HomeMy WebLinkAboutW&S Plan_1994 Update• WATER
PLAN
-Washington County, Maryland.
1994 Update
GE
Prepared y the Washington County. Planning Department;.
CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, Title 9, Subtitle 5 of the Health -Environmental
Article of the Annotated Code of Maryland required the governing
body of each County to adopt and submit to the Department of the
Environment, amendments to the existing plan dealing with water
supply systems and sewerage systems, and
WHEREAS, following a public hearing by the Board of County
Commissioners for Washington County on March 29, 1994, the Board
adopted text and map amendments to the Water and Sewerage Plan as
required by Title 9, Subtitle,5 of the Health -Environmental Article
of the Annotated Code of Maryland for submission to the Maryland
Department of the Environment for approval.
THIS IS TO CERTIFY, that the Board of County Commissioners for
Washington County have adopted on May 17, 1994 and declared their
intentions to faithfully execute and implement, to the best of its
ability,- all aspects of the amendments as they pertain to the
Washington County Water and Sewerage Plan.
Signed this J' Day of
ATTEST::
Jam' L . BIttner, Clerk
.i
1994.
i hard E.Roulet e,President
Board of County Commissioners
for Washington County
IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION .02 OF THE REGULATIONS FOR
PLANNING WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE SYSTEMS, TITLE 9
OF THE ANNOTATED CODE OF MARYLAND, NOTICE HAS BEEN
GIVEN TO ALL MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS REGARDING THE
PREPARATION OF THE COUNTY PLAN AND SUCH OFFICALS
OR ENTIITIES HAVE BEEN GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE
HEARD WITH RESPECT TO THE PREPARATION OF THIS PLAN.
THE WASHINGTON COUNTY WATER AND SEWERAGE PLAN AND
AMENDMENTS HEREIN ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE COUNTY ADOPTED BY THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON FEBRUARY 17, 1981.
0 -LL
ROBERT C. ARCH, PLANNING DIRECTOR
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Mcty 7, 1q'?y
ATE
ii
CERTIFICATE OF ADOPTION
WHEREAS, Article 43, Section 387C of the Annotated Code of Maryland
requires the governing body of each County to adopt and submit to the Depart -
went of Health and Mental Hygiene., a plan dealing with water supply systems
and sewerage systems, and
WHEREAS, following a public hearing by the Washington County Planning
and Zoning Commission on September 26, 1974, by the Board of Washington County
Commissioners on November 19, 1974, by the Washington County Planning Commis-
sion, Hagerstown Planning Commission, Board of Washington County Commissioners,
and City of Hagerstown Mayor and Council on April 8, 1975, the Board of Washington
County Commissioners on May 13, 1975, adopted a Water and Sewerage Plan as
required by Article 43, Section 387C of the Annotated Code of Maryland:
THIS IS TO CERTIFY, that the Washington County Board of County
C3'rissioners have adopted and declared their intentions to faithfully execute
and'implement, to the best of it's ability, all aspects of the Washington
County Water and Sewerage Plan.
Signed this /J day o , 1975.
Marti L. nook, resident
Washington County Board of
ATTEST: County Commissioners
`rte
onald L. Charles, Cler
Washington County Board of County Commissioners
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. GOALS AND ORGANIZATION
Purpose I - 1
Goals I - 3
Objectives I - 4
Organization I - 7
Development Review Procedures I - 10
II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Physical Features II - 1
Population Analysis II - 57
Land Use II - 61
Growth Management and Land Preservation
Strategy II - 69
III. EXISTING AND PLANNED WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS
Existing Water Service Areas. III - 2
Planned Service Areas III - 7
Projected Demands III - 25
Water Problem Areas & Water Conservation III - 30
Program for Correction III - 34
Policy For Water Line Installation
In Areas Where Service Is Not Available III - 47
Service Area Requirements III - 48
Priority Area Requirements III - 5].
iv
PAGE
IV. EXISTING AND PLANNED SEWERAGE SYSTEMS
Existing Sewerage Facilities and Service
Areas - Washington County Sanitary District
IV -
1
Planned Sewerage Service Areas -
Washington County Sanitary District
IV -
16
Existing and Planned Sewerage Service Areas -
City of Hagerstown, Other Municipalities
and Service Providing Agencies
IV -
20
Projected Demands
IV -
29
Sewage Flow Allocation
IV -
43
Sludge Management
IV -
60
Policy For Sewer Line Installation
In Areas Where Service Is Not Available
IV -
69
Policy On Sewage Disposal Alternatives
IV -
71
Policy On Interim Treatment Plants
IV -
74
Service Area Requirements
IV -
76
Priority Area Requirements
IV -
79
V. ADMINISTRATION AND IMPLEMENTATION..
Introduction
V -
1
Water Facilities
V -
2
Sewerage Facilities
V -
3
Management Of Connection Allocations
V -
6
County -Wide Water And Sewer Authority
V -
6
APPENDICES
A Definitions
A -
1
B Amendment Procedures
B -
1
v
C Listing of Service Agreements C - 1
D Policy On Interim And Permanent
Community Water And Sewerage Systems D - 1
E Revised Policy Statement for City
of Hagerstown Water Pollution
Control Plant Capacity Allocation E - 1
F Resolutions Adopted by the Board of
County Commissioners of Washington
County and -the- Mayor.and Council of
the City of Hagerstown Relating to
the Hagerstown Urban Growth Area,
Water and Sewer Study prepared by
BCM Engineers, Inc. F - 1
G Compilation of Financial Management
Statistics, "FS" Schedules for Publicly
Owned Community Sewerage Systems G — 1
vi:.
LIST OF MAPS
FOLLOWS
MAP NO.
PAGE
I
Generalized Topography
II - 2
II
Ground Cover
II - 2
III
Soil Drainage Characteristics
II - 2
IV
(Deleted),
V
Major Watersheds
II - 16
VI
Water Provinces
II - 40
VII
Aquifer Characteristics
II - 45
VIII
(Deleted)
IX
Washington County Election Districts
II - 58
and Planning Sectors
X
Generalized Existing Land Use (Out of Print)
XI
Major- Public' Institutions
II - 75
XII
Smithsburg Town Growth Area
II - 75
XIII
Boonsboro Town Growth Area
II - 75
XIV
Urban Growth Area
II - 75
XV
Hancock Town Growth Area
II - 75
Series of
Water Service Priority Area
Numbers
Maps (1" = 20001)
III - 55
Series of
Sewerage Service Priority Area
Numbers
Maps (1" = 2000')
IV - 83
Water and Sewerage Facilities And Service
Inside
Areas (1" = 1 mile)
Front
Pocket
Flow Allocation Schematic for Hagerstown
Inside
and Halfway Sewerage Service Areas
Front
Pocket
vii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO.
PAGE
1
Washington County Population
Patterns
II
- 59
1--A
Washington County Projections
By Election District
II
- 60
2-A
Historic, Land_.Use_Change 1973.-.1990
II
- 66
2-B
Land Cover Forecast 1990 - 2000
II
- 67
2-C
Zoning Classifications 1991
II
- 68
2-D
Population Of Major Public
Institutions
II
- 75
3
Projected Water Supply Demands
And Planned Capacity
III
- 28
4
Inventory Of Existing Community
Water Supplies
III
- 29
5
Inventory Ofysater Supply
Problem Areas
III
- 38
6
Immediate Five And Ten Year
Priorities For Water Development
III
- 43
9
Projected Sewerage Demands And.
Planned Capacity
IV -
31
viii
TABLE NO.
10
Inventory Of Existing Sewage
Treatment Plants
10-A
Inventory Of Existing Interceptors,
Pumping Stations And Force Mains
For Large Service Areas
11
Inventory Of Discharge Permits
12
Flow Allocations For Sewage
Treatment Plants
12-A
Flow Allocations For Interceptors
Or Pumping Stations For Large
Service Areas
12-B
Flow Allocations For Major
Developments
13
Inventory Of Sewage, Drainage,
And Water Pollution Problem Areas
14
Immediate Five And Ten Year
Priorities For Sewerage
Development
15
Inventory of Current Sewerage Sludge
Generation and Utilization
ix
PAGE
IV -
33
IV -
36
IV -
40
IV -
44
IV -
45
IV -
50
IV -
54
IV -
55
IV -
68
Chapter One
GOALS AND ORGANIZATION
PURPOSE
The State of Maryland's fundamental purpose in establishing
regulations which require the governing body of each County to
develop an on -going plan for water supply and sewerage systems is
to achieve a consistency with the County's adopted Comprehensive
Plan for guiding development. Inherent in this purpose is the
realization that the planning and implementation of water and
sewerage facilities constitute the most physically direct method
of guiding development within the County.
In virtually every instance growth is contingent upon the
availability of the necessary facilities to sustain the higher
orders of development._._The,znstallation of water distribution
lines, sewage collection lines, and adequate transportation
networks serve as a magnet for the location of new residential
projects, industrial complexes and supportive commercial
activities. Although the exact timing and magnitude of the
higher development forms will be determined in part by much more
regional economic conditions, the fact remains that their
location will directly manifest the development policies of
Washington County and its incorporated municipalities.
Consequently, it becomes well apparent that a Water and.. Sewerage
Plan, in order to be truly comprehensive, must go beyond merely
the crisis oriented approach of abating existing problems, and
strive to contribute and reinforce the overall planning
objectives of the study area. While zoning establishes the
developmental guidelines for primarily private sector
initiatives, the process of implementing water and sewerage plans
is a direct, more immediate public effort to move from plan to
reality.
This plan provides information in the form of maps, charts, and
tables which give a general overall picture of the current and
projected status of water and sewerage systems in Washington
County. The plan is intended to provide the basis for more
detailed planning at the projected level. The general level of
information and the scale of mapping within the plan do not
reflect such details as the specific location of all water and
sewerage lines, or the availability or economic feasibility of
service to particular parcels of land. For such information, the
applicable agencies and.municipalities.providing. these services
must be contacted.
Plan maps within this document do not represent a commitment by
the Board of County Commissioners or by any agency or
municipality to provide water and sewer service by a specified
time. Service priority designations shown on the plan maps
indicate the general time frame in which it can be reasonably
expected that these services will be provided and are based upon
I-2
the current intentions of service providers and of private land
owners and developers to the extent that they are known. The
actual construction of facilities and extension of services will
depend upon a number of factors such as economic feasibility,
availability of funds, and initiative on the part of private land
owners and developers.
GOALS
It is the purpose of the Comprehensive Water and Sewerage Plan to
provide for the continued health and well-being of Washington
Countians and our downstream neighbors through extensive,
thorough public and private sector cooperation in the formation
of long range plans for adequate water supply and effective
sewerage disposal and treatment for Washington County. To this
end, the following goal s..- are - -hereby- established.
1. To protect the health, safety and welfare of the people of
Washington County by providing acceptable and adequate water
supply and sanitary sewerage facilities to all areas of the
County.
2. To coordinate the policies and plans relative to land use and
the provision of water and sewerage facilities to assure a
logical growth pattern in Washington County.
3. To identify and analyze all sources of pollution within the
County and devise the means by which the adverse impact can
be minimized or eliminated.
I-3
4. To provide for the qualified management of water resources in
the County in cooperation with th 'aunicipalities of the
County, in order to effectively cope with water pollution and
to conserve and/or improve the quality of streams and
groundwaters within and adjacent to the County.
5. To establish plan priorities which can be directly related to
the programming and budgetary processes of Washington County,
the City of Hagerstown and other municipalities.
6. To provide for the periodic amendment of the Comprehensive
Water and Sewerage Plan as required by changes in need or
conditions within the County.
OBJECTIVES
In refinement of the overall goals for Washington County, the
following itemizes the objectives which specifically encompass
the policy guidelines relative to water and sewerage planning.
1. Develop a plan. for water and sewerage facilities which is
fiscally responsible and reasonable and at the same time
provide facilities which will eliminate the extraordinary
problems of groundwater pollution caused by existing
development as well as following the implementation policies
of the Comprehensive Plan for the County.
2. On -lot septic disposal systems in Washington County have, in
many cases, proven inadequate in terms of implementing the
goals of this plan. As a result, a primary objective is to
lIL 4
provide to the greatest extent possible, alternatives to
these systems without encouraging increases in development
density in those areas designated in the Plan for the County.
3. To seek the closest possible cooperation between Washington
County and the City of Hagerstown in the implementation,
operation and management of applicable existing and planned
water and sewerage systems.
4. To encourage andguideresidential growth to those areas
which are served or planned to be served with community water
and sewerage systems to provide opportunities for new and
adequate housing at reasonable costs for the citizens of
Washington County consistent with the plan for the County.
5. To assure a logical development pattern and continued ability
of the County and municipalities to provide the other
necessary public.. facilities..and services (in accordance with
existing land use plans and controls) as a result of the
availability of new systems in areas outside planned service
areas.
6. Encourage development of an organizational framework which
will result in "REGIONAL" planning, programming and
implementation of the plan.
7. Prepare guidelines which are both permissive and prohibitive
with regard to the use of various types of systems and levels
of treatment which will be compatible with the planned
staging policy and its feasibility for implementation.
1-5.
8. Provide for adequate water supply, storage, treatment and
distribution on a regional bas -is.
9. Encourage resource conservation -by particularly large water
users through cooperative recycling programs.
10. To encourage the extension and expansion of existing water
and sewer lines and facilities to ultimately serve all of the
land which is considered to be within the designated urban
and town growth areas and to streamline the review process
for development proposals within designated growth areas.
11. To assure that the Water and Sewerage Plan and any amendments
will take into consideration the "six visions" of the
Maryland Economic Growth, Resource Protection and Planning
Act of 1992.
-6.
ORGANIZATION
The following charts illustrate the existing organizational
framework relative to planning and implementing water and
sewerage within the County and incorporated municipalities.
FIGURE No. 1
WASHINGTON COUNTY
IBOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING
WASHINGTON COUNTY
PLANNING
COMMISSION
IMPLEMENTATION
WATER AND SEWER
WASHINGTON COUNTY
SANITARY DISTRICT*
*Sewerage system responsibilit-y currently includes the Towns of
Sharpsburg and Keedysville (Subdistrict #4-1), Smithsburg
(Subdistrict #12), Clear Spring and Sanitary Subdistricts within
the County. (Subdistrict #1 Halfway, #5 Potomac (Tammany/Van
Lear), #5-1 Cloverton/Greenlawn, #6 Fountainhead, #9-1
Highfield/Cascade/PenMar, #14 Sharpsburg Pike, #15
Maugansville/Orchard Hills, #18 Conococheague and #19 Sandy
Hook.)
S- 7
Water sy-,tems responsibility currently includes the Town of
Sharpsbi_ and adjacent areas (Subdistrict #4) and Subdistricts
within the County (Subdistricts #9 Highfield/Cascade, #15-1
Martins Crossroads/Cearfoss, #17 Elk Ridge, #19-1 Sandy Hook,
#18-1 Conococheague and #7 Mt. Aetna).
1-8
FIGURE NO 2.
CITY OF HAGERSTOWN
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
PLANNING**
HAGERSTOWN
PLANNING
COMMISSION
ICITY ADMINISTRATORI
HAGERSTOWN
WATER DEPARTMENT
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
IMPLEMENTATION
SEWER*
DEPARTMENT OF WATER
POLLUTION CONTROL
*Water and Sewer System responsibility includes both city
and non -subdistrict, unincorporated areas of the County.
**Planning responsibilities (directly) only City.
Substantial input to County Planning process.
TOWNS. OF-.HANCOCK CLEAR SPRING
WILLIAMSPORT, KEEDYSVILLE*
BOONSBORO, SMITHSBURG AND FUNKSTOWN
MAYOR AND COUNCIL
PLANNING
TOWN PLANNING
COMMISSION
IMPLEMENTATION
WATER AND SEWER
I COMMITTEE OF COUNCILMENI
I TOWN EMPLOYEES I
*The Washington County Sanitary District is responsible for
the sewer system in Keedysville.
I-9
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES
The following are brief descriptions of development review
procedures within Washington County unincorporated areas and
within the limits of municipal incorporations. For developments
planned for unincorporated areas, the review procedures of the
Washington County Planning Commission are applicable. However,
where such developments are dependent upon municipal water or
sewerage service, the munnicipalities concerned should be
consulted early in the process. The following descriptions are
intended to assist citizens and prospective developers in
becoming familiar with the organizational and procedural
relationships between approving authorities and water and sewer
service agencies.
Washington County (Unincorporated Areas')
Proposals for development. within unincorporated areas are
submitted for review and approval to the Washington County
Planning Commission. The Commission meets on the first Monday of
each month at 7:00 P.M. in the County Administration Building.
Initial contact may be made with the Washington County Planning
Commission staff. At this stage the proposed development is
reviewed for conformance with the County Comprehensive Plan,
Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance and Water and Sewerage
Plan. Upon request, the staff will arrange for a preliminary
consultation at which the developer can informally discuss the
proposal with representatives from the applicable review agencies
I-10
including the Health Department and water and sewer service
providers.
In lieu of a preliminary consultation, the appropriate water and
sewer authorities should be contacted individually. Developments
which are proposed for wells and septic systems should be
discussed with the Division of Environmental Health of the
Washington County Health Department. Developments which are
proposed for service by means of the extension of existing
community water and sewerage systems should be discussed with the
responsible municipality or with the Washington County Sanitary
District as applicable.
Any development proposed for an unincorporated area which is
intended for service by a- new --community water or sewerage system
or by the extension of existing Sanitary District facilities
should be reviewed by the Washington County Planning Commission
staff to determine if the proposal is consistent with the adopted
plan for the County. The development proposed should then be
brought to the attention of the Washington County Sanitary
District. Such developments shall first be included in the
Washington County Water and Sewerage Plan, then must be located
within the boundaries of a Sanitary Subdistrict. Procedures for
inclusion of an area within an established Sanitary Subdistrict
or for the creation of a new Sanitary Subdistrict are provided
for by Sanitary District Law.
Formal application for development approval is made to the
Washington County Planning Commission or Department of Permits
and Inspections in the form of a subdivision plat or site plan
respectively. Water and sewerage system construction drawings
are submitted along with the application for final plat approval.
Copies of submitted plats, site plans, and construction drawings
are circulated to the appropriate agencies and municipalities for
information, review and -approval'.
Approval of water and sewerage construction drawings by the
Washington County Sanitary District constitutes a firm commitment
to allocate the needed water supply or sewage treatment capacity
for the proposed development. The Sanitary District issues an
approval letter to the Planning Commission for the final
development plat upon._recei.ptof._an approved construction permit
from the Maryland Department of the Environment. The Washington
County Health Department issues an approval letter for the final
plat after the issuance of- approval letters from water and sewer
service providers when the development is to be served by a
community system.
Upon the receipt of correspondence from all applicable review
agencies, the plat or site plan is reviewed for approval by the
Planning Commission at the regular monthly meeting.
I-12
CONTACT: Washington County Planning Commission 791-3065
Washington County Health Department 791-3270
Washington County Sanitary District 791-3083
223-9416
Town of Boonsboro
For developments proposed within the municipal limits, a
tentative sketch plan may be submitted to the Town Manager in the
Municipal Building. The tentative sketch plan procedure is
optional but strongly recommended as an early and informal method
of consulting with the Boonsboro Planning Commission.
Preliminary and final plat submittals are also made through the
Town Manager who circulates plat copies to the appropriate review
and approval agencies including the Boonsboro Municipal Utilities
Commission for availability of water and sewer services. Upon
receipt and consideration of the comments of the review and
approval agencies, the Boonsboro Planning Commission considers
the plat at its regular monthly meeting at the Municipal
Building.
Developments located outside the Town limits which desire water
and sewer service, should contact the Town Manager through the
municipal office to discuss annexation procedures.
CONTACT: Wayne Winebrenner, Town Manager 432-5141
Barbara Rodenhiser, Clerk Fax 432-4050
I-13
Town of Clear Spring
Water and sewer facilities are constructed within a development
at the developer's expense and dedicated to the Town of Clear
Spring. Initial proposals are made to the Mayor and Council
which meets on the first Tuesday of each month at 7:00 P.M. in
the Town Hall.
CONTACT: Paul Hose, Mayor
or 842-3344
Nancy L. Keefer, Clerk 842-2252
Town of Funkstown
All areas within the corporate limits of Funkstown are considered
physically capable of being served by the Town water and sewer
systems. For areas outside the Town, Public Works personnel
should be contacted.
AL
CONTACT: Roger Griffith.._.
or
Timothy Faulder 797-3228 or 791-0948
For proposed developments within the Town limits, application
must be made to the Funkstown Zoning Administrator who reviews
plans for conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning
Ordinance, and Subdivision Ordinance. Town water and sewer
personnel then review the plans for placement o€ utilities. The
Planning and Zoning Commission considers the application at its
regular meeting on the first Tuesday of each month at 6:30 P.M.
in the Town Hall.
CONTACT: Brenda Haynes, Clerk 791-0948
I-14
City of Hagerstown
Proposals for large developments intended to be served by the
City of Hagerstown water and sewerage systems should be brought
to the attention of the City Planning Department. Developments
proposed within the municipal limits will receive guidance from
the Planning Department on the City of Hagerstown's development
process. Developments proposed for outside the municipal limits
will receive guidance on annexation procedures if applicable.
A preliminary consultation between the applicant and the Planning
Department staff is recommended but not required. For
developments within the municipal limits, the staff may recommend
a preliminary consultation with the City of Hagerstown Planning
Commission. Early discussions with the City Water Department and
with Water Pollution Control -are also advisable.
Formal application for development approval within the City is
made in the form of a site plan or subdivision plat submission to
the Planning Department. Copies of the plat or site plan are
circulated to various review agencies including the City Water
Department, Water Pollution Control, and the County Health
Department. Plat or site plan submission must occur on or before
the first working day of the month to be reviewed at the regular
Planning Commission meeting. The Commission's regular meeting is
held on the last Wednesday of the month at 7:00 P.M. in City
Hall.
I-15
CONTACT: City
Planning Department
790-3200,
Ext. 138, 139
City
Water Department
790-3200,
Ext. 171
City
Water Pollution Control
790-3200,
Ext. 165, 166
City
Engineer
790-3200,
Ext. 125
Town of Hancock
The Town Manager issues individual water and sewer connection
permits from the Town Office. Development proposals are
submitted for review to the Town Planning Commission which meets
the first Wednesday of each-, month" at 7:00 P.M. in the Town Hall.
The proposal must include the proposed water and sewer layout and
the number of people to be served. Based upon this proposal, a
tentative commitment is made by the Town to serve the proposed
development.
Water and sewer design is reviewed and approved by the Town
Engineer and the M.D.E... The. Town. Planning Commission recommends
plat approval to the Mayor and Council. With Mayor and Council
approval, the proposed development receives a firm commitment for
water and sewer service.
CONTACT: Stephen Gyurisin, Town Manager 678-5622
Town of Smithsburg
Land development proposals are first discussed in concept with
the Smithsburg Planning Commission. The Commission meets on the
last Tuesday of each month at 7:30 P.M. in the Town Hall. The
Commission then refers the applicant to the Smithsburg Mayor and
Council for a determination on the provision of water and sewer
I-16
services. The applicant may then submit a preliminary plat to
the Smithsburg Planning Commission for developments within the
corporate limits, or to the Washington County Planning Commission
for developments outside the corporate limits.
CONTACT: Harold Boyer, Chairman 824-3851
Smithsburg Planning Commission (after 5:00 P.M.)
Town of Williamsport
Development proposals should be discussed initially in concept
with the Williamsport Planning Commission. The Commission meets
on an "as needed" basis. At the time of the initial meeting a
tentative agreement will be made on the allocation of sewer
capacity for the proposed development. This allocation is
subtracted from the total allocation granted to the Town of
Williamsport by the Washington County Sanitary District.
The developer will then meet to advise the Town Mayor and Council
of the proposed development. If the development is located
within the Town limits, a development plat is submitted to the
Williamsport Planning Commission for approval. Current Town
policy requires annexation for any development located outside
the corporate limits that will connect the Town of Williamsport
sewage collection system or water distribution system.
CONTACT: George Stumbaugh, Chairman
Williamsport Planning Commission
223-7711
(City Hall)
1-17
CHAPTER TWO
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
In order to establish parameters for the planning of sewer and
water facilities, it is necessary to determine the physical,
social, economic and land use factors which, in part, dictate the
needs and priorities for such systems. The following discussion
of background information attempts to summarize the relevant
factors which have been previously -developed and analyzed through
the preparation of the County's Comprehensive Plan, Solid Waste
Plan, and prior Water and Sewerage Plan.
1. PHYSICAL FEATURES
An analysis of the physical features of Washington County
provides a framework whereby planning and future engineering
decisions can be made -in part based upon environmental
characteristics.
TOPOGRAPHY - The Physiographic characteristics -of Washington
County are formed largely from the western slope of the
Blue Ridge Mountains, the wide Hagerstown Valley which
is in turn a portion of the expansive Great Limestone
Valley network of the east; and the eastern ridge of
the Appalachian Mountain system. Elevations within the
County range from a high of 2,145 feet at the crest of
Quirack Mountain of the Blue Ridge to a low of
approximately 300 feet near the Potomac River.
Topographic features are rather steep at the Blue
Ridge, gently rolling within the broad and shallow
valley to Fairview Mountain, and with sharp ridges and
intervening small valleys or ravines differentiating
the westward portion of the County. As illustrated on
Map No. 1 - Generalized Topography, slopes are steepest
along both the eastern and western boundaries of the
County and.within-the areabetween Licking Creek and
the Little Conococheague Creek. Approximately 35% of
the County's land area has slopes in excess of 15%
while the Hagerstown Valley portion of the County
comprising slightly more than half of the land area is
essentially level or very gently rolling.
GROUND COVER - Natural ground cover patterns in Washington
County, as illustrated on Map No. II - Ground Cover,
are characterized by woodlands both in the mountainous
areas and along the ridge and valley section west of
Fairview Mountain. Also, in these steeply sloping
areas very rocky and stony features prevail. The
remaining undeveloped portions of the County are
largely in open field/ agricultural coverage or
floodplains or wetlands.
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS - The soils of Washington County have been
categorized into four broad groupings based upon the history
1I-2
I I Ii I I I I I Ii I I I F
U j H NASSAOX, HEMSLEY, INCORPORATED L CONSULTANTS
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
-.1 I 1 I II I I I I �I I I I :1 I I I I I
Al NASSAUX-HEMSLEY, INCORPORATED CONSUITANTS
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
/J1J{
r Sprin US 4U " Hager town 3
it .J.
W 1 S T 131 J
—
V I R C I N I A
1 1 old � ••:,, a
c s8 10
13
LEGEND 14
0 Well Drained,Stony & Very Stony " t1
on aio
1 Dekalb-Leetonia-Edgemont•Laidig
2 Oekalb • Highfield KeedpsriHe 600
3 Highfield-Fauquier 11
C Well to Excessively Drained,Shallow, " -~ x 10
r —
Medium Textured Shdrpshurg)))
4 Berks • Montevallo t l 10
5 Hazel•Chandler -- 1
6 Talladega 13 i �
7 Litz -Teas WASHINGTON COUNTY WATER
8 CalvimBerks•Litr•Aiontevalio AND SEWERAGE PLAN 13 ' U -
Moderately Well to Well Drained, -
Deep, Medium Textured WASHINGTON COUNTY :3 12
Holston Monongahela Huntington - Lindside SOIL DRAINAGE CHARACTERISTICS s 0 .1 /4r —
(With Soils Associations)
WeII Drained, Deep, Medium Textured
10 Braddock•Thurmont-Edgemont-Laidig N 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 Mi. 550
11 Waynesboro :.
12 Fallquier•Myersville Higkfield SOURCE: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service
13 Murrill
14 Hagerstown-Duffield•Frankstown 0► H NASSAUX- HENISLEY, INCORPORATED : CONSULTANTS
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
V
of their formation and position on the landscape. According
to the United States Department of Agriculture, Soil
Conservation Service, the formations stemmed from soils o€
the uplands, soils of old colluvial deposits, soils of old
stream terraces, and soils of the floodplains. A percentage
breakdown of the four groupings reveals that the soils of
the uplands comprise about 71% of the land area in the
County while the -other -formations comprise 16%, 5%, and 8%
respectively. The upland soils have been developed in place
from materials weathered from the underlying rock. The
remaining soil categories are formed from deposits
transported by water.
There are 14 general soil patterns in Washington County
referred to as_.s.o.il._ass.ociations... These associations
have been combined into the following four divisions by
the Soil Conservation Service based upon drainage and
soil depth. 3..
1. Well drained, stony and very stony soils.
2. Well to excessively drained, shallow, medium textured
soils.
3. Moderately well to well drained, deep, medium
textured soils.
4. Well drained, deep, medium textured soils.
Map No. III - Soil Drainage Characteristics illustrates the
generalized location of soil drainage patterns within
Washington County.
1I-3
For the purpose of planning water and sewerage
facilities an analysis of the soils is fundamental.
With both water supply and quality discussed later in
this Chapter, attention is directed here to the
suitability of the soils to accommodate (properly) on -
lot subsurface disposal systems. The most common on -
site sewage disposal method used in areas where central
sewage systems 'areunava-ilabie-is-the septic tank
system. Successful operation of the system depends
upon the ability of the soil to absorb and filter the
liquid or effluent once it passes through the tile
field. The presence of a soil characteristic which
impairs proper absorption and filtering of the effluent
will cause health hazards as well as public nuisance
situations. Soil, characteristics affecting the
operation of the tile disposal field include
permeability rates, depth to bedrock, depth to seasonal
high water table, slope, stoniness, and flood hazard.
SUITABILITY FOR ON -LOT SUB -SURFACE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS - Past and
present practices with regard to septic system usage
seem to indicate that residents have the attitude that
such methods of disposal are a matter of right rather
than privilege. Furthermore, many residents believe
that, so long as no surface malfunctioning is apparent,
their household sewage system is operating properly.
11-4'
Little concern is directed toward the issue of
groundwater contamination except when it affects an
individual's own property or well.
It is important to have a basic understanding of the
sewage decomposition processes that take place within a
septic system in order to fully appreciate the serious
health hazards which can potentially exist. A septic
tank is a watertight receptacle which receives sewage
and is designed and constructed to provide for sludge
storage, sludge decomposition, and to separate solids
from the liquid through a period of detention before
allowing the liquid to be discharged to a subsurface
absorption area.
The sewage is broken down through an oxygen -less
process called anaerobic decomposition in which
anaerobic bacteria. digest suspended solids,,liquefying
much of the material and reducing the rest to inert
masses of sludge and scum. This primary treatment
stage removes solids so that the effluent or clarified
liquid which is discharged from the tank does not clog
the distribution system.
Septic tanks do not remove pathogenic organisms
(harmful bacteria and viruses). The removal of
pathogens from the effluent is affected only by
percolation through the soil after the effluent is
distributed through the tile field. Therefore...,
"septic tank effluents cannot be considered safe. The
liquid that is discharged from a tank is, in some
respects, more objectionable than that which goes in,
it is septic and malodorous."* The bacteria are
removed, from .the effluent _by- filtration and because the
soil presents an unfavorable environment for their
existence.
In an efficient system, pathogens and other waste
products are completely removed from the effluent
before it recharges the groundwater table. In an
inefficient and unsafe system, the effluent may drain
rapidly into solution channels and fractures in the
bedrock and may reach the groundwater table before
complete. purification occurs. The untreated sewage
will then flow with the groundwater to pollute wells
and streams with disease causing bacteria. "Studies in
the Nittany Valley, Pennsylvania, a hydrogeologic
environment similar to that of the study area (the
11-6
Hagerstown Valley) show, on the basis of dye tracings,
(Jacobson and Langmuir, 1970) that the groundwater
moves roughly 4,000 feet in 2 to 6 days."**
In another type of malfunctioning system, more obvious
to the homeowner, the effluent flows through the
drainage bed until it reaches an impermeable layer such
as clay or a fragipan (a compact, brittle layer of
soil) or bedrock in which case it is forced to the
surface where it becomes an immediate health hazard. A
third type of pollution hazard can develop when too
many septic systems are constructed within a given
area.
Permits issued. for.the..repair. of failing systems
constitute a large share of the installation process of
the Health Department. Approximately 20 percent of the
permits issued for the septic system•installation are
for repairs. These repairs generally require the
complete replacement of all parts of the system except
the septic tank itself, including the replacement of
*Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health, Education and
Welfare, Manual of Septic Tank Practice, 1969, p. 29.
**Nutter, Larry J. Hydrogeology of the Carbonate Rocks,_ Frederick
and Hagerstown Valleys, Maryland, Maryland Geological Survey
Department of Natural Resources, 1973.
,I.I-17 ,
drain tiles and distribution box and the relocation of
the drain field or seepage pit to another area. These
kinds of repairs become necessary when drain tiles are
clogged or drain fields are saturated resulting in the
back up of effluent to the house or the appearance of
effluent on the surface of the ground. Such problems
may be caused by poor initial installation, by
inadequate_ mairitenance...by. the._homeowner,... or by overuse
resulting in saturation of the absorption area. The
map does not reflect those failures in which effluent
may drain into fracture in the bedrock and for which
there are no apparent symptoms on the surface.
In an effort to minimize the risks of septic system
failure and groundwater contamination, the Washington
County Health Department has established standards and
instituted procedures for the planning and installation
of new on -lot ,.and .sub -surface disposal systems. Prior
to the approval of such systems for use on building
lots, percolation tests are conducted to evaluate the
renovative capabilities of on -site soils. Trenches are
excavated to ensure that a minimum filterable soil
cover exists between drain tiles and bedrock or
groundwater. A reserve area is set aside to allow for
the use of alternate drain fields in the event that the
first field becomes saturated. The location of septic
I1-8
systems and reserve areas are limited to a minimum
distance from on -lot and adjacent well water supplies.
Where a number of on -lot sub -surface systems are
planned for a given area, a geohydrologic study is
conducted for the entire area of the proposed
development in an effort to evaluate the cumulative
effect such systems might have on sub -surface geology
and groundwater.
The above standards and procedures have their
limitations however. Percolation and trench tests are
limited to relatively small areas and conclusions drawn
from these tests must be generalized to the larger
areas of the absorption fields where they may or may
not be valid.. Even.the...percolation (absorption) test
is seen by some authorities as an incomplete testing
procedure: "The principal weaknesses of the absorption
test are that it is made -in a short time and with clear
water. It should be recognized that two processes take
place during the test --infiltration, or entrance of the
liquid into the soil, and percolation through the soil.
The infiltration rate is largely dependent upon the
characteristics of the liquid, while speed or
percolation depends upon the soil characteristics.
11-9
When clear liquid is applied continuously to a soil,
there is first a drop in the infiltration rate for 1 to
several days. As air escapes from the soil, the rate
rises to a maximum after a time measured in days, and
thereafter it slowly decreases to a small percentage of
the original rate. The slow decrease is caused by the
following phenomena, which are dependent upon soil
characteristics, migration -of fine particles with water
movement to accumulate and clog pore spaces; ion
exchange, which affects the cohesive force between
particles and deflocculates materials, and the
continued swelling of colloidal materials. Even with
water as the liquid, there will be microbial growths
that will clog soil pores and interfere with
infiltration and percolation. Obviously,
substitution of septic sewage for water will increase
the number of fine particles and will encourage
microbial growth. .Ion exchangeand colloidal swelling
will depend upon the chemical activity of the soil. So
far, no soil test or examination method has been
devised that will indicate the suitability of a soil
for absorption of sewage over a long period... In the
absence of a more effective procedure than the
absorption test, precautions should be applied that
will prevent disposal -field failures or at least
postpone them for a long period. Important is
II -10
resting, which permits air penetration, the
establishment of aerobic conditions in clogged areas,
and digestion of solid accumulations. With food no
longer available, the bacteria will also die. This
housecleaning requires days, not the hours that will be
provided by the usual sewerage -flow variations of a
residence...*
*Ehlers, Victor M., C.E., and Steel, Ernest W., C.E., Municipal
and Rural Sanitarian, Sixth Edition, McGraw-Hill Co., 1966,
(p.126)
As part of the continuing effort to improve on -lot testing
reliability and to guard against groundwater contamination by on -
lot systems, a County -wide Geohydrologic Study was conducted by
the consulting firm of R. E. Wright and Associates. This study
was jointly funded by the.Washington County Board of County
Commissioners and by a grant from the U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency administered through the Maryland Water
Resources Administration. By means -of -on -site testing and
evaluation within three prototype study areas of the County,
three remote sensing techniques were found to be valid in
determining shallow bedrock within prospective septic disposal
areas. However, the consultant report concluded that the use of
these methods "will require the continuation of the conventional
site investigation (slit trench evaluation)."
A further product of the study was the development of a
comprehensive County sub -surface sewage disposal ordinance in
accord with minimum State requirements which includes (a)
subsurface sewage disposal planning requirements, (b) site
investigatory procedures, (c) system design criteria, (d)
comprehensive inspection program, (e) legal enforcement
procedures, (f) designated enforcement personnel and training
program, (g) monitoring of the functionality of subsurface
disposal system, and (h) procedures for modifying design
criteria. The On -Site Sewage Disposal Ordinance for Washington
County was adopted in September 1983. The Washington County
Health Department administers the Ordinance with guidance from
the companion Technical Manual.
The Ordinance also encouraged the use of innovative and
alternative sewage disposal methods in light of the County's
limestone geology. Pursuant to Health -Environmental Article,
Subtitle 9-14 and a Memorandum of Understanding, Washington
County participated in the Innovative and Alternative On -Site
Sewage Disposal Grant Program. Subsequent evaluation of this
program resulted in the acceptance of certain innovative and
alternative systems as being conventional when percolation rates
are within specified limits.
Even the use of the traditional septic system is seen by some
authorities as a viable wastewater treatment alternative to
11-12
central treatment processes. A report by the Comptroller General
of the United States concludes that, "if properly designed,
constructed, operated, and maintained, septic systems
- should not fail,
- can be as permanent as central treatment facilities,
- are often more ecologically sound then sewers and central
facilities, and
- can provide a high degree of wastewater treatment as good
or better than the effluent produced by conventional
central treatment processes."*
*The Comptroller General of the United States, Report to the
Congress, Community -Managed Septic Systems: A Viable Alternative
to Sewage Treatment Plants, United States General Accounting
Office, November 3, 1978, (p.i.)
II -13
The report emphasizes, however, that the key to good septic
system performance is a system for public supervision and
management of septic systems and recommends that the
Environmental Protection Agency establish minimum standards for
such public management. The report does not address septage
disposal. A management system and criteria which are uniquely
suited to the Washington County natural -physical environment in
the form of the On -Site Sewage. Disposal Ordinance is an important
product of the geohydrologic study mentioned above.
SURFACE WATER CHARACTERISTICS - Washington County lies totally
within the Potomac River Basin and is drained by the
Conococheague Creek in the western portion of the Great
Valley and by the Antietam Creek in the eastern section
as both Creeks flow southward into the Potomac River.
The majority of the County lies within the Upper
Potomac River Sub -basin. The remainder, a small
section in southeastern Washington County, lies within
the limits of the middle Potomac River Sub -basin. The
tributaries of the Potomac River drain approximately
342 square miles in Washington County. The pattern and
intensity of surface water drainage is dictated by the
County's location in the Valley and Ridge physiographic
province which is characterized by long, ridge -like,
parallel mountains and intervening valleys. In the
western, more mountainous area of the County, the
TT -14
streams have rather flashy runoff as a result of the
steeply sloping terrain and rough topography. Moving
eastward into the valleys, the relief is gentle and
slightly rolling; hence, the streams are less flashy.
and meandering.
9'
DRAINAGE SHEDS
Washington County is divided into nine major watersheds, as
indicated on Map No. V, in addition to those areas draining '
directly into the Potomac. River. The Antietam: Watershed, which,
drains approximately 187 square miles or about 40% of Washington
County is by far the largest drainage area. The following table
indicates the drainage area of each major watershed in the
.........................................:...........:............::..........
...................................:.:
County,
r aF.
......................... .............. ......:..
✓t
51:
i rA
. . ............... .....:..: �..::..:.,.:...... ..,........:..�..::-c' ter„,.
.:..........:......
.................:::.:.:.: ,✓ h,„� W,y�' ��Q�jl I r
F . :.:..:............
ra
��.. .. .. ... ..... ..: - 111
r �
.................................:.......: ............ ..
! I u.I I I =I I f
P E N S Y L V A N I A
` r QR-
C --KINGsoCONOCOC A E
REEK
lea nUS40 �_.�
VIRGIN I A
- o !!`teedvsville
WASHINGTON COUNTY WATER
AND SEWERAGE PLAN1.,/:
WASHINGTON COUNTY rr ��
MAJOR WATERSHEDS
wv �
1 0 1 2 3 4 5 Mi.
SOURCE: Washington County Comprehensive Water & Sewer Plan
Q j H NASSAUX - HEMSLEY, INCORPORATED - CONSULTANTS
COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
e
U,
itlisburg
650 1
600 1
550
FIGURE NO. 3
WASHINGTON COUNTY WATERSHED AREAS*
WATERSHED DRAINAGE AREA (SQ. MI.)
Washington Total
County
Antietam Creek
187
Conococheague Creek
65
Israel Creek
14
Licking Creek
27
Little Conococheague Creek
Little Tonoloway
16
St. James - Marsh Run
20
Sideling Hill Creek
9
Tonoloway
2
16
292
563
14
214
18
26
20
104
114
*Source: Washington County, Plan for the County
WATER QUALITY
Quality of Washington County's surface water has been
studied by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Water
Resources Administration, in its 1974 Water Survey. Studies have
also been done by the Office of Environmental Programs, Maryland
Department of Health and Mental Hygiene 1986 Report to EPA
According to Section 3.05(b) Clean Water Act (P.L.97-117) and the
Water Management Administration,- Maryland Department of the
Environment 1988 Report to the EPA According to Section 3.05(b)
of the Clean Water Act (P.L.100-4). The 1986 report to the EPA
includes basin description and trend analysis of all the
watersheds in the County. The 1988 report includes an updated
trend analysis of the Potomac mainstem, the Antietam Creek and
the Conococheague Creek.
The quality of Washington County's surface waters as a
source of supply would necessitate considerable treatment prior
to consumption. Evena generalized. analysis._. of. the . sampling data
compiled by the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin
and the Maryland Water Resources Administration indicates a high
coliform count. In addition to the high coliform count, most of
the watercourses were quite alkaline because of the limestone
formation. The predominate cause of the degradation of water
quality of the watercourses in Washington County are agricultural
and urban runoff, and industrial and sewage treatment discharges.
The following dissertation discusses the significant pollution
IE-17
problems and predominant causes of pollution of each of the
watercourses traversing Washington County.
The 1988 report summarized that water quality in the Upper
Potomac River sub -basin is Good and suited to water contact
recreation and aquatic life and, where classified, trout
production. Elevated suspended sediment, nutrient and bacterial
levels are primarilydue. to .agricultural' runoff and upstream
sources. Urban runoff and failing septic systems also contribute
to bacterial and nutrient levels observed in the sub -basin.
Overall, water quality has degraded slightly in the Upper Potomac
River sub -basin between 1976-7 and 1985. Total nitrogen and
total phosphorus levels show significant increases throughout
much of the basin. Fecal coliform bacteria and total suspended
solids levels generally show no trend.
POTOMAC RIVER MAINSTEM
The mainstem of the.-Potomac,River..is 112.3.miles in length.
It follows a sinuous course through most of its length. Upstream
reaches flow through primarily forested land, while the land
draining the lower reaches is principally agricultural. Several
small towns are located along the River's banks.
In 1974 the river met State water quality standards for
dissolved oxygen, Ph and temperature. The water was found to be
alkaline having flowed through the limestone areas of the
Appalachian Region. Nitrogen averages tended to be high
particularly in the section of the river from Shepherdstown to
the mouth of the Shenandoah River where the average concentration
was above 1 part per million (ppm) nitrogen. Phosphate
concentrations were found to be higher both in the upper and
lower sections. Algae blooms were indicated by occasionally high
values for chlorophyll, recorded during the summer months.
Bacteriological values met the water quality standard not
exceeding a log mean of 200 for fecal coliform bacteria
throughout most of the mainstem. Although the Potomac River has
a consistently good water quality, the waste flowing from the
North Branch resulted in poor bacteriological quality water,
therefore influencing the water quality of the Potomac in
Washington County. ----Other sect-ions.of-the Potomac River that did
not meet the numerical standard were the portion passing through
Hancock, Maryland and a stretch below Shepherdstown, West
Virginia.
Domestic wastes, agricultural wastes and soil erosion are
the primary sources of pollution in the mainstem of the Potomac
throughout Washington County. Septic tank seepage enters the
river from numerous non -point source locations throughout the
County.
11.19
In the Hancock area, sewage treatment plant wastes from the
Town are discharged into Tonoloway Creek a short distance above
its mouth. At Williamsport, the Sanitary District's treatment
plant serving Halfway, Tammany, Van Lear, Cloverton/Greenlawn and
Williamsport has a discharge to the river. Also, at
Williamsport, a tannery discharges wastes to Conococheague Creek,
just above its mouth.
The Sanitary District is currently constructing a wastewater
treatment plant to serve the Sandy Hook area. This plant will
discharge into Martins Run which is in the Israel Creek drainage
area.
In addition to the Maryland discharges, the West Virginia
towns of Shepherdstown1Bolivar_and Harpers Ferry have domestic
waste discharges to the mainstem of the Potomac River. Also,
Jellystone Park discharges wastewater to this segment of the
river.
The 1988 report to the EPA concluded that in the lower
mainstem river (Segment 01), total nitrogen and total phosphorus
significantly increased between 1976 and 1985 respectively. The
ICPRB reported significantly increased nitrate and nitrite levels
are between 1974 and 1984 in this segment (Haywood et al., 1987).
Fecal coliform bacteria levels significantly declined between
1976 and 1985.
I1-20
ANTIETAM CREEK
The Antietam Creek segment lies east of Hagerstown, Maryland
having drainage areas in Maryland of 187.0 square miles. Another
104.9 square miles of Antietam Creek drainage is contained in
Pennsylvania. Average stream discharge measured at the U.S.
Geological Survey (U.S.G.S.) gage four miles upstream from the
mouth is 265 cfs. The principal cities in the watershed are
Waynesboro, Pennsylvania and-Hagerstown,•Maryland. The 1986
Report to EPA mentioned previously indicates "Unlike most of the
sub -basin, land use in this segment is primarily agricultural."
Little Antietam Creek, Beaver Creek, and Marsh Run are all
classified as Class III (natural) trout waters while the
remaining surface waters are classified as Class IV
(recreational) trout waters. Water quality in this segment
ranges from Fair .. to .Good..__,.-High_.bacterial levels are due to
agricultural runoff and malfunctioning septic systems. Nutrient
levels are also high, but there are no eutrophication problems in
this segment due-to,the continual streamflow. Because of intense
agricultural use and practices and soil type in this segment, the
Antietam Creek drainage is designated a "priority watershed" for
the potential release of phosphorus from agricultural sources
(State Soil Conservation Committee, 1984). The branches and
headwaters of Antietam Creek in Pennsylvania are reportedly
"water quality limited" (Department of Environmental Resources,
1984).
1I-21
Benthic community structure and diversity from three
stations in the mainstem Creek indicate Excellent water quality
in the lower portion of the segment (ANT0044), Fair water quality
below Hagerstown (ANT0203) and Good water quality just south of
the State line (ANT0366). In both 1984 and 1985, 1750 adult
rainbow trout were stocked into this segment as a put -and -take
fishery (Tidewater Administration, 1984, 1985a).
The 1988 report to the EPA stated that in the Antietam Creek
basin (Segment 02), total nitrogen and total phosphorus
significantly increased throughout the sub -basin between 1977-
1985 and 1976-1985, respectively. The ICPRB reported
significantly increased nitrate levels between 1974 and 1984 were
reported in this segment. Fecal coliform bacteria levels
significantly increased at. mid -basin (ANT0203) although the
upstream and downstream stations (ANT0044, ANT0306) showed no
trend. In the 1970's, lower fecal coliform counts could possibly
be attributed to the use of chlorine as -a disinfectant at the
Hagerstown treatment facility. The use of chlorine is now
prohibited by State discharge limitations. The Hagerstown
treatment facility currently uses ozone for disinfection.
Increased fecal coliform counts may be considered an indication
that the City has improved effluent quality by eliminating the
potential of toxicity from chlorine.
11-22
(The mainstem of Antietam Creek is classified by the State
for purposes of water pollution control as Recreational Trout
Waters.)
In -stream sampling performed by the Maryland Water Resources
Administration during 1974 revealed the following conditions of
surface water quality.
Bacterial concentrations were found to be in violation of
State standards throughout the entire course of Antietam Creek.
The mainstem of the stream did not meet the fecal coliform
standard, and almost all bacterial counts were greatly in excess
of the standard. The highest counts were recorded one mile
downstream from the Pennsylvania State line. Significantly lower
values were recorded -i-mmedi-ately--below the sewerage treatment
plants serving Hagerstown and Funkstown. Ultimately though, the
water supplied to the Potomac River by Antietam Creek was still
bacteriologically poor.
Water temperature in the mainstem of Antietam Creek below
Hagerstown did not meet the standard for Class IV "Recreational
Trout Waters". Temperature elevation downstream from the
Hagerstown Municipal Power Plant was pronounced, often 56 degrees
F above stream temperatures. Maximum temperatures below the
plant reach the high eighties and low nineties on hot summer
days. The return to ambient temperature did not occur for miles
I1-23
downstream. The Hagerstown Sewerage Treatment Plant, 2.0 miles
below the power plant, also releases an effluent warmer than the
ambient stream temperature. Factors which contributed to
maintaining elevated temperatures far below the two effluents
were slow stream flow and a lack of cold water springs entering
the stream. Any association between the municipal power plant
and stream water temperature is no longer valid because the plant
is no longer 'being- used-. -Any--current increased stream
temperature in this area may be partially the result of "Memorial
Run" which is a stone and concrete culvert exposed to solar
heating. Marsh Run and Beaver Creek, tributaries to Antietam
Creek, were found to have water temperatures well above the
Natural Trout Water Standards (Class III) for these streams.
However, no warm water discharges are known, and these waters may
be solar heated.
The waters of Antietam Creek and its tributaries are used by
several industries and municipalities for cooling purposes and
sewerage disposal. Hagerstown and Funkstown sewerage treatment
plants are located south of Hagerstown about 1 1/2 miles apart
and discharge directly into the stream's mainstem. In July of
1990, the Washington County Sanitary District completed
construction of a new waste water treatment plant to serve the
Sharpsburg Keedysville area. This treatment plant discharges
into the mainstem of the Antietam Creek south of Sharpsburg.
1I-24
There are eleven other, small sewerage treatment plants in the
segment.
Little Antietam Creek in the Towns of Boonsboro and
Keedysville has exhibited high biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) as
a result of organic wastes utilizing the oxygen in the stream.
The BOD in Falls Creek below the Fort Ritchie Military
Reservation was also above •normal for- this stream. Antietam
Creek waters are found to be alkaline, to contain large amounts
of dissolved material, and were greatly enriched with nitrogen
and phosphorus. Except for bacteriological degradation and
temperature elevation, water quality standards were met during
1974.
The effects of murU cipal„_dis.charges on the level of
dissolved oxygen in Antietam Creek is the subject of a computer
modeling exercise being performed by the State Department of
Health and Mental Hygiene: The model -indicates - that some future
municipal discharges of secondary effluent would be likely to
cause violations of the dissolved oxygen standards (5 mg/i avg.)
in Antietam Creek. Therefore, Antietam Creek has been designated
as "Water Quality Limited" with respect to dissolved oxygen.
Special effluent limitations will be determined by the State in
order to protect the Antietam Creek from oxygen depletion.
.11-25
Most of the industries located in the Antietam Creek
drainage area are in complian-e with the State industrial
effluent standards. Those few which are not, are working toward
compliance.
CONOCOCHEAGUE CREEK
The Conococheague Creek segment lies to the west of
Hagerstown,., Maryland_. The.drainage. of 65.8 square
miles with a main stream length of 22.0 miles. The great
majority of the stream's drainage, 497.6 square miles, is
contained in Pennsylvania. Most of the segment is agricultural
or forest, except for the eastern edge which drains the western
urban fringe area surrounding Hagerstown. Few small towns are
found in the segment, the largest being the greater part of
Williamsport. The average discharge measured at the U. S.
Geological Survey gage at Fairview, Maryland, 18.7 miles above
the stream's mouth, was 572 cubic feet per second.
Conococheague Creek water exhibited poor quality from 1966
to 1969. Extremely high bacteriological values were recorded
just downstream of the Pennsylvania State line. Bacterial water
quality of the remainder of the stream's length did not meet
water quality standards. During summer months, dissolved oxygen
concentrations were low and occasionally dropped below 4.0 parts
per million; the lower limit for Class IV waters. Water
temperatures as high as 86.9 degrees F, well above the
1I-26
temperature standards of 75 degrees F, were recorded, but there
is no known source of thermal pollution. High temperatures are
probably due to natural conditions.
By 1974, water quality had improved. Fecal coliform values
still violated the numerical standard but were generally lower
throughout the stream. Dissolved oxygen values were generally
high and at no time went below the standard. The stream water
was found to be alkaline and to contain large amounts of
dissolved solids. Nitrate concentration was high and phosphate
was unusually high.
Computer modeling performed for the Maryland portion of the
Conococheague indicated that future planned dischargers from
standard secondary treatment plants are not likely to cause
violations of the dissolved oxygen standard of 5 milligrams per
lit (mg/1) daily average.
Conococheague Creek upstream of the Maryland/Pennsylvania
line receives a large variety of domestic and industrial wastes.
The Towns of Chambersburg and Mercersburg, Pennsylvania discharge
sewage treatment plant wastes into the stream. In Maryland, the
stream is polluted by farm wastes and individual septic system
seepage. A waste water treatment plant serving the W.D. Byron
tannery discharges into the stream just above its mouth. In
February of 1992, the Washington County Sanitary District began
11-27
using a newly constructed 2.5 MGD wastewater treatment plant
which serves a large portion of the Conococheague drainage basin
within the Hagerstown Urban Growth Area. This plant discharges
directly in to the Conococheague Creek at a point near Kemps
Mill.
The 1986 Report indicates surface waters are all classified
as Class I for water contact recreation. and aquatic life. Water
quality in the Conococheague Creek segment is generally good.
High bacteria and nutrient levels are monitored throughout the
segment and are attributed to agricultural runoff. Because of
the intensive agricultural use and practices and soil type, this
segment was designated as a "priority watershed" for the
potential release of nitrogen from agricultural sources (State
Soil Conservation Committee 1984). An extreme range of pH
conditions (<6.5, >8.5) has been monitored on occasion in this
segment and is considered to be naturally occurring. The upper
tributaries of Conococheague Creek in Pennsylvania are generally
considered to be "water quality limited" (Department of
Environmental Resources 1984). Benthic community structure and
diversity at two stations near each end of the segment (CON0005,
CON0180) indicate Good water quality.
LITTLE CONOCOCHEAGUE
The 1988 report to the EPA indicates that in the
Conococheague Creek basin (Segment 04), total nitrogen
significantly increased throughout the sub -basin between 1977 and
1985. The ICPRB reported significantly increased nitrate levels
between 1974 and 1984 in this segment. Total phosphorus
significantly increased at the downstream station (CON0005)
between 1976 and 1985, at the upstream station (CON0180), no
significant trend was found between 1977 and 1985. At the lower
station, pH significantly declined but no trend in pH was
observed- at the upper- station' between 19.77 and 1985. The ICPRB
reported significantly decreased pH between 1976 and 1984 at the
downstream station. Fecal coliform bacteria showed no trend
throughout the sub -basin.
Little Conococheague Creek is located just west of
Conococheague Creek. Of its total drainage area of 18.0 square
miles, 16.7 square_ miles. -.are, -contained in Maryland. A large
tract of land in the upper segment, the Indian Springs Wildlife
Management Area, is forested. The watershed is generally
sparsely population with -some -farm -,land -in --the lower section.
Clear Spring, the only Town in the watershed, is located on Tom's
Run, which is the largest tributary.
Water quality of the stream was monitored in 1974 in Tom's
Run just below Clear Spring and at the mouth of the Little
Conococheague Creek. At both points, these streams did not meet
the bacteriological numerical standard. Water quality was
especially degraded below Clear Spring where fecal coliform
1I-29
counts were always in the thousands or organisms per 100
milliliter of sample. However, dissolved oxygen, pH and
temperature met water quality standards.
It is likely that water quality with respect to dissolved
oxygen and bacteria improved in Tom's Run and the Little
Conococheague due to the construction of a sewage treatment plant
serving Clear Spring and discharging to Tom's Run. No industrial
wastes are known to enter the stream.
The 1986 Report confirms that water quality has improved.
All surface waters in this watershed are classified as Class III
(natural) trout waters. Water quality in this segment is Good.
High bacterial levels are due to agricultural runoff. Benthic
community structure and diversity at a station near the
confluence with the Potomac River (LCC0001) indicates Good water
quality.
LICKING CREEK
Licking Creek is located west of Little Conococheague Creek.
Its largest drainage area is mostly in Pennsylvania (185.5 square
miles), and only 27.6 square miles are included in the Maryland
segment. Most of this area is forest. Part of the Indian
Springs Wildlife Management Area is located in the western
segment of the drainage area. One small town (Pectonville) lies
II -30
on the stream's western bank approximately two miles above the
stream's mouth.
Water quality of Licking Creek has been monitored by the
Water Resources Administration at a single station 0.4 miles
above the mouth. At this point, stream quality met State
standards, except for bacteriological values which were in
violation of the numerical standard-forthis parameter. Nutrient
(nitrogen, phosphorus) concentrations were slightly below the
average for streams in the Upper Potomac Basin.
There are no known sources of contamination of this stream.
Farm animals undoubtedly contribute to the fecal coliform count
in the stream. Other possible sources of contamination in
Pennsylvania are. not _known-.-- The .office of Environmental Programs
indicates in its 1986 Report to EPA that surface waters in this
segment are classified as Class IV (recreational) trout waters.
Water quality in this segment is very Good, however, some high
temperatures are occasionally monitored during the summer months.
This is a natural condition, but it probably reflects a lack of
stream cover and may stress cold water fishes such as trout. In
both 1984 and 1985, 1000 adult rainbow trout were stocked into
this creek (Tidewater Administration, 1984, 1985a). Benthic
community structure and diversity at a single station near the
confluence with the Potomac River (LIC0004) indicates Good water
quality. Most of the upper drainage in Pennsylvania is
11-31
classified as "water quality limited" (Department Environmental
Resources 1984).
TONOLOWAY CREEK
The Tonoloway Creek drainage segment is located just east
and northeast of Hancock, Maryland. This segment is quite small
consisting of only 2.1 square miles. The remainder of the
watershed is in Pennsylvania--and-is.111.,5 square miles in size.
Several orchards are found in the segment, but no towns and very
few dwellings.
Water quality of Tonoloway Creek was determined 0.4 miles
above the stream's mouth and 0.4 miles downstream from the point
of discharge for the Hancock Sewerage Treatment Plant. Except
for fecal coliform values which exceeded the numerical standard
of 200 MPN per 100 ml, water quality met the State standards in
1974. Dissolved oxygen was sufficient for aquatic organisms and
nutrient values were generally low.
All surface waters in this segment are classified as Class
IV (put -and -take) for recreational trout. Water quality in the
Tonoloway Creek segment was considered Good in 1986. High
bacteria and nutrient levels from runoff from the limited
agricultural land and failing septic systems are the segment's
most serious water quality concerns.
11-32
The town of Hancock's treatment plant is probably the major
cause of high bacteriological values. The nature of wastes
entering the stream above the Maryland/Pennsylvania State line
is, as yet, undetermined.
Benthic community structure and diversity at a single
station near the confluence with the Potomac River (TOC0004)
indicate Good water quality. In 1985, the State stocked 500
adult rainbow trout into this stream (Tidewater Administration,
1985a).
LITTLE TONOLOWAY
"All surface waters in this segment are classified as Class
IV (recreational) trout waters. Water quality in this segment is
Good. Elevated bacterial levels from agricultural runoff and
failing septic systems and high suspended sediments from
agricultural runoff are the primary water quality concerns in
this segment. In 1984.and 1985, 500 adult rainbow trout were
stocked each year into this segment as a put -and -take fishery
(Tidewater Administration, 1984 1985a)." The State of Maryland
recently constructed a package sewerage treatment plant to serve
the Sideling Hill Interpretive Center located off of I-68 on
Sideling Hill Mountain. Discharge from this plant is into Munson
Spring Branch, a tributary of the Little Tonoloway.
1I-33
SIDELING HILL CREEK
The Sideling Hill Creek segment includes 23.1 square miles.
The total drainage area includes an additional 80.5 square miles
in Pennsylvania. Sideling Hill Creek and all tributaries are
classified as Class IV waters (to be protected for use as
recreational trout waters).
Average.stream.discharge_was_124,.,cf-s, measured at the U.S.
Geological Survey gage 1.2 miles upstream from the mouth. Land
in the watershed is largely forested with some farm land.
Included in the drainage area is the Sideling Hill Wildlife
Management Area.
Water quality of the stream was excellent in 1974, as
determined one and one-half miles above the mouth. All water
quality standards were met, and fecal coliform values were very
low at this point. Measurements of pH, although not very high,
were on the alkaline side of neutral. Dissolved ionic
constituents were low, including nitrate which was very low in
concentration. Phosphate was below average for many streams in
the sub -basin.
Few domestic wastes enter the stream and little agricultural
pollution is present. A boy scout camp near the mouth of the
stream, and above the sampling station, discharges treated wastes
into the stream. There are no known industrial discharges.
11-34
The 1986 Report to EPA indicates that water quality in this
segment is Good to Excellent. Elevated bacterial and suspended
sediment levels are due to agricultural runoff. Benthis
community structure and diversity in the lower portion of the
segment (SID0015) indicate Good water quality. In 1984 and 1985,
this segment was stocked as a put -and -take fishery with 3000 to
4000 adult rainbow trout, respectively (Tidewater Association,
1984 1985a).-
DARGAN AREA DRAINAGE
The Dargan Area Drainage is located just above the Town of
Harpers Ferry between Antietam Creek and Israel Creek. It
consists of 11.1 square miles of drainage, and includes several
small unnamed tributaries which enter the Potomac River directly.
The watershed is sparsely., populated and contains forest land and
small farms. Accessibility to the river is good and boating,
fishing and camping are popular along the river's banks.
There is no known quality data for the streams in this
segment, but no probable sources of pollution are suspected.
DOWNSVILLE AREA DRAINAGE
The Downsville area segment lies to the west of Antietam
Creek between Williamsport and Shepherdstown, and contains many
streams directly tributary to the Potomac River. The area is
52.4 square miles in size. The largest stream in the segment is
St. James -Marsh Run whose headwaters originate at St. James, a
suburb of Hagerstown. One station was monitored in Marsh Run at
stream mile 1.6 in 1974, but no data is available for the other
streams.
Plans were recently approved for the construction of a
package sewerage treatment plant to serve St. James school. The
purpose of this plant. is to..eliminate_the _school's present
failing septic system. Discharge from the plant will be into an
unnamed tributary to St. James Run.
II -36
Marsh Run was found to be polluted by high concentrations of
fecal coliform bacteria, but the other parameters met the water
quality standards. The stream was found to have hard water due
to a high total alkalinity measured as calcium carbonate. The pH
was generally a little above 8, but well within the limits of the
pH standard. The stream receives wastes from urban and
agricultural runoff. Probably the agricultural activities are
the major cause of the bacteria counts.-
PINESBURG STATION AREA DRAINAGE
Pinesburg Station Area Drainage is a small segment (6.3
square miles) being at the southwest of the Conococheague Creek.
It consists of a few small unnamed tributaries and is sparsely
populated. Water quality of these streams is not known, but
there is no reason tobelieve_...that..the. streams do not meet water
quality standards.
GREENSPRING AREA DRAINAGE•
This segment which drains 20.5 square miles is located
between the Conococheague Creek and Licking Creek watersheds.
Fort Frederick State Park adjoining Big Pool, a large lake, on
the C & 0 Canal, is found near the Potomac River.
No data is available for the small streams of this small
segment, but no water quality problems are suspected.
II -37
TIMBER RIDGE DRAINAGE AREA
The Timber Ridge segment (11.0 square miles) lies to the
west of Licking Creek. Ditch Run and several small tributaries
drain this area. Water quality of these streams has not been
tested, and no wastes are known to enter the stream.
TONOLOWAY RIDGE DRAINAGE AREA
Tonoloway Ridge Area -Drainage -(20.a square miles) is located
west of Tonoloway Creek and east of Sideling Hill Creek. Little
Tonoloway Creek contained almost entirely within Maryland is the
largest stream in the segment. Plans were recently approved for
the construction of a package sewage treatment plant to serve a
proposed campground along the Potomac River on the east side of
Tonoloway Ridge. Discharge is into an unnamed tributary. The
Town of Hancock, Maryland_is_.found. within the Little Tonoloway
drainage area, although the Town's sewage treatment plant
discharges into Tonoloway Creek, another watershed. Sideling
Hill Mountain and Tonoloway Ridge, which pass through the area,
are forested. Orchards and small farms characterize the
cultivated areas.
Little Tonoloway, which was sampled in 1974, by the Water
Resources Administration, seems to be degraded. by farm runoff,
although exact sources have not yet been determined. Fecal
coliform values did not meet the water quality standard and were
extremely high in two samples taken during spring months. Other
water quality parameters met the standards.
II -38
FIGURE NO. 4
CLASSIFICATION OF THE WATERS OF
WASHINGTON COUNTY
UNIT
CODE NAME DESCRIPTION
Class II Waters NONE NONE
Shellfish
Harvesting (NONE)
Class III Waters -
Natural Trout
Waters
Class IV Waters -
Recreational Trout
Waters
Beaver Creek
Marsh Run
Sideling Hill
Creek and all
Tributaries
Tonoloway Creek
and all
Tributaries
Licking Creek
and all
Tributaries
Conococheague
Creek and all
Tributaries
Antietam Creek
and Tributaries,
Except Classified
Above as Natural
Trout Waters
Mainstem only,
in Antietam Creek
Watershed
Mainstem only,
in Antietam Creek
Watershed
Entire Sideling
Hill Creek
Watershed
Entire Tonoloway
Watershed
Entire Licking
Creek
Watershed
Entire
Conococheague
Creek Watershed
Entire Antietam
Creek Watershed
Except Those
Designated
Natural Trout
Waters
Source: Water Resources Administration
iI-39
FIGURE
NO. 5
- WATER QUALITY STATUS
Water**
Water
Quality
Standards
Met?
Quality
Segment
Temp
pH
D.0
Bact.*
Turb.
Limited
Major Causes of Degradation
Potomac River,
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
WQ
Bacteria standards not met in four sections
Mainstem (01)
below Sewer Treatment Plants, otherwise
standards are met.
Antietam Cr.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
WQ
Agricultural and urban/suburban runoff.
(02)
industry, sewage systems.
Conococheague
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
WQ
Tannery wastes, agricultural runoff.
Creek (03)
Little Conoco-
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
WQ
Runoff from agriculture and failing
cheague Cr. (4)
septic systems.
Licking Creek
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
WQ
Agricultural activities.
(05)
Tonoloway
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
EL
Sewer Treatment Plant serving Hancock,
H Creek (06)
located near mouth of Tonoloway Creek.
H
Sideling Hill
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
EL
Relatively few possible sources of pollution.
C3 Creek (07)
0
Dargan (10)
EL
No water quality data. No known sources of
pollution.
Downsville (11)
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
WQ
Marsh Run polluted by residential and
agricultural runoff.
Pinesburg (12)
EL
No water quality data. No known sources of
pollution.
Green Spring (13)
EL
No water quality data. No known sources of
pollution.
Timber Ridge (14)
EL
No water quality data. No known sources of
pollution.
Tonoloway
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
WQ
Little Tonoloway Creek polluted by unknown
source(s)
*'Noindicates that the numerical aspect of the bacteria standard is exceeded, but water is not technically in
violation unless cause is known to be a health problem.
** WQ - Water Quality Limited (all with respect to bacteria). These segments will require non -point source controls.
EL - Effluent Quality Limited, standards are or can be met with point source controls.
SOURCE: Water Resources Administration
U I
P E N N S Y E V A N I
WASHINGTON COUNTY WATER
AND SEWERAGE PLAN
WASHINGTON COUNTY
WATER PROVINCES
1 0 1 2 3 4 5 Mi.
SOURCE: Md. Dept. of Geology, Mines & Water
Resources Bulletin 24 , 1962
Q j H NASSAUX _ HEMSLEY, INCORPORATED _ CONSULTANI[jll
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
GROUNDWATER CHARACTERISTICS AND AQUIFERS - Washington County is
divided generally into four water provinces based upon
physiographic formations. As illustrated on accompanying Map No.
VI - Water Provinces, the division includes the South Mountain -
Elk Ridge province averaging three miles in width along the
eastern boundary of the County; the Hagerstown Valley province
extending approximately 18 miles in width to the base of Fairview
and Powell Mountains; the Hancock -Indian Springs province
reaching westward from the Fairview and Powell Mountains nearly
19 miles to the base of Sideling Hill Mountain; and the Sideling
Hill -Town Creek province extending to the County line.
1. Within the South Mountain -Elk Ridge water province, only
small differences exist in the water -bearing capacities of the
geologic formations. According to compiled data, the mean yield
from wells is less than__1D._,gpm._with_.a range from 1 to 60 gpm.
The best yields appear to be located in the Catoctin metabasalt
formation in the Cascade-Highfield-Fort Ritchie area. Springs in
this water province, although-numerous,•are-generally small with
discharges ranging from less than 10 to 100 gpm. The chemical
quality of groundwater is considered suitable for most uses with
spring water lower in mineral content, but slightly more acidic
than well water.
2. The Hagerstown Valley water province covering an area of
approximately 300 square miles is considered hydrogeologically
complex because of the broken and folded characteristics of the
limestone and similar carbonate rocks such as dolomite. "In
consolidated carbonate rocks, most of the water is stored in
in joints, bedding planes, irregular fractures, and solution
openings and at many places in the intergranular pores of the
residuum (soil derived from weathered rock). ..The number, size
and degree of interconnection of the joints, solution cavities
and other secondary openings of the carbonate rocks determine
their capacity to transmit water."*
The major direction of groundwater movement in the Hagerstown
Valley province is southward to the Potomac River. Although
local variations may exit in rock permeability, the water table
contours within the Hagerstown Valley closely• parallel the
topographic patterns.
Groundwater recharge in. this. province occurs primarily by
precipitation filtering through the soil and subsoil. "Streams
that flow off South Mountain to the east...and Powell and
Fairview Mountains to the west are major sources of recharge."**
Surface depressions and sags acts as efficient basins to collect
rain water and a sinkhole at Jugtown, Washington County is known
to have "captured" a perennial stream with a flow of 220 gallons
per minute.***
The quantity of groundwater available in the limestone and
dolomite aquifers of the Hagerstown Valley is quite large. As
Nutter has noted, "Carbonate rocks...are often excellent sources
II -42
of water because the interstices (fractures and solution
cavities) are large and hence yield freely nearly all the water
being held against gravity."**** Wells drilled in the Hagerstown
Valley yield from 2 to 400 gpm with the Tomstown dolomite,
Conococheague limestone, and Stonehenge limestone evidencing
respectively the highest yields. Springs also occur throughout
the Hagerstown Valley water province and have a discharge range
from 25-100 gpm to 2000-3000 gpm.
3. The third major water province in Washington County, the
Hancock -Indian Springs province, extends westward from the
Fairview -Powell Mountains to the eastern base of Sideling Hill.
With shale as the dominant rock type in this province,
groundwater recharge is low. Shale soils evidence a low to
moderate moisture holding capacity and a relatively high direct
surface runoff results. Hydrogeologic conditions, therefore, are
unfavorable for large capacity wells of any sustained yield.
Springs occur in all of the formations in the Hancock -Indian
Springs water province, and are for the most part, gravity fed.
Although sufficient amounts of water may be available for modest
domestic and farm use, test results indicate rather poor aquifers
are present.
• *Nutter, Larry J., Ibid., p. 13
**Ibid., p. 13
***Ibid., p. 13
****Ibid., p. 32
II -43
The quality of water in this province is generally satisfactory.
However, both a high iron content and a hardness factor prevail.
One of the least desirable water supply areas is along the
Tonoloway Ridge west of Hancock where hardness and nitrate
content were significantly high.
4. The Sideling Hill -Town Creek water province occupies the small
portion of Washington County between Sideling Hill and Sideling
Hill Creek. The best well in the province yields only 36 gpm
which indicates the absence of any significant groundwater
supplies. Also in the province hardness and iron content may
necessitate treatment of water supplies. Additionally high
sulfur and nitrate contents have been found in certain wells in
the Jennings formation.
The accompanying map generally illustrates the aquifer
characteristics in Washington County in terms of the following
three Hydrologic Units.
Hydrologic Unit I - Contains the most productive aquifers.
Average yields and specific capacities fall in the
upper 25%. Well yields range from 1 to 580 gpm. There
is approximately a 20% chance of getting a well
yielding 50 gpm or more.
Hydrologic Unit II - Aquifers are of intermediate
productivity. There is approximately a 6% change of
I1-44
getting a well yield of 50 gpm or more.
Hydrologic Unit III - Contains the poorest aquifers within
the County. Well yields range from 1 to 200 gpm with
only a 2% chance of getting 50 gpm or more.
GROUNDWATER QUALITY - Although ample groundwater quantity is
apparent, groundwater quality continues to be a problem. One
method of determining the pollution level of groundwater is to
count the coliform organisms. Positive coliform bacteria which
are found in the excreta of warm blooded animals are harmless,
but their presence indicates the groundwater is likely
contaminated by pathogenic organisms. Unfortunately, "there is
no easily applicable method of demonstrating the presence or
absence of pathogenic micro-organisms in water" as Ehler and
Steel note.*
Groundwater quality has been monitored in Washington County for
many years pursuant to requirements of various projects and
regulatory programs.- One of the most- comprehensive sampling
programs conducted was in 1981 when R. E. Wright and Associates
of Pennsylvania conducted a countrywide sampling program. This
study included a comprehensive water quality sampling and
analysis program to determine existing groundwater quality and
specific problems within three designated prototype areas.
Analyses included total coliform, fecal coliform, fecal
streptococci, nitrates, chlorides, and ABS to establish water
quality relationships to point and nonpoint pollution sources
�I-45
II I I I I I I I i 1 f 1 �I 1 I f �I
U 1 H NASSAUX - HEMSLEY, INCORPORATED : CONSULTANTS
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
such as malfunctioning septic systems, agricultural sources
(cattle barns, feed lots, chemical fertilization, and manure
application), storm water sources, background water quality, etc.
As a result of these analyses, the following conclusions were
presented in the consultant's report:
*op. cit., p.31.
A
11-46
SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS*
Conclusions Relative to Coliform Contamination
1. Twenty-four percent of all wells sampled from the three
prototype areas exhibited total coliform contamination
as measured by the MPN method. However, only thirteen
percent of the wells were characterized by the presence
of total coliform in three or more tubes of the five -
tube MPN method.
2. Seven percent of all wells exhibited fecal coliform
contamination as measured by the MPN method; however,
only two percent of all wells exhibited fecal contami-
nation in three or more of the five -tube MPN tests.
3. The MPN method of total coliform analysis is considerably
more sensitive than the MF method to the presence of
non -fecal coliform organisms. (environmental coliforms)
and other bacterial organisms which yield positive
results by this method.
4. The hydrogeologic environment- of Washington County is
quite susceptible in many locations to contamination by
naturally occurring shallow bacterial organisms. Such
susceptibility, as demonstrated by the results of the
MPN test results is undesirable from a public health
standpoint as it indicates that potential avenues of
bacterial or pathogenic communication exist between the
surface and the subsurface groundwater supply.
*From Groundwater Quality of Washington County, Maryland, R. E.
Wright Associates, Inc., August, 1981
II -47
5. Subsurface sewage disposal practices in Washington
County appear to Igenerally providing adequate
wastewater renovat_ :gin before the infiltrate from these
systems reaches the groundwater system. Three -fourths
of the incidences of contamination are attributed to
non -septic system sources. These sources are believed
to be naturally occurring environmental coliform
organisms associated with soil, plant, insect, and
cold-blooded animals. However, twenty-five percent of
the incidences of contamination are generally
attributed to incomplete renovation of subsurface
disposal sewage effluents. Livestock and other warm-
blooded animal (non -human) sources are considered to be
negligible as sources of fecal contamination of the
sampled wells.
6. Many wells contaminated by environmental coliforms,
will periodically be free of contamination due to the
lack of fluid mechanism for transport. This means that
many cases (+75%) of contamination are dependent upon
rainfall frequency and intensity, vertical soil
permeabilities, and travel time to subject wells.
Conclusions Relatives to Well Construction
7. Deeper wells generally have a lower incidence of
bacteriological contamination. Conversely, the shorter
the well casing length, the more likely a well is to
have bacteriological contamination.
8. The closer a well is to the on -site or neighboring
septic system, the more likely it is to be
contaminated. Conversely, the greater the isolation
distance between well and septic system, the less
likely the well is to be contaminated.
9. The age of a well is directly related to its
probability of being contaminated. Newer wells are
more likely to be uncontaminated and older wells are
more likely to be contaminated. This is attributed to
improved well construction practices as well as
improved septic system planning, design, and
enforcement procedures in practice in recent years.
10. The greater the depth to the static water level, the
less likely a well is to be contaminated. Conversely,
the shallower -the -static -water level, the more likely
the well is to be contaminated.
11. Well casings extended well below the static water level
will provide an added-,-degree,of -sanitary protection to
the subject well.
Conclusions Relative to Plannina. Desicm and Management
12. Certain aquifer units in the County appear to be more
sensitive to groundwater contamination. Specifically,
the Beekmantown (48%) and the Metamorphic Aquifer (36%)
are much more likely to have wells which are
contaminated. This conclusion is relative to the
average rate of contamination across the three
II -49
prototype areas (24%). For this reason, special
planning and other protective measures may be
especially warranted for these aquifer units.
13. Wells (and septic systems) are no more likely to be
contaminated when placed on hydrogeologic and soils
limitations than are those which are placed upon more
ideal sites. This does not, however, refute the fact
that sites. characterized• by. bedrock outcroppings or
shallow and rocky soils generally provide incomplete
renovation of infiltrating sewage effluent.
14. Improvements in planning and design standards for the
following criteria will result in improved groundwater
quality.*
(a) Well depth.
(b) Length of well casing.
(c) Isolation distances.
(d) Soils and hydrogeologic conditions.
(e) Depth to static water level.
(f) Wells drilled in the Beekmantown and Metamorphic
Aquifer Units.
15. Any groundwater quality management, plan which succeeds
in significantly improving groundwater quality must be
multi -faceted, designed to address and regulate point
and non -point sources of surficial bacteriological
contamination and to require appropriate well siting
and construction standards.
*Editorial Note: Any changes to design standards for wells could
only be made by, and with the cooperation of, the Maryland
Department of the Environment.
Groundwater, and to a limited degree, surface water
quality in Washington County has been extensively
investigated by the Maryland Geological Survey. In
1962, the Maryland Department of Geology, Mines, and
Water Resources published Bulletin 24 titled the Water
Resources of Allegheny and Washington County (J.M.
Darling). In 1991, the Maryland Geological Survey
published Bulletin 36 titled Water Resources of
Washington County (Duigon and others). This is the
most up-to-date, comprehensive water quality document
available for the area. This report provides an
updated assessment of the availability and quality of
ground and surface water resources in Washington County
and presents an evaluation of the spatial and temporal
variations in the,.pr_operties__of _these resources. The
report is based on a compilation of data collected over
many years; the basic data are published separately in
a document titled: Basic Data Report No. 18, Ground -
Water and Surface -Water Data for Washington County,
Maryland (Duigon and others, 1989). In summary, these
reports found that groundwater and stream flow
characteristics show that water volume is adequate and
that there is no consequential pesticide or volatile
organic chemical contamination of the ground or surface
water supply in Washington County.
11-51
In 1990 and 1991, Washington County Health Department's
Division of Environmental Health conducted a survey in an attempt
to assess the quality of groundwater, specifically, any change
which could be noted from the parameters presented in the 1981
study. In an attempt to do this, a random sampling was conducted
of 50 percent of the sites originally used by R. E. Wright and
Associates. The conclusions of the Health Department survey are
presented- in Figure 6..
ii -52
FIGURE 6
GROUNDWATER SURVEY STUDY
WASHINGTON COUNTY
A uifer Unit
Negative Total Fecal
Metamorphic
Wright
32/47
(68%)
15/47
(32%)
7/47
(15%)
H.D.
17/24
(71%)
7/24
(29%)
2/24
(8%)
Lower
Wright
52/68-'(T6%)
- 16/68
(24%)
4/68
(6%)
Cambrian
H.D.
19/26
(73%)
7/26
(27%)
0/26
(0%)
Conococheague
Wright
92/114
(84%)
18/114
(16%)
6/114
(5%)
H.D.
37/48
(77%)
11/48
(23%)
4/48
(8%)
Beekmantown
Wright
11/21
(52%)
10/21
(48%)
3/21
(14%)
H.D.
10/20
(50%)
10/20
(50%)
3/20
(15%)_
Shale
Wright
40/46
(87%)
6/46
(13%)
0/46
(0%)
H.D.
10/16
(62%)
6/16
(38%)
3/16
(19%)
11-53
The results of the resurvey of the 1981 R. E. Wright and
Associates, Inc. report indicate that while there has been a
seemingly minor decrease in groundwater quality, especially in
the shale aquifer unit, on the whole the overall water quality in
the County (within the parameters tested) has remained relatively
constant. Rates of contamination for these two studies are also
consistent with results of other sampling which has been done by
the Washington, County -Health Department.' The hope for an
increase in groundwater quality due to a more stringent on -site
water and sewer regulation has not been seen; however, it should
be born in mind that in the ten-year period 1981 through 1991,
3,834 permits for the installation of new septic systems were
issued by the Washington County Health Department. This growth
has occurred during a period of increased stringency for
construction and siting. _of. .on. -site. systems and it may well be
that the regulations imposed by the Washington County
Commissioners in 1983 has had the effect of stemming ground water
contamination at earlier levels.
Currently, study continues on the ground water quality
within the County with the County Health Department modifying
study methods and attempting to assess the effect of external
variables, eg, seasonal, agricultural activity, on water quality.
It is anticipated that the Washington County Sanitary Commission
will soon have the capability of performing a more wide range of
laboratory analyses and when that is possible, increased
I1-54
screening, especially from volatile organic compounds and heavy
metals, is planned.
WATER QUALITY PLANS - The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of
1977 made improved water quality a national priority and
authorized funding for the planning, design and construction of
sewerage facilities. The planning and construction grants
programs established by this Act have provided the means by which
the County and municipalities can meet many of the local
objectives for the development of sewerage facilities. Under
Section 303(e) of the Water Pollution Control Act, the Water
Resources Administration of the State of Maryland prepared the
Upper Potomac River Basin Water Quality Management Plan in 1976.
The Plan evaluates existing water quality, sources of pollution,
and recommends management approaches for the Basin, which
includes all of Washington County. The scope of the Plan is much
broader than the need for sewerage facilities. The Plan
classifies streams according to the degree of water quality to be
achieved, and thus determines either directly or indirectly the
type of treatment works and operational efficiency required of
sewerage facilities. The inventory of existing systems and
problem areas is useful in establishing priorities for the
construction of improvement sewerage facilities.
While the Basin Plan prepared under Section 303(e) deals
primarily with pollution which can be traced to point discharges
11-55
to surface waters, the Basin Plan prepared pursuant to Section
208 deals with non -point sources. The 208 Plan, completed in
1979, identifies non -point sources of water pollution and current
management activities in the areas of stormwater runoff, sediment
control, surface mining, residuals management, failing septic
systems, forestry operations, agriculture, and snow and ice
controls. Section 201 of the Water Pollution Control Act
established a construction grants program for public sewerage
facilities. Until 1989 funds were allocated by EPA to local
areas on the basis of state-wide priorities in a three step
process. In step 1, Facilities Planning, the specific sewerage
requirements of a planning area designed by the State are
investigated, alternatives evaluated, and a particular solution
recommended. The Antietam Basin Facilities Plan for Hagerstown
metropolitan, area, including the incorporated towns of Funkstown,
Williamsport and Smithsburg, was prepared with a Step 1 grant.
The 201 Plan for Boonsboro-Keedysville-Sharpsburg was originally
prepared in 1981 and updated. in 1985. Steps 2 and 3 of the
construction grant program funded the preparation of detailed
engineering plans and specifications and the construction of
facilities respectively. There was a tendency to consolidate
steps 2 and 3 into 'step 4'. EPA grants also funded facilities
planning for Clear Spring, Highfield-Cascade-PenMar, Hancock, and
Sandy Hook.
1I-56
k
The Maryland Department of the Environment, State Revolving
Loan Fund has served as a replacement source of funding for EPA
grants since they were phased out in 1989. The Washington County
Sanitary District as well as other service providing agencies are
using this source as well as Farmers Home Administration,
Community Development Block Grant, Appalachian Regional
Commission, and Economic Development Administration funds for
facilities planning purposes-. Plans for the -St. James area and
the Rte. 64/Jefferson Boulevard corridor are currently in
preparation by the Washington County Sanitary District.
2. POPULATION ANALYSIS
The 1990 population of Washington County at 121,393 persons
represents an increase of 7.3% or some 8,307 residents since
1980. In addition to.total_population changes, the internal
County patterns are significant to the planning of water and ,
sewerage facilities. Table No. 1 outlines the 1970-1990
population patterns for each Planning Sector and Election
District within the County. The table illustrates that the
County wide growth rate for the period 1980 to 1990 was 7.3%.
This rate of growth was somewhat lower than the growth rate of
8.9% between 1970 and 1980.
Planning Sector I (metro) which includes the Hagerstown Urban
Growth Area accounted for approximately 65% of the total
population of the County in 1990. This percentage remained
1I-57
virtually unchanged from the 1980 census. Within Planning Sector
I, the Chewsville and Cedar Lawn election districts experienced
the most significant increases in population, 21.3% and 30.2%
respectively. The City of Hagerstown reversed its loss of
population reflected in the 1980 census and showed an increase of
1.6% between 1980 and 1990.
Planning Sector II (Mid) which, includes 'the Boonsboro Growth Area
experienced the highest percentage of growth between 1980 and
1990 with a residential growth rate of 19.8% (this does not
include a significant increase in group quarters population at
the state prison complex).
According to the 1990 census, Planning Sector IV (North East)
which includes Smithsburg and Ringgold election districts
decreased in population by 6% between 1980 and 1990.
PROJECTIONS
For purposes of water and sewerage planning, population
projections developed by the Department of State Planning for the
County as a whole will be used as a base. These total
projections are broken down to election district projections in
Table 1-A based upon a pattern of distribution developed by the
County Planning Commission.
1I-58
p
WASHINGTON COUNTY
ELECTION DISTRICTS
PLANNING SECTORS
a
11
0 2 4
Scale L 1 I I
' un
1
c77
z
TABLE NO. 1
WASHINGTON COUNTY
1980 TO 1990 POPULATION PATTERNS
SECTOR AND NET PERCENT PERCENT OF
ELECTION DISTRICT 1980 1990 CHANGE CHANGE CO. POP.(1990
I METRO
75,708
78,787
3,079
4.1
64.91
2 Williamsport
4,718
4,345
- 373
- 7.9
3.58
9 Leitersburg
3,070
2,814
- 256
- 8.3
2.32
10 Funkstown*
7,801
9,034
1,233
15.8
7.44
13 Maugansville
5,030
5,351
321
6.4
4.41
18 Chewsville*
5,532
6,346
814
14.7
5.23
24 Cedar Lawn
867...
1,129_
262
30.2
0.93
26 Halfway
9,489
9,418
- 71
- 0.7
7.76
27 Fountainhead*
5,069
4,905
- 164
- 3.2
4.04
Hagerstown
34,132
35,445
1,313
3.8
29.20
II MID
14,825
19,013
4,188
28.3
15.67
1 Sharpsburg
2,313
2,697
384
16.6
2.22
6 Boonsboro
3,927
4,652
725
18.5
3.83
12 Fairplay
3,089
5,506
2,417
78.2(12.0)
4.54
16 Beaver Creek
2,725
3,141
416
15.3
2.59
19 Keedysville
1,216
1,259
43
3.5
1.04
20 Downsville
1,555
1,758
203
13.1
1.45
III SOUTHEAST
3,451
3,800
349
10.1
3.13
8 Rohrersville
1,901
2,137
236
12.4
1.76
11 Sandy Hook
1,550
1,663
113
7.3
1.37
IV NORTHEAST
8.,56.8._...-
8,060
-508
- 5.9
6.64
7 Smithsburg
4,413
4,297
-116
- 2.6
3.54
14 Ringgold
4,155
3,763
-392
- 9.4
3.10
V CENTRAL
6,925
7,901
914
14.1
6.51
4 Clear Spring
2,368
2,552
184
7.8
2.10
15 Indian Springs
1,694
1,842
148
8.7
1.52
23 Wilson
2,863
3,507
644
22.5
2.89
VI WESTERN
5 Hancock
3,609
3,832
223
6.2
3.16
TOTALS
113,086
121,393
8,307
7.3
100.00
II -59
TABLE NO. 1-A
WASHINGTON COUNTY PROJECTIONS BY ELECTION DISTRICT
ELECTION
GROWTH RATE
% OF TOTAL COUNTY
(2)
SECTOR
DISTRICT
BETWEEN 1980-1990
POPULATION
1990
1995
2000
2010
2020
1
2
Williamsport
-7.9%
3.58%
4345
4511
4622
4786
4901
9
Leitersburg
-8.3%
2.32%
2814
2923
2995
3101
3176
10
Funkstown
15.8%
7.44%
9034
9374
9605
9947
10,185
13
Maugansville
6.4%
4.41%
5351
5557
5693
5896
6037
18
Chewsville
14.7%
5.23%
6346
6590
6752
6992
7159
24
Cedar Lawn
30.2%
0.93%
1129
1172
1201
1243
1273
26
Halfway
-0.7%
7.76%
9418
9778
10,018
10,375
10,623
27
Fountainhead
-3.2%
4.04%
4905
5090
5216
5401
5530
Hagerstown
3.8%
29.20%
35,445
36,792
37,697
39,040
39,974
II
1
Sharpsburg
16.6%
2.22%
2697,
2797
2866
2968
3039
6
Boonsboro
18.5%
3.83%
4652
4826
4945
5120
5243
(3)
12
Fairplay
78.2%
4.54%
5506
5720
5861
6070
6215
16
Beaver Creek
15.3%
2.59%
3141
3263
3344
3462
3545
19
Keedysville
3.5%
1.04%
1259
1310
1343
1390
1423
20
Downsville
13.1%
1.45%
1758
1827
1872
1938
1985
III
8
Rohrersvflle
12.4%
1.76%
2137
2218
2272
2353
2409
11
Sandy Hook
7.3%
1.37%
1663
1726
1769
1831
1875
IV
7
Smithsburg
-2.6%
3.54%
4297
4460
4570
4733
4846
14
Ringgold
-9.4%
3.10%
3763
3906
4002
4144
4243
V
4
Clear Spring
7.8%
2.10%
2552
2646
2711
2807
2874
15
Indian Springs
8.7%
1.52%
1842
1915
1962
2032
2080
23
Wilsons
22.5%
2.89%
3507
3641
3731
3863
3956
VI
5
Hancock
6.2%
3.16%
3832
3982
4080
4224
4326
TOTALS
121,393
126,024
129,127
133.716
136,917
CHANGE
3.8%
2.5%
3.6%
2.4%
4631
3103
4589
3201
Total County Growth Rate 1980-1990 - 7.3%
Notes:
(1) Figures are based on Maryland Office of Planning Population Projections (December 1992). Projections for Election
Districts are based on each District's percent of the County's total population in 1990 as a part of the projected
total County population. This method does not account for different growth rates in Election Districts but assumes
a constant rate of growth throughout the County for each projection period.
(2) 1990 figures from actual Census counts.
(3) Election District 12 contains large Group Quarters population. 78.2% increase reflects growth of resident population,
as well as Group Quarters. True growth in resident population was 12.0% between 1970-1980.
11-60
3. LAND USE
A generalized land use analysis of Washington County indicates
that the highest orders of development are located in the
Hagerstown Valley. In particular, the City of Hagerstown and the
surrounding adjacent communities evidence the most intense
residential, commercial, and industrial land use activities.
With the Hagerstown Metropolitan Area as the virtual hub of the
County, small incorporated towns and communities are situated
along almost every primary corridor emanating from the City.
Considerable strip development has taken place along those
roadways between the Hagerstown Metropolitan Area and the
established communities.
Outside the Hagerstown Valley, land use patterns are manifested
largely by open space/agriculturaluses and sporadic residential
clusters.
Tables 2A and 2B illustrate the -historical and projected changes
in land use composition of the County from 1973 to 2020. Also
shown is the current composition of County land area by Zoning
districts (table 2C). Zoning districts are shown on the detailed
Water and Sewer Maps at the conclusion of this document.
In order to provide a continuous up-to-date source of data on
what type of development is occurring and where it is occurring,
the County Planning Department compiles a data base of
subdivision and building permit activity as applications are made
and approved in order to provide a continuous up-to-date source
of data on what type of development is occurring and where it is
occurring. An additional source of land use data is nearing
completion through a project to assign house numbers to all
significant structures in the County, and enter the data into the
computer. Summary reports are now produced for subdivision
activity.
All data files will soon be converted to a PC format from a
mainframe computer, allowing quicker access and more flexibility.
Planning'has begun in the development of a Geographic Information
System (GIS) to provide graphic and analysis components. The
integration of separate data files into a GIS environment will
allow much more detailed and comprehensive analysis of
development factors in facilities and infrastructure planning.
The Comprehensive Plan for Washington County separates the County
into three specific planning areas: the Urban and Town Growth
Areas, the Rural/Agricultural Area and Special Planning Areas.
Areas where public facilities and services either exist or can be
cost-effectively planned and programmed over the next twenty
years are designated as Growth Areas. An area around the City of
Hagerstown, Funkstown and Williamsport has been designated as the
Urban Growth Area. Town Growth Areas have been designed around
II -62
Smithsburg and Boonsboro. A Town Growth Area for Hancock was
designated and adopted in January of 1990. The Comprehensive
Plan encourages development of all types within the designated
growth areas. In order to support this development the Plan also
encourages extension of public water and sewer facilities to all
of the land considered to be located within the growth area. The
entire growth area is considered to be ultimately served in the
future.
The remainder of the land in the County, outside of the
boundaries of the Urban and Town Growth Areas, is designated as
the Rural/Agricultural Area. Of highest priority in this area
are the goals of preserving agricultural land and conserving open
space, water supply sources, mountain and woodland areas and
other natural and scenic resources. Development within the
Rural/Agricultural Area should be in keeping with the rural
character of the environment and should not require public
investments in services.. or, f acilities. which would result in
increased growth pressures and divert priorities from the Growth
Area. In several areas of the County extension of public water
and/or sewer facilities exist within the rural -agricultural area.
These may be lines which connect a water supply source or
treatment plant with service areas in a growth area or rural
village. They may also be extensions of lines outside of the
Growth area into portions of the rural -agricultural area that
have been necessitated by water quality problems with existing
11-63
wells documented by the Health Department. The presence of these
lines shall not be considered a catalyst for new development
above that which normally would be expected to occur in the
rural -agricultural area.
Within the rural -agricultural area are small communities called
rural villages. These small communities possess characteristics
such as small clustered populations, a few small local
businesses, a church, and perhaps a fire station. Some of these
villages may currently have their own small public water and/or
sewerage system. Most however depend on individual private wells
and on site septic systems many of which are old, substandard,
and possibly failing. This could be resulting in groundwater
contamination. New public water and sewer facilities may be
necessitated in these villages to alleviate these problems.
Residential development policies for rural villages should be
generally the same as for the rest of the rural -agricultural
area. Residential andlimited commercial uses of a function and
scale appropriate to the character of the communities should be
permitted.
Three areas have been identified as being particularly critical
at the present time for natural resource protection. These areas
are the Edgemont and Smithsburg Reservoir Watersheds, the Beaver
Creek Watershed, including the Albert M. Powell Trout Hatchery,
and the Appalachian Trail. They have been designated as Special
II. -64
Planning Areas and are identified on the General Plan map in the
Comprehensive Plan.
11-65
TABLE NO. 2-A
H
H
rn
0
WASHINGTON COUNTY
1973
LAND USE IN ACRES
1981 1985
1990
1973-1990
Acres
LAND USE
Percent
CHANGE
1985-1990
Acres Percent
Low Density Residential
7,225
8,479
8,709
15,242
8,017
111.0%
6,533
75.0%
Med/High Density Res.
4,902
5,023
5,177
5,594
692
14.1%
417
8.1%
Commercial/Industrial
3,896
4,395
4,804
5,314
1,418
36.4%
510
10.5%
Institutional/open
1,995
2,046
2,264
2,874
879
44.1%
610
26.9%
95
133
396
524
429
451.6%
128
32.3%
Bare Ground
18,113
20,076
21,350
29,548
11,435
63.1%
8,198
38.4%
TOTAL DEVELOPMENT
Agriculture
160,468
158,530
157,576
151,166
(9,302)
-5.8%
(6,410)
-4.1%
114,897
114,840
114,417
112,585
(2,312)
-2.0%.
(1,832)
-1.6%
Forest
Extractive/Barren
461
506
609
587
126
27.3%
(22)
-3.6%
32
19
19
19
(13)
-40.6%
0
0.0%
Wetland
275,858
273,895
272,621
264,357
(11,501)
-4.2%
(8,264)
-3.0%
TOTAL RESOURCES
293,971
293,971
293,971
293,905
(66)
-0.0%
(66)
-0.0%
Total Land
5,921
5,921
5,921
5,987
66
1.1%
66
1.1%
Water
TOTAL AREA
299,892
299,892
299,892
299,892
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding. 1973 and 1981 land areas are based
on 91.8 acre grid cells which have been adjusted with 1985 and 1990 polygon data.
Water area before 1985 was assumed to be constant.
Source: Maryland Office of Planning
Maryland's Land 1973 - 1990
A Changing Resource
October 1991
TABLE NO. 2-B
LAND COVER FORECAST
Land Cover in Acres
County: WASHINGTON
1990
2000
2010
2020
Total Development
40,917
45,927
49,897
52,998
Residential
32,205
36,199
39,365
41,837
Very Low Density(1)
11,369
12,850
14,023
14,940
Low Density(2)
15,242
17,154
18,670
19,854
Med/High Density(3)
5,594
6,195
6,672
7,044
Non-residential
8,712
9,728
10,532
11,161
Commercial and industrial
5,314
5,973
6,495
6,903
Institutional and open
2,874
3,230
3,513
3,734
Bare ground(4)
524
524
524
524
Total Resources
252,988
247,978
244,008
240,907
Agriculture
144,650
141,779
139,503
137,726
Forest
107,732
105,594
103,899
102,575
Extractive and barren(4)
587
587
587
587
Wetland(4)
19
19
19
19
Total Land
293,905
293,905
293,905
293,905.
Water(4)
5,987
5,987
5,987
5,987
299,892
Total County
299,892
299,892
299,892
(1) 1 du/5 acres to 1 du/20 acres. Source: Maryland Department of Assessments
and Taxation; compiled by Maryland Office of Planning. The Land Use/Cover
Inventory has been determined to be inaccurate for very low density parcels;
Assessments and Taxation data is used as a supplement.
(2) .2 du/acre to 2 du/acre
(3) 2 du/acre to >8 du/acre
(4) Assumed constant over forecast period
Methodology: Forecast uses 1990 Maryland Office of Planning Land Use/Cover
Inventory as a base. To calculate increase in residential land, A and T average
parcel sizes are multiplied by OP household projections. Other developed uses
are increased proportionally and resource uses are decreased proportionally. See
text for complete discussion.
Source: Maryland Office of Planning
Maryland Land Use/Land Cover
1990 - 2020 Forecast
September 1992
11-67
TABLE NO. 2-C
ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS
(As of December 31, 1991)
Z of County
Zoning District
Total Acreage
Land Area
Conservation
105,449
35.7
Agricultural
143,944
48.7
Residential Rural
7,222
2.4
Residential Suburban
3,933
1.3
Residential Urban .
2,49.4-
.8
Residential Multi -Family
558
.2
Business Transitional
1
>.1
Business Local
641
.2
Business General
853
.1
Airport
384
.1
Industrial Transitional
0
0
Industrial Restricted
148
.1
Industrial General
2,196
.7
Industrial Mineral
5,283
1.8
RS - PUD
484
.2
A - PUD
82
>.1
Planned Business
207.
>.1
Planned Industrial
1,203
.4
Highway Interchange
11,442
3.7
Historic Preservation
562
.2
Hagerstown
5,587
1.9
Other Municipal
3,015
1.0
TOTAL 295,688 1002
11-68
4. GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND LAND PRESERVATION STRATEGY
In an effort to implement the policies regarding land use in the
Comprehensive Plan for the County and to address the "Six
Visions" of the Maryland Economic Growth, Resource Protection and
Planning Act of 1992, the County has adopted, or is currently
working on the following policies:
Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance:
On October 16, 1990 the Board of County Commissioners
adopted an A.P.F.O. which became effective December 1, 1990.
The Ordinance follows closely the subdivision and site plan
review procedures now in effect. it delegates approval or
disapproval, authority tp-the. Planning Commission based on
the service providing agency's determination of whether the
subject facility is adequate or not. The facilities
included are -County roads•,_ public schools and all forms of
water and sewerage systems. There is also a requirement for
interim fire protection systems in areas where public water
is not yet available. Provisions within the Ordinance allow
the developer to make the necessary improvements to bring
the facility up to minimum standards in order to gain
development approval. Much subjectivity in the
determinations of adequacy is removed by specifying the
agency which has the responsibility to determine projected
11-69
demands on the infrastructure and the standards to be used.
The Ordinance tends to direct development toward the
Growth Areas where facilities are adequate. This
tendency accomplishes a major goal of the Comprehensive
Plan. It also shifts much of the new infrastructure
costs to the appropriate parties, ie. the developers.
Forest Conservation Ordinance:
On February 2, 1993, the County Commissioners adopted
the Forest Conservation Ordinance. The purpose of this
Ordinance is to meet the requirements of Natural
Resources Article 5-1601--5-1612, Annotated Code of
Maryland. This Ordinance provides the requirements and
guidance for the. preservation or replanting, whichever
is applicable, of trees or forests during certain
development activities by requiring forest stand
delineations, forest•conservation plans, maintenance
agreements and sureties.
Rural -Agricultural Area:
New subdivision regulations have been adopted to restrict
the use of panhandle lots and immediate family member
conveyances. Subdivisions on sub -standard roads are not
permitted unless provisions are made to improve the road
based on the County's policy to determine adequacy of
II -70
existing roadways for additional development. The
Washington County Health Department conducted a water
quality study by testing wells in the rural areas. The
Health Department continues to monitor ground water quality
through ongoing testing of wells.
Water and/or sewer facilities which are located outside
of a designated growth area and not within a rural
village are considered "Restricted Use" facilities.
Connections to these facilities are only permitted for
existing dwellings or lots of record directly adjacent
to the line and for new subdivision lots that can be
served by the existing line without extension. The
presence of these lines shall not be considered as an
enticement for new development or for new development
at a density greater than what could occur without
public facilities.
In an effort to encourage agricultural preservation,
the Board of County Commissioners in 1990 approved a
ten year Agricultural Land Preservation District Tax
Credit Program. In exchange for restricting land to
agricultural use only, farmers receive a County
property tax credit. To date 144 farms totaling 20,236
acres have been enrolled in the Program. Of these 12
farms totaling 3100 acres have sold development rights
easements.
Rural Villages:
Existing or planned water and sewer facilities located
within areas considered as Rural Villages by the
comprehensive plan shall be designated as a "Rural
Village Service --Area, Thee -purpose -of these systems is
to eliminate contaminated wells and correct water
quality problems created by failing septic systems
within these villages. The service area established
around these villages would allow for in -fill
development on existing lots and some limited growth in
accordance with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan
dealing with., Rural_ Villages..
Urban and Town Growth Areas:
The Urban Growth -Area is established around the City of
Hagerstown and includes the towns of Funkstown and
Williamsport. Town Growth Areas have been established
around Smithsburg and Boonsboro. Hancock was completed by
early 1990. Maps XII through XV show the adopted Growth
Areas.
On August 22, 1989, the Hagerstown Mayor and Council and the
Board of County Commissioners entered into an agreement with
11-72
BCM Potomac, Inc. to perform a 20 -year comprehensive water
and sewer study for the Hagerstown metropolitan area
commonly referred as the adopted Urban Growth Area (UGA).
The BCM Study was presented in draft form in August of 1990
with a revised Executive Summary and Technical Memoranda
presented in May of 1991. The consultants study contains
the following elements:
1. Population and development trends for the Urban
Growth Area between 1990 and 2010 and their inter-
relationship with current and future land use patterns.
2. Projected water and sewer system demands to the
year 2010.
3. Developed a Hagerstown water systemimprovementand
expansion master_-plan_.for...1990. to 2010.
4. Developed an Urban Growth Area sewer system master
plan for 1990 to 2010.
5. Developed and evaluated alternatives for the
implementation of the recommended water and sewer
system improvements.
In March and April of 1993, the Mayor and Council and
the County Commissioners each adopted resolutions
pertaining to the intent and affect of the BCM study.
Copies of these resolutions are included in Appendix F.
In summary, the governing bodies resolved that the
II -73_. _ ..:..
primary use for this study is that it is to be used as
a guide and basis for amending the Water and Sewerage
Plan where applicable and for assisting the Mayor and
Council and the Board of County Commissioners in
providing water and sewerage services within the
Hagerstown Urban Growth Area.
In order to streamline, the review and approval process
for development within designated urban and town growth
areas, development proposals which involve the
extension of water and sewer lines into these portions
of the growth area will be considered to be consistent
with the comprehensive Plan. An individual amendment
to the Water and Sewerage Plan will not be necessary.
0
II -74
TABLE NO. 2-D
POPULATION OF MAJOR INSTITUTIONS
(FIGURES FOR WINTER 1991-92)
Map
Total
Map
Total
Ref.
Educational Institutions Enrollment
Ref.
Educational Institutions
Enrollment
E-1
North Hagerstown High School
1,012
E-31
Sharpsburg Elementary School
311
E-2
South Hagerstown High School
823
E-32
Clear Spring High School
404
E-3
Northern Middle School
626
E-33
Clear Spring Middle School
362
E-4
E. Russell Hicks School
685
E-34
' Clear Spring Elementary School
379
E-5
Western Heights Middle School
464
E-35
Smithsburg High School
645
E-6
Bester Elementary School
555
E-36
Smithsburg Middle School
550
E-8
Conococheague Elementary School
266
E-37
Smithsburg Elementary School
370
E-9
Emma K. Doub Elementary School
228
E-38
Cascade Elementary School
381
E-10
Fountaindale Elementary School
601
E-39
Williamsport High School
685
E-11
Funkstown Elementary School
239
E-40
Springfield Middle School
604
E-12
Lincolnshire Elementary School
507
E-41
Williamsport Elementary School
405
E-13
Maugansville Elementary School
365
E-42
Fountain Rock Elementary School
330
E-14
Old Forge Elementary School
268
E-43
Hancock Middle School
396
E-15
Pangborn Boulevard Elementary School 642
E-44
Hancock Elementary School
317
E-16
Paramount Elementary School
222
E-45
Hickory Elementary School
247
E-17
Potomac Heights Elementary'Schoul
358
Pleasant Valley
248
E-18
Salem Avenue Elementary School
444
Alternative Center
47
E-20
Winter Street Elementary School
337
E-46
Hagerstown Junior College *
5,733
E-22
Marshall Street Education Center
85
* Hagerstown
Junior College has enrolled
3,361
Credit Students and 2,372 Continuing
E-23
Job Development Center
83
Education
Students
E-24
Boonsboro High School
726
Major Health Centers
Capacity
E-25
Boonsboro Middle School
650
H-1
Washington County Hospital
317 beds
E-26
Boonsboro Elementary School
527
H-2
Coffman Health Center
51 beds
(Administrative
Offices)
E-27
Greenbrier Elementary School
293
H-3
Western Maryland Center
175 beds
Governmental Establishments
G-1
Maryland Correctional Institute
Maryland Correctional Training
Center and Roxbury Correctional
Institute
6,594
G-2
Fort Ritche
1,301
11-75
GENERALIZED EXISTING LAND USE
OUT OF PRINT
CURRENTLY BEING REVISED
P E N N S Y_ L V A N I A
JR10
R9
W is T
LEGEND
El -
E46
Educational Institutions
H 1 -
H3
Major Health Centers
Cl -
C3
Governmental Establishments
R1-
R13
Recreational Facilities
WASHINGTON
R4
V I RC I N I A
E
G3
WASHINGTON COUNTY WATER
AND SEWERAGE PLAN
WASHINGTON COUNTY
MAJOR PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS
1 0 1 2 3 4 5Mi.
SOURCE: Washington County Planning - Zoning Commission R3 ,
E j H NASSAUX - HEMSLEY, INCORPORATED CUMSULTAN]j]
COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
1
146
;a E38
G2
35
E3 mithsburg i
R8
x
� v
•
R5
R6
RV
9 �
600 1
Map No. XIII
BOONSBORO'town Growth Area
6ki
CAS 1
��
MAP SCALE
O 1 2ML.G5
Map No. XIV Urban Growth Area
• ;;I::.
O •�, 1 3 1
• {- I ,. i r a• •. • ♦� ♦ %near. � -, • . ' ra Y�r .
,,- b: Y c d • •. i
•
� _ 7 ( � 151.. '•- .
U ;P . • -. .., — ,; !:
.• ST
• 3jS •
..•!<, �r
� S •
i. ♦ 4 � r , • .15
' i I I C
•• 1'•s •
• � • air raw �• , • I f •I wnI pa
. •• �•
t • • r I
• ♦ ^1 :pi j !. _ `• -
3 y 11 r '
•Nr v.Y :.::• ":: ...
p .,. d '� fir` •. 3 5. �.. 1'p•::'• : I' H �" I
• • .l „' � - . at o •o m = :-- :± ice }
c5'1'. :C 77 •
Id • t •t.
.i*:.
•d
Q
+� r
1 "i''' _'! •!L
-- • : • . a •r j I •
MAP NO. XV
Hancock Growth Area
HANCOCK
CHAPTER THREE
EXISTING AND PLANNED WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS
WASHINGTON COUNTY SANITARY DISTRICT:
The Washington County Sanitary District operates and maintains
several water distribution systems and water treatment plants
within Washington• County.-.}These--systems,-serve the communities of
Subdistrict No. 4 - Sharpsburg, Subdistrict No. 7 - Mt. Aetna,
Subdistrict No. 9 - Highfield/Cascade, Subdistrict No. 17 - Elk
Ridge and Subdistrict No. 19-1 - Sandy Hook.
The District also owns water distribution systems which serve
Subdistrict No. 15-1 - Martins Crossroads/Cearfoss and
Subdistrict No. 18-1 - Conococheague. The City of Hagerstown
provides operations and maintenance on these systems. The City
also provides billing services and collects the fees for these
subdistricts and forwards the debt fees. to the District collected
from the customers to pay the loans against the project costs.
The District is actively preparing for several planned water
service area extensions. The Pen Mar community and the Victor
Cullen Center are proposed to be incorporated into Subdistrict
No. 9 - Highfield/Cascade. Water line extensions on Bower
Avenue, Leonard Avenue, Kemps Mill Road, Rock Hill Road and
Honeyfield Road, Cedar Lawn and Green Lawn are being planned and
are proposed to be incorporated into Subdistrict No. 18-1 -
Conococheague. The following information will provide data on
each of the existing and planned water service areas.
EXISTING WATER SERVICE AREAS:
SHARPSBURG AREA - SUBDISTRICT NO. 4:
The Town of Sharpsburg is_.situated.12.miles south of Hagerstown.
The District owns, operates and maintains the water filtration
plant and water distribution system which extends through the
corporate boundaries of the Town of Sharpsburg and to adjacent
subdivisions of Forge Hill Estates, Battlefield Knolls, Potomac
Crest and Confederate Hills. The water distribution system also
serves the Antietam Battlefield Visitors Center and extends west
on Maryland Route 34 to the end of the developed area.
The water filtration plant is situated along the Potomac River,
which is the raw water source.. The District. processes and
chemically treats the raw water and adds fluoride prior to
distribution. The water system also includes a 200,000 gallon
elevated storage tank. The capacity of the filtration plant is
230,000 gpd. This water system presently serves approximately
479 residential and 18 commercial units which represents 570
Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's). This is considered a Rural
Village Service area.
111-2
MT. AETNA AREA - SUBDISTRICT NO. 7:
At the request of the Mt. Aetna Water Association, Inc. the
Sanitary District has assumed operations and maintenance of the
Mt. Aetna Water System. Transfer of ownership of this community
water system to the Sanitary District is to occur by mid -1994.
Various improvements to the water system are being planned to
bring the supply-and•d,istribution systeminto compliance with
State regulations. This water system serves approximately 126
residential units and 4 commercial units which represents 201
Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's). This is considered a Rural
Village Service area.
HIGHFIELD/CASCADE AREA — SUBDISTRICT NO. 9:
The Washington County Sanitary District began operating the
Highfield/Cascade Water System (previously known as the Blue
Ridge Water Company). October 1,.. 1978 following revocation of the
franchise by the Maryland Public Utilities Commission and a
subsequent Washington County Court Order sought by the Maryland
State Health Department. The Highfield/Cascade area is located
in the northeast portion of Washington County and is considered a
Rural Village Service area.
Followed by six years of legal entanglements, in July 1984 the
Washington County Sanitary District became owners of the water
111-3
system. Soon after the District began operation and maintenance
of the water system in 1978 it was realized that the deteriorated
system would have to be replaced with a new one. Study, planning
and subsequent design began shortly thereafter. In October 1987
construction was completed for a new water distribution system
with fire protection, a 400,000 gallon storage tank and upgrade
of the Cascade and Willard Wells.
In 1988 the Sanitary District drilled a third well, known as the
"Highfield Well" to supplement the Highfield/Cascade distribution
system. The District chemically treats the well water without
filtration prior to distribution. In the fall of 1990 a fourth
well known as the "Pennersville Well", was drilled to supplement
the Highfield/Cascade system plus to provide water supply for the
future Pen Mar water system. Together with the Cascade, Willard,
Highfield and Pennersville wells, the average maximum capacity is
200,000 gallons per day. This water system presently serves 367
residential and 4. commercialunits which represents 449
Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's).
MARTINS CROSSROADS/CEARFOSS - SUBDISTRICT NO. 15-1:
The Washington County Sanitary District managed the water line
extension program for the Martins Crossroads/Cearfoss area (Map
Nos. 10, 23, 24 and 36). Upon completion of the planning, study,
and design phases, construction began July 1987 with completion
111-4
one year later (July 1988). The system was an extension of the
City of Hagerstown's lines which includes the following areas:
Route 40 at Huyetts Crossroads; Maryland Route 63 from Route 40
to Route 58; portions of Mt. Tabor Church Road, Resh Road,
Pinecrest Road, Broadfording Church Road, Route 58 and Route 416.
Public water is presently being supplied to approximately 365
residential and 14 commercial units which represents 422
Equivalent Dwelling Units,(EDULs)The water distribution system
is maintained by the City of Hagerstown. This is considered a
Restricted Use Service area and is consistent with a policy
adopted by the Planning Commission on July 11, 1983 concerning
future development in this area.
ELK RIDGE AREA - SUBDISTRICT NO. 17:
In November 1987 the Washington County Sanitary District assumed
the operations and maintenance of the Ridge Water Corporation
which was privately. owned by the citizens of the community known
as Elk Ridge located adjacent to Chestnut Grove Road in South
Washington County. In April 1989 the Sanitary District assumed
ownership of this water system pursuant to the request of the
property owners. This water system supplies 29 residential units
which represents 29 Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's) with the
source being three wells. (No. 1, 2, and 3). An average of
2,700 gallons per day is presently being pumped. The District
proposes to implement an improvement program for this water
II1-5
system which includes installation of water meters, additional
storage, another well for additional quantity and equipment to
improve the water quality. This is considered a Rural Village
Service area.
CONOCOCHEAGUE AREA - SUBDISTRICT NO.18-1:
A 16" water main extension project on Hopewell Road initiated the
creation of this.. subdistrict._. An. interconnection was made to the
water main at the intersection of MD Route 144 and Hopewell Road.
The water main was extended on Hopewell Road to an approximate
point several hundred feet north of the railroad crossing on
Hopewell Road south of the Halfway Boulevard intersection.
Several 12" and 8" laterals have been installed for future
extensions. Approximately 14 residential and 6 commercial units
are provided water service which represents 59 Equivalent
Dwelling Units (EDU's). This subdistrict is located within the
Urban Growth Area.
SANDY HOOK AREA - SUBDISTRICT NO.19-1:
The water supply and distribution system for the Sandy Hook
community was completed March 1993. Two wells provide water
supply, capable of producing 45 gpm or approximately 65,000
gallons of water per day. The treatment process includes iron
and manganese removal with chlorine addition. The distribution
system includes fire protection with a 100,000 gallon storage
1I1-6
tank. The system serves 1 commercial and 58 residential units
which represents 59 Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's). This is
considered a Rural Village System.
PLANNED WATER SERVICE AREAS:
PEN MAR:
In July 1988 the Washiigtbfn`Cbturity-Board -of -County Commissioners
were petitioned by the property owners of the Pen Mar area to
investigate the probability of extending public water service to
their area. The petition was presented to the Washington County
Sanitary Commission and they directed the Sanitary District to
perform a Feasibility Study Report for the Pen Mar area. In
March 1989, the Feasibility Report was completed and the Sanitary
District held a public_.hearing-regarding the project on May 22,
1989. The proposed outlay of the project is to extend the
Highfield/Cascade water supply system which would require the
current subdistrict boundaries to be extended to include the Pen
Mar area. This project would include a water supply distribution
system with fire protection, above ground water (100,000) gallon
storage tank, well and disinfection facilities. This water
system would serve approximately 77 Equivalent Dwelling Units
(EDU's). Funding options are currently being investigated to
allow the same user rate for Subdistrict No. 9 -
Highfield/Cascade to be maintained for the Pen Mar area as it is
for Subdistrict No. 9 - Highfield/Cascade. This would be
considered a Rural Village Service area.
VICTOR CULLEN CENTER:
The Maryland Environmental Services and the Maryland Department
of Juvenile Services have requested the District to extend the
Highfield Water System to serve the state complex known as the
Victor Cullen Center which is located in Frederick County. The
eight inch water lineextension.with.applicable appurtenances is
expected to be completed by mid -1994.
CEDAR LAWN:
The District has been petitioned by the property owners of Cedar
Lawn to provide public water supply. Planning and design of the
water line extension project has been completed. This area has
been included in Subdistrict No. 18-1 - Conococheague and is
located within the Urban Growth Area.
Connections will be made to the existing 24" water main in MD
Route 144 and extended to the existing development. Public water
supply will be provided to 60 residential units and 1 commercial
establishment representing a total of 61 Equivalent Dwelling
Units (EDU's). Construction of the water line extension project
is proposed to begin by March 1994 and completed by September
1994.
III -8
KEMPS MILL ROAD, ROCK HILL ROAD AND HONEYFIELD ROAD AREA:
The District has been petitioned by several residents of Kemps
Mill Road, Rock Hill Road and Honeyfield Road areas for public
water supply. The District has completed preliminary engineering
and completed the public participation segment for these
projects. The funding and design of the water line extension
projects are expected to-be-eompleted=by... early 1994 with
construction to begin by August 1994 and completed by June 1995.
These areas have been incorporated into Subdistrict No. 18-1 -
Conococheague Water and is located within the Urban Growth Area.
To provide service to existing homes on Kemps Mill Road and
Celeste Drive, a connection will be made to an existing 8" water
line on Kemps Mill -Road -south 9f the intersection at Kemps Mill
Road and Rock Hill Road extending south to the railroad tracks.
A second 8" water line connection will be made to an existing
water line at the intersection of Kemps Mill Road and MD Route
63.
Connection will be made to an existing 8" water line at the
intersection of Rock Hill Road and Everly Drive to extend water
service to existing homes on Rock Hill Road north of the
intersection.
To provide water service to existing homes on Honeyfield Road, an
8" water line connection will be made to an existing 24" water
line north of the Town of Williamsport's corporate limits.
Water service is expected to be provided to 35 residential units
which represents 35 Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's).
BOWER AND LEONARD AVENUES:
By petition, the District is planning to, extend public water to
42 existing residential units on Bower and Leonard Avenues (17
units in the Leonard Avenue/Halfway Boulevard area and 25 units
on Bower Avenue). The Bower Avenue and Leonard Avenue area has
been incorporated into Subdistrict No. 18-1 - Conococheague Water
and is located within the Urban Growth Area.
A connection to an existing 8" water line at the intersection of
Tamarack Drive and Bower Avenue will be made extending an 8"
water line south on Bower Avenue to the I-70 overpass. To
provide water service to the Leonard Avenue/Halfway Boulevard
area, water line extensions consist of an 8" water line on
Leonard Avenue, a 2" water line on Halfway Boulevard and a 12"
water line on MD Route 632 to serve the 17 existing homes in this
area. Construction of these lines are to be completed by late
1994.
GREEN LAWN:
The Green Lawn area is located in the County, southeast of the
corporate limits of the Town of Williamsport and is located
within the Urban Growth Area. Several property owners in the
Green Lawn area have requested the District to upgrade existing
water lines and extend public water service to existing homes in
the Green'Lawnarea. Planning and -public -participation are
anticipated to begin by January 1994.
To provide service to the remaining portions of the area that do
not have public water, three connections to the existing water
main are required. One connection will be made at the
intersection of Sunset Avenue and Britner Avenue with a second
connection being. made -to -an --existing 8" water line on South
Artizan Street. An 8" connection will be made to an existing 8".
water line in MD Route 68 to loop the system. Substandard water
lines and water services will be upgraded in the area where water
service is being presently provided. It is proposed that meters
will be placed on the system, whereas the District will bulk
purchase water from the Town of Williamsport. However, the Town
of Williamsport and the Sanitary District will have to negotiate
a water service agreement.
This area is proposed to be incorporated into Subdistrict No. 18-
1 - Conococheague Water. Water service is proposed to be
upgraded and/or provided to 39 residential units and 1 commercial
unit representing 40 Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's).
CITY OF HAGERSTOWN
The City of Hagerstown Water Department serves more than 75,000
people within the Hagerstown corporate limits, in unincorporated
areas, and in . other municipalities...__. The _Hagerstown, system
provides the entire water supply for the towns of Funkstown and
Williamsport and some of the water for the Town of Smithsburg.
These towns purchase their water from Hagerstown but they retain
responsibility for the operation and maintenance of their own
distribution facilities such as pumps, water lines, and water
services. The Hagerstown system also serves large industrial and
institutional water users such as Mack Truck, the Maryland
Correction Institution, and Washington County Hospital.
The Hagerstown system is served by.the R.C. Willson Filtration
Plant on the Potomac River and is listed in Table No. 4. The
Potomac River provides a reliable and adequate source of drinking
water for the Hagerstown service area.
Use of the Edgemont and Smithsburg Reservoirs for public water
supply was suspended on July 1, 1987. These facilities remain on
standby for emergency supply only. The City continues to
maintain the reservoirs and watershed land as public water supply
facilities. Safety improvements to the Edgemont Dam and Spillway
were completed in 1993. The addition of filtering facilities at
the Smithsburg Reservoir are being considered by the City.
PLANNED WATER SERVICE AREAS
Using a prioritized program of capital improvements such as major
upgrades, future- trunk • mains;--water-t'anks and pumping facilities,
the Hagerstown Water Department will meet the needs of a growing
urban area.
Planned improvements to the Hagerstown system are listed below.
a. Richard C. Willson Water Treatment Plant - Upgrade of
the plant_ is...planned_..to. _enable the treatment of up to
20 MGD at future water quality standards. The current,
maximum treatment flow is 15 MGD.
b. Watershed Land Acquisition - Continue program of
acquiring watershed property above the reservoir as it
becomes available to preserve the integrity of same.
c. Pipe Lining Program - The City is in the final stages
of a program which has reconditioned over 476,900
lineal feet of existing lines within the service area.
The program is scheduled for completion by the end of
fiscal year 1994.
d. Williamsport Transmission Main - A third twenty-four
inch (24") or larger water transmission main is needed
to deliver the future demands from the filter plant to
the southern portion of the Hagerstown system.
e. Edgemont Water Filtration Plant - Install filtration
facilities to enable the use of the Edgemont Reservoir
as a source of potable water supply. Must meet current
and future waterquality., standards...
f. Western Maryland Parkway - Extend sixteen inch (16")
waterline north from the intersection of Underpass Way
and Railway Lane to Western Maryland Parkway at the
County Detention Center, thus completing a major
interconnection between two 24 -inch transmission mains.
g. Hopewell Road - To service area bounded by 1-70, I-81,
IA
MD 144, and MD 63, extend a 16 -inch main in Hopewell
Road from MD Route 144 to I-70. The interconnection
should be made from this line to the existing 16 -inch
main in Elliott Parkway on the south side of 1-70.
h. Zone 2 Storage - To improve service to areas along Hump
Road and south of the West End Reservoir to Wesel
Boulevard, construct a storage tank in the vicinity of
Wesel Boulevard.
i. Southern Transmission Main - A sixteen inch (16")
transmission main along the southern portion of the
water system is needed to carry an increased demand to
the east and to a proposed water tank site near 1-70
and U.S. Route 40.
j. Eastern Transmission Main - To deliver water to the
northeastern portion of the system, a sixteen -inch
(16") water-- main• i sneeded'• f rom, the Londontowne-
Brightwood area to Jefferson Boulevard and Eastern
Boulevard to the north.
k. West End Reservoir - Install a cover and liner for the
existing concrete reservoir at Hellane Park to provide
for a safer, more secure and leak proof storage
facility in anticipation of future regulations
dictating- the same. --
1. Robinwood Drive - Extend twelve inch (12") waterline
from Route 64 to the Hagerstown Junior College to
complete a major loop to the Dual Highway and proposed
elevated storage near same.
M. Oak Ridge Industrial Area - Oakmont Drive - Oakmont
Drive area is presently being served by a twelve inch
(12") waterline. Provisions should be included to
extend the system along East Oak Ridge Drive to Roadway
and the former Plummer Construction Company site. This
line should eventually be interconnected with the mains
in the Ravenswood Lutheran Home area.
111=15
n. Paramount Loop - The distribution system should be
looped with a twelve inch (12") main from West
Longmeadow Road to Marsh Pike in the vicinity of Avalon
Manor to eliminate a long stretch of single source
piping.
o. Paramount Storage - Locate elevated storage tank in the
Avalon Manor area for the purpose of increasing supply
capabilities .in. _the .area.
p. Downsville Pike - Extend twelve inch (12") line along
Downsville Pike from West Oak Ridge Drive to the
Potomac Edison office building. (Map Nos. 49 and 57)
q. , Potomac Avenue Booster and Transmission Main - Project
includes installation of a booster pumping station at
Northern Avenue and extension of a transmission main
from Northern Avenue up Maryland Route 60 to Marsh
Pike. This project is necessary to meet additional
demands as residential and planned commercial
development is permitted upon the installation of
sewerage facilities. (Map Nos. 25 and 38)
SMITHSBURG
The Town of Smithsburg has two sources of water supply in the
form of springs. One is located south of Town (Map No. 52) near
the existing reservoir. The reservoir receives the spring water.
Water is then fed by gravity to the Town distribution system. A
new spring has been developed northeast of Town (Map No. 27).
Also, a water pumping station and transmission line from the
spring to the Town distribution system have been built. In
addition, the reservoir storage capacity has been expanded to
360,000 gallons. During the Smithsburg Town Growth Area Study
adopted by the County Commissioners on July 22, 1986, Town and
County officials recognized the need to investigate and develop
new sources of public water supply in order to meet the demands
of expected growth in ••population. - The study recommends
investigation of new sources including land for a permanent
storage facility, continued cooperation in use of water from
Hagerstown's Edgemont reservoir and improvements to the existing
transmission system.
Government officials acknowledge the purpose and effect of Growth
Areas establishment_to.encourage_development and make use of
existing public health facilities.
The Town purchases water from the City of Hagerstown only in
cases of emergency. Water mains have been extended to serve
property recently annexed into the Town. This property is
located on the west side of Town and includes new residential
developments called Meadows of Grove Creek and Whispering Hills.
The Town is currently awaiting State approval for the use of two
(2) existing wells located west of Town to supplement the
existing sources. Future plans also call for the extension of a
12" line through the Whispering Hills development to connect with
the existing line in Cavehill Road in order to form a loop. Also
proposed is the replacement of an existing line in E. Water
Street and the extension of this line to serve a new residential
development called Mountain Shadows. To date, subdivision
approval has been granted to Section 1 which involves 13 lots.
The Town is currently exploring additional sources for water such
as new production wells -and/or the possibility of bringing
existing private wells on line to supplement the existing supply.
In January of 1992, a Maryland Department of the Environment
study reported that Hauver Spring is directly influenced by a
surface water source (Little Antietam Creek) and that the town
would have to comply with the Surface Water Treatment Rule
regarding meeting standards for the control of certain viruses,
bacteria and turbidity. To comply with this report, the Town is.
currently monitoring the water supply and forwarding information
to the MDE in order for them to determine if this supply will
continue to be acceptable.
Service priority designations for individual properties inside
the Growth Area boundaries have not been changed in this plan.
It is acknowledged that requests for service and would be
considered consistent with the Plan and will complement and
coincide with other planning activities and goals.
FT. RITCHIE
The Fort Ritchie system provides water service to approximately
1,296 persons residing on post and an additional 1,612 persons
who live off post and work on post. In the past, this system
also served several off post residential customers however as of
the fall of 1992 these customers were taken off this system and
connected to the Sanitary District's Highfield/Cascade System
(S.D.9).
Water for this system is provided by a spring and seven wells
that feed two reservoirs having a total capacity of 1,300,000
gallons.: As a result of a groundwater study and report made by
the Army Environmental Hygiene Administration, well number three
was permanently closed in early 1992. At the recommendation of
the Maryland Department of the Environment, spring number one was
disconnected in January 1990 in order to better insure overall
water quality based on the requirements of the Safe Drinking
Water Act. Work on a new well to supplement the existing supply
was to be completed by 1992.
BOONSBORO-KEEDYSVILLE
The Boonsboro-Keedysville water system is supplied by two active
springs and one well--Keedysville Spring located outside the Town
of Keedysville (map no.73), Warrenfeltz Spring located within the
Town of Boonsboro (map no.73), and Well #8 located outside the
Town of Boonsboro (map no. 68). An additional new water supply
referred to as the Crestview well is currently under
construction. The water is treated with chlorine disinfection by
the town of Boonsboro at each location. Excess water is stored
in a 1.5 million gallon reservoir located east of Boonsboro (map
no. 68) and again treated with chlorine before reentering the
system. The Town of Keedysville purchases water from the Town of
Boonsboro, but owns and operates its own distribution system.
Much of the maintenance of the Keedysville system is performed on
a cost reimbursement basis by the Town of Boonsboro.
In Boonsboro, an apparent high per capita consumption caused
mainly by unaccounted water losses has been significantly reduced
by the installation of residential meters, the lining and
covering of the storage reservoir (to reduce the need for
overflows), and a triennial leak detection program.
A serious problem of inadequate fire flows and water pressure in
many areas of Boonsboro has been corrected by installing larger
mains, completing loops in the distribution system, replacing old
and/or defective fire hydrants, and adding new fire hydrants to
the system.
An equally serious deficit in supply was corrected when Well #8
behind Graystone Hills in Boonsboro went on line yielding 100,000
gpd (70 gpm).
iII-20
To address the impact of growth on the water supply, the
Utilities Commission adopted a policy requiring each developer
(except minor subdivisions of 5 or less units) to provide a
minimum new water supply of 100,800 gpd (70 gpm) in the form of a
well to be connected to the existing distribution system.
Also, to address the impact of growth of the Town, the Mayor and
Council has -adopted--a,new•Comprehensive-Development Plan and a
new Growth Management Ordinance.
The Boonsboro Town Growth Area, adopted in 1986 by the Town and
the County, identifies an area surrounding Boonsboro where growth
and extension of public utilities is encouraged. Service
priority designations for property within the growth area will be
assigned once development., proposals are reviewed and approved by
the County and the Town. The Boonsboro Utilities Commission is
willing to make extensions of the water system within the growth
area. However, it is clearly -the policy of the Town to require
that the cost of all such extensions be borne by the developer.
I11-21
WEVERTON
The Pleasant Valley Elementary School and approximately twelve
residences in southern Washington County are served by the water
system for the Town of Brunswick in Frederick County. Service is
provided via the transmission main leading from the Yourtee
Springs to the Town of Brunswick. This is considered a
restricted use service area.
The Town is currently making improvements at the spring to
conform with Clean Water Act requirements. These improvements
involve enclosing the spring in a building and placing a liner in
the clay slope to divert rainwater away from the spring.
CLEAR SPRING
The Town of Clear Spring and a few residences outside of Town are
supplied by a series of wells and springs feeding a 1.5 million
gallon reservoir at the foot of Fairview Mountain. The Town
recently expanded its service area with the construction of a
second transmission main from the reservoir to Clear Spring and
has recently completed the extension of a water line south of
Town to create a loop with the existing line in Martin Road.
In the past, the Clear Spring water system has experienced high
domestic per capita water use, probably due in part to the lack
of residential metering. To correct this, the Town is currently
installing meters. Recent water line replacement also found and
corrected some significant leakage.
111-22
The Town recently completed a water study done by a private
consultant for the Town. This study found that the existing
water recharge area serving the existing water sources (wells and
springs) is nearing its maximum and that only a few additional
hookups would be available utilizing the existing water sources.
The study recommended that the Town explore the possibility of
finding additional sources of water and recommended 15 possible
well sites. The study also recommended improvements that need to
be made to the water distribution system. The Town is discussing
the possibility of constructing a water storage tank at the
reservoir site based on a recommendation for the water study.
In late 1993, the Town will be extending a new 6" water line from
an existing 8" line in Big Spring Road south to the Clear Spring
Fire Company carnival ground .to serve a new building and fire
hydrant. The Town will also be replacing an existing 2" water
line in South Hawbaker Circle to Houck Avenue with an 8" line and
extending the line to the Amber Associates property to serve
future development.
The Comprehensive Plan for Washington County recognizes Clear
Spring as a Town Growth Area, however a growth area study has not
been done nor has a growth area boundary been defined. In the
near future the Town intends to develop a growth management plan
:III -,23
that will address the Town's ability to handle new development.
This may affect the existing planned water service area.
HANCOCK
The Hancock water system provides water for approximately 1926
people who are mostly located within the municipal limits. The
principal source is the. Little Tonoloway Creek with two storage
tanks and a reservoir providing a total storage capacity of 1.3
million gallons. A new modular water treatment plant was
recently constructed with Federal funding assistance from the
Economic Development Administration and the Farmer's Home
Administration.
The volume of water flowing in Little Tonoloway Creek is highly
variable, and during many summer months, the flow is insufficient
to meet the existing water supply demands of the Town. During
these times the Town has used water from the Potomac River to
supply its water needs.
The Town has recently hired an engineering consultant to do a
complete water study of Hancock's water system. One of the major
concerns that will be addressed in the study will be an
alternative water source other than surface water. The existing
well located north of I-70 will be one of these alternatives,
along with recommendations for changes, improvements and
III -24
expansions of the water system. A portable pump has been
purchased to supply the Town with water during times of dry
weather. The Town recently completed construction of a new eight
inch (8") water line east of Town.
A Town Growth Area Study for Hancock was initiated in 1988 and
was adopted by the County Commissioners and the Mayor and Council
in January of 1990. A Growth Area for.the Town was delineated
and recommendations made in regard to the water system.
PROJECTED DEMANDS
Projected water supply demands for existing water service areas
are shown in Table No. 3. Note that present year per capita
water consumption in each service area was used as a factor in
determining future supply._ requirements (See Note #9). As a
result, Table No. 3 reflects projected water supply demands for
the future assuming present consumption rates remain the same.
It is anticipated that some service area consumption rates will
decrease in the future due to system improvements. It is assumed
that present water consumption rates will not appreciably
increase due to current conservation trends, especially for hot
water.
111-25
Notes for Table No. 3
1) Water Service Area - That area served, or potentially
served, by a single distribution system under control of a
single utility, or, in a very large system, sub -areas as
delineated by the County.
2) Population Served - From service providing agencies.
Projections for 1995, 2000. and 2010 based on projected
growth trends for the applicable election district (See
Table 1-A).
3) Domestic Corporation - (Million Gallons Per Day) - Water
consumed for domestic or residential purposes.
4) Other Consumption - (Million Gallons Per Day) - Water
consumed for other than domestic purposes such as
industrial, commercial, and institutional uses.
5) Total Consumption - (Million Gallons Per Day) - The sum of
Domestic and Other Consumption. Figures provided by agency
or municipality concerned.
6) System Capacity - (Million Gallons Per Day) - Based upon
'Design Capacity' from the Drinking Water Supplies System
print-out by the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene
dated 2-8-79 and updated by municipalities. Unless
111-26
indicated otherwise, projected SYSTEM CAPACITY for future
years will be considered the same as for the present year.
7) Domestic Per Capita Consumption (Gallons Per Capita Per Day)
- Determined by dividing DOMESTIC CONSUMPTION (3) by
POPULATION SERVED (2). This is a more realistic figure for
water use per person than TOTAL PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION (8),
but it may include 'unaccounted for' losses.
8) Total Per Capita Consumption - (Gallons Per Capita Per
Day) - Determined by dividing TOTAL CONSUMPTION (5), by
POPULATION SERVED (2). This is an overall figure for water
use per person which includes water use by businesses,
industry, institutions, and 'unaccounted for' losses.
9) Total Consumption - (Million. Gallons Per Day) - A projected
figure determined by multiplying the projected POPULATION
SERVED (2) by TOTAL PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION (8).
III -27
TABLE NO. 3
PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY DEMANDS AND PLANNED CAPACITY
SERVICE AREA (1)
PRESENT YEAR
5 YEAR PLANNING
5-1O YEAR PLANNING
10-20 YEAR PLANNING
(1995)
(2000)
(2010)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
Per Capita
(2)
(9)
(6)
(2)
(9)
(6)
(2)
(9)
(6)
Consumption
NAME
a
a
u
0
..tea
0
(7)
(8)
ccro
��
il�
U
upA.
pq�Q(1,.
Qv
q
6ui
H
6�a
aro
gp p
�+
p
y
^
N o0
01pp.
�+ 0
p�.tA
�lUv
P
HU
v_
8....
U .%
HAGERSTOWN
Hagerstown
35,445
36.792
37.697
39,054
Funkstown
1,193
11238
1.269
1,315
Williamsport
2,095
2.175
2.229
2,309
ii Unincorporated
30,765
31.934
32,732
33,91
I-4 MCl/MCTC/RCI
I I0TA1
6 594
76,092
3.98
5.88
9.86
15.0
52
130
6 858
97
11
20
6 858
8085
11.8
20
6 85
N
,44
12.5
20
0D SMITHSBURG
1,554
.250
.300
196
196
1,613
.256
1.653
.259
1,713
.263
HIGHFIELD/CASCADE
1,362
.070
.070
.200
51
51
1.414
.072
1.449
.073
1.501
.074
FT. RITCHIE
1,296
0.233
0.250
106
1.326
0.233
1,326
0.233
1,326
0.233
BOONSBORO/
2,942
0.201
0.500
68
3.341
0.227
3.684
0.251
4,361
0.297
KEEDYSVILLE
SHARPSBURG
1.178
0.091
0.091
0.160
77
77
1,223
.094
1,254
0.091
1,299
.100
WEVERTOM
40
0.350
40
40
40
CLEAR SPRING
660
0.123
0.200
186
685
.104
702
.106
727
.110
HANCOCK
1,926
.100
.100
.200
0.806
52
104
1,926
.200
1,982
.250
2,042
.275
MT. AETNA
350
0.070
0.110
200
363
372
385
ELK RIDGE
75
.005
.005
0.009
67
67
75
.005
75
.005
75
.005
SANDY HOOK
170
.010
.010
0.03
59
59
174
.010
176
.010
17
.011
Table No. 4
Permitted
Town
Water Source
Coordinates
Appropriation
Withdrawals
Reported
Population
Permit No.
Avg/Max
Pumpage
Served
(mgd)
(mgd)
Hagerstown
Potomac River
N648
E0560
WA28S001
(02)
15/18
10
76,092
Smithsburg
Hauver Spring
N675
E0639
WA76G143
(01)
.120/.175
Oiffendahi Spring
N659
E0641
.180
1,554
Two wells in
N665
E0636
WA76G043
(01)
.065/.100
Whispering Hills
Highfield/
4 wells
N685
E0666
WA88G032
(02)
.08/.12
N/A
1,362
Cascade
Boonsboro/
Warrenfeltz Spring
N6I1
E0624'
WA79G013
(02)
.13/.15
.062
Keedysville
2,942
Keedysville Spring
N604
E0605
WA79G012
(01)
.210/.215
.203
Well #8
H613
E0613
WA88G006
.103/.147
.129
Crestview Well
N600
E0601
WA89G022
.087/.103
.087
Sharpsburg
Potomac River
H588
E0575
WA67S002
(04)
.1/.2
.072
1,178
Brunswick
Yourtee Spring
H562
E0613
WA83G012
(01)
.35/.5
Serves
40
(FR CO)
Weverton
Clear Spring
4 wells
N666
E0530
WA67G001
(05)
.2/.3
.116
660
2 springs
Hancock
Little Tonoloway Creek
N682
E0468
WA75S007
(03)
.3/.5
.260
1,926
Mt. Aetna
2 springs
N642
E632
WA75S001
(02)
.061.1
.062
350
Elk Ridge
4 wells
N577
E0605
WA60G005
(04)
.0117/.0195
N/A
75
Ft. Ritchie
8 wells
N682
N0655
WA82G200
(01)
.25/.34
.25
1296
2 springs
File only - no permit
Source: Maryland Department of Natural Resources
Water Resources Administration
Water Supply Division
III -29
WATER PROBLEM AREAS
WATER CONSERVATION
Compliance with the Maryland Water Conservation
Plumbing Fixtures Act -
Investigation of compliance with MWCPFA revealed some
shortcomings. Although planning officials were advised of the
intention to adopt requirements for documenting compliance in
1964 and subsequent adoption in 1986, building officials were not
advised of the new statute. In an effort to comply, the
Washington County Plumbing Board has made an initial attempt by
contacting all businesses that sell plumbing fixtures. This
method also included contact with all persons who hold "Master
Plumber" licenses. The Board has requested documentation that
all fixtures currently available for sale and installation in
Washington County comply with MWCPFA. The Board must first
determine the degree of non-compliance, if any, prior to
formulating a plan of corrective action. The needed action may
involve a simple amendment to the Building Code or a large scale
program yet to be developed. Other water conservation efforts
are noted below.
Hagerstown - By far the largest water provided in Washington
County, the Hagerstown Water Department does not have a formal
program of educating its customers about water conservation.
However, the City's ongoing program of water line rehabilitation
and leak protection does qualify as a conservation effort. Also,
11I-30
the Department advises that encouraging the customer to
rehabilitate private water lines is accomplished through billing
for water used, even when high consumption is the result of
leakage. This promotes correction and conservation rather than
waste.
Washington County Sanitary District - The Sanitary District
provides a potable water supply to the incorporated municipality
of Sharpsburg (Subdistrict #4), Mt. Aetna (Subdistrict #7), Elk
Ridge (Subdistrict #17), Sandy Hook (Subdistrict #19-1), and the
Highfield/Cascade area (Subdistrict #9). Presently, the Sanitary
District does not have a formal conservation plan. During low
water emergencies, the District employs the news media to advise
consumers of a ban on all non -essential water uses such as
watering lawns and.. washingcars.. The District also uses "bill
stuffers" during these times if the emergency should coincide
with the billing. As with the City of Hagerstown, the Sanitary
District also has an ongoing program of water line rehabilitation
and leak detection which does qualify as a conservation effort.
Also, the Sanitary District encourages customers to rehabilitate
private water lines through billing for water used, even when
high consumption is the result of leakage. This promotes
correction and conservation rather than waste.
Boonsboro - The Utilities Commission has adopted a low -flow
plumbing fixtures ordinance which requires low -flow toilets and
other water saving devices in all new construction.
The Commission has encouraged active conservation through an
aggressive public information campaign on water conservation with
the help of the University of Maryland Extension Service.
Clear Spring, Funkstown, Hancock, Williamsport and Smithsburg -
The other . small.. towns_. in _Washington..Coumty. have indicated that
they do not have formal or continuing programs on water
conservation. All have indicated that in the event of a need to
conserve or any other need to advise customers regarding water
use, they have or would use media campaigns on local radio
stations and newspapers.
IDENTIFICATION
Contamination is present in a large percentage of wells in
Washington County, particularly in the Hagerstown Valley. Water
samples collected from residential wells by the Washington County
Health Department between 1976 and 1991 indicated that
approximately 30 percent tested positive for coliform bacteria.
The data is based upon samples taken from old existing wells and
from new residential wells which had been sited, constructed, and
approved by the Health Department.
It can be reasonably assumed that the pollution of groundwater is
I11-32
a direct result of the introduction of contamination from
numerous non -point sources in the County. Washington County's
topography, underlain by karst limestone, contributes not only to
the introduction of contaminants to the groundwater, but also to
their rapid and unpredictable dissemination. Extensions to and
improvements in public water systems will partially alleviate the
problem. The major correction to this situation, however, will
be in the form of community or multi -use sewerage service to
replace on -lot disposal and serve new developments, thereby
reducing the source of groundwater contamination.
Table No. 5 lists Water Problem Areas in terms of water quality
problems and water quantity problems. First, water quality
problems have been identified by the Washington County Health
Department and listed in priority order according to the degree
of seriousness and number of persons affected. The areas listed
in Table No. 5 do not represent all water quality problem areas
in Washington County, only those judged by the Health Department
as being the most serious and in the most need of immediate
attention. Secondly, water quantity problems have been
identified by municipalities and local fire companies and are
also listed in priority order.
111-33
PROGRAM FOR CORRECTION
A multi -faceted approach is proposed for the solution of water
quality problems in Washington County. The approach for water
quality problems will follow the headings listed below:
1. Geohydrologic Study - This initial study had been
conducted by R. E. Wright Associates and funded
jointly by the Washington County Board of County
Commissioners and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency in 1981. Specific aquifer units and water
problem areas were evaluated by the study and the
results published and presented to the County
Commissioners.
Fri
In an effort to supplement and update the R. E. Wright
Study, the Washington County Health Department, in
conjunction with the Washington County Sanitary
District, has initiated a_groundwater sampling program
that has resulted in the collection of well samples
from across the County. The results are available to
County and State agencies for consideration in planning
and policy formulation. New problem areas may be
identified and added to Table 5 in the future as a
result of this program.
2. Data Collection - The Washington County Health
Department will compile all relevant data including
111-34
recent water sample reports for the problem areas
listed. Data collection work will be performed on a
countywide basis as well as in targeted problem areas.
In each case the Health Department will determine the
need for conducting a house -to -house water sampling
survey for the affected area. When available, data
indicates that a listed area is no longer a problem,
the area will be removed from the list. Where
available data indicates a current and potentially
hazardous water quality problem, the Health Department
will present its findings to the Board o€ County
Commissioners, sitting as'the Board of Health.
In an effort to address problems of groundwater quality
for individual homeowners, several approaches will be
applied. First, and already in effect, is the attempt.
to guarantee adequate potable water for new subdivision
proposals by the drilling of test wells as the site
with the intent of ensuring that water quality meets
all applicable requirements. Two other proposals
currently being developed by the Washington County
Health Department in conjunction with the Maryland
Department of Environment and the Washington County
Planning Commission are (1) the use of public water
supplies as an alternative to individual private wells
for developments in the Rural -Agricultural area. Such
II;I.-35
systems would be restrictive as to conform with growth
and development policies outlined in the Comprehensive
Plan and (2) the incorporation of continuous on -site
disinfection systems onto individual private supplies.
Both of these proposals, offering definite and obvious
benefits, also involve considerable coordination
between agencies for both development and
implementation.
3. Feasibility Study - For each problem area so identified
to the Board of County Commissioners by the Health
Department, the Board will take such action as it deems
appropriate. Such action may include the funding of a
feasibility study to determine possible abatement
measures and the feasibility of a community water
system for the affected area. The Board will be
assisted in this effort by the Washington County
Sanitary District and by the Washington County Planning
Commission.
4. Sanitary District Law - As a long term measure, the
Sanitary District Law for Washington County will be
evaluated for possible amendment to facilitate the
future management of community water systems by the
Washington County Sanitary District. Specifically, the
need for establishing a Sanitary Subdistrict prior to
TIT -35., -
the involvement of the Sanitary District in the
operation and management of a community water system
should be reviewed.
Based upon the above program, planned correction
measures will be identified in Table No. 5 as they
occur. Planned correction measures will be listed, not
as intentions', but when specific action has been taken,
such as the application for a grant or loan, the actual
appropriation of funds for a project, or the
undertaking or completion of the project itself.
IiI" 37
TABLE NO 5
INVENTORY OF WATER SUPPLY PROBLEM AREAS
H
H
w
ao
GEOGRAPHIC
AREA
COORDINATE
LOCATION
POPULATION
NATURE OF
PROBLEM
PLANNED
CORRECTION
(WATER QUALITY PROBLEMS)
Mt. Lena and
N630 -E620
400
Inadequate individual supplies (cisterns).
San Mar
to N610 -E620
Small lot sizes afford no buffer zone
between sewage disposal and water supplies.
Contamination of groundwater.
Leitersburg
N675 -E620
400
Cisterns unsafe. Bacteria, unsafe wells.
Investigations of
hookup to public
lines in MD Route
64 or community
wells. Problem
continues but
opposition to
proposals.
Downsville
N620 -E570
300
Gas in wells. Bacteriological and nitrate
contamination.
Wilson -Shady
N665 -E555
400
Wilson -Shady Bower corridor "possessed
Bower
to N670 -E560
the poorest groundwater quality of any
Conococheague
area' which was sampled by R.E. Wright
Associates in 1981. High percentage of
homes with bacteriological contamination.
Also high chlorides and nitrate -nitrogen.
Falling Waters
N620 -E570
150
High rate of groundwater contamination
and Neck Road
High nitrates and bacteria.
Rohrersville
N590 -E620
100
Gasoline in shallow wells. Small lots
and hand -dug wells. R.E. Wright
Associates noted nitrate -nitrogen
and coliform contamination.
TABLE NO 5
INVENTORY OF WATER SUPPLY PROBLEM AREAS
H
H
GEOGRAPHIC
COORDINATE
POPULATION
NATURE OF
PLANNED
AREA
LOCATION
PROBLEM
CORRECTION
(WATER QUALITY PROBLEMS)
Tilghmanton
N620 -E590
200
Groundwater contamination. Some lots
have inadequate supply. R.E. Wright
and Associates found no coliform but
did find that nitrate -nitrogen'
concentrations approach the maximum
contamination level in many of these
wells.
Cedar Lawn
N663 -E585
360
Cisterns and contaminated wells.
Washington County
Sanitary District
to extend public
water lines to
area. To be
completed 9/94.
Antietam Drive
N665 -E605
200
Contaminated wells from Security to
Northern Avenue.
Greenlawn
94
Substandard water distribution system,
Washington County
system deteriorating in part of area.
Sanitary District
Remaining area utilizes unsafe
proposing water
cisterns. Insufficient for fire
system upgrade and
protection.
extension of water
lines to remainder
of area. To be
completed by 3/95.
Kemps Mill,
85
Contaminated wells, unsafe cisterns
Washington County
Rock Hill Area
Sanitary District
proposing water line
extension to be
completed by 6_195.
TABLE NO 5
INVENTORY OF WATER SUPPLY PROBLEM AREAS
H
H
H
0
GEOGRAPHIC
AREA
COORDINATE
LOCATION
POPULATION
NATURE OF
PROBLEM
PLANNED
CORRECTION
(WATER QUALITY PROBLEMS)
Bower/Leonard
Avenue Area
100
Contaminated wells, unsafe cisterns
Washington County
Sanitary District
proposing water line
extension to be
completed by 12/94.
Resh, Spade,
Kaiser Ridge
Road Area
76
Contaminated wells, fecal coliform
Possible extension of
water line from existing
Martin's crossroads system.
Elk Ridge Area
75
Inadequate production, low quality raw
water inadequate finished water storage.
Washington County
SanitaryDistrict
to provide additional water
source (well) and upgrade
storage facility.
HJC-Youngstoun
N655 -E613
600
Inadequate fire flow. Flow tests in 1991
indicated only 800 gpm available for fire
protection. Area served by dead-end water
Looping eyetem within
within pressure zone
boundary.
main which is undesirable from hydraulic
and reliability standpoint.
Pen Mar
N686 -E658
221
Inadequate individual supplies.
The Washington County
Cisterns and wells.
Sanitary District has
proposed to extend Sub-
district No. 9 boundaries
and water distribution
from the existing
Highfield Cascade
system.
TABLE NO 5
INVENTORY OF WATER SUPPLY PROBLEM AREAS
GEOGRAPHIC I COORDINATE I POPULATION
Mt. Aetna
Boonsboro
H
Smithsburg
,cam
Maryland
Correctional
Institute
N611 -E616
350
N/A
1554
6594
NATURE OF
(WATER QUANTITY PROBLEMS)
Inadequate fireflow, spring supply subject
to surface water contamination. System
required chlorination and PH adjustment.
Inadequate water system, leakage and
pressure problems.
Insufficient water volume and fire flows
on Rte. 40A south from Reeders Home to
High's Store.
Low water pressure in vicinity of Cave Hill
Road Area.
Existing water lines serving the prison
complex are inadequate to meet the fire
flow requirements established by the
State Fire Marshall.
PLANNED
ORRECTION
Washineton County Sanita
District proposes spring
head improvements and
upgrade and improvements
on water distribution
system.
Develop new storage
facilities higher than
current reservoir.
Loopingof existing 12`
line. No additional
hookups along Cave Hill
Road.
Maryland Environmental
service to construct a
new water transmission
line from the City of
Hagerstown.
Notes for Table No. 6
1) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY, MUNICIPALITY, OR DEVELOPER -
Responsibilities include project initiation and
management, but not necessarily financing.
2) WATER SERVICE AREA - That area served, or potentially
served, by a single. distribution. _system.. under control
of a single utility, or, in a very large system, sub-
areas as delineated by the County.
3) LOCATION - In accordance with the Maryland Grid System.
4) GRANTS ELIGIBLE - Dollar amounts indicate funds for
which the project may be eligible from sources shown in
parentheses. Source abbreviation represent agencies
and programs as follows:
EPA - Environmental Protection Agency
EDA - Economic Development Administration
UDAG - Urban Development Action Grant
CDBG - Community Development Block Grant
FmHA - Farmers Home Administration
ARC - Appalachian Regional Commission
MDE - Maryland Department of the Environment
The local cost for any project may be assumed to be the
total cost estimate less any amount shown as grants
eligible.
III -42.
TABLE NO. 6
IMMEDIATE FIVE AND TEN YEAR PRIORITIES FOR WATER DEVELOPMENT
H
H
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY,
MUNICIPALITY OR
DEVELOPER (1)
SERVICE AREA
(2)
LOCATION
3
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
TOTAL COST
ESTIMATE
GRANTS
ELIGIBLE(4)
COMPLETION SCHEDULE
PLANNING DESIGN CONST.
Washington County
Pen Mar
N-686
Installation of 13,100 feet of 4, 6,
2,009.567
FmHA
Contingent upon funding
Sanitary District
E-658
and 8 inch line, well and well house
CDBG
booster pumping station, 79 meter
MDE
services, and 100,000 gallon storage
tank.
Washington County
Conococheague/
Waterline extension to provide 61 homes
250,000
Soaking
Complete Complete 9/94
Sanitary District
Cedar Lawn
with public water supply including fire
CDBG and
(SD 18-1)
protection
MDE funding
Washington County
Mt. Aetna
Springhead Improvement and upgrade of
350,000
Soaking
Springhead Improvements
Sanitary District
(SD 7)
water distribution system
MDE funding
complete by 1O/93.Upgrade
contingent upon funding.
Washington County
Elk Ridge
Distribution/water supply and storage
100,000
Soaking
Contingent upon funding
Sanitary District
(SD 17)
improvements
CDBG and
MDE funding
Washington County
Kemps Mill/
Waterline extension to provide 35 homes
600,000
Soaking
Complete 6/94 6/95
Sanitary District
Rockhill Rd
homes with public water
CDBG, MDE
Area (SD 18-1)
and FmHA
Washington County
Bower and .
Waterline extension to provide 41 homes
386,000
Soaking CDBG,
9/93 10/93 12/94
Sanitary District
Leonard Ave.
with public water
FmHA and MDE
(SD 18-1)
funding
Hagerstown Water
Hagerstown
H-648
R.C. Willson Plant - Sedimentation
850,000
Contingent upon 15 mgd
Department
E-560
equipment when 15 mgd production is
production
reached.
Hagerstown Water
Hagerstown
N-650
Pipeline program to recondition 102,000
1,530,000
N/A N/A N/A
Department
E-604
lineal feet.
Hagerstown Water
Hagerstown
N-670
Watershed land acquisition in vicinity of
200,000
N/A N/A N/A
Department
E-650
Edgemont Reservoir.
Hagerstown Water
Hagerstown
N-652
Water line extension to Robinwood Drive
350,000
Contingent upon
Department
E-610
in vicinity of HJC.
development
TABLE NO. 6
IMMEDIATE FIVE AND TEN YEAR PRIORITIES FOR WATER DEVELOPMENT
H
H
RLPONSILU AGENCY.
MUNICIPALITY OR
DEVELOPER J1L
SERVICE AREA
II(3)
LOCATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
OTAL COST
ESTIMATE
GRANTS
ELIGIBLE 4
COMPLETION SCHEDULE
PLANNING DESIGN CONST.
Hagerstown Water
Hagerstown
N-675
Paramount Loop, Extension of loop system
200,000
Contingent upon
Department
E-602
from Longmeadow Road to Marsh Pike.
development
Hagerstown Water
Hagerstown
N-670
Extension north between railroad and 1-81
75,000
Contingent upon
Department
E-590
to Route 40 and Cedar Lawn area.
development.
Hagerstown Water
Hagerstown
N-650
Extension along Downsville Pike to Oak
288,000
Contingent upon
Department
E-590
Ridge area.
development.
Hagerstown Water
Hagerstown
N-665
Zone 2 Storage - Elevated storage in
550,000
Contingent upon
Department
E-590
vicinity of 1-81 and U. S. Route 40.
development.
Hagerstown Water
Hagerstown
N-680
Paramount Storage
687,000
Contingent upon
Department
E-608
development.
Hagerstown Water
Hagerstown
N-668
Potomac Avenue booster and transmission
455,000
Contingent upon
Department
E-604
main in Route 60 and Marsh Pike vicinity.
development.
Hagerstown Water
Hagerstown
H-658
CONRAIL Site - Water distribution
720,000
Contingent upon
Department
E-592
improvements,
development.
Hagerstown Water
Hagerstown
N-642
Installation of an additional 24 inch or
Not
Not
Contingent upon
Department
E-668
larger transmission main and water storage
Available
Available
development.
to
tank southern portion of service area.
N-642
E-610
Town of Hancock
Hancock
N-683
New well and storage tank north of 1-70 to
N/A
N/A
Contingent upon
E-468
increase water supply in east end of town.
development.
Town of Hancock
Hancock
N-683
Complete study of water system possible
20.000
N/A
Improvements to be determined
E-468
water plant upgrade
(study)
after water study
Town of Smithsburg
Smithsburg
N-663
Supplement water supply with 2 new
N/A
N/A
Contingent upon
E-630
wells. Extend existing 12 inch line
development.
at Whispering Hills to form loop at
Cave Hill Road.
TABLE NO. 6
IMMEDIATE FIVE AND TEN YEAR PRIORITIES FOR WATER DEVELOPMENT
H
H
to
RESPONS RESPONSIBLE AGENCY
MUNICIPALITY OR
DEVELOPER (1)
SERVICE AREA
(2)
LOCATION
(3)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
TOTAL COST
ESTIMATE
GRANTS
ELIGIBLE(4)
COMPLETION SCHEDULE
PLANNING DESIGN CONST.
Town of Smithsburg
Smithsburg
N-663
Replace and extend existing line in
N/A
N/A
Contingent upon development
E-630
E. Water Street to serve Mountain
Shadows Subdivision
Town of Funkstown
Funkstown
H-648
Replace approximately 1.000 ft. of
N/A
N/A
Contingent upon funding
E-600
water line along Rt. 40A between
Cemetery Street to E. Baltimore St.
Town of Clear
Clear Spring
N-663
Supplement water supply with new wells.
N/A
N/A
Contingent upon development
Spring
E-537
possible system improvements including
installation of a water storage tank
Town of Clear
Clear Spring
M-663
Extension of new 6" line from Big Spring
N/A
N/A
Complete Complete 11/93
Spring
E-537
Road, South to Clear. Spring Fire Company
carnival ground
Town of Clear
Clear Spring
N-663
Replacement of existing 2" line and
N/A
N/A
Complete Complete 11/93
Spring
E-537
extension with new 8" line to serve
Amber Associates property
Maryland
MCI complex
Construction of a new 16" and 20"
N/A
M.E.S.
Complete Complete starting
Environmental
and Rt. 65
water line beginning in the vicinity
funding
date
Service
corridor
of Halfway County Park and extending
12/93
south eastward to the M.C.I. complex
completion
with service to the surrounding area
by 7/94
Town of
Boonsboro
Install 2150 L.F. of 12 inch waterline
238,200
contingent upon funding
Boonsboro
on Rt. 34 from square to King Road
replacing existing waterline.
Town of
Boonsboro
Abandon 2 -inch main and bore new
118,100
contingent upon funding
800nsboro
service lines under Rt. 40A north to
the existing water line from Stouffer
Avenue to Knode Circle
Town of
Boonsboro
Install 2,000 L.F. of 12 -inch waterline
200,900
contingent upon funding
Boonsboro
on Rt. 40A south from Reeders Home to
the Highs Store replacing existing
waterline
TABLE NO. 6
IMMEDIATE FIVE AND TEN YEAR PRIORITIES FOR WATER DEVELOPMENT
RESPONSIBLE A
MUNICIPALITY OR
DEVELOPER 1
SERVICE AREA
2
LOCATION
(3)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
TOTAL COST
ESTIMATE
GRANTS
ELIGIBLE(4)
COMPLETION SCHEDULE
PLANNING DESIGN CONST.
Town of
Boonsboro
Install 3,100 L.F. of 12 -inch waterline
340,800
Contingent upon funding
Boonsboro
on Rt. 66 north from Rt. 40A to Kinsey
Heights replacing existing waterline
Town of
Boonsboro
Misc. repairs and replacement Items for
83,484
Contingent upon funding
Boonsboro
for springs, distribution and reservoir
Town of
Boonsboro/
Filtration system
500,000 -
MDE
Contingent upon MOE
Boonsboro
Keedysville
Keedysvilie Spring
1,500,000
(Partial)
requirements
Boonsboro
Boonsboro
Extend waterlines in Boonsboro West
unknown
N/A
Contingent upon developer
West
East of Rt. 40A
Crestview
Boonsboro
Extend waterline in Crestview
unknown
N/A
Contingent upon developer
Developer
Development south of Rt. 34. Construct
a well house and connect well to the
Town's water system
POLICY FOR WATER LINE INSTALLATION IN
AREAS WHERE SERVICE IS NOT AVAILABLE
All new development shall be served by an adequate water supply
and distribution system which provides sufficient water and
service pressure for domestic consumption and fire protection
pursuant to Article VII of the adopted Adequate Public Facilities
Ordinance of Washington County.
In order to prevent street and other damage encountered in
providing public water service to developed areas, and to provide
for efficient and effective connection to public water service,
the following policy is presented for water line installation in
areas where water service is not available at the time of street
and residential construction but will be made available at some
future time:
1. Requests for such installation will only be accepted
where interim systems are permitted by the Water and
Sewerage Plan.
2. Each application for a water construction permit must
be accompanied by a letter from the County Health
Officer requesting that such installation be permitted.
3. Building permits, subdivision plats, and well approvals
shall include a provision requiring the connection of
the premises to community water within twelve (12)
months of announced availability.
4. Water lines shall be designed and installed in
I11-47
accordance with applicable municipal or Commission
specifications.
5. The connection of the "dry" system shall be plugged
with a visible and readily inspectable plug at the
future point of connection to the existing system.
6. New commercial and industrial development in adopted
Urban or Town Growth areas where public water is not
currently available shall comply with Article VIII of
the adopted Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance of
Washington County regarding interim fire protection
systems.
SERVICE AREA REQUIREMENTS
The following shall be applicable to each respective designated
service area. Criteria for creation and amendment of service
areas are outlined in Appendix B.
1. Urban and Town Growth Area Service Areas
The provision of community water and sewer facilities within
the designated Growth Areas of Washington County is encouraged.
Development proposals which involve the extension of water and
sewer lines within the boundaries of a designated Growth Area
will be considered to be consistent with the policies of the
Comprehensive Plan for the County and will therefore not require
an individual amendment to the Water and Sewerage Plan in order
to proceed with the review and approval process for development.
II1-48
Specific arrangements between the developer and the appropriate
service providing agencies shall be finalized prior to the
development receiving an appropriate Service Priority
Classification of W-3 and S-3 as part of the bi-annual update of
this plan. Determinations as to whether or not a property is
considered to be within the influence of a Growth Area will be
made by the Washington County Planning Commission.
2. Rural Village Service Areas
Existing or planned community water and sewer facilities
located within areas considered as Rural Villages by the
Comprehensive Plan shall be designated as a Rural Village Service
Area. While primarily designed to serve the existing development
in the village, a service area established around these villages
could allow for in -fill development on existing lots of record
and some limited growth. Development proposals for new
subdivision lots within existing Rural Village Service Areas will
require Planning Commission review and approval to determine if
the proposal is consistent with policies of the Comprehensive
Plan dealing with Rural Villages. The Rural Village designation
may also be used for development proposals utilizing innovative
planning techniques such as clustering which, as the most
environmentally sound method, necessitate community water and
sewerage facilities. Such development proposals shall be
presented as a package in order that the Planning Commission may
determine if the proposal is consistent with the policies of the
Comprehensive Plan.
111-49
3. Restricted Use Service Area
Community Water and/or sewer facilities that are located
outside of a designated Growth Area and not within a Rural
Village are considered restricted use facilities. These service
areas are created to correct documented public health problems
generally associated with contaminated wells or failing septic
systems. The use of the facilities within these service areas is
limited to the following conditions:
a. To provide service to existing uses or new uses on existing
lots of record which are directly adjacent to the right-of-way
containing the water or sewer line.
b. To provide service, where sufficient capacity is available, to
new subdivision lots that can be served by the line without
extension. Density shall be no greater than what could occur
without public facilities.
c. To provide service to areas where the Health Department
determines that access is necessary to solve an existing Health
related problem and the County Commissioners agree to permit
access to the line.
d. To provide service to properties where a written agreement
with the service providing agency, executed prior to the
restricted access designation, obligated the service providing
III -50
agency to permit access to the particular line to provide service
to a specific property or a specific use or provide a specific
number of taps.
PRIORITY CLASSIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
The following requirements shall be applicable to each respective
designated priority classification within established service
areas:
1. W-1 Priority (Existing Service or Under Construction)
a. Individual water systems shall not be
permitted, except as follows:
If an existing community water facility is
inadequate or is not available,* an interim
individual water system may be used subject
to the following, conditions:
(1) Such interim systems are adjudged by the
local health department to be adequate, safe,
and in compliance with pertinent State and
local regulations.
*The adequacy or availability of community water service to a
particular parcel of land is a judgement which must be made in
each case through consultation among the responsible agencies and
cannot be made on the basis of this Plan alone.
(2) Permits for such interim systems shall bear a
notice regarding the interim nature of the permit
and stating that connection to a future community
system shall be made within 1 year or less after
such system becomes available.
(3) Provisions shall be made, whenever possible
to locate such systems so as to permit connection
to the public facilities in a most economical and
convenient manner.
b. Extensions of existing community water systems
shall be permitted and encouraged.
2. W-3 Priority (Programmed Service)
a. Individual water systems may be permitted on
an interim basis provided that:
(1) Such interim systems are adjudged by the
local health department to be adequate, safe,
and in compliance with pertinent State and
local regulations.
(2) Permits for such interim systems shall
bear a notice regarding the interim nature of
the permit and stating that connection to a
future community system shall be made within
1 year or less after such system becomes
available.
(3) Provisions shall be made, whenever
possible, to locate such systems so as to
111-52
permit connection to the public facilities in
a most economical and convenient manner.
b. Extensions of existing community water or
sewerage systems shall be permitted and
encouraged.
3. W-5 Priority (Planned Service)
a. Individual water systems shall be
permitted.
b. Extensions of existing community water
systems shall not be permitted, except as
provided by Policy for Water Line
Installation in Areas Where Service is Not
Available.
c. New, permanent community water systems shall
not be permitted.
I
NPS Designation (No Planned Service)
This designation is not applied within established
service areas.
a. Individual water systems shall be permitted.
b. Extensions of existing community water systems
shall not be permitted.
c. New, permanent community water supply systems shall
not be permitted.
In all cases where interim or permanent community water systems
are permitted, they shall be subject to the standards and
III -53 .....
•
regulations of the applicable State and Federal agencies.
Adequate documentation that the State and Federal standards can
be complied with shall be evidenced prior to County Plan
amendment consideration. All interim or permanent community
water systems, or multi -use water supply systems in Washington
County, excluding municipal systems, shall be approved by and
when applicable dedicated to the appropriate agency for
ownership, and/or operation, and maintenance in accordance with
established County and State standards and procedures.
WATER SERVICE PRIORITY AREA MAPS (1" = 2000')
The maps on the pages that follow show existing and planned
facilities and service areas that have priority designations of
W-1 or W-3. Letter designations shown on the maps are County
zoning districts for which more information may be found in the
Zoning Ordinance. Planned service areas having a designation of
W-5 are shown on Map No. XII Water Facilities and Service Areas
(1" = 1 mile) found in the inside front pocket of this Plan.
While every effort was made to insure accuracy in the preparation
of these maps, errors may have resulted from the transfer of
information from maps at different scales. The classifications
of parcels of land as having either existing service or
programmed service was based upon the location of existing
service lines and upon the best estimates for future service by
the service providing agencies. The delineation of the boundary
1I1-54
for the W-5 (Planned Service) classification is based on the land
use policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan for Washington
County. W-5 priority classifications within the Urban and Town
Growth Area service area are based on the established growth area
boundaries. Determinations as to whether or not a particular
parcel of land is considered to be within the influence of a
Growth Area shall be made by the Washington County Planning
commission and when applicable, the Planning Commission of the
affected incorporated municipality.
Because of these inherent accuracy limitations, these maps should
be used for general planning purposes only. For certainty as to
the exact location of all existing facilities or to the status of
particular parcels of land, the Washington County Planning
Department and the service providing agencies should be
contacted. Changes to these maps which may be required by errors
or inaccuracies may be made in accordance with the administrative
procedures set forth in Appendix B (Page B-10) of this Plan.
1I1-55 ;.
M
HIGHF!ELD- CASCA
it - 118
31
CLEAR SPRING
0
%IV MP
WATER SYSTEMS INDEX MAP
WATER AND SEWERAGE PLAN
WASHINGTON COUNTY. MARYLAND
O 6101141 lteafltll t1 T• U all etlatl►tfloaf 11AIIA /TIVIM
1t11T1fAt flit? olMUIt AU ltlataN"$ loelllil IA 1119 11AIII
1T1flNI section of Toot PlAll
11111 TO WAINIott/n tltoff TAI NAPS 1ltr/11/ 1 • $3 1 110
A1ltllllot MAP$ N Alin Nlllollt WAtIf..1111151
Iw... w1t1o1MIOR 1INY IIM MM JAM fl MAr
ft.r...1 IT. 11.MNMtfe$ M11T KNNNIMI low-II10N
..t.. l.N M M t.
iii
35 HAGE $i-�-
PUNKS TO WN
WILLIAMSPORr 1MOUNT AITNA O
!lOONSSORO
KFEDVSVILLE
0 SHARPSBURO
ELM RIDGE LAME
\Io
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
ExIstlna Proposed
;'WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
O
.. h1ATER PUMPING STATION
WATER STORAGE TANK
*
O
WELL
W
W
PRING
s
RESERVOIR
tRANSMISSION MAIN
•
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W-1 ExistIng a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
w a . . ■ .
a w ►" w
wa a a
wawa ar a.
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
w-
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Pronosed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
I I
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
�
-a
RESERVOIR
I I
TRANSMISSION MAIN
• -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing &
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■Li
WATER STORAGE TANK
WELL
SPRING
s
'a'
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
-
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
SV* URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W-1 Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
% f ■ NW ! ■ !
■ : ■ ■ k k ■ ■
• NW ■ ■ ■ N ■ !
N SNIPUN ■
%% M N F ■ N ■ N ■
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existina Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■T
I
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
�
-a
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
•
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
♦,URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W-1 Existing Bi
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
M N ■ ■ s ■ M ■
■■ ■ M ■ ■ M ■
• ■ t MM M ■ M
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
Sr
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existina Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■
WATER STORAGE TANK
ci
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
• -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
W* URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
■ ■ M ■ 1 ■ ■■ ■■
■■
■ ■ ■ ■ M■M M ■
■■ ■
W 5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
l �
Q\ V W
Q yl
•<'
E:
r,// ,
j I
\L
�• a
1 '
I 'L
HI
I
Q a
I \ ,
r /
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
L I
WATER STORAGE STORAGE TANK
WELL
SPRING
:RESERVOIR
I I
TRANSMISSION MAIN
- •
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN 8 TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing &
Under Construction
W-3
Programed
Service
N r r
x R ■
N r r
K r r r ■ N
K r r NW
r ■ t r r
r r r
r ■ rr
r r -■
rrN ■r
r
ar rr
rN
r
■
r ■ r
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
0
RURAL VILLAGE C .' ay
17
SERVICE AREA \' - RR
at R R
• ..• *6GHFlELD
1{URAL YILLM
SERVICE AR
.
A 7RURAL
iEINMVAIMA
VILLAGE
SERVICE AREA
- _
_
x
__ _
u
�r
`
;
;`.. •err
���.
�
..
.:.:
RESTRICTED USE 9L "El 1102.
636 659 662 665
NO.
•� .._ -- - -- .�._.. - NT
lur Mo
666 671 11
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Exlstlno Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
• - -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W -1 Existing 8
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
N PSI , PS , N
" N,
■•■ f N N ■ N N
Y , N N N
N K N N
M M U NM ■N N ■ N NN M Y N
UN
N N ■ N N ■ N
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existln4 Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■I
I
WATER STORAGE TANK
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
-
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W-1 Existing 8i
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
K ■ NW K ■ ■
X K $ K X ■ X X K
r ■ K ■ K X a K X N
■ ■
■ K K K ■ K
XK ■ X a a ■
K ■
X
I •wK ■KK M■wwX K X X ■ ■ X
X
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
r r/T
�
p.
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
ExIstIn4 Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■
WATER STORAGE TANK
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
I I
TRANSMISSION MAIN
- -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing 8t
Under Construction
W-3
Programed
Service
N N N
N N N N •
N
N N ■
NN ■ •t N
N N N
N a N N NNN
N ■ N
NUNr NN
N RN
N N N ■ N N
Nr
NN N ■
N ■ K
N N NNN N N
N N ■
N N N K
W 5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Extstinn 15mm-tart
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■Li
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
FtESERV0IR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
N - -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
x r x r■ r■ x ■ x
r ■ x r ■ ■ s x ■
■ ■ ■ r ■ ■ x ■ r
■ ■ r ■ s NUN
rx k
xrr ■ ■r x
■ x■
xr N r x N N .ay
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
.'� x % •-y,fJi�O:`. . P
. . .
X x K X 1\I X x w.�K IM •! ,
ll♦\ X N X % X; x M
!; \\, / I � X x x x '/x x x m z%< x x f r�_`x . 11."ti•,`i �i .�/�'� .
/= {'#}#f11} ##kkzx%xxx' ..... . , . {
I::�•ty. _W may
a' f
N � , Q - :::::: x x �x� ... :Q�✓
:
- I ' M IT�ti •ii:• N x ' ilifnM b '�
�'� w •% X% x :Z X x . .tiT.
��.. x X X x K i . ' fr —• _ 'r x (D Z ..x` G:7 1 -1
i .v. x X �� .' x x C• r!
K k
'`� x xx xX xx%XXXxX xxx%x
t{ X X X �% �% K,•.% x M 1
. . '. . ' xxxx x% /xx X %%X xX xxx��'•i...Y �Y } .�. .
x
`11
\:
X
X% M x X % % x X
{}j
. Tr.
Q, r. y, Y• �. x % % X xf �x YX X .t}
rt x,
% f *i xrX ^�e + �
+ + ___ - / (' /Y/ :.•: :.::/::
<LI -- �,� s K X
II \'<+ ., < If n
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
'WATER PUMPING STATION
■I
I
WATER STORAGE TANK
'WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
-
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
■ N Sx x ■ x x ■
x Rx R ■ K ■■ ■
■ K ■ ■ K X ■■ k x
■ xx ■ x i ■ x ■
■ x x M ■ x M M
N ■ ■ K
■ K K
■ x
x x + ■ K
■
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
/\
,< jam,_-�.--
7
MI
a
'f.
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■
WATER STORAGE TANK
CD
*ELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
- -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
N ■ ■ r r MN r , K KM r ■ •X _
K r MM UN ■ r r
w
i r . ■ = w ■ r
■ X K r w ■ F r
w r r
r r + r
w w w w r w w w
K i r w w ■ r w
W 5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
RESTRICTED USE p*�
.......... C
5 i ............. : %' RUFAL VI /LAGE
ICE AREA
::.:Fogg ::: Wawa ; *' + + t
/ /
+ C BLOCK 3
Y. ..;::::G::::::::' ``(�- / y'RR 'a:s:ieii• ��.�yo �t� �•�:•'-• .•RR•• -
a . ....... . 13i'4�1 C
__ ____ I / //{. n . RU AL VILLAGE
�; ..:. s': R. SERVICE AREA
{
i4 iJB 659 B!2 _ 6i6 iii
. bill
7 -i
I 4781
67. Ii
w
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
- -.
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W-1 Existing &
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
KK■
S K ■■ KK K K ■ KK
■ K
■ ■ ■ K K K K
NW K ■ N K Y
K s KK
KKK rK■■■■
■K V Y ■ K ■K
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
n «
te`
�7/ �v\ �y� 1
5 —Tt' ____
- / , / L.y / /
#xk#xX � a
LL.
„ � # ' x # x kx �
r. Yep � I xx xx x# xx xk /
lrJ IMM1 xX kk kx kk xk / •Q txx kkxx kk k kkkxk"Y /
kk x kk i,k k J K x _ p•
• R. M
...� x X •<'�.J x x
.� ,/ �
s f'y •• Kx xk4 ^',f R% if xrX/e
'- —-------- •�•
x xXx�� x
. . ' ' • .. /Itx x % x
M x•
. . . - • �'X X X K x
T. • x x N K
.... /.... )p�•` .r''C x x
�} k*NK%%xCXXz
)f„
�; *# •#.. :•..�. �k i}•:.,<- ���H+xy€X KX x% CC CC K.
f # •� # # 4 # x• M % X N X X
Q ` H rp, r 'air. ;�:. .-�•} •�✓
�Ai?, i •
� 1
' � w
M
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
[ I
TRANSMISSION MAIN
- •
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W-1 Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
N N M N N ■ ■ •
N N `N N NM MNN
N•
N ■ N N N N N N N
N Y N ■ NWN N
N N N N N N N ■ N
N ~ N N MN N N N
Y N NN N ■ N ■
N
N N N NW N N N
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
I
I
nl
n
«I
r
a 1 I.
I /7r'
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
EYtstInn Prnnne*A
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■1
1
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
• -.
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
V* URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
'
• • ■ ■ ■■ M M ■
i• ■ M • • N a r r
• • R M F■ t
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
REA BOUNDAR
I
Ar.: ( \ hc <N V A \ / 11
\ X 7
,2
'1 \ I \. _ / ____
A- -\ /
,\ s
A / A /
- (ti \ \ \_ .rr
:•.RR - ..: `i
- -� -
y �' R R J
.`< H! Rz-3I5 �(
RR RIB 1 A
J H....
A xxxxtL�` r
*y I
C A 1
1 i1_
CLEAR S IN T R AREA E CE`ARE OWN G 0TH
,BOUNDRY NOT MAPPED. "HI" ZONED LAND -W-5 (PLANNED SERVICE) wrxa.
334 533 •53• 536 542 545 548k Dh
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Exlstina Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■T
I
WATER STORAGE TANK
•
O
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
1
TRANSMISSION MAIN
-
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W -I Existing &
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
• R
• R R
■
■ •C a
IS
• R
R R
R • ■
• R
■ • R
R
R ■ • •
R
• PU.NC
•
R
R R
• R
■ N
• R •
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
u
' A
/\17 ((J A
Ti A( ___
7 8G
� 7
A C RZ-284 ' L4
' L I
A 1 /
i r R124
A
A %Xr Xxx x%r xx X kXxx % x xk
x Xxxx 1 xYkX k x x k x
k x Y
%Xxx RESTRICT x xx Xxxxxx x
544 061 554 557 660 663 "4 Zs
WATER
MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
______
()
SPRING
'(-
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
- -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W -i Existing 6
Under Construction
..................
W-3 Programed
Service
S ■ ■ ■ ■ w ■ ■ w
■ R ■ ■ ■ ■ w ■ w w
■ w w ■ UNNU ■
■ ■ w w ■ ■ ■ ■ w
■ IN w w ■ UN w ■
NI t w w■ UN
w
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
x
_ '7,
X k r 1 U \
VT. r
?" " /1
A ,17 f/ // I- -. - - Ix
II 'A
C Fy L
•� A / (lxxxxxxxxx x
\� I�` A ��xxxxx' X
� C, H
i'l
RZ 91 $2 ¶ �„ xx x x x #
/ I _
%~
A ___
r 11� * * ** *tf4 * RS 'YI/ \\ / ) /AtR
......... .
WA► N0.
bee 56f 572 575 ale eel 5e 0e
NOT[ . LL*TNt (O.JTP%XTYM .n.i.
7K u<f•...010. COU.tI ICfd1&L .l.►o.T C( IO4.
7! ftt YU tprt11L faq P..f 1T- MAO.fa.T 7u.IACtt .
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■
WATER STORAGE TANK
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W -I Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
NN ■ N ! N R k
■ W NN N ■ INK
■ ■
w NN ■ N NN
a a ■ NN ■ N ■
■ ■ N I N ■ N N N N
NN l
N N N N ■ N N
N NN NNNN
Na ■ N N N N
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
J
o � +
��� + +++�+'ir ry �++ }+ •/}JTAN.. � .,yam,..
+ } + + + +, 'r } �1�•7 N . . . . . . . . . . . .
K . . •-- .�1.. 1 .j% . . . . . , . . . . . . . s. Q . . ._• . . . . . , ,
::. ::...............•.....
.-�.� .. !: ......
. : . . . . • . • . . . . . . . . ' . . : .:. : ._.� . R . . .
• • .� • • Ate.~,•. • • . .
.. . . . . . . . '`• • • .
:r` ..:::.:::K :::
xx$4 xxXx x ..... • 3t 1
x x ..
K x X I� x .•^ :
. .... x X x XxxiK�x,�Jx., \�`•. ..;. .(L.. ... �i.:•x
x x x x x x k
�.. ' x x x x x x� •V f .. .. .. r
�,,. - - X. X "«. x - �i� 1 • ....... • •V .. r. iC Iii
�� e\ X x x x x ♦ I T. r.
OL X: 71'rx x t.
IL rF % x x
a � % % K M % 1 I �•
of
C
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Exisfina Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
F I
TRANSMISSION MAIN
N N -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN 8TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing &
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
•■ a a a NUN` a
■ k ■ NUN a a■
s a a s an a s■
■ a a a ■ a a ■ a
■ ■ a a a a ■ ■ ■ a
■ s e a N. a a w
a a a a ■ sMa k R
a a a ■ a k
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
N w • n
� b r Y • Z
• N
i
r r �• � o
At Ti/
17
T-3 Ia,
: /_I
/ N/ __ ___
is /
/1 < --___
L_ !I w
N .4. a. w• *.
r,. .,,
NX� N .
x x x x x x x x x
X x x x x x R'•
z x x K .
x x x
R 11 N
x• x x x x X• ih
?
% % M R M % % % % % YkXNxX x,1 X NBC x. ... B •
N M M N x %. X I Y x x x N N x
X. N. .. ..
N x K % K % M K R % X
� N N % x M N fx Y
% R x x •( JC X N NM R X •% x xR % x •.
N N t X X �xx%X
xNI . ..
N '• .•x x z ?I
K X X x INN Y NY K XXX x •. •• .. •. Ir
x x x x x NXXXX % M X XXX •••••••• .• 1 • % N X M %xN . .. ' x %xx
N K
N x %N x/xNxxY 14 111 r.. .. .. -s.....+• . . . •I.
% % ..
r_ 0
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Exisfin4 Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■L
I
WATER STORAGE TANK
WELL
SPRING
'€'
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
- -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W -1 Existing a
Under Construction
W-3
Programed
Service
KK N
NE K K K N ■
K K K
KIN K K K
KK ■
K K K K K
KK
K ■ K
KK K NW
K K
k KK Y KK
*•
wKY
K*
}•
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
) ___
�. 1 � {/ � X Ill•. .. � % x �F' f
1 k N• x X •••� ••� �F �M �,
+!r I � �.J¢ N N Kx � { r kN x kN •'�c• ' • '� Z x c-.+-�.-'�, �
; N N N •k N, N x l
/ x N R
. N k xN kN x N N k x I
/ __
I - :
%
x x
`.7/)!/ / <./ .i / __
><(/\,: / /\ N< ':-* 7.
<- ;Z 7----.- — I
__ __ - - I-
.��
/ I r-•-i'-- /
a •/f: /7
r-• // (I V
R
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Fiktlnn Prnnncnrl
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
WATER PUMPING STATION
■I
I
WATER STORAGE TANK
WELL
SPRING
{s}
-a
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W -I Existing a
Under Construction
W-3
Programed
Service
' a ■
■ ■ a . r a
M M UWN
M ■ MU
' ■ M
' M M i k M 1
M M M
k a K M M■
a a
a • M M 1 t a
M M ■
M MW ' ■ M
a a a
a M ■ M M '
M M ■
■ p ■ M M
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
ExIstIng Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■I
I
WATER STORAGE TANK
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
1 11111
TRANSMISSION MAIN
- • •
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing a
Under Construction
w-3 Programed
Service
■ K ■ f i K 11 k
X K K K ■ % ■ X %
% K S K k k % X
• NW ■ ■ XN X
K K k % ■ ■
V k %kk %NVNN
% K N X ■
VNVN
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
IAA 1
A A
A \ IN
4 / (
L YA ( IM
IM I; � o�p TOW( oP (RZ-431)
Mnu. PORT
�'� __-_!i-
- yet
J(RZ 91- 16 )
RZ - 39fi 24
H `:.•• a ` A of u f 24.
IMf w°.
349 331 554 557 04O SW OK ♦7
I0
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
•
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
e N N N N ■ K R ■
N K K K N K K ■
K ■ N N N NN ■ K N K
N NK P K NI K N
■ K K K K ■ K K N
R ■ N N K K■ K K K N N K N K
N N K ■ K ■ N N N
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
-1 / ¶ // 4 I -
4 rJ —
....: }�-Y4
+*�� ++ + ::
** ** * * * iI +44
: i: .y . . # . ,,,/ .. -
4 + + *++ *+ *++ ** +* *+ «+ r •
111 * + �. *+ •.Q' 1 > + * * •_
1. '` • ''. ,�' j
/'; •.• ••tom' ' .••
•j
1 � r y ' til Q •
1 nfk'7VIA ��
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Exisiino Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
.
WATER STORAGE TANK
�
O
WELL
SPRING
'
'a
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W -t Existing t31
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
K K ■ K USX
N K NUNU N N K
K N: K % N N N N M K
a
N % K U K ■ K N ■
K t K
N % %K ■N
K % KNN
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
::12 ::12
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Exlstina Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■[1
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
• -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
f t ' w M ■
• M M ' M . ■ 1 ' M
y M ■ NW M X M' N
NWN I SW M Ml
' f fl ' k f M ■ Y f
' • • M M ' M t Y M • N
' M M ' M M
■ K MM M S S MM
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
2 g a ST -
RU e„ Rd 112-408___ / Lx % y X� 4 y •, � •\ �
s Rs.. }}}}t k.. } j AbA J(VF1 1/::)::'' ' RS r;.
111-290 �ii' } k x }viT7
•
/++ q. �/�.+ y } fix/
} ++ ++ a } } z
l..�J++++ o• }}Yxz}N Yxk YXxx
+ } x .•"(�' xy xxx XXx XN` RU \,\\ \x x% x x �_,�
. :9C:.�' }}}"}} } ,�:; :f 2j r=xx xxx
I .. .. �:��M � {{ �}/7 IA}� }} } { } • � � M.%N Kx KyxX �xx� -
.� :::::::: RI -331- / } } k* } }Jc1 /} '1 x x X x x
x N X x/X A i
l. }k}'}} }k} j' j': xxx% xxx I /
—" )' } }{ } }} . : .... .... .. x xxX xx x/z.x xx X yx xx lY V
�//``�•}}. t x xyXyyxxx.,.l: :'�.■ 'xx z} xxxxxxxx �+ . 8.( c. X N X N' Y X % •
44 lib (es'ej • S: x x�y N x N A \\/
— __ — x;:x:: : 'I f / I( 105 w2 $N 114 617 szo
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■
I ]
MATER STORAGE TANK
.
'WELL
SPRING
'
'a'
RESERVOIR
1
TRANSMISSION MAIN
• - -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN R TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W -t Existing 8
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
I■ w B UN w w
w ■ a w NB a wa
w w a UN a w UN w
a RN a a w a w a
■ w NW a w BU ■ a
aw
a w w ■ • w
a a a w aa w a w a
NW w NB w a a ■
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
. K %
% •,� cis i
K % I
is L i /1
i•. 4f≤/ flT b<1 /1
+ j.
' +ms's+. ' \ :
a �,+
/ t1.
• / ,, r/ •
i
t -.
____ • '1—Zi\ /+ } / c\ .7
;
/ a /.1 \.-__• \' / ,V'• 'N
11 \ \ \YI\ K
n :/ \
___ : ///>_
` %
' •••• _Th':- .:.: ••
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■ii
WATER STORAGE TANK
KID
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
• -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing &
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
• K K M ■ t i t ■ t at a ■ K K
a t
a ■ t ■ Y K K K
K a a 1 t N. ■ a
s ataaNNMM
t 1
S ■ kKM ■tit
k ■ a Y K Kt tK ttt
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
ExIstina Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
• -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
r* URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W • I Existing a
Under Construction
W-3
Programed
Service
+ ' % •
% % M % i
i % % i R % +
■ e
M % i% k i i
%
i
% % % % i r
•+ %
k Y % % Y T
•+
k
It kIt i ik
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Extstino Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■T
I
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
I I
TRANSMISSION MAIN
• • •
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing &
Under Construction
..................
w-3 Programed
Service
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTS ID E
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
I
-ii
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Exlstlna Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
WATER PUMPING STATION
■I
I
WATER STORAGE TANK
WELL
SPRING
''
-('?J-
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
N -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W-1 Existing &
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
• • • ■ M MM l
1 N M M ■ = k
• ■ ■ • M M NN M ■
M M M N N N •
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
•t t
3xxX, 7 i \L) o
%
x
Hx X x / / a ' II
_ rr
i x� x :::x> x
( K X X X x N p
X N N l! `fix X x x 0.
( X N N x �Y % IN k x~ NN % N X —•+~r
% x % % x % x % % X K x X %
i.•% X `�
x x N X N N X% x a' �-
N X� % x % X X K 1r M N M % %Xx %%
('�` x% x% x�a x.Tx x x x x x x x N t
xxxx :%xx Il ►�-
!� X x x •I (.! t( x Xxx
x N x
NX .O }Y^ xxxx 3 Nxx
R X fi iw%vm
., j fix N
�x % x # .fix '��'✓ xXx x�x Xx.xN - NNL____•' „�.• N x # x •
x
xXxx xN xM x''' �"'r`Rx xx x!
x X ,< 7 #
..... ,\• "r kx XXx xxNXx .'ice^+; �'' x%�x%xxxx
... .. .. ,• xfixX xk-I xxkxXL, xXX X x # xX xX•#xx xXX
_ X
... Xx x h X x #k1�x X#xXx XX x N X
.. _ k mL xqlX x x X X R x X R XIf
• , . xx �x�{�/� xXX X % X x x�".YT7`�^ R X x Xx
'.ir .. xX XX #ryN x # x xX xXx '^ xxxx N fi
x x
. :. •::: xX kRN xN # X X # Xx
x x x % x
i x x ' .. y X X x,` x N k
x x x 1_ _ x x N /
----�_xx4
•'. x x� ��,• `X' Q
XN N *
:J:::
.:. NNN NWjVP" \ V / f
x x X X X x X
.. ix xxxx #rX �Xx xx
• -'�( Y xXX X MxV X x Q � jj
� V
I J :• _
x N \N X X X X X f f! C
• [xN,>jN*NNNxNk I.
/ a :\ '
N : 6.�"y• x , NNX xx N*'NN NxX - \rte\ r r G
.r .. � -"5--
I 11. • . Mx Xxx . . ; ///JJJ�///,,,/// I� \,
'— �x N' f i �\�\
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existlna Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
.WELL
SPRING
,RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W-1 Existing a
Under Construction
..................
W-3 Programed
Service
y M y y } ■ y
• i y M
■ y y y r y
M
N M
Y y y t y N yM
N N y ■ y N M y ■
N ■ f y R M y f •
M y M
M M N S 5 y yM M M M
N NNrNMM
M
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
,I
1 O I
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■LI
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
• -.
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
1* URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W -1 Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
N
r ■ ■ ■ ■ r ■ ■
N
K r NNNN r r r
■ T rr
N % ■ i K a
N . N I ■ . . .
it ,....
N r r •
N ■ Y ` rxrr w ■ r r r r
■ M R N
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA 8OUNDAR
f • i M p
r . • r r
/ // •///! / / /1.
1-� _: r•
• c. X/X
K
/� 7 rX x�aF'y�(�JL1 k� R X a /
1
KI
r
4�m
YI
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
1 1
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
I I
TRANSMISSION MAIN
-
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing B
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
■ M ■ M ■ ■ ■
■ w
■ ■ K ■ Y Y
■ ■ w ■ k w ■
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
i
� SSA
I 1 N +_ / / I1 Q C � ` •e•)
A
11 / A
(4
'K r---.4 __
_ _ /1/ \\;
1 h1' 1
.x x xrx K .. .... :. .J
K y K x K�Y K Y
X.. N K X K X X k ,({[
SKX N M % N % N . ., �
rN 1 L
J
x z z x x x X x • .. J
S K
K x x x N x K N x K xNxN
K K x K K X K K K N X • ..
Ir ( 11
KNINNx x N KX x x Y x x NN N XxN
Nx l XNK k N K x KKbIC
N /
If
K M M Y y y x
x X K Y 4( N N K K
1
M N Nx NxNNN N N Ny KK,
• N X X x k K x x M
X K y y ` \
M N X X x x x x N X Y x x K K r �'
fx % k K x X Y k XNM YNx Kx NX K}� : \'� \
x X 1
x y 1. xxN xN xxK k x K Y K x!
% N
x K x K X x Y K x N N I •\
/
1 h
x�x JR
x x x x
F
•
/:� Q
.A:
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Exlstina Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■I
I
WATER STORAGE TANK
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
I I
TRANSMISSION MAIN
• - •
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W-1 Existing 8,
Under Construction
W-3
Programed
Service
! p
NP ! ! N
! ■
■ M
N M MiM ■
!
■ ■ M P N M
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
REA BOUNDAR
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existlno PrnnnsAd
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
I I
WATER STORAGE TANK
�
O
WELL
Y
Y
SPRING
RESERVOIR
L I
TRANSMISSION MAIN
• - -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
S ■ NW r r r R S ■
N N N r R N N ■ N
N r ■ r r r r r N M
N r N N N NUN r
r r r r r N r r r
NN*•NU r N
N r r k N N r r
N R N N N N N
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
At
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
''
RESERVOIR
I I
TRANSMISSION MAIN
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing &
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
■ w■ w ■ r r
• w ■ ■ ■■ w ■ w ■
U ■ N U w w MU r
NW w . NUN w ■
w■ w• N P r
■ ■ w ■ • • U w
w w ■ R w ■ww w r
w w w ■ w r r r
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTS ID E
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
Ir
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
L I
WATER STORAGE TANK
�
O
WELL
SPRING
-a
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
- - -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
F M N K M M t ■ ■ Y
R R ■ R ■ • • ■
• • K • ■ ■ R R i N ■ •
Y ■ M • Y ■ • • K
IS M R * ■ ■■KN F
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
/ 1 `' 1 \
\jj'a JJi> t
t« -)i' r![jI xx x x K / do
x y x
Q f x x
# * f
4
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Exlstlnn Prnnntarl
_WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■
dWATER STORAGE TANK
..WELL
Y
Y
SPRING
{s}
RESERVOIR
I I,
TRANSMISSION MAIN
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
M M ■ M M ■ a
MN M M ■ M M M
■ M M M NM M X N M
M M ■ M M M ■ M M
■ ■ M ■ ■ ■ ■ M ■ M
■ ■ ■■■■M ■■MMM■ ■
M NM M M M ■ M
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
L
•
w a
w
, J Q
5w
J
a
W
i
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
ExIstlne Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
WATER PUMPING STATION
■
ElWATER
STORAGE TANK
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
i
TRANSMISSION MAIN
M
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
** URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W-1 Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
■ N ■ ■ ■
"
N ■ w w ■ M N Y
'" ' w■ ■ w ■ w Rw ■
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
Antietam Ov&, la y Zone
iiiiiiiiuQU!l11111Ri11! A O •1
A02
......... A 0.3
. i .
S
A
A :�A
A � kk
PORTERSTOWM
A/ AOT3i
3A �•
s ..7 .
A
•1.12 \ c
( J.. :i±,
/ T'
yam'
C FLICKER Ll
I-.5.....
.J _1 •
7 599 SO ��
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■TI
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
•
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
I* URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W-1 Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
•
• K ! , • MN • Y r
N • r r iY , ■
N , ■ r NW ■ •
rr■
• r • rr l •
N
■ • ••r ■ •N rK Pt
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
514
I
557
Nnti a tans uvt ay c. uric
rrunurrnunirruurur AO - 1
AO- 2
AO.3
If .
LC
'O-3 t
f
f...f
~ J -j ,/ / V'r'f J
5.5
11.rp
LJ
590 593 5.. 599 602[
57.
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■f]
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
I I
TRANSMISSION MAIN
--
-
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing &
Under Construction
W-3
Programed
Service
%% MN
K NW K• ■
% K ■
M M K K KK
K MN
M % ■ K ■ ■ K
•■ K
M K $N • M
r r
r • ■ : rK
• K K
■ K
r K
• K N
K K M • • K K K
%K K
M M%N N N •
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
-I
S
I
.9I
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Exlstlna Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■I
i
WATER STORAGE TANK
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
W* URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing a
Under Construction
..................
W-3 Programed
Service
N
a ■ a s r ■ r
a s■ ■ a s w ■ ■
a a a a a a i a N
■ r a■ r a a a a
w ■ ■ a wa a a w
■ w a ■ aw ■ ■
■ a w
a r r r ■ a a ■ ■ i a w
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■I
I
WATER STORAGE TANK
WELL
SPRING
RESERVOIR
L J
TRANSMISSION MAIN
• -_
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
SV* URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W -I Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
M N Y. N N NM N
MN N N MM Y N N
N N ■ N N N N ■ ! N
■ N M N PPM NY
M N N N a N N N N
N N 1 WI N N N
N N Y N ■ M N Y
NY N N NNNSN
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) N 0
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
4
li'
____ IT /1 £ /
- ) -
i NAPT•�I I run /'AT1011AL UONUId T \�
�j (HP)
c
Hi
P / G / IJ •
144 I
• �: z...� _ r-'�-tom'
_ HP
=- URAL VILLAGE
H P f4vE8 C H p SERVICE AR A
RURAL VILLAGE :::: sz aye
SERVICE AREA �: Ray<��
HP P O-
114 667 110 693
f f -' 6•v
MAP wo.
611 399 102 9T
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■11
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
SPRING
s
'a'
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
N -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN d TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W - I Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
N N N ■ ■ N N t
N ■ N ■ f N N N
N N ■ N ■ N M
NN
NW ■ s N x ! •N
N ! N N N N Y
NN N N N!
NNN NN NN NN
NNNN N N ■ N
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
WATER MAP SYMBOLS
Existina Pronosed
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
WATER PUMPING STATION
■
WATER STORAGE TANK
O
WELL
Y
Y
SPRING
Y
RESERVOIR
TRANSMISSION MAIN
• - -
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
RESTRICTED USE
RURAL VILLAGE
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
W-1 Existing a
Under Construction
W-3 Programed
Service
'
K ■ Y K a KK K
K Ki K K N K ■
Ka K K K K K K ■
K KK K K *5 K ,
• a a a a a a ■ ■ K
a K 1 , K
a K KKK KKKK KK
K a K K K
W-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDAR
CHAPTER FOUR
EXISTING AND PLANNED SEWERAGE SYSTEMS
WASHINGTON COUNTY SANITARY DISTRICT
TheWashington County Sanitary District owns, operates and
maintains several public wastewater collection systems and
treatment plants throughout Washington County. The Sanitary
District has jurisdiction to any area serviceable with public
wastewater facilities which is not incorporated or is not served by
an incorporated_municipality—..-
IV-1
A listing of the plants, the service area for which treatment is
provided, the treatment plant capacity, the average daily flows and
the discharge parameters are described in the following:
Wastewater
Treatment
Average Daily
Discharge
Plant
Area(s) Served
Capacity
Flow
Parameters
Nicodemus
SD -1 Halfway
1.6 MCD
.700 MCD
30 mg/IS.S.
SD -5 Potomac (Tammany/Van Lear)
30 mg/i BODS
SD5-1 Cloverton/Greenlawn
Town of Williamsport
Conococheague
SD -1 Halfway
2.5 MGD
.800 MCD
30 mg/l S.S
20130 mg/1 BOD5
Antietam
SD4-1 Sharpsburg/Raedysville
.163 MCD
.100 MGD
30 mg/l S.S.
30 mg/l BOD5
Sandy Hook
SD -19 Sandy Hook
.030 MCD
.010 MCD
30 mg/2 S.S.
30 mg/1 BODS
Winebrenner
SD9-1 Highfield/Cascade
.600 MGD
.450 MGD
10 mg/1 S.S.
Pen Mar., Pt. Ritchie
10 mg/L BOD5
Smithsburg
SD -12 Rolling Hills-Cavetown Area, Holiday
.180 MGD
.093 MCD
30 mg/l S.S.
Acres (future)
(Present)
10 mg/l BOD
Town of Smithsburg - (present)
.333 MGD
Upgrade &
(Future)
Expansion
complete by
12/94
Conococheague
(Waste to be trucked -in) Potential users -
.125 MGD
Scheduled
Pretreatment
Washington County (Landfill leachate)
Construction
Industrial waste generators of Washington
Completion -
County
2/94
* Monthly Average of
S.S. - Suspended Solids
DOD - Biological Oxygen Demand
IV -2
John "Al" Nicodemus Wastewater Treatment Plant
The John "Al" Nicodemus Wastewater Treatment Plant (formerly called
Halfway) is located along the Potomac River on Lockwood Road on the
outskirts of Williamsport, Maryland. The plant is a secondary
treatment facility and the plant's process includes primary
clarification, high rate trickling filters, secondary clarification
and disinfection. The plant discharges effluent into the Potomac
River.
The Nicodemus plant
processes
wastewater from
various types
of
collection systems
such
as conventional
gravity,
low
pressure/grinder pump and small diameter gravity systems.
No major expansion..of._-this. treatment facility is probable due to
the terrain of the land immediately adjacent to the Nicodemus site,
A Solids Handling Facility at the Nicodemus Plant receives and
processes septic waste from septic haulers of Washington County as
well as sewage sludge generated at other treatment facilities
throughout Washington County.
Conococheague Wastewater Treatment Plant
The Conococheague Wastewater Treatment Plant is located in the
70/81 Industrial Park off of MD. Route #63 approximately one mile
IV -3
north of Williamsport. The treatment process includes mechanical
bar screens, grit removal, activated sludge, tertiary filters, and
UV disinfection. The tertiary process is an added "plus" and
insures that State discharge limits are far exceeded. Solids
handling is by belt filter press with capability of lime addition
for bulking or stabilization. The plant also incorporates advanced
odor control systems to insure that it remains a "good neighbor".
The Conococheague Plant currently processes waste from conventional
gravity and low pressure/grinder pump collectors.
Adequate space at the Conococheague Wastewater Treatment Plant site
will allow three additional modules of 2.5 MGD each to be added as
needed.
A chemical toilet/raw sewage receiving station has been added to
the facility to handle trucked in holding tank and "Sans -Pot" type
waste. Landfill leachate is also received at the facility at a
separate truck receiving station. All wastes are closely monitored
to insure continuance of the high quality effluent discharged from
the facility.
Antietam Wastewater Treatment Plant
The Antietam Wastewater Treatment Plant is located south of the
town of Sharpsburg along Harpers Ferry Road. Wastewater received
in this facility is from a grinder pump pressure sewer collection
IV -4
system. There is no planned expansion for the Antietam Wastewater
Treatment Plant.
The treatment plant utilizes an activated sludge multi -channel
oxidation ditch process and till disinfection to insure a high
quality discharge. Odor control is also incorporated into the
plant to insure an odor free facility. Sludge generated at the
facility is transported to-, and -processed'by the Nicodemus Solids
Handling Facility. Effluent is discharged into the Antietam Creek.
Sandy Hook Wastewater Treatment Plant
The Sandy Hook Wastewater Treatment Plant is located on Sandy Hook
Road in the south Washington County community o€ Sandy Hook.
Wastewater received in this facility is from a low pressure/grinder
pump collection system.
The facility utilizes a clarigester for primary treatment followed
by trickling filters, secondary clarifiers and W disinfection with
odor control. The Sandy Hook Wastewater Treatment Plant site is
restrictive of any enlargement or expansion because of the terrain
of the land. Sludge generated at the facility is transported to
and processed by the Nicodemus Solids Handling Facility. Effluent
is discharged into Martins Run.
-;V-5_
C. Wm. Winebrenner Wastewater Treatment Plant
The C. William Winebrenner Wastewater Treatment Plant (formerly Ft.
Ritchie Wastewater Treatment Plant) is located off MD. Route 550 in
the northeast Washington County community of Highfield/Cascade.
Wastewater received into this facility is from gravity and septic
tank effluent pump (STEP) collection systems.
The treatment plant utilizes primary clarifiers, Rotating
Biological Contactors (RBC's) for secondary treatment, secondary
clarifiers, and chlorination for disinfection followed by
dechlorination to meet strict effluent standards. Sludge generated
at the facility is dried in on -site sand drying beds or transported
to and processed by the Nicodemus Solids Handling Facility.
Effluent is discharged into Falls Creek.
No major expansion is planned for the Winebrenner Wastewater
Treatment Plant. However, improvements to the plant are planned
for the treatment facility to maintain the quality of effluent when
additional flows are received upon completion of the Highfield,
Cascade and Pen Mar collection systems.
mithsburg Wastewater Treatment Plant
The Smithsburg Wastewater Treatment Plant is located at the south
side of Leitersburg-Smithsburg Road approximately 200 feet west of
IV-�6.
Stevenson Road. The plant is currently being upgraded to .333 MGD
using Sequencing Batch Reactors (activated sludge) followed by
tertiary filters and UV disinfection. Existing components of the
facility currently in use will be converted to sludge holding and
flow equalization prior to discharge in order to maximize the cost
efficiency of the project. Discharge of effluent is into Little
Grove Creek. Wastewater received at this facility at present is
primarily from conventional gravity collectors.
Conococheague Pretreatment Facility
Conococheague Pretreatment Facility is located adjacent to the
Conococheague Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant at the 70/81
Industrial Park outside of Williamsport, Maryland off of MD. Route
63. This state-of-the-art pretreatment facility has been designed
to handle .125 MGD of higher strength waste that would be generated
by industries located in Washington County. Construction of this
facility is to be completed by February 1994. The facility will
handle metals bearing, high strength organic waste streams,
landfill leachate, waste streams requiring pH adjustment, and oily
waste streams requiring oil/water separation. Each waste will be
independently analyzed and matched to the design capability of the
plant to insure that final treatment by the Conococheague
Wastewater Treatment Plant will not cause pass -through or violation
of water quality standards.
IV.7
Waste is received into the plant via computerized truck receiving
stations which record the amount of waste discharged by each
hauler. Direct flow to the treatment train through which waste are
programmed to be processed, and control automatic samplers which
sample all discharge into the facility for control purposes.
Sludge from the facility is dewatered using a plate -and -frame
filter press to dewater to approximately 40% solids for disposal.
Existing Sewerage Service Areas
The Sanitary District currently provides service in twelve (12)
sanitary sewer subdistricts.
each.
Subdistrict No. 1 - Halfway
The following is a description of
n
The Halfway area is situated approximately three (3) miles south of
Hagerstown and three (3) miles north of Williamsport. The Halfway
area consists of primarily conventional gravity collectors system
with a small amount of grinder pumps which serves the following
areas: Halfway, Parkview Meadows, Towne Oak Village, Oak Ridge,
Woodmoor, Greenberry Hills, Valley Mall, Valley Plaza, Lakeside
Trailer Park, the 70/81 Industrial Park and the Virginia Avenue
IV -8
corridor from the corporate city limits of Hagerstown south to the
1-70 overpass.
Within the Halfway sewer service area there are three (3) pumping
stations: 1) Potomac Edison Pump Station, 2) Oak Ridge Pump
Station/Oak Ridge Ejector Station, and 3) Wright Road Pump Station.
Generally the treatment is provided at Conococheague Wastewater
Treatment Plant, however, some flow is treated at the Nicodemus
Wastewater Treatment. There is capability of transferring flow to
either plant.
The Halfway sewer area currently has a total of 2,404 residential
and 49 commercial units representing 3,949 Equivalent Dwelling
Units (EDU`s). This service area is located within the Hagerstown
Urban Growth Area. -
A proposed major development project in this subdistrict known as
Cross Point is a mix of residential and commercial units.
Subdistrict No. 4-1 Sharpsburq Keedysville
A low pressure/grinder pump sewer collection system serves the
Sharpsburg/Keedysvi1le subdistrict and surrounding subdivisions of
Forge Hill Estates, Battlefield Knolls, Potomac Crest, Confederate
Hills, Trout Run, and the Antietam Battlefield Visitors Center.
This is considered a Rural Village Service area. This sewer system
.HIV -9
presently serves approximately 701 residential and commercial units
which represents 843 Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's).
Two conventional pumping stations collect the waste generated from
the area and transported to the Antietam Wastewater Treatment Plant
for treatment.
Subdistrict No. 5 - Potomac (Tammanv/Van- Lear
The Potomac subdistrict is situated south of the Halfway area and
north of the town of Williamsport's corporate limits. This area
includes subdivisions of Mt. Tammany Manor and Van Lear Manor and
the Interstate Industrial Park. This service area is located
within the Hagerstown Urban Growth Area.
The collection system is a conventional gravity system which
includes four (4) pumping stations. The wastewater flow from the
west side of U.S. Route 11 gravity flows to the Wright Road Pumping
Station, whereas the wastewater generated from the east side of
U.S. Route 11 ultimately collects at the Industrial Park Pumping
Station. The wastewater is then transported for treatment to the
John "Al" Nicodemus Wastewater Treatment Plant via a 16 inch force
main.
Sewer service is provided to 476 residential and 16 commercial
units representing 866 Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's).
IV -10
Development occurring in this subdistrict includes extensions of
the subdivision known as Van Lear Manor.
Subdistrict No. 5-1 - Cloverton/Green Lawn
The District completed a small diameter gravity sewer system for
the communities of Cloverton and Green Lawn adjacent to the town of
Williamsport in December 1990. This type,of system utilizes septic
tanks for each unit for primary treatment with the liquid waste
ultimately being piped to the Nicodemus Wastewater Treatment Plant
for treatment. Two pumping stations and modifications at the
Nicodemus Treatment Plant consisting of septic receiving tanks and
pumps, belt filter press, a sludge dewatering facility are utilized
to process the wastewater generated from this subdistrict. Odor
control facilities were -also part of the project for this area.
The District serves a total of 164 residential units which also
represents 164 Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's) and is located
within the Hagerstown Urban Growth Area.
One major development project in this area is a proposed 35 house
subdivision known as Cloverton II.
Subdistrict No. 6 - Fountainhead
The Washington County Sanitary District managed the planning,
design and construction projects for providing public sewer service
,TV -:11
to the Urban Growth Area north of Hagerstown's city limits. The
subdistrict encompasses the area bordered by Northern Avenue,
Pennsylvania Avenue, Longmeadow Road and Marsh Pike.
The Fountainhead subdistrict's conventional gravity system and one
(1) pumping station has been operational since summer 1980 with the
City of Hagerstown providing treatment of the wastewater generated
from this area. . Currently_ there are.• 914 residential and 34
commercial services in this subdistrict representing 1,126
Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's).
Major development has occurred in this subdistrict during the last
several years, including the development projects of - Arbor Gate,
Fountainhead Estates, and Foxleigh Meadows.
Subdistrict No. 9-1 - Highfield/Cascade/Pen Mar
Construction of a combination Small. Diameter Gravity Sewer (SDGS)
system and a Septic Tank Effluent Pump (STEP) pressure sewer system
and three pumping stations is scheduled to be complete by October
1993 to provide sewer service to the communities of Highfield,
Cascade, and Pen Mar. These rural village communities are located
in the north eastern section of Washington County.
The C. Wm. Winebrenner Wastewater Treatment Plant (formerly Ft.
Ritchie) will provide treatment of wastewater generated by these
IV -12
areas. Approximately 479 units will be served which represents 559
Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's).
Subdistrict No. 14 - Sharpsburg Pike
At the request of the Board of County Commissioners, in February
1987 the District implemented the planning and design for extending
public sewer service south on Route 65 -(Sharpsburg Pike) to a point
approximately 1000 feet beyond the 1-70 overpass.
The construction consisted of approximately 4,085 feet of 8 inch
and 10 inch gravity sewer, 4,556 feet of 8 inch force mains, and 1
pumping station with the City of Hagerstown providing treatment of
the wastewater generated from this area. The present design
}
capacity of the pump station is 108,000 gpd. With upgrading the
pump motors and impellers of the station, ultimate capacity of the
station and collection system can be increased to 350,000 gpd.
The District is presently serving 10 commercial and 18 residential
units representing 56 Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's).
Development activity is ongoing in this subdistrict. The sewer
line has been extended approximately 700 feet south on the
Sharpsburg Pike to serve new development. A new subdivision known
as Cross Creek is also currently being developed. This service
area is located within the Hagerstown Urban Growth Area.
IV -113
Subdistrict No. 15 - Mau ansvi11e Orchard Hills
The Washington County Sanitary District completed the planning,
design, and construction of gravity sewer system in 1985 with the
City of Hagerstown providing treatment of the wastewater generated
from this area. The subdistrict is within the Hagerstown Urban
Growth Area and includes the areas of Maugansville, Orchard Hills,
North Ridge, Fountainhead North, Maugans Meadows, State Line, a
portion of Paramount, Citicorp and the Washington County Regional
Airport.
A significant amount of growth is ongoing in this subdistrict, such
as developments of Northbrook, North Village, extension of Garden
Spot Apartments, Maple Valley, proposed development of the Horst
and Martin properties and expansions at the Washington County
Regional Airport.
The area serves 1,123 residential and 90 commercial units which
represents 2,038 Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's).
Subdistrict No. 18 - Conococheapue
The Conococheague area consists of the MD. Route 63 corridor from
the Town of Williamsport's corporate boundary, bordered to the west
by Walnut Point Road, bordered to the east by Interstate 81,
bordered to the northeast by the subdivision known as Ceder Lawn
f
IV -14.
and bordered northwest and running concurrent with the Urban Growth
Area boundary.
A collection system, force main, pump station and interceptor sewer
make up the infrastructure in this area.
Service is currently provided to 204 residential and 8 commercial
units which represents 270 Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's). By
mid 1994 sewer service is scheduled to be extended to serve
existing units on Honeyfield Road, Kemps Mill Road (to the
intersection of Kemps Mill Road and Rock Hill road north from
Celeste Drive), and Rock Hill Road (from Kemps Mill Road north to
dead end). Proposed new development in this area includes Hap
Park, Highland Manor East and Walnut Road Estates Limited.
Subdistrict No. 19 - _Sandy Hook
The sewer collection system and a wastewater treatment plant for
the Sandy Hook rural village was completed in March 1993. The
collection system is grinder pump/pressure sewer servicing 58
residential and 1 commercial unit which represents 59 Equivalent
Dwelling Units (EDU's). Treatment is provided at the Sandy Hook
Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Planned Sewerage Service Areas
The District is actively pursuing the task of providing sewerage
facilities to various areas throughout Washington County where
there is a need. The following is a description of each.
Subdistrict No. 12 - Rolling Hills
Subdistrict No. 12 encompasses the area from the City of
Hagerstown's corporate limits near Pangborn Boulevard to and
including the Smithsburg Town Growth Area. The Sanitary District
completed a facilities plan for Subdistrict No. 12 in October 1992,
which has been approved by the Maryland Department of the
Environment. Sewer service will initially be provided to the
Pangborn area with construction beginning by December 1993.
Approximately 160 residential units will be served by a combination
of conventional gravity and grinder pump/pressure sewer collection
system extension. Connection to the City of Hagerstown's
collection system will transport the wastewater to the City of
Hagerstown's treatment plant for treatment.
The Cavetown Area is scheduled to be provided sewer service by the
end of 1995. A collection system to serve Holiday Acres, a pump
station and force main is planned to be constructed by the end of
1996. Treatment of wastewater collected from these areas will be
provided at the Smithsburg Wastewater Treatment Plant.
IV -1f,
The Village Square Shopping Center development required a pump
station and force main to provide sewer service. The wastewater
ultimately flows through the Town of Smithsburg's collection system
with treatment at the Smithsburg Wastewater Treatment Plant. The
pumping station that serves the Village Square Shopping Center will
also serve the area of Cavetown.
Subdistrict No. 16 - St. James
The District has completed the study phase of Subdistrict No.16
with the development of wastewater facilities planning document.
The subdistrict area to be served initially is the Wolfe Tract
(Rockland) and Earley Industrial Park which is located within the
Hagerstown Urban Growth Area. Pump station and force main piping
to the Potomac Edison pumping station is scheduled to be built by
mid 1994. The collection system to serve Earley Industrial Park is
scheduled to be built by early 1996.
The Sanitary Commission has been petitioned by residents of
Chaplewood Lane, Deanewood Lane, Summerlin Drive, Woodside Drive
and portions of Sharpsburg Pike to be included in the proposed
project to be provide sewer service. Additional public information
meetings and a public hearing will be held before a final decision
of the Commission is made.
IV -17
The development known as Rockland is planned to be built on the
Wolfe Tract. This development consists of 731 residential units,
a golf course and club house which represents approximately 900
Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's).
Treatment of wastewater collected from the St. James area will be
transported to and processed at the Conococheague Wastewater
Treatment Plant.
The St. James School complex required immediate attention to
address the problem of failing septic systems. Therefore, the
school procured a package wastewater treatment plant to process the
wastewater generated on main campus. The collection system and the
treatment plant became operational in June 1993.
Bower Avenue/Leonard Avenue Areas
Approximately 42 homes are scheduled to be provided sewer service
on a portion of Bower Avenue and Leonard Avenue. The areas are
within the boundaries of Subdistrict No. 1 - Halfway and the
Hagerstown Urban Growth Area.
Service will be provided by a combination of conventional gravity
and grinder pump/pressure sewer systems. Construction is scheduled
to begin by December 1993 and completed by November 1994.
Spring Valley Area
This area of Spring Valley is within the boundaries of Subdistrict
No. 15 - Maugansville/Orchard Hills. The Sanitary Commission was
petitioned to provide service. However, additional information is
being coordinated for the Sanitary Commission's consideration.
Future public information meeting(s) and/or hearings will be
conducted to determine the need for service.
Existing infrastructure "down stream" is planned to be able to
accommodate the wastewater flow from the Spring Valley Area.
Town of Williamsport Inflow and Infiltration
In March 1992, the Washington County Board of County Commissioners
requested the Sanitary District to perform a sewer system inflow
and infiltration analysis of the Town of Williamsport sewerage.
The town's sewer system is hydraulically overloaded, especially
during rainfall events. If the study determines cost effective
measures to remove the inflow and infiltration, it will be of great
benefit for Williamsport's maintenance costs and in preventing
possible sewage backups or spills. The removal of the inflow and
infiltration is important to the District because it inhibits the
hydraulic capacity and bacteriologic treatment process of the
Nicodemus Wastewater Treatment Plant.
IV -19
The study will include continuous and instantaneous flow monitoring
and manhole inspection and is schedule to be completed by November
1992.
Town of Smithsbura Inflow and Infiltration
An analysis of Smithsburg Wastewater Treatment Plant flow records
by BCM Engineers, January 1992, has indicated approximately 50,000
gpd of infiltration and as much as 250,000 gpd of inflow during
rainfall events.
The current deficiency of the Smithsburg Wastewater Treatment Plant
to perform in accordance with Maryland discharge limitations, as
well as washout problems, is partly due to the excess inflow and
infiltration.
It is expedient for the District, by direction of the County
Commissioners, to assist the Town of Smithsburg to identify and
remove the inflow and infiltration. The urgency of this study goes
hand -in -hand with the State regulated improvements to the
Smithsburg Wastewater Treatment Plant that is currently needed.
CITY OF HAGERSTOWN
EXISTING SEWERAGE SERVICE AREA
The City of Hagerstown's wastewater collection and treatment system
serves approximately 35,600 persons and numerous commercial and
IV -20
industrial concerns within the city. Outside the corporate limits,
approximately 12,600 people are served in Fountainhead,
Maugansville/Orchard Hills/Paramount, Colonial Park, Londontowne,
Brightwood Acres East, Youngstoun/Robinwood Court, part of
Greenberry, Sharpsburg Pike Area and a small area west of
Hagerstown. Service is also provided to industrial, commercial and
institutional customers in the County such as Mack Truck, Citicorp
and Hagerstown Junior College. All of, these service areas are
located within the Hagerstown Urban Growth Area.
The Hagerstown wastewater treatment plant is located in the
southern part of the city along the Antietam Creek. It provides
secondary treatment of both domestic and industrial wastes by means
of grit, oil, and grease removal, bar screen oxygen, activated
sludge treatment, secondary clarification, and disinfection. The
plant's present capacity is about 8 MGD (million gallons per day).
Some facilities located within the Hagerstown sewerage service
area, outside of the corporate limits of the City are managed and
maintained by the Washington County Sanitary District with the city
providing treatment only. These areas include the Fountain Head
district, Maugansville/Orchard Hills district and the Sharpsburg
pike district. A General Service Agreement between the city of
Hagerstown and the Washington County Sanitary District was signed
on May 1, 1978. A listing of all service agreements is presented
in Appendix C.
1 IV -21
The following Water Pollution Control projects have recently been
completed or are currently in progress:
Water Pollution Control Plant Improvements:
The conversion of the anaerobic sludge management system to Enviro-
Gro sludge pellitization was completed and placed on line in 1989.
Planning is currently underway- for an expansion of the treatment
plant to expand the plant's capacity and provide for an increased
level of treatment involving a nutrient removal process.
Water Pollution Control Collection System Improvements:
In late 1993, the City completed the rehabilitation of the
collection system and sewer.mains in the Belview Terrace area to
correct inflow and infiltration problems. This project was the
first step in addressing the Hamilton Run interceptor problem area.
The existing Hamilton Run interceptor has a design capacity of
approximately 4 mgd. The capacity of the interceptor was
determined to be inadequate based on the sewer modeling performed
as part of the UGA-Water and Sewer Study completed in 1992. Future
plans are to construct a new Hamilton Run relief interceptor for
the purpose of increasing capacity and eliminating inflow and
infiltration.
IV -2.2
CITY OF HAGERSTOWN
SEWER
On August 20, 1991 the Mayor and Council adopted a revised policy
statement regarding the distribution of remaining Water Pollution
Control Plant Capacity allocation among development projects. This
policy which applies to developments both inside and outside of the
city, basically appropriates sewer allocation on a first come,
first serve basis when an owner/developer secures the required
development proposals which involve 25 equivalent dwelling units or
more must be approved by the City Council following approval of the
final site plan. This policy also allows developers to request
"set aside" allocation for projects. Such allocations must be
approved by the Mayor and Council and a benefit charge paid to the
City of Hagerstown. These "set aside" allocations are good for a
period of two years. Water Pollution Control capacity allocation
has also been reserved for several "special priority" projects that
have a significant influence on the community. These projects do
not require a benefit charge or have a time limit. A copy of the
revised policy statement is presented in Appendix E.
Funkstown
The Town of Funkstown operates a wastewater collection and
treatment system which serves approximately 1,100 residents and the
Funkstown Elementary School east of town. The Town is part of the
Hagerstown Urban Growth Area. Treatment is accomplished by
IV -23
utilizing a system of lagoons with effluent chlorinated and
dechlorinated by sulfur dioxide before discharge to the Antietam
Creek.
The Antietam Basin 201 Facilities Plan determined that Funkstown
sewerage was subject to excessive infiltration and inflow. The
Plan recommended that the Funkstown lagoon system should: (1)
remain in service, (2) be modified for capacity expansion with more
efficient operation from 0.12 MGD to 0.15 MGD and (3) eventually
serve certain areas outside the town limits.
In 1982 the Town completed pursuing a major project of sewage
treatment plant modification, system rehabilitation, and pumping
station improvements.
U
SMITHSBURG
The Town of Smithsburg and its surrounding Growth Area are served
by a wastewater treatment system that is owned and operated by the
Washington County Sanitary District. Details as to the design of
the facility and planned improvements are outlined in the Sanitary
District's section of this Plan.
MARYLAND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
The present treatment facility is operated by the Maryland
Environmental Service and has a rated capacity of 0.58 MGD. A
major improvement project at the plant has expanded this capacity
IV -24
to 1.23 MGD to accomodate a population of approximately 6,600
persons.
BOONSBORO
The Town of Boonsboro provides public sewerage to a population of
about 2,445 people residing within town limits. The two -cell
lagoon system wastewater treatment plant with chlorination and
dechlorination has a design capacity of..460 mgd.
The Town anticipates replacement of all five aerators with three
new aerators and sludge removed from one or both lagoons within the
next two years. Also, equipment and structural modifications
(existing and new) at the lagoons are anticipated to meet new
discharge permit requirements.
To address the impact of growth on the town, the Mayor and Council
has adopted a new Comprehensive Development Plan and a new Growth
Management Ordinance.
The Boonsboro Town Growth Area Study, adopted in 1986 by the Town
and the County, identifies an area surrounding Boonsboro where
growth and extension of public utilities is encouraged. Service
priority designations for property within the Growth Area will be
assigned once development proposals are reviewed and approved by
the County and the Town. The Boonsboro Utilities Commission is
willing to make extensions of the sewer system within the Growth
Area but only, for annexed properties. It remains the Town's policy
that public sewerage will not be extended beyond corporate
boundaries.
CLEAR SPRING
The Town of Clear Spring's wastewater collection and treatment
system serves a population of approximately 663 people mostly
located within the town limits. By contractual agreement, the
Washington County Sanitary District provides operation and
maintenance of the system.
The Town completed modification in 1988 to it's sewerage treatment
plant that was initially constructed in 1976. The Maryland
Department of Environment rated capacity of this plant is 0.2 mgd.
The present treatment facility consists of an influent channel with
flow measurement and recording equipment and a comminutor to reduce
the size of the solids entering the plant. The influent flow is
directed to an oxidation ditch -equipped with Mannoth Rotor Aerators
to transfer oxygen to the mixed liquor. The oxidation mixed liquor
is pumped to a single final clarifier where suspended solids are
separated for return to the oxidation ditch or wasted to an aerobic
sludge digestion tank. The clarifier overflow is routed through
sand filters prior to ultra violet light disinfection and discharge
to Tom's Run.
= ,. a s.. V-26
In 1991 at the request of the Mayor and Council, an engineering
study of the Clear Spring waste water treatment plant was completed
by a private consultant. The study concluded that: "The Clear
Spring treatment plant has been operated at a high level of
efficiency during the study period (July 1, 1989 to May 31, 1991).
The plant treatment capacity is limited by the low concentration of
the waste sludge from the existing settling tank which results in
reduced hydraulic detention time--in-the, aerobic sludge digester.
The plant is capable of handling up to 200,000 gallons per day from
both a hydraulic and organic loading perspective. The plant
influent flow cannot be increased to the full 200,000 gallons per
day level until the sludge digestion capacity is increased by
addition sludge thickeners or additional digestion capacity."
The Town is currently pursuing. funding for the installation of
sludge thickeners in order to increase the plant's solids handling
capacity and efficiency. The Town has also taken steps to reduce
the amount of inflow and infiltration into the system by installing
water meters and replacing leaking lines.
The 201 Facilities Plan prepared for Clear Spring does not call for
any improvements to the treatment plant, however the 201 Plan does
not address possible future expansion of sewer service beyond the
current Town limits and the possible resultant need for plant
improvements. The Town of Clear Spring is identified in the
Comprehensive Plant as a "Town Growth Area", however, a Growth Area
IV-27-
boundary has not been established. The Town is currently
considering conducting a growth management study to determine how
the future growth of the Town will be handled.
HANCOCK
The Town of Hancock owns and operates a wastewater collection and
treatment system which serves a population of about 1,926 people
mostly located within the town limits. The town has a designated
growth area. Treatment is afforded by 12.8 acre aerated lagoon
from which the treated effluent is discharged to the Tonoloway
Creek. The lagoon was designed to treat an average daily flow of
0.38 MGD.
The 201 Facilities Plan which as been prepared for the Town of
Hancock states that the existing lagoon system has been unable to
attain the degree of treatment required by the current MPDES permit
for the facility. Infiltration and inflow to the collection system
has caused pumping capacity of pumping stations to be exceeded and
resulted in periodic discharges of untreated wastes to surface
waters through pump station. overflows. The Town has received a
grant for system rehabilitation that was outlined in the facilities
plan. Since 1988, several improvement projects to the wastewater
collection and treatment facility have been completed. Those
remaining improvements to be completed are listed below.
1. Complete study of the Town's collection and treatment
facilities.
IV -28
2. Treatment plant upgrades: Aeration, new out fall, P.T. flow
paced chemical feed system.
3. Rehabilitation of pumping stations and ejector stations,
replace undersized pumps to eliminate untreated overflow and
handle future growth.
4. Installation of a new collection line in Dale Street.
FORT RITCHIE
The Fort Ritchie military installation which has a population of
about 1,300 people is served by the Winebrenner wastewater
treatment plant operated by the Washington County Sanitary
District. This plant also serves the Highfield, Cascade and Pen
Mar Service area. A description of this system can be found
outlined in the Sanitary District's section of this Plan.
PROJECTED DEMANDS
Projected demands for existing service areas are shown in Table No.
9. Future demand projections presented in this table are based
upon future population projections for each area and a figure for
TOTAL PER CAPITA FLOW in gallons per capita per day.
rc IV -29
i-
NOTES FOR TABLE NO. 9
(1) SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT - The facility which serves
specific service areas within the County and
municipalities.
(2) POPULATION SERVED - From agency or municipality.
Interpolated for 1995 - 2010
(3) DOMESTIC FLOW (Million Gallons Per Day) - Sewage flows
from domestic or residential sources. Figures provided
by the agency or municipality.
(4) INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL FLOW (Million Gallons Per Day) -
Sewage flows from industrial and commercial uses.
Figures provided by the agency or municipality.
(5) INFILTRATION/INFLOW (Million Gallons Per Day) -
Infiltration is groundwater entering a sewer system and
service connections through such means as defective
pipes, pipe joints, connections, or manhole walls.
Inflow is water discharged into a sewer system from such
sources as roof leaders, drains, cooling water
discharges, manhole covers, catch basins, surface runoff,
and street washers. Figures provided by the agency or
municipality.
(6) TOTAL FLOW (Million Gallons Per Day) - Based upon
'Calendar Year 1992 Average Flow' from the Sewerage Flow
Allocation Table published by the Maryland Department of
the Environment.
(7) DOMESTIC PER CAPITA FLOW (Gallons Per Capita Per Day) -
Determined by dividing DOMESTIC FLOW by POPULATION
SERVED.
(8) TOTAL PER CAPITA FLOW (Gallons Per Capita Per Day) -
Determined by dividing TOTAL FLOW by POPULATION SERVED.
(9) TOTAL FLOW (Million Gallons Per Day) - These projected
figures are determined by multiplying TOTAL PER CAPITA
FLOW for the present year by POPULATION SERVED for the
planning year.
(10) SYSTEM CAPACITY (Million Gallons Per Day) - Present year
system capacity is based upon 'Design Capacity' from the
Sewerage Flow Allocation Table published by the Maryland
Department of the Environment for Calendar Year 1992.
Future system capacity figures are assumed to remain the
same as present year unless indicated otherwise.
IV -30
TABLE NO. 9
PROJECTED SEWERAGE DEMANDS AND PLANNED CAPACITY
SEWAGE
PRESENT YEAR
5 YEAR PLANNING
5-10 YEAR PLANNING
10-20 YEAR PLANNING
TREATMENT
PLANT (1)..:
(1995)
(2000)
(2010)
Per Capita
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
Flow
(2)
(9)
(10)
(2)
(9)
(10)
(2)
(9)
(10)
NAME
o
(7)
(8)
o
u
0
0
0
Z
W b
,4 W
v
i
Ii
M
N U
aJ ►.
t/1 W .-'
1W
.
ai 3
r-1 b
rti
B ,-+
4) U
U
,I -
u A
Vl
. ,
A
u
31 v
u
E ,+
W
to V
s�'i
6 ,+
awl
ro v
4-)
a -.a
>
0.H
8
3
��®
"4-4
44
W 3(q,ry
/''
a� ro
43 0.
Wp�p3,,
Bbt
r-1
pp.i,
rl 0)
a
r-1 .-.
of 3q
N U .
4j rotpph
0.Z
N 0)
>
1
w ,
W 0 r+
431
r1 W
.
.-4
ro 3qq
"roroA�
P. 41W.�
HUW�
F
HH
O�
HW�
Vi
Q..
C7
0.
O. -'Z
cn �.,,
0 3)i
0.
0'-'Z
31X Vii 1X
00. 0)
0
cnU£
Hagerstown
48,255
6.647
8.000
138
50,089
6.900
51,341
7.072
53.189
7.327
funkstown
1.141
0.063
0.150
55
1,184
0.065
1,214
0.068
1,25
0.069
i Smithsburg
1,340
0.135
0.180
101
1,391
0.094
0.333
1,426
0.096
1,477
0.097
MCI
6,600
N/A
1.230
N/A
6,829
N/A
6,829
N/A
6,82
N/A
Boonsboro
2.445
0.207
0.470
85
2,787
0.236
3,073
0.260
3,64
0.309
Clear Spring
663
0.115
0.200
173
688
0.119
705
0.122
73
0.127
Hancock
1,926
0.270
0.380
140
1,999
0.280
2,049
0.287
2.12
0.298
Nicode ws
4,495
0.600
0.100
0.700
1.600
4,666
0.727
4,783
0.745
4,95
0.772
Conococheaghe,
10,736
0.700
0.100
0.800
2.500
11,144
0.830
11,423
0.851
11.83
0.882
Winebrenner
2,967
0.450
0.600
3,080
0.467
3,157
0.479
3,27
0.496
Sandy Hook
170
0.010
0.030
177
0.010
181
0.011
18
0.011
Antietam
2,143
0.093
0.163
2,224
0.097
2,280
0.099
2,36
0.103
NOTES FOR TABLE NO. 10
(1) TREATMENT TYPE is described more fully in the text of
this Plan. Both TREATMENT TYPE and STP DESIGN CAPACITY
information has been extracted from the applicable
Facilities Plans.
(2) RECEIVING WATERS The stream or river into which the
treated effluent is discharged.
(3) GENERATED SLUDGE information is from the MD Department of
Environment, Sewage Sludge Division and represents 1992
data.
(4) Little sludge generated.
A
IV -32
TABLE NO. 10
INVENTORY OF EXISTING SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS
SEWAGE
TREATMENT
PLANT
STP COORDINATE
LOCATION
TREATMENT TYPE
(1)
STP DESIGN
CAPACITY (1)
MGD
RECEIVING WATERS
(2)
GENERATED SLUDGE
WET TONS/YEAR (3)
Hagerstown
N-651 E-600
Oxygen Activated Sludge
8.00
Antietam Creek
1429
Nicodemus
N-641 E-567
Trickling Filter
1.60
Potomac River
734
{Halfway)
Funkstown
N-645 E-660
Lagoons, Chlorination, Aeration
0.15
Antietam Creek
(Note 4)
Smithsburg
M-667 E-567
Extended Aeration
0.18
Grove Creek
109
FIC1
N-627 E-600
Trickling Filter
1.23
Tributary Antietam Creek
8444
-Boonsboro
N-610 E-612
Lagoons, Chlorination. Dechlorination
0.47
Tributary Little Antietam
(Note 4)
Creek
Clear Spring
N-661 E-539
Oxidation, Chlorination. Ditch
0.20
Toms Run
627
Hancock
N-684 E-475
Lagoon. Chlorination, Aeration
0.380
Tonoloway Creek
(Note 4)
Winebrenner
N-685 E-660
Rotating Biological Contactors
0.60
Falls Creek
535
Broadfording
N-676 E-575
Aeration, Chlorination
0.010
Tributary Conococheague
(Note 4)
Church
Doubleday Co.
N-662 E-637
Aeration, Chlorination
0.006
Beaver Creek
Fahrney Keedy
N-626 E-618
Septic tank, open sand filter.
0.025
Little Beaver Creek
Home
Chlorination
Fairchild
N-685 E-595
Trickling Filter
0.114
Marsh Run
Republic Corp.
Greenbriar
N-622 E-628
Extended Aeration, Chlorination
0.050
Tributary Little Antietam
42
'State Park
;Hi.ghland View
N-643 E-627
Extended Aeration, Chlorination
0.030
Tributary Beaver Creek
1
Hunter Hill
N-641 E-567
Extended Aeration, Chlorination
0.030
Tributary Marsh Run
Apartments
r ;
SEWAGE
STP COORDINATE
TREATMENT
LOCATION
PLANT
Roadway
N-647
E-595
Express
South Mountain
N-602
E-625
Inn
Washington
N-675
E-598
Center
Conococheague
Brookdane
Sandy Hook
N-545
E-600
Antietam
N-585
E-590
St. James
N-635
E-587
School
TABLE 00. 10
INVENTORY OF EXISTING SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS
TREATMENT TYPE STP DESIGN RECEIVING WATERS
(1) CAPACITY (1) (2)
Aeration, drain fields
Aeration, Chlorination
Aeration, drain fields
Sequencing Batch Reactors
Activated Sludge (Package Plant)
Trickling Filter
Multi -Channel Oxidation Ditch
Activated Sludge (Package Plant)
0.015 Underground
Stream In Frederick County
0.011 Underground
2.50
Conococheague Creek
0.010
Grove Creek
0.030
Potomac River
0.163
Antietam Creek
0.025
St. James Run
GENERATED SLUDGE
WET TONS/YEAR (3)
932
8
493
0
NOTES FOR TABLE NO. 10-A
(1) This table lists only those facilities which are
considered critical to the future service of significant
land areas for which future development is likely.
(2) COORDINATE LOCATION - In accordance with the Maryland
Grid System. Grid reference shown for interceptors are
the locations of critical points of most restricted flow.
References shown for force mains are the same as those
for their respective pumping stations.
(3) CAPACITY (MGD) - Average daily flow capacity in million
gallons per day for which a facility is designed. This
figure does not represent the capacity for peak loads.
Average daily flow capacity for Sanitary District
facilities has been determined by applying peak pumping
rates to the Standard Sanitary Sewer Design Peak Flow
Curve. For the City of Hagerstown facilities, peak
pumping rates have been divided by a peak factor of 2.5.
. t• ! .. - •� � � '.l a .L , 'T:
TABLE NO. 10 A
SERVICE AREA
AND SUB -AREA
INVENTORY OF EXISTING INTERCEPTORS. PUMPING STATIONS. AND FORCE MAINS
FOR LARGE SERVICE AREAS (1)
INTERCEPTORS
PUMPING STATIONS
FORCE MAINS
IDENTIFICATION
COORDINATE
LOCATION
GN
FCAPACITY
IDENTIFICATION
COORDINATE
LOCATION
DESIGN
CAPACITY
IDENTIFICATION
COORDINATE
LOCATION
(MGS) (2)
(3)
(MGS) (2)
(MGD) (3)
(MGS) (2)
HAGERSTOWN
Sub -Basin 3B
Hamilton Run
From N-666 E-604
4
Interceptor
to N-651 E-601
P. S. # 10
N-665 E-604
0.076
r -a
P. S. 1 3
N-657 E-602
0.238
rn
P. S. # 6
N-656 E-603
0.230
P. S. 1 4
N-652 E-602
1.036
P. S. # 7
N-651 E-599
1.700
Sub -Basin 3C
P. S. # 8
N-654 E-612
0.248
Sub -Basin 3F
P. S. # 9
N-648 E-606
0.088
Sub -Basin 10
P. S. # 13
N-659 E-585
0.600
P. S. # 15
N-655 E-590
1.600
P. S. 12
N-667 E-592
0.048
Sub -Basin 3F
P. S. # 16
M-583 E-660
0.046
P. S. # 17
N-593 E-648
0.068
NICODEMUS
Sub -Basin lE
15" Interceptor
N-652 E-581
0.375
Van Lear
N-648 E-579
0.094
3" F.M. from
from Valley
P. S.
P.S.
Mall Area
DESIGN
CAPACITY
(MCD) (3)
SERVICE AREA
AND SUB -AREA
Sub -Basin iF
C
I
WILLIAMSPORT
CONOCOCHEAGUE
Sub -Basin 2
TABLE NO. 10 A
INVENTORY OF EXISTING INTERCEPTORS. PUMPING STATIONS, AND FORCE MAINS FOR LARGE SERVICE AREAS (I)
INTERCEPTORS PUMPING STATIONS FORCE MAINS
COORDINATE DESIGN COORDINATE DESIGN COORDINATE DESIGN
IDENTIFICATION LOCATION CAPACITY IDENTIFICATION LOCATION CAPACITY IDENTIFICATION LOCATION CAPACITY
(MGS) (2) (MGD) (3) (MGS) (2) (MGD) (3) (MGS) (2) (MGD) (3)
21' Interceptor
to Wright Road
P. S.
18" Interceptor
to P. S. 11
N-652 E-579 2.000
I N-643 E-573
0.900
Wright Road
P. S.
Cloverton
P.S.
Industrial
Park P.S.
12
Green lawn
P.S.
Industrial
Park P. S. 11
Williamsport
P.S.
Oak Ridge
P.S.
Potomac
P.S.
N-650 E-572
N-647 E-571
H-639 E-571
H-640 E-569
H-644 E-573
N-641 E-567
N-648 E-587
H-645 E-586
0.800 16" F.M. from N-650 E-572 0.800
0.103
0.050
0.060
0.108
0.500
0.820
0.090
Wright Road
P.S. to Sewage
Treatment Plant
4" F.M. to
Wright Rd F.M.
4" F.M. from
P.S. 0 2
4' F.N. to
Wright Rd
F.M.
8" F.M. from
P. S. Ii
12" F.M. from
Oak Ridge P.S.
10" F.M. from
Potomac Edison
P.S.
N-647 E-571
H-639 E-571
N-640 E-569
N-644 E-573
H-648 £-587
H-645 E-586
0.103
0.050
0.060
0.108
0.820
0.090
SERVICE AREA
AND SUB -AREA
Sub -Basin 10
SHARPSBURG
PIKE
M
FOUNTAIN HEAD
CITICORP
MAUGANSVILLE/
ORCHARD HILLS
TABLE NO. 10 A
INVENTORY Of EXISTING INTERCEPTORS. PUMPING STATIONS, AND FORCE MAINS FOR LARGE SERVICE AREAS (1)
INTERCEPTORS PUMPING STATIONS FORCE MAINS
COORDINATE DESIGN COORDINATE DESIGN COORDINATE DESIGN
IDENTIFICATION LOCATION CAPACITY IDENTIFICATION LOCATION CAPACITY IDENTIFICATION LOCATION CAPACITY
(JIGS) (2) (MGD) (3) (JAS) (2) (MGD) (3) (MGS) (2) (MGD) (3)
15" Interceptor N-650 E-585 0.900
from Oak Ridge
Area
48' Interceptor H-653 E-574 10.000 Keeps Mill N-653 E-571 0.150 8" F.N. to
to Conoco. P. S. Conoco. S.T.P.
S.T.P.
10' Interceptor N-645 E-595 0.108 Sharpsburg H-645 E-595 0.108 8" F.M. from
south of 1-70 Pike Pumping Sharpsburg
Route 65 area Station Pike P in
Fountain
Head Pumping
Station
Citicorp
Pumping
Station
Route 11
Pumping
Station
Farm Lane
Pumping
Station
Airport
Pumping
Station
N-665 E-596
N-687 E-593
N-678 E-598
N-681 E-598
N-683 E-598
.102
.072
.265
.138
.072
ump g
Station
6" F.M. from
Fountain Head
Station
6" F.M. from
Fountain Head
Pumping
Station
10" F.M. from
Route 11
Pumping
Station
8" F.M. from
Farm Lane
Pumping
Station
6" F.M. from
Pumping
Station
N-652 E-511
N-645 E--595
N-665 E-596
N-681 E-593
N-678 E-598
N-681 E-598
N-683 E-598
0.150
0.108
.102
.072
265
.138
.072
TABLE NO. 10 A
INVENTORY OF EXISTING INTERCEPTORS, PUMPING STATIONS. AND FORCE MAINS FOR LARGE SERVICE AREAS (1)
SERVICE AREA
AND SUB -AREA
INTERCEPTORS
PUMPING STATIONS
COORDINATE
DESIGN
COORDINATE
IDENTIFICATION
LOCATION
CAPACITY
IDENTIFICATION
LOCATION
(MGS) (2)
(MGD) (3)
(MGS) (2)
Maugansville
N-676 E-590
Pumping
Station
Countryside
H-680 E-588
Pumping Statio
Paramount
N-675 E-602
P. S.
State Line
N-688 E-597
P. S.
Garden Spot
N-676 E-587
P. S.
Haugans
N-675 E-590
Meadows
P. S.
NORTHBROOK
Northbrook
N-671 E-606
P. S.
ANTIETAM
Sharpsburg
N-591 E-588
P. S.
Keedysville
N-600 E-600
P. S.
WEINBRENNER
Highfield
N-684 E-661
P. S.
Pen Mar
N-686 E-657
P. S.
Old
N-687 E-668
Sabillasville
'Rd. P. S.
DESIGN
CAPACITY IDENTIFICATION
(MGD) (3)
.120 10' F.M. from
.030
.030
.030
.014
.068
.135
.135
.072
.204
.024
.003
Maugansville
P.S.
4" F.M. from
Pumping Station
3" F.M. from
P. S.
4' F.M. from
P. S.
2.5" F.M. from
P. S.
4' F.H. from
P. S.
8" F.M. from
P. S.
8" F.H. to
S.T.P.
6' F.M. from
P. S.
8" F.M. from
P. S.
4" F.M. from
P. S.
2 1/2" F.M.
from P. S.
FORCE MAINS
COORDINATE
LOCATION
(MGS) (2)
H-676 E-590
N-680 £-588
N-675 E-602
H-688 E-597
N-676 E-587
N-675 E-590
N-670 E-607
H-591 E-588
N-600 E-600
H-684 E-661
H-686 E-657
N-687 E-668
DESIGN
CAPACITY
() (3)
.120
.030
.030
.030
.014
.068
.135
.135
.072
.204
.024
.003
0
Tk . NO. 11
DISCHARGE PERMITS IN PROCESSING BY COUNTY
—._— _..____ .—_ IAdustriat1$usietpat-Dtscharg.?errits tu-toanty-Order --Active Sts
NPDES
Status
Expire
S I
NAME
CITY
ZIP
CNTY
PERMIT
Number
ID
STATUS
Date
Date
G M
AEROQUIP CORPORATION -
NILLIAMSPORT --
-•21795
-- WSHO
86 -OP -2277
-'$00061701
NDPUP9862277
ISSUED/REFILED---02/28/9t-03/01/91r
S-i----
91-DP-2277
$00061701
BEING PROCESSED
03/11/91
S I
ANTIETAM WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
SHARPSBURG
21782
7
93 -DP -2354
$00062303
NDPDP9372354
APPLICATION REVIEW
07/09/92
S M
"��
37 -DP -2354
-.$00062308
-,'."-" I
ISSUED/REFILED --"--07/09/92
06/10/92.5
N
B T C TRUCKING COAL LOADING FACILITY
HAGERSTOWN
91 -OP -2324
MDPPP9912824
ISSUED
02/15/91
02/15/96
G I
BOONSBORO W. W. T. P.
BDONSBQRO
21713
93 -DP -0126
$00020231
MDPOP9370126
APPLICATION REVIEW
04/20/93
S M
37 -OP -0126
' $00020231
ISSUED/REFILED
03/22/33
-
S A
79 -DP -0126
$00020231
ISSUED/REFILED
02/26/37
06/15/87
S M
BROADFOROING BIBLE BRETHREN CHURCH
HAGERSTOWN
21740
1
83 -OP -1006
MO0051373
140POP9831006
ISSUED
06/01/39
05/31/94
S N
BROOK LANE PSYCHIATRIC CENTER "- "
-' - HAGERSTOWN
21740
81 -OP -1243'- $0005319$
MDP0P9311243
ISSUED/REFILED --"--
09/03/92
11/30/92
S N
93 -DP -1243
$00053193
APPLICATION REVIEW
09/03/92
S N
CALDWELL MANUFACTURING COMPANY
WILLIAMSPORT
21795
89 -OP -2630
MDPDP9372630
ISSUED
11/06/29
11/06/94
G I
CERTAINTEED CORPORATION
WILLIAMSPORT -- -'
- 21795
-----
'92 -OP -1676
-$00057541
$00000221275
APPLICATION REVIEW
- 05/07/92-
- ----S
I
86 -OP• -1676A
$00057541
ISSUED/REFILED
05/07/92
11/23/92
S I
CLEAR SPRING W. W. T. P.
CLEAR SPRINGS VILLAS
88 -OP -1254
$00053325
MDPDP9381254
ISSUED
09/01/39
03/31/94
5 N
-CONOCOCHEAGUE W. N. T. -P.' ---- -------'
HAGERSTOWN----.......-22740
"--
88-OP-2563^
$00063509
MDP0P9332563
ISSUED ----12/01/89
11/30/94
S M
CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC.
- HAGERSTOWN
21740
90 -DP -0539
$00002321
MDPDP9350539
ISSUED
03/11/91
03/11/96
S I
DANZER METAL WORKS
HAGERSTOWN
21740
i
87 -DP -1400
$00003077146
ISSUED
09/27/90
09/27/95
G 1
--DEPT. OF ARMY - USASTRATCOM FT.-RITCHIE -CASCADE -------------21719
---{
91-OP-2516-M0000322t-NDPDP9882516
ISSUED--- ----
-11/01/91
10/31/96
S N
DUVINAGE CORPORATION
HAGERSTOWN '
21740
83 -DP -1420
MDPDP9831420
ISSUED
07/24/9
07/24/94
6 I
ELECTROMET ENGRAVING 6 MANUFACTURING
CO. HAGERSTOWN
21740
'
89 -OP -2647
$00071217095
ISSUED
10/16/39
10/16/94
G I
ENVIRONMENTAL AIR CONTROL, INC. _'------'--
HAGERSTOWN -'---
21740
-87-DP-0339•
-$00051071
$00054906201
ISSUED ----
12/18/97
12/18/92
S I -
H FAHRNEY-KEEDY MEMORIAL HOME, INC.
BOONSBORO
21713
S9 -DP -1229
$00053066
MDF•DP9891229
ISSUED
09/01/39
08/31/94
S M
C FAIRCHILD REPUBLIC CO
HAGERSTOWN
21740
81 -DP -0295'
$00041956194
ISSUED/REFILED
06/20/91
08/01/91
G I
-__- _ ------------------------
Q FIL-TEC, INC.
O
-------- -------
'SMITHSBURG
-
21733
91 -OP -0295
92 -DP -0246
- --- ---
$00002917
- -APPLICATION
MOD022679377
REVIEW
APPLICATION REVIEW
-06/20/91
04/03/92
---G
I
S I
87 -DP -0246
$00002917
ISSUED/REFILED
04/03/92
05/12/92
S I
--FUNKSTOWN 9. T. P. - "-.
'_FUNKSTOWN ---------21734
-----
85 -OP -0169
$00020362
ROPOP9850169
ISSUED -----------06/01/89
05/31/94
S M
GARDEN STATE TANNING
WILLIAMSPORT
21795
83 -OP -1267
$00053431
$00003062114
ISSUED
12/27/33
12/27/93
S I
GENERAL RECREATION, INC.
HAGERSTOWN
21740
80 -OP -1005
$00051365
MDPDP9301005
ISSUED/REFILED
03/22/88
S N
_......_ --- _ . - --------
._ - -,.-- ...._.. .--•.--
- -. --- ---
75 -OP -1005
- $00051365
-
ISSUED/REFILED
01/21/30
02/01/80
S N
93 -OP -1005
$00051365
APPLICATION REVIEW
02/23/93
S N
GRANO VIEW COUNTRY INN
KNOXVILLE
21753
84 -DP -2192
$00061107
NOPOP9342192
ISSUED
06/01/37
05/31/92
S N•
GREENBRIER STATE PARK W. M. T. P. -
-_-BONNESBORO - '
"` --- --
-_---
93 -OP -0753
$00023368
MBPOF9380753
APPLICATION REVIEW---
06/23/93
- ---
9 N -
83 -OP -0753
$00023368
ISSUED/REFILED
01/01/39
12/31/93
S N
14 6 H STORAGE, LTD.
HANCOCK
21750
87 -DP -0372A
$00020023
MOPUP9370372
ISSUED/REFILED
11/07/90
03/07/93
S I '
----_--_-- -_ .•. .. _..-.------- --
------- --------------
--
._ . ---93-UP-0372
- $0002002$
- - APPLICATION REVIEW
-01/05/93-
-_ - --- -$�
HAGERSTOWN FIBER L.P.
HAGERSTOWN
21740.
93 -DP -3077
$00066974
MOPDP9933077
APPLICATION REVIEW
06/14/93
S I
HAGERSTOWN W.N.T.P.
HAGERSTOWN
21740
86 -DP -073$A $00021776
$00000731323
ISSUED
12/01/39
01/31/92
S N
HANCOCK W.W.T.P. - ''"'' -
---HANCOCK --------------21750---------
-92-DP-0832
--$00024562
HOPOP986OS32
APPLICATION REVIEW
--01/17/92
- ------S
N --
86 -OP -0832
$00024562
ISSUED/REFILED
01/17/92
04/30/92
S M
HARDELL CORPORATION
HAGERSTOWN
21740
89 -DP -2627
HOPOP9892427
ISSUED
10/27/39
10/27/94
G I .
--HESCO■ INC.------------------------------------
HAGERSTOWN -
21740
----
88 -DP -2073
- $00060267
$00003090016
ISSUED/REFILED -
07/27/83
07/27/93
S I
93 -DP -2073
$00060267
APPLICATION REVIEW
01/20/93
S I
HETZER, C. WILLIAM INC.
HAGERSTOWN
21740
92 -OP -2993
HOPOP992=993
APPLICATION REVIEW
04/10/92
6 I
HIGHFIELD/CASCADE W.W.T.P. -- -
---HIGHFIELO
-- 21753
----
90 -DP -2749
-$00064718
MOP0P9902749
ISSUED ---- --------11/01/91
10/31/96
S N
HIGHLAND MANOR W.W.T.P.
HAGERSTOWN
21740
39 -OP -0813
$00024376
NUPOP9390313
ISSUED
01/01/90
12/31/94
S M
HIGHLAND VIEW ACADEMY W.W.T.P.
HAGERSTOWN
21740
93 -OP -1034
$00024627
MDPDP9301034
APPLICATION REVIEW
04/21/93
S N
_ _ _
_...
80 -OP -1034
--$00024627
--
ISSUEC+/REFILED --•
-03/01/29
32/31/93
S A
HUNTER HILL APARTMENTS W.W.T.P.
HAGERSTOWN
21740-
80 -DP -0610
$00022926
$DPOP9300610
ISSUED
02/01/37
12/31/91
S N
INDEPENDENT CEMENT CORPORATION
HAGERSTOWN
21740
37 -DP -0356
900002151
$00003075694
ISSUED/REFILED
05/27/92
11/13/92
S I
-..., _..
_._...... ..._ -
w .------..,
92 -DP -0356
$00002151
APPLICATION REVIEW
--0E/27/92
.......--5
I
JEFFERSON CHEESE MFG. INC.
HANCOCK
21750
94 -OP -2576
$00063592
MDPOP9^•^;2576
APPLICATION REVIEW
03/23/93
S I
83 -DP -2576
$00063592
ISSUED/REFILED
02/21/39
02/21/94
3 1
---LAKEVIEW FISHERY -
FAIRPLAY -
21733
91 -DP -2897
MDF0P9912897
BEING PROCESSED ----
06/01/91
S I
Source: Maryland Department
of the
Environment
TABLE NO. 11
DISCHARGE PERMITS IN PROCESSING BY COUNTY
ONNJ-VeL-a77S
. - . ......
.... .............-.- .. ...---.---.�.-_-
-"-`....�-.w.
Ma yr..i..xy-y
--Isdustrial/MusicipaI
Discherge Peewits -is--County
Order---Activt Status — --
----- •---------
NPOES
Status
Expire
S I
NAME
----------------------------------------
CITY
--------------------
ZIP
CNTY PERMIT.
Number
ID
STATUS
Date
[late
G M
MACK TRUCKS, INC.
HAGERSTOWN
--------- ----------------
21742 ----- WSHG 87 -DP -0390
---------
--. - ----
------------
M00003071776
--------------------
ISSUED ••-•-_._......--.-
--------
02/15X^9
--------
02/15/94
- -
G I --
MARTIN MARIETTA AGGR. CBOONSBORO QUARRY)
MARTIN MARIETTA AOGR. (PINESBURG QUARRY)
BOONSBORO
WILLIAMSPORT
21713
21795
90 -OP -0538
-.93-OP-I405
M00002623
$00055026
MOPCIP9840538
NDPOP9371405
ISSUED
APPLICATION REVIEW
05/11/90
09/01/92
05/11/95
S I
S I
-.----. -'•' -- _ ------- -------'----'
-----'---------
_--
-- --87-OP-1405
$00055026
- - _.. ----ISSUED/REFILED
---09/01/92
11/23/92
S I--
MARYLAND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTE
HAGERSTOWN
21740
87 -OP -0759
MC10023957
MOPOP9870759
ISSUED/REFILED
09/01/38
03/31/93
S N
93 -DP -0759
$00023957
APPLICATION REVIEW
02/04/93
S M
MARYLAND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION ----HAGERSTOWN
- -21746 ---
--91-DP-2880 --
---'- -
MOPOP9912880
BEING PROCESSED ----
12/28!90
......-------11
I-
NAUGANSVILLE ELEVATOR 6 LUMBER CO..► INC.
NO STATE MILITARY FACILITY
MAUGANSVILLE
HAGERSTOWN
21767
21740 ..._-
' 88 -DP -1447
91 -DP -2876
MDPOP9831447
MDD9S1933053
ISSUED
ISSUED
04/15/33
11/08/41
04/15/93
11/08/96
G I
G I
-MELLOTT ESTATE - BEAVER CREEK QUARRY--HAGERSTOWN
--- -
- 21740--- 88 -DP -1387
-
MOPOP9981387
ISSUED ---- -v4/03/89
04/03/94
G I--
MELLOTT ESTATE - HANCOCK QUARRY
HANCOCK
21750
;'88 -OP -2086
MD0060356
MOPOP93320S6
ISSUED
03/16/39
03/16/94
S I
MELLOTT ESTATE, INC.
CLEAR SPRING
21722
93 -OP -3039
$00066711
MOPOP9933039
APPLICATION REVIEW
10/14/92
S I
--METAL FINISHING, INC. - - -- --
MEYERS, KEITH SLAUGHTERHOUSE
HAGERSTOWN -------------21740
SHARPSEURG
-
21732 .
-- 89 -OP -0059
87 -DP -1351
- MD0056596-N00003102763
HOPOP9371351
ISSUED ------•--
ISSUED
09!29/89
11/01/38
09/29/94-S--I-
11/01/93
-
G I
MILBURN, CHARLES L.
NEAR HANCOCK
89 -OP -2636
M00064262
MOPDP9392686
PENDING
05/08/39
S M
---MOUNT ROUND TOP CAMP SROUND W.W.T.P.---
HAGERSTOWH ---------21741
---
---91-DP-2836
N00065757
MOPDP9912836
ISSUED --02/91/92
01/31/97
S i{-
MT. AETNA WATER ASSOCIATION, INC.
HAGERSTOWN
21740
93 -DP -0240
$00050954
MOPDP9360240
ISSUED
10/29/92
$ M
NICHOLSi ROBERT N. - PRIVATE RESIDENCE
HAGERSTOWN
21740 '
/ 90 -DP -2731
MD0064572
MDPDP9902731
HEARING HELD
04/26/90
-
S N
--NICODEMUS W.W.T.P. --- - - -
WILLIAMSPORT
21795
- '.-9O--OP-O701- N00020214
MDPDP9790701-ISSUED
---
OE/01/91
04/30/94
S M-
_PANGBORN CORPORATION
HAGERSTOWN
21740
92 -DP -1298
$00053775
M000462829S4
APPLICATION REVIEW
06/02/92
S I
67 -DP -1293A
M00053775
ISSUED/REFILED
06/02/92
10/21/92
S I
H
--POTOMAC EDISON COMPANY ----------NILLIAMSPORI- '----21795
----B7-DP-0026A
-MD0000532
$00980555783
ISSUED/REFILED-----• 03/11/91
01/31/9-4-S
I-
94 -DP --0026
$00000522
APPLICATION REVIEW
03/05/93
S I
`POWELL, ALBERT M. FISH HATCHERY
HAGERSTOWN
21701
93 -DP -1326
M00054054
NOPOP9381326
APPLICATION REVIEW
01/25/93
S I
W
------
------ --
-- ------
------
,-
88-OP1326- MD0054054
- - - ---
ISSUEDlREFILED -----45124/88
05/24!43
S I --
POWLEN EQUIPMENT CO., INC.
S
HAGERSTOWN
21740
87 -DP -2419
NDPDP9872419
ISSUED
07/24/89
07/24/94
G I
REOLAND BRICK INC.
WILLIA14SPORT
21795
1 91 -OP -1050
M00051527
NDPOP936L050
ISSUED
02/12/92
02/12/97
S I
RESH ROAD LANDFILL --- - --
NEAR SYLVAN GROVE
- -- -- ----
--90-OP-2764
-. M00064866
MOPOP9902764.
ISSUED ------•-
12/26/91
-12/26/96-S--I-
ROGER BUHRMAN -
SABILLASVILLE
21780
91 -DP -2914
MDPGP9912914
APPLICATION REVIEW
05/17/91
G I
SAINT JAMES SCHOOL W.W.T.P.
ST. JAMES
91 -DP -2855
$00065536
MOPOP9912855
ISSUED
11/01/91
10/31/96
S M
---SANDY HOOK W.W.T.P. ---- - -----------------
SANDY HOOK -----------
----
---•--90-DP-2728MO0064530
NDPOP9902728
ISSUED ------09/01/90-03/31/-96-
S- 4-
SHARPSBURG WATER TREATMENT PLANT
SHARPSBURG
21732
- 86 -OP -1361
MDPOP9361361
ISSUED/REFILED
03/13/92
08/20/92
0 M
SHARRETT OLDSMOBILE/MAZDA
HAGERSTOWN
21740
91 -DP -2859
MDPCP9912859
BEING PROCESSED
12/28/90
-
G I
SIDELING HILL REST AREA -.-
BIDELING HILL--------21401----------•-93-DP-2434
--M0062821--MDPOP9832434
APPLICATION REVIEW
---03/24/93
---•-6-M-
88-DP-2434
$00062321
ISSUED/REFILED
09/01/33
08/31/93
S M
SMITHSBURG S. T. P.
SMITHSBURG
21733
s 91 -DP -102?
M00024317
HOPOP9801029
ISSUED
04/01/92
03/31/97
S N
--------------•-----------------------------.-
80 -OP -1029-0
MD0024317
-- -_ ._._._ _-ISSUED/REFILED-
-
03/18/91-12/31!41-
6-M-
STATE HIGHWAY ADMIN.-
STATION FURNITURE COMPANY
HAGERSTOWN
21740
88 -OP -2557
3
MDPDP9332557
ISSUED
03/16/89
033/16/94
0 I
MANUFACTURING
HAGERSTOWN
21740
88 -DP -2078
MOPOP9882078
ISSUED
10/27/83
10/27/93
G I
SUN CHEMICAL
IN
IRT `- - ?
Y 99-DP-2638
---------MDPDP9392638
ISSUED -- ---- ---•--09!06!39
09/06/94
G I--
TH ARGON ASFHAGERSTOWN
SUN FLIGHT LICORPINC.O88-OP-2492
21799138
M00063223
$00921940950
ISSUED/REFILED
05/20;33
05/20/93
S I
TROUPE RUN MOBILE HOME PARK W.W.T.P.
HAGERSTOWN
21740
83 -OP -2469
M00063061
MDPC'P9332469
PENDING
11/19/37
S N
- UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC.---- -- -- -- •
HAGERSTOWN -- - - 21740 -
92 -DP -1929
86-DP-1929
----------- -
MDF•OP9861929
APPLICATION REVIEW
ISSUED/REFILED
- 05/10/92
06/10/92
- -- -
06/30/92
G -I--
G I
WEAVERTON DEVELOPMENT TRUST N.N.T.P.
WEAVERTON
87 -OP -0619
M00023612
MDPDP?e706l9
ISSUED
09/01/33
03/31!93
S N
WILLSON, RICHARD C.. N. T. P. - --- --
WILLIAMSPORT --
---21795
--- 90 -DP -0626
NDPDP9060626
APPLICATION REVIEW
12/07/92
12/07/97
G M
Source: Maryland Department of the Environment
TABLE N0. 11
DISCHARGE PERMITS IN PROCESSING BY COUNTY
0411 J-uvt-L71J
f . ..
I.,
.., .. ..
_.. . -. . --....-.1.-...
. ... ..
1.a Sc -
rt.i....
-_.-__- - __ _ .-._. _... _._.__._-.--..
Industrial/NunicipaI
Discharge Persits in County
Order ---Active
Status
-- ---
--•------
-------
r
NPDES
Status
Expire
S I
NAME
CITY
ZIP CNTY PERMIT
Number
ID
STATUS
Date
Date
G M
HONEYW000 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
NEDGESVILLE ................--WV
-79-DP-0120
MD0023540
9OPOP9790120
ISSUED/REFILED
--.--04/22/91
03/31/91.6
N
91 -DP -0120
M00023540
ISSUED
05/01/92
04/10/97
S M
PAW PAW W.W.T.P. -
PAW PAW
83 -DP -1261
H00027405
MOPOP9831261
ISSUED
01/01/S7
12/31/91
S N
• RIOGELY W.W.T.P. - - - -
RIDGELY -
21660 -----= -81-OP-0819 -
ND0050342
NDPDP9810919
ISSUED
--10/01/85
06/30/90S
M. -
RIVER BEND PARK (FORMERLY YOGI BEAR)
FALLING WATERS
80 -DP -0609
MD0024236
MOPOP9800609
ISSUED
01/01/£7
12/31/91
S N
92 -DP -0609
MD0024236
ISSUED
08/19/91
12/31/91
S N
SH£PHEROSTOWNI CORP. OF SIP --
SHEPHEROSTOWN -
:- 83 -OP -0464
M00050938
MDPDP98330464
ISSUED -- -----•
11/01/£7
09/30/93
S N
Source: Maryland Department of the Environment
SEWAGE FLOW ALLOCATION
The following tables are intended to assist in the long-range
planning of sewage flow allocation. This flow data is not intended
to represent a commitment by Washington County or by any
incorporated municipality to provide service to any particular
development. The data is used for planning purposes only.
Commitments are made formally with sewer service providers by such
means as are described in notes to these tables.
The tables provide flow data from the general to the more specific.
Table No. 12 compares flow allocations to available flow capacity
of sewage treatment plants. Table No. 12 A compares flow
allocations to available flow capacity of important collection
facilities for the large sewerage service areas of Hagerstown and
Halfway. Finally, Table No. 12 B lists existing and planned
developments with flow allocations for each, and indicates thq
collection facilities to which these developments are expected to
contribute sewage flow.
IV -43
TABLE 12
SEWAGE FLOW ALLOCATION TABLE
1992 Allocation
Washington County
1991,TAverage
SEWA(*
Design
NPDES
Calendar Year
Gross
Comments
TREATMENT
PLANT.
Capacity
MGD
Permit
} D
Average Flow
Capacity
MGD
MGD
Ant`f6tam
0.163
0.141
0.093
0.048
Boorsboro
0.470
0.290
0.207
0.083
t5
Clerspring
0.200
0.200
0.115
0.085
Conccocheague
2.500
2.000
---
0.500
Initial allocation for new facility.
Fun Btown
0.150
0.150
0.063
0.087
Haggrstown
8.000
8.000
6.647
1.353
Flow allocation contingent on correction of
5i
fecal coliform violations. Consent Order in
effect September 16, 1992.
Hancock
0.380
0.380
0.270
0.110
NicUdemus
1.600
1.371
1.385
0.050
Allocation as per letter of October 4, 1988.
Smi ,hsburg
0.180
0.140
0.129
0.011
Allocation contingent on compliance with
*Winrenner
0.600
Consent Order.
0.600
0.450
0.150
*San*Hook
0.030
0.015
0.010
0.005
*Antietam
0.163
0.163
0.100
0.063
Source: State of
MD Department
of Environment
* Washington County Sanitary District
TABLE NO. 12 A
FLOW ALLOCATIONS FOR INTERCEPTORS OR PUMPING STATIONS FOR LARGE SERVICE AREAS
H
Ln
S(WERAC1E SERVICEINTERCEPTOR
AREAS AND
SUB-tEAS
PUMPING STATION
1
D NA
LOCATION
1
DESIGN
CAPACITY
(MGD)
1
ALENDAR
YEAR (2)
AVERAGE
FLOW MGD)
GROSS
AVAILABLE
FLOW
(MGD) (3
TOTAL
ALLOCATED
FLOW (MGD) (4)
NET
AVAILABLE
FLOW
(MCD) (5
PENDING
FIRM
NICODEMUS
Sub -Basin 1E
Wright Road P.S.
N-650 E-572
0.800
0.051
0.040
0.071
0
Sub -Basin 1F
Industrial Park P.S. #1
N-644 E-573
0.108
0.086
0.060
0.046
0.041
Industrial Park P.S. #2
H-630 E-571
0.050
0.005
0.040
0.050
Sub -Basin 1E
Cloverton P.S.
H-647 E-571
0.103
0.012
0.091
Sub -Basin 1F
Greenlawn P.S.
N-640 E-569
0.060
0.003
0.057
Williamsport
Williamsport P.S.
N-641 E-567
0.500
0.206
0.294
0.294
CONOCOCHEAGUE
Sub -Basin 2
Oak Ridge P.S.
N-648 E-587
0.820
0.300
0.520
0.020
0.500
Potomac Edison P.S.
N-645 E-586
0.090
0.005
0.085
0.015
Sub -Basin 10
48' Interceptor to
N-653 E-574
10.000
0.800
9.200
9.200
Conococheague S.T.P.
Sub -Basin ID
Kemps Mill P.S.
H-653 E-571
0.150
0.030
0.120
SHARPSBURG
Sharpsburg Pike P.S.
N-645 E-595
0.108
0.007
0.101
0.103
FOUNTAIN HEAD
Fountain Head P.S.
0.102
0.035
0.100
0.135
CITICORP
Citicorp F.S.
0.072
0.0095
0.0625
MIAUGANSVILLE/
Orchard Hills
Route 11 P.S.
0.265
0.1360
0.129
0.250
farm Lane P.S.
0.138
0.039
0.099
0.138
Maugansville P.S.
0.120
0.100
0.020
0.250
Countryside P.S.
0.030
0.011
0.019
0.028
Paramount P.S.
0.030
0.007
0.023
0.018
State Line P.S.
0.030
0.007
0.023
0.018
Maugans Meadows P.S.
N-675 E-590
0.068
0.002
0.066
0.031
0.035
Garden Spot P.S.
H-676 E-587
0.014
0.001
0.013
TABLE NO. 12 A
FLOW ALLOCATIONS FOR INTERCEPTORS OR PUMPING STATIONS FOR LARGE SERVICE AREAS
SCWERGE SERVICEINTERCEPTOR
AREAS AND
SUIT -AREAS
PUMPING STATION
1
DINAT
LOCATION
1
M
CAPACITY
(MGD)
(1)
CALENDAR
YEAR (2)
AVERAGE
FLOW MGD)
GROSS
AVAILABLE
FLOW
(MGD) (3
TOTAL
ALLOCATED
FLOW MGD (4)
NET
AVAILABLE
FLOW
(MGD) (5)
PENDING
FIRM
NORTHR OOK
Northbrook P.S.
M-671 E-606
0.135
0.002
0.133
0.023
0.110
ANTIETAAM
Sharpsburg P.S.
N-591 E-588
0.135
err,
Keedysville
N-600 E-600
0.072
WINEBRNNER
Highfield P.S.
N-684 E-661
0.204
0.204
0.218
as
Pen Mar P.S.
N-686 E-657
0.204
0.024
0.024
Old Sabillasville Rd. P.S.
N-687 E-668
0.003
0.003
0.002
0.001
HAGERRJDWN
38
Hamilton Run Interceptor
FroSublasin
N-666 Em 604
to
M-651 E-601
4.0
P.S. #10
N-665 E-604
0.076
0.012
0.064
0.064
P.S. #3
H-657 E-602
0.238
0
0.238
0.P38
P.S. #6
N-656 E-603
0.230
0
0.230
0.230
e96
?'}
P.S. #4
M-652 E-602
1.036
0.140
0.896
0.342
0.896
P.S. #7
N-651 E-599
1.700
0.460
1.240
0.113
1.240
Sub -%%sin 3C
P.S. #8
N-654 E-612
0.248
0.018
0.230
0.158
0.230
r,p
Sub4asin 3F
P.S. #9
M-648 E-606
0.088
0.005
0.083
0.083
P.S. #17
M-593 E-648
0.069
0.008
0.061
Sub.4asin 1D
P.S. #2
H-667 E-592
0.048
0.011
0.037
0.027
0.037
P.S. #13
N-659 E-585
0.600
0.069
0.531
0.037
0.531
P.S. 116 (planned)
M-583 E-660
0.046
0
0.046
NOTES FOR TABLE NO. 12 A
(1) INTERCEPTOR OR PUMPING STATION, COORDINATE LOCATION, AND
DESIGN CAPACITY (Million Gallons Per Day) - Are taken
from Table No. 10 A. DESIGN CAPACITY does not represent
the capacity for peak loads. Average daily flow capacity
for Sanitary District facilities has been determined by
applying peak pumping rates to the Standard Sanitary
Sewer Design Peak Flow Curve. For City of Hagerstown
facilities, peak pumping rates have been divided by a
peak factor of 2.5.
(2) CALENDAR YEAR AVERAGE FLOW (Million Gallons Per Day) -
Average flow rates are based upon records of sewer
service providers. For the Halfway Sewerage Service
Area, flow rates are based upon average daily flows which
were measured over the last six months of 1992. For the
Hagerstown Sewerage Service Area, flow rates are based
upon electric meter readings to determine the length of
time pumps are in operation in the course of a 24 hour
period.
(3) GROSS AVAILABLE FLOW (Million Gallons Per Day) - The
numerical difference between DESIGN CAPACITY and CALENDAR
YEAR AVERAGE FLOW. Where CALENDAR YEAR FLOW is greater
than DESIGN CAPACITY the difference is shown as zero.
(4) TOTAL ALLOCATED FLOW (Million Gallons Per Day) — These
figures represent the allocation for planning purposes of
excess capacity to existing and planned developments
which are itemized in Table 12 B. TOTAL ALLOCATED FLOW
for each facility in Table 12 A is the summation of the
allocated flows tributary to that facility listed in
Table 12 B. For the Halfway Sewerage Service Area,
allocations are FIRM when sewer construction drawings are
approved by the Washington County Sanitary District. For
the Hagerstown Sewerage Service area, allocations are
FIRM when the Sewer Service Connection Permit is approved
by Water Pollution Control. In all other cases, TOTAL
ALLOCATED FLOW is considered tentative and is listed as
PENDING. Allocated flow for a planned development which
has received an approval letter from a sewer service
provider, for example, would be considered PENDING
allocation.
(5) NET AVAILABLE FLOW (Million Gallons Per Day) - This
figure is the difference between GROSS AVAILABLE FLOW
and the total of FIRM allocations.
NOTES FOR TABLE NO. 12-B
{1} DEVELOPMENTS TO BE SERVED - include both existing and
planned developments. (Note that Number of Dwelling Units
are listed either EXISTING or PLANNED). Existing
developments are existing residential developments which
have been proposed for service by a 201 Facilities Plan
or existing commercial or industrial developments which
have requested additional allocations from the sewer
service provider. Planned developments are those which
have been submitted for development review to the
applicable Planning Commission and have received at least
Preliminary Approval and an approval letter from the
service provider.
(2) NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS - This column shows the number
of dwelling units, both existing and planned, which are
currently not served by public sewer and are planned to
be served. A dwelling unit is one or more rooms in a
residential building for use by one or more persons
maintaining a common household. A dwelling unit may be
an owned or rented apartment, town house, single family
residence, mobile home, or any other arrangement which
meets this definition. Numbers of dwelling units for
existing developments are based upon estimates from
facilities plans and design studies for imminent projects
and upon County land use maps (1975) for projects to be
done in the more distant future. Where known, vacant
buildable lots within existing developments are listed
under planned dwelling units. The number of dwelling
units for planned development are based upon plans which
have been submitted for approval to the applicable
Planning Commission.
(3) ALLOCATED FLOW PER DWELLING UNIT (Gallons Per Day) - This
is an estimated figure which is used by the sewer service
provider for planning purposes only and not for sizing
such facilities as sewer lines. These figures are based
upon metered water consumption readings for the various
types of dwelling units within the two sewerage service
areas.
(4) TOTAL ALLOCATED FLOW (Million Gallons Per Day) - In the
case of residential developments, this figure is
determined by multiplying the number of dwelling units by
the allocated flow per dwelling unit. For commercial and
industrial developments, this figure is the total
allocated flow as determined by the sewer service
provider. For the Halfway Sewerage Service Area,
allocations are FIRM when sewer construction drawings are
approved by the Washington County Sanitary District. For
the Hagerstown Sewerage Service Area, allocations are
IV -48
FIRM when the Sewer Service Connection Permit is approved
by Water Pollution Control. In all other cases, TOTAL
ALLOCATED FLOW is considered tentative and is listed as
PENDING. Allocated flow for a planned development which
has received an approval letter from a sewer service
provider, for example, would be considered PENDING
allocation.
(5) TRIBUTARY TO - This column indicates the major facilities
listed in Table No. 12-A to which the development will be
contributing sewage flow. Proposed facilities which are
not listed in Table No. 12-A are shown in parentheses.
TABLE NO. 12B
FLOW ALLOCATIONS FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENTS
H
to
0
SEWERAGE SERVICE
AREA AND
SUB -AREAS
DEVELOPMENTS TO BE SERVED
(1)
COORDINATE
LOCATION
NUMBER OF
DWELLING UNITS
ALLOCATED
FLOW PER
DWELLING(3)
UNIT (GPO)
TOTAL ALLOCATED
FLOW MGD (4)
TRIBUTARY TO
(5)
EXIST1NG
PLANNED
PENDING FIRM
HAGERSTOWN
Sub -Basin 38
Antietam Heights
N-657
85
230
0.020
Hamilton Run Interceptor
E-604
Pangborn-Antietam Drive Area
E-660
280
230
0.064
Hamilton Run Interceptor
E-603
Jefferson Heights -Sunset Acres
N-660
416
230
0.096
(Proposed P.S.)
E-609
Hamilton Run Interceptor
Sub -Basin 38
and
Brightwood Acres
N-650
70
15
230
0.020
Existing P.S. #4
Sub -Basin 3F
E-607
100
32
230
0.030
(Proposed Interceptor)
(Proposed P.S.)
Existing P.S. #4
Sub -Basin 3C
Robinwood-Sycamore Heights
M-658
544
58
230
0.138
(Proposed Interceptor)
Greenhill Acres
E-615
Existing P.S. #8
Existing P.S. #4
Youngstoun, Section 1, Phase 1
H-654
108
184
0.020
Existing P.S. #8
E-613
Existing P.S. #4
Sub -Basin 3E
Brightwood Acres East, Section A
N-651
54
230
0.012
Undetermined
E-612
Londontowne, Section 8
M-648
122
230
0.028
(Proposed P.S.
E-609
(Proposed P.S.
Existing P.S. #4
Sub -Basin 3F
Londontowne, Section A
N-647
232
230
0.053
(Proposed Interceptor)
E-607
(Proposed P.S.)
Existing P.S. #4
U.S. 40 Area Residential
N-646
100
42
230
0.033
(Proposed Interceptor)
Commercial/Industrial
E-606
0.020
(Proposed P.S. #15)
Existing P.S. #4
TABLE NO. 12B
FLOW ALLOCATIONS FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENTS
H
SEWERAGE"SERVICE
AREAAND
SUB -N EAS
DEVELOPMENTS TO BE SERVED
(1)
COORDINATE
LOCATION
NUMBER OF
DWELLING UNITS
ALLOCATED
FLOW PER
DWELLING(3)
UNIT (GPO)
TOTAL ALLOCATED
FLOW MGD (4)
TRIBUTARY TO
(5)
EXISTING
PLANNED
PENDING
FIRM
Sub -Bann 1D
Cedar Lawn
N-663
159
230
0.037
(Proposed P.S.)
ii
E-585
Existing P.S. 113
Existing P.S. #15
Existing P.S. #7
'•�
Cearfoss Pike Area
N-669
117
230
0.027
(Proposed P.S.)
E-590
Existing P.S. #2
Paradise Homes
N-677
108
230
0.025
To be determined by
E-602
Facilities Plan
Spring Valley
H-675
265
230
0.061
To be determined by.
E-606
Facilities Plan
Hunter Hill Apartments
N-674
105
230
0.024
To be determined by
E-607
Facilities Plan
Sub -Basin 3B
Doub Meadow
N-651
95
230
0.022
Existing P.S. 17
E-594
Washington Gardens
N-663
100
230
0.023
Hamilton Run Interceptor
E-604
+Fi+
Fi...
la
i
Gr
C7 ✓
Y ♦
i C 1
a I
0 I
0 0
♦
A I
0.
CO
w I
Fo:r.
O CnC.a
C
� q✓ d
w
1
41
I
o
I
i
a
rr i
i ++
a a
Q
d
0✓ 47
O
0
a7
01
q
-a.—.—.—
r
ti
— .41
+I
✓ ✓
i i a
r.. Q
i Q o
w a
0 0
a a a
0 0 o
1 a d✓
s e o
V 4
i O a
a1
✓
.r -w
.r .r
.r
✓ ..r .r
—
d
w oa
01 01
d) CI! 47
07 li r.
01
✓ ...
O
.4
✓ ✓ ..I
d7 �+ +`I
COC•) Or r
a
4 i
r i
.4 i i
i i
1 4 a
.O+
M
71l 7M al:
V 0 .✓
✓
••••I
.
4.4
.✓
tr +,
all L.
d
4 4 a
O 0. P)
01 01
H `J7 01C
I
0101
C Cr U
s
Ir
•a4
•o. �e,
•O.•e
o.
.4.4
a+
o.
7.s
a► al.
.d
an er aw
v 40
a b y
Ir !- W
4. 1- I-
L. w
a 4 a
w a a
/- C a
I.- Of l-
C C a
w d a
w a
00
00 O
O 0
0 0 O
410 r
0."
O O
•-.• .• r
0 •.•1 -..
00
...a ...
✓ a+ -.I
v •r1 0.
0. 0. 0.
4 7
w 0. 0._i
- 40.4
0. 0.
0. 0.
0. 0
0. 0. 0
r.' 0.
q 0.
r,r w
0. r 4
O. 41
s 4 4
0-41
a a.....
Y a a
r a a
a V a
Y• r o
Y 41 J
. r
Y Y
9 = o
r'•ts 41
•4
0 w
0 Cl 0
C.) a Q
0. Cl .r_
.0 J.1 .0
Y 0.
U 0. 0.
Cl 0. CJ
0. O. A.
4 4
7 41 ++
Y Ilr w
v I.. ..
w 1r
•••• .� •�
_ r.
V
♦. w 1+
O
0 v Y
Y Y 9
Y 41 Y
-J 41,0.0.0.
0.0.
0.41
Y a Y
Y a Y
Y Y Y
4 4
0 U
�.r ...1 p
✓ ✓
.1+.--
- •. r
ar — ...
.r+ or ar
r
N ..�-q•rl
i .r
a d
a { 0
w r
a M M
Y'.i +.
Q r
a O
_ r
Y -•.:r.
Y
so a.
a. 1.. 4.
�.
.0 •�
r .•+
M O F..
•r •r
�- .r1 .r
.� y
•O
0.41
0 0 0
41«O>
.O:
0 0 0
• 01..0
'0
0.41
.14..N Or
es
0.s.0O
O.
/. 41.0
r 4
OJ
r M (4
41
Y L i
V Cl s
C) V V
'J Y M
w 4 4
4 a - au
U a a
C) 0041
a 4104141
a
a 0.4
a a 0
r/ d
0.0.0.0.00
a r i
d .L a
a a i
i i. r
a G�
.r .r w
.- -w r
r -.-1 Y
.- - •
Y .-. —
a0 all
r 41.—
r — M
— — M
a- .r w
-J
t ♦ a
. • I
a 1 i
i .s i
i✓ J
1 •- ,O
1 Y I
7 0 J
-J 0 y
✓ -.
O O 4.
01 O
1.. O .a
l! C.0
.r i-
K i
e 4. O
a i i
i i i
i ••+ i
.... -� U
r ...
V w p
01 40 01
h C-) Z
•`- Z S
r 0—
y 01 Z
Y Z 01
01 C. 4.
e 0 0101
0 0
O •e7
CS
Q 0 0
0 0 O
O
O
O e 0
3 O O
O —
O
0 0
0 O d
o r
O
.O W Iq
.V 0 0
N
o!
441-001
a0 .Y
N
-
'
-r N aq
.-7 r. e.
a rs
.-►
. a w
r
+•
Ce
001001
0
O
0101
O 0101
Cl
O
Ca
40 010
01
I'd
.
.V
N Ca
—IM
10 •9
01
ICe
01
O 01
C/ 101
N 17 a- I
M Y I Q 1 - r / . 1 01000 00 e e v Q o0e 01 01 e
o Q I o o e e o a o _ Osa a e a o e o 0 0 0
Z 0 0 �� ; N 0101010101 N. � N N N N N N N 0144* N
I
a :n
ao z
-
E- 1 .. -
f4 44 I I'401 Ca 0101 01 01 ' 01 01 - 41 01 40
`I OR ✓ 104401 --01 Y N V V N- . N
U - aI N
,
• 0 0 I -'
1 T
' s
- I N ii,;
rb,l�r.t•' };i
g e r Q.1./ rr w r r w H
..► r,► 7 w yr a. w • r s w .r w
♦ a .40410 04141— 1 oa.011, 1• s .04100 0001ig
V 1 t>/ a r a O Y •0 ../ 7 O r/ y w ..► . M ... Y -+ 4 .di
0 , r 101 r 04 w Is
a r `p 01.0 a -o-- • Y r S.. �. w w w .► w
••••� 1 r .-1 . Y Y r O 7 41014100010100 w rr Y
a 1 rl Oa -001 p O 001411 r p 4101001 4141410
Y Y
r+� v w v i 4101 e r w .I Ole• .. 0.+. p
• O+ a— Y w w w Y d r .O W as y Y ..) w .s w 4101 - w .401 .01
• I 41 0.a Y • w 01 41 I. O ` Y .M 4141 +.4 Y r ++ 4.
1 .0 .0 et .0 .0 + 4 ti, O 41I41 0.01 41.00141 O 3m ace -a
1 O O +4 Q w O Y 4 p Q.'0 Y 01 4100 4 •1u1 I a s...l
I 01l U40.- .-. } ..1 M 41-144141 1- 40—_i-- w w w w y r
• 0410 41- i s w i- a w w 041141 w Y w 4141004101 41a a.—
• a.. .. .4 .. 4101 .d v O w .r 0 01 41.4.40.40 w di w 0141001
I O .`.. w+ +` 41000 41.041— Y -A . w 0 0 0•`-
1 Ol 0' 4141041.4 w a 4141.40I04141041041.0 Y i 1. Y 0 w w Y ' s1 Y I .. Y w
1 q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) i w �. O Q s 0 0 0 •r � w i 0 4l i •.— s
I r. 00 Oa. a 4..0. r. p Ci = L O 0 G wl Cl C) Or >!Q •ti K CO C7 it Y CO CO 4i
q 1
'�..' 1•. •1. •1 01•M Ills s7s` `Vs+.r "0. O r V V w N N +1 M t.. w w
/• i I Ys A e � N 417 M N N Ir. r O n. O V Ms N a 01101 R 3 r —p440. ..•1 i.
1 ` 01 44* fJ N M 0100101 M `••IN N N N N s•S1N M N M 01 0541 IA w
V ♦ Ik � 11
`Ji • 1 I
- 01001 ^ .7 C O'«
N � >a Vi 1A G.f 2 CO •a4 Y7 a.• .-.1 "41 y_ ,rr•
` y IV -52
4-
4.-
TABCE 1!1O.' 1 —
•1'. FLOW ALLOCATIONS FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT ts
WASHINGTON COUNTY SANITARY DISTRICT
'rnl No Major Developseat
—15! Terse Oak Vil1aj4; acting!'.•*• -+-- - 51 200
10 161 lepewel l Miaor1 motet
Ii' 113 Salgkta lea �� :• 22i Towse Oak Village, 8ectioa l 38
•311 A.C.OT. Project
Valley
Towse Oak Village, sect
?s' Parkriev Meadows
ry Lakeside Park Section
Muylaed Paper M::
Soatkaide Meadowmf'.-
Towee Oak Village 1ect
VCSD Admiaistratioa lei
Valley Mall
Bowman Mattress
Nosewood
Vas Lear Masora!Jeo 8
lovely lug Reii Pstt
Londoatowne Corp.
Sterling Oaks
Van Lear Manor, See. 10
I C, P►aa
1
l 23 .200
100 200
1f Zoo
55too
120 200
35 200
W.P. Witter Co. .?• y4,
Via Lear Masor, leotios 1t'`:` i;: :r 35 200'
Pacts lg Serticeit
Cloverton/Creealawm sewer allocation (SD Projectl 163 200
Cloverton 11 (T. Shank) 31 200
No. Read'l
Flow per
Total GFD
Total L'P9
Total CPO
Units
Unit
aendi
fira
Connected Tributary to
10800 .
Wright Road Pumping Station
5800
Wright Bold Pumping Station
_
1618
Wright Road Pumping Station
6800
Wright Road Pumping Station
5000
Wright Road Pumping Station
1600
Wright Road Puiping Station
• 43100
Wright had Pumping Station
2235
•'.. :;...
Wright 5Vpi Station
845
.&'.
Wright >lod Fuipint Station
1200
3100
Wright Road Pumping Station
20000
Wright Road Pumping Station
1400
8050
Wright Road Pumping Station
15000
i
Wright Rood Pumping Station
11000
1
Wright .Read ;?umping Station
9600
V V •';''
Wright Road Puioing Station
LOGO
Wright Road Pumping Station
X210')
85200
Wright Road Pumping Station
3500
Wright Road Pun ing Station
6300 :'
induotrialaPatk Pumping Staion
.2600;•
Industrial} -Pik Pumping Staion
200
• 2800
Industrial Park Puaping Staion
3300
Industrial Park Pumping Staion
2.1000
pusping Station No. 3
1000
Industrial Park Pumping Station
980
Industrial Part Pumping Station
4000
"
Ioduattial Piro Pumping Station
2800
Industrial Patk Puaping Station
32600
Cloverton A Creenlawn Pumping Stations—
b��1C
Cloverton Pumping Station
' F¢ .':
t;. y a}�
' ¢ •; i`..
a
TABLE NO. 13
INVENTORY OF SEWAGE. DRAINAGE•AND
WATER POLLUTION PROBLEM AREAS
H
Ut
SERVICE AREA
COORDINATE
LOCATION
POPULATION
NATURE OF PROBLEM
PLANNED CORRECTION
St. James
H-638
980
Failing septic systems
Public sewer to be provided
(Subdistrict 16)
E-593
Spring Valley Area
N-676
Failing septic systems
Area to be evaluated and studies for
(Subdistrict 15)
E-606
possible public sewer.
Rolling Hills
N-660
(Subdistrict 12)
E-603 to
Failing septic systems
Public sewer to be provided
Pangborn area 1994
N-660
Cavetown area 1995
E-635
Holiday Acres 1996
West Oak Ridge Drive area
N-648
Failing septic systems
Area to be evaluated and studies for
'(Subdistrict 1)
E-593
possible public sewer.
Bower/Leonard Avenue
N-648
108
Failing septic systems
Public sewer to be provided by 1994.
(Subdistrict 1)
E-582
Hagerstown
N-666
Inadequate capacity of
Construct new Hamilton Run relief
(Subbasin 3B)
E-604 to
existing interceptor
interceptor
N-651
E-601
TABLE NO. 14
IMMEDIATE FIVE AND TEN YEAR PRIORITIES FOR SEWERAGE DEVELOPMENT
H
4i
I
Ui
Ui
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY.
SEWER
LOCATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
TOTAL
GRANTS
COMPLETION SCHEDULE
MUNICIPALITY OR
SERVICE AREA
COST -
ELIGIBLE
DEVELOPER (1)
(2)
(3)
ESTIMATE
(4)
PLANNING
DESIGN
CONST.
Washington County
St. James
N-638
Provide sewerage
N/A
N/A
Contingent
upon
results
Sanitary District
E-593
facilities for existing
from request
for
Proposal
residential community
Washington County
Smithsburg
N-664
Sewage treatment plant
2.656,000
500,000
Complete
Complete
1993-94
Sanitary District
E-639
improvements and
(MOE)
ex ansion
Washington County
Subdistrict 12
N-660
4.8
SRL
Complete
Ongoing
Sanitary District
Rolling Hills
E-603
million
Pangborn
Extension of sewer
12/94
lines
Cavetown
Extension of sewer
12/95
lines
Holiday Acres
Extension of sewer
12/96
lines, force main and
pump station
Washington County
Subdistrict 1
N-648
Extend public sewer to
600.000
None
Complete
9/93
12/93
Sanitary District
Bower & Leonard
E-582
43 homes
Avenue
Washington County
Subdistrict 1
N-648
Pump station &
1.3
SRL &
7/95
10/95
5/96
Sanitary District
W. Oak Ridge
E-593
collection system to
million
Reserve
Drive
service primarily
existing commercial
units
Washington County
Subdistrict 1
N-664
New intercepter to
300.000
SRL
Complete
Complete
9/93
Sanitary District
Greenberry
E-587
correct inflow &
Hills
infiltration problems
Washington County
Subdistrict 9-1
N-684
Winebrenner W.W.T.D.
630,000
SRL,EPA,
Complete
Complete
9/93
Sanitary District
Highfield/
E-661
Improvements upgrade
MDE
Cascade/Pen Mar
plant components
TABLE NO. 14
IMMEDIATE FIVE AND TEN YEAR PRIORITIES FOR SEWERAGE DEVELOPMENT
H
U'
rn
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY,
SEWER
LOCATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
TOTAL COST
GRANTS
COMPLETION SCHEDULE
MUNICIPALITY OR
SERVICE
ESTIMATE
ELIGIBLE
PLANNING
DESIGN
CONST.
DEVELOPER (1)
AREA (2)
(3)
(4)
Washington County
Subdistrict 16
N-636
Phase I -Force Main
1.1 million
SRL
Complete
Complete
9/93
Sanitary District
St. James
E-595
Phase II -Pump Station
500,000
SRL
Complete
10/93
12/93
Phase III -Collection System/
1.0 million
SRL
Complete
9/94
2/96
Industrial Park
Washington County
Subdistrict 18
N-649
Extension of public sewer to
600,000
SRL
Complete
Complete
7/94
Sanitary District
Hone field Road
E-570
service 41 residential units
Washington County
Subdistrict 15
N-676
Pump station & collection
N/A
N/A
Contingent
upon
study
Sanitary District
Spring Valley
E-606
system
findings
City of Hagerstown
Hagerstown
N-652
Sewage treatment plan
N/A
N/A
Complete
Complete
1997
E-601
expansion and upgrade to add
nutrient removal process
City of Hagerstown
Hagerstown
Construct new lower Hamilton
N/A
N/A
Complete
Complete
1997
Run relief intercepter to
increase capacity and
eliminate I & I
Town of Boonsboro
800nsboro
N-610
Lagoon Upgrade Pond
120,000
Contingent
upon
funding
E-615
Aerators and Sludge Removal
Lagoon Upgrade - Equipment
150,000
Contingent
upon
funding
and Structural
Modifications/Additions
Crestview Developer
Boonsboro
N-608
Extend sewer lines in
unknown
N/A
Contingent
upon
funding
E-612
Crestview Development south
of Route 34 construct a
gravity main
TABLE NO. 14
IMMEDIATE FIVE AND TEN YEAR PRIORITIES FOR SEWERAGE DEVELOPMENT
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY,
SEWER
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
TOTAL COST
GRANTS
COMPLETION SCHEDULE
MUNICIPALITY OR
SERVICE AREA
LOCATION
ESTIMATE
ELIGIBLE
DEVELOPER (1)
(2)
(4)
PLANNING
DESIGN
CONST.
(3)
Boonsboro West
Boonsboro
N-615
Extend sewer lines in
unknown
N/A
Contingent
upon
developer
E-615
Boonsboro west east of Rt.
40A. May have to construct
a sanitary sewer pumping
station and force main and
gravity mains.
Town of Boonsboro
Boonsboro
N-610
Miscellaneous repairs and
194,400
Contingent
upon
funding
E-615
replacement items for
lagoon, collection system
and pumping stations
—Town of Clear Spring
Clear Spring
N-665
Sewage treatment plant
N/A
N/A
Complete
Contingent
upon
E-537
improvements.
funding
Installation of sludge
thickeners
Town of Clear Spring
Clear Spring
N-665
Construct approximately
700,000
N/A
Contingent
upon
E-537
15.000 feet of interceptor
development
sewer. Construct a
sanitary sewer pumping
station & force main.
Town of Funkstown
Funkstown
N-648
Sewage treatment plant
N/A
N/A
Complete
Complete
Contingent
E-600
system rehabilitation &
upon
maintenance
funding
Town of Hancock
Hancock
N-683
Sewerage treatment plant &
290,000
N/A
Complete
Complete
Ongoing
E-468
sewer system
rehabilitation &
improvements
TABLE NO. 14
IMMEDIATE FIVE AND TEN YEAR PRIORITIES FOR SEWERAGE DEVELOPMENT
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY,
SEWER
LOCATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
TOTAL COST
GRANTS
COMPLETION SCHEDULE
MUNICIPALITY OR
SERVICE AREA
ESTIMATE
ELIGIBLE
DEVELOPER (1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
PLANNING
DESIGN
CONST.
Town of Smithsburg
Smithsburg
N-664
Design and construction of
50,000
42,500
Complete
Contingent
upon
E-639
plant modification to meet
(EPA)
funding.
disinfection standards
3,800
using ultraviolet
(DHMH)
irradiation
Town of Williamsport
Halfway
N-644
Sewer system rehabilitation
39,200
29,400
Complete
Contingent
upon
E-568
to correct inflow and
(EPA)
funding
infiltration
4,900
(DHMH)
Washington County
Halfway
H-644
Extend sewerage lines to
150.000
150,000
Contingent
upon
funding
Department of Housing
(Williamsport)
E-568
Fenton Avenue area west of
(CDBG)
& Community
Conococheague Creek.
Development
H
Ui
NOTES FOR TABLE NO. 14
(1) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY, MUNICIPALITY, OR DEVELOPER Responsibilities may include project initiation and
management but no necessarily financing.
(2) SEWER SERVICE AREA - That area served, or potentially
served, by a system of sanitary sewers connected to a
treatment plant, or, in a very large system, sub -areas as
delineated by the County. Sub -basins refer to drainage
areas shown in the applicable 201 Facilities Plan.
Subdistricts refer to Sanitary Subdistricts of the
Washington County Sanitary District.
(3) LOCATION - In accordance with the Maryland Grid System.
(4) GRANTS ELIGIBLE - Dollar amounts indicate funds for which
the project may be eligible from sources shown in
parentheses. Source abbreviations represent agencies and
programs as follows:
EPA - Environmental Protection Agency
MDE - Department of the Environment
EDA - Economic Development Administration
UDAG - Urban Development Action Grant
CDBG - Community Development Block Grant
FmHA - Farmers Home Administration
ARC - Appalachian Regional Commission
HUD - Housing and Urban Development Grant
SRL - State Revolving Loan Fund
The local cost for any project may be assumed to be the total cost
estimate less any amount shown for grants eligible.
IV -59
SLUDGE MANAGEMENT
Sludge is defined as the solid residuals of sewage treatment.
Primary or raw sludge is obtained in the primary state of a
treatment plant by collecting solids that have settled. Sludge is
stabilized after the organic matter has been decomposed into a
relatively stable material. A common method of stabilization is
anaerobic digestion.
Sludge management is an integral part of the sewage treatment and
disposal process. The disposal of treatment plant sludge is
regulated by the Maryland Department of the Environment in
accordance with the code of maryland Regulations 10.03.48. Sludge
disposal sites are approved after an analysis of such factors as
the site surface drainage, soil type, depth to bedrock and sludge
composition.
On November 25, 1992, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
adopted the National Sewerage Sludge Use and Disposl Regulation
(Chapter 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 503). The rule
addresses three general categories of use and disposal practices
for sludge that is; 1) land -applied, distributed, or marketed; 2)
disposed of at dedicated sites or in sludge -only landfills; and 3)
incinerated in sludge -only incinerators. The new rule includes
standards that apply to generators, processors, beneficial users,
or disposers of sludge or septic wastes. The rule sets standards
in two areas. First, it sets standards for 10 heavy metals,
pathogens, and total hydrocarbon emissions from incinerators.
Second, it sets standards for managing sewage sludge use and
disposal. The prescribed management practices have been designed
to limit human and ecological exposure to any contaminants and
ensure that sewage sludge is used on the land or disposed of in
ways that are protective of human health and the environment.
Several methods of sludge disposal are described in the Upper
Potomac River Basin Water Quality Management Plan. The methods
include land spreading, incineration, ocean disposal, sanitary
landfilling, and composting. The key methods of sludge disposal in
Washington County are land spreading and landfill.
Land Spreading
Land spreading refers to the process of sludge application to lands
used for farming, forestry, or recreational purposes. Sewage
sludge is generally not as easily handled nor as high in nutrient
content as commercial fertilizers. However, it does greatly
enhance soil physical fertility when applied to marginal lands.
Sludges may contain pathogenic bacteria or viral organisms. They
may also contain heavy metals which could pose a threat to public
health through transmission of toxic levels in crops grown on
treated land or through leaching into groundwater. For these
reasons, sludge must be stabilized prior to land spreading to
IV -61
reduce public health hazards and to prevent nuisance odor
conditions.
In order to ensure that harmful contaminants do not enter the human
food chain, sludge application rates are controlled and crops grown
on sludge treated land are restricted based upon recommendations by
the University of Maryland.
The University of Maryland warns that "sewage sludge should not be
considered an innocuous or harmless product. The implications of
the uptake by plants of heavy metals and persistent organics from
sludge, their intake by grazing animals, and their ingestion by
humans are not entirely understood. Therefore, the University of
Maryland cannot predict the long term effects of sewage sludge on
the environment and does notaccept responsibility for any such
effects."
The Upper Potomac River Water Quality Management Plan describes
further implications of land spreading. "When contemplating
instituting a land spreading program, municipalities must consider
the availability of land, the time frame within which that land can
be leased or otherwise controlled and potential alternative sites.
Should public pressure or public health considerations cause
termination of land spreading activities, municipalities must be
prepared to undertake interim sludge disposal operations until more
acceptable permanent solutions can be devised. Similarly, it must
be recognized that land for sludge spreading may have a finite
useful lifetime. Thus, additional land should be available nearby.
Gaining access to large tracts of land is always difficult near
urban areas. Hence, land spreading of sludges may not be a
realistic alternative for most large metropolitan areas, especially
on a long-term basis.
"When land is to be leased, or sludge is to sold to private
landowners, municipal officials will have to deal with problems of
general acceptance. The extra time and costs associated with
transporting and spreading sludges, a natural reluctance to work
with sewage sludge, and the limited nutrient value compared to
commercial fertilizers may make it difficult to sell sludge to
farmers. Where sludge spreading is an attractive sludge disposal
alternative, wastewater officials will need to have the flexibility
to offer additional incentives. These would be most effective irk
the form of indirect subsidies such as free delivery of bulk lots
of processed sludge and low cost rental of spreading devices.
Municipalities should also consider the possibilities for nutrient
enrichment of sludges to enhance their value to the farmer. This
could be contracted out to a private fertilizer concern."**
Sanitary Landfillin
Sanitary landfill of sludge containing no free moisture, either
separately or along with mixed municipal solid waste, is an
environmentally acceptable method for disposal of sludge. The
4
IV -63
sludge must be stabilized as described for land spreading in order
to prevent nuisance odors and reduce hazards to those working in
the area.
The relative benefits of sanitary landfill disposal are discussed
in the Upper Potomac River Water Quality Management Plan as
follows:
"Many of the considerations that must be taken into account in
evaluating the land spreading option such as protection of
groundwaters are pertinent to the discussion of sanitary landfills.
Typically, however, sanitary landfills have less problems with
surface runoff, and uptake by crops is generally not a prime
consideration. Further, sanitary landfill obviously requires less
land than land spreading-..- -..._
IV -64
The trade-off required to obtain this added protection and
decreased land requirement is the loss of most of the advantages of
resource recovery realized in land spreading. landfill offers
little more than the use of a solid material to fill natural
depressions or replace soils or gravel that can be used elsewhere.
Areas where landfill has been practiced can be reclaimed for
recreational or other purposes."**
NOTES•
* From Sewage Procedures for Approval, Division of Solid Waste
Control, January 25, 1977.
** From Upper Potomac River Basin Water Quality Management Plan,
Maryland Water Resources Administration, September 2, 1976
(Section 12).
IV -65
Sludge Management Practices in Washington County
Table number 15 provides an inventory of current sewerage sludge
generation and how it is utilized. All municipal and non -municipal
treatment plants that generate sludge and have a sludge utilization
permit are listed. Sewerage treatment plants for the Towns of
Boonsboro, Hancock and Funkstown utilize lagoons and therefore
produce no sludge.
The majority of the sludge produced in Washington County is
disposed of in the Washington County sanitary landfill. The
remainder of the sludge is disposed of by landspreading. Non -
municipal treatment facilities which transport sludge to larger
plants generally do not have the facilities to adequately de -water
the sludge. De -watering is provided at the receiving treatment
plant and is either disposed. of at the Washington County sanitary
landfill or landspread. All sludge transported to the Nicodemus,
(Halfway) treatment plant is disposed of at the landfill. Some
non -municipal, package treatment plants produce insignificant
amounts of sludge, however, these plants do have permits for
disposal.
The method for utilizing or disposing of sludge generated by
proposed sewerage treatment plants is discussed in the narrative
for each new project addressed in this Plan.
The City of Hagerstown recently placed on line a sludge
IV -66
pellitization plant. This plant completely replaced the previous
anaerobic digestion process. The new plant is operated and
maintained by Enviro-Gro Technologies Inc. under a lease agreement
with the City of Hagerstown. The following is a general
explanation of the sludge pellitization process.
Sludge produced by the treatment plant is gathered together and
thickened in a holding. tank. Specification grade sludge is
delivered continuously to the pellitization plant during one shift
per day. Once in the plant, the sludge is conditioned with a
polymer additive. The conditioned sludge is pressed in a belt
press and placed in a rotary kiln where it is heat dried, sludge
pellets are produced in the kiln and then deposited in a silo for
storage. The pellets are then shipped to a fertilizer manufacture.
The City of Hagerstown, Water Pollution control, waste water,
facility currently produces 1429 wet tons per year of sludge which
is processed in the pellitization plant.
IV -67
TABLE NO. 15
1992 SEWAGE SLUDGE UTILIZATION IN WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
All figures in terms of wet tons of sludge
H
4
m
WWTP
TOTAL
GENERATED
HAULED TO
ANOTHER WWTP
APPLIED TO -
AGRICULTURAL LAND
DISTRIBUTED AND
MARKETED
DISPOSED IN
LANDFILL
Antietam
493
335
0
0
158
Blue Plains
835
0
835
0
0
Brooklane Psychiatric
8
0
0
0
8
Clear Spring
627
168
419
0
40
Conococheague
932
0
0
0
932
Fort Ritchie
535
0
517
0
18
Greenbriar State Park
42
42
0
0
0
Hagerstown
1,429
0
0
1,429
0
Highland Manor
136
133
0
0
3
Maryland Correctional Inst.
8,444
0
8,444
0
0
Nicodemus (Halfway)
734
0
0
0
734
Sidling Hill
17
17
0
0
0
Smithsburg
109
0
0
0
109
TOTALS
14,341
695
10,215
1,429
2,002
SOURCE: Maryland Department of the Environment
Sewage Sludge Division
POLICY FOR SEWER LINE INSTALLATION IN AREAS WHERE SERVICE IS NOT
AVAILABLE
All new subdivisions shall be served by adequate sewerage disposal
systems pursuant to Article VI of the adopted Adequate Public
Facilities Ordinance for Washington County.
In order to prevent street and other damage encountered in
providing public sewer service to developed areas, and to provide
for efficient and effective connection to public sewer service, the
following policy is presented for sewer line installation in areas
where public sewerage service is not available at the time of
street and residential construction, but will be made available at
some future time:
1. Requests for such installation will only be accepted where
interim systems are permitted and public sewer service is
programmed by the Water and Sewerage Plan (S-1, S-3, S-5).
2. Each application for a sewer construction permit must be
accompanied by a letter from the county Health Officer
requesting that such installation be permitted.
3. Building permits, subdivision plats, and septic tank
approvals shall include a provision requiring the connection
of the premises to community sewerage within twelve (12)
months of announced availability.
4. Sewer lines shall be designed and installed in accordance
with applicable municipal or Commission specifications.
IV -69
5. The connection of a "dry" system shall be plugged with a
visible and readily inspected plug at the future point of
connection to the existing system.
n
IV -70
POLICY ON SEWAGE DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVE
Individual On -Lot Systems
The traditional septic system should not be discounted as a
permanent means of individual, on -lot sewage disposal. Such
systems must be properly designed, constructed, operated and
maintained to ensure permanent, environmentally sound service.
A number of alternatives to the standard septic system for on -lot
sewage disposal have been identified and shown to be operationally
sound under appropriate circumstances. Such systems include
improved septic tank -tile field systems, mound systems, and systems
with toilet sewage separated from wash water (composting toilets,
incinerating toilets, and liquid recycling toilets). The high cost
of central sewerage systems and the fact that on -lot systems are
currently failingin someareas. is sufficient justification to
experiment with alternative techniques.**
Alternative on -lot systems should be preferred in rural areas where
there are existing sewage disposal problems and where they are
found to be economically and environmentally sound methods of
correcting such problems. All plans for the correction of
wastewater management problems in these areas should incorporate
measures to assure adequate maintenance of new facilities and to
reduce sewage generation.
IV -71
Community Systems
Every effort should be made to investigate the reliability and
desirability of community sewerage systems which could serve as
appropriate alternatives to conventional central sewerage systems.
Such systems may be used as corrective measures to solve existing
sewage disposal problems and as interim or permanent measure to
serve new development under appropriate circumstances.
Within growth areas, pressure sewers and vacuum sewers may be more
appropriate and cost-effective than conventional gravity sewers to
provide permanent service to a given development. Such measures as
dry sewers should be evaluated as a appropriate interim measure
until sewer lines are extended to a given development.
O7
Within the Rural/Agricultural Area, community sewerage system
alternatives acceptable to all approving state and county agencies,
should be considered for development proposals utilizing innovative
planning techniques such as clustering of rural housing to preserve
agricultural land and the rural character. Some alternative
systems which are appropriate for on -lot disposal may lend
themselves to the clustering approach. The use of package
treatment plants may also be considered to serve cluster
developments and rural villages within the Rural/Agricultural area.
The appropriateness of such development and it's associated
sewerage system shall be determined by the Planning Commission
based on the policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan for
IV -72
Washington County. The use of such facilities shall be approved by
all appropriate state and local authorities as well as meeting all
applicable health and water quality requirements.
NOTES:
* See Report to the Congress, Community -Managed Septic
Systems: A Viable Alternative to Sewage Treatment Plants,
United States General Accounting Office, November, 3, 1978.
** See Upper Potomac River Basin Water Quality Management Plan,
Maryland Water Resources Administration, September 2, 1976
(Section 12).
TV -'73
POLICY ON INTERIM TREATMENT PLANTS*
1. An interim treatment plant is acceptable as long as
it is an interim step in a regional long-range
sewerage treatment plant with a specific date by
which permanent facilities will be provided. No
permit will be granted for an interim treatment
plant which is planned to be in operation longer
than five years.
2. The State will issue a permit for such a plant only
if it has been included by the County as part of an
approved 10 -year Water and Sewer Plan, and adequate
measures have been taken by the County to assure
that growth will be limited to the capacity of such
treatment plant. The State will approve only a
limited number -of such plants and only where they
are compatible with appropriate regional plans for
such sewerage service.
3. Any such plant must meet all applicable health and
water quality requirements.
4. Privately finance interim treatment plants must be
publicly owned and operated.
IV -74
5. When such a plant is proposed for a sewer system
from which raw sewerage overflows are presently
occurring or threatened, the State may require the
capacity of the plant to be enlarged to provide
capacity to alleviate or prevent the overflows,
where practicable. Financing arrangements for such
enlargements must be approved by the Department of
Health and Mental Hygiene.
*See also the Washington County Sanitary District's POLICY ON
INTERIM AND PERMANENT COMMUNITY WATER AND SEWERAGE SYSTEMS in
Appendix D of this Plan.
Policy on Interim Treatment plants
Adopted by the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene - 2.5.73
Approved by Council on the Environment - 2.5.73
IV -75
SERVICE AREA REQUIREMENTS
The following shall be applicable to each respective designated
service area. Criteria for creation and amendment of service areas
are outlined in Appendix B.
1. Urban and Town Growth Area Service Areas
The provision of community water and sewer facilities within the
designated Growth Areas of Washington County is encouraged.
Development proposalswhich_. involve. the- extension of water and
sewer lines within the boundaries of a designated Growth Area will
be considered to be consistent with the policies of the
Comprehensive Plan for the County and will therefore not require an
individual amendment to the Water and Sewerage Plan in order to
proceed with the review and approval process for development.
Specific arrangements between the developer and the appropriate
service providing agencies shall be finalized prior to the
development receiving an appropriate Service Priority
Classification of W-3 and S-3 as part of the bi-annual update of
this plan. Determinations as to whether or not a property is
considered to be within the influence of a Growth Area will be made
by the Washington County Planning Commission.
2. Rural Village Service Areas
Existing or planned community water and sewer facilities located
within areas considered as Rural Villages by the Comprehensive Plan
shall be designated as a Rural Village Service Area. While
primarily designed to serve the existing development in the
village, a service area established around these villages could
IV -.76
allow for in -fill development on existing lots of record and some
limited growth. Development proposals for new subdivision lots
within existing Rural Village Service Areas will require Planning
Commission review and approval to determine if the proposal is
consistent with policies of the Comprehensive Plan dealing with
Rural Villages. The Rural Village designation may also be used for
development proposals utilizing innovative planning techniques such
as clustering which, as the most environmentally sound method,
necessitate community water and sewerage facilities. Such
development proposals shall be presented as a package in order that
the Planning Commission may determine if the proposal is consistent
with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
3. Restricted Use Service Areas
Community Water and/or sewer facilities that are located outside
of a designated Growth Area and not within Rural Village are
considered restricted use facilities. These service areas are
created to correct documented public health problems generally
associated with contaminated wells or failing septic systems. The
use of the facilities within these service areas is limited to the
following conditions:
a. To provide service to existing uses or new uses on existing
lots of record which are directly adjacent to the right-of-way
containing the water or sewer line.
IV -77
b. To provide service, where sufficient capacity is available, to
new subdivision lots that can be served by the line without
extension. Density shall be no greater than what could occur
without public facilities.
c. To provide service to areas where the Health Department
determines that access is necessary to solve an existing Health
related problem and the County Commissioners agree to permit access
to the line.
d. To provide service to properties where a written agreement with
the service providing agency, executed prior to the restricted.
access designation, obligated, the service providing agency to
permit access to the particular line to provide service to a
specific property for a specific use or provide a specific number
of taps.
IV -78
PRIORITY CLASSIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
The following requirements shall be applicable to each respective
designated priority classification within established service
areas:
1. S-i Priority (Existing Service or Under Construction)
a. Individual on -lot disposal systems including
approved alternate on -lot sewerage treatment systems
shall not be permitted, except as follows:
If an existing community sewerage facility is
inadequate or is not available*, an interim
individual sewerage system may be used subject to
the following conditions:
(1) Such interim systems are adjudged by the local
health department to be adequate, safe, and in
compliance with pertinent State and local
regulations, including minimum lot ownership as
set forth in Regulation 10.03.28.02 and .03;
(2) Permits for such interim systems shall bear a
notice regarding the interim nature of the
permit and stating that connection to a
future community system shall be made within 1
year or less after such system becomes
available;
IV -79
(3) Provisions shall be made, whenever possible, to
locate such systems so as to permit connection
to the public facilities in a most economical
and convenient manner.
b. Extensions of existing community sewerage systems shall be
permitted and encouraged.
*The adequacy or availability of community sewerage service to a
particular parcel of land is a judgement which must be made in each
case through consultation among the responsible agencies and cannot
be made on the basis of this Plan alone.
2. S-3 Priority (Programmed Service)
a. Individual on -lot disposal systems including approved
alternate on -lot sewage treatment systems may be permitted
on an interim basis provided that:
(1) Such interim systems are adjudged by the local health
department to be adequate, safe, and in compliance
with pertinent State and local regulations,
including minimum lot ownership as set forth in
Regulation 10.02.28.02 and 0.3;
(2) Permits for such interim systems shall bear a notice
regarding the interim nature of the permit and
stating that connection to a future community
system shall be made within one year or less after
such system becomes available;
(3) Provisions shall be made, whenever possible, to
locate such systems so as to permit connection to
the public facilities in a most economical and
convenient manner;
IV -80
b. Extensions of existing community sewerage systems shall be
permitted and encouraged.
3. S-5 Priority (Planned Service)
a. Individual on -lot disposal systems including approved
alternate on -lot sewerage treatment systems shall be
permitted.
b. Extensions of existing community sewerage systems shall
not be permitted, except as provided by Policy for Sewer
Line Installation in Areas Where Service is Not Available.
c. New, permanent community sewerage systems shall not be
permitted.
4. NPS Designation (No Planned Service)
This designation is not applied within established service
areas.
a. Individual-on--lot-disposal systems including approved
alternate on -lot sewerage treatment systems shall be
permitted;
b. Extensions of existing community sewerage systems shall
not be permitted;
c. New, permanent community sewerage systems shall not be
permitted.
In all cases where interim or permanent community sewerage systems
are permitted, they shall be subject to the standards and
regulations of the applicable State and Federal agencies. Adequate
documentation that the State and Federal standards and regulations
IV -81
can be compiled with shall be evidenced prior to County Plan
amendment consideration. ALL INTERIM OR PERMANENT COMMUNITY
SEWERAGE SYSTEMS, OR MULTI -USE SEWERAGE SYSTEMS SHALL BE APPROVED
BY AND WHEN APPLICABLE DEDICATED TO THE APPROPRIATE AGENCY FOR
OWNERSHIP AND/OR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH
ESTABLISHED COUNTY AND STATE STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES.
SEWERAGE SERVICE PRIORITY AREA MAPS (1" 2000')
The maps on the pages that follow show existing and planned
facilities and service areas that have priority designations of
S - 1 or S - 3. Letter designations shown on the maps are county
zoning districts for which more information may be found in the
Zoning Ordinance. Planned service areas having a designation of
S - 5 are shown on Map No. XIII Sewerage Facilities and Service
Areas (1" = 1 mile) found in the inside front pocket of this Plan.
While every effort was made to insure accuracy in th preparation of
these maps, errors may have resulted from the transfer of
information from maps at different scales. The classifications of
parcels of land as having either existing service or programmed
service was based upon the location of existing service lines and
upon the best estimates for future service by the service providing
agencies. The delineation of the boundary for the S - 5 (Planned
Service) classification is based on the land use policies of the
adopted Comprehensive Plan for Washington County. S - 5 priority
classifications within the Urban and Town Growth Area service area
V-82
ez , ;fit , : x
are based on the established growth area boundaries.
Determinations as to whether or not a particular parcel of land is
considered to be within the influence of a Growth Area shall be
made by the Washington County Planning Commission and when
applicable, the Planning Commission of the affected incorporated
municipality.
Because of these inherent accuracy limitations, these maps should
be used for general planning purposes only. For certainty as to
the exact location of all existing facilities or to the status of
particular parcels of land, the Washington County Planning
Department and the service providing agencies should be contacted.
Changes to these maps which may be required by errors or
inaccuracies may be made in accordance with the administrative
procedures set forth in Appendix B (Page B-10) of this Plan.
IV -83
4
JET. RSTCHIE
CLEAR SPRING] 0
SEWERAGE SYSTEMS INDEX MAP
WATER AND SEWERAGE PLAN
WASHINGTON COUNTY. MARYLAND
IINIBAt tleAtt.N Sr TIws ANI CIIAII►IIBuuu stwtllA/t $11110
ill Ir1ITISIAt MAP t$M1tSt AN/ //$IIAAN$ FNCtuils tN 151 slwtlA$1
U/rgIM$ uttlel of 111» ►RAN
Note$ to tI1*M11111111 CIIMl! VAN -OfPB 1U./(IS I • Is I FBI
AIJBININI MA►I IF 11111 M1INI1L ISMIIABI $toYIet
hw"twAsmNITON COI*TT NAP
►.N..N y' 1AH1111ITON COVNtT ►LAII*NI CCMMI$1$ON
►1St . wN l ♦ • N I
HAGER STOWN
°WILLIAMSPORT
0
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
/\ -
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■I
I
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
m o
FFQHCE MAINS
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
''''''"''''••''
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
WURBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(AS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S - 3 Programed
Service
K ■ URN NM K N
K M K M ■ KKK ■
RN K RN K KK K
K K K N K K MN K r
N K K K K K K K K
URN ■ K K K R K
t ■ K K K M K K K ■
K N K K K K K K
S-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
ivi Y
\i"r
II
P0
/
li
XXX x11"" x
XXX K �w % I
11
x y X 'i'r51V_\r- y
X X X X %
I
_ X K t
K X M X X II K X %
�
4
x x X % I
I.
X
iN 'C
'•
H
I
r
,1
`
I
_
/
Q i
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existina ProDOsed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
O
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■I
I
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
•• •
FORCE MAINS
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
•'••••'•«'•''''
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
0 URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(.AS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - 1 Existing a
Under Construction
S - 3 Programed
Service
NM M M M N M M M
M A M M r ■ M N
M
• M M M ■ M N M %
N * M M N N N M ■
■ Y ■ a MN R N M
N a ■ N M ■ 1 M U F
■ M K M ■ NA ■ M
• t ■ Y M ■ Y K M
S —5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
p
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existlna Proposed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTA
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
N• -
FORCE MAINS
1111111111111111111
uuu•'•'uuuu's.0
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(AS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S-1 Existing a
Under Construction
S - 3 Programed
Service
N ■ : a ■ i ■ ■
NI N NI N N NI
a a N ■ N N N R ■
■ NM N N ■ ■ N N
a a N N R a a R ■
N N ■ NI MN N N
a a a ■ N N a ■ R
■ N N N N N N N •
S —5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
i
a Q r
J i
/
.�a lid
f 4II
iF
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
EYistlnn Prnnnsnd
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
Q,
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
I 1
IN1ERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
� m
FO CE MAINS
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
r•e
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
low URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(AS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(A'S NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing 8
Under Construction
..................
S -3 Programed
Service
R 11 s 11 ■ w 11 x
■ Y Y ■ ■ K x t ■
U ■ 11 r ■ M ■ u 11
■ y t 11 M i r ■ 11 M
■ M ■ * ! ■ Z s e
■ R X R ■ ■ i i it ■
11 ■ Z NUNU • 11
i Y 11 ■ ■ R Y Y
S-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
:STRICTED
USE
esf
Z IYIr � IYT MZT ; 0nv
BL s�QEY ■o ; xi
662 665
/' _yam
•
RURAL --r�� '•� moo.
VILLAGE `� ,r ' '' i• RR
SERVICE .- •-.-.
AREA >�•
/ ••�• •t RR
suarr•see• BLOCK NO. 2
R
RURAL VILI AGE
SERVICE A EA
MM NO
f611 671 671
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existlno Proposed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
___
SE 'AGE PUMPING STATION
■1
1
INtfERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
• N
-
F'Okk E MAINS
IIIIIIIIIIiIIIIIIIl
,•..
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(AS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S - 3 Programed
Service
K K r r R r r
r ax r R a RNN r
a s a K R R r a R
■ ■ Y R a a r ■ r
a a a a r a a a a
• s a a a a a a a N
a a a a a Y Y r a
R a a a Na a a
S -5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
M
r
[tEl
/ ...._ 1i is
1 :J1 ti
I
p
p.
wIf
f
��'_ w !H:��
_
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Exlstlna Prnnnsed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
,.
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■I
1
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
-. -
FORCE MAINS
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
"•..••.•"•'
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
lowURBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
tAS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S —3 Programed
Service
MN N N N N N M ■
N N
N N N N M N ■
Y ■
N N N N ■ N N
N N
N ■ N ■ N r : R
• N NM
N N SNXN
INN
N NNN N N
INN
N N N N N N
K ■
N N N SNI
S -5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existlne Prnnnsed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
SEW -AGE PUMPING STATION
■1
1
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
o •
FORCE MAINS
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiIII
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
lowI URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
As NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
..................
S -3 Programed
Service
M r r M M f. srrY
M M r M r NW NM
. M NM MN M ■ M Y
N NM M N MN . M
N M M M . . . NM }
MM N MN N M . N
M ■ NM NM MS M
S -5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
m
�_�� L. }„x . i:�bioE�i►E_' GiQ5*.. ' ss A 2 �'l
�s I J- 'r- 'I� x-% XK �i X •x/J..
:�:.:�:... j... Y x x/x X xx
x x x X if, x x
A
�, :: :CAF? :::
1 x x Y x x A x x x x
_-. fFLT/rT—!
��'
vR • v«t ...
i r_::.. 'z ::::: t::r::::::: as
::..::: :I: X x X X x .xkx
I,
x Y
i x
..1. . .. _ x x x Y x x
..... x'X' x xx x x x.
.1. •is"j/
.. : �. ........ :. x x x x xxx x x x
:,,,. XxX� xxkx xxxx
x x x x x x x x x x
I - —�= IL
::::. . .. Y
RR : :. :: x x Xx x
_ = XXx..XXXxx x
.p[7-...:_: Tl :•��:: :s—.�'� x x x Xxx/x iE-.x-J,�.\�x "'�cx x x, . k..' . � . � F{L \x Y x x % x
� X x X X 911 % X X x S{(
[ �y{� .�. ,% % X x% X
I • +. '.�� • :� i. — _R;`Jf4x X x x x x xx x x x x
-i •c F.i_f_;.•.Y .p
. ..... :( t xi1r1r ; :::.::.r1�.�, X X X Moc X X Y
�4 ;k : l �r x x�;xSx x f x x x X .�.r .N1 �,A..311::::.
:-1.�: x x —Yx .s:: x xXxxx
r�i::: ...:y?.:1 j4E:
x x x x x
��.. J I %x xY
�.' .... ... . ..... ��:
` f :�:� _ _. :' S: rt :4' ce;_ diiJmt
504 581 590 593 sn 599
i
575 1
•71 E
NOTE• FOR VJQXUATION REWLAIx. COITION wITNIII
TK WASNINGTON C'JVNTY REGIONAL *'CAI CUAR ZOME•
t(E W► ENIIREO FAR FART IT— 1.AGrIARY SI FACES'.
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existlnn Prnnnand
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■[7
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
�
FORCE MAINS
II I I I II! II II I it l l ll
"•'i'••"'•'••
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(As NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S —3 Programed
Service
% % K M % K , NM T
. Ma K K 1 , ,
% x , K K K % K K
, K K Na K K K ■
R K , K K K ■ . •
%
INN K ■ , MR K K
■ . K K N K , K N
S-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
a
I '2/
N / N / "k
r r 2 O
\. � /' -. �--
' <:r v
' / /4
\
j 24/
: 1 / .5 Li /I °r
'JII_ \ ,
1 dN . � /,\.,..,xN x
r x
J'
I \
+ 4 x x
`;'''�
j��
x x x x z •x -:y
x
ax
MX
<x x J�' ^�4, xx•
••..� Mx 'X3 it x XXKx x: •�
X * Xt x
K X Xx % K
N'
xft x XXX x&Dx N x Ix
X x x x X x x xl ,X x N
x xx x x x xx .x x
N. Na
M x X N fx X K r
N M % K % M M x
x : x f K X x % z X % a K M x- !!
Q K Y k N x x x..d► X x x
K x % X XXX L K X % N x 7.1{XXX X'Xa Mxxa x Nx xxKT/x NK N
N ` x x Nx N
ltx xx`
MMM it x
N K. X •
N K .x N N K IN x
XXX lxxx x x itlx X x x N X N
. XXX XXX N x X k K• N x g
;1 • N x. N' N x x x %
Nit XXX X *7Th x x N x X x N x• .N N
r N N x N, x x x a K x x x x 7!! Ix. a
N 1N XXX N X x x N N % x XX XXX
Xx X% K % x X N x *X K N
x [ XXX It N x x x x!
Q XXX lit XIX a
X x 1 K x a x
x N x K N N
K-
XXX r N
x x x N N - xx x x x
x X
it x x x
N x x x x x x
+ x x x x tax
#. - x N x x x x
N K
x x x x it -x x
• X. x x x xt
x x x x X•--
# it it it
P* t
e
t # k N
k+�
• # r1'1'd ,f#
k# t ##'I
� N
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■I
I
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
�
FORCE MAINS
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I! I I I I
si'r""""""
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(AS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
..................
S-3 Programed
Service
■ K 1 k , k K , ,
NUN UN K N K K
k , MN K ■ , K ,
NUN K NUN k K
K K K K UN K K k
, K , k K K K K k
k
U K K K N K k # ■
, K k k K K K K
S —5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existina Proposed
SE)GE TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■I
I
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
FQI,CCE MAINS
1111111111111111111
••''•'•«•'"''.
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
WURBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
t
(AS NOTED ) . RESTRICTED USE
(AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing 8
Under Construction
S-3 Programed
Service
MX N S
N Y M M ■
• NY M K 11 K K K I.E.M
K ■ K ■ K M ■
,Y S EN
S -5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
3
c,
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existina Pronosed
SELVAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
SE,1IGE PUMPING STATION
■I
I
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
�
FORCE MAINS
IlIllIlIllIlI111111
ruune••tn•"
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(AS NOTED) . RESTRICTED USE
(4As NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S — 3 Programed
Service
N N N ■ N N ■ ■ N
N N N MX N N NM
N N N N N N ■ M M
N N N N N N N N N N
N N ■ N N NM N N
N N M N N N ■ N N
N N N N N N N N N
N N N N N ■ N N
S —5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
FYkt1nn Prnnncarl
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■
1 1
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
- • -
FORCE MAINS
'•'''"'''"''
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
WURBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
f,JAs NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(As NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing B�
Under Construction
S - 3 Programed
Service
M K ■ R M NM Xi
■ ■ K M ■ ■ N M M
M M } K ■ M ■ K K
K A N A N K N M K M
a a. K a w ■ ■ Y
k K a ■ ■ ■ ■ M K
a a K• a R K K
a a a ■ a a K ■
41 N via. iii
S-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
r A
/ ( \ tT \\\ \. \ /1 , 1
/ zk - /
\ /Hi
R R
— `fir N _ asa
/ f _ HI A
RZ3I t
\.
A RR R
C Aa HI A
1
/ A N . r
�- /, A (( _______ HI
MAP No.
530 633 636 536 542 345 543 34
CLEAR SPRING TOWN GROWTH AREA, SERVICE ANEA bUUNUAt T
NOT MAPPED. HI ZONED LAND. S- 5 (PLANNED SERVICE)
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
r -001nn Prnnnena4
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
,l.
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■I
I
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
•• -
-
FORCE MAINS
III! III I IIIl I III III
""•'•'•"••
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
toW URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
Q(.AS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S — 3 Programed
Service
K a a ■ ■ ■ a ■ Y
■ a K K $ K a K K ■
N. pap p. K a
a a a a a a a pa
a a a a a K N K K
K ■ ■ R a a a a K
• a ■ a a K a a ■
pp ■ a ■ K ■ a ■
S -5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
•
r
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
EYit Finn Prnnncpr!
SEVI'AGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■
D
INT'-'RCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
W •
FORCE MAINS
llllllllllllllillll
'''''''•'e'•''
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(AS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(As NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S — 3 Programed
Service
K X K ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
INN ■ X K ■ X X
■ K K K Y X ■ ■ K
■ ■ NM ■ ■ R K ■ ■
K ■ ■ ■ X K K ■ K
K K ■ K K K K K X N
' N ■ WMN K K M K K ■ ■ ■ ■ K ■ f
N N INN MN MM
S -5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
FMS¢¢
@.t
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Proposed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
,.
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■
D
INtERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
- •
FORCE MAINS
1111111111111111111
ree,r
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(AS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(As NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Exisling a
Under ConstrucBon
S-3 Programed
Service
r ■. ,r . , r Nr
N N M N NI NIX N
M N K N I SIN .
• r r M N NM M N K
r . . K . r M . ■
I r N . . M . ■
II N MIX SlIT
S —5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
ICJ
t`
A
:.:
N*i..... R.
HI .... . T ,.
x \ :4' t-Rz-290-
x . +r�x.3 IL `.�. 1)r-7.
.... • �' t � : + }} + >t iif
.� . . +
X x x
Xxx ` HI 18•
x . +^ 8L '
x x x i!. R -29
4xx x ..........
xx ..... �' .•... .... ..♦
i"
HlX or ... '..... ............. L: ...
------- _ - - ! ...... ..... ... t ........ .... _ .... iii
A .u/ I/f
us40
x -- .. .. .. fis
x �
.7.
r :t0::• ::::: ' :L` IG' .. - - i8'• 1 :tg'-
f
-... 2 .
kY Y %..i�JtJ �1% Yx .. % X . 4 L1.1i31 Li:�tZi ir2' •� - R _ -_-._ _-
',
MAP NO
664 557 590 593 094 599 902 S T
M
NOTE, rn MrO. a1. l AEGV ATMG CO.SIIR]Ctt MTxI
TIE ■AjMiN.TGN ' '".TT NZC'C$I L ALPO..
SEC YAP CNIIILCO '1AA •AR! !1- NAT ! CL1 .
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existlna Proposed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■
D
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
0 • •
FORCE MAINS
IIIlIIIHItIIIIIlII
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
10 WURBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(A5 NOTED ) RESTRICTED USE
(_AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S - 3 Programed
Service
■ ■ t ■ ■ AN ■■
NW M R M■ ■■■
NA ■
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■
■ a ■ ■ M a ■ 1 M
S -5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
x X X X x X•• Q\ A /.
x x /
: X x
'
A
/ _____
HP
x x x Y RX 91-14
X x Y X x= I T
XXxx. _ --
x x X Y Y Y IM /jfrr/ ' I__ ___ __
/1/i Y Y Y Y J fM
% Y /
X Y X x
X X
x 1 RS
x x
=X=x= RS .3 IM / a` i
Y
• x X - �
x x
XX Im ,
X X -
x x RS 7S RS I , A i
x x Y \ 12 /
Y x x ! ,�
�X xxxxxX �t� `, �,,
R R R x X ,, j ::RB;
( RR--I�I , . � � 7 660
SO 605 60s 6s 6N 61? 620 $6
NOTE• AEOULaTMO COX TTOX w1TAM
( TI y&$XNXTOA C0UX*T AEGx%IM. £APOAT CLEif-
.!EE YA. EATITL1G -TAR PMT i-WAX*NXXTT
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existlna Prenoced
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■
D
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
• -
FORCE MAINS
IIIIIIII1IIIIIIIIII
'''•'u'u••••.uu•
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
10 W URBAN 8 TOWN GROWTH AREA
(AS NOTED)
RESTRICTED USE
(AS NOTED) RURAL. VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
..................
S -3 Programed
Service
1 ■ ■ ■ r 1 ■ 1 1
N 1 1 r r ■ ■ 1 1
• 1 1■ 1 r r r 1 r�
i ■ 1 r 1 r 1 ■ 1
It 1 r ■ ■ : 1 1 1
IN 1 1 r r r 1 1 ■
S ■ ■ r 1 1 1 1 ■
f 1 N r ■ 1 1 1
S —5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
• H
....: ' A R STRIeTE !
i? N A I' A dI1L1 '.
/ /t41j / Y A
X % X X X xyy{lI
~' / l\ X '
I x x x X
/ X x
Mi
�- Xk Y
/F
I!A XXY ::
V II II j 'i / / X x
,., % X
�
x k
�• V
XxX x . . .. . .. . .
\.. - 1 %- f' -� X % X % Z_J•t • . . . . . . .
A
I J A X x x X 7�kf R: ::�iliai�wi
\ -
{ '4
{ I'!
x x x
x x
1 �. A i .x x ;RR
-
�• —
{ x f, > /RR�/y]/ X Y� � i''tu�N� , x x
! G x '. Xx
-...�.\ RR I1I X k I
RR _ • a6�
. k x x x x x x x Ax % x x k x x x'k k X
x x x
x
1: « RR
RR
420 623 624 629 032 ass 850 39
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existlna Proposed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
,.
O
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■
El
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
m
-�
FORCE MAINS
IIIIIIIItiIIIIliiII
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
k AS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
, (AS NOTED) RURAL. VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S - 3 Programed
Service
■ Y N ■ N:K,.
N k N N ■ N N
N N N N N N N
NN■■NNNNM■ ■
S -5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
/
T •tom_ /.�►�� l .�i.\\ AR 1
JLdE
VI • I
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Exisfna Pronnsed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■I
I
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
-
FORCE MAINS
IIIIIIIIIiIIiIIIII1
•ua''ss.,uuiuu
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
toW URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(As NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(As NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S — 3 Programed
Service
K ■ NUN ■ ■ M K
K K ■ K K K ■
N K K K■ K K K`
K K K K K NUN K `
■ UK ■ K K NUN
K K ■ K K K KU M
` ■ KU K K ■ K ■ K
K K K K K K ■ K
S-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
V
MMa• .
fl\4__g\/4 ; .�•!: max *\•\*::x: '�. ..::`�� ..
• r a � I2T
L:(*.,: ,• f f yt
x _
I- I W J
% % % % x x l x x xl „ xi x M M % % X • Y. N YLj
% % x x % % M M x % •• ix / Y
IAA X % f L
x%%%K Xxx Xxxx% xx x X M M i X % •;
x x x xx x• yL x x x�.•� „ „% x K/
% % x x % �• % x x x x K 1 t } S
„ „ 1( x x K x/xK x x
fI %4•K % J(/� %�,%x %�%x%x %x� K Kx �x+y?�, f
y, f
:.4::.x x+ x x
x xX X &44,,** '� xx xx '4"
)4� x x x
x"71 x x X /x%&xx x %•••.'••'•
x .' •� f
% % X x'X x X % X x x % K x .1; • . /• • . ; ,f * x + x f
.1 •.� rr ,yR 1 x lam' x-xx�x •• •: ,"j,'.� .�. x + X/ ..
\t' : '4
� ��'' •�1 •'' Vie, x x b l
N a
N '
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
EYistinn Prnnneart
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
O
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■[
1
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
• • •
FORCE MAINS
fflIIIIIIIIiIIIIIII
''''•'"'''"'''
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
Ins NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(As NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S-3 Programed
Service
a a saw a a a a
a ■ a a ■ a x aa
a NUNN a ■■ a
a R Na ■ a a a ■ }
a a a a a ■ a a a
a a a a N a f a
a N a a■■ a
Na a a■ a a a
S-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
a
•� �� X`k Y % x x r k k •7//
` x NAEFWAYx x x x k t +� .
• x x x x x x x++ k t ,,: .. .. ..
x x x x x x x x' t++ �, k x+ _..s e. _• .• •.�
x x x x x x t k ••11�� i MMn
ilI I! tit
TEA
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existina Pronosed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
FORCE MAINS
IllIIIII111IlIIIIII
•"•i""i
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
('aS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(sAS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing Q
Under Construction
..................
5-3 Programed
Service
R K f ■ K K f f K
■ NM K K K f K K
MN x f K K f f K
M f K R MN ■ K f f
N M R M R ! K s f
K K M K ■ NM K I
Y N K K N K I I R
• K N K K MN K K •
S-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
I.
X..
% %
/
(
x x % l x A1x k k• Y IC k k
l:Ik. x. )✓/% yr• % .x x x } Jr j.\ N . } } f }k k
• Y' x k X x % N k N IC X} }
x x x r } X } N N ,7,,x ,•(�`k }:
��(( } h X N N k
.M x Jr.iX w 3. } }} N k N} IC
'�`. �'-
ICr % •* %-'••r11 4 x x X > 4k }'Y N } k ]., k
IC X X x x x x + N N} } X X N N} N�k,
% x x x x ••x X % �rN } 'C•kk N k k k k?r �.,•�
•\ x ,%.\ - ) x x ) 1 Jt } } } Nh k k + k ICIC. x % x x k X X k )( k N N k k }
.R�K % ) K x } k
'C x x x a.x } k } } x�xk/N k } }
x ) 1 N k}
< % M:
x x x x K LiIC x+ N X N X''• ''•'•'•• K } C
. x IC f x K % xAX ,' }+ IC 't 'k .•'�
•.,',♦
: • `.k
x�K" % K %xx C' IC
A A. } k k•' ' •
CC_ IC •ate' -. at x �x%/t 10 xx x % x r x� :.....:...••• •,� }} t
wi )1Kx .x ICI . CI x �
IC IC x x /�'� • • IC } } } IC }
ax x ICICIC
X �x XXX x x IX1 '•;, .. . . . }# } {++�/
+ +
I 4 'c .., 4 IC
I/ ..•......'....' . ,. •:.
N Iii m +
:r• _:: 7D: Vi• +++
....i .:.. fir ) ++!
�J. } •'::':. A• ++
' X KK + + + +•r +
}r =, k
• xKK KK%%x +++V ++ Q. } k• x x % % x r % % % % x ,� '�V1 + 0
' • .• . k' • % { i K K K x x x x X 4' +
. .. a1. . . %x K xx xK%Kx X%X%%x x%xx
K % % 3Z x +
��t ..• .1.: % x rx % K KKk%'K
x X x L,__x K x
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existina Pronosed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■1
1
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
m
FORCE MAINS
I I I I f II l I I Il I II 1 1 II
irre
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
QS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
'ERAS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S -3 Programed
Service
M N Na M M w w a
w ■ M M ■ M M M
• M M w M M MU M M=
NM NM KU NUN
U UN M N Na Na
NUN XXX N M w
' w w M N M M M M M
M M UN M NUN M
S-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
�fp
\ L/ 1 )/ /
�
s / A(L1)c/
is
/ '—Hr'
& I]\ / /
°c L.
w
14
4
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existina Prnnnned
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
,.
O
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
�
FORCE MAINS
IIIIIIIIII!IIIIIIII
•''''''•''E'"•'
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
WURBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
' ('AS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
`(As NOTED) RURAL
VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
..................
..................
S - 3 Programed
Service
K K SUN NM K ■
K K K M K K • K K
K SUN K 55 5S
NM MN R 1$ N
K K U MN NMM
K
K ■ K K M K K f K
IN ■ ■ E Y 1 K K K
■ K N SBUS K N
S -5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
6 N
t h
'I 1
i N th"7 1
rJ , � �
j
U ti
� �� _--fit
x; � ,
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existing PrnnnSPd
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
♦
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
-
FORCE MAINS
II11111111111111111
''''•'''•••'••••
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
lo'URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(AS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(As NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S — 3 Programed
Service
K
K K K K■ ■K.%
■ K K K ■ K NUN k
K ■ 1 K ■ N K K %.
Na 1 K ■ K K NI
K■ K K K ■ K ■ .
S -5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
' i..
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existlnn PrnnnePd
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
O
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
I I
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
F $R:CE MAINS
1111111111111111111
11teri
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN 81 TOWN GROWTH AREA
(As NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S - 3 Programed
Service
K ■ K •• ■ K K K
K K K EN ■ S K
: K K K K l w K K
K Y K K K K R K K
N K II K N K R K K
i K K K K ■ K K K
K K K a K K K • K
EN ■ K ■ K K K
S-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
0
r.i r
alimom
r.�
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Fvisfinn Prnnncad
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
• -
FORCE MAINS
Illlillllllllllilll
es:.ii>Iri
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
TURBAN 8 TOWN GROWTH AREA
f
(AS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(As NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing
Under Construction
S - 3 Programed
Service
MN MAN NA 1 ■
s M II I II M M
MMIII N I IX
s I NM IN I I I M
I MINI I I I N
NAN MS III M
1 ■ I I ■ I I I MX
Na NM XIII
S -5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
t
X I
(/) xxx>+4++++% n
N x++++++++ +/i4+ o I I ��
'r X X+i ' +++++ •
'x xx +++ i +++++++++
x N x • +++++ + + 4 + �F + a
x % X x ++1 ,?i+tlY+++
'XxX% x k +� �(+++;- +++
\X X N
N x X x N +++++++
x o
' x x x x x x xxx x x x�x�x x
X x x x X N % x x •
x X N % X X X X % •Q 1
X.
x x X % x N N N X N MN N NX X x
,M X K NXNNN X XXNNN
XX X % x x k X % x N X X N N
x
K x' Sw x ....•..•:• 1 i O
N
r� ' xX �. •.IxNI. .','.[/'...: ' ... xK K x%
j '�l NTf. •��I� .y: i•!{. •_' 11 ` 1 K MN X XI
NN % xx(� xK
X X
+++++ •...•\ .y KKK T'•��zx K%.'.
X X % N x . r. . . . . . . T N N %
�'•i. X N X% x •• 4+++++++
XNNXN • ••••• ++++++++++ x N N x K N N N•
MX K K K
N x % x .••.4..4..4.$++++++x v K
X N % N % - _ x N Xr NN
% %
K N K xN N
• ate-«- ...-r•i ;�- X -+ xf1
`X N% NN N v x K x
• `• �-••../+4++++ •+++++
+ x x N :• xxx x
:. `•Kr ••• ++ +++++ ++ K x x K K 1T y � x XXK xK
• ++++t+}+++ % v $ N xN rx` Kx % %
K N x X1x K K
+++++i++++ K x% NNNN % N.N -1- xN X x. N
t+ t++++++ t+ N N N N N N % y N K N N M «
}++4++4++g++ %'N % X Nx Nx x x%
.... x x X x ' K
• •. .+++++++ x x (Mx K Nrrwl
. +++ v %
N%N N N xN N - N Nl N %
N N N
+. 4 K x x x N XN
}
x x N�
N — — �rrrrrrrrrrrrr —;/
0 I L Q n
s f—../ I'
III iunnionuffliiiw I /y Q 4 \ �. •i id's. � '� .c•/.. / ��'-• - — q
L
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existinn Pmnnsed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
O
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■
Lj
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
•
FORCE MAINS
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i i 11
'''""'u''''.'
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
soW URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
( S NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
('AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
..................
S -3 Programed
Service
1! ■ ■ K R N R ■ ■
• K ■ ■ R R R ■ ■ ■
155 1555 ■ ■
NI NM IRIS I
S-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
i
•,...�
_
f <4 J
� A
T ii
J� //• ..� � J I , " •tea I
/'
1• �
X xx xxkX fT, j, .— '
IJL
tti f % •;'s, 1
\
t x X x x x
x
x x xlxxxxxx R
x x L x% x x x x x x x xxx i
' /
y I .
% x x x x I x x �-•�
�� K� � • 4 4
x +x x x ^x
I'
% x+x x %
x x _
x x
x 1M• rye+... 4r
x x xxxx
.;u:xxx•%max Q
:\ _i /
Q I
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
EYistlnn Pmnncort
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
,.
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■1
1
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
•
FORCE MAINS
1111111111 111111111
's''''r'rre''''
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
WURBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
((AS NOTED) ) RESTRICTED USE
(AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S —3 Programed
Service
■ % N
N■ ' ■% %NN N ■%■ N■
% N N ■ ■ NI N ■
K N N N N N INN
N a N x ■ N
• N
N N N N N N N N N
• ■ N N N N N N N N
N ■ N N ■ ■ NUN
S -5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
a
— 'a t 7 (- ___7 / I____
_I _ / _
++
+ +
`11
r +�
+ t + + + + + t + + f } t
+'F'__ _ _
++r++++++++++ -
+ .,,�� I
++++++t+
•+ •+++t+++�+ +++++
++++++++ +++++ ++ \, /
�t+ +++}• } _ \ \ \.\ rte/
d /+++ r Ta /
' ,LL.
ErY
a
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existina Pronosed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
-
A
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■TI
IN1 RCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
- m m
FORCE MAINS
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIItI
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
01 W URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
tJAS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
:AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S - 3 Programed
Service
NNN■ N N N N N
N N N N M N N NN
CNN N N N ■■N�
N N N K N N N ■ N N
N N N N N K N N N
■ N N N N K N K N
N N N ■ N K N ■ N
N N N K N N N K N
S —5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
w a11
� r :
Ii&n% J
` ri /:
/1,_O
ri
T tT f?\kftT
NI I _
C �
-- TL/ I __
-ter
Q
L!
do � �_
y S
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existina Proposed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
O
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■1
1
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
•
FORCE MAINS
IJIIIIIIItIIIIIIIIl
'''''••'•''•'''•
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(ins NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
IIAS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S - 3 Programed
Service
■ N N N N N ■ N N
N ■ N N N N N K N
■ Y N N N N r K N
N N N N K NNN '
N K N KS N KK N
N UN ■ UN N N N
NW N K N N a a ■
N ■ N N N ■ N i N
S-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
Antietam Ove ✓ Zone
uunnnnUUlluunnrsr A O - 1
Sewer' AO' 2
•. • •.s. AO'3
\ � A I
A I I A
4j ii I 1 \/ A[
' A / \/ / -
/ IIIIHI IIIlillllflll1141Npwnu
— — w.
/A /
A ` `� \• R RALJ
� Vl LAG. /
` rf VIC
.�. fl A ;F{
r wv eo
-aK sQ► sso sss ss� 4 Sys sot re
• w:7y
-............................._.........-....._... ___ _....,_......__........._...-....,...._._..........._....-._.
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Exlsflna Prnnnced
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■I
I
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
-
FORCE MAINS
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
••••••••••••••••
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
toW URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
;(�aS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
G(AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing B,
Under Construction
..................
S - 3 Programed
Service
a a a a a a a
NI N NI N a N a
a a a. a N N X N
K K N N NN K a a
y
N a N a a a a a a
• a N N N N N N N N
■ a K a a a a a a
N a K N ■ a N N ■
S -5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
7L' ci
'?
\ k k +• k k k +
k k k k k 1
L I
iT•'
4.-- c .-j/ j
1 N �
f..
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Fviaflnn Prnnneael
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■L
I
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
-
FQQQE MAINS
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
••••••••••••,.
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
0 URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
4qs NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(As NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S-1 Existing a
Under Construction
S - 3 Programed
Service
■ N ■ MN M k K ■
K N N N a a ■ N a
K N M Ma N, N ■
K K a K K N K K K
N N ■ a N ■ a a a
■■ a a a a a a a
• a a K N NM a a a
N a NM a a a x
S -5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
w
w
W W
d QU
� C to
I
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
EYIctInn Prnnnepd
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
O
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
I I
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
N N
FQ i C E MAINS
I I I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
'''''••''•''''u'
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
0WURBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(AS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
.(AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S -3 Programed
Service
N M N N M MN N ■
■ M N M N N M N N
N■ N ■ M N ■ N N N
■ M N N N ■ ■ NN }
N N N N N N S ■
■
MN N MN N N N N
N ■ N• N ■ N N
S —5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
21-
4niialam vi iy curers
euummwumuluumu '4 0 - t
AO -2
•........ AO.3
IM►IN
$84 6.f 690 696 699 soilT9
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
EYistlnn Prnnnsed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
A
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■I
I
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
• -
FORCE MAINS
IIIIIIIIIiItIIIIiII
r•'''rer•''''r
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
toURBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(AS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S-3 Programed
Service
K K K K 1 M Y
Y K K K M Y M 555
Y K M M M M M K M
Y K K K K Y K K Y
■ Y K a ■ ■ K K
K
s ■ ■ MS R K K K N
• ■ K K K Y NM ■ K
K ■ M M Y ■ Y K
S-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
NI be? 5.0
bas
bas
Antietam Ur +ay Zone
uuuuniuiuuuuuuc .: J • I
ll AO.2
........• AO.3
• 40.3
a
599
We
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existing Prnnnsed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
,.
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
- -
FORCE MAINS
1111111111111111111
"•"•"e'•
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
toURBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(As NOTED ) RESTRICTED USE
(As NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
..................
S - 3 Programed
Service
■ K ■ ■ X X N NW
N Y KX■K ■K
■ N k K K X N ■K X�
K X NW K K KK K
■ ■ ■ k K N K X ■
■ X K N R K K ■ K
• MN K X K X ■ ■ K
N X K K ZR X ■ ■
S-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
71
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
EYIslInn Prnnnarui
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
A
O
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
1 1
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
FORCE MAINS
IIIIltIiIIIIIIiipil
••'i•''r'••ree''
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
1URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(AS NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
..................
S -3 Programed
Service
NNNa
a N a M N
NN *N Na a . a
NN N N ■ N N N ■
ax xi N N N ■ K
MN N N NW a N N
N K N N a N N N N
a N N k N K N N N
N ■ N K N ■ N N
S-5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
SEWERAGE MAP SYMBOLS
Existina Proposed
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
Q
SEWAGE PUMPING STATION
■1
1
INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS
• -
FORCE MAINS
111111111111111111!
E.saiuuu..''
SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES
toW URBAN a TOWN GROWTH AREA
(As NOTED) RESTRICTED USE
(AS NOTED) RURAL VILLAGE SERVICE AREA
SERVICE PRIORITY
DESIGNATIONS
S - I Existing a
Under Construction
S - 3 Programed
Service
M N N N N N N N
N N N N N N ■ N N N
■ N N N N ■ N N N
NW NW N N N N N
N ■ N N N N N N N
■ N N N N N N N.
INN N N N N N ■
N N N N N N N ■
S -5 Planned
Service
INSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
(NPS) NO
PLANNED SERVICE
OUTSIDE
SERVICE
AREA BOUNDARY
01
CHAPTER FIVE
ADMINISTRATION AND IMPLEMENTATION
INTRODUCTION
The key to the on -going success of providing adequate water and
sewerage facilities in Washington County is the positive,
cooperative action between the County and the governmental bodies
of the incorporated municipalities --particularly the City of
Hagerstown. Because of the significant role planned for the
water and sewerage facilities of the City of Hagerstown in
the realization of this Plan, it is paramount that an equitable,
clearly defined management structure between the City and County
be established. At the basis of the eventual management
agreement should be the fundamental purpose to adequately and
effectively serve those residents and those areas where water and
sewerage facilities are needed.
In this pursuit, it is important to recognize that we no longer
live in an era where governmental responsibilities abruptly
terminate at corporate boundaries. Both subtle and overt
municipal interrelationships demand a high degree of
communication and cooperation between governments in an
effort to achieve the best possible communities. To further this
objective, it only seems realistic that limitations resulting
from either statutory restrictions or long standing precedents
must be actively resolved. With this in mind, the following
ownership and operational structures are strongly recommended.
V-1
WATER FACILITIES
As previously discussed, the City of Hagerstown supplies water to
approximately 38,000 residents outside its corporate boundaries.
Since the majority of these residents reside in the County, the
City does not have the necessary voice in terms of plumbing
codes, guaranteed users, or comprehensive service area
formations. Nevertheless, the City has embarked upon an
aggressive program to increase plant capacity to meet the water
needs largely brought upon by the growing demands in the County.
However, it is rather inequitable for the Water Department to ask
the City to bear the total bonded indebtedness for improvements
which will proportionately serve more residents outside of the
City. Furthermore, the County without having any direct role in
the implementation of water facilities other than through zoning
and subdivision provisions cannot achieve a thorough
coordination of development activities.
In an effort to achieve a high level of cooperation between the
City and County and proportionate obligations for bonded
indebtedness, it is recommended that future distribution systems
be financed by the County and constructed, operated, and
maintained by the City. Additionally, supply and transmission
expenditures should be proprotionately financed by City and
County as well as outstanding indebtedness on existing
transmission. More specifically, the County's involvement would
be essentially for appropriate funding responsibility. Design
V•-2
and construction would be performed by the City with County
review and approval. Rates would be jointly established by
the City and County to cover bonded indebtedness and operation
and maintenance costs. The actual operation, maintenance,
billing and collection functions would be performed by the City.
Ownership of the system should eventually be under a unified
agency so that the system would remain more comprehensive rather
than fragmented. To further the-degree•of cooperation and mutual
decision -making the Hagerstown Board of Water Commissioners
should have County representation.
For those portions of the County outside the Hagerstown service
area, and adjacent to the other incorporated municipalities, the
County should cooperate with the towns in extending water service
based upon adopted plans Wand policies.
u
SEWERAGE FACILITIES
The City of Hagerstown's sewerage facilities are essential to
effective plan implementation. The strategic location of the
City's sewerage treatment plant enables the County to achieve
most economically a concentrated development pattern around the
northern and eastern quadrants of the City while correcting
significant environmental concerns and health hazards.
Obviously, this achievement requires a high degree of cooperation
between the City and County in a manner which equitably addresses
the needs of all residents. Furthermore, it should be well
V-3
apparent that the Environmental Protection Agency is becoming
increasingly more involved not only in establishing design
criteria but also in determining rate schedules and
operation and maintenance procedures. Consequently, local
governments --both the County and the City --should not become too
preoccupied with the concern for complete and ultimate control in
the sense that it hinders adequate service to its residents.
To this end, it is recommended that the County shall be
responsible for the feasibility studies, designs, rights -of -way
acquisition, construction, and financing of the proposed
interceptor and collector systems in those areas planned to be
serviced by the Hagerstown sewerage treatment plant. The City
shall have the benefit of review, inspection, and approval of all
phases of the.planning, design, and construction of the proposed
systems in order to assure consistency with the engineering and .
construction standards of the City.
Although the County shall retain ownership of its portion of the
system, operation and maintenance responsibilities shall be
accomplished by the City through a management agreement
mechanism. Obviously such a management agreement must be
established in a manner to assure that all portions of the
system both in the County as well as in the City receive
thorough, efficient, and prompt operation and maintenance
service. One method to be considered would be for the County to
V-4
be responsible for the operation and maintenance of its portion
of the system and to perform this function by subcontracting the
services of the City's Water Pollution Control Department.
Theoretically, in the event the Water Pollution Control
Department personel would be unable to respond to a specific
service need, because of scheduling or other prior commitments,
the County would have the alternative of seeking assistance
elsewhere. Regardless ofthefinal contractual agreement for
operation and maintenance responsibilities, both parties should
cooperatively attempt to assure a high degree of service so
as to maintain the integrity of the complete system.
The County shall be responsible for establishing its rates based
upon its financial obligations; conveyance to and treatment by
the Hagerstown facility; the. City's operation, maintenance, and
administrative services; and other equitably related costs. The,
City's administrative services shall also include billings and
collections which would be further refined in the management
agreement with the County having auditing privileges. To further
the degree of cooperation and mutual decision making, the
Hagerstown Sewer Board should have County representation.
For those portions of the County outside the Hagerstown service
area, and adjacent to other incorporated municipalities, the
County should consider similar arrangements in extending sewerage
service based upon adopted plans and policies.
Vf-5
MANAGEMENT OF CONNECTION ALLOCATIONS
This plan proposes an aggressive program of immediately sewering
considerably large portions of the County. However, it is not
intended that the availability of sewerage facilities be solely a
commodity which can be secured and controlled by the private
sector. Consequently, efforts shall be made to allocate and
assess connections based upon both prevailing zoning and the
entire service area. Sanitary Sewerage Connection Permits,
Industrial Waste Permits and any Benefit Charges should be
carefully administered to assure equitable development
opportunities. Additionally, users should be required to connect
to the system within one year from application approval so that
permits do not become a speculative resource.
COUNTY -WIDE WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY
Recommendations have been made in this plan to evaluate the ,
feasibility of community water systems in water problem areas
throughout the County. Recommendations have also been made to
consider the use of alternative on -lot and alternative community
sewerage systems to serve areas of failing septic systems and to
serve new development utilizing the cluster concept. The key to
both recommendations will be the efficient management and
operation of such systems by a public agency.
Participation by the Washington County Sanitary District in the
management and operation of water and sewerage systems is
V-6
presently limited to areas within established Sanitary
Subdistricts. Under the current practice, a new Sanitary
Subdistrict must be established for each new water or sewerage
system for which the Sanitary District assumes responsibility.
As the number of such systems increase per the recommendations
above, so increases the administrative complexity and cost of
managing an increased number of relatively small, geographically
unrelated, and financially independent Subdistricts.
Because Sanitary Subdistricts are established to be financially
self-supporting, the costs of providing water and sewerage
service to some areas of the County may be prohibitively
expensive to consumers in those areas. It is often the case that
those areas with the greatest need may also be the most expensive
to serve. For this reason.a County -wide approach which provides
for a wider distribution of costs by means of a uniform rate
schedule may facilitate service to many areas of need.
The Sanitary Subdistrict law should be evaluated and amended as
necessary to allow for a more efficient and cost-effective
approach to the management and operation of public water and
sewerage systems throughout the County. Ultimately, the creation
of a County Public Works Department should be considered as a
means to this end.
V-7
APPENDIX A
DEFINITIONS
The terms defined below are used throughout this plan.
Definitions are consistent with those in Maryland Agency
Regulation 10.17.01 except where indicated (*) as peculiarly
applicable to Washington County.
1. "Approving authority" means one or more officials, agents,
or agencies of local government designated by the local
governing body or specified by other provisions of Article
43, 387C to take certain actions as a part of implementing
these regulations.
2. "Board" means The Board of County Commissioners for
Washington County.
3. "Community sewerage system" means any system, whether
publicly or privately owned, serving two or more
individual lots, for the collection and disposal of sewage
or industrial wastes of a liquid nature, including various
devices for the treatment of the sewage and industrial
wastes.
4. "Community water supply system" means a source of water
and a distribution system, including treatment and storage
facilities, whether publicly or privately owned, serving
two or more individual lots.
5. "County plan" means a plan for the provision of adequate
water supply systems and sewerage systems, whether
publicly or privately owned, throughout the County
A»,1
including its incorporated municipalities and all
amendments and revisions to it.
6. "Department" means the Maryland Department of the
Environment.
7. "Service Area Designation" means a designation of
Urban/Town Growth Area, Rural Village, or Restricted
Use, assigned to a service area to assure that
development associated with the provision o€ water or
sewer facilities is consistent with the policies of
the adopted Comprehensive Plan for Washington County
and where applicable, the Comprehensive Plan for the
affected municipality.
8. "Sewerage service area" is that area served, or
potentially served, by a system of sanitary sewers
connected to a treatment plant, or, in a very large
system, sub -areas as delineated by the County. 4
9. "Water service area" means that area served, or
potentially served, by a single distribution system under
control of a single utility, or, in a very large system,
sub -areas as delineated by the County.
10. "Service Priority Classification" is a classification
assigned to a service area indicating the current
implementation phase for provision of water or sewer
service by means of a community system. The first phase
being Planned Service, followed by Programmed Service,
then Existing/Under construction.
A-2
11. "Existing or under construction" means the service
priority classification which is assigned within a service
area that is currently served or where actual work is
progressing or where a notice to proceed with a contract
for this work has been let as of the effective date of the
plan. The symbol for this classification shall be W-1,
S-1.
12. "Programmed Service Priority" is -a classification assigned
to property within a service area indicating that the
necessary approvals have been obtained to proceed with the
provision of public water and/or sewage service. Such
approvals may include where applicable, establishment of a
Sanitary Sub -District, approval of a Preliminary
Subdivision Plat or Site Plan and inclusion of any
capital projects in the. municipality's Capital
Improvements Program.
13. "Planned Service Priority" is a classification assigned
to property within a service area indicating that the
provision of public water and sewage service is considered
to be consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive
Plan for Washington County.
14. "No Planned Service" is a designation assigned to property
that is not located within a water or sewer service area
indicating that community water and sewer service is not
planned for the area.
A-3
15. "Marina" means a dock, wharf, or basin providing mooring
for boats which contain on -board toilet facilities,
operated under public or private ownership, either free or
on a fee basis, for the convenience of the public or club
membership.
16. "Individual water supply system" means a single system of
piping, pumps, tanks, or other facilities utilizing a
source of ground or surface water to supply only a single
lot.
17. "Individual sewerage system" means a single system of sewers
and piping, treatment tanks or other facilities serving only
a single lot and disposing of sewage or individual wastes of
a liquid nature, in whole or in part, on or in the soil of
the property, into any waters of this State or by other
methods.
18. "Multi -use sewerage system" means a single system serving a.
single lot, whether owned or operated by an individual or
group of individuals under private or collective ownership
and serving a group of individuals for the collection and
disposal of sewage or industrial wastes of a liquid nature,
including various devices for the treatment of sewage and
industrial wastes having a treatment capacity in excess of
5,000 GPD.
19. "Multi -use water supply system" means a single system of
piping pumps, tanks, or other facilities utilizing a source
of ground or surface water to supply a group of individuals
A-4
on a single lot and having a capacity in excess of 1,500
GPD.
20. "Non -point source" means pollution originating from land
run-off where no specific outfall can be identified.
21. "Interim Plant" means a sewage or water treatment plant that
is designed to temporarily serve all of, or a portion of a
designated service area established in the Washington County
Water and Sewerage Plan.
22. "Major Facilities" mean the principal components of a
community or multi -use water or sewerage system. The
characteristics of various systems may differ in size,
capacity and method of conveyance and treatment of water
or wastewater. However, generally, the term is meant to
exclude house connections, smaller water distribution
lines, and sewer laterals designed as part of a residential
development.
Examples of major facilities include:
a. Interceptors, trunk and outfall sewer lines; and
water transmission, feeder mains and storage
facilities.
b. Community or multi -use wells or impondments, water
storage or treatment facilities.
c. Sewage treatment plants (permanent or interim).
d. Pumping stations or water filtration plants.
A-5
APPENDIX B
POLICIES, PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA FOR AMENDMENT TO THE COUNTY
PLAN FOR WATER AND SEWERAGE
I GENERAL POLICIES
a. An application for amendment to the Water and Sewerage Plan
shall be initiated whenever any person, firm, private agency,
public agency, or municipal corporation wishes to:
1) Create major new water or sewer facilities.
2) Change the location, type, size or capacity of existing or
planned facilities.
3) Establish new water or sewerage service areas or change the
boundaries of existing service areas.
4) Change the priority classification of an area for water or
sewerage service.
B. It shall be the responsibility of the Washington County
Planning Department to coordinate the review of amendments to the
Water and Sewerage Plan in cooperation with the staffs of the
service providing agencies, the Washington County Health
Department and the effected municipality when applicable.
Amendments proposed within a municipality or served by a
municipality's system must be proposed by that municipality or be
accompanied by a letter from the Mayor or a designated municipal
official that the municipality has been notified that the
amendment application is being submitted. Criteria for amendment
of service area/priority classifications and eligibility for
priority classifications are outlined in Section II.
Applications for amendments to the County Water and Sewerage Plan
B-1
shall be considered via four different methods:
1) Biennial Review and Update. State Law Title 9, Subtitle 5 of
the Environmental Article of the Annotated Code of Maryland
requires the governing body of the County, after reasonable
opportunity for public hearing, to review the Water and Sewerage
Plan at least once every two years. Requests for Individual
amendments to the Water and Sewerage Plan may be considered at
that time. Procedures for the Biennial• Review and Update are
listed in Section III.
2) Individual Amendment. Applications for individual amendments
to the Water and Sewerage Plan may be accepted by the Planning
Department at any time. Public Hearings to consider individual
applications shall be held at least semi-annually (twice a year).
Procedures for the review of Individual Amendment applications
and requirements for information to be included in the
application are listed in Section VIII. Modifications in
facilities design by public agencies should be reported at the
Biennial Review, rather than by Individual Application.
3) Administrative Amendment. The Water and Sewerage Plan may be
amended to correct errors, omissions, or inaccuracies which may
be discovered from time to time in the Plan text or Plan maps.
Such amendments shall be initiated by the Planning Department
based upon a request and presentation of more accurate
information by the service providing agency. Procedures for
Administrative Amendments are provided in Section V.
4) Special Amendment.
The County Commissioners may at their
B-2
discretion initiate amendments to the Water and Sewerage Plan
outside of the semi-annual review sequence when necessary; (1) To
allow service to an existing structure when a potential health
hazard has been declared by the Health Department, (2) to allow
requests submitted by a government agency for capital projects to
proceed. Procedures for special amendments are provided in
Section VI.
II CRITERIA FOR AMENDMENT OF SERVICE AREA AND SERVICE PRIORITY
CLASSIFICATIONS
A. Existing Service Areas
The Water and Sewerage Plan shall define the areas planned to be
served by community water and sewerage systems within the next
twenty years. In order to assure conformance with the policies
of the adopted Comprehensive Plan for the County and if
applicable, the effected municipality, one of the following.
designations shall be assigned to all service areas: Urban and
Town Growth Area, Rural Village or Restricted. A description of
these designations is given in Chapter Three page 48 for water
service areas and Chapter Four page 76 for sewer service areas.
Potential service areas established in '201 Facilities Plans' may
be taken into consideration, however, the service area designated
by the Water and Sewerage Plan shall not be dictated by '201'
Plan boundaries and may in fact be larger or smaller. Within the
boundaries of defined service areas an assignment of a priority
classification of W-5 and S-5 will be given to indicate that
extension of water and sewer lines is possible and desirable and
iB- 3
that provision of service is considered consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan. Priority classifications from W-3 and S-3 to
W-1 and S-1 will be assigned at such time as plans to provide
service are initiated, either in response to a request from
private developer or by the service providing agency. The
assigned classification will be based upon the project schedule
and satisfactory compliance with eligibility requirements
described in paragraph C of this section. A designation of NPS
(No Planned Service) shall be assigned to all lands located
outside of existing service areas. This designation shall mean
that these lands are not included within a service area and not
planned to be served in the future.
B. Planned New Service Areas
Proposals by property owners to establish new service areas or to
extend collection or transmission facilities beyond the f
boundaries of existing service areas shall be submitted to the
Planning Department in the form of a development proposal.
Proposals which involve the establishment of a new Washington
County Sanitary District, Sub -District or the enlargement of an
existing sub -district shall be included in the Water and Sewerage
plan prior to creation of the sub -district.
The development proposal shall be submitted with an application
for establishment of new service area boundaries and shall be
consistent with the policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan
B-4.
for Washington County. The proposal shall describe the facilities
proposed and define the drainage area which could potentially be
served if the proposed facilities were established. A
Preliminary Consultation shall be held and the development
project area shall be identified, with a description of the
proposed land use, density and location of the development. The
application shall contain all of the required information
outlined in Section VIII. In the process of considering
proposals to establish new service areas or expansions of
existing service areas, the County Commissioners upon the
recommendation of the Planning Commission shall also determine
the appropriate designation for the service area in order to
assure compatibility with the Policies of the Comprehensive Plan
as well as providing for the most environmentally sound method of
water supply and sewerage disposal within all areas of the
County.
C. Service Priority Classification
The criteria listed below shall apply to requests for amendment
of priority classifications for water and sewerage service where
major water and/or sewerage facilities are proposed by property
owners. It is the intent of these procedures that, within
service areas established by the Water and Sewerage Plan,
satisfactory compliance by developers with the established
criteria should result in appropriate changes to the service
priority classification. Once a priority classification of S-5
B-5
or W-5 has been obtained, it may not be necessary to initiate an
individual amendment request for a higher classification or wait
for the Biennial Review of the Plan before proceeding with the
development of facilities. A letter of intent to the appropriate
State agency issued by the County Commissioners will satisfy
interim approval with formal amendment of the classification
being made at the Biennial Review, provided all criteria have
been satisfied. It is the responsibility of the developer to
satisfy the criteria in each step of the process.
1. Eligibility for S -5/W-5 (Planned Service) Classification:
a) The provision of service has been determined to be
consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan for the
County and if applicable, the appropriate municipality.
b) The method of service has been determined satisfactory
and has received written acknowledgement by the appropriate
public agencies such as the Health Department, Sanitary
Commission, and municipalities. Agency acknowledgement will be
for the method of service in concept and not in design.
c) A Preliminary Consultation has been held with the
Planning Commission.
d) If necessary, the Planning Commission has determined
that the property is located within an Urban or Town Growth Area
and has determined an appropriate service area designation, i.e.
Urban/Town Growth Area, Rural Village, or Restricted service.
.B-6
2. Eligibility for S -3/W-3 (Programmed Service) Classification:
a) All of the requirements for S -5/W-5 have been met.
b) Arrangements have been made with the appropriate agency
for acceptance of facilities, operating and maintenance
responsibility, allocation of capacity, and/or connections to the
public system.
c) When the proposed development is located within an area
that is under the jurisdiction of the Washington County Sanitary
District, the developer shall have obtained approval of the
establishment of a new sanitary subdistrict or expansion of an
existing subdistrict pursuant to Sanitary District Policy and
Procedures.
d) Adequate capacity shall be existing or be programmed by
the service providing agency responsible for the system that will
serve the site. Any capital. costs to be incurred by public
agencies should be included in the Capital Improvements Program
of the appropriate jurisdiction.
e) Preliminary plat and/or site plan approval has been
obtained from the Planning Commission and other appropriate
public agencies responsible for approval of plans, or future
operating maintenance costs of sanitary facilities.
f) A discharge permit, where appropriate, has been approved
by appropriate State Agencies.
g) A hydrogeolic study, where appropriate, supports the
establishment of a community water system which will not be
detrimental to adjoining wells.
B-7
3. Eligibility for S -1/W-1 (Service Existing or Under
Construction) Classification:
a) All requirements for S -3/W-3 have been met and,
b) Facilities are under construction or completed.
III PROCEDURES FOR THE BIENNIAL REVIEW AND UPDATE
In the Biennial review year, the Planning Department shall notify
the appropriate service providing agencies and municipalities
that the Water and Sewerage Plan is being reviewed and updated.
The service providing agencies, municipalities and Health
Department will be asked to provide information to be included in
the draft updated plan. This may include changes to text, maps,
tables, charts, or other information within the Plan to reflect
changes that have occurred since the previous update or new
proposals expected to occur within the planning period.
Applications for individual amendments by property owners will
also be considered during the Biennial Update.
The Planning Department will prepare a Draft Updated Plan to be
submitted to the Planning Commission for their review and
comments.
Copies of the Draft Updated Plan will be made available to the
Public and to the Municipalities and service providing agencies.
A joint Public Hearing by the Board of County Commissioners and
the Planning Commission shall be scheduled.
The principle elected official of each municipal corporation that
is effected shall be notified of the Plan Update at least 14 days
prior to the public hearing.
The Planning Department shall publish notice of the time and
place of the public hearing, with a summary of the update in at
least one newspaper of general circulation, once each week for
two successive weeks with the first notification appearing at
least 14 days prior to the hearing.
Following the public hearing the Planning Commission shall review
any testimony presented.
The Planning Commission shall certify that the Updated Plan as
presented or modified is consistent with the County Comprehensive
Plan.
Following the Planning Commission's certification, the Board of
County Commissioners shall adopt the updated plan.
Following the adoption of the updated plan by the County
Commissioners, the Plan shall then be sent to the Maryland
Department of the Environment for its review and final approval.
The State has at least 90 days and may extend its review period.
IV PROCEDURE FOR INDIVIDUAL AMENDMENT APPLICATION REVIEW
Applications for individual amendments to the Water and Sewerage
Plan shall be considered at a joint public hearing by the Board
of County Commissioners and the Planning Commission held at least
twice a year.
Requests for proposed amendments to the Water and Sewerage Plan
may be submitted to the Washington County Planning Department,
County Administration Building, 100 West Washington Street,
Hagerstown, Maryland. Requests for proposed amendments will be
processed in at least two cycles a year. Closing dates for
amendment requests shall be available at the Washington County
Planning Department. Requests for amendments must contain all of
the applicable information listed in Section VIII. Incomplete
applications or applications that do not meet the applicable
criteria listed in Section II will not be excepted.
V PROCEDURES FOR ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDMENTS
Administrative amendments need not be formally adopted by the
Board of County Commissioners via the public hearing process.
Such amendments are to correct errors and are for informational
purposes. These amendments do not represent changes in policy or
future plans. Administrative amendments should generally be
limited to existing conditions which fall within the following
categories:
B-10
1. To correct omitted or inaccurate locations of existing
facilities on the Plan maps.
2. To correct erroneous service priority classifications
which indicate no service provided when in fact service is being
provided to a particular area.
3. To correct erroneous data on existing population served,
flow and capacity data on existing facilities, and similar
information which is a matter of record.
Once an administrative amendment is made by the Planning
Commission, copies of amended maps or text will be forwarded to
all applicable agencies to replace maps or text which have been
found to be in error.
VI PROCEDURES FOR SPECIAL AMENDMENTS
Special amendments outside of the semi-annual review sequence max
only be initiated by the Board of County Commissioners upon the
request of the Washington County Health Department or a
Municipality or Service providing agency.
Special amendments should be limited to: a) allowing service to
an existing structure when a potential health hazard has been
declared by the Health Department, b) allowing requests
submitted by government agency for capital projects to proceed.
B-11
Special Amendments shall be considered, following public
notification, at a joint public hearing held by the Planning
Commission and County Commissioners.
VII FEES
A fee schedule established by the County Commissioners is to be
applied to all applicants, other than municipalities or public
agencies, requesting individual amendments to the Water and
Sewerage Plan. These fees are not refundable and must be paid at
the time application is made.
VIII DATA TO BE INCLUDED IN APPLICATIONS FOR AMENDMENT TO THE
COUNTY PLAN
The following data, as applicable, shall be included in an
application for amendment of the County Plan for Water and
Sewerage for the creation of a new service area, expansion of an
i
existing service and the establishment of a priority
classification of S-5 or W-5 or higher.
Applications for amendment shall address the
interrelationship of water supply and waste water disposal.
B-12
Applications for the establishment of new service areas or
the creation of new or improved major facilities must include the
following as appropriate to the project:
1. Proposed type, capacity, size and location of
facilities (new or proposed for use) and map.
2. Name and location of development or service area
(boundary, drainage area, acreage and map).
3. Number of people (existing in drainage or service
area, density of development).
4. Number of people to be served in drainage or service
area by planned staged development.
5. Design, average and peak flows.
6. Degree and type of treatment given.
7. Sludge disposal plans.
8. Transmission facilities (size of pipe).
9. Effluent disposal plans (spray irrigation, discharge
to stream, etc.).
10. Classification of stream receiving discharge.
n
11. Operation and maintenance costs.
12. Proposed means of financing improvement.
13. Description of ground and surfacewaterresources
within the service or development area, including the
quantity and quality of these resources.
14. Sources of pollution or contamination of groundwater
resources within the development or service area.
15. Source and amount of water to be withdrawn.
16. Relationship to Comprehensive Plan.
17. Relationship to Water and Sewer Plan.
18. Reason for change.
19. Alternatives and the rationale used in determining
the means of providing water supply.
B-13
20. Rationale for selecting a particular design and
alternatives for any proposed treatment facility,
pumping station or interceptor.
Applications which would extend collection or transmission
facilities beyond the boundaries of existing ten-year service
areas, should include:
1. Location of the proposed development or service area
(boundaries, acreage, map) and relationship to
existing service area and facilities.
2. Number of people existing in development or service
area.
3. Number of people to be served in development or
service area by planned staged development.
4. Relationship to Comprehensive Plan.
5. Relationship to Water and Sewerage Plan.
All maps included in applications for amendment which
delineate the boundaries of the service area, or show the
location of facilities shall be prepared at a scale of 1"=2000'
on a base provided by the Planning Commission.
B-14
APPENDIX C
LISTING OF SERVICE AGREEMENTS
Agreement For Provision of Sanitary Sewer Service For The
Maugansville/Orchard Hills Area By And Between The City Of
Hagerstown And The Washington County Sanitary District.
March 25, 1982
Supplemental Agreement No. 1 To Contract For Sanitary Sewer
Service For The Maugansville/Orchard Hills Area By And Between
The City Of Hagerstown And The Washington County Sanitary
District.
June 22, 1982
Agreement For The Provision Of Sanitary Sewer Service For
Fountain Head Area By And Between The City Of Hagerstown And The
Washington County Sanitary District.
December 5, 1977
Revision Of Fountainhead Service
County Sanitary District And The
Pollution Control Department)
September 1, 1983
Agreement Between The Washington
City Of Hagerstown (Water
Agreement For The Provision Of Sewer Service To The Sharpsburg
Pike Area Between The City Of Hagerstown And The Washington
County Sanitary District.
January 11, 1988.
Memorandum Of Understanding Regarding Industrial Waste
Pretreatment Under The General Sewer Service Agreement Dated May
1, 1978 Between The City Of Hagerstown And The Washington County
Sanitary District.
November 5, 1984
These service agreements are on file at the Washington
County Sanitary District Office.
C-1
APPENDIX D
Washington County Sanitary District
POLICY ON INTERIM AND PERMANENT CCMMUNITY WATER AND
SEWERAGE SYSTEMS, Anril 27, 1976
The District shall own and operate all interim and permanent water
and sewerage system facilities within the County, except those within an
incorporated area or approved existing system, under the following
conditions:
1. The District shall be the sole judge as to whether a community
water or sewerage facility can be approved and accepted for
ownership and operation by the District within the framework of
the Sanitary District law. It shall have the sole right to
determine the conditions of approval and acceptance necessary to
satisfying the provisions of said law.
2. The District shall have the sole right to determine what
facilities are interim or permanent; as to when the installed
facilities shall be modified, enlarged or abandoned; and who may
use said installed facilities. However, in making such
determinations, the District shall be governed by all applicable
County and State regulations and requirements.
3. All applications for community water or sewerage facilities
shall be filed with the Washington County Planning Commission.
All such applications must include an engineering report
prepared by a Maryland registered professional engineer with
sufficient experience in sanitary work satisfactory to the
District. This report must include estimated construction and
operation costs, together with all necessary design and
technical data required by the State for effluent discharge
and/or water appropriation permits.
4. No community water or sewerage facility will be approved for
ownership, operation or maintenance by the District unless such
ownership, operation and maintenance jurisdiction encompasses
the entire system, including treatment, collection,
distribution, storage, etc., except as may be covered by special
arrangement with the applicant at the discretion of the
District.
5. Construction plans and specifications for all interim and
permanent cca munity water and sewerage systems must be prepared
in accordance with State requirements but must be reviewed and
approved by the District prior to submittal to the State for a
construction permit. All construction shall be in compliance
with applicable Sanitary District standards.
D-1
6. Interim and permanent sewerage and water facilities shall be
designed and constructed at no cost to the District.
Construction costs to be borne by others include that inspec -1
during construction deemed necessary by the District to protL
its ownership and operational interests in the project.
7. No water or sewerage facility will be accepted by the District
for ownership, operation and maintenance until a mutually
acceptable agreement or contract between the District and the
applicant has been consummated and put into effect.
8. The effective date of this policy is April 27, 1976 and it shall
apply to all appications submitted consequent to that date.
o-2
1 1_
APPENDIX E
REVISED POLICY STATEMENT FOR CITY OF HAGERSTOWN WATER
POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT CAPACITY ALLOCATION
E-1
August 20, 1991
REVISED POLICY STATEMENT
Regarding the Distribution of Remaining
Water Pollution Control Plant Capacity
Allocation Among Development Projects
Owners and/or developers are hereby advised that limited capacity
is presently available at the Water Pollution Control Plant to
support development projects. Allocation of'this capacity will be
on a "first come, first serve" basis when an owner/developer
secures the required approved Application(s) for Sanitary Sewer
Service. An Application for Sanitary Sewer Service will not be
accepted until such time that an approved final site plan is
issued for the development. Should any project require a Sewerage
Construction Permit from the State of Maryland, Department of the
Environment, no application(s) will be accepted until such permit
is secured. When an owner/developer is issued an approved
Application for Sanitary Sewer Service for a specified project,
construction of said project must commence within six (6) months
and be completed within fourteen (14) months. (Commencement of
construction will be demonstrated by the first footer building
inspection and completion will be demonstrated by the final
plumbing inspection.)
The Water Pollution Control Manager may grant a short extension to
these deadlines if he is satisfied that a hardship exists and that
the delay was due to conditions beyond the control of the
applicant.
Assigned allocation to any development may not exceed 5,000
gallons per day unless approved by the Mayor and Council of the
City of Hagerstown.
Furthermore, prior to filing an Application(s) for Sanitary Sewer
Service, an owner or developer, through the office of the City
Administrator, may request that a specific amount of remaining
reserve capacity allocation be "set aside" for a project. Any
approval of "set aside" allocation must be approved by the Mayor
and Council of the City of Hagerstown. "Set aside" allocation
will not be considered as such until the corresponding Benefit
Charge at the prevailing rate is paid to the City of Hagerstown.**
From time of payment of the Benefit Charge, the owner/developer
will have a period of two (2) years to make Application(s) for
Sanitary Sewer Service to use the "set aside" allocation. "Set
aside" allocation will be monitored through the receipt of
required approved Application(s) for Sanitary Sewer Service for
the project.
E-2
Failure to comply with these requirements will result in the
assigned or "set aside" allocation reverting back to the Water
Pollution Control allocation bank and the owner/developer being
charged an administrative fee of one-third (1/3) the previously -
assessed Benefit Charge.
The Mayor and Council of the City of Hagerstown reserve the right
to rescind "set aside" capacity allocations before the two year
expiration date, if in their absolute discretion they determine
that the capacity will not be used as originally intended. If the
Mayor -and Council of the City of Hagerstown rescind "set aside"
capacity allocations prior to the two year expiration date, then
no administrative fee shall be assessed.
This revised policy shall become effective immediately and shall
apply to all future requests for "set aside" and/or Application(s)
for Sanitary Sewer Service.
** Payment of the required Benefit Charge is due and payable to
the City of Hagerstown within fourteen (14) days of approval of
the "set aside" allocation by the Mayor and Council. If such
payment is not made within the required period of time, the
Water Pollution Control Department shall request that Mayor and
Council action be taken to rescind the previously approved "set
aside" allocation for the associated project.
E-3
APPENDIX F
RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
WASHINGTON COUNTY AND THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HAGERSTOWN RELATING TO THE HAGERSTOWN URBAN GROWTH AREA,
WATER AND SEWER STUDY PREPARED BY BCM ENGINEERS, INC.
F-1
'1 i rt3: ''l l): ,� 1i;{'_ ;_. : t' n •h ? 4t 1�.,, r t?f ,.............. »......, —... w_...»...._—._...�........__......._..,..-
00006 00227
ACTS, ORDINANCES &,
RESOLUTIONS - COUN7 '` cis ','sir CUT
RESOLUTION
of
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
relating to Water and Sewer Study prepared by
BCM ENGINEERS, INC.
WHEREAS, the master plan entitled "Washington County Water & Sewerage Plan' was
originally prepared in 1975 and updated through January, 1990; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Washington, Maryland, and the
Mayor and Council of the City of Hagerstown, commissioned BCM Engineers, Inc. to present
a final report and master water and sewerage plan to the Washington County Planning
Commission with the charge to prepare a master plan to guide development of water and
sewerage facilities in the Hagerstown area through the year 2010; and
WHEREAS, BCM Engineers, Inc. has prepared a Water and Sewer Study for
Washington County/City of Hagerstown dated November, 1992, and which has been submitted
to the Mayor and Council of the City of Hagerstown and the Board of County Commissioners
of Washington County, Maryland.
NOW, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Washington
County, Maryland, that the study report prepared by BCM Engineers, Inc. Is to be used as a
guide and basis for updating the County's Water and Sewer Plan where applicable and for
assisting the Mayor and Council of the City of Hagerstown and the Board of County
Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland, in providing water and sewerage services
in the Washington County area. Notwithstanding the aforegoing, acceptance of the BCM
Engineer Study Report does not represent a legal commitment by the County to finance or in
any manner create an obligation on the part of the County to provide future water or sewer
improvements or utility service to any presently served or unserved area.
Adopted this 2'I"day of t4 , 1993.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SHINGTON C NTY, MARYLAND
`L�L
Joni L. Bittner, Clerk Ri tard E. Roulette„Pfigsident
Approved as to legal sufficiency:
Ralph . France, II
County Attorney
Mail to:
Ralph H. France, II F-2
County Attorney
100 W. WA G hincrnn crrvot
Ro Id L. Bowerb; Vice President
Linda C. Irvin -Craig
CITY OF HAGERSTOWN
MARYLAND
91740
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
City Hall. Room 200
April 5, 1993
Barry A. Teach
Washington County Administrator
County Administration Building
100 West Washington Street
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
Dear Barry:
(301) 790-3200
Extension 112
Attached is a copy o€ the Resolution recently approved by the
Mayor and City Council pertaining to their intent and effect of the
formal acceptance o€ the water and sewer study for the Urban Growth
Area as prepared by BC.�f Engineers, Inc.
Do not hesitate to call if you have any questions pertaining
to this matter.
Very truly yours,
, Georgi_z.nn N. Lucas
City Clerk
Attachment
c: BC.M Engineers, Inc.
S.M. Feller, City Administrator
J. Brittain, County Planner
R.L. Kautz, City Planner
R.E. Thomas, City WPC Manager
E.V. Walzl, City Water Department Manager
}
Lynn Palmer, Director, Washington Co. Sanitary District
,r.
'rii!:iV:;. '. if1({'. ';1;;:, .'l. i:. 11., :x••�;, 7:,. .i _ ..� .. .. .. -� ....._. ......., ...-..... _.... .... .,..-....,...--s..- r.. ..-..... ....-.,..., ... ..
F-3
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the master plan entitled "Washington County Water &
Sewerage Plan" was originally prepared in 1975 and
updated through January, 1990; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Washington,
County, Maryland, and the Mayor and Council of the
City of Hagerstown, commissioned BCM Engineers,
Inc. to present a final report and master water and
sewerage plan to the Washington County/City of
Hagerstown Water -Sewer Committee with the charge to
prepare a master plan to guide development of water
and sewerage facilities in the Hagerstown Urban
Growth Area through the year 2010; and
WHEREAS, BCM Engineers, Inc. has prepared a Water and Sewer
Study for Washington County/City of Hagerstown
dated November, 1992, and which has been submitted
to the Mayor and Council of the City of Hagerstown
and the Board of County Commissioners of Washington
County, Maryland; and
WHEREAS, this Resolution is to describe the intent of the
Mayor and City Council and the effect of the formal
acceptance of the water and sewer study for the
Hagerstown Urban Growth Area, hereinafter referred
to as the "UGA Water -Sewer Study", prepared by BCM
Engineers and dated November 1992.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council of
the City of Hagerstown that:
1. The Mayor and City Council state that the
primary use for the UGA Water -Sewer Study is to
provide a basis for updating the County's water and
sewer plan where geographically applicable. The
UGA Water -Sewer Study is intended to support and
reinforce the implementation of the Hagerstown
Urban Growth Area concept.
2. For areas in which utility service is planned
or provided under service agreements between the
City and the County, the UGA Water -Sewer Study
should be interpreted as recommendations for future
consideration to redefine utility service areas
with the understanding that existing utility
service area boundaries shall remain unchanged
until formal agreements are executed to alter any
utility service area boundary.
F-4 ,q3c? 3 -O?
3. The Antietam Basin 201 Facilities Plan is
recognized as an integral part of the general Sewer
Service Agreement dated May 5, 1978 and specific
sewer service agreements for Washington County
Sanitary Subdistricts 06, #14, and 015. These
agreements were made between the City and the
county through the agency and representation of the
Washington County Sanitary District. Until these
agreements are formally amended and mutually
accepted, they shall take precedence in matters of
legal interpretation and administration under the
said agreements.
4. Notwithstanding the recommendations of the UGA
Water -Sewer Study, acceptance of this study does
not represent a legal commitment by either the city
or the county to finance or in any manner create an
obligation to provide future water or sewer
improvements or utility service to any presently
cnrvAtq nr tinserved area.
3
Approved this ' ....O - day of
(SEAL)
ATTEST:
GeorgiAnn N. Lucas
City Clerk
, 1993.
CITY OF HAGZRSTOWN
BY • �'� �►
ven
yor
F-5
APPENDIX G
COMPILATION OF FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT STATISTICS, "FS SCHEDULES"
FOR PUBLICLY OWNED COMMUNITY SEWERAGE SYSTEMS
G-1
SO IEBJLE FS
FINMiCl/1i_ WtKEI1iNT STATISTICS
C x ni WATER & S&IEJi PIAKS
County Nc�n Washington
System Narre Hagerstown WPC
)
Fiscal Year ,;1 FY 90
Fiscal Year #2 FY 91
A
FISCAL YEAR #1
CQLI..MI 1
7-1-89 6-30-90
FISCAL YEAR d2
COLU4'1 2
7-1-90 6-30-91
B
Seher charge revenue
3 ,477 ,093
Serer charge revenue
3,862,409
C
Cennecticn charge revenue
46,630
Connection charge revenue
37,430
D
Front ft assessment revenue
233,091
Front ft assessment revenue
148,134
E
Other revenue (carplete schedule
on ace 2
619 , 722
Other revenue (carplete schedule
on awe 2)
344,098
F
Total revenue
4,376,536
Totai revenue
4,392,071
G
Operation expense
3,854,476
Operation expense
3,860,945
It
Maintenance expense
149,965
Maintenance expense
10 5613
I
Replacennt costs
—0—
Replacement costs
J
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
-0-
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
-0-
K
Total CM & R
4,004,441
Total CM & R
3,966,558
L
Interest expense
282,409
Interest expense
261,536
M
Depredi ati on expense *
737,638
Depreciation expense
412,559
1-i
Total expense
5,024,488
Total expense
4,640,653
O
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
(647 ,952)
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
(248,582)
!'
Debt principal
43,390
Debt principal
192,100
Q
Total flow volume
1,632,749,300
Total flaw volume
1,647,772,700
R
Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are those whidi are of such a nature as to be beyond those repairs anticipates
in the annual budget. Exarples of "extraordinary" breakdo�ns might include a blower breakdo�n in the zeration syste
large purp system motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator. Please
identify the most costly potential repair and maintenance preblen for this seherage systen.
0 2 Compressor
S ( I\pproxiinate cost of this potential repair $250,000
Depreciation on City's contribution of tpra''jAssets value.
Excludes value contributed by grants (E tale, Developer)
G-2
U SHFEXLE FS
FINANCIAL ?t1dGEI4ENF STATISTICS
COUNTY WATER & SEWER PL tS
County Naie Washington
System Nate Hagerstown WPC
Fiscal Year #1
Fiscal Year #2 Fv 89
A
FISCAL YEAR #1
COLLMV 1
FISCAL YEAR ,,'2
COLU'1 2
6/30/89
3
Setter charge revenue
Serer charge revenue
3 , 512, 19 3
C
Connection charge revenue
Connection charge revenue
40,330
D
Front ft assessu nt revenue
Frcxrtaft assessment revenue
351,101
E
Other revenue (corplete schedule
on page 2)
Other revenue (carplete schedule
on pace 2)
.42 4,923
F
Total revenue
��€�� revenue
4,328,547
G
Operation expense
Operation expense
55
i
t4iintenance expense
Maintenance expense
113 ,934
I
Replaceient costs
Replacerent costs
-o -
I
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
K
Total CM & R
Total CM & R
3,680 089
L
Interest expense
Interest expense
131,835
M
Depreciation expense
Depreciation expense
ti
Total expense
Total expense
9S9
O
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
(149.412)
P
Debt principal
Debt principal
Q
Total flaw volume
Total flaw volume
1, 650, 909 ,100
R
Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are those r iich are of such a nature as to be beyond those repairs anticipi
in the annual budget. Exarples of •'extraoramary oreaKoa,ns miynt incivae a uic' r urtanuc'l iiUlu a,.,,
large porip system motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator. Please
identi fy the nest costly potential repair and maintenance problem for this setierage system.
S 1 Alrproxini to cost of this potential repair
Depreciation on City's contribution of tota�DVset value excludes value contributed
by GRANTS (EPA, STATE, DEVELOPER).
G-3
-2-
T i Describe the source of funds to cover this extraordinary item (a bond, line of credit, escrow account, workinc
I capital, etc.)
Bond, Working Capital if available
U Additional comrients Total flow volume is billable consumption and excludes
infiltration — average influent flow is 6.7 to 7 MGD.
V) Detail of other revenue on Line E (if applicable):
Description
Ind. Surcharge
Interest I/C
Misc.
Total
Capacity: 8 fGt)
Users: residential 13,529 (EST)
cam�ercial 913 (EST)
Year 1
Amount
$298,804
295,320
25,598
619,722
Contact Person:
Year 2
Amunt
$145,286
127,669
71,143
344,098
Rick Thomas, WPC Manager
1 Clean Water Circle
ADDRESS
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
301) 791-4528
TB_EPFO1E #
G-4
SH-fEE IE FS
F1M CIAL h flYT STATISTICS
CCUYIY WATER & SB ER PU 1S
County Name Washington
System Name Funkscown
Fiscal Year -1 6/30/91
Fiscal Year 2__________________
FISCAL YEaR T1
COLLM1 1
(1991)
FISCAL YEaR z2 l
CCLL'T 2
Setter charge revenue
65 , 911.11
SeAer cnnarge revenue
Connection charge revenue
Connection charge revenue
Front ft assessment revenue
Front ft assesmient revenue
Other revenue (ccnulete schedule
on oaae 2)
11, 297.50
Other revenue (camlete schedule
on ace 2)
Total revenue
77,208.61
Total revenue
Operation expense
44,336.02
Operation expense
maintenance expense
12 910.04
Maintenance expense
Replacement costs
Repiace ent costs
Fees paid to other jurisdictions{
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
tal CM & R
57,246.06
Total GI&R
R
Interest expense
3 , 488.54
Interest expense
Depreciation expense
34, 948.56
Depreciation expense
Total expense J
95, 683.16
Total expense
Increase' (Decrease) Fund Balance
(18,474. 55)
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
Debt principal
10,000.00
Debt principal
Total flow volume f_19,588,540.00
Total flaw volume
Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are those nich are of such a nature as to be beyond those repairs anticipated
in the annual budget. Examples of 'extraordinary' breakda ns might include a blower breakdown in the aeration systelr
lame puTTp systen motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator. Please
identify the most costly potential repair and maintenance preblen for this sererage systen.
Rehab of Pond
ximate cost of this potential repair x100,000
(over)
G-5
SQ-iEMLE FS
FINPI'C .PL MWG&INr STATISTICS
C£t.MY 'WATER & S&ER FL445
Ccunty NI W3shinzCon Fiscal Year .=1 6/30/89
Systen lei Funkstown Fiscal Year #26/30/90
Fi.C-& YEAR .1 (1989) CCLLM' I #FISC?L YEAR =2 CCLLM 2 (1990)
c-rarge revenue Serer carte revenue
66,673.36 � J. 64, 815.83
':rnnecticn charge revenue
1 000.00
Ccnnecticn Charge revenue
_--
Front ft assessn it revenue
J
From ft assesnit it revenue
t. Other avenue (camlete schedule
cn oace 2)
9,714.31
Other revenue (camlete schedule
on pace 2)
10, 930.14
eta l revenue
77,387.67
lotaT revenue
75,745.97
Cperaticn expense
#
40,178.72
ICperaticn expense
36,909.49
maintenance expense
6,374.95
(Maintenance etC --Ise
II
5,798.02
=eplac.Ent costs
RlaceTeit costs
Fees paid to other jurisdicticns
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
__
Total CM & R
46,553.67
Total CM & R
42,707.51
Interest expense
4,352.49
Interest use
3,868.80
Depreciation expense
35 ,196.40
Deoreciatic n else I
34, 077.28
' 1 Total e`cpense
86,102.56
Total expense l
80, 653.59
Increase' (Decrease) Fund Balance
(8,714.89)
Incase (Decrease) Fund Balance
(4,907.62)
• t principal
10,000.00 1
Debt principal
10,000.00
Total f v volume
19,588,540.00 IT1flvolum
23,641,110.00
E,z. aordinari repairs and maintenance are those 'Tit are of such a nature as to be beyond those rerairs anticipated
in the annual budget. Exarales of "extraordinary" breakda�ns might include a bider breakdohn in he aeration syster
;arse purrs systen motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a Heating aerator. Please
identify the irtst costly potential repair and maintenance proalen for this saa.rage systen.
Rehab of Pond
or;xi r ze :os4 'fir his potential r air $100 000
(over)
G-6
_2-
v
sc be the scur'e of ftids to cover this extraordinary iten (a band, line of credit, escrcw account, a&rking
capital, etc.)
CD's — Balance @ 10/15/92 $252,000
' Additional cmmits
!I Cetail of other revenue on Line E (if applicable):
'fear 1 Year 2
CescrioticnPntunt. 1989 pmt 1990 199
Interest income $9,100.30 $10,930.14 $11,297.5
Equity Fees 600.00
counts
14.01
Total 9,714.31 10,930.14 11,297.5
Contact Person:
:t,: .15 IS Brenda L. Haynes
se residential 480 P. 0. Box 235
C Ea
GCrnmercial 33 Funkstown, Maryland 21734
(301) 791-0948
iONE
G-7
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT STATISTICS
COUNTY WAXER is SEWER PLANS
County Name • Washington
System Name Smithsburg WWTP
Fiscal Year 11 1991
Fiscal Year 42
A
FISCAL YEAR 101
COLII)Qi 1
FISCAL YEAR i2
COL'u2-fi
9
I Sewer/Water= charge revenue
110,215
Sewer/Watar charge revenue
C
Connec_icn charge revenue
26,000
Connection charge revenue
0
Front ft assessment revenue
FroFt;ft assessment revenue
Other revenue (complete
schedule on page 2)
33•,624
Other revenue (complete
schedule on page 2)
F
Tctal revenue
169,839
Total revenue
Operation expense
63,745
Operation expense
M
Maintenance expense
33,290
Maintenance expense
I
Replacement costs
Replacement costs
J
Fees paid to other
jurisdictions
Fees paid to other
jurisdictions
q
Total OM & R, Fees
97,035
Total CM & R, Fees
L
interest expense
.5,850
Interest expense
M
Depreciation expense
15,378
Depreciations expense
N
Total expense
118,263
Total expense
0
Increase (Dec -ease) fund
balance
51,576
Increase (Decrease) fund
balance
P
Debt principal
20,000
Debt principal
Q
Total flow volume
51,329,800
Total flow volume
R
Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are those which are of such a nature as to be
beyond those repairs anticipated in the annual budget. Examples of "extraordinary"
breakdowns might include a blower breakdown in the aeration system, large pump system
motor and control, clarfier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator.
PLease identify the most costly potential repair and maintenance problem for this
sewerage system.
S
Approximate cost of this potential repair
G-8
T Desc_ibe the source of funds to cover this extraordinary item (a bond, line of
credit, escrow.account, working capital, etc.)
U Additional comments:
V s' Detail of other revenue on Line E (if applicable):
Year 1 Yea-- 2
Descthtio Amourft ov t
Interest Income '33,624
I '
Contact Parson:
Capacity: mcd Ms. Elizabeth Martin
(Name)
Users: residential P. 0. Box 237
commercial (Address)
Smithsburg, Maryland 21783
(301) 824-7234
(Telephone Number)
G-9
SCHEDULE FS
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT STATISTICS
-' COUNTY WATER &.SEWER PLANS
County Name Washington Fiscal Year r2 1989
System Name Smichsburg WWTP Fiscal rear 1990
A
FISCAL TEAR 41
1 COLUMN 1
I FISCAL YEAR #2
COLUMN
3
Sewer/water charge revenue
88,756
Sewer/Water charge revenue
97,283
C
C.onnection charge revenue
14,500
Connection charge revenue
23,500
D
Front ft assessment revenue
1.7ront ft assessment revenue
3
Other revenue ccmolete
� (
schedule an page 2)
26,140
Other revenue (earaplete
schedule on page 2)
33,411
Total revenue
129,396
Total revenue
154,194
?GPI
Operation expense
22,306
Operation expense
27,290
H
Maintenance expense
16.992
Maintenance expense
23,464
I
Replacement costs
Replacement costs
—
J
Fees paid to other
jurisdictions
-"
Fees paid to other
jurisdictions
.--
K
Total OM & R, Fees
39,298
Total OM & R, Fees
50,754
L
Interest expense
7,650
Interest expense
6,750
M
Depreciation expense
11,794
Depreciations expense
12,596
N
Total expense
58.742
Total expense
70,100
O
Increase (Decrease) fund
balance
70,654
Increase (Decrease) fund
balance
84,094
P Debt principal
20,000
Debt principal
20,000
Q
Total flow volume
39,350,700
Total flow volume
35,843,700
Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are those which are of such a nature as to be
beyond those repairs anticipated in the annual budget. Examples of "extraordinary"
breakdowns might include a blower breakdown in the aeration system, large pump system
motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator.
Please identi_y the most costly potential repair and maintenance problem for this
sewerage system.
Flooding of the sewage treatment plant and damage to its oumos and electrical
control equipmenc.
S
Approximate cost of this potential repair $200,000
aer )
G-10
T Describe the source of funds to cover this extraordinary 'stem (a bond, line of
credit, escrow account, working capital, etc.)
Approximately $375,000 in working capital/future expansion reserve is available
for these emergencies.
J .
0 i Additional comments:
t
V ;1 Detail of other revenue on Line E (if applicable):
Des criotian
Interest Income
.2
Capacity : tad
tfsers : residential______
commercial 12
Year I
amount
26,140
Coatact Person:
Ms. Elizabeth Martin
(Name)
P. 0. Box 237
(Address)
Smithsburg, Maryland
(301) 824-7234
(Telephone Number)
Year 2
ou nt
33,411
4 -
G-11
SG RULE FS
FINAI�CIA1_ t1 1PGEY€NT STATISTICS
CO(XM V ATER & S&IER PIJ'NS
County Name Washintnn
Systen Nave Hancc-k Wsi-iter Department
Fiscal Year #1
Fiscal Year #2
90
per charge revenue
Serer charge revenue
)nnection charge revenue
3,500
Connection charge revenue
2,500
rant ft assessment revenue
-0- '
Front ft assessment revenue
-O-
ther revenue (camplet.9 schedule
on age 2)
33,836
Other revenue (complete schedule
on pane 2)
9,202
3ta1 revenue
173 ,O 5
Tota. E revenue
149,138
)eratioi expense
91,728
Operation expense
77,772
aintenance expense
Maintenance expense
epl acenent costs
35 705
Replacement costs
25,763
ees paid to other jurisdictions
-0-
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
-D-
otal CM & R
127,433
Total CM & R
103,535
nterest expense
5 , 730
Interest expense
5, 22
epreciation expense
36,233
Depreciation expense
37,205
otal expense
169,396
Total expense
145,862
ncrease • (Decrease) Fund Balance
3,j49
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
3,276
ebt principal
8,549
Debt principal
8,548
otal flow volume
89,571 528
Total flew volume
81,620,000
xtraordinary repairs and maintenance are those Mich are of such a nature as to be beyond those repairs anticipated
n the annual budget. Examples of "extraordinary" breakdowns might include a blower breakdonn in the aeration system,
arge pup system motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator. Please
dentify the most costly potential repair and maintenance problem for this senerage system.
)roximate cost of this potential repair
(over) cr; f
G-12
, •
-2-
0
Describe the source of funds to cover this extraordinary item (a bond, line of credit, escrow account, vorking
capital, etc.)
U
Additional Cuui nts
Detail of other revenue on Line E (if applicable):
Description
Non Operating income
Interest
Grant
Miscellaneous
Capacity: M0
Users: residential
commercial
Ye89
ar 1
,yin unt
3,579
30,012
245
$36 33
-TN
Contact Person:
YS 2unt
5,937
3,109
156
9,202
G-13
i
v
SOEEX LE FS
FINAICIa1_ M'NPGL1{NT STATISTICS
CU,NTY SEATER & SEWER PLANS
Systen Name H ncock 'last?water Department
Y 43 91
Fiscal Year #1
Fiscal Year ff2
A
FISCAL YEAR 413 91
COLLMV 1
FISCAL YEAR 42
COLLNV 2
6
Seer charge revenue
137 657
Seer charge revenue
C
Connection charge revenue
1,000
Connection charge revenue
D
Front ft assessment revenue
-0 _
Front ft assessment revenue
E
+ Other revenue (complete schedule
on pane 2)
5,095 '
Other revenue (complete schedule
on pace 2)
F
Total revenue
143 , 752
Total revenue
G
Operation expense
76,657
Operation expense
H
Maintenance expense
Maintenance expense
I
Replacement costs
94,580
Replacement costs
J
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
-n-
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
K
Total CM & R
T71,23 7
Total CM & R
L
Interest expense
4 �
Interest expense
M
Depreciation expense
38,816
Depreciation expense.
N
Total expense
215,002
Total expense
0
Increase* (Decrease) Fund Balance
(71, 250)
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
P
Debt principal
6,689
Debt principal
Q
Total flaw volume
91 , 940 , 000
Total flow volume
R
Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are those Mich are of such a nature as to be beyond those repairs anticipate
in the annual budget. Examples of "extraoralnary" oreakdonns m gnt include a oiower areaxoarn in me aeraLiuiI 5y5L
large pump system motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator. Please
identify the most costly potential repair and maintenance problem for this seAerage system.
Removal of lagoon sludoe 550,000
Surface aerators at lagoon 31,000
Replacement of pumping & ejector stations 709,000
1 , 290 , 000
S I Approximate cost of this potential repair w
G-14
rc1v. o-
-2-
', Describe the source of funds to cover this extraordinary item (a bond, line of credit, escrow account, working
capital, etc.)
Rate increase
M0E Water Quality Financing loan
I �
M0E Grant for Assistance in the Construction of Sewerage Facilities
Additional camnts The Town of Hancock combines water and sewer records. Forty _ nine
percent (49%) of revenues and exoenses are assianed to sewer.
u
Detail of other revenue on Line E (if applicable):
Year I Year 2
Description Pm ant Arrant
Non Operating Income
Interest 4,677
Miscellaneous 418
5
Capacity: 380'000 M3D
Users: residential 629
176
camrertial
/1'l 12 -2 /7 5 a
37
G-15
1
SO 1II7U E FS
FINANCIAL. MMNGQi STATISTICS
COUNTY WATER & SEWtR PLANS
County Plane WASHINGTON
Systen Name TOWN OF CLEAR SPRING
U
Fiscal Year #1 FYs9
Fiscal Year #2 F?90
A
FISCAL YEAR #1
COLUt4 1
7/1/88-5/30/89
FISCAL, YEAR #2
COLLf1q 2
7/1/89-6/30/90
B
Sewer charge revenue
80, 349
Serer charge revenue
81, 528
C
Connection charge revenue
2,530
Connection charge revenue
4,980
D
Front ft assessment revenue
Front ft assessment revenue
E
Other revenue (carplete schedule
on oaae 2)
22,978
Other revenue (carplete schedule
on aae 2)
3,536
F
Total revenue
105,857
Total revenue
90,044
G
Operation expense
26,624
ration expense
23,082
11
Maintenance expense
38,644
r•iainteilance expense
40844
I
Replacement costs
Replacement costs
.1
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
K
Total CM & R
65,268
Total Chi & R
63,926
L
Interest expense
10,709
Interest expense
8,176
N
Depreciation expense
38,798
Depreciation expense
36,866
Pl
Total expense
114,775
Total expense
110,968
0
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
(9,918)
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
(20,924)
1'
Debt principal
54,804
Debt principal
7,780
Q
Total flaw volurrn
26,397,000
Total flow.volume
26,817,000
R
Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are those which are of such a nature as to be beyond those repairs anticipate:
in the annual budget. Examples of "extraordinary" breakda•.ns might include a Deaver nreakUatin in the aeration syst€
large prep systenlnotor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator. Please
identify the most costly potential repair and maintenance problen for this setierage systen.
ULTRA VIOLET DISINFECTANT SYSTEM
S I Approximate cost of this potential repair $10, 000
(over)
G-16
-2 -
Describe the source of funds to cover this extraordinary iten (a bond, line of credit, escrow account, ,narking
I capital, etc.)
WORKING CAPITAL
r:
Additional ca relents
Vl
Detail of other revenue on Line E (if applicable):
Year 1 Year 2
Description Pntunt Wnount
Penalties & Interest On Delinquent Acc'ts $ 1,032 $ 1,155
Interest Income 1,107 2,381
Gain From Early Retirement of Long -Term Debt. 20,839 -
22,978 3,536
4
Contact Person:
:'apdCi tY: .2
4D
PATRICK E. KLINE
tW'
Users: residential
249.8
FY89
KLINE & LIPELLA, CPA
252.3
FY90
PC0RESS
comercial
107.5
FY89
39 EAST WASHINGTON STREET
108.5
FY90
HAGERSTOWN, MD. 21740-5605
TELEPUJNE # (301)739-8733
G-17
SOIUliE FS
FINANCIAL WNPGE}(NT STATISTICS
axrf WATER & S&lER PL146
County Name WASHINGTON
Systen Hare TOWN OF CLEAR SPRING
Fiscal Year FY91
Fiscal Year #2
A FISCAL YEAR #1
COLLM1 I
7/1/90 - 6/30/91
FISCAL YE:'R #2
COLLIiN 2
B 5e.Ner charge revenue
114.51S
Serer charge revenue
C Connection charge revenue
d
Connection charge revenue
D Front ft assessment revenue
Front ft assessment revenue
E Other revenue (caiplete schedule
on page 2)
4,721
Other revenue (carplete schedule
on pacie 2)
F Total revenue
124,876
Total revenue
(i Operation expense
34 314
Operation expense
II Maintenance expense
0,421
Maintenance expense
I Replacerent costs
Replacement costs
J Fees paid to other jurisdictions
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
K Total CM & R
84,735
Total CP1 & R
L Interest expense
7,791
Interest expense
;•1 Depreciation expense
38,517
Depreciation expense
N Total expense
131,043
Total expense
1) Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
(6,167)
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
P Debt principal
8,148
Debt principal
() Total flat volume
29, 781, 000
Total flow .volume
R Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are thosewhich are of such a nature as to be beyond those repairs anticipated
in the annual budget. Exatples of "'extraordinary"' breakdans might include a blower breakdown in the aeration syste
large ptup systen motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator. Please
identify the most costly potential repair and maintenance problen for this seeerage system.
OXIDATION DITCH AERATOR MOTOR
S Appraxir;sate cost of this potential repair _______f 22O.000
(over)
G-18
-2-
v
Describe the source of funds to cover this extraordinary itan (a bond, line of credit, escrow account, working
capital, etc.)
WORKING CAPITAL
Additional cam-ents
Detail of other revenue on Line E (if applicable):
Year 1 Year 2
Description kount Arount
PENALTIES & INTEREST ON DELINQUENT ACCTS $ 1,428
INTEREST INCOME 3,293
4,721
A
Contact Person:
..apacity: .2 hGD
Users: residential 26.2 FY91
caunercial 111.3
PATRICK
NPM-E
KL N & F
ADoRSS
39 EAST WASHINGTONS;REET
HAGERSTOWN..MD_ 21740-5Bc' -
TELEPICNE # (301)7398733
G-19
SCHEDULE FS
FIWT IAL M'►a^1, &7'IJ'If STATISTICS
tWilY WATER & 513&R I'UWS
County Nave Washington
Systan NanTcwn of Williamsport
Fiscal Year #1 1989
Fiscal Year #2
A
FISCAL YEAR #1
07/01/88 -_06/30/89
COL
FISCAL YEAR #2
COIJflI2
B
Sewer charge revenue
135,868.14
Seeer charge revenue
C
Connection charge revenue
500.00
Connection charge revenue
D
Front ft assessnnt revenue
Front ft assessment revenue
E
Other revenue (carplete schedule
on ae2
.00
Other revenue (carplete schedule
on ae2)
F
Total revenue
136,368.14
Total revenue
G
Operation expense
35,774.83
Operation expense
N
Maintenance expense
11,320.89
Maintenance expense
I
Replacerrnt costs
Replacenent costs
J
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
92,238.88
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
K
Total CM & R
139 334.60
Total Qh & R
L
Interest expense
9,582.50
Interest expense
M
Depreciation expense
21,000.00
Depreciation expense
N
Total expense
169, 917.10
Total expense
0
Increase' (Decrease) Fund Balance
(33,548.96)
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
P
Debt principal
30,000.00
Debt principal
Q
Total flaw volune
82,300,000
Total flow volure
R
Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are those which are of such a nature as to be beyond those repairs anticipated
in the annual budget. Exaiples of "extraordinary" breakdorins might include a blo+�er breakdo�n in the aeration systan,
large purp systenimtor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator. Please
identify the nest costly potential repair and maintenance problen for this senerage systen.
S { lyrproximate cost of this potential repair
(over)
G-20
SQ-E(JLE Fs
FIN +CIAL MWAMENC STAT1ST1(5
aANM WATER & 560 PLANS
M
County Nano w d
System Nave Town of Williamsport
Fiscal Year #1 1990
Fiscal Year #2 1991
it
FISCAL YEAR #1
CULLMV 1
FISCAL YEAR #2
CULIJMII 2
07-01-89 - 06-30-90
07-01-90 - 06-30-91
B
Sever charge revenue
131,475.92
Sewer cf iargc, revenue
143,209.50
C
Connection charge revenue
1, 000.00
Connection charge revenue
.' 0 0
!)
Front ft assessment revenue
, 00
Front ft. assessment revenue
. 00
E
Other revenue (co plete schedule
Other. revenue (coxrplete schedule
on paae2)
.00
on ae2)
F
Total revenue
Total revenue
143,209.50
(;
Operation expense
36,265.74
Operation expense
61,390.39
II
Maintenance expense
27 951.58
Maintenance expense
T
33,956.05
1
Replacement costs
Replaceuent costs
3
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
65 034.31
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
133,145.84
Total CM & R
129,251.63
Total C14 & It
228,492.28
L
Interest expense
15,745.00
Interest expense
14,377.50
M
Depreciation expense
22,092.03
Depreciation expense
22, 666.03
N
Total expense
08
Total expense
265,535.81
0
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
(34,612.74)
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
(122,326.31)
P
Debt principal
Debt principal
5,000.00
5,000.00
()
Total flow voluue
70 658,083
Total flow volume
100,544,800
RJ Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are those Mich are of such a nature as to be beyond those repairs anticipate
in the annual budget. Exaiples of "extraordinary" breakda�rs might include a bl(x%er breakdown in the aeration syst
large purp system motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator. Please
identify the most costly potential repair and maintenance problem for this sewerage system.
Large pump system motor and control
Approximate cost of this potential repair $25,000
(over)
G-21
-2-
0
T
Describe the source of funds to cover this extraordinary iten (a bond, line of credit, escrow account:, ridng
capital, etc.)
Working capital and borrowing from the town's general fund.
Additional cannents THE TCWN OF WILLIAMSPCRT OPERATES AND MAINTAINS A SEWER COLLECTION
SYSTEM. THE WASTE IS PUMPED TO AND TREATED BY THE WASHINGTON COUNTY SANITARY DISTRICT.
Detail of other revenue on Line E (if applicable):
Description
Year 1 Year 2
AlDunt Pmamt
4
Cc itact Person:
Capacity: PM DONNA K . SP ICKLER
IVPWE
Users: residential 700 TOWN OF WILLIAMSPORT
ADi1RESS
camercial 50 P. O. BOX 307, 2 N. CONOCOCHEAGUE ST.
WILLIAMSPORT, MD 21795
TELEPHJN # (301) 223-7711.
G-22
SGINLE FS
F•RIAiwIAL 4 WG T STATISTICS
awry WATER & SEER PUNS
County Name
systen Name R4C— rrc_ r <—
Fiscal Year R1
Fiscal Year T2
FISCAL YEAR 41
CCU.N 1
FISCAL YEAR 42
cow 2
Seer cname revenue
Seger charge revenue
C
Connection charge revenue
Connection charge revenue
D
Front ft assessment revenue
Front ft assessire revenue
E
Other revenue (carplete schedule
on aoe 2)
j 7f
Other revenue (carplete schedule
on aae 2)
F
Total revenue
Total revenue
G
Operation expense
�
Operation expense
It
Maintenance expense
Maintenance expense
I
Replacerent costs
Replacement costs
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
K
Total.C14& R
Total CM&R
L
Interest expense
Interest expense
M
Depreciation expense
Depreciation expense
t'1
Total expense
Y.
Total expense
0
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
-U-
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
P
DLbt principal
Debt principal
Q
Total flow volume
Total flow volume
R I Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are those which are of such a nature as to be beyond those repairs antici
in the annual budget. Examples of "extraordinary" breakdowns might include a blower breakdohn in the aeration
large purp system motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator. Please
identify the most costly potential repair and maintenance problem for this se�erage system.
S I A{rprox imate cost,of I this' potential repair.
G-23 (over)
-2 -
Describe the source of funds to cover this extraordinary iten (a bond, line of credit, escrow account, rking
\ capital, etc.)
i
Additional comments
Detail of other revenue on Line E (if applicable):
Year 1 Year 2
Description mamt Amami
1
Contact Person:
jaci ty: t
WE
.rs: residential
crmmrci al
G-24
t
SGEJULE FS
FIN ICTAL MST STATISTICS
COfTY WTEl & SE1 R PLI4 S
Couity rlarre .WA^.':ti
Systan dame G>~cu j
r
Fiscal Year *1
Fiscal Year #2
A
FISCAL YEIR #1
COLON I.
FISCAL YEAR #2
COL&V 2
B
seer charge revenue
Sewer charge revenue
C
Connection charge revenue
Connection charge revenue
D
Front ft assessment revenue
Fart ft assessment revenue
E
- Other revenue (carplete schedule
on paae 2)
=°
Other revenue (complete schedule
on Dace 2)
F
Total revenue
Total revenue
G
Operation expense
Operation expense
It
Maintenance expense
Maintenance expense
I
Replacerent costs
Replacement costs
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
K
Total Ct4 & R
��,
Total CM & R
L
Interest expense
Interest expense
M
Depreciation expense
Depreciation expense
rl
total expense
Total expense
O
increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
..
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
P
Di.�t principal
Debt principal
(1
Total flow volume
Total floc volume
R
E'ctraordinary repairs and maintenance are those Mich are of such a nature as to be beyond those repairs antic
in the annual budget. Examples of "extraordinary" breakdotins might include a blower breakdown in the aeration
large purp system motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator. Please
identify the west costly potential repair and maintenance problem for this severage system.
S Approximate cost of this pate tial r air
G-25 (over)
-2-
9
Describe the source of funds to cover this extraordinary item (a bond, line of credit, escrow account, working
capital, etc.)
1
Additional comlent5
Detail of other revenue on Line E (if applicable):
Year 1- Year 2
Description Amount Antxmt
Far Servi c
Contact Person:
)acity:
=rs: residential
ADDRESS
camercial
G-26
SOEXJLE FS
FINPJVCIfIL M4NPC8ETf SIATISTTCS
COUNTY WATER & Sift PLANS
County Narrtr
Systen Natrle V:I dir=t rw,�'
Fiscal Year #1 c//5
Fiscal Year #2
FISCAL YE?R .#1
COLLt0 1
FISCAL YEAR #2
COL" 2
[i
Suer charge revenue
Sever charge revenue
C
Connection charge revenue
Catnecti at charge revenue
D
Front ft assessment revenue
Front ft assessment revenue
E
Other revenue (complete schedule
on aae 2)
5'73, O`7l
Other revenue (crnplete schedule
on pa a 2)
F
Total revenue
Total revenue
G
Operation expense
�-7
Operation expense
II
Maintenance expense
—7-
Maintenance expense
I
Replacenent costs
Replacement costs
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
K
L
Total CM & R
Interest expense
S��? �-7
Total C1&R
R
Interest expense
.1
Depreciation expense
Depreciation expense
t
Total expense
S77
Total expense
0
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
'
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
P
[kttt principal
Debt principal
f)
Total flow volume
Total flow volume
R
Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are those , tich are of such a nature as to be beyond those repairs antici-
in the annual budget. Examples of "extraordinary" breakdoms might include a bloNer breakdorit in the aeration
large pump systen motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator. Please
identify the frost costly potential repair and maintenance problenn for this seAerage systen.
S I Approximate cost of this potential repair
G-27 (over)
-2 -
Describe the source of funds to cover this extraordinary item (a bond, line of credit, escrow account, working
capital, etc.)
i
Additional torments
Detail of other revenue on Line E (if applicable):
Year 1 Year 2
Description Amount Pimcmt
r
f
Contact Person:
)aci ty: MD
ME
?rs: residential
ADDRESS
camerci ai
G-28
SOE1J.E FS
FINANCIAL M4t'BiT STATISTICS
UMrY WATER & SI3 Ply
County Name
Systen Name t'1 '"~?
Fiscal Year i#1 ( -
Fiscal Year #2
FISCAL YE, #1
COI,.fl1 1
FTSL YEAR 2
I5U" 2
Serer charge revenue
Serer charge revenue
C
Ccnnecticn charge revenue
Connection charge revenue
D
Frcnt ft assessrnt revenue
Frazt ft assessment revenue
E
Other revenue (carplete schedule
on aae 2)
� y
, `"�
Other revenue (carplete schedule
cn pace 2)
° 8i LC
F
Total revenue
Total revenue
G
Operation expense
Operation expense
Ii
Paintenance expense
Maintenance expense
-o 0L;
I
Replacerent costs
Rep lacemelt costs
i
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
K
Totalal
_.
Total CM&R
--Q c
L
F1
Interest expense
Depreciation expense
Interest expense
Depreciation expense
ti
Total expense
—
Total expense
0
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
_ G
P
Debt principal
Dent principal
Q
Total flow volume
Total flow volume
R
Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are those 1iich are of such a nature as to be beyond those repairs antic
in the annual budget. Exarples of "extraordinary" breakdomis might include a blower breakdom in the aeration
large puip system motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator. Please
identify the most costly potential repair and maintenance prcblen for this sererage systen.
S I Approximate cost of this potential repair
G-29 (over)
_2_
Describe the source of funds to cover this extraordinary item (a bond, line of credit, escrow account, rkina
capital, etc.)
Additional comments
Detail of other revenue an Line E (if applicable):
Year 1 Year 2
Description pma,utt Hunt
Curtact Person:
pacity: N®
ers: residential ______
camErcial
WE /
M 6r%/ C.nvtr<)r me. r1 f ______
nci c,Ls r r a( Dr. A n ca, 11r)( MQ
G-30
SCUJ(II.F FS
FTNPI CIAL W4 E tT STATISTICS
CUM WATER & S&iER FtAtt5
County N31e
Systen Nano ^,.C:?
Fiscal Year #I (- 3-
Fiscal Year #2 (-2.--
F ISC?1. YEAR Ri
COLLM'! I
, ISCAL YEAR #2
COLLMV 2
[i
ieeer charge revenue
Serer charge revenue
C
Connection charge revenue
Connection charge revenue
D
Front ft assessamt revenue
Fruit ft assessner t revenue
E
- Other revenue (caiplete schedule
on age 2)
IG J
Other revenue (camplete schedule
on page 2)
F
Total revenue
Total revenue
G
Operation expense
_
Operation expense
..
Ii
Pkiintenance expense
, _
Maintenance expense
Replacement costs
Replace !nt costs
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
K
Total Ct'l & R
'-�
Total CTI & R
(c c�
L
Interest expense
Interest expense
h1
Depreciation expense
Depreciation expense
N
Total expense
�o
Total expense
O
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
,�
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
_� y
P
Dcbt principal
Debt principal
Q
Total flaw volume
Total flaw volume
R Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are those + hieh are of such a nature as to be beyond those repairs antic -
in the annual budget. Examples of "extraordinary" breakdonns might include a bla+,er breakdown in the aeration
large pump system motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator. Please
identify the most costly potential repair and maintenance problem for this seeerage system.
S ly)proximate cost of this potential repair
G— 31 (over)
-2-
v
Describe the source of finds to cover this extraordinary iten (a bond, line of credit, escrow account, rkinq
capital, etc.)
Additional come is
Detail of other reve ue on Line E (if applicable):
• Description
cz/)4 lL 4r ri-' i j
Year! Year 2
pmt Amunt
Contact person: achy: i , nn Hap \f•n
ice N _.
ors: residential
cam�erci al �_ _ _
iVPhE �
r %/I a r' 1V l c.
2i�{Q
rE # 3Q1 99L(...
G-32
SCILUI.E FS
FINANCIAL MPNPCi STATISTICS
COUNTY WATER & SE FR PIR'LS
County Name .
4`_kS_ ___
Fiscal
Year #1
(_-?c-.">
Systen
Fiscal
Year 2
F I SCA YErR T 1
COLUITI 1
FISCAL YEAR ,i:2
coati 2
a
Se.,er cnarce revenue
Sewer charge revenue
C
Connection charge revenue
Connection charge revenue
D
Front ft assessment revenue
Frait ft assessment revenue
E
Other revenue (complete schedule
on oaae 2)
Other revenue (crnpleteesschedule
lea 2)
F
Total revenue
Total revenue
G
Operation expense
Operation expense,
Ii
Pkiintenance expense
Maintenance expense
I
Replacement costs
Replacement costs
.J
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
Total Ci4 & R
,�:
Total CM & R
"3 I
L
Interest expense
interest expense
M
Depreciation expense
Depreciation expense
N
Total expense
_
Total expense
? �3
0
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
P
Debt principal
Debt principal
{)
Total flaw volume
Total flew volume
R
Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are those which are of such a nature. as to be beyond those repairs antici
in line annuai budget. Examples of "extraordinary" breakaomis mmgnt incruce a otoAer 4reaxaaNn in uze derdLILMi
large purp system motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator. Please
identify the it st costly potential repair and maintenance problen for this sewerage systen.
pproxiinrate cost of this potential repair
(over)
G-33
-2 -
Describe the source of funds to'cover this extraordinary item (a bond, line of credit, escr i acct, working
capital, etc.)
Additional cuumnts
Detail of other revenue on Line E (if applicable):
Year Year 2
Description Awmt Pmxmt
A
G-34
SQUAD FS
FIW4 IAL ? W'GF34 NT STATISTICS
COUNTY WATER & SEWER P%fi11S
"County Na»e raGh;nat�n
.Fiscal Year #1 ,o a�
Fiscal Year #2
A
FISCAL Y #1
1989
COLU41 1
FISCAL YEAR #2
COLUMN 2
Server diarge revenue
99,333
SeAer charge revenue
C
Connection charge revenue
9 , 950
Connection diarge revenue
D
Front ft assessment revenue
Front ft assessment revenue
E
Other revenue (carplete schedule
on page 2)
19 ,177
Other revenue (crnplete schedule
on pace 2)
F
Total revenue
128,460
Total revenue
G
Operation expense
63,592
Operation expense .'
H
Maintenance expense
16,050
Maintenance expense
I
Replacement costs
5,231
Replacement costs
J
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
--_---.
Fees paid tp_othgr jurisdictions
K
Total CM & R
84,873
Total CM & R
L.
Interest expense
8,641
Interest expense
M
Depreciation expense
44,011
Depreciation expense
N
Total expense
137,525
Total expense
0
Increase' (Decrease) Fund Balance
(9,065)
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
P
Debt principal
36,022
Debt principal
Q
Total flow volume
75,697,000
Total flow volume
R
Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are those which are of such a nature as to be beyond those repairs anticipat
in the annual budget. Examples of "extraordinary" breakdorvns„might include a blamer breakdorvrr in the aeration sys
large pump system motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, Vora'fl'oat' d aerater.'.'Please
identify the most costly potential repair and maintenance problem for this sewerage system.
Gas detection eoujpment- 51,951 25
Repaired puma on chlorinator- S325.17,,
Sewer svtrn f1ushin-. S5.132.00 Ladon motor reo1r- l.083.17 '
Lagoon Gearmotor repair- .$858.78 ., r•x.,�
S Approximate cost of this potential repair $9,550,37 "
(over)
Mau
r �
• 2 -
Describe the source of funds to cover this extraordinary item (a bond, line of credit, escrtw account, working
capital, etc.) "i,
Working capital
i
U Additional cats
V Detail of other revenue on Line E (if applicable):
Year I. Year 2
Description pm unt mamt
Rental and. Other Income . $2,357
Ttex't` .Income.:....._ .. 16, 820
JY
w ... W..., :......., w.. _, ..•.__ _.... ..1.9•l.177 .
��• � .. .. .. 1. i , t � � `
yr .. .rr m.. ... .w . .... .. . . . • . . .. .. _.. ......................
, _r . .... •� •-.r,..
• Vrr .i• ..•'$ 7f'. .:..
^.. .�'' !':' .1C rr. .i r!i' `?t '�l i[ Q tact Person:
Capacity: 0.46 y,,< _., '�' . Fay,,.1,e ,Smith, Town Manager
NAND
Users: residentla1Paul Street
785............__ ....,.................... Town of Boonsboro, 11 St.......
camiercial Eoonsboro, IMD 217
65....................• ...
.�.._...._� ....:.. .......::....:...:... _ /M....... _ 301-432-5141
t. ;. I
...mr,:. , ,._,,...w_.:.N.,.. ,. _ ....a ......... .:. .,.w F,ax .301-432-4050 _
G-36'
SG1EI LE FS
FIN/ ZCIAL PGMiT STATISTICS
COUNTY WATER & SEWER Pl.PM
County Nance
Washington
Systen NanBoonsboro Lagoon
�:,-'r .'.�i::';t•: 1'991 _ ,
Fiscal Year #1
(Fiscal Year #21990
K
FISCAL YEAR #1
COLI.P'N 1
FISCAL YEAR #2
q
COLUMN 2
n
Serer charge revenue
125,110
Sr c arge revenue
loo . 930
C
Connection charge revenue
5,600
Connection charge revenue
8,110
0
Front ft assessment revenue
Front ft as'��v�nue
E
Other revenue (carplete schedule
on e2
,
25,216
Other. revenue _(caiplete schedule
on page 2)
_
"127,065
F
Total revenue
155,926
Tota revenue
-... F..,.,
105
G
Operation expense
7 R
Operation expense
6.1.344
Ii
Maintenance expense
Maintenance expense
I
Replacerent costs
' ...
Replacerent costs
J
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
-Fees..
paid to other jurisdictions
.... . .. ...-. ... :i .. A:.
-
K. Total C1&R R
103,313
Total C1&R R
177,582
L Interest expense
6,316
Interest expense
7,483
M
Depreciation expense
42,339
Depreciation expense
44,7.84
Pl
Total expense
151,968
Total expense
229,849
0
Increase• (Decrease) Fund Balance
3,958
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
6,256
P
Debt principal
42,417
Debt principal
36,805
Total flaw volume
71,275,000
Total flaw volume -
67,615,000'
R Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are those r4iich are of such a nature as to be beyond tfrose�repa 'rs aiticipate<
in the annual budget. Exarples -of "extraordinary" breakda�ns might include a blower breakdown in the aeration systE
large pulp systen motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator. Please
identify the most costly potential repair and maintenance:.plen for this se+�erage �S+stn.n��'
1990 -Aerator repairs- S864.45
--Lagoon motor repair- S1,335.45 m_ R r......l: x;
Mixer motor repair- $1,030.26
~'
1991- Lagoon repair- $2,685.85 'Motor.Krepa,.r- $297.28
Lagoon motor repair- $1,845.63 South end pump station repair- $ 1,710.00
Filters & Scale- 51,029.50 Lagoon .,£ow meter repair- $272.00
Time indicator- $396.00 Lagoon chlorine heads- $1,690.95
Approximate cost of this potential repair 1990-, $3,230.16 1991- $9,927.21
(over)
G-37
1'
:t
Describe the source of funds to cover this extraordinary item (a bald, line of credit, escrv• -.o:
capital, ettr.):-
Working capital
Additional ,caRne:ts
tail of other revenue on..Line.E (if applicable):
::......... ' Description _ • ...•_... y.....'• ; .; .
Rental and other income
Interest income ........... .......•,...
EPA' Gratis _•.
Year 1
Amamt
S4,344
18,032
2,840
25,216
• . Y 1 ..' t. _Y .m Vs.twc.vn.,vi', ��. ,.n .i i...1I. ...wv.. .,...��. '.... . • . w.. ... ...ar ...
Year 2
Amamt
., w. .$:2,564
`'18,775
105;726
117,065
Jk. t(..•.(:' r: '.ir
. .,..w. �..w..•er••r. 4.. v .rn.. .. „w '...su.,, .r,.. u.. r. .n.•r .... ..... .0 .n ....n. m..v . .. .' ' •
K't2 f . ' u`r .ar• .... Contact Person:
C apa"' Fay L Smith, Town Manager cIty.1.: p:6...:
..�� _._ ....- . ;_.• Users, residential 785 Town of Boonsboro, 1'1 Srpain Street
......,_.�...,- _ .� ...� ......., ...��...... ,.. ...... _ : ADDRESS . .. ...... .
camiercial 65 Boonsboro, Mr) 21713
432-5141
T #
Fax- 301-432-4050
G-38
SO1l:DU1 E FS
FINAN2IAi_ i STATIS I{3
CUUNTY RATER & €ER PL
County Plane Washington Fisa71Yearr`I ' 1989/90
Systen Naue.See "U" Washington County Sanitary District Fiscal Year 2 1990/91
A
FISCAL YF?R r 1
COLill 1
FISCAL YEIR i2 ..
CDt.LrT 2
Sever charge revenue
1,710,496
SeNer charge revenue
1,716,347
C
Connection charge revenue
717 ,56 i
Connection charge revenue
269 , 617
D
Fruit ft assessment revenue
--
Front ft assessmentre `. even... n
ue
--
E
Other revenue (corpiete schedule
on oaae 2)
122,321
Other revenue (c*Tetthedule
on oaoe 2)
212 700
'
F
Total revenue
2,550,378
Total revenue ""
2,198,664
G
Operatic i expense
881 ,205
Operation expense
1,573,403
H
Maintenance expense
18,379
Maintenance expense ,,'
28,667
I
Rep l ace er t costs
Replace :t.• costs : _
J
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
Total `CM & R
899,584
Total CM & R
1,602,070
Interest expense
418,753
Interest expense
508,687
Depreciation expense
301, 969
Depreciation expense
, 413,203
N
Total expense
1,620,306
Total ewe
2,523,960
0
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
930,072
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
(325,296)
P
Debt principal
1,577,250
Debt principal
2,481,582
Q
Total flaw volume
455,120,369
Total flaw volute
633,573,300
R I Extraordinary and maintenance are those +rich are of s airs rep � udi a nature as to"-be"beyond those repairs anticipa
in the annual budget. Exarples of "extraordinary" breakdatins might include a blower breakdcon in the aeration sy
large puro system motor and control, clarifier sludge scraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator. Please
identify the most costly potential repair and maintenance problen for this seNerage sy�tu=m,
. i .. .... .. n.,u . s... .m -w ...... „Y.: ��;.. L ��1 i Aid V,Y•wr•..
Generator
S} Approxiurrate cost of this potential repair 77,000
hover}
G-39
l
—2-
I Describe the scurce.of furls tom: :carer this extraordinary item (a bcnd, line of credit, escrow account, working
capital , etc.)
Cr1t} Pr
U Mdjja1 coniien s N i cad�mus WWTP i i, H h I a nd Manor , WWTP nt r WWTP
(' hie -!-Hal' uax t =- w.as re -name d-�'N codem�ss WwfiP
L.
--- .• , f! .' l"� � Z � I I Y�I Y I:/YDrr�l:4�•
V Detafl :of other revenue as Line .5. f `' akTe .; ... _ ...
5,w
�....,w. ,.. .....:... n...a.rrwrw-+.... v{
Year z:
Oescr�ytiort _. , .. �.:N.,. , ... , Arr�mt
Penalty iiarge, -,'. -` ,_-, _..,,w,.. _ ti.r,,, w, .,..�_.,. , 6,206
interest 109,424 •..- —
122,321 :
{...D..., `.....,. ,,_:....
♦w.. .-i....,• ..,'lmti Iww.t„sx .rn. ...... r4r: .... •,. Mu ,. .,vu, c,wr... .ru. •....hr+.:ww :t ,. r ., � S �! n :wr+.+MF. wrw w ,: •:.. +e» u. -a:..
,r �� t+r�,+w�n�,� ,rr. • ,m N „rn,.,. w. .w rn=r. ,. ,.aan a ,n a,rn +x1•w . x.,xl.w.t'wwv'., rr ,yn:r.., ... n,,.'.. n.. Dnxnr w.:s.� .-.seau xn r:rwo. , •.r: ":.. M :.. ..
Il. _, f +•,.. ".. a,x. rW:.. w -.,w_ .wr ..,... ,w,+.w+ •r
•• „e..rw wzw:,a ani••ar.wxD ., .: „ierl"i.;rvNnr.4.-wa `at'r:'' '-• ,-.*1 �'.M �V "'wr.+„ r, ..
t. r . . �'�� �.�': ....-,. !'r.. w ,n. ,..r.,-Na'c.M a,w. ,..n.ar ee,w:w-.. a.,:n,n..na .n. .,: .e.r. n•. ..
.....,,. .. Iry lyl° .: x.�.: f S'!"�' De'{'en' •e-.VM �� a K:�..
�_z710 NG0 ditiar ray ......:R MIh
l.,:W69
.... '.,.:.:W?Iliams2grt M
(301) 791-3083
21795
G-40 "'
,
SG!DIIL£ FS -
FINP CIAL WL0GD NT STATISTIC
WJ{1Y WATER & SCR P1 6
County Nave Washinaton h i naton . ea v #1 88/89
Systen Nave See "U". Washington County Sanitary District-•".. . Fiscal Year 42 (1'
A
FISG?L YEAR i1
COLLMV I
FISCAL__YEt!i3 3Z
COLfi 2
...�96
8
Serer charge revenue
1,162,003
Seae��...t�rge, revenue
.
1 710
C
Connection charge revenue
489.215 _
Ccnnecttcn charge tense
,
D
Front ft assessment revenue
_:f
.,Wks ent� ,enue :
E
Other revenue (caTplete schedule
716 960
r. newer e.. (calr fete schedule
on ace 2)
,
an pads"2�.-
321
F
Tota i revenue
.. .. • ° -" "-
2,37x,178 w.
Tea _rev.
G
Operation expense.
959,842
is `' se .; ...' ' ,,:T'
,.
881i5
H
Maintenance expense
3247.x
,'=''
Maintenance expense
Q
I
Replacement costs
.
Replaceint costs
"
J
Fees paid to other' jurisdictions
.a.
Fees paid to other jurisdictions
K Total CM & R
i 992,OiL_
Total CM & R
`.
899,584
Interest expense
448,gfi5
Interest expense
418,753
M
Depreciation expense
386 490
,
Depreciation expense
.301,969
N
Total expense
1,827471
Total expense
1,620,306
0
Increase' (Decrease) Fund Balance
550,707
Increase (Decrease) Fund Balance
. 930,072
D
Debt principal
3,721,172
Debt principal
1,577,250
Q
Total flay volume
463,982,700'S
Total flow volume
455,120,369
RI Extraordinary repairs and maintenance are tfio'se�v�hich•are-of.•sr _a,.rnatuM,as to be beyond those repairs: anticipat
in the annual budget. ExaTples of "extraordinary" br akdawns sight include a B aver area 6dw, in-the••aer ticn syE
large pulp system mstor and control, clarifier sludgecraper arm and bearings, or a floating aerator.. Please
identify ttne nose costly potential ra1rar1dmapitenance problei for this sewerage system.
i rpF
S 1 approximate cost of this potential repair 71,000
(over)
G-41
-2-
Year 2
Aunt
53,246.
64 ,387.1
387 . :. ' .:.. .
83,492 .
36,54q
t rsont
Cpacity��,..,...�..,.
301-223-941:6
.6,206
109p424
6,691:
ter^
122,32.1`:
G-42