# Nutrient Reduction Technology Cost Estimations for

Point Sources in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed

Prepared by

The Nutrient Reduction Te chnology Cost Task Force

A Stakeholder Gr oup of th e Chesapeake Bay Program



# November 2002

# EXECUTIVE S U M M ARY

The purpose of this report is to provide costs estim ates for treatm e nt tech nologies

associated w ith varying concentration leve ls of nitrogen and phosphorus rem oval from

industrial and m unicipal wastewater plants in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The data

will be us ed by the Ches apeake Bay Program to estim ate cos t s of nutrient rem oval

program s for all point-source categories acro ss the Bay watershed dur ing the nutrient and

sedim e nt water quality criteria a nd use developm ent process.

A m u lti-stak eholder Nutrient Reduction Technol o gy Cost Task Force was assim ilated by

the Chesapeake Bay Program in March of 2002 fo r the purpose of developing these costs.

The Task Force consisted of representatives of municipal w a stewater associations, state

governm e nts, EPA, local governm e nt organi zations, and consulta nts with extensive

expertise in the Nutrient Re duction T echnology (NRT) field.

Costs were derived acco rding to sp ecific effl uent disch a rge levels defined across fou r

Tiers. Thes e tiers were part of a larger e ffort intended to estim a te varying levels of

nutrient removal from all sources (non-poi nt as well as point sources) across the

watershed. The Task Force defined what w ould be logical Tiers (or different nutrient

reduction levels) for point sources and then es tim a ted costs by Tier, spe c if ic to e ach

facility. Using flows estim a ted/projecte d for the year 2010, the tiers range from the

current (year 2000) treatm ent levels to the lim it of technology (LOT).

The point sources analyzed in th is effort in clude f acilities lo cated in the Chesapeake B a y Watershed (from PA, M D , VA, DE, WV, NY, an d the Distric t of Colum b ia), which th e

Bay jurisdictions have determ ined discha rge significant am ounts of nitrogen and

phosphorus. These point sources are divided into several cate gories for purposes of this

exercise and include:

• Significant Municip a l facilities (wh i ch generally are m unicipal wastewater

treatm ent plants that discharge flow s of equal to or greater than 0.5 MGD);

• Significant Industrial facili ties (which have been identified to discharge

equivalent or greater amounts of nutrient as com p ared to a m u nicipal wastewater

treatm ent plant of 0.5 MGD);

• Non-significant m unicipal f acilities (which are genera lly discharge flows sm aller

than 0.5 MGD and lim ited to facilities in MD and VA due to availability of data);

and

• Com b ined Sewer Overflows (which for th is exercise, includes the CSO for the

District of Colom b ia because th is is the only CSO for which the Bay Pro g ram has

nutrient load data).

i

## Exhibit 1 below provides a summ ary descrip tion of the levels of nutrient reduction by

point source catego r y for each tier.

EXHIBIT 1 : DESCRIPTION OF TIERS FOR POINT SOURCES*

(concentrations given in terms of an annual average in mg /l)

Point Source

Ca te gor y Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

Significant

M unic i pals TN = 8 for POT W 's

ope r a ting (or planne d)

NRT; TN for r e m ain d er

= 2000 concentrations.

TP =2000 concentrations,

excep t T P = 1 .5 at th os e

targeted b y VA. TN = 8;

TP = 1.0 or permit

limit if less TN= 5.0;

TP = 0.5 or permit

limit if less TN = 3.0;

TP = 0.1

Significant

Ind u str i als TN and TP =

2000 concentrat ions

or perm it limit if l e ss G e ne r a l l y a 5 0%

reduction from Tier 1

(2000 concentra t ions)

or p erm it con d i tion s if

less Genera ll y an 80 %

reduction from Tier 1

(2000 concentra t ions)

or p erm it con d i tion s if

less TN = 3.0;

TP = 0.1 or permit

c o nditions if le ss

Nonsignificant

M unic i pals TN and TP = 2 000

con cen tration s TN and TP = 2 000

con cen tration s TN and TP = 2 000

con cen tration s TN = 8 & T P = 2.0

Or 2000 concentrations

if l e ss

CSOs S ee Ap p e n d i x B for a comp l e te d e s crip t ion of t h e tie r s for th e DC CS O



## * Note that all flows are in term s of t hose projected by 2010

Wherever costs were provided by a facility, their respective association s

, or a state

agency, thes e direct cos t s were used. W h ere no other data w a s available, estim ates were

calculated using different m e thodologies depe nding on the technology. Chapters III and

VI provide infor m ation on the estimating m e thods em ployed wherever costs were

otherwise u n available.

Exhibit 2 below provides a summ ary on the num bers of significant m unicipal f acilitie s

which provided cost data versus those fo r which cost es tim ates were calculated.

Exhibit 2: Summ ary on the Num b ers of Significant Municipal Facilities

Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

TN CC TP CC TN CC TP CC TN CC TP CC TN CC TP CC

P r o v i d e d 5 4 0 2 5 1 4 4 0 3 3

C a l c ul at e d 9 0 13 2 1 1 1 25 1 0 25 2 2 9 5

Tot a l 6 3 0 15 7 1 1 2 29 5 0 25 5 2 9 8



## Note: CC = Capital Cos t

ii

## For m unicipal facilities, the technolo g ies priced f o r each tier varied d e pending on the

tiers’ nutrient reduction levels. For Tier 2, the costs fo r technologies to achieve 8 m g /l

total nitrogen include extended aeration processes and denitrification zones, along with

chem ical addition to achieve a phosphorus di scharge of 1.0 mg/l wher e facilities are not

already achieving these levels. For T i er 3, th e costs for technologies to achieve 5.0m g/l

total nitrogen include ad ditio n a l aeration, a s econ d ary anoxic zone plus m e thanol

addition, ad dition a l clarification tank age, a nd add ition a l chem ical costs to achieve a

phosphorus discharge of 0.5 m g /l. For Tier 4, the costs for technologies to achieve

3.0m g /l total nitrogen include deep bed deni trif ica tion f i lters a nd m i crof iltr a tion to

achieve a phosphorus discharge of 0.1 m g /l. (N ote: Costs for Tier 1 are generally equal

to zero b ecause this tier repres ents actions al ready being taken or planned). Capital costs

and operation and m a intenance costs were develo ped as well as annualized costs. Due to

seasonal flu c tuation, the effluent/discharge le vels for each tier were defined as an an nual

average.

For industries, site specific inform ation on costs and reductions by facility was obtained

via phone contacts or site visits. W h e r e know n costs were available for a like industry

(SIC code), those codes m a y have be en appl ied to another like discharger. W h ere cost

inform ation was otherwise unavailable, a m e thodology (sim ilar to that developed for

POTW s) was applied to reflect cost estim at es by facility by tier. There are no costs

associated w ith Tier 1 because it represents current conditions or pl ans for reductions that

are already in progress. Tier 2 and 3, in general, reflect levels of reduction of 50% and

80% from Tier 1, respectively, unless perm it cond itions are less than this or site spec if ic

inform ation provides alternate data. Tier 4 re flects TN and TP concentrations of 3.0 and

0.1 m g /l res p ectiv ely un less perm it conditions or actual 2000 concentratio ns are less than

this. For tier 4, som e industrial facilitie s would be incapable of achieving the discharge

concentration/level, so the cost/alter native reflects conne cting to a POTW.

Costs for the Blue Plains CS O were provided by the Distri ct o f Colum b ia W a ter and

Sewer Authority.

Overall, the costs de rive d f r om this e f f o rt represent order of m a gnitude estim ates based

on applying a m u lti-stak eholder d e v e loped m e thodology unifor m ly to all facilities across

the wate rshe d and will v a ry f r om actual cos t s inc u rred on a s i te-spe cif i c b a sis. This

report provides the cost inform ation by facili ty. Exhibit 3 on next page provides a

summary of these costs both by jurisd iction and by point source category.

iiiExhibit 3: Cost Summary by State and by Point Source CategoryDESIGN# OF FLOWPLANTS (MGD) TN CC TP CC TN CC TP CC TN CC TP CC TN CC TP CC TN CC TP CC TN CC TP CC TN CC TP CCWATERSHED TOTALSIGNIFICANT 304 2,336.01 597.91 0 921.44 40.09 1,519.36 40.09 1,190.49 0 2,709.85 40.09 1,663.59 1,301.89 4,373.44 1,341.98NON-SIGNIFICANT 185 21.17 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 83.09 11.30 83.09 11.30INDUSTRIAL 49 459.51 0.00 0 48.57 2.36 48.57 2.36 46.02 0.8 94.58 3.16 112.58 83.91 207.17 87.07DC-CSO1 7.61 130.00 0 0 0 130.00 0 0 0 130.00 0 3,500.00 0 3,630.00 0TOTAL 539 2,824.30 727.91 0 970.01 42.45 1,697.92 42.45 1,236.51 0.8 2,934.43 43.25 5,359.27 1,397.11 8,293.70 1,440.35TOTAL BY STATEDCSIGNIFICANT 1 169.40 0.00 0 15.11 9.16 15.11 9.16 103.01 0 118.12 9.16 167.11 11.45 285.23 20.60CSO 1 7.61130.00 00.00 0.00 130.00 0.00 0.00 0130.00 0.003,500.00 0.00 3,630.00 0.00DC TOTAL 2 177.01 130.00 0 15.11 9.16 145.11 9.16 103.01 0 248.12 9.16 3,667.11 11.45 3,915.23 20.60DESIGNIFICANT 3 3.30 3.19 0 2.37 0.25 5.56 0.25 3.18 0 8.74 0.25 4.15 4.26 12.90 4.51INDUSTRIAL 1 37.83 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00DE TOTAL 4 41.13 3.19 0 2.37 0.25 5.56 0.25 3.18 0 8.74 0.25 4.15 4.26 12.90 4.51MDSIGNIFICANT 65 725.82 384.75 0 25.13 11.79 409.88 11.79 356.36 0 766.24 11.79 658.43 398.36 1,424.66 410.14NON-SIGNIFICANT 181 20.59 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 80.97 10.99 80.97 10.99INDUSTRIAL 10 53.30 0.00 0 12.25 0.21 12.25 0.21 5.89 0 18.14 0.21 5.70 15.76 23.84 15.97MD TOTAL 256 799.71 384.75 0 37.38 12.00 422.13 12.00 362.25 0 784.38 12.00 745.09 425.10 1,529.47 437.10NYSIGNIFICANT 18 82.57 0.00 0 61.87 3.29 61.87 3.29 40.60 0 102.47 3.29 71.58 65.43 174.05 68.71NY TOTAL 18 82.57 0.00 0 61.87 3.29 61.87 3.29 40.60 0 102.47 3.29 71.58 65.43 174.05 68.71PASIGNIFICANT 123 469.21 72.08 0 277.87 4.79 349.94 4.79 319.81 0 669.76 4.79 241.32 396.12 911.08 400.91INDUSTRIAL 19 75.62 0.00 0 17.34 0.79 17.34 0.79 16.95 0 34.29 0.79 47.98 23.89 82.27 24.67PA TOTAL 142 544.84 72.08 0 295.20 5.58 367.28 5.58 336.77 0 704.05 5.58 289.30 420.00 993.35 425.58VASIGNIFICANT 86 871.95 137.90 0 515.90 9.72 653.80 9.72 356.55 0 1,010.35 9.72 505.21 411.00 1,515.56 420.72NON-SIGNIFICANT 1 0.05 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.07 0.40 0.07INDUSTRIAL 16 292.44 0.00 0 13.79 1.27 13.79 1.27 22.72 0.8 36.51 2.07 58.37 44.27 94.88 46.34VA TOTAL 103 1,164.44 137.90 0 529.68 10.99 667.58 10.99 379.28 0.8 1,046.86 11.79 563.98 455.35 1,610.84 467.13WVSIGNIFICANT 8 13.75 0.00 0 23.19 1.09 23.19 1.09 10.97 0 34.16 1.09 15.79 15.28 49.96 16.37NON-SIGNIFICANT 3 0.53 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 1.71 0.25 1.71 0.25INDUSTRIAL 3 0.32 0.00 0 5.19 0.10 5.19 0.10 0.45 0 5.64 0.10 0.54 0.00 6.18 0.10WV TOTAL 14 14.60 0.00 0 28.38 1.19 28.38 1.19 11.42 0 39.81 1.19 18.05 15.53 57.85 16.71NOTE: Blue Plains costs are allocated among DC, MD and VA according to the Blue Plains cost allocation methodology by MWCOG.Non-significant category covers only plants with existing data in the database, which are mainly MD facilities. Most VA non-significant plants are not yet included due to no loading data.Many industrial facilities do not have design flow data available. 2010 flows were used for industrial design flows. Actual design flows were used for several MD plants that have the data.TN CC = Total Nitrogen Capital Costs; TP CC = Total Phosphorus Capital CostsTIER 1 COSTS ($MIL)TIER 4 COST ($MIL)TIER 2 COST ($MIL) TIER 3 COST ($MIL)CUMULATIVE INCREMENTAL CUMULATIVEINCREMENTAL INCREMENTAL CUMULATIVE INCREMENTALNRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstalbe x-c_exh3ivCBPO, 11/12/2002

# ACKNOWLEDG M ENTS

This document compiles the work of the Nutrient Reduction T echnology C o st Task

Force which developed methodologies for es tima ting costs of nutrien t rem o val at

Chesapeake Bay watersh ed point sou r ces. This e f fort was per f

ormed by a multi

stakeholder group comprised of individuals that volunt eered their time to support

this work. T h e Chesapeake Bay Program would like to thank all the members of

the Task Force. Special thanks go ou t to Tom Sadick, of CH2M HILL and Thor

Young of Sterns and Wheler, two consu ltants who generously donated their

exceptional expertise in assisting th e Cost Task Force in developing th e cost

methodologies. Additionally, appreciation is extended to Lisa Bacon, Tara Ajello

and Alta Turner of CH2M HILL who vol unteered their expertise in designing

statistically accurate cos t curves a s p a rt of the estimation techniques described

herein. Special thanks also go to Ning Zhou, Point Source Data Manager under

grant with V i rginia Tech, at the Ches apeake Bay Program Office, who took the

cost methodologies developed by the consultants and the Task Force and applied

them to all individual point sources in the waters hed to develop facility s p ecific

cost estimates. In addition, thanks go to representatives of m any municipal and

industrial w a stewater treatment plants around the watershed for providing cost

estimates on their own at the request of the Task Force for va rying levels of

nutrien t rem o val for their resp ec tiv e facilities. T h ese ind i vid ual fac ility e s timates

were used where availab l e ins t ead of develop ing costs based on the Task Force

cost methodologies, and provided for a more credible and accurate database

overall.

v

# TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive S u mm ary

Acknowledgem e nts

I. Purpose, Background, and General Methodology................................................1

II. Point Source Nutrient Reduc tion Technology Tiers Description..............................3

2.1 Tier 1..........................................................................................4

2.2 Tier 2..........................................................................................5

2.3 Tier 3..........................................................................................5

2.4 Tier 4..........................................................................................5

III. Cost Metho dology for Significan t M unicipals for Tier 2 and 3 ................................7

3.1 Purpose........................................................................................7

3.2 Background and Approach.................................................................7

3.3 Tier 2 Nitrogen Rem ova l System Upgrades.............................................8

3.3.1 Capital Cost Estim ating – Tier 2 Nitrogen Rem o val Upgrades...............8

3.3.2 O&M Cost Estim ating – Nitrogen R e m oval....................................9

3.4 Tier 2 Phosphorus Rem o val System Upgrades.........................................10

3.4.1 Capital Cost Estim ating – Phosphorus Re m oval



# ... ...........................11

3.4.2 O&M Cost Estim ating – Phosphorus Re m oval...............................13

3.5 Tier 3 Phosphorus Rem o val System Upgrades.........................................14

IV. Cost Methodology for Significant Municipals for Tier 3 and 4..............................15

4.1 Tier 3 Results and Methodology.........................................................15

4.1.1 Costs for TN = 5 m g /L............................................................16

4.1.2 Methodology for estim ating TN = 5 mg/L costs..............................18

vi

## 4.1.3 Methodolog y for fitting equation s to TN = 5 m g /L data...... ...............20

4.1.4 Capital Costs for TP = 0.5 m g /L.................................................20

4.1.5 Methodology for estim ating opera ting costs for T P = 0.5 m g /L............21

4.2 Tier 4 Results and Methodology.........................................................22

4.2.1 Deep Bed Denitrifying F ilters...................................................22

4.2.2 Microfiltration.....................................................................23

4.2.3 Costs for TN = 3 m g /L............................................................23

4.2.4 Methodology for estim ating TN = 3 mg/L costs..............................25

4.2.5 Methodolog y for fitting equation s to TN = 3 m g /L data...... ...............26

4.2.6 Costs for TP= 0.1 m g /L..........................................................27

4.2.7 Methodolog y for estim ating TP = 0.1 m g /L costs and for fittin g equation s

to TP = 0.1 mg/L data.............................................................29

V. Cost Methodology for Industrials.................................................................30

5.1 Loads.........................................................................................32

5.2 Costs..........................................................................................33

5.2.1 Tier 1.................................................................................33

5.2.2 Tier 2-3...............................................................................33

5.2.3 Tier 4.................................................................................37

VI. Cost Methodology for Non- significant Municipals.............................................46

6.1 Assum p tion..................................................................................46

6.2 Methodology.................................................................................46

6.3 TN capital cost estim a tes for TN at 8 m g /l for facilities with design flow < 0.5

MGD..........................................................................................47

vi i

## 6.4 TN capital cost estim a tes for TN at 8 m g /l for fac ilities with design

flow > 0.5 MGD..............................................................................49

6.5 TN O&M estim ates for TN at 8 m g / l for all non-significant facilities..............50

6.6 TP capital cost and O&M estim at es for TP at 2mg/l for all

non-significant facilities...................................................................50

VII. Cost Estim ates for Combined Sewer Overflows................................................57

VIII. Cost Metho dology Application for Significan t M unicipals for Tier 1-4... ..................59

8.1 Allocating Blue Plains Co sts to the Jurisdictions......................................59

8.2 Tier One Costs...............................................................................59

8.3 Tier Two Costs...............................................................................63

8.4 Tier 3 and T i er 4 TN Capital Costs......................................................64

IX. Load Calculation Description and Summary....................................................67

9.1 Load Calculation For S i gnifi cant Municipal Facilities................................67

9.1.1 Tier Definition for Point Sources...............................................67

9.1.2 2010 Flow Projection..............................................................67

9.1.3 Load calculation....................................................................69

9.2 Load Calculation For non-signi ficant Municipal Facilities...........................69

9.2.1 Tier definition for non-signifi cant municipal facilities.......................69

9.2.2 Projected 2010 flow...............................................................69

9.2.3 Load calculation....................................................................69

9.3 Load Calculation for Industrial Plants and CSO.......................................69

9.4 Blue Plains Load Alloca tion Am ong DC, MD and VA...............................70

9.5 Load Summary..............................................................................70



# X. Cost Result Summ aries.............................................................................97

v iii

# LIST OF TABLES

Table I–A Point Source Summ ary Profile.............................................................2

Table II–A Total Nitrogen Discharge Loads (lbs/yr) Summ ary.....................................3

Table II–B Total Phosphorus Disc harge Loads (lbs/yr) Summ ary..................................3

Table II-C Description Of Tiers For Point Sources...................................................6

Table III-A Capital Cos t Data Summary – Phosp horus Rem o val......... ........................12

Table IV-A Summ ary of Tiered Nitrogen and Phosphorus Levels.................................15

Table IV-B Summ ary of Capital a nd Operating C o sts for Tier 3

Nitrogen Removal TN = 5 m g /L..........................................................16

Table IV-C Summ ary of Capital a nd Operating C o sts for Tier 4

Nitrogen Removal TN = 3 m g /L..........................................................23

Table IV-D Summ ary of Capital a nd Operating C o sts for Tier 4

Phosphorus Re m oval TP = 0.1 m g /L.....................................................27

Table V-A Total In cre m ental Capital Cost (For Nitrogen A nd

Phosphorus Reductions) Su mm ary By Industry ($)..................................31

Table V-B Total Increm ental Capita l Cost (Nitrogen And Phosphorus

Reductions) Summ ary By Basin ($ ) For Industrial Facilities.........................31

Table V-C Industrial Facility Costin g And Conc entration Codes By Tier........................38

Table V-D Flow and Concentration Codes and Data For Industrial

Facilities by Nutrient Param e ter...........................................................40

Table V-E Industrial Facility Co st D a ta For All Four Tiers........................................42

Table V-F Industrial Facility Total Capital Cost And Concentration

Data For All Four Tiers......................................................................44

Table VI-A Source Data For The Cost Curve.........................................................47

Table VI-B Non-significant Facili ties with Design Flow < 2010 Flow............................49

Table VI-C NRT Cost for Non-significant Municipal Facilities...................................51

Table VII DC CS O & BLUE P L AI NS WWT P COST E S TIMATES

- For Chesapeake Bay-wide UAA Cost Analysis......................................58

ix

## T a b l e V I I I

- A Current BNR with T1 Cost................................................................59

Table VIII-B Facilities with Tier 1 TN CC Calculated.................................................50

T a b l e V I I I

- C Tier 1 costs, 2000 and T1 TN discharged loads by state...............................60

T a b l e V I I I

- D Facilities with Tier 1 TN Capital Costs..................................................60

Table VIII-E Total Flow Increas es Between 2010 and 2000 by State................................62

T a b l e V I I I

- F Top Ten Facilities W ith The Highest Flow Increases..................................63

T a b l e V I I I

- G Facilities with Tier 2 TN Cap ital Costs from sour ces other than calculation........63

T a b l e V I I I

- H Tier 2 TN capital cost s and the load reduc tion by state...............................64

Table VIII-I Municipal F aciliti es with Design Flow >30 MGD.....................................64

Table VIII-J Tier 3 TN capital cost s and the load reduc tion by state...............................65

Table VIII-K Tier 4 TN capital cost s and the load reduc tion by state...............................66

T a b l e I X

- A Projected 2010 Flows Provide d by the State Agency or Facility....................68

T a b l e I X

- A NRT Tier TN Load (Lbs/Yr) Summ a r y By Basin.....................................71

Table IX-B NRT Tier TN Load (Lbs/Yr) Summ a r y By State......................................71

T a b l e I X

- C NRT Tier TN Load (Lbs/Yr) Summ a r y By Facility Type ............................71

T a b l e I X

- D NRT Tier TP Load (Lbs/Yr) Summ a r y By Basin.....................................72

T a b l e I X

- E NRT Tier TP Load (Lbs/Yr) Summ a r y By State......................................72

Table IX-F NRT Tier TP Load (Lbs/Yr) Summ a r y By Facility Type ............................72

T a b l e I X

- G Discharged Nitroge n Loads (lbs/yr) for All Poin t Sources Sorted by Basin.......73

Table IX-H Discharged Phosphorus Loads (lbs /yr) for All Point Sour ces Sorted by Basin....85

Table X-A Nitrogen Increm ental Cost For Signif i cant Munic i pal Facilitie s

In The Bay Watershed.....................................................................98

Table X-B Phosphorus Increm ental Cost For Significant Muni cipal Facilities

In The Bay Watershed...................................................................107

T a b l e X

- C NRT Capital Cost Summ ary For Point Sources By State And Category.........116

T a b l e X

- D NRT Incremental Cost Summ ary Fo r Point Sources By Category And State....117

Table X-E NRT Incremental Cost Summ ary For Significant Municipal F acilities...........118

Table X-F Total Design Flow and TN Capital Cost Summary f o r

Significant Municipals by State.........................................................119

Table X-G Total Design Flow and TP Capital Cost Summary f o r

Significant Municipals by State.........................................................119

x

# LIST OF FIGURES

Figure III-A Cost Curve for TN=8m g /l..................................................................9

Figure III- A Cost Curve for TP=1m g / l .................................................................12

Figure IV-A Cost Curves for Tota l Capital Costs with TN=5mg/l.................................17

Figure IV-B Cost Curves for Total O&M Costs w ith TN=5m g /l...................................18

Figure IV-C Cost Curves for Tota l Capital Costs with TN=3mg/l.................................24

Figure IV-D Cost Curves for Total O&M Costs w ith TN=3m g /l...................................25

Figure IV-E Cost Curves for Tota l Capital Costs with TP=0.1mg/l................................27

Figure IV-F Cost Curves for Allowance for Chemical/Ins trum entation Sys t em

Im prove m e nts for TP = 0.1 m g /l.........................................................28

Figure IV-G Cost Curves for Annual O&M Costs for TP = 0.1mg/l...............................28

Figure VI-A TN Capital Cost Curve at 8 m g /l for Non-significant Facilities.....................48

Figure VIII-A Cum u lative TN Ca pital Costs by State by Tier........................................66

Figure VIII-B TN Discharged Load Reduc tion from 2000 Level by State by Tier.................66

xi

# LIST OF APPENDIXES

Appendix A List of NRT Cost Task Force Mem b ers

Appendix B Point Source NRT Cost Survey

Part 1: Point Source Survey

Part 2: Point Source Survey Results

Appendix C Correspondences Used to Develop Costs for Municipalities

Appendix D Description of CS O Tiers for Blue Plains

Appendix E Capital Cost Data for Tier 1 for Nitrogen Rem o val

Appendix F Statistical A n alyses of Tier 2 Cost D a ta

Appendix G Details of Cost Assum p t i ons Used in the Tier 3 and 4 Methodology

Appendix H References and Data Contacts for Industrial Costs

Appendix I Communications, Deci sions, and References for Cost and Load Data Compiling

Part 1: Communications and Decision s for Cost Methodology Applications

Part 2: Communications and Decisi ons for Load Calculations by Tier

Part 3: References for Se ction IX Summary Cost Tables

xi i

# I. PURPOSE, BACKGROUND AND GE NERAL MET H ODOL OGY

The purpose of this report is to present cost s estim ated for technologies to achieve varying

effluent levels of nitrogen and phosphorus rem oval from industrial a nd m unicipal wastewater

trea tm ent plants in the C h esapeake B a y waters h e d. The data will be us ed by the Ches apeake

Bay Program in estim ating costs of nutrient re moval program s for all so urce categories across

the Bay watershed dur in g its nutrient and sedim e nt water qu a lity criter ia a nd use developm ent

process.

A m u lti-stak eholder Nutrient Rem oval Technolog y Cost Task (NRT) Force was assim ilated by

the Chesapeake Bay Program in March of 2002 for the purpose of developing these costs. The

Task Force consisted of represen tatives of m unicipal wastewater associations, state governm e nts,

EPA, local governm e nt organizations, and consulta nts with extensive exp e r tise in the N R T f i eld.

A list of the m e mbers of this Task Force can be found in Appendix A.

Costs were derived acco rding to sp ecific effluent disch a rge levels defined by Tiers. These Tiers

were part of a larger effort intended to estim ate varying levels of nutrient rem oval from all

sources (non-point as well as po int so urces) acros s the waters he d. The NRT Task Force defined

what would be logical Tiers (or different nutri ent reduction levels) for point sources and then

estim ated costs by Tier. Descript ions of the four tiers can be found in the subsequent section,

however, generally they range from c u rrent (yea r 2000) reduction levels extrapolated out to 2010

flows to lim its of technology.

The point sources analyzed in th is ef f o rt in cluded f acilities loc a ted in the C h esapeake B a y Watershed (from PA, M D , VA, DE , WV, NY, and the District of Colum b ia) that have been

identified by the State as signi ficant discharge sources of nitr ogen and phosphorus. These point

sources are divided into seve ral categories for purposes of this exercise an d include:

• Significant Municip a l faciliti es, which generally are m unicipal wastewater treatm e nt

plants that discharge flows of equal to or greater than 0.5 MGD. More specifically,

significan t municipal facilities are d e fined sligh t ly differently for each ju risdiction. For

Virginia, these facilities are those that 1) have a design flow of 0.5 MGD or greater, and

2) are loca te d below the f a ll lin e, reg a rdles s of flow. For MD, signi ficant facilities are

those having a current flow of 0.5 M GD or greater. For PA, significant facilities are

those having average annual 1985 flows of 0.4 M GD or greater. For DE, WV and NY

the Chesapeake Bay Program selected fac ilities in the EPA Perm it Com p liance Sys t e m

database with current flows of 0.5 or greater.

• Significant Industrial facilities, which have been identified to discharge equivalent or

greater am ounts of nutrient as com p ared to a m u nicipal wastewat er treatm ent of 0.5

MGD. These discharge loads would roughly be equivalent to those of m u nicipalities

with flows of 0.5 MGD or greater, and a Total N itrogen load of 75 lbs/day, and a

Phosphorus load of 25 lbs/day or greater (bas ed on a m unicipal discharge of 6 m g /l TP

and 18 m g /l TN).

1

## • Non-significant m unicipal facili ties are those, which are generally sm aller than discharge

flows of 0.5 MGD. Only facilities p e rm itted by MDE are in cluded in this analys is du e to

availability of data.

• Com b ine Sewer Overflows: only the CSO for the District of Colom b ia has been costed in

this ex ercise because this is the on ly CS O for which the Bay P r ogram has nutrient lo ad

data. Certainly there are other CSOs in th e Bay watershed, but to date, these have not

been quantified in term s of nitrogen and phos phorus load discharges and thus, are not

included for analysis here.

Table I -A provides a summary profile of these f acilities in the watersh e d.

TABLE I – A: Point Source Summary Profile

Point Source

Ca te gor y Descripti o n Number of

Fa cilities T o t a l 2 0 00

Flow (MG D )

Sig n ifica n t Municip a ls* G e n e r a l l y > 0. 5 MG D 30 4 1 554 .4

Sig n ifica n t

Indus trials D i scharg e loads g e nera lly > 75

lb/da y TN & 25 lb/da y TP 49 52 4. 7

Non-si g n ificant

Municip a ls General l y < 0. 5 MG D 18 5 10 .8

CSOs Only for Blue Plains 1 7. 6

To ta l

– 54 0 2, 09 7. 5



## * includ in g the 6 VA plants to be built by 201 0.

Costs for technologies to achieve various nutrient reduction levels ar e estim a ted in this report in

one of two ways:

1) Costs were obtained direc tly from individual faciliti es, or th eir respec tiv e sta t e

agencies, or site v i sit rep o rts and etc.

2) In cases where data was otherwise una vailable, costs were estim a ted by applying

m e thodologies described in this report.

Costs were obtained either thr ough a survey of the point source facilities issued by the state

municipal authorities, or from individual contacts. Appendix B provides the point source survey

and a collection of the survey responses receiv ed. Appendix C provide s other correspondences

from facilities. These cost data were used in the costing m e thodology developm ent and costing

analysis.

W h erever c o sts were ob tained d i re ctly f r om f

acility ope rato rs or the i r r e sp ectiv e assoc i ations,

these costs were used. Then, if no other data w a s available, estim ates were calculated using

different m e thodologies depending on the technology level of re duction. Chapters III – VI

provide inform ation on the estim a ting m e thods employed wherever costs were otherwise

unavailable. Chapter VIII is a description of how the cost m e thodologies were actually applied

on a facility specific bas e . Ch apter IX is a description of ho w the loads for each tier were

calcu lated. Both concen tra tions a nd flows, which are factors of th e loads

, are im portant elem ents

to applying the cost m e thodologies.

2

# II. TI ER DESCRI PTIONS

The Chesapeake Bay Program , as part of an effort to estim ate water quality responses as well as

costs of varying nutrient reduction measures fo r all sources across the watershed, developed a

series of technological reduction tiers. The f our tiers spanned technological im plem e n tation

ranging from current practices to lim its of technology. The NRT Cost Task Force developed

f o u r t i e r s f o r p o i n t s o u r c e s , which range from current (or pl anned) levels of technological

im ple m entation and operation to lim its of t echnology for nutrient and phosphorus rem oval at

wastewater treatm e nt plants. Different levels of technological im ple m entation are indicated by

the discharge concentration of n itrogen and phosphorus for each ti er. The types of technologies

necessary to achieve these effluent levels were then m a tched to the concentrations and costs. All

concentrations, and calculations perf orm e d on them , are assum e d o n a n a nnual average basis.

The discharge flows represented for each facility are thos e projected for the year 201 0. It is

im portant to note however that capital cots for these technologies are ca l c u l a t e d o n d e s i g n f l o w s

by facilities, whereas th e O&M costs as well as the discharge loads rep r es ented by each tier are

estim ated as sum i ng the 2010 projected flows. Ta ble II-A an d II-B summarize the n itrogen and

phosphorus loads respectively represented by e ach Tier for each point source category.

TABLE II – A: Total Nitrogen Disc harge Loads (lbs/y r) Su mmary

Facility Type 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

SIGNIFI C ANT M UNICIPAL 61,113,341 54,675,431 42,510,365 26,894,197 16,136,518

INDUST R I A L 9

, 0 9 9

, 7 3 7 7,633,234 6,858,729 5

, 8 9 2

, 9 1 6 3,534,150

NON

- SIG M UNI CIPAL 493,649 540,258 540,258 540,258 287,977

C S O 1 6 2

, 7 0 6 70,298 70,298 7 0

, 2 9 8 0

T o t a l 7 0

, 8 6 9

, 4 3 4 62,919,222 49,979,650 3 3

, 3 9 7

, 6 6 9 19,958,644



## TABLE II – B: Total Phosphorus Discharge Loads (lbs/yr) S u mm ary

Facility Type 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

SIGNIFI C ANT M UNICIPAL 4,387,008 5,252,012 3,685,449 2,046,441 537,884

INDUST R I A L 1

, 1 2 1

, 7 5 0 1,074,316 623,023 3 9 8

, 2 4 5 154,120

NON

- SIG M UNI CIPAL 74,615 82,174 82,174 82,174 56,219

C S O 4 6

, 3 5 3 15,330 15,330 1 5

, 3 3 0 0

T o t a l 5

, 6 2 9

, 7 2 8 6,423,832 4,405,976 2

, 5 4 2

, 1 8 9 748,223



## For non-significant facilities, current conditions are assum e d for Tiers 1 - 3, and then Tier 4

assum e s a TN of 8 mg/l and a TP of 2.0 m g /l.

CSO assumptions for all Tiers fo r th e Distr i ct of Colum b ia we re provided by the W a s h ington

Council of Governm e nt s with load estim ates from the DC Washington A r ea Sanitary Authority

CSO study in 2001. A description of the tiers fo r this CSO can be found in Appendix D.

3

## Table II - C summarizes the Tier assumptions, which are described in m o re detail below.

2.1 Tier 1

Tier 1 assu m e s NRT i m plem entation either current or planned extrapolated out to 2010 flows.

For exam ple, as of the date of this writing, there exist 304 signifi cant m unicipal facilities in the

Bay watersh e d, 84 of which cur r ently operate NRT f o r nitroge n rem oval. This num ber will

increase to a total of 154 f acilities operating NRT for nitrogen by the year 2010. Thus, for

significant municipalities, NRT is assum e d for all 154 facilities, and the Tier 1 discharge level

rela tive to th ese is 8 m g /l Total Nitro g en (TN) th at is the gen e rally acc epted ef f l uent

perform a nce for the types of NRT operating in the watershed now. There are som e exception s to

this effluent concentration for nitrogen however depending on specific situ ations that e x ist a t

certain facilities. Blue Plains for example ha s a goal of 7.5 mg/l TN, and Back River has a goal

of 10 m g /l (see Section IX).

Note that th e concentrations f o r m a ny f acilities m a y actually be increased from one Tier to the

next due to an artifact in the Ti er definitions and their applications to the point source database.

There exist m a ny facilities in th e watershed th at are operating at TN concen tra tions a c tually less

than 8 m g /l in 2000. In these cases, the Tier 1 co ncentrations for these fa cilities are actually

raised to 8 mg/l (from t h e year 2000 to the year 2010). The NRT Cost Task Force believed that

at 2000 flows som e facilities m i ght be able to operate m o re e fficiently than at 2010 flows, thus

the 2000 concentrations m a y not be realistic for 2010 conditions a nd that these concentrations

should be elevated to the Tier definition of 8 m g /l TN.

For all other facilities (industria l and non-significant m unicipalities) , Tier 1 for nitrogen equals

the to tal n itrogen annual average con centration th at existed fo r them in 2000, which is accepted

as being representative of currant conditions.

Again, Tier 1 flows, as well as fl ows for Tiers 2 - 4, are equal to t hose projected out to the year

2010. These projections were either obtained direc tly from individual facilities, or derived from

related population projections pe rform e d by the Chesapeake Bay Program (see Section IX).

Phosphorus rem oval, whether it is by physical/c hem i cal or biological m e ans, is operating in

about half of the m unicipal facilities in the watershed (especially MD) due to state and local

water quality requirem e nts. Genera lly, effluents range from 0.18 - 4.0 mg/l. Tier 1 therefore, for

phosphorus, assum e s an effluent concentration e qualing the facilities’ an nual average discharge

for this param e ter that existed in the year 2000.

For industries, Tier 1 represents the industries’ current discharge le vels unless it is known that

NRT will be im ple m ented at a giv e n facility by 2 010.

For non-significant facilities, current 2000 conditions are assum e d for Tier 1.

4

## 2.2 Tier 2

Total Nitrogen for ALL significant municipals is brought to 8 m g /l, which then carries over the

NRT for the 154 operating NRT and adds NRT for th e rem a ining facilities. Total Phosphorus is

set equal to 1.0 m g /l or a perm it level if less than 1.0 m g /l.

Section VI more thoroughly descri bes the tiers for industrial facili ties. In general, the tiers

reflect levels of reduction on the order of 50% fr om Tier 1 unless perm it conditions are less that

this, in wh ic h case, pe rmit cond ition s would apply.

For non-significant m unicipal facilities Tier 1 = Tier 2 = current conditions.

2.3 Tier 3

Tier 3 for significant m unicipals equals a TN of 5.0 m g /l and a TP of 0.5 mg/l. Tier 3 for

industrial facilities gene rally reflects a reduction of 80% from Tier 1 unles s perm it conditions are

less than this. Tier 1 = T i er 2 = T i er 3 = curre nt conditions for non-sign ificant m unicipals.

2.4 Tier 4

Tier 4 for significant m unicipals equals a TN of 3.0m g /l and a TP of 0.1 mg/l. Tier 4 for

industrial facilities gene rally equals Tier 4 for significant m unicipals unless perm it co nditions are

less than that. Tier 4 for non-signi ficant m unicipal facilities is e qual to a TN of 8 mg/l and a TP

of 2.0 m g /l. It was determ ined by the NRT Cost Task Force that it would not be feasible and in

most cases n on-cost effective to cons ider a leve l of im plem entation grea te r than this f o r sm all

f acilities.

Note that for TP, as in th e case for T N previ ously described, loads for certain facilities m a y actually increase depending on the tiers. For example, a facility m a y have an actual 2000 TP

effluent concentration of 0.87 m g /l TP, but the con centration is raised to 1.0 m g /l to m a tch the

Tier 1 definition (assum i ng there is no perm it lim its requiring an effluent less than 1.0 mg/l).

The NRT Task Force believed th at th is is m o re appropriate than holding the effluent

concentration in 2000 constant th roughout the Tiers because operati ons efficiency m a y decrease

at higher 2010 flows.

5

## TABLE II - C: Descrip t ion Of T i ers For Point Sources*

( c o n c e n t r a t i o n s g i v e n i n t e r m s o f a n a n n u a l a v e r a g e in mg /l)

P o int Sour c e Category Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

Significant

M unic i pals TN= 8 for those

with BNR operating

or planne d;

TN and TP for rest of

facilities

= 2000 concentrations TN = 8

TP = 1.0

Or pe rmit lim it if less TN= 5.0

TP = 0.5

Or pe rmit lim it if less TN = 3.0

TP = 0.1

Significant

Ind u str i als TN and TP =

2000 concentrat ions

or perm it limit if l e ss G e ne r a l l y a 5 0%

reduction from Tier 1

(or 2000 concen trations)

or p erm it con d i tion s if

le ss Genera ll y an 80 %

reduction from Tier 1

(or 2000 concen trations)

or p erm it con d i tion s if

le ss TN = 3.0 and T P = 0.1

or p erm it con d i tion s if

le ss

Nonsignificant

M unic i pals TN and TP = 2 000

con cen tration s TN and TP = 2 000

con cen tration s TN and TP = 2 000

con cen tration s TN = 8 & T P = 2.0

Or 2000 concentrations

if le ss

CSOs S ee Ap p e n d i x B for a comp l e te d e s crip t ion of t h e tie r s for th e DC CS O



## * Note that all flows are in term s of t hose projected by 2010

6

# III. COST METHODOLOGY FOR ESTIMATING THE COSTS

FOR SIGNIFICANT M UNI CI PALS FOR TI ER 2 & 3

Prepared by Thor Young, STEARNS & WHELER, LLC, Bowie, MD with assi stance fro m

CH 2 

## MHILL, Herndon, VA



## 3.1 Purpose

The purpose of this report is to develop a m e thodology for estim a ting the capital and

operating costs of upgrading all significant m unicipal wastewat er treatment plants in the

Chesapeake Bay watersh e d for:

• Tier 2 Nitrogen Goal of 8.0 m g /L efflue nt annual average total nitrogen (T N)

for all plants not included in Ti er 1 nitrogen rem oval upgrades.

• Tier 2 Phosphorus Goal of 1.0 m g /L e ffluent m o nthly average total phosphorus

(TP) f o r all plants no t cu rrently capable of m eeting this goal.

• Tier 3 Phosphorus Goal of 0.5 m g /L effluent m o nthly average TP for all plants

that were upgraded for T i er 2 Phosphorus Goals or were already operating with

less than 1.0 m g /L efflue nt TP.

These estimates m a y be used for scenario planning and cost/benefit analysis, especially

for plants that do not already have sp ecific cost estim ates developed.

3.2 Background and Approach

Actual and estim ated capital cost data is av ailable for nitrogen rem oval system upgrades

to 8.0 m g /L effluent TN for m a ny plants in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. These

estim ates were tabulated by the EPA’s Ches apeake Bay Program Office. Because th e

actual data date from the late 1990s to 2002, for the purposes of this cost estim ating

m e thod, all costs were converted to 2000 dollars. The year 2 000 was selected as the base

year for the cost es tim ates for two reasons. First, the data in the EPA’s database was

collected in the year 2000. Secondly, 2000 is the approxim a te m i d-point of the different

cost estim ates in this database. The co st data was converted to 2000 dollars using

Engineering News-Record, Building Cost Index

.

The EPA’s Chesapeake Bay Program Office had no previou s ly tabu lated capital cos t data

for phosphorus rem oval system s.

Nitrogen and phosphorus rem oval processes invo lve different associated operations and

m a intenance costs. Therefore, separate approaches were taken for nitrogen and

phosphorus rem oval cost estim a ting. Both cap ital and operations and m a intenance costs

are assum e d to be in July 2000 dollars, and s hould be updated to the anticipated date of

construction.

7

## 3.3 Tier 2 Nitrogen Removal System U p grades

About half of the significant m unicipal treat m e nt plants in the Chesapeake Bay watershed

have already been upgraded to m eet Tier 1 nitrogen rem oval goals of 8.0 mg/L efflue nt

TN or less. The Tier 2 nitrogen rem oval goals are the sam e as the Tier 1 goals (8 m g /L

TN or less), therefore it was determ ined th at the cost of upgrad ing non-B N R facilities for

Tier 2 nitrogen goals could be estim ated from an extrapolation of the cost of upgrading

sim ilar f acilities f o r the Tier 1 nitrogen rem oval goals.

3.3.1 Capital Cost Estimatin g – Tier 2 Nitrogen Removal Upgrades

The available capital cost data for Tier 1 nitrogen rem oval upgrades at significant

municipal w a stewater treatm ent plants in the Chesapeake Bay watershed are listed in

Appendix E. Only cost data produced from actual construction costs, engineering design

estim ates, or prelim inary engineering reports/fac ilities plan s are includ ed in Appendix E.

The list, pro v ided by the EPA, includes accu ra te capital cost estim ates for upgrading 67

f acilities. A statis tical analys is on the data was perform e d, a nd a best-fit line equation

was calcu lated. A summary of the statis tic al analysis is shown in Appendix F. The

calculated equation is representa tive of the capital cost asso ciated with nitrogen rem oval

f o r any wastewater trea tm ent f acility in th e Ches apeake Bay watershed. A graph of the

data is shown in Figure III -A. The equation ca n be used to extrapolate cost estim a tes for

all plants requiring upgrades that do not have current cost es tim a tes available, based on

each plan t’s specific design flow.

As Appendix B shows, capita l cos t s f r om f

ac ilitie s in VA, MD, and PA were used to

determ ine the average price for nitrogen rem oval upgrades and m u ch of the cost

inform ation was obtained from as-bid costs prov ided by the facility or State as part of

their state grant cost share program s. It shoul d be noted that while cost estim ates from all

states were c o llec tive l y u s ed to de ter m ine av erage values, capital costs may be som e what

less f o r the Virginia f acilities due to dif f e re nces in state gran t cost share eligib ility

requirem e nts. Because Virginia’s existi ng g r an t program is considered “ V oluntary

Cooperative”, the Commonwealth has not funded nitrification proce ss com ponents and/or

tanks if the need to nitrif y year round was based on a pe rm itted requirement; on ly the

share/p e rcen tage of nitrification capacity lost/needed as a result of installing

denitrif ica t ion has been consider ed g r ant e lig ible.

The equation for Tier 2 Nitroge n Ca pita l Cost Es tim ating:

2 

## 733

. 5986 8039

. 704350 2023829 Q Q Cost ×

− × + =

where Q = design flow rate (mgd) between 0.5 and 30.0 m gd

8Cost Cu rve @ 8 m g / L

0 5, 000, 000 10, 000, 000 15, 000, 000 20, 000, 000 25, 000, 000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Plan t Siz e ( m g d )Cost (2000 $)



## Figure III- A: Graph showing capital cos t to re duce total nitrogen efflu e nt concen trations

to 8m g/L for plants Chesapeake Bay watershed.

For treatm ent plants larger th an 30.0 m gd, specific cost data furnished by the facilities

them selves will be us ed inste a d of th e cost cu rve shown in Figure II I -A.

3.3.2 O&M Cost Estimating – Nitrogen Removal

The prim ary im pact on operations costs associat ed with biological nitrogen rem oval is the

change in electrical requirem ents for aerati on. The current effluent amm o nia and nitrate

concentratio n for each facility can b e us ed to determ ine the impacts on aeration

requirem e nts. Plants with amm onia con centratio ns greater th an 2 m g /L r e quire

additional nitrification to conve rt ammonia-nitrogen to nitrat e-nitrogen. The nitrification

process requires oxygen. Specifically, 4.57 lbs of oxygen are required per pound of

ammonia nitrogen rem oved. Thus, the oxygen requirem e nt can be calculated given a

plant’s effluent amm oni a concentration. Once the oxygen requirem e nt is known, the

brake horsepower can be determ ined using a simplified calculation m e thod. This method

is based on the following assum p tions that have been developed from typical aeration

system s:

• The typical actual oxygen requirem e nt/sta ndard oxygen requirem ent (AOR/SOR)

ratio for a fine bubble aeration system is 0.33.

• The typical fine bubble oxygen transfer efficiency (SOTE) is 2.0% per f oot of

diffuser subm ergence. Assum e 25% on average.

• 1 SCFM of air contains 0.0173 pounds of oxygen.

• 40 HP is required to adia batically compress 1000 SCFM

9

## First, the a i r f l ow rate (S CFM) is calcula ted based on the oxygen requirem e nt, AOR/ SOR,

and SOTE. Then, the brake hor sepower is calculated based o n the airf low rate, b l ower

discharge pressure, and blower efficiency. Finally the cost is determ ined based on the

brake horsepower and the cost of electricit y. $0.05 per kilowatt-hour of electricity was

assum e d. An exam ple spreadsheet utilizi ng this m e thodology has been provided. The

calcu lations are summ arized below:

• 

# ( )

nitrify N lb lbsO Q NH NH d req O goal 2

2010 3 2000 3 2 

## 57

. 4 34

. 8 ] [ ] [ ' × × ×

− =



## • 

# ( ) ) / ( 0173

. 0 / ) / ( 1440 / / / / ' '

2 2 

## SCFM O lbs day m SOTE SOR AOR d req O d req SCFM

=



## • 

## SCFM HP SCFM BHP 1000 40

× =

Denitrification processes lower the bioc hem i cal oxygen dem a nd of the wastewater

stream , thus lowering the ove rall oxygen requirem e nt of the plant. Therefore,

denitrification processes provide an electrical co st saving s to the operation of the plant.

To determ ine the electrical cost savings, th e am ount of oxygen saved is calculated using

the relationship: 2.86 pounds of oxygen save d per pound of nitrate denitrified. The

calculated amount of oxygen saved is converted to an electrical cost in the sam e

procedure used for nitrification processes. An exam ple spreadsheet u t ilizing th is

m e thodology has been provided. The calcula tion to determ ine the am ount of oxygen

saved by denitrification is shown below:



# ( )

denitrify N lb lbsO Q NO NO saved O goal 2

2010 3 2000 3 2 

## 86

. 2 34

. 8 ] [ ] [ × × ×

− =



## In both nitrification and de nitrification process operat ion and m a intenance cost

calculations, the anticipated plan t flow rate for the year 2010 s hould be used. In term s of

additional operations and m a intenance cost, ther e is a neg lig ible change in solids

production, and there is no additional labor re quired. Capital repl acem ent cost is not

included in the operations and m a intenance cost . Maintenance cost can be estim a ted as

2% of capital costs p e r y ear.

3.4 Tier 2 Phosphorus Removal System Upgrades



## Significant municipal w a stewater treatm ent plants in the Chesapeake Bay watershed

should be divided into three categorie s: “TP<1mg/L”, “1<TP < 2m g/L”, a nd

“TP>2m g/L”.

10

## For the purp o ses of this evalua tion, it was assum e d that all tr eatm e nt pla n ts will u s e

chem ical precipitation to rem ove phosphorus. T h is is not intended as a recomm endat i on

of che m ical precipitation over biological phosphorus rem oval. On the contrary,

biological phosphorus rem oval is often the pref erred alternative when feasible. However,

for the task of assigning cost for the Tier 2 phosphorus rem oval standa rds, it is easier to

genera te cap ita l and oper a ting co sts if the assum p tion is m a de that a ll sy ste m s use

chem ical precipitation m e thods.

Plants with total phosphorus concentration le ss than 1 m g /L a r e already achieving Tier 2

nutrient levels and are not in cluded in the evaluation. Plants with total phosphorus

concentratio ns greater th an 1 m g /L and less than 2 m g /L are assum e d to already have

chem ical addition system s for phosphorus rem oval. There are no a dditional capital costs

associated w ith th ese plants; however, th ere are o p erations an d m a intenan ce costs

associated w ith increased chem ical addition and sludge handling. The plants with total

phosphorus concentratio ns greater th an 2 m g /L r e quire n e w chem ical addition facilities

and subsequent operations and m a intenance costs.

3.4.1 Capital Cost Estimatin g – Phosphorus Removal



## For all plants with total phosphorus greater th an 2 m g /L, capital costs for a new chem i cal

addition f acility includ in g chem ical f eed pum ps and chem ical storage tank s will be

incurred. For this m e thodology, we selected alum as the chem ical for phosphorus

rem oval. Alum is readily available, cost-effective, and precipitates phosphorus

efficiently. Since chem ical f eed f acilities ’ desig n does not v a ry gre a tly b e tween plan ts, it

was determ ined f o r this evalua tion that cap ita l costs for a 0.5, 1, 10, and 30 m gd plant

would be representative of the range of costs f o r all p l ants. C a pita l cos t s f o r plan ts with

flow capacities of 0.5 to 10 m gd were obtained from the EPA Handbook – Retrofitting

POTWs for Phosphorus Removal in the Chesapeake Bay Drainage Basin (Sept, 1987).

Capital cost f o r a plant w ith f l ow cap acity of 30 mgd was obtained from the Innovative

and Alternative Technol ogy Assessm ent Manual (Feb, 1980). Both sources of cost data

were converted to July 2000 dollars using the Engineering News-Record – Construction

Cost Index. The results are summ arized in Table I II - A. Thes e typical cos t estim a tes are

graphed ve rsus plant d e s i gn flow capacity. The g r aph is show n in Figure III-B. Cost

estim ates for indiv i dual plants can b e ex trapolated from Figure III-B bas e d on each

plant’s specific design flow.

Capital costs can be ex trapol ated by determ ining the equatio n s of the line s between the

data points on Figure III - B. The e quations for F i gure III-B are as follows:

For, 0.1 < Q ≤ 1.0 m g d Cost = 94444 x Q design 

## + 65556

1.0 < Q < 30.0 mgd Cost = 15172 x Q design 

## + 144828

11

## From these equation s , th e f acility ca pita l cost based on design flow is given. Facility cost

for plants with flows outside the range of this graph can be approxim a ted by using the

ma x i mu m a n d mi n i mu m c o s t

.

Table III - A : Capital Cost Data Summ ary – Phos phorus Removal

Pla n t Flow

(mgd) 0.1 1 30

Cost ($) $75,000 $160,000 $600,000

Capi tal Cost Curve, T P = 1 m g / L

$0 $100, 000 $200, 000 $300, 000 $400, 000 $500, 000 $600, 000 $700, 000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Pla n t Size ( m gd)Cost ($)



## Figure III - B: Graph show ing capital cost/mg d plant flow to reduce total

phosphorus concentrations to 1 mg/L



## 12

## 3.4.2 O&M Cost Estimating – Phosphorus Removal



## In chem ical phosphorus precipita tion, liquid alum, or alum inum sulfate, is added to the

wastewater stream . The alum inum s u lfat e reacts with soluble phosphorus to form

alum inum phosphate, w h ich is insoluble and precipitates out of solution as sludge.

Com p eting reactions occur sim u ltaneously and th us alum inum hydroxide sludge is also a

byproduct of phosphorus rem oval. For plants w ith total phosphorus concentrations

greater than 1 m g /L, operations and m a intena nce costs as sociated with ch em ical costs

and sludge handling costs were calculated.

To estim ate the cost of liquid alum per faci lity, the am ount of liquid alum required to

reduce the plant’s total phosphor us concentration to 1 m g /L is calculated. For this

m e thodology, the alum inum dose required is calculated using the alum inum to

phosphorus molar ratio of 1.5:1 for Tier 2 nutri ent levels. Therefore, 14.4 m g /L alum is

required per 1 m g /L total phosphorus rem oved. 50 % alum solution should be assum e d

for all calculations with an alum bulk density of 11.09 lb/gal. For this m e thodology, use

a budget cost of $269/ton alum , per EPA Wastewater Technology Fact Sheet for

Chemical Precipitation (Septem b er, 2000). An exam ple spreadsheet utilizing this

m e thodology has been provided. The cal culation is summ arized below:

• TP removed 

## (mg/L) = TP 2 000 

## – TP

go al



## • Alum Mass Flow (lb/day) = TP

remo ved 

## x MFR x WR x Q 2010 

## x 8.34

where: MFR = Al:P molar feed ratio (1.5:1, for Tier 2)

WR = Alum:P weight ratio (9.6:1)

Q 2010 

## = Anticipated F l ow for Year 2010, mgd

• Alum Cost = Alum (lb/day) x (365d ays/year) / (2000lbs/ton) x ($269/ton)

To estim ate the sludge production from alum ch em ical addition, calculations detailed in

the EPA Design Manual for Phosphorus Removal (Septem b er, 1987) should be used.

The following stoichiom e tric equations govern the sludge producing reactions:

Al + PO 4 

## = AlPO 4 

## and Al + 3 OH = Al(OH) 3



## Each plant’s specific effluent phosphorus c oncentration should be used along with the

anticipated 2010 plant flow rate to calcul ate the sludge produced to reach a total

phosphorus concentration of 1 m g /L. For th is m e thodology, sludge handling and disposal

costs shou ld be assum e d to be $300/dry ton slud ge. No additional labo r costs are

required for phosphorus precip itation and additional energy costs are negligible.

Maintenance cost can be estim a ted as 2% of ca pita l costs p e r yea r . Capita l rep l ace m e nt

costs shou ld not be inclu d ed in the o p erations an d m a intenan ce cost. An exam ple

spreadsheet utilizing this m e thodology ha s been provided. The calculations are

summar i zed bel o w:

13

## • Al dose(mg/L) = MFR x TP removed 

## x AWR

where: MFR = Al:P molar feed ratio (1.5:1, for Tier 2)

AWR = Al:P atomic weight ratio (27/31)

• [AlPO 4 

## ] = 

# ( )

aw

aw removed 

## AlPO

P TP

4 

## ×



## where: [ A lPO 4 

## ] = concentration of aluminum phosphate (mg/L)

P

aw 

## = atomic weight of phosphorus (31)

( A l P O 4 

## )

aw 

## = atomic weight of aluminum phosphate (122)

• [Al(OH 3 

## )] = 

# ( ) ( )

aw

aw removed

aw 

## OH Al

P TP

Al

dose Al

3 

## ×      

 

 

 

 

−  

 

 

 

where: [ A l(OH) 3 

## ] = concentration of aluminum hydroxide (mg/L)

A l

aw 

## = atomic weight of aluminum (27)

( A l ( O

H

) 3



## )

aw 

## = atomic weight of aluminum hydroxide (78)

• Total Sludge (lb/d) = ([AlPO 4 

## ] + [ A l ( O

H

) 3



## ]) x Q 2010 

## x 8.34

• Sludge Handling Cost = Total Sludge x (365d/yr) / (2000lbs/ton) x ($300/ton)

3.5 Tier 3 Phosphorus Removal System Upgrades



## In form ulating the cost of Tier 3 phosphor us rem oval system upgrades, it was again

assum e d that all treatm e nt plants will use chem ical precipitation to rem ove phosphorus.

Furtherm ore, it was assum e d that Tier 3 goals would be enacted after Tier 2 goals were

already in place, so th at all of the s i g n ificant was t ewater treatm e nt plants in the waters hed

would already have chem ical phosphorus rem oval system s in place. Th us, the cap ital

cost of im plem enting Tier 3 phosphorus rem oval system upgrades will be zero.

The operating cost of implem enting Tier 3 phosphorus rem oval upgrades can be found

using the sam e methodology used to determ in e the operating cost of Tier 2 phosphorus

rem oval upgrades, with the following exceptions:

• 

## All facilities are assum e d to already be operating with an effluent TP of 1.0

m g /L or less

.

• 

## The goal m o lar f eed r a tio to achieve 0

. 5 m g /L effl uent TP will be 2:1 instead of

1.5:1, as was used to achieve an effluent TP of 1.0 m g /L.

14

# IV. COST M E THODOLOGY FOR TIER 3 AND TIER 4 NUTRIENT

REM O VAL FOR SIGNIFI CANT M UNICI PAL FACI LITIES

By Tom Sadick, CH2M HILL, Herndon, VA

Cost estim ates were developed to as sist in the ev aluation of the benefits and potential

costs of various levels of nutrient removal at wastewater trea tm ent plants in the

Chesapeake Bay watershed. Four tiers or levels o f treatm e nt were analy z ed. The first tier

repres ents th e curr ent (20 02) leve l of trea tm ent being achieved by plants w ithin the

watershed (DC, Maryland, Virginia and Penns ylvania). T i er 1 is the baseline for

com p arison. The second tier represents the in crem ental costs required to achieve total

nitrogen (T N) concentrations of 8 mg/L a nd total phosphorus (TP) concentrations of 1.0

mg/L for those plants without this level of treatm e n t in operation or construction. Tier 3

provides increm ental costs for TN of 5 m g /L and TP of 0.5 mg/L. The highest level of

treatm ent, Tier 4, repres ents in crem ental co st s for going from Tier 3 to T i er 4 – the lim it

of technology (LOT). LOT is generally consid ered to be 3 mg/L TN and 0.1 m g /L TP.

The tiers are summarized in Table IV- A. The purpose of this docum ent is to present the

results of this work and to describe the m e thodology used to estim ate costs.

Table IV – A Summary of Tier ed Nitrogen and Phosphorus Levels

Tier Total Nitrogen Total Phosphorus

1 Current lim it Current lim it

2 8 m g /L 1 m g /L

3 5 m g /L 0.5 m g /L

4 3 m g /L 0.1 m g /L

Appendix G provides details of cost assum p tions used in this m e thodology.

4.1 Tier 3 Results and Methodology

Cost inf o rmation f o r ach ieving Tier 2 lim its we re available f o r approxim a tely one half of

the treatm e nt plan ts in th e watersh e d. These data were analy z ed sta tis tica l ly and used to

estim ate costs for the plants without specific cost infor m ation. However, unlike Tier 2,

costs f o r ach ieving Tier 3 lim its is v e ry li m ited and unavaila b le with in th e tim e f r am e

needed for this evaluatio n. Therefore, a generic approach using was developed to

estim ate app r oxim a te costs f o r this level of tre a tm ent.

Capital costs were estimated by assum i ng certain im prove m e nts were necessary to

achieve treatm ent levels to plants with capacities of 0.1, 1.0, 10 a nd 30 m g d. Operations

and m a intenance (O&M ) costs were also calcul ated for the plants of these sizes. Cost

15

## curves were then developed from this data and w e re used for estim ating costs for plants

within these ranges that do not have a c tual costs a v ailab l e f o r this lev e l of treatm ent.

The results f r om this type of analysis will prov ide an “orde r-o f

- m a gnitude ” estim a te on

the basis of design flow that will have value for estim ating basin-wide costs, but not for

the developm ent of budgets for individual facil ities (an individual faci lity m a y cost more

or less, but the aggregate num b ers should be reasonable). S ite specific factors such as

wastewater characteristics, site constraints, geotechnica l conditions, and the condition

and layout of the existing facility can have a dram atic im pac t on the ultim a te cost of a

WWTP renovation p r oject. Unfortunately, a detailed evaluation of each facility that

consider s site specif i c f a ctors require s conside r ab le ef f o rt, an d f e w f acilities have don e

the planning for Tier 3 and Tier 4 nutrient re m o val, thus this approach was used as an

approxim a tion of costs.

4.1.1 Costs for T N = 5 mg/L

Capital and O&M costs for achieving Tier 3 nitrogen lim its for the four generic plant

sizes are p r esented in Table IV- B.

Table IV- B

Summ ary of Capital and Operating Costs for Tier 3 Nitrogen Re m oval TN = 5 m g /L

Plan t Design C a p acity

0. 1 M G D 1. 0 M G D 10 M G D 30 M G D

C a pi t a l C o st $ 2 4 1

, 0 0 0 $ 1, 11 2, 0 00 $ 4, 92 7, 0 00 $ 12 ,3 8 3

, 0 0 0

An n u al O & M C o st $ 7, 04 6 $ 29 ,2 1 8 $ 15 7, 4 69 $ 29 3, 9 38



## Figure IV-A presents the capital cos t curves for T N = 5 and Figure IV-B shows the O&M

cost curves developed from the generic cos t s.

16

## T N = 5

, Co s t Cu r v e f o r T o t a l Ca p i t a l Co s t s

y

= 967. 06x + 144. 44

R 2 

## = 1

$0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1, 000 $1, 200

0 0

. 2 0. 4 0

. 6 0. 8 1 1. 2

Pl a n t Si z e (m g d )Costs (x$1000)



## T N = 5

, Co s t Cu r v e f o r T o t a l Ca p i t a l Co s t s

y

= 386. 01x + 864. 83

R 2 

## = 0. 999

$0 $2, 000 $4, 000 $6, 000 $8, 000 $10, 000 $12, 000 $14, 000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Pl a n t Si z e (m g d )Costs (x$1000)



## Figure IV- A: Cost Curves for Total Capital Costs with TN = 5 m g /L

17

## TN = 5

, C o s t C u r v e f o r A nnua l O & M C o s t s

y

= 24636x + 4582. 1

R 2 

## = 1

$0 $5, 0 00 $10, 000 $15, 000 $20, 000 $25, 000 $30, 000 $35, 000

0 0

. 2 0. 4 0

. 6 0. 8 1 1. 2

P l a n t S i z e (mg d )Costs



## TN = 5

, C o s t C u r v e f o r A nnua l O & M C o s t s

y

= 13383x + 19021

R 2



## = 0. 9996

$0 $50, 000 $100, 0 00 $150, 0 00 $200, 0 00 $250, 0 00 $300, 0 00 $350, 0 00 $400, 0 00 $450, 0 00

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

P l a n t S i z e (mg d )Costs



## Figure IV- B: Cost Curves for Total O&M Costs with TN = 5 m g /L



## 4.1.2 Methodology for estimating TN = 5 mg/L costs

The m e thodology for developm ent for costs fo r TN = 5 consisted of assum i ng certain

im prove m e nts would be needed to bring a standa rd activated sludge plant to this level of

treatm ent. The following assum p tions were m a de in order to develop the costs.

4.1.2.1. The plant is already capable of achie ving an annual average TN of 8 mg/L

18

## 4.1.2.2. In order to achieve 5 m g /L, im provem e nts woul d be required to im prove

nitr if ication, clar if ication

, and to rem ove an additional 3 m g /L of TN

4.1.2.3. For increased nitrogen re moval, it was further assum e d that a secondary anoxic

zone (follow i ng aeration) would be used. The zone was sized for a one hour

hydraulic detention tim e at design flow. Methanol addition w a s also assum e d to

be needed to achieve the additional denitr ification in the seco ndary anoxic zone.

The costs for additional tankage for the secondary anoxic zone were estimated

at $2.50 per gallon installed. An allowa nce was also provided for m i xing and

m i scellaneo u s m echanical equipm ent not specifically identified. Estim ates were

also m a de for m e thanol storage and f eed facilities for each size plant.

4.1.2.4. Because the additional n i trogen rem o val re qu ires more nitrification capacity and

reliability an allowance was provide d f o r im provem ents such as im proved f l ow

splitting, m o re tankage, or aeration imp rovem e nt s. These were based on an

allowance per gallon - $ 0.50/gal for th e 0.1 m gd plant, $0.25/gal for the 1.0

mgd plant , and $ 0.10/gal for the 10 and 30 m gd plants.

4.1.2.5. It was further assum e d that additional clarification capacity would be required

to handle the additional MLSS needed for m o re reliable n i trif ication a s well a s

im proving overall clarification and TSS rem oval. Additi onal clarification

equivalent to 25% of the design flow was assum e d. For exam ple, the 1 m gd

plant would receive 250, 000 gpd of addition a l capacity, 2.5 mgd of clarification

capacity was added for the 10 m gd plan t and the 30 m gd plant would increase

clarifier capacity by 7.5 mgd. Costs for the additional clarification capacity was

estim ated using EPA cost curves for clarifiers (E PA 430/9-78-009 Innovative

and Alternative Technology A ssessm e nt) and adjusted for inflation using the

Engineering News Record Construction Cost Indexes (ENR CCI).

4.1.2.6. The sum of the im provem e nts was then added for each facility and then a 30%

program i m plem entation cost was added for program costs associated with

engineering, construction m a nagem e nt, legal, bonding and adm i nistrative fees.

The sum of the construction and the imple m e ntation cost is th e capital co s t

.

4.1.2.7. O&M costs were developed using co sts for m e thanol, increased solids

production, energy, and m a intenance. A dditional labo r for operations was not

consider ed n ecessa ry f o r this a lte rnativ e. The ass u m p tions for each are as

f o llows:

• Methanol: 3.1 lbs of m e th anol per pound of nitrate re duced (3 m g /L nitrate in

this case) Methanol costs of $1.00 per ga llon were used exce pt for the 0.1 m gd

plant where $2.00 per gallon was used for 55 gallon drum feed instead of bulk

storage.

• Additional solids production: Yield of 0.12 lbs of solids per lb of m e thanol

applied. $300.00 per dry ton was used for solids handling, stabilization and

disposal or reuse.

19

## • Energy was estim ated on the bas i s of m i xing and other uses for each p l ant size

at $0.05/kW -hr.

• Maintenance costs were developed usi ng two percent of the p l ants capital

cost.

Note: the O & M costs for all Tiers were deve loped using design flow for each facility

. When used to develop basin wide cos t s, th e 2010 flows will be used to prorate the an nual

O&M costs.

4.1.3 Methodology for fitting equations to TN = 5 mg/L data

Several d i fferent types o f equation fits were tested with each da ta set: linear, power,

logarithm i c, and polynom i al. Linear, pow er, and polynom ial (specifically quadratic)

were found to be the closest m a tches depending on the data set. One m e a s ure of the

success of the fit of an equa tion to the line is a hig h coef f i cient of determ ination (R 2 

## ).

However, in the case of these data sets, freque ntly m o re than o n e t ype of equation fit the

line with an R 2 

## value of over 0.99. The difference in R 2 

## values between equation fits is

therefore m eaningless. However, given th e few data points available, it is m o st

appropriate to use a linear fit.

In addition to testing different types of equations, different data sets were also exam ined.

The first round involved determ ining the e quation of both the total capital costs and

O&M costs of the entire upgrade. Th en, the equation for the capital costs of each

com ponent of the upgrade (i.e. secondary a noxic reactor, denite filters, etc.) was

determ ined. It was found that the equations for the total capital costs were a close

enough fit that there was no need to look at the equations for the data subsets.

The equation fits for the entire upgrade still ha d som e inherent degree of error in them

. That is, they underestimated costs in som e places and overestim ated in others. In o r der to

m i nim i ze this erro r and r e f i ne the eq uations, the data se t was split in two subsets (POTW s

0.1 to 1.0 mgd and POTWs greater than 1.0 m g d to 30 m gd) based on plant size. This

provided the m o st precise set of equations for both Total Capital Costs and Annual O&M

Costs. This sam e m e thodology was used to determ ine the equations associated with the

TN= 3 m g /L data.

4.1.4 Capital Costs for TP = 0.5 mg/L

In for m ulating the cost of Tier 3 phosphor us rem oval system upgrades, it was again

assum e d that all treatm e n t plants will use ch em ical precipitation to rem ove phosphorus.

Furtherm ore, it was assum e d that Tier 3 goals would be enacted after Tier 2 goals were

already in place, so that all of the sig n ificant was t ewate r trea tm ent plants in th e waters hed

would already have chem ical phosphorus rem ova l system s in place. Thus, the capital

cost of im plem enting Tier 3 phosphorus rem oval system upgrades will be zero.

20

## 4.1.5 Methodology for estimating operating costs for TP = 0.5 mg/L

In chem ical phosphorus precipita tion, liquid alum, or alum i n um sulfate, is added to the

wastewater stream . The alum inum sulfate rea c ts with so luble phosphorus to form

alum inum phosphate w h ich is insoluble a nd precipitates out of solution as sludge.

Com p eting reactions occur sim u ltaneously and th us alum inum hydroxide sludge is also a

byproduct of phosphorus rem oval. For plants with total phosphorus concentrations

greater than 0.5 m g /L, operations and m a intena nce costs associated with chem ical costs

and sludge handling costs were calculated. All facilities are assum e d to already be

operating with an effluent TP of 1.0 mg/L or less.

To estim ate the cost of liquid alum per faci lity , the am ount of li quid alum required to

reduce the plant’s total phosphorus concentration to 0.5 mg/L is calculated. For this

m e thodology, the alum inum dos e required is calculated using the alum inum t o

phosphorus molar ratio of 2.0:1 fo r Tier 3 nutrient levels. T h er efore, 19.2 m g /L alum i s

required per 1 m g /L total phosphorus rem oved. 50 % alum solution should be assum e d

for all calculations with an alum bul k dens ity of 11.09 lb/gal. For this methodology, use

a budget cost of $269/ton alum , per EPA Wastewater Technology Fact Sheet for

Chemical Precipitation (Septem b er, 2000). The calculation is summ arized below:

• TP removed 

## (mg/L) = TP 2 000 

## – TP

go al



## • Alum Mass Flow (lb/day) = TP

remo ved 

## x MFR x WR x Q 2010 

## x 8.34

where: MFR = Al:P molar feed ratio (2.0:1, for Tier 3)

WR = Alum:P weight ratio (9.6:1)

Q 2010 

## = Anticipated F l ow for Year 2010, mgd

• Alum Cost = Alum (lb/day) x (365d ays/year) / (2000lbs/ton) x ($269/ton)

To estim ate the sludge production from alum chem ical addition, calculations detailed in

the EPA Design Manual for Phosphorus Removal (September, 1987) should be used.

The following stoichiom e tric equations govern the sludge producing reactions:

Al + PO 4 

## = AlPO 4 

## and Al + 3 OH = Al(OH) 3



## Each plant’s specific effluent phosphorus c oncentration should be used along with the

anticipated 2010 plant flow rate to calcula te the sludge produced to reach a total

phosphorus concentration of 1 m g /L. For th is m e thodology, sludge handling and disposal

costs should be assum e d to be $300/dry to n sludge. No additi onal labor costs are

required for phosphorus precipitation and a ddition a l energy cos t s are neg lig ible.

Maintenance cos t can b e es tim ated as 2% of ca pita l cos t s p e r ye ar. Ca pita l r e pla c e m ent

costs should not be included in the operations and m a intenance cost. The calculations are

summarized below:

21

## • Al dose(mg/L) = MFR x TP removed 

## x AWR

where: MFR = Al:P molar feed ratio (2.0:1, for Tier 3)

AWR = Al:P atomic weight ratio (27/31)

• [AlPO 4 

## ] = 

# ( )

aw

aw removed 

## AlPO

P TP

4 

## ×



## where: [ A lPO 4 

## ] = concentration of aluminum phosphate (mg/L)

P

aw 

## = atomic weight of phosphorus (31)

( A l P O 4 

## )

aw 

## = atomic weight of aluminum phosphate (122)

• [Al(OH 3 

## )] = 

# ( ) ( )

aw

aw removed

aw 

## OH Al

P TP

Al

dose Al

3 

## ×      

 

 

 

 

−  

 

 

 

where: [ A l(OH) 3 

## ] = concentration of aluminum hydroxide (mg/L)

A l

aw 

## = atomic weight of aluminum (27)

( A l ( O

H

) 3



## )

aw 

## = atomic weight of aluminum hydroxide (78)

• Total Sludge (lb/d) = ([AlPO 4 

## ] + [ A l ( O

H

) 3



## ]) x Q 2010 

## x 8.34

• Sludge Handling Cost = Total Sludge x (365d/yr) / (2000lbs/ton) x ($300/ton)

4.2 Tier 4 Results and Methodology

For Tier 4 generic plant cost developm ent, it was assum e d that the technology used to

achieve an e f f l uent TN of 3 m g /L was deep be d d e nitrif ica tio n f ilter s . M e tal salt addition

with m i crofiltration was assum e d as the tec hno lo gy of choice for LOT for 0.1 m g /L TP.

4.2.1 Deep Bed Denitrifying Filters

A proven technology that can achieve this level of nitrogen rem oval and provide a

reasonab l e e s tim ate of costs is d eep bed de nitrif ying f ilte rs ( D BDF). Another s i gnif i cant

advantage o f DBDFs is the filtering action that can aid TSS and phosphorus rem oval.

Other technologies can achieve a TN level of 3 mg/L (e.g., fluidized beds, denitrifying

biological filters, suspen ded growth sy stem s with m u ltiple anoxic zones and

supplem ental carbon add ition ) , however, apply i n g the sim p lifying assum p tion th at DBDF

technology will be us ed at all facilities will p r ovide reason able capital and operating costs

that can be used for prelim inary pl anning and cost benefit analysis.

Deep bed denitrifying filtration is a down -flow, packed-bed process perform i ng both

suspended s o lids r e m o val (as in a ty pical filter) and biological nitrogen rem oval.

Denitrifying bacteria grow on the m e dia usi ng an extern al sou r ce of carbo n, such as

m e thanol, as a food source and nitrate in the effluent as a source of respiration (under

22

## anoxic cond itions ). The DBDFs are sim ilar to w a ter filters except th e m e dia is usu a lly a

coarse, high density sand consisting of round hard particles. Bed depths are typically on

the order of 5 feet and have a gravel underdrain system

. DBDFs use both air and water

during backwashing.

In operation, the denitrifica tion process reduces nitrate-n itrogen to nitrogen gas, and

results in the f o rm ation of cell m a ss, water, and alkalinity. T h e beds are occasionally

rem oved from service and are “bum ped” usi ng w a shwater to rem ove trapped gas from

the bed. Conventional hydraulic loading ra tes of 1 to 2 gpm / s q ft are typical for

municipal w a stewater. At thes e loa d ing ra tes ba ckwash inte rvals can range from 1 to 4

days. Nitrogen gas bumping cycles are typically between 4 and 8 hrs.

DBDFs are widely used for nitrogen rem oval, particu l ar ly in s m aller plants in Flor ida

where TN lim its of 3 mg/L are being achieved. T a m p a, Florida and Munich, Germ any

have large installations.

4.2.2 Microfiltration

Low pressure m e mbrane treatm ent (m icro or ultra filtration ) is a suitable technology to

achieve very low effluent phosphorus concentrat ions if m e tal salts ar e used just upstream

to precipitate soluble phosphorus. S o m e ex isting plants in the region with tertiary

clar if ication and f iltr atio n can re liab l y achieve T P concentr ations below 0 .1 m g /L.

However, microf iltra tion is consid era b ly le ss exp e nsive than an additiona l cla r if ica tio n

and f iltr atio n process an d was theref ore selected f o r use in th is exerc i se a s a reason able

add on process for plants without these facilities. Another fact or in the selection of this

technology is its use with denitr ification filters. The denitr ification filters m u st have

sufficient phosphorus for cell synthesis of th e denitrifiying organism s. Approxim a tely

0.1 to 0.2 mg/L of soluble phosphorus m u st pass on to the filters to support growth and

therefore they cannot be relied upon as the final barrier for phos phorus. Adding a small

dose of m e tal salts and th en process i n g the flow th rough m i crofilters can reduce effluent

TP to below 0.1 m g /L.

4.2.3 Costs for T N = 3 mg/L

Capital and O&M costs for achieving Tier 4 nitrogen lim its for the four generic plant

sizes are p r esented in Table IV- C.

Table IV- C

Summ ary of Capital and Operating Costs for Tier 4 Nitrogen Re m oval TN = 3 m g /L

Plan t Design C a p acity

0. 1 M G D 1. 0 M G D 10 M G D 30 M G D

C a pi t a l C o st $ 3 1 2

, 0 0 0 $ 1, 26 8, 0 00 $ 9, 62 0, 0 00 $ 26 ,5 2 0

, 0 0 0

An n u al O & M C o st $ 22 ,9 9 3 $ 69 ,9 2 5 $ 31 1, 6 34 $ 84 1, 1 20



## Figure IV- C presents the capital co st curv es for TN = 3 and Figure IV- D shows the

O&M cost curves developed from the generic costs.

23

## T N = 3 , T o t a l C a p i t a l C o s t C u r v e

y

= 1061. 7x + 205. 83

R

2 

## = 1

$0 $ 200 $ 400 $ 600 $ 800 $1, 0 0 0 $1, 2 0 0 $1, 4 0 0

0 0

. 2 0. 4 0

. 6 0. 8 1 1. 2

Pl a n t Si z e ( m g d )Costs (x$1000)



## T N = 3 , T o t a l C a p i t a l C o s t C u r v e

y

= 866. 49x + 627. 19

R

2



## = 0. 9 995

$0 $5, 000 $10, 000 $15, 000 $20, 000 $25, 000 $30, 000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Pl a n t Si z e ( m gd )Costs (x$1000)



## Figure IV- C: Cost Curves for Total Capital Costs with TN = 3 m g /L

24

## TN = 3

, A nnua l O & M C o s t s

y

= 26573x + 44393

R 2



## = 1

$0 $100, 000 $200, 000 $300, 000 $400, 000 $500, 000 $600, 000 $700, 000 $800, 000 $900, 000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

P l a n t S i z e (m g d )Costs 

## T N = 3

, A n n u al O & M C o st s

y

= 52147x + 17779

R

2 

## = 1

$0 $10, 000 $20, 000 $30, 000 $40, 000 $50, 000 $60, 000 $70, 000 $80, 000

0 0 .2 0

. 4 0 .6 0

. 8 1 1

. 2

P l a n t S i z e (m g d )Costs



## Figure IV- D: Cost Curves for Annual O & M Costs with TN = 3 m g /L



## 4.2.4 Methodology for estimating TN = 3 mg/L costs

As discussed above deep bed denitrification filters were assum e d. Costs were developed

for plant sizes of 0.1, 1.0, 10 and 30 m gd. Capital costs consisted of the f o llowing:

4. 2. 4. 1. 

## A pum p ing station capa b le of providing 30 f t TDH to the denitrif ica tio n f ilter s

and three tim e s the annual design flow to handle peak flows. The cost for the

25

## station was developed using two sets of EPA cost curves (E PA 430/9-78-009

Innovative and Alternative Technology Asse ssment, and the EPA cost curves in

the Cost of Wastewater Conveyance Manua l) with indexing of the cost to the

present u s in g the ENR CCI.

4. 2. 4. 2. 

## Denitrification filter costs were developed using a design hydraulic loadin g of 2

gpm / sq ft and adding redundancy factors fo r filters being backwashed or out of

service for m a intenance. (50% additiona l filters for the 0.1 mgd plant, 20% for

the 1 m gd plant, 15% for the 10 m gd plan t and 10% for the 30 m gd plant). A

flat cost of $ 1,500 per sq uare foot of filter surface was used. This cost is

typica lly us e d to cover th e cost of the f ilter s , build ing and app u rtenan ces.

4. 2. 4. 3. 

## A 30 % program i m plem entation factor was used to arrive at the final capital

cost for each generic plant.

4. 2. 4. 4. 

## N O T E : T h e s e c a p i t a l c o sts are only valid fo r plants without filtration as a final

process. Pla n ts with f i ltr a tion and pu mping statio ns in pla ce will be

consider ably less cos tly to retrof it f o r

this level of nitrog en re moval.

4.2.4.5. O&M costs were developed using co sts for m e thanol, increased solids

production, energy, and m a intenance, and a dditional labor on the basis of plant

size. The as sum p tions for each are as follows:



## • Methanol: 3.1 lbs of m e tha nol per pound of nitrate redu ced (3 m g /L nitrate in

this case 5 mg/L to 2 mg/L – treatm ent target) Methanol costs of $1.00 per

gallon were used except for the 0.1 mgd plant where $2.00 per gallon was

used for 55 gallon drum feed instead of bulk storage.



## • Additional solids production: Yield of 0.12 lbs of solids per lb of m e thanol

applied. $300.00 per dry ton was used for solids handling, stabilization and

disposal or reuse.



## • Energy was estim ated on the bas i s of pum p ing and other uses for each plant

size at $0.05/kW -hr.



## • Labor was based on plant size 0.1 m g d = 2 hrs/day, 1.0 = 4 hrs/day, 10 mgd =

6 hrs/day and 30 m gd = 12 hrs/day. Labor was considered for a 5 day work

week. $30 was used per hour to cove r salary and fringe benefits.



## • Maintenance costs were developed usi ng two percent of the p l ants capital

cost.

4.2.5 Methodology for fitting equations to TN = 3 mg/L data

The sam e methodology was used to determ ine the equations associated w ith the TN= 3

mg/L data as was used to determ ine the equa tion s f o r TN = 5 m g /L. Please ref e r to th at

section for more detailed inform ation.

26

## 4.2.6 Costs for T P = 0.1 mg/L

Capital and O&M costs for achieving Tier 4 pho sphorus lim its for the four generic plant

sizes are p r esented in Table IV- D.

Table IV- D

Summ ary of Capital and Operating Costs for Tier 4 Phosphorus Rem o val TP = 0.1 mg/L

Plan t Design C a p acity

0. 1 M G D 1. 0 M G D 10 M G D 30 M G D

C a pi t a l C o st $ 3 8 8

, 0 0 0 $ 1, 31 5, 0 00 $ 6, 96 9, 0 00 $ 18 ,3 3 0

, 0 0 0

An n u al O & M C o st $ 54 ,3 8 5 $ 18 9, 8 00 $ 1, 09 5, 0 00 $ 3, 06 6, 0 00



## Figures IV-E and IV-F present the capital co st curves for TP=0.1 and Figure IV-G shows

the O&M cost curves developed from the generi c costs. Fig u re IV- E was taken d i re ctly

fro m 

## EPA 8 15-C-01-001 Low-Pressure Membrane Filtration for Pathogen Removal:

Application, Implementa tion and Regulatory Issues . Figure IV- F shows cost curves for

additional allowances made for chem ical sy stem and instrum e ntation improvem e nt s.

These costs are explained in m o re detail in the methodology section. Figure IV- G shows

the cost curves for O&M associated with a TP = 0.1 m g /L based on data f r om the EPA

source cited earlier.

Mi cro / Ul traf iltration Costs

y = 1.14E + 0 6x 5. 06E

- 0 1 

## y = 1.2 9 E+ 06 x 7. 4 3 E- 0 1

$1 0 0

, 0 0 0 $1

, 0 0 0

, 0 00 $1 0

, 0 0 0, 0 0 0 $ 1 0 0

, 0 00 ,000 $ 1

, 0 00 ,0 0 0

, 0 00

0. 0 1 0. 1 1 10 10 0 1 0 0 0

P l an t C a p a c i ty [m g d ]CapitalCost[$] D i s c h a rg e t o S e w e r - 1 0 D e g r e e s C



### y = 7.39E+0 5 x 9. 4 1 E- 01



## Figure IV- E: Cost Curves for Capital Costs for TP = 0.1 m g /L ( Take n di rect l y fr om EPA 815-C0 1 -0 01 Lo w

- Pressu re Memb r a n e Filtra tion f o r Pa thog en Remo va l: App lica tio n,

Im

pl eme n t a t i o n an d Reg u l a t o ry Iss u es )

27

# T P =0.1, Cost Cur ves fo r Al l o wance for

Chemi cal/ I nst r ume n t a t i on S yste m I m pr ovements

y = 1 6 667x + 8 333 3

R 2 

### = 1

y = 55 556x + 4 444 4

R 2 

### = 1

$0 $1 00 ,0 0 0 $2 00 ,0 0 0 $3 00 ,0 0 0 $4 00 ,0 0 0 $5 00 ,0 0 0 $6 00 ,0 0 0

0 5 10 1 5 20 25 30 35

P l ant S i ze (mgd) Co

sts

(x$

10

00 ) y = 12 50 0x + 1 250 00

R 2 

### = 1

y = 12 245 7x 0. 9 505



### R 2 

### = 1 

## Figure IV- F: Cost Curves for Allowance for Chem ical/Instrumentation S y stem Im provements

for TP = 0.1 m g /L



# TP = 0

. 1, Cos t Cur v e s fo r Annual O & M

y = 18 919 6x 0.5 4 1 8



### R 2 

### = 1 y = 19 25 8 4 x 0. 7 683



### R 2



### = 0.99 8

$1 $10 $10 0 $1 ,0 0 0 $10, 000 $100 ,00 0 $1 ,0 00,0 0 0 $1 0, 000, 000

0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6

P l ant Si ze (mgd ) Co

st

0



## Figure IV- G: Cost Curves for Annual O & M Costs for TP = 0.1 m g /L

28

## 4.2.7 Methodology for estimating TP = 0.1 mg/L costs and for fitting equations to

TP = 0.1 mg/L data

As discussed above, m i crofiltration was a ssum e d as the technology of choice for LOT

phosphorus rem oval for the generic plants. Bo th capital and O&M co sts were developed

using cost curves for lo w pressure m e mbra ne filtration for d r inking water (EPA 815-C01-001 Low-Pressure Mem b rane Filtrati on for Pathogen Removal: Application,

Im plem entation and Reg u lato ry Issu es). This a pplica tion w ill b e rea s on ably sim ilar to

water trea tment in term s water qua lity and m e mb rane flux at this point in the waste water

trea tm ent process (h ighly trea ted de nitr if icat ion f ilter ef f l uent TSS < 3 mg/L) and thu s , it

should be applicable. The cu rve used (shown above in Figur e IV- E) was directly from

the “m icrof iltr ation / ultra f iltra tion co s t s with disc h a rge to s e we r (back to th e plant) with a

m i ni m u m water tem p erature of 10 degrees C.”

4.2.7.1. In addition to the construction cost of the facilities, an allowance was provided

for each for im provem e nts to in strumentation and contro l system s to i m prove

chem ical application prior to the m e mbranes. The allowances were as follows:

0.1m gd = $50k, 1.0 m gd = $ 100, 10 mgd = $250k, 30 m gd = $ 500k. This data

was plotted in Figure IV- F. The same m e thodology was used to fit an equation

to the line as was used in analyzing the TN data. The data wa s split in to three

subsets based on the way the EPA s ource data divided their equations.

4.2.7.2. Capital costs include non-construction costs such as engineering, legal and

perm itting. Figure IV- E shows the capita l cos t curves. Thes e curves and

equations were taken directly from th e EPA docum ent referenced earlier.

Theref ore, to determ ine the to tal c a p ital cost for a given design flow, the

equations in Figure IV- E and F n eed to be added together.

4.2.7.3. O&M costs were also take n directly from the EPA cu rves and include: power, 5

year m e m b r a ne replacem e nt, labor 2 hrs/week for very sm all system s < 1 m gd,

40 hrs for larger system s, and chem ical cleaning once per m onth. The O&M

costs were based on the data in the E P A docum e n t referenced earlier. C o sts per

1,000 gallon s were tak e n from that so urce, m u ltiplied by the n u m b er of

thousands of gallons in the design flow and m u ltiplied by 36 5 days. This

provided O & M costs per year at design fl ow. This data was plotted in F i gure

IV- G on a logarithm i c scale. It was determ ined that the b e st fit for these curves

were power equations. The data was sp lit into three subsets based on the way

the cap ita l c o st curve s were split.

29

# V. METHO D O L O G Y FOR ESTIMATING I N DUSTRIAL LO ADS a nd

COSTS BY TIER

Estim ates of industrial nutrient load reductions by tier and related costs to achieve those

reductions are presented in this sec tio n. The tie rs applied to in dustries con ceptua lly m i rror the

tie rs f o r the signif i can t m unicipal f a cilities in th at Tie r 1 reflects current im ple m entation and

Tiers 2 – 4 reflect add i tional redu ction m easures ultim ately leading up to lim its of technology.

There are 49 industrial direct di schargers in the C B PO nutrient poi nt source database that the

Bay jurisdictions have indicated are substantial sources of nutrients to the watershed. Site

specific inform ation on m a ny of these facilities was obtained via phone cont acts or site visits

which provided individualized data on what appr opriate load reductions and/or costs would be

by tier. A cost estim a tion m e thodology applie d wherever site speci fic infor m ation was

unavailable. Certain assum p tions were applie d using the m e thodology described below. These

costs and reduction levels are to be used onl y as a m eans to estim ate potential reduction and

resulting costs watershed wide accord ing to Tiers. This is no t infor m ation that should b e used to

determ ine or verify actual site specific lo ad reductions and cost s by facility for actual

im ple m entation m easures.

Table V-A below provides a summ ar y of the cost s resulting f r o m the theor e tic al im ple m entation

of the tiers grouped by SIC code. Table V-B pr ovides the sam e summar y inform ation grouped

by m a jor Bay Basins. Tables V-C, V-D, V-D a nd V-F in this sec tion provide costs and loads by

facility by Tier as described below.

Note that the source of som e of the following inf o rm ation on loads or costs m a y com e from

individu al facility or state c ontacts. Reference n u m b ers are pl aced after such information which

link the inform ation to a hard copy describing the communication. Appendix H to this report

com p iles all of these contacts and is availa b l e at the Chesapeake Bay Program Office by

contacting Ning Zhou at 410-267-5727.

30

### Table V- A : TOT A L INCREM E NT A L C A P I T A L COST (for Nitrogen and Phos phorus Reductions)

SUMM A R Y B Y INDUSTRY ($)



### INDUSTRY TIER 1

TO T A L CC T I E R 2

TO T A L CC T I E R 3

TO T A L CC T I E R 4

TO T A L CC



### CHEMI CALS Total 0 448,88 4 800,00 0 20,850,1 8 4

FISH HATCHERIES Total 0 0 3,180,69 7 10,676,4 1 9

MEAT PROCESSING Total 0 13,337,1 6 6 3,433,44 1 8,684,99 8

METALS Total 0 0 0 9,149,40 6

MISC Total 0 24,984,5 7 2 15,256,7 0 3 28,127,5 9 5

PAPER MILLS Total 0 4,928,49 6 17,535,1 4 1 115,81 2,973

PETRO- C HE MICALS To t a l 0 0 398,76 4 1,124,06 8

TEXTILES Total 0 7,000,00 0 6,212,01 6 2,073,17 5

Grand To tal 0 50,699,1 1 8 46,816,7 6 2 196,49 8,818

Ta ble V-B: T O T A L INCREMENT A L C A P I T A L CO ST (Nitroge n a n d P hos phorus Re duc tions )

SUMM A R Y B Y B A SIN ($) F O R INDUSTRIA L F A C I LITIES



### INDUSTRY TIER 1

TO T A L CC T I E R 2

TO T A L CC T I E R 3

TO T A L CC T I E R 4

TO T A L CC



### JAMES RIVE R Total 0 5,754,17 6 21,432,2 4 1 70,252,8 8 6

MD EASTE R N SHORE Total 0 0 0 1,106,44 8

MD WESTE R N SHORE Total 0 0 398,76 4 5,273,47 4

PATUXE NT RIVER Total 0 7,350,91 0 489,33 2 1,325,35 3

POTOMAC RIVER Total 0 19,593,0 0 7 6,916,46 6 16,979,3 9 6

SUSQUE HA NN A RIVER Total 0 17,994,5 2 5 16,954,9 5 9 71,866,1 7 1

VA EASTERN SHORE Total 0 6,500 625,00 0 1,250,00 0

YORK RIVER Tot al 0 0 0 28,445,0 9 0

Grand To tal 0 50,699,1 1 8 46,816,7 6 2 196,49 8,818

31

## 5.1 LOADS

Loads for industrial facilities were determ ined by a com b ination of facility contacts, estim ates bas e d

on an application of POTW technologies, or simply by applying increasing non-technology based

percentages of reductions by tier. In general, Tier 1 for industries refl ects nutrient concentrations that

existed in 2000, or plans known to be in place by 2010, or perm it lim its if less than this. Tier 2 and 3

for industries generally reflects a 50 and 80% reduction respectively fr om Tier 1 or perm it lim its if

less th an th is. Tier 4 reflects the s a m e concentrati ons as for significant munici pal f a cilities at lim its

of technolog y, or 3 m g /l for TN and 0.1 m g /l for TP. More site specific d ecis i ons for loads by facility

are described below. It should be noted that loads for Tier 4 are real ly an artifact of how the tiers

were constructed (which basically equaled LOT fo r m unicipals) rath er th an a reflection of the

capability of the ind i vidu al indus tr ial facilities to m eet this lev e l.

See Table V

- C for a list of indus try concentrations, flows, and codes by Tier for loads and

costing (see Section 5.2 below).

See Table V

- D for a list of industry concentrations and flows as a result of applying the codes by

tie r listed in Table V-C. The inf o rm ation is o r ga nized by nutrient param e ter for easy reference.

Flows: Flows for the year 2010 are the sam e as those for 2000. This is because industrial flows

do not necessarily increase due to po pulation, as in the case o f m unicipal facilities, an d there

exist no data for 2010 projections other than data we have for 2000.

The following m e thodology (code) was used to dete rm ine TN and TP concentrations for the

industrial facilities for th e different tiers. Howeve r, in all cas e s, the perm it concentrations will be

used if lower than those determ ined by applying the codes below.

5.1.1. Concentrations will be held cons tan t from Tier 1 because s i gnificant red u ctions h a ve

already been m a de (equal or gr eater than 85%). Code: R

5.1.2. Concentrations will be held cons tan t from Tier 1 because th ey are alread y equal to o r

below 3.0 and 0.1 m g /l TN and TP respectively. Code: HC

5.1.3. The sam e tier levels are applied as are us ed for significant m unicipals where Tier 1

concentrations are equal or below 20.0 a nd 7.0 mg/l TN and TP respectively. Code:

POT W

5.1.4. Tier 2 = 50% of 1985 concentration (or 2000 co ncentration, whichever is lower), Tier 3 =

80% reduction from 1985 concentration (or 2000 concentration, whichever is lower). But

in any case, do not go lower than 3.0 and 0.1 m g / l for TN and TP respectively. Use in

cases where facilities have experienced an increase in 50% or less in load since 1985.

Code: AC1

5.1.5. Tier 2 = 50% of 2000 concentration (or 1985 co ncentration, whichever is lower), Tier 3 =

80% reduction from 2000 concentration (or 1985 concentration, whichever is lower). But

32

## in any case, do not go lower than 3.0 and 0.1 m g / l TN and TP respectively. Use in cases

where facilities have exp e rien ced an increas e in load of greater th an 50%. Code: AC2

Note: used in only two facilities: Hienz Pe t Foo d s in PA, and Lee' s Comm ercial Carpet

in VA. Also note that 2010 concentrations are s e t equal to 20 00 concentrations (as

presented in the following tables) unless it was known that reductions would occur

between 2000 and 2010.

5.1.6. Som e loads are applied according to site specific inform ation provided by either the

respective state, or facility. Such site specific inform ation is available for Osram in PA,

Che m etals in MD, Rocco Farm Foods in VA, Tysons Foods in VA (4031) and others.

Loads for Wam p ler Foods - Tim b erville, VA, W a mpler Longacre in WV, and Hester

Industries WV are all consider ed to be zero because spray irrigation technology has been

em ployed at these facilities. Note: if loads do ap pear in the final tier s f o r these f a cilities,

it is b ecause the draft data set was fin a lized pr io r to input of th is inform ation. References

for load and cost inform ation are cite d specifically under Section 5.2: Costs.

5. 1. 7. 

## Poultry Processing Plants: TP is set to 2.0 m g /l or lower for all poultry processing plants

for Tier 2 an d 3 because m a ny facilities have th is concentratio n as a perm it lim it. Tys ons

Foods (4031) has a permit lim it of 0.3 m g /l TP . Tysons Foods (4049) has a perm it lim it

of 2.0 m g /l TP.

A different category code m a y be applied to either TN or TP for a given facility depending on

the situation

.

5.2 COSTS

It should be noted that costs were generated in this report assum i ng nutrient reduction was

im ple m ented through construction of wastewater tr eatm ent or transportatio n to a POTW. There

m a y also exist m e thods to reduce nutrient leve ls through pollution prevention efforts industrial

facilities m a y em ploy but which were not costed.

See Table V

- E for a lis t of capital an d O&M cost s by Tier for TN and TP reduction measures.

See Table V

- F for a list of industr ial flows, TN a nd TP concentra tions, and TN and TP com b ined

capital cos t s by Tier.

5.2.1 Tier 1

All costs for industrial facilities are assum e d to be zero for Tier 1 becau se this represents either

conditions existing in 2000 or inco rporates plans for reductions that were already in process.

5.2.2 Tiers 2 - 3

Costs f o r m a ny f acilities in thes e tiers were a ssumed to be zero whenever their TN or TP

concentrations that existed in 2000 were equal to, fairly close to if higher, or less than, the

33

## concentrations defined in the tiers. Where conc entrations of TN and/or TP were near POTW

influent concentrations, the POTW m e thodology wa s applied to obtain a reasonable estim ate of

costs, even where it is known th at som e industrial wastewater is not treatable biologically. In

applying the POTW m e thodology, which is based, in part on knowing a facility s design flow,

industrial facility design flows were assum e d to be equal to 2000 flow . For poultry processing

plants in general, it was agreed that the Tier 3 TN concentration s hould be 10.0 m g /l or lower

because this is a perform a nce lev e l or perm itte d effluent conce n tra tion dem onstra t ed by m a ny

curren tly op erating facilities. Costs for these fa cilities are based on a TN of 10 for tier 3 for the

Virginia plants. However, there m a y be a few cases where a level of 10 mg/l TN is in fact not

reflected in the database for Tier 3 due to deci sion m a king after the database was com p l e ted.

Where additional considerations ot her than those above were applie d to estim ate costs, they are

explained below:

Allen Fam ily Foods: TN is already low so no co sts for TN reduction are assum e d. No costs are

assum e d in general for poultry facilities to m eet an effluent TP of 2.0 m g / l because this is a

standard perm it requirem e nt for this industry.

Bethlehem Steel: Costs are assum e d to be zero for this f a c i lity as its inf l u e nt com e s f r om Back

River and an y reductions will be im plem ented and paid f o r by Back River.

Che m etals: Based on correspondence with Chem etals and planned reductions via P2 - see

Chesapeake Bay Point Source 2005 and 2010 Scenar io Nutrient Data Co mpiling, April , 2000,

CBPO.(Attachm e nt 1, Appendix H) Che m etals planned on getting reductions via P 2 since

1999. These reductions were estim a ted to result in a TN concentration of 223 m g /l TN, or an

81% reduction from 2000 levels. Costs are assum e d to be zero as they w e re already planned.

Costs are zero for TP because th eir effluent is les s than Tier 3 concentrations.

Congoleum : TP and TN are already below Tier 2 le vels so costs are zero. Costs for Tier 3 are

for TN only to go from TN of 6.6 to 5.0. POTW cost m e thodology is applied here.

Garden State Tanning: No costs for TP because it is already very low. During a 1999 facility

visit, Garden State Tanning stated that they were going to incorporate a recycle line in their

wastewater treatm e nt sys t em that would result in a 20% reduc tion of TN in the

effluent(Attachm e nt 1, Appendix H). The Tier 1 TN concentration refl ects this 20% reduction

from 2000 c oncentrations. Subsequent inform a tion from EPA Region 3 stated that an NPDES

perm it is currently under review which will ask fo r a 40% red u ction within 3 years. (Attachm e nt

2, Appendix H) Current TN is 121 mg/l based on a 4/18/02 em ail from Peter W e ber from EPA

Region 3 which stated th at the p e rm it will have a load cap of 155,250 lbs TN per year. At their

current flow of 0.42 MGD, this equates to a TN of 121 m g /l now. A 40% reduction would

equate to an effluent of 72.5 m g /l TN. However this is not as low as the calculated T i er 2

concentration of 54.77 mg/l. MDE ha s requested costing inform ation fr om this facility but at the

tim e of this writing, no infor m ation has been pr o v ided. Because the facility already has

nitr if ication and denitrif ication capab ility at its w a stewater treatm ent plant, a Best Professional

Judgem e nt estim ate is ap proxim a tely $5 m illion to reduce the TN concentration from 72.5 m g /l

to 54.77 m g / l . An additional $5 m illion is estim a ted to go to the Tier 3 calculated TN effluent of

21.9 m g /l. 8% O&M is assum e d in both tiers.

34

## MD & VA Milk Producers: Costs were determ ined by applying the POTW m e thodology because

TN and TP levels were in the range of m unicipal influents.

Indian Head : TN costs are assum e d to be zero becau se TN concentrations are already low. Costs

for TP are determ ined using the PO TW m e thodology.

Upper Potom ac River Comm ission in MD: TN costs are assum e d to be zero because TN

concentrations are already low. Costs for TP are determ ined using the P O TW methodology. It

should be noted that this fac ility is a POTW yet it is prim arily funded by an industry.

WR Grace: Concentrations for TN have been s ubstantially reduced since 1985 thus no costs are

assum e d for this facility. TP values are also already low and below Ti er 2 and 3 definitions.

Appleton Paper: Costs are for TP only to go from 1.16 to 0.5 mg/l. The POTW methodology

was applied.

Georgia Pacific: 1985 T N and TP concentratio ns are based on a 3/18/02 em ail from Bob

Ehrhart.(Attachm e nt 3, Appendix H) Zero cost s are assum e d for TN reductions based on an

3/20/02 em ail from John Moore, Ge o r gia Pacific which states that the source of nitrogen in the

effluent should be rem oved by plans in place alr eady to remove the sludge in the final settling

pond (which is the source of the nitrogen in the effluent).(Attachm e nt 4, Appendix H) Costs for

TP are calculated usi ng the POTW methodology.

Osram : Bas e d on a 3/14/02 em ail from Car m en Ven ezia, OSRAM, this f acility is inc o rporating

P2 into their process by reducing the am ount of ni trate used w h ich would result in approxim a tely

a 20% reduction by end of 2001, a 30% reduction by m i d 2002, a nd a 50% reduction by end of

2002.(Attachm e nt 5, Appendix H) Hence, Tiers 2 - 3 reflect the 20 and 30% reductions, or 88

mg/l and 77 mg/l TN respectively.

Hoecht-Celanese: Based on an 4/11/02 em ail from Bob Ehrhart, TN ha s been sign ificantly

reduced since 1985 and thus no costs are applied.(A ttachm e nt 6, Appendix H) TP levels are also

very low. Its direct discharge has been substant ially reduced and thus it is no longer considered a

significant source of nutrients by VADEQ.

Lees Commercial Carpet: Based on a 4/4/02 em ail from Bob Ehrhart which states that achieving

reductions would only be achievable by jointly c onstructing a POTW w/ the Town of Glasgow

the es tim ate would be approxim a tely $2 m illion a nd would apply unilate ra lly (no t inc r em entally)

across the tiers. (Attachm e nt 7, Appendix H) T hus, this cost is placed in Tier 2.

Merck in V A : No costs are assum e d for TN as its concentration is already low. Costs are for TP

reduction only. Based on a 3/22/02 em ail from Ste phen Klevickis at Merck, costs to get to a TP

of 1.0 would be zero because of source reduction. (Attachm e nt 8, Appendix H) Costs to go to 0.5

mg/l TP would be about $800,000 to em ploy precipita tion an d filtration, also based o n the sam e

correspondence from M e rck.

35

## Phillip Morris: Based on a 4/29/02 em ail from B ob Ehrhart which states that achieving Tier 4

would be achievable by constructing a pum p st ation and force m a in, the estim ate would be

approxim a tely $12 m illion. (Attach m e nt 9, Appendix H) Costs asso ciated with Tier 2 & Tier 3

were provided by Mrs. Ethel Tatum by letter dated April 29, 2002. (Attachm e nt 9A, Appendix

H)

Proctor and Ga m b le in PA: Based on a 4/2/02 em a il from Drew Hadley at Proctor and Ga m b le

(Attachm e nt 10, Appendix H), this facility discontinued the pulp production in 1999 and

perm anently shut down the sulfite pulp process in May of that year. The wastewater treatm e nt

plant was also reconfigu r ed at th at tim e to a relatively low lo ad aerated stabilization system

. Ammonia Nitrogen discharge is now less than 2% of historical di scharge levels. However, the

2000 TN concentration estim ates provided by P ADEP show a TN estimate of 17.58 mg/l TN.

Apparently, as this is the sam e value since 1997, th is is an estim ate not ba sed on actual data and

m a y not reflect this facility s current discharge levels which are m o st lik ely som e thing m u ch

less than that. However, without confirm a ti on from Proctor and Ga m b le that the TOTAL

Nitrogen is low, and not just th e ammonia nitr o g en, we proceeded with assum i ng POTW tiered

concentrations, and used the POTW m e thodology to estim a te costs.

Chicken George’s (formerly, Rocco Farm Foods ): This facility’s NPDES perm it requires a TN of

10 and TP of 2.0 be m e t. Costs are estim ated to m eet a TN of 10 m g /l for Tier 2 which is a part

of a 2001-02 upgrade for this facility. Costs were estim ated by Bob Ehrhart using costs from

other sim ilar facilities (Attachm e nt 15, Appendix H).

Tysons Foods Glen Allen(4031): No costs are assum e d in Tier 2 for this facility because its TN

and TP concentrations are alr eady low. TN of 6.0 is estim a ted based on the early 2000

perform a nce of BNR recently im plem ented at that facility. (Attachm e nt 1, Appendix H)

However, a more accurate pro j ection of TN for th is facility fo r Tiers 2 and 3 would be 10 m g /l

based on demonstrated perform a nce of si m ilar facilities, however, th is was decided after

com p letion of the database. Costs to achieve T i ers 3 and 4 are provide d by Doug Ba xter in a

4/25/02 em ail. (Attachm e nt 1B, Appendix H)

Tysons Foods Tem pora n ceville(4049): The Tier 2 concentration of 60 reflects the early 2000

perform a nce of BNR that was recently im pl e m ented.(Attachm e nt 1, Appendix H) Costs to

achieve the Tier 3 & T i er 4 concentrations have been provided by Doug Ba xter in an em ail and

attachm e nt dated: April 24, 2002. (A ttachm e nt 1A, Appendix H)

Wa m p ler-Timberville: T h is facility is currently offline due to land a pplication (Attachm e nt 11,

Appendix H). Thus the discharge is essentially zero and no costs ar e applied to any of the Tiers.

Hester: This facility ha s plans already for land application, thus no costs are applied to this

facility for nutrient reduction. (Attachm ent 12, Appendix H)

Wa m p ler-Longacre, WV: This facility h a s plan s al ready for land application, thus no costs are

applied to this facility for nutrient reduction. (A ttachm e nt 12, Appendix H)

36

## DuPont: Nutrients are already low for the DuPont facilities an d therefore n o additional costs are

estim ated as confirm e d in a telephone conversat ion with Bob Dunn of DuPont (Attachm e nt 13,

Appendix H). The W a ynesboro facility h a s a new BNR facility cu rren tly operating.

BWXT: Costs are based on a 4/24/02 em ail from Bob Ehrhart which states that pumping the

waste to the Lynchburg facility would cost appro x im ately $5 m illion for Tier 4 (Attachm ent 14,

Appendix H).

Sm urfit Stone: Note that the c oncentration for Tier 2 should ha ve been 5.26 m g /l TN instead of

8 m g /l to ref l ect its 2000 perform a nc e levels (or Tier 1). This was an inadvertent error.

5.2.3 Tier 4

Costs for Tier 4 are zero where re ductions are already low or P2 is planned. For poultry facilities

in general, it was agreed that a m o re reasona ble effluent level for Tier 4 would be a TN

concentration of 0.3 m g / l instead of 0.1 m g /l because this refl ects best perfor m ance currently

operating. However, the database does not re flect a concentration of 0.3, but rather 0.1 m g /l

because of d ecis i on m a king after the com p letion of the datab a se. However, costs are based on an

effluent concentration of 0.3 m g /l instead of 0.1 mg/l. All other costs are based on the POTW

m e thodology for getting to a TN of 3.0 m g /l and / or a TP of 0.1 m g /l except for indiv i dual

assum p tions f o r the f o llo wing f acilities:

Che m etals, Garden State Tanning, Osram

, and Merc k: No Tier 4 costs were estim a ted because

no inform ation was available on whic h to base a reasonable assum p tion.

Lees Commercial Carpet and Phillip Morris: See explanation under Tier 2-3 costs for these

f acilities f o r a descr i ption of Tier 3 cost assum p tions.

Tysons Foods (4031): Costs to achieve Tier 4 ha ve been provided by Doug Baxter in an em ail

and attachment dated: 4/25/02 (Attachm ent 1A, Appendix H).

37Table V-C: INDUSTRIAL FACILITY COSTING AND CONCENTRATION CODES BY TIERSTATFACILITY NPDESTN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l) COSTTN(mg/l)TP(mg/l) COSTTN(mg/l)TP(mg/l) COSTTN(mg/l)TP(mg/l) COSTTN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)DEDUPONT-SEAFORDDE0000035 37.83 2.03 0.12 2.03 0.12 0 2.03 0.12 0 HC HC 0 HC HC 0 2.03 0.10MDALLEN FAMILY FOODMD0067857 0.75 0.26 4.69 0.09 3.63 2.40 0 3.63 2.40 0 POTW POTW 0 POTW POTW PN 3.00 0.10MDBETHLEHEM STEELMD0001201 23.18 88.25 24.15 0.35 6.25 0.30 0 6.25 0.30 0 R R 0 R R 0 3.00 0.10MDCHEMETALSMD0001775 0.13 158.66 0.02 223.00 0.03 0 223.0 0.03 0 223 0.03 0 223 0.03 ? 3.00 0.03MDCONGOLEUMMD0001384 0.26 0.50 0.18 6.60 0.20 0 6.60 0.20 0 POTW POTW N POTW POTW PN 3.00 0.10MDGARDEN STATE TANMD0053431 0.42 109.54 0.05 112.65 0.05 0 112.65 0.05 5 AC1 AC1 5 AC1 AC1 ? 3.00 0.05MDMD & VA MILK PRODMD0000469 0.325 0.36 4.05 27.25 16.19 12.92 0 16.19 12.92 PN POTW POTW PN POTW POTW PN 3.00 0.10MDNSWC-INDIAN HEADMD0003158 0.49 620.05 4.84 1.20 3.00 0 1.20 3.00 P R POTW P R POTW P 1.20 0.10MDUPPER POTOMACRMD0021687 21.5 20.21 3.58 0.84 1.29 0.79 0 1.29 0.79 0 R POTW P R POTW P 1.29 0.10MDW R GRACEMD0000311 4.066 4.06 460.17 0.30 25.10 0.15 0 47.99 0.15 0 R R 0 R R N 3.00 0.10MDWESTVACO CORPOMD0001422 2.18 1.92 0.09 1.92 0.09 0 1.92 0.09 0 HC HC 0 HC HC 0 1.92 0.09PAAPPLETON PAPERSPA0008265 4.32 0.37 0.16 4.17 1.16 0 4.17 1.16 0 POTW POTW P POTW POTW PN 3.00 0.10PACHLOE TEXTILES INPA0009172 0.27 0.76 3.88 8.18 0.81 0 8.18 0.81 0 POTW POTW PN POTW POTW PN 3.00 0.10PACONSOLIDATED RAPA0009229 0.16 0.48 0.92 2.86 0.22 0 2.86 0.22 0 HC POTW 0 HC POTW P 2.86 0.10PAEMPIRE KOSHER POPA0007552 1.17 3.32 1.00 8.46 0.40 0 8.46 0.40 0 POTW POTW N POTW POTW P 3.00 0.10PAGOLD MILLS DYEHOPA0008231 0.68 2.92 0.49 8.40 0.15 0 8.40 0.15 0 POTW POTW N POTW POTW N 3.00 0.10PAHEINZ PET FOODSPA0009270 0.52 4.58 2.78 41.73 11.80 0 41.73 11.80 N AC2 AC2 N AC2 AC2 PN 3.00 0.10PAMERCK & COMPANYPA0008419 12.70 8.01 4.61 1.49 0 4.61 1.49 P POTW POTW P POTW POTW PN 3.00 0.10PANATIONAL GYPSUMPA0008591 0.31 3.74 3.20 2.93 1.28 0 2.93 1.28 0 R POTW P R POTW P 2.93 0.10PAOSRAM SYLVANIAPPA0009024 1.09 70.57 0.16 109.98 0.70 0 109.98 0.70 0 88 POTW 0 77 POTW ? 3.00 0.10PAP-H GLATFELTER COPA0008869 12.45 0.37 0.16 11.07 0.07 0 11.07 0.07 N POTW R N POTW R N 3.00 0.07PAPENNSYLVANIA FISHPA0040835 2.291 6.40 1.50 0.30 1.03 0.10 0 1.03 0.10 0 R R 0 R R 0 1.03 0.10PAPENNSYLVANIA FISHPA0010553 6.00 1.50 0.57 6.52 0.15 0 6.52 0.15 0 POTW POTW N POTW POTW N 3.00 0.10PAPENNSYLVANIA FISHPA0010561 4.87 1.50 0.21 4.25 0.13 0 4.25 0.13 0 POTW POTW 0 POTW POTW N 3.00 0.10PAPENNSYLVANIA FISHPA0112127 13.00 1.40 0.11 0.10 0.03 0 0.10 0.03 0 R R 0 R R 0 0.10 0.03PAPENNSYLVANIA FISHPA0044032 0.20 1.50 0.30 1.03 0.10 0 1.03 0.10 0 R R 0 R R 0 1.03 0.10PAPOPE & TALBOT WISPA0007919 1.65 18.00 6.00 6.86 1.02 0 6.86 1.02 0 POTW POTW PN POTW POTW PN 3.00 0.10PAPROCTOR & GAMBLPA0008885 11.5 4.88 24.64 1.50 17.58 2.44 0 17.58 2.44 PN POTW POTW PN POTW POTW PN 3.00 0.10PATYSON FOODSPA0035092 0.55 111.02 19.53 25.00 2.00 0 25.00 2.00 N AC1 POTW N AC1 POTW PN 3.00 0.10PAUSFW-LAMAR NATIOPA0009857 4.40 0.37 0.09 0.25 0.03 0 0.25 0.03 0 R R 0 R R 0 0.25 0.03VAHONEYWELLVA0005291 42 132.14 10.65 0.07 1.98 0.13 0 1.98 0.13 0 R R 0 R R 0 1.98 0.10VAAMOCO-YORKTOWNVA0003018 56.4 60.77 36.24 0.51 0.90 0.12 0 0.90 0.12 0 R R 0 R R 0 0.90 0.10VABROWN & WILLIAMSVA0002780 1.998 0.82 12.19 3.36 8.27 1.76 0 8.27 1.76 P POTW POTW PN POTW POTW PN 3.00 0.10VABWXTVA0003697 2.9 0.48 854.40 0.48 76.50 1.06 0 76.50 1.06 0 R POTW P R POTW 5 3.00 0.10DESIGNFLOW(MGD)2000FLOW(MGD)1985 2010 TIER 1 TIER 2 TIER 3 TIER 4NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlsTable V-C conc & codes38CBPO, 11/6/2002Table V-C: INDUSTRIAL FACILITY COSTING AND CONCENTRATION CODES BY TIERSTATFACILITY NPDESTN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l) COSTTN(mg/l)TP(mg/l) COSTTN(mg/l)TP(mg/l) COSTTN(mg/l)TP(mg/l) COSTTN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)DESIGNFLOW(MGD)2000FLOW(MGD)1985 2010 TIER 1 TIER 2 TIER 3 TIER 4VADUPONT-SPRUANCEVA0004669 81.1 23.33 2.15 0.26 2.83 0.11 0 2.83 0.11 0 HC HC 0 HC HC 0 2.83 0.10VADUPONT-WAYNESBOVA0002160 0.5 2.97 22.74 4.33 3.21 0.14 0 3.21 0.14 0 HC HC 0 HC HC 0 3.00 0.10VAGEORGIA PACIFICCVA0003026 12 7.21 0.06 0.03 13.00 7.40 0 13.00 7.40 P POTW AC2 P POTW AC2 P 3.00 0.10VALEES COMMERCIALVA0004677 2 0.80 11.28 17.52 33.09 38.79 0 33.09 38.79 2 AC2 AC2 0 AC2 AC2 0 3.00 0.10VAMERCK & COMPANYVA0002178 1.2 10.09 11.93 3.17 3.13 2.61 0 3.13 2.61 0 POTW POTW 0.8 POTW POTW ? 3.00 0.10VAPHILLIP MORRIS-PAVA0026557 2.9 1.92 34.66 13.77 33.93 1.27 0 33.93 1.27 3.5 AC1 R 8 AC1 R 12 3.00 0.10VAPILGRIMS PRIDE-HINVA0002313 0.54 53.66 33.00 53.66 33.00 0 53.66 33.00 PN AC1 AC1 PN AC1 AC1 PN 3.00 0.10VAGEORGE'S CHICKENVA0077402 1.2 1.21 84.90 11.00 10.00 2.00 0 138.85 33.33 2.96 10 2 0 10 2 0.503 3.00 0.10VASMURFIT STONEVA0003115 36 18.45 14.08 5.80 8.00 1.50 0 5.26 1.23 0 POTW POTW P POTW POTW PN 3.00 0.10VATYSON FOODS, INCVA0004031 0.95 73.76 0.08 6.00 0.30 0 7.37 0.27 0 6 POTW 0.15 6 POTW 0.38 3.00 0.10VATYSON FOODS, INCVA0004049 0.98 1.05 113.91 1.15 60.00 2.00 0 79.81 14.40 0 AC1 AC1 0.625 AC1 AC1 0.625 3.00 0.10VAWESTVACO CORPOVA0003646 26.48 29.73 8.00 0.29 8.00 0.29 0 8.00 0.29 0 POTW POTW N POTW POTW PN 3.00 0.10WVHESTER INDUSTRIEWV0047236 0.53 3.87 1.09 12.60 0.94 0 12.60 0.94 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.00 0.10WVSPECRATECH INTERWV0005533 0.32 27.13 0.14 29.66 3.00 0 29.66 3.00 N AC1 POTW N AC1 POTW N 3.00 0.10WVWAMPLER-LONGACWV0005495 1.54 62.41 0.88 52.91 9.79 0 52.91 9.79 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.00 0.10NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlsTable V-C conc & codes39CBPO, 11/6/2002Table V-D: Flow and Concentration Codes and Data For Industrial Facilities by Nutrient Parameter2010STATFACILITY NPDES FLOW 85 2010 TIER 1 TIER 2 TIER 3 TIER 4 TIER 2 TIER 3 85 2010 TIER 1 TIER 2 TIER 3 TIER 4 TIER 2 TIER 3DEDUPONT-SEAFORDDE0000035 37.83 2.03 2.03 2.03 2.03 2.03 2.03 HC HC 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.10 HC HCMDALLEN FAMILY FOODMD0067857 0.26 4.69 3.63 3.63 3.63 3.63 3.00 POTW POTW 0.09 2.40 2.40 2.00 2.00 0.10 2 2MDBETHLEHEM STEELCMD0001201 88.25 24.15 6.25 6.25 6.25 6.25 3.00 R R 0.35 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.10 R RMDCHEMETALSMD0001775 0.13 158.66 223.00 223.00 223.00 223.00 3.00 223 223 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03MDCONGOLEUMMD0001384 0.26 0.50 6.60 6.60 6.60 5.00 3.00 POTW POTW 0.18 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.10 POTW POTWMDGARDEN STATE TANMD0053431 0.42 109.54 112.65 112.65 54.77 21.91 3.00 AC1 AC1 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.01 0.01 R RMDMD & VA MILK PRODUMD0000469 0.36 4.05 16.19 16.19 8.00 5.00 3.00 POTW POTW 27.25 12.92 12.92 1.00 0.50 0.10 POTW POTWMDNSWC-INDIAN HEADMD0003158 0.49 620.05 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 R R 4.84 3.00 3.00 1.00 0.50 0.10 POTW POTWMDUPPER POTOMAC RIVMD0021687 20.21 3.58 1.29 1.29 1.29 1.29 1.29 R R 0.84 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.50 0.10 POTW POTWMDW R GRACEMD0000311 4.06 460.17 25.10 25.10 25.10 25.10 3.00 25.1 25.1 0.30 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.10 R RMDWESTVACO CORPORMD0001422 2.18 1.92 1.92 1.92 1.92 1.92 1.92 HC HC 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 HC HCPAAPPLETON PAPER SPPA0008265 4.32 0.37 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 3.00 POTW POTW 0.16 1.16 1.16 1.00 0.50 0.10 POTW POTWPACHLOE TEXTILES INCPA0009172 0.27 0.76 8.18 8.18 8.00 5.00 3.00 POTW POTW 3.88 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.50 0.10 POTW POTWPACONSOLIDATED RAILPA0009229 0.16 0.48 2.86 2.86 2.86 2.86 2.86 HC HC 0.92 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.10 POTW POTWPAEMPIRE KOSHER POPA0007552 1.17 3.32 8.46 8.46 8.00 5.00 3.00 POTW POTW 1.00 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.10 POTW POTWPAGOLD MILLS DYEHOUPA0008231 0.68 2.92 8.40 8.40 8.00 5.00 3.00 POTW POTW 0.49 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.10 POTW POTWPAHEINZ PET FOODSPA0009270 0.52 4.58 41.73 41.73 4.58 4.58 3.00 AC2 AC2 2.78 11.80 11.80 2.78 2.36 0.10 AC2 AC2PAMERCK & COMPANYPA0008419 12.70 8.01 4.61 4.61 4.61 4.61 3.00 POTW POTW 1.49 1.49 1.00 0.50 0.10 POTW POTWPANATIONAL GYPSUMCPA0008591 0.31 3.74 2.93 2.93 2.93 2.93 2.93 R R 3.20 1.28 1.28 1.00 0.50 0.10 POTW POTWPAOSRAM SYLVANIA PRPA0009024 1.09 70.57 109.98 109.98 88.00 77.00 3.00 88 77 0.16 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.50 0.10 POTW POTWPAP-H GLATFELTER COPA0008869 12.45 0.37 11.07 11.07 8.00 5.00 3.00 POTW POTW 0.16 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 R RPAPENNSYLVANIA FISHPA0040835 6.40 1.50 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 R R 0.30 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 R RPAPENNSYLVANIA FISHPA0010553 6.00 1.50 6.52 6.52 6.52 5.00 3.00 POTW POTW 0.57 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.10 POTW POTWPAPENNSYLVANIA FISHPA0010561 4.87 1.50 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 3.00 POTW POTW 0.21 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.10 POTW POTWPAPENNSYLVANIA FISHPA0112127 13.00 1.40 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 R R 0.11 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 R RPAPENNSYLVANIA FISHPA0044032 0.20 1.50 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 R R 0.30 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 R RPAPOPE & TALBOT WISPA0007919 1.65 18.00 6.86 6.86 6.86 5.00 3.00 POTW POTW 6.00 1.02 1.02 1.00 0.50 0.10 POTW POTWPAPROCTOR & GAMBLEPA0008885 4.88 24.64 17.58 17.58 8.00 5.00 3.00 POTW POTW 1.50 2.44 2.44 1.00 0.50 0.10 POTW POTWPATYSON FOODSPA0035092 0.55 111.02 25.00 25.00 25.00 22.20 3.00 25 AC1 19.53 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.10 2 2PAUSFW-LAMAR NATIOPA0009857 4.40 0.37 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 R R 0.09 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 R RVAHONEYWELLVA0005291 132.14 10.65 1.98 1.98 1.98 1.98 1.98 R R 0.07 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.10 R RVAAMOCO-YORKTOWNVA0003018 60.77 36.24 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 R R 0.51 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.10 R RVABROWN & WILLIAMSOVA0002780 0.82 12.19 8.27 8.27 8.00 5.00 3.00 POTW POTW 3.36 1.76 1.76 1.00 0.50 0.10 POTW POTWVABWXTVA0003697 0.48 854.40 76.50 76.50 76.50 76.50 3.00 R R 0.48 1.06 1.06 1.00 0.50 0.10 POTW POTWTN Concentrations (mg/l) TN Codes TP Concentrations (mg/l) TP CodesNRT_TABLE_V-X.xlsTable V-D Concs40CBPO, 11/6/2002Table V-D: Flow and Concentration Codes and Data For Industrial Facilities by Nutrient Parameter2010STATFACILITY NPDES FLOW 85 2010 TIER 1 TIER 2 TIER 3 TIER 4 TIER 2 TIER 3 85 2010 TIER 1 TIER 2 TIER 3 TIER 4 TIER 2 TIER 3TN Concentrations (mg/l) TN Codes TP Concentrations (mg/l) TP CodesVADUPONT-SPRUANCEVA0004669 23.33 2.15 2.83 2.83 2.83 2.83 2.83 HC HC 0.26 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.10 HC HCVADUPONT-WAYNESBOVA0002160 2.97 22.74 3.21 3.21 3.21 3.21 3.00 HC HC 4.33 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.10 HC HCVAGEORGIA PACIFIC COVA0003026 7.21 2.43 13.00 13.00 2.43 2.43 2.43 2.43 2.43 4.95 7.40 7.40 4.95 0.50 0.10 4.95 0.5VALEES COMMERCIALCVA0004677 0.80 11.28 33.09 33.09 11.28 6.62 3.00 AC2 AC2 17.52 38.79 38.79 17.52 7.76 0.10 AC2 AC2VAMERCK & COMPANYVA0002178 10.09 11.93 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.00 POTW POTW 3.17 2.61 2.61 1.00 0.50 0.10 POTW POTWVAPHILLIP MORRIS-PARVA0026557 1.92 34.66 33.93 33.93 17.33 6.93 3.00 AC1 AC1 13.77 1.27 1.27 1.27 1.27 0.10 R RVAPILGRIMS PRIDE-HINVA0002313 0.54 53.66 53.66 53.66 26.83 10.73 3.00 AC1 AC1 33.00 33.00 33.00 2.00 2.00 0.10 2 2VAGEORGE'S CHICKENVA0077402 1.21 84.90 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 3.00 10 10 11.00 2.00 33.33 2.00 2.00 0.10 2 2VASMURFIT STONEVA0003115 18.45 14.08 8.00 5.26 8.00 5.00 3.00 POTW POTW 5.80 1.50 1.23 1.00 0.50 0.10 POTW POTWVATYSON FOODS, INC.VA0004031 0.95 73.76 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 3.00 6 6 0.08 0.30 0.27 0.30 0.30 0.10 0.3 0.3VATYSON FOODS, INC.-VA0004049 1.05 113.91 60.00 60.00 56.96 22.78 3.00 AC1 AC1 1.15 2.00 14.40 2.00 2.00 0.10 2 2VAWESTVACO CORPORVA0003646 29.73 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 5.00 3.00 POTW POTW 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.10 POTW POTWWVHESTER INDUSTRIESWV0047236 0.00 3.87 12.60 12.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 1.09 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0WVSPECRATECH INTERWV0005533 0.32 27.13 29.66 29.66 13.57 5.43 3.00 AC1 AC1 0.14 3.00 3.00 1.00 0.50 0.10 POTW POTWWVWAMPLER-LONGACRWV0005495 0.00 62.41 52.91 52.91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.88 9.79 9.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlsTable V-D Concs41CBPO, 11/6/2002Table V-E: INDUSTRIAL FACILITY INCREMENTAL COST DATA FOR ALL FOUR TIERSTIER 1STATFACILITY NPDES ALL COST TN CC TN O&MTP CC TP O&MTN CC TN O&MTP CC TP O&MTN CC TN O&MTP CC TP O&MDEDUPONT-SEAFORDE0000035 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0MDALLEN FAMILY FOMD0067857 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 476,717 31,083 629,731 90,259MDBETHLEHEM STEEMD0001201 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0MDCHEMETALSMD0001775 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0MDCONGOLEUMMD0001384 0 0 0 0 0 398,764 11,061 0 0 485,063 31,493 639,005 91,755MDGARDEN STATETMD0053431 0 5,000,000 400,000 5,000,000 400,000MDMD & VA MILK PROMD0000469 07,251,672144,42899,238 37,120489,332 13,3680 1,927 584,494 36,377740,859 108,221MDNSWC-INDIAN HEAMD0003158 0 0 0111,434 10,2610 00 2,625 0 0862,547 127,944MDUPPER POTOMACMD0021687 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 109,197 0 0 12,884,637 2,132,534MDW R GRACEMD0000311 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,149,406 152,410 0 0MDWESTVACO CORPMD0001422 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0PAAPPLETON PAPERPA0008265 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23,341 4,370,145 159,180 3,981,196 592,703PACHLOE TEXTILESPA0009172 0 0 0 0 0 406,239 11,251 0 908 493,269 31,896 647,998 93,207PACONSOLIDATEDRPA0009229 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 504,840 70,177PAEMPIRE KOSHERPA0007552 0 0 0 0 0 1,315,629 33,331 0 0 0 0 1,550,422 216,966PAGOLD MILLS DYEHPA0008231 0 0 0 0 0 805,777 21,430 0 0 931,908 53,440 0 0PAHEINZ PET FOODSPA0009270 0 4,037,698 78,106128,833 48,885646,001 17,359 0 2,802 756,495 44,825 891,024 132,565PAMERCK & COMPANPA0008419 0 0 0337,450 58,1790 0 0 68,602 11,628,038 381,760 8,359,599 1,370,929PANATIONAL GYPSUPA0008591 0 0 0 0 718 0 0 0 1,675 0 0 691,947 100,307PAOSRAM SYLVANIAPA0009024 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,863PAP-H GLATFELTERPA0008869 0 4,905,080 86,6370 05,671,393 169,3850 0 11,416,648 375,2780 0PAPENNSYLVANIA FPA0040835 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0PAPENNSYLVANIA FPA0010553 0 0 0 0 0 3,180,697 102,575 0 0 5,825,697 203,818 0 0PAPENNSYLVANIA FPA0010561 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,850,722 173,918 0 0PAPENNSYLVANIA FPA0112127 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0PAPENNSYLVANIA FPA0044032 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0PAPOPE & TALBOTWPA0007919 0 0 0 0 0 1,502,717 42,306 0 8,929 2,059,077 88,305 1,984,452 283,283PAPROCTOR & GAMBPA0008885 0 4,355,014 77,780 319,306 64,532 2,750,183 89,061 0 26,392 4,859,307 174,181 4,356,183 651,359PATYSON FOODSPA0035092 0 4,039,977 79,131 0 0 676,323 18,132 0 0 789,785 46,460 917,419 136,849PAUSFW-LAMAR NATPA0009857 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0VAHONEYWELLVA0005291 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0VAAMOCO-YORKTOWVA0003018 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0VABROWN & WILLIAMVA0002780 0 0 00 5,173942,156 24,904 04,4571,081,634 60,794 1,124,462 170,457VABWXTVA0003697 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,588 0 0 5,000,000 126,955TIER 4TIER 2 TIER 3NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlsTable V-E costs_TN_TP42CBPO, 11/6/2002Table V-E: INDUSTRIAL FACILITY INCREMENTAL COST DATA FOR ALL FOUR TIERSTIER 1STATFACILITY NPDES ALL COST TN CC TN O&MTP CC TP O&MTN CC TN O&MTP CC TP O&MTN CC TN O&MTP CC TP O&MTIER 4TIER 2 TIER 3VADUPONT-SPRUANVA0004669 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0VADUPONT-WAYNESVA0002160 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0VAGEORGIA PACIFICVA0003026 0 0 0254,176 386,4210 0 0 38,944 0 0 5,799,883 878,300VALEES COMMERCIAVA0004677 0 2,000,000VAMERCK & COMPANVA0002178 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 800,000 54,503VAPHILLIP MORRIS-PVA0026557 0 3,500,000 1,300,000 8,000,000 1,900,000 12,000,000 1,000,000VAPILGRIMS PRIDEHVA0002313 0 5,326,149 102,538 116,540 145,144 666,489 17,881 0 2,917 778,988 45,930 908,936 135,472VAGEORGE'S CHICKVA0077402 0 2,960,000 0 888,000 0 0 0 0 0 503,000 40,000 500,000 100,000VASMURFIT STONEVA0003115 0 0 035,7860 0 0 99,677 16,611,208 534,581 11,833,882 1,955,433VATYSON FOODS, INVA0004031 0 0 0 150,000 1,200 0 0 380,000 1,200 0 0VATYSON FOODS, INVA0004049 0 0 0 6,500 150,000 625,000 45,625 0 0 625,000 40,000 625,000 75,000VAWESTVACO CORPVA0003646 0 0 0 0 0 12,340,085 307,945 0 0 26,386,091 834,352 18,480,816 3,077,696WVHESTER INDUSTRWV0047236 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0WVSPECRATECH INTWV0005533 0 5,190,884 102,636 95,395 4,520 449,977 12,366 01,707541,288 34,255 0 0WVWAMPLER-LONGAWV0005495 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Total 48,566,474 2,371,256 2,356,873 946,739 46,016,759 3,239,180 800,000 457,056 112,583,979 4,575,535 83,914,838 12,718,371Notes: Costs are in dollarNRT_TABLE_V-X.xlsTable V-E costs_TN_TP43CBPO, 11/6/2002Table V-F: INDUSTRIAL FACILITY TOTAL INCREMENTAL CAPITAL COST AND CONCENTRATION DATA FOR ALL FOUR TIERSDESIGN 2000STATEFACILITY NPDESFLOW(mgd)FLOW(mgd)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TOTALCC ($mil)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TOTALCC ($mil)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)CC($mil)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TOTALCC ($mil)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)DE DUPONT-SEAFORDDE0000035 37.83 2.03 0.12 2.03 0.12 0 2.03 0.12 0 2.03 0.12 0 2.03 0.12 0 2.03 0.10DE Total37.83 0 0 0 0MD ALLEN FAMILY FOODMD0067857 0.75 0.26 4.69 0.09 3.63 2.40 0 3.63 2.40 0 3.63 2.00 0 3.63 2.00 1.11 3.00 0.10MD BETHLEHEM STEELMD0001201 23.18 88.25 24.15 0.35 6.25 0.30 0 6.25 0.30 0 6.25 0.30 0 6.25 0.30 0 3.00 0.10MD CHEMETALSMD0001775 0.13 158.66 0.02 223.00 0.03 0 223.0 0.03 0 223.00 0.03 0 223.00 0.03 0 3.00 0.03MD CONGOLEUMMD0001384 0.26 0.50 0.18 6.60 0.20 0 6.60 0.20 0 6.60 0.20 0.40 5.00 0.20 1.12 3.00 0.10MD GARDEN STATE TANMD0053431 0.42 109.54 0.05 112.65 0.05 0 112.65 0.05 5 54.77 0.05 5 21.91 0.01 ? 3.00 0.05MD MD & VA MILK PRODMD0000469 0.325 0.36 4.05 27.25 16.19 12.92 0 16.19 12.92 7.35 8.00 1.00 0.49 5.00 0.50 1.33 3.00 0.10MD NSWC-INDIAN HEADMD0003158 0.49 620.05 4.84 1.20 3.00 0 1.20 3.00 0.11 1.20 1.00 0 1.20 0.50 0.86 1.20 0.10MD UPPER POTOMACRMD0021687 21.5 20.21 3.58 0.84 1.29 0.79 0 1.29 0.79 0 1.29 0.79 0 1.29 0.50 12.88 1.29 0.10MD W R GRACEMD0000311 4.066 4.06 460.17 0.30 25.10 0.15 0 47.99 0.15 0 25.10 0.15 0 25.10 0.15 4.15 3.00 0.10MD WESTVACO CORPOMD0001422 2.18 1.92 0.09 1.92 0.09 0 1.92 0.09 0 1.92 0.09 0 1.92 0.09 0.00 1.92 0.09MD Total116.61 0 12.46234 5.8881 21.45PA APPLETON PAPERSPA0008265 4.32 0.37 0.16 4.17 1.16 0 4.17 1.16 0 4.17 1.00 0 4.17 0.50 8.35 3.00 0.10PA CHLOE TEXTILES INPA0009172 0.27 0.76 3.88 8.18 0.81 0 8.18 0.81 0 8.00 0.81 0.41 5.00 0.50 1.14 3.00 0.10PA CONSOLIDATED RAPA0009229 0.16 0.48 0.92 2.86 0.22 0 2.86 0.22 0 2.86 0.22 0.00 2.86 0.22 0.50 2.86 0.10PA EMPIRE KOSHER POPA0007552 1.17 3.32 1.00 8.46 0.40 0 8.46 0.40 0 8.00 0.40 1.32 5.00 0.40 1.55 3.00 0.10PA GOLD MILLS DYEHOPA0008231 0.68 2.92 0.49 8.40 0.15 0 8.40 0.15 0 8.00 0.15 0.81 5.00 0.15 0.93 3.00 0.10PA HEINZ PET FOODSPA0009270 0.52 4.58 2.78 41.73 11.80 0 41.73 11.80 4.17 4.58 2.78 0.65 4.58 2.36 1.65 3.00 0.10PA MERCK & COMPANYPA0008419 12.70 8.01 4.61 1.49 0 4.61 1.49 0.34 4.61 1.00 0 4.61 0.50 19.99 3.00 0.10PA NATIONAL GYPSUMPA0008591 0.31 3.74 3.20 2.93 1.28 0 2.93 1.28 0 2.93 1.00 0 2.93 0.50 0.69 2.93 0.10PA OSRAM SYLVANIAPPA0009024 1.09 70.57 0.16 109.98 0.70 0 109.98 0.70 0 88.00 0.70 0 77.00 0.50 ? 3.00 0.10PA P-H GLATFELTER COPA0008869 12.45 0.37 0.16 11.07 0.07 0 11.07 0.07 4.91 8.00 0.07 5.67 5.00 0.07 11.42 3.00 0.07PA PENNSYLVANIA FISHPA0040835 2.291 6.40 1.50 0.30 1.03 0.10 0 1.03 0.10 0 1.03 0.10 0 1.03 0.10 0 1.03 0.10PA PENNSYLVANIA FISHPA0010553 6.00 1.50 0.57 6.52 0.15 0 6.52 0.15 0 6.52 0.15 3.1807 5.00 0.15 5.83 3.00 0.10PA PENNSYLVANIA FISHPA0010561 4.87 1.50 0.21 4.25 0.13 0 4.25 0.13 0 4.25 0.13 0 4.25 0.13 4.85 3.00 0.10PA PENNSYLVANIA FISHPA0112127 13.00 1.40 0.11 0.10 0.03 0 0.10 0.03 0 0.10 0.03 0 0.10 0.03 0 0.10 0.03PA PENNSYLVANIA FISHPA0044032 0.20 1.50 0.30 1.03 0.10 0 1.03 0.10 0 1.03 0.10 0 1.03 0.10 0 1.03 0.10PA POPE & TALBOT WISPA0007919 1.65 18.00 6.00 6.86 1.02 0 6.86 1.02 0 6.86 1.00 1.50 5.00 0.50 4.04 3.00 0.10PA PROCTOR & GAMBLPA0008885 11.5 4.88 24.64 1.50 17.58 2.44 0 17.58 2.44 4.67 8.00 1.00 2.75 5.00 0.50 9.22 3.00 0.10PA TYSON FOODSPA0035092 0.55 111.02 19.53 25.00 2.00 0 25.00 2.00 4.04 25.00 2.00 0.68 22.20 2.00 1.71 3.00 0.10PA USFW-LAMAR NATIOPA0009857 4.40 0.37 0.09 0.25 0.03 0 0.25 0.03 0 0.25 0.03 0 0.25 0.03 0 0.25 0.03PA Total75.62 0 18.12336 16.955 71.86617VA HONEYWELLVA0005291 42 132.14 10.65 0.07 1.98 0.13 0 1.98 0.13 0 1.98 0.13 0 1.98 0.13 0 1.98 0.10VA AMOCO-YORKTOWNVA0003018 56.4 60.77 36.24 0.51 0.90 0.12 0 0.90 0.12 0 0.90 0.12 0 0.90 0.12 0 0.90 0.10TIER 3 TIER 41985 2010 TIER 1 TIER 2NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlsTable V-F total cc and concs44CBPO, 11/6/2002Table V-F: INDUSTRIAL FACILITY TOTAL INCREMENTAL CAPITAL COST AND CONCENTRATION DATA FOR ALL FOUR TIERSDESIGN 2000STATEFACILITY NPDESFLOW(mgd)FLOW(mgd)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TOTALCC ($mil)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TOTALCC ($mil)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)CC($mil)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TOTALCC ($mil)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TIER 3 TIER 41985 2010 TIER 1 TIER 2VA BROWN & WILLIAMSVA0002780 1.998 0.82 12.19 3.36 8.27 1.76 0 8.27 1.76 0 8.00 1.00 0.94 5.00 0.50 2.21 3.00 0.10VA BWXTVA0003697 2.9 0.48 854.40 0.48 76.50 1.06 0 76.50 1.06 0 76.50 1.00 0 76.50 0.50 5 3.00 0.10VA DUPONT-SPRUANCEVA0004669 81.1 23.33 2.15 0.26 2.83 0.11 0 2.83 0.11 0 2.83 0.11 0 2.83 0.11 0 2.83 0.10VA DUPONT-WAYNESBOVA0002160 0.5 2.97 22.74 4.33 3.21 0.14 0 3.21 0.14 0 3.21 0.14 0 3.21 0.14 0 3.00 0.10VA GEORGIA PACIFICCVA0003026 12 7.21 0.06 0.03 13.00 7.40 0 13.00 7.40 0.25 2.43 4.95 0 2.43 0.50 5.80 3.00 0.10VA LEES COMMERCIALVA0004677 2 0.80 11.28 17.52 33.09 38.79 0 33.09 38.79 2 11.28 17.52 0 6.62 7.76 0 3.00 0.10VA MERCK & COMPANYVA0002178 1.2 10.09 11.93 3.17 3.13 2.61 0 3.13 2.61 0 3.13 1.00 0.8 3.13 0.50 ? 3.00 0.10VA PHILLIP MORRIS-PAVA0026557 2.9 1.92 34.66 13.77 33.93 1.27 0 33.93 1.27 3.5 17.33 1.27 8 6.93 1.27 12 3.00 0.10VA PILGRIMS PRIDE-HINVA0002313 0.54 53.66 33.00 53.66 33.00 0 53.66 33.00 5.44 26.83 2.00 0.67 10.73 2.00 1.69 3.00 0.10VA GEORGE'S CHICKENVA0077402 1.2 1.21 84.90 11.00 10.00 2.00 0 138.85 33.33 3.85 10.00 2.00 0 10.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 0.10VA SMURFIT STONEVA0003115 36 18.45 14.08 5.80 8.00 1.50 0 5.26 1.23 0 8.00 1.00 0 5.00 0.50 28.45 3.00 0.10VA TYSON FOODS, INCVA0004031 0.95 73.76 0.08 6.00 0.30 0 7.37 0.27 0 6.00 0.30 0.15 6.00 0.30 0.38 3.00 0.10VA TYSON FOODS, INCVA0004049 0.98 1.05 113.91 1.15 60.00 2.00 0 79.81 14.40 0.0065 56.96 2.00 0.625 22.78 2.00 1.25 3.00 0.10VA WESTVACO CORPOVA0003646 26.48 29.73 8.00 0.29 8.00 0.29 0 8.00 0.29 0 8.00 0.29 12.3401 5.00 0.29 44.87 3.00 0.10VA Total292.44 0 15.05136 23.5237 102.64WV HESTER INDUSTRIEWV0047236 0.53 3.87 1.09 12.60 0.94 0 12.60 0.94 0 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.10WV SPECRATECH INTERWV0005533 0.32 27.13 0.14 29.66 3.00 0 29.66 3.00 5.29 13.57 1.00 0.44998 5.43 0.50 0.54 3.00 0.10WV WAMPLER-LONGACWV0005495 1.54 62.41 0.88 52.91 9.79 0 52.91 9.79 0 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.10WV Total2.38 0 5.286279 0.44998 0.54Grand Total524.88 0 50.92335 46.8168 196.50Note: Total CC = Total Capital Cost = (TN Capital Cost + TP Capital Cost)NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlsTable V-F total cc and concs45CBPO, 11/6/2002

# VI. COST M E THODOLOGY FOR NO N-SIGNIFICANT FACILITIES

A total of 185 non-signif i cant m unicipal plants ar e included in this analysis. 183 of these 185

plants are re giste r ed with MDE, and one of them is a VA f acility that d i sc harges in to Maryland

waters. MD E provided the loading and flow info rm ation for these facilities. The other two

facilities are W V non-significant plants select ed into the database by CBPO. No other

jurisdictions have provided non-si gnificant facilities inform ati on before the progress 2000 m odel

run. VADE Q has provided som e no n-significant plant inform ation after the progress 2000 run,

and these data have not been pr ocessed and loaded into the data base at the tim e of this writing.

Therefore, this analysis only covers the non-significant m unici pal facilities existing in the

database with the progress 2000 data.

Am ong the four Tiers, there is no action on non-si gnificant plants for Tier 1-3. For Tier 4, nonsignifican t municipal facilities ar e expected to reduce their TN c oncentrations to 8 mg/l and TP

to 2 m g /l.

The NRT cost estim a tes for non-significant f acilities were developed from the following

assum p tion and four different m e thodologies.

6.1 Assumption:

Since the T i er 4 scenario for non-significant fac ilities provides that TN = 8 m g /l and TP = 2

mg/l, it is assum e d that there are no TN or TP costs where th e plant h a s TN concentration < 8

mg/l or TP < 2 m g /l respectiv ely.

6.2 Methodologies:

6.2.1 TN capital cost estim a tes for TN at 8 m g /l for facilities with design flow less than

0.5 MGD. This m e thodology was develope d based on the data from 9 VA and 2

MD sm all plants.

6.2.2 TN capital cost estim a tes for TN at 8 m g /l for facilities with design flow greater

than 0.5 MGD. The TN capital co st for Tier 2 m e thodology developed by

Stearns & W h eler, LLC and CH2M Hill wa s used to ca lc ulate these c o sts.

6.2.3 TN O&M estim ates for TN at 8 m g / l for all non-significant facilities. The

Operating and Maintenance Costs (O&M) were assum e d to equal 7% of the

annualized capital cost assum i ng a 5.4% am ortization factor (based on EPA’s

1992 Office of Management and Budget Guidelines) was used.

46

## 6.2.4 TP capital cost and O&M estim ates for TP at 2mg/l for all non-significant

facilities. Th e spreadsh eet applicatio n for Tier 2 T P capital cos t and O&M

estim ates developed by Stearns & Wheler, LLC was used with the adjustm e nt of

TP goal.

6.3 TN capital cost estimates for TN at 8 mg /l for facilities w i th design flow < 0.5 M G D

The NRT TN@8 cost curve for non-significant f acilities with design flow less than 0.5 MGD

was develop e d based on the cos t data f

r om 9 VA and 2 MD sm all f acilitie s. The sele ction of

these source data was recommended by VADE Q and MD E. The cost and design flow data of the

9 VA non-significant facilities were provided by VADE Q. T h e MD da ta were selected fro m the

MDE BNR cost repo rt. There are four MD fac ilities <0.5 MGD having cost data. But only two

of them were selected to put on the cost curv e, b e cause ano t h e r two plan ts- Pittsville and

Centreville have relatively high co sts that are far out of the range of the selected data group for

the curve. The design flows of the selected f acilities range from 0.065 MGD to 0.568 MGD. The

f o llowing Table VI-A lists all of the s e f acilities , their design flows and NR T capital c o sts f o r TN

=8 m g /l.

Table VI-A. Source Data For The Cost Curve

STATE Facilities Design Flow (m gd) TN CC@8

V A S u r r y Cou n t y 0.06 5 405, 672

V A P o w h a t a n 0.1 481, 571

V A M o n t r o s s 0.13 432, 496

V A A p p o m a t t o x 0.3 1 ,35 3 ,28 5

V A L o u i s a 0.4 694, 988

V A S h e n a n d o a h 0.4 756, 339

V A C r e w e 0.5 1 ,048,720

V A K i l m a r n o c k 0.5 1 ,71 4 ,56 6

V A P a r h a m Land ing 0 .56 8 1,98 8,29 4

M D I n d i a n H e a d 0.5 656, 000

M D S n o w H i l l 0.5 1 ,600,000



## Based on these source data, several curves were generated and evaluate d. The following curve

has the highest R value and was selected as th e cost curve for TN capital cost curve for nonsignificant municipa l f a cilities.

47T N C C @8 Co st Cu rve f o r No n

- S i g n i f i can t F aci li t i es



## y = 35585 7e 2

. 49 21x



## R 2



## = 0.6295

0 5 00, 00 0 1, 0 00, 00 0 1, 5 00, 00 0 2, 0 00, 00 0 2, 5 00, 00 0

0 0 .1 0

. 2 0 .3 0

. 4 0 .5 0

. 6

De s i g n Flow (M GD )CC ($)



## Figure VI - A. TN Capital Cost Curve at 8 m g /l for Non-significant Facilities

The equation of this cost curve is

Y = 355857e 2.4921X



## W h ere Y= Capita l Cost in Dollar

X= Design Flow in MGD (or 2010 Flow if Design Flow is less

than 2010 Flow)

There are 21 non-significant facili ties with projected 2010 flow great er than current design flow.

Because we do not have updated design flow in form ation for non-signifi cant facilities, we

assum e d that the design flow w ill eq ual to the projected 201 0 fl ow where 2010 flow is greater

than design flow. In such cases, the 2010 flow was used to calculate the cost for both TN and TP

costs. Following table lists the 21 plants.

48

### a ble VI-B : Non-si g n ificant Fa cilities with Desig n Flow < 20 10 Flow T

FA CI LI TY NP DE S D E S I G N_FLOW (M GD) 2010 FLOW (M GD)

BO W L EYS Q U AR TER S M D 0058807 0. 004 0. 0067

C H ESAPEAKE C I TY N O R T H M D 0020401 0. 075 0. 0955

C H ESAPEAKE C O L L E G E M D 0024384 0. 015 0. 0157

CRE S T V I E W M D 0022683 0. 036 0. 0384

FLIN TSTON E M D 0055620 0. 045 0. 0587

FOU N TAIN D A LE M D 0022721 0. 2 0

. 2528

FO XVIL L E U S N AVAL SU PPO R T M D 0025119 0. 018 0. 0291

H EBR O N M D 0059617 0. 105 0. 1314

I- 7 0 R E ST AR EA M D 0023680 0. 028 0. 0342

J E FFER S ON M D 0020737 0. 15 0. 1754

K E MP TOWN S C HOOL M D 0056481 0. 005 0. 0054

MID D L E TOW N M D 0024406 0. 25 0. 2617

N O TC H C LIFF M D 0022951 0. 02 0. 0380

PAR K W A Y IN N M D 0052329 0. 02 0. 0243

PO R T D EPO SIT M D 0020796 0. 15 0. 1503

R A W L IN G S H E IG H T S M D 0023213 0. 08 0. 0956

S O UT HE RN CORRE C T I ONA L CA M P M D 0023914 0. 02 0. 0349

TAW E S VO C A TIO N AL

- T EC H N IC AL M D 0022993 0. 01 0. 1728

TR APPE M D 0020486 0. 115 0. 1360

TR I- TOWN PLAZA M D 0024937 0. 01 0. 0135

WI LLA RDS M D 0051632 0. 08 0. 0820



## 6.4 TN capital cost estimates for TN at 8 mg/l for facilities w i th design flow > 0.5 MG D

The workgroup decided that the TN capital costs for non-significant plants with design flow

greater than 0.5 MGD were to be calculate d by the Tier 2 T N capital cost m e thodology

developed b y Stearns & Wheler, LLC and CH2M Hill. This m e thodology is describ e d in a

docum ent provided Stea r n s & W h eler, LLC and CH2M Hill.

The equation of this m e thodology is

Y = 2023829 + 704350.8039X - 5986.733X 2



## Where, Y= TN Capital Cost in dollar

X = Design Flow in MGD

49

## 6.5 TN O&M estimates for TN at 8 mg/l for all non-signif ican t facilities

The Operating and Maintenance Costs (O&M) we re assum e d to equal 7% of the annualized

capital cost assum i ng a 5.4% am ortization was use d. This assum p tion is based on EPA Office

of Management and Budget, “Mem orandum for Heads of Executive Departm e nts and

Establishm e n ts: Guidelines and Discount Rates f o r Benefit-C o st Analyses of Federal Program s”,

Appendix C, Oct. 29, 1992. A discount factor of 0.0830 was chosen for this analysis assum i ng

5.4% not taking inflation into account.

The equation for TN O&M cost for non-significant plants:

TN O&M Cost = 7% x Annualized Capital Cost

Annualized Capital Cost = 0.083 x Capital Cost

W h ere, Amortization factor = 0.0830 (@ 5.4% over 20 years)

6.6 TP capital cost and O&M estimates for TP at 2mg/l for all non-sign ificant facilities

The spreads h eet app lication for Tier 2 TP capita l cost and O&M estim ates developed by Stearns

& W h eler, LLC was used with the adjustm e nt of TP goal. In the or igina l spreadshe e t applic ation

for Tier 2 T P cost, TP goal was set to 1 m g /l fo r significant facilities. T h e scenario for nonsignificant plants requires TP= 2m g/l. Therefore, the TP goad was set to 2 m g /l for nonsignificant plant O&M calculation in the spreadsheet application. Other factors such as design

flow, 2000 flow, 2010 flow and 2000 TP concentra tion, were inserted into the different

application sheet depends on the plan t’s 2000 TP concentration level. The original description

of the Tier 2 TP cost m e thodology was docum ented by Stearns & W h eler, LLC

Results:

Based on the assum p tions and m e thodologies de scribed above, the Tier 4 capital and

O&M costs for TN and TP were calculated for the non-significant facilities. The following is the

summary of the total costs for 185 non-significant facili ties in the current database..

Total TN capital cost: $83,089,000

Total TN O&M cost: $624,534

Total TP capital cost: $11,303,260

Total TN O&M cost: $296,520

Table VI-C lists the detailed cos t inform ation for individual non-significant plants.

50Table VI - C: NRT Cost for Non-significant Municipal FacilitiesDESIGN TIER 1*TIER 2* TIER 3*STATE FACILITY NPDESFLOW(mgd)FLOW(mgd) TN(mg/l) TP(mg/l)TOTALCOSTTOTALCOSTTOTALCOST TN CC TN O&MTNNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETOTALCCTOTALO&MMD ANTIETAMMD00623080.163 0.1094 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $534,184 $3,104 1 $80,950 $2,523 5$615,134 $5,627MD BALTIMORE YACHT CLMD0054542 0.005 0.0019 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $360,319 $2,093 1 $66,028 $1,337 5$426,347 $3,430MD BELTSVILLE USDA EASMD0020842 0.62 0.2358 8.00 2.07 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $124,111 $2,610 5$124,111 $2,610MD BELTSVILLE USDA WESMD0020851 0.2 0.1244 11.70 2.20 0 0 0 $585,783 $3,403 1 $84,445 $1,895 5$670,228 $5,298MD BENJAMINS TRAILERPMD0024961 0.04 0.0190 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $393,159 $2,284 1 $69,334 $1,544 5$462,493 $3,828MD BETTERTONMD00205750.2 0.0212 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $585,783 $3,403 1 $84,445 $1,864 5$670,228 $5,268MD BIERS LANEMD00657490.0095 0.0030 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $364,382 $2,117 1 $66,453 $1,354 5$430,835 $3,471MD BLOOMINGTONMD0060933 0.05 0.0273 18.00 3.87 0 0 0 $403,080 $2,342 1 $70,278 $1,828 5$473,358 $4,170MD BOHEMIA MANOR HIGHMD00234690.015 0.0067 1.90 3.00 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $66,973 $1,395 5$66,973 $1,395MD BOONES MOBILEMD0050903 0.08 0.0652 18.01 1.28 0 0 0 $434,370 $2,524 1 $0 $0 4$434,370 $2,524MD BOONSBOROMD0020231 0.46 0.4034 18.00 2.41 0 0 0 $1,119,788 $6,506 1 $109,000 $3,552 5$1,228,788 $10,058MD BOWLEYS QUARTERSMD0058807 0.004 0.0067 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $361,867 $2,102 1 $65,934 $1,374 5$427,801 $3,477MD BOWLING BROOK PREMD0067571 0.025 0.0059 0.68 3.00 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $67,917 $1,407 5$67,917 $1,407MD BRANDYWINE RECEIVIMD00256580.005 0.0012 5.55 3.00 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $66,028 $1,330 5$66,028 $1,330MD BRETTON WOODSMD0064777 0.015 0.0097 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $369,411 $2,146 1 $66,973 $1,420 5$436,384 $3,566MD BROADFORDINGMD0051373 0.01 0.0011 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $364,837 $2,120 1 $66,500 $1,339 5$431,337 $3,459MD BROOK LANEMD00531980.01 0.0056 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $364,837 $2,120 1 $66,500 $1,376 5$431,337 $3,496MD BUDGET MOTELMD0023027 0.019 0.0021 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $373,112 $2,168 1 $67,350 $1,364 5$440,462 $3,532MD CAMP SHADOWBROOKMD00531390.04 0.0005 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $393,159 $2,284 1 $69,334 $1,391 5$462,493 $3,675MD CECILTONMD0020443 0.05 0.0415 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $403,080 $2,342 1 $70,278 $1,749 5$473,358 $4,091MD CHARLES COUNTY COMD0052311 0.06 0.0364 28.30 2.80 0 0 0 $413,251 $2,401 1 $71,223 $1,665 5$484,474 $4,066MD CHELTENHAM BOYS VMD0023931 0.07 0.0370 10.53 1.02 0 0 0 $423,679 $2,462 1 $0 $0 4$423,679 $2,462MD CHERRY HILLMD00528250.25 0.1327 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $663,517 $3,855 1 $89,167 $2,880 5$752,684 $6,735MD CHESAPEAKE CITY NOMD0020401 0.075 0.0955 8.17 3.63 0 0 0 $451,423 $2,623 1 $72,639 $2,739 5$524,062 $5,362MD CHESAPEAKE CITY SOMD0020397 0.088 0.0748 10.23 1.97 0 0 0 $443,117 $2,575 1 $0 $0 4$443,117 $2,575MD CHESAPEAKE COLLEGMD0024384 0.015 0.0157 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $370,016 $2,150 1 $66,973 $1,469 5$436,989 $3,619MD CHOPTICAN HIGHMD00519180.02 0.0056 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $374,043 $2,173 1 $67,445 $1,395 5$441,488 $3,568MD CHURCH HILLMD0050016 0.08 0.0730 6.90 1.95 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $0 $0 4$0 $0MD CLEARSPRINGMD00533250.2 0.0793 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $585,783 $3,403 1 $84,445 $2,345 5$670,228 $5,748MD CLIFFTON ON THE POTMD0055557 0.2 0.0514 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $585,783 $3,403 1 $84,445 $2,113 5$670,228 $5,517MD COLONEL RICHARDSOMD0055522 0.05 0.0063 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $403,080 $2,342 1 $70,278 $1,458 5$473,358 $3,800MD CONCORD TRAILER PAMD0023060 0.015 0.0046 12.31 3.00 0 0 0 $369,411 $2,146 1 $66,973 $1,378 5$436,384 $3,524MD CRESTVIEWMD0022683 0.036 0.0384 13.64 3.03 0 0 0 $391,570 $2,275 1 $68,956 $1,706 5$460,526 $3,981MD DAN-DEE INC.MD0023710 0.012 0.0024 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $366,660 $2,130 1 $66,689 $1,354 5$433,349 $3,484MD DONALDSON BROWNCMD0054950 0.006 0.0022 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $361,218 $2,099 1 $66,123 $1,341 5$427,341 $3,439MD DREAMS LANDINGMD00528680.02 0.0084 16.03 3.00 0 0 0 $374,043 $2,173 1 $67,445 $1,419 5$441,488 $3,5922010 DATA TIER 4** (TN=8mg/l AND TP=2mg/l)NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable VI-C51CBPO, 11/6/2002Table VI - C: NRT Cost for Non-significant Municipal FacilitiesDESIGN TIER 1*TIER 2* TIER 3*STATE FACILITY NPDESFLOW(mgd)FLOW(mgd) TN(mg/l) TP(mg/l)TOTALCOSTTOTALCOSTTOTALCOST TN CC TN O&MTNNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETOTALCCTOTALO&M2010 DATA TIER 4** (TN=8mg/l AND TP=2mg/l)MD EASTERN CORRECTIOMD0023876 0.03 0.0158 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $383,482 $2,228 1 $68,389 $1,498 5$451,871 $3,726MD EASTERN CORRECTIOMD0066613 0.48 0.4159 2.05 0.14 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $0 $0 4$0 $0MD EDGEMEADE RESIDENMD0052680 0.005 0.0022 26.59 4.40 0 0 0 $360,319 $2,093 1 $66,028 $1,364 5$426,347 $3,458MD ELK NECK STATE PARKMD0023833 0.108 0.0277 17.21 2.53 0 0 0 $465,762 $2,706 1 $75,756 $1,636 5$541,518 $4,343MD EMERGENCY MANAGEMD0025666 0.01 0.0002 19.56 1.17 0 0 0 $364,837 $2,120 1 $0 $0 4$364,837 $2,120MD ENGLISH GRILLMD0053104 0.003 0.0004 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $358,527 $2,083 1 $65,839 $1,320 5$424,366 $3,403MD EWELLMD0052230 0.065 0.0224 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $418,432 $2,431 1 $71,695 $1,619 5$490,127 $4,050MD FAHRNEY-KEEDY MEMMD0053066 0.025 0.0190 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $378,733 $2,200 1 $67,917 $1,515 5$446,650 $3,716MD FAIRMOUNTMD0052256 0.05 0.0309 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $403,080 $2,342 1 $70,278 $1,661 5$473,358 $4,003MD FLINTSTONEMD0055620 0.045 0.0587 16.59 3.00 0 0 0 $411,924 $2,393 1 $69,806 $1,881 5$481,730 $4,275MD FOREST GREENMD00532790.013 0.0100 18.00 14.80 0 0 0 $367,575 $2,136 1 $66,784 $2,398 5$434,359 $4,534MD FOUNTAINDALEMD0022721 0.2 0.2528 19.66 3.82 0 0 0 $668,233 $3,882 1 $84,445 $5,493 5$752,678 $9,376MD FOXVILLE US NAVAL SMD00251190.018 0.0291 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $382,600 $2,223 1 $67,256 $1,586 5$449,856 $3,808MD FUNKSTOWNMD0020362 0.15 0.0643 40.53 5.53 0 0 0 $517,156 $3,005 1 $79,723 $3,470 5$596,879 $6,474MD GAITHER MANORMD00228450.045 0.0226 3.10 3.97 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $69,806 $1,764 5$69,806 $1,764MD GALENAMD00206050.04 0.0267 26.26 4.51 0 0 0 $393,159 $2,284 1 $69,334 $1,940 5$462,493 $4,224MD GORMANMD0060950 0.009 0.0047 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $363,929 $2,114 1 $66,406 $1,367 5$430,335 $3,482MD GREAT OAKS LANDINGMD00249450.014 0.0058 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $368,492 $2,141 1 $66,878 $1,385 5$435,370 $3,526MD GREEN RIDGE FORESTMD00249880.008 0.0032 18.00 3.72 0 0 0 $363,023 $2,109 1 $66,312 $1,371 5$429,335 $3,481MD GREENBRIAR STATEPMD00238680.05 0.0152 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $403,080 $2,342 1 $70,278 $1,532 5$473,358 $3,873MD GREENSBOROMD0020290 0.28 0.1697 21.02 3.48 0 0 0 $715,025 $4,154 1 $92,000 $3,917 5$807,025 $8,071MD HAMPSTEADMD0022446 0.9 0.6826 20.13 0.24 0 0 0 $2,652,895 $15,413 6 $0 $0 4$2,652,895 $15,413MD HANCOCKMD0024562 0.38 0.2239 20.70 2.43 0 0 0 $917,385 $5,330 1 $101,445 $2,825 5$1,018,830 $8,155MD HAPPY TRAILS CAMPGMD0065757 0.025 0.0035 3.27 3.00 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $67,917 $1,387 5$67,917 $1,387MD HARBOUR VIEWMD0024023 0.065 0.0077 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $418,432 $2,431 1 $71,695 $1,498 5$490,127 $3,929MD HARWOOD SOUTHERNMD00237280.04 0.0059 6.70 7.70 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $69,334 $1,667 5$69,334 $1,667MD HEBRONMD0059617 0.105 0.1314 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $493,725 $2,869 1 $75,473 $2,596 5$569,198 $5,464MD HIGHLAND VIEWMD0024627 0.03 0.0094 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $383,482 $2,228 1 $68,389 $1,445 5$451,871 $3,673MD HOLIDAY MOBILE ESTAMD0053082 0.125 0.1071 7.33 1.13 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $0 $0 4$0 $0MD HUNTER HILL APARTMMD0022926 0.03 0.0291 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $383,482 $2,228 1 $68,389 $1,608 5$451,871 $3,836MD I-70 REST AREAMD0023680 0.028 0.0342 26.77 3.00 0 0 0 $387,563 $2,252 1 $68,200 $1,647 5$455,763 $3,899MD JEFFERSONMD0020737 0.15 0.1754 0.45 3.00 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $79,723 $3,045 5$79,723 $3,045MD JUDE HOUSEMD0057614 0.017 0.0000 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $0 $0 4$0 $0MD KEMPTOWN SCHOOLMD0056481 0.005 0.0054 29.00 3.00 0 0 0 $360,712 $2,096 1 $66,028 $1,366 5$426,740 $3,461MD KENNEDYVILLEMD0052671 0.05 0.0045 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $403,080 $2,342 1 $70,278 $1,443 5$473,358 $3,785MD KITZMILLERMD0060941 0.04 0.0175 18.00 3.37 0 0 0 $393,159 $2,284 1 $69,334 $1,585 5$462,493 $3,869NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable VI-C52CBPO, 11/6/2002Table VI - C: NRT Cost for Non-significant Municipal FacilitiesDESIGN TIER 1*TIER 2* TIER 3*STATE FACILITY NPDESFLOW(mgd)FLOW(mgd) TN(mg/l) TP(mg/l)TOTALCOSTTOTALCOSTTOTALCOST TN CC TN O&MTNNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETOTALCCTOTALO&M2010 DATA TIER 4** (TN=8mg/l AND TP=2mg/l)MD KUNZANG ODSAL PALGMD00675390.035 0.0008 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $388,290 $2,256 1 $68,862 $1,384 5$457,152 $3,640MD LACKEY HIGHMD00231590.028 0.0106 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $381,575 $2,217 1 $68,200 $1,452 5$449,775 $3,669MD LAFAYETTE MOTELMD0053201 0.005 0.0013 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $360,319 $2,093 1 $66,028 $1,331 5$426,347 $3,424MD LEWISTOWN ELEMENTMD0022900 0.022 0.0030 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $375,912 $2,184 1 $67,634 $1,377 5$443,546 $3,561MD LIBERTYTOWNMD0060577 0.05 0.0300 21.45 2.89 0 0 0 $403,080 $2,342 1 $70,278 $1,626 5$473,358 $3,968MD LYONS CREEK MOBILEMD0053511 0.125 0.0719 10.21 1.91 0 0 0 $485,919 $2,823 1 $0 $0 4$485,919 $2,823MD MANCHESTERMD00225780.25 0.0816 20.94 0.27 0 0 0 $663,517 $3,855 1 $0 $0 4$663,517 $3,855MD MANCHESTER PARKMD00231080.035 0.0273 16.75 4.65 0 0 0 $388,290 $2,256 1 $68,862 $1,974 5$457,152 $4,230MD MAPLE HILL PARKMD0053171 0.016 0.0061 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $370,333 $2,152 1 $67,067 $1,392 5$437,400 $3,543MD MAPLE RUNMD0024970 0.004 0.0031 2.20 3.00 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $65,934 $1,344 5$65,934 $1,344MD MARDELA HIGHMD00242790.014 0.0024 9.57 3.00 0 0 0 $368,492 $2,141 1 $66,878 $1,357 5$435,370 $3,498MD MARLBORO MEADOWSMD0022781 0.6 0.3243 12.90 0.97 0 0 0 $2,444,284 $14,201 6 $0 $0 4$2,444,284 $14,201MD MARYLAND MANOR MOMD0024333 0.07 0.0666 11.00 1.50 0 0 0 $423,679 $2,462 1 $0 $0 4$423,679 $2,462MD MAYO LARGE COMMUNMD0061794 1 0.5526 8.52 0.81 0 0 0 $2,722,193 $15,816 6 $0 $0 4$2,722,193 $15,816MD MIDDLETOWNMD0024406 0.25 0.2617 26.02 2.45 0 0 0 $683,107 $3,969 1 $89,167 $2,757 5$772,274 $6,726MD MILL BOTTOMMD00654390.1 0.0527 2.21 3.00 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $75,000 $1,936 5$75,000 $1,936MD MILLINGTONMD00204350.07 0.0581 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $423,679 $2,462 1 $72,167 $1,924 5$495,846 $4,386MD MONROVIA WWTPMD00596090.2 0.0323 3.72 3.00 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $84,445 $1,956 5$84,445 $1,956MD MORNING CHEERMD00522990.03 0.0201 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $383,482 $2,228 1 $68,389 $1,534 5$451,871 $3,762MD MT CARMEL WOODSMD00532280.021 0.0209 13.95 0.79 0 0 0 $374,976 $2,179 1 $0 $0 4$374,976 $2,179MD MT ST MARYS COLLEGMD0023230 0.16 0.0530 25.49 6.32 0 0 0 $530,206 $3,080 1 $80,667 $3,507 5$610,873 $6,588MD MYERSVILLEMD00206990.3 0.1868 19.88 4.32 0 0 0 $751,566 $4,367 1 $93,889 $5,461 5$845,455 $9,828MD NAS-PATUXENTMD00200950.045 0.0340 8.00 3.00 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $69,806 $1,677 5$69,806 $1,677MD NATIONAL INSTITUTEOMD0020931 0.1 0.0567 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $456,569 $2,653 1 $75,000 $1,969 5$531,569 $4,622MD NATIONAL WILDLIFE VIMD00653580.04 0.0014 18.00 2.09 0 0 0 $393,159 $2,284 1 $69,334 $1,388 5$462,493 $3,672MD NEW GERMANY STATEMD0023981 0.006 0.0014 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $361,218 $2,099 1 $66,123 $1,334 5$427,341 $3,433MD NEW LIFE FOURSQUARMD0057100 0.009 0.0019 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $363,929 $2,114 1 $66,406 $1,344 5$430,335 $3,459MD NEW MARKETMD00207290.24 0.1208 23.40 4.80 0 0 0 $647,185 $3,760 1 $88,223 $4,560 5$735,408 $8,321MD NEW WINDSORMD0022586 0.13 0.0526 15.07 3.97 0 0 0 $492,011 $2,859 1 $77,834 $2,413 5$569,845 $5,271MD NORTH CAROLINE HIGMD0023621 0.024 0.0023 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $377,790 $2,195 1 $67,823 $1,376 5$445,613 $3,571MD NORTH HARFORD JR&MD0023281 0.02 0.0120 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $374,043 $2,173 1 $67,445 $1,448 5$441,488 $3,622MD NORTHERN HIGH SCHOMD0052167 0.04 0.0158 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $393,159 $2,284 1 $69,334 $1,518 5$462,493 $3,802MD NOTCHCLIFFMD0022951 0.02 0.0380 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $391,194 $2,273 1 $67,445 $1,663 5$458,639 $3,936MD NSWC-INDIAN HEADMD00208850.5 0.3471 7.35 2.13 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $112,778 $2,627 5$112,778 $2,627MD OLD SOUTH MOUNTAINMD00554250.018 0.0025 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $372,183 $2,162 1 $67,256 $1,366 5$439,439 $3,528MD OLDTOWNMD00247590.04 0.0105 18.00 2.15 0 0 0 $393,159 $2,284 1 $69,334 $1,400 5$462,493 $3,684NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable VI-C53CBPO, 11/6/2002Table VI - C: NRT Cost for Non-significant Municipal FacilitiesDESIGN TIER 1*TIER 2* TIER 3*STATE FACILITY NPDESFLOW(mgd)FLOW(mgd) TN(mg/l) TP(mg/l)TOTALCOSTTOTALCOSTTOTALCOST TN CC TN O&MTNNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETOTALCCTOTALO&M2010 DATA TIER 4** (TN=8mg/l AND TP=2mg/l)MD OXFORDMD0022543 0.208 0.1085 18.00 0.67 0 0 0 $597,579 $3,472 1 $0 $0 4$597,579 $3,472MD PARKWAY INNMD00523290.02 0.0243 9.40 1.90 0 0 0 $378,088 $2,197 1 $0 $0 4$378,088 $2,197MD PATUXENT MOBILEMD0024694 0.035 0.0259 15.09 1.41 0 0 0 $388,290 $2,256 1 $0 $0 4$388,290 $2,256MD PATUXENT WILDLIFEHMD0025623 0.027 0.0209 2.35 3.00 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $68,106 $1,535 5$68,106 $1,535MD PETER PAN INNMD0024244 0.03 0.0035 4.15 1.27 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $0 $0 4$0 $0MD PHEASANT RIDGEMD0024546 0.125 0.0250 12.97 2.69 0 0 0 $485,919 $2,823 1 $77,362 $1,690 5$563,281 $4,513MD PICCOWAXIN MIDDLEMD0023451 0.025 0.0027 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $378,733 $2,200 1 $67,917 $1,381 5$446,650 $3,581MD PINEY ORCHARDMD00591451.2 0.3625 3.83 0.28 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $0 $0 4$0 $0MD PINTOMD00227480.45 0.2696 9.94 2.77 0 0 0 $1,092,227 $6,346 1 $108,056 $3,877 5$1,200,283 $10,223MD PITTSVILLEMD00603480.14 0.0881 14.75 0.95 0 0 0 $3,469,050 $161,940 2 $0 $0 4$3,469,050 $161,940MD PLEASANT BRANCHMD00652690.1 0.0510 7.94 3.00 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $75,000 $1,922 5$75,000 $1,922MD PLESANT VALLEYMD00667450.019 0.0093 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $373,112 $2,168 1 $67,350 $1,424 5$440,462 $3,592MD POCOMOKE TRUCK STMD0054330 0.006 0.0024 18.33 3.00 0 0 0 $361,218 $2,099 1 $66,123 $1,342 5$427,341 $3,441MD POINT LOOKOUT STATMD00239490.25 0.0186 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $663,517 $3,855 1 $89,167 $1,937 5$752,684 $5,792MD POINT OF ROCKSMD0020800 0.23 0.0988 17.63 5.05 0 0 0 $631,256 $3,668 1 $87,278 $4,238 5$718,534 $7,905MD PORT DEPOSITMD0020796 0.15 0.1503 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $517,533 $3,007 1 $79,723 $2,837 5$597,256 $5,844MD PRESTONMD0020621 0.116 0.0600 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $475,141 $2,761 1 $76,512 $2,026 5$551,653 $4,787MD QUEENSTOWNMD0023370 0.085 0.0787 15.54 2.44 0 0 0 $439,816 $2,555 1 $73,584 $1,761 5$513,400 $4,316MD RANDLE CLIFFS NAVALMD00201680.06 0.0173 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $413,251 $2,401 1 $71,223 $1,568 5$484,474 $3,969MD RAWLINGS HEIGHTSMD0023213 0.08 0.0956 14.66 1.06 0 0 0 $451,623 $2,624 1 $0 $0 4$451,623 $2,624MD RICHLYN MANORMD0022713 0.09 0.0881 13.43 2.10 0 0 0 $445,331 $2,587 1 $74,056 $1,554 5$519,387 $4,141MD RISING SUNMD00202650.3 0.2553 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $751,566 $4,367 1 $93,889 $3,988 5$845,455 $8,355MD ROCK HALLMD0020303 0.505 0.2707 14.81 0.51 0 0 0 $2,377,999 $13,816 6 $0 $0 4$2,377,999 $13,816MD ROCKY GAP STATE PAMD0051667 0.12 0.0518 6.48 3.00 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $76,889 $1,966 5$76,889 $1,966MD ROSE HAVENMD0022756 0.06 0.0486 20.59 1.20 0 0 0 $413,251 $2,401 1 $0 $0 4$413,251 $2,401MD RUNNYMEADE SCHOOMD0065927 0.02 0.0031 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $374,043 $2,173 1 $67,445 $1,375 5$441,488 $3,548MD SANDY HOOKMD0064530 0.015 0.0065 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $369,411 $2,146 1 $66,973 $1,393 5$436,384 $3,539MD SHAMROCK RESTAURAMD0058050 0.01 0.0029 1.95 3.00 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $66,500 $1,354 5$66,500 $1,354MD SHARPTOWNMD00521750.15 0.1207 26.00 7.10 0 0 0 $517,156 $3,005 1 $79,723 $6,682 5$596,879 $9,687MD SHEPPARD PRATT WEMD0067521 0.01 0.0035 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $364,837 $2,120 1 $66,500 $1,359 5$431,337 $3,479MD SIDELING HILL RESTAMD0062821 0.025 0.0070 21.00 3.00 0 0 0 $378,733 $2,200 1 $67,917 $1,417 5$446,650 $3,617MD SMITHSBURGMD0024317 0.333 0.2221 7.55 1.89 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $0 $0 4$0 $0MD SOUTH CARROLL HIGHMD00245890.02 0.0064 18.00 0.14 0 0 0 $374,043 $2,173 1 $0 $0 4$374,043 $2,173MD SOUTHERN CORRECTIMD0023914 0.02 0.0349 20.37 4.50 0 0 0 $388,145 $2,255 1 $67,445 $2,069 5$455,590 $4,324MD SPRING MEADOWSMD0024953 0.016 0.0106 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $370,333 $2,152 1 $67,067 $1,429 5$437,400 $3,581MD SPRINGVIEW ESTATESMD0022870 0.007 0.0067 21.13 3.00 0 0 0 $362,119 $2,104 1 $66,217 $1,380 5$428,336 $3,484NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable VI-C54CBPO, 11/6/2002Table VI - C: NRT Cost for Non-significant Municipal FacilitiesDESIGN TIER 1*TIER 2* TIER 3*STATE FACILITY NPDESFLOW(mgd)FLOW(mgd) TN(mg/l) TP(mg/l)TOTALCOSTTOTALCOSTTOTALCOST TN CC TN O&MTNNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETOTALCCTOTALO&M2010 DATA TIER 4** (TN=8mg/l AND TP=2mg/l)MD ST TIMOTHY SCHOOLMD0056103 0.015 0.0056 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $369,411 $2,146 1 $66,973 $1,385 5$436,384 $3,532MD ST. JAMES SCHOOLMD0065536 0.016 0.0069 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $370,333 $2,152 1 $67,067 $1,398 5$437,400 $3,550MD SUDLERSVILLEMD00205590.09 0.0497 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $445,331 $2,587 1 $74,056 $1,892 5$519,387 $4,479MD SUMMER HILL TRAILERMD0023272 0.019 0.0113 13.87 1.31 0 0 0 $373,112 $2,168 1 $0 $0 4$373,112 $2,168MD SWAN HARBOR PARKMD0023043 0.05 0.0123 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $403,080 $2,342 1 $70,278 $1,507 5$473,358 $3,849MD SWAN POINTMD00575250.07 0.0367 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $423,679 $2,462 1 $72,167 $1,746 5$495,846 $4,208MD TALBOT COUNTY REGIMD0023604 0.5 0.3803 14.39 3.09 0 0 0 $1,237,167 $7,188 1 $112,778 $5,680 5$1,349,945 $12,868MD TALBOT COUNTY REGIMD0059463 0.15 0.0767 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $517,156 $3,005 1 $79,723 $2,229 5$596,879 $5,234MD TAWES VOCATIONALTMD0022993 0.01 0.1728 23.76 3.00 0 0 0 $547,415 $3,180 1 $66,500 $2,759 5$613,915 $5,939MD THUNDERBIRD APARTMD0050334 0.032 0.0133 32.36 2.25 0 0 0 $385,398 $2,239 1 $68,578 $1,399 5$453,976 $3,638MD THUNDERBIRD MOTELMD00531550.005 0.0046 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $360,319 $2,093 1 $66,028 $1,359 5$426,347 $3,452MD TOLCHESTERMD0067202 0.265 0.0901 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $688,789 $4,002 1 $90,584 $2,557 5$779,373 $6,559MD TRAPPEMD0020486 0.115 0.1360 18.00 2.62 0 0 0 $499,402 $2,902 1 $76,417 $2,220 5$575,819 $5,122MD TRI-TOWN PLAZAMD0024937 0.01 0.0135 18.00 1.97 0 0 0 $368,027 $2,138 1 $0 $0 4$368,027 $2,138MD TRIUMPH INDUSTRIALMD00249290.063 0.0383 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $416,352 $2,419 1 $71,506 $1,747 5$487,858 $4,166MD TWIN CITIESMD0055352 0.28 0.1182 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $715,025 $4,154 1 $92,000 $2,817 5$807,025 $6,971MD TYLERTONMD00522480.02 0.0051 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $374,043 $2,173 1 $67,445 $1,391 5$441,488 $3,564MD U.S. ARMY-CHESAPEAMD0020206 0.005 0.0003 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $360,319 $2,093 1 $66,028 $1,323 5$426,347 $3,416MD UNION BRIDGEMD0022454 0.2 0.1032 28.07 3.27 0 0 0 $585,783 $3,403 1 $84,445 $2,772 5$670,228 $6,176MD UNITED CONTAINERMD00246350.014 0.0076 18.74 3.00 0 0 0 $368,492 $2,141 1 $66,878 $1,400 5$435,370 $3,541MD URBANA HIGH SCHOOMD0066940 0.03 0.0029 18.00 3.52 0 0 0 $383,482 $2,228 1 $68,389 $1,404 5$451,871 $3,632MD US NAVAL ACADEMYMD0023523 1 0.1884 8.00 0.12 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $0 $0 4$0 $0MD USAF BRANDYWINE HOMD0025640 0.005 0.0014 19.03 3.63 0 0 0 $360,319 $2,093 1 $66,028 $1,339 5$426,347 $3,432MD USAF TRANSMITTERSMD0025631 0.01 0.0000 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $0 $0 4$0 $0MD VICTOR CULLEN CENTMD0023922 0.25 0.0416 10.69 3.00 0 0 0 $663,517 $3,855 1 $89,167 $2,127 5$752,684 $5,982MD VIENNAMD0020664 0.06 0.0562 19.28 3.00 0 0 0 $413,251 $2,401 1 $71,223 $1,889 5$484,474 $4,290MD VILLA JULIE COLLEGEMD0066001 0.05 0.0070 3.96 0.16 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $0 $0 4$0 $0MD WALKERS TRAILER PAMD0057487 0.015 0.0141 22.30 3.00 0 0 0 $369,411 $2,146 1 $66,973 $1,456 5$436,384 $3,603MD WAYSONS MOBILEMD0023647 0.06 0.0456 19.16 2.28 0 0 0 $413,251 $2,401 1 $71,223 $1,530 5$484,474 $3,931MD WHITE HOUSE MOTELMD0056553 0.005 0.0016 18.17 3.00 0 0 0 $360,319 $2,093 1 $66,028 $1,333 5$426,347 $3,427MD WHITE ROCKMD00250890.05 0.0171 12.45 3.00 0 0 0 $403,080 $2,342 1 $70,278 $1,547 5$473,358 $3,889MD WILLARDSMD0051632 0.08 0.0820 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $436,493 $2,536 1 $73,112 $2,140 5$509,605 $4,676MD WINTERS APARTMENTMD0057606 0.013 0.0002 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $367,575 $2,136 1 $66,784 $1,338 5$434,359 $3,473MD WOODLAWN MOBILEHMD0023337 0.054 0.0000 0 0 0 $0 $0 3 $0 $0 4$0 $0MD WOODSBOROMD0058661 0.25 0.1220 20.14 2.17 0 0 0 $663,517 $3,855 1 $89,167 $1,955 5$752,684 $5,810MD WOODSTOCK TRAININMD0023906 0.05 0.0087 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $403,080 $2,342 1 $70,278 $1,478 5$473,358 $3,819NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable VI-C55CBPO, 11/6/2002Table VI - C: NRT Cost for Non-significant Municipal FacilitiesDESIGN TIER 1*TIER 2* TIER 3*STATE FACILITY NPDESFLOW(mgd)FLOW(mgd) TN(mg/l) TP(mg/l)TOTALCOSTTOTALCOSTTOTALCOST TN CC TN O&MTNNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETOTALCCTOTALO&M2010 DATA TIER 4** (TN=8mg/l AND TP=2mg/l)MD WORTON-BUTLERTONMD00605850.15 0.0629 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $517,156 $3,005 1 $79,723 $2,115 5$596,879 $5,119MD Total20.5905 11.5411 $80,973,919 $612,243 $10,986,221$91,960,140 $900,121VA FAIRVIEW BEACHMD0056464 0.05 0.0392 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $403,080 $2,342 1 $70,278 $1,729 5$473,358 $4,071VA Total0.05 0.0392 $403,080 $2,342 $70,278$473,358 $4,071WV HARPERS FERRY-BOLIWV0039136 0.3 0.1907 18.00 3.00 0 0 0 $751,566 $4,367 1 $93,889 $3,455 5$845,455 $7,821WV MOUNTAIN TOP PSDWV0101524 0.0504 0.0263 18.83 3.00 0 0 0 $403,482 $2,344 1 $70,316 $1,624 5$473,798 $3,968WV RIVER BEND PARKWV0105384 0.18 0.0223 24.03 3.00 0 0 0 $557,302 $3,238 1 $82,556 $1,835 5$639,858 $5,073WV Total0.5304 0.2393 $1,712,349 $9,949 $246,761$1,959,110 $16,862Grand Total21.1709 11.8195 $83,089,348 $624,534 $11,303,260$94,392,608 $921,054Note:* There is no action on non-sigificant plants for Tier 1-3. Therefore, no cost is applied.** Tier 4 scenario for non-significant plant is that TN =8 mg/l and TP = 2 mg/l.1 = Calculated with the curve developed for the non-significant plants < or = 0.5MGD based on 9 VA and 2 MD non-significant facilities.This methodology used to develop this curve was agreed by Tom Sadick, CH2M Hill and Thor Young, Stearn & Wheler, LLC.2 = BNR Capital cost from MDE, 5/15/20023 = Assumes that there is no cost for non-significant plants that have TN concentration < 8 mg/l4 = Assumes that there is no cost for non-significant plants that have TP concentration < 2 mg/l5 = Calculated from the methodology developed by Thor Young, Stearn & Wheler for Tier 2 TP cost.The TP goal in the calculation is adjusted from 1 mg/l to 2 mg/l.6 = Due to its design flow >0.5 MGD, the costs were calculated from the methodology developed by Thor Young, Stearn & Wheler for Tier 2 TN costNRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable VI-C56CBPO, 11/6/2002

# VII. COST ES TIMATES FO R COMBI N ED SEWER OVERFLOWS

CSO cost estimates were provided b y th e City of Richm ond and th e Blue Plains CSO for the District of

Colum b ia. H o wever, only Blue Plains CSO costs are considered herein. This is because cost s are only

included where respective nutrient reduc tions are known, wh ich is the case only for Blue Plains at this time.

Costs for m e e ting various tiered reductions for the CSO are provided in Table VII. These costs were obtained

b y the Washi ngton Counci l of Governments.



## The DC CSO tiers are s t ructured to incorpor ate existing DC-WASA ( W a s hington Area Sanitary

Authority) program s and acknowledges that the D r aft CSO Long Term Control Plan is a m a jor 20-

year cap ital program , although at the tim e of this wr iting, it h a s yet to be form ally approved by EPA.

Overall nutrient and sedim e nt loads are expected to be reduced by 43% over the next 8 years and this

is reflected in Tier 1, which is also carried over into Tier 2, and again in Tier 3.

For purposes of conceptually estim ating lim its of technology, zero overflo ws were assum e d for

Tier 4. However, as noted by WASA, this is not considered a practical re duction m easure, at this

tim e, because it would require com p lete sewer separation and is not a m easure endorsed by W A SA.

The costs, th erefore, for Tier 1 – 3 are the sam e and reflect cu rrent estim a tes by WASA for projects

already planned. Estim ates for the T i er 4 cont ro ls are bas e d on the current Draft CSO LTCP and

reflect the concept of a m a jor 40- year com p lete sewer sepa r a tion th at w a s not adopted in the LT CP

due to the immense cost burden and the potential of making water quality worse (due to the lack of

treatm ent the resulting s e parated sto r mwater run o ff would receive). The O&M costs for the CSO are

estim ated to be 5% of the capital cos t s.

57ITable VII. DC CSO & BLUE PLAINS WWTP COST ESTIMATES - For Chesapeake Bay-wide UAA Cost Analysis(as of 4/02/02)Tier FacilityCapital Cost(TN req.'s)Capital Cost(TP req.'s)Total Capital Cost(Year 200$'s)Capital Cost Range(-30%-+50%)O&M(annual)Tier I/II Blue Plains$33M $20M $53 M $37.1 to $79.5M $8.9MTier III Blue Plains$225M $225 M $157.5 to $337.5M $13.4MTier IV Blue Plains$365M $25M $390 M $273M to $585M $18.7 MTier I/II/III DC CSO (Phase I)$130 M $91 to $195 M $6.5 M(proposed Tier IV)DC CSO (LTCP-current draft) $1.1 B $0.77 to $1.65B $55 MTier IV DC CSO (zero discharges)$3.5 B $2.45 to $5.25B $175 MNotes:1) Tiers I & II Blue Plains cost estimates are based on current CIP costs and current O&M costs.2) Tiers III & IV Blue Plains cost estimates are estimated costs in Year 2002$'s, and represent 'Planning Level' cost estimates(-30% to +50%).8 ) CSO cost estimates for O&M costs are estimated to be 5% of the capital costs.7) Cost estimates for the CBP's Tier IV CSOcontrols reflect the concept of a major 40-yearcomplete sewer separation scenario that was not adopted in the current Draft CSO LTCP (due to theimmense cost burden and the result of making water quality worse)4) Tier I, II, & III cost estimates for Blue Plains assume continued compliance with existing TP permit limit. Tier IV assumescompliance with a lower TP permit limit.3) Tier I & II cost estimates for Blue Plains assume continued voluntary compliance with TN goals. Tiers III & IV also assumeeither voluntary goals, or use of "annual average" goals if TNrequirements are included in a permit.5) Blue Plains O&M costs for Tier I & II are based on current costs. Tier III & IV O&M costs estimated from CH2M Hill's 1999 report. All O&M costs are based on 370 MGD average daily flow.6) Tier I, II & III CSO cost estimates are based on current estimated costs for projects already in the CIP; while estimates for the 'proposed' Tier IV controls are based on the current, Draft CSOLTCP.58

# VIII. COST METHODOLOG Y APPLICATION FOR THE

SIGNIFI CANT M UNICI PALS FOR TIERS 1-4

This section explain s ho w the cost estim a tion methodolog ies presented in Section III and

IV were applied to derive the technology costs by facility for various nutrient reduction

levels. This section also explain s where ac tu al d a ta re ceived f r om f

acilitie s or m unicipal

representatives was used in lieu of applica tion of the cost estim ation m e thodologies. For

inform ation regarding the source codes shown in this section, please see the notes at the

ends of Table X-A (pages 98-106) and Table X-B (pages 107-115).

8.1 Allocating Blue Plains Costs to the Jurisdictions

The Blue Plains facility treats wastewater from Maryland, V i rgin ia, as w e ll as the District

of Colum b ia. The loads for the Blue Plains facility are therefor e proportional to each

jurisd iction accord ing to the flows being treated from each of the th ree ju risdictions. The

flow allocation data were provided by Metropolitan W a sh ington Council of

Governm e nt (MWCOG) (Attachm e nt 11, part 2, Appendix I). Costs to achieve these

load reductions were also provided by M W CO G(see Table VII). These to tal co sts are

allocated to each of the jurisdictions accord ing to their percen tage of flow treated by B l ue

Plains. In the tables and gra phs presenting costs in this report, it will be noted whether

the costs for Blue Plains are in tota l or divided up am ong the jurisdictions.

8.2 Tier 1 Costs

Am ong the 304 significant m unicipal plants, th ere are 154 facilities that are currently

operating NRT or have plans to im plem ent NRT. Only 65 of these 154 plants have costs

associated w ith NRT for Tier 1 becau s e th e funds for the rem i nding 89 NRT facilities are

already in place. Most of the 65 plants w ith Tier 1 costs are going to im plem ent NRT by

2005 or 2010. Only 3 out of the 65 plants are currently running NRT and are listed in

Table VIII- A.

Table VI II - A: Cur r e n t BNR with T1 Co st

STATE FACILIT Y NPDES BNR_STATUS T1TN CC

M D H U R L O C K M D 0 0 2 2 7 3 0 CURREN T 5

, 2 0 0

, 0 0 0

M D P R I N C E S S ANN E M D 0 0 2 0 6 5 6 CURREN T 3

, 5 6 3

, 5 0 0

V A A Q U I A V A 0 0 6 0 9 6 8 CURREN T 8

, 0 0 0

, 0 0 0



## Most of the TN capital costs for thes e 65 plants are provid e d by the state agencies or

f r om the NRT cost surve y. Only 9 f acilities ( lis te d in f o llowing table ) use d the es tim ates

calculated w ith the Tier 2 m e thodology developed by St earns & W h eler, LLC.

59

### Table VIII- B: Facilities with Tier 1 TN CC Cal c ul ated

STATE FACILIT Y NPDES BNR_STATUS T1TN CC

PA ELIZABETH T OWN PA0023108 B Y 200 5 4,083,001

PA LACKAWANNA RIVER PA0027081 B Y 200 5 2,513,941

PA LEWISBURG AR EA PA0044661 B Y 201 0 3,693,297

PA LOCK HAVEN PA0025933 B Y 201 0 4,580,956

PA LOGAN T O WNS H IP- PA0032557 B Y 200 5 2,444,284

VA HA Y M OUN T ST P VA0089125 B Y 201 0 2,687,559

V A O R A N G E V A 0 0 2 1 3 8 5 B Y 201 0 3

, 0 6 6

, 8 8 5

VA SOUT H WALES STP VA0080527 B Y 201 0 2,622,367

VA WIDEWATER WWTP VA0090387 B Y 201 0 2,374,508

Total 28,066,798



## Since the total TN capital cost of Ti er 1 is $605,314,959, the calculated estim ates

accounts for only 4.7% of the total Tier 1 cost.

The following table summ arizes the Tier 1 cost s, along with TN load s discharged in 2000

in com p arison to the Tier 1 load reduction.

Table VIII- C: Tier 1 costs, 2000 and T1 TN di scharged loads by state.

STATE Tier1 T N

Capital Cost 2000 TN LOAD

(l bs / y r) TIER 1 TN L O AD

(l bs / y r) REDUC TION

(2000T N- T1 TN )

DC To tal 

### 0 8 ,726,0 8 4 7 ,805,2 3 7 920,8 4 7

DE To tal 

### 3,187,4 0 0 286,7 0 1 292,4 0 4

- 5,702

MD To tal 

### 384,7 49,9 0 9 14,14 2,11 7 12,56 6,33 5 1 ,575,7 8 1

NY To tal 

### 0 4 ,252,5 8 9 2 ,931,6 6 1 1 ,320,9 2 8

PA T o t a l 

### 72,07 9,81 3 14,32 6,18 0 11,94 1,87 1 2 ,384,3 0 9

VA T o t a l 

### 145,2 97,8 3 7 27,96 8,57 4 26,55 9,01 5 1 ,710,4 4 9

W V Total 

### 0 510,8 3 3 243,5 8 2 267,2 5 1

Gr an d T o tal 

### 605,3 14,9 5 9 70,21 3,07 9 62,34 0,10 5 8 ,173,8 6 3



## The detailed cost and load data for each facili ty with Tier 1 cost ar e listed in Table VIIID. Due to the proje c ted flow increa ses, m a ny facilities listed in Table VIII- D show load

increases (n egativ e redu ction values ). The Ti er 1 TN concentrations for these facilities

r e 8 m g /l. a

Table VIII- D: Facilities with Tier 1 TN Capital Costs

ST FACI LI TY NPDES T1TNCC ($) SOURCE 2000TN

(lbs/y r) T1TN (lbs/y r) Reducti on

D E B R I D G E V I L L E D E 0 0 2 0 2 4 9 3,187 ,400 12, M 12,109 5,404 6,705

M D A P G

- A B E R D E E N M D 0 0 2 1 2 3 7 8,000 ,000 2, M 55,125 22,278 32,847

M D B R U N S W I C K M D 0 0 2 0 9 5 8 4, 900

, 000 2, M 34, 9 3 5 18, 5 6 2 16, 372

M D C A M B R I D G E M D 0 0 2 1 6 3 6 9,934

, 376 2, M 112,051 124,494 -12,444

M D C E L A N E S E M D 0 0 6 3 8 7 8 5,791

, 500 2, M 18,422 24,754 -6,332

M D C E N T R E V I L L E M D 0 0 2 0 8 3 4 5,065 ,400 2, M 12,685 8,587 4,098

M D C H E S T E R T O W N M D 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 2,600 ,000 2, M 17,978 15,916 2,062

M D C O N O C O C H E A G U E M D 0 0 6 3 5 0 9 5,555 ,439 2, M 21,512 29,063 -7,551

M D C O X C R E E K M D 0 0 2 1 6 6 1 9,476

, 780 2, M 627,021 299,577 327,444



### 60Table VIII - D( co ntin ued ): 

## Facilities with Tier 1 TN Capita l

ST FACI LI TY NPDES T1TNCC ($) SOURCE 2000TN

(lbs/y r) T1TN (lbs/y r) Reducti on

M D C R I S F I E L D M D 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 4,052 ,200 2, M 27,044 16,547 10,498

M D D E L M A R M D 0 0 2 0 5 3 2 1,030

, 000 2, M 24,745 14,068 10,677

M D E L K T O N M D 0 0 2 0 6 8 1 6,360

, 000 2, M 82,662 42,125 40,537

M D F E D E R A L S B U R G M D 0 0 2 0 2 4 9 1, 500 ,000 2, M 1 8

, 1 1 7 8

, 0 2 0 10,097

M D F R E D E R I C K M D 0 0 2 1 6 1 0 8,816 ,824 2, M 485, 4 6 0 1 8 9

, 0 9 6 296,364

M D F R U I T L A N D M D 0 0 5 2 9 9 0 6,200 ,000 2, M 25,812 12,612 13,200

M D G E O R G E S CREE K M D 0 0 6 0 0 7 1 2, 000 ,000 2, M 3 6

, 5 2 5 1 6

, 2 9 3 20,231

MD HAVRE DE GRAC E MD0021750 6, 278 ,550 2, M 4 8

, 1 2 5 3 4

, 0 2 0 14,105

M D H U R L O C K M D 0 0 2 2 7 3 0 5, 200

, 000 2, M 42, 3 2 7 25, 8 6 3 16, 464

M D I N D I A N H E A D M D 0 0 2 0 0 5 2 656,000 2, M 13, 6 3 9 8

, 5 8 7 5,052

M D K E N T ISL A N D M D 0 0 2 3 4 8 5 20,742 ,570 2, M 87,899 39,970 47,929

M D L A P L A T A M D 0 0 2 0 5 2 4 4,120

, 970 2, M 16,705 20,084 -3,379

M D L E O N A R D T O W N M D 0 0 2 4 7 6 7 1,840 ,000 2, M 18,598 11,730 6,868

M D M A T T A W O M A N M D 0 0 2 1 8 6 5 7,935 ,800 2, M 320, 6 3 7 1 9 9

, 1 0 9 121,528

M D N O R T H E A S T RIV E R M D 0 0 5 2 0 2 7 1, 800 ,000 2, M 2 3

, 0 2 3 1 5

, 3 0 4 7,719

M D P A T A P S C O M D 0 0 2 1 6 0 1 200,000 ,000 2, M 2,388 ,559 1,778

, 6 0 7 6 0 9

, 9 5 1

M D P O C O M O K E C I TY M D 0 0 2 2 5 5 1 2, 700 ,000 2

, 2 2 4

, 8 5 4 2 3

, 4 3 5 1,420

M D P O O L E S V I L L E M D 0 0 2 3 0 0 1 1, 658 ,000 2, M 16,660 16,175 485

M D P R I N C E S S A N N E M D 0 0 2 0 6 5 6 3, 563 ,500 2, M 2 0

, 0 9 2 1 5

, 1 0 0 4,992

M D S A L I S B U R Y M D 0 0 2 1 5 7 1 15,000 ,000 2, M 332, 0 9 9 1 4 3

, 6 3 1 188,468

M D S E N E C A C R E E K M D 0 0 2 1 4 9 1 29,520

, 000 2, M 268,698 458,052 -189,354

M D S N O W H I L L M D 0 0 2 2 7 6 4 1,600 ,000 2, M 21,632 11,331 10,301

M D W I NE BRENNER W W T P M D 0 0 0 3 2 2 1 852,000 2, M 12, 0 2 9 5

, 3 7 8 6,651

P A C H A M B E R S B U R G B O R O U G H P A 0 0 2 6 0 5 1 6,400 ,000 3, M 1 3 0

, 8 1 7 1 1 6

, 3 5 2 14,465

PA EASTERN SNY D ER COUNTY PA0110582 3,000 ,000 10, M 7 0

, 3 8 8 3 9

, 0 6 1 31,327

P A E L I Z A B E T H T O W N B O R O U G H PA 0 0 2 3 1 0 8 4

, 0 8 3 ,001 1 2 3 6

, 1 8 0 5 7

, 0 9 6 179,084

PA HARRISBURG SE W E RAGE PA0027197 22,682 ,000 S 1

, 5 6 5

, 5 9 7 6 3 9

, 3 0 0 926,297

PA LACKA W ANNA RIVER BAS IN P A 0 0 2 7 0 8 1 2

, 5 1 3 ,941 1 2 1

, 3 0 0 1 1

, 9 8 4 9,316

PA LANCASTER ARE A SE W E R PA 0 0 4 2 2 6 9 4

, 2 4 9 ,333 S

, 2 8 1

, 7 6 6 1 8 9

, 6 5 2 92,114

P A L A N C A S T E R CITY P A 0 0 2 6 7 4 3 1, 077 ,000 3, M 5 3 1

, 3 4 8 5 0 4

, 6 9 2 26,657

P A L E W I SBURG ARE A P A 0 0 4 4 6 6 1 3,693 ,297 1 8 3

, 9 5 0 2 9

, 1 8 0 54,769

P A L O C K H A V E N P A 0 0 2 5 9 3 3 4, 580 ,956 1 1 1 0

, 9 8 7 5 3

, 1 2 7 57,860

P A L O G A N TO W N SHIP-GREEN W O O D P A 0 0 3 2 5 5 7 2,444 ,284 1 1 6

, 9 5 2 8

, 9 1 6 8,035

PA SUNBURY CIT Y MUNICIPAL PA 0 0 2 6 5 5 7 3

, 0 0 0 ,000 1 5

, M 1 0 7

, 6 6 3 7 3

, 4 4 6 34,217

P A S W ATARA TO W N S H I P P A 0 0 2 6 7 3 5 2, 000 ,000 13, M 1 9 0

, 9 1 0 8 1

, 3 1 0 109,600

PA UNIVERSITY ARE A JOINT PA 0 0 2 6 2 3 9 7 8 0

, 0 0 0 3

, M 2 3 6

, 4 5 7 1 2 3

, 5 3 7 112,921

P A W I LLIAMS P ORT

- C E N T R A L P A 0 0 2 7 0 5 7 6,330 ,000 3, M 4 6 4

, 0 4 0 1 7 8

, 2 3 5 285,805

P A W I LLIAMS P ORT

- W E S T P A 0 0 2 7 0 4 9 5, 246 ,000 3, M 4 1 4

, 4 1 3 6 4

, 9 7 1 349,443

V A A Q U I A V A 0 0 6 0 9 6 8 8,000 ,000 C9, M 47,259 128,888 -81,629

V A A S H L A N D V A 0 0 2 4 8 9 9 2,415 ,700 S, M 65,842 37,765 28,077

V A B R O A D RUN W R F VA_BROADR 13, 500

, 000 1 7 58, 4 7 5

V A C O L O N I A L BEAC H V A 0 0 2 6 4 0 9 90, 000 3, M 32,298 20,617 11,682

V A C U L P E P E R V A 0 0 6 1 5 9 0 4,200 ,000 6, M 57,077 55,312 1,765

V A D O S W EL L V A 0 0 2 9 5 2 1 3,045 ,000 6, M 100,438 164,460 -64,022

V A F A L L I N G C R E E K V A 0 0 2 4 9 9 6 395, 818 6, M 202,791 200,744 2,047

V A H A Y M OUNT S T P V A 0 0 8 9 1 2 5 2,687 ,559 1 2 3

, 1 4 6

V A H R S D

- Y O R K V A 0 0 8 1 3 1 1 17,700 ,000 C 1 4 5 2 2

, 3 0 3 3 0 9

, 4 2 9 212,874

V A O R A N G E V A 0 0 2 1 3 8 5 3,066 ,885 1 3 5

, 6 8 4 1 6

, 8 4 7 18,836

V A R I C H M O N D V A 0 0 6 3 1 7 7 70,000 ,000 6, M 1,732 ,937 1,169

, 2 4 9 5 6 3

, 6 8 9

V A S O U T H C E N T R A L V A 0 0 2 5 4 3 7 7, 800 ,000 S 2 7 6

, 3 0 7 3 1 5

, 0 3 3 -38,726

VA SOUTH W A L ES S T P VA0080527 2,622 ,367 1 20,856

V A W I DE W A TER W W T P V A 0 0 9 0 3 8 7 2,374 ,508 1 2

, 4 3 6

T o t a l 4,560 ,508



### 61

## MD has the highest T i er 1 cost becau s e all MD significant m unicipal plan ts reach

TN@8m g /l in Tier 1, and do not have T N capital costs in T i er 2, except B ack River

using 10 m g /l in T i er 1 and $10 m illion TN capital cos t in Tier 2 to go to 8 m g /l. Other

states will h a ve all their significan t p l ants r each 8 m g /l in Tie r 2. Also note that cos t s

for Patapsco alone account for 52% of the total MD Tier 1 costs.

PA has lower TN capital costs and higher TN load reduction than MD and VA. As the

following table indicates, the bigge st load reduction in PA is Harrisburg that will reduce

922,000 pounds TN discharge lo ad in Tier 1 with a TN capital cos t of $22.68 m illio n.

While, the h i ghest TN cost in MD is $200 m illio n for Pataps co that will reduce only

603,000 pounds in Tier 1. In PA, there are 5 faci lities with calculated Tier TN capital

costs, 6 facilities with su rvey costs and 7 plants with the co st data provided by Virginia

Tech’s NRT cost es tim ates.

There are dram atic increases in the projec ted 2010 flows from 2000 levels for both MD

and VA, which increase the Tier 1 loads and off set the load reduction. T h e 2010 flow

survey results provid e d by the state agencies or direc tly by the f a cilities are sign if ica n tly

greater than the projected 2010 flow es tim ated by CBPO base d on the population

increase. A s Table VIII- E presents, th e second colum n lists the 2010 flow increase

including the flow survey results, and the third colum n lists the 2010 flow estim ated only

with the 2010 flow projection m e thodology. Fo r exam ple, if all facilities use only the

2010 flow estim ates from the flow pr ojection m e thodology based on the population

increase, th e total 2010 flow increase for VA will only be 48. 9 MGD. However, the s t ate

agencies and som e facilities provided their own 2010 flow pr ojections for som e plants.

By using these 2010 flow provided with the 201 0 flow estimates for the rem a ining plants,

VA will increase th e total flow by 130 MGD by 2010. The difference of 82 MGD

repres ent nearly add i tion al 2 m illion pounds TN discharg e lo ad at TN=8 mg/l. Blue

Plains provided a flow slightly lower than the re sult of its 20 00 flow adjusted by the

population increase in D C area. And, other st ates including PA did not provide any their

own 2010 fl ow projections. Th erefore, the load reductions in Tier 1 for MD and VA are

largely off set by the flo w increas es that are proportionally higher than other states.

Table VIII- E: Total Flow In creases Between 2010 and 2000 by State

STATE FLOW INCREASES (mgd)

2010 FL O W -2000 FL O W

(Inclu ding su rvey results) FLOW INCREASES (mgd)

2010 FL O W -2000 FL O W

(only estim a tes)

V A 1 1 6

. 4 7 4 8

. 9 0

M D 5 2

. 5 0 2 2

. 2 5

D C 2 3

. 8 1 2 4

. 3 6

P A 9

. 8 6 9

. 8 6

N Y 0

. 7 2 0

. 7 2

D E 0

. 1 9 0

. 1 9

W V

- 1

. 6 8

- 1

. 6 8



## The f o llowing table lis ts the top ten f acilities wi th the highest flow increases. All of them

are using 20 10 f l ow subm itted, not c a lculated.

62

## Table VIII- F: Top Ten Facilities With The High est Flow Increases.

STATE FACILITY 2000 2010

D C B L U E P L A I N S 3 1 7

. 9 0 341.71

V A H O P E W E L L 2 9

. 0 1 35.12

V A H E N R I C O C O U N T Y 3 7

. 1 0 50

M D P A T A P S C O 6 0

. 5 4 73

M D S E N E C A C R E E K 6

. 4 9 18.8

VA NOMA N M. COLE JR. 42.89 53

VA UPPER OCCOQUA N 24.39 34

V A H R S D-BOA T HARBO R 1 4

. 3 2 23.05

V A A R L I N G T O N 2 7

. 4 6 35.29

V A H R S D

- C H E S A P E A K E 1 9

. 0 6 26.3



## 8.3 Tier Tw o Costs:

There is no cost for MD in Tier 2, except fo r Back River th at has $10 m illion TN cap ital

cost to go from TN =10 mg/l to 8 mg/l. For other jurisdictions, m o st of their Tier 2 TN

capital costs were calculated with the Tier 2 TN capital cost m e thodology developed by

Stearns & Wheler, LLC. The f o llowing f acilities listed in Table VIII- G use the co sts

provided by the state agencies or from the cost s u rveys prov ided by the facilities.

Table VIII- G: Facilities with Tier 2 TN Capital Costs from s ources other than calculation

STATE FACILIT Y NPDES T2TN CC T2TN_S OU RCE

D C B L U E P L A I N S DC002119 9 33,000,000 1 4

M D B A C K R I V E R M D 0 0 2 1 5 5 5 10,000,000 1 9

N Y E N D I C O T T ( V ) N Y 0 0 2 7 6 6 9 6,656,000 7

P A A L T O O N A C I TY

- E A S T P A 0 0 2 7 0 1 4 1,200,000 3

P A A L T O O N A C I T Y

- W E S T P A 0 0 2 7 0 2 2 1,200,000 3

PA DERR Y T O WNS H IP PA0026484 1,983,000 2

P A G R E A T E R HAZ E L T O N P A 0 0 2 6 9 2 1 7,840,000 3

P A H A N O V E R B O R O U G H P A 0 0 2 6 8 7 5 60,000 3

PA LEBANON CITY AUTH ORITY PA0027316 4,039,000 3

V A D A H L G R E N V A 0 0 2 6 5 1 4 30,000 3

V A F I S H E R S V I L L E V A 0 0 2 5 2 9 1 790,000 3

V A F R O N T R O Y A L V A 0 0 6 2 8 1 2 50,000 3

V A H O P E W E L L V A 0 0 6 6 6 3 0 57,230,000 1 6

VA HRSD-ARM Y BA SE VA0081230 81,000,000 C14, C15

V A H R S D

- B O AT H A R B O R V A 0 0 8 1 2 5 6 112,000,000 C14, C 1 5

V A H R S D

- C H E S A P E A K E V A 0 0 8 1 2 6 4 35,000,000 C 1 4

V A H R S D

- J A M E S R I V E R V A 0 0 8 1 2 7 2 27,300,000 C 1 4

V A H R S D

- N A NSEM O N D V A 0 0 8 1 2 9 9 13,100,000 C 1 4

V A H R S D

- V I P V A 0 0 8 1 2 8 1 10,000,000 C 1 4

V A H R S D

- W I L L I A M S B U R G V A 0 0 8 1 3 0 2 15,800,000 C 1 4

V A L U R A Y V A 0 0 6 2 6 4 2 0 3

V A L Y N CHBUR G V A 0 0 2 4 9 7 0 54,900,000 C 6

V A P A R K I N S M I L L V A 0 0 7 5 1 9 1 97,000 3

V A S T R A S B U R G V A 0 0 2 0 3 1 1 120,000 3

V A W A Y N E S B O R O V A 0 0 2 5 1 5 1 3,500,000 3

V A W O O D S T O C K V A 0 0 2 6 4 6 8 700,000 3



### 63

## Table VIII-H provides a summary of the Tier 2 TN capital co sts a nd the load reduction

by state.

Table VIII- H: Tier 2 T N capital costs and the load reduction by state

STATE Tier 2 T N

Capi tal Cos t ($) Tier 2 Cumulativ e

Capi tal Cos t ($) TN Load Reduction

(2000- Tier2 ) (lbs/yr)

DC To tal 33,000,000 33,000,000 920,847

DE To tal 2,374,508 5,561,908 8,129

MD To tal 10,000,000 394,749,909 1,454,723

NY To tal 61,874,054 61,874,054 2,652,253

P A To tal 277,865,025 349,944,837 5,294,979

V A To tal 406,238,704 626,459,541 8,190,984

WV Total 23,193,004 23,193,004 42,904

Gran d T o tal 804,545,294 1,484,783,25 3 18,564,819



## 8.4 Tier 3 and Tier 4 TN Capital Costs:

The m e thodology described in Section IV to estim ate the Tier 3 and Tier 4 TN capital

costs were developed for plant sizes of 0.5 to 30 MGD. Addi tionally, the NRT Cost Task

Force m eeting on March 26, 2002 decided to survey the costs for plants greater than or

equal to 30 MGD in design (Attachm e nt 1, Part 1, Appendix I). There are a total of 16

f acilities lis ted below with design f l o w s of this size. Costs on 9 of these 16 plants cam e

either from t h e survey or Virginia Tech’s NRT cost estim a tes. MDE decided to use the

m e thodology described in Section IV to calcula te the costs for Back River and Patapsco

(Attachm e nt 1, Part 1, Appendix I). The sam e methodologies were used for the

rem a ining 5 plants to calculate their costs due to the lack of survey data for them

.

Table VIII- I: Munici pal Facilities with Design Flow >30 MGD

FACILIT Y NPDES D E S I G N _F LO W T3-4 TN C C Sou r c e

BLUE PLAINS DC002119 9 370 SURVE Y

PISCATAWA Y M D 0 0 2 1 5 3 9 30 CALCULATE D

BACK RIVER MD0021555 180 CALCULATE D

P A T A P S C O M D 0 0 2 1 6 0 1 73 CALCULATE D

WESTERN BRA NCH MD0021741 30 SURVE Y

W Y OMIN G VAL LE Y PA0026107 50 SURVE Y

HARRISBUR G S E WERAGE PA0027197 37.7 S URVE Y

UPPER OC COQUAN SEWAGE VA0024988 54 CALCULATE D

ARLINGT O N V A 0 0 2 5 1 4 3 40 CALCULATE D

A L E X A N D R I A V A 0 0 2 5 1 6 0 54 SURVE Y

NOMAN M. COL E JR. VA0025364 67 SURVE Y

RICHM O N D V A 0 0 6 3 1 7 7 70 SURVE Y

HENRIC O C O U N T Y VA0063690 75 SURVE Y

H O P E W E L L V A 0 0 6 6 6 3 0 35.12 SURVE Y

H R S D

- V I P V A 0 0 8 1 2 8 1 40 CALCULATE D

HRSD-NA NSEM O N D V A 0 0 8 1 2 9 9 30 CALCULATE D



### 64

## In addition to the cost data obtained for the large r f

acilities d e scri bed above, cost data

was provided for m a ny facilities to go to 3 m g /l TN. In m o st cases, the sources of this

data did not include costs to go to 5 mg/l. Thus, a dilemm a arose as to what costs to

include for Tier 3 (to go to 5 m g /l) for facil ities for which cost data was available only to

go to 8 and 3 m g /l TN. Som e options consid ered by the NRT Cost Task Force included

the f o llowin g :

1) Taking the m i dpoint of costs to go to 8 m g /l and 3 m g /l, and placing that value

both in Tier 3 and Tier 4 so that the c u m u lative c o sts st ill equ a led th e costs to go

to 8 and 3 mg/l com b ined.

2) Inserting the costs of going to 3 m g /l into the Tier 3 (even though this is the tier to

go to 5 m g /l), and setting the costs to go to Tier 4 to zero, again, keeping the

cum u lative costs equal to the cos t s to go to 8 and 3 m g /l combined.

Attachm e nt 2 in Part 1 of Appendix I indi cates that Option 2 a bove was implem e nted

because that would keep the cos t values in tact th at were p r ov ided by the various sou r ces.

Additionally, it was believed that a facility would mo st likely expend the amount

provided to go to 3 m g /l whether it achieved 5 or 3 m g /l TN anyway.

An exceptio n to the abo v e decis i on rule is th at M D E decided to use calculated es tim ates

for Tier 3 an d Tier 4 for all MD facilities (A ttachm e nt 3, Appendix I, Part 1)), except for

Western Branch that h a s zero cos t s for both Tier 3 and Tier 4 b ecause it is already

operating @ TN =3m g /l (Attachm e nt 1, Appendix I, Part 1).

Since the actual data for TN@3 

## cos t s provided are com p aratively lower th an the com b ined

calculated T i er 3 and T i er 4 costs, MD Tier 3 and Tier 4 TN capital cos t s are

com p aratively higher than other states.

Table VIII-J and Table VIII-K prov ide summ ar y cost inform ation for Tier 3 and T i e r 4

respec tive l y and com p are this to TN lo ad reductions achieved by each Tier.

Table VIII- J: Tier 3 TN capital costs and the load reduction by state

STATE T3TN CC ($ ) T3 Cumulative

CC ($ ) TN Load Reduction

(2000- Tier3 ) (lbs/yr)

DC To tal 225,000,000 258,000,000 3,522,593

DE To tal 3,182,908 8,744,816 24,712

MD To tal 253,226,556 647,976,465 5,089,163

NY To tal 40,600,618 102,474,671 3,252,379

P A To tal 319,811,406 669,756,244 8,048,336

V A To tal 338,254,142 964,713,683 14,027,696

WV Total 10,971,658 34,164,662 107,054

Gran d T o tal 1,191,047,28 8 2 ,685,830,54 1 34,071,932



### 65

## Table VIII- K: Tier 4 TN capital costs and the load reduction by state

STATE T4TN CC ($ ) T4 Cumulative

CC ($ ) TN Load Reduction

(2000- Tier4 ) (lbs/yr)

DC To tal 365,000,000 623,000,000 5,603,990

DE To tal 4,152,080 12,896,896 35,766

MD To tal 491,117,129 1,139,093,59 5 7 ,512,123

NY To tal 71,577,888 174,052,559 3,652,463

P A To tal 241,323,231 911,079,475 9,883,907

V A To tal 499,539,463 1,464,253,14 6 18,082,178

WV Total 15,792,986 49,957,647 149,821

Gran d T o tal 1,688,502,77 7 4 ,374,333,31 8 44,920,247



## The f o llowing two charts presen t the cum u lative TN capital c o sts ($m illio n) and the T N

discharged load reduction from 2000 level by each state for each tier. Blue Plains costs

and load reductions were allocated among jurisdictions.

Figure VIII-A : Cumulativ e T N Capital Costs ($million)

0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600

T i er 1 T ier 2 T ier 3 T ier 4TN Capital Cost ($million) 

## DC DE MD NY PA VA WV

Figure VIII- B: T N Discharged Load Reduct i on From 2000 Lev e l

0. 00 2. 00 4. 00 6. 00 8. 00 10. 00 12. 00 14. 00 16. 00 18. 00

T i er 1 T ier 2 T ier 3 T ier 4TN Discharged Load Reduction (million lbs/yr) 

## DC DE MD NY PA VA WV

66

# IX. LOAD CALCULATION DESCRIPTI O N AND SUMMARY

This section presents the decision rules for, a nd results of, estim a ting TN and TP load reduction

estim ates by facility by Tier.

9.1 Load Calculation For S i gnificant Municipal Facilities

9

. 1

. 1 Tier Definition for Point Sources

The Tier def i nition was reviewed and discu ssed by the point source workgroup and the NRT

Cost Task Force m e m b e r s, and approved by the wo rkgroup m eeting. All concentrations are in

mg/l as annu al averages. A series of attachm e nt s that are referenced in this section are included

in Appendix I, Part 2.

9.1.1.1 Tier 1: TN is set to 8 m g /l fo r all plants currently running NRT or wi th NRT plans,

except following three plants. Th e rest of facilities use their 2000 TN

concentrations.

Blue Plains DC0021199 TN = 7.5 mg/l

Back River MD0021555 TN= 10 m g /l

Hopewell VA0066630 TN =21 m g /l (Att achm e nt 1 – Part 2, Appendix I)

All significant m unicipal facilities us e their 2000 TP concentrations, except VA

facilities targeted by VADEQ either under the W Q IF Grant program and/or the Tributary

Strategy Plan for Lower River Tributaries. For these VA facilities, TP = 1.5 m g /l.

The load red u ctions lis te d in the Tab l es in th is section reflecting im ple m e n tation of NRT to TN =

8 m g /l occur in Tier 1 for the HRSD Nansem ond a nd VIP facilities. However, HRSD requested,

after the watershed m odel runs were conducted, that these load reductions should first appear in

Tier 2. Because the m odel runs were already co mpleted, these load reduction rem a in in Tier 1,

but costs do not show up until T i er 2. Cum u lativ e loads r e m a in the s a m e , as additiona l load

reductions do not show up in Tier 2.

9.1.1.2 Tier 2: TN is set to 8 m g /l for all significant municipal faci lities, except Blue

Plains, which uses TN = 7.5 m g /l

For TP, all significant municipals us e TP = 1m g/l or th eir lo wer lim its.

9.1.1.3 Tier 3: TN = 5 m g /l for a ll significant m unicipal facilities;

TP = 0.5m g /l or lower lim it f o r all signif i cant m unicipa l f acilities

9.1.1.4 Tier 4: TN = 3 m g /l for all significant m unicipal facilities;

TP = 0.1m g /l f o r all sign if icant m unicipal f a c i lities

9

. 1

. 2 2010 Flow Projection

For m o st significant m unicipal facilities, th eir 2010 flows were projected based on the 2000

flows adjusted by the population increase factor s (this factor is se t to 1 where population

decreases). A population incr ease factor is based on the US Census estim a ted population

changes between 2010 and 2000 in the county wher e th e facility located. However, actual

site sp ecific estim ates were obtained for m a ny faci lities either from state agencies, facility

contacts or the survey. Facilities for wh ich actual 2010 estimated flows were obtained are

listed in Table IX-A.

67

## Table IX-A also lists the attach m e nt # (Attachm e nt 2-10 in A ppendi x I, P a rt 2) as the sources

of these flow data. VADEQ sugge sted using the design flow or estim a ted flow for the six

VA facilities to be built before 2010. TIMB ERVILLE and MOOREFIELD will be o ff-line

by 2010 according to V ADEQ and WVDEP.

Table IX-A: Projected 2010 Flow s Provided by the State Agency or Facility

FLOW (MG D ) SOURCE

STA FACILIT Y NPDES DESIG N 2000 2010 Attachment #

App.I, part 2

D C B L U E P L A I N S DC002119 9 370 3 1 7

. 8 9 9 3 4 1

. 7 1 7

M D D A M A S C U S M D 0 0 2 0 9 8 2 1.5 0

. 8 8 1 0

. 8 6 7

M D P A R K W A Y M D 0 0 2 1 7 2 5 7.5 5

. 9 6 2 6

. 2 7

M D P A T A P S C O M D 0 0 2 1 6 0 1 73 6 0

. 5 3 6 7 3 1 0

M D P I S C A T A W A Y M D 0 0 2 1 5 3 9 30 2 1

. 0 5 2 2 5

. 3 7

M D S E N E C A CREE K M D 0 0 2 1 4 9 1 5 6

. 4 9 4 1 8

. 8 7

M D W E S T E R N BRA N C H M D 0 0 2 1 7 4 1 30 1 8

. 2 9 3 2 3 7

VA ALLEGHAN Y C O . L O WER JAC KSON VA0090671 1.5 0.75 VADEQ

V A A Q U I A V A 0 0 6 0 9 6 8 6.5 3

. 3 2 6 5

. 2 9 8

V A A R L I N G T O N V A 0 0 2 5 1 4 3 40 2 7

. 4 6 4 3 5

. 2 9 7

V A A S H L A N D V A 0 0 2 4 8 9 9 2 1

. 1 5 3 1

. 5 5 4

VA BRO A D RUN W R F VA_BRO A DR 15 2.4 3

V A B R O A D W A Y LA G O O N S V A 0 0 2 1 2 4 5 0.322 0

. 5 2 1 0 V A D E Q

V A D O S W E L L V A 0 0 2 9 5 2 1 1 4

. 1 3 5 6

. 7 5 4

V A F I S H E R S V I L L E V A 0 0 2 5 2 9 1 2 0

. 7 9 8 1

. 7 1 8

V A H

. L

. MOONE Y V A 0 0 2 5 1 0 1 18 9

. 6 3 2 1 4

. 6 3 5

V A H A R R I S O N B U R G-R O CKI N GHA M V A 0 0 6 0 6 4 0 16 8

. 5 7 1 1 1

. 6 5 8

V A H A Y M OUN T ST P V A 0 0 8 9 1 2 5 0.95 0

. 9 5 V A D E Q

V A H E N R I C O C O U N T Y V A 0 0 6 3 6 9 0 75 3 7

. 0 9 6 5 0 6

V A H O P E W E L L V A 0 0 6 6 6 3 0 50 2 9

. 0 0 7 3 5

. 1 2 2

V A H R S D

- A R M Y BA S E V A 0 0 8 1 2 3 0 18 1 2

. 7 4 9 1 7

. 4 5 8

V A H R S D

- B O AT H A R B O R V A 0 0 8 1 2 5 6 25 1 4

. 3 1 8 2 3

. 0 5 8

V A H R S D

- C H E S A P E A K E / E L I Z A B E T H V A 0 0 8 1 2 6 4 24 1 9

. 0 5 6 2 6

. 3 8

V A H R S D

- J A M E S R I V E R V A 0 0 8 1 2 7 2 20 1 4

. 4 6 7 2 0 8

V A H R S D

- N A NSEM O N D V A 0 0 8 1 2 9 9 30 1 8

. 9 4 8 2 0

. 1 5 8 / V A D E Q

V A H R S D

- V I P V A 0 0 8 1 2 8 1 40 3 1

. 5 3 5 3 5

. 9 8

V A H R S D

- W I L L I A M S B U R G V A 0 0 8 1 3 0 2 22.5 1 5

. 3 4 4 1 5

. 9 8 / V A D E Q

V A H R S D

- Y O R K V A 0 0 8 1 3 1 1 15 1 1

. 3 2 9 1 2

. 7 8

V A L I T T L E FALLS R U N V A 0 0 7 6 3 9 2 4 2

. 6 1 8 4

. 1 6 8

V A L Y N CHBUR G V A 0 0 2 4 9 7 0 22 1 3

. 2 1 6 1 7

. 4 8

V A M A T H E W S COU R TH O U S E V A 0 0 2 8 8 1 9 0.1 0

. 0 4 7 0

. 0 8 8

V A M I D D L E R I V E R V A 0 0 6 4 7 9 3 6.8 3

. 5 9 7 5

. 6 5 8

VA MOORES CREE K -RIVANNA VA0025518 15 10.343 11.888 9

VA NOMAN M. COL E JR. VA0025364 67 42.889 53 8

V A S O U T H CEN T R A L V A 0 0 2 5 4 3 7 23 1 2

. 0 3 5 1 2

. 9 3 8

V A S O U T H WALES S T P V A 0 0 8 0 5 2 7 0.856 0

. 8 5 6 V A D E Q

V A S T U A R T S DRAF T V A 0 0 6 6 8 7 7 1.4 0

. 8 3 6 1

. 5 8

V A T I M B E R V I L L E V A 0 0 2 7 1 1 1 0.2 0

. 1 9 8 0 V A D E Q

V A T O T O P O T O M O Y V A 0 0 8 9 9 1 5 5 5 V A D E Q

VA UPPER OC COQUAN SEWAGE VA0024988 54 24.391 34 8

V A U R B A N N A V A 0 0 2 6 2 6 3 0.1 0

. 0 5 6 0

. 1 1 3 8

V A W E S T POIN T V A 0 0 7 5 4 3 4 0.6 0

. 6 2 3 0

. 6 8 / V A D E Q

V A W E Y E RS CAVE S T P V A 0 0 2 2 3 4 9 0.5 0

. 1 1 6 0

. 4 8

V A W I D E W A T E R W W T P V A 0 0 9 0 3 8 7 0.5 0

. 1 V A D E Q

W V M O O R E F I E L D W V 0 0 2 0 1 5 0 0.6 0

. 3 1 5 0 W V D E P



### 68

## 9.1.3 Load calculation

The TN and TP loads for each Tier were calc ulated with the p r ojected 201 0 flows and the

concentratio ns defined above for individual facility for each Tier. The following lo ad

calculation form ula was used to calculat e the TN and TP annual discharge loads.

Annual Discharge Load = Con centration X Flow X 8.344 X 365

9.2 Load Calculation For n o n-significant Municip a l Facilities

9.2.1 Tier definition for non-signi ficant municipa l facilities:

There is no action for Tier 1-3 for non-signifi cant facilities, th e current 20 00 TN and TP

concentratio ns are used f o r Tier 1

- 3. NRT is applied to Tier 4 for all non-significant

f acilities.

Tier 1 – 3: Current 2000 TN and TP were used.

Tier 4: TN is set to 8 m g /l for all non-signifi cant facilities.

TP is set to 2 m g /l or lower 2000 concentrations.

9.2.2 Projected 2010 flow:

For all non -s ignif i can t municipa l f acilities

, their 2010 flows were projected based on the

2000 flows with population increase factors (thi s factor is set to 1 where population

decreases).

9.2.3 Load calculation:

The sam e form ula as used for calculati ng loads of significant plants was used.

Annual Discharge Load = Concentration X Flow X 8.344 X 365

9.3 Load Calculation for Industrial Plants and CSO

a) Load calcu lations for in dustrial facilities were perform e d individually for each facility

by tier and described in Section V.

b) CSO Load Calculation

Only DC CSO is includ e d in this ana l ysis. Based on the scenarios provided by

M W COG, there will be 43% CSO fl ow reduc tion from 2000 level for Tier 1-3, and a

zero CSO discharge for Tier 4.

69

## Tier 1-3 : Since there is no treatm ent change involved in C S O load reduction

scenarios, current default TN concen tration of 7.02 m g /l and TP of 2 mg/l

were used to calcu late th e loads.

TN = 7.02 mg/l

TP = 2 m g /l

Flow: Current default flow of 7.61 MGD was used as the base flow.

Flow = 7.61 MGD X (1-43%) = 4.3377 MGD

Tier 4: Due to zero disc harge, its flow should be zero.

The discharge loads of DC CSO for each Tier are calcu lated with the s a me

for m ula:

Annual Discharge Load = Con centration X Flow X 8.344 X 365

9.4 Blue Plains Load Allocation Among DC, MD and VA

The Blue Plains facility treats wastewater from Maryland, V i rgin ia, as w e ll as the District

of Colum b ia. The loads for the Blue Plains facility are therefor e proportional to each

jurisd iction accord ing to the flows being treated from each of the th ree ju risdictions. The

flow allocation data were provided by Metropolitan W a sh ington Council of

Governm e nt (MWCOG) (Attachm e nt 11, part 2, Appendix I)

9.5 Load Sum mary

Loads are su mmarized in the followin g tables by watershed basin, by state and by facility

y p e

. t

Table IX-A provides discharged nitrogen loads for all facilities by basin by tier.

T a b l e I X

- B p r o v i d e s d i s c h a r g e d n i t r o g e n l o ads for all facilities by state b y tier.

Table IX-C summarizes discharg ed nitrogen loads by point so urce typ e by tie r f o r the

n t i r e B a y w a t e r s h e d

. e

Table IX-D provides discharged phosphorus loads for all faciliti es by basin by tier.

T a b l e I X

- E p r o v i d e s d i s c h a r g e d p h o s p h o r u s l o ads for all facilities by state by tier.

Table IX-F summ arizes discha rged phosphorus loads by point source type by tier for the

entire Bay watershed.

T a b l e I X

- G d e t a i l s d i s c h a r g e d n i t r o g e n l o ads f o r all f acilitie s by tier sorted by basin.

Table IX-H details discharged phosphorus load s for all facilities by tier sorted by basin.

70

## Total Nitrogen Discharged Load Sum mary

TABLE IX-A: NRT TIE R TN LOA D (lbs /yr) SUMMA RY BY BA SIN

CBP_BASIN 2000 T1 T2 T3 T4

SUSQUEHA NN A RIVER 18,406,790 14,667,032 10,009,752 6,486,420 3,767,236

MD EASTERN S H ORE 1,399,635 1,053,234 1,039,402 807,596 561,581

MD WESTERN SHORE 9,200,882 7,813,372 7,279,015 5,360,611 2,811,084

PATUXENT R I VER 1,105,479 1,642,075 1,633,176 1,032,757 626,068

POT O MAC RIVE R 23,815,593 18,694,524 17,106,000 11,234,067 6,671,469

RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER 593,711 603,585 541,832 338,645 203,187

VA EASTERN S H ORE 279,936 216,057 192,246 79,270 13,523

Y O RK RIVER 1,230,918 1,178,066 1,286,798 866,577 586,430

JAMES RIVER 15,030,654 17,175,126 11,015,416 7,303,871 4,729,907

T O T A L 7 1

, 0 6 3

, 5 9 6 63,043,070 50,103,636 3 3

, 5 0 9

, 8 1 3 19,970,486



### TABLE IX-B: NRT TIE R TN LOA D (lbs /yr) SUMMA RY BY STATE *

STATE 2000 T1 T2 T3 T4

D C 4

, 4 5 1

, 4 3 3 3,648,026 3,648,026 2

, 4 5 6

, 8 4 8 1,429,413

D E 2 8 7

, 4 8 7 292,404 278,572 2 6 1

, 9 9 0 250,935

M D 1 8

, 0 9 0

, 8 3 6 16,743,186 16,125,597 1 1

, 2 5 1

, 8 3 2 6,294,866

N Y 4

, 2 6 4

, 2 4 0 2,931,661 1,600,336 1

, 0 0 0

, 2 1 0 600,126

P A 1 4

, 3 6 5

, 4 3 0 11,941,871 8,638,350 5

, 6 2 9

, 0 3 6 3,252,912

V A 2 9

, 0 7 8

, 3 8 9 27,228,746 19,615,040 1 2

, 7 8 4

, 1 6 4 8,069,366

W V 5 2 5

, 7 8 2 257,177 197,716 1 2 5

, 7 3 3 72,868

T O T A L 7 1

, 0 6 3

, 5 9 6 63,043,070 50,103,636 3 3

, 5 0 9

, 8 1 3 19,970,486

NOTE: * Blue Pl ains load w a s allocated among D C , MD and VA a ccording to the flow allocation pro v ided

b y

MWC O G for UAA. (Attachme nt 11, Part 2, A p pendix I)



### TABLE IX-C:NRT TIE R TN LOA D (lbs /yr) SUMMA RY BY FACILI TY TYPE

F A C I L I TY TY PE 2000 T1 T2 T3 T4

SIGNIFI C ANT M UNICIPAL 61,280,775 54,706,871 42,541,943 26,913,933 16,148,360

INDUST R I A L 9

, 1 2 4

, 6 6 8 7,633,234 6,858,729 5

, 8 9 2

, 9 1 6 3,534,150

NON

- SIG M UNI CIPAL 495,001 540,258 540,258 540,258 287,977

C S O 1 6 3

, 1 5 2 162,706 162,706 1 6 2

, 7 0 6 0

T o t a l 7 1

, 0 6 3

, 5 9 6 63,043,070 50,103,636 3 3

, 5 0 9

, 8 1 3 19,970,486



### 71

## Total Phosphorus Discharged Load Summary

TABLE IX-D: NRT TIE R TP LOAD (lbs / y r) SUMMA RY BY BA SIN

CBP_BASIN 2000 T1 T2 T3 T4

SUSQUEHA NN A RIVER 1,934,145 1,969,969 1,168,012 597,230 127,191

MD EASTERN S H ORE 201,875 214,324 120,721 83,030 38,713

MD WESTERN SHORE 395,719 435,606 510,996 326,904 96,185

PATUXENT R I VER 102,930 118,710 187,940 103,579 23,190

POT O MAC RIVE R 1,202,995 1,322,949 845,869 645,156 251,482

RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER 55,802 96,615 67,729 33,864 6,773

VA EASTERN S H ORE 49,358 49,235 7,698 7,039 451

Y O RK RIVER 189,324 222,313 162,071 92,034 32,514

JAMES RIVER 1,513,003 2,031,025 1,369,910 686,350 172,121

T O T A L 5

, 6 4 5

, 1 5 1 6,460,745 4,440,946 2

, 5 7 5

, 1 8 6 748,618



### TABLE IX-E: NRT TIE R TP LOAD (lbs / y r) SUMMA RY BY STATE *

STATE 2000 T1 T2 T3 T4

D C 7 5

, 3 0 2 72,410 106,987 1 0 6

, 9 8 7 47,647

D E 2 3

, 8 3 9 24,945 19,353 1 6

, 5 9 0 12,075

M D 1

, 1 1 2

, 7 8 6 1,277,022 1,187,063 7 9 4

, 8 3 0 258,611

N Y 4 9 2

, 0 5 9 495,602 199,551 1 0 0

, 0 2 1 20,004

P A 1

, 5 0 8

, 0 1 7 1,542,890 997,049 5 1 1

, 4 4 5 109,980

V A 2

, 3 2 6

, 8 9 0 2,985,836 1,906,411 1

, 0 3 1

, 9 5 4 296,609

W V 1 0 6

, 2 5 9 62,039 24,532 1 3

, 3 5 9 3,692

T O T A L 5

, 6 4 5

, 1 5 1 6,460,745 4,440,946 2

, 5 7 5

, 1 8 6 748,618

NOTE: * Blue Pl ains load w a s allocated among D C , MD and VA a ccording to the flow allocation pro v ided

b y

MWC O G for UAA. (Attachme nt 11 Part 2, Ap p endix I)



### TABLE IX-F:NRT TIE R TP LOAD (lbs / y r) SUMMA RY BY FACILI TY TYPE

F A C I L I TY TY PE 2000 T1 T2 T3 T4

SIGNIFI C ANT M UNICIPAL 4,399,028 5,257,902 3,689,397 2,048,414 538,279

INDUST R I A L 1

, 1 2 4

, 8 2 4 1,074,316 623,023 3 9 8

, 2 4 5 154,120

NON

- SIG M UNI CIPAL 74,820 82,174 82,174 82,174 56,219

C S O 4 6

, 4 8 0 46,353 46,353 4 6

, 3 5 3 0

T o t a l 5

, 6 4 5

, 1 5 1 6,460,745 4,440,946 2

, 5 7 5

, 1 8 6 748,618



### 72

### TABLE IX-G: Discharged Nitrogen Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E CAMP SHADOWBROO K MD0053139 25 27 27 27 12

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E NORTH HARFORD JR & MD0023281 608 660 660 660 293

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E PERRYVILLE MD0020613 10,781 22,845 22,845 14,278 8,567

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E ADDISON (V) NY0020320 12,501 12,696 5,728 3,580 2,148

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E BATH (V) NY0021431 40,101 40,726 18,499 11,562 6,937

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E BINGHAMTON-JOHNS O NY0024414 1,573,153 475,933 475,933 297,458 178,475

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E COOPERSTOWN NY0023591 36,932 37,365 15,774 9,859 5,915

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E CORNING (C) NY0025721 76,923 78,122 31,612 19,758 11,855

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E CORTLAND (C) NY0027561 435,680 207,633 207,633 129,771 77,862

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E ELMIRA / CHEMUNG C NY0035742 326,789 328,422 175,159 109,474 65,684

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E ENDICOTT (V) NY0027669 542,979 541,495 184,577 115,361 69,216

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E HAMILTON (V) NY0020672 38,419 40,050 10,939 6,837 4,102

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E HORNELL (C) NY0023647 142,082 144,296 73,340 45,837 27,502

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E LAKE STREET/CHEMU NY0036986 424,417 426,538 173,390 108,368 65,021

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E NORWICH NY0021423 235,765 245,097 65,272 40,795 24,477

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E ONEONTA (C) NY0031151 160,806 162,692 73,269 45,793 27,476

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E OWEGO #2 NY0025798 52,773 25,363 25,363 15,852 9,511

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E OWEGO (V) NY0029262 29,249 29,287 15,194 9,496 5,698

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E RICHFIELD SPRINGS ( V NY0031411 16,082 16,271 7,851 4,907 2,944

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E SIDNEY (V) NY0029271 34,527 34,501 16,204 10,128 6,077

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E WAVERLY (V) NY0031089 85,062 85,173 24,599 15,374 9,224

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E ALTOONA CITY AUTH O PA0027014 252,759 259,659 146,803 91,752 55,051

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E ALTOONA CITY AUTH O PA0027022 311,339 319,838 152,304 95,190 57,114

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E ANNVILLE TOWNSHIP PA0021806 42,767 43,758 11,577 7,235 4,341

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E APPLETON PAPER SP R PA0008265 55,010 54,860 54,860 54,860 39,467

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E ASHLAND MUNICIPAL PA0023558 19,315 19,262 17,606 11,004 6,602

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E BEDFORD BOROUGH M PA0022209 38,930 40,404 23,837 14,898 8,939

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E BELLEFONTE BOROU G PA0020486 95,751 101,301 50,545 31,591 18,954

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E BERWICK MUNICIPAL A PA0023248 103,889 104,035 36,205 22,628 13,577

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E BLOOMSBURG MUNIC PA0027171 77,109 77,217 64,843 40,527 24,316

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E BLOSSBURG PA0020036 6,761 7,018 5,071 3,170 1,902

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E BROWN TOWNSHIP M U PA0028088 27,149 28,178 8,216 5,135 3,081

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E BURNHAM BOROUGH PA0038920 15,694 16,289 14,479 9,049 5,430

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E CARLISLE BOROUGH PA0026077 198,197 208,323 83,959 52,474 31,485

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E CARLISLE SUBURBAN PA0024384 22,575 17,148 17,148 10,718 6,431

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E CHLOE TEXTILES INC. PA0009172 6,760 6,742 6,596 4,122 2,473

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E CLARKS SUMMIT-SOU PA0028576 118,078 117,755 55,460 34,662 20,797

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E CLEARFIELD PA0026310 88,457 88,215 63,939 39,962 23,977

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E COLUMBIA PA0026123 40,435 43,988 20,110 12,569 7,541

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E CONSOLIDATED RAIL PA0009229 1,400 1,397 1,397 1,397 1,397

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E CURWENSVILLE MUNI PA0024759 20,051 19,996 10,901 6,813 4,088

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E DANVILLE MUNICIPAL PA0023531 58,057 58,739 52,407 32,754 19,653

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E DERRY TOWNSHIP M U PA0026484 155,620 156,293 84,660 52,912 31,747

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E DILLSBURG BOROUG H PA0024431 21,139 22,191 16,037 10,023 6,014

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E DOVER TOWNSHIP S E PA0020826 80,927 90,258 90,258 56,411 33,847

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E DUNCANSVILLE PA0032883 37,334 38,353 14,851 9,282 5,569

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E EAST PENNSBORO S O PA0038415 122,458 128,714 59,071 36,919 22,152

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E EASTERN SNYDER C O PA0110582 70,388 39,061 39,061 24,413 14,648

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E ELIZABETHTOWN BO R PA0023108 236,180 57,096 57,096 35,685 21,411

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E ELKLAND MUNICIPAL A PA0113298 29,113 30,216 10,592 6,620 3,972

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-g TN_DISCH 

### 73

CBPO, 11/22/2002

### TABLE IX-G: Discharged Nitrogen Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E EMPIRE KOSHER POU PA0007552 30,185 30,103 28,454 17,784 10,670

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E EMPORIUM BOROUG H PA0028631 9,524 10,076 11,725 7,328 4,397

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E EPHRATA BOROUGH W PA0027405 15,376 16,727 67,664 42,290 25,374

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E FAIRVIEW TOWNSHIP PA0081868 12,839 13,478 9,740 6,088 3,653

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E FAIRVIEW TOWNSHIP PA0082589

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E GOLD MILLS DYEHOU S PA0008231 17,543 17,495 16,662 10,414 6,248

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E GREATER HAZELTON PA0026921 211,384 210,807 162,785 101,741 61,044

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E GREGG TOWNSHIP PA0114821 12,604 16,195 16,195 10,122 6,073

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E HAMPDEN TOWNSHIP PA0028746 54,008 31,565 31,565 19,728 11,837

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E HAMPDEN TOWNSHIP PA0080314 54,524 57,310 49,035 30,647 18,388

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E HANOVER BOROUGH PA0026875 255,711 277,726 93,616 58,510 35,106

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E HARRISBURG SEWER A PA0027197 1,565,597 639,300 639,300 399,563 239,738

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E HEINZ PET FOODS PA0009270 66,088 65,907 7,234 7,234 4,739

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E HIGHSPIRE PA0024040 47,583 47,788 25,534 15,959 9,575

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E HOLLIDAYSBURG RE G PA0043273 60,176 61,818 72,489 45,306 27,183

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E HOUTZDALE BOROUG PA0046159 2,557 2,960 2,960 1,850 1,110

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E HUNTINGDON BOROU PA0026191 70,434 71,939 51,989 32,493 19,496

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E JERSEY SHORE BOR O PA0028665 44,325 46,038 17,476 10,922 6,553

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E KELLY TOWNSHIP MU N PA0028681 11,527 44,367 44,367 27,729 16,637

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E LACKAWANNA RIVER B PA0027081 21,300 11,984 11,984 7,490 4,494

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E LACKAWANNA RIVER B PA0027090 205,831 205,268 124,831 78,019 46,812

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E LACKAWANNA RIVER B PA0027073 29,313 29,232 8,322 5,202 3,121

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E LACKAWANNA RIVER B PA0027065 68,252 68,066 59,620 37,262 22,357

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E LANCASTER AREA SE W PA0042269 281,766 189,652 189,652 118,532 71,119

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E LANCASTER CITY PA0026743 531,348 504,692 504,692 315,432 189,259

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E LEBANON CITY AUTH O PA0027316 551,304 564,084 134,093 83,808 50,285

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E LEMOYNE BOROUGH M PA0026441 115,152 115,650 40,446 25,279 15,167

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E LEWISBURG AREA JO I PA0044661 83,950 29,180 29,180 18,238 10,943

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E LEWISTOWN BOROU G PA0026280 77,838 80,788 46,165 28,853 17,312

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E LITITZ SEWAGE AUTH O PA0020320 194,758 211,872 73,694 46,059 27,635

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E LOCK HAVEN PA0025933 110,987 53,127 53,127 33,204 19,923

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E LOGAN TOWNSHIP-G R PA0032557 16,952 8,916 8,916 5,573 3,344

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E LOWER ALLEN TOWN S PA0027189 134,376 141,241 82,930 51,831 31,099

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E LOWER LACKAWANN A PA0026361 187,419 186,907 85,269 53,293 31,976

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E LYKENS BOROUGH PA0043575 8,114 8,149 5,889 3,681 2,208

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MAHANOY CITY PA0070041 14,164 13,928 13,928 8,705 5,223

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MANHEIM BOROUGH A PA0020893 19,614 21,337 19,354 12,096 7,258

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MANSFIELD BOROUG H PA0021814 17,740 18,413 14,029 8,768 5,261

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MARIETTA-DONEGAL J PA0021717 13,979 15,207 10,990 6,869 4,121

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MARTINSBURG PA0028347 13,413 13,779 9,958 6,224 3,734

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MARYSVILLE MUNICI P PA0021571 34,158 37,217 26,896 16,810 10,086

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MECHANICSBURG BO R PA0020885 60,790 63,896 20,195 12,622 7,573

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MERCK & COMPANY PA0008419 178,739 178,250 178,250 178,250 115,998

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MIDDLETOWN PA0020664 72,184 72,496 28,883 18,052 10,831

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MIFFLINBURG BOROU PA0028461 12,460 17,091 17,091 10,682 6,409

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MILLERSBURG BORO U PA0022535 23,472 23,573 17,036 10,647 6,388

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MILLERSVILLE BORO U PA0026620 3,378 3,675 16,799 10,499 6,299

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MILTON MUNICIPAL A U PA0020273 30,410 30,327 41,725 26,078 15,647

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MONTGOMERY BORO U PA0020699 49,016 50,910 12,590 7,869 4,721

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MOSHANNON VALLEY PA0037966 57,735 61,081 34,726 21,703 13,022

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-g TN_DISCH 

### 74

CBPO, 11/22/2002

### TABLE IX-G: Discharged Nitrogen Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MOUNT JOY PA0021067 46,949 51,074 18,200 11,375 6,825

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MOUNT UNION BORO U PA0020214 11,156 11,395 8,235 5,147 3,088

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MOUNTAINTOP AREA PA0045985 73,672 66,933 66,933 41,833 25,100

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MT. CARMEL MUNICIP A PA0024406 66,128 65,947 23,043 14,402 8,641

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MT. HOLLY SPRINGS B PA0023183 16,524 17,368 9,313 5,821 3,492

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E MUNCY BOROUGH M U PA0024325 15,683 16,289 15,602 9,751 5,851

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E NATIONAL GYPSUM C O PA0008591 2,774 2,766 2,766 2,766 2,766

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E NEW CUMBERLAND B O PA0026654 16,550 16,621 12,012 7,507 4,504

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E NEW FREEDOM WTP PA0043257 65,363 68,617 28,007 17,504 10,503

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E NEW HOLLAND BORO U PA0021890 89,240 97,082 26,874 16,796 10,078

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E NEW OXFORD MUNICI PA0020923 39,127 30,219 30,219 18,887 11,332

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E NEWBERRY TOWNSHI PA0083011 25,277 25,386 10,076 6,298 3,779

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E NORTHEASTERN YOR PA0023744 20,748 21,781 15,741 9,838 5,903

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E NORTHUMBERLAND B PA0020567 26,234 26,162 10,975 6,860 4,116

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E OSRAM SYLVANIA PR O PA0009024 364,440 363,444 290,822 254,469 9,914

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E P-H GLATFELTER CO M PA0008869 420,958 419,808 303,384 189,615 113,769

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E PALMYRA BOROUGH A PA0024287 68,723 70,316 19,867 12,417 7,450

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E PENN TOWNSHIP PA0037150 45,082 47,327 40,537 25,335 15,201

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E PENNSYLVANIA FISH & PA0040835 20,131 20,076 20,076 20,076 20,076

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E PENNSYLVANIA FISH & PA0010553 119,459 119,132 119,132 91,359 54,816

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E PENNSYLVANIA FISH & PA0010561 63,264 63,091 63,091 63,091 44,535

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E PENNSYLVANIA FISH & PA0112127 3,970 3,959 3,959 3,959 3,959

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E PENNSYLVANIA FISH & PA0044032 629 627 627 627 627

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E PINE CREEK MUNICIP A PA0027553 34,071 34,962 15,626 9,766 5,860

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E PINE GROVE BOROU G PA0020915 26,040 25,969 10,969 6,856 4,113

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E POPE & TALBOT WIS I N PA0007919 34,620 34,525 34,525 25,164 15,098

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E PORTER TOWER JOIN PA0046272 13,210 13,705 13,705 8,566 5,139

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E PROCTOR & GAMBLE PA0008885 262,222 261,505 119,001 74,376 44,625

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E ROARING SPRING BO R PA0020249 11,330 16,597 16,597 10,373 6,224

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E SAYRE PA0043681 31,705 31,619 15,949 9,968 5,981

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E SCRANTON SEWER A U PA0026492 739,403 320,456 320,456 200,285 120,171

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E SHAMOKIN-COAL TO W PA0027324 274,373 273,623 86,658 54,161 32,497

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E SHENANDOAH MUNIC I PA0070386 27,606 27,531 28,980 18,112 10,867

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E SHIPPENSBURG BOR O PA0030643 97,062 100,617 55,628 34,767 20,860

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E SILVER SPRING TOW N PA0083593 2,695 2,833 3,826 2,391 1,435

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E SOUTH MIDDLETON T O PA0044113 14,497 15,237 11,012 6,882 4,129

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E SPRINGETTSBURY T O PA0026808 299,326 275,067 275,067 171,917 103,150

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E ST. JOHNS PA0046388 5,746 7,797 7,797 4,873 2,924

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E STEWARTSTOWN BO R PA0036269 8,654 9,085 6,623 4,139 2,484

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E SUNBURY CITY MUNI C PA0026557 107,663 73,446 73,446 45,904 27,542

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E SWATARA TOWNSHIP PA0026735 190,910 81,310 81,310 50,819 30,491

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E TOWANDA MUNICIPA L PA0034576 17,722 16,658 16,658 10,411 6,247

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E TRI-BORO MUNICIPAL PA0023736 8,512 8,827 6,916 4,323 2,594

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E TWIN BOROUGHS SA N PA0023264 11,156 11,637 8,409 5,256 3,154

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E TYRONE BOROUGH S E PA0026727 84,453 155,904 155,904 97,440 58,464

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E TYSON FOODS PA0035092 41,991 41,876 41,876 37,193 5,025

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E UNIVERSITY AREA JO I PA0026239 236,457 123,537 123,537 77,210 46,326

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E UPPER ALLEN TOWN S PA0024902 17,778 18,686 13,504 8,440 5,064

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E USFW-LAMAR NATION PA0009857 3,359 3,350 3,350 3,350 3,350

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E WELLSBORO MUNICI P PA0021687 68,957 71,570 28,784 17,990 10,794

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-g TN_DISCH 

### 75

CBPO, 11/22/2002

### TABLE IX-G: Discharged Nitrogen Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E WESTERN CLINTON C O PA0043893 2,703 8,599 8,599 5,375 3,225

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E WHITE DEER TOWNS H PA0020800 15,943 16,894 6,645 4,153 2,492

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E WILLIAMSPORT SANI T PA0027057 464,040 178,235 178,235 111,397 66,838

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E WILLIAMSPORT SANI T PA0027049 414,413 64,971 64,971 40,607 24,364

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E WYOMING VALLEY PA0026107 379,587 581,266 581,266 363,291 217,975

SUSQUEHANNA RIV E YORK CITY PA0026263 445,316 290,627 290,627 181,642 108,985

SUSQUEHANNA RIVER Total 18,406,790 14,667,032 10,009,752 6,486,420 3,767,236

MD EASTERN SHOR E BRIDGEVILLE DE0020249 12,109 5,404 5,404 3,377 2,026

MD EASTERN SHOR E DUPONT-SEAFORD DE0000035 234,995 234,353 234,353 234,353 234,353

MD EASTERN SHOR E LAUREL DE0020125 19,340 21,558 7,727 4,829 2,898

MD EASTERN SHOR E SEAFORD DE0020265 21,043 31,088 31,088 19,430 11,658

MD EASTERN SHOR E ALLEN FAMILY FOOD S MD0067857 410 409 409 409 303

MD EASTERN SHOR E BENJAMINS TRAILER P MD0024961 943 1,041 1,041 1,041 463

MD EASTERN SHOR E BETTERTON MD0020575 1,137 1,163 1,163 1,163 517

MD EASTERN SHOR E BOHEMIA MANOR HIG MD0023469 35 39 39 39 163

MD EASTERN SHOR E BUDGET MOTEL MD0023027 104 115 115 115 51

MD EASTERN SHOR E CAMBRIDGE MD0021636 112,051 124,494 124,494 77,809 46,685

MD EASTERN SHOR E CECILTON MD0020443 2,061 2,276 2,276 2,276 1,012

MD EASTERN SHOR E CENTREVILLE MD0020834 12,685 8,587 8,587 5,367 3,220

MD EASTERN SHOR E CHERRY HILL MD0052825 6,586 7,274 7,274 7,274 3,233

MD EASTERN SHOR E CHESAPEAKE CITY N O MD0020401 2,150 2,375 2,375 2,375 2,326

MD EASTERN SHOR E CHESAPEAKE CITY S O MD0020397 2,109 2,329 2,329 2,329 1,822

MD EASTERN SHOR E CHESAPEAKE COLLE G MD0024384 752 858 858 858 381

MD EASTERN SHOR E CHESTERTOWN MD0020010 17,978 15,916 15,916 9,948 5,969

MD EASTERN SHOR E CHURCH HILL MD0050016 1,345 1,535 1,535 1,535 1,779

MD EASTERN SHOR E COLONEL RICHARDS O MD0055522 324 347 347 347 154

MD EASTERN SHOR E CRISFIELD MD0020001 27,044 16,547 16,547 10,342 6,205

MD EASTERN SHOR E DELMAR MD0020532 24,745 14,068 14,068 8,793 5,276

MD EASTERN SHOR E DENTON MD0020494 12,134 9,952 9,952 6,220 3,732

MD EASTERN SHOR E DONALDSON BROWN MD0054950 110 121 121 121 54

MD EASTERN SHOR E EASTERN CORRECTI O MD0023876 759 866 866 866 385

MD EASTERN SHOR E EASTERN CORRECTI O MD0066613 2,459 2,592 2,592 2,592 10,134

MD EASTERN SHOR E EASTON MD0020273 52,633 46,973 46,973 29,358 17,615

MD EASTERN SHOR E ELK NECK STATE PA R MD0023833 1,315 1,452 1,452 1,452 675

MD EASTERN SHOR E ELKTON MD0020681 82,662 42,125 42,125 26,328 15,797

MD EASTERN SHOR E ENGLISH GRILL MD0053104 21 22 22 22 10

MD EASTERN SHOR E EWELL MD0052230 1,162 1,225 1,225 1,225 545

MD EASTERN SHOR E FAIRMOUNT MD0052256 1,608 1,695 1,695 1,695 753

MD EASTERN SHOR E FEDERALSBURG MD0020249 18,117 8,020 8,020 5,013 3,008

MD EASTERN SHOR E FOREST GREEN MD0053279 498 551 551 551 245

MD EASTERN SHOR E FRUITLAND MD0052990 25,812 12,612 12,612 7,883 4,730

MD EASTERN SHOR E GALENA MD0020605 2,084 2,132 2,132 2,132 650

MD EASTERN SHOR E GREAT OAKS LANDIN G MD0024945 308 315 315 315 140

MD EASTERN SHOR E GREENSBORO MD0020290 10,135 10,866 10,866 10,866 4,136

MD EASTERN SHOR E HARBOUR VIEW MD0024023 384 425 425 425 189

MD EASTERN SHOR E HEBRON MD0059617 6,552 7,203 7,203 7,203 3,201

MD EASTERN SHOR E HURLOCK MD0022730 42,327 25,863 25,863 16,164 9,699

MD EASTERN SHOR E KENNEDYVILLE MD0052671 243 249 249 249 111

MD EASTERN SHOR E KENT ISLAND MD0023485 87,899 39,970 39,970 24,981 14,989

MD EASTERN SHOR E MANCHESTER PARK MD0023108 1,259 1,390 1,390 1,390 664

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-g TN_DISCH 

### 76

CBPO, 11/22/2002

### TABLE IX-G: Discharged Nitrogen Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

MD EASTERN SHOR E MAPLE HILL PARK MD0053171 301 333 333 333 148

MD EASTERN SHOR E MARDELA HIGH MD0024279 64 70 70 70 59

MD EASTERN SHOR E MILLINGTON MD0020435 3,114 3,187 3,187 3,187 1,416

MD EASTERN SHOR E MORNING CHEER MD0052299 1,000 1,104 1,104 1,104 491

MD EASTERN SHOR E NORTH CAROLINE HI G MD0023621 119 128 128 128 57

MD EASTERN SHOR E NORTHEAST RIVER MD0052027 23,023 15,304 15,304 9,565 5,739

MD EASTERN SHOR E OXFORD MD0022543 5,625 5,945 5,945 5,945 2,642

MD EASTERN SHOR E PITTSVILLE MD0060348 3,601 3,959 3,959 3,959 2,147

MD EASTERN SHOR E POCOMOKE CITY MD0022551 24,854 23,435 23,435 14,647 8,788

MD EASTERN SHOR E POCOMOKE TRUCK S T MD0054330 118 131 131 131 57

MD EASTERN SHOR E PORT DEPOSIT MD0020796 7,460 8,239 8,239 8,239 3,662

MD EASTERN SHOR E PRESTON MD0020621 3,068 3,290 3,290 3,290 1,462

MD EASTERN SHOR E PRINCESS ANNE MD0020656 20,092 15,100 15,100 9,437 5,662

MD EASTERN SHOR E QUEENSTOWN MD0023370 3,266 3,727 3,727 3,727 1,919

MD EASTERN SHOR E RISING SUN MD0020265 12,670 13,994 13,994 13,994 6,219

MD EASTERN SHOR E ROCK HALL MD0020303 11,933 12,213 12,213 12,213 6,596

MD EASTERN SHOR E SALISBURY MD0021571 332,099 143,631 143,631 89,769 53,862

MD EASTERN SHOR E SHARPTOWN MD0052175 8,691 9,555 9,555 9,555 2,940

MD EASTERN SHOR E SNOW HILL MD0022764 21,632 11,331 11,331 7,082 4,249

MD EASTERN SHOR E SPRING MEADOWS MD0024953 537 583 583 583 259

MD EASTERN SHOR E SUDLERSVILLE MD0020559 2,388 2,725 2,725 2,725 1,211

MD EASTERN SHOR E TALBOT COUNTY RE G MD0023604 15,766 16,664 16,664 16,664 9,265

MD EASTERN SHOR E TALBOT COUNTY RE G MD0059463 3,980 4,207 4,207 4,207 1,870

MD EASTERN SHOR E TAWES VOCATIONAL- T MD0022993 11,862 12,505 12,505 12,505 4,211

MD EASTERN SHOR E TOLCHESTER MD0067202 4,827 4,940 4,940 4,940 2,196

MD EASTERN SHOR E TRAPPE MD0020486 7,053 7,455 7,455 7,455 3,313

MD EASTERN SHOR E TRIUMPH INDUSTRIA L MD0024929 1,902 2,101 2,101 2,101 934

MD EASTERN SHOR E TWIN CITIES MD0055352 6,313 6,479 6,479 6,479 2,880

MD EASTERN SHOR E TYLERTON MD0052248 266 280 280 280 124

MD EASTERN SHOR E U.S. ARMY-CHESAPE A MD0020206 14 16 16 16 7

MD EASTERN SHOR E VIENNA MD0020664 3,216 3,300 3,300 3,300 1,369

MD EASTERN SHOR E WALKERS TRAILER P A MD0057487 896 961 961 961 345

MD EASTERN SHOR E WILLARDS MD0051632 4,087 4,493 4,493 4,493 1,997

MD EASTERN SHOR E WOODLAWN MOBILE H MD0023337 0

MD EASTERN SHOR E WORTON-BUTLERTO N MD0060585 3,372 3,451 3,451 3,451 1,534

MD EASTERN SHORE Total 1,399,635 1,053,234 1,039,402 807,596 561,581

MD WESTERN SHOR E ABERDEEN MD0021563 28,612 42,018 42,018 26,261 15,757

MD WESTERN SHOR E ABERDEEN PROVING MD0021237 55,125 22,278 22,278 13,924 8,354

MD WESTERN SHOR E ABERDEEN PROVING MD0021229 22,292 23,400 23,400 14,625 8,775

MD WESTERN SHOR E ANNAPOLIS MD0021814 165,551 183,701 183,701 114,813 68,888

MD WESTERN SHOR E BACK RIVER MD0021555 2,470,828 2,671,787 2,137,429 1,335,893 801,536

MD WESTERN SHOR E BALTIMORE YACHT C L MD0054542 104 106 106 106 47

MD WESTERN SHOR E BETHLEHEM STEEL C O MD0001201 1,685,321 1,680,716 1,680,716 1,680,716 806,277

MD WESTERN SHOR E BOWLEYS QUARTER S MD0058807 362 368 368 368 164

MD WESTERN SHOR E BROADNECK MD0021644 68,510 127,415 127,415 79,634 47,781

MD WESTERN SHOR E BROADWATER MD0024350 15,371 30,890 30,890 19,307 11,584

MD WESTERN SHOR E CHEMETALS MD0001775 460,274 87,006 87,006 87,006 1,170

MD WESTERN SHOR E CHESAPEAKE BAY IN S MD0022985

MD WESTERN SHOR E CHESAPEAKE BEACH MD0020281 8,950 19,690 19,690 12,306 7,384

MD WESTERN SHOR E CONGOLEUM MD0001384 5,301 5,286 5,286 4,005 2,403

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-g TN_DISCH 

### 77

CBPO, 11/22/2002

### TABLE IX-G: Discharged Nitrogen Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

MD WESTERN SHOR E COX CREEK MD0021661 627,021 299,577 299,577 187,235 112,341

MD WESTERN SHOR E DREAMS LANDING MD0052868 387 411 411 411 205

MD WESTERN SHOR E FREEDOM DISTRICT MD0021512 65,579 69,535 69,535 43,460 26,076

MD WESTERN SHOR E GAITHER MANOR MD0022845 181 213 213 213 551

MD WESTERN SHOR E HAMPSTEAD MD0022446 35,572 41,842 41,842 41,842 16,631

MD WESTERN SHOR E HAVRE DE GRACE MD0021750 48,125 34,020 34,020 21,262 12,757

MD WESTERN SHOR E HOLIDAY MOBILE EST A MD0053082 2,252 2,391 2,391 2,391 2,609

MD WESTERN SHOR E JOPPATOWNE MD0022535 15,465 20,913 20,913 13,071 7,842

MD WESTERN SHOR E MANCHESTER MD0022578 4,422 5,201 5,201 5,201 1,987

MD WESTERN SHOR E MAYO LARGE COMMU MD0061794 13,509 14,341 14,341 14,341 13,464

MD WESTERN SHOR E MOUNT AIRY MD0022527 8,883 16,025 16,025 10,016 6,010

MD WESTERN SHOR E NOTCHCLIFF MD0022951 2,044 2,083 2,083 2,083 926

MD WESTERN SHOR E PATAPSCO MD0021601 2,388,559 1,778,607 1,778,607 1,111,629 666,978

MD WESTERN SHOR E PHEASANT RIDGE MD0024546 839 987 987 987 609

MD WESTERN SHOR E RANDLE CLIFFS NAV A MD0020168 751 949 949 949 422

MD WESTERN SHOR E RICHLYN MANOR MD0022713 3,536 3,604 3,604 3,604 2,147

MD WESTERN SHOR E RIVERBOAT MOTEL MD0051535

MD WESTERN SHOR E ROSE HAVEN MD0022756 2,873 3,051 3,051 3,051 1,185

MD WESTERN SHOR E SOD RUN MD0056545 391,952 306,828 306,828 191,768 115,061

MD WESTERN SHOR E SOUTH CARROLL HIG H MD0024589 299 352 352 352 157

MD WESTERN SHOR E ST TIMOTHY SCHOOL MD0056103 299 305 305 305 135

MD WESTERN SHOR E SUMMER HILL TRAILE R MD0023272 451 479 479 479 276

MD WESTERN SHOR E SWAN HARBOR PARK MD0023043 619 672 672 672 299

MD WESTERN SHOR E UNITED CONTAINER MD0024635 426 434 434 434 185

MD WESTERN SHOR E US GYPSUM CO MD0001457

MD WESTERN SHOR E US NAVAL ACADEMY MD0023523 3,917 4,591 4,591 4,591 4,591

MD WESTERN SHOR E VILLA JULIE COLLEGE MD0066001 83 84 84 84 170

MD WESTERN SHOR E W R GRACE MD0000311 595,770 310,737 310,737 310,737 37,140

MD WESTERN SHOR E WOODSTOCK TRAINI N MD0023906 468 477 477 477 212

MD WESTERN SHORE Total 9,200,882 7,813,372 7,279,015 5,360,611 2,811,084

PATUXENT RIVER BOONES MOBILE MD0050903 3,367 3,574 3,574 3,574 1,588

PATUXENT RIVER BOWIE MD0021628 44,442 50,835 50,835 31,772 19,063

PATUXENT RIVER DORSEY RUN MD0063207 16,490 35,731 35,731 22,332 13,399

PATUXENT RIVER EDGEMEADE RESIDE N MD0052680 162 178 178 178 53

PATUXENT RIVER EMERGENCY MANAG E MD0025666 10 11 11 11 4

PATUXENT RIVER FORT MEADE MD0021717 10,331 52,924 52,924 33,077 19,846

PATUXENT RIVER HARWOOD SOUTHER N MD0023728 114 121 121 121 145

PATUXENT RIVER LITTLE PATUXENT MD0055174 366,461 502,683 502,683 314,177 188,506

PATUXENT RIVER LYONS CREEK MOBIL E MD0053511 2,107 2,236 2,236 2,236 1,752

PATUXENT RIVER MARLBORO MEADOW S MD0022781 11,654 12,742 12,742 12,742 7,902

PATUXENT RIVER MARYLAND CITY MD0062596 20,306 25,934 25,934 16,209 9,725

PATUXENT RIVER MARYLAND MANOR M O MD0024333 2,102 2,231 2,231 2,231 1,623

PATUXENT RIVER MD & VA MILK PRODU C MD0000469 17,636 17,588 8,689 5,431 3,258

PATUXENT RIVER NATIONAL WILDLIFE V MD0065358 68 75 75 75 33

PATUXENT RIVER NORTHERN HIGH SC H MD0052167 686 868 868 868 386

PATUXENT RIVER PARKWAY MD0021725 63,213 151,060 151,060 94,412 56,647

PATUXENT RIVER PARKWAY INN MD0052329 656 696 696 696 592

PATUXENT RIVER PATUXENT MD0021652 33,265 118,047 118,047 73,780 44,268

PATUXENT RIVER PATUXENT MOBILE MD0024694 1,121 1,191 1,191 1,191 631

PATUXENT RIVER PATUXENT WILDLIFE H MD0025623 137 149 149 149 508

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-g TN_DISCH 

### 78

CBPO, 11/22/2002

### TABLE IX-G: Discharged Nitrogen Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

PATUXENT RIVER PINE HILL RUN MD0021679 84,780 94,832 94,832 59,270 35,562

PATUXENT RIVER PINEY ORCHARD MD0059145 3,979 4,224 4,224 4,224 8,833

PATUXENT RIVER POINT LOOKOUT STA T MD0023949 902 1,020 1,020 1,020 453

PATUXENT RIVER USAF BRANDYWINE H MD0025640 72 79 79 79 33

PATUXENT RIVER USAF TRANSMITTER S MD0025631 0

PATUXENT RIVER WAYSONS MOBILE MD0023647 2,509 2,663 2,663 2,663 1,112

PATUXENT RIVER WESTERN BRANCH MD0021741 418,909 560,383 560,383 350,239 210,144

PATUXENT RIVER Total 1,105,479 1,642,075 1,633,176 1,032,757 626,068

POTOMAC RIVER BLUE PLAINS DC0021199 8,749,992 7,805,237 7,805,237 5,203,492 3,122,095

POTOMAC RIVER WASHINGTON, D.C. C DC-CSO 163,152 162,706 162,706 162,706 0

POTOMAC RIVER ANTIETAM MD0062308 5,709 5,997 5,997 5,997 2,665

POTOMAC RIVER BALLENGER CREEK MD0021822 81,659 100,388 100,388 62,743 37,646

POTOMAC RIVER BELTSVILLE USDA EA S MD0020842 7,555 5,745 5,745 5,745 5,745

POTOMAC RIVER BELTSVILLE USDA W E MD0020851 4,053 4,431 4,431 4,431 3,030

POTOMAC RIVER BIERS LANE MD0065749 166 166 166 166 74

POTOMAC RIVER BLOOMINGTON MD0060933 1,421 1,498 1,498 1,498 666

POTOMAC RIVER BOONSBORO MD0020231 21,055 22,115 22,115 22,115 9,829

POTOMAC RIVER BOWLING BROOK PR E MD0067571 10 12 12 12 143

POTOMAC RIVER BRANDYWINE RECEI V MD0025658 18 20 20 20 29

POTOMAC RIVER BRETTON WOODS MD0064777 484 534 534 534 237

POTOMAC RIVER BROADFORDING MD0051373 59 62 62 62 27

POTOMAC RIVER BROOK LANE MD0053198 293 308 308 308 137

POTOMAC RIVER BRUNSWICK MD0020958 34,935 18,562 18,562 11,602 6,961

POTOMAC RIVER CELANESE MD0063878 18,422 24,754 24,754 15,471 9,283

POTOMAC RIVER CHARLES COUNTY C O MD0052311 2,714 3,134 3,134 3,134 886

POTOMAC RIVER CHELTENHAM BOYS V MD0023931 1,086 1,187 1,187 1,187 902

POTOMAC RIVER CHOPTICAN HIGH MD0051918 270 305 305 305 136

POTOMAC RIVER CLEARSPRING MD0053325 4,140 4,348 4,348 4,348 1,933

POTOMAC RIVER CLIFFTON ON THE PO T MD0055557 2,438 2,815 2,815 2,815 1,251

POTOMAC RIVER CONCORD TRAILER P A MD0023060 144 173 173 173 112

POTOMAC RIVER CONOCOCHEAGUE MD0063509 21,512 29,063 29,063 18,164 10,899

POTOMAC RIVER CRESTVIEW MD0022683 1,333 1,594 1,594 1,594 935

POTOMAC RIVER CUMBERLAND MD0021598 355,300 233,824 233,824 146,140 87,684

POTOMAC RIVER DAMASCUS MD0020982 19,999 20,953 20,953 13,096 7,858

POTOMAC RIVER DAN-DEE INC. MD0023710 110 131 131 131 58

POTOMAC RIVER EMMITSBURG MD0020257 7,575 14,086 14,086 8,804 5,282

POTOMAC RIVER FAHRNEY-KEEDY ME M MD0053066 991 1,041 1,041 1,041 462

POTOMAC RIVER FLINTSTONE MD0055620 2,955 2,966 2,966 2,966 1,430

POTOMAC RIVER FORT DETRICK MD0020877 22,788 27,002 27,002 16,876 10,126

POTOMAC RIVER FOUNTAINDALE MD0022721 12,663 15,139 15,139 15,139 6,160

POTOMAC RIVER FOXVILLE US NAVAL S MD0025119 1,333 1,594 1,594 1,594 708

POTOMAC RIVER FREDERICK MD0021610 485,460 189,096 189,096 118,185 70,911

POTOMAC RIVER FUNKSTOWN MD0020362 7,552 7,932 7,932 7,932 1,566

POTOMAC RIVER GARDEN STATE TANN MD0053431 145,063 144,667 70,334 28,134 3,853

POTOMAC RIVER GEORGES CREEK MD0060071 36,525 16,293 16,293 10,183 6,110

POTOMAC RIVER GORMAN MD0060950 246 260 260 260 115

POTOMAC RIVER GREEN RIDGE FORES MD0024988 174 174 174 174 77

POTOMAC RIVER GREENBRIAR STATE P MD0023868 795 835 835 835 371

POTOMAC RIVER HAGERSTOWN MD0021776 265,734 206,287 206,287 128,930 77,358

POTOMAC RIVER HANCOCK MD0024562 13,441 14,118 14,118 14,118 5,456

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-g TN_DISCH 

### 79

CBPO, 11/22/2002

### TABLE IX-G: Discharged Nitrogen Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

POTOMAC RIVER HAPPY TRAILS CAMP G MD0065757 33 35 35 35 86

POTOMAC RIVER HIGHLAND VIEW MD0024627 489 513 513 513 228

POTOMAC RIVER HUNTER HILL APART M MD0022926 1,518 1,595 1,595 1,595 709

POTOMAC RIVER I-70 REST AREA MD0023680 2,336 2,792 2,792 2,792 834

POTOMAC RIVER INDIAN HEAD MD0020052 13,639 8,587 8,587 5,367 3,220

POTOMAC RIVER JEFFERSON MD0020737 203 243 243 243 4,275

POTOMAC RIVER JUDE HOUSE MD0057614 0

POTOMAC RIVER KEMPTOWN SCHOOL MD0056481 402 480 480 480 132

POTOMAC RIVER KITZMILLER MD0060941 911 961 961 961 427

POTOMAC RIVER KUNZANG ODSAL PAL MD0067539 41 46 46 46 20

POTOMAC RIVER LA PLATA MD0020524 16,705 20,084 20,084 12,553 7,532

POTOMAC RIVER LACKEY HIGH MD0023159 504 582 582 582 259

POTOMAC RIVER LAFAYETTE MOTEL MD0053201 59 69 69 69 31

POTOMAC RIVER LEONARDTOWN MD0024767 18,598 11,730 11,730 7,332 4,399

POTOMAC RIVER LEWISTOWN ELEMEN T MD0022900 137 163 163 163 73

POTOMAC RIVER LIBERTYTOWN MD0060577 1,640 1,961 1,961 1,961 731

POTOMAC RIVER LUPPINO RESIDENCE MD0063070

POTOMAC RIVER MAPLE RUN MD0024970 21 21 21 21 76

POTOMAC RIVER MARYLAND CORREC T MD0023957 6,931 22,990 22,990 14,369 8,621

POTOMAC RIVER MATTAWOMAN MD0021865 320,637 199,109 199,109 124,443 74,666

POTOMAC RIVER METTIKI COAL D MD0064149

POTOMAC RIVER MIDDLETOWN MD0024406 17,345 20,737 20,737 20,737 6,376

POTOMAC RIVER MILL BOTTOM MD0065439 296 354 354 354 1,285

POTOMAC RIVER MONROVIA WWTP MD0059609 306 366 366 366 788

POTOMAC RIVER MT CARMEL WOODS MD0053228 771 890 890 890 510

POTOMAC RIVER MT ST MARYS COLLE G MD0023230 3,443 4,116 4,116 4,116 1,292

POTOMAC RIVER MYERSVILLE MD0020699 9,461 11,311 11,311 11,311 4,552

POTOMAC RIVER NAS-PATUXENT MD0020095 1,646 827 827 827 827

POTOMAC RIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE MD0020931 2,822 3,111 3,111 3,111 1,383

POTOMAC RIVER NEW GERMANY STAT E MD0023981 73 77 77 77 34

POTOMAC RIVER NEW LIFE FOURSQUA MD0057100 89 107 107 107 47

POTOMAC RIVER NEW MARKET MD0020729 7,200 8,608 8,608 8,608 2,943

POTOMAC RIVER NEW WINDSOR MD0022586 2,051 2,412 2,412 2,412 1,281

POTOMAC RIVER NORBECK COUNTRY C MD0024309

POTOMAC RIVER NORTH INDIAN HEAD E MD0024601

POTOMAC RIVER NSWC-INDIAN HEAD MD0003158 1,782 1,777 1,777 1,777 1,777

POTOMAC RIVER NSWC-INDIAN HEAD MD0020885 6,730 7,772 7,772 7,772 8,456

POTOMAC RIVER OLD SOUTH MOUNTAI MD0055425 114 137 137 137 61

POTOMAC RIVER OLDTOWN MD0024759 571 573 573 573 255

POTOMAC RIVER PETER PAN INN MD0024244 37 44 44 44 85

POTOMAC RIVER PICCOWAXIN MIDDLE MD0023451 127 147 147 147 65

POTOMAC RIVER PINTO MD0022748 8,131 8,161 8,161 8,161 6,569

POTOMAC RIVER PISCATAWAY MD0021539 669,955 616,421 616,421 385,263 231,158

POTOMAC RIVER PLEASANT BRANCH MD0065269 1,033 1,234 1,234 1,234 1,244

POTOMAC RIVER PLESANT VALLEY MD0066745 435 512 512 512 228

POTOMAC RIVER POINT OF ROCKS MD0020800 4,439 5,307 5,307 5,307 2,408

POTOMAC RIVER POOLESVILLE MD0023001 16,660 16,175 16,175 10,109 6,066

POTOMAC RIVER RAWLINGS HEIGHTS MD0023213 4,255 4,271 4,271 4,271 2,330

POTOMAC RIVER ROCKY GAP STATE P A MD0051667 1,019 1,023 1,023 1,023 1,263

POTOMAC RIVER RUNNYMEADE SCHO O MD0065927 146 172 172 172 77

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-g TN_DISCH 

### 80

CBPO, 11/22/2002

### TABLE IX-G: Discharged Nitrogen Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

POTOMAC RIVER SANDY HOOK MD0064530 339 356 356 356 158

POTOMAC RIVER SENECA CREEK MD0021491 268,698 458,052 458,052 286,283 171,770

POTOMAC RIVER SHAMROCK RESTAU R MD0058050 14 17 17 17 70

POTOMAC RIVER SHEPPARD PRATT W E MD0067521 160 191 191 191 85

POTOMAC RIVER SIDELING HILL REST A MD0062821 429 450 450 450 171

POTOMAC RIVER SMITHSBURG MD0024317 4,862 5,107 5,107 5,107 5,411

POTOMAC RIVER SOUTHERN CORREC T MD0023914 1,872 2,162 2,162 2,162 849

POTOMAC RIVER SPRING MILLS WV1031613

POTOMAC RIVER SPRINGVIEW ESTATE S MD0022870 361 432 432 432 164

POTOMAC RIVER ST. JAMES SCHOOL MD0065536 361 379 379 379 168

POTOMAC RIVER SWAN POINT MD0057525 1,741 2,010 2,010 2,010 893

POTOMAC RIVER TANEYTOWN MD0020672 15,929 22,186 22,186 13,866 8,320

POTOMAC RIVER THUNDERBIRD APAR T MD0050334 1,136 1,311 1,311 1,311 324

POTOMAC RIVER THUNDERBIRD MOTE L MD0053155 220 254 254 254 113

POTOMAC RIVER THURMONT MD0021121 9,722 24,449 24,449 15,281 9,168

POTOMAC RIVER TRI-TOWN PLAZA MD0024937 737 740 740 740 329

POTOMAC RIVER UNION BRIDGE MD0022454 7,500 8,823 8,823 8,823 2,514

POTOMAC RIVER UPPER POTOMAC RIV MD0021687 79,436 79,219 79,219 79,219 79,219

POTOMAC RIVER URBANA HIGH SCHO O MD0066940 133 159 159 159 71

POTOMAC RIVER VICTOR CULLEN CEN T MD0023922 1,132 1,353 1,353 1,353 1,013

POTOMAC RIVER WESTMINSTER MD0021831 70,103 104,838 104,838 65,524 39,314

POTOMAC RIVER WESTVACO CORPOR A MD0001422 12,768 12,733 12,733 12,733 12,733

POTOMAC RIVER WHITE HOUSE MOTE L MD0056553 75 86 86 86 38

POTOMAC RIVER WHITE ROCK MD0025089 542 647 647 647 416

POTOMAC RIVER WINEBRENNER WWT P MD0003221 12,029 5,378 5,378 3,361 2,017

POTOMAC RIVER WINTERS APARTMEN T MD0057606 12 13 13 13 6

POTOMAC RIVER WOODSBORO MD0058661 6,259 7,482 7,482 7,482 2,973

POTOMAC RIVER ANTRIM TOWNSHIP PA0080519 21,731 12,076 12,076 7,548 4,529

POTOMAC RIVER CHAMBERSBURG BO R PA0026051 130,817 116,352 116,352 72,720 43,632

POTOMAC RIVER FRANKLIN COUNTY A U PA0020834 3,321 3,442 26,352 16,470 9,882

POTOMAC RIVER GETTYSBURG MUNICI PA0021563 23,181 39,416 39,416 24,635 14,781

POTOMAC RIVER HYNDMAN BOROUGH PA0020851 2,714 2,817 2,028 1,268 761

POTOMAC RIVER LITTLESTOWN BORO U PA0021229 17,803 19,336 12,365 7,728 4,637

POTOMAC RIVER WASHINGTON TOWN S PA0080225 21,323 22,700 22,700 14,188 8,513

POTOMAC RIVER WAYNESBORO BORO U PA0020621 13,403 13,894 21,176 13,235 7,941

POTOMAC RIVER ALEXANDRIA VA0025160 2,721,661 924,460 924,460 577,788 346,673

POTOMAC RIVER AQUIA VA0060968 47,259 128,888 128,888 80,555 48,333

POTOMAC RIVER ARLINGTON VA0025143 920,587 859,822 859,822 537,389 322,433

POTOMAC RIVER BROAD RUN WRF _ R 58,475 58,475 36,547 21,928

POTOMAC RIVER CHICKEN GEORGES VA0077402 513,909 36,910 36,910 36,910 11,073

POTOMAC RIVER COLONIAL BEACH VA0026409 32,298 20,617 20,617 12,886 7,731

POTOMAC RIVER DAHLGREN (DAHLGR E VA0026514 5,596 6,317 7,410 4,631 2,779

POTOMAC RIVER DALE CITY #1 VA0024724 72,361 74,585 74,585 46,616 27,969

POTOMAC RIVER DALE CITY #8 VA0024678 86,966 69,368 69,368 43,355 26,013

POTOMAC RIVER DUPONT-WAYNESBO R VA0002160 29,128 29,048 29,048 29,048 27,125

POTOMAC RIVER FAIRVIEW BEACH MD0056464 1,901 2,146 2,146 2,146 954

POTOMAC RIVER FISHERSVILLE VA0025291 38,546 82,406 41,663 26,040 15,624

POTOMAC RIVER FRONT ROYAL VA0062812 81,507 94,353 67,316 42,072 25,243

POTOMAC RIVER FWSA OPEQUON VA0065552 137,829 143,520 143,520 89,700 53,820

POTOMAC RIVER H.L. MOONEY VA0025101 634,056 356,452 356,452 222,783 133,670

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-g TN_DISCH 

### 81

CBPO, 11/22/2002

### TABLE IX-G: Discharged Nitrogen Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

POTOMAC RIVER HARRISONBURG-ROC VA0060640 418,813 283,846 283,846 177,404 106,442

POTOMAC RIVER LEESBURG MD0066184 140,776 72,079 72,079 45,049 27,030

POTOMAC RIVER LURAY VA0062642 6,456 6,867 36,625 22,890 13,734

POTOMAC RIVER MASSANUTTEN PUBLI VA0024732 20,687 21,603 9,242 5,776 3,466

POTOMAC RIVER MERCK & COMPANY I N VA0002178 96,556 96,293 96,293 96,293 92,159

POTOMAC RIVER MIDDLE RIVER VA0064793 101,906 137,659 137,659 86,037 51,622

POTOMAC RIVER MONTROSS - WESTM O VA0072729 618 756 473 284

POTOMAC RIVER NAVAL SURFACE WA R VA0021067 6,449 10,572 10,572 6,608 3,965

POTOMAC RIVER NEW MARKET STP VA0022853 29,402 31,880 13,639 8,524 5,114

POTOMAC RIVER NOMAN M. COLE JR. P VA0025364 2,822,421 1,291,317 1,291,317 807,073 484,244

POTOMAC RIVER PARKINS MILL VA0075191 69,823 80,929 34,622 21,639 12,983

POTOMAC RIVER PILGRIMS PRIDE-HIN T VA0002313 88,471 88,229 44,115 17,646 4,932

POTOMAC RIVER PURCELLVILLE VA0022802 20,125 10,320 10,320 6,450 3,870

POTOMAC RIVER QUANTICO-MAINSIDE VA0028363 43,513 33,738 33,738 21,086 12,652

POTOMAC RIVER ROUND HILL WWTP VA0026212 7,153 8,573 3,668 2,292 1,375

POTOMAC RIVER SIL MRRS VA0090263 30,822 30,822 19,264 11,558

POTOMAC RIVER STONY CREEK STP VA0028380 13,896 15,067 6,446 4,029 2,417

POTOMAC RIVER STRASBURG VA0020311 40,582 44,002 18,825 11,765 7,059

POTOMAC RIVER STUARTS DRAFT VA0066877 45,608 36,547 36,547 22,842 13,705

POTOMAC RIVER UPPER OCCOQUAN S E VA0024988 1,425,687 1,981,956 828,392 517,745 310,647

POTOMAC RIVER WAYNESBORO VA0025151 161,369 168,996 68,586 42,866 25,720

POTOMAC RIVER WEYERS CAVE STP VA0022349 6,610 22,781 9,746 6,091 3,655

POTOMAC RIVER WIDEWATER WWTP VA0090387 2,436 2,436 1,523 914

POTOMAC RIVER WOODSTOCK VA0026468 21,975 23,827 10,194 6,371 3,823

POTOMAC RIVER BERKELEY COUNTY P WV0020061 8,186 9,619 14,657 9,161 5,496

POTOMAC RIVER BERKELEY COUNTY P WV0082759 12,385 14,554 22,580 14,112 8,467

POTOMAC RIVER CHARLESTOWN WV0022349 22,125 24,432 18,207 11,379 6,828

POTOMAC RIVER FORT ASHBY PSD WV0041521

POTOMAC RIVER FRANKLIN WV0024970

POTOMAC RIVER HARPERS FERRY-BO L WV0039136 10,485 10,456 10,456 10,456 4,647

POTOMAC RIVER HESTER INDUSTRIES, WV0047236 20,211 0 0 0 0

POTOMAC RIVER HONEYWOOD HOMES WV0080918

POTOMAC RIVER KEYSER WV0024392 62,273 62,504 29,399 18,375 11,025

POTOMAC RIVER MARTINSBURG WV0023167 56,376 66,246 57,170 35,731 21,439

POTOMAC RIVER MOOREFIELD WV0020150 17,320 0 0 0 0

POTOMAC RIVER MOUNTAIN TOP PSD WV0101524 1,513 1,509 1,509 1,509 641

POTOMAC RIVER PETERSBURG WV0021792 13,805 13,767 17,928 11,205 6,723

POTOMAC RIVER REPUBLIC PAPERBO A WV0005517

POTOMAC RIVER RIVER BEND PARK WV0105384 1,551 1,629 1,629 1,629 542

POTOMAC RIVER ROMNEY WV0020699 22,087 23,921 11,126 6,954 4,172

POTOMAC RIVER SHEPHERDSTOWN WV0024775

POTOMAC RIVER SPECRATECH INTER N WV0005533 28,619 28,541 13,055 5,222 2,887

POTOMAC RIVER VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & WV0005525

POTOMAC RIVER WAMPLER-LONGACR E WV0005495 248,846 0 0 0 0

POTOMAC RIVER Total 23,815,593 18,694,524 17,106,000 11,234,067 6,671,469

RAPPAHANNOCK RI V CULPEPER VA0061590 57,077 55,312 55,312 34,570 20,742

RAPPAHANNOCK RI V FMC VA0068110 60,984 80,180 80,180 50,113 30,068

RAPPAHANNOCK RI V FORT A.P. HILL (WILC O VA0032034 7,291 2,842 2,842 1,776 1,066

RAPPAHANNOCK RI V FREDERICKSBURG VA0025127 57,378 54,323 54,323 33,952 20,371

RAPPAHANNOCK RI V HAYMOUNT STP VA0089125 23,146 23,146 14,466 8,680

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-g TN_DISCH 

### 82

CBPO, 11/22/2002

### TABLE IX-G: Discharged Nitrogen Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

RAPPAHANNOCK RI V KILMARNOCK VA0020788 3,311 3,499 6,077 3,798 2,279

RAPPAHANNOCK RI V LITTLE FALLS RUN VA0076392 45,300 101,356 101,356 63,348 38,009

RAPPAHANNOCK RI V MASSAPONAX VA0025658 205,268 106,781 106,781 66,738 40,043

RAPPAHANNOCK RI V ORANGE VA0021385 35,684 16,847 16,847 10,530 6,318

RAPPAHANNOCK RI V REEDVILLE VA0060712 2,050 2,177 931 582 349

RAPPAHANNOCK RI V REMINGTON REGION A VA0076805 10,725 13,966 13,966 8,729 5,237

RAPPAHANNOCK RI V SOUTH WALES STP VA0080527 20,856 20,856 13,035 7,821

RAPPAHANNOCK RI V TAPPAHANNOCK VA0071471 21,122 21,292 9,109 5,693 3,416

RAPPAHANNOCK RI V URBANNA VA0026263 3,191 6,436 2,753 1,721 1,032

RAPPAHANNOCK RI V WARRENTON VA0021172 44,185 51,092 28,752 17,970 10,782

RAPPAHANNOCK RI V WARSAW VA0026891 11,951 12,364 5,289 3,306 1,984

RAPPAHANNOCK RI V WILDERNESS SHORE S VA0083411 28,195 31,116 13,312 8,320 4,992

RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER Total 593,711 603,585 541,832 338,645 203,187

VA EASTERN SHORE CAPE CHARLES VA0021288 8,696 8,672 3,710 2,319 1,391

VA EASTERN SHORE ONANCOCK VA0021253 13,295 13,329 5,702 3,564 2,138

VA EASTERN SHORE TANGIER ISLAND VA0067423 2,628 2,635 1,127 705 423

VA EASTERN SHORE TYSON FOODS, INC.- T VA0004049 255,318 191,421 181,706 72,683 9,571

VA EASTERN SHORE Total 279,936 216,057 192,246 79,270 13,523

YORK RIVER AMOCO-YORKTOWN VA0003018 166,665 166,210 166,210 166,210 166,210

YORK RIVER ASHLAND VA0024899 65,842 37,765 37,765 23,603 14,162

YORK RIVER CAROLINE COUNTY R E VA0073504 10,584 11,172 4,780 2,987 1,792

YORK RIVER DOSWELL VA0029521 100,438 164,460 164,460 102,788 61,673

YORK RIVER GORDONSVILLE VA0021105 29,210 32,236 13,791 8,619 5,172

YORK RIVER HRSD-YORK VA0081311 522,303 309,429 309,429 193,393 116,036

YORK RIVER MATHEWS COURTHO U VA0028819 1,481 2,535 1,949 1,218 731

YORK RIVER PARHAM LANDING W W VA0088331 2,352 2,612 2,525 1,578 947

YORK RIVER SMURFIT STONE VA0003115 296,463 295,653 449,448 280,905 168,543

YORK RIVER TOTOPOTOMOY VA0089915 121,822 121,822 76,139 45,683

YORK RIVER WEST POINT VA0075434 35,580 34,171 14,619 9,137 5,482

YORK RIVER Total 1,230,918 1,178,066 1,286,798 866,577 586,430

JAMES RIVER ALLEGHANY CO. LOW E VA0090671 42,714 18,273 11,421 6,853

JAMES RIVER BROWN & WILLIAMSO N VA0002780 20,829 20,772 20,098 12,561 7,537

JAMES RIVER BUENA VISTA VA0020991 82,744 82,518 35,302 22,064 13,238

JAMES RIVER BWXT VA0003697 111,874 111,568 111,568 111,568 4,375

JAMES RIVER CLIFTON FORGE VA0022772 70,477 70,284 30,068 18,793 11,276

JAMES RIVER COVINGTON VA0025542 101,465 101,188 43,289 27,056 16,233

JAMES RIVER CREWE STP VA0020303 6,832 6,922 4,797 2,998 1,799

JAMES RIVER DUPONT-SPRUANCE VA0004669 201,414 200,864 200,864 200,864 200,864

JAMES RIVER FALLING CREEK VA0024996 202,791 200,744 200,744 125,465 75,279

JAMES RIVER FARMVILLE VA0083135 2,223 2,262 23,698 14,812 8,887

JAMES RIVER GEORGIA PACIFIC CO VA0003026 286,132 285,350 53,338 53,338 53,338

JAMES RIVER HENRICO COUNTY VA0063690 1,517,151 1,218,224 1,218,224 761,390 456,834

JAMES RIVER HONEYWELL VA0005291 800,548 798,361 798,361 798,361 798,361

JAMES RIVER HOPEWELL VA0066630 1,052,385 2,246,161 855,681 534,800 320,880

JAMES RIVER HRSD-ARMY BASE VA0081230 918,983 1,254,443 425,160 265,725 159,435

JAMES RIVER HRSD-BOAT HARBOR VA0081256 1,018,381 1,634,998 561,601 351,001 210,600

JAMES RIVER HRSD-CHESAPEAKE/ E VA0081264 1,415,416 1,948,185 640,786 400,491 240,295

JAMES RIVER HRSD-JAMES RIVER VA0081272 895,610 1,234,762 487,290 304,556 182,734

JAMES RIVER HRSD-NANSEMOND* VA0081299 904,767 490,944 490,944 306,840 184,104

JAMES RIVER HRSD-VIP* VA0081281 884,709 874,685 874,685 546,678 328,007

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-g TN_DISCH 

### 83

CBPO, 11/22/2002

### TABLE IX-G: Discharged Nitrogen Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

JAMES RIVER HRSD-WILLIAMSBUR G VA0081302 382,014 394,768 387,395 242,122 145,273

JAMES RIVER LAKE MONTICELLO S T VA0024945 28,940 32,250 13,797 8,623 5,174

JAMES RIVER LEES COMMERCIAL C A VA0004677 81,059 80,837 27,557 16,167 7,329

JAMES RIVER LEXINGTON-ROCKBRI VA0088161 47,964 49,380 21,125 13,203 7,922

JAMES RIVER LYNCHBURG VA0024970 343,072 450,438 423,942 264,964 158,978

JAMES RIVER MOORES CREEK-RIV A VA0025518 425,208 487,381 289,645 181,028 108,617

JAMES RIVER PHILLIP MORRIS-PAR K VA0026557 198,657 198,114 101,178 40,471 17,515

JAMES RIVER PROCTORS CREEK VA0060194 272,092 430,068 430,068 268,792 161,275

JAMES RIVER RICHMOND VA0063177 1,732,937 1,169,249 1,169,249 730,780 438,468

JAMES RIVER SOUTH CENTRAL VA0025437 276,307 315,033 315,033 196,895 118,137

JAMES RIVER TYSON FOODS, INC. VA0004031 21,382 17,353 17,353 17,353 8,676

JAMES RIVER WESTVACO CORPOR A VA0003646 726,288 724,304 724,304 452,690 271,614

JAMES RIVER Total 15,030,654 17,175,126 11,015,416 7,303,871 4,729,907

Grand Total 71,063,596 63,043,070 50,103,636 33,509,813 19,970,486

Note:

* The load reductions listed in the Tables in this section reflecting implementation of NRT to TN = 8 mg/l occur in Tier 1 for the HRSD Nansemond

and VIP facilities. However, HRSD requested, after the watershed model runs were conducted, that these load reductions should first appear in

Tier 2. Because the model runs were already completed, these load reduction remain in Tier 1, but costs do not show up until T ier 2. Cumulative

loads remain the same, as additional load reductions do not show up in Tier 2.

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-g TN_DISCH 

### 84

CBPO, 11/22/2002

### TABLE IX-H: Discharged Phosphorus Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

SUSQUEHANNA R I CAMP SHADOWBROOK MD0053139 4 5 5 53

SUSQUEHANNA R I NORTH HARFORD JR&SR MD0023281 101 110 110 110 73

SUSQUEHANNA R I PERRYVILLE MD0020613 777 858 2,856 1,428 286

SUSQUEHANNA R I ADDISON (V) NY0020320 2,115 2,148 716 358 72

SUSQUEHANNA R I BATH (V) NY0021431 6,831 6,937 2,312 1,156 231

SUSQUEHANNA R I BINGHAMTON-JOHNSON C NY0024414 121,100 120,769 59,492 29,746 5,949

SUSQUEHANNA R I COOPERSTOWN NY0023591 5,847 5,915 1,972 986 197

SUSQUEHANNA R I CORNING (C) NY0025721 11,673 11,855 3,952 1,976 395

SUSQUEHANNA R I CORTLAND (C) NY0027561 32,683 33,839 25,954 12,977 2,595

SUSQUEHANNA R I ELMIRA / CHEMUNG CO. S NY0035742 65,358 65,684 21,895 10,947 2,189

SUSQUEHANNA R I ENDICOTT (V) NY0027669 69,406 69,216 23,072 11,536 2,307

SUSQUEHANNA R I HAMILTON (V) NY0020672 3,938 4,106 1,367 684 137

SUSQUEHANNA R I HORNELL (C) NY0023647 27,080 27,502 9,167 4,584 917

SUSQUEHANNA R I LAKE STREET/CHEMUNG C NY0036986 64,698 65,021 21,674 10,837 2,167

SUSQUEHANNA R I NORWICH NY0021423 23,545 24,477 8,159 4,080 816

SUSQUEHANNA R I ONEONTA (C) NY0031151 27,157 27,476 9,159 4,579 916

SUSQUEHANNA R I OWEGO #2 NY0025798 7,868 7,878 3,170 1,585 317

SUSQUEHANNA R I OWEGO (V) NY0029262 5,690 5,698 1,899 950 190

SUSQUEHANNA R I RICHFIELD SPRINGS (V) NY0031411 80 81 491 491 98

SUSQUEHANNA R I SIDNEY (V) NY0029271 6,081 6,077 2,026 1,013 203

SUSQUEHANNA R I WAVERLY (V) NY0031089 10,909 10,923 3,075 1,537 307

SUSQUEHANNA R I ALTOONA CITY AUTHORI T PA0027014 76,855 78,953 18,350 9,175 1,835

SUSQUEHANNA R I ALTOONA CITY AUTHORI T PA0027022 79,503 81,673 19,038 9,519 1,904

SUSQUEHANNA R I ANNVILLE TOWNSHIP PA0021806 2,102 2,151 1,447 724 145

SUSQUEHANNA R I APPLETON PAPER SPRIN G PA0008265 15,237 15,195 13,156 6,578 1,316

SUSQUEHANNA R I ASHLAND MUNICIPAL AU T PA0023558 7,117 7,097 2,201 1,100 220

SUSQUEHANNA R I BEDFORD BOROUGH MU N PA0022209 3,988 4,139 2,980 1,490 298

SUSQUEHANNA R I BELLEFONTE BOROUGH PA0020486 4,115 4,353 6,318 3,159 632

SUSQUEHANNA R I BERWICK MUNICIPAL AU T PA0023248 19,686 19,714 4,526 2,263 453

SUSQUEHANNA R I BLOOMSBURG MUNICIPA L PA0027171 11,413 11,429 8,105 4,053 811

SUSQUEHANNA R I BLOSSBURG PA0020036 800 830 634 317 63

SUSQUEHANNA R I BROWN TOWNSHIP MUNI C PA0028088 915 950 1,027 513 103

SUSQUEHANNA R I BURNHAM BOROUGH PA0038920 2,616 2,715 1,810 905 181

SUSQUEHANNA R I CARLISLE BOROUGH PA0026077 4,192 4,407 10,495 5,247 1,049

SUSQUEHANNA R I CARLISLE SUBURBAN AU T PA0024384 1,320 1,388 2,144 1,072 214

SUSQUEHANNA R I CHLOE TEXTILES INC. PA0009172 670 668 668 412 82

SUSQUEHANNA R I CLARKS SUMMIT-SOUTH A PA0028576 21,689 21,629 6,932 3,466 693

SUSQUEHANNA R I CLEARFIELD PA0026310 6,231 6,214 7,992 3,996 799

SUSQUEHANNA R I COLUMBIA PA0026123 1,627 1,770 2,514 1,257 251

SUSQUEHANNA R I CONSOLIDATED RAIL CO R PA0009229 106 105 105 105 49

SUSQUEHANNA R I CURWENSVILLE MUNICIP A PA0024759 2,545 2,538 1,363 681 136

SUSQUEHANNA R I DANVILLE MUNICIPAL AU T PA0023531 8,741 8,844 6,551 3,275 655

SUSQUEHANNA R I DERRY TOWNSHIP MUNI C PA0026484 13,996 14,056 10,582 5,291 1,058

SUSQUEHANNA R I DILLSBURG BOROUGH A U PA0024431 1,682 1,766 2,005 1,002 200

SUSQUEHANNA R I DOVER TOWNSHIP SEWE R PA0020826 14,667 15,397 11,282 5,641 1,128

SUSQUEHANNA R I DUNCANSVILLE PA0032883 4,173 4,287 1,856 928 186

SUSQUEHANNA R I EAST PENNSBORO SOUT H PA0038415 24,507 25,759 7,384 3,692 738

SUSQUEHANNA R I EASTERN SNYDER COUN T PA0110582 18,307 19,303 4,883 2,441 488

SUSQUEHANNA R I ELIZABETHTOWN BOROU G PA0023108 5,716 6,218 7,137 3,569 714

SUSQUEHANNA R I ELKLAND MUNICIPAL AUT PA0113298 1,120 1,162 1,324 662 132

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-h TP_DISCH 

### 85

CBPO, 11/6/2002

### TABLE IX-H: Discharged Phosphorus Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

SUSQUEHANNA R I EMPIRE KOSHER POULT R PA0007552 1,427 1,423 1,423 1,423 356

SUSQUEHANNA R I EMPORIUM BOROUGH (M I PA0028631 3,498 3,701 1,466 733 147

SUSQUEHANNA R I EPHRATA BOROUGH WW T PA0027405 11,722 12,753 8,458 4,229 846

SUSQUEHANNA R I FAIRVIEW TOWNSHIP PA0081868 747 784 1,218 609 122

SUSQUEHANNA R I FAIRVIEW TOWNSHIP PA0082589

SUSQUEHANNA R I GOLD MILLS DYEHOUSE PA0008231 317 316 316 316 208

SUSQUEHANNA R I GREATER HAZELTON PA0026921 19,112 19,059 20,348 10,174 2,035

SUSQUEHANNA R I GREGG TOWNSHIP PA0114821 2,544 2,696 2,024 1,012 202

SUSQUEHANNA R I HAMPDEN TOWNSHIP PA0028746 3,979 4,182 3,946 1,973 395

SUSQUEHANNA R I HAMPDEN TOWNSHIP SE W PA0080314 4,073 4,281 6,129 3,065 613

SUSQUEHANNA R I HANOVER BOROUGH PA0026875 10,622 11,536 11,702 5,851 1,170

SUSQUEHANNA R I HARRISBURG SEWERAG E PA0027197 109,743 110,217 79,913 39,956 7,991

SUSQUEHANNA R I HEINZ PET FOODS PA0009270 18,690 18,639 4,391 3,728 158

SUSQUEHANNA R I HIGHSPIRE PA0024040 5,174 5,197 3,192 1,596 319

SUSQUEHANNA R I HOLLIDAYSBURG REGIO N PA0043273 14,963 15,372 9,061 4,531 906

SUSQUEHANNA R I HOUTZDALE BOROUGH M PA0046159 263 263 370 185 37

SUSQUEHANNA R I HUNTINGDON BOROUGH PA0026191 8,335 8,513 6,499 3,249 650

SUSQUEHANNA R I JERSEY SHORE BOROUG H PA0028665 12,798 13,293 2,184 1,092 218

SUSQUEHANNA R I KELLY TOWNSHIP MUNICI PA0028681 4,082 4,326 5,546 2,773 555

SUSQUEHANNA R I LACKAWANNA RIVER BA S PA0027081 1,685 1,681 1,498 749 150

SUSQUEHANNA R I LACKAWANNA RIVER BA S PA0027090 13,738 13,700 15,604 7,802 1,560

SUSQUEHANNA R I LACKAWANNA RIVER BA S PA0027073 905 903 1,040 520 104

SUSQUEHANNA R I LACKAWANNA RIVER BA S PA0027065 12,405 12,371 7,452 3,726 745

SUSQUEHANNA R I LANCASTER AREA SEWE R PA0042269 16,259 17,688 23,706 11,853 2,371

SUSQUEHANNA R I LANCASTER CITY PA0026743 46,904 51,025 63,086 31,543 6,309

SUSQUEHANNA R I LEBANON CITY AUTHORI T PA0027316 22,690 23,216 16,762 8,381 1,676

SUSQUEHANNA R I LEMOYNE BOROUGH MU N PA0026441 7,171 7,202 5,056 2,528 506

SUSQUEHANNA R I LEWISBURG AREA JOINT S PA0044661 4,570 4,842 3,648 1,824 365

SUSQUEHANNA R I LEWISTOWN BOROUGH PA0026280 7,228 7,502 5,771 2,885 577

SUSQUEHANNA R I LITITZ SEWAGE AUTHORI T PA0020320 13,274 14,441 9,212 4,606 921

SUSQUEHANNA R I LOCK HAVEN PA0025933 15,635 16,044 6,641 3,320 664

SUSQUEHANNA R I LOGAN TOWNSHIP-GREE N PA0032557 2,921 3,001 1,115 557 111

SUSQUEHANNA R I LOWER ALLEN TOWNSHI P PA0027189 14,264 14,993 10,366 5,183 1,037

SUSQUEHANNA R I LOWER LACKAWANNA V A PA0026361 16,824 16,778 10,659 5,329 1,066

SUSQUEHANNA R I LYKENS BOROUGH PA0043575 960 964 736 368 74

SUSQUEHANNA R I MAHANOY CITY PA0070041 4,655 4,643 1,741 870 174

SUSQUEHANNA R I MANHEIM BOROUGH AUT H PA0020893 3,009 3,273 2,419 1,210 242

SUSQUEHANNA R I MANSFIELD BOROUGH PA0021814 3,790 3,934 1,754 877 175

SUSQUEHANNA R I MARIETTA-DONEGAL JOI N PA0021717 1,280 1,392 1,374 687 137

SUSQUEHANNA R I MARTINSBURG PA0028347 1,806 1,855 1,245 622 124

SUSQUEHANNA R I MARYSVILLE MUNICIPAL A PA0021571 366 398 3,362 1,681 336

SUSQUEHANNA R I MECHANICSBURG BORO U PA0020885 2,716 2,855 2,524 1,262 252

SUSQUEHANNA R I MERCK & COMPANY PA0008419 57,770 57,612 38,666 19,333 3,867

SUSQUEHANNA R I MIDDLETOWN PA0020664 2,559 2,570 3,610 1,805 361

SUSQUEHANNA R I MIFFLINBURG BOROUGH PA0028461 1,593 1,688 2,136 1,068 214

SUSQUEHANNA R I MILLERSBURG BOROUGH PA0022535 2,778 2,790 2,129 1,065 213

SUSQUEHANNA R I MILLERSVILLE BOROUGH PA0026620 2,516 2,737 2,100 1,050 210

SUSQUEHANNA R I MILTON MUNICIPAL AUTH O PA0020273 2,223 2,217 5,216 2,608 522

SUSQUEHANNA R I MONTGOMERY BOROUG H PA0020699 3,530 3,667 1,574 787 157

SUSQUEHANNA R I MOSHANNON VALLEY JOI PA0037966 1,832 1,938 4,341 2,170 434

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-h TP_DISCH 

### 86

CBPO, 11/6/2002

### TABLE IX-H: Discharged Phosphorus Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

SUSQUEHANNA R I MOUNT JOY PA0021067 662 720 2,275 1,138 228

SUSQUEHANNA R I MOUNT UNION BOROUGH PA0020214 1,320 1,348 1,029 515 103

SUSQUEHANNA R I MOUNTAINTOP AREA PA0045985 30,890 30,806 8,367 4,183 837

SUSQUEHANNA R I MT. CARMEL MUNICIPAL S PA0024406 7,943 7,921 2,880 1,440 288

SUSQUEHANNA R I MT. HOLLY SPRINGS BOR O PA0023183 745 784 1,164 582 116

SUSQUEHANNA R I MUNCY BOROUGH MUNI C PA0024325 2,919 3,032 1,950 975 195

SUSQUEHANNA R I NATIONAL GYPSUM COM P PA0008591 1,212 1,208 944 472 94

SUSQUEHANNA R I NEW CUMBERLAND BOR O PA0026654 724 727 1,501 751 150

SUSQUEHANNA R I NEW FREEDOM WTP PA0043257 5,266 5,529 3,501 1,750 350

SUSQUEHANNA R I NEW HOLLAND BOROUG H PA0021890 5,245 5,706 3,359 1,680 336

SUSQUEHANNA R I NEW OXFORD MUNICIPA L PA0020923 1,162 1,263 3,777 1,889 378

SUSQUEHANNA R I NEWBERRY TOWNSHIP PA0083011 1,867 1,875 1,260 630 126

SUSQUEHANNA R I NORTHEASTERN YORK C O PA0023744 2,331 2,447 1,968 984 197

SUSQUEHANNA R I NORTHUMBERLAND BOR O PA0020567 867 864 1,372 686 137

SUSQUEHANNA R I OSRAM SYLVANIA PROD U PA0009024 2,311 2,304 2,304 1,652 330

SUSQUEHANNA R I P-H GLATFELTER COMPA N PA0008869 2,679 2,672 2,672 2,672 2,672

SUSQUEHANNA R I PALMYRA BOROUGH AUT PA0024287 3,595 3,679 2,483 1,242 248

SUSQUEHANNA R I PENN TOWNSHIP PA0037150 5,263 5,525 5,067 2,534 507

SUSQUEHANNA R I PENNSYLVANIA FISH & B O PA0040835 1,954 1,949 1,949 1,949 1,949

SUSQUEHANNA R I PENNSYLVANIA FISH & B O PA0010553 2,748 2,741 2,741 2,741 1,827

SUSQUEHANNA R I PENNSYLVANIA FISH & B O PA0010561 1,935 1,930 1,930 1,930 1,484

SUSQUEHANNA R I PENNSYLVANIA FISH & B O PA0112127 1,191 1,188 1,188 1,188 1,188

SUSQUEHANNA R I PENNSYLVANIA FISH & B O PA0044032 61 61 61 61 61

SUSQUEHANNA R I PINE CREEK MUNICIPAL A PA0027553 2,950 3,027 1,953 977 195

SUSQUEHANNA R I PINE GROVE BOROUGH A PA0020915 3,723 3,713 1,371 686 137

SUSQUEHANNA R I POPE & TALBOT WIS INC. PA0007919 5,148 5,133 5,033 2,516 503

SUSQUEHANNA R I PORTER TOWER JOINT M U PA0046272 2,233 2,227 1,713 857 171

SUSQUEHANNA R I PROCTOR & GAMBLE PA P PA0008885 36,395 36,295 14,875 7,438 1,488

SUSQUEHANNA R I ROARING SPRING BORO U PA0020249 3,110 3,195 2,075 1,037 207

SUSQUEHANNA R I SAYRE PA0043681 698 696 1,994 997 199

SUSQUEHANNA R I SCRANTON SEWER AUTH PA0026492 71,631 71,435 40,057 20,029 4,006

SUSQUEHANNA R I SHAMOKIN-COAL TOWNS H PA0027324 19,986 19,931 10,832 5,416 1,083

SUSQUEHANNA R I SHENANDOAH MUNICIPA L PA0070386 1,453 1,449 3,622 1,811 362

SUSQUEHANNA R I SHIPPENSBURG BOROU G PA0030643 3,330 3,452 3,477 3,477 695

SUSQUEHANNA R I SILVER SPRING TOWNSH I PA0083593 212 222 478 239 48

SUSQUEHANNA R I SOUTH MIDDLETON TOW N PA0044113 556 584 1,376 688 138

SUSQUEHANNA R I SPRINGETTSBURY TOWN S PA0026808 43,170 45,319 34,383 17,192 3,438

SUSQUEHANNA R I ST. JOHNS PA0046388 1,046 1,043 975 487 97

SUSQUEHANNA R I STEWARTSTOWN BOROU PA0036269 1,168 1,226 828 414 83

SUSQUEHANNA R I SUNBURY CITY MUNICIP A PA0026557 22,163 22,103 9,181 4,590 918

SUSQUEHANNA R I SWATARA TOWNSHIP PA0026735 16,644 16,716 10,164 5,082 1,016

SUSQUEHANNA R I TOWANDA MUNICIPAL AU T PA0034576 4,340 4,329 2,082 1,041 208

SUSQUEHANNA R I TRI-BORO MUNICIPAL AU T PA0023736 825 856 865 432 86

SUSQUEHANNA R I TWIN BOROUGHS SANIT A PA0023264 1,320 1,377 1,051 526 105

SUSQUEHANNA R I TYRONE BOROUGH SEW E PA0026727 7,460 7,664 19,488 9,744 1,949

SUSQUEHANNA R I TYSON FOODS PA0035092 3,359 3,350 3,350 3,350 168

SUSQUEHANNA R I UNIVERSITY AREA JOINT A PA0026239 836 884 2,007 2,007 1,544

SUSQUEHANNA R I UPPER ALLEN TOWNSHIP PA0024902 2,417 2,541 1,688 844 169

SUSQUEHANNA R I USFW-LAMAR NATIONAL F PA0009857 403 402 402 402 402

SUSQUEHANNA R I WELLSBORO MUNICIPAL A PA0021687 6,261 6,498 3,598 1,799 360

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-h TP_DISCH 

### 87

CBPO, 11/6/2002

### TABLE IX-H: Discharged Phosphorus Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

SUSQUEHANNA R I WESTERN CLINTON COU N PA0043893 943 967 1,075 537 107

SUSQUEHANNA R I WHITE DEER TOWNSHIP PA0020800 1,907 2,021 831 415 83

SUSQUEHANNA R I WILLIAMSPORT SANITAR Y PA0027057 72,931 75,750 22,279 11,140 2,228

SUSQUEHANNA R I WILLIAMSPORT SANITAR Y PA0027049 32,058 33,298 8,121 4,061 812

SUSQUEHANNA R I WYOMING VALLEY PA0026107 99,086 98,815 72,658 36,329 7,266

SUSQUEHANNA R I YORK CITY PA0026263 8,974 9,421 36,328 18,164 3,633

SUSQUEHANNA RIVER Total 1,934,145 1,969,969 1,168,012 597,230 127,191

MD EASTERN SH O BRIDGEVILLE DE0020249 3,272 3,647 675 338 68

MD EASTERN SH O DUPONT-SEAFORD DE0000035 13,864 13,826 13,826 13,826 11,522

MD EASTERN SH O LAUREL DE0020125 2,772 3,090 966 483 97

MD EASTERN SH O SEAFORD DE0020265 3,931 4,382 3,886 1,943 389

MD EASTERN SH O ALLEN FAMILY FOODS MD0067857 36 36 36 36 10

MD EASTERN SH O BENJAMINS TRAILER PAR MD0024961 157 174 174 174 116

MD EASTERN SH O BETTERTON MD0020575 189 194 194 194 129

MD EASTERN SH O BOHEMIA MANOR HIGH MD0023469 55 61 61 61 41

MD EASTERN SH O BUDGET MOTEL MD0023027 17 19 19 19 13

MD EASTERN SH O CAMBRIDGE MD0021636 41,284 42,372 15,562 7,781 1,556

MD EASTERN SH O CECILTON MD0020443 343 379 379 379 253

MD EASTERN SH O CENTREVILLE MD0020834 2,628 2,998 1,073 537 107

MD EASTERN SH O CHERRY HILL MD0052825 1,098 1,212 1,212 1,212 808

MD EASTERN SH O CHESAPEAKE CITY NORT H MD0020401 955 1,055 1,055 1,055 581

MD EASTERN SH O CHESAPEAKE CITY SOUT H MD0020397 406 449 449 449 449

MD EASTERN SH O CHESAPEAKE COLLEGE MD0024384 125 143 143 143 95

MD EASTERN SH O CHESTERTOWN MD0020010 8,437 8,635 1,990 995 199

MD EASTERN SH O CHURCH HILL MD0050016 380 434 434 434 434

MD EASTERN SH O COLONEL RICHARDSON M MD0055522 54 58 58 58 39

MD EASTERN SH O CRISFIELD MD0020001 3,966 4,181 2,068 1,034 207

MD EASTERN SH O DELMAR MD0020532 558 613 1,759 879 176

MD EASTERN SH O DENTON MD0020494 1,596 1,711 1,244 622 124

MD EASTERN SH O DONALDSON BROWN CE N MD0054950 18 20 20 20 13

MD EASTERN SH O EASTERN CORRECTIONA L MD0023876 127 144 144 144 96

MD EASTERN SH O EASTERN CORRECTIONA L MD0066613 162 171 171 171 171

MD EASTERN SH O EASTON MD0020273 14,411 15,232 5,872 2,936 587

MD EASTERN SH O ELK NECK STATE PARK MD0023833 193 213 213 213 169

MD EASTERN SH O ELKTON MD0020681 5,185 5,727 5,266 2,633 527

MD EASTERN SH O ENGLISH GRILL MD0053104 4 4 4 42

MD EASTERN SH O EWELL MD0052230 194 204 204 204 136

MD EASTERN SH O FAIRMOUNT MD0052256 268 282 282 282 188

MD EASTERN SH O FEDERALSBURG MD0020249 913 979 1,003 501 100

MD EASTERN SH O FOREST GREEN MD0053279 410 453 453 453 61

MD EASTERN SH O FRUITLAND MD0052990 4,302 4,730 1,577 788 158

MD EASTERN SH O GALENA MD0020605 358 366 366 366 162

MD EASTERN SH O GREAT OAKS LANDING MD0024945 51 53 53 53 35

MD EASTERN SH O GREENSBORO MD0020290 1,678 1,799 1,799 1,799 1,034

MD EASTERN SH O HARBOUR VIEW MD0024023 64 71 71 71 47

MD EASTERN SH O HEBRON MD0059617 1,092 1,201 1,201 1,201 800

MD EASTERN SH O HURLOCK MD0022730 22,576 23,171 3,233 1,616 323

MD EASTERN SH O KENNEDYVILLE MD0052671 41 41 41 41 28

MD EASTERN SH O KENT ISLAND MD0023485 3,144 3,588 4,996 2,498 500

MD EASTERN SH O MANCHESTER PARK MD0023108 349 386 386 386 166

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-h TP_DISCH 

### 88

CBPO, 11/6/2002

### TABLE IX-H: Discharged Phosphorus Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

MD EASTERN SH O MAPLE HILL PARK MD0053171 50 55 55 55 37

MD EASTERN SH O MARDELA HIGH MD0024279 20 22 22 22 15

MD EASTERN SH O MILLINGTON MD0020435 519 531 531 531 354

MD EASTERN SH O MORNING CHEER MD0052299 167 184 184 184 123

MD EASTERN SH O NORTH CAROLINE HIGH MD0023621 20 21 21 21 14

MD EASTERN SH O NORTHEAST RIVER MD0052027 1,632 1,802 1,913 957 191

MD EASTERN SH O OXFORD MD0022543 210 222 222 222 222

MD EASTERN SH O PITTSVILLE MD0060348 232 255 255 255 255

MD EASTERN SH O POCOMOKE CITY MD0022551 11,238 12,475 2,929 1,465 293

MD EASTERN SH O POCOMOKE TRUCK STO P MD0054330 19 21 21 21 14

MD EASTERN SH O PORT DEPOSIT MD0020796 1,243 1,373 1,373 1,373 915

MD EASTERN SH O PRESTON MD0020621 511 548 548 548 366

MD EASTERN SH O PRINCESS ANNE MD0020656 268 282 944 944 189

MD EASTERN SH O QUEENSTOWN MD0023370 514 586 586 586 480

MD EASTERN SH O RISING SUN MD0020265 2,112 2,332 2,332 2,332 1,555

MD EASTERN SH O ROCK HALL MD0020303 414 423 423 423 423

MD EASTERN SH O SALISBURY MD0021571 22,735 24,995 17,954 8,977 1,795

MD EASTERN SH O SHARPTOWN MD0052175 2,373 2,609 2,609 2,609 735

MD EASTERN SH O SNOW HILL MD0022764 4,791 5,318 1,416 708 142

MD EASTERN SH O SPRING MEADOWS MD0024953 89 97 97 97 65

MD EASTERN SH O SUDLERSVILLE MD0020559 398 454 454 454 303

MD EASTERN SH O TALBOT COUNTY REGION MD0023604 3,385 3,578 3,578 3,578 2,316

MD EASTERN SH O TALBOT COUNTY REGION MD0059463 663 701 701 701 467

MD EASTERN SH O TAWES VOCATIONAL-TE C MD0022993 1,498 1,579 1,579 1,579 1,053

MD EASTERN SH O TOLCHESTER MD0067202 805 823 823 823 549

MD EASTERN SH O TRAPPE MD0020486 1,025 1,083 1,083 1,083 828

MD EASTERN SH O TRIUMPH INDUSTRIAL PA R MD0024929 317 350 350 350 233

MD EASTERN SH O TWIN CITIES MD0055352 1,052 1,080 1,080 1,080 720

MD EASTERN SH O TYLERTON MD0052248 44 47 47 47 31

MD EASTERN SH O U.S. ARMY-CHESAPEAKE MD0020206 2 3 3 32

MD EASTERN SH O VIENNA MD0020664 500 514 514 514 342

MD EASTERN SH O WALKERS TRAILER PARK MD0057487 121 129 129 129 86

MD EASTERN SH O WILLARDS MD0051632 681 749 749 749 499

MD EASTERN SH O WOODLAWN MOBILE HO M MD0023337

MD EASTERN SH O WORTON-BUTLERTON MD0060585 562 575 575 575 383

MD EASTERN SHORE Total 201,875 214,324 120,721 83,030 38,713

MD WESTERN SH O ABERDEEN MD0021563 584 634 3,414 2,626 525

MD WESTERN SH O ABERDEEN PROVING GR O MD0021237 1,064 1,154 2,785 1,392 278

MD WESTERN SH O ABERDEEN PROVING GR O MD0021229 1,323 1,436 2,925 1,462 292

MD WESTERN SH O ANNAPOLIS MD0021814 9,606 10,198 22,963 11,481 2,296

MD WESTERN SH O BACK RIVER MD0021555 42,546 43,357 53,436 53,436 26,718

MD WESTERN SH O BALTIMORE YACHT CLUB MD0054542 17 18 18 18 12

MD WESTERN SH O BETHLEHEM STEEL COR P MD0001201 81,163 80,941 80,941 80,941 26,876

MD WESTERN SH O BOWLEYS QUARTERS MD0058807 60 61 61 61 41

MD WESTERN SH O BROADNECK MD0021644 7,258 7,705 15,927 7,963 1,593

MD WESTERN SH O BROADWATER MD0024350 1,963 2,085 3,861 1,931 386

MD WESTERN SH O CHEMETALS MD0001775 11 11 12 12 12

MD WESTERN SH O CHESAPEAKE BAY INSTIT MD0022985

MD WESTERN SH O CHESAPEAKE BEACH MD0020281 1,724 2,179 2,461 1,231 246

MD WESTERN SH O CONGOLEUM MD0001384 161 160 160 160 80

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-h TP_DISCH 

### 89

CBPO, 11/6/2002

### TABLE IX-H: Discharged Phosphorus Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

MD WESTERN SH O COX CREEK MD0021661 45,048 47,825 37,447 18,724 3,745

MD WESTERN SH O DREAMS LANDING MD0052868 72 77 77 77 51

MD WESTERN SH O FREEDOM DISTRICT MD0021512 4,998 5,879 8,692 4,346 869

MD WESTERN SH O GAITHER MANOR MD0022845 232 273 273 273 138

MD WESTERN SH O HAMPSTEAD MD0022446 432 508 508 508 508

MD WESTERN SH O HAVRE DE GRACE MD0021750 3,500 3,799 4,252 2,126 425

MD WESTERN SH O HOLIDAY MOBILE ESTAT E MD0053082 347 369 369 369 369

MD WESTERN SH O JOPPATOWNE MD0022535 1,921 2,085 2,614 1,307 261

MD WESTERN SH O MANCHESTER MD0022578 56 66 66 66 66

MD WESTERN SH O MAYO LARGE COMMUNA L MD0061794 1,281 1,360 1,360 1,360 1,360

MD WESTERN SH O MOUNT AIRY MD0022527 798 939 2,003 1,002 200

MD WESTERN SH O NOTCHCLIFF MD0022951 341 347 347 347 231

MD WESTERN SH O PATAPSCO MD0021601 144,631 173,933 222,326 111,163 22,233

MD WESTERN SH O PHEASANT RIDGE MD0024546 174 205 205 205 152

MD WESTERN SH O RANDLE CLIFFS NAVAL MD0020168 125 158 158 158 105

MD WESTERN SH O RICHLYN MANOR MD0022713 553 564 564 564 537

MD WESTERN SH O RIVERBOAT MOTEL MD0051535

MD WESTERN SH O ROSE HAVEN MD0022756 168 178 178 178 178

MD WESTERN SH O SOD RUN MD0056545 41,334 44,860 38,354 19,177 3,835

MD WESTERN SH O SOUTH CARROLL HIGH S C MD0024589 2 3 3 33

MD WESTERN SH O ST TIMOTHY SCHOOL MD0056103 50 51 51 51 34

MD WESTERN SH O SUMMER HILL TRAILER P A MD0023272 43 45 45 45 45

MD WESTERN SH O SWAN HARBOR PARK MD0023043 103 112 112 112 75

MD WESTERN SH O UNITED CONTAINER MD0024635 68 69 69 69 46

MD WESTERN SH O US GYPSUM CO MD0001457

MD WESTERN SH O US NAVAL ACADEMY MD0023523 63 67 67 67 67

MD WESTERN SH O VILLA JULIE COLLEGE MD0066001 3 3 3 33

MD WESTERN SH O W R GRACE MD0000311 1,814 1,809 1,809 1,809 1,238

MD WESTERN SH O WOODSTOCK TRAINING C MD0023906 78 80 80 80 53

MD WESTERN SHORE Total 395,719 435,606 510,996 326,904 96,185

PATUXENT RIVER BOONES MOBILE MD0050903 239 254 254 254 254

PATUXENT RIVER BOWIE MD0021628 992 1,085 6,354 3,177 635

PATUXENT RIVER DORSEY RUN MD0063207 945 1,003 4,466 2,233 447

PATUXENT RIVER EDGEMEADE RESIDENTI A MD0052680 27 29 29 29 13

PATUXENT RIVER EMERGENCY MANAGEME MD0025666 1 1 1 11

PATUXENT RIVER FORT MEADE MD0021717 1,198 1,272 6,615 3,308 662

PATUXENT RIVER HARWOOD SOUTHERN HI MD0023728 131 139 139 139 36

PATUXENT RIVER LITTLE PATUXENT MD0055174 18,767 22,000 47,126 31,418 6,284

PATUXENT RIVER LYONS CREEK MOBILE MD0053511 394 418 418 418 418

PATUXENT RIVER MARLBORO MEADOWS MD0022781 873 954 954 954 954

PATUXENT RIVER MARYLAND CITY MD0062596 1,479 1,570 3,242 1,621 324

PATUXENT RIVER MARYLAND MANOR MOBI L MD0024333 287 304 304 304 304

PATUXENT RIVER MD & VA MILK PRODUCE R MD0000469 14,068 14,030 1,086 543 109

PATUXENT RIVER NATIONAL WILDLIFE VISI T MD0065358 8 9 9 98

PATUXENT RIVER NORTHERN HIGH SCHOO L MD0052167 114 145 145 145 96

PATUXENT RIVER PARKWAY MD0021725 5,304 5,501 18,882 9,441 1,888

PATUXENT RIVER PARKWAY INN MD0052329 133 141 141 141 141

PATUXENT RIVER PATUXENT MD0021652 4,683 4,972 14,756 7,378 1,476

PATUXENT RIVER PATUXENT MOBILE MD0024694 105 111 111 111 111

PATUXENT RIVER PATUXENT WILDLIFE HQ MD0025623 174 191 191 191 127

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-h TP_DISCH 

### 90

CBPO, 11/6/2002

### TABLE IX-H: Discharged Phosphorus Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

PATUXENT RIVER PINE HILL RUN MD0021679 14,260 16,131 11,854 5,927 1,185

PATUXENT RIVER PINEY ORCHARD MD0059145 294 312 312 312 312

PATUXENT RIVER POINT LOOKOUT STATE P MD0023949 150 170 170 170 113

PATUXENT RIVER USAF BRANDYWINE HOU S MD0025640 14 15 15 15 8

PATUXENT RIVER USAF TRANSMITTER STA T MD0025631

PATUXENT RIVER WAYSONS MOBILE MD0023647 299 317 317 317 278

PATUXENT RIVER WESTERN BRANCH MD0021741 37,990 47,636 70,048 35,024 7,005

PATUXENT RIVER Total 102,930 118,710 187,940 103,579 23,190

POTOMAC RIVER BLUE PLAINS DC0021199 104,298 111,804 187,326 187,326 104,070

POTOMAC RIVER WASHINGTON, D.C. COM B DC-CSO 46,480 46,353 46,353 46,353 0

POTOMAC RIVER ANTIETAM MD0062308 952 999 999 999 666

POTOMAC RIVER BALLENGER CREEK MD0021822 3,590 4,293 12,549 6,274 1,255

POTOMAC RIVER BELTSVILLE USDA EAST MD0020842 1,357 1,484 1,484 1,484 1,436

POTOMAC RIVER BELTSVILLE USDA WEST MD0020851 762 833 833 833 757

POTOMAC RIVER BIERS LANE MD0065749 28 28 28 28 18

POTOMAC RIVER BLOOMINGTON MD0060933 306 322 322 322 166

POTOMAC RIVER BOONSBORO MD0020231 2,821 2,963 2,963 2,963 2,457

POTOMAC RIVER BOWLING BROOK PREPA R MD0067571 46 54 54 54 36

POTOMAC RIVER BRANDYWINE RECEIVING MD0025658 10 11 11 11 7

POTOMAC RIVER BRETTON WOODS MD0064777 81 89 89 89 59

POTOMAC RIVER BROADFORDING MD0051373 10 10 10 10 7

POTOMAC RIVER BROOK LANE MD0053198 49 51 51 51 34

POTOMAC RIVER BRUNSWICK MD0020958 5,822 6,961 2,320 1,160 232

POTOMAC RIVER CELANESE MD0063878 7,763 7,792 3,094 1,547 309

POTOMAC RIVER CHARLES COUNTY COM M MD0052311 268 310 310 310 221

POTOMAC RIVER CHELTENHAM BOYS VILL A MD0023931 105 115 115 115 115

POTOMAC RIVER CHOPTICAN HIGH MD0051918 45 51 51 51 34

POTOMAC RIVER CLEARSPRING MD0053325 690 725 725 725 483

POTOMAC RIVER CLIFFTON ON THE POTO M MD0055557 406 469 469 469 313

POTOMAC RIVER CONCORD TRAILER PAR K MD0023060 35 42 42 42 28

POTOMAC RIVER CONOCOCHEAGUE MD0063509 2,780 4,622 3,633 1,816 363

POTOMAC RIVER CRESTVIEW MD0022683 296 354 354 354 234

POTOMAC RIVER CUMBERLAND MD0021598 50,434 50,621 29,228 14,614 2,923

POTOMAC RIVER DAMASCUS MD0020982 3,005 2,925 2,619 1,310 262

POTOMAC RIVER DAN-DEE INC. MD0023710 18 22 22 22 15

POTOMAC RIVER EMMITSBURG MD0020257 2,912 3,481 1,761 880 176

POTOMAC RIVER FAHRNEY-KEEDY MEMO R MD0053066 165 173 173 173 116

POTOMAC RIVER FLINTSTONE MD0055620 534 536 536 536 358

POTOMAC RIVER FORT DETRICK MD0020877 3,308 3,955 3,375 1,688 338

POTOMAC RIVER FOUNTAINDALE MD0022721 2,460 2,942 2,942 2,942 1,540

POTOMAC RIVER FOXVILLE US NAVAL SUP P MD0025119 222 266 266 266 177

POTOMAC RIVER FREDERICK MD0021610 82,916 99,129 23,637 11,818 2,364

POTOMAC RIVER FUNKSTOWN MD0020362 1,030 1,082 1,082 1,082 391

POTOMAC RIVER GARDEN STATE TANNING MD0053431 64 64 64 13 13

POTOMAC RIVER GEORGES CREEK MD0060071 6,087 6,110 2,037 1,018 204

POTOMAC RIVER GORMAN MD0060950 41 43 43 43 29

POTOMAC RIVER GREEN RIDGE FORESTR Y MD0024988 36 36 36 36 19

POTOMAC RIVER GREENBRIAR STATE PAR K MD0023868 133 139 139 139 93

POTOMAC RIVER HAGERSTOWN MD0021776 56,857 59,720 25,786 12,893 2,579

POTOMAC RIVER HANCOCK MD0024562 1,578 1,657 1,657 1,657 1,364

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-h TP_DISCH 

### 91

CBPO, 11/6/2002

### TABLE IX-H: Discharged Phosphorus Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

POTOMAC RIVER HAPPY TRAILS CAMPGR O MD0065757 31 32 32 32 21

POTOMAC RIVER HIGHLAND VIEW MD0024627 81 86 86 86 57

POTOMAC RIVER HUNTER HILL APARTMEN T MD0022926 253 266 266 266 177

POTOMAC RIVER I-70 REST AREA MD0023680 262 313 313 313 209

POTOMAC RIVER INDIAN HEAD MD0020052 2,352 2,716 1,073 537 107

POTOMAC RIVER JEFFERSON MD0020737 1,341 1,603 1,603 1,603 1,069

POTOMAC RIVER JUDE HOUSE MD0057614

POTOMAC RIVER KEMPTOWN SCHOOL MD0056481 42 50 50 50 33

POTOMAC RIVER KITZMILLER MD0060941 171 180 180 180 107

POTOMAC RIVER KUNZANG ODSAL PALGU L MD0067539 7 8 8 85

POTOMAC RIVER LA PLATA MD0020524 3,460 3,995 753 753 251

POTOMAC RIVER LACKEY HIGH MD0023159 84 97 97 97 65

POTOMAC RIVER LAFAYETTE MOTEL MD0053201 10 11 11 11 8

POTOMAC RIVER LEONARDTOWN MD0024767 3,853 4,359 1,466 733 147

POTOMAC RIVER LEWISTOWN ELEMENTAR MD0022900 23 27 27 27 18

POTOMAC RIVER LIBERTYTOWN MD0060577 221 264 264 264 183

POTOMAC RIVER LUPPINO RESIDENCE MD0063070

POTOMAC RIVER MAPLE RUN MD0024970 28 28 28 28 19

POTOMAC RIVER MARYLAND CORRECTION MD0023957 957 1,005 2,874 1,437 287

POTOMAC RIVER MATTAWOMAN MD0021865 2,890 3,337 4,480 4,480 2,489

POTOMAC RIVER METTIKI COAL D MD0064149

POTOMAC RIVER MIDDLETOWN MD0024406 1,633 1,953 1,953 1,953 1,594

POTOMAC RIVER MILL BOTTOM MD0065439 403 482 482 482 321

POTOMAC RIVER MONROVIA WWTP MD0059609 247 295 295 295 197

POTOMAC RIVER MT CARMEL WOODS MD0053228 44 51 51 51 51

POTOMAC RIVER MT ST MARYS COLLEGE MD0023230 854 1,021 1,021 1,021 323

POTOMAC RIVER MYERSVILLE MD0020699 2,056 2,458 2,458 2,458 1,138

POTOMAC RIVER NAS-PATUXENT MD0020095 274 310 310 310 207

POTOMAC RIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF H MD0020931 470 518 518 518 346

POTOMAC RIVER NEW GERMANY STATE P A MD0023981 12 13 13 13 9

POTOMAC RIVER NEW LIFE FOURSQUARE C MD0057100 15 18 18 18 12

POTOMAC RIVER NEW MARKET MD0020729 1,477 1,766 1,766 1,766 736

POTOMAC RIVER NEW WINDSOR MD0022586 540 635 635 635 320

POTOMAC RIVER NORBECK COUNTRY CLU B MD0024309

POTOMAC RIVER NORTH INDIAN HEAD EST A MD0024601

POTOMAC RIVER NSWC-INDIAN HEAD MD0003158 4,451 4,438 1,479 740 148

POTOMAC RIVER NSWC-INDIAN HEAD MD0020885 1,949 2,251 2,251 2,251 2,114

POTOMAC RIVER OLD SOUTH MOUNTAIN I N MD0055425 19 23 23 23 15

POTOMAC RIVER OLDTOWN MD0024759 68 68 68 68 64

POTOMAC RIVER PETER PAN INN MD0024244 11 14 14 14 14

POTOMAC RIVER PICCOWAXIN MIDDLE MD0023451 21 25 25 25 16

POTOMAC RIVER PINTO MD0022748 2,266 2,274 2,274 2,274 1,642

POTOMAC RIVER PISCATAWAY MD0021539 7,517 9,009 13,869 13,869 7,705

POTOMAC RIVER PLEASANT BRANCH MD0065269 390 466 466 466 311

POTOMAC RIVER PLESANT VALLEY MD0066745 73 85 85 85 57

POTOMAC RIVER POINT OF ROCKS MD0020800 1,272 1,520 1,520 1,520 602

POTOMAC RIVER POOLESVILLE MD0023001 1,587 1,749 2,022 1,011 202

POTOMAC RIVER RAWLINGS HEIGHTS MD0023213 308 309 309 309 309

POTOMAC RIVER ROCKY GAP STATE PARK MD0051667 472 474 474 474 316

POTOMAC RIVER RUNNYMEADE SCHOOL MD0065927 24 29 29 29 19

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-h TP_DISCH 

### 92

CBPO, 11/6/2002

### TABLE IX-H: Discharged Phosphorus Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

POTOMAC RIVER SANDY HOOK MD0064530 56 59 59 59 40

POTOMAC RIVER SENECA CREEK MD0021491 25,684 74,154 28,628 28,628 5,726

POTOMAC RIVER SHAMROCK RESTAURAN T MD0058050 22 26 26 26 17

POTOMAC RIVER SHEPPARD PRATT WEST E MD0067521 27 32 32 32 21

POTOMAC RIVER SIDELING HILL REST ARE A MD0062821 61 64 64 64 43

POTOMAC RIVER SMITHSBURG MD0024317 1,216 1,278 1,278 1,278 1,278

POTOMAC RIVER SOUTHERN CORRECTION MD0023914 414 478 478 478 212

POTOMAC RIVER SPRING MILLS WV1031613

POTOMAC RIVER SPRINGVIEW ESTATES MD0022870 51 61 61 61 41

POTOMAC RIVER ST. JAMES SCHOOL MD0065536 60 63 63 63 42

POTOMAC RIVER SWAN POINT MD0057525 290 335 335 335 223

POTOMAC RIVER TANEYTOWN MD0020672 4,156 4,888 2,773 1,387 277

POTOMAC RIVER THUNDERBIRD APARTME N MD0050334 79 91 91 91 81

POTOMAC RIVER THUNDERBIRD MOTEL MD0053155 37 42 42 42 28

POTOMAC RIVER THURMONT MD0021121 1,787 2,136 3,056 1,528 306

POTOMAC RIVER TRI-TOWN PLAZA MD0024937 81 81 81 81 81

POTOMAC RIVER UNION BRIDGE MD0022454 874 1,028 1,028 1,028 629

POTOMAC RIVER UPPER POTOMAC RIVER C MD0021687 49,000 48,866 48,866 30,773 6,155

POTOMAC RIVER URBANA HIGH SCHOOL MD0066940 26 31 31 31 18

POTOMAC RIVER VICTOR CULLEN CENTER MD0023922 318 380 380 380 253

POTOMAC RIVER WESTMINSTER MD0021831 5,854 6,886 13,105 6,552 1,310

POTOMAC RIVER WESTVACO CORPORATI O MD0001422 598 597 597 597 597

POTOMAC RIVER WHITE HOUSE MOTEL MD0056553 12 14 14 14 10

POTOMAC RIVER WHITE ROCK MD0025089 130 156 156 156 104

POTOMAC RIVER WINEBRENNER WWTP MD0003221 1,136 1,193 672 336 67

POTOMAC RIVER WINTERS APARTMENTS MD0057606 2 2 2 21

POTOMAC RIVER WOODSBORO MD0058661 674 806 806 806 743

POTOMAC RIVER ANTRIM TOWNSHIP PA0080519 3,126 3,240 1,510 755 151

POTOMAC RIVER CHAMBERSBURG BOROU PA0026051 37,236 38,599 14,544 7,272 1,454

POTOMAC RIVER FRANKLIN COUNTY AUTH O PA0020834 2,113 2,191 3,294 1,647 329

POTOMAC RIVER GETTYSBURG MUNICIPA L PA0021563 2,327 2,528 4,927 2,463 493

POTOMAC RIVER HYNDMAN BOROUGH PA0020851 269 279 254 127 25

POTOMAC RIVER LITTLESTOWN BOROUGH PA0021229 2,448 2,659 1,546 773 155

POTOMAC RIVER WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP PA0080225 7,021 7,278 2,838 1,419 284

POTOMAC RIVER WAYNESBORO BOROUG H PA0020621 12,274 12,723 2,647 1,323 265

POTOMAC RIVER ALEXANDRIA VA0025160 6,005 6,170 20,800 20,800 11,556

POTOMAC RIVER AQUIA VA0060968 1,015 1,610 2,900 2,900 1,611

POTOMAC RIVER ARLINGTON VA0025143 5,360 6,868 19,346 19,346 10,748

POTOMAC RIVER BROAD RUN WRF VA_BROADR 731 7,309 3,655 731

POTOMAC RIVER CHICKEN GEORGES VA0077402 123,344 123,007 7,382 7,382 369

POTOMAC RIVER COLONIAL BEACH VA0026409 6,639 7,022 2,577 1,289 258

POTOMAC RIVER DAHLGREN (DAHLGREN S VA0026514 439 496 926 463 93

POTOMAC RIVER DALE CITY #1 VA0024724 743 886 1,678 1,678 932

POTOMAC RIVER DALE CITY #8 VA0024678 714 851 1,561 1,561 867

POTOMAC RIVER DUPONT-WAYNESBORO VA0002160 1,252 1,249 1,249 1,249 904

POTOMAC RIVER FAIRVIEW BEACH MD0056464 317 358 358 358 238

POTOMAC RIVER FISHERSVILLE VA0025291 6,510 13,917 5,208 2,604 521

POTOMAC RIVER FRONT ROYAL VA0062812 8,055 9,324 8,414 4,207 841

POTOMAC RIVER FWSA OPEQUON VA0065552 17,672 20,483 17,940 8,970 1,794

POTOMAC RIVER H.L. MOONEY VA0025101 2,953 4,473 8,020 8,020 4,456

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-h TP_DISCH 

### 93

CBPO, 11/6/2002

### TABLE IX-H: Discharged Phosphorus Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

POTOMAC RIVER HARRISONBURG-ROCKIN G VA0060640 57,587 78,058 35,481 17,740 3,548

POTOMAC RIVER LEESBURG MD0066184 11,624 12,812 9,010 4,505 901

POTOMAC RIVER LURAY VA0062642 1,765 1,877 4,578 2,289 458

POTOMAC RIVER MASSANUTTEN PUBLIC S E VA0024732 2,766 2,888 1,155 578 116

POTOMAC RIVER MERCK & COMPANY INC.- S VA0002178 80,398 80,179 30,720 15,360 3,072

POTOMAC RIVER MIDDLE RIVER VA0064793 22,566 35,349 17,207 8,604 1,721

POTOMAC RIVER MONTROSS - WESTMORE VA0072729 111 95 47 9

POTOMAC RIVER NAVAL SURFACE WARFA R VA0021067 3,387 3,823 1,322 661 132

POTOMAC RIVER NEW MARKET STP VA0022853 3,931 4,262 1,705 852 170

POTOMAC RIVER NOMAN M. COLE JR. POL L VA0025364 13,923 17,159 29,055 29,055 16,141

POTOMAC RIVER PARKINS MILL VA0075191 9,335 10,819 4,328 2,164 433

POTOMAC RIVER PILGRIMS PRIDE-HINTON VA0002313 54,403 54,255 3,288 3,288 164

POTOMAC RIVER PURCELLVILLE VA0022802 2,691 3,225 1,290 645 129

POTOMAC RIVER QUANTICO-MAINSIDE VA0028363 342 407 759 759 422

POTOMAC RIVER ROUND HILL WWTP VA0026212 1,148 1,375 458 229 46

POTOMAC RIVER SIL MRRS VA0090263 5,779 3,853 1,926 385

POTOMAC RIVER STONY CREEK STP VA0028380 1,858 2,014 806 403 81

POTOMAC RIVER STRASBURG VA0020311 5,425 5,883 2,353 1,177 235

POTOMAC RIVER STUARTS DRAFT VA0066877 4,920 6,853 4,568 2,284 457

POTOMAC RIVER UPPER OCCOQUAN SEW A VA0024988 3,173 4,411 10,355 10,355 10,355

POTOMAC RIVER WAYNESBORO VA0025151 35,879 37,575 8,573 4,287 857

POTOMAC RIVER WEYERS CAVE STP VA0022349 884 3,046 1,218 609 122

POTOMAC RIVER WIDEWATER WWTP VA0090387 609 305 152 30

POTOMAC RIVER WOODSTOCK VA0026468 2,938 3,185 1,274 637 127

POTOMAC RIVER BERKELEY COUNTY PSS D WV0020061 4,677 5,496 1,832 916 183

POTOMAC RIVER BERKELEY COUNTY PSS D WV0082759 7,206 8,467 2,822 1,411 282

POTOMAC RIVER CHARLESTOWN WV0022349 6,183 6,828 2,276 1,138 228

POTOMAC RIVER FORT ASHBY PSD WV0041521

POTOMAC RIVER FRANKLIN WV0024970

POTOMAC RIVER HARPERS FERRY-BOLIVA R WV0039136 1,747 1,743 1,743 1,743 1,162

POTOMAC RIVER HESTER INDUSTRIES, IN C WV0047236 1,513 0 0 0 0

POTOMAC RIVER HONEYWOOD HOMES WV0080918

POTOMAC RIVER KEYSER WV0024392 3,826 3,840 3,675 1,837 367

POTOMAC RIVER MARTINSBURG WV0023167 18,245 21,439 7,146 3,573 715

POTOMAC RIVER MOOREFIELD WV0020150 2,887 0 0 0 0

POTOMAC RIVER MOUNTAIN TOP PSD WV0101524 241 240 240 240 160

POTOMAC RIVER PETERSBURG WV0021792 6,742 6,723 2,241 1,121 224

POTOMAC RIVER REPUBLIC PAPERBOARD WV0005517

POTOMAC RIVER RIVER BEND PARK WV0105384 194 203 203 203 136

POTOMAC RIVER ROMNEY WV0020699 3,852 4,172 1,391 695 139

POTOMAC RIVER SHEPHERDSTOWN WV0024775

POTOMAC RIVER SPECRATECH INTERNATI O WV0005533 2,895 2,887 962 481 96

POTOMAC RIVER VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & PO W WV0005525

POTOMAC RIVER WAMPLER-LONGACRE, IN WV0005495 46,052 0 0 0 0

POTOMAC RIVER Total 1,202,995 1,322,949 845,869 645,156 251,482

RAPPAHANNOCK R CULPEPER VA0061590 9,348 10,371 6,914 3,457 691

RAPPAHANNOCK R FMC VA0068110 2,835 15,034 10,023 5,011 1,002

RAPPAHANNOCK R FORT A.P. HILL (WILCOX C VA0032034 1,365 1,441 355 178 36

RAPPAHANNOCK R FREDERICKSBURG VA0025127 7,927 8,934 6,790 3,395 679

RAPPAHANNOCK R HAYMOUNT STP VA0089125 4,340 2,893 1,447 289

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-h TP_DISCH 

### 94

CBPO, 11/6/2002

### TABLE IX-H: Discharged Phosphorus Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

RAPPAHANNOCK R KILMARNOCK VA0020788 1,839 1,944 760 380 76

RAPPAHANNOCK R LITTLE FALLS RUN VA0076392 7,050 11,172 12,670 6,335 1,267

RAPPAHANNOCK R MASSAPONAX VA0025658 5,075 20,021 13,348 6,674 1,335

RAPPAHANNOCK R ORANGE VA0021385 4,771 3,159 2,106 1,053 211

RAPPAHANNOCK R REEDVILLE VA0060712 274 291 116 58 12

RAPPAHANNOCK R REMINGTON REGIONAL VA0076805 3,364 2,619 1,746 873 175

RAPPAHANNOCK R SOUTH WALES STP VA0080527 3,910 2,607 1,303 261

RAPPAHANNOCK R TAPPAHANNOCK VA0071471 2,824 2,846 1,139 569 114

RAPPAHANNOCK R URBANNA VA0026263 427 860 344 172 34

RAPPAHANNOCK R WARRENTON VA0021172 3,337 3,859 3,594 1,797 359

RAPPAHANNOCK R WARSAW VA0026891 1,598 1,653 661 331 66

RAPPAHANNOCK R WILDERNESS SHORES VA0083411 3,769 4,160 1,664 832 166

RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER Total 55,802 96,615 67,729 33,864 6,773

VA EASTERN SHO R CAPE CHARLES VA0021288 1,163 1,159 464 232 46

VA EASTERN SHO R ONANCOCK VA0021253 1,777 1,782 713 356 71

VA EASTERN SHO R TANGIER ISLAND VA0067423 351 352 141 70 14

VA EASTERN SHO R TYSON FOODS, INC.-TEM P VA0004049 46,067 45,941 6,381 6,381 319

VA EASTERN SHORE Total 49,358 49,235 7,698 7,039 451

YORK RIVER AMOCO-YORKTOWN VA0003018 22,058 21,998 21,998 21,998 18,507

YORK RIVER ASHLAND VA0024899 8,802 7,081 4,721 2,360 472

YORK RIVER CAROLINE COUNTY REGI O VA0073504 2,564 2,706 597 299 60

YORK RIVER DOSWELL VA0029521 31,303 30,836 20,558 10,279 2,056

YORK RIVER GORDONSVILLE VA0021105 3,905 4,310 1,724 862 172

YORK RIVER HRSD-YORK VA0081311 45,959 58,018 38,679 19,339 3,868

YORK RIVER MATHEWS COURTHOUSE VA0028819 202 345 244 122 24

YORK RIVER PARHAM LANDING WWTP VA0088331 221 245 316 158 32

YORK RIVER SMURFIT STONE VA0003115 69,554 69,364 56,181 28,091 5,618

YORK RIVER TOTOPOTOMOY VA0089915 22,842 15,228 7,614 1,523

YORK RIVER WEST POINT VA0075434 4,757 4,568 1,827 914 183

YORK RIVER Total 189,324 222,313 162,071 92,034 32,514

JAMES RIVER ALLEGHANY CO. LOWER J VA0090671 4,568 2,284 1,142 228

JAMES RIVER BROWN & WILLIAMSON VA0002780 4,430 4,418 2,512 1,256 251

JAMES RIVER BUENA VISTA VA0020991 11,062 11,032 4,413 2,206 441

JAMES RIVER BWXT VA0003697 1,550 1,546 1,458 729 146

JAMES RIVER CLIFTON FORGE VA0022772 9,422 9,396 3,759 1,879 376

JAMES RIVER COVINGTON VA0025542 13,565 13,528 5,411 2,706 541

JAMES RIVER CREWE STP VA0020303 164 166 600 300 60

JAMES RIVER DUPONT-SPRUANCE VA0004669 7,882 7,860 7,860 7,860 7,104

JAMES RIVER FALLING CREEK VA0024996 26,704 31,618 25,093 12,547 2,509

JAMES RIVER FARMVILLE VA0083135 8,589 8,742 2,962 1,481 296

JAMES RIVER GEORGIA PACIFIC CORP O VA0003026 162,875 162,430 108,652 10,975 2,195

JAMES RIVER HENRICO COUNTY VA0063690 173,622 233,377 152,278 76,139 15,228

JAMES RIVER HONEYWELL VA0005291 52,110 51,968 51,968 51,968 40,244

JAMES RIVER HOPEWELL VA0066630 36,983 160,440 106,960 53,480 10,696

JAMES RIVER HRSD-ARMY BASE VA0081230 53,997 73,708 53,145 26,573 5,315

JAMES RIVER HRSD-BOAT HARBOR VA0081256 61,445 98,649 70,200 35,100 7,020

JAMES RIVER HRSD-CHESAPEAKE/ELIZ A VA0081264 91,597 126,074 80,098 40,049 8,010

JAMES RIVER HRSD-JAMES RIVER VA0081272 58,254 80,313 60,911 30,456 6,091

JAMES RIVER HRSD-NANSEMOND VA0081299 72,341 76,721 61,368 30,684 6,137

JAMES RIVER HRSD-VIP VA0081281 96,305 109,336 109,336 54,668 10,934

JAMES RIVER HRSD-WILLIAMSBURG VA0081302 46,860 48,424 48,424 24,212 4,842

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-h TP_DISCH 

### 95

CBPO, 11/6/2002

### TABLE IX-H: Discharged Phosphorus Loads (lbs/yr) for All Point Sources Sorted by Basin

BASIN FACILITY NPDES 2000 Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4

JAMES RIVER LAKE MONTICELLO STP VA0024945 3,869 4,312 1,725 862 172

JAMES RIVER LEES COMMERCIAL CAR P VA0004677 95,022 94,762 42,801 18,952 244

JAMES RIVER LEXINGTON-ROCKBRIDG E VA0088161 6,412 6,602 2,641 1,320 264

JAMES RIVER LYNCHBURG VA0024970 124,313 163,218 52,993 26,496 5,299

JAMES RIVER MOORES CREEK-RIVANN A VA0025518 100,164 114,810 36,206 18,103 3,621

JAMES RIVER PHILLIP MORRIS-PARK 50 0 VA0026557 7,456 7,435 7,435 7,435 584

JAMES RIVER PROCTORS CREEK VA0060194 17,081 20,224 53,758 26,879 5,376

JAMES RIVER RICHMOND VA0063177 114,364 219,234 146,156 73,078 14,616

JAMES RIVER SOUTH CENTRAL VA0025437 27,446 59,069 39,379 19,690 3,938

JAMES RIVER TYSON FOODS, INC. VA0004031 791 789 868 868 289

JAMES RIVER WESTVACO CORPORATI O VA0003646 26,328 26,256 26,256 26,256 9,054

JAMES RIVER Total 1,513,003 2,031,025 1,369,910 686,350 172,121

Grand Total 5,645,151 6,460,745 4,440,946 2,575,186 748,618

NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable ix-h TP_DISCH 

### 96

CBPO, 11/6/2002

## X. COST RESULTS SUMMARI ES

This section provides tables that sum m a rize the costs which were either obtained directly from

individual facilities, or ca lculated using the previous ly described m e thodologies.

Table X-A - provides the costs for T N rem oval by Ti er for all of the signif i cant m unicipal facilities.

Table X-B - provides the costs for TP rem oval by Tier for all of the significant m unici pal facilities.

Table VI-C in Section 6 provides the costs for the non-significant m unicipal facilities.

Table V-C - in Section 5 provides the costs for the industrial facilities.

Table VII - in Section 7 provides th e costs for th e Blue Plain s CSO.

Table X-C - provides a summ ary of the costs in total f o r a ll p o int source categories arranged by state.

Table X-D - provides a summ ar y of t h e costs by s t ate arra nged by point source category.

Table X-E - provides a summ ary of t h e costs for the sign ificant m unicipal facilities only by state.

Table X-F and X-G provide inform ation relating the am ount of total design flow and num b er of the

facilities b e ing treated b y each Tier to the to tal cost for each jurisd iction.

References noted in the Section X tables are included in the Part 3 of Appendix I.

97Table X-A: NITROGEN INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTAFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTEDC BLUE PLAINSDC0021199CURRENT370 341.71 7.50 0.110 01433,000,000 5,541,50914225,000,000 13,400,00014365,000,000 17,501,280 14DC Total370.00 341.710 0 33,000,000 5,541,509 225,000,000 13,400,000 365,000,000 17,501,280DE BRIDGEVILLEDE0020249BY 20100.8 0.22 8.00 5.403,187,400 63,24412, M0 0N918,088 6,73411,055,210 16,495 1DE LAURELDE0020125 0.5 0.32 22.32 3.20 82,374,508 147,0261627,970 10,7191736,700 27,814 1DE SEAFORDDE0020265CURRENT2 1.28 6.04 1.130 090 0N1,636,850 29,21112,360,170 62,228 1DE Total3.30 1.813,187,400 63,2442,374,508 147,026 3,182,908 46,665 4,152,080 106,537MD ABERDEENMD0021563CURRENT4 1.72 8.00 0.120 020 0N2,408,870 31,28114,093,150 64,967 1MD ABERDEEN PROVINMD0021237BY 20052.8 0.91 8.00 0.418,000,000 159,1462, M0 0N1,945,658 18,44813,053,362 38,794 1MD ABERDEEN PROVINMD0021229CURRENT3 0.96 8.00 0.490 020 0N2,022,860 18,94213,226,660 39,733 1MD ANNAPOLISMD0021814CURRENT10 7.54 8.00 0.440 020 0N4,724,930 115,24519,292,090 233,824 1MD BACK RIVERMD0021555CURRENT180 87.73 10.00 0.160 0210,000,000 141,12919, M70,346,630 1,183,3241156,595,390 2,352,813 1MD BALLENGER CREEKMD0021822CURRENT6 4.12 8.00 0.340 020 0N3,180,890 68,20315,826,130 139,973 1MD BOWIEMD0021628CURRENT3.3 2.09 8.00 0.170 020 0N2,138,663 39,94913,486,607 83,510 1MD BROADNECKMD0021644CURRENT6 5.23 8.00 0.480 020 0N3,180,890 86,56515,826,130 177,657 1MD BROADWATERMD0024350CURRENT2 1.27 8.00 0.540 020 0N1,636,850 29,02512,360,170 61,832 1MD BRUNSWICKMD0020958BY 20050.7 0.76 8.00 3.004,900,000 10,9282, M0 0N821,382 23,7561949,040 59,079 1MD CAMBRIDGEMD0021636BY 20058.1 5.11 8.00 2.729,934,376 198,2412, M0 0N3,991,511 80,38217,645,759 163,783 1MD CELANESEMD0063878BY 20051.25 1.02 8.00 2.525,791,500 116,2602, M0 0N1,347,343 29,05711,710,303 63,080 1MD CENTREVILLEMD0020834BY 20050.375 0.35 8.00 2.795,065,400 101,5832, M0 0N507,088 12,9881603,988 35,086 1MD CHESAPEAKE BEACMD0020281CURRENT1.18 0.81 8.00 0.890 020 0N1,320,322 23,84211,649,648 51,878 1MD CHESTERTOWNMD0020010BY 20050.9 0.65 8.00 4.342,600,000 51,7822, M0 0N1,014,794 19,42011,161,380 46,971 1MD CONOCOCHEAGUEMD0063509BY 20054.1 1.19 8.00 1.275,555,439 111,5772, M0 0N2,447,471 21,49814,179,799 44,613 1MD COX CREEKMD0021661BY 200515 12.30 8.00 1.289,476,780 198,9732, M0 0N6,654,980 180,144113,624,540 363,121 1MD CRISFIELDMD0020001BY 20051 0.68 8.00 2.024,052,200 80,1392, M0 0N1,111,500 19,84311,267,550 47,489 1MD CUMBERLANDMD0021598BY 200515 9.60 8.00 1.730 020 0N6,654,980 140,605113,624,540 283,421 1MD DAMASCUSMD0020982CURRENT1.5 0.86 8.00 1.120 020 0N1,443,845 22,41511,926,925 48,305 1MD DELMARMD0020532BY 20050.65 0.58 8.00 0.351,030,000 19,8332, M0 0N773,029 18,2951895,955 45,903 1MD DENTONMD0020494CURRENT0.8 0.41 8.00 1.380 020 0N918,088 12,40311,055,210 30,378 1MD DORSEY RUNMD0063207CURRENT2 1.47 8.00 0.220 020 0N1,636,850 33,57412,360,170 71,522 1MD EASTONMD0020273CURRENT2.35 1.93 8.00 2.590 020 0N1,771,953 41,40612,663,441 87,650 1MD ELKTONMD0020681BY 20052.7 1.73 8.00 1.096,360,000 128,2342, M0 0N1,907,057 35,31912,966,713 74,371 1MD EMMITSBURGMD0020257CURRENT0.75 0.58 8.00 1.980 020 0N869,735 17,77511,002,125 43,854 1MD FEDERALSBURGMD0020249BY 20050.75 0.33 8.00 0.981,500,000 29,2822, M0 0N869,735 10,12111,002,125 24,969 1MD FORT DETRICKMD0020877CURRENT2 1.11 8.00 1.170 080 0N1,636,850 25,37112,360,170 54,048 1MD FORT MEADEMD0021717CURRENT4.5 2.17 8.00 0.190 080 0N2,601,875 38,25214,526,395 79,150 1MD FREDERICKMD0021610BY 20058 7.76 8.00 4.198,816,824 153,3162, M0 0N3,952,910 122,32017,559,110 249,304 1MD FREEDOM DISTRICTMD0021512CURRENT3.5 2.85 8.00 0.680 020 0N2,215,865 53,70513,659,905 112,037 1MD FRUITLANDMD0052990BY 20050.5 0.52 8.00 3.006,200,000 124,5492, M0 0N627,970 17,4961736,700 45,400 1MD GEORGES CREEKMD0060071BY 20050.6 0.67 8.00 3.002,000,000 40,7092, M0 0N724,676 21,5821842,870 54,688 1MD HAGERSTOWNMD0021776CURRENT8 8.47 8.00 2.320 020 0N3,952,910 133,44117,559,110 271,969 1MD HAVRE DE GRACEMD0021750BY 20051.89 1.40 8.00 0.896,278,550 125,3542, M0 0N1,594,389 32,73912,264,856 69,900 1MD HURLOCKMD0022730CURRENT2 1.06 8.00 7.175,200,000 103,3782, M0 0N1,636,850 24,30212,360,170 51,769 1TIER 4 ($) (TN=3 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 $) (TN=8 for NRT plants)) TIER 2 ($) (TN=8 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TN=5 for ALL)NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-a98CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-A: NITROGEN INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTAFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETIER 4 ($) (TN=3 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 $) (TN=8 for NRT plants)) TIER 2 ($) (TN=8 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TN=5 for ALL)MD INDIAN HEADMD0020052BY 20050.5 0.35 8.00 2.53656,000 12,6032, M0 0N627,970 11,9121736,700 30,909 1MD JOPPATOWNEMD0022535CURRENT0.95 0.86 8.00 0.800 020 0N1,063,147 25,28611,214,465 60,823 1MD KENT ISLANDMD0023485BY 20052.135 1.64 8.00 0.7220,742,570 415,4702, M0 0N1,688,961 36,57012,477,146 77,704 1MD LA PLATAMD0020524BY 20051 0.82 8.00 1.594,120,970 82,8232, M0 0N1,111,500 24,08511,267,550 57,642 1MD LEONARDTOWNMD0024767BY 20050.68 0.48 8.00 2.971,840,000 37,0682, M0 0N802,041 15,1051927,806 37,695 1MD LITTLE PATUXENTMD0055174CURRENT22.5 20.63 8.00 0.350 020 0N9,550,055 293,557120,123,215 588,955 1MD MARYLAND CITYMD0062596CURRENT2.5 1.06 8.00 0.480 020 0N1,829,855 22,34412,793,415 47,187 1MD MARYLAND CORREMD0023957CURRENT1.23 0.94 8.00 0.350 020 0N1,339,622 27,22011,692,973 59,129 1MD MATTAWOMANMD0021865BY 200515 8.17 8.00 0.137,935,800 162,0782, M0 0N6,654,980 119,730113,624,540 241,343 1MD MOUNT AIRYMD0022527CURRENT1.2 0.66 8.00 0.470 020 0N1,328,042 19,22811,666,978 41,811 1MD NORTHEAST RIVERMD0052027BY 20052 0.63 8.00 0.941,800,000 35,7032, M0 0N1,636,850 14,38012,360,170 30,634 1MD PARKWAYMD0021725CURRENT7.5 6.20 8.00 0.290 020 0N3,759,905 98,69917,125,865 201,451 1MD PATAPSCOMD0021601BY 201073 73.00 8.00 0.78200,000,000 4,067,5232, M0 0N29,043,560 995,980163,880,960 1,984,222 1MD PATUXENTMD0021652CURRENT7.5 4.85 8.00 0.340 020 0N3,759,905 77,12917,125,865 157,426 1MD PERRYVILLEMD0020613CURRENT1.65 0.94 8.00 0.300 020 0N1,501,746 23,35812,056,898 50,144 1MD PINE HILL RUNMD0021679CURRENT6 3.89 8.00 1.360 020 0N3,180,890 64,42815,826,130 132,225 1MD PISCATAWAYMD0021539CURRENT30 25.30 8.00 0.120 020 0N12,445,130 354,631126,621,890 709,735 1MD POCOMOKE CITYMD0022551BY 20051.4 0.96 8.00 4.262,700,000 200,0002, 20 0N1,405,244 25,94011,840,276 56,059 1MD POOLESVILLEMD0023001BY 20050.625 0.66 8.00 0.871,658,000 33,1472, M0 0N748,853 21,2221869,413 53,504 1MD PRINCESS ANNEMD0020656CURRENT1.26 0.62 8.00 0.153,563,500 70,6852, M0 0N1,351,203 17,65011,718,967 38,304 1MD SALISBURYMD0021571BY 20056.8 5.90 8.00 1.3915,000,000 303,4952, M0 0N3,489,698 95,38416,519,322 195,136 1MD SENECA CREEKMD0021491BY 20055 18.80 8.00 1.3029,520,000 566,0202, M0 0N2,794,880 323,11914,959,640 666,490 1MD SNOW HILLMD0022764BY 20050.5 0.47 8.00 3.751,600,000 32,0172, M0 0N627,970 15,7191736,700 40,788 1MD SOD RUNMD0056545CURRENT20 12.59 8.00 1.170 020 0N8,585,030 180,512117,956,990 362,593 1MD TANEYTOWNMD0020672CURRENT1.1 0.91 8.00 1.760 020 0N1,289,441 27,93211,580,329 60,946 1MD THURMONTMD0021121CURRENT1 1.00 8.00 0.700 020 0N1,111,500 29,31911,267,550 70,168 1MD WESTERN BRANCHMD0021741CURRENT30 23.00 8.00 0.680 020 0N0 0180 0 18MD WESTMINSTERMD0021831CURRENT5 4.30 8.00 0.530 020 0N2,794,880 73,95514,959,640 152,545 1MD WINEBRENNER WWMD0003221BY 20051 0.22 8.00 1.77852,000 16,5782, M0 0N1,111,500 6,45011,267,550 15,436 1MD Total556.23 397.79384,749,909 7,788,496 10,000,000 141,129 253,226,5565,843,881 491,117,129 11,987,846NY ADDISON (V)NY0020320 0.42 0.24 17.73 3.00 82,318,600 46,6691550,605 8,3571651,764 22,213 1NY BATH (V)NY0021431 1 0.76 17.61 3.00 82,722,193 53,89011,111,500 22,18411,267,550 53,091 1NY BINGHAMTON-JOHNNY0024414BY 200520 19.53 8.00 2.030 070 0N8,585,030 280,000117,956,990 562,432 1NY COOPERSTOWNNY0023591 0.52 0.65 18.95 3.00 82,388,473 46,4001647,311 21,6551757,934 55,897 1NY CORNING (C)NY0025721 2.13 1.30 19.77 3.00 83,496,935 67,48911,687,031 28,95112,472,814 61,519 1NY CORTLAND (C)NY0027561BY 200510 8.52 8.00 1.300 070 0N4,724,930 130,25919,292,090 264,286 1NY ELMIRA / CHEMUNGNY0035742 12 7.19 15.00 3.00 89,613,949 181,37415,496,950 107,607111,025,070 217,631 1NY ENDICOTT (V)NY0027669 10 7.58 23.47 3.00 86,656,000 133,6897, M0 03, M0 0ANY HAMILTON (V)NY0020672 0.85 0.45 29.29 3.00 82,618,202 50,7101966,441 13,48111,108,295 32,803 1NY HORNELL (C)NY0023647 4 3.01 15.74 3.00 84,745,444 90,00512,408,870 54,59814,093,150 113,395 1NY LAKE STREET/CHEMNY0036986 9.5 7.12 19.68 3.00 88,174,859 147,65114,531,925 109,48918,858,845 222,361 1NY NORWICHNY0021423 2.2 2.68 30.04 3.00 83,544,425 60,71311,714,052 59,01512,533,468 125,247 1NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-a99CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-A: NITROGEN INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTAFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETIER 4 ($) (TN=3 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 $) (TN=8 for NRT plants)) TIER 2 ($) (TN=8 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TN=5 for ALL)NY ONEONTA (C)NY0031151 4 3.01 17.76 3.00 84,745,444 63,86712,408,870 54,54514,093,150 113,284 1NY OWEGO #2NY0025798BY 20052 1.04 8.00 2.480 070 0N1,636,850 23,83212,360,170 50,769 1NY OWEGO (V)NY0029262 1 0.62 15.42 3.00 82,722,193 53,45811,111,500 18,22111,267,550 43,608 1NY RICHFIELD SPRINGNY0031411 0.6 0.32 16.58 0.08 82,444,284 48,3201724,676 10,3991842,870 26,351 1NY SIDNEY (V)NY0029271 1.7 0.67 17.03 3.00 83,203,924 92,65611,521,047 16,34212,100,223 35,040 1NY WAVERLY (V)NY0031089 0.65 1.01 27.70 3.55 82,479,128 46,1061773,029 31,9901895,955 80,263 1NY Total82.57 65.680 0 61,874,0541,182,996 40,600,618 990,925 71,577,888 2,080,192PA ALTOONA CITY AUTPA0027014 5.5 6.03 14.15 4.30 81,200,000 15,6373, M8,330,000 282,9033, M0 0APA ALTOONA CITY AUTPA0027022 9 6.25 16.80 4.29 81,200,000 12,8113, M11,530,000 257,4153, M0 0APA ANNVILLE TOWNSHPA0021806 0.75 0.48 30.24 1.49 82,548,725 49,1551869,735 14,60911,002,125 36,041 1PA ANTRIM TOWNSHIPPA0080519CURRENT1.05 0.50 8.00 2.150 0N0 0N1,270,140 15,61211,537,004 34,127 1PA ASHLAND MUNICIPAPA0023558 1.3 0.72 8.75 3.23 82,929,367 59,22711,366,643 20,24311,753,627 43,877 1PA BEDFORD BOROUGPA0022209 1.2 0.98 13.56 1.39 82,860,429 58,27411,328,042 28,60111,666,978 62,191 1PA BELLEFONTE BOROPA0020486 3.22 2.07 16.03 0.69 84,229,766 81,12312,107,782 40,01813,417,288 83,728 1PA BERWICK MUNICIPAPA0023248 3.65 1.49 22.99 4.36 84,514,951 92,50812,273,767 27,63013,789,879 57,560 1PA BLOOMSBURG MUNPA0027171 4.29 2.66 9.53 1.41 84,935,313 101,15012,520,813 47,41714,344,432 98,261 1PA BLOSSBURGPA0020036 0.6 0.21 11.07 1.31 82,444,284 49,0901724,676 6,7181842,870 17,022 1PA BROWN TOWNSHIPPA0028088 0.6 0.34 27.44 0.93 82,444,284 49,4501724,676 10,8821842,870 27,576 1PA BURNHAM BOROUGPA0038920 0.64 0.59 9.00 1.50 82,472,161 49,9761763,358 18,8951885,338 47,498 1PA CARLISLE BOROUGPA0026077 7 3.45 19.85 0.42 86,660,935 136,59713,566,900 55,48116,692,620 113,423 1PA CARLISLE SUBURBAPA0024384CURRENT0.925 0.70 8.00 0.650 0N0 0N1,038,971 20,82611,187,923 50,229 1PA CHAMBERSBURGBPA0026051BY 20055.2 4.78 8.00 2.656,400,000 124,8683, M0 0N0 03, M0 0APA CLARKS SUMMIT-SOPA0028576 2 2.28 16.99 3.12 83,408,584 64,03311,636,850 52,11112,360,170 111,012 1PA CLEARFIELDPA0026310 4.5 2.62 11.04 0.78 85,072,176 104,02112,601,875 46,21314,526,395 95,623 1PA COLUMBIAPA0026123 2 0.83 17.50 0.70 83,408,584 69,20711,636,850 18,89612,360,170 40,254 1PA CURWENSVILLE MUPA0024759 0.5 0.45 14.68 1.86 82,374,508 47,9981627,970 15,1221736,700 39,240 1PA DANVILLE MUNICIPPA0023531 3.22 2.15 8.97 1.35 84,229,766 85,17812,107,782 41,49213,417,288 86,812 1PA DERRY TOWNSHIPPA0026484 5 3.47 14.77 1.33 81,983,000 111,000S1,240,000 26,496S, M0 0APA DILLSBURG BOROUPA0024431 1 0.66 11.07 0.88 82,722,193 55,09111,111,500 19,23211,267,550 46,027 1PA DOVER TOWNSHIPPA0020826CURRENT4 3.70 7.53 1.360 0N0 0N2,408,870 67,19314,093,150 139,553 1PA DUNCANSVILLEPA0032883 1.217 0.61 8.00 2.31 82,872,157 55,99511,334,604 17,68411,681,708 38,431 1PA EAST PENNSBOROPA0038415 3.7 2.42 17.43 3.49 84,547,969 86,38812,293,067 44,91013,833,203 93,514 1PA EASTERN SNYDERPA0110582BY 20052.8 1.60 8.00 3.953,000,000 61,85610, M0 0N0 0100 0 10PA ELIZABETHTOWNBPA0023108BY 20053 2.34 8.00 0.874,083,001 86,43110 0N2,022,860 46,22013,226,660 96,949 1PA ELKLAND MUNICIPAPA0113298 0.55 0.43 22.82 0.88 82,409,411 47,2031676,323 14,3311789,785 36,722 1PA EMPORIUM BOROUPA0028631 0.52 0.48 6.88 2.53 82,388,473 47,7651647,311 16,0961757,934 41,549 1PA EPHRATA BOROUGPA0027405 3.8 2.78 1.98 1.51 84,613,914 93,55112,331,668 51,06813,919,852 106,241 1PA FAIRVIEW TOWNSHPA0081868 0.5 0.40 11.07 0.64 82,374,508 47,8831627,970 13,5121736,700 35,061 1PA FRANKLIN COUNTYPA0020834 0.4 1.08 1.05 0.67 82,304,611 46,7411531,264 39,0361630,530 104,476 1PA GETTYSBURG MUNPA0021563CURRENT1.63 1.62 5.11 0.510 0N0 0N1,494,026 40,52812,039,569 87,048 1PA GREATER HAZELTOPA0026921 8.9 6.68 10.36 0.94 87,840,000 163,1703, M16,250,000 391,8383, M0 0APA GREGG TOWNSHIPPA0114821CURRENT0.8 0.66 6.60 1.330 0N0 0N918,088 20,18211,055,210 49,433 1NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-a100CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-A: NITROGEN INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTAFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETIER 4 ($) (TN=3 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 $) (TN=8 for NRT plants)) TIER 2 ($) (TN=8 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TN=5 for ALL)PA HAMPDEN TOWNSHPA0028746CURRENT1.76 1.30 8.00 1.060 0N0 0N1,544,208 31,33912,152,212 67,103 1PA HAMPDEN TOWNSHPA0080314 2.5 2.01 9.35 0.70 83,747,289 73,61811,829,855 42,24712,793,415 89,217 1PA HANOVER BOROUGPA0026875 3.65 3.84 23.73 0.99 860,000 035,130,000 161,1923, M0 0APA HARRISBURG SEWEPA0027197BY 201037.7 26.24 8.00 1.3822,682,000 865,000S0 0N0 03, M0 0APA HIGHSPIREPA0024040 2 1.05 14.97 1.63 83,408,584 69,03011,636,850 23,99212,360,170 51,110 1PA HOLLIDAYSBURGRPA0043273 2 2.98 6.82 1.70 83,408,584 67,34911,636,850 68,11312,360,170 145,099 1PA HOUTZDALE BOROPA0046159CURRENT0.3 0.12 6.89 0.710 0N0 0N434,558 4,8491524,360 13,536 1PA HUNTINGDON BOROPA0026191 3.75 2.13 11.07 1.31 84,580,956 93,71712,312,368 39,38013,876,528 81,961 1PA HYNDMAN BOROUGPA0020851 0.104 0.08 11.11 1.10 82,097,017 42,0221245,014 5,7191316,267 18,574 1PA JERSEY SHORE BOPA0028665 0.8 0.72 21.08 6.09 82,583,478 52,6781918,088 21,77911,055,210 53,344 1PA KELLY TOWNSHIPMPA0028681CURRENT2.75 1.82 2.20 0.780 0N0 0N1,926,358 36,96513,010,038 77,784 1PA LACKAWANNA RIVEPA0027090 7 5.12 13.16 0.88 86,660,935 128,65516,920,000 160,0343, M0 0APA LACKAWANNA RIVEPA0027065 6 2.45 9.13 1.66 86,034,411 120,01313,180,890 40,50615,826,130 83,129 1PA LACKAWANNA RIVEPA0027073 1 0.34 28.10 0.87 82,722,193 55,02511,111,500 9,98011,267,550 23,885 1PA LACKAWANNA RIVEPA0027081BY 20050.7 0.49 8.00 1.122,513,941 55,02510 0N821,382 15,3381949,040 38,143 1PA LANCASTER AREASPA0042269BY 200515 7.78 8.00 0.754,249,333 93,253S,0 0N10,460,000 179,2483, M0 0APA LANCASTER CITYPA0026743BY 201029.73 20.71 8.00 0.811,077,000 8,4613, M0 0N23,080,000 543,2413, M0 0APA LEBANON CITY AUTPA0027316 8 5.50 33.65 1.39 84,039,000 121,5893, M7,620,000 167,2093, M0 0APA LEMOYNE BOROUGPA0026441 2.088 1.66 22.88 1.42 83,468,413 71,82811,670,819 37,33912,436,421 79,407 1PA LEWISBURG AREAJPA0044661BY 20102.42 1.20 8.00 1.333,693,297 75,71710 0N3,630,000 51,3373, M0 0APA LEWISTOWN BOROPA0026280 2.4 1.89 14.00 1.30 83,679,787 75,69311,791,254 40,37412,706,766 85,397 1PA LITITZ SEWAGE AUTPA0020320 3.5 3.02 23.00 1.57 84,415,719 80,05612,215,865 56,91713,659,905 118,738 1PA LITTLESTOWN BORPA0021229 1 0.51 12.51 1.72 82,722,193 54,97411,111,500 14,82911,267,550 35,488 1PA LOCK HAVENPA0025933BY 20103.75 2.18 8.00 2.424,580,956 94,17610 0N4,590,000 79,8803, M0 0APA LOGAN TOWNSHIP-PA0032557BY 20050.6 0.37 8.00 2.692,444,284 49,31610 0N724,676 11,8101842,870 29,927 1PA LOWER ALLEN TOWPA0027189 5.95 3.40 13.63 1.45 86,002,771 123,77013,161,589 56,43315,782,805 115,843 1PA LOWER LACKAWANPA0026361 6 3.50 17.54 1.57 86,034,411 125,08513,180,890 57,93215,826,130 118,893 1PA LYKENS BOROUGHPA0043575 0.41 0.24 11.07 1.31 82,311,606 46,4701540,935 8,6561641,147 23,085 1PA MAHANOY CITYPA0070041CURRENT1.38 0.57 8.00 2.670 0N0 0N1,397,524 15,53011,822,946 33,580 1PA MANHEIM BOROUGPA0020893 1 0.79 8.82 1.35 82,722,193 55,15011,111,500 23,20911,267,550 55,545 1PA MANSFIELD BOROUPA0021814 1 0.58 10.50 2.24 82,722,193 54,99611,111,500 16,82311,267,550 40,262 1PA MARIETTA-DONEGAPA0021717 0.6 0.45 11.07 1.01 82,444,284 49,3291724,676 14,5571842,870 36,888 1PA MARTINSBURGPA0028347 0.5 0.41 11.07 1.49 82,374,508 47,8921627,970 13,8141736,700 35,845 1PA MARYSVILLE MUNICPA0021571 0.5 1.10 11.07 0.12 82,374,508 48,5761627,970 37,3121736,700 96,817 1PA MECHANICSBURGBPA0020885 2.08 0.83 25.31 1.13 83,462,978 66,70611,667,731 18,67212,429,489 39,715 1PA MIDDLETOWNPA0020664 2.2 1.19 20.08 0.71 83,544,425 72,50511,714,052 26,11412,533,468 55,422 1PA MIFFLINBURG BOROPA0028461CURRENT0.512 0.70 6.18 0.790 0N0 0N639,575 23,5601749,440 60,939 1PA MILLERSBURG BORPA0022535 1 0.70 11.07 1.31 82,722,193 55,13111,111,500 20,42911,267,550 48,892 1PA MILLERSVILLE BORPA0026620 1 0.69 1.75 1.30 82,722,193 54,78411,111,500 20,14511,267,550 48,212 1PA MILTON MUNICIPALPA0020273 2.6 1.71 5.81 0.43 83,814,671 76,69611,868,456 35,44812,880,064 74,748 1PA MONTGOMERY BORPA0020699 0.6 0.52 32.35 2.33 82,444,284 49,8581724,676 16,6761842,870 42,257 1PA MOSHANNON VALLPA0037966 1.5 1.43 14.07 0.45 83,066,885 62,92011,443,845 37,14711,926,925 80,054 1NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-a101CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-A: NITROGEN INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTAFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETIER 4 ($) (TN=3 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 $) (TN=8 for NRT plants)) TIER 2 ($) (TN=8 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TN=5 for ALL)PA MOUNT JOYPA0021067 1.3 0.75 22.45 0.32 82,929,367 56,61011,366,643 20,92711,753,627 45,359 1PA MOUNT UNION BORPA0020214 0.63 0.34 11.07 1.31 82,465,194 49,6361753,688 10,7851874,721 27,163 1PA MOUNTAINTOP AREPA0045985CURRENT2.4 2.75 8.00 3.680 0N0 0N1,791,254 58,53812,706,766 123,815 1PA MT. CARMEL MUNICPA0024406 1.5 0.95 22.90 2.75 83,066,885 62,74011,443,845 24,65011,926,925 53,123 1PA MT. HOLLY SPRINGPA0023183 0.6 0.38 14.92 0.67 82,444,284 48,3111724,676 12,3361842,870 31,260 1PA MUNCY BOROUGHPA0024325 1.4 0.64 8.35 1.55 82,998,186 59,63811,405,244 17,27011,840,276 37,322 1PA NEW CUMBERLANDPA0026654 1.25 0.49 11.07 0.48 82,894,913 58,38311,347,343 14,10011,710,303 30,609 1PA NEW FREEDOM WTPA0043257 1.3 1.15 19.60 1.58 82,929,367 56,04211,366,643 32,20311,753,627 69,800 1PA NEW HOLLAND BORPA0021890 1.14 1.10 28.90 1.70 82,819,009 52,38211,304,881 33,16511,614,989 72,262 1PA NEW OXFORD MUNPA0020923CURRENT0.825 1.24 8.00 0.330 0N0 0N942,264 37,44411,081,752 91,406 1PA NEWBERRY TOWNSPA0083011 0.4 0.41 20.16 1.49 82,304,611 46,6581531,264 14,9261630,530 39,949 1PA NORTHEASTERN YOPA0023744 1.7 0.65 11.07 1.24 83,203,924 64,71411,521,047 15,87512,100,223 34,039 1PA NORTHUMBERLANDPA0020567 0.75 0.45 19.07 0.63 82,548,725 51,5701869,735 13,85011,002,125 34,169 1PA PALMYRA BOROUGPA0024287 1.42 0.82 28.31 1.48 83,011,935 57,35511,412,964 21,83511,857,606 47,160 1PA PENN TOWNSHIPPA0037150 4.2 1.66 9.34 1.09 84,876,496 96,43512,486,072 29,80114,266,448 61,797 1PA PINE CREEK MUNICPA0027553 1.3 0.64 17.90 1.55 82,929,367 59,40311,366,643 17,96711,753,627 38,942 1PA PINE GROVE BOROPA0020915 0.6 0.45 18.94 2.71 82,444,284 49,4781724,676 14,5291842,870 36,817 1PA PORTER TOWER JOPA0046272CURRENT0.43 0.56 7.69 1.300 0N0 0N560,276 19,8521662,381 52,590 1PA ROARING SPRINGBPA0020249CURRENT0.7 0.68 5.61 1.540 0N0 0N821,382 21,2411949,040 52,825 1PA SAYREPA0043681 1.94 0.65 15.86 0.35 83,367,738 68,13111,613,689 15,17912,308,181 32,374 1PA SCRANTON SEWERPA0026492BY 200528 13.15 8.00 1.780 040 0N11,673,110 184,956124,888,910 370,357 1PA SHAMOKIN-COAL TOPA0027324 7 3.56 25.26 1.84 86,660,935 138,84713,566,900 57,26516,692,620 117,070 1PA SHENANDOAH MUNPA0070386 2 1.19 7.60 0.40 83,408,584 69,16711,636,850 27,23012,360,170 58,008 1PA SHIPPENSBURG BOPA0030643 2.75 2.28 14.47 0.50 83,915,519 80,88311,926,358 46,34813,010,038 97,527 1PA SILVER SPRING TOPA0083593 0.5 0.16 5.92 0.47 82,374,508 47,6101627,970 5,3081736,700 13,773 1PA SOUTH MIDDLETONPA0044113 0.75 0.45 11.07 0.42 82,548,725 51,4191869,735 13,89511,002,125 34,282 1PA SPRINGETTSBURYPA0026808CURRENT15 11.29 8.00 1.320 0N0 0N6,654,980 165,406113,624,540 333,413 1PA ST. JOHNSPA0046388CURRENT0.6 0.32 5.88 1.070 0N0 0N724,676 10,3271842,870 26,169 1PA STEWARTSTOWNBPA0036269 0.4 0.27 10.97 1.48 82,304,611 46,1511531,264 9,8111630,530 26,257 1PA SUNBURY CITY MUPA0026557BY 20053.5 3.01 8.00 2.413,000,000 63,04415, M0 0N2,500,000 63,999S, M0 0APA SWATARA TOWNSHPA0026735BY 20056.3 3.34 8.00 1.642,000,000 32,98213, M0 0N5,659,000 55,000S0 0APA TOWANDA MUNICIPPA0034576CURRENT1 0.68 8.00 2.080 0N0 0N1,111,500 19,97611,267,550 47,807 1PA TRI-BORO MUNICIPPA0023736 0.5 0.28 10.21 0.99 82,374,508 47,7361627,970 9,5951736,700 24,896 1PA TWIN BOROUGHSSPA0023264 0.6 0.35 11.07 1.31 82,444,284 49,2251724,676 11,1391842,870 28,226 1PA TYRONE BOROUGHPA0026727CURRENT9 6.40 4.45 0.390 0N0 0N4,338,920 99,15918,425,600 201,598 1PA UNIVERSITY AREAJPA0026239BY 20053.84 5.07 8.00 0.06780,000 6,9863, M0 0N520,000 20,5983, M0 0APA UPPER ALLEN TOWPA0024902 0.48 0.55 11.07 1.51 82,360,538 47,7561608,629 18,9451715,466 49,431 1PA WASHINGTON TOWPA0080225CURRENT1 0.93 7.79 2.570 0N0 0N1,111,500 27,22211,267,550 65,149 1PA WAYNESBORO BORPA0020621 1.59 0.87 5.25 4.81 83,128,612 62,75611,478,586 22,02912,004,909 47,362 1PA WELLSBORO MUNICPA0021687 2 1.18 19.89 1.81 83,408,584 65,50311,636,850 27,04612,360,170 57,615 1PA WESTERN CLINTONPA0043893CURRENT0.9 0.35 2.58 0.900 0N0 0N1,014,794 10,49211,161,380 25,377 1PA WHITE DEER TOWNPA0020800 0.42 0.27 20.34 2.43 82,318,600 46,7471550,605 9,6941651,764 25,766 1NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-a102CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-A: NITROGEN INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTAFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETIER 4 ($) (TN=3 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 $) (TN=8 for NRT plants)) TIER 2 ($) (TN=8 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TN=5 for ALL)PA WILLIAMSPORT SANPA0027057BY 200510.5 7.32 8.00 3.406,330,000 137,0563, M0 0N9,610,000 217,2013, M0 0APA WILLIAMSPORT SANPA0027049BY 20054.5 2.67 8.00 4.105,246,000 112,2633, M0 0N9,760,000 176,1493, M0 0APA WYOMING VALLEYPA0026107CURRENT50 23.86 5.21 1.360 030 0N24,690,000 402,0313, M0 0APA YORK CITYPA0026263CURRENT26 11.93 8.00 0.260 030 0N11,080,000 171,1263, M0 0APA Total469.21 301.3572,079,813 1,866,433 277,865,0255,667,625319,811,4066,443,904241,323,231 6,681,174VA ALEXANDRIAVA0025160BY 200554 37.94 8.00 0.050 050 0N20,000,000 592,000S55,000,000 800,000 SVA ALLEGHANY CO. LOVA0090671 1.5 0.75 18.70 2.00 83,066,885 116,56711,443,845 19,54811,926,925 42,126 1VA AQUIAVA0060968CURRENT6.5 5.29 8.00 0.108,000,000 160,000C9, M0 0N4,000,000 35,000S0 0AVA ARLINGTONVA0025143BY 200540 35.29 8.00 0.060 050 0N16,305,230 489,067135,286,790 976,927 1VA ASHLANDVA0024899BY 20102 1.55 8.00 1.502,415,700 45,093S, M0 0N0 0S0 0SVA BROAD RUN WRFVA_BROADRBY 201015 2.40 8.00 0.1013,500,000 268,466170 0N6,654,980 35,163111,025,070 72,654 1VA BUENA VISTAVA0020991 2.25 1.45 18.70 2.50 83,578,310 68,55511,733,353 31,63912,576,793 67,089 1VA CAPE CHARLESVA0021288 0.25 0.15 18.70 2.50 82,199,543 43,6741386,205 6,5421471,275 18,769 1VA CAROLINE COUNTYVA0073504 0.5 0.20 18.70 4.53 82,374,508 47,0831627,970 6,6311736,700 17,205 1VA CLIFTON FORGEVA0022772 2 1.23 18.70 2.50 83,408,584 66,80211,636,850 28,25312,360,170 60,186 1VA COLONIAL BEACHVA0026409BY 20102 0.85 13.26 2.7290,000 7403, M0 0N3,360,000 39,7663, M0 0AVA COVINGTONVA0025542 3 1.78 18.70 2.50 84,083,001 77,96812,022,860 35,04313,226,660 73,504 1VA CREWE STPVA0020303 0.5 0.20 11.54 0.28 82,374,508 47,2951627,970 6,6541736,700 17,267 1VA CULPEPERVA0061590BY 20054.5 2.27 8.00 1.504,200,000 82,3816, M0 0N2,601,875 39,97814,526,395 82,721 1VA DAHLGREN(DAHLGVA0026514 0.325 0.30 6.82 0.54 830,000 03520,000 13,3533, M0 0AVA DALE CITY #1VA0024724BY 20054 3.06 8.00 0.090 050 0N1,060,000 24,433S, M0 0AVA DALE CITY #8VA0024678BY 20054 2.85 8.00 0.100 050 0N1,060,000 22,724S, M0 0AVA DOSWELLVA0029521BY 20101 6.75 8.00 1.503,045,000 57,8756, M0 0N0 0S0 0SVA FALLING CREEKVA0024996BY 201010.1 8.24 9.57 1.26395,818 2,2066, M0 0N5,598,000 393,000S0 0AVA FARMVILLEVA0083135CURRENT2.4 0.97 0.76 2.95 80 0N1,791,254 20,72612,706,766 43,838 1VA FISHERSVILLEVA0025291 2 1.71 15.82 2.67 8790,000 14,4253, M3,360,000 80,3603, M0 0AVA FMCVA0068110BY 20055.4 3.29 8.00 1.500 0210 0N2,949,284 55,63315,306,236 114,502 1VA FORT A.P. HILL(WILVA0032034CURRENT0.53 0.12 8.00 4.060 0N0 0N656,982 3,8821768,551 9,995 1VA FREDERICKSBURGVA0025127CURRENT3.5 2.23 8.00 1.320 0N0 0N2,215,865 41,95513,659,905 87,526 1VA FRONT ROYALVA0062812 4 2.76 11.21 1.11 850,000 034,790,000 99,6503, M0 0AVA FWSA OPEQUONVA0065552CURRENT8.4 5.89 8.00 1.140 050 0N6,390,000 238,000S0 0AVA GORDONSVILLEVA0021105 0.67 0.57 18.70 2.50 82,493,057 48,6851792,370 17,8161917,189 44,537 1VA H.L. MOONEYVA0025101BY 200518 14.63 8.00 0.100 050 0N8,011,100 267,500S0 424,845 SVA HARRISONBURG-ROVA0060640CURRENT16 11.65 8.00 2.200 050 0N7,040,990 169,762114,491,030 341,899 1VA HAYMOUNT STPVA0089125BY 20100.95 0.95 8.00 1.502,687,559 53,31910 0N1,063,147 27,98611,214,465 67,319 1VA HENRICO COUNTYVA0063690BY 201075 50.00 8.00 1.530 060 0N25,000,000 4,000,000S0 0AVA HOPEWELLVA0066630BY 201050 35.12 21.00 1.500 02057,230,000 2,383,2001613,200,000 1,603,3001639,750,000 539,700 16VA HRSD-ARMY BASEVA0081230 18 17.45 23.60 1.39 881,000,000 154,000C14, C157,813,010 251,973116,224,010 506,735 1VA HRSD-BOAT HARBOVA0081256 25 23.05 23.29 1.4108112,000,000 151,900C14, C1510,515,080 326,016122,289,440 653,438 1VA HRSD-CHESAPEAKVA0081264 24 26.30 24.32 1.57 835,000,000 213,800C1410,129,070 372,817121,422,950 747,517 1VA HRSD-JAMES RIVERVA0081272 20 20.00 20.27 1.32 827,300,000 132,100C148,585,030 286,681117,956,990 575,853 1VA HRSD-NANSEMONDVA0081299CURRENT30 20.15 8.00 1.250 0C1413,100,000 0C1412,445,130 282,443126,621,890 565,263 1NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-a103CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-A: NITROGEN INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTAFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETIER 4 ($) (TN=3 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 $) (TN=8 for NRT plants)) TIER 2 ($) (TN=8 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TN=5 for ALL)VA HRSD-VIPVA0081281CURRENT40 35.90 8.00 1.000 0C1410,000,000 0C1416,305,230 497,521135,286,790 993,813 1VA HRSD-WILLIAMSBUVA0081302 22.5 15.90 8.15 1.00 815,800,000 0C149,550,055 226,231120,123,215 453,882 1VA HRSD-YORKVA0081311BY 201015 12.70 8.00 1.5017,700,000 132,100C140 0N6,654,980 186,069113,624,540 375,063 1VA KILMARNOCKVA0020788 0.2 0.25 4.61 2.56 82,164,460 43,3041337,852 11,8591418,190 35,177 1VA LAKE MONTICELLOVA0024945 0.6 0.57 18.70 2.50 82,444,284 47,7091724,676 18,2751842,870 46,309 1VA LEESBURGMD0066184CURRENT4.85 2.96 8.00 1.420 050 0N2,736,978 51,19414,829,666 105,691 1VA LEXINGTON-ROCKBVA0088161CURRENT4 0.87 18.70 2.50 80 0N2,408,870 15,72714,093,150 32,663 1VA LITTLE FALLS RUNVA0076392CURRENT4 4.16 8.00 0.880 050 0N4,000,000 25,000S0 0AVA LURAYVA0062642 1.6 1.50 1.50 0.41 80 033,360,000 86,1003, M0 0AVA LYNCHBURGVA0024970 22 17.40 8.50 3.08 854,000,000 620,000C6845,000 1,000,000C60 0AVA MASSANUTTEN PUBVA0024732 0.75 0.38 18.70 2.50 82,548,725 50,1861869,735 11,66311,002,125 28,773 1VA MASSAPONAXVA0025658BY 20058 4.38 8.00 1.500 050 0N3,952,910 69,07317,559,110 140,780 1VA MATHEWS COURTHVA0028819 0.1 0.08 10.41 1.42 82,094,204 41,8181241,146 5,6371312,020 18,395 1VA MIDDLE RIVERVA0064793CURRENT6.8 5.65 8.00 2.050 050 0N3,489,698 91,41816,519,322 187,023 1VA MONTROSS - WESTVA0072729 0.1 0.03 6.54 1.170 082,094,204 41,8701241,146 2,1861312,020 7,135 1VA MOORES CREEK-RIVA0025518 15 11.89 13.46 3.17 811,242,076 209,70816,654,980 174,172113,624,540 351,083 1VA NAVAL SURFACEWVA0021067CURRENT0.4 0.43 8.00 2.890 0N0 0N531,264 15,6611630,530 41,914 1VA NEW MARKET STPVA0022853 0.5 0.56 18.70 2.50 82,374,508 46,3271627,970 18,9211736,700 49,095 1VA NOMAN M. COLE JRVA0025364BY 200567 53.00 8.00 0.110 050 0N12,760,000 345,8103, M0 0AVA ONANCOCKVA0021253 0.25 0.23 18.70 2.50 82,199,543 43,5051386,205 10,0551471,275 28,848 1VA ORANGEVA0021385BY 20101.5 0.69 8.00 1.503,066,885 59,90110 0N1,443,845 18,02211,926,925 38,839 1VA PARHAM LANDINGWVA0088331 0.57 0.10 8.27 0.78 82,423,364 48,4161695,664 3,3861811,019 8,637 1VA PARKINS MILLVA0075191 2 1.42 18.70 2.50 897,000 9223, M3,360,000 66,7793, M0 0AVA PROCTORS CREEKVA0060194CURRENT21.5 17.65 8.00 0.380 050 0N1,500,000 526,000S0 0AVA PURCELLVILLEVA0022802BY 20051 0.42 8.00 2.500 050 0N1,111,500 5,7903, M0 0AVA QUANTICO-MAINSIDVA0028363CURRENT2.2 1.38 8.00 0.100 0N0 0N1,714,052 30,50412,533,468 64,738 1VA REEDVILLEVA0060712 0.2 0.04 18.70 2.50 82,164,460 43,2101337,852 1,8171418,190 5,391 1VA REMINGTON REGIOVA0076805BY 20052 0.57 8.00 1.500 050 0N1,636,850 13,12312,360,170 27,956 1VA RICHMONDVA0063177BY 201045 47.99 8.00 1.5070,000,000 1,350,3236, M0 0N10,000,000 363,325S, M0 0AVA ROUND HILL WWTPVA0026212 0.5 0.15 18.70 3.00 82,374,508 47,1771627,970 5,0881736,700 13,203 1VA SIL MRRSVA0090263CURRENT1.923 1.27 8.00 1.500 0220 0220 0222,293,450 62,820 1VA SOUTH CENTRALVA0025437BY 201023 12.93 8.00 1.507,800,000 338,000S0 0N4,300,000 217,000S0 0AVA SOUTH WALES STPVA0080527BY 20100.856 0.86 8.00 1.502,622,367 52,05810 0N972,243 25,67111,114,665 62,417 1VA STONY CREEK STPVA0028380 0.6 0.26 18.70 2.50 82,444,284 48,3361724,676 8,5381842,870 21,635 1VA STRASBURGVA0020311 0.98 0.77 18.70 2.50 8120,000 7943, M2,650,000 54,9503, M0 0AVA STUARTS DRAFTVA0066877BY 20051.4 1.50 8.00 1.500 050 0N520,000 14,9703, M0 0AVA TANGIER ISLANDVA0067423 0.1 0.05 18.70 2.50 82,094,204 41,7881241,146 3,2601312,020 10,639 1VA TAPPAHANNOCKVA0071471 0.8 0.37 18.70 2.50 82,583,478 50,8931918,088 11,35211,055,210 27,804 1VA TOTOPOTOMOYVA0089915BY 20105 5.00 8.00 1.500 050 0N2,794,880 85,93614,959,640 177,258 1VA UPPER OCCOQUANVA0024988 54 34.00 19.14 0.04 822,601,459 394,910121,709,370 466,998147,417,650 931,433 1VA URBANNAVA0026263 0.1 0.11 18.70 2.50 82,094,204 41,6491241,146 7,9621312,020 25,983 1VA WARRENTONVA0021172 2.5 1.18 14.22 1.07 83,747,289 73,29611,829,855 24,77112,793,415 52,313 1NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-a104CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-A: NITROGEN INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTAFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETIER 4 ($) (TN=3 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 $) (TN=8 for NRT plants)) TIER 2 ($) (TN=8 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TN=5 for ALL)VA WARSAWVA0026891 0.3 0.22 18.70 2.50 82,234,595 44,2411434,558 8,6641524,360 24,187 1VA WAYNESBOROVA0025151 4 2.81 19.71 4.38 83,500,000 44,3093, M0 03, M0 0AVA WEST POINTVA0075434 0.6 0.60 18.70 2.50 82,444,284 47,4441724,676 19,3641842,870 49,067 1VA WEYERS CAVE STPVA0022349 0.5 0.40 18.70 2.50 82,374,508 47,2381627,970 13,5201736,700 35,082 1VA WIDEWATER WWTPVA0090387BY 20100.5 0.10 8.00 2.002,374,508 47,44510 0N627,970 3,3801736,700 8,771 1VA WILDERNESS SHORVA0083411 0.5 0.55 18.70 2.50 82,374,508 49,3521627,970 18,4671736,700 47,918 1VA WOODSTOCKVA0026468 0.8 0.42 18.70 2.50 8700,000 13,1313, M2,650,000 36,6683, M0 0AVA Total845.85 652.05137,897,837 2,649,908 513,412,5435,747,584338,088,427 14,883,168 475,053,70611,543,148WV BERKELEY COUNTYWV0082759 2.35 0.93 5.16 3.00 83,645,992 72,89811,771,953 19,90412,663,441 42,133 1WV BERKELEY COUNTYWV0020061 0.9 0.60 5.25 3.00 82,652,895 53,03511,014,794 17,88311,161,380 43,254 1WV CHARLESTOWNWV0022349 1.2 0.75 10.74 3.00 82,860,429 56,74511,328,042 21,84611,666,978 47,502 1WV KEYSERWV0024392 2.4 1.21 17.01 1.05 83,679,787 74,74911,791,254 25,71212,706,766 54,383 1WV MARTINSBURGWV0023167 5 2.35 9.27 3.00 85,395,915 47,89212,794,880 40,32914,959,640 83,186 1WV MOOREFIELDWV0020150BY 20100.6 0.00 8.00 3.000 0110 0N724,676 01842,870 0 1WV PETERSBURGWV0021792 0.8 0.74 6.14 3.00 82,583,478 51,5421918,088 22,34311,055,210 54,725 1WV ROMNEYWV0020699 0.5 0.46 17.20 3.00 82,374,508 46,6451627,970 15,4351736,700 40,050 1WV Total13.75 7.0223,193,004 403,506 10,971,658 163,451 15,792,986 365,233Grand Total2,341 1,767 597,914,959 12,368,080 921,719,133 18,831,375 1,190,881,57341,771,993 1,664,017,02050,265,410Source Notes* 2010 Data are the projections based on 2000 data. 2010 flows are projected with 2000 flow and population increase factor,except where facility's own projection is provided. Concentrations are the same as 2000.1 = Calculated from the methodologies provided from Thor Young, Stearn & Wheler, LLC and Tom Sadick, CH2M Hill.2 = NRT eligible cost report from MDE,4/23/02, where cost=0, MDE has indicated funds already appropriated2a= NRT Cost report, from MDE 3/6/20023 = Randall 51 Facility Report, 1999 for BNR @8 and additional 3/2001 report with 60 facilities.4 = Paid for by Corp of Engineers5 = From VA 2000 Annual Report and VA 2002 annual Report - Assumes that the cost share information equals 1/2 of total BNR costto get 8, and that funds are already made available for these facilities to go to 8,except for FMC and Henrico where no funds have been spent as of 2002.6 = Email from Bob Ehrhart to Allison Wiedeman, 3/7/027= BNR funded under federal funds.8 = No cost is applied, because TN or TP =current level for Tier 1 for this facility8a = The 2010 TP concentration of 1.5 mg/l shown for these facilities reflects the specific effluent concentration targeted byVirginia either under WQIF Grant program and/or the Tributary Strategy Plan for the Lower River Tributaries.9 = Cost survey from Seaford WWTP, 3/22/0210 = From 4/2/01 letters from Eastern Snyder County Regional Authority to Senator Specter. Also, costs not calculated to 8 because they are currently designing only to 3(4/26/01 Telephone conversation between CBPO and Gannett Hemming)11= Message from WVDEP, cost=0 due to irrigation.12 = Email message from Paul Janiga, DE DNREC, 3/28/02.13 = Cost survey from Mike Kyle, LASA, 3/6/0214 = DC CSO & Blue Plains Cost Estimates- UAA cost analysis, from Tanya spano, WMCOG, 4/10/0215 = Telephone conversation with Sunberry WWTP, 6/21/0116 = Cost Summary: City of Hopewell, from Bob Steidel, Hopewell Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility. 8/7/2002.17= Message from Tom Broderick, LCSA, concerning Broad Run, 3/11/0218 = Message from Marya Levelev, 4/5/02, Western Branch already can achieve 3 mg/l.NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-a105CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-A: NITROGEN INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTAFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETN CC TN O&MTNNOTETIER 4 ($) (TN=3 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 $) (TN=8 for NRT plants)) TIER 2 ($) (TN=8 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TN=5 for ALL)19 = Message from Marya Levelev, 8/12/02, to add $10 million TN cc in Tier 2 for Back River20 = Message from Bob Steidel, 9/17/02, to remove the Tier 1 cost for Hopewell.21 = Message from Bob Ehrhart, 9/4/02, to remove Tier 1 costs for FMC and Hopewell.22 = Message from Bob Ehrhart, 9/19/02, to add SIL which replaced Broadway Lagoons, Timberville, Rocco Quality Foods and Wampler Foods-Timberville.23 = Message from Bob Ehrhart, 11/14/02, No Tier 2 TP cost due to chemical feed facilities have been funded.A = The capital costs at TN =3 from sources other than calculation are applied to Tier 3 for TN. And, in these cases, the Tier 4 TN capital costs are set to zero. Message from Allison Wiedeman, 5/3/02.B = The value is set to zero, because this plant's TN or TP level have been lower than the defined level in this Tier for morethan five years.C14 = Message from W. Hunley, HRSD, 10/3/02C15 = Cost shown represent an order of magnitude planning level estimate as transmitted by HRSD on October 3, 2002. A less costly alternative, which provides for only seasonal nitrificationand/or an annual average TN concentration greater than 8.0 mg/l, does potentially exist as discussed in the September1989 Technical Memoranda C.22 and C. 25 prepared by CH2M Hill. Message from Bob Ehrhart, 11/4/02C6 = Letter from City of Lynchburg to Allison Wiedeman, 7/14/2001C9 = Bos, Robert E, PE, Public Utility Administrator with County of Stafford, letter to Allison Wiedeman, EPA, re: Nitrogen Removal Costs, 7/31/01M = For facilities with existing capital costs and no O&M costs available, the O&M costs are calculated from exiting capitlalcosts adjusted by the cost ratio between calculated O&M and capital cost fromthe methodologies provided from Thor Young, Stearn & Wheler, LLC and Tom Sadick, CH2M Hill.N = NRT facilities that currently have or will install NRT by 2010, It is assumed that no additional cost is needed.S = From NRT cost survey results.NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-a106CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-B: PHOSPHORUS INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTATFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TPCCTPO&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETPCC TP O&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTEDC BLUE PLAINSDC0021199CURRENT370 341.71 7.50 0.110 0 8 20,000,000 3,358,491 14 0 0 14 25,000,000 1,198,718 14DC Total370.00 341.710 0 20,000,000 3,358,491 0 0 25,000,000 1,198,718DE BRIDGEVILLEDE0020249BY 20100.8 0.22 8.00 5.400 0 8 141,111 10,888 1 0 1,198 1 1,107,172 46,479 1DE LAURELDE0020125 0.5 0.32 22.32 3.200 0 8 112,778 8,023 1 0 1,714 1 874,978 82,429 1DE SEAFORDDE0020265CURRENT2 1.28 6.04 1.130 0 8 0 1,346 1 0 6,895 1 2,275,679 209,272 1DE Total3.30 1.810 0 253,889 20,257 0 9,807 4,257,828 338,180MD ABERDEENMD0021563CURRENT4 1.72 8.00 0.120 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 3,763,436 240,882 1MD ABERDEEN PROVING GROMD0021237BY 20052.8 0.91 8.00 0.410 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 2,902,223 138,716 1MD ABERDEEN PROVING GROMD0021229CURRENT3 0.96 8.00 0.490 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 3,051,371 143,392 1MD ANNAPOLISMD0021814CURRENT10 7.54 8.00 0.440 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 6,701,258 823,833 1MD BACK RIVERMD0021555CURRENT180 87.73 10.00 0.160 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 100,291,496 8,307,728 1MD BALLENGER CREEKMD0021822CURRENT6 4.12 8.00 0.340 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 5,067,115 523,899 1MD BOWIEMD0021628CURRENT3.3 2.09 8.00 0.170 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 3,270,506 304,707 1MD BROADNECKMD0021644CURRENT6 5.23 8.00 0.480 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 5,067,115 664,944 1MD BROADWATERMD0024350CURRENT2 1.27 8.00 0.540 0 8 0 0 1 0 546 1 2,275,679 207,940 1MD BRUNSWICKMD0020958BY 20050.7 0.76 8.00 3.000 0 8 131,667 15,230 1 0 4,117 1 1,035,087 169,733 1MD CAMBRIDGEMD0021636BY 20058.1 5.11 8.00 2.720 0 8 267,721 78,132 1 0 27,610 1 6,322,049 606,062 1MD CELANESEMD0063878BY 20051.25 1.02 8.00 2.520 0 8 163,793 16,028 1 0 5,490 1 1,626,795 185,802 1MD CENTREVILLEMD0020834BY 20050.375 0.35 8.00 2.790 0 8 100,973 7,245 1 0 1,904 1 759,286 104,508 1MD CHESAPEAKE BEACHMD0020281CURRENT1.18 0.81 8.00 0.890 0 8 0 0 1 0 3,367 1 1,561,808 149,779 1MD CHESTERTOWNMD0020010BY 20050.9 0.65 8.00 4.340 0 8 150,556 21,050 1 0 3,530 1 1,175,260 129,708 1MD CONOCOCHEAGUEMD0063509BY 20054.1 1.19 8.00 1.270 0 8 0 1,696 1 0 4,073 1 3,832,009 165,660 1MD COX CREEKMD0021661BY 200515 12.30 8.00 1.280 0 8 0 28,172 1 0 66,439 1 9,760,640 1,316,794 1MD CRISFIELDMD0020001BY 20051 0.68 8.00 2.020 0 8 160,000 8,934 1 0 3,670 1 1,390,000 130,791 1MD CUMBERLANDMD0021598BY 200515 9.60 8.00 1.730 0 8 0 58,071 1 0 51,857 1 9,760,640 1,027,777 1MD DAMASCUSMD0020982CURRENT1.5 0.86 8.00 1.120 0 8 0 830 1 0 4,647 1 1,851,848 150,771 1MD DELMARMD0020532BY 20050.65 0.58 8.00 0.350 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 997,280 133,080 1MD DENTONMD0020494CURRENT0.8 0.41 8.00 1.380 0 8 0 1,268 1 0 2,207 1 1,107,172 85,601 1MD DORSEY RUNMD0063207CURRENT2 1.47 8.00 0.220 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 2,275,679 240,527 1MD EASTONMD0020273CURRENT2.35 1.93 8.00 2.590 0 8 180,482 29,019 1 0 10,417 1 2,556,347 304,602 1MD ELKTONMD0020681BY 20052.7 1.73 8.00 1.090 0 8 0 1,252 1 0 9,342 1 2,826,651 264,521 1MD EMMITSBURGMD0020257CURRENT0.75 0.58 8.00 1.980 0 8 0 4,669 1 0 3,124 1 1,071,677 124,794 1MD FEDERALSBURGMD0020249BY 20050.75 0.33 8.00 0.980 0 8 0 0 1 0 1,696 1 1,071,677 71,053 1MD FORT DETRICKMD0020877CURRENT2 1.11 8.00 1.170 0 8 0 1,573 1 0 5,988 1 2,275,679 181,763 1MD FORT MEADEMD0021717CURRENT4.5 2.17 8.00 0.190 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 4,102,241 295,232 1MD FREDERICKMD0021610BY 20058 7.76 8.00 4.190 0 8 266,204 210,251 1 0 41,937 1 6,264,304 923,206 1MD FREEDOM DISTRICTMD0021512CURRENT3.5 2.85 8.00 0.680 0 8 0 0 1 0 5,439 1 3,413,810 411,157 1MD FRUITLANDMD0052990BY 20050.5 0.52 8.00 3.000 0 8 112,778 10,815 1 0 2,797 1 874,978 134,547 1MD GEORGES CREEKMD0060071BY 20050.6 0.67 8.00 3.000 0 8 122,222 13,502 1 0 3,613 1 958,115 159,887 1MD HAGERSTOWNMD0021776CURRENT8 8.47 8.00 2.320 0 8 266,204 97,440 1 0 45,750 1 6,264,304 1,007,140 1MD HAVRE DE GRACEMD0021750BY 20051.89 1.40 8.00 0.890 0 8 0 0 1 0 5,935 1 2,184,979 232,027 1MD HURLOCKMD0022730CURRENT2 1.06 8.00 7.170 0 8 175,172 57,625 1 0 5,736 1 2,275,679 174,099 1TIER 4 ($) (TP=0.1 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 ($) (TP=Current) TIER 2 $) (TP=1 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TP=0.5 for ALL)NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-b107CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-B: PHOSPHORUS INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTATFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TPCCTPO&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETPCC TP O&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETIER 4 ($) (TP=0.1 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 ($) (TP=Current) TIER 2 $) (TP=1 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TP=0.5 for ALL)MD INDIAN HEADMD0020052BY 20050.5 0.35 8.00 2.530 0 8 112,778 6,714 1 0 1,904 1 874,978 91,602 1MD JOPPATOWNEMD0022535CURRENT0.95 0.86 8.00 0.800 0 8 0 0 1 0 2,762 1 1,208,015 166,256 1MD KENT ISLANDMD0023485BY 20052.135 1.64 8.00 0.720 0 8 0 0 1 0 3,866 1 2,385,295 265,019 1MD LA PLATAMD0020524BY 20051 0.82 8.00 1.590 0 8 0 4,030 1 0 4,454 1 1,390,000 158,753 1MD LEONARDTOWNMD0024767BY 20050.68 0.48 8.00 2.970 0 8 129,778 10,448 1 0 2,602 1 1,020,117 108,696 1MD LITTLE PATUXENTMD0055174CURRENT22.5 20.63 8.00 0.350 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 14,243,449 2,165,645 1MD MARYLAND CITYMD0062596CURRENT2.5 1.06 8.00 0.480 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 2,673,351 165,782 1MD MARYLAND CORRECTIONMD0023957CURRENT1.23 0.94 8.00 0.350 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 1,608,323 173,208 1MD MATTAWOMANMD0021865BY 200515 8.17 8.00 0.130 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 9,760,640 875,188 1MD MOUNT AIRYMD0022527CURRENT1.2 0.66 8.00 0.470 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 1,580,472 121,430 1MD NORTHEAST RIVERMD0052027BY 20052 0.63 8.00 0.940 0 8 0 0 1 0 3,001 1 2,275,679 103,022 1MD PARKWAYMD0021725CURRENT7.5 6.20 8.00 0.290 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 5,972,817 748,618 1MD PATAPSCOMD0021601BY 201073 73.00 8.00 0.780 0 8 0 0 1 0 184,707 1 42,919,870 7,228,896 1MD PATUXENTMD0021652CURRENT7.5 4.85 8.00 0.340 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 5,972,817 585,016 1MD PERRYVILLEMD0020613CURRENT1.65 0.94 8.00 0.300 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 1,982,292 160,794 1MD PINE HILL RUNMD0021679CURRENT6 3.89 8.00 1.360 0 8 0 11,611 1 0 21,032 1 5,067,115 494,901 1MD PISCATAWAYMD0021539CURRENT30 25.30 8.00 0.120 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 18,639,092 2,618,102 1MD POCOMOKE CITYMD0022551BY 20051.4 0.96 8.00 4.260 0 8 166,069 29,233 1 0 5,197 1 1,763,058 171,343 1MD POOLESVILLEMD0023001BY 20050.625 0.66 8.00 0.870 0 8 0 0 1 0 2,620 1 977,878 155,786 1MD PRINCESS ANNEMD0020656CURRENT1.26 0.62 8.00 0.150 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 1,636,003 113,132 1MD SALISBURYMD0021571BY 20056.8 5.90 8.00 1.390 0 8 0 19,113 1 0 31,854 1 5,556,410 728,147 1MD SENECA CREEKMD0021491BY 20055 18.80 8.00 1.300 0 8 0 45,868 1 0 101,586 1 4,431,721 2,493,599 1MD SNOW HILLMD0022764BY 20050.5 0.47 8.00 3.750 0 8 112,778 12,847 1 0 2,513 1 874,978 120,880 1MD SOD RUNMD0056545CURRENT20 12.59 8.00 1.170 0 8 0 17,662 1 0 68,048 1 12,760,503 1,329,599 1MD TANEYTOWNMD0020672CURRENT1.1 0.91 8.00 1.760 0 8 0 5,741 1 0 4,920 1 1,486,331 171,535 1MD THURMONTMD0021121CURRENT1 1.00 8.00 0.700 0 8 0 0 1 0 2,158 1 1,390,000 193,252 1MD WESTERN BRANCHMD0021741CURRENT30 23.00 8.00 0.680 0 8 0 0 1 0 39,020 1 18,639,092 2,380,093 1MD WESTMINSTERMD0021831CURRENT5 4.30 8.00 0.530 0 8 0 0 1 0 1,185 1 4,431,721 570,732 1MD WINEBRENNER WWTPMD0003221BY 20051 0.22 8.00 1.770 0 8 0 1,414 1 0 1,193 1 1,390,000 42,511 1MD Total556.23 397.790 0 2,619,174827,485 0 805,854386,898,209 44,938,204NY ADDISON (V)NY0020320 0.42 0.24 17.73 3.000 0 8 105,222 8,377 1 0 1,270 1 802,746 66,194 1NY BATH (V)NY0021431 1 0.76 17.61 3.000 0 8 160,000 15,754 1 0 4,103 1 1,390,000 146,218 1NY BINGHAMTON-JOHNSONCNY0024414BY 200520 19.53 8.00 2.030 0 8 448,268 175,305 1 0 105,551 1 12,760,503 2,062,392 1NY COOPERSTOWNNY0023591 0.52 0.65 18.95 3.000 0 8 114,667 12,998 1 0 3,498 1 892,180 165,283 1NY CORNING (C)NY0025721 2.13 1.30 19.77 3.000 0 8 177,144 24,996 1 0 7,011 1 2,381,267 209,716 1NY CORTLAND (C)NY0027561BY 200510 8.52 8.00 1.300 0 8 0 21,404 1 0 46,048 1 6,701,258 931,158 1NY ELMIRA / CHEMUNG CO.SNY0035742 12 7.19 15.00 3.000 0 8 326,892 125,406 1 0 38,846 1 7,933,681 778,464 1NY ENDICOTT (V)NY0027669 10 7.58 23.47 3.000 0 8 296,548 131,191 1 0 40,935 1 6,701,258 827,759 1NY HAMILTON (V)NY0020672 0.85 0.45 29.29 3.000 0 8 145,833 10,350 1 0 2,426 1 1,141,670 91,510 1NY HORNELL (C)NY0023647 4 3.01 15.74 3.000 0 8 205,516 53,881 1 0 16,265 1 3,763,436 420,443 1NY LAKE STREET/CHEMUNGNY0036986 9.5 7.12 19.68 3.000 0 8 288,962 123,447 1 0 38,454 1 7,112,961 813,481 1NY NORWICHNY0021423 2.2 2.68 30.04 3.000 0 8 178,206 47,860 1 0 14,476 1 2,437,447 429,785 1NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-b108CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-B: PHOSPHORUS INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTATFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TPCCTPO&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETPCC TP O&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETIER 4 ($) (TP=0.1 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 ($) (TP=Current) TIER 2 $) (TP=1 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TP=0.5 for ALL)NY ONEONTA (C)NY0031151 4 3.01 17.76 3.000 0 8 205,516 53,833 1 0 16,249 1 3,763,436 420,033 1NY OWEGO #2NY0025798BY 20052 1.04 8.00 2.480 0 8 175,172 16,282 1 0 5,625 1 2,275,679 170,734 1NY OWEGO (V)NY0029262 1 0.62 15.42 3.000 0 8 160,000 13,511 1 0 3,370 1 1,390,000 120,101 1NY RICHFIELD SPRINGS (V)NY0031411 0.6 0.32 16.58 0.080 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 958,115 77,042 1NY SIDNEY (V)NY0029271 1.7 0.67 17.03 3.000 0 8 170,620 14,409 1 0 3,594 1 2,025,100 113,264 1NY WAVERLY (V)NY0031089 0.65 1.01 27.70 3.550 0 8 126,945 23,843 1 0 5,455 1 997,280 232,696 1NY Total82.57 65.680 0 3,285,513 872,847 0 353,177 65,428,020 8,076,273PA ALTOONA CITY AUTHORITPA0027014 5.5 6.03 14.15 4.300 0 8 228,274 169,072 1 0 32,558 1 4,753,037 781,731 1PA ALTOONA CITY AUTHORITPA0027022 9 6.25 16.80 4.290 0 8 281,376 175,652 1 0 33,778 1 6,834,065 723,562 1PA ANNVILLE TOWNSHIPPA0021806 0.75 0.48 30.24 1.490 0 8 0 1,910 1 0 2,567 1 1,071,677 102,562 1PA ANTRIM TOWNSHIPPA0080519CURRENT1.05 0.50 8.00 2.150 0 8 160,759 7,913 1 0 2,678 1 1,438,455 94,382 1PA ASHLAND MUNICIPAL AUTPA0023558 1.3 0.72 8.75 3.230 0 8 164,552 16,583 1 0 3,905 1 1,672,652 130,953 1PA BEDFORD BOROUGH MUNPA0022209 1.2 0.98 13.56 1.390 0 8 0 3,147 1 0 5,287 1 1,580,472 180,621 1PA BELLEFONTE BOROUGHPA0020486 3.22 2.07 16.03 0.690 0 8 0 0 1 0 4,237 1 3,212,578 304,699 1PA BERWICK MUNICIPAL AUTPA0023248 3.65 1.49 22.99 4.360 0 8 200,206 45,232 1 0 8,029 1 3,519,941 212,006 1PA BLOOMSBURG MUNICIPALPA0027171 4.29 2.66 9.53 1.410 0 8 0 9,021 1 0 14,381 1 3,961,156 365,752 1PA BLOSSBURGPA0020036 0.6 0.21 11.07 1.310 0 8 0 533 1 0 1,125 1 958,115 49,767 1PA BROWN TOWNSHIP MUNICPA0028088 0.6 0.34 27.44 0.930 0 8 0 0 1 0 1,549 1 958,115 80,622 1PA BURNHAM BOROUGHPA0038920 0.64 0.59 9.00 1.500 0 8 0 2,456 1 0 3,211 1 989,561 137,944 1PA CARLISLE BOROUGHPA0026077 7 3.45 19.85 0.420 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 5,676,432 422,786 1PA CARLISLE SUBURBAN AUTPA0024384CURRENT0.925 0.70 8.00 0.650 0 8 0 0 1 0 1,122 1 1,191,737 138,001 1PA CHAMBERSBURG BOROUPA0026051BY 20055.2 4.78 8.00 2.650 0 8 223,722 69,774 1 0 25,804 1 4,561,171 627,679 1PA CLARKS SUMMIT-SOUTHAPA0028576 2 2.28 16.99 3.120 0 8 175,172 43,398 1 0 12,300 1 2,275,679 373,330 1PA CLEARFIELDPA0026310 4.5 2.62 11.04 0.780 0 8 0 0 1 0 7,870 1 4,102,241 356,678 1PA COLUMBIAPA0026123 2 0.83 17.50 0.700 0 8 0 0 1 0 1,821 1 2,275,679 135,371 1PA CURWENSVILLE MUNICIPAPA0024759 0.5 0.45 14.68 1.860 0 8 0 3,190 1 0 2,418 1 874,978 116,290 1PA DANVILLE MUNICIPAL AUTPA0023531 3.22 2.15 8.97 1.350 0 8 0 6,224 1 0 11,623 1 3,212,578 315,923 1PA DERRY TOWNSHIP MUNICPA0026484 5 3.47 14.77 1.330 0 8 0 9,430 1 0 18,776 1 4,431,721 460,880 1PA DILLSBURG BOROUGH AUPA0024431 1 0.66 11.07 0.880 0 8 0 0 1 0 2,709 1 1,390,000 126,762 1PA DOVER TOWNSHIP SEWEPA0020826CURRENT4 3.70 7.53 1.360 0 8 0 11,171 1 0 20,017 1 3,763,436 517,431 1PA DUNCANSVILLEPA0032883 1.217 0.61 8.00 2.310 0 8 163,292 9,864 1 0 3,294 1 1,596,276 112,163 1PA EAST PENNSBORO SOUTPA0038415 3.7 2.42 17.43 3.490 0 8 200,964 53,899 1 0 13,101 1 3,555,073 344,813 1PA EASTERN SNYDER COUNPA0110582BY 20052.8 1.60 8.00 3.950 0 8 187,310 42,890 1 0 8,663 1 2,902,223 243,221 1PA ELIZABETHTOWN BOROUPA0023108BY 20053 2.34 8.00 0.870 0 8 0 0 1 0 9,402 1 3,051,371 349,882 1PA ELKLAND MUNICIPAL AUTPA0113298 0.55 0.43 22.82 0.880 0 8 0 0 1 0 1,776 1 917,419 108,165 1PA EMPORIUM BOROUGH(MPA0028631 0.52 0.48 6.88 2.530 0 8 114,667 8,361 1 0 2,600 1 892,180 122,856 1PA EPHRATA BOROUGH WWTPA0027405 3.8 2.78 1.98 1.510 0 8 0 11,658 1 0 15,006 1 3,624,983 392,539 1PA FAIRVIEW TOWNSHIPPA0081868 0.5 0.40 11.07 0.640 0 8 0 0 1 0 621 1 874,978 103,908 1PA FRANKLIN COUNTY AUTHPA0020834 0.4 1.08 1.05 0.670 0 8 0 0 1 0 1,929 1 783,713 311,394 1PA GETTYSBURG MUNICIPALPA0021563CURRENT1.63 1.62 5.11 0.510 0 8 0 0 1 0 228 1 1,965,078 278,207 1PA GREATER HAZELTONPA0026921 8.9 6.68 10.36 0.940 0 8 0 0 1 0 31,529 1 6,777,827 775,360 1PA GREGG TOWNSHIPPA0114821CURRENT0.8 0.66 6.60 1.330 0 8 0 1,822 1 0 3,592 1 1,107,172 139,294 1NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-b109CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-B: PHOSPHORUS INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTATFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TPCCTPO&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETPCC TP O&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETIER 4 ($) (TP=0.1 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 ($) (TP=Current) TIER 2 $) (TP=1 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TP=0.5 for ALL)PA HAMPDEN TOWNSHIPPA0028746CURRENT1.76 1.30 8.00 1.060 0 8 0 641 1 0 7,000 1 2,076,053 218,866 1PA HAMPDEN TOWNSHIP SEWPA0080314 2.5 2.01 9.35 0.700 0 8 0 0 1 0 4,316 1 2,673,351 313,449 1PA HANOVER BOROUGHPA0026875 3.65 3.84 23.73 0.990 0 8 0 0 1 0 20,173 1 3,519,941 548,189 1PA HARRISBURG SEWERAGEPA0027197BY 201037.7 26.24 8.00 1.380 0 8 0 82,263 1 0 141,782 1 23,085,846 2,684,742 1PA HIGHSPIREPA0024040 2 1.05 14.97 1.630 0 8 0 5,442 1 0 5,663 1 2,275,679 171,883 1PA HOLLIDAYSBURG REGIONPA0043273 2 2.98 6.82 1.700 0 8 0 17,130 1 0 16,076 1 2,275,679 487,964 1PA HOUTZDALE BOROUGHMPA0046159CURRENT0.3 0.12 6.89 0.710 0 8 0 0 1 0 276 1 681,020 39,909 1PA HUNTINGDON BOROUGHPA0026191 3.75 2.13 11.07 1.310 0 8 0 5,292 1 0 11,530 1 3,590,086 302,530 1PA HYNDMAN BOROUGHPA0020851 0.104 0.08 11.11 1.100 0 8 0 69 1 0 450 1 412,902 44,435 1PA JERSEY SHORE BOROUGPA0028665 0.8 0.72 21.08 6.090 0 8 141,111 32,976 1 0 3,876 1 1,107,172 150,314 1PA KELLY TOWNSHIP MUNICPA0028681CURRENT2.75 1.82 2.20 0.780 0 8 0 0 1 0 5,510 1 2,864,524 277,412 1PA LACKAWANNA RIVER BASPA0027090 7 5.12 13.16 0.880 0 8 0 0 1 0 20,930 1 5,676,432 628,601 1PA LACKAWANNA RIVER BASPA0027065 6 2.45 9.13 1.660 0 8 0 13,352 1 0 13,222 1 5,067,115 311,140 1PA LACKAWANNA RIVER BASPA0027073 1 0.34 28.10 0.870 0 8 0 0 1 0 1,358 1 1,390,000 65,783 1PA LACKAWANNA RIVER BASPA0027081BY 20050.7 0.49 8.00 1.120 0 8 0 496 1 0 2,658 1 1,035,087 109,583 1PA LANCASTER AREA SEWERPA0042269BY 200515 7.78 8.00 0.750 0 8 0 0 1 0 20,704 1 9,760,640 833,618 1PA LANCASTER CITYPA0026743BY 201029.73 20.71 8.00 0.810 0 8 0 0 1 0 69,130 1 18,482,056 2,144,517 1PA LEBANON CITY AUTHORITPA0027316 8 5.50 33.65 1.390 0 8 0 17,519 1 0 29,739 1 6,264,304 654,670 1PA LEMOYNE BOROUGH MUNPA0026441 2.088 1.66 22.88 1.420 0 8 0 5,826 1 0 8,970 1 2,347,336 269,562 1PA LEWISBURG AREA JOINTPA0044661BY 20102.42 1.20 8.00 1.330 0 8 0 3,243 1 0 6,472 1 2,611,175 187,943 1PA LEWISTOWN BOROUGHPA0026280 2.4 1.89 14.00 1.300 0 8 0 4,699 1 0 10,238 1 2,595,551 297,906 1PA LITITZ SEWAGE AUTHORITPA0020320 3.5 3.02 23.00 1.570 0 8 0 14,194 1 0 16,344 1 3,413,810 435,750 1PA LITTLESTOWN BOROUGHPA0021229 1 0.51 12.51 1.720 0 8 0 3,021 1 0 2,742 1 1,390,000 97,739 1PA LOCK HAVENPA0025933BY 20103.75 2.18 8.00 2.420 0 8 201,723 29,561 1 0 11,782 1 3,590,086 309,155 1PA LOGAN TOWNSHIP-GREENPA0032557BY 20050.6 0.37 8.00 2.690 0 8 122,222 7,565 1 0 1,977 1 958,115 87,495 1PA LOWER ALLEN TOWNSHIPPA0027189 5.95 3.40 13.63 1.450 0 8 0 12,559 1 0 18,392 1 5,036,010 433,631 1PA LOWER LACKAWANNA VAPA0026361 6 3.50 17.54 1.570 0 8 0 16,610 1 0 18,911 1 5,067,115 444,999 1PA LYKENS BOROUGHPA0043575 0.41 0.24 11.07 1.310 0 8 0 619 1 0 1,306 1 793,284 68,803 1PA MAHANOY CITYPA0070041CURRENT1.38 0.57 8.00 2.670 0 8 165,765 11,192 1 0 3,089 1 1,745,110 102,173 1PA MANHEIM BOROUGH AUTPA0020893 1 0.79 8.82 1.350 0 8 0 2,318 1 0 4,292 1 1,390,000 152,977 1PA MANSFIELD BOROUGHPA0021814 1 0.58 10.50 2.240 0 8 160,000 9,118 1 0 3,111 1 1,390,000 110,887 1PA MARIETTA-DONEGAL JOINPA0021717 0.6 0.45 11.07 1.010 0 8 0 49 1 0 2,437 1 958,115 107,846 1PA MARTINSBURGPA0028347 0.5 0.41 11.07 1.490 0 8 0 1,657 1 0 2,208 1 874,978 106,229 1PA MARYSVILLE MUNICIPALAPA0021571 0.5 1.10 11.07 0.120 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 874,978 286,926 1PA MECHANICSBURG BOROUPA0020885 2.08 0.83 25.31 1.130 0 8 0 897 1 0 4,479 1 2,340,853 134,712 1PA MIDDLETOWNPA0020664 2.2 1.19 20.08 0.710 0 8 0 0 1 0 2,713 1 2,437,447 190,181 1PA MIFFLINBURG BOROUGHPA0028461CURRENT0.512 0.70 6.18 0.790 0 8 0 0 1 0 2,198 1 885,336 180,361 1PA MILLERSBURG BOROUGHPA0022535 1 0.70 11.07 1.310 0 8 0 1,792 1 0 3,778 1 1,390,000 134,655 1PA MILLERSVILLE BOROUGHPA0026620 1 0.69 1.75 1.300 0 8 0 1,730 1 0 3,726 1 1,390,000 132,781 1PA MILTON MUNICIPAL AUTHPA0020273 2.6 1.71 5.81 0.430 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 2,750,372 264,311 1PA MONTGOMERY BOROUGHPA0020699 0.6 0.52 32.35 2.330 0 8 122,222 8,126 1 0 2,792 1 958,115 123,545 1PA MOSHANNON VALLEY JOIPA0037966 1.5 1.43 14.07 0.450 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 1,851,848 249,869 1NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-b110CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-B: PHOSPHORUS INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTATFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TPCCTPO&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETPCC TP O&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETIER 4 ($) (TP=0.1 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 ($) (TP=Current) TIER 2 $) (TP=1 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TP=0.5 for ALL)PA MOUNT JOYPA0021067 1.3 0.75 22.45 0.320 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 1,672,652 135,374 1PA MOUNT UNION BOROUGHPA0020214 0.63 0.34 11.07 1.310 0 8 0 866 1 0 1,826 1 981,786 79,021 1PA MOUNTAINTOP AREAPA0045985CURRENT2.4 2.75 8.00 3.680 0 8 181,241 64,537 1 0 14,844 1 2,595,551 431,926 1PA MT. CARMEL MUNICIPALSPA0024406 1.5 0.95 22.90 2.750 0 8 167,586 17,038 1 0 5,112 1 1,851,848 165,809 1PA MT. HOLLY SPRINGS BORPA0023183 0.6 0.38 14.92 0.670 0 8 0 0 1 0 715 1 958,115 91,392 1PA MUNCY BOROUGH MUNICPA0024325 1.4 0.64 8.35 1.550 0 8 0 2,937 1 0 3,460 1 1,763,058 114,074 1PA NEW CUMBERLAND BOROPA0026654 1.25 0.49 11.07 0.480 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 1,626,795 90,161 1PA NEW FREEDOM WTPPA0043257 1.3 1.15 19.60 1.580 0 8 0 5,504 1 0 6,211 1 1,672,652 208,320 1PA NEW HOLLAND BOROUGHPA0021890 1.14 1.10 28.90 1.700 0 8 0 6,369 1 0 5,960 1 1,524,237 206,067 1PA NEW OXFORD MUNICIPALPA0020923CURRENT0.825 1.24 8.00 0.330 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 1,124,540 256,280 1PA NEWBERRY TOWNSHIPPA0083011 0.4 0.41 20.16 1.490 0 8 0 1,670 1 0 2,235 1 783,713 119,069 1PA NORTHEASTERN YORK CPA0023744 1.7 0.65 11.07 1.240 0 8 0 1,300 1 0 3,491 1 2,025,100 110,027 1PA NORTHUMBERLAND BOROPA0020567 0.75 0.45 19.07 0.630 0 8 0 0 1 0 633 1 1,071,677 97,234 1PA PALMYRA BOROUGH AUTPA0024287 1.42 0.82 28.31 1.480 0 8 0 3,244 1 0 4,406 1 1,780,940 144,781 1PA PENN TOWNSHIPPA0037150 4.2 1.66 9.34 1.090 0 8 0 1,242 1 0 8,990 1 3,900,164 229,776 1PA PINE CREEK MUNICIPALAPA0027553 1.3 0.64 17.90 1.550 0 8 0 2,916 1 0 3,465 1 1,672,652 116,225 1PA PINE GROVE BOROUGHAPA0020915 0.6 0.45 18.94 2.710 0 8 122,222 8,801 1 0 2,433 1 958,115 107,639 1PA PORTER TOWER JOINT MPA0046272CURRENT0.43 0.56 7.69 1.300 0 8 0 1,395 1 0 3,039 1 812,105 156,668 1PA ROARING SPRING BOROUPA0020249CURRENT0.7 0.68 5.61 1.540 0 8 0 3,041 1 0 3,681 1 1,035,087 151,765 1PA SAYREPA0043681 1.94 0.65 15.86 0.350 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 2,226,366 108,121 1PA SCRANTON SEWER AUTHPA0026492BY 200528 13.15 8.00 1.780 0 8 0 85,177 1 0 71,070 1 17,473,874 1,365,717 1PA SHAMOKIN-COAL TOWNSPA0027324 7 3.56 25.26 1.840 0 8 0 24,700 1 0 19,219 1 5,676,432 436,379 1PA SHENANDOAH MUNICIPALPA0070386 2 1.19 7.60 0.400 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 2,275,679 195,078 1PA SHIPPENSBURG BOROUGPA0030643 2.75 2.28 14.47 0.500 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 2,864,524 347,827 1PA SILVER SPRING TOWNSHPA0083593 0.5 0.16 5.92 0.470 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 874,978 40,819 1PA SOUTH MIDDLETON TOWNPA0044113 0.75 0.45 11.07 0.420 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 1,071,677 97,555 1PA SPRINGETTSBURY TOWNPA0026808CURRENT15 11.29 8.00 1.320 0 8 0 29,686 1 0 61,004 1 9,760,640 1,209,063 1PA ST. JOHNSPA0046388CURRENT0.6 0.32 5.88 1.070 0 8 0 185 1 0 1,729 1 958,115 76,509 1PA STEWARTSTOWN BOROUPA0036269 0.4 0.27 10.97 1.480 0 8 0 1,081 1 0 1,469 1 783,713 78,260 1PA SUNBURY CITY MUNICIPAPA0026557BY 20053.5 3.01 8.00 2.410 0 8 197,930 39,036 1 0 16,289 1 3,413,810 434,282 1PA SWATARA TOWNSHIPPA0026735BY 20056.3 3.34 8.00 1.640 0 8 0 17,786 1 0 18,033 1 5,252,406 419,567 1PA TOWANDA MUNICIPAL AUPA0034576CURRENT1 0.68 8.00 2.080 0 8 160,000 9,298 1 0 3,694 1 1,390,000 131,666 1PA TRI-BORO MUNICIPAL AUTPA0023736 0.5 0.28 10.21 0.990 0 8 0 0 1 0 1,503 1 874,978 73,782 1PA TWIN BOROUGHS SANITAPA0023264 0.6 0.35 11.07 1.310 0 8 0 885 1 0 1,865 1 958,115 82,522 1PA TYRONE BOROUGH SEWEPA0026727CURRENT9 6.40 4.45 0.390 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 6,834,065 740,666 1PA UNIVERSITY AREA JOINTPA0026239BY 20053.84 5.07 8.00 0.060 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 3,652,817 714,940 1PA UPPER ALLEN TOWNSHIPPA0024902 0.48 0.55 11.07 1.510 0 8 0 2,314 1 0 2,995 1 857,455 146,780 1PA WASHINGTON TOWNSHIPPA0080225CURRENT1 0.93 7.79 2.570 0 8 160,000 15,254 1 0 5,034 1 1,390,000 179,428 1PA WAYNESBORO BOROUGHPA0020621 1.59 0.87 5.25 4.810 0 8 168,951 57,274 1 0 9,254 1 1,930,489 150,328 1PA WELLSBORO MUNICIPALAPA0021687 2 1.18 19.89 1.810 0 8 0 7,872 1 0 6,384 1 2,275,679 193,758 1PA WESTERN CLINTON COUNPA0043893CURRENT0.9 0.35 2.58 0.900 0 8 0 0 1 0 1,526 1 1,175,260 70,078 1PA WHITE DEER TOWNSHIPPA0020800 0.42 0.27 20.34 2.430 0 8 105,222 5,336 1 0 1,474 1 802,746 76,780 1NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-b111CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-B: PHOSPHORUS INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTATFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TPCCTPO&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETPCC TP O&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETIER 4 ($) (TP=0.1 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 ($) (TP=Current) TIER 2 $) (TP=1 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TP=0.5 for ALL)PA WILLIAMSPORT SANITARYPA0027057BY 200510.5 7.32 8.00 3.400 0 8 304,134 151,230 1 0 39,528 1 7,010,600 797,388 1PA WILLIAMSPORT SANITARYPA0027049BY 20054.5 2.67 8.00 4.100 0 8 213,102 72,604 1 0 14,409 1 4,102,241 362,436 1PA WYOMING VALLEYPA0026107CURRENT50 23.86 5.21 1.360 0 8 0 71,004 1 0 128,912 1 30,084,265 2,407,145 1PA YORK CITYPA0026263CURRENT26 11.93 8.00 0.260 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 16,303,836 1,243,143 1PA Total469.21 301.350 0 4,793,727 1,724,742 0 1,291,747 396,116,842 40,127,199VA ALEXANDRIAVA0025160BY 200554 37.94 8.00 0.050 08 0 01 0 0 1 0 0BVA ALLEGHANY CO. LOWERJVA0090671 1.5 0.75 18.70 2.000 0 8 167,586 9,552 1 0 4,053 1 1,851,848 131,486 1VA AQUIAVA0060968CURRENT6.5 5.29 8.00 0.100 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 5,374,706 660,273 1VA ARLINGTONVA0025143BY 200540 35.29 8.00 0.060 08 0 01 0 0 1 0 0BVA ASHLANDVA0024899BY 20102 1.55 8.00 1.500 0 8a 175,172 22,725 1 0 8,375 1 2,275,679 254,216 1VA BROAD RUN WRFVA_BROADRBY 201015 2.40 8.00 0.100 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 17VA BUENA VISTAVA0020991 2.25 1.45 18.70 2.500 0 8 178,965 21,547 1 0 7,829 1 2,477,301 231,238 1VA CAPE CHARLESVA0021288 0.25 0.15 18.70 2.500 0 8 89,167 4,826 1 0 821 1 623,612 54,373 1VA CAROLINE COUNTY REGIOVA0073504 0.5 0.20 18.70 4.530 0 8 112,778 7,980 1 0 1,060 1 874,978 50,988 1VA CLIFTON FORGEVA0022772 2 1.23 18.70 2.500 0 8 175,172 18,807 1 0 6,668 1 2,275,679 202,405 1VA COLONIAL BEACHVA0026409BY 20102 0.85 13.26 2.720 0 8 175,172 15,570 1 0 4,572 1 2,275,679 138,784 1VA COVINGTONVA0025542 3 1.78 18.70 2.500 0 8 190,344 52,922 1 0 9,602 1 3,051,371 265,271 1VA CREWE STPVA0020303 0.5 0.20 11.54 0.280 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 874,978 51,172 1VA CULPEPERVA0061590BY 20054.5 2.27 8.00 1.500 0 8a 0 11,052 1 0 12,267 1 4,102,241 308,555 1VA DAHLGREN(DAHLGRENSVA0026514 0.325 0.30 6.82 0.540 0 8 0 0 1 0 116 1 708,032 96,298 1VA DALE CITY #1VA0024724BY 20054 3.06 8.00 0.090 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 3,763,436 427,580 1VA DALE CITY #8VA0024678BY 20054 2.85 8.00 0.100 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 3,763,436 397,670 1VA DOSWELLVA0029521BY 20101 6.75 8.00 1.500 0 8a 160,000 85,740 1 0 5,403 1 1,390,000 1,299,942 1VA FALLING CREEKVA0024996BY 201010.1 8.24 9.57 1.260 0 8 0 17,712 1 0 44,521 1 6,763,197 899,819 1VA FARMVILLEVA0083135CURRENT2.4 0.97 0.76 2.950 0 8 181,241 19,315 1 0 5,256 1 2,595,551 152,928 1VA FISHERSVILLEVA0025291 2 1.71 15.82 2.670 0 8 175,172 27,144 1 0 9,240 1 2,275,679 280,458 1VA FMCVA0068110BY 20055.4 3.29 8.00 1.500 0 8a 0 13,603 1 0 17,782 1 4,689,380 428,780 1VA FORT A.P. HILL(WILCOXCVA0032034CURRENT0.53 0.12 8.00 4.060 0 8 115,611 5,259 1 0 630 1 900,666 29,518 1VA FREDERICKSBURGVA0025127CURRENT3.5 2.23 8.00 1.320 0 8 0 5,819 1 0 12,048 1 3,413,810 321,206 1VA FRONT ROYALVA0062812 4 2.76 11.21 1.110 0 8 0 2,469 1 0 14,929 1 3,763,436 385,908 1VA FWSA OPEQUONVA0065552CURRENT8.4 5.89 8.00 1.140 0 8 0 6,903 1 0 31,830 1 6,494,226 692,822 1VA GORDONSVILLEVA0021105 0.67 0.57 18.70 2.500 0 8 128,833 9,596 1 0 3,059 1 1,012,557 128,660 1VA H.L. MOONEYVA0025101BY 200518 14.63 8.00 0.100 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 S 0 759,796 SVA HARRISONBURG-ROCKINVA0060640CURRENT16 11.65 8.00 2.200 0 8 0 0 23 0 62,951 1 10,364,714 1,243,671 1VA HAYMOUNT STPVA0089125BY 20100.95 0.95 8.00 1.500 0 8 0 3,927 1 0 5,133 1 1,208,015 184,010 1VA HENRICO COUNTYVA0063690BY 201075 50.00 8.00 1.530 0 8 300,000 500,000 S 0 270,175 1 300,000 580,000 SVA HOPEWELLVA0066630BY 201050 35.12 21.00 1.500 0 8a 1,070,000 365,000 16 0 0 16 26,550,000 1,461,300 16VA HRSD-ARMY BASEVA0081230 18 17.45 23.60 1.390 0 8 0 55,819 1 0 94,291 1 11,566,461 1,852,009 1VA HRSD-BOAT HARBORVA0081256 25 23.05 23.29 1.410 0 8 0 77,225 1 0 124,551 1 15,716,889 2,406,892 1VA HRSD-CHESAPEAKE/ELIZAVA0081264 24 26.30 24.32 1.570 0 8 0 124,804 1 0 142,112 1 15,128,584 2,751,813 1VA HRSD-JAMES RIVERVA0081272 20 20.00 20.27 1.320 0 8 0 52,667 1 0 108,070 1 12,760,503 2,111,605 1VA HRSD-NANSEMONDVA0081299CURRENT30 20.15 8.00 1.250 0 8 0 43,772 1 0 114,358 1 18,639,092 2,085,169 1NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-b112CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-B: PHOSPHORUS INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTATFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TPCCTPO&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETPCC TP O&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETIER 4 ($) (TP=0.1 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 ($) (TP=Current) TIER 2 $) (TP=1 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TP=0.5 for ALL)VA HRSD-VIPVA0081281CURRENT40 35.90 8.00 1.000 0 8 0 0 1 0 190,325 1 24,403,414 3,662,487 1VA HRSD-WILLIAMSBURGVA0081302 22.5 15.90 8.15 1.000 0 8 0 0 1 0 85,916 1 14,243,449 1,668,967 1VA HRSD-YORKVA0081311BY 201015 12.70 8.00 1.500 0 8a 0 34,796 1 0 69,265 1 9,760,640 1,360,100 1VA KILMARNOCKVA0020788 0.2 0.25 4.61 2.560 0 8 84,445 22,658 1 0 1,345 1 560,479 98,650 1VA LAKE MONTICELLO STPVA0024945 0.6 0.57 18.70 2.500 0 8 122,222 9,467 1 0 3,060 1 958,115 135,391 1VA LEESBURGMD0066184CURRENT4.85 2.96 8.00 1.420 0 8 0 10,322 1 0 15,985 1 4,333,782 395,171 1VA LEXINGTON-ROCKBRIDGEVA0088161CURRENT4 0.87 18.70 2.500 0 8 205,516 14,863 1 0 4,685 1 3,763,436 121,106 1VA LITTLE FALLS RUNVA0076392CURRENT4 4.16 8.00 0.880 0 8 0 0 1 0 12,207 1 3,763,436 581,054 1VA LURAYVA0062642 1.6 1.50 1.50 0.410 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 1,939,157 259,622 1VA LYNCHBURGVA0024970 22 17.40 8.50 3.080 0 8 478,612 308,781 1 0 94,021 1 13,947,657 1,828,449 1VA MASSANUTTEN PUBLIC SVA0024732 0.75 0.38 18.70 2.500 0 8 136,389 7,432 1 0 2,050 1 1,071,677 81,879 1VA MASSAPONAXVA0025658BY 20058 4.38 8.00 1.500 0 8a 0 0 1 0 23,682 1 6,264,304 521,326 1VA MATHEWS COURTHOUSEVA0028819 0.1 0.08 10.41 1.420 0 8 0 275 1 0 432 1 405,553 43,471 1VA MIDDLE RIVERVA0064793CURRENT6.8 5.65 8.00 2.050 0 8 247,998 54,207 1 0 30,530 1 5,556,410 697,873 1VA MONTROSS - WESTMOREVA0072729 0.1 0.03 6.54 1.170 0 8 0 44 1 0 168 1 405,553 16,863 1VA MOORES CREEK-RIVANNAVA0025518 15 11.89 13.46 3.170 0 8 372,408 219,075 1 0 63,711 1 9,760,640 1,273,139 1VA NAVAL SURFACE WARFARVA0021067CURRENT0.4 0.43 8.00 2.890 0 8 103,334 50,513 1 0 2,345 1 783,713 124,927 1VA NEW MARKET STPVA0022853 0.5 0.56 18.70 2.500 0 8 112,778 9,197 1 0 3,025 1 874,978 145,499 1VA NOMAN M. COLE JR. POLLVA0025364BY 200567 53.00 8.00 0.110 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 39,597,492 5,270,706 1VA ONANCOCKVA0021253 0.25 0.23 18.70 2.500 0 8 89,167 10,034 1 0 1,264 1 623,612 83,572 1VA ORANGEVA0021385BY 20101.5 0.69 8.00 1.500 0 8a 167,586 11,927 1 0 3,736 1 1,851,848 121,225 1VA PARHAM LANDING WWTPVA0088331 0.57 0.10 8.27 0.780 0 8 0 0 1 0 310 1 933,894 25,369 1VA PARKINS MILLVA0075191 2 1.42 18.70 2.500 0 8 175,172 21,125 1 0 7,678 1 2,275,679 233,060 1VA PROCTORS CREEKVA0060194CURRENT21.5 17.65 8.00 0.380 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 13,651,476 1,856,981 1VA PURCELLVILLEVA0022802BY 20051 0.42 8.00 2.500 0 8 160,000 8,452 1 0 2,289 1 1,390,000 81,569 1VA QUANTICO-MAINSIDEVA0028363CURRENT2.2 1.38 8.00 0.100 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 2,437,447 222,149 1VA REEDVILLEVA0060712 0.2 0.04 18.70 2.500 0 8 84,445 3,318 1 0 205 1 560,479 15,117 1VA REMINGTON REGIONALVA0076805BY 20052 0.57 8.00 1.500 0 8a 0 0 23 0 3,097 1 2,275,679 94,014 1VA RICHMONDVA0063177BY 201045 47.99 8.00 1.500 0 8a 0 198,373 1 0 145,391 1 27,252,964 4,867,426 1VA ROUND HILL WWTPVA0026212 0.5 0.15 18.70 3.000 0 8 112,778 4,745 1 0 813 1 874,978 39,128 1VA SIL MRRSVA0090263CURRENT1.923 1.27 8.00 1.500 0 22 0 0 22 0 0 22 2,212,325 209,375 1VA SOUTH CENTRALVA0025437BY 201023 12.93 8.00 1.500 0 8a 0 53,448 1 0 100,000 S 7,420,000 200,000 SVA SOUTH WALES STPVA0080527BY 20100.856 0.86 8.00 1.500 0 8 0 3,538 1 0 4,625 1 1,145,747 173,911 1VA STONY CREEK STPVA0028380 0.6 0.26 18.70 2.500 0 8 122,222 5,725 1 0 1,430 1 958,115 63,253 1VA STRASBURGVA0020311 0.98 0.77 18.70 2.500 0 8 158,111 12,743 1 0 4,175 1 1,227,295 147,537 1VA STUARTS DRAFTVA0066877BY 20051.4 1.50 8.00 1.500 0 8a 0 11,513 1 0 8,105 1 1,763,058 267,211 1VA TANGIER ISLANDVA0067423 0.1 0.05 18.70 2.500 0 8 75,000 3,823 1 0 249 1 405,553 25,142 1VA TAPPAHANNOCKVA0071471 0.8 0.37 18.70 2.500 0 8 0 0 23 0 2,020 1 1,107,172 78,346 1VA TOTOPOTOMOYVA0089915BY 20105 5.00 8.00 1.500 0 8a 0 20,668 1 0 27,017 1 4,431,721 663,191 1VA UPPER OCCOQUAN SEWAVA0024988 54 34.00 19.14 0.040 08 0 01 0 0 1 0 0BVA URBANNAVA0026263 0.1 0.11 18.70 2.500 0 8 75,000 8,928 1 0 611 1 405,553 61,403 1VA WARRENTONVA0021172 2.5 1.18 14.22 1.070 0 8 0 719 1 0 6,376 1 2,673,351 183,791 1NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-b113CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-B: PHOSPHORUS INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTATFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TPCCTPO&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETPCC TP O&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETIER 4 ($) (TP=0.1 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 ($) (TP=Current) TIER 2 $) (TP=1 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TP=0.5 for ALL)VA WARSAWVA0026891 0.3 0.22 18.70 2.500 0 8 93,889 17,796 1 0 1,173 1 681,020 71,309 1VA WAYNESBOROVA0025151 4 2.81 19.71 4.380 0 8 205,516 82,836 1 0 15,211 1 3,763,436 393,188 1VA WEST POINTVA0075434 0.6 0.60 18.70 2.500 0 8 122,222 11,048 1 0 3,749 1 958,115 143,455 1VA WEYERS CAVE STPVA0022349 0.5 0.40 18.70 2.500 0 8 112,778 7,216 1 0 2,161 1 874,978 103,969 1VA WIDEWATER WWTPVA0090387BY 20100.5 0.10 8.00 2.000 0 8 112,778 3,082 1 0 540 1 874,978 25,992 1VA WILDERNESS SHORESVA0083411 0.5 0.55 18.70 2.500 0 8 112,778 9,031 1 0 2,952 1 874,978 142,010 1VA WOODSTOCKVA0026468 0.8 0.42 18.70 2.500 0 8 141,111 8,010 1 0 2,261 1 1,107,172 87,677 1VA Total845.85 652.050 0 7,379,470 2,841,483 0 2,071,890 409,232,24652,293,664WV BERKELEY COUNTY PSSDWV0082759 2.35 0.93 5.16 3.000 0 8 180,482 18,933 1 0 5,008 1 2,556,347 146,420 1WV BERKELEY COUNTY PSSDWV0020061 0.9 0.60 5.25 3.000 0 8 150,556 12,958 1 0 3,251 1 1,175,260 119,444 1WV CHARLESTOWNWV0022349 1.2 0.75 10.74 3.000 0 8 163,034 15,617 1 0 4,038 1 1,580,472 137,960 1WV KEYSERWV0024392 2.4 1.21 17.01 1.050 0 8 0 449 1 0 6,520 1 2,595,551 189,716 1WV MARTINSBURGWV0023167 5 2.35 9.27 3.000 0 8 220,688 43,211 1 0 12,679 1 4,431,721 311,230 1WV MOOREFIELDWV0020150BY 20100.6 0.00 8.00 3.000 0 8 122,222 3,779 1 0 540 1 958,115 0 1WV PETERSBURGWV0021792 0.8 0.74 6.14 3.000 0 8 141,111 14,989 1 0 3,976 1 1,107,172 154,205 1WV ROMNEYWV0020699 0.5 0.46 17.20 3.000 0 8 112,778 9,806 1 0 2,467 1 874,978 118,693 1WV Total13.75 7.020 0 1,090,872 119,742 0 38,479 15,279,616 1,177,669Grand Total 2,341 1,767 0 0 39,422,6459,765,046 0 4,570,953 ###########148,149,906Source Notes* 2010 Data are the projections based on 2000 data. 2010 flows are projected with 2000 flow and population increase factor,except where facility's own projection is provided. Concentrations are the same as 2000.1 = Calculated from the methodologiesprovided from Thor Young, Stearn & Wheler, LLC and Tom Sadick, CH2M Hill.2 = NRT eligible cost report from MDE,4/23/02, where cost=0, MDE has indicated funds already appropriated2a= NRT Cost report, from MDE 3/6/20023 = Randall 51 Facility Report, 1999 for BNR @8 and additional 3/2001 report with 60 facilities.4 = Paid for by Corp of Engineers5 = From VA 2000 Annual Report and VA 2002 annual Report - Assumes that the cost share information equals 1/2 of total BNR costto get 8, and that funds are already made available for these facilities to go to 8,except for FMC and Henrico where no funds have been spent as of 2002.6 = Email from Bob Ehrhart to Allison Wiedeman, 3/7/027= BNR funded under federal funds.8 = No cost is applied, because TN or TP =current level for Tier 1 for this facility8a = The 2010 TP concentration of 1.5 mg/l shown for these facilities reflects the specific effluent concentration targeted byVirginia either under WQIF Grant program and/or the Tributary Strategy Plan for the Lower River Tributaries.9 = Cost survey from Seaford WWTP, 3/22/0210 = From 4/2/01 letters from Eastern Snyder County Regional Authority to Senator Specter. Also, costs not calculated to 8 because they are currently designing only to 3(4/26/01 Telephone conversation between CBPO and Gannett Hemming)11= Message from WVDEP, cost=0 due to irrigation.12 = Email message from Paul Janiga, DE DNREC, 3/28/02.13 = Cost survey from Mike Kyle, LASA, 3/6/0214 = DC CSO & Blue Plains Cost Estimates- UAA cost analysis, from Tanya spano, WMCOG, 4/10/0215 = Telephone conversation with Sunberry WWTP, 6/21/0116 = Cost Summary: City of Hopewell, from Bob Steidel, Hopewell Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility. 8/7/2002.17= Message from Tom Broderick, LCSA, concerning Broad Run, 3/11/0218 = Message from Marya Levelev, 4/5/02, Western Branch already can achieve 3 mg/l.NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-b114CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-B: PHOSPHORUS INCREMENTAL COST FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIES IN THE BAY WATERSHEDDESIGNSTATFACILITYNPDESBNRSTATUSFLOW(MGD)FLOW(MGD)TN(mg/l)TP(mg/l)TPCCTPO&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETPCC TP O&MTPNOTETP CC TP O&MTPNOTETIER 4 ($) (TP=0.1 for ALL)2010 DATA* TIER 1 ($) (TP=Current) TIER 2 $) (TP=1 for ALL) TIER 3 ($) (TP=0.5 for ALL)19 = Message from Marya Levelev, 8/12/02, to add $10 million TN cc in Tier 2 for Back River20 = Message from Bob Steidel, 9/17/02, to remove the Tier 1 cost for Hopewell.21 = Message from Bob Ehrhart, 9/4/02, to remove Tier 1 costs for FMC and Hopewell.22 = Message from Bob Ehrhart, 9/19/02, to add SIL which replaced Broadway Lagoons, Timberville, Rocco Quality Foods and Wampler Foods-Timberville.23 = Message from Bob Ehrhart, 11/14/02, No Tier 2 TP cost due to chemical feed facilities have been funded.A = The capital costs at TN =3 from sources other than calculation are applied to Tier 3 for TN. And, in these cases, the Tier 4 TN capital costs are set to zero. Message from Allison Wiedeman, 5/3/02.B = The value is set to zero, because this plant's TN or TP level have been lower than the defined level in this Tier for morethan five years.C14 = Message from W. Hunley, HRSD, 10/3/02C15 = Cost shown represent an order of magnitude planning level estimate as transmitted by HRSD on October 3, 2002. A less costly alternative, which provides for only seasonal nitrificationand/or an annual average TN concentration greater than 8.0 mg/l, does potentially exist as discussed in the September1989 Technical Memoranda C.22 and C. 25 prepared by CH2M Hill. Message from Bob Ehrhart, 11/4/02C6 = Letter from City of Lynchburg to Allison Wiedeman, 7/14/2001C9 = Bos, Robert E, PE, Public Utility Administrator with County of Stafford, letter to Allison Wiedeman, EPA, re: Nitrogen Removal Costs, 7/31/01M = For facilities with existing capital costs and no O&M costs available, the O&M costs are calculated from exiting capitlalcosts adjusted by the cost ratio between calculated O&M and capital cost fromthe methodologies provided from Thor Young, Stearn & Wheler, LLC and Tom Sadick, CH2M Hill.N = NRT facilities that currently have or will install NRT by 2010, It is assumed that no additional cost is needed.S = From NRT cost survey results.NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-b115CBPO,11/22/2002Table X-C: NRT CAPITAL COST SUMMARY FOR POINT SOURCES BY STATE AND CATEGORYDESIGN# OF FLOWPLANTS (MGD) TN CC TP CC TN CC TP CC TN CC TP CC TN CC TP CC TN CC TP CC TN CC TP CC TN CC TP CCWATERSHED TOTALSIGNIFICANT 304 2,336.01 597.91 0 921.44 40.09 1,519.36 40.09 1,190.49 0 2,709.85 40.09 1,663.59 1,301.89 4,373.44 1,341.98NON-SIGNIFICANT 185 21.17 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 83.09 11.30 83.09 11.30INDUSTRIAL 49 459.51 0.00 0 48.57 2.36 48.57 2.36 46.02 0.8 94.58 3.16 112.58 83.91 207.17 87.07DC-CSO1 7.61 130.00 0 0 0 130.00 0 0 0 130.00 0 3,500.00 0 3,630.00 0TOTAL 539 2,824.30 727.91 0 970.01 42.45 1,697.92 42.45 1,236.51 0.8 2,934.43 43.25 5,359.27 1,397.11 8,293.70 1,440.35TOTAL BY STATEDCSIGNIFICANT 1 169.40 0.00 0 15.11 9.16 15.11 9.16 103.01 0 118.12 9.16 167.11 11.45 285.23 20.60CSO 1 7.61130.00 00.00 0.00 130.00 0.00 0.00 0130.00 0.003,500.00 0.00 3,630.00 0.00DC TOTAL 2 177.01 130.00 0 15.11 9.16 145.11 9.16 103.01 0 248.12 9.16 3,667.11 11.45 3,915.23 20.60DESIGNIFICANT 3 3.30 3.19 0 2.37 0.25 5.56 0.25 3.18 0 8.74 0.25 4.15 4.26 12.90 4.51INDUSTRIAL 1 37.83 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00DE TOTAL 4 41.13 3.19 0 2.37 0.25 5.56 0.25 3.18 0 8.74 0.25 4.15 4.26 12.90 4.51MDSIGNIFICANT 65 725.82 384.75 0 25.13 11.79 409.88 11.79 356.36 0 766.24 11.79 658.43 398.36 1,424.66 410.14NON-SIGNIFICANT 181 20.59 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 80.97 10.99 80.97 10.99INDUSTRIAL 10 53.30 0.00 0 12.25 0.21 12.25 0.21 5.89 0 18.14 0.21 5.70 15.76 23.84 15.97MD TOTAL 256 799.71 384.75 0 37.38 12.00 422.13 12.00 362.25 0 784.38 12.00 745.09 425.10 1,529.47 437.10NYSIGNIFICANT 18 82.57 0.00 0 61.87 3.29 61.87 3.29 40.60 0 102.47 3.29 71.58 65.43 174.05 68.71NY TOTAL 18 82.57 0.00 0 61.87 3.29 61.87 3.29 40.60 0 102.47 3.29 71.58 65.43 174.05 68.71PASIGNIFICANT 123 469.21 72.08 0 277.87 4.79 349.94 4.79 319.81 0 669.76 4.79 241.32 396.12 911.08 400.91INDUSTRIAL 19 75.62 0.00 0 17.34 0.79 17.34 0.79 16.95 0 34.29 0.79 47.98 23.89 82.27 24.67PA TOTAL 142 544.84 72.08 0 295.20 5.58 367.28 5.58 336.77 0 704.05 5.58 289.30 420.00 993.35 425.58VASIGNIFICANT 86 871.95 137.90 0 515.90 9.72 653.80 9.72 356.55 0 1,010.35 9.72 505.21 411.00 1,515.56 420.72NON-SIGNIFICANT 1 0.05 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.07 0.40 0.07INDUSTRIAL 16 292.44 0.00 0 13.79 1.27 13.79 1.27 22.72 0.8 36.51 2.07 58.37 44.27 94.88 46.34VA TOTAL 103 1,164.44 137.90 0 529.68 10.99 667.58 10.99 379.28 0.8 1,046.86 11.79 563.98 455.35 1,610.84 467.13WVSIGNIFICANT 8 13.75 0.00 0 23.19 1.09 23.19 1.09 10.97 0 34.16 1.09 15.79 15.28 49.96 16.37NON-SIGNIFICANT 3 0.53 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 1.71 0.25 1.71 0.25INDUSTRIAL 3 0.32 0.00 0 5.19 0.10 5.19 0.10 0.45 0 5.64 0.10 0.54 0.00 6.18 0.10WV TOTAL 14 14.60 0.00 0 28.38 1.19 28.38 1.19 11.42 0 39.81 1.19 18.05 15.53 57.85 16.71NOTE: Blue Plains costs are allocated among DC, MD and VA according to the Blue Plains cost allocation methodology by MWCOG.Non-significant category covers only plants with existing data in the database, which are mainly MD facilities. Most VA non-significant plants are not yet included due to no loading data.Many industrial facilities do not have design flow data available. 2010 flows were used for industrial design flows. Actual design flows were used for several MD plants that have the data.TN CC = Total Nitrogen Capital Costs; TP CC = Total Phosphorus Capital CostsTIER 1 COSTS ($MIL)TIER 4 COST ($MIL)TIER 2 COST ($MIL) TIER 3 COST ($MIL)CUMULATIVE INCREMENTAL CUMULATIVEINCREMENTAL INCREMENTAL CUMULATIVE INCREMENTALNRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstalbe x-c116CBPO, 11/12/2002Table X-D: NRT INCREMENTAL COST SUMMARY FOR POINT SOURCES BY CATEGORY AND STATESignificant Plants SummarySTATE#PLANTSDESIGNFLOWTN CC TN O&M TN CC TN O&M TP CC TP O&M TN CC TN O&M TP CC TP O&M TN CC TN O&M TP CC TP O&MDC Total 1 153 0 0 15,108,649 2,537,112 9,156,757 1,537,644 103,013,514 6,135,027 0 0 167,110,811 8,012,748 11,445,946 548,818DE Total 33.33,187,400 63,244 2,374,508 147,026 253,889 20,257 3,182,908 46,665 0 9,807 4,152,080 106,537 4,257,828 338,180MD Total 65 726 384,749,909 7,788,496 25,126,486 2,681,237 11,786,742 2,366,944 356,361,691 11,986,151 0 805,854 658,425,237 20,010,054 398,357,668 45,487,670NY Total 18 82.57 0 0 61,874,054 1,182,996 3,285,513 872,847 40,600,618 990,925 0 353,177 71,577,888 2,080,192 65,428,020 8,076,273PA Total 123 469.21 72,079,813 1,866,433 277,865,025 5,667,625 4,793,727 1,724,742 319,811,406 6,443,904 0 1,291,747 241,323,231 6,681,174 396,116,842 40,127,199VA Total 86 888 137,897,837 2,649,908 515,898,541 6,206,296 9,721,232 3,261,645 356,552,954 16,008,012 0 2,071,890 505,210,107 13,017,780 411,003,381 52,423,385WV Total 8 13.75 0 0 23,193,004 403,506 1,090,872 119,742 10,971,658 163,451 0 38,479 15,792,986 365,233 15,279,616 1,177,669Grand To304 2,336 597,914,959 12,368,080 921,440,267 18,825,798 40,088,731 9,903,821 1,190,494,749 41,774,135 0 4,570,953 1,663,592,340 50,273,719 1,301,889,303 148,179,194Insignificant Plants SummarySTATE#PLANDESIGNTN CC TN O&M TN CC TN O&M TP CC TP O&M TN CC TN O&M TP CC TP O&M TN CC TN O&M TP CC TP O&MMD 181 20.59 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 80,973,919 612,243 10,986,221 287,877VA 1 0.05 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 0403,080 2,342 70,278 1,729WV 3 0.53 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 01,712,349 9,949 246,761 6,914GRANDT185 21.17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 83,089,348 624,534 11,303,260 296,520Industrial Plants SummarySTATE#PLANTSDESIGNFLOWTN CC TN O&M TN CC TN O&M TP CC TP O&M TN CC TN O&M TP CC TP O&M TN CC TN O&M TP CC TP O&MDE Total 1 37.83 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0MD Total 10 53.30 0 0 12,251,672 544,428 210,673 47,381 5,888,095 424,429 0 113,749 5,695,679 251,363 15,756,779 2,550,713PA Total 19 75.62 0 0 17,337,769 321,654 785,589 172,314 16,954,957 504,830 0 138,513 47,981,091 1,733,061 23,885,080 3,648,345VA Total 16 292.44 0 0 13,786,149 1,402,538 1,265,216 722,524 22,723,729 2,297,555 800,000 203,087 58,365,921 2,556,857 44,272,979 6,519,313WV Total 3 0.32 0 0 5,190,884 102,636 95,395 4,520 449,977 12,366 0 1,707 541,288 34,255 0 0GRANDT49 459.51 0 0 48,566,474 2,371,256 2,356,873 946,739 46,016,759 3,239,180 800,000 457,056 112,583,979 4,575,535 83,914,838 12,718,371CSO SUMMARYSTATE#PLANTSDESIGNFLOWTN CC TN O&M TN CC TN O&M TP CC TP O&M TN CC TN O&M TP CC TP O&M TN CC TN O&M TP CC TP O&MDC 17.61130,000,000 6,500,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,500,000,000 175,000,000GRAND TOTALW/O CSO538 2,817 597,914,959 12,368,080 970,006,741 21,197,054 42,445,603 10,850,560 1,236,511,508 45,013,315 800,000 5,028,009 1,859,265,666 55,473,788 1,397,107,401 161,194,086W CSO 539 2,824 727,914,959 18,868,080 970,006,741 21,197,054 42,445,603 10,850,560 1,236,511,508 45,013,315 800,000 5,028,009 5,359,265,666230,473,788 1,397,107,401 161,194,086NOTE: Blue Plains costs are allocated among DC, MD and VA according to the flow allocation projected by MWCOG. Most VA insignificant plants are not yet included.TIER 1 COSTS ($) TIER 2 COST ($) TIER 3 COSTS ($) TIER 4 COSTS ($)TIER 1 COSTS ($) TIER 2 COST ($) TIER 3 COSTS ($) TIER 4 COSTS ($)TIER 1 COSTS ($) TIER 2 COST ($) TIER 3 COSTS ($) TIER 4 COSTS ($)TIER 1 COSTS ($) TIER 2 COST ($) TIER 3 COSTS ($) TIER 4 COSTS ($)NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-d117CBPO, 11/12/2002Table X-E: NRT INCREMENTAL COST SUMMARY FOR SIGNIFICANT MUNICIPAL FACILITIESSTATE TN CC TN O&M TN CC TN O&M TP CC TP O&M TN CC TN O&M TP CC TP O&MTN CC TN O&M TP CC TP O&MDC Total 0 0 33,000,000 5,541,509 20,000,000 3,358,491 225,000,000 13,400,000 0 0 365,000,000 17,501,280 25,000,000 1,198,718DE Total 3,187,400 63,244 2,374,508 147,026 253,889 20,257 3,182,908 46,665 0 9,807 4,152,080 106,537 4,257,828 338,180MD Total 384,749,909 7,788,496 10,000,000 141,129 2,619,174 827,485 253,226,556 5,843,881 0 805,854 491,117,129 11,987,846 386,898,209 44,938,204NY Total 0 0 61,874,054 1,182,996 3,285,513 872,847 40,600,618 990,925 0 353,177 71,577,888 2,080,192 65,428,020 8,076,273PA Total 72,079,813 1,866,433 277,865,025 5,667,625 4,793,727 1,724,742 319,811,406 6,443,904 0 1,291,747 241,323,231 6,681,174 396,116,842 40,127,199VA Total 137,897,837 2,649,908 513,133,676 5,742,007 8,045,556 2,980,258 337,701,603 14,885,310 0 2,071,890 474,629,026 11,551,456 408,908,787 52,322,951WV Total 0 0 23,193,004 403,506 1,090,872 119,742 10,971,658 163,451 0 38,479 15,792,986 365,233 15,279,616 1,177,669Grand Total 597,914,959 12,368,080 921,440,267 18,825,798 40,088,731 9,903,821 1,190,494,749 41,774,135 0 4,570,953 1,663,592,340 50,273,719 1,301,889,303 148,179,194Note: The costs listed are incremental.TIER 1 COSTS ($) TIER 2 COST ($) TIER 3 COSTS ($)TIER 4 COSTS ($)NRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-e118CBPO, 11/6/2002Table X-F: Total Design Flow and TN Capital Cost Summary for Significant Municipals by State# of Design # of Capital Cost # of Capital Cost # of Capital Cost # of Capital CostState Plants Flow (MGD) Plants MGD % $million Plants MGD % $million Plants MGD % $million Plants MGD % $millionDC 1 169.4 0 0.0 0% 0.00 1 169.4 100% 15.11 1 169.4 100% 103.01 1 169.4 100% 167.11DE 3 3.3 1 0.8 24% 3.19 1 0.5 15% 2.37 3 3.3 100% 3.18 3 3.3 100% 4.15MD 65 725.8 31 162.2 22% 384.75 1 349.6 48% 25.13 64 695.8 96% 356.36 64 695.8 96% 658.43NY 18 82.6 0 0.0 0% 0.00 15 50.6 61% 61.87 17 72.6 88% 40.60 17 72.6 88% 71.58PA 123 469.2 15 129.5 28% 72.08 85 188.7 40% 277.87 120 423.5 90% 319.81 102 220.9 47% 241.32VA 86 876.7 14 127.9 15% 137.90 45 385.9 44% 515.90 82 867.7 99% 356.55 60 545.1 62% 505.21WV 8 13.8 0 0.0 0% 0.00 7 13.2 96% 23.19 8 13.8 100% 10.97 8 13.8 100% 15.79Total 304 2,341 61 420 598 155 1,158 921 295 2,246 1,190 255 1,721 1,664TN Cost Notes: (detailed notes were listed in Table X-A)Tier 1:MD All costs for 31 plants were provided from MDE, $200 million is due to Potapsco alone.PA 5 plants used calculated costs; Costs for another 5 plants were from the Randall report; The remaining 5 plants used costs from survey or facility contacts.VA 4 plants used calculated costs; 1 plant used the Randall report cost; 4 plants used the grant agreement costs; the remaining5 plants used costs from survey or facility contacts.Tier 2:MD Back River ($ 10 million) and Blue Plains ($ 15Million)PA 79 plants used calculated costs; Cost for 5 plant were from the Randall report; The remaining 1 plant used costs from surveyor facility contacts.VA 29 plants used calculated costs; 7 plants used the Randall report cost; the remaining 9 plants used costs from survey or facility contacts.Table X-G: Total Design Flow and TP Capital Cost Summary for Significant Municipals by State# of Design # of Capital Cost # of Capital Cost # of Capital Cost # of Capital CostState Plants Flow (MGD)Plants MGD %$million Plants MGD %$million Plants MGD %$million Plants MGD %$millionDC 1 169.4 0 0.0 0% 0.00 1 169.4 100% 9.16 0 0.0 0% 0.00 1 169.4 100% 11.45DE 3 3.3 0 0.0 0% 0.00 2 1.3 39% 0.25 0 0.0 0% 0.00 3 3.3 100% 4.26MD 65 725.8 0 0.0 0% 0.00 16 206.5 28% 11.79 0 0.0 0% 0.00 65 725.8 100% 398.36NY 18 82.6 0 0.0 0% 0.00 16 72.0 87% 3.29 0 0.0 0% 0.00 18 82.6 100% 65.43PA 123 469.2 0 0.0 0% 0.00 27 71.1 15% 4.79 0 0.0 0% 0.00 123 469.2 100% 396.12VA 86 876.7 0 0.0 0% 0.00 44 259.4 30% 9.72 0 0.0 0% 0.00 81 695.7 79% 411.00WV 8 13.8 0 0.0 0% 0.00 7 11.3 83% 1.09 0 0.0 0% 0.00 8 13.8 100% 15.28Total 304 2,341 0 0 0 113 791 40 0 0 0 299 2,160 1,302Note: Blue Plains design flow and costs were allocated among DC, MD and VA based on the ratios provided by MWCOG for UAA.But Blue Plains is counted only once in the "# of Plants" columns as a DC plant.The "%" columns list the percentage of the design flow costed over the total design flow in each state.Design FlowDesign FlowDesign Flow Design FlowDesign Flow Design Flow Design Flow Design FlowTier 1 Facilities with Costs Tier 2 Facilities with Costs Tier 3 Facilities with Costs Tier 4 Facilities with CostsTier 1 Facilities with Costs Tier 2 Facilities with Costs Tier 3 Facilities with Costs Tier 4 Facilities with CostsNRT_TABLE_V-X.xlstable x-f-g119CBPO, 11/6/2002