow 

data for self-supplied facilities:

 Consumptive-use coefficient (%) = [(Water withdrawn –

Water returned) ÷ Water withdrawn] × 100 (3)

The RW method was used for all the water-use categories 

except public supply. (See the “Public Supply” section for 

more information why this method was not used.)

2. The second method—the winter base-rate method 

(WBR) uses monthly withdrawal data to compute 

consumptive-use coefficients (Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin). 

LaTour (1991), in a water-use study in Illinois, found that 

the WBR method produced the most reasonable results 

out of three methods to determine domestic consumptive use. The winter base-rate method focuses on outdoor 

water uses (lawn watering, landscape and garden irrigation, car washing, and swimming pool filling), which 

LaTour assumed made up most of domestic consumptive 

use. It is unknown how much of the water used for outdoor use is returned, the elapsed time between withdrawal 

and return, or the water quality of this returned water. 

Because there is no scientific information to the contrary, 

it is assumed that 100 percent of this water is consumed. 

Three WBR equations were applied to the following 

datasets to determine consumptive-use coefficients: 

• Annual (eq. 4) 

• Summer, fall, and spring (eq. 5)

• Summer monthly (eq. 6). 

 Annual consumptive-use coefficient (%) = 

 [(Sum of all monthly withdrawals ÷ 12) – 

 (Sum of winter-month withdrawals ÷ 3)] ÷ 

 (Sum of all monthly withdrawals ÷ 12) × 100 (4)

“All months” are January through December, and

“winter months” are December through February.

 Summer consumptive-use coefficient (%) = 

 [(Sum of summer monthly withdrawals – 

 Sum of winter monthly withdrawals) ÷ 

 Sum of summer monthly withdrawals] × 100 (5)

“Summer months” are June through August. This

basic equation is also used to estimate coefficients

for spring (March through May) and fall (September

through November).

 Monthly consumptive-use coefficient (%) = 

 [(Monthly withdrawals) – 

 (Sum of winter monthly withdrawals) ÷ 3] ÷

 (Monthly withdrawals) × 100 (6)

“Monthly” refers to an individual summer months:

May, June, July, August, September or October.

“Winter months” are December through February. 

In the WBR method, one assumes that, for certain 

water-use categories, the seasonal increase (fig. 3B) is 

outdoor use and therefore consumptive use. For WBR, the 

following procedures and a decision diagram (fig. 4) were 

used to determine whether the method would work for the 

water-use category: 

• Graph—Each water-use category or subcategory with 

a representative number of facilities and monthly withdrawal data was graphed to assess monthly variation in 

water use. 

• Group—Water-use patterns were grouped as follows: 

(a) approximately constant water use throughout the 

year, and (b) water use throughout the year, with 

specific months having greater water use than others. 

Examples of these water-use patterns are shown in 

figure 3. Figure 3B illustrates the seasonal increase. 

• Decide—The decision diagram was used to determine 

whether the WBR method was appropriate for a specific water-use category. In general, water-use patterns 

similar to that in figure 3A were assigned constant 

consumptive-use coefficients for the year, and wateruse patterns similar to that in figure 3B were further 

investigated to see whether the seasonal increase was 

due to outdoor use. The percentage of withdrawals in 

the summer had to be 0.5 percent higher than the percentage of withdrawals in the winter to be considered 

pattern 3B.
Methods and Data Requirements 7

MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS,

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

60

45

30

15

0

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

0

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, 

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

A. Constant water use throughout the year.

B. Seasonal pattern in water use, with increased water use in summer months.

Examples of Monthly Water Use

Figure 3. Examples of different types of monthly water use.

15

30

45

60

Winter months

Winter months

Winter months

Winter months

Summer months

Summer months

Summer increase

Graph monthly 

withdrawals

by water-use 

category

Winter-base rate method 

does not work for this water-use 

category.

List the results.

Discuss results

and limitations.

Are monthly withdrawals 

higher in the summer?

Apply winter 

base-rate

method

YES

NO

Are results

reasonable based on

previous studies and

facility information?

NO

YES

Figure 4. Winter base-rate method, decision diagram for consumptive-use coefficients.

Figure 3. Examples of different types of monthly water use.

Figure 4. Winter base-rate method, decision diagram for consumptive-use coefficients.
8 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Aquaculture, livestock, and mining water-use categories showed constant water withdrawals throughout 

the year or increases in withdrawals during nonsummer 

months, when outdoor use and evaporation is usually lowest, so the WBR method was not used for these categories. 

Industrial and Thermoelectric power water-use categories 

showed an increase in summer withdrawals similar to that 

in figure 3B. However, the WBR method was not used for 

the industrial category because it was unknown whether 

the summer withdrawal increase was from consumptive 

use, an increase in demand, or both. The WBR method 

also was not used for thermoelectric power. The WBR 

method was tested on the Ohio and Indiana thermoelectric 

datasets and was adjusted for increased power production 

in the summer. The resulting consumptive-use coefficient 

was much higher than that found in previous studies and 

was therefore rejected. Two factors may contribute to the 

significant increase in withdrawals in the summer besides 

consumptive use and increased power protection:

• During the summer, the influent water is warming, 

and withdrawals must increase in order to produce the 

same amount of electricity and cool the reactors and 

condensers.

• Thermoelectric power withdrawals and consumptive 

use also depend on the type of cooling at a facility, but 

many facilities use different types of cooling during 

different times of the year. One Indiana facility has 

even brought in portable cooling towers to use on a 

temporary basis (Donald Arvin, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., [March] 2008). 

Irrigation water withdrawals were predominantly in 

the summer months, so the WBR was not used because 

the winter-base rate is questionable. Winter withdrawals 

by irrigation facilities may reflect commercial activities in 

the clubhouse (golf-course irrigation), nursery buildings, 

or farm buildings.

Both Commercial and Public Supply water-use categories showed withdrawal patterns similar to that in figure 

3B and outdoor water use, and the WBR was suitable for 

these two categories. (See those sections for more details.) 

3. The third method—the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code method (Industrial only)—involves 

applying a consumptive-use coefficient (Shaffer and 

Runkle, 2007; Appendix table 2–5) based on the SIC for 

each facility in a state. These consumptive-use coefficients were applied to water withdrawn from facilities in 

Indiana and Ohio from 1999 to 2004. If the SIC codes did 

not match up (because of revisions to SIC codes), the sites 

were matched by facility name and type of facility. If the 

particular SIC consumptive-use coefficient was not available because of Census masking (an approach to ensure 

the confidentiality of all respondents in a dataset), the 

industrial group consumptive-use coefficient was used. 

Analysis of Variation in Monthly 

Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and 

Consumptive Use

Facilities were divided by water-use categories to 

compare variation in monthly water withdrawals. The waterwithdrawal, return-flow, and consumptive-use data were used 

to determine consumptive-use coefficients per month. Because 

public-supply withdrawals are delivered to domestic, commercial, and industrial customers, the public-supply section 

follows the domestic, commercial and industrial sections. 

An ethanol plant is an example of a water-withdrawal facility that has a fairly high consumptive-use coefficient.
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 9

Domestic

Horn and others (2008) used a per capita water-demand 

model to determine annual, summer, and winter per capita 

water-demand coefficients and an annual domestic consumptive-use coefficient for the seacoast region in southeastern 

New Hampshire. Summer per capita water demand corresponded to June, July, and August, when outdoor water 

demand and consumptive use are high because of evaporation. 

Winter per capita water demand corresponded to December, 

January, and February, when virtually all household use is 

indoor where little evaporation is occurring (with the exception of humidifiers, which can account for up to 1 percent of 

per capita water demand). The town mean annual per capita 

water demand coefficient ranged from 62.3 to 111.4 (gal/d) 

with an average of 74.6 gal/d. The town mean summer per 

capita water demand coefficient ranged from 74.7 to 151.8 

gal/d, with an average of 92.3 gal/d. The town mean winter per 

capita water demand ranged from 50.9 per 77.6 gal/d, with an 

average of 62.7 gal/d. The domestic annual consumptive-use 

coefficient ranged from 12 to 30 percent, with an average of 

16 percent. The summer consumptive-use coefficient ranged 

from 26 to 49 percent, with an average of 39 percent.

Domestic water use is water withdrawn for indoor household purposes (such as drinking, food preparation, bathing, 

washing clothes and dishes, and flushing toilets) and outdoor 

purposes (such as watering lawns and gardens). Water for 

domestic use can be self-supplied or be delivered by a publicsupply facility (see the “Public Supply” section). Three USGS 

studies have used the WBR method to estimate domestic 

consumptive use: LaTour (1991), Mullaney (2004), and Horn 

and others (2008). These studies also estimated domestic per 

capita water demand.

LaTour (1991) estimated domestic per capita use and 

domestic consumptive use for the Rockford and Kankakee 

areas in Illinois. The per capita use ranged from 67.2 to 71 

gal/d for publicly supplied domestic use (average 69.2 gal/d) 

and 24.4 to 51 gal/d for self-supplied domestic use (average 

37.7 gal/d). The annual consumptive-use coefficient ranged 

from 3 to 14 percent and averaged 7 percent. The increase in 

summer withdrawals was from lawn watering, and rainfall 

was found to affect water use; monthly withdrawals increased 

during dry periods and decreased during wet periods, and 

returns increased during periods of increased rainfall because 

of groundwater and surface runoff entering the sewer systems. 

Mullaney (2004) estimated water-use data and a 

consumptive-use coefficient for the Greenwich area in 

Connecticut and New York. The water-demand coefficient was dependent on the type of development: areas 

with less than a 1-acre lot size had per capita rates of 

113 gal/d or less, whereas areas with larger lots had 

per capita rates as high as 416 gal/d. Mullaney also 

looked at seasonal variation (April through September 

in contrast to October through March) and found that 

larger residential properties showed a greater difference 

between warm-weather and cold-weather household 

demand. For residential properties less than 0.5 acre, 

median household water use was 230 gal/d in April 

through September and 204 gal/d in October through 

March; for properties larger than 4 acres, median water 

use was 1,389 gal/d in April through September and 

848 gal/d in October through March. Mullaney estimated consumptive use to be equal to outdoor water 

(lawn or landscape watering, filling swimming pools, 

and washing vehicles because these uses generally are 

consumptive uses—water is transpired by plants into 

the atmosphere or water evaporates directly from surfaces). Indoor water use was estimated to be the winter 

water use. Consumptive use was estimated by subtracting the winter water-use data from the average daily 

water use. For the Greenwich area in 2000, the average 

consumptive use was 20 percent, the median was 19 

percent, and the interquartile range was 3 to 39 percent.

Self-supplied domestic use includes water withdrawn from a groundwater or 

surface-water source by a user rather than being obtained from a public supply 

facility. Domestic water withdrawals are used for indoor household purposes like 

drinking, food preparation, bathing, washing clothes and dishes, flushing toilets, 

and such outdoor purposes as watering lawns and gardens.
10 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Commercial

6 shows that withdrawals are typically higher in May through 

September than in October through April. 

Commercial water withdrawal data and consumptiveuse coefficients were aggregated by SIC code and by similar 

water-use groups. Data were aggregated both ways because 

SIC codes are not always available. The commercial waterwithdrawal data list the amount of water facilities withdrawals, whereas the consumptive-use coefficients help managers 

better understand what percentage of the water withdrawn is 

or is not available for reuse. Although the Ohio and Indiana 

water-use registration programs include facilities that have the 

capacity to withdrawal 100,000 gal/d, commercial facilities 

vary in their water withdrawals (table 2 and 3). Commercial 

median water withdrawals are displayed in two tables: table 3 

includes groups that may be classified as community watersupply systems, and table 2 lists groups that typically would 

not be classified as community water-supply systems. Wildlife 

establishments, stores, medical facilities, amusement facilities, schools, colleges, correctional institutions, and national 

security facilities had some of the largest median withdrawals 

(tables 2 and 3). A list of commercial facility types by SIC 

code is in Appendix 3.

Commercial water use is water used at restaurants, 

motels, hotels, office buildings, ski slopes, and other commercial facilities. Processes that contribute to commercial 

consumptive use are lawn and landscaping watering, sidewalk 

and car washing, food preparation by restaurants, cooling towers for large air-conditioning units, fountains, aquariums and 

water-theme parks, laundromats, snow making, toilet use by 

customers, and whirlpools used in rehabilitation facilities and 

hospitals. Indiana, and Ohio commercial monthly withdrawal 

data from 1999 to 2004 were analyzed to determine the percentage distribution of annual withdrawals by month. Monthly 

water withdrawals for commercial facilities in Indiana and 

Ohio are graphed in fig 5. Average monthly water withdrawals 

increased during the summer months (Indiana, 30.4 Mgal/d 

in January to 62.3 and 65.0 Mgal/d in August and September; 

Ohio, 23.2 Mgal/d in November to 49.5 Mgal/d in August). 

The percent of annual withdrawals per month is listed on each 

monthly bar in fig. 5 and was calculated by use of equation 2.

Figure 6 and appendix tables 2–1, 2–2, and 2–3 show 

the statistics of monthly withdrawals for commercial facilities expressed as a percentage of annual withdrawals. Figure 

Commercial water withdrawals include recreational facilities like this manmade stream used for water sport activities.
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 11

Figure 5. Indiana and Ohio monthly commercial water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. Monthly percentages of annual 

withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is the number of records. AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

December

AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, 

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

INDIANA

OHIO

Commercial Water Withdrawals (Average Monthly, From Aggregated Data), in Million Gallons Per Day

Figure 5. Indiana and Ohio monthly commercial water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. Monthly

percentages of annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is the number

0.0

0.0

70.0

17.5

35.0

52.5

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

June

5.4 5.4

6.5

7.3

8.0

9.3

10.1

11.0

11.4

9.5 9.3

6.8

Percentage of annual withdrawals

N = 1,982

70.0

17.5

35.0

52.5

5.6

6.4 6.8

7.9

9.7

10.5 10.2

11.8

10.6

9.4

5.5 5.6

N = 612
12 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Figure 6. Indiana and Ohio commercial water withdrawals, monthly, as a percentage of annual withdrawals for 1999–2004. PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

December

INDIANA

OHIO

Distribution of Commercial Water Withdrawals (Individual Records), 

Monthly, as Percentage of Annual Withdrawals

Figure 6. Indiana and Ohio commercial water withdrawals, monthly, as a percentage of annual withdrawals for 1999–2004.

0

0

100

10

20

30

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

June

100

10

20

30

8.7

6.6 5.4 5.7

9.1

7.7

5.5

2.4

7.0 6.7

4.1

8.5 8.4 8.9

7.1

9.2

8.3

6.4

8.3 7.8

10.6

12.0

15.3 14.5

11.8

10.0

8.5 9.1

23 8 9 22 40 52 82 93 42 20 14 22

2.2

6.9

1.4

8.8

7.2

8.4

0.9 0.8

8.5

7.3 7.4 7.0

10.1

7.9

5.5

0.6

6.4 6.3

3.0

8.7 8.7 9.5

8.3 9.0 8.3

6.3

8.3

7.7

10.9

13.1

14.3 15.4

11.8

9.4

8.6 8.3

25 11 2 1 0 7 15 40 25 16 1 22

0.2

6.3

0.0

8.3

6.8

8.3

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

0.0 0.0

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

Smallest value

1

Largest value

less than 

1.5 times IQR 

Outside value

(>1.5 × IQR)

75th Percentile

25th Percentile

IQR, The interquartile range;

distance between 75th and 

25th percentiles 

Median

EXPLANATION

7 Number of outside values 
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 13

Table 2. Median withdrawals, by commercial group, for Ohio and Indiana, 1999–2004. 

[Facility size was computed by percentiles of all commercial facilities; “small” denotes less than 33d percentile, “medium” is from the 33d to 66th percentiles, “large” is from the 66th to 90th percentiles, and “very large” is from the 90th percentiles and above. Median withdrawals are rounded to three significant 

figures.]

Description of group 

type

Subgroup 

based on 

withdrawals 

at facility

Number of 

records

Median water 

withdrawals, 

in gallons per 

day

Agriculture services1

Small 10 1,670

Medium 18 16,800

Large 2 41,600

Wildlife establishments2

Small 43 1,860

Medium 35 7,100

Large 39 95,900

Very large 25 770,000

Stores3

Small 70 1,970

Medium 35 11,000

Large 30 131,000

Very large 5 1,640,000

Restaurants

Small 12 2,140

Medium 6 16,700

Offices

Small 21 1,020

Medium 36 15,300

Large 29 57,500

Very large 21 551,000

Hotels4

Small 43 2,250

Medium 39 18,600

Large 48 64,000

Very large 11 305,000

Cleaners

Medium 7 15,400

Large 11 48,000

Car washes

Small 12 220

Medium 6 10,900

Description of group 

type

Subgroup 

based on 

withdrawals 

at facility

Number of 

records

Median water 

withdrawals, 

in gallons per 

day

Businesses

Small 204 263

Medium 38 7,890

Large 57 68,600

Very large 15 362,000

Amusement facilities

Small 17 1,420

Medium 68 12,300

Large 45 89,000

Very large 38 850,000

Healthcare facilities

Small 14 1,600

Medium 21 16,700

Large 26 54,300

Medical facilities

Small 17 227

Medium 16 18,500

Large 22 97,800

Very large 11 2,470,000

Schools

Small 307 2,570

Medium 398 9,150

Large 39 49,900

1 Agriculture services includes SIC codes 0711, 0723, 0721, and 0782.

2

 Wildlife establishments are SIC codes 0971 and 9512.

3

 Stores include wholesale and retail.

4

 Hotels include hotels that are connected with a ski resort that have most 

withdrawals during November–March. It is unknown if this is because water 

withdrawals are used for hotel seasonal operations and/or snow making.
14 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

The RW method (tables 4 and 5) and the WBR method 

(table 6) were both used to determine consumptive use for 

commercial facilities. Facility data were more scarce for the 

RW method. Therefore, the RW data were aggregated in two 

ways; by SIC code (table 4) and by commercial groups with 

similar water uses (table 5, which is more comparable to table 

6). Table 4 lists the SIC code, number of individual records 

reported, and the computed consumptive-use coefficient 

median for Ohio sites with return-flow data; the data should 

be used with caution because they are representative of only a 

few facilities. Table 5 lists consumptive-use coefficients based 

on Ohio RW method for commercial groups with similar water 

uses. The median annual consumptive-use coefficient was 17 

percent for all facilities with return-flow data, but the average 

was 42 percent. Amusement parks and colleges had some of 

the higher median consumptive-use coefficients. The averages 

were typically higher than the median consumptive-use coefficients because many of the facilities with higher withdrawals 

had higher consumptive use.

The WBR method results for commercial water use are 

in table 6, which is organized by group types and by state and 

year. Summer consumptive-use coefficients were the highest for all the categories, as is evident in table 6. Homeowners, tenant and condominium associations, medical facilities, 

offices, and colleges were categories with some of the higher 

consumptive-use coefficients. For many of the facilities in 

these categories, withdrawals increased significantly in the 

summer. For all commercial facilities the annual consumptiveuse coefficient was 30 percent for both Ohio and Indiana 

(WBR method). This falls within the average and median 

consumptive-use coefficient (42 and 17, respectively) found 

for the RW method. The wide spread between the average and 

median (RW method) is because facilities making large withdrawals in Ohio tended to have high consumptive use, thus 

making the average high; however, more facilities had less 

consumptive use. All three numbers, (17, 30, and 42 percent) 

are higher than most commercial consumptive-use coefficients 

found in the survey by Shaffer and Runkle (2007). This may 

because many previous commercial consumptive-use coefficients were estimated and not based on studies. 

The computed commercial consumptive-use coefficients 

were higher than expected, but a review of the water uses of 

commercial facilities listed in the ODNR database (2008) 

showed that outdoor use and evaporation have a significant 

part in commercial water use. A facility may have a single use 

or multiple uses. Listed in table 7 is a compilation of types 

of water uses and the corresponding number of commercial 

individual records with any percentage (1–100 percent) listed 

as part of its use. Many commercial facilities use water for 

miscellaneous purposes (see table 7, footnote 1) or other purposes that lead to considerable outdoor use, evaporation, and 

consumptive use (for example, recreation/amusement, nursery/

turf/landscaping, livestock, and so forth). The commercial 

consumptive-use coefficient will vary by how the water is 

used at each facility; facilities that use water in ways such 

that most water is evaporated and transpired will have a high 

consumptive-use coefficient.

Table 3. Median withdrawals, by commercial group, for facilities that may be classified as community water 

systems in Ohio and Indiana, 1999–2004. 

[Facility size was computed by percentiles of all commercial facilities; “small” denotes less than 33d percentile, “medium” is from the 

33d to 66th percentiles, “large” is from the 66th to 90th percentiles, and “very large” is from the 90th percentiles and above. Median 

withdrawals are rounded to three significant figures.]

Description of group type Subgroup based on 

withdrawals at facility

Number of 

records

Median water withdrawals, 

in gallons per day

Operators of real estate1

Small 17 3,120

Medium 59 14,300

Large 110 49,800

Very large 19 330,000

Colleges

Small 14 2,550

Medium 19 7,400

Large 52 114,000

Very large 40 651,000

Homeowner, tenant, and 

condominium associations

Small 20 1,750

Medium 61 13,700

Large 88 55,700

Very large 14 349,000

Correctional institutions

Small 1 548

Medium 11 12,400

Large 1 64,500

Very large 45 677,000

National-security facilities

Small 12 1,330

Medium - -

Large 19 79,900

Very large 12 2,160,000

1

 Operators of real estate include operators of apartment buildings or mobile home parks, real estate agents and managers, and land 

subdividers and developers.
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 15

Table 4. Standard Industrial Classification codes for records used in the return-flow and withdrawal method. 

[Median consumptive-use coefficient and withdrawal range are rounded to nearest whole number. Mgal/yr, million gallons per year.]

SIC code SIC description Number of 

records

Median 

consumptiveuse coefficient

Description of when 

withdrawn and returned

Annual

withdrawal

range 

(Mgal/yr)

0971 Hunting and trapping1 10 32 Water was withdrawn July through 

October, but returns were January 

through May. 

16–97

4011 Railroads, line-haul operating6 40 Withdrawals and returns were April 

through December.

92–105

4581 Airports, flying fields, and 

airport terminal services

6 802 Withdrawals and returns were for the 

whole year, but withdrawals were 

higher in the summer months.

1-2

4931 Electric and other service 

combined

3 0 Withdrawals and returns varied by 

record.3

2–3

5032 Brick, stone, and related 

construction material

3 1 Withdrawals and returns were fairly 

even for the entire year.

1–4

5171 Petroleum blue stations 

and terminals wholesale 

distribution

4 0 Withdrawals and returns varied by 

record.4

2-–70

5541 Gasoline service stations 6 0 Withdrawals and returns were fairly 

even for the entire year.

5–12

6515 Operators of residential 

mobile home sites

2 5 Withdrawals and returns were fairly 

even for the entire year.

7–14

7011 Hotels and motels (ski 

resort)

4 14 Withdrawals and returns were significant in Dec. and Jan. (11–18 gal/d), 

smaller in Nov. and Feb (1–4 gal/d). 

and nominal in Mar.–Oct. (<0.22 

gal/d).

35–39

7213 Linen supply 6 45 Withdrawals and returns were fairly 

even for the entire year.

14–19

7299 Misc. personal services5 4 0 For three records, withdrawals and 

returns were fairly even for the 

entire year. One record had data for 

Jan. through March.

3–13

7996 Amusement parks 18 30 All records showed higher withdrawals in the summer. Two facilities 

reported that much of the water 

withdrawn was not returned (20 to 

91 percent), whereas a third facility 

reported that all of the water withdrawn was returned.

135–1,180

7999 Amusement/Recreation 

services6

24 36 With exception of snow skiing areas, 

these records had most withdrawals and returns during May–Sept.; 

some records also had higher withdrawals in April and October.

1–323

8051 Skilled nursing care 

facilities

2 20 Withdrawals and returns were fairly 

even for the entire year.

1–2

8052 Intermediate care facilities 5 5 Withdrawals and returns were fairly 

even for the entire year.

5–6

8062 General medical and surgical 

hospitals

1 0 Withdrawals and returns were 

throughout the year, but they were 

higher April through November and 

highest July–September.

700–800

8069 Specialty hospitals 6 0 Withdrawals and returns for the most 

part are for the entire year, but they 

were sometimes higher in the summer months.

122–2,760
16 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 4. Standard Industrial Classification codes for records used in the return-flow and withdrawal method. 

[Median consumptive-use coefficient and withdrawal range are rounded to nearest whole number. Mgal/yr, million gallons per year.]

SIC code SIC description Number of 

records

Median 

consumptiveuse coefficient

Description of when 

withdrawn and returned

Annual

withdrawal

range 

(Mgal/yr)

8211 Elementary and secondary 

schools

22 18 Withdrawal and returns were for the 

entire year with slightly larger withdrawals September–June.

1–9

8221 Colleges and universities 17 232 Withdrawals and returns were for 

the entire year, but some records 

showed more withdrawals in the 

summer, others showed more 

withdrawals during the school year 

(Sept.–June), and one was fairly 

steady throughout the year.

35–170

8249 Vocational schools 1 1 Withdrawals and returns were for the 

entire year.

3–4

8322 Individual and family social 

services

4 26 Withdrawals and returns were fairly 

even for the entire year.

1–6

8361 Residential care 1 0 Withdrawals and returns were fairly 

even for the entire year.

23–24

8422 Arboreta and botanical or 

zoological gardens

3 83 Withdrawals and returns were for the 

entire year, but more in the summer 

months.

75–82

8661 Religious organizations 6 887 Withdrawals and returns were for the 

entire year.

132–203

8742 Management consulting 

services

5 0 Withdrawals and returns were for the 

entire year.

40–102

9223 Correctional institutions 4 4 Withdrawals and returns were fairly 

even for the entire year.

618–787

9511 Air and water resource and 

sold waste management

6 0 Withdrawals and returns were for the 

entire year.

48–83

9512 Land, mineral, wildlife, and 

forest conservation

1 10 Water was withdrawn in August, but 

returns were April and May. 

40–60

9532 Admin. of urban and community development3 0 Water was withdrawn and returned in 

the same month, but each record 

was different on which months.

157–276

9711 National security 11 80 Water was withdrawn and returned 

throughout the year, with a slight 

increase in withdrawals in July and 

August.

25–1,430

1

 Facilities primarily engaged in commercial hunting and trapping, or in the operation of game preserves.

2

 Facilities noted as having greater than 85 percent community water. These large consumptive-use coefficients are probably overinflated because the return 

flow reported may not indicate all the actual return flows (return flows to a nearby wastewater-treatment plant). 

3

 One record showed withdrawals and returns in April through September. The second one showed withdrawals and returns in October only. The third record 

showed withdrawals and returns in July through September. 

4

 Two records showed withdrawals and returns all year. A third record showed withdrawals and returns in March through December. The fourth record showed 

withdrawals and returns January, February, August, and October–December. Withdrawals in some months were in the 0.01- to 12.36-gal/d range.

5

 These records are for service areas that probably have restrooms. 

6

 This includes parks, a waterpark, a mill, snow-skiing areas, and a waterfall. The records showed varied consumptive-use coefficients; 0–78 percent for parks, 

0–40 percent for the water park, 0–0.4 percent for the mill, 6–56 percent for the skiing areas, and zero percent for the waterfall. 

7

 This is a youth center.
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 17

Table 5. Ohio commercial monthly consumptive-use coefficients statistics based on withdrawal and return-flow data for 1999–2004. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest whole number. The median and 25th and 75th percentiles are based on computing the consumptive-use 

coefficient for each record and analyzing for these statistics. Monthly consumptive-use coefficient average is computed by subtracting monthly return flows from 

monthly withdrawals and dividing by monthly withdrawals. The average is computed by taking the total withdrawals for all records and subtracting the record 

return flows, then dividing this number by the record total withdrawals. There were 196 records.]

Statistic Jan Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Annual

Mobile homes/Correctional facilities/National security (N=22)

25th percentile 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 3 0 0 0 0 1

Median 15 20 16 15 20 20 20 19 16 15 7 9 14

75th percentile 76 77 77 80 78 80 85 81 83 82 79 78 80

Average 57 56 58 60 59 62 63 63 63 58 56 56 59

Businesses (N=24)

25th percentile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Median 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

75th percentile 50 50 50 55 56 56 45 54 49 50 48 50 53

Average 36 33 33 16 31 43 45 52 37 31 43 38 37

Hospitals/Skilled nursing care facilities/Intermediate care facilities/Social services (N=19)

25th percentile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Median 5 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 4 3 5 5

75th percentile 24 20 20 22 20 24 20 24 20 20 19 20 21

Average 19 32 28 23 20 20 18 19 19 13 15 18 20

Amusement parks (N=23)

25th percentile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Median 20 20 20 20 22 20 21 21 22 20 20 16 20

75th percentile 25 25 34 56 85 89 91 92 87 86 34 20 75

Average 25 24 29 39 40 41 41 40 39 41 27 24 36

Amusement/Recreation services (N=23)

25th percentile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Median 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

75th percentile 72 68 71 69 83 77 65 69 70 82 79 73 75

Average 71 67 70 67 67 73 69 64 59 76 77 76 69

Colleges (N=18)

25th percentile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4

Median 0 15 4 15 27 35 35 42 43 27 14 0 21

75th percentile 93 92 94 94 94 94 92 94 93 95 95 94 94

Average 14 21 20 26 25 28 27 32 39 37 23 13 26

Schools (N=22)

25th percentile 12 7 11 10 17 3 0 5 6 6 15 8 13

Median 18 17 24 23 27 17 10 18 23 24 22 20 18

75th percentile 75 39 66 56 47 50 28 65 59 60 74 46 46

Average 40 33 40 40 38 21 13 43 38 35 40 37 36

All commercial facilities (N=196)

25th percentile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Median 4 4 5 7 7 7 8 19 17 16 3 4 17

75th percentile 44 50 50 55 56 56 50 73 78 78 48 47 56

Average 33 42 37 36 38 43 44 48 48 45 40 38 42
18 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 6. Monthly, seasonal, and annual commercial consumptive-use coefficients for Ohio and Indiana, by commercial category and 

by year, computed by use of the winter-base-rate method. 

[Consumptive-use coefficients are rounded to nearest whole number]

Category or year N

Monthly consumptive-use coefficient Seasonal consumptiveuse coefficient Annual

May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Spring SummerFall

By category (Indiana and Ohio)

Stores 140 25 18 19 27 25 8 15 21 13 13

Restaurants 18 10 11 14 14 11 11 6 13 9 7

Offices 107 54 58 56 59 51 45 47 58 36 41

Hotels1 115 21 42 51 48 34 18 7 46 19 23

Cleaners 18 0 7 11 16 10 0 4 8 4 4

Businesses 314 22 48 52 50 47 22 13 50 30 28

Amusement facilities 168 41 45 44 43 32 25 19 44 16 23

Healthcare facilities 61 12 21 18 14 17 0 9 18 7 9

Medical facilities 66 63 68 70 68 66 44 54 69 48 52

Schools 744 6 22 19 29 33 14 0 23 16 10

Operators of real estate 205 7 28 36 27 4 0 5 30 0 9

Colleges 125 39 47 52 50 45 31 24 50 32 31

Homeowner, tenant, and 

condominium associations

183 72 81 85 84 80 69 70 84 72 71

Correctional institutions 58 2 4 6 5 2 0 1 5 0 2

National-security facilities 43 5 8 13 17 13 3 2 13 6 6

Indiana, by year 

1999 332 29 47 57 53 51 32 19 52 40 33

2000 323 49 45 50 62 65 55 38 53 58 44

2001 319 29 38 38 47 55 32 19 41 47 31

2002 322 9 53 60 61 60 44 92 58 50 38

2003 331 48 50 47 53 53 54 42 50 54 42

2004 337 35 38 38 47 54 50 26 41 48 33

1999–2004 1,964 31 40 45 50 52 42 24 45 45 33

Ohio, by year

1999 104 41 44 46 55 46 27 38 49 29 33

2000 103 42 52 43 45 37 32 28 47 25 29

2001 97 24 27 25 49 35 35 92 36 26 20

2002 94 37 41 39 43 43 30 27 41 28 27

2003 89 46 47 49 58 48 49 31 52 40 36

2004 99 53 56 55 58 60 54 42 57 47 42

1999–2004 586 42 47 45 53 47 41 31 48 34 32

1

 Excludes facilities at ski areas.

2

 These numbers are low because withdrawals in March and April were less than withdrawals in winter months (Dec.–Feb.). 

Table 7. Ohio commercial facilities type of water use, in decreasing order of number of facilities reporting type of water use (Ohio 

Department of Natural Resources, 2008). 

[As part of the Ohio Water Withdrawal Registration Program, facilities are asked to estimate the percentage of total water withdrawal that goes to each type of 

water use. A facility may have multiple types of water or just one.]

Type of water use

Number of 

commercial records 

reporting listed use

Miscellaneous other1 360

Public supply, noncommunity 282

Public supply, community 217

Heating/cooling 126

Recreation/Amusement 90

Nursery/Turf/Landscaping 60

Dewatering 36

Livestock 36

Industrial, cooling water 36

Domestic 30

Remediation 24

Type of water use

Number of 

commercial records 

reporting listed use

Industrial, process water 18

Golf Course 17

Thermoelectric 6

Crop 6 1

 “Miscellaneous other” includes specified uses in database noted by the 

facilities: “fill pond and water plants, waterfowl, hydrostatic testing, research, 

waterfall, mill, backwash, pipe test, fire, hydro test, line test, dust control, 

marsh management, fire protection, truck wash, fire department, utility 

installation, groundwater remediation, yard irrigation, pond, resident camp, 

equipment wash, car wash, horserace, racetrack, hospital, wet lands, wash bay, 

fire fighting, cleaning.”
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 19

Industrial

Figure 8 shows the average monthly industrial water 

use for Indiana and Ohio for 1999–2004, and table 16 lists 

statistics for the monthly percentage of the total water used. 

Withdrawals in Indiana were higher than those in Ohio (2,400 

Mgal/d in Indiana and 807 Mgal/d for Ohio in 2000). The 

average monthly water withdrawals are larger in the summer 

months than in other months (fig. 8 and table 2–2). Indiana 

withdrawals ranged from 2,220 Mgal/d in December to 2,620 

Mgal/d in August, and those in Ohio ranged from 707 Mgal/d 

in January to 787 Mgal/d in August (fig. 8). 

The RW and the SIC code method were both used in 

this study to estimate industrial consumptive-use coefficients. 

Some industrial groups were not used in the SIC code analysis 

because either a consumptive-use coefficient was not available 

or the U.S. Bureau of Census (1986) listed water discharge 

greater than water intake. SIC codes not used in the SIC code 

method and the reasons they were excluded are listed in table 8.

Industrial water use is water used for industrial fabrication, 

washing, processing, and cooling and includes industries such as 

chemical and allied products, paper and allied products, steel, and 

petroleum refining (Hutson, Barber, and others, 2004). Industrial 

consumptive use is the water that is not returned to the hydrologic 

system or to a wastewater treatment plant because it is incorporated 

into a product, evaporated, or removed from the immediate environment for reuse for other purposes. 

The type of industrial facility (defined by the SIC code or 

the North American Industrial Classification (NAICS) code), 

the type of processes, and the age of equipment in an industrial facility all affect the amount of water consumed. Industrial consumptive-use coefficients are either typically associated with a specific SIC code or with a geographical area. 

These general industrial coefficients are based on a mixture 

of industrial facility types (SIC codes) that are in a particular 

geographical area. A consumptive-use coefficient based on one 

geographical area may be very different from that for another 

area based on the mix of industrial facilities, the water use, 

and the consumptive use. 

An example of industrial water withdrawals and consumptive use.

An example of Industrial water withdrawals and consumptive use. 
20 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Figure 7. Indiana and Ohio monthly industrial water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. Monthly percentages of annual 

withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is the number of records. AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

December

AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, 

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

INDIANA

OHIO

Industrial Water Withdrawals (Average Monthly, From Aggregated Data), in Million Gallons Per Day

Figure 7. Indiana and Ohio monthly industrial water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. Monthly

percentages of annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is the number 

of individual records.

3,000

2,250

0

3,000

2,500

800

750

0

1,500

750

June

8.0 8.0 7.8 7.8 8.1 8.5 8.9 9.3 9.0 8.7 8.2

7.8

Percentage of annual withdrawals N = 2,229

8.0 8.0 8.0 8.2 8.2 8.4 8.5 8.7 8.9 8.7 8.3 8.3

N = 1,304

Table 8. Standard Industrial Classification codes (SIC) not used in the SIC-code method for estimating consumptive use. 

SIC Description Reason not used in SIC method

1521 General contractor-single family houses No data available from U.S. Bureau of Census (1986)

1611 Highway and street construction, except elevated highways No data available from U.S. Bureau of Census (1986)

1711 Plumbing, heating, and air-conditioning No data available from U.S. Bureau of Census (1986)

1770 Concrete work No data available from U.S. Bureau of Census (1986)

1781 Water-well drilling No data available from U.S. Bureau of Census (1986)

2732 Book printing No data available from U.S. Bureau of Census (1986)

2754 Commercial printing No data available from U.S. Bureau of Census (1986)

2759 Commercial printing, not elsewhere classified No data available from U.S. Bureau of Census (1986)

2875 Fertilizers, mixing only No data available from U.S. Bureau of Census (1986)

2951 Asphalt paving mixtures and blocks Water discharged was greater than water intake

3295 Minerals and earths, ground or otherwise treated Water discharged was greater than water intake

3531 Construction machinery and equipment Water discharged was greater than water intake

3621 Motors and generators Water discharged was greater than water intake
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 21

Figure 8. Indiana and Ohio industrial water withdrawals, monthly, as a percentage of annual withdrawals for 1999–2004 

(see fig. 6 for explanation).

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

December

INDIANA

OHIO

Distribution of Industrial Water Withdrawals (Individual Records), 

Monthly, as Percentage of Annual Withdrawals

Figure 8. Indiana and Ohio industrial water withdrawals, monthly, as a percentage of annual withdrawals 

for 1999–2004 (see fig. 6 for explanation).

100

100

20

10

0

20

10

June

3.4

5.3

6.4

7.2 7.7 7.7 8.1

7.5 7.0

5.5

4.3

7.1 6.9

7.8 8.1 8.5 8.8 8.8 9.2

8.5 8.5

7.8

7.0

8.5 8.3 8.9 9.1 9.8

10.6 11.1 11.5

10.3 9.7

8.8 8.5

33 20 27 34 25 85 141 161 72 29 25 43

3.1

0

5.8

7.0 7.3 7.9 8.0 7.9 8.2 7.7 7.5

6.6

5.3

8.2 7.7 8.3 8.2 8.5 8.5 8.6 8.8 8.3 8.4 8.0 7.7

8.8 8.3 9.2 8.9 9.6 10.1 10.1 10.6

9.6 9.4

8.6 8.5

17 12 18 5 20 37 53 51 20 5 9 43

6.0

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

Once the consumptive-use coefficient was assigned 

to each individual record, the minimum, median, maximum, 

and 25th and 75th percentile consumptive-use coefficients 

were computed from the full set of consumptive-use coefficients. To determine the average consumptive-use coefficient, 

the consumptive-use coefficients were multiplied by the water 

withdrawn for each individual record. The total consumptive 

use and total water withdrawn were computed, then the total 

consumptive use for all facilities was divided by the total 

withdrawals for all facilities (table 9). Half of the coefficients 

for individual records derived by the SIC code method were 

between 4 and 20 percent for Indiana and 7 and 20 percent 

for Ohio (table 9). Overall, the industrial median coefficients 

derived by the SIC code method for Indiana and Ohio were 

similar (11 and 12 percent, respectively). These are both 

representative of a large geographical area and a varied mix of 

industries.

Table 10 summarizes monthly and annual consumptiveuse coefficients computed by the return-flow method. The 

overall percentage of consumptive use by month was steady 

throughout the year: medians ranged from 8 to 9 percent, and 

averages ranged from 11 to 12 percent (table 10). The annual 

median Ohio consumptive-use coefficient was 10 percent, and 

the average was 11 percent (table 10). 

Withdrawal and return-flow data were analyzed by SIC 

code to determine consumptive-use statistics (table 11). Only 

SIC codes with 25 or more individual records were included 

in the analysis. The median and average for food and kindred 

products (SIC 20), paper and allied products (SIC 26), primary 

metal industries (SIC 33), and fabricated metal products (SIC 

37) (table 24) were within 4 percent of the consumptive-use 

coefficients computed from the Census of Manufacturing 

(Shaffer and Runkle, 2007; table 2–5). The lower rubber and 

miscellaneous plastics coefficient may be from more industries 
22 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 9. Industrial consumptive-use coefficients based on SIC code method, 1999–2004. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest whole number. N is the number of records. Average consumptive-use coefficient is computed by adding 

annual estimated consumptive use and dividing by annual withdrawals.]

SIC code1 SIC title

Statistics

Minimum25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile

Maximum Average N

Indiana

20 Food and kindred products 2 7 13 21 45 8 250

24 Lumber and wood products 0 14 16 22 67 27 48

26 Furniture and fixtures 0 3 5 14 14 11 68

28 Chemical and allied products 1 1 8 14 19 8 106

29 Petroleum and coal products 15 15 15 15 15 15 37

30 Rubber and misc. plastic products 11 11 20 20 20 16 164

32 Stone, clay, and glass products 0 26 29 29 59 23 494

33 Primary metal industries 0 4 7 10 27 6 216

34 Fabricated metal products 0 3 4 6 18 8 176

35 Machinery, except electrical 0 0 2 8 35 6 107

36 Electronic equipment 0 0 1 9 12 9 93

37 Transportation equipment 3 7 10 12 12 10 131

38 Measuring, analyzing, and controlling equipment 0 7 7 9 10 7 32

20–39 All industrial 0 4 11 20 67 8 1,9612

Ohio

20 Food and kindred products 2 8 13 22 46 19 120

24 Lumber and wood products 22 22 22 42 42 36 17

26 Furniture and fixtures 0 5 5 14 14 6 83

28 Chemical and allied products 6 9 16 19 81 19 155

29 Petroleum and coal products 15 15 15 15 15 15 30

30 Rubber and misc. plastic products 11 11 18 18 18 17 87

32 Stone, clay, and glass products 0 14 29 29 59 34 253

33 Primary metal industries 2 7 10 10 27 10 180

34 Fabricated metal products 0 0 3 3 9 3 91

35 Machinery, except electrical 8 8 8 8 8 8 17

37 Transportation equipment 7 7 12 12 12 11 92

20–39 All industrial 0 7 12 20 81 10 1,1492

1

 Only SIC codes with 17 or more individual records are listed.

2

 The number of individual records for “all industrial” will be higher than the sum of individual records because only SIC codes with more than 17 individual 

records are listed.

in the Ohio dataset having lower consumptive-use coefficients: fabricated rubber products (11 percent) and rubber and 

plastics footwear (0 percent) (Shaffer and Runkle, 2007). The 

higher stone, clay, glass, and concrete products coefficient 

may be from more industries in the Ohio dataset having higher 

consumptive-use coefficients: structural clay products (50 

percent), gypsum products (59 percent), and gaskets, packing, 

and sealing devices (50 percent) (Shaffer and Runkle, 2007; 

table 2–5). These differences may be due to not just the mix of 

facilities but also changes in the processes at facilities. These 

SIC code consumptive-use coefficients represent groups of 

similar industries, but even similar facilities can differ substantially in consumptive use. Thus, relying on available industrial 

consumptive-use data at the facility level is preferred over 

using industrial consumptive-use coefficients.

Industrial withdrawals vary considerably by SIC group 

and by size of facility within each group. Table 12 lists the 

median water withdrawals (gallons per day) for group and 

facility size. The primary metal industries and fabricated metal 

products had some of the highest median water withdrawals 

(63.5 and 67 Mgal/d, respectively). Other industries with high 

median water withdrawals for very large facilities (based on 

withdrawals) were food, paper, chemical, rubber, transportation, stone, clay, glass, concrete products, and petroleum 

refining.
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 23

Table 10. Ohio industrial monthly and annual consumptive-use coefficients statistics based on withdrawal and return-flow data from 

1999 through 2004. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest whole number. Only major SIC codes with more than 20 individual records were compiled for this table. 

N is the number of records. “All facilities” statistics based on 471 records. The median and 25th and 75th percentile are based on computing the consumptiveuse coefficient for each record and analyzing for these statistics. Monthly consumptive-use coefficient average is computed by subtracting monthly return flows 

from monthly withdrawals and dividing by monthly withdrawals. The annual average is computed by taking the total withdrawals for all records and subtracting 

the individual-record return flows, then dividing this number by the records’ total withdrawals.]

SIC code or 

statistic Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Annual average

N

Facilities, by SIC code

20 10 2 1 14 0 11 31 19 17 24 16 12 15 27

26 11 13 12 9 9 13 11 13 8 8 9 12 11 33

28 23 28 24 25 27 28 27 25 25 25 24 21 25 62

29 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 3 4 21

30 12 13 13 13 13 12 12 12 12 12 12 13 12 29

32 38 38 36 37 34 49 48 47 43 36 41 43 41 80

33 11 12 11 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 12 12 11 74

34 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9 10 10 10 10 48

37 8 8 7 7 9 8 7 6 7 11 9 8 8 46

All facilities

25th percentile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 471

Median 8 9 9 9 8 8 9 9 9 8 9 9 10 471

75th percentile 37 37 39 40 37 39 40 40 41 40 37 36 38 471

Average 11 12 11 11 11 12 12 12 11 11 12 12 11 471

Table 11. Annual Industrial consumptive-use coefficients, by Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code computed by 

use of withdrawal and return-flow data. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest whole number. N is the number of records. Average consumptive-use coefficient is 

computed by subtracting monthly return flows from monthly withdrawals and dividing by monthly withdrawals. SIC code median consumptive-use coefficient is from Census of Manufacturing, 1986, noted in Shaffer and Runkle, 2007; table 2–5.]

 Ohio statistics National

SIC code median 

consumptive-use 

coefficient

Min 25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile Max Average N

SIC 20: Food and kindred products

0 3 17 31 71 15 27 15

SIC 26: Paper and allied products

0 4 7 20 80 11 33 7

SIC 28: Chemicals and allied products

0 7 42 57 100 25 62 12

SIC 30: Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products

0 3 6 25 88 12 29 18

SIC 32: Stone, clay, glass, and concrete products

0 11 34 65 100 41 80 14

SIC 33: Primary metal industries

0 0 8 25 62 11 74 11

SIC 34: Fabricated metal products

0 0 0 9 24 10 48 6

SIC 37: Transportation equipment

0 0 24 37 71 8 46 9
24 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 12. Industrial withdrawals, by group, for Ohio and Indiana, 1999–2004. 

[Facility size was computed by percentiles of all industrial facilities; “small” denotes less than 33d percentile, “medium” is from the 33d to 66th percentiles, 

“large” is from the 66th to 90th percentiles, and “very large” is from the 90th percentiles and above. Median withdrawals are rounded to three significant figures. 

Median withdrawals are rounded to three significant figures.]

Description of group 

type

Subgroup 

based on 

withdrawals 

at facility

Number of 

records

Median 

water withdrawals, in 

gallons per 

day

SIC 20: Food and kindred productsSmall 70 6,170

Medium 192 108,000

Large 61 494,000

Very large 42 4,260,000

SIC 22: Textile mill 

products

Small 12 9,620

Medium 2 164,000

Large 1 320,000

SIC 24: Lumber and 

wood products, 

except furniture

Small 23 3,330

Medium 42 58,800

SIC 25: Furniture and 

fixtures

Small 6 2,630

Medium 6 34,800

SIC 26: Paper and allied 

products

Small 16 6,980

Medium 40 117,000

Large 48 660,000

Very large 39 7,290,000

SIC 27: Printing, 

publishing, and allied 

industries

Small 2 15,600

Medium 20 104,000

Large 6 653,000

SIC 28: Chemicals and 

allied products

Small 79 6,210

Medium 44 138,000

Large 87 771,000

Very large 70 5,000,000

SIC 29: Petroleum 

refining and related 

industries

Small 38 5,420

Medium 8 126,000

Large 36 736,000

Very large 12 73,600,000

SIC 30: Rubber and 

miscellaneous plastics products

Small 105 3,080

Medium 76 71,200

Large 61 454,000

Very large 5 5,880,000

Description of group 

type

Subgroup 

based on 

withdrawals 

at facility

Number of 

records

Median 

water withdrawals, in 

gallons per 

day

SIC 31: Leather and 

leather products

Small 6 14,500

Medium 3 47,600

SIC 32: Stone, clay, 

glass, and concrete 

products

Small 297 4,260

Medium 199 95,300

Large 230 676,000

Very large 37 4,300,000

SIC 33: Primary metal 

Industries

Small 71 852

Medium 117 70,500

Large 134 851,000

Very large 76 63,500,000

SIC 34: Fabricated 

metal products

Small 77 7,690

Medium 112 80,900

Large 40 439,000

Very large 24 67,000,000

SIC 35: Industrial and 

commercial machinery and computer 

equipment

Small 83 3,340

Medium 56 105,000

Large 26 708,000

Very large 3 2,910,000

SIC 36: Electronic and 

other electrical equipment and components

Small 70 714

Medium 34 80,700

Large 7 1,630,000

SIC 37: Transportation 

equipment

Small 77 5,780

Medium 94 82,500

Large 30 829,000

Very large 6 6,250,000

SIC 38: Measuring, 

analyzing, and controlling instruments

Small 17 12,000

Medium 19 75,000

Large 5 464,000

SIC 39: Miscellaneous 

manufacturing industries

Small 12 1,720
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 25

Public Supply

• A public-supply facility delivers water to domestic, 

commercial, industrial, irrigation, and thermoelectric 

users. The WBR method does not address the variability in public-supply deliveries to different users, 

but delivery data from Wisconsin made it possible to 

address this variability. 

• The WBR method may not include consumptive use 

that is constant throughout the year (for example, 

product incorporation); it may result in zero or negative consumptive use in winter. Consumptive use may 

indeed be low in winter (depending on the uses of 

the water), typically much lower than in summer for 

domestic and commercial water uses. For industrial 

facilities, the consumptive use throughout the year will 

vary by facility.

Public-supply water use is water withdrawn by private and 

public water suppliers and delivered to customers who, in turn, 

use the water for domestic, commercial, thermoelectric power, 

industrial, and public purposes (Solley and others, 1998). In this 

report, public supply includes public and private water systems 

that furnish water to at least 25 people or that have a minimum 

of 15 connections (Hutson, Barber, and others, 2004). In 2000, 

Ohio had a population of 11,400,000 people and public-supply 

withdrawals of 1,470 Mgal/d. These figures represent almost 

twice the population of Indiana (6,080,000 people) or Wisconsin (5,360,000 people) and more than twice the public-supply 

withdrawals in Indiana (670 Mgal/d) or Wisconsin (623 Mgal/d) 

(Hutson, Barber, and others, 2004). 

The WBR method was used to estimate public-supply 

consumptive-use coefficients. The RW was not used for public 

supply in this report for the following reasons: 

• The customer base for the water supplier and wastewater-treatment plant may not be the same. (For instance, 

a large municipal public supplier serves 100,000 

people, but the municipal wastewater facility serves 

125,000; the difference of 25,000 people results from 

a combination of small public-supply facilities and 

private wells.)

• Individual facilities may supplement public supply 

with self-supplied water. (A city has multiple large 

industrial facilities that use self-supplied water, but 

the facilities discharge large amounts of water into the 

municipal wastewater system.)

• Infiltration or inflows into sewer pipes may be misinterpreted as return flow, thus resulting in underestimation of consumptive use.

• There may be substantial public uses and conveyance 

losses that are not measured.

Ohio’s withdrawal and return-flow data could not be 

used to estimate consumptive use for public supply. Figure 

9, an example from Darke County, Ohio, shows the types 

of problems typical of public-supply datasets. Wastewater 

return flow (fig. 9B) often exceeds withdrawal (fig. 9A) and is 

more similar to precipitation than to withdrawal in terms of 

the month-by-month pattern (fig. 9C, especially January and 

April). Figure 9 shows that withdrawals increase during the 

summer. Potentially, the increase in withdrawals in the summer compared to the winter may be attributed to consumptive 

use or an increase in demand not subjected to consumptive 

use. By using the WBR method, consumptive-use coefficients 

may be estimated for public-supply datasets, but there are 

limitations: 

Public-supply water withdrawals is water withdrawn by public and private 

water suppliers that furnish water to at least 25 people or have a minimum of 15 

connections. Public suppliers provide water for a variety of uses, such as domestic, 

commercial, industrial, thermoelectric power, and public water use.
26 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

Darke County, Ohio, 2005 Public-Supply Withdrawals

Darke County, Ohio, 2005 Public-Supply Return Flow

Darke County, Ohio, Public-Supply Withdrawals as Compared to Return Flow and Precipitation

Figure 9. Public-supply withdrawals, public-supply return flow, and precipitation data for 2005, Darke County, 

Ohio. Withdrawal (Ohio Department of Natural Resources, 2007) and return flow (Ohio Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2008) are in million gallons per day. Precipitation data (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 

2005) are in inches.

8.0

Darke County, Ohio, 2005 Precipitation Data From Greenville Water Plant MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY MONTHLY PRECIPITATION, IN INCHES

December

0.0

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

June

5.0

6.0

9.0

10.0

December

0.0

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

June

2.5

4.0

9.0

10.0

December

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

June

2.5

5.0

7.5

10.0

2.5

0.0

Figure 9. Public-supply withdrawals, public-supply return flow, and precipitation data for 2005, Darke County, Ohio. 

Withdrawal (Ohio Department of Natural Resources, 2008) and return flow (Ed Swindall, Ohio Environmental Protection 

Agency, written commun., 2008) are in million gallons per day. Precipitation data (National Climatic Data Center, 2005) are in 

inches.
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 27

Public-supply consumptive-use coefficients are based on 

water that is delivered to residential, commercial, industrial, 

and other users. Wisconsin’s public-supply database, which 

includes metered and unmetered data from 1997 to 2005, 

classifies gallons sold to each of the categories residential, 

industrial, commercial and “other sales to public.” Overall, 

40.8 percent of the water withdrawals went to residential 

users, 28.7 percent went to industrial users, 24.5 percent went 

to commercial users, and 6.0 percent went to “other sales to 

public” during that period. The Wisconsin commercial use 

category includes businesses, apartments, and multifamily housing with four or more units (Cheryl Buchwald, U.S. 

Geological Survey, written commun., 2006). This categorization is important to note because delivery to apartment and 

multifamily housing is considered domestic water use by the 

USGS. Results from a telephone and email survey to Ohio 

public suppliers classifying the percentage of water withdrawn to residential, commercial, and industrial users and 

unaccounted-for use are listed in table 13. The unaccountedfor uses ranged from 0 to 40 percent. Public suppliers that 

noted no unaccounted-for use typically had new systems that 

were supplying only a few users. Some public-supply systems 

may have large percentages of unaccounted-for water because 

of specific public uses such as firefighting, system operation, 

public buildings, or leaky community swimming pools, all of 

which constitute large commitments of water to the public-use 

sector; misregistration of meters; lack of metering; or billing accounting procedures. The public suppliers that reported 

unaccounted-for uses greater than 30 percent noted these sorts 

of issues as contributing factors. 

Average monthly water withdrawals for public suppliers in Indiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin are graphed in figure 10, 

which shows increases in monthly water withdrawals during 

the summer. Figure 11 and appendix tables 2–3, 2–4, and 2–5 

show the statistical distributions of monthly public-supply 

withdrawals expressed as a percentage of annual withdrawals. 

Individual records from Wisconsin that included withdrawals 

sporadically or only for 3 months of the year were not used 

in the compilation of these statistics. Withdrawals in July and 

August were higher than in other months (figs. 10 and 11). 

In half of the Ohio records, 8.6 to 10.2 percent of the annual 

withdrawals were in July (fig. 11).

Some public suppliers in Ohio withdrew the greatest 

amounts in January and February because they were filling 

reservoirs (this, however is categorized as a water transfer). To 

reveal how these withdrawal practices affected the percentage 

of water withdrawn per month, statistics were compiled for 

(1) all facilities and (2) facilities where July withdrawals were 

equal to or greater than the February withdrawals (table 2–4).

Table 13. Percentage of water delivered to domestic, commercial, and industrial users and unaccounted-for 

uses for selected Ohio public suppliers in 2007.

[Minimum, median, maximum, 25th percentile, and 75th percentile are in percent and rounded to the nearest whole number. N is the 

number of references in the statistical analysis. For public suppliers who gave a range, the median of the range was used in the statistics. Reported percentages were not verified by the USGS.]

Water-use deliveries 

or unaccounted-for uses

Statistics 

Minimum 25th Median 75th Maximum N

Domestic deliveries 01 41 49 71 992 49

Commercial deliveries 12 12 17 25 66 49

Industrial deliveries 02 5 14 20 951 46

Unaccounted-for uses 0 10 15 25 40 41

1

 The public supplier with a low percentage of residential deliveries and high percentage of industrial deliveries was a public supply 

where almost all of its water was used by industrial facilities.

2

 The public supplier with high residential deliveries had no industrial customers and supplied water to only a small number of commercial facilities.
28 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY 1,500

1,000

2,000

0

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

1,500

1,000

500

0

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, 

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

0

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, 

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

INDIANA

OHIO

WISCONSIN

Public-Supply Water Withdrawals (Average Monthly, From Aggregated Data), 

in Million Gallons Per Day

Figure 10. Indiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin monthly public-supply water withdrawals, aggregated 

for 1999–2004. Monthly percentages of annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent 

rounding. N is the number of individual records.

2,000

500

7.8 7.8 7.5 7.8 7.5 8.3

9.0

9.8 9.6 9.2

8.0 7.6

8.2 8.2 8.4 8.0 7.8

8.8

9.2

8.6 9.0

8.1 7.8 7.9

2,000

1,500

1,000

500 7.7 7.9 7.6 7.8 8.2

9.0

10.0 9.7 9.1

8.1 7.5 7.4

Percentage of annual withdrawals

N = 2,939

N = 3,604

N = 3,373

Figure 10. Indiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin monthly public-supply water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. Monthly 

percentages of annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is the number of 

records.
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 29

100

15

10

0

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

100

15

10

0

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

15

10

0

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

INDIANA

OHIO

WISCONSIN

Distribution of Public-Supply Water Withdrawals (Individual Records), 

Monthly, as Percentage of Annual Withdrawals

Figure 11. Indiana, Ohio and Wisconsin public-supply water withdrawals, monthly, as a percentage of annual 

withdrawals for 1999–2004 (see fig. 6 for explanation).

100

6.7 7.2 7.3

8.0 8.3 8.6 9.2

8.0 7.7 7.6

7.0

8.1

7.4

7.9 7.9

8.6 8.7

9.3

8.5 8.6 8.2 7.8

7.1

8.7

8.0 8.4 8.4

9.1 9.3

10.2 10.0

9.3

8.7

8.1 8.4

36 31 27 23 29 45 99 88 64 35 21 25

7.4

6.8

7.5 7.4

8.2 8.3

8.7 9.0

8.1 7.8 7.7

7.3

8.2

7.4

8.0 7.9

8.6 8.8

9.3

8.6 8.4 8.3 8.0

7.4

8.6

7.9

8.5 8.3

9.0 9.3

10.1 9.7

9.0 8.7

8.2 8.5

13 0 10 13 17 35 76 49 33 20 15 17

7.6

6.7

7.3

8.0 8.2

8.9 9.3

8.0 7.8 7.5

7.1

7.9

7.2

7.9 7.8

8.4 8.6

9.6

8.6 8.5 8.2

7.7

7.2

8.4

7.8

8.3 8.2

8.9 9.1

10.5 10.1

9.2 8.6

8.0 8.2

8 3 5 7 16 15 94 85 51 29 8 7

7.4

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

7.3

Figure 11. Indiana, Ohio and Wisconsin public-supply water withdrawals, monthly, as a percentage of annual withdrawals 

for 1999–2004 (see fig. 6 for explanation).
30 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

The Wisconsin data consist of two separate datasets for 

withdrawals and deliveries. The unaccounted-for uses (losses 

and public uses) were about 20 percent for Wisconsin during 

1999 to 2004. Public-supply withdrawal records were organized by delivery data; specifically, by percentage of water 

delivered to residential customers. The withdrawals for each 

delivery group were divided by seasons. Summer was the 

season of the highest withdrawals for all residential categories (fig. 12), and public suppliers with higher withdrawals 

delivered 20 to 59 percent of their water to residential customers. Consumptive-use coefficients varied little by Wisconsin 

residential group (table 14), so Wisconsin withdrawals were 

then analyzed for three groups of public suppliers: those 

with residential deliveries greater than 85 percent, those with 

industrial deliveries greater than 50 percent, and those with 

commercial deliveries greater than 50 percent (fig. 13). The 

WBR consumptive-use coefficient was similar for each of the 

residential groups, and also for public suppliers with residential deliveries greater than 85 percent and public suppliers with 

industrial deliveries greater than 50 percent. The consumptiveuse coefficients for public-supply facilities with residential 

deliveries of 0 to 29 percent were higher in spring and fall. 

Consumptive-use coefficients for the public-supply facilities with greater than 50 percent commercial deliveries were 

higher in the summer—43 percent—than for the other groups. 

This percentage is similar to those reported in the Commercial 

section: a 42-percent average coefficient from the RW method 

and coefficients of 42 percent Indiana for and 46 percent Ohio 

(1999–2004) from the WBR method. These elevated summer 

coefficients may be explained by commercial facilities characterized by a high proportion of outdoor withdrawals. 

Figure 12. Wisconsin seasonal withdrawals for public-supply facilities, based on percentage of total withdrawals

delivered to residential customers. (Winter, December–February; spring, March–May; summer, June–August; 

fall, September–November.)

100-90 89-80 79-70 69-60 59-50 49-40 39-30 29-20 19-10 9- 0

PUBLIC-SUPPLY FACILITIES, BY PERCENTAGE OF RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS

0

50

100

150

200

250

WITHDRAWALS, IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

Winter

Spring

Summer

Fall

Table 14. Wisconsin public-supply seasonal and annual consumptive-use coefficient, computed with the 

winter-base-rate method by delivery group for 1999–2004.

[Consumptive-use coefficient is in percent and is rounded to the whole number. N is the number of records. A range in the 

percentage of residential deliveries or delivery group denotes the percent range of the water delivered to residential customers 

(for example 100–90 are public suppliers that with 90 to 100 percent of their deliveries to residential customers. Res > 85 

denotes public suppliers with 85 percent or more of their deliveries going to residential customers. Ind > 50 denotes public 

suppliers with 50 percent or more of their deliveries going to industrial customers. Com > 50 denotes public suppliers with 

50 percent or more of their deliveries going to commercial customers.]

Percentage of residential deliveries 

or delivery group

Consumptive-use percentage N Spring Summer Fall Annual

100–90 2 25 8 10 156

89–80 2 24 6 9 324

79–70 0 19 5 7 494

69–60 3 23 7 9 577

59–50 1 18 6 7 581

49–40 1 19 5 7 492

39–30 4 20 8 9 327

29–20 6 25 12 12 226

19–10 6 21 10 10 114

9–0 5 25 11 12 52

Res > 85 3 24 7 9 310

Ind > 50 4 21 11 10 333

Com > 50 10 43 15 21 94

Figure 12. Wisconsin seasonal withdrawals for public-supply 

facilities, based on percentage of total withdrawals delivered 

to residential customers. (Winter, December–February; spring, 

March–May; summer, June–August; fall, September–November.)

Tables 15, 16, and 17 list the seasonal and annual consumptive-use coefficients for Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin, 

and table 18 lists the monthly consumptive-use coefficients for 

May through October. Overall, consumptive use was higher in 

July and August than in other months (table 17); summer consumptive use ranged from 10 to 26 percent (tables 14, 15, and 

16). Table 19 lists the average monthly temperature and rainfall 

for the state and corresponds with table 18. Many of the higher 

consumptive-use coefficients (table 18) were found during periods of low rainfall and high temperatures (table 19).
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 31

5.0

2.5

0.0 January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

90

60

30

0

7.5

5.0

2.5

0.0

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

Withdrawals From Wisconsin Public-Supply Facilities (Average Monthly, From Aggregated Data), 

in Million Gallons Per Day

Figure 13. Wisconsin public-supply withdrawals, 1999–2004, for A, facilities delivering more than 85 percent of 

withdrawals to domestic customers; B, facilities delivering more than 50 percent of withdrawals to industrial 

customers; and C, facilities delivering more than 50 percent of withdrawals to commercial customers.

120

WITHDRAWALS, 

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

WITHDRAWALS, 

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

WITHDRAWALS, 

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

A

B

C

Figure 13. Wisconsin public-supply withdrawals, 1999–2004, for A, facilities delivering more than 85 percent of withdrawals 

to domestic customers; B, facilities delivering more than 50 percent of withdrawals to industrial customers; and C, facilities 

delivering more than 50 percent of withdrawals to commercial customers.
32 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 15. Indiana public-supply seasonal and annual consumptive-use coefficients 

computed by use of the winter-base-rate method.

[Consumptive-use coefficient is in percent and is rounded to the whole number. N is the number of 

facilities. ]

Year or

statistic

Consumptive use (percent) N

Spring Summer Fall Annual

1999 2 23 11 10 485

2000 0 11 4 4 486

2001 6 18 3 7 482

2002 0 26 9 10 487

2003 1 18 6 7 498

2004 2 14 7 6 501

25th 0 14 4 6 -

Median 2 18 7 7 -

75th 2 23 9 10 -

1999–2004 

average

2 19 7 7 2,971

Table 16. Ohio public-supply seasonal and annual consumptive-use coefficients 

computed by use of the winter-base-rate method.

[Consumptive-use coefficient is in percent and is rounded to the whole number. N is the number of 

records.]

Year or

statistic

Facilities with July withdrawals ≥ February withdrawals

Consumptive use (percent) N

Spring Summer Fall Annual

1999 0 19 7 7 559

2000 0 10 2 3 485

2001 2 16 6 7 531

2002 0 22 11 9 531

2003 6 12 2 5 456

2004 0 12 2 3 436

25th 0 12 2 3 -

Median 0 14 4 6 -

75th 2 19 7 7 -

1999–2004 1 16 5 6 2,998

Table 17. Wisconsin public-supply seasonal and annual consumptive-use coefficients 

computed by use of the winter-base-rate method.

[Consumptive-use coefficient is in percent and is rounded to the whole number. N is the number of 

records.]

Year or

statistic

Consumptive use (percent) N

Spring Summer Fall Annual

1999 3 21 9 9 561

2000 3 16 6 6 562

2001 3 22 5 8 562

2002 3 24 8 10 563

2003 3 22 8 9 562

2004 2 15 8 7 563

25th 3 16 6 7 -

Median 3 22 8 8 -

75th 3 22 8 9 -

1999–2004 3 20 7 8 3,373
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 33

Table 18. Monthly consumptive-use coefficients for Wisconsin, Ohio, and Indiana public supply computed by 

use of the winter-base-rate method.

[Consumptive-use coefficient is in percent and is rounded to the whole number. N is number of records.]

Year or

statistic

Consumptive-use coefficient (percent)

N May June July August September October

Indiana

1999 485 9 19 26 22 24 6

2000 486 4 8 14 12 12 2

2001 482 13 15 20 20 9 3

2002 487 3 17 31 28 21 4

2003 498 4 15 19 21 14 3

2004 501 7 13 15 14 16 6

25th percentile - 4 13 15 14 12 3

Median - 6 15 20 20 15 4

75th percentile - 9 17 26 22 21 6

Ohio1

1999 559 7 19 22 16 15 3

2000 485 4 9 12 10 7 1

2001 531 6 11 20 18 9 6

2002 531 1 14 27 24 19 8

2003 456 8 12 13 12 7 0

2004 436 5 9 15 11 8 0

25th percentile - 4 9 13 11 7 0

Median - 6 12 18 14 8 2

75th percentile - 7 14 22 18 15 6

Wisconsin

1999 561 7 23 22 19 19 5

2000 562 9 11 17 19 11 6

2001 562 7 13 30 22 9 5

2002 563 7 16 31 23 17 6

2003 562 5 17 21 28 20 5

2004 563 4 10 18 18 19 5

25th percentile - 5 11 18 19 11 5

Median - 7 14 22 20 18 5

75th percentile - 7 17 30 23 19 6

Indiana, Ohio1

, Wisconsin (1999–2004)

25th percentile - 4 11 15 14 9 3

Median - 6 14 20 19 14 5

75th percentile - 7 17 26 22 19 6

1

 Ohio data are for facilities with withdrawals in July that are greater or equal to withdrawals in February.
34 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 19. Monthly state-averaged precipitation and temperature data for Wisconsin, Ohio, and Indiana for 1999–2004.

[Monthly state-averaged precipitation is in inches, and temperature is in degrees Fahrenheit. Precipitation and temperature data from Midwestern 

Regional Climate Center (2008).]

Year Data type

Monthly state-averaged precipitation and temperature data

May June July August September October

Indiana

1999 Precipitation 3.14 3.98 2.76 2.35 1.36 2.04

Temperature 63.4 71.9 77.7 71.1 65.5 53.4

2000 Precipitation 4.54 6.30 3.81 4.46 4.58 2.21

Temperature 64.1 70.3 71.8 72.0 64.3 57.2

2001 Precipitation 4.27 4.23 5.60 4.02 3.84 7.72

Temperature 63.8 68.9 73.7 73.8 63.5 53.6

2002 Precipitation 7.00 3.25 2.76 2.85 3.76 2.83

Temperature 58.4 72.9 77.0 74.8 69.3 52.3

2003 Precipitation 6.64 3.30 8.47 3.50 6.21 2.47

Temperature 60.5 67.3 73.2 74.0 63.4 52.8

2004 Precipitation 7.27 4.64 5.17 4.96 0.76 4.26

Temperature 65.8 69.5 72.1 68.6 67.0 54.6

Ohio

1999 Precipitation 2.23 2.10 3.80 3.12 1.87 2.19

Temperature 62.0 71.2 76.9 70.0 64.7 52.4

2000 Precipitation 4.82 4.76 3.98 3.81 3.83 2.22

Temperature 62.8 69.9 70.0 69.7 63.1 55.7

2001 Precipitation 5.45 3.09 3.79 3.64 3.12 4.61

Temperature 61.4 68.4 72.0 72.9 62.1 53.6

2002 Precipitation 5.18 3.62 2.75 2.09 4.17 3.09

Temperature 56.9 71.5 75.9 74.2 68.3 52.0

2003 Precipitation 6.89 4.11 6.67 5.17 6.02 2.61

Temperature 59.6 66.2 71.9 72.6 62.7 50.8

2004 Precipitation 6.99 4.64 4.54 4.21 4.50 2.77

Temperature 64.4 67.9 71.4 68.3 65.8 53.1

Wisconsin

1999 Precipitation 5.02 4.29 7.75 3.25 2.17 1.30

Temperature 58.1 65.3 72.5 65.9 58.0 45.6

2000 Precipitation 4.28 6.62 4.53 3.83 3.78 0.90

Temperature 56.8 62.7 67.6 67.5 58.1 50.3

2001 Precipitation 4.86 4.85 2.67 4.59 4.05 2.44

Temperature 56.7 64.3 69.9 69.8 57.2 46.0

2002 Precipitation 3.01 5.60 3.63 4.47 4.58 3.97

Temperature 50.6 66.1 72.7 67.5 61.5 41.9

2003 Precipitation 4.78 3.32 3.39 2.07 3.18 1.39

Temperature 53.4 62.8 68.5 70.1 59.3 46.4

2004 Precipitation 7.64 4.61 3.33 3.21 2.16 3.58

Temperature 52.7 61.8 66.8 62.1 62.8 47.8
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 35

Thermoelectric Power

plants: (1) once-through freshwater, (2) recirculating pond/

canal, (3) recirculating draft tower (forced, induced, and natural-draft towers), and (4) plants that combine cooling types 1, 

and 2, and/or 3. Thermoelectric self-reported consumptive-use 

coefficients are listed in table 21. Facilities with once-through 

cooling and recirculating ponds and/or canals estimated 0 percent consumptive use (median, table 26). Facilities with recirculating draft towers estimated 22 to 100 percent consumptive 

use for Ohio and Indiana, with medians of 80 percent (Indiana) and 79 percent (Ohio) (table 21). Plants with recirculating draft towers have higher consumptive-use coefficients but 

much lower withdrawals than once-through cooling plants. 

Thermoelectric-power water use is water used in the 

process of generating electric power. Most of the consumptive use is from evaporation during condenser and reactor 

cooling, and a smaller amount is consumed by scrubbers and 

facility maintenance. The two basic types of thermoelectric 

facilities are once-through thermoelectric power facilities 

(also called open-loop cooling) and other-than-once-through 

thermoelectric power facilities (also called closed-loop or 

recirculating cooling). A once-through thermoelectric power 

facility uses water only once in the condenser- and reactorcooling process before returning the water to a surface-water 

source. An other-than-once-through thermoelectric power 

facility uses cooling towers or cooling ponds to recycle water 

repeatedly for condenser and reactor cooling. Figure 14 shows 

thermoelectric water withdrawal by month for Ohio and Indiana in million gallons per day. Figure 15 shows water withdrawal by month as a percentage of the annual withdrawal, 

and table 2–6 lists the statistics for the percentage of annual 

water withdrawn per month. Ohio’s thermoelectric average 

monthly withdrawals ranged from 7,380 to 10,000 Mgal/d, 

and Indiana’s thermoelectric average monthly withdrawals 

ranged from 5,520 to 7,510 Mgal/d (fig. 14). July and August 

were the months of the greatest monthly median percentage of 

annual withdrawals: 10.6 and 10.4 percent for Indiana and 9.5 

and 9.4 for Ohio (fig. 15). Cooling type, and operational and 

regulatory requirements can influence monthly water use and 

consumptive use. Cooling-type information is available from 

the U.S. Department of Energy and has been used in this study 

and other studies to estimate consumptive use by cooling type. 

Dziegielewski and others (2006) list benchmarks of weightedaverage use rates of cooling water for thermoelectric plants; 

the percentage consumptive use for once-through systems is 

less than 1 percent, whereas closed-loop systems with cooling towers consume 70 percent for fossil-fuel plants and 30 

percent for nuclear plants; recirculating systems with ponds 

consume 3 to 4 percent.

Thermoelectric-power withdrawals increase in the summer (fig. 14 and table 2–6). On the basis of Ohio withdrawal 

and return-flow data on sites that reported those data, the 

annual consumptive-use coefficient was between 0 and 10 

percent for half of the facilities. The median consumptiveuse coefficient was 2 percent (table 20), which is the same as 

that found by Shaffer and Runkle (2007) and very close to 

that found by Torcellini and others (2003), who estimated a 

consumptive-use coefficient of 2.5 percent nationwide for the 

United States.

The U.S. Department of Energy (2004) compiles data 

for consumptive use by thermoelectric powerplants. The 

2005 U.S. Department of Energy water datasets for Ohio and 

Indiana (aggregated by Nancy Barber, U.S. Geological Survey, 

August 2006) include consumptive-use data for four types of Example of a thermoelectric powerplant.
36 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Figure 14. Indiana, and Ohio monthly thermoelectric-power water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. Monthly 

percentages of annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is the number of 

records. AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, IN MMILLION GALLONS PER DAY

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

December

AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, 

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

INDIANA

OHIO

Thermoelectric-Power Water Withdrawals (Average Monthly, From Aggregated Data), 

in Million Gallons Per Day

Figure 14. Indiana, and Ohio monthly thermoelectric-power water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004.

Monthly percentages of annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is 

12,000

10,000

0

12,000

9,000

6,000

3,000

0

8,000

June

6,000

3,000

7.6 7.6 7.3 7.4

8.1

9.5 9.9 10.0

9.1

8.0 7.8 7.8

Percentage of annual withdrawals

N = 197

7.5 7.2 7.4 7.3

8.3

9.4 9.8 9.7

8.8 8.4 8.0 8.1

N = 289
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 37

Figure 15. Indiana and Ohio thermoelectric-power water withdrawals, monthly, as percentage of annual water withdrawals 

for 1999–2004 (see fig. 6 for explanation).

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

December

INDIANA

OHIO

Distribution of Thermoelectric-Power Water Withdrawals (Individual Records), 

Monthly, as Percentage of Annual Withdrawals

Figure 15. Indiana and Ohio thermoelectric-power water withdrawals, monthly, as percentage of annual water 

withdrawals for 1999–2004 (see fig. 6 for explanation).

100

0

100

20

10

0

20

June

10

4.8 4.9

6.2

8.2

9.1

10.4

7.7

3.9

7.3

3.7

7.5 6.9 7.1 7.0

8.3

9.3

10.6

9.0 8.9

8.0 7.6

5.3

8.8 8.3 8.6 8.3

9.4

10.5

12.4 12.5

10.1

9.2 8.5 8.8

9 9 2 3 4 8 16 17 2 3 0 5

4.9

5.8

6.7

7.6 8.1

8.5

9.4

7.4

6.6

8.0

6.3

8.2 7.4

9.0

7.9

8.5 8.8

9.5

8.5 8.3 8.5 8.0

6.4

9.1

8.1 8.3 8.5

9.4 10.1

11.2 11.0

9.3 9.1 8.7 8.9

1 1 0 5 2 11 12 12 3 1 0 2

6.5 6.7

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

4.4
38 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 21. Indiana and Ohio thermoelectric consumptive-use coefficients computed from data for 2005. 

[Consumptive-use coefficient is in percent and is rounded to the whole number. Consumptive-use coefficient was computed by dividing the average 

rate of consumption in million gallons per day by the average rate of withdrawal in million gallons per day. N is the number of cooling systems for each 

type of cooling; some plants have multiple systems. Data originally from U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, aggregated 

by Nancy Barber, U.S. Geological Survey, in 2006.]

Type of cooling plant

Statistics

Minimum 25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile Maximum N

Indiana

Once-through, freshwater 0 0 0 0 100 30

Recirculating, pond/canal 0 0 0 0 0 6

Recrirculating, draft tower 24 69 80 100 100 7

Plants with both once-through freshwater and recirculating draft tower0 0 0 0 96 11

Ohio

Once-through, fresh water 0 0 0 0 0.03 29

Once-through cooling, pond/canal 0 0 0 0 0 1

Recirculating, draft tower 0 22 79 100 100 11

Plants with both once-through fresh and 

once-through cooling pond/canal

0 0 0 0 0 4

Table 20. Ohio thermoelectric monthly consumptive-use coefficients statistics based on withdrawal and return-flow data for 

1999–2004.

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest whole number. Statistics based on 289 records. The median and 25th and 75th percentiles based on 

computing the consumptive-use coefficient for each record and analyzing for these statistics. Monthly consumptive-use coefficient average is computed by 

subtracting monthly return flows from monthly withdrawals and dividing by monthly withdrawals. The average is computed by taking the total withdrawals 

for all records and subtracting the individual-record return flows, then dividing this number by the individual-records’ total withdrawals.]

Statistic Jan Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Annual

Individual records with both types of cooling

25th percentile 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Median 1 2 1 3 2 5 3 3 2 2 2 2 2

75th percentile 5 6 3 5 5 6 6 8 5 5 3 5 5

Average 3 3 2 2 2 3 4 4 3 2 3 3 3

Individual records with closed-loop cooling

25th percentile 6 5 6 3 6 7 7 12 6 5 6 6 9

Median 26 29 30 23 25 29 28 33 24 21 27 26 24

75th percentile 59 65 75 65 75 72 75 75 71 49 63 65 74

Average 23 23 24 22 25 24 24 25 25 25 24 24 24

Individual records with once-through cooling

25th percentile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Median 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

75th percentile 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2

Average 3 2 3 2 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

All records

25th percentile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Median 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 21

75th percentile 7 8 8 6 10 12 15 16 7 7 8 13 16

Average 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 5 5

1 Annual calculation includes more records than monthly records.
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 39

Irrigation

data), 97 to 122 nursery and turf-irrigation sites, and 54 to 

87 crop-irrigation sites per year. Return-flow data from Ohio 

were available for only 5 percent of golf courses. No irrigation 

withdrawal or return-flow data were available from Wisconsin. 

Golf-course irrigation withdrawal can also include a proportion of water for clubhouse use, restaurants, toilets, sinks, 

showers, and cleaning of equipment. The withdrawal occurs 

primarily from May through October for Ohio and Indiana (fig 

18; table 2–7). The average withdrawals shown in fig. 12 do 

not include sites that reported no withdrawals in a given year. 

Even though Indiana has 38 percent of the golf courses among 

the two states, it accounts for 44 percent of the golf course 

withdrawals, primarily because facilities in Indiana irrigated 

more. Return-flow data for golf courses in Ohio may represent 

irrigation activity, discharges after commercial activities in the 

clubhouse, or a combination of both. 

Withdrawal for nursery and turf irrigation can occur 

year round, but it peaks in May through August (fig. 19; table 

2–8). Return flows for nurseries occur during the months of 

withdrawals. Ohio had more nursery farms, nursery irrigated 

farms, square feet under glass or other protection, acres in the 

open, and irrigated acres in the open for nurseries than Indiana 

(U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2008; tables 22 and 23). 

Irrigation water use is the application of water on lands 

to assist in the growing of crops, pasture grasses, and nursery 

plants or to maintain vegetative growth in recreational lands 

such as parks and golf courses. Irrigation consumptive use 

is from evapotranspiration (the combination of evaporation 

and transpiration from watering vegetation). Evaporation 

is water lost to the atmosphere during application of water 

and the ground surface. Transpiration is the release of water 

vapor through the leaves of a plant and varies in response to 

temperature, relative humidity, wind, soil type, soil-moisture 

availability, land slope, sunlight availability and intensity, and 

type of plant. Return flow after all types of irrigation occurs 

through groundwater recharge and, after furrow irrigation, to 

surface water as well.

Irrigation can be subdivided into three categories: golfcourse (fig. 16), nursery and turf, and crop irrigation (fig. 17). 

Over the period 1999–2004, numbers of irrigation sites in the 

Indiana dataset ranged from 233 to 261 for golf course sites, 

16 to 18 for nurseries and turf-irrigation facilities, and 1,288 

to 1,402 for crop-irrigation sites per year. No return-flow data 

were available from Indiana. The Ohio dataset includes more 

than 400 self-supplied golf course facilities (approximately 79 

percent of which were 18-hole golf courses, according to 2005 

Drip hoses supply irrigation water to day lilies at a western Ohio nursery.
40 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

December

AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, 

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

INDIANA

OHIO

Golf-Course Irrigation Water Withdrawals (Average Monthly, From Aggregated Data), 

in Million Gallons Per Day

Figure 16. Indiana and Ohio monthly golf-course irrigation water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004.

Monthly percentages of annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. 

N is the number of individual records.

50

0

0

30

5

10

20

25

35

15

40

45

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

June

15

30

45

60

0.7 0.3 1.0 3.7

8.1

15.9

21.2 21.6

17.6

7.4

1.8 0.7

N = 1,487

N = 2,616

0.4 0.3 0.5 3.8

8.9

16.4

22.2 21.9

16.1

7.1

2.2 0.5

Percentage of annual withdrawals

AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS,

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

December

AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, 

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

INDIANA

OHIO

Nursery, Turf, and Crop Irrigation Water Withdrawals (Average Monthly, From Aggregated Data), 

in Million Gallons Per Day

600

0

0

450

150

300

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

June

0.6

50

500

600

0.2 0.2 0.5 1.4 2.9

15.2

35.2 33.5

7.8

1.6 1.2 0.3

N = 8,197

Percentage of annual withdrawals

0.7 2.4

4.9

8.9

16.2

21.4 20.1

13.0

7.0

3.4 1.2

N = 1,103

Figure 16. Indiana and Ohio monthly golf-course irrigation water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. Monthly percentages of 

annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is the number of records.

Figure 17. Indiana and Ohio monthly nursery, turf, and crop irrigation water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. Monthly 

percentages of annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is the number of records.
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 41

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

December

INDIANA

OHIO

Distribution of Golf-Course Irrigation Water Withdrawals (Individual Records), 

Monthly, as Percentage of Annual Withdrawals

Figure 18. Indiana and Ohio golf-course-irrigation water withdrawals, monthly, as percentage of annual water 

withdrawals for 1999–2004 (see fig. 6 for explanation).

50

0

0

30

10

20

40

100

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

June

10

20

40

30

2.2

11.0

17.1

23.3

12.3

1.3

0.0

7.2

15.7

22.3

18.2

16.7

5.7

0.0

0.2 0.0

11.6

20.0

27.9 29.2

22.0

10.3

4.5

7 0 0 0 0 5 10 16 7 0 0 4

0.0

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

0.0

10.5

18.7

23.5

10.0

0.0

6.3

16.2

24.0

17.9

15.0

4.3

11.8

20.6

30.7 30.3

20.2

9.1

0 0 1 2 11 8 62 62 10 5 1 1

50

100

0.0

0.0

0.4

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

3.4

Figure 18. Indiana and Ohio golf-course-irrigation water withdrawals, monthly, as percentage of annual water 

withdrawals for 1999–2004 (see fig. 6 for explanation).
42 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

December

INDIANA

OHIO

Distribution of Nursery-Irrigation Water Withdrawals (Individual Records), 

Monthly, as Percentage of Annual Withdrawals

100

50

0

30

10

40

June

20

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

5.0

11.2

13.9

18.9

8.9

1.3

0.0

0.6 0.0

10.0

15.4

18.5

13.7 12.8

7.0

0.0

0.0

3.8

13.1

20.0

24.7 25.0

16.8

11.0

4.7

8.1

0 0 0 0 2 6 19 7 4 1 0 0

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

0.9

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

100

50

0

30

10

40

20

0.0

0.0

0.4

0.0

0.0

0.6

0.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

9.3 9.3

15.5

9.8

2.0

0.0

2.5

0.0 0.0

9.3

12.9

14.4

11.5 13.0

8.5

0.0

0.0

5.7

12.8

17.9

24.0 24.4

21.3

12.8

7.0

9.4

0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0

0.0

0.0 0.0

6.2

0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0

0.0

Figure 19. Indiana and Ohio nursery-irrigation water withdrawals, monthly, as percentage of annual withdrawals for 

1999–2004 (see fig. 6 for explanation).
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 43

Table 22. Agricultural irrigation data for Ohio and Indiana in 2002.

[Data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2008; (D), withheld to avoid disclosing data for individual farms; NR, not reported.]

Agricultural

product

Indiana Ohio

Harvested Irrigated Harvested Irrigated

Farms Acres Farms Acres Farms Acres Farms Acres

Selected crops harvested 44,298 11,937,370 2,122 311,963 58,577 10,041,416 2,561 39,881

Corn for grain1 24,156 5,123,291 767 180,305 23,898 2,869,951 26 3,387

Sorghum for grain 94 9,950 3 (D) 21 996 - -

Wheat for grain 5,907 299,873 30 2,862 14,340 796,085 1 (D)

Barley for grain 75 1,255 - - 489 5,745 - -

Buckwheat 3 76 - - 22 1,615 - -

Canola 2 (D) - - 1 (D) - -

Emmer and spelt 25 268 - - 297 4,125 - -

Oats for grain 914 11,015 1 (D) 3,865 55,151 2 (D)

Popcorn 273 69,207 40 9,791 353 67,378 2 (D)

Proso millet - - - - 1 (D) - -

Rye for grain 91 1,070 - - 270 3,521 2 (D)

Sunflower seed, all 30 307 2 (D) 31 849 - -

Triticale 1 (D) - - 5 51 - -

Dry edible beans, excluding 

limas 19 1,016 - - 44 3,988 - -

Potatoes 131 2,491 29 2,090 314 4,865 23 1,067

Sweet potatoes 12 5 4 2 46 13 6 1

Sugarbeets - - - - 21 1,530 1 (D)

Soybeans2 25,212 5,761,363 558 84,571 26,327 4,718,690 12 1,478

Tobacco 1,282 4,034 57 317 1,845 5,764 10 90

Field and grass seeds 14 249 - - 178 3,941 - -

All hay and forage3 22,196 625,898 77 2,928 33,939 1,271,137 16 530

All haylage, grass silage, and 

greenchop 937 34,869 17 826 2,648 130,327 1 (D)

Corn for silage or greenchop 2,875 116,939 41 5,222 5,503 255,359 7 548

Sorghum for silage or greenchop 56 1,020 - - 110 1,861 - -

Land used for vegetables 4 1,139 37,682 374 16,892 2,323 43,909 655 16,654

Land in orchards 613 5,354 47 268 1,654 13,144 192 922

Fruits and nuts 1,159 5,314 NR NR 3,472 13,149 NR NR

Land in berries 311 1,226 102 602 772 1,555 278 878

Cut christmas trees 373 5,630 - - 1,105 16,625 - -

Maple syrup 128 - - - 594 - - -

Nursery, floriculture, etc.5 1,123 14,095 305 4,341 2,700 38,439 660 12,787

1

 Indiana counties with more than 2,500 acres of irrigated corn for grain were Bartholomew, Elkhart, Fulton, Jasper, Knox, Kosciusko, LaGrange, Lake, La 

Porte, Marshall, Newton, Noble, Porter, Posey, Pulaski, St. Joseph, Starke, and Sullivan. No Ohio counties had more than 2,500 acres of irrigated corn for grain; 

the highest amount was in Fulton County with 1,105 acres.

2

 Indiana counties with more than 2,500 acres irrigated for soybeans were Elkhart, Fulton, Jasper, Knox, Kosciusko, LaGrange, La Porte, Porter, Posey, 

Pulaski, St. Joseph, Starke, and Sullivan. There were no Ohio counties with more than 2,500 acres irrigated for soybeans.

3

 “All hay and forage” includes land used for all hay and all hayage, grass silage, and greenchop.

4

 Indiana counties with more than 1,000 acres of irrigated land used for vegetables were Knox, LaGrange, Lake, La Porte, and Sullivan. Ohio counties with 

more than 1,000 acres of irrigated land used for vegetables were Huron and Lucas; in Fulton, Mahoning, Meigs, and Putnam counties more than 600 acres were 

irrigated.

5

 Harvested numbers are for nursery, greenhouse, floriculture, aquatic plants, mushrooms, flower seeds, vegetable seeds, and sod harvested, total farms and 

acres in the open. Irrigation numbers are for nursery, floriculture, vegetable and flower seed crops, sod harvested, etc., grown in the open, irrigated. Indiana 

Counties with more than 230 acres irrigated were Hamilton, Lake, and St. Joseph. Ohio Counties with more than 230 acres irrigated were Butler, Clark, Delaware, Franklin, Fulton, Hamilton, Lake, Lorain, Pickaway, Stark, Union, Warren, and Wayne.
44 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Withdrawal for crop irrigation in Indiana (fig. 17) was 

almost 7 times that in Ohio, and the irrigated acreage in Indiana was almost 7 times that in Ohio. The threshold requirement for reporting water withdrawal is the same for Indiana 

and Ohio (a capacity to withdraw 100,000 gal/d). Most Indiana withdrawals are in June, July, and August (fig. 20). Table 

22 lists the irrigated farms and acreage in 2002 for Ohio and 

Indiana (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2008), and figure 

21 shows 2002 irrigated acreage. Indiana had more irrigated 

farms and irrigated acreage for corn (for grain) and soybean 

crops than Ohio. A reported 2 to 3 percent of corn and soybean 

farms in Indiana irrigated their crops, whereas the proportion 

in Ohio was less than 0.1 percent. Irrigated vegetable acreage 

in the two states was similar (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

2008). Approximately two-thirds of crop farm withdrawal 

occurs in July and August in Indiana, as does half of the 

annual withdrawal in Ohio (table 2–8). 

Improving the understanding of consumptive use in 

irrigation would require field studies measuring groundwater 

recharge, runoff, and, where flood irrigation is used, measuring the return flow from the field. By definition in Ohio, 

consumptive use is 100 percent.

Instructions for the Ohio Water Withdrawal Facility Registration tell facilities to assume 100 percent consumptive use for 

irrigation (golf, crop, nurseries) (Paul Spahr, Ohio Department 

of Natural Resources, written commun., 2008). The ODNR 

database for 1999–2004 includes more than 2,000 golf course 

records, but only 94 of them furnished return-flow data. Most 

sites did not report return flow, but it is not known whether the 

Table 23. Nursery data for Ohio and Indiana in 2002.

[Data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2008; (D), withheld to avoid disclosing data for individual farms; (X), Not applicable).]

Nursery product

Indiana Ohio

Farms

Square feet under 

glass or other protection

Acres in the 

open

Farms Square feet under glass 

or other protection Acres in the open

State total 1,123 16,215,460 14,095 2,700 39,708,263 38,439

Nursery, floriculture, vegetable 

and flower seed crops, sod 

harvested, etc., grown in the 

open, irrigated

305 (X) 4,341 660 (X) 12,787

Bedding/Garden plants 599 9,471,681 300 1,196 24,215,599 801

Cut flowers and cut florist greens 73 461,610 85 144 1,346,649 216

Foliage plants 101 1,054,042 20 109 790,018 52

Potted flowering plants 251 3,642,120 95 405 6,818,842 101

Aquatic plants 15 (D) 4 48 146,108 17

Bulbs, corms, rhizomes, and 

tubers – dry

17 13,306 (D) 40 115,930 36

Flower seeds 7 (D) (D) 16 25,288 5

Greenhouse vegetables 49 384,632 (X) 139 1,151,891 (X)

Mushrooms 5 (D) (X) 11 23,719 (X)

Nursery stock 442 470,108 8,210 1,267 4,229,895 26,963

Sod harvested 38 (X) 5,076 62 (X) 9,434

Vegetable seeds 18 8,418 1 35 134,452 60

Other nursery and greenhouse 

crops

27 118,850 133 85 710,412 756

nonresponse was because (1) return-flow data are not required, 

(2) the form implies that return flow will not occur (100 percent 

consumption is assumed), or (3) course managers have actually 

observed that 100 percent (or most) of the water withdrawn is 

evaporated or transpired. The 94 records that reported returnflow data can be put in the two categories consumptive use 

of less than 40 percent or greater than or equal to 40 percent. 

Results of an analysis of the sites with consumptive use greater 

than or equal to 40 percent are listed in table 24. On the basis 

of withdrawals and return flows, the median consumptive-use 

coefficient for golf courses was 77 percent (annually), but 80 

to 84 percent from June through September, when most of the 

withdrawals occur. This 77 percent may not reflect the hydrology of all golf courses because it does not include facilities that 

did not report return-flow data.

For other irrigation (primarily crop and nursery irrigation), the Ohio Water Withdrawal Facility Registration 

Program listed more than 1,700 individual records, but only 66 

included return flow. Reasons for nonresponse are unknown 

but may be the same as those suspected for golf courses. 

Four sites with return-flow data were not included in statistical analyses because all withdrawals or return flows were in 

one month or the facility reported zero consumptive use. Of 

the remaining 62 records, 20 were for crop irrigation and 42 

were nursery irrigation. The median consumptive-use coefficient was 78 percent for the entire year (table 24) but 80 to 82 

percent for June through September, when most withdrawals 

occur. The averages for the months in table 24 were similar to 

the median consumptive-use coefficient in table 25.
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 45

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

December

INDIANA

OHIO

Distribution of Crop-Irrigation Water Withdrawals (Individual Records), 

Monthly, as Percentage of Annual Withdrawals

Figure 20. Indiana and Ohio crop-irrigation water withdrawals, monthly, as percentage of annual withdrawals 

for 1999–2004 (see fig. 6 for explanation).

50

0

30

60

10

20

80

90

70

40

100

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

June

0.0

50.0

24.4

10.6

27.2

48.7

24.6

37.5

34.2

13 2 2 3 19 95 346 301 21 3 2 3

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

0.0

4.5

10.7

21.3

0.0 0.0

2.3

13.1

24.5

9.4 8.3

0.0

9.4

22.7

37.8

33.3

15.1

7.8

0 0 0 0 4 14 19 12 1 0 0 0

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

50

0

30

60

10

20

80

90

70

40

100

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

11.1

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

1.6

0.0

0.0

0.1

0.0

0.0

0.1

0.0

0.0

0.6

0.0

0.0

4.5

Table 24. Monthly average consumptive-use coefficients for golf course and nursery and crop irrigation based on Ohio withdrawal 

and return-flow data for 1999–2004. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest tenth. Average consumptive-use coefficient is computed by subtracting monthly return flows from 

monthly withdrawals and dividing by monthly withdrawals. – indicates that withdrawals were less than return flows for the month. Golf-course irrigation numbers are based on 59 records. Other irrigation based on 62 records (20 crop and 42 nursery).]

Month 

or statistic

Average 

consumptive-use coefficient

Golf-course 

irrigation

Nursery and 

crop irrigation

January 51 21

February 47 30

March 43 80

April 43 82

May 70 82

June 75 80

July 76 80

August 79 79

September 86 77

Month 

or statistic

Average 

consumptive-use coefficient

Golf-course 

irrigation

Nursery and 

crop irrigation

October 89 73

November 86 76

December 51 41

Annual, 

25th percentile

63 65

Annual, median 77 78

Annual, 75th percentile 97 89

Annual, average 78 78

Figure 20. Indiana and Ohio crop-irrigation water withdrawals, monthly, as percentage of annual withdrawals 

for 1999–2004 (see fig. 6 for explanation).
46 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Figure 21. Irrigated land acreage in Indiana and Ohio for 2002 (National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2008).

Base from U.S. Geological Survey 1:2,000,000 Digital Data; Albers Equal-Area 

Conic Projection, -5 rotation; standard parallels 29 30' and 45 30', central meridian -96 o o o o

85° 80°

38°

40°

42°

EXPLANATION

Data not available

Acres irrigated

0 - 600

601 - 2,000

2,001 - 5,000

5,001 - 20,000

20,001 - 32,400

0 25 50 100 Miles

0 50 100 25 Kilometers

Table 25. Ohio irrigation monthly consumptive-use coefficient statistics, based on withdrawal and return-flow data for 1999–2004. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest tenth. Average consumptive-use coefficient is computed by subtracting monthly return flows 

from monthly withdrawals and dividing by monthly withdrawals. – indicates that withdrawals were less than return flows for the month. Golf-course 

irrigation numbers based on 59 records. Other irrigation based on 62 records (20 crop irrigation and 42 nursery irrigation).]

Statistic Consumptive-use coefficient

April May June July August September October November

Golf-course irrigation

25th percentile 11 42 65 67 68 68 37 01

Median 71 75 82 80 84 82 75 31

75th percentile 99 98 98 95 98 99 98 94

Crop and nursery irrigation

25th percentile 67 68 65 68 66 60 56 37

Median 79 78 82 80 80 81 81 70

75th percentile 93 91 90 90 93 92 90 84

1

 These numbers are low because many of the facilities had no withdrawals or return flows in these months.

Figure 21. Irrigated land acreage in Indiana and Ohio for 2002 (National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2008).
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 47

Livestock

livestock production schedule (animals born in the spring and 

sold off in the fall). Figure 22A shows livestock water use for 

all the reporting Indiana sites, and figure 22B shows the water 

use for Ohio facilities. 

Ohio withdrawals are fairly constant (fig. 23), whereas 

Indiana monthly percentages appear to be much more affected 

by seasonal withdrawals. Table 2–9 lists the percentage of 

annual withdrawals for Indiana and Ohio sites, and table 2–10 

lists the summary statistics for Indiana broken out by seasonal 

facilities and all-year facilities. Statistics for all-year facilities 

in Ohio (table 2–9) and Indiana (table 2–10) are similar, but 

withdrawals at the Indiana seasonal sites are highly concentrated in June through September. Among 18 individual 

records with return flow from Ohio, the consumptive-use coefficients ranged from 12 to 100 percent, with a median of 76 

percent. The facility with a 12 percent consumptive-use coefficient reported to ODNR (2008) that 50 percent of groundwater 

withdrawals was used as process water and 50 percent was for 

cooling water, which would explain the low consumptiveuse coefficient. Because the records are so few, the median 

consumptive-use coefficient should be viewed with caution. 

Livestock water use is water associated with livestock 

watering, feedlots, dairy operations, and other on-farm needs 

(Hutson, Barber, and others, 2004); consumptive use occurs 

during stock watering—by which water is incorporated into 

the product (milk, eggs, growth of livestock) or evaporates—

and facility and animal cleaning—during which water evaporates. Some water used for stock watering may be returned to 

the hydrologic environment, but water quality and location 

of the return may limit if and when this water is available 

for reuse. Only livestock facilities that have the capacity to 

withdraw 100,000 gal/d are required to report withdrawals to 

Ohio and Indiana. Much of the livestock withdrawals in Ohio 

and Indiana may be from facilities that have a capacity of less 

than 100,000 gal/d. This is why Census of Agriculture data 

frequently are used to estimate livestock water use (Hutson, 

Barber, and others, 2004). Therefore, figure 22 may not be 

representative of all the livestock withdrawals in Ohio and 

Indiana. 

Livestock facilities can be categorized as those that 

withdraw continuously throughout the year and those that 

withdrawal seasonally, most likely from the start to end of a 

Livestock water use is water associated with livestock watering, feedlots, dairy operations, and other on-farm needs.
48 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

December

AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, 

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

INDIANA

OHIO

Livestock Water Withdrawals (Average Monthly, From Aggregated Data), 

in Million Gallons Per Day

Figure 22. Indiana and Ohio monthly livestock water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. Monthly 

percentages of annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is the 

0.00

0.00

3.00

0.75

1.50

2.25

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

June

0.75

2.50

1.50

3.00

6.6

7.9

7.1 7.3 7.4

9.2

11.0

12.0

8.3

7.7 7.9 7.5

Percentage of annual withdrawal

N = 114

7.7

8.4 8.1 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.7 8.6 8.8 8.7 8.3 8.0

N = 114

Figure 22. Indiana and Ohio monthly livestock water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. Monthly percentages of 

annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is the number of records.
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 49

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

December

INDIANA

OHIO

Distribution of Livestock Water Withdrawals (Individual Records), 

Monthly, as Percentage of Annual Withdrawals

Figure 23. Indiana and Ohio livestock water withdrawals, monthly, as percentage of annual withdrawals for 1999–2004 

(see fig. 6 for explanation).

0

0

100

10

20

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

June

10

100

20

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

7.4

8.3 7.9 8.3

12.2

6.8 6.6

8.0

8.3 8.3

2.9

8.3 8.5 8.9

7.2 8.3 8.0

8.3 8.9

7.8

7.0

9.2

10.5

8.4

8.9 8.3 8.5 8.3

0 0 0 0 0 7 19 19 3 3 4 4

4.8

1.4

6.7

8.7

7.9

5.2

7.6

8.3

8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3

9.4

8.1 7.9

8.4 8.3 8.3

7.7 8.3 8.2

8.5

8.1 8.3

8.6

8.3 8.5

8.2 8.4 8.9 9.4

8.3

8.8

8.3

8.5

8.3

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

7.4 7.6 7.7

8.7 8.5

7.9

7.2

8.5

Figure 23. Indiana and Ohio livestock water withdrawals, monthly, as percentage of annual withdrawals for 1999–2004 (see 

fig. 6 for explanation).
50 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Aquaculture

Aquaculture water use is water associated with raising 

organisms that live in water and includes fish-farming and 

fish-hatchery activities. Aquaculture production includes controlled feeding, sanitation, and harvesting procedures primarily 

in ponds, flowthrough raceways, and, to a lesser extent, cages, 

net pens, and closed-recirculation tanks (Hutson, Barber, and 

others, 2004). There were 11 aquaculture sites in Indiana and 

8 sites in Ohio with data between 1999 and 2004. The average 

monthly withdrawals are graphed in figure 24. Many of the 

Indiana and Ohio facilities had specific months during which 

no water was withdrawn (tables 2–11). 

The months that tend to have highest withdrawals (March 

through June) correspond with fish-hatchery life cycles for 

cool-water species, which end in late May when the fish 

are stocked as fingerlings (John Tertuliani, U.S. Geological Survey, oral commun., 2008). The water withdrawals 

tend to correspond with production times of each species of 

fish; water withdrawals may be higher when ponds are filled 

before production and after production (after the pond has 

been drained after production). Higher withdrawals in December and January may be to prevent ponds from freezing by 

pumping water to aerate the pond (a frozen-over pond would 

limit photosynthesis). The type of aquaculture facility may 

also affect withdrawals and consumptive use:

1. Raceways—Typically the water flows through the raceways, and only a small percentage of water is evaporated.

2. Ponds—Typically, ponds have high levels of evaporation 

and therefore consumptive use (especially during the summer months). Water for hatcheries that use ponds might 

fill up the pond 3 to 5 months before the pond is drained, 

thus making it difficult to quantify evaporation and consumptive use because of the time lag.

There were 65 individual aquaculture records for Ohio 

between 1999 and 2004. For Ohio aquaculture, fewer than 35 

individual records included return-flow and withdrawal data. 

The consumptive-use coefficients from the return-flow method 

ranged from 0 to 100 percent, with half (IQR) of the coefficients 

between 0 and 2 percent. The average consumptive-use coefficient for the individual records was higher (5 percent, table 26). 

Fish hatcheries represent a major form of aquaculture in the United States. (Photograph from the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, reproduced with 

permission.)
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 51

AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS,

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

December

AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, 

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

INDIANA

OHIO

Aquaculture Water Withdrawals (Average Monthly, From Aggregated Data), 

in Million Gallons Per Day

Figure 24. Indiana and Ohio monthly aquaculture water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. Monthly

percentages of annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is the number 

of individual records.

0

12

3

6

9

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

June

9.1

6.7

9.2 9.5

8.3

9.4

7.4 7.5 7.8 8.0

8.6 8.7

Percent of annual withdrawals N = 65

0

12

3

6

9

6.7 7.3 8.2

13.3

8.8

11.7

7.6 7.5

8.5 7.7

6.3 6.4

N = 65

Table 26. Ohio aquaculture monthly consumptive-use coefficient statistics, based on withdrawal and return-flow data for 1999–2004. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest whole number. The median and 25th and 75th percentiles are based on computing the consumptive-use 

coefficient for each record and analyzing for these statistics. Monthly consumptive-use coefficient average is computed by subtracting monthly return flows 

from monthly withdrawals and dividing by monthly withdrawals. The average is computed by taking the total withdrawals for all records and subtracting the 

individual-record return flows, then dividing this number by the individual-records total withdrawals. Statistics based on 33 records.]

Statistic Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Annual

25th percentile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Median 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

75th percentile 0 0 0 0 4 9 5 5 5 0 0 0 2

Average 4 3 7 8 5 9 5 5 6 3 2 1 5

Figure 24. Indiana and Ohio monthly aquaculture water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. Monthly percentages of 

annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is the number of records.
52 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Mining

higher (30 percent) (table 27). For the return-flow analysis, 

the mining facilities were separated by type of mining. Both 

the coal mining (SIC 12) and nonmetallic minerals (SIC 14) 

had the same minimums (0), medians (10), and 25th and 75th 

percentiles (0 and 30, respectively) but different maximums 

(80 percent, coal; 100 percent, nonmetallic minerals). 

An alternative method for estimating consumptive use 

(not attempted in this study) is based on quantity of product 

mined. For example, CHM2HILL (2003) includes net water 

consumption by mining operation in gallons per ton and stated 

that one coal surface-mine operator found that dust control 

consumed about 5.2 gal of water per ton of coal produced.

Another alternative method would be to use return-flow data 

from reporting facilities to estimate a consumptive-use coefficient for facilities with no data, depending on activities at 

those facilities (mining, mineral preparation, both). For example, as part of a recent study in Pennsylvania, Stuckey (2008) 

examined registered mining withdrawals for a corresponding 

return flow. If no discharges were found, a consumptive-use 

coefficient of 8 percent was used. For mining operations 

involving only mineral preparation, a consumptive-use coefficient of 17 percent was used.

Mining water is water withdrawn during the extraction 

of minerals, and the corresponding consumptive use is water 

consumed during quarrying, milling, and other operations. 

Ohio and Indiana have two major types of mining: coal mining 

(SIC 12) and mining and quarrying of nonmetallic minerals, 

except fuels (nonmetallic minerals, SIC 14, includes dimension stone, crushed and broken limestone, sand and gravel, 

construction sand and gravel, and industrial sand, among other 

products). Figure 18 is the average monthly mining withdrawals during 1999–2004 for Ohio and Indiana. The May–October 

monthly withdrawals were typically higher than November–

March withdrawals. The April withdrawals (for coal mining 

and nonmetallic mining) were either similar to or greater than 

summer withdrawals (figs. 26 and 27). Although the USGS 

does not consider dewatering a mining withdrawal, dewatering 

is included in the ODNR and IDNR registration programs and 

could not be separated out for this report. Thus, the increased 

April withdrawals may be from dewatering caused by high 

water tables in the spring. Table 2–12 and figure 28 also show 

increased withdrawals beginning in April and continuing 

through November. 

Although the median mining coefficient for 1999–2004 

was 10 percent (from the return-flow method), the average was 

This sand and gravel mining and processing facility is typical of many such facilities throughout the Great Lakes States.
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 53

AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS,

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

December

AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, 

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

INDIANA

OHIO

Mining Water Withdrawals (Average Monthly, From Aggregated Data), in Million Gallons Per Day

Figure 25. Indiana and Ohio monthly mining water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. Monthly

percentages of annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is the number 

0.0

0

150.0

37.5

75.0

112.5

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

June

40

80

120

160

Percent of annual withdrawals

N = 541

5.1

6.0

7.7

9.5 9.6 10.0

9.3 9.3 9.2 9.3

8.4

6.6

5.3

6.0

7.6

9.4 9.3 9.5

9.0 9.2 9.3 9.2 9.0

7.3

N = 961

Figure 25. Indiana and Ohio monthly mining water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. Monthly percentages of annual 

withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is the number of records.
54 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

December

AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, 

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

INDIANA

OHIO

Coal-Mining Water Withdrawals (Average Monthly, From Aggregated Data), 

in Million Gallons Per Day

Figure 26. Indiana and Ohio monthly coal-mining water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. Monthly

percentages of annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is the number 

0

0

20

5

10

15

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

June

5

10

18

20

Percentage of annual withdrawals

N = 96

7.2 7.5 7.9

10.9

9.1 9.4

7.6 7.9 7.6

9.4

8.0 7.4

N = 144

7.9

9.2 9.6 9.3 9.3

8.4 8.2 7.6 8.1 7.4 7.6 7.4

Figure 26. Indiana and Ohio monthly coal-mining water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. Monthly percentages of 

annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is the number of records.
Analysis of Variation in Monthly Water Withdrawals, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 55

AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS,

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

December

AVERAGE MONTHLY WITHDRAWALS, 

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

INDIANA

OHIO

B

Nonmetallic-Mining Water Withdrawals (Average Monthly, From Aggregated Data), 

in Million Gallons Per Day

Figure 27. Indiana and Ohio average monthly nonmetallic-mining water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. 

Monthly percentages of annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is 

0

0

160

80

120

140

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

Percentage of annual withdrawals

N = 493

40 4.8

5.8

7.6

9.3 9.7 10.1 9.6 9.5 9.4 9.3 8.5

6.5

40

80

120

160

N = 818

June

5.1

5.8

7.5

9.5 9.3 9.5

9.0 9.2 9.3 9.3 9.1

7.2

Figure 27. Indiana and Ohio monthly nonmetallic-mining water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004. Monthly 

percentages of annual withdrawals may not add up to 100 percent because of independent rounding. N is the number of 

records.
56 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

December

INDIANA

OHIO

Distribution of Mining Water Withdrawals (Individual Records), 

Monthly, as Percentage of Annual Withdrawals

Figure 28. Indiana and Ohio mining water withdrawals, monthly, as percentage of annual withdrawals for 1999–2004 

(see fig. 6 for explanation).

10

0

20

30

100

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

June

0

10

20

100

7.9

11.1

9.9

8.0

9.8

7.4 7.8

6.5

8.2

5.0

7.7 8.3 8.2

9.7

7.8

9.3 9.6

6.0

8.3

9.3 9.9

11.8 11.9 12.1 11.4 11.6

9.4 9.5

5 6 2 8 4 2 2 4 4 2 3 2

5.4

3.9 3.3

12.0

8.1 7.8

0.0 0.0

8.3

10.9

9.3

8.0

9.2

8.0 7.9

6.9

8.3

5.3

8.0 8.3 8.2 9.1 8.0

9.0 8.9

6.9

8.5 8.9 9.6

11.4 11.3 11.8 11.1 11.5

9.1 9.9

9 5 4 6 9 5 11 9 8 5 6 10

4.8 4.6 4.4

11.5

8.2 8.2

0.0 0.0

30

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL WATER 

WITHDRAWAL PER MONTH

Figure 28. Indiana and Ohio mining water withdrawals, monthly, as percentage of annual withdrawals for 1999–2004 (see fig. 

6 for explanation).

Table 27. Ohio mining monthly consumptive-use coefficient statistics, based on withdrawal and return-flow data for 1999–2004. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest whole number. The median and 25th and 75th percentiles are based on computing the consumptive-use 

coefficient for each record and analyzing for these statistics. Monthly consumptive-use coefficient average is computed by subtracting monthly return flows 

from monthly withdrawals and dividing by monthly withdrawals. The average is computed by taking the total withdrawals for all records and subtracting the 

individual-record return flows, then dividing this number by the individual-record total withdrawals. The number of records is 418.]

Statistic Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Annual

25th percentile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Median 3 5 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

75th percentile 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

Average 29 30 30 30 30 29 28 31 30 31 31 31 30
Findings 57

Findings

Consumptive-use coefficients, monthly withdrawal variations, and methods used in this report can be used in future 

studies to assist water managers and planners in estimating 

monthly data where reported data from facilities—the preferred and generally most accurate datasets—are not available. 

Estimation of withdrawal, return flow, and consumptive use 

on the basis of data from similar facilities is generally the next 

best option to reported data in terms of maximizing accuracy 

and minimizing uncertainty, but estimates based on water-use 

categories or groups of water-use categories may be necessary 

if similar-facility data are not available. 

If monthly data are not available, water-resource planners must rely on other methods to estimate monthly water 

withdrawal, return flow, and consumptive use. Monthly 

water withdrawals can be computed by multiplying annual 

withdrawal by the monthly percentage of annual withdrawals (figs. 5, 7, 10,14, 16, 17, 22, 24, 25, 26, and 27) or the 

monthly median percentage of annual withdrawals (figs. 6, 8, 

11, 15, 18, 19, 20, 23, 24, and 28 or Appendix 2). If annual 

withdrawal data are not available, water withdrawals may be 

estimated by using median withdrawal rates based on wateruse categories, groups, or SIC codes (tables 2, 3, 12, 30, and 

3–1) and multiplying the median water withdrawal rate by 365 

days to get an estimated annual withdrawal. Return-flow and 

consumptive-use estimates can be computed by multiplying 

the monthly withdrawal by an annual, seasonal, or monthly 

consumptive-use coefficient. 

Study methods and major findings are summarized in 

table 28. The return-flow and withdrawal (RW) method of 

calculating consumptive-use coefficients was used for all 

water-use categories except public supply, subject to data 

availability. The winter-base-rate (WBR) method was used 

for commercial and public-supply water-use categories. Table 

28 also lists the changes in monthly withdrawals per season. 

Public-supply, industrial, thermoelectric, irrigation, and commercial withdrawals were higher during May through October 

than during November through April. Ohio livestock withdrawals were fairly constant, but Indiana withdrawals were 

heavily influenced by facilities that operated only seasonally. Aquaculture withdrawals may relate to the seasonal life 

cycle of fish and aeration of ponds during the winter. Mining 

withdrawals, specifically for nonmetallic mining, were high in 

April, perhaps a result of dewatering. 

Table 29, figure 29 and figure 30 summarize average 

withdrawals for 1999–2004 for Indiana and Ohio by water-use 

category. Thermoelectric power was the category of highest 

withdrawals for both states (fig. 29). Industrial and publicsupply withdrawals were second and third highest (Indiana 

with more industrial withdrawals and Ohio with more publicsupply withdrawals; fig. 30). The remainder of the water-use 

categories made up less than 3 percent of the total withdrawals 

for Ohio or Indiana. Crop and nursery irrigation withdrawals 

in Indiana were highest from June through August and were 

between 29 to 61 percent of the average public-supply withdrawals of that month for the State. Crop irrigation withdrawals were higher in Indiana than Ohio because more corn and 

soybean farms irrigated land in Indiana (U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, 2008). Overall, June and July were the months 

of heaviest withdrawals for combined categories (9.6 to 10.1 

percent), whereas January, February, and March were the 

months of the least combined withdrawals (7.3 to 7.6 percent) 

(fig. 29).

Water-use category withdrawals are divided by facility 

size in table 30. Facility size was determined by percentile of 

withdrawals, and then median withdrawal for each facility size 

group was computed. The thermoelectric-power water-use category had the largest median withdrawals for all of the facility 

size groups in comparison to other water-use categories. After 

thermoelectric power, industrial had the highest median withdrawal for the “extra large and very large” facility sizes, and 

public supply had the highest median withdrawals for “small, 

median, and large” facility sizes. The top 10 percent of many 

water-use categories accounted for most of the withdrawals 

in that category: industrial, 95 percent of withdrawals; public 

supply, 76 percent; commercial, 86 percent. Livestock and 

aquaculture withdrawals were not included because insufficient data were available on type and number of livestock and 

aquaculture counts per facility.

Table 31 lists the results from the return-flow method 

for computing consumptive-use coefficients. For industrial 

facilities and thermoelectric plants with once-through cooling, 

consumptive-use coefficient averages and medians were fairly 

constant for the entire year. Consumptive-use coefficients 

(average and/or medians) for commercial facilities were highest during the summer and fall (June–October). Coefficients 

were highest for golf course irrigation from June through 

September and from crop and nursery irrigation from June 

through October. Mining consumptive-use coefficients (from 

the return-flow method) were fairly constant except for January and February, which had lower medians.

Table 32 lists the consumptive-use coefficients computed 

by use of the WBR method for commercial and public-supply 

facilities for Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin. Consumptive 

use was highest from June through September. Rainfall and 

temperature may affect water withdrawals and consumptive 

use, but it was outside the scope of this study to determine to 

what extent.
58 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 28. Summary of methods and major findings.

Water-use category Return-flow and withdrawal 

method Winter-base-rate method Monthly withdrawals

Public supply Should not be used to compute 

consumptive use. See the “Public Supply” section for more 

information and exceptions. 

Can be applied to estimate consumptive use but is based on the 

assumptions that (1) publicsupply deliveries are going to 

mostly domestic customers 

and (2) the summer increase is 

outdoor water use and therefore 

is evaporated or transpired.

Increased withdrawals in the summer—some of the January and 

February withdrawals may be 

for filling reservoirs.

Industrial Can be used to compute consumptive use but is limited by 

data availability and types of 

industries.

Should not be used because the 

increase in summer withdrawals 

may be from increase in production, not consumptive use .1

Increased withdrawals in the summer (this increase was greater in 

Indiana than Ohio).

Thermoelectric Can be used to compute consumptive use but is limited by data 

availability. Type of cooling 

used at the plant affects consumptive use.

Should not be applied because in 

the summer; the same amount of 

electrical production will result 

in higher withdrawals due to 

warmer influent water.

Increased in summer, possibly 

because more intake water is 

needed for cooling in the summer in response to higher water 

temperatures and increased 

thermoelectric power production 

in the summer versus the winter.

Irrigation, golf course Can be used to compute consumptive use but is limited by data 

availability.

Should not be applied because the 

withdrawals in the winter are 

most likely for the clubhouse 

uses, not irrigation.

Increased withdrawals in the summer.

Irrigation, other Can be used to compute consumptive use but is limited by data 

availability.

Should not be applied because 

most withdrawals occur in the 

summer.

Increased withdrawals in the summer. Indiana had many more 

registered facilities than Ohio, 

but Ohio had more nurseries 

than Indiana.

Livestock Can be used to compute consumptive use but is limited by data 

availability.

Should not be used to estimate 

consumptive use.

Withdrawals were fairly constant 

in Ohio, but varied by facility in 

Indiana.

Mining Can be used to compute consumptive use but is limited by data 

availability.

Because mining activities vary 

widely by facility, this method 

should not be used to estimate 

consumptive use. 

Dewatering my be a factor during 

spring months.

Commercial Can be used to compute consumptive use, but is limited by data 

availability. Types of facilities 

and outdoor water use affect 

consumptive use.

Can be applied to estimate consumptive use but is based on 

the assumption that the summer 

increase is outdoor water use 

and therefore is evaporated or 

transpired. Does not apply to 

snow-skiing facilities.

Increased withdrawals in the summer. 

1

 A better method may be the SIC code method. For more information see the “Industrial” section.
Findings 59

Table 29. Average water withdrawals for Ohio and Indiana, 1999–2004. 

[Numbers are million gallons per day rounded to three significant figures.]

Water-use 

category Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.

Indiana

Public supply 651 653 625 646 690 752 817 802 766 669 631 622

Industrial 2,250 2,250 2,190 2,200 2,290 2,410 2,510 2,620 2,550 2,450 2,310 2,220

Thermoelectric 5,720 5,760 5,520 5,590 6,070 7,140 7,480 7,510 6,860 6,020 5,870 5,850

Golf-course 

irrigation

1.15 0.57 1.67 6.54 14.2 28.1 37.4 38.1 31.0 13.1 3.11 1.18

Irrigation, other 2.98 3.52 7.50 19.4 41.4 216 502 477 110 22.1 16.7 4.98

Livestock 1.51 1.80 1.62 1.67 1.70 2.09 2.50 2.73 1.89 1.75 1.80 1.71

Aquaculture 10.1 7.41 10.3 10.5 9.21 10.4 8.18 8.40 8.64 8.85 9.56 9.67

Commercial 30.4 31.0 36.7 41.4 45.5 52.6 57.3 62.3 65.0 54.2 53.1 38.5

Mining 58.4 68.7 87.5 109 109 114 106 106 105 106 95.8 75.3

Ohio

Public supply 1,440 1,480 1,410 1,380 1,440 1,540 1,620 1,580 1,510 1,420 1,380 1,400

Industrial 707 732 711 730 748 758 772 787 770 734 734 711

Thermoelectric 7,690 7,380 7,510 7,440 8,470 9,620 10,040 9,910 8,960 8,580 8,110 8,220

Golf-course 

irrigation

.86 .77 1.20 8.54 19.3 37.1 50.2 49.3 36.4 16.1 4.86 1.05

Irrigation, other 1.21 1.52 4.97 10.1 18.3 33.3 43.9 41.3 26.6 14.4 7.06 2.43

Livestock 1.01 1.10 1.06 1.07 1.09 1.13 1.12 1.16 1.13 1.09 1.06 1.05

Aquaculture 4.87 5.30 5.94 9.57 6.38 8.43 5.46 5.45 6.12 5.53 4.52 4.66

Commercial 23.5 27.0 28.3 33.3 40.7 44.0 42.6 49.5 44.3 39.4 23.2 23.4

Mining 87.7 100 127 157 155 157 149 152 154 154 150 121
60 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Public supply

Industrial

Mining

Commercial

Aquaculture

Livestock

Irrigation

Thermoelectric

Public supply

Industrial

Mining

Commercial

Aquaculture

Livestock

Irrigation

Thermoelectric

MONTHLY AVERAGE WITHDRAWALS,

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

December

INDIANA

OHIO

Water Withdrawals (Average Monthly, From Aggregated Data), by Water-Use Category

Figure 29. Indiana and Ohio average monthly water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004, by water-use category.

14,000

0

12,000

8,000

10,000

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

June

2,000

4,000

6,000

MONTHLY AVERAGE WITHDRAWALS,

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

14,000

0

12,000

8,000

10,000

2,000

4,000

6,000

Figure 29. Indiana and Ohio monthly water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004, by water-use category.
Findings 61

Public supply

Industrial

Mining

Commercial

Aquaculture

Livestock

Irrigation

Public supply

Industrial

Mining

Commercial

Aquaculture

Livestock

Irrigation

MONTHLY AVERAGE WITHDRAWALS,

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

December

INDIANA

OHIO

Water Withdrawals (Average Monthly, From Aggregated Data), by Water-Use Category, 

Excluding Thermoelectric Power Production

Figure 30. Indiana and Ohio average monthly water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004, by water-use category, 

excluding thermoelectric power production.

January

February

March

April

May

July

August

September

October

November

June

MONTHLY AVERAGE WITHDRAWALS,

IN MILLION GALLONS PER DAY

5,000

0

4,000

3,000

1,000

2,000

5,000

0

4,000

3,000

1,000

2,000

Figure 30. Indiana and Ohio monthly water withdrawals, aggregated for 1999–2004, by water-use category, excluding 

thermoelectric power production.
62 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 30. Water demand by water-use category and facility size for Ohio and Indiana, 1999–2004. 

[Facility size was computed by percentiles of withdrawals for records; “small” denotes less than 33d percentile, “medium” is from 

the 33d to 66th percentiles, “large” is from the 66th to 90th percentiles,” very large” is from the 90th to 98th percentiles, and “extra 

large” is greater than the 98th percentile. Mgal/d, million gallons per day. N, number of records. Due to rounding, the sum of “Percent 

of total withdrawals” may not equal 100.]

Water-use category Facility size N

Median

withdrawal 

(Mgal/d)

Percent of total 

withdrawals 

(in percent)

Public supply Small 2,157 0.07 1

Medium 2,160 0.28 5

Large 1,570 1.27 18

Very large 524 5.32 27

Extra large 131 40.4 49

Industrial Small 1,078 0.004 <1

Medium 1,078 0.09 1

Large 784 0.65 4

Very large 261 5.46 11

Extra large 66 130 84

Thermoelectric power Small 161 0.15 <1

Medium 160 24.5 6

Large 116 301 44

Very large 39 777 36

Extra large 10 1,230 14

Irrigation, golf Small 1,354 0.006 4

Medium 1,356 0.03 19

Large 918 0.07 33

Very large 327 0.14 24

Extra large 82 0.31 19

Irrigation, nursery Small 260 0.01 2

Medium 258 0.03 12

Large 188 0.11 29

Very large 63 0.42 38

Extra large 16 0.81 20

Irrigation, crop Small 2,822 0.01 5

Medium 2,037 0.05 18

Large 682 0.10 28

Very large 171 0.24 24

Extra large 171 0.74 24

Commercial Small 858 0.002 <1

Medium 855 0.01 2

Large 624 0.06 11

Very large 206 0.47 28

Extra large 51 3.65 59

Mining1 Small 496 0.02 1

Medium 495 0.39 14

Large 360 1.12 33

Very large 120 3.26 30

Extra large 31 9.42 22

1

 Mining numbers may include dewatering.
Findings 63

Table 31. Monthly consumptive-use coefficients for Ohio, 1999–2004, computed by use of the return-flow and withdrawal method.

Statistic Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Annual1

Commercial facilities

25th percentile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Median 4 4 5 7 7 7 8 19 17 16 3 4 17

75th percentile 44 50 50 55 56 56 50 73 78 78 48 47 56

Average 33 42 37 36 38 43 44 48 48 45 40 38 42

Industrial facilities

25th percentile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Median 8 9 9 9 8 8 9 9 9 8 9 9 10

75th percentile 37 37 39 40 37 39 40 40 41 40 37 35 38

Average 11 12 11 11 11 12 12 12 11 11 12 12 11

Thermoelectric-power records with both types of cooling

25th percentile 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Median 1 2 1 3 2 5 3 3 2 2 2 2 2

75th percentile 5 6 3 5 5 6 6 8 5 5 3 5 5

Average 3 3 2 2 2 3 4 4 3 2 3 3 3

Thermoelectric-power records with closed-loop cooling

25th percentile 6 5 6 3 6 7 7 12 6 5 6 6 9

Median 26 29 30 23 25 29 28 33 24 21 27 26 25

75th percentile 59 65 75 65 75 72 75 75 71 49 63 65 74

Average 23 23 24 22 25 24 24 25 25 25 24 24 24

Thermoelectric-power records with once-through cooling

25th percentile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Median 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

75th percentile 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2

Average 3 2 3 2 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

All thermoelectric power records

25th percentile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Median 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2

75th percentile 7 8 8 6 10 12 15 16 7 7 8 13 16

Average 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 5 5

Golf-course irrigation

25th percentile - - - 12 42 65 67 68 68 37 02 - -

Median - - - 71 75 82 80 84 82 75 32 - -

75th percentile - - - 99 98 98 95 98 99 98 94 - -

Crop and nursery irrigation

25th percentile - - - 67 68 65 68 66 60 56 37 - -

Median - - - 79 78 82 80 80 81 81 70 - -

75th percentile - - - 93 91 90 90 93 92 90 84 - -

Mining records

25th percentile 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Median 3 5 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

75th percentile 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

Average 29 30 30 30 30 29 28 31 30 31 31 31 30

1 Annual calculation includes more records than monthly records.

2 These numbers are low because many of the facilities had no withdrawals or return flows in these months. 
64 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 32. Monthly and seasonal consumptive-use coefficients for Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin, 1999– 2004, computed by use of the 

winter-base-rate method.

Category or year N

Monthly consumptive-use coefficient Seasonal consumptive-use 

coefficient Annual

May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Spring Summer Fall

Indiana commercial 

1999 332 29 47 57 53 51 32 19 52 40 33

2000 323 49 45 50 62 65 55 38 53 58 44

2001 319 29 38 38 47 55 32 19 41 47 31

2002 322 9 53 60 61 60 44 91 58 50 38

2003 331 48 50 47 53 53 54 42 50 54 42

2004 337 35 38 38 47 54 50 26 41 48 33

1999–2004 1,964 31 40 45 50 52 42 24 45 45 33

Ohio commercial 

1999 104 41 44 46 55 46 27 38 49 29 33

2000 103 42 52 43 45 37 32 28 47 25 29

2001 97 24 27 25 49 35 35 91 36 26 20

2002 94 37 41 39 43 43 30 27 41 28 27

2003 89 46 47 49 58 48 49 31 52 40 36

2004 99 53 56 55 58 60 54 42 57 47 42

1999–2004 586 42 47 45 53 47 41 31 48 34 32

Indiana public supply

1999 485 9 19 26 22 24 6 2 23 11 10

2000 486 4 8 14 12 12 2 0 11 4 4

2001 482 13 15 20 20 9 3 6 18 3 7

2002 487 3 17 31 28 21 4 0 26 9 10

2003 498 4 15 19 21 14 3 1 18 6 7

2004 501 7 13 15 14 16 6 2 14 7 6

1999–2004 (median) 2,971 7 15 21 20 16 4 2 19 7 7

Ohio public supply2

1999 559 7 19 22 16 15 3 0 19 7 7

2000 485 4 9 12 10 7 1 0 10 2 3

2001 531 6 11 20 18 9 6 2 16 6 7

2002 531 1 14 27 24 19 8 0 22 11 9

2003 456 8 12 13 12 7 0 6 12 2 5

2004 437 5 9 15 11 8 0 0 12 2 3

1999–2004 2,939 5 13 19 16 11 3 1 16 5 6

Wisconsin public supply

1999 561 7 23 22 19 19 5 3 21 9 9

2000 562 9 11 17 19 11 6 3 16 6 6

2001 562 7 13 30 22 9 5 3 22 5 8

2002 563 7 16 31 23 17 6 3 24 8 10

2003 562 5 17 21 28 20 5 3 22 8 9

2004 563 4 10 18 18 19 5 2 15 8 7

1999–2004 3,373 6 15 23 22 16 5 3 20 7 8

1

 Spring of 2002 had low temperatures and high precipitation.

2

 Ohio data are for facilities with withdrawasl in July that are greater than or equal to withdrawals in Febuary.
Summary and Conclusions 65

Summary and Conclusions

State agencies with jurisdiction within the Great Lakes 

Basin have indicated that refinement of consumptive-use data 

and coefficients for all water-use categories were of interest 

and value to water-supply managers. As part of the USGS 

National Assessment of Water Availability and Use Pilot Program, this study took available datasets and analyzed monthly 

withdrawals and consumptive-use coefficients by month and 

season. Two principal methods, winter-base rate (WBR) and 

return-flow and withdrawal (RW), were used to estimate 

consumptive-use coefficients. The WBR method was used for 

commercial and public-supply facilities, and the RW method 

was used for all water-use categories except public supply. A 

third method based on Standard Industrial Classification codes 

(SIC code method) was used only to compute consumptive use 

for certain industrial facilities.

Commercial average monthly withdrawals increased 

significantly in the summer, particularly in August and September. The commercial average monthly withdrawals ranged 

from 30.4 to 65.0 Mgal/d for Ohio and 23.2 to 49.5 Mgal/d for 

Indiana—more than doubling at summer highs from winter 

lows. The consumptive-use coefficients were 30 percent (Ohio 

and Indiana annual coefficient, WBR method) and 17 and 42 

percent (Ohio, median and average, RW method). 

Industrial average monthly withdrawals were highest in the summer months in Ohio and Indiana. Indiana had 

almost three times the industrial withdrawals of Ohio. Indiana 

industrial withdrawals ranged from 2,220 to 2,620 Mgal/d, and 

Ohio industrial withdrawals ranged from 707 to 787 Mgal/d. 

The industrial consumptive-use coefficient varied by Standard 

Industrial Classification code. The overall industrial consumptive-use coefficient for Ohio was 10 percent (from the RW 

method) and 12 percent (Ohio) and 11 percent (Indiana) (from 

the SIC code method). These coefficients are based on large 

geographical areas and may not be representative of a particular geographical area based on the mix of industrial facilities 

and the processes at these facilities that affect the consumptive 

use. Shaffer (2008), Shaffer and Runkle (2007), and this report 

list variations in industrial consumptive-use coefficients. 

Many industrial facilities report withdrawal, return-flow, and 

consumptive-use data, such reported data are preferred, if 

available, over estimates based on general industrial consumptive-use coefficients.

Public-supply average withdrawals were higher in the 

summer months for Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin. Ohio’s 

average monthly withdrawals ranged from 1,380 to 1,620 

Mgal/d for 1999 to 2004 and were more than twice the publicsupply withdrawals of Indiana (621 to 816 Mgal/d) or Wisconsin (515 to 694 Mgal/d). Ohio has almost twice the population 

of Indiana or Wisconsin (Hutson, Barber, and others, 2004). 

The public-supply annual average consumptive-use coefficient 

calculated by use of the WBR method ranged from 6 to 8 

percent, and the summer consumptive-use coefficient ranged 

from 16 to 20 percent for Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin. 

Monthly precipitation and temperature affects consumptiveuse, but it was beyond the scope of this study to determine to 

what extent.

Thermoelectric-power average monthly withdrawals were 

highest in the summer months for Ohio and Indiana. Ohio’s 

average monthly withdrawals ranged from 7,380 to 10,040 

Mgal/d and Indiana’s ranged from 5,520 to 7,510 Mgal/d. 

Thermoelectric-power consumptive use varies by facility 

cooling type (0 to 25 percent median). Once-through cooling 

facilities have low consumptive-use coefficients (less than 2 

percent), whereas closed-loop cooling has higher consumptive use (median of 25 percent). Facilities with both types 

of cooling and all facilities overall for Ohio had a median 

consumptive use coefficient of 2 percent. The U.S. Department of Energy collects consumptive-use rates from most 

thermoelectric-powerplants and, because the data are facility 

specific, may be less uncertain than estimates based on general 

consumptive-use coefficients.

Irrigation withdrawals were mostly in May through October. Indiana had about three times the withdrawals of Ohio, 

mostly as crop irrigation. More acres were irrigated for corn 

and soybean crops in Indiana in 2002 (284,876 acres) than in 

Ohio (4,865 acres) (National Agricultural Statistic Service, 

2008). Of the many golf courses, nurseries, and farms in Ohio, 

irrigation consumptive-use coefficients were calculated from 

only 58 golf course records and 62 records, owing in part to 

possible confusion about State reporting requirements and 

instructions. The median golf-course irrigation coefficient 

was 77 percent, and the median nursery and crop irrigation 

coefficient was 78 percent; however, the June to September 

consumptive-use coefficients ranged from 80 to 84 percent. 

These coefficients should be used with caution until a more 

scientific basis is available for understanding the ranges of 

irrigation consumptive-use coefficients. Studies that determine the surface-water runoff and groundwater recharge after 

irrigation, could be used to compute irrigation consumptiveuse coefficients. In addition, studies that document irrigation 

purposes, practices, methods, and environmental conditions 

in detail may assist in specifying better guidance on selecting 

ranges on irrigation consumptive-use coefficients.

Average monthly withdrawals for livestock, aquaculture, 

and mining water-use categories varied considerably throughout the year and differed somewhat between Ohio and Indiana. 

The livestock monthly withdrawals were virtually constant 

for Ohio but the monthly pattern was varied for Indiana and 

depended on the type of facility. Aquaculture withdrawals 

appeared to correlate with growing seasons and/or aeration 

of ponds during the winter months. Mining withdrawals were 

larger in April than expected, possibly because of dewatering. The RW method was used to calculate consumptive-use 

coefficients for livestock, aquaculture, and mining water-use 

categories, but the values should be used with caution because 

records for these categories were scarce. Median annual 

consumptive-use coefficients were 76 percent for Livestock, 0 

percent for aquaculture, and 10 percent for mining.
66 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Water-resource planners use water-withdrawal, returnflow, and consumptive-use data to understand the effects of 

human use of water on the hydrologic system. The availability of water-use data limits our ability to understand the 

effects of water use on the hydrologic system in real time. 

Among the many state agencies nationwide that are responsible for compiling water-use data, agency programs differ 

substantially regarding what data are collected, how data are 

organized, how often the data are collected, and when data 

are made available to the public. Monthly data are of great 

value for understanding the effect of human activity in areas 

where there may be potential water shortages or water-quality 

stress on aquatic life. These periods tend to be in the summer 

and early fall, when water temperatures are at maximum and 

streamflows and ground-water levels are at minimum. Summer months and early fall (June, July, August, and September) 

are also when water withdrawals for most water-use categories 

are at their highest (figs. 29 and 30).

In terms of maximum accuracy and minimal uncertainty, 

use of available withdrawal, return-flow, and consumptiveuse data reported by facilities and data estimated from similar 

facilities is preferable over estimates based on data for a 

particular water-use category or groups of water-use categories. If monthly withdrawal, return flow, and consumptive 

use data are few and limited, monthly patterns described in 

this report may be used as a basis of estimation, but the level 

of uncertainty may be a greater than for the other estimation 

methods. Annual and monthly withdrawal data can be estimated by using median withdrawal rates and monthly percentages of annual withdrawals. Return flow and consumptive-use 

estimates can be estimated by using withdrawal data and 

consumptive-use coefficients.

Acknowledgments

The author appreciates the assistance of Donna Runkle, Don 

Arvin, and Cheryl Buchwald of the USGS for discussing 

methods and checking numbers. The author acknowledges 

Paul Spahr of ODNR for his work on the Ohio Water Withdrawal Program. Finally, the author thanks Laura Simonson, 

Dan Button, Rich Frehs, and Mike Eberle of the USGS for 

assistance with illustrations for this publication.

References Cited

American Society of Civil Engineers, 1973, Consumptive 

use of water and irrigation water requirements: New York, 

Technical Committee on Irrigation Water Requirements of 

the Irrigation and Drainage Division of the American Society of Civil Engineers, 215 p. 

CH2M Hill, 2003, Industrial Water Management: A systems 

approach (2d ed.): New York, Center for Waste Reduction 

Technologies, American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 

p. 48–52.

Dziegielewski, Ben; Bik, Thomas; Usama, Alqalawi; Mubako, 

Stanley; Eidem, Nathan; and Bloom, Shauna, 2006, Water 

use benchmarks for thermoelectric power generation: 

Accessed November 5, 2007, at http://www.geog.siu.edu/

geography_info/research/documents/ThermoReport.pdf

Government of Canada and the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office, 1995, The 

Great Lakes—An environmental atlas and resource book 

(3d ed.): Toronto, Ontario, and Chicago, Ill., 46 p. 

Grannemann, N.G., and Reeves, H.W., 2005, Great Lakes 

Basin water availability and use: U.S. Geological Survey 

Fact Sheet 2005–3113, 4 p. 

Great Lakes Commission, 2003, Water Resources Management Decision Support System for the Great Lakes—Status 

of data and information on water resources, water use, and 

related ecological impacts: Ann Arbor, Mich., final report, 

chap. 3, p. 47–68, accessed July 30, 2006, at http://www.glc.

org/wateruse/wrmdss/finalreport/pdf/WR-Ch.3-2003.pdf

Great Lakes Commission, 2005, Annual reports from the 

Great Lakes Regional Water Use Database Repository, representing 1998 to 2002 water-use data: Ann Arbor, Mich., 

accessed May 31, 2006, at http://www.glc.org/wateruse/

database/downloads.html

Horn, M.A.; Moore, R.B.; Hayes, Laura; and Flanagan, S.M., 

2008, Methods for and estimates of 2003 and projected 

water use in the Seacoast region, southeastern New Hampshire: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations 

Report 2007–5157, 87 p., plus 2 apps. on CD-ROM.

Hutson, S.S., Barber, N.L., Kenny, J.F., Linsey, K.S., Lumia, 

D.S., and Maupin, M.A., 2004, Estimated use of water in 

the United States in 2000: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 

1268, 46 p.

Hutson, S.S., Koroa, M.C., and Murphree, C.M., 2004, 

Estimated use of water in the Tennessee River watershed in 

2000 and projections of water use to 2030: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 03–4302, 

89 p., accessed July 30, 2006, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/

wri034302/PDF/wrir034302part2.pdf

Indiana Department of Natural Resources, 2007, State of Indiana Water withdrawal database, accessed September, 2007 

at http://www.in.gov/dnr/water/water_availability/SWWF/

index.html
References Cited 67

International Joint Commission, 2004, Protection of the waters 

of the Great Lakes—Review of the recommendations in 

the February 2000 report: 20 p., accessed June 15, 2006, at 

http://www.ijc.org/php/publications/pdf/ID1560.pdf

Kaufman, Alvin, 1967, Water use in the mineral industry: 

Transactions of the Society of Mining Engineers, AIME, 

v. 238, p. 83–90.

Kaufman, Alvin, and Nadler, Mildred, 1966, Water use in the 

mineral industry, 1963: U.S. Bureau of Mines Information 

Circular 8285, 58 p.

Kite, Geoff, and Droogers, Peter, 2000, Comparing estimates 

of actual evapotranspiration from satellites, hydrological 

models, and field data—A case study from Western Turkey: 

Colombo, Sri Lanka, International Water Management Institute, Research Report 42. 

LaTour, J.K., 1991, Determination of water use in Rockford 

and Kankakee areas, Illinois: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 90–4166, 70 p.

Midwest Regional Climate Center, 2008, Online precipitation 

and temperature data, available at http://mcc.sws.uiuc.edu/

Mullaney, J.R., 2004, Water use, ground-water recharge and 

availability, and quality of water in the Greenwich area, 

Fairfield County, Connecticut and Westchester County, New 

York, 2000–2002: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 03–4300, 64 p.

National Agriculture Statistics Service, 2008, 2002 Census 

of Agriculture Interactive Statistical Map, Acres irrigated, 

accessed November 2008 at http://www.nass.usda.gov/

Data_and_Statistics/SVG/index.asp

National Climatic Data Center, 2005, Climatological data, 

Ohio—Annual summary: Asheville, N.C., p. 4–5.

Ohio Department of Natural Resources, 2008, Water withdrawal registration program database: March 2008 version.

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 2008, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Compliance 

System Access database.

Pebbles, Victoria, 2003, Measuring and estimating consumptive use of the Great Lakes water: Ann Arbor, Mich., Great 

Lakes Commission, prepared in cooperation with the Water 

Withdrawal Subcommittee of the Water Resources Decision 

Support System Project, 18 p.

Prism Group, 2006a, Minimum temperature—Annual climatology map (1971–2000): Oregon State University, accessed 

Oct. 13, 2006, at http://www.ocs.orst.edu/prism/products/

viewer.phtml?file=/pub/prism/us_30s/graphics/tmin/

Normals/us_tmin_1971_2000.14.png&year=1971_2000&v

artype=tmin&month=14&status=final

Prism Group, 2006b, Precipitation—Annual climatology map 

(1971–2000): Oregon State University, accessed Oct. 13, 

2006, at http://www.ocs.orst.edu/prism/products/viewer.

phtml?file=/pub/prism/us_30s/graphics/ppt/Normals/

us_ppt_1971_2000.14.png&year=1971_2000&vartype=ppt

&month=14&status=final

Quan, C.K., 1988, Water use in the domestic nonfuel minerals 

industry: U.S. Bureau of Mines Information Circular 9196, 

62 p.

Shaffer, K.H., 2008, Consumptive water use in the Great 

Lakes Basin: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2008–

3032, 6 p.

Shaffer, K.H., and Runkle, D.L., 2007, Consumptive water–

use coefficients for the Great Lakes Basin and climatically 

similar areas: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5197, 191 p.

Shiklomanov, I.A., and Rodda, J.C., 2003, World water 

resources at the beginning of the 21st century: Cambridge 

U.K., Cambridge University Press [for] UNESCO, 435 p.

Solley, W.B., Pierce, R.R., and Perlman, H.A., 1998, Estimated use of water in the United States in 1995; U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1200, 71 p.

Stuckey, M.H., 2008, Development of the Water-Analysis 

Screening Tool used in the initial screening for the Pennsylvania State Water Plan update of 2008: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 2008–1106, 9 p.

Torcellini, P., Long, N., and Judkoff, R., 2003, Consumptive 

water use for U.S. power production: Golden, Colo., U.S. 

Department of Energy, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, NREL/TP–550–33905, 12 p.

U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1986, 1982 Census of manufactures: Washington, D.C., Subject series, Water Use in Manufacturing, MC82–S–6, 72 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2008, 2002 Census of Agriculture, accessed 

November 3, 2008, at http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/

Publications/2002/index.asp

U.S. Department of Energy, 2004, Year 2004 annual steamelectric plant operation and design data: Department of 

Energy Form EIA-767 data file, accessed January 5, 2006, 

at http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia767.html

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999, Safe Drinking 

Water Act—Glossary: EPA publication 810F99023, 4 p.

Water Resources Council, 1978, The Nation’s water resources, 

1975–2000: Washington, D.C., 4 v., 6 apps.

Wisconsin Public Service Commission, 2006, Monthly Wisconsin public supply data 1999-2004: Madison, Wis. 
68 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin
Glossary 69

Glossary

The terms in this glossary were compiled from numerous 

sources. Some definitions have been modified specifically 

in reference to this report and are not the only valid ones for 

those terms.

25th percentile The value in a rank of values below which 

one-fourth (25 percent) of the values fall. The 25th and 75th 

percentile together bracket half of the values.

75th percentile The value in a rank of values below which 

three-fourths (75 percent) of the values fall. The 25th and 75th 

percentile together bracket half of the values.

average The statistical mean of a set of numbers. 

climatically similar areas Basins, states, or countries that 

have climates similar to the Great Lakes Basin. 

commercial water use Water for motels, hotels, restaurants, 

office buildings, other commercial facilities, military and 

nonmilitary institutions—and in USGS water-use circulars for 

1990 and 1995, water for offstream fish hatcheries.

community water system A public water system that delivers water for human consumption through pipes and other 

constructed conveyances if such a system regularly serves at 

least 25 year-round residents or has at least 15 service connections used by year-round residents. Community water systems 

might serve towns, cities, military bases, apartment complexes, or mobile home parks (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1999). 

consumptive use Water that is evaporated, transpired, 

incorporated into products or crops, consumed by humans or 

livestock, or otherwise removed from the immediate water 

environment.

consumptive-use coefficient The percentage of water 

removed from the immediate environment by evaporation, 

transpiration, incorporation into products or crops, or 

consumption by humans or livestock. 

conveyance loss Either positive or negative. A negative 

conveyance loss is water that is lost in transit from a pipe, 

canal, conduit, or ditch by leakage or evaporation. A positive 

conveyance loss represents water that infiltrates a wastewater 

collection (sewer) system and is usually water from a high 

water table.

data availability By jurisdictions, water use data and the 

data quality differs significantly. This hinders our ability to 

compare data by jurisdictions and truly analyze water availability and consumptive use.

domestic water use Water used for all such indoor household purposes as drinking, food preparation, bathing, washing 

clothes and dishes, flushing toilets, and such outdoor purposes 

as watering lawns and gardens.

evaporation The change of water from a liquid form into a 

vapor state such as water evaporating from pools, large bodies 

of water, and runoff from car-washing or irrigation systems; 

also includes evaporation through humidifiers, heating and 

cooling processes in industrial facilities and thermoelectric 

plants. 

evapotranspiration A collective term used to include water 

discharged to the atmosphere as a result of plant transpiration 

and evaporation from soil and surface-water bodies. 

Great Lakes Basin In this report, the eight United States and 

two Canadian provinces that have all or part of their states or 

provinces in the Great Lakes Basin. It also includes any areas 

in the eight states and two provinces that may or may not be in 

the Great Lakes Basin.

industrial water use Water used for fabrication, processing, 

washing, and cooling, and includes such industries as chemical 

and allied products, food, mining, paper and allied products, 

petroleum refining, and steel.

irrigation water use Water that is applied by an irrigation 

system to assist in the growing of crops and pastures or to 

maintain vegetative growth in recreational lands such as parks 

and golf courses. 

livestock consumptive use Water used for processes like 

stock watering and facility and animal cleaning that is evaporated (on the ground, or off the skin) or is incorporated into 

products (milk, eggs, the animal itself). Some livestock water 

withdrawals may be returned to the hydrologic environment, 

but water quality, areal, and time aspects may limit the reuse 

of this water.

maximum The largest number in a group of values. 

median The point in a rank of values above and below which 

50 percent of the values fall. 

minimum The lowest number in a group of values. 

mining water use Water used for the extraction of naturally 

occurring minerals including solids, such as coal, sand, gravel, 

and other ores; liquids, such as crude petroleum; and gases, 

such as natural gas. Also includes uses associated with quarrying, milling, and other preparations customarily done at the 

mine site or as part of a mining activity. 

nonmetallic minerals Includes SIC 14 minerals like dimension stone, crushed and broken limestone, sand and gravel, 

construction sand and gravel, industrial sand among others. 

once-through thermoelectric power facility A facility that 

uses water only one time in the condenser-and reactor-cooling 

process before returning the water to a surface-water source. 

Although once-through cooling requires substantial water 

withdrawals, the consumption is low—usually less than 3 

percent (Solley and others, 1998).

other than once-through thermoelectric power facility A

facility that uses cooling towers or cooling ponds to recycle 

water repeatedly for condenser and reactor cooling. This type 
70 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

of facility typically uses less water than a once-through facility 

but has a higher percentage of consumptive use (evaporation), 

typically greater than 60 percent (Solley and others, 1998).

product incorporation Inclusion of water as a component of 

industrial, food, and beverage products. 

return flow Water that reaches a groundwater or surfacewater source after release from the point of use and thus 

becomes available for further use. 

return flow method Water withdrawal data and return flow 

data used to compute consumptive use. Return flow data is 

subtracted from water withdrawal data to compute consumptive use and then divided by the water withdrawal data to 

compute the consumptive use coefficient (multiplied by 100) 

for percent.

standard industrial classification (SIC) codes Four-digit 

codes established by the Office of Management and Budget, 

published in 1987, and used in the classification of establishments by type of activity in which they are engaged.

summer increase The amount of summer months’ water 

withdrawals that is greater than the average winter rate of 

withdrawals. 

summer months For this publication, refers to May through 

October.

thermoelectric-power water use Water used in the process 

of generating electricity with steam-driven turbine generators. 

time and areal variability Water is found in the hydrologic 

cycle in different locations on earth as water, precipitation, 

or condensation. Water that is removed from an environment 

might take days, months, years, or millions of years to return 

to that location, if it ever returns. At what specific timeframe is 

the water considered “consumed” versus still being used and 

returnable for reuse.

transfer Conveyance of water that occurs during distribution 

or collection of water and sewage.

transpiration The process in which water is absorbed by 

plants, usually from the roots and evaporated into the atmosphere from the plant surface. Transpiration occurs in all types 

of plants including crops, grass (lawns, golf courses), landscaping plants, and nursery plants.

individual record A combination of facility and water.

water balance The mathematical equation of the inflows, 

outflows, and change in storage of water in a given area 

(Inflows = Outflows + Change in storage).

water-use category The type of specific use (facility or 

consumer) for which water is withdrawn (for example, public 

supply, irrigation, industrial, thermoelectric power).

water-quality aspects of consumptive use The degradation 

of water quality of the returned water limits the reuse of the 

water.

water transfer Water that is withdrawn might be returned 

to a different water body, or basin (this is a transfer). This 

becomes complex because the water is no longer available for 

use at the original environment (body of water, basin), but is 

available for use somewhere else (water is transferred).

withdrawal Removal of water from either a surface-water or 

groundwater source.

winter base-rate method Method used to estimate consumptive use and monthly consumptive-use coefficients. 

winter months For this publication, refers to November 

through April.
Appendix 1

Tables

1–1. Scope of work for initial U.S. Geological Survey study of consumptive-use coefficients in the Great Lakes and climatically similar areas (Shaffer and Runkle, 2007)

1–2. Consumptive-use coefficient statistics for Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin, the Great 

Lakes Basin, climatically similar areas, and the world, by water-use category

Figures

1–1. The Great Lakes surface-water basin, the Great Lakes States and Provinces, and 

states considered climatically similar

1–2. Domestic and public supply consumptive-use coefficients, from various sources 

for Great Lakes States

1–3. Industrial consumptive-use coefficients from various sources for Great Lakes States.

1–4. Thermoelectric power consumptive-use coefficients from various sources for 

Great Lakes States

1–5. Irrigation consumptive-use coefficients from various sources for Great Lakes States
72 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 1–1. Scope of work for initial U.S. Geological Survey study of consumptive-use coefficients in the Great Lakes and climatically 

similar areas (Shaffer and Runkle, 2007).

Scope of Work Explanation

Validity of coefficients The intent of Shaffer and Runkle (2007) was to simply compile consumptive-use coefficients 

from publications, rather than determine the validity of the coefficients. The information 

in the annotated bibliography describes the coefficients and presents some of the methods 

and assumptions used by the source to determine the coefficients. Many references did not 

include an approach or methodology for their consumptive-use data or coefficients.

Great Lakes Basin Shaffer and Runkle (2007) compared two main areas: the Great Lakes Basin and climatically 

similar areas to the Great Lakes Basin in North America. The Great Lakes Basin (fig. 1) 

includes parts of Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, the entire state of Michigan, and parts of Ontario and Quebec. 

Geographic area Shaffer and Runkle (2007) found that, in many publications, consumptive-use values or coefficients were determined for the entire state or province and not just the Great Lakes Basin 

portion. The coefficients from these publications were assumed to be representative of the 

Great Lakes Basin because they could not be separated by river basin or water-resources 

region. The state- or province-based coefficients were identified as such in the text, figures, 

and tables.

Climatically similar areas Consumptive use and consumptive-use coefficients are a function of climate, economics, and 

culture. Choice of the climatically similar states (fig. 2) was based on patterns of temperature and precipitation (Prism Group, 2006a, b), water-resources regions (Solley and 

others, 1998), comparable percent consumptive loss for water-resources regions (Shaffer 

and Runkle, 2007; fig. 3), and water use in the state. Hutson, Koroa, and Murphree (2004) 

found that six water-resources regions (Great Lakes, Mid-Atlantic, New England, Ohio, 

Tennessee, and Upper Mississippi) had comparable percentages of consumptive losses 

(Shaffer and Runkle, 2007; fig. 4). These water-resources regions (fig. 4) and the major 

states in these regions (Shaffer and Runkle, 2007; fig. 2) are considered part of the scope 

of this report. These states have annual precipitation of 28–60 in. (1971–2000) and average minimum temperatures of 21 to 49°F (1971 to 2000; Prism Group, 2006a, b). States 

south of Missouri, Tennessee, and Virginia had average minimum temperatures greater 

than 49°F (Prism Group, 2006a). States west of Minnesota, Iowa, and Missouri have areas 

with annual precipitation of less than 24 in. (from 1971 to 2000; Prism Group, 2006b) 

and many of these states reported irrigation as the primary water-use category (excluding 

thermoelectric power; Hutson, Barber, and others, 2004). 

World, continent, and country 

consumptive-use coefficients

As part of this report, a search for world, continent, and country consumptive-use coefficients was done. Only a few references were found, and they are included in this report as 

a basis of comparison with the coefficients of Great Lakes Basin and climatically similar 

areas. Most of these coefficients were geographically broad (large countries, continents, 

or the world), in areas of the world not climatically similar, and in countries with economic and cultural differences. Therefore, these references although not included with the 

climatically similar references, were kept in the report to broaden the understanding of the 

Great Lakes Basin and climatically similar areas consumptive-use coefficients. 

Agriculture modeling The terms “consumptive-use coefficient” and “consumptive crop irrigation coefficient” are 

used in relation to coefficients used in agriculture modeling to estimate evaporation and 

transpiration in crop irrigation (American Society of Civil Engineers, 1973; Kite and 

Droogers, 2000). These coefficients are not included in this document because almost 

all the references were in areas not climatically similar to the Great Lakes Basin and the 

primary water-use category for these areas was irrigation (excluding thermoelectric).

Evaporation losses Stream, lake, and reservoir evaporation losses were not addressed in this report. 

References Many publications included consumptive-use coefficients derived from another reference. 

References not adding value to the understanding of consumptive-use coefficients were 

not included in the report. References using a coefficient from another reference or combination of other references to compute consumptive use were included in the report and 

statistical computations if they fit the geographical area and timeframe of the statistics. 

Consumptive use and water use Some publications use the words “consumptive use” to average “water use” (or water 

withdrawals). In this report, water use is defined as water that is withdrawn for a specific 

purpose like irrigation, industrial processing, public supply, or thermoelectric power. 
Appendix 1 73

Table 1–2. Consumptive-use coefficient statistics for Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin, the Great Lakes Basin, climatically similar areas, 

and the world, by water-use category.—Continued

[Great Lakes Basin refers to basins, parts of states, and states in the Great Lakes Basin. Climatically similar areas are basins and states with climatically 

similar areas to the Great Lakes Basin. Great Lakes and climatically similar references are the combination of references from these two areas. References 

are only from publications after either 1975 (mining and commercial), 1980 (industrial, irrigation, thermoelectric, livestock), or 1985 (domestic and public 

supply) and do not include all of Canada coefficients, all of the United States coefficients, or continent coefficients (excluding Europe) because these have 

areas that are not climatically similar to the Great Lakes Basin. Minimum (min), median, maximum (max), 25th percentile, and 75th percentile are in percent 

and rounded to the nearest whole number. N is the number of references in the statistical analysis. “RW” means computed from return-flow and withdrawal 

data. ”WBR” means computed from the winter-base-rate method. “SIC” means computed from Standard Industrial Classification code consumptive-use coefficients. WBR statistics are computed using only facilities with monthly annual average withdrawals greater than Dec.–Feb. monthly average withdrawals. 

Shaffer and Runkle (2007) coefficients are from table 43 on page 74.]

Geographical area Reference

or method Min 25th Median 75th Max N

Domestic and Public Supply

Great Lakes Basin Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

0 10 12 15 74 161

Climatically similar areas Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

6 10 15 20 70 68

Great Lakes and climatically 

similar references

Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

0 10 13 15 74 229

World Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

14 16 16 18 19 4

Indiana WBR 0 5 8 14 100 2,339

Ohio1 WBR 0 3 7 12 100 2,672

Wisconsin WBR 0 5 9 13 86 2,913

Industrial

Great Lakes Basin Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

0 7 10 14 35 122

Climatically similar areas Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

0 4 10 13 34 97

Great Lakes and climatically 

similar references

Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

0 6 10 13 35 219

World Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

9 10 10 11 11 4

Ohio RW 0 0 10 38 100 471

Ohio SIC 0 7 12 20 81 1,962

Indiana SIC 0 4 11 20 67 1,149

Thermoelectric

Great Lakes Basin Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

0 1 2 2 21 141

Climatically similar areas Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

0 0 2 4 75 75

Great Lakes and climatically 

similar areas

Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

0 1 2 3 75 216

Ohio RW 0 0 2 16 100 289

Irrigation

Great Lakes Basin Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

70 90 90 96 100 95

Climatically similar areas Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

37 90 100 100 100 75

Great Lakes and climatically 

similar References

Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

37 90 91 100 100 170

World Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

65 65 68 72 78 4

Ohio, golf-course irrigation RW 45 63 77 97 99 59

Ohio, nursery and crop irrigation RW 23 65 78 89 99 62
74 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 1–2. Consumptive-use coefficient statistics for Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin, the Great Lakes Basin, climatically similar areas, 

and the world, by water-use category.—Continued

[Great Lakes Basin refers to basins, parts of states, and states in the Great Lakes Basin. Climatically similar areas are basins and states with climatically 

similar areas to the Great Lakes Basin. Great Lakes and climatically similar references are the combination of references from these two areas. References 

are only from publications after either 1975 (mining and commercial), 1980 (industrial, irrigation, thermoelectric, livestock), or 1985 (domestic and public 

supply) and do not include all of Canada coefficients, all of the United States coefficients, or continent coefficients (excluding Europe) because these have 

areas that are not climatically similar to the Great Lakes Basin. Minimum (min), median, maximum (max), 25th percentile, and 75th percentile are in percent 

and rounded to the nearest whole number. N is the number of references in the statistical analysis. “RW” means computed from return-flow and withdrawal 

data. ”WBR” means computed from the winter-base-rate method. “SIC” means computed from Standard Industrial Classification code consumptive-use coefficients. WBR statistics are computed using only facilities with monthly annual average withdrawals greater than Dec.–Feb. monthly average withdrawals. 

Shaffer and Runkle (2007) coefficients are from table 43 on page 74.]

Geographical area Reference

or method Min 25th Median 75th Max N

Livestock

Great Lakes Basin Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

01 80 83 90 100 85

Climatically similar areas Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

102 86 100 100 100 73

Great Lakes and climatically 

similar areas

Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

01,2 80 90 100 100 158

World (Agriculture) Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

65 65 68 72 78 4

Ohio RW 12 19 76 93 100 18

Commercial

Great Lakes Basin Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

4 8 10 15 26 29

Climatically similar areas Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

3 8 10 13 33 61

Great Lakes and climatically 

similar areas

Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

3 8 10 13 33 90

Ohio RW 0 0 17 57 97 196

Ohio WBR 0 9 36 100 100 612

Indiana WBR 0 9 34 99 100 1,450

Mining

Great Lakes Basin Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

0 7 10 25 58 58

Climatically similar areas Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

0 10 14 20 86 83

Great Lakes and climatically 

similar areas

Shaffer and Runkle, 

2007

0 8 13 22 86 141

Ohio RW 0 0 10 30 100 418

1

 The livestock low coefficient minimum (0 percent) is from Great Lakes Commission (2005), in which Minnesota reported 0.25 Mgal/d total withdrawn in 

1998 and 0.0 Mgal/d consumptive-use. The next lowest coefficient for the Great Lakes basin was 66 percent. 

2

 The livestock low minimum coefficients are from Solley and others (1988) and may result from adding animal specialties (including fish farming) into the 

livestock water-use category. In USGS reports previous and subsequent to Solley and others, fish farming was in different water-use categories.
Appendix 1 75

!

!

!

!! !

!

!! ! !

!

!

!!

!! !

!

! ! !

!

!

! ! !

!!

!!

!! !

!

!!

! !

! !

!!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!!

!!

!! ! !

!!

! ! ! !

!!

!

!

!

! !!

!

!

! !

! !

!

!

!! !! !!

! !

! ! !!

! !

! !

!!

!! !!

!

!

!! ! !

! !

!

!

!!

! !

!!

0 180 360 Kilometers

0 150 300 Miles

MINNESOTA

50°

45°

40°

35°

OHIO INDIANA

MICHIGAN

WISCONSIN

ILLINOIS

MISSOURI

KENTUCKY

TENNESSEE NORTH CAROLINA

VIRGINIA

WEST

VIRGINIA

PENNSYLVANIA

NEW YORK

HAMPSHIRE

VERMONT

MAINE

MASSACHUSETTS

ISLAND

NEW

JERSEY

CONNECTICUT

DELAWARE

MARYLAND

CANADA

ONTARIO

QUEBEC

Base from U.S. Geological Survey 1:2,000,000 Digital Data; Albers Equal-Area 

Conic Projection, -5 rotation; standard parallels 29 30' and 45 30', central meridian -96 o o o

EXPLANATION

Great Lakes

Great Lakes States and 

Provinces

Climatically similar

states

Great Lakes Basin

boundary

IOWA RHODE

o

90° 80° 70°

Figure1-1. The Great Lakes surface-water basin, the Great Lakes States and Provinces, and states

considered climatically similar. Figure 1–1. The Great Lakes surface-water basin, the Great Lakes States and Provinces, and states 

considered climatically similar.
76 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

5

34

20

10

10

15

15

15

70°

80°

80°

90°

90°

50° 50°45° 45°40° 40°

35° 35°

Figure 1-2. Domestic and public supply consumptive-use coefficients, from various sources for Great Lakes States.

Data from Solley and others, 1998, Estimated use of water in the 

United States in 1995. (The consumptive-use coefficient is for the entire state for combined self-supplied and publicly-supplied 

domestic.)

Data from Pebbles, 2003, Measuring and estimating consumptive

use of the Great Lakes water. (The consumptive-use

coefficient is for the Great Lakes Basin part of the state and is 

for both public supply and domestic water-use categories.)

A

70°

80°

80°

90°

90°

50°45°40°35°

10-15

10

10-15

10-15

B

10-15

10-15

15

10

70°

70°

80°

80°

90°

90°

45°

45°

40°

40°

35°

35°

70°

70°

80°

80°

90°

90°

50°

50°

45° 45°40° 40°35° 35°

C

D

E

8

7 6

Winter-base rate method; data from 1999-2004 water-withdrawal 

programs for Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin. Consumptive-use 

coefficient is for public supply water use. Summer consumptive-use

coefficients are 19 (Indiana), 16 (Ohio), and 20 percent 

(Wisconsin).

12 For all Great LakesStates and

provinces

15 For allclimatically

similar states

Data from Shaffer and Runkle, 2007, Consumptive water-use coefficients

for the Great Lakes Basin and climatically similar areas (medians). 

Consumptive-use coefficients are for domestic and public supply water-use categories.

19

16

13

Studies using the winter-base rate method in various areas and

regions for domestic consumptive-use coefficients. (Horn and 

others, 2008; Latour, 1991; Mullaney, 2004).

CANADA

Minnesota

Iowa

Tennessee

Missouri

Wisconsin

Illinois

Indiana Ohio

Michigan

Kentucky

Virginia

WestVirginia

Pennsylvania

New York

Maryland

Delaware

New Jersey

Connecticut

Rhode Island

Massachusetts

Vermont

New

Hampshire

Maine

Minnesota

Iowa

Tennessee

Missouri

Wisconsin

Illinois

Indiana Ohio

Michigan

Kentucky

Virginia

WestVirginia

Pennsylvania

New York

New Jersey

Delaware

Maryland

Connecticut

Rhode Island

Massachusetts

Vermont Maine

New

Hampshire

Minnesota

Iowa

Tennessee

Missouri

Wisconsin

Illinois

Indiana

Ohio

Michigan

Kentucky Virginia

WestVirginia

Pennsylvania

New York

Maryland

Delaware

New Jersey

Connecticut

Rhode 

Island

Massachusetts

Vermont

New

Hampshire

Minnesota

Iowa

Tennessee

Missouri

Wisconsin

Illinois

Indiana Ohio

Michigan

Kentucky

Virginia

WestVirginia

Pennsylvania

New York

Maryland

Delaware

New Jersey

Connecticut

Rhode

Island

Massachusetts

Vermont

New

Hampshire

2

Wisconsin

Indiana Ohio

UNITED STATES

Map B

5-1010-1515

Maps A, C, D, and E

5 - 1011 - 1415 - 34

CANADA CANADA

CANADA

UNITED STATES UNITED STATES

UNITED STATES

Explanation

Consumptive-use coefficients (in percent)

Figure 1–2. Domestic and public supply consumptive-use coefficients from various sources for Great Lakes States.
Appendix 1

77

8

8

5

13

16

12

11 10

70°

80°

80°

90°

90°

50° 50°45° 45°40° 40°35° 35°

10

25 13

10

12

6

20 10

70°

80°

80°

90°

90°

8

14

8

6

16

11

10

21

70°

80°

80°

90°

90°

50° 50°45° 45°40° 40°35° 35°

Figure 1-3. Industrial consumptive-use coefficients from various sources for Great Lakes States.

Data from U.S. Bureau of Census, 1986, 1982 Census of

manufactures: Water use in manufacturing. (The consumptive-use

coefficient is for the entire state.)

Data from the Great Lakes Commission, 2005, Annual reports,

1998-2002. (The consumptive-use coefficient is for the Great Lakes

Basin part of the state; Illinois coefficient is for 2000.)

Data from Solley and others, 1998, Estimated use of water in the 

United States in 1995. (The consumptive-use coefficient is for the

entire state.)

A B C

70°

70°

80°

80°

90°

90°

50°45°

45°

40°

40°

35°

35°

12

D E F

10

10

10

SIC-code method; data from 1999-2004 water withdrawal programs

from Ohio and Indiana.

Return-flow method; data from 1999-2004 water withdrawal program

for Ohio.

Data from Shaffer and Runkle, 2007, Consumptive water-use

coefficients for the Great Lakes Basin and climatically similar 

areas (medians).

Consumptive-use coefficents (in percent)

Maps A, B, C, D, and E

EXPLANATION

5 - 1112 - 1819 - 25

Map F

Great Lakes States and Provinces

Climatically similar states

Iowa

Missouri

Wisconsin

Illinois Indiana

Michigan

Ohio

Pennsylvania

New York

Vermont

New Hampshire

Maine

Tennessee

Kentucky Virginia

West

Virginia

Maryland

Delaware

New Jersey

Rhode Island

Connecticut

Massachusetts

CANADA

Iowa

Missouri

Wisconsin

Illinois Indiana

Michigan

Ohio

Pennsylvania

New York

Vermont

New Hampshire

Tennessee

Kentucky Virginia

West

Virginia

Maryland

Delaware

New Jersey

Rhode 

Island

Connecticut

Mass. Iowa

Missouri

Minnesota

Illinois

Indiana

Michigan

Ohio

Pennsylvania

New York

Vermont

New Hampshire

Tennessee

Kentucky Virginia

West

Virginia

Maryland

Delaware

New Jersey

Rhode 

Island

Connecticut

Mass.

Iowa

Missouri

Wisconsin

Illinois Indiana

Michigan

Ohio

Pennsylvania

New York

Vermont

New Hampshire

Tennessee

Kentucky Virginia

West

Virginia

Maryland

Delaware

New Jersey

Rhode 

Island

Connecticut

Mass.

90

CANADA

Del.

Minnesota

Wisconsin

UNITED STATES

Ohio

Ohio Indiana

Minnesota

Minnesota

11

CANADA CANADA

UNITED STATES UNITED STATES UNITED STATES

For all Great Lakes 

states and 

provinces

For all

climatically 

similar areas

Figure 1–3. Industrial consumptive-use coefficients from various sources for Great Lakes States.
78 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

1 3 1

1

2

2

NA

2

70°

80°

80°

90°

90°

45° 45°40° 40°

2

1

2

2

4 4

2

2

70°

80°

80°

90°

90°

45°40°

Figure 1-4. Thermoelectric power consumptive-use coefficients from various sources 

for Great Lakes States.

Consumptive-use coefficents (in percent)

Data from Great Lakes Commission, 2005, Annual reports

1998-2002. (The consumptive-use coefficient is for the 

Great Lakes Basin part of the state; NA- Pennsylvania 

had no thermoelectric withdrawals or consumptive-use data.

Adapted from Shaffer and Runkle, 2007; appendix tables 

3-4 and 3-5.)

Data from Solley and others, 1998, Estimated use of water for the 

United States in 1995. (The consumptive-use coefficient is for the 

A

entire state.)

B

70°

70°

80°

80°

90°

90°

50° 50°45° 45°40° 40°35° 35°

Minnesota

Iowa

Tennessee

Missouri

Wisconsin

Illinois

Indiana Ohio

Michigan

Kentucky Virginia

WestVirginia

Pennsylvania

New York

Maryland

Delaware

New Jersey

Connecticut

Rhode Island

Massachusetts

Vermont Maine

New

Hampshire

C

2

2

2

Return-flow method, 1999-2004 water withdrawal program

for Ohio.

Data from Shaffer and Runkle, 2007, Consumptive

water-use coefficients for the Great Lakes Basin

and climatically similar areas (medians.)

EXPLANATION

123 - 4

Minnesota

Iowa

Missouri

Wisconsin

Illinois Indiana Ohio

Michigan

Kentucky Virginia

WestVirginia

Pennsylvania

New York

Maryland

New Jersey

Delaware

Connecticut

Rhode 

Island

Mass.

Vermont

New

Hampshire

Minnesota

Iowa

Missouri

Wisconsin

Illinois Indiana Ohio

Michigan

WestVirginia

Pennsylvania

New York

Maryland

New Jersey

Delaware

Connecticut

Rhode 

Island

Mass.

Vermont

New

Hampshire

Ohio

Great Lakes states and provincesClimatically similar areas

CANADA

UNITED STATES UNITED STATES UNITED STATES

CANADA CANADA

For all Great Lakes 

States and provinces

For all climatically 

similar areas

Figure 1–4. Thermoelectric power consumptive-use coefficients from various sources for Great Lakes States.
Appendix 1

79

90 90

70

90

90

90 90

90

70°

80°

80°

90°

90°

50° 50°45° 45°40° 40°

89

89

87

96

95

100 90

100

70°

80°

80°

90°

90°

50°45°40°

Figure 1-5. Irrigation consumptive-use coefficients from various sources for Great Lakes States.

Data from Pebbles, 2003, Measuring and estimating 

consumptive use of the Great Lakes water. (The 

consumptive-use coefficient is for the Great Lakes 

Basin part of the state.)

Data from Solley and others, 1998, Estimated use of water

in the United States in 1995. (The consumptive-use coefficient is for the entire state.)

A B

70°

70°

80°

80°

90°

90°

50° 50°45° 45°40° 40°35° 35°

Minnesota

Iowa

Missouri

Wisconsin

Illinois Indiana

Michigan

Ohio

Pennsylvania

New York

Vermont

New Hampshire

Maine

Tennessee

Kentucky Virginia

West

Virginia

Maryland

Delaware

New Jersey

Rhode Island

Connecticut

Massachusetts

90

100

C

Data from Shaffer and Runkle, 2007, Consumptive water-use

coefficients for the Great Lakes Basin and climatically 

similar areas (medians).

Return flow method, 1999-2004 water withdrawal program for 

Ohio. Both golf-course irrigatin and crop and nursery 

irrigation were 77 percent.

Iowa

Missouri

Wisconsin

Illinois Indiana Ohio

Michigan

Kentucky Virginia

WestVirginia

Pennsylvania

New York

Maryland

Delaware

New Jersey

Connecticut

Rhode 

Island

Massachusetts

Vermont

New

Hampshire

Michigan

Iowa

Missouri

Wisconsin

Illinois Indiana

Michigan

Ohio Pennsylvania

New York

Vermont

New Hampshire

Kentucky Virginia

West

Virginia

Maryland

Delaware

New Jersey

Rhode 

Island

Massachusetts

Connecticut

90

Minnesota

CANADA

UNITED STATES

Ohio

77

D

EXPLANATION

Consumptive-use coefficents (in percent)

70-8788 - 9091 - 100

CANADA CANADA

UNITED STATES UNITED STATES

For all Great Lakes

States and provinces

For all 

climatically

similar areas

Figure 1–5. Irrigation consumptive-use coefficients from various sources for Great Lakes States.
80 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin
Appendix 2 81

Appendix 2

Tables

2–1. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana and 

Ohio commercial facilities, 1999–2004

2–2. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month by Indiana and 

Ohio industrial facilities, 1999– 2004

2–3. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month by Indiana 

public-supply facilities, 1999–2004

2–4. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month by Ohio publicsupply facilities, 1999–2004, for all facilities and years and for facilities without 

records where February withdrawals were greater than July withdrawals

2–5. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month by Wisconsin 

public-supply facilities, 1999–2004

2–6. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana and 

Ohio thermoelectric facilities, 1999–2004

2–7. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana and 

Ohio golf-course facilities, 1999–2004

2–8. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana 

crop and nursery irrigation facilities, 1999–2004

2–9. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana and 

Ohio livestock facilities, 1999–2004

2–10. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana 

livestock facilities, 1999–2004, seasonal facilities and all-year facilities

2–11. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana and 

Ohio aquacultural sites, 1999–2004. 

2–12. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana and 

Ohio mining facilities, 1999–2004
82 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 2–1. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana and 

Ohio commercial facilities, 1999–2004. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest tenth. Statistics based on 1,981 records for Indiana and 612 

records for Ohio.]

Month

Statistics

Indiana Ohio

25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile

25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile

January 0.9 6.9 8.7 0 6.4 8.5

February 0.8 6.7 8.4 0 6.4 8.3

March 2.2 7.2 8.8 0.2 6.9 8.3

April 4.1 7.8 9.1 3.0 7.7 8.6

May 6.6 8.5 10.6 7.3 8.7 10.9

June 5.4 8.4 12.0 7.4 8.7 13.1

July 5.7 8.9 15.3 7.0 9.5 14.3

August 7.1 9.1 14.5 8.3 10.1 15.4

September 7.7 9.2 11.8 7.9 9.0 11.8

October 5.5 8.3 10.0 5.5 8.3 9.4

November 2.4 7.0 8.5 0.6 6.3 8.3

December 1.4 6.4 8.3 0 6.3 8.3

Table 2–2. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month by Indiana and Ohio 

industrial facilities, 1999– 2004. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest tenth. Statistics are based on 2,091 records for Indiana and 1,188 

records for Ohio.]

Month

Statistics

Indiana Ohio

25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile

25th 

percentile Median

75th 

percentile

January 3.1 7.1 8.5 6.0 8.2 8.8

February 3.4 6.9 8.3 5.8 7.7 8.3

March 5.3 7.8 8.9 7.0 8.3 9.2

April 6.4 8.1 9.1 7.3 8.2 8.9

May 7.2 8.5 9.8 7.9 8.5 9.6

June 7.7 8.8 10.6 8.0 8.5 10.1

July 7.7 8.8 11.1 7.9 8.6 10.1

August 8.1 9.2 11.5 8.2 8.8 10.6

September 7.5 8.5 10.3 7.7 8.3 9.6

October 7.0 8.5 9.7 7.5 8.4 9.4

November 5.5 7.8 8.8 6.6 8.0 8.6

December 4.3 7.0 8.5 5.3 7.7 8.5
Appendix 2 83

Table 2–3. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per 

month by Indiana public-supply facilities, 1999–2004.

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest tenth. Statistics are based on 

2,939 records.]

Month

Statistics of monthly withdrawals, as a percentage of 

annual withdrawals

25th percentile Median 75th percentile

January 7.4 8.1 8.7

February 6.7 7.4 8.0

March 7.2 7.9 8.4

April 7.3 7.9 8.4

May 8.0 8.6 9.1

June 8.3 8.7 9.3

July 8.6 9.3 10.2

August 8.5 9.2 10.0

September 8.0 8.6 9.3

October 7.7 8.2 8.7

November 7.0 7.6 8.1

December 7.1 7.8 8.4

Table 2–4. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month by Ohio public-supply 

facilities, 1999–2004, for all facilities and years and for facilities without records where February 

withdrawals were greater than July withdrawals. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest tenth. There are 3,604 records for all facilities and 2,998 facilities 

where July withdrawals are greater than or equal to February withdrawals.]

Month

Statistics

All facilities

Facilities where July withdrawals were 

greater than or equal to February withdrawals

25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile

25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile

January 7.6 8.2 8.8 7.6 8.2 8.6

February 6.9 7.5 8.2 6.8 7.4 7.9

March 7.5 8.1 8.6 7.5 8.0 8.5

April 7.4 7.9 8.3 7.4 7.9 8.3

May 8.1 8.5 9.0 8.2 8.6 9.0

June 8.2 8.7 9.2 8.3 8.8 9.3

July 8.5 9.1 9.9 8.7 9.3 10.1

August 8.4 8.9 9.6 8.6 9.0 9.7

September 7.9 8.4 8.9 8.1 8.4 9.0

October 7.7 8.2 8.7 7.8 8.3 8.7

November 7.2 7.7 8.2 7.3 7.7 8.2

December 7.4 8.0 8.5 7.4 8.0 8.5
84 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 2–5. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per 

month by Wisconsin public-supply facilities, 1999–2004. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest tenth. Sites for which withdrawals were reported quarterly or annually were not included in the statistics. Statistics 

based on 3,373 records.]

Month

Statistics

25th percentile Median 75th percentile

January 7.4 7.9 8.4

February 6.7 7.2 7.8

March 7.3 7.9 8.3

April 7.3 7.8 8.2

May 8.0 8.4 8.9

June 8.2 8.6 9.1

July 8.9 9.6 10.5

August 8.6 9.3 10.1

September 8.0 8.5 9.2

October 7.8 8.2 8.6

November 7.1 7.5 8.0

December 7.2 7.7 8.2

Table 2–6. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana and Ohio 

thermoelectric facilities, 1999–2004. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest tenth. Statistics based on 197 records for Indiana and 289 for Ohio. ]

Month

Indiana Ohio

25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile

25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile

January 4.9 7.5 8.8 6.7 8.2 9.1

February 4.8 6.9 8.3 5.8 7.4 8.1

March 4.9 7.1 8.6 6.7 8.3 9.0

April 4.4 7.0 8.3 6.5 7.9 8.5

May 6.2 8.3 9.4 7.6 8.5 9.4

June 8.2 9.3 10.5 8.1 8.8 10.1

July 9.1 10.6 12.4 8.5 9.5 11.2

August 9.0 10.4 12.5 8.5 9.4 11.0

September 7.7 8.9 10.1 7.4 8.3 9.3

October 3.9 8.0 9.2 6.6 8.5 9.1

November 3.7 7.3 8.5 6.3 8.0 8.7

December 5.3 7.6 8.8 6.4 8.0 8.9
Appendix 2 85

Table 2–7. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana and Ohio golf-course 

facilities, 1999–2004. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest tenth. Statistics based on 1,487 records for Indiana and 2,616 for Ohio. ] 

Month

Statistics

Indiana Ohio

25th percentile Median 75th percentile 25th percentile Median 75th percentile

January 0 0 0 0 0 0

February 0 0 0 0 0 0

March 0 0 0 0 0 0

April 0 0.2 4.5 0 0 3.4

May 2.2 7.2 11.6 0 6.3 11.8

June 11.0 15.7 20.0 10.5 16.2 20.6

July 17.1 22.3 27.9 18.7 24.0 30.7

August 18.2 23.3 29.2 17.9 23.5 30.3

September 12.3 16.7 22.0 10.0 15.0 20.2

October 1.3 5.7 10.3 0 4.3 9.1

November 0 0 0.4 0 0 0

December 0 0 0 0 0 0
86 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 2–8. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana crop and 

nursery irrigation facilities, 1999–2004. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest tenth. Statistics based on 8,196 records for Indiana and 1,103 

for Ohio for Crop and nursery irrigation combined, 8,090 records for Indiana and 425 records for Ohio for crop irrigation, and 106 records for Indiana and 678 for Ohio for nursery irrigation.]

Month

Indiana Ohio

25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile

25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile

Crop and nursery irrigation combined

January 0 0 0 0 0 0.3

February 0 0 0 0 0 0.4

March 0 0 0 0 0 3.1

April 0 0 0 0 0.9 7.2

May 0 0 0 0 8.3 12.5

June 0 10.9 24.5 8.9 14.9 20.5

July 26.7 37.2 50 13.3 19.9 28.6

August 23.8 33.9 48.4 12.9 19.5 27.0

September 0 0 11.4 4.2 11.5 16.4

October 0 0 0 0 5.5 9.5

November 0 0 0 0 0 4.0

December 0 0 0 0 0 0.6

Crop irrigation

January 0 0 0 0 0 0.1

February 0 0 0 0 0 0.1

March 0 0 0 0 0 0.6

April 0 0 0 0 0 4.5

May 0 0 0 0 2.3 9.4

June 0 10.6 24.6 4.5 13.1 22.7

July 27.2 37.5 50.0 10.7 24.5 37.8

August 24.4 34.2 48.7 9.4 21.3 33.3

September 0 0 11.1 0 8.3 15.1

October 0 0 0 0 0 7.8

November 0 0 0 0 0 1.6

December 0 0 0 0 0 0.1

Nursery irrigation

January 0 0 0 0 0 0.4

February 0 0 0 0 0 0.6

March 0 0 6.2 0 0 4.0

April 0 5.7 9.4 0 3.8 8.1

May 0 9.3 12.8 5.0 10.0 13.1

June 9.3 12.8 17.9 11.2 15.4 20.0

July 9.3 14.3 23.9 13.9 18.5 24.7

August 11.5 14.9 23.8 13.7 18.9 25.0

September 9.8 12.9 21.3 8.9 12.8 16.8

October 2.0 8.6 12.8 1.3 7.0 11.0

November 0 2.5 7.0 0 0.6 4.7

December 0 0 0 0 0 0.9
Appendix 2 87

Table 2–9. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana and Ohio 

livestock facilities, 1999–2004. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest tenth. Indiana livestock statistics are based on 114 records. Ohio 

livestock statistics are based on 114 records.]

Month

Statistics

Indiana Ohio

25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile

25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile

January 1.4 7.4 8.3 7.4 8.3 8.5

February 5.2 7.6 8.3 7.2 7.9 8.3

March 4.8 7.9 8.3 7.6 8.3 8.5

April 2.9 7.8 8.3 7.7 8.2 8.3

May 7.0 8.3 8.7 8.3 8.4 8.7

June 7.9 8.5 9.2 8.2 8.3 8.9

July 8.3 8.9 10.5 8.3 8.5 9.4

August 8.3 8.9 12.2 8.3 8.5 9.4

September 7.2 8.4 8.9 8.1 8.3 8.8

October 6.8 8.3 8.5 8.1 8.3 8.6

November 6.6 8.0 8.3 7.9 8.3 8.4

December 6.7 8.0 8.3 7.7 8.3 8.5

Table 2–10. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana livestock 

facilities, 1999–2004, seasonal facilities and all-year facilities. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest tenth. The number of records were 88 for all-year facilities and 26 for 

seasonal facilities.]

Month

Statistics

Seasonal facilities All-year facilities

25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile

25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile

January 0 0 0 6.5 8.0 8.3

February 0 0 0 7.0 8.0 8.3

March 0 0 0 7.2 8.1 8.3

April 0 0 0 7.1 8.0 8.3

May 0 0 0 8.2 8.3 8.8

June 0 0 16.8 8.3 8.5 9.6

July 12.3 31.5 44.4 8.3 8.8 9.5

August 12.2 31.8 50.0 8.3 8.8 9.8

September 0 0 9.3 8.2 8.5 8.9

October 0 0 0 8.0 8.3 8.6

November 0 0 9.01 7.6 8.2 8.3

December 0 0 0 7.5 8.1 8.3

1

 The seasonal facilities included sites where withdrawals concluded in November and sites where withdrawals began in 

November.
88 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 2–12. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana and Ohio 

mining facilities, 1999–2004. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest tenth. Indiana statistics are based on 541 records, and Ohio statistics are based on 961 records.]

Month

Statistics

Indiana Ohio

25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile

25th 

percentile Median 75th percentile

January 0.0 3.9 7.9 0 4.8 8.3

February 0.0 5.0 7.8 0 5.3 8.2

March 5.4 8.1 9.4 4.6 8.2 9.1

April 7.7 9.3 11.1 8.0 8.9 10.9

May 8.3 9.9 12.0 8.3 9.6 11.5

June 8.2 9.9 11.8 8.2 9.3 11.4

July 8.0 9.7 11.9 8.0 9.1 11.3

August 7.8 9.8 12.1 8.0 9.2 11.8

September 7.4 9.3 11.4 8.0 9.0 11.1

October 7.8 9.6 11.6 7.9 8.9 11.5

November 6.5 8.2 9.5 6.9 8.3 9.9

December 3.3 6.0 8.3 4.4 6.9 8.5

Table 2–11. Statistics for the percentage of annual water withdrawn per month for Indiana and Ohio aquacultural 

sites, 1999–2004. 

[Statistics are in percent and are rounded to the nearest tenth. The number of records is 65 for both Ohio and Indiana.]

Month

Statistics

Instances of no 

withdrawals

Minimum 25th percentile Median 75th percentile Maximum

Indiana

January 11 0 6.2 8.4 9.3 30.7

February 12 0 4.7 7.5 8.2 12.1

March 2 0 7.5 8.5 10.8 42.0

April 0 4.0 8.2 9.9 13.3 35.2

May 3 0 5.7 8.5 9.7 20.8

June 0 5.0 8.1 9.0 13.6 32.6

July 6 0 5.0 7.2 8.5 24.5

August 6 0 6.7 7.5 8.5 16.9

September 0 2.4 6.1 7.8 8.3 14.9

October 0 2.8 6.1 7.8 8.7 14.9

November 3 0 5.7 7.8 8.5 20.0

December 9 0 4.6 8.3 8.8 19.3

Ohio

January 13 0 4.4 6.8 8.7 22.0

February 13 0 4.4 6.7 7.9 21.7

March 0 2.3 6.6 8.4 11.1 94.0

April 0 0.9 8.1 8.8 12.2 41.2

May 1 0 6.9 8.7 9.2 18.3

June 0 0.9 8.0 8.8 12.2 40.1

July 0 1.1 5.3 7.8 9.2 11.3

August 4 0 5.3 8.1 9.4 12.2

September 0 0.9 7.4 8.5 9.7 13.5

October 4 0 7.6 8.5 8.8 11.7

November 10 0 4.4 7.3 8.5 15.3

December 11 0 4.4 7.2 8.5 31.5
Appendix 3 89

Appendix 3

Table 3–1. Commercial withdrawals by SIC code for Ohio and Indiana, 1999–2004.—Continued

[Median consumptive-use coefficient and withdrawal range are rounded to two significant figures. Mgal/yr, million gallons per year.]

SIC code SIC description Number of 

records

Median annual 

withdrawal

(Mgal/yr)

Description of withdrawals

Annual

withdrawal

range 

(Mgal/yr)

0711 Soil preparation services 6 0.45 Withdrawals were from March to 

November.

0.08–0.70

0721 Crop planting, cultivating, 

and protecting

12 8.2 Withdrawals are mostly from March 

to October.

1.8–9.2

0723 Crop preparation services 

for market

6 1.5 Withdrawals are for July and August 

only.

0.97–17

0782 Lawn and garden services 6 5.9 Withdrawals varied by year but 

were usually June to October with 

occasional withdrawals in May, 

November, and December.

0.96–13

0971 Hunting and trapping1 34 86 Most of the withdrawals were concentrated August through November, 

even though some records listed 

withdrawals throughout the year. 

6.0–880

4011 Railroads, line-haul 

operating

6 100 Withdrawals were April through 

December with higher withdrawals 

June through September.

92–105

4221 Farm product warehousing 

and storage

7 0.30 Withdrawals were March through 

December.

0.25–0.56

4225 General warehousing and 

storage

6 2.3 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 1.4–3.8

4231 Freight trucking terminals 6 0.64 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 0.57–0.68

4581 Airports, flying fields, and 

airport terminal services

22 0.36 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 0.03-82

4613 Refined petroleum pipelines 6 11 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 6.2–15

4833 Television broadcasting 

station

15 0.08 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 0.0–79

4922 Natural gas transmission 6 0.10 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 0.05–0.23

4923 Natural gas transmission and 

distribution

18 0.16 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 0.05–1.1

4924 Natural gas distribution 12 0.23 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 0.16–0.38

4931 Electric and other service 

combined

4 2.9 Withdrawals varied by record.3 2.0–7.3

4939 Combination utilities2 6 0.03 Withdrawals varied monthly by 

record.

0.02–0.04

5031 Lumber, plywood, millwork, 

and wood panels

6 1.2 Withdrawals were mostly throughout 

the entire year, with an increase in 

withdrawals July and August.

0.30–3.4

5032 Brick, stone, and related 

construction material

6 0.80 Withdrawals were fairly even for the 

entire year.

0.77–4.0

5082 Construction and mining 

machinery and equipment

6 3.7 Withdrawals were throughout the 

entire year.

3.0–4.6

5084 Industrial machinery and 

equipment

6 0.03 Withdrawals varied monthly by 

record. June through August withdrawals were highest.

0.02–0.06
90 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 3–1. Commercial withdrawals by SIC code for Ohio and Indiana, 1999–2004.—Continued

[Median consumptive-use coefficient and withdrawal range are rounded to two significant figures. Mgal/yr, million gallons per year.]

SIC code SIC description Number of 

records

Median annual 

withdrawal

(Mgal/yr)

Description of withdrawals

Annual

withdrawal

range 

(Mgal/yr)

5141 Groceries, general line 6 64 Withdrawals were throughout the 

entire year.

30–84

5171 Petroleum blue stations 

and terminals wholesale 

distribution

17 69 Withdrawals varied by record. 2.2–980

5191 Farm supplies 29 0.81 Some records had withdrawals 

throughout the year and others were 

seasonal.

0.12–9.9

5411 Grocery stores 6 1.8 Withdrawals were throughout the 

entire year.

1.4–2.4

5500 Automotive dealers and 

gasoline service Stations

5 51 Withdrawals were April through 

October.

51–52

5511 Motor vehicle dealers (new 

and used)

6 0.99 Withdrawals were throughout the 

entire year.

0.99–1.0

5541 Gasoline service stations 13 3.2 Withdrawals and returns were fairly 

even for the entire year.

0.72–12

5812 Eating places 24 3.4 Withdrawals were fairly even for the 

entire year.

0.61–55

6035 Savings institutions, 

federally chartered

10 16 Withdrawals varied by record. Some 

listed withdrawals throughout the 

year, and others listed withdrawals 

March through November.

0.26–21

6211 Security brokers, dealers, 

and flotation companies

9 8.6 Withdrawals were fairly even for the 

entire year.

0.89–66

6311 Life insurance establishments6 500 Withdrawals were throughout the entire year but higher in June through 

September.

390–540

6500 Real estate establishments 6 0.72 Withdrawals were fairly even for the 

entire year.

0.66–0.72

6512 Operators of nonresidential 

buildings

11 0.81 Withdrawals varied by record. Some 

listed withdrawals throughout the 

year, and others listed withdrawals 

May through December.

0.01–18

6513 Operators of apartment 

buildings

42 62 Withdrawals were throughout the 

year, but higher June through 

September.

14–150

6515 Operators of residential 

mobile home sites

116 8.5 Withdrawals were throughout the 

entire year. A few records listed 

higher withdrawals in July and 

August.

0.10–150

6531 Real estate agents and 

managers

12 74 Withdrawals were throughout the 

entire year.

16–1,000

6552 Land subdividers and developers, except cemeteries34 11 Withdrawals varied by record. Some 

listed withdrawals throughout the 

year, and others listed withdrawals 

May through October.

0.72–35

6553 Cemetery subdividers and 

developers

6 53 Withdrawals were throughout the 

entire year.

47–74
Appendix 3 91

Table 3–1. Commercial withdrawals by SIC code for Ohio and Indiana, 1999–2004.—Continued

[Median consumptive-use coefficient and withdrawal range are rounded to two significant figures. Mgal/yr, million gallons per year.]

SIC code SIC description Number of 

records

Median annual 

withdrawal

(Mgal/yr)

Description of withdrawals

Annual

withdrawal

range 

(Mgal/yr)

6710 Investment and holding 

offices

6 4.6 Withdrawals were May through 

October.

1.4–15

7011 Hotels and motels 87 10 Withdrawals for hotels and motels 

associated with a skiing area were 

highest November through February. Other hotels and motels either 

had fairly constant withdrawals 

throughout the year or some increase July through September.

0.46–140

7032 Sporting and recreational 

camps

16 0.56 Withdrawals varied by record. Some 

listed withdrawals throughout the 

year, and others listed withdrawals 

part of the year. Withdrawals typically increased during June through 

August.

0.19–1.7

7033 Recreation vehicle parks and 

campsites

32 7.7 Withdrawals varied by record. Some 

listed withdrawals throughout the 

year, and others listed withdrawals 

May through October. Withdrawals increased during June through 

August.

0.12–26

7213 Linen supply 6 18 Withdrawals were fairly even for the 

entire year.

14–19

7218 Industrial launderers 12 7.3 Withdrawals were fairly even for the 

entire year.

5.4–27

7299 Misc. personal services5 8 13 Most records listed withdrawals 

throughout the year with an increase in July and August.

3–23

7350 Misc. equipment rental and 

leasing

6 60 Withdrawals were June through 

September.

44–82

7370 Computer programming, 

data processing, and other 

computer related services

6 9.4 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 8.9–13

7389 Business services, not elsewhere classified6 1.2 Withdrawals varied by record. 0.09–1.8

7532 Top, body, and upholstery 

repair shops and paint 

shops

6 0.05 Withdrawals varied by record. 0.01–0.09

7542 Carwashes 12 2.0 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 0.02–5.7

7941 Professional sports clubs and 

promoters

4 390 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 33–690

7948 Racing, including track 

operations

18 4.8 Withdrawals varied by record, with 

most facilities having higher withdrawals June through September.

0–48

7990 Miscellaneous amusement 

and recreation services

12 5.0 Withdrawals were April through 

November.

3.7–34

7991 Physical fitness facilities 5 990 Withdrawals were for the entire year 

with higher withdrawals December 

through June.

680–1,100
92 Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin

Table 3–1. Commercial withdrawals by SIC code for Ohio and Indiana, 1999–2004.—Continued

[Median consumptive-use coefficient and withdrawal range are rounded to two significant figures. Mgal/yr, million gallons per year.]

SIC code SIC description Number of 

records

Median annual 

withdrawal

(Mgal/yr)

Description of withdrawals

Annual

withdrawal

range 

(Mgal/yr)

7996 Amusement parks 38 130 Withdrawals varied by record with 

more withdrawals May through 

September.

1.8–1,000

7999 Amusement/Recreation 

services6

87 4.9 Ski facilities had more withdrawals in 

winter months while other facilities had more withdrawals April 

through September.

0–1,500

8000 Health services 6 0.32 Withdrawals varied by month. 0.26–0.38

8051 Skilled nursing care 

facilities

36 14 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 0.72–34

8052 Intermediate care facilities 6 6.2 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 0.45–6.3

8059 Nursing and personal care 

facilities

19 1.5 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 0–44

8060 Hospitals 6 6.2 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 5.9–7.0

8062 General medical and surgical 

hospitals

49 10 Withdrawals varied by record, many 

had higher withdrawals April 

through October.

0–910

8069 Specialty hospitals 15 10 Withdrawals and returns for the most 

part are for the entire year but they 

were sometimes higher in the summer months.

7.1–2,800

8211 Elementary and secondary 

schools

755 1.9 Withdrawals varied by record with 

larger withdrawals September 

through June.

0–68

8221 Colleges and universities 125 46 Withdrawals varied by record with 

larger withdrawals September 

through June.

0.53–9,000

8249 Vocational schools 12 2.4 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 0.55–5.5

8322 Individual and family social 

services7

5 2.6 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 0.04–5.7

8361 Residential care 21 13 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 0.04–24

8422 Arboreta and botanical or 

zoological gardens

6 88 Withdrawals were for the entire year 

but greater in the summer months.

75–110

8641 Civic, social, and fraternal 

association

190 11 Withdrawals varied by record. 0–382

8661 Religious organizations 41 2.3 Withdrawals varied by record. 0.01–200

8731 Commercial physical and 

biological research

12 2.8 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 0–5.6

8734 Testing laboratories 9 2.3 Withdrawals were May through 

September.

0–6.9

8741 Management services 5 39 Withdrawals were for the entire year, 

with higher withdrawals May 

through September.

32–77

8742 Management consulting 

services

6 60 Withdrawals and returns were for the 

entire year.

40–100

8744 Facilities support management services12 120 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 2.3–290

9199 General government 3 1,500 Withdrawals varied by record. 0.01–2,800
Appendix 3 93

Table 3–1. Commercial withdrawals by SIC code for Ohio and Indiana, 1999–2004.—Continued

[Median consumptive-use coefficient and withdrawal range are rounded to two significant figures. Mgal/yr, million gallons per year.]

SIC code SIC description Number of 

records

Median annual 

withdrawal

(Mgal/yr)

Description of withdrawals

Annual

withdrawal

range 

(Mgal/yr)

9223 Correctional institutions 52 220 Withdrawals were fairly even for the 

entire year.

0.20–790

9224 Fire protection 82 0.06 Withdrawals varied by record. 0–1.0

9511 Air and water resource and 

solid waste management

36 1.0 Withdrawals varied by record. 0–83

9512 Land, mineral, wildlife, and 

forest conservation

108 2.4 Withdrawals varied by record with 

many records having withdrawals 

August through December.

0–3,400

9531 Administration of housing 

programs

12 68 Withdrawals varied by record. 0.06–140

9532 Admin. of urban and community development6 190 Withdrawals varied by record. 160–410

9621 Regulation of administration 

of transportation programs

30 8.2 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 0.37–21

9711 National security

facilities

43 29 Withdrawals were for the entire year. 0.02–1,400

9999 Nonclassifiable establishments18 13 Withdrawals varied by record. 0–300

1

 Facilities primarily engaged in commercial hunting and trapping or in the operation of game preserves.

2

 This is a fire department. 

3

 One record listed withdrawals and returns in April through September. The second one listed withdrawals and returns in October only. The third record 

listed withdrawals and returns July through September. 

4

 Two records listed withdrawals and returns all year. A third record listed withdrawals and returns March through December. The fourth record listed withdrawals and returns January, February, August, and October through December. In some months, withdrawals were 0.01 to 12.36 gal/d. 

5

 These records are for service areas that probably has restrooms. 

6

 This category includes parks, a water park, a mill, snow-skiing areas, and a waterfall. The records listed varied consumptive-use coefficients; 0–78 percent 

for parks, 0–40 percent for the water park, 0–0.4 percent for the mill, 6–56 percent for the skiing areas, and zero percent for the waterfall. 

7

 This is a youth center.
Shaffer —Variations in Water Withdrawal, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use of Water in Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin—Scientific Investigations Report 2009–5096

Printed on recycled paper