Grayson County, Texas

BASIN SUMMARY REPORT

FOR THE

RED RIVER BASIN

September 1999

1.0 Background

Reach I of the Red River Basin (eastern region) was monitored by the Authority in FY 1997. During this period, it was necessary to choose priority subwatersheds to conduct further study of concerns identified during previous assessments. Therefore, subwatersheds in Reach I of the Red River Basin were analyzed for many factors to determine which would be classified as priority subwatersheds. Choctaw Creek, Bois D’Arc Creek and Pine Creek subwatersheds were chosen as the three priority subwatersheds in this reach. These perennial creeks have relatively large watersheds containing all major land uses including urban, farming and ranching activities. All three creeks receive a large amount of wastewater effluent from major discharges in the reach.

Choctaw Creek was chosen as the highest priority of the three watersheds since it is an unclassified stream and the watershed encompasses a large urban area of Sherman with several industrial companies which tend to increase the potential for water quality problems through runoff, spills, leaks, etc. The City of Sherman discharges its wastewater effluent into a tributary of Choctaw Creek, contributing considerable flow to the watershed. Additionally, there are numerous petroleum storage tanks and groundwater wells which add to the potential of water quality problems.

Historical water quality data shows several fish kills in Choctaw Creek having several different causes. These causes include sewage, pesticides and ammonia. This indicates that at least in the past, undesired pollutants are finding their way into Choctaw Creek. Monitoring results taken by the Authority showed elevated levels of total dissolved solids and nutrients for Choctaw Creek. All these factors resulted in the selection of the Choctaw Creek watershed as the highest priority watershed in Reach I of the Red River.

2.0 Trend Analysis

Trend analysis of chemical constituents found to be a concern or possible concern in the 1996 screening process which was performed on stations located in the selected subwatershed with sufficient data. As seen on the following tables, there were no significant trends found for the 12 constituents analyzed for the two stations having sufficient data.

3.0 Identifying Sources

Global positioning data were collected on petroleum storage tanks (PSTs) and groundwater wells were taken to obtain accurate locations on potential sources of pollution which would have the greatest influence on the priority watershed. Maps were then prepared showing the geographical location of these potential sources of pollution, as well as the location of municipal landfills.

4.0 Events and Issues

Events identified in this subwatershed include two permit amendments for the City of Sherman WWTP dated 11/21/97 and 2/24/98, as well as six reported fish kills listed below:

Date	Estimate Killed	Source	General Cause	Specific Cause	Location
5/25/77	28	Municipal	Organic Compound	Sewage	Choctaw Creek ) Northwest Corner of Grayson County between FM 1753 and SH 120
6/25/83	Unknown	Municipal	Organic Compound	Sewage	Choctaw Creek at FM 120
6/10/87	20	Individual	Organic Compound	Other	Choctaw Creek ) Grayson County
5/30/90	100	Agriculture	Organic Compound	Pesticide	Choctaw Creek near FM 697 and FM 11
9/17/94	500	Municipal	Low Dissolved Oxygen	Sewage Bypass	Post Oak Creek at Discharge
9/23/94	50	Industry	Inorganic Compound	Ammonia	Choctaw Creek at Discharge from Oscar Meyer plant

These reported fish kills show that all major land uses in the subwatershed have had a negative effect on water quality.

5.0 Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis of chemical constituents found to be a concern was performed on two TNRCC monitoring sites. Other sites were not adequate for analysis due to certain factors.

Station	Number Events	Date Range	# of Days	Determination
10108	2	5/23/1984	1	Insufficient Data
10109	11	5/23/1984 – 7/23/1991	3	Timespan Inadequate
10110	10	5/29/1991 – 7/23/1991	2	Timespan Inadequate
10111	20	5/23/1984 – 4/15/1992	10	Adequate Data for Analysis
10112	4	5/23/1984 – 7/23/1991	2	Insufficient Data
10114	2	5/23/1984	1	Insufficient Data
10115	24	5/23/1984 – 12/27/1998	15	Adequate Data for Analysis
15442	N/A	N/A	N/A	Insufficient Data
15446	N/A	N/A	N/A	Insufficient Data
16123	8	8/21/1997 – 3/20/1998	8	Insufficient Data

Statistical Analysis for Station 10111

Parameters	N	P-Value
00300	16	0.798971
00620	10	0.404762
00650	N/A	N/A
00665	10	0.736605
00671	10	0.991070
00900	N/A	N/A
00940	10	0.878393
00945	10	0.682449
01025	N/A	N/A
01049	N/A	N/A
01075	N/A	N/A
70507	N/A	N/A

Statistical Analysis for Station 10115

Parameters	N	P-value
00300	20	0.943958
00620	N/A	N/A
00650	N/A	N/A
00665	N/A	N/A
00671	N/A	N/A
00900	N/A	N/A
00940	N/A	N/A
00945	N/A	N/A
01025	N/A	N/A
01049	N/A	N/A
01075	N/A	N/A
70507	N/A	N/A

Map of Choctaw Subwatershed (Transportation Theme)

Map of Choctaw Subwatershed (Hydrology Theme)

Map of Choctaw Subwatershed (City Boundary Theme)

Map of Choctaw Subwatershed (TNRCC Monitoring Stations Theme)

Map of Choctaw Subwatershed (Miscellaneous Theme)

Map of Choctaw Subwatershed (Water Resources I Theme)

Map of Choctaw Subwatershed (Water Resources II Theme)

Graph of Choctaw Creek at SH 11 SE of Sherman – Dissolved Oxygen Measurements

Graph of Choctaw Creek at SH 11 SE of Sherman – Chloride and Sulfate Measurements

Graph of Choctaw Creek at SH 11 SE of Sherman – Nitrate + Nitrite, Dissolved Orthophosphorus Measurements

Graph of Choctaw Creek at SH 11 SE of Sherman – Total Phosphorus, and Post Oak Creek at FM 1417, SE of Sherman, Dissolved Oxygen