DOCSLIB.ORG

A Flow-Simulation Model of the Tidal Potomac River

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Flow-Simulation Model of the Tidal Potomac River A Flow-Simulation Model of the Tidal Potomac River A Water-Quality Study of the Tidal Potomac River and Estuary United States Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2234-D Chapter D A Flow-Simulation Model of the Tidal Potomac River By RAYMOND W. SCHAFFRANEK U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 2234 A WATER-QUALITY STUDY OF THE TIDAL POTOMAC RIVER AND ESTUARY DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL MODEL, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1987 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section, U.S. Geological Survey, Federal Center, Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Schaffranek, Raymond W. A flow-simulation model of the tidal Potomac River. (A water-quality study of the tidal Potomac River and Estuary) (U.S. Geological Survey water-supply paper; 2234) Bibliography; p. 24. Supt. of Docs, no.: I. 19.13:2234-0 1. Streamflow Potomac River Data processing. 2. Streamflow Potomac River Mathematical models. I. Title. II. Series. III. Series: U.S. Geological Survey water-supply paper; 2234. GB1207.S33 1987 551.48'3'09752 85-600354 Any use of trade names and trademarks in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey. FOREWORD a rational and well-documented general approach for the study of tidal rivers and estuaries. This interdisciplinary effort emphasized studies of the Tidal rivers and estuaries are very important features transport of the major nutrient species and of suspended of the Coastal Zone because of their immense biological sediment. The movement of these substances through five productivity and their proximity to centers of commerce and major reaches or control volumes of the tidal Potomac River population. Most of the shellfish and much of the local and Estuary was determined during 1980 and 1981. This finfish consumed by man are harvested from estuaries and effort provided a framework on which to assemble a variety tidal rivers. Many of the world's largest shipping ports are of investigations: located within estuaries. Many estuaries originate as river (1) The generation and deposition of sediments, nu­ valleys drowned by rising sea level and are geologically trients, and trace metals from the Holocene to the present ephemeral features, destined eventually to fill with sedi­ was determined by sampling surficial bottom sediments and ments. Nutrients, heavy metals, and organic chemicals are analyzing their characteristics and distributions. often associated with the sediments trapped in estuaries. (2) Bottom-sediment geochemistry was studied and Part of the trapped nutrients may be recycled to the water the effects of benthic exchange processes on water-column nutrient concentrations ascertained. column, exacerbating nutrient-enrichment problems caused (3) Current-velocity and water-surface-elevation data by local sewage treatment plants, and promoting undesir­ were collected to calibrate and verify a series of one- and able algae growth. The metals and organics may be concen­ two-dimensional hydrodynamic flow and transport models. trated in the food chain, further upsetting the ecology and (4) Measurements from typical urban and rural threatening the shell and finfish harvests. Our knowledge of watersheds were extrapolated to provide estimates of the the processes governing these phenomena is limited, and the nonpoint sources of sediments, nutrients, and biochemical measurements needed to improve our understanding are oxygen demand during 1980 and 1981. scarce. (5) Intensive summertime studies were conducted to In response to an increasing awareness of the impor­ determine the effects of local sewage-treatment-plant efflu­ tance and delicate ecological balance of tidal rivers and ents on dissolved-oxygen levels in the tidal Potomac River. estuaries, the U.S. Geological Survey began a 5-year inter­ (6) Species, numbers, and net productivity of phyto- disciplinary study of the tidal Potomac River and Estuary in plankton were determined to evaluate their effect on nutri­ October of 1977. The study encompassed elements of both ents and dissolved oxygen. the Water Resources Division's ongoing Research and River (7) Wetland studies were conducted to determine the Quality Assessment Programs. The Division has been con­ present-day distribution and abundance of submersed aquat­ ducting research on various elements of the hydrologic cycle ic vegetation, and to ascertain the important water-quality since 1894 and began intense investigation of estuarine and sediment parameters influencing this distribution. processes in San Francisco Bay in 1968. The River Quality (8) Repetitive samples were collected to document Assessment program began in 1973 at the suggestion of the the distribution and abundance of the macrobenthic infaunal Advisory Committee on Water Data for Public Use, which species of the tidal river and estuary and to determine the saw a special need to develop suitable information for effects of changes in environmental conditions on this distri­ river-basin planning and water-quality management. The bution and abundance. Potomac assessment was the first to focus on a tidal river The reports in this Water-Supply Paper series docu­ and estuary. In addition to conducting research into the ment the technical aspects of the above investigations. The processes governing water-quality conditions in tidal rivers series also contains an overall introduction to the study, an and estuaries, the ultimate goals of the Potomac Estuary integrated technical summary of the results, and an execu­ Study were to aid water-quality management decision- tive summary, which links the results with aspects of concern making for the Potomac, and to provide other groups with to water-quality managers. Philip Cohen Chief Hydrologist James P. Bennett Potomac Study Coordinator A Flow-Simulation Model of the Tidal Potomac River III CONTENTS Foreword III Abstract 1 Introduction 1 The tidal Potomac River 1 The branch-network flow model 4 Model development 5 Network schematization 5 Channel geometry 5 Boundary conditions 6 Initial conditions 7 Model calibration and verification 7 Source and accuracy of measured data 7 Computation-control parameters 8 Flow-conveyance parameters 8 Simulation results 9 Sensitivity analyses 12 Computation control 12 Boundary-condition errors 15 Initial-condition errors 15 Operational guidelines 16 Effects of wind 17 Model applications 19 Particle transport 20 Flow-volume assessment 21 Summary and conclusions 23 References cited 24 Conversion factors 25 Appendix I, Program-control record format 29 Appendix II, Job control 37 Appendix III, Model execution setup 39 Appendix IV, Diagnostic messages 40 FIGURES 1. Map showing Potomac River near Washington, D.C. 2 2. Map showing the tidal Potomac River system 3 3. Schematic diagram of the tidal Potomac River system for the branch-network flow model 6 4. Graph showing model-generated water-surface elevations versus measured water- surface elevations for the Potomac River near Broad Creek (A, fi), near Hains Point (C), near Key Bridge (D), and near National Airport (E) 10 5. Graph showing model-generated discharges versus measured discharges for the Potomac River near Broad Creek (A, fi), at Indian Head (C, D), and near National Airport (£) 11 6. Graph showing discharges computed for the Potomac River at Indian Head by use of 5- , 15- , and 60-minute time steps (Ar) 13 7. Graph showing discharges computed for the Potomac River at Indian Head by use of 0.6, 0.75, and 1.0 values for the spatial derivative weighting factor (6) 14 A Flow-Simulation Model of the Tidal Potomac River V 8. Graph showing measured water-surface elevations near Key Bridge versus computed by use of +10-cm and 10-cm datum adjustments at Indian Head 15 9. Graph showing discharges computed for the Potomac River at Indian Head by use of known, estimated, and hypothesized initial conditions 16 10. Graph showing water-surface elevations computed for the Potomac River near Key Bridge by use of known, estimated, and hypothesized initial conditions 16 11. Graph showing water-surface elevations recorded at Indian Head and near Key Bridge and wind data recorded at Indian Head for Sept. 21-27, 1981 17 12. Graph showing water-surface elevations recorded at Indian Head and near Wilson Bridge and wind data recorded at Indian Head for Nov. 18-24, 1981 18 13. Graph showing model-generated plot of computed versus measured water-surface elevations for the Potomac River near Key Bridge on Sept. 23, 1981 18 14. Graph showing model-generated plot of computed versus measured water-surface elevations for the Potomac River near Wilson Bridge on Nov. 21, 1981 19 15. Graph showing time-of-travel plot of injected particles in the Potomac River from Aug. 15, 1981, through Sept. 13, 1981 22 TABLES 1. Comparison of computed and measured flow volumes 13 2. Model performance using alternative computation-control parameter values 14 3. Potomac River cross-section locations for the branch-network flow model 20 4. Accumulated flow volumes for the Potomac River at Wilson Bridge from Aug. 15, 1981, through Sept. 13, 1981 23 SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS A Area of cross section L2 B Top width of cross section L Cd Water-surface drag coefficient g Gravitational acceleration LT~2 k Flow-resistance coefficient function T2L~2/3 q Lateral inflow per unit length of channel L2T-1 Q Flow discharge L3T-1 R Hydraulic radius of cross section L t Time T A? Time increment T u Point flow velocity LT~ J U Mean flow velocity LT" 1 Ua Wind velocity LT" 1 x Longitudinal channel distance L A* Length increment L Z Water-surface elevation L a Angle between wind direction and x-axis Degrees P Momentum coefficient n. Flow-resistance coefficient similar to Manning's n TL~ 1/3 0 Spatial-derivative weighting factor £ Wind-resistance coefficient p Water density ML~3 p Atmospheric density ML~3 VI A Water-Quality Study of the Tidal Potomac River and Estuary A WATER-QUALITY STUDY OF THE TIDAL POTOMAC RIVER AND ESTUARY A Flow-Simulation Model of the Tidal Potomac River By Raymond W.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nanjemoy and Mattawoman Creek Watersheds
    Defining the Indigenous Cultural Landscape for The Nanjemoy and Mattawoman Creek Watersheds Prepared By: Scott M. Strickland Virginia R. Busby Julia A. King With Contributions From: Francis Gray • Diana Harley • Mervin Savoy • Piscataway Conoy Tribe of Maryland Mark Tayac • Piscataway Indian Nation Joan Watson • Piscataway Conoy Confederacy and Subtribes Rico Newman • Barry Wilson • Choptico Band of Piscataway Indians Hope Butler • Cedarville Band of Piscataway Indians Prepared For: The National Park Service Chesapeake Bay Annapolis, Maryland St. Mary’s College of Maryland St. Mary’s City, Maryland November 2015 ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this project was to identify and represent the Indigenous Cultural Landscape for the Nanjemoy and Mattawoman creek watersheds on the north shore of the Potomac River in Charles and Prince George’s counties, Maryland. The project was undertaken as an initiative of the National Park Service Chesapeake Bay office, which supports and manages the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail. One of the goals of the Captain John Smith Trail is to interpret Native life in the Middle Atlantic in the early years of colonization by Europeans. The Indigenous Cultural Landscape (ICL) concept, developed as an important tool for identifying Native landscapes, has been incorporated into the Smith Trail’s Comprehensive Management Plan in an effort to identify Native communities along the trail as they existed in the early17th century and as they exist today. Identifying ICLs along the Smith Trail serves land and cultural conservation, education, historic preservation, and economic development goals. Identifying ICLs empowers descendant indigenous communities to participate fully in achieving these goals.
    [Show full text]
  • Saco River Saco & Biddeford, Maine
    Environmental Assessment Finding of No Significant Impact, and Section 404(b)(1) Evaluation for Maintenance Dredging DRAFT Saco River Saco & Biddeford, Maine US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS New England District March 2016 Draft Environmental Assessment: Saco River FNP DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Section 404(b)(1) Evaluation Saco River Saco & Biddeford, Maine FEDERAL NAVIGATION PROJECT MAINTENANCE DREDGING March 2016 New England District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 696 Virginia Rd Concord, Massachusetts 01742-2751 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 2.0 PROJECT HISTORY, NEED, AND AUTHORITY .......................................... 1 3.0 PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................... 3 4.0 ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................................ 6 4.1 No Action Alternative ..................................................................................... 6 4.2 Maintaining Channel at Authorized Dimensions............................................. 6 4.3 Alternative Dredging Methods ........................................................................ 6 4.3.1 Hydraulic Cutterhead Dredge....................................................................... 7 4.3.2 Hopper Dredge ........................................................................................... 7 4.3.3 Mechanical Dredge ....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Anacostia River Watershed Restoration Plan
    Restoration Plan for the Anacostia River Watershed in Prince George’s County December 30, 2015 RUSHERN L. BAKER, III COUNTPreparedY EXECUTIV for:E Prince George’s County, Maryland Department of the Environment Stormwater Management Division Prepared by: 10306 Eaton Place, Suite 340 Fairfax, VA 22030 COVER PHOTO CREDITS: 1. M-NCPPC _Cassi Hayden 7. USEPA 2. Tetra Tech, Inc. 8. USEPA 3. Prince George’s County 9. Montgomery Co DEP 4. VA Tech, Center for TMDL and 10. PGC DoE Watershed Studies 11. USEPA 5. Charles County, MD Dept of 12. PGC DoE Planning and Growth Management 13. USEPA 6. Portland Bureau of Environmental Services _Tom Liptan Anacostia River Watershed Restoration Plan Contents Acronym List ............................................................................................................................... v 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose of Report and Restoration Planning ............................................................................... 3 1.1.1 What is a TMDL? ................................................................................................................ 3 1.1.2 What is a Restoration Plan? ............................................................................................... 4 1.2 Impaired Water Bodies and TMDLs .............................................................................................. 6 1.2.1 Water Quality Standards ....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard (2012)
    FGDC-STD-018-2012 Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard Marine and Coastal Spatial Data Subcommittee Federal Geographic Data Committee June, 2012 Federal Geographic Data Committee FGDC-STD-018-2012 Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard, June 2012 ______________________________________________________________________________________ CONTENTS PAGE 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Objectives ................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Need ......................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Scope ........................................................................................................................ 2 1.4 Application ............................................................................................................... 3 1.5 Relationship to Previous FGDC Standards .............................................................. 4 1.6 Development Procedures ......................................................................................... 5 1.7 Guiding Principles ................................................................................................... 7 1.7.1 Build a Scientifically Sound Ecological Classification .................................... 7 1.7.2 Meet the Needs of a Wide Range of Users ......................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Water Resources
    Gaithersburg A Character Counts! City City of Gaithersburg WATER RESOURCES A Master Plan Element February 17, 2010 2009 MASTER PLAN CITY OF GAITHERSBURG 2009 MASTER PLAN WATER RESOURCES ELEMENT Planning Commission Approval: January 20, 2010, Resolution PCR-2-10 Mayor and City Council Adoption: February 16, 2010, Resolution R-10-10 MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Mayor Sidney A. Katz Council Vice President Cathy C. Drzyzgula Jud Ashman Henry F. Marraffa, Jr. Michael A. Sesma Ryan Spiegel PLANNING COMMISSION Chair John Bauer Vice-Chair Matthew Hopkins Commissioner Lloyd S. Kaufman Commissioner Leonard J. Levy Commissioner Danielle L. Winborne Alternate Commissioner Geraldine Lanier CITY MANAGER Angel L. Jones ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Erica Shingara, former Environmental Services Director Gary Dyson, Environmental Specialist Christine Gallagher, former Environmental Assistant Meredith Strider, Environmental Assistant PLANNING AND CODE ADMINISTRATION Greg Ossont, Director, Planning & Code Administration Lauren Pruss, Planning Director Kirk Eby, GIS Planner Raymond Robinson III, Planner CIT Y CITY OF GAITHERSBURG OF GAITHERSBURG 2009 MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 2 WATER RESOURCES TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Purpose and Intent................................................................................................................ 1 2. Background.......................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Introduction.................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Physicsof Estuariesand Coastal Seas
    1 August 12-16 2012 n New York City The Physics of Estuaries and Coastal Seas Symposium 2 3 Assessing Suspended Sediment Dynamics in the San Francisco Bay-Delta System: Coupling Landsat Satellite Imagery, in situ Data and a Numerical Model Fernanda Achete1, Mick van der Wegen1, Dave Schoellhamer2, Bruce E. Jaffe2 1 UNESCO-IHE, Delft, Netherlands 2 U.S. Geological Survey Rivers draining the Central Valley and Sierras of California, including the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers, meet in the Delta before discharging into the northeastern end of the San Francisco Estuary. The Bay-Delta system is an important region for a) economic activities (ports, agriculture, and industry), b) human settling (the San Francisco Bay area hosts 7.15 million inhabitants) and c) ecosystems (the Delta area hosts several endemic species and is an important regional breeding and feeding environment). Human activities, including hydraulic mining and agriculture development have affected the Bay-Delta system over the past 150 years. Other examples of anthropogenic influence on the system are damming of rivers, channels dredging, land reclamation and levee construction. Suspended sediment concentration (SSC) has varied considerably as a result of these activities. The change in SSC has a high impact on ecosystems by influencing light penetration that is closely related to primary production, contaminants distribution and marshland development. Better understanding of the spatial distribution and temporal variation of SSC opens the way to improved understanding ecosystem dynamics in the Bay-Delta system and to assess the impact of future developments such as water export, sea level rise and decreasing SSC levels.
    [Show full text]
  • EARTH Title Description ENTITIES ATTRIBUTES DYNAMIC ASPECTS
    EARTH Title Description ENTITIES ATTRIBUTES DYNAMIC ASPECTS DIMENSIONS ACCESSORY TERMS <EFFECTS AND SINGLE EVENTS> <STRUCTURE AND MORPHOLOGY> ACTIVITIES COMPOSITION CONDITIONS GENERAL TERMS IMMATERIAL ENTITIES MATERIAL ENTITIES PROCESSES PROPERTIES TIME <ABIOTIC ENVIRONMENT PROCESSES> <BIOECOLOGICAL PROCESSES> <COGNITIVE PROCESSES> <COMPLEX> <MENTAL CONSTRUCTS> <PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROCESSES> <PHYSICAL OPERATIONS> <POLICY ACTIVITIES> <PROCESSES OF COMPLEX SYSTEMS (BY GENERAL TYPE)> <PROCESSES RELATED TO MATERIALS AND PRODUCTS> <PRODUCTIVE SECTORS> <SOCIAL AND CULTURAL ACTIVITIES> <SOCIAL, CULTURAL AND POLICY PROCESSES> INDUSTRY LIVING ENTITIES NON LIVING ENTITIES <ABSTRACT CONCEPTS AND PRINCIPLES> <DISPOSAL AND RESTORATION> <KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS> <MANIPULATION, PRODUCTION, CONSUMPTION> <MEASURES> <METHODS AND TECHNIQUES> <PARAMETERS, CRITERIA AND FACTORS> <REPRESENTATION AND ELABORATION SYSTEMS> ARTIFICIAL ENTITIES BIOECOLOGICAL ENTITIES DATA NATURAL ENTITIES NATURAL SPACES BY GENERAL TYPES SOCIAL ENTITIES <ABIOTIC ENVIRONMENT> <BUILT ENVIRONMENT> <EARTH CONSTITUENTS AND MATERIALS> <MATERIALS AND PRODUCTS> <OPEN SPACES, CULTURAL LANDSCAPES> <PARTS> <PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CONSTITUENTS> <WHOLE> EQUIPMENT AND TECHNOLOGICAL SYSTEMS symbiotic organisms technological systems <ATMOSPHERE ENVIRONMENT> <ECOSYSTEM ABIOTIC COMPONENTS> <EXTRATERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENT> <GEOGRAPHICAL REGIONS AND CLIMATIC ZONES> <TERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENT> <WATER ENVIRONMENT> <CONTINENTAL WATER ENVIRONMENT> <OCEANIC WATER ENVIRONMENT> <TERRESTRIAL AREAS AND LANDFORMS> geological
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland's 2016 Triennial Review of Water Quality Standards
    Maryland’s 2016 Triennial Review of Water Quality Standards EPA Approval Date: July 11, 2018 Table of Contents Overview of the 2016 Triennial Review of Water Quality Standards ............................................ 3 Nationally Recommended Water Quality Criteria Considered with Maryland’s 2016 Triennial Review ............................................................................................................................................ 4 Re-evaluation of Maryland’s Restoration Variances ...................................................................... 5 Other Future Water Quality Standards Work ................................................................................. 6 Water Quality Standards Amendments ........................................................................................... 8 Designated Uses ........................................................................................................................... 8 Criteria ....................................................................................................................................... 19 Antidegradation.......................................................................................................................... 24 2 Overview of the 2016 Triennial Review of Water Quality Standards The Clean Water Act (CWA) requires that States review their water quality standards every three years (Triennial Review) and revise the standards as necessary. A water quality standard consists of three separate but related
    [Show full text]
  • The District of Columbia Water Quality Assessment
    THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT 2008 INTEGRATED REPORT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND U.S. CONGRESS PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 305(b) AND 303(d) CLEAN WATER ACT (P.L. 97-117) District Department of the Environment Natural Resources Administration Water Quality Division Government of the District of Columbia Adrian M. Fenty, Mayor PREFACE PREFACE The Water Quality Division of the District of Columbia's District Department of the Environment, Natural Resources Administration, prepared this report to satisfy the listing requirements of §303(d) and the reporting requirements of §305(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (P.L. 97-117). This report provides water quality information on the District of Columbia’s surface and ground waters that were assessed during 2008 and updates the water quality information required by law. Various programs in the Natural Resources Administration contributed to this report including the Fisheries and Wildlife Division and the Watershed Protection Division. Questions or comments regarding this report or requests for copies should be forwarded to the address below. The District of Columbia Government District Department of the Environment Natural Resources Administration Water Quality Division 51 N St., NE Washington, D.C. 20002-3323 Attention: N. Shulterbrandt ii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ................................................................... ii TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................iii LIST OF TABLES...........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland Stream Waders 10 Year Report
    MARYLAND STREAM WADERS TEN YEAR (2000-2009) REPORT October 2012 Maryland Stream Waders Ten Year (2000-2009) Report Prepared for: Maryland Department of Natural Resources Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division 580 Taylor Avenue; C-2 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 1-877-620-8DNR (x8623) [email protected] Prepared by: Daniel Boward1 Sara Weglein1 Erik W. Leppo2 1 Maryland Department of Natural Resources Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division 580 Taylor Avenue; C-2 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 2 Tetra Tech, Inc. Center for Ecological Studies 400 Red Brook Boulevard, Suite 200 Owings Mills, Maryland 21117 October 2012 This page intentionally blank. Foreword This document reports on the firstt en years (2000-2009) of sampling and results for the Maryland Stream Waders (MSW) statewide volunteer stream monitoring program managed by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division (MANTA). Stream Waders data are intended to supplementt hose collected for the Maryland Biological Stream Survey (MBSS) by DNR and University of Maryland biologists. This report provides an overview oft he Program and summarizes results from the firstt en years of sampling. Acknowledgments We wish to acknowledge, first and foremost, the dedicated volunteers who collected data for this report (Appendix A): Thanks also to the following individuals for helping to make the Program a success. • The DNR Benthic Macroinvertebrate Lab staffof Neal Dziepak, Ellen Friedman, and Kerry Tebbs, for their countless hours in
    [Show full text]
  • Building Stones of the National Mall
    The Geological Society of America Field Guide 40 2015 Building stones of the National Mall Richard A. Livingston Materials Science and Engineering Department, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742, USA Carol A. Grissom Smithsonian Museum Conservation Institute, 4210 Silver Hill Road, Suitland, Maryland 20746, USA Emily M. Aloiz John Milner Associates Preservation, 3200 Lee Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22207, USA ABSTRACT This guide accompanies a walking tour of sites where masonry was employed on or near the National Mall in Washington, D.C. It begins with an overview of the geological setting of the city and development of the Mall. Each federal monument or building on the tour is briefly described, followed by information about its exterior stonework. The focus is on masonry buildings of the Smithsonian Institution, which date from 1847 with the inception of construction for the Smithsonian Castle and continue up to completion of the National Museum of the American Indian in 2004. The building stones on the tour are representative of the development of the Ameri­ can dimension stone industry with respect to geology, quarrying techniques, and style over more than two centuries. Details are provided for locally quarried stones used for the earliest buildings in the capital, including A quia Creek sandstone (U.S. Capitol and Patent Office Building), Seneca Red sandstone (Smithsonian Castle), Cockeysville Marble (Washington Monument), and Piedmont bedrock (lockkeeper's house). Fol­ lowing improvement in the transportation system, buildings and monuments were constructed with stones from other regions, including Shelburne Marble from Ver­ mont, Salem Limestone from Indiana, Holston Limestone from Tennessee, Kasota stone from Minnesota, and a variety of granites from several states.
    [Show full text]
  • The District of Columbia Water Quality Assessment
    THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT 2012 INTEGRATED REPORT TO THE US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND CONGRESS PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 305(b) AND 303(d) CLEAN WATER ACT (P.L. 97-117) District Department of the Environment Natural Resources Administration Water Quality Division i PREFACE The Water Quality Division of the District of Columbia's District Department of the Environment, Natural Resources Administration, prepared this report to satisfy the listing requirements of §303(d) and the reporting requirements of §305(b) of the federal Clean Water Act (P.L. 97-117). The report provides water quality information on the District of Columbia’s surface and ground waters that were assessed during 2010-2011 and updates the water quality information required by law. Various programs in the Natural Resources Administration contributed to this report including the Fisheries and Wildlife Division, the Stormwater Management Division, and the Watershed Protection Division. The Lead and Healthy Housing Division, Environmental Protection Administration also contributed to this report. Questions or comments regarding this report should be forwarded to the address below. The District of Columbia Government District Department of the Environment Natural Resources Administration Water Quality Division 1200 First Street, NE 5th Floor Washington, D.C. 20002 Attention: N. Shulterbrandt ii TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]