United States
iiyyirorimental Protection
•Agency
Region 4
345 Cqurtland Street, NE
Atlanta, GA 30365
EPA 904/9-86 142
October 1986
vvEPA
of a Saltwater
Marsh Ecosystem for the
Management of Seafood
Processing Wastewater
POINT AUX PINS
SANDY BAY
PORTERSVILLE
BAY
MOBILE
BAYOU
LA BATRE J MOBILE
BAY
GULF OF MEXICO
-------
Utilization of a Saltwater Marsh Ecosystem for the
Management of Seafood Processing Wastewater
October, 1986
Prepared by
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region IV - Atlanta, Georgia
Marine Environmental Sciences Consortium
Dauphin Island, Alabama
Alabama Department of Environmental Management
Montgomery, Alabama
Taxonomic Associates
Mobile, Alabama
This report presents the results of a cooperative study that
examined the potential for using a saltwater wetland to manage
seafood processing wastewater. An irregularly flooded black
needlerush (Juncus roemerianus) marsh located at Point aux
Pins in coastal Alabama was selected for the study. From
June 1984 through June 1985 the marsh was intensively studied
before, during, and after construction and operation of a
small pilot facility that distributed screened seafood processing
wastewater at various loading rates to controlled areas of
the marsh.
The study determined that the application of seafood processing
wastewater to the marsh affected a number of the marsh's water
quality characteristics in direct relation to the wastewater
loading rate. However, monitoring of the marsh flora and
fauna showed virtually no impact at any of the experimental
loading rates. As a result of this study a number of design
and loading criteria are suggested for any future projects
involving wastewater discharges to saltwater wetlands.
This report contains all data, analyses and conclusions
resulting from this study. Comments or inquiries should be
forwarded to :
Robert Lord
Environmental Assessment Branch
US EPA Region IV
345 Courtland Street NE
Atlanta, Georgia 30365
(404) 347-3776
June 25, 1987
Jack E. Ravan
-------
Utilization of a Saltwater Marsh Ecosystem
for the Management of Seafood
Processing Wastewater
Prepared by
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region IV - Atlanta, GA
Alabama Department of Environmental Management
Montgomery, Alabama
Marine Environmental Sciences Consortium
Dauphin Island, Alabama
Taxonomic Associates
Mobile, Alabama
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The pilot project reported in this document was built with the
generous support of the Alabama Department of Environmental Management
(ADEM). Additional support was rendered by the ADEM Water Quality Lab,
Montgomery, Alabama, through analysis of water and sediment samples. ADEM
personnel from Montgomery and the Mobile Field Operations Office assisted
in transportation of samples.
The Alabama Marine Environmental Sciences Consortium provided
technical and support personnel as well as participating in project
management.
Inquiries regarding information in this report should be made to
Robert Lord, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV, 345 Courtland
Street, Atlanta, Georgia, 30365.
-------
ABSTRACT
Over 640,000 gallons of screened seafood processing wastewater were applied
to an irregularly flooded Juncus roemerianus saltmarsh, located in southwest
Alabama, over a four month period (August - December) in 1984. Hydraulic loading
rates ranging from 1.33 cm/week to 3.56 cm/week did not result in measurable runoff
from the system during periods of low tide and no rainfall due to high evaporation
rates. Significant elevations in levels of Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, ammonium ion
and Biochemical Oxygen Demand were detected in surface waters of experimental plots
with elevations most evident in plots receiving the heaviest waste load. Signif-
icant microbial activity was indicated by increased mineralization/transformation
of nitrogen species on the plot surfaces. About 37 percent of the nitrogen applied
to the most heavily loaded plots was assimilated each day, assuming the conditions
of no tidal innundation and no rainfall were met. Little or no penetration of
wastewater into the groundwater was noted. However, nitrogen was slightly elevated
in surficial sediments (0-5cm). The canal adjacent to the study marsh showed no
water quality impacts from the project. Biological monitoring within experimental
and control plots, and the adjacent canal demonstrated significant seasonal vari-
ation but no impact on plant growth, plant productivity, marsh epifauna, or on
canal benthic and natant communities due to the waste discharge. Total abundance of
marsh infauna was slightly higher in the treated plots than in the control plots.
The study indicated a low impact loading level for this type of wastewater to be
about 2.0 cm per day during the growing season along the northern Gulf coast area.
11
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The management of seafood processing wastewater is a problem of the
seafood industry throughout the nation, but is particularly acute for Gulf
of Mexico shrimp processing plants. Large amounts of water are required in
the processing of the peeled and deveined product, resulting in a
tremendous volume of wastewater. In many areas, this wastewater is simply
discharged into coastal waters with little or no treatment. The impacts
associated with the loading of these high oxygen demanding wastes into gulf
coast receiving waters are compounded by the poor tidal flushing
characteristic of the region.
This study was conducted to determine the feasibility of using an
irregularly flooded June us saltmarsh as a seafood wastewater management
system. The spreading of seafood wastewaters would serve as a "living
filter" for the organic wastes, serve as a fertilizer for marsh plants and
contribute a nutrient source to the detrita.1/bacterial food web upon which
estuarine productivity is dependent.
Character!zation of_ Shrimp Prpjressijig^ Wastewater j_n_ Al abama
Because of the problems experienced in the Bayou La Batre area, the
Alabama Water Improvement Commission (now the Alabama Department of
Environmental -Management), the City of Bayou La Batre and the waste
processors themselves initiated several studies addressing the quantity and
quality of wastes in the area. Most of these addressed the feasibility of
discharging the wastes into Portersville Bay, directly south of the city
and the costs associated with the collection and outfall system.
A study conducted by Polyengineering (1979) addressed the quality of
seafood processing wastewaters during the summer of 1979. The results of
that study showed that the average seafood wastewater had a 5 day BOD of
617 mg/1 and total suspended solids (TSS) of 163 mg/1. These values are
less than half of the averages calculated from data collected for shrimp
processing plants located on the Mississippi Gulf Coast by Gulf Coast
Laboratory investigators (Perry 1984). The averages for the Mississippi
facilities were 1,612 mg/1 BOD (50 Ib./lOOO Ib.) and 509 mg/1 for TSS (38.5
Ib./lOOO Ib.). During the 1978-79 period, 11 industrial shrimp peelers, in
Bayou La Batre,,/!abama, averaging about 16,000 gallons per day (GPD)
peeler, produced'an average daily flow of 180,000 GPD.
Study Rationale and Design
The effectiveness of saltwater wetlands in the treatment of waste has
been examined for sewage sludge (Teal and Valiela 1973; Nichols 1983; and
others) and menhaden plant effluent (Meo 1974). This study assesses the
effectiveness and impact of using land application on a Juncus roemerianus
marsh as an efficient low cost management system for screened seafood
processing wastewater. The spreading of wastewater by spray irrigation
would provide a "living filter" for organic wastes, serve as fertilizer for
marsh plants and contribute to the estuarine food web.
-------
A pilot irrigation system was constructed within a six acre portion of
a Juneus roemerianus marsh in coastal Alabama. Twelve study plots, 90 feet
x 90 feet (8,100 sq. ft.) were established as three control plots and three
replicate plots each receiving 3.56, 1.82 and 1.33 cm of wastewater per
five consecutive days each week. Wastewater was applied by overhead spray
heads, loading rates controlled by computerized timers and valves.
Approximately 640,000 gallons of waste were applied August-December, 1984.
Study plots were monitored for predischarge conditions (June-July,
1984), during test discharge (August-December, 1984) and following test
discharge (January-June, 1985).
Water Quality Parameters
Hydrologic investigations showed that no runoff was detectable from
the plots at any of the hydraulic loading rates during periods of no
rainfall and no tidal inundation. Little penetration of the wastewaters
into the groundwater was noted during the study. Wastewaters applied to
the system remained on the plots until they either were lost to
evapotranspiration or flushed off during a high tidal event or through
rainfall.
Discharge of seafood processing wastewater onto the surface of the
marsh resulted in elevations of levels of several nitrogen species (Total
Kjeldahl Nitrogen and ammonium ion) and Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) in
the surface waters of the plots. Impact of the wastes was most evident on
the plots receiving the heaviest waste loads of 3.56 cm per week.
The loading also resulted in the elevation of nitrogen in the
surficial sediments (0-5 cm) which remained somewhat elevated after the
discharge of wastes had ceased. The findings, along with the persistence
of high chlorophyll a_ levels and increases in nitrite-nitrate levels in the
waters on the plots during post discharge, indicated that the surficial
sediments retain much of the materials loaded and release these materials
slowly after continued cycling and mineralization. Little or no
penetration into the groundwater was noted for any of the parameters
measured.
The canal adjacent to the marsh receiving the wastes showed no water
quality impacts from the project for the parameters measured. No
significant elevations were noted in nutrients, chlorophyll £ or BOD that
could be attributed to the waste loadings.
Based on the water quality of the experimental plots during the
discharge period, an optimal loading level of 1.82 cm per week is
recommended. The 3.56 cm per week loading level resulted in the disruption
of the normal nutrient cycling observed for the control plots and exceeded
the apparent capacity of the marsh to rapidly assimilate the wastes.
Biological Parameters
• " —• \
No significant differences in plant species composition, growth
parameters or productivity were detected between sprayed plots and control
plots. Only expected seasonal variability was demonstrated. Mean values
IV
-------
for stem density (650 m-2), diameter (3.5 mm) and height (88 cm) were
within the range of values for similar Gulf Coast Juncus marshes. Mean
aboveground biomass production (2,177 gm-2) was higher than reported in
previous studies but did not differ significantly between study plots.
Increased nutrient loads to the marsh had no measureable enhancement
effect on plants present. The long term impact of residual nitrogen in the
shallow sediments, subsequent nutrient transformations and applications
over greater than four months, or at other times of the year, cannot be
predicted from this study.
Application of the wastewater resulted in no significant changes in
faunal communities of the adjacent canal but resulted in slightly elevated
infaunal abundance in the treated marsh plots. Marsh infauna abundance
patterns over the study period are similar to literature reports, with a
spring-summer increase and a late summer - early winter decline in species
abundance. The seasonal changes in species composition and abundance
principally reflect natural population cycles of the component species.
The strong dominance of oligochaetes and Capitella capitata is unique to
this study and may explain the dynamics observed.
Design Criteria for Land Application of Wastewaters
Several key scientific and engineering design/operation considerations
mentioned in the EPA Saltwater Wetlands for Wastewater Management
Environmental Assessment were addressed in this study. The key factors a'nd
the conclusion reached in this study were:
Erosion. Erosion was not a problem on the saltmarsh under the
conditions studied.
Nutrients. Cycling of nitrogen, an element usually limiting
productivity in saltmarsh systems, was enhanced on the marsh as a result of
the loading.
Hydraulic Loading. Hydraulic loads of up to 3.56 cm/week produced no
discernable runoff during periods of no rainfall and no tidal inundation.
Nutrient Loading. Maximum nitrogen loading levels based on the
results of this study would be 0.73 grams/square meter-day (4.72 Ibs/acre-
day).
Biochemical Oxygen Demand Loading. Maximum BOD loading of 3.1
grams/square meter-day (20.1 Ibs/acre-day) would be recommended based on
the study results.
Assimilation Rate for Nitrogen. Approximately 37 percent of the total
nitrogen applied to the plots was removed through microbial mineralization.
Discharge Schedule. Intermittent discharge of wastes during the week
is recommended with periods of no discharge to allow equilibration of the
system. No discharge should be allowed during periods of high tides (when
marsh is inundated) or during and immediately following large rainfall
events.
-------
Biota. Application of wastewater at the rates and season of the study
resulted in slightly increased abundances of marsh infauna on treated
plots. Species diversity was not affected.
Study Limitations
This study of the effectiveness and impacts of spray irrigation of seafood
wastewater on an irregularly flooded Juncus marsh has the following limitatio,ns.
1. Application took place during the period August - December. The
peak shrimp season in Alabama is June - November, also the peak of the
Juncus growing season. Therefore, (a) short-term cumulative loading was
less than would be expected if this methodology were implemented over the
entire shrimping season; (b) biotic impacts may be different at different
times of the year; (c) biotic impacts may be different with longer periods
of loading, especially freshwater impacts, and (d) the effectiveness of the
marsh in assimilating the wastewater may be different at different times of
the year and with longer duration applications.
2. Larger shrimp processing facilities import raw materials and
process products year-round. In actual practice, application of wastewater
to marshes may be continuous but at different monthly rates, over each 12-
month calendar year. The study did not test the effectiveness or impacts
of such an application regime.
3. The study did not address the' long-term (multiple years) impacts
or effectiveness of marsh application.
VI
-------
LIST OF PREPARERS
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Robert Howard, Project Officer
Ronald Mikulak, Project Monitor
Robert Lord, Project Monitor
Marine Environmental Sciences Consortium
Judy Stout, Project Coordinator
Mike Dardeau, Biologist
Charlie Lutz, Technical Assistant
Taxonomic Associates, Inc.
El don C. Blancher, Environmental Scientist
Alabama Department of_ Environmental Management
Sonya S. Massey, Engineer
Joe L. Marsh, Environmental Lab Services
DISCLAIMER
The mention of trade names or commercial products in this report is
for illustration purposes and does not constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
vn
-------
CONTENTS
PAGE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i
ABSTRACT 11
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY HI
LIST OF PREPARERS vii
CONTENTS vl 11
LIST OF TABLES x
LIST OF FIGURES x1H
1.0. INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1. STUDY OBJECTIVES 1-4
2.0. MATERIALS AND METHODS 2-1
2.1. STUDY SITE 2-1
Pilot Facility Layout 2-1
2.2. WATER QUALITY 2-4
2.3. HYDROLOGY 2-6
2.4. SEDIMENTS 2-7
2.5. FLORA 2-7
2.6. FAUNA 2-8
3.0. RESULTS 3-1
3.1. WATER QUALITY 3-1
Wastewater 3-1
Surface Water-Experimental Plots 3-3
Groundwater 3-10
Canal Water 3-13
3.2. 5EDIHENT577 3-18
3.3. FLORA 3-21
Growth 3-21
Standing Crop 3-21
3.4. FAUNA... 3-26
Marsh Fauna 3-26
Canal Fauna 3-37
4.0. DISCUSSION 4-1
4.1. WATER QUALITY 4-1
Experimental Plots 4-1
Groundwater and Se'diments 4-13
Canal WateFs 4-15
4.2. FLORA 4-17
4.3. FAUNA 4-20
vm
-------
PAGE
5.0. PILOT FACILITY OPERATION 5-1
5.1. GENERAL SYSTEMS APPROACH 5-1
5.2. HYDROLOGY 5-2
5.3. WATER QUALITY 5-11
Conservative Species Model 5-11
Non-conservative Species Model 5-14
6.0. DESIGN DISCHARGE CRITERIA 6-1
Costs Associated with the Land Application of
Seafood Wastewaters 6-3
7.0. CONCLUSIONS. 7-1
7.1. WATER QUALITY 7-1
7.2. BIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS 7-1
7.3. FACILITY OPERATION 7-2
7.4. RECOMMENDATIONS 7-2
8.0. REFERENCES 8-1
APPENDIX A - Quality Assurance/Quality Control A-l
APPENDIX B - Study Data B-l
APPENDIX C - Hydrologic - Salinity Models C-l
APPENDIX D - Pilot Facility Design D-l
IX
-------
LIST OF TABLES
PAGE
Table 1. Parameters measured in water samples 2-5
Table 2. Methods of preservation and analysis for Water Quality
samples 2-5
Table 3. Monitoring regime by parameter and study phase 2-9
Table 4. Estimated seafood processing flows (GPD) based on
Bayou La Batre STP flow records for 1978-1979 3-2
Table 5. Average quality of effluent discharged by various
seafood plants during August 1979 in Bayou La Batre 3-2
Table 6. Descriptive statistics on the wastewater chemical
data. Al 1 parameters reported in mg/1 3-3
Table 7. Means of physico-chemical parameters measured on the
plots for the pre-discharge, discharge and post
discharge periods 3-5
Table 8. Mean values for nutrients (mg/1) sampled from the
various loading plots during the pre-discharge and
discharge period 3-6
Table 9. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (5 day BOD) on the
experimental plots during the pre-discharge, discharge
and post discharge periods. All concentrations are in
mg/1 3-8
Table 10. Summary of Chlorophyll a^ Data during the three study
periods. All concentrations are expressed in mg/m3.... 3-9
Table 11. Mean Concentration of nutrients from various depths on
the experimental plots 3-11
Table 12. Means of physico-chemical parameters measured in the
canal adjacent to the plot site 3-14
Table 13. Mean concentration of various nutrient constituents in
the canal adjacent to the sample site. All
concentrations are in mg/1 3-15
Table 14. Five Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) mg/1 from
the canal waters during the study 3-17
Table 15. Chlorophyll a Values in the Canal during the pre-
discharge, discharge and post discharge periods.
Concentrations are expressed in mg/M3 3-17
-------
List of Tables Continued.
PAGE
Table 16. Sediment Total Organic Carbon (TOO, Total Kjeldahl
Nitrogen (TKN) and Total Phosphate (TP) from the pre-
discharge, discharge and post discharge samplings 3-19
Table 17. Mean Eh values (in millivolts) from the sample plots
during the pre-discharge, discharge and post discharge
periods 3-19
Table 18. Comparison of sediment texture before and after
discharge, treatments pooled by depth 3-20
Table 19. Pre-discharge, discharge and post discharge live stem
density by application 3-22
Table 20. Pre-discharge and discharge aboveground plant biomass
by appl ication 3-24
Table 21. Post discharge aboveground plant biomass by application
rate 3-25
Table 22. Pre-discharge and discharge belowground plant biomass
by appl ication rate 3-28
Table 23. Post discharge beJowground plant biomass by application
rate 3-28
Table 24. Pre-discharge marsh epifauna abundance by application rate.... 3-29
Table 25. Discharge marsh epifaunal abundance by application rate 3-30
Table 26. Post discharge marsh epifaunal abundance by application rate.. 3-31
Table 27. Pre-discharge marsh infaunal abundance 3-33
Table 28. Discharge marsh infaunal abundance 3-35
Table 29. Post discharge marsh infaunal abundance 3-39
Table 30. Pre-discharge benthic faunal abundance from canal grab
sampl es 3-43
Table 31. Discharge benthic faunal abundance from canal grab
sampl es 3-44
Table 32. Post discharge benthic faunal abundance from canal
grab samples 3-45
Table 33. Canal faunal abundance collected in lift nets 3-46
Table 34. Canal faunal abundance collected in gill nets 3-47
xi
-------
List of Tables Continued.
PAGE
Table 35. Rainfall and evaporation data for stations in the proximity... 5-5
Table 36. Precipitation volumes collected at Point aux Pins 5-5
Table 37. Monthly averages of the daily tidal amplitudes (centimeters)
for the period June through December 1984 5-6
Table 38. Results of the Dye study performed on the experimental
plots 5-7
Table 39. Mean well heights recorded during water quality samplings 5-7
Table 40. Estimated non-land capital costs associated with wetland
wastewater di sposal 6-3
XII
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
PAGE
Figure 1. Mean monthly flows for Bayou La Batre sewage
treatment plant 1978-1979 1-2
Figure 2. Location of study site 2-2
Figure 3. Site layout 2-3
Figure 4. Stem height and diameter 3-23
Figure 5. Belowground standing crop 3-27
Figure 6. Total marsh infaunal abundance 3-38
Figure 7. Mean salinity on the experimental plots during the
pi 1 ot study 4-1
Figure 8. Mean TON on the experimental plots during the pilot
study 4-3
Figure 9. Mean ammonium ion concentrations on the experimental
plots during the pilot study 4-4
Figure 10. Mean nitrite-nitrate levels on the experimental plots
during the study period 4-5
Figure 11. Nitrogen species in the surface waters on the
experimental plots during the discharge period 4-5
Figure 12. Temporal variations in Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
concentration for the control and full loading plots
for the entire study period 4-6
Figure 13. Temporal variations in ammonium ion concentration for
the control and full loading plots for the entire
study period 4-7
Figure 14. Mean nitrite-nitrate on experimental plots during the
study period 4-9
Figure 15. Mean Total Organic Carbon (TOO on the experimental
plots during the pilot study 4-10
Figure 16. Mean biochemical oxygen demand on the plots during the
pilot study 4-12
Figure 17. N:P ratios during the pre-discharge and discharge
periods 4-12
Figure 18. Total organic carbon in sampling wells during the pre-
discharge period 4-13
xm
-------
List of Figures Continued.
PAGE
Figure 19. Total nitrogen in sampling wells during the pre-
discharge period 4-14
Figure 20. Ammonium ion in the sampling wells during the
discharge period 4-14
Figure 21. Mean nitrite-nitrate levels in the canal during the
pi 1 ot study 4-16
Figure 22. Live stem densities 4-18
Figure 23. Aboveground biomass 4-19
Figure 24. Monthly abundance of dominant marsh infaunal species 4-21
Figure 25. Abundance of major canal benthos at Stations 1, 2
and 3 4-23
Figure 26. Systems diagram of the simplified hydrologic model used in this
study 5-3
Figure 27. Representative tidal records from the canal on 13-14 July
1985 5-6
Figure 28. Representative continuous well height records for the 10,
20 and 30 centimeter sampling wells 5-8
Figure 29. Results of the steady state simulation of the hydrologic
model 5-10
Figure 30. Systems diagram of the simplified salinity model used in
thi s study 5-12
Figure 31. Results of the steady-state simulation for salinity on the
control and fully loaded plots 5-13
Figure 32. Concept!onal model of the nitrogen cycle in a salt marsh
system. (Goose!ink e^t al_. 1979) 5-15
Figure 33. Simplified conceptual model of nitrogen for this study 5-17
Figure 34. Time course of nitrogen species on a plot receiving the
maximum hydraulic loading level (3.56 cm/week) during the
week of 6 October 1985 through 10 October 1985 5-19
Figure 35. Simulation of the nitrogen species model for a fully
loaded experimental plot 5-20
Figure 36. Relationship between hydrologic loading and biochemical
oxygen demand for the saltmarsh system receiving screened
seafood process waters 6-1
xiv
-------
1.0. INTRODUCTION
The disposal of seafood processing wastewaters is a problem that
is evident in the seafood industry throughout the nation, but is
particularly acute for Gulf of Mexico shrimp processing plants. In Bayou
La Batre, Alabama, where approximately 75% of the residents are engaged in
the seafood industry, seven large shrimp processing plants are located.
These modern facilities require high volumes of water to wash, peel and
devein shrimp. One peeler will average 40 to 60 gallons per minute (GPM)
and a plant's peeler can account for more than 50% of the facility's
wastewaters (USEPA 1974). In many other areas of the country, these
wastewaters are simply discharged into coastal waters with little or no
treatment. The impacts associated with the loading of these high oxygen-
demanding wastes into Gulf Coast receiving waters are compounded by the
poor tidal flushing characteristic of the region.
Bayou La Batre is consistently ranked among the nations top ten
fishing ports. Seafood landings there were valued at 33 million dollars in
1981. It is believed that these landings support a $188 million seafood
industry in Mobile County alone. Shrimp landings, approximately 15.8
million pounds in 1981, comprise the bulk of the seafood landings in Bayou
La Batre. This figure does not include products trucked in for processing.
The large concentration of shrimp processing plants has exacerbated
the city's wastewater treatment problems. Before 1978, wastewater from the
seafood processing plants was discharged directly into the bayou which runs
through the city. Since these discharges were in violation of the Alabama
Water Improvement Commision's (now the Alabama Department of Environmental
Management, ADEM) regulations, the seafood processors were given notice to
connect to the city's sewage treatment plant.
The small 1-MGD activated sludge treatment facility operated by the
city was originally designed to handle domestic wastewater and some seafood
wastewater. However, since the completion of the treatment facility there
have been major problems with the system due to the volume of seafood
processing wastewater. The plant was designed for the seafood industry as
it existed in 1970. Subsequent growth of the seafood industry was
unanticipated and the volume of seafood wastewater has surpassed the
capacity of the system (Figure 1). Thus, since 1978, the plant has
experienced severe operational problems and has failed to meet its
discharge requirements. Since the outfall for this plant is located in
Portersville Bay off of the Mississippi Sound, the discharge of
insufficiently treated wastewater has closed some of the productive oyster
grounds in the state.
Due to continued violations of NPDES permit limits caused primarily by
the excessive loadings from the seafood wastewaters, the city was forced to
place a moratorium on the further expansion of the processing industry.
The result of this moratorium has been a virtual halt in the growth of this
industry in the city.
In addition to the above problems, the rate schedule of $0.60 per 1000
gallons charged to the processors for waste treatment is placing an
economic hardship on the processors. One large shrimp processor indicated
1-1
-------
1.2-
i.o-
o
O 0.8 H
0.6-
0.4-
ESTIMATED SEAFOOD
WASTE FLOWS
10 II 12 |
MONTH
Figure 1. Mean monthly flows for the Bayou La Batre sewage
treatment plant for the year 1978-79. The bars indicate the
standard error on either side of the mean.
1-2
-------
that his wastewater treatment bill is exceeding the mortgage payment on his
modern plant.
A similar situation exists in Gulf Shores, Alabama, where screened
seafood wastewaters are directly discharged from the fishing boats in the
Inter-coastal waterway. This practice has contributed to water quality
problems in that receiving water body and is now coming under increased
scrutiny of the state regulatory agencies. Pressure from local public
opinion and state and federal agencies has at least halted the spread of
this method of waste disposal. It is anticipated that the seafood
processors in this portion of the state will also be forced to more
adequately treat their wastes before discharge as the processors in Bayou
La Batre have done.
The effectiveness of saltwater wetlands in treatment of waste has been
tested for sewage sludge (Teal and Valiela 1973; Valiela et al 1973;
Hardisky et al 1983; and Nichols 1983). A pilot project in an enclosed
marsh in Dulac, Louisiana, using effluent from a menhaden processing plant,
indicated that overland flow is a valuable means for providing secondary
and, in some cases, tertiary treatment of high-load organic waste water
(Meo 1974).
This study examines the effectiveness and impacts of using land
application on a Juncus roemerianus marsh as an efficient, low cost
management system for screened seafood processing wastewater. A pilot
facility was constructed to spray-irrigate screened seafood wastewater on a
high salt marsh. Data collected over the course of pilot facility
operation was used to evaluate the assimilation potential, environmental
impact and applicability of this method of discharge at both the test site
and other sites where the disposal of seafood wastewaters is of concern.
The spreading of screened shrimp processing wastes by irrigation would
provide a "living filter" for organic wastes, serve as a fertilizer for
marsh plants and contribute to a limited extent to the detrital/bacteria
food web upon which estuarine productivity is dependent. This approach, if
implemented, could provide the city's seafood processors with a more
economical way to treat their seafood wastewaters and ultimately allow the
processors to disconnect from the city's sewerage system.
Salt marsh systems of the northeastern Gulf of Mexico are dominated by
irregularly flooded Juncus roemerianus. Seafood based communities are most
frequently adjacent to or near coastal salt marshes. It was, therefore,
decided that application of wastewaters to a Juncus marsh would be
appropriate.
The application of wastewater to land areas is predicated on the fact
that some infiltration of the wastes into the soil will occur. If the land
that receives the waste stream is inundated, little if any infiltration of
wastewaters can occur. The Juncus marsh systems selected are irregularly
flooded by the lunar tidal amplitude, and event-related wind driven tides.
Evaporation during long periods of exposure leaves surface sediments well
above the water table and tidally saturated soils.
1-3
-------
1.1. STUDY OBJECTIVES
The objectives of the study of pilot facility operations included:
1. Ecological considerations of the impact of wastewater discharge on
biota, water quality and hydrology of the marsh system and adjacent water
bodies.
2. Engineering considerations of the effectiveness of a Juncus marsh
in providing treatment of screened seafood processing wastewater.
3. Evaluation of the basic facility design and operational regime of
the pilot discharge method.
1-4
-------
2.0. MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1. STUDY SITE
The study was conducted on Point aux Pins, approximately 4.5 miles
(7.5 km) southwest of the city of Bayou la Batre in Mobile county, Alabama.
The project site is shown in Figure 2.
Point aux Pins is a peninsula extending approximately 1.2 miles (2.0
km) into Mississippi Sound and forming the western shore of Portersville
Bay. The Marine Environmental Sciences Consortium and the University of
Alabama own the southern portion of the peninsula including that land
designated for project use. The project site was located about midway
along the eastern edge of Point aux Pins on about 20 acres (50 ha) of land
bordering Portersville Bay.
The study site was located within a salt marsh dominated by the black
needle rush, Juncus roemerianus (Vittor & Stout 1975) . Other species
present include Spartina a!term'flora, S. patens and Distich!is spicata,
usually found as co-dominants of typical saltwater marshes of the northern
Gulf coast. These latter species are uncommon in the designated study
plots which are essentially monotypic stands of Juncus.
The marsh is flooded irregularly by storm tides and during periods of
strong southerly winds. Low tidal amplitude (0.3-0.5m) of normal lunar
tides does not flood the marsh surface daily. A canal has been dredged
immediately south of the study area. At the dead end of this canal two
tidal creeks enter which drain the adjacent marsh and salt flats. These
creeks provide for tidal flushing with the adjacent Portersville Bay. The
upland margins of the marsh provide an interface for the regular inflow of
freshwaters from natural drainage patterns.
The area selected for experimental testing was a remote area, well
away from any residential, business and recreational areas. The specific
site selected for testing is located near the northern border of that
property and is isolated from the rest of the property by a canal to the
south. The area above the canal was selected because of its drainage
characteristics and because it is relatively isolated from the more
pristine areas located further south on the peninsula.
Pilot Facility Layout
Approximately six acres of land were used for the pilot study. Twelve
- 90X90 foot plots, enclosing 8100 square feet (753 sq. m.), were
established in the Juncus saltmarsh. A schematic of the experimental
layout including control areas is shown in Figure 3. The array was
designed to minimize any apparent differences in vegetation or substrate
character between the test sites. The design included 3-replicate plots
each for the control areas, and the experimental treatments. The
experimental plots included 3 levels of waste loading (3-replicates each)
to determine optimal loading rates (3.56 cm, 1.82 cm and 1.33 cm per 5 day
application period)? All plots were located along an elevation isocline
and type of treatment was selected by using a random number table. This
throughout this report these loading rates are referred to as "full", "half",
and "quarter" respectively. £-
-------
STUDY
PLOTS
SANDY BAY
POINT AUX PINS
PORTERSVILLE
BAY
MOBILEj
BAYOU
LA BATRE
V
GULF OF MEXICO
Figure 2. Location of study site.
2-2
-------
JUNCUS
^XJ
12
3.56cm
II
3.56cm
10
coti
9
1.33cm
8
1.82cm
7
l.33cm
6
J.Sficm
5
CON
4
|-fl9rm
UQ£Cm
3
1 82rm
2
1 QOrm
1
PAW
^X^^t*
^^2
<
o
*TIDE GAGE
Figure 3. Site layout indicating loading rates and control
plots (CON) and canal sample locations.
2-3
-------
type of randomized block design maximized the probability of obtaining
statistically significant results from the experiment and allow for
variation due to undetected environmental gradients.
2.2. WATER QUALITY
Water quality monitoring was conducted to establish levels of selected
parameters in test site surface waters and groundwaters and in the adjacent
canal. Table 1 shows the parameters measured during the study. Water
quality samples were taken biweekly prior to discharge initiation and
during the discharge period. Samples were taken monthly from February thru
June.
All samples were collected by MESC personnel and transported on the
day of collection either to the Mobile ADEM office, or to the Dauphin
Island Sea Lab. Samples were transported to the ADEM lab in Montgomery for
nutrient analysis. Methods of sample preservation are given in Table 2.
Five water samples were taken from the canal on each sample date - at
the confluence of the tidal creek (1 sample), in mid-canal (surface and
bottom) and at the mouth of the canal (surface and bottom). Water was
analysed for nutrients, TOC, TSS, BOD and chlorophyl1-a. Field
measurements were made of water temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen and
pH.
Marsh surface water was sampled from standing ponds within the radius
to be sprayed during the treatment phase of the study. One sample was
taken from each plot and analysed for nutrients, TOC, BOD, TSS and
chlorophyll-a. Field measurements of surface water temperature, pH,
salinity and dissolved oxygen were made in each plot.
A 20 cm deep well in each plot was utilized on each date and the
second well alternated between the 10 cm and 30 cm wells, beginning with
the deep well in June. Standing water was pumped from the wells and
discarded. After a period of recharge, water was pumped from wells and
analyzed for nutrients, TOC and BOD. Field measurements of pH were made
within each well with a Beckman Monitor II field unit and salinity with an
AO refractometer.
An Isco model 1680 automated sampler was utilized to collect samples
over several irrigation cycles to determine the changes in well water
quality. Events were sampled for 2-6 days at 6 hour intervals for the 10,
20 and 30 cm wells on a rotating basis.
Samples of wastewater were taken from the discharge pipeline three
times each week during the discharge phase. Wastewater was analyzed for
TOC, TSS, BOD and nutrients.
All chemical analyses of water samples followed the methodology of
Standard Methods for the Examination of Waters and Wastes (APHA,AWWA 1980),
or Environmental Protection Agency methodology (U.S.EPA 1973,1979) as
indicated in Table 2. Sediment sample analysis followed the methods of
the U.S. EPA and Corps of Engineers Technical Committee on Criteria for
Dredge and Fill Material (U.S.EPA/COE 1981).
2-4
-------
Table 1. Parameters measured In water samples.
Treatment Plots
Parameter
Surface Water
Groundwater
Canal
Wastewater
Temperature
Dissolved Oxygen
PH
Total Susp. Solids(TSS)
Salinity
Biochemical Oxygen Dmd
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Organic Nitrogen (TON)
Nitrate (N03)
Nitrite (N02)
Ammonium (NH4)
Total Phosphate (TP)
Ortho-Phosphate (P04)
X
X
X
X
X
(BOD) X
(TKN) X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Total Organic Carbon (TOO X
Chlorophyll a (funct.)
Table 2. Methods
samples.
Parameter
Temperature
PH
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Susp. Sol.
Salinity
Biochemical Ox. Dmd
Total Kjeldahl Nitr
Organic Nitrogen
Ni trate
Nitrite
Ammonia
Total Phosphate
Ortho-phosphate
Total Org. Carbon
Chlorophyll a
X
of preservation and
Method of
Preservation
in situ
HJ^ situ
in situ
chiTTed
in situ
. chiTTed'
H?S04 & chilled
N/A
H2S04 & chilled
HoSOj & chilled
H2S04 & chilled
H2S04 & chilled
H2S04 & chilled
sulfuric acid
chilled/dark
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
analysis for Water
Analytical
Method
Thermistor
Electrode
Electrode
Gravimetric
Electrode
Incubation
phenate proc.
TKN-NH4
Cd-reduction
Cd-reduction
phenate
molybdate
molybdate
TOC analyzer
Spectrophoto.
Quality
Ref.
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
2-5
-------
Details on the analytical methodology are included in the Quality
Assurance/Quality Control report, Appendix 1 of this document.
Simple descriptive statistics (Mean, Range, Standard Deviation) of the
data were performed with the Symphony software package. All statistics
were calculated on the basis of deleting all missing values, hence n, the
number of observations, changes due to missing or invalid data. Data were
designated invalid as determined by the quality control-quality assurance
procedure described in Part III of this report. When data were at the
limits of detection of their respective analytical procedure, a value of 80
percent of the detection limit was assigned for that constituent. If the
mean value of the constituent was below the detection limit, the number
reported then was the detection limit. This procedure then allowed for
data to be included in the statistics that were at or near the detection
limit but did not allow values below the detection limit to be reported
directly as valid data.
The BMDP statistical software package running on an IBM-XT was
utilized for all analytical statistics. Multiway analysis of variance for
repeated measures and unequal cell sizes was performed on all water quality
data utilizing the program BMDP-2V. Analysis of the BOD data to obtain the
rate constants was performed with program BMDP-3R, nonlinear regression.
Samples of wastewater were taken three times weekly from discharge
pipes at the study site. Samples were removed from the irrigation flow as
wastewater was being applied to the plots. Parameters measured in the
wastewater are indicated in Table 1.
2.3. HYDROLOGY
A water level recorder was installed near the end of the intake canal
to the south of the test site (Figure 3.). Levels measured here provide
information on tidal activity and the frequency and duration of test site
inundation.
Three test wells, one each at 10, 20 and 30 cm deep measured from the
surface, were installed in each of the plots to monitor water table levels
within the marsh. The wells were fashioned from 2-inch PVC pipe and fitted
with a screw top coupling to prevent contamination and false readings from
precipitation. The bottom was covered with several layers of nylon mesh
(.505 mm) to prevent large particles from entering the well. The wells
were installed by digging a hole slightly larger than the pipe, inserting
the pipe in the ground and backfilling first with sand, then clay and then
the excavated sediments.
Well heights were continuously measured in selected wells to determine
the immediate hydrologic response at the sites. An ISCO model 1570 flow
meter was utilized to measure the well heights. The meter was moved
between the 10, 20 and 30 cm wells to determine the hydrologic response at
each of these levels.
Rainfall data were obtained for the Mobile, Fairhope and Coden,
Alabama Weather Stations. Evaporation pan data were obtained for the
2-6
-------
Fairhope, Alabama Station. A bulk precipitation collector was installed at
the site to collect integrated precipitation data for comparison with
published reports.
Dye studies were performed in both the marsh and adjacent canal to
determine flushing characteristics of the system and the initial dilution
values. Rhodomine WT dye was used and delivered either by the discharge
sprinkler system for the marsh studies or by slug dose at the head of the
canal. Dye concentration was determined by fluorometry using a Turner
model fluorometer.
2.4. SEDIMENTS
At the initiation of sampling (June, 1984) and again in November
sediment samples were taken in triplicate in each plot by inserting a 3.5
cm diameter core to a depth of 20 cm. These cores were subsequently split
into subsamples 0-5 cm, 5-10 cm and 10-20 cm. Sediment texture was
determined utilizing standard methods.
Two additional sediment cores were taken monthly from each plot.
Similar depth segments from the two replicates were pooled and the
sediments analysed for TOC and nutrients.
2.5. FLORA
The plant communities of the marsh are important as primary producers
and sediment binders. Alteration of species composition, production
capability or species abundance will not only impact the marsh ecosystem
but the adjacent estuary as well. To determine the effects of wastewater
application upon the plants, dominant species were monitored for growth and
productivity similarities between treatments.
Two 0.25 m^ clip samples of aboveground growth were removed at the
sediment surface from each of the 12 plots on a monthly schedule. Live
stem height and diameter were measured for 20 randomly selected stems.
Density of living stems was determined by counting all stems in a sample
that were green for more than 1/2 their length. Material was separated by
species, where necessary, and into living and dead components. Live and
dead material was bagged, dried at 110 °C and weighed to determine standing
crop biomass.
A core 47.78 cm^ was removed to a depth of 20 cm from each clipped
area. Each core was divided into 0-5, 5-10 and 10-20 cm segments in the
field. Cores were washed over a 0.5 mm mesh screen and all material
retained was preserved in Rose Bengal/70X isopropyl alcohol. Plant
material was sorted from fauna, and dried at 110 °C. Total standing crop
biomass of belowground plant tissues was determined for each depth segment
by weighing dried material.
2-7
-------
2.6. FAUNA
To monitor infaunal community composition, fauna were removed from
three depths in each of two replicate cores taken for belowground plant
biomass from each study plot. Organisms were identified and counted.
Samples were taken each month with the exception of September, 1984.
All macroepifauna were identified and counted in each 0.25 m2 clipped
area (2 per plot) monthly. Representative epifauna were retained as a
voucher collection.
Samples of creek and canal fauna were collected coincident with times
for marsh fauna during pre-discharge and bimonthly during discharge and
postdischarge. Three benthic stations were sampled; one at the confluence
of the creek and canal, one in mid-canal and one at the mouth of the canal.
Three replicate samples (approximately 0.225 tn2) were taken at each
station. Samples were washed over a 0.5 mm screen, stained with Rose
Benqal and preserved in 70% isopropyl alcohol. Organisms were identified
and counted.
On each sample date, 3 - 1 m2 drop nets (0.3 cm mesh) were placed on
the canal bottom in the same regions as the benthic samples. Nets were
deployed at the beginning of the sample day and removed at the end by rapid
vertical lifting. Organisms were preserved in 70% isopropyl alcohol,
identified and counted.
At the initiation of each sampling date a gill net was located across
the canal at its mid-point. Organisms caught were preserved in 70%
isopropyl at the end of each date. Species were identified and inumerated.
A summary of parameters monitored and ferquency of sampling during
each study phase is provided in Table 3.
2-8
-------
Table 3. Monitoring regime by parameter1 and study phase.
Parameter/Month
Marsh Biota
Canal Fauna
Sediments:
Fauna
TOC
Nutrients
^Surface Water
1Groundwater
^anal Water
^astewater
/ 1 QQA / /_
Pre- Discharge
JJASONDJ
/ Month! v
X X
/— -______Ri wpolf 1 v------- -/
/________Ri wp&lf 1 v — /
/ — 3 per week--/
1 QQC /
Post Discharge
F M A M J
/ Monthly /
/ Monthly /
/ Monthly /
See Table 1 for details of analyses performed on each sample.
2-9
-------
-------
3.0. RESULTS
3.1. WATER QUALITY
Wastewater
Because of the problems experienced in the Bayou La Batre area, the
Alabama Water Improvement Commission (now the Alabama Department of
Environmental Management), the City of Bayou La Batre and the waste
processors themselves initiated several studies addressing the quantity and
quality of wastes in the area. Most of these addressed the feasibility of
discharging the wastes into Portersville Bay, directly south of the city
and the costs associated with the collection and outfall system.
The volume of the seafood processing wastewater entering the city's
sewage treatment plant (STP) can be roughly calculated by taking the STP
total flow records and subtracting out the base flow entering the plant
during periods when industrial discharges are negligible (during odd hours
out of season). Table 4 presents the estimated daily flows from all
processors in 1978-79. During that period, 11 industrial shrimp peelers
were known to be in operation. Dividing the means of the table by 11
gives an average daily flow (GPD) per shrimp peeler.
A study conducted by Polyengineering (1979) addressed the quality of
seafood processing wastewaters during the summer of 1979. The results of
that study are summarized in Table 5 and show that the average seafood
wastewater has a five day BOD of 617 mg/1 and total suspended solids (TSS)
of 163 mg/1. These values are less than half of the averages calculated
from data collected for shrimp processing plants located on the Mississippi
Gulf Coast by Gulf Coast Laboratory investigators (Perry 1984). The
averages for the Mississippi facilities were 1,612 mg/1 BOD (50 Ib./lOOO
Ib.) and 509 mg/1 for TSS (38.5 Ib./lOOO lb.).
The wastes utilized for the study were taken from a single seafood
processor located in Bayou La Batre, Alabama. The wastes included all
process waters (de-icer, peelers and floor drains) which were screened
through a fine mesh screen (SWECO). They were pumped from a collection
tank in the afternoon and placed in a 9000 gallon tank for transport to the
site early the next morning.
Total Organic Carbon (TOO in the wastewaters was highly variable
ranging from 18.0 mg/1 to 10,005.0 mg/1 (up to 1 percent organic carbon).
Mean TOC in the wastewaters was 751.6 mg/1 (Table 6).
Nitrogen parameters were high in the wastewaters applied to the marsh.
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in the wastewaters ranged from 12.8 mg/1 to 554.0
mg/1 during the discharge period. The mean TKN for wastewaters was 201.9
mg/1. No consistent trend was noted over the sampling period that would
indicate a seasonal trend in the waste stream. Ammonium ion showed a
variability similar to the other parameters sampled ranging from 9.6 mg/1
to 206.0 mg/1. Mean ammonium ion levels were 89.01 indicating that almost
half of the nitrogen delivered was in this form. Combined nitrite-nitrate
3-1
-------
Table 4. Estimated seafood processing flows (GPD) based on Bayou La Batre
STP flow records for 1978-1979. Mean discharge per peeler calculated by
dividing the total flow by the number of peelers in operation (11).
MONTH
MEAN FLOW
TOTAL FLOWS
ALL PROCESSORS
178,000
MEAN DISCHARGE
PER PEELER
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
Negligible
Negligible
230,000
Negligible
250,000
150,000
Negligible
Negligible
510,000
306,000
490,000
300,000
20,900
22,700
13,600
46,300
27,800
35,400
27,300
16,200
Table 5. Average quality of effluent discharged by various seafood plants
during August 1979* in Bayou La Batre.
Quality Foods, Inc.
Sea Pearl Seafood, Inc.
Fi Shermans Seafood
Seafood Haven
Flow Weighted Average
BOD5
599
839
588
522
616.7
pH
6.9
7.1
7.5
7.3
7.02
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
164
179
163
93
163.3
AVERAGE
FLOW
(MGD)
.383
.047
.047
.082
.014
*Data from Polyengineering, 1979.
3-2
-------
Table 6. Descriptive statistics on the wastewater chemical
data. All parameters reported in mg/1.
Parameter
Mean Maximum Minimum Std. Dev.
Ammoni urn
Nitrate-Nitrite
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Total Organic Carbon
Total Phosphate
Ortho-Phosphate
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
89.01
0.04
201.9
751.5
18.9
11.67
863.3
206.00
0.40
554.0
10005.0
100.0
27.2
2323:5
9.60
0.02
12.8
18.0
2.76
0.84
166.67
52.3
0.07
118.9
1573.4
15.4
5.59
372.5
levels were generally low in the wastewaters ranging from 0.02 mg/1 (the
detection level) to 0.4 mg/1. The mean N02-N03 level was 0.04 mg/1
(Table 6). Generally, the higher nitrate-nitrite levels were found in the
more dilute wastewater loads. In the deliveries with high TKN and ammonium
levels, N02-N03 levels were at or below the detection limits.
Total Phosphate levels were quite variable in the wastewaters ranging
from 2.76 mg/1 to 100.0 mg/1. The mean total phosphate level was 18.9
mg/1. Ortho-phosphate levels paralleled the total phosphate ranging from
0.84 mg/1 to 27.1 mg/1. The overall mean value of ortho-phosphate was
11.67 indicating that over half of the phosphate delivered was in this
highly labile form (Table 6). Much of the labile phosphate could have come
from detergents used to clean certain areas in the plant.
Biochemical oxygen demand was quite high in the wastewaters ranging
from 166.67 mg/1 to a maximum recorded value of 2325.5 mg/1. This high
value borders on the limits of the methodology of the test in our study
since in several samples of wastewater the demand exceeded the available
oxygen in the highest dilution bottle rendering the test values
questionable on the upper limits in these cases. It is possible that
higher BOD values could have existed. The mean BOD in the wastewaters was
862.2 mg/1 (Table 6).
Surface Water -_ Experimental Plots
Mean pre-discharge surface water temperature on the 12 plots ranged
from 30.6 deg. C. to 36.5 deg. C. for the sampling dates from 20 June 1984
to 18 July 1984. No data was recorded for surface temperature on 6 June
1984 due to dry conditions on the plots. An overall mean temperature for
the period was 32.7 deg C (Table 7).
During discharge, temperatures ranged slightly lower for the fall
period ranging from 8.0 deg. C. to 40.0 deg. C. No significant trends
across plots were noted. During the post discharge period mean
temperatures went lower still, a function of inclusion of the winter months
in these statistics.
3-3
-------
Mean salinities for the pre-discharge period ranged from 18.2 ppt. to
20.5 ppt. over the 12 experimental plots (Table 7). An overall mean of 19.4
ppt. was observed. Individual plot salinities showed little variation on a
particular day and varied more over time.
During the discharge period salinities ranged from 2.0 ppt. to 30 ppt.
on the individual plots with the lowest occuring on the full loading plots.
Mean values for the different loadings ranged from 14.3 ppt. on the full
loading plots to 21.0 ppt. on the control plots.
Salinities during the post discharge period were less variable than
the discharge period and exhibited a small range in terms of the overall
mean between plots (Table 7). The mean value for this period (19.0 deg.
C.) was similar to the pre-discharge conditions.
Pre-discharge dissolved oxygen was low in the surface waters of the
experimental plots with the mean values ranging from 2.28 mg/1 to 3.15
mg/1. Mean oxygen for the pre-discharge sampling period was 2.64 mg/1.
Individual dissolved oxygen values ranged from 0.8 mg/1 to 5.2 mg/1 for
the sampling period with no consistent pattern discernible across the
plots. The lowest readings were taken early morning on 19 July 1984 when
the previous day's sampling regime was interrupted due to a thunder storm.
All other samplings were taken from mid-morning to mid-afternoon. This
indicates a pattern of diurnal changes in oxygen concentration on the
plots.
Dissolved oxygen values on the plots varied widely during the
discharge period. The overall range went from 0.0 mg/1 on the full loading
plots to 19.0 mg/1 on the quarter loading plots. The range on the control
plots was from 2.0 mg/1 to 15.0 mg/1. Mean value for the various loading
levels ranged from a high of 8.0 mg/1 on the control plots down to a low of
5.7 mg/1 on the full loading plots. On many occasions, the experimentally
loaded plots exhibited dissolved oxygen values of 200+ percent of
saturation.
The dissolved oxygen levels for the post discharge period on the plots
were less variable with the means varying by slightly over 1 mg/1 between
the plots (Table 7). The values were near saturation levels usually
reflecting monthly changes in temperature and salinity.
Mean pH ranged from 6.23 to 6.56 for the pre-discharge samplings.
Overall mean pH for the plots was 6.43. A similar constancy was noted
for pH during the discharge and post discharge periods with the mean pH
ranging from 6.4 - 6.5 and 6.0 - 6.3 respectively, across all plots.
Analysis of Variance detected significant differences for temperature
between the different periods of the study reflecting the temporal
variation in this parameter. No other significant differences were
detectable at the 0.05 probability level for either temporal or between
plots for any of the other physicochemical parameters.
3-4
-------
Table 7. Means of physico-chemical parameters measured on the
plots for the pre-discharge, discharge and post discharge periods.
Temperature
(°C)
Salinity
(ppt. )
Dissolved
Oxygen
(mg/1 )
PH
Pre-Discharge
Discharge
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
34.4
34.4
32.3
35.6
25.2
24.8
25.1
25.1
19.9
20.3
18.3
21.7
21.0
20.0
19.1
14.3
2.4
2.0
2.7
3.0
8.0
7.0
6.4
5.7
6.4
6.4
6.5
6.4
6.5
6.4
6.4
6.5
Post Discharge
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
23.4
22.2
24.1
23.4
19.3
17.6
20.3
18.8
7.5
6.8
6.2
7.4
6.0
6.3
6.8
6.3
During the pre-discharge period Total Organic Carbon (TOO ranged from
7.3 mg/1 to 73.6 mg/1 throughout the plots (Table 8). The mean value for
each of the designated loading groups (Control, Full, Half and Quarter
loading) ranged over a considerably smaller concentration, from 23.1 mg/1
to 25.4 mg/1 (Table 8). This indicates that there were no significant
differences in concentration for this constituent across the plots during
the pre-discharge period.
During the discharge period, mean TOC ranged from 18.90 in the control
plots to 60.49 in the full loading plots. The range reflects the various
loading levels applied to the plots and appears to be directly correlated
to wasteload.
During the post discharge period, TOC levels accross all plots
averaged lower than during either the pre- or during discharge periods.
The means ranged from a low of 13.6 mg/1 to a high of 22.3 mg/1 across the
various experimentally loaded plots (Table 8).
3-5
-------
Table 8. Mean values for nutrients (mg/1) sampled from the various
loading plots during the pre-discharge and discharge period.
NH4
N03
TKN
TOC TP P04
Pre-discharge
Discharge
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
Post Discharge
0.42
3.17
4.04
9.38
0.052 3.13 25.4
0.059 3.76 23.1
0.082 2.81 24.6
0.057 7.78 24.6
0.043 3.81 18.90
0.096 8.62 23.81
0.071 11.10 34.02
0.057 29.52 60.49
0.53
2.14
1.56
0.71
0.24 0.211
0.44 0.849
0.78 0.679
2.52 1.927
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
0.
0.
0.
0.
21
22
41
80
0
0
0
0
.083
.099
.119
.204
1
0
1
2
.08
.85
.38
.37
16
13
13
22
.8
.6
.75
.31
0.
0.
0.
0.
104
085
175
181
0.087
0.052
0.157
0.264
The pre-discharge mean value for Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) showed
a range of concentrations from 2.8 to 7.8 mg/1 across the groupings
(Table 8). Individual samples ranged from the detection limit (<1.0) to
28.8 mg/1. Most of the variation in the data was attributed to
variability in the nature of the sample, brought about by the
difficulty of obtaining a "clean" sample in the extremely shallow
surface waters (sometimes < 1 cm in depth).
During the discharge period, mean TKN values went from 3.8 mg/1 in the
control plot to 8.62 mg/1 on the quarter loading plots, 11.11 mg/1 on the
half loading plots and 29.52 mg/1 on the full loading plots. These levels
were indicative of and appeared highly correlated to the loading levels the
plots received.
The TKN levels of the post discharge period fell below those observed
during the pre-discharge period with means across the plots ranging from
0.85 mg/1 to 2.37 mg/1, a trend similar to that seen with TOC. This
finding is indicative of the seasonal changes in TKN naturally occurring on
the plots and demonstrates the rapidity with which the TKN levels returned
to background levels.
Pre-discharge ammonium levels at the plots were always below the
limits of detection for that analytical procedure. Ammonium during
discharge showed markedly elevated values in all plots with mean levels
ranging from 1.19 mg/1 on the control plots to 15.89 mg/1 on the full
loading plots (Table 8). These differences were reflective of the waste
loading levels received during the test period. Immediately following the
3-6
-------
discharge period, ammonium levels fell to near the pre-discharge conditions
and hovered slightly above the detection levels with the means for the
post discharge period ranging from 0.21 mg/1 to 0.80 mg/1.
Mean nitrite-nitrate levels on each plot group for the pre-
discharge period were low, ranging from 0.052 mg/1 to 0.082 mg/1 (Table
8). Individual samples ranged from the detection limit (0.04mg/l) to 0.17
mg/1.
For the discharge period mean nitrite-nitrate levels ranged from right
above the detection limit on the control plots (0.048 mg/1) to a high of
0.173 mg/1 on the quarter loading plots. The half and full loading plots
had intermediate mean values of 0.136 mg/1 and 0.050 mg/1 respectively.
Post discharge levels of nitrite-nitrate ranged slightly higher still
from 0.083 mg/1 on the control plots to 0.204 mg/1 on the full loading
plots. The means for this period reflected the loading levels which the
plot recieved during the discharge period.
Concentrations for pre-discharge Total Phosphorus (TP) on the
surface plots was variable ranging from 0.015 to 5.0 mg/1 in the individual
samples. Mean values were slightly less variable ranging from 0.53
mg/1 to 2.14 mg/1 (Table 8). As with TOC and TKN sampling,
difficulties in obtaining good surface water samples probably attributed
to the variability observed in the Total Phosphorus values.
Total Phosphorus was highly variable during the discharge period as
well. Mean values across the different loading levels went from 0.24 mg/1
to 2.52 mg/1 with the highest levels occuring in the full loading plots.
A similar variability was also noted during the post discharge period.
Ortho-phosphate was not analyzed during the pre-discharge but showed a
trend similar to total phosphate on the various plots during the waste
discharge period. Ortho-phosphate ranged from 0.211 mg/1 on the control
plots to 1.927 mg/1 on the full loading plots. During post discharge
ortho-phosphate also paralleled the behaviour of Total Phosphate on the
plots.
Analysis of variance on the various nutrient species showed
significant date (temporal) differences for all parameters except TOC.
Ortho-phosphate also exhibited a significant date/plot interaction. Plot
differences were not detectable in an overall ANOVA but were highly
significant for NH4, TKN and TOC during the discharge period and for N03
for the post discharge period.
Pre-discharge Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODc) for the test plot
surface and groundwaters (wells) are presented in Table 9. Values
for the three sampling dates ranged from 0.2 to over 37 mg/1 with most of
the values (80 percent) falling between 1 and 12 mg/1. As expected,
highest BOD5 levels were generally found in the surface waters on the
plots, reflecting the presence of degradable biogenic materials at
the sediment surface. No significant trend between test plots were noted
during the pre-discharge period.
3-7
-------
Table 9. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (5
experimental plots during the pre-discharge,
discharge periods. All concentrations are in
day BOD) on the
discharge and post
mg/1.
Depth/Period
Control Quarter Half
Full
Meai
Pre-discharge
Surface
10 cm well
20 cm well
30 cm well
5
4
5
7
7
8
4
7
3
3
4
13
5
3
7
5
4
3
Discharge
Surface
10 cm well
20 cm well
30 cm wel1
Post Discharge
Surface
10 cm well
20 cm well
30 cm well
Mean
14
10
10
11
11
10
13
10
19
14
16
12
11
10
16
10
20
18
15
11
12
10
13
14
8
78
16
17
11
13
12
14
15
13
33
15
15
11
12
11
14
12
Mean BODg for the discharge period shows elevated levels on the
surface of the plots receiving the wastewaters. The mean of the control
plots was within the range of pre-discharge values but had a broader range
during the discharge period, from 3.4 mg/1 to 70.0 mg/1. The ranges on the
quarter and half loading plots, 1.8 to 71.0 and 5.4 to 71.0 mg/1
respectively, were similar on the control but the means were slightly
higher, 17.5 and 18.4 mg/1 respectively. BOD5 had the widest range on the
full loading plots (0.40 to 400.0 mg/1) and had a mean value of 78.2 mg/1.
During the post discharge period mean BODg ranged 10 to 16 mg/1
across all plots and depths (Table 9). The variability across plots and
depths for this period was similar to the pre-discharge period although the
mean values were generally slightly higher.
Significant temporal (date) differences existed for BOD when tested by
analysis of variance (ANOVA). BOD levels on the surface of the fully
loaded plots were significantly higher than the other plots.
Chlorophyll a_ values for the test plot surface waters on the three
pre-discharge sampling dates for which data were available ranged from 2.67
to 191.35 mg/m3 with a mean of 64.85 mg/m3 (Table 10). Chlorophyll £ also
3-8
-------
Table 10. Summary of Chlorophyll a. Data during the three study
periods. All concentrations are expressed in mg/m3.
Station
CONCENTRATION
Mean Win. Max.
Pre-discharge
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
59.3
74.3
51.8
64.3
32.0
32.9
2.67
24.9
106.8
98.
191.3
107.7
Discharge
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
Post discharge
52.6
141.3
115.3
161.5
5.34
0.0
0.0
2.67
237.6
899.8
379.1
688.8
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
82.05
37.73
201.46
208.44
4.5
0
4.5
9.1
567.3
99.85
794.3
830.6
exhibited a high degree of variability (standard deviation of 46.53 mg/m3).
This variability results from the non-uniform method of collection as well
as the heterogeneity of the specific sites sampled.
During the discharge period chlorophyll £ levels exhibited even more
variability ranging from 0.0 mg/m3 to 899.8 mg/m3 (Table 10). Mean values
also exhibited a wide fluctuation going from 27.2 mg/1 to 218.9 mg/1. Mean
chlorophyll a for the various loadings ranged from 52.58 mg/m3 on the
control plot To 161.47 on the full loading plots.
Post discharge chlorophyll a remained high on the half and fully
loaded plots where the means for this period exceeded the discharge levels
(Table 10).
Testing the chlorophyll a_ by ANOVA showed no detectable differences
between either loading plot or period, presumably due to the high
variability exhibited by this parameter.
3-9
-------
Groundwater
Mean groundwater salinity during the pre-discharge ranged from 26.0
ppt. to 32.4 ppt. in the sampling wells with the highest value recorded
from the deepest (30 cm) wells. Overall means for the individual depths
during the pre-discharge sampling were 26.1 ppt., 26.9 ppt. and 32.4
ppt. in the 10, 20 and 30 cm wells respectively.
During the discharge period, mean salinities ranged from 21.6 ppt to
30.1 ppt. The general trend across the plots was to exhibit the highest
values in the deepest (30 cm) wells. In the surface wells (10 cm), a
trend of decreasing salinities was noted with increase in loading level.
During the post discharge period this trend disappeared and the wells
behaved in the same manner observed for the pre-discharge period.
Mean pH varied from 6.08 to 6.67 in the various depths during the pre-
discharge period. A trend of increasing pH with depth of sampling well was
noted in the overall means . During the discharge period mean pH ranged
from 6.11 to 6.32 with no noticeable trends across either depth or loading
level. Post discharge mean pH ranged from 6.10 to 6.5, again with no
noticable trend in either treatment plot or date.
Mean Total Organic Carbon in the wells during pre-discharge ranged
from 24.9 mg/1 to 84.7 mg/1 with the highest values occurring in the
deepest (30 cm) sampling wells {Table 11). Difference between depths was
greater than difference between plots designated for the various
experimental loading levels. The greatest difference in TOC during pre-
discharge was between the 20 cm and 30 cm wells where the mean values were
38.7 mg/1 and 64.7 mg/1, respectively.
During discharge TOC ranged slightly higher in the wells going from a
low of 37.38 mg/1 to a high of 91.6 mg/1. No noticable trend with either
depth or loading level was noted during this period.
Post discharge TOC seemed to exhibit a reversed trend during this
period with the highest values occurring in the shallowest wells.
Mean TKN values ranged from 1.8 mg/1 in the deep (30 cm) wells to a
high of 9.7 mg/1 in the shallowest well (10 cm). As with TOC levels, the
greatest difference was seen between 20 and 30 cm depths and differences
between plots were less pronounced (see Table 11).
During the discharge period, mean TKN ranged from 1.93 mg/1 in the 30
cm control wells to a high of 13.03 mg/1 in the quarter loading, 20 cm
wells. TKN values were all slightly elevated in the plots that received
the wastewaters but no consistent trend was apparent.
The same trend was noted for the post discharge period where the mean
values ranged from 1.94 mg/1 to 4.06 mg/1, slightly lower than the
discharge period.
3-10
-------
Table 11. Mean Concentration of nutrients from various depths on the
experimental plots.
Loading Depth TOC
P
R
E
D
I
S
C
H
R
G
E
D
I
S
H
A
R
G
E
P
0
S
T
D
I
S
C
H
A
R
G
E
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
Control
Quarter
Full
Half
Control
Quarter
Full
Half
Control
Quarter
Full
Half
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
10 31.7
24.9
33.5
34.6
20 37.9
45.1
35.3
36.6
30 33.9
69.5
70.7
84.7
10 91.16
42.82
46.32
85.62
20 49.88
52.25
37.38
83.18
30 40.20
41.08
55.78
53.90
10 100.2
82.6
79.0
140.0
20 75.2
60.9
36.2
77.9
30 74.4
36.5
38.1
85.4
TKN
6.58
5.45
4.43
4.45
4.65
4.45
4.48
6.95
2.56
1.80
2.40
2.50
6.79
13.03
4.82
7.67
3.86
8.39
5.34
9.97
1.93
4.00
4.27
6.03
2.88
1.94
2.93
3.55
3.35
3.49
2.21
5.11
2.62
3.02
2.80
4.06
NH4
0.56
1.23
0.51
0.45
1.50
1.45
0.73
0.80
0.76
1.48
1.90
1.10
0.50
1.11
1.25
3.19
0.81
2.42
2.00
4.26
0.183
1.922
1.22
1.36
0.78
0.95
1.01
1.28
1.32
1.90
0.73
2.80
0.35
1.06
0.39
1.49
N02-N03
0.04
0.05
0.05
0.06
0.09
0.07
0.17
0.06
0.11
0.14
0.17
0.12
0.05
0.07
0.27
0.06
0.12
0.14
0.13
0.13
0.01
0.06
0.08
0.09
0.08
0.22
0.08
0.18
0.22
0.26
0.12
0.24
0.15
0.13
0.19
0.09
TP
1.35
1.50
1.03
0.64
1.52
0.93
0.71
1.04
0.70
0.88
0.71
2.15
3.54
2.75
2.27
1.46
1.47
1.64
1.06
1.05
0.61
0.56
0.63
0.89
0.97
1.01
1.57
0.88
0.79
0.87
0.37
1.22
0.58
0.38
0.62
1.22
P04
_
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2.54
2.53
1.20
0.60
1.32
0.66
1.51
0.48
3.28
2.00
0.52
0.93
1.07
1.05
1.64
0.88
0.78
0.75
0.33
0.87
0.44
0.38
0.56
0.82
3-11
-------
Mean ammonium levels ranged from 0.45 mg/1 to 1.90 mg/1 in the
various plots sampled during pre-discharge (Table 11). A slight increasing
trend was noted in the means in the deeper wells but given the variability
observed for this parameter it is not known whether this trend is
significant.
The range of ammonium levels during the discharge period went from
0.183 mg/1 in the 30 cm control wells to a high of 4.27 mg/1 in the full
loading 20 cm wells. In general, there was a trend of increasing ammonium
levels in the plots receiving the wastewater loadings, especially in the
shallower wells (10 and 20 cm).
Post discharge ammonium displayed a behavior' more similar to the
pre-discharge period but ranged slightly higher, especially in the wells on
the plots that had recieved the heaviest wasteloads. No apparent depth
trend was notable for this parameter during post discharge.
Pre-discharge mean nitrite-nitrate levels also increased slightly in
the deeper wells from 0.055 mg/1 in the 10 cm wells to 0.137 in the 30 cm
wells (Table 11). The individual means within the various plots ran from
0.047 mg/1 to 0.170 mg/1. As with some of the other parameters above,
variability between plots was less than variability between depths
indicating that the trend in depth is a real phenomenon.
During the discharge period, nitrite-nitrate levels were highest in
the intermediate depth wells (20 cm) for all loading levels. The highest
mean value was found in the half loading, 10 cm depth plots and the lowest
at the 30 cm control plot.
Post discharge exhibited a similar trend with the mid depth wells
ranging slightly higher than the other depths.
The pre-discharge range of mean total phosphate values ran from a low
of 0.64 mg/1 to a high of 2.15 mg/1 (Table 11). There was no consistent
trend observed in the means across either depth or loading group for this
parameter.
During the discharge period, mean Total Phosphate also varied widely
between the plots and depths, ranging from 0.616 mg/1 to 3.54 mg/1. There
was a consistent trend of decreasing Total Phosphate levels with increasing
depth for all loading plots. Curiously, the highest mean Total Phosphate
levels was found in the control plots.
In general, post discharge levels ranged slightly lower than the
discharge period and showed no obvious trends with respect to plot or
depth.
Ortho-phosphate levels varied most closely with the Total Phosphate
values over both plots and depths during the discharge period. However the
numbers were quite variable as attested by the values of ortho-phosphate
being higher than the Total Phosphate levels in the deeper wells. Post
discharge levels behaved similarly.
3-12
-------
Canal Water
Mean Physico-chemical parameters for the canal adjacent to the
discharge site are presented in Table 12. Mean temperatures in the canal
waters during pre-discharge ranged from 26.2 deg. C. on 5 June 1984 to 32.4
deg. C. on 20 June 1984. The overall mean temperature for the pre-
discharge period was 29.8 deg. C., typical of the mid summer months in
Alabama coastal waters. Monthly temperatures for the various canal
stations during the discharge period ranged from 29.0 deg. C. to 11.0 deg.
C., respectively from 15 August 1984 through 8 December, 1985, reflecting
the trend of fall cooling throughout the period. An overall mean
temperature of 23.6 deg. C. was observed during the discharge period.
Lowest temperatures were during the post discharge period when the
temperature fell to 7.0 deg. C. The usual seasonal warming trend was
observed for the remainder of the project. Overall mean for the post
discharge period was 18.98 deg. C.
Mean salinity for the pre-discharge period was 20.7 ppt. and ranged
from 16.0 ppt. on 20 June 1984 to a high of 24.4 on 18 July 1984. No
consistent trend was noted in salinity, either with depth within the canal
or in distance from the mouth of canal, indicating a relatively well
flushed system. During the discharge period, salinity ranged from 18.0
ppt. to 28.0 ppt., more typical of the late summer-fall regimen. The mean
salinity for this period was 22.3 ppt. Salinity during the post discharge
period averaged slightly lower at 18.8 ppt reflective of the increased
river discharge during the late winter-spring season.
The pre-discharge means for dissolved oxygen in the canal ranged
from 5.4 mg/1 on 20 June 1984 to 7.8 mg/1 on 6 June 1984. The overall
mean for this constituent was 6.65 mg/1. A slight trend of oxygen
concentration decreasing with increasing depth was noted on several
occasions, but with the exception of the 6 June 1984 was never greater
than 0.5 mg/1. On 6 June, a difference of 0.6 mg/1 was noted at station 3
and a differences of 1.6 mg/1 was noted at station 2.
During the discharge period dissolved oxygen ranged slightly higher in
the canal with readings of 4.4 mg/1. to 10.9 mg/1. Mean values for the
various stations showed little variability in dissolved oxygen with a range
of only 0.5 mg/1 from 7.2 to 7.7 mg/1. Overall mean for this period was
7.5 mg/1 for all stations.
During post discharge no notable trends in dissolved oxygen were
observed. Overall mean values ranged slightly higher for the surface
stations (7.6 mg/1 to 8.8 mg/1) compared to the bottom stations (7.0 mg/1
to 7.4 mg/1)
3-13
-------
Table 12. Means of physico-chemical parameters measured in
adjacent to the plot site.
the canal
Parameter
Station
IS 2S 3S 2B
Overall
3B Mean
Pre-Discharge
Temperature(deg.C.) 29.5 29.8 30.6 29.8 30.4 29.8
Salinity(ppt.) 21.0 20.3 20.5 20.8 20.8 20.7
Dissolved oxygen(mg/1) 7.0 6.8 6.9 6.0 6.8 6.5
pH 7.6 7.6 7.5 7.6 7.4 7.4
Discharge
Temperature (deg. C.) 23.3 23.2 23.3 23.4 24.8 23.6
Salinity (ppt) 22.3 22.0 22.1 21.9 23.0 22.3
Dissolved oxygen (mg/1) 7.5 7.5 7.2 7.7 7.5 7.5
pH 6.6 6.6 6.7 6.7 6.6 6.6
Post Discharge
Temperature (deg.C.)
Salinity
Dissolved
PH
(ppt)
Oxygen (mg/1 )
19.4
18.8
8.6
6.6
18.
18.
7.
6.
66
6
6
5
19
18
8
6
.2
.5
.8
.5
18.
19.
7.
6.
66
3
4
5
19.
19.
7.
6.
08
2
0
5
18.9
18.8
7.8
6.5
During the study dissolved oxygen trends reflected typical seasonal
trends in response to changes in salinity and temperature.
Mean pH was variable throughout the pre-discharge sampling period
ranging from 6.81 on 18 July 1984 to 8.16 on 20 June 1984. The overall mean
pH was calculated at 7.46 for the pre-sampling period from all stations
and depth combinations. During the discharge period pH ranged between 6.0
and 7.4 with a mean value of 6.6. Post discharge pH was also not notable
ranging from 6.0 to 7.2 through the period with an overall mean of 6.5.
Analysis by ANOVA of the physico-chemical data showed significant
differences between the pre-discharge, discharge and post discharge periods
for temperature and dissolved oxygen in the canal. These differences were
attributable to seasonal trends in these parameters.
Pre-discharge Total Organic Carbon ranged from a minimum of 4.1 mg/1
to a maximum of 16.5 mg/1 in canal waters. The means for this constituent
in the surface waters ranged slightly higher in the surface samples (10.0-
10.17 mg/1) compared to the samples taken from the deeper portions of
the canal (8.8-8.9 mg/1) (Table 13).
3-14
-------
Table 13. Mean concentration of various nutrient constituents in
the canal adjacent to the sample site. All concentrations are in
mg/1.
Station NH4 N02-N03 TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Pre-discharge Period
IS
2S
2B
3S
3B
IS
2S
2B
3S
3B
0.06
0.08
0.09
0.06
0.10
1.1
1.1
1.3
1.7
1.25
Discharge Period
0.17
0.11
0.20
0.13
0.14
0.04
0.19
0.18
0.22
0.13
0.46
0.63
1.38
0.39
1.02
10.0
10.21
8.9
10.11
8.8
3.99
5.20
4.67
5.11
6.33
0.08
0.37
0.15
0.06
0.08
0.05
0.04
0.16
0.02
0.14
Post Discharge Period
0.099
0.034
0.160
0.037
0.078
IS
2S
2B
3S
3B
0.23
0.32
0.17
0.37
0.21
0.049
0.101
0.063
0.057
0.116
0.78
0.71
0.95
0.73
0.80
6.36
7.92
8.80
6.81
8.61
0.07
0.08
0.22
0.10
0.11
0.033
0.038
0.322
0.036
0.020
During the discharge period, TOC ranged lower than for the pre-
discharge period with the mean values falling between 3.99 mg/1 to 6.33
mg/1. With the exception of station IS, TOC values were slightly higher in
the surface samples. Total Organic carbon in the post discharge period
ranged slightly higher from 6.36 mg/1 to 8.61 mg/1.
Pre-discharge total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) was relatively constant
in the canals ranging from the detection limits of the ADEM laboratory
(0.4 mg/1) to a maximum of 2.8 mg/1. Mean values of TKN were between 1.10
and 1.70 illustrating the low variability observed in the canal data.
For the discharge period mean TKN ranged from 0.39 to 1.38 in the canal
stations with the higher values occurring in the deeper samples from
stations 2 and 3. Post discharge TKN was lower still with the period
average ranging from 0.73 mg/1 to 0.80 mg/1 in the canals.
Ammonium ion was at the detection limit (<1.0 mg/1 for first two
samplings; <0.1 thereafter) for all samples taken from the canal during
the pre-discharge period. During discharge mean ammonium ion levels
across the stations ranged from 0.11 mg/1 to 0.20 mg/1 and ranged higher
during the post discharge period (0.16 mg/1 to 0.37 mg/1).
3-15
-------
Combined nitrite-nitrate pre-discharge levels ranged from the
detection limit (0.04 mg/1) to 0.24 mg/1 in the deeper stations of the
canal. Slightly higher means were observed for the deeper stations
(0.088-0.099mg/l) relative to the surface water stations (0.063-0.079
mg/1). Nitrite-nitrate ranged slightly higher during discharge than the
pre-discharge period from 0.04 mg/1 to 0.22 mg/1. The highest values were
observed at station 3S near the mouth of the canal leading to Portersville
Bay. Post ischarge nitrite-nitrate fell slightly at most stations (0.049
mg/1 to 0.116)
Mean Total Phosphate ranged from 0.06 mg/1 to 0.36 mg/1 in canal
waters for the pre-discharge period and ranged from 0.02 mg/1 to 0.16 mg/1
during discharge. Post discharge values exhibited a similar variability
going from 0.07 mg/1 to 0.22 mg/1. Highest levels were mostly observed in
the bottom samples.
Ortho-phosphate was not measured during the pre-discharge period.
During the discharge period mean P04 ranged from 0.034 mg/1 to 0.160 mg/1
and from 0.020 to 0.038 during post discharge No notable trends were
evident for this variable which exhibited a wide range of variation.
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the nutrients in the canals showed
significant differences between the pre-discharge, discharge and post
discharge periods for ammonium ion (NH4) and total organic carbon (TOO.
No significant differences were detected between stations for any parameter
tested.
Little variability was shown by pre-discharge BOD values determined
for the canal waters (Table 14). Values for samples taken during the
three pre-discharge surveys ranged from 3.6 to 6.4 mg/1 with an
average value of 5.0 mg/1. No trends relating to station or depth were
noted. BOD values increased slightly over the course of the baseline
sampling program.
During the discharge period, mean BOD5 was slightly lower ranging from
2.6 to 2.9 mg/1 across the stations. The overall range ran from 2.1 to 9.2
mg/1 showing slightly higher variations during this period. Post discharge
6005 means increased slightly ranging from 3.3 mg/1 to 4.4 mg/1 and ranged
from 2.1 mg/1 to 7.8 mg/1.
Results of ANOVA testing on the BOD5 data from the canals showed that
there were no significant differences between testing periods (dates),
stations or depths.
Pre-discharge chlorophyll £ levels in canal waters averaged 20.9 mg/m3
and ranged from 1.78 to 34.71 mg/m3 (Table 15). While no notable trends
were seen in chlorophyll distribution, the highest surface water levels on
each date were noted at the rear of the canal.
Chlorophyll a_ exhibited similar trends during the during the discharge
period ranging from 4.45 mg/m3 to 32.9 mg/m3 across the canal stations with
no apparent trends as to station or depth. The mean values ranged slightly
lower for the stations displaying values between 13.65 mg/m3 to 17.31
mg/m3.
3-16
-------
Table 14. Five Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) mg/1 from the
canal waters during the study.
PRE-DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE
POST DISCHARGE
Station
IS
2S
2B
3S
3B
IS
2S
2B
3S
3B
IS
2S
2B
3S
3B
Mean
5.0
5.0
5.4
5.4
4.6
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.8
2.6
3.4
3.3
4.4
3.4
4.3
Min
4.0
4.3
3.1
3.6
4.1
2.0
2.5
2.1
2.4
1.5
1.7
1.6
2.2
2.2
1.7
Max
6.1
5.7
6.2
6.4
4.9
7.8
7.8
8.6
9.2
7.4
5.5
5.0
5.4
7.4
7.2
Table 15. Chlorophyll £ Values in the Canal during the pre-
discharge, discharge and post discharge periods. Concentrations
are expressed in mg/M3
STATION
IS
2S
2B
3S
3B
IS
2S
2B
3S
3B
IS
2S
2B
3S
3B
Mean
PRE
27.0
15.4
25.5
19.6
17.2
D
17.3
14.2
16.0
13.7
14.2
POST
15.9
14.3
28.8
13.0
16.3
Mi nimum
-DISCHARGE
4.6
1.8
17.7
9.8
10.7
ISCHARGE
6.2
5.3
4.5
5.3
6.2
DISCHARGE
7.6
6.0
10.5
4.5
7.3
M a x i m u n
34.7
24.0
32.0
29.4
24.0
32.9
29.4
32.0
27.6
20.5
30.3
27.3
81.7
22.6
52.9
Standard
Deviation
_
_
-
_
-
9.7
8.4
8.4
6.9
5.4
8.7
7.9
22.8
5.7
15.1
3-17
-------
3.2. SEDIMENTS
Mean TOC for the top 5 cm of sediments in the pre-discharge
experimental plots are represented in Table 16. Individual samples among
the plots ranged between 26 mg/g to 71 mg/g for the pre-di scharge period
with the mean values for the different loading plots ranging from 39.0 to
56.0 mg/g. Overall mean for TOC at the 5 cm level was 49.65 mg/g.
During the discharge period mean TOC ranged slightly higher in all the
experimental plots and ranged from 69.3 mg/g to a high of 91.88 mg/g in the
full loading plots. The highest recorded TOC values were from the full
loading plots where individual values ranged as high as 132.0 mg/g
TOC levels in the post discharge surficial sediments returned to
levels similar to those found during the pre-discharge period. The range
during post discharge of mean TOC is from 34.7 mg/g to 39.6 mg/g.
Pre-discharge Mean TKN for the various sediments sampled from the
different plots are presented in Table 16. Mean values for TKN ranged from
2,160 to 12,933 ug/g across plots and depth. Lowest mean TKN values were
noted in the deepest (20 cm) depth cores where mean TKN was 4,095 ug/g
compared to 9,773 and 10,311 ug/g for the 5 and 10 cm cores respectively.
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ranged from 11,468 ug/g in the half loading
plots to 15,893 mg/g in the full loading plots. The control and quarter
loading plots had intermediate values of 12,502 and 12,322 mg/g
respectively.
Post discharge sediment TKN remained near the discharge levels with
the means ranging from 12,412 ug/g to 13,422 mg/g.
Mean Total Phosphate (TP) in the sediments ranged from the detection
limit ( < 100 ug/g as P) to 365 ug/g across various plots and depth during
the pre-discharge sampling (Table 16). The overall mean value was highest
in the uppermost cores where Total Phosphate measured 246 ug/g.
During discharge the mean Total Phosphate values ranged from 362 ug/g
to 520 mg/g with no clear trend as to loading. Post discharge TP means
showed little variation ranging from 260 ug/g to 296 mg/g.
During pre-di scharge the mean Eh for sediments measured at both the
surface (0 mm) and at a depth of 50 mm was quite variable (Table 17). The
range in means for the sediment surface was from -35 mv to +280 mv with no
consistent trends noted. The means for the 50 mm samples ranged from -116
to +240 mv.
During the discharge period, Eh values were generally lower than
during the pre-discharge period. Mean Eh values ranged from -8 mv to -172
mv at the sediment surface (0.0 mm) and went from -120 mv to -307 mv at the
50 mm depth. There was a consistent trend of decreasing Eh with increase
in loading level.
3-18
-------
Table 16. Sediment Total Organic Carbon (TOO, Total Kjeldahl
Nitrogen (TKN) and Total Phosphate (TP) from the pre-discharge,
discharge and post discharge samplings.
Parameter
Depth Control
Quarter
Half
Full
Pre-Discharge
TOC (mg/g)
TKN (ug/g)
TP (ug/g)
Discharge
TOC (mg/g)
TKN (ug/g)
TP (ug/g)
Post Discharge
TOC (mg/g)
TKN (ug/g)
TP (ug/g)
5
5
10
20
5
10
20
5
5
5
5
5
5
45.6
7,310
12,933
3,853
184
206
<100
69.3
12,502
408
34.7
12,986
296
54.0
11,850
9,570
3,658
312
<100
<100
54.0
12,322
394
39.6
13,422
273
39.0
8,130
8,520
2,160
123
312
<100
39.0
11,468
362
39.5
12,412
290
56.0
11,803
10,223
6,710
365
180
<100
91.9
15,893
520
37.2
12,903
260
Table 17. Mean Eh values (in millivolts) from the sample plots
during the pre-discharge, discharge and post discharge periods.
Sediment
Depth
0 mm
50 mm
Loading
Level
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
Pre-
Discharge
+92
+188
+92
+97
+67
+47
+46
+7
Discharge
-49
-44
-56
-162
-171
-189
-232
-300
Post
Discharge
-4
-20
-29
-28
-151
-169
-171
-204
3-19
-------
During the post discharge period, Eh values at the Omm and 50 mm
depths ranged higher than the discharge period but did not get as high as
during the pre-discharge period. A consistent trend of decreasing Eh with
increased loading level remained evident on the plots.
Sediment texture data, pre-discharge and following discharge, are
summarized in Table 18. Analysis of variance on paired plots and depths,
before and after wastewater application indicated, no change in sediment
texture (a = 0.01). Significant changes over depth were detected with
decreasing percentage mud ( <62.5 microns) at 10 cnu and 20 cm. Mean
percentage mud for each depth was 75.5, 65.6 and 43.8 for 0-5 cm, 5-10 cm
and 10-20 cm portions respectively.
Table 18. Comparison of sediment texture before and after discharge,
treatments pooled by depth.
DEPTH/
SAMPLE PERIOD
% MUD
RANGE
% MUD
X
SE1 2BETWEEN SAMPLE
x PERIOD ANOVA
5 cm
Pre-discharge
Post discharge
5cm mean (n = 60)
39.3 - 95.3
55.0 - 90.8
77.0
74.0
75.5
2.73
2.94
2.84
NS
10 cm
Pre-discharge 39.3
Post discharge 39.2
10 cm mean (n = 60)
89
87.9
68.6
63.1
65.6
3.22
3.17
3.20
NS
20 cm
Pre-discharge 20.9
Post discharge 25.8
20 cm mean (n = 60)
73.4
81.4
41.4
46.3
43.8
2.55
3.07
2.81
NS
SE = Standard Error of the Mean.
^Significant at 0.01.
NS = Not Significant.
3-20
-------
3.3. FLORA
All sample plots were covered by an essentially monospecific community
of black needlerush, Juncus roemerianus. Occassional rare individiual
plants of Spartina alterni flora and Distich!is spicata were collected, but
plant species composition did not change within the study plots.
Therefore, all results are reported for Juncus roemerianus only.
Growth
Variability in live stem densities between plots were greater than
differences between loading rates and between sampling periods (Table 19).
No significant load effect on production and survival of live stems was
detected, with the exception of the half-loaded (2.5 cm) plots in August.
Mean live stem density within the half load plots was 812 nr2, higher than
control and other treatments (Table 19).
Plot stem densities ranged from 374 nr2 (May/Full) to 916 m~2
(Dec./Half). Overall densities averaged 650 live stems per m2 for the
study period. Maximum monthly densities occurred in December (x = 805 nr2)
and were lowest at the end of the study in June, 1985 (x = 503 m-2).
Densities were significantly lower in June, 1985, than starting densities
in June, 1984.
Changes in height and diameter of live plant stems could not be
correlated with different loading rate applications, but reflected the
typical growth pattern for Juncus in all treatments. Both height and
diameter increased through the summer (Figure 4).
Mean diameter of live stems remained relatively constant through fall
and declined throughput the winter and spring to return in June, 1985, to a
period of apparent increasing growth. Mean diameter ranged from 0.30 cm
(May, 1985) to 0.42 cm (August, 1985).
Mean stem height reached maximum in September at 115 cm and declined
slowly through the fall and winter to a minimum of 67 cm in March. Stem
height frequency distribution was essentially normal though positively
shifting through October. However, the distribution became bimodal in
November, perhaps due to a late-summer, early-fall secondary growth period.
As larger, older leaves became senescent the curve returned to a normal but
had a negatively skewed distribution in March as the new growing season
began.
Standing Crop
To determine any differences in plant productivity between
applications mean standing crop per month per application rate were
compared to the control and to each other. Aboveground standing crop was
not statistically different between applications, with two exceptions
(Tables 20 and 21). In December, standing crop of Juncus in the half-
loaded plots was greater than control and quarter-1oaded standing crop was
greater than control in January. Mean aboveground standing crop was lowest
in March (1.8 Kg m~2) just as the growing season began. Peak mean
aboveground standing crop was 2.7 kg nr2 in July.
3-21
-------
Table 19. Pre-discharge, discharge and post discharge live stem density by application.
ro
ro
PERIOD:
APPLICATION
RATE MONTH:
Control
Full
Half
Quarter
ANOVA 1 on Applications
Pre-discharge
6-84
550
a58.8
728
93.8
655
56.9
719
57.2
NS
7-84
631
48.5
672
67.2
728
87.9
779
96
NS
8-84
515
52.8
431
19.4
812
111.9
601
75.4
**
9-84
633
15.9
620
42.1
583
43.4
654
82.8
NS
Discharge
10-84
Mean
632
72.9
665
70.4
765
75.7
605
155
NS
11-84
Stem Density
515
30.5
731
111.8
533
24
771
164
NS
12-84
(nf2)
677
45.3
812
94.5
916
119.8
814
158
NS
1-85
627
a75
802
52
876
106
707
72
NS
2-85
672
72
703
56
655
53
744
63
NS
Post Discharge
3-85
541
74
575
95
648
98
583
45
NS
4-85
745
37
706
103
615
112
693
120
NS
5-85
595
122
374
26
625
110
691
102
NS
6-85
555
128
404
88
484
114
567
122
NS
* Significant at 0.05
** Significant at 0.01
a Standard Error of the Mean (n = 6)
NS Not significant
-------
120
10
100
.2>CVJ
S
90
80
70
60
Month
0.50
0.40 A f
li
0.30
J
Figure 4. Stem height and diameter.
3-23
-------
Table 20. Pre-discharge and discharge aboveground plant biomass by
application rate.
PERIOD:
APPLIC.
RATE MONTH:
Pre-discharge
6-84
7-84
8-84
Di
9-84
Mean Aboveground Biomass
Control
Full
Half
Quarter
ANOVA 1 on Applications
1.9
.2ia
2.6
.24
2.4
.23
2.6
.19
NS
2.4
.28
2.8
.17
2.7
.21
2.7
.32
NS
2.0
.09
1.8
.16
2.1
.17
2.1
.18
NS
2.3
.17
2.1
.11
2.0
.23
2.1
.25
NS
scharge
10-84
11-84
12-84
(kg m-2)
2.4
.16
2.2
.29
2.2
.15
2.3
.16
NS
2.4
.25
2.2
.31
2.3
.26
2.0
.23
NS
2.2
.19
1.9
.17
2.7
.16
2.5
.22
*
* Significant at 0.05
** Significant at 0.01
a Standard Error of the Mean (n = 6)
3-24
-------
Table 21. Post discharge aboveground plant biomass by application rate.
BIOMASS (Kg/m2)
APPLICATION RATE 1-85 2-85 3-85 4-85 5-85 6-85
Control
Full
Half
Quarter
ANOVA
2.0
a.10
1.8
.13
1.8
.18
2.3
.12
*
2.0
.25
1.7
.13
1.6
.11
2.0
.16
NS
1.9
.14
1.8
.15
2.1
.11
1.8
.17
NS
2.3
.27
2.1
.25
1.8
.23
2.2
.36
NS
2.1
.16
1.8
.22
1.9
.12
2.1
.16
NS
2.4
.26
2.7
.11
2.4
.30
2.7
.28
NS
*Significant at 0.05
**Significant at 0.01
NS = Not significant
a = Standard error of the mean, n = 6
3-25
-------
Standing crop of roots and rhizomes was quite variable and no
significant differences could be detected. Biomass fluctuated over time,
with generally low standing crop through the late fall and winter months
(November through March) gradually increasing through the spring and summer
to a peak value in September (Figure 5). Overall mean belowground biomass
was 5.1 kg m-2 with a range of 4.35-6.6 kg m-2 (Tables 22 and 23).
Depth distribution of belowground standing crop was unequal in the 20
cm core. Approximately 60% of the biomass was found in the upper 10 cm
equally distributed in the 0-5 cm and 5-10 cm segments. Only 30% of the
total biomass was located in the lower 10 centimeters (10-20 cm deep).
3.4. FAUNA
Marsh Fauna
Seven species of epifauna were found in the marsh study plots.
Epifauna samples were strongly dominated by the molluscs, Melampus
bidentatus and Guekensia demissa (Tables 24, 25, 26). Other species listed
are rare in the community, though the snails Littorina irrorata and
Neritinia usnea were more frequently found than the crabs and marsh clams.
Abundance of dominant species and total epifaunal abundance increased from
June, 1984, through August. Abundance declined through the fall (October-
December) to an almost absence of epifauna from January, 1985, through
April. Guekensia demissa. a non-motile bivalve, was the only epifaunal
species frequently enountered in the winter and early spring. This species
suffered considerable mortality during the winter. Abundant damaged shells
on the surface may indicate increased predation during this period when the
marsh surface is usually above tidal inundation. Patterns in population
change were consistent across all plots and could not be related to
experimental manipulations. Epifaunal abundance was increasing in late
spring into June, 1985, when population size was greater in all plots than
in June, 1984.
Pre-discharge infaunal abundance is presented in Table 27. Infauna
were dominated by the polychaete Capitella capitata and three oligochaete
species. A total of 18 taxa of infauna were identified. Abundance of
individuals and number of taxa was greatest in the upper 5 centimeters of
the sediment. With the exception of oligochaete A and Namalycastic abiuma,
significant declines in abundance and species richness were observed in the
5-10 cm and 10-20 cm depths of the sediment. No differences were apparent
among plots.
Twenty-nine infaunal taxa were identified during the discharge phase.
Dominance remained in the three oligochaetes and C. capitata with an
increased contribution by N^ abiuma. As noted in the epifauna, abundance
declined during the discharge phase, but with no notable differences among
application rates (Table 28).
3-26
-------
7.0-
6.5-
6.0-
5.5-
g 5 4.0-J
o.
UJ
00
3.0
LOAD RATE
CONTROL
FULL
HALF
QUARTER
J J
PRFniSOHARGF I
A S
1984
N
D
II
F M A M J
1985
Figure 5. Belowground standing crop.
3-27
-------
Table 22. Pre-discharge and discharge belowground plant biomass by
application rate.
PERIOD:
APPLIC.
RATE MONTH:
Pre-discharge
6-84
7-84
8-84
Mean Belowground
Control
Full
Half
Quarter
ANOVA 1 on Applications
5.0
a. 45
5.8
.56
5.6
.39
6.2
.49
NS
4.4
.61
5.1
.52
4.7
.58
5.6
.50
NS
5.5
.53
6.4
.44
5.5
.29
5.7
.19
NS
Di
9-84
scharge
10-84
Biomass (kg
6.7
.60
7.7
.74
6.1
.60
6.0
.41
NS
5.5
.37
4.8
.47
4.8
.39
4.7
.23
NS
11-84
m-2)
5.0
.22
4.2
.31
4.3
.47
3.9
.33
NS
12-84
4.3
.16
5.5
.38
4.9
.61
4.4
.38
NS
* Significant at 0.05
** Significant at 0.01
a Standard Error of the Mean (n = 6)
Table 23. Post discharge belowground plant biomass by application rate.
BIOMASS (Kg/m2)
APPLICATION RATE
Control
Full
Half
Quarter
Sig. ANOVA
*Signif icant at 0.05
**Significant at 0.01
1-85
4.6
a.16
5.3
.72
6.2
1.32
5.2
.42
NS
2-85
5.1
.67
4.0
.39
ND
4.5
.43
NS
NS
a
ND
3-85
4.3
.61
4.6
.53
4.6
.47
3.9
.44
NS
= not signi
= Standard
= no data
4-85
5.4
.70
5.3
.56
4.1
.22
5.0
.80
NS
ficant
error of
5-85
4.8
.51
5.0
.41
5.1
.63
4.9
.45
NS
the mean
6-85
5.3
.57
5.6
.21
5.1
.38
4.8
.55
NS
, n = 6
3-28
-------
Table 24. Pre-discharge marsh epifauna abundance by application rate
MONTH- JUNE JULY
APPLICATION RATE- CONTROL QUARTER HALF FULL CONTROL QUARTER HALF FULL
TAXA (LPIL)
Melampus bidentatus
Guekensia demi ssa
Neritina usnea
Uca sp.
23
0
0
1
15
1
0
0
18
0
2
1
7
0
0
2
26
1
0
1
40
9
1
2
3
4
0
1
4
1
1
0
TOTAL 24 21 16 9 28 52
3-29
-------
Table 25. Discharge marsh epifaunal abundance by application rate.
MONTH-
APPLICATION RATE-
TAXA (LPIL)
Melampus bidentatus
Guekensia demissa
Littorina irrorata
Neritina usnea
Polymesoda carol ini ana
Uca sp.
Sesarma ret leu la turn
TOTAL
CONTROL
17
5
0
0
0
0
0
22
AUGUST
QUARTER HALF
42
7
0
0
1
0
0
50
54
6
1
0
0
0
0
61
FULL
22
5
0
0
0
0
0
27
CONTROL
3
13
0
1
0
0
1
18
OCTOBER
QUARTER HALF
5
2
0
0
0
1
0
8
1
29
0
0
0
0
0
30
FULL
2
3
2
0
0
0
0
7
CONTROL
0
13
0
0
0
1
0
14
DECEMBER
QUARTER HALF
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
12
3
2
0
0
0
17
FULL
1
2
2
0
2
0
0
2
-------
Table 26. Post discharge marsh epifaunal abundance by application rate.
CO
MONTH:
APPLICATION RATE:
TAXA (LPIL)
Melampus bidentatus
Guekensia demissa
Littorina irrorata
Neritina usnea
Polymesoda carol ini ana
yea sp.
Sesarma reticulatum
JANUARY
CONTROL QUARTER HALF
0
11
1
0
0
0
0
0
4
1
0
1
0
0
0
3
2
0
0
0
0
FULL
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
FEBRUARY
CONTROL QUARTER HALF
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
7
1
0
1
0
0
FULL
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
MARCH
CONTROL QUARTER
0
6
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
HALF
0
5-
1
0
1
0
0
FULL
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
TOTAL 12
-------
Table 26. Concluded.
00
l\5
MONTH-
APPUCATION RATE-
TAXA (LPIL)
Melampus bidentatus
Guekensia demissa
Littorina irrorata
Neritina usnea
Polymesoda carol iniana
Uca sp.
Sesarma reticulatum
APRIL
CONTROL QUARTER HALF FULL
0
11
0
1
0
0
0
0
28
0
2
0
0
1
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
1
1
0
0
MAY
CONTROL QUARTER HALF FULL
18
8
1
1
0
0
0
31
2
0
1
0
0
0
30
4
0
0
0
0
0
44
1
0
2
0
0
0
JUNE
CONTROL QUARTER HALF FULL
23
18
0
2
0
0
0
29
23
2
1
0
1
0
16
13
3
10
0
0
0
13
6
0
0
0
0
0
TOTAL 12 31 2 7 28 34 34 47 43 56 42 19
-------
Table 27. Pre-discharge marsh infaunal abundance replicates combined.
CONTROL
MONTH JUN JUL JUN JUL JUN JUL
DEPTH 05 05 10 10 20 20
Capitella capitata 97 63 6 144
Oligochaeta sp. C 14 39 23 20 2
Oligochaeta sp. B 815111
Hobsonia florida 19
Gammarus mucronatus 6 1
Cyrenoida floridana 82 2
Oligochaeta sp. A 7 64 15 44 47 13
Sabellidae 13
Melita sp. 6
Me lamp us bidentatus
Namalycastis abiuma 92 43
Neanthes succinea
Insecta 2 1
Polymesoda carol ini ana
Uca sp.
Ostracoda
Oligochaeta
Guekensia demissa 1
JUN JUL
05 05
50 78
5 18
12 12
3
3 2
2 15
1 57
2
1
4
1 4
1
QUARTER
JUN JUL JUN JUL
10 10 20 20
2 3 34
13 4 1 1
22 7 10 1
20 9 97 6
1
2 1
3-33
-------
Table 27. Concluded.
MONTH
DEPTH
Capitella capitata
Oligochaeta sp. C
Oligochaeta sp. B
Hobsonia florida
Gammarus mucronatus
Cyrenoida floridana
Oligochaeta sp. A
Sabellidae
Melita sp.
Melampus bidentatus
Namalycastis abiuma
Neanthes succinea
Insecta
Polymesoda carol ini ana
Uca sp.
Ostracoda
Oligochaeta
Guekensia demissa
JUN
05
103
12
10
19
9
13
9
1
1
1
HALF
JUL JUN JUL JUN JUL
05 10 10 20 20
91 9 1 2
15 18 7 12 2
25 3 1 5
20
1
3
54 8 20 19 4
1
9 1
2
2 1
FULL
JUN JUL JUN JUL JUN JUL
05 05 10 10 20 20
53 90 66 16
31 12 26 4 11
76 6 10 4
17 24 11
16 2
3 3
7 41 10 18 54 1
4
4
11123
2
1
1
3-34
-------
Table 28. Discharge marsh infaunal abundance.
CO
i
CO
ui
MONTH
DEPTH
TAXA (LPIL)
Capitella capitata
Oljgochaeta sp. B
Ollgpchaeta sp. C
NamalycastTs abiuma
OTigochaeta sp. A
Ampnaretidae
Hobsom'a florida
Cyrenolda fToridana
Gammarus mucronatus
Melita sp.
Eteone heteropoda
Glyptotendipes barbi pes
Dicrotendlpes barbi pes
Neanthes succinea
Streblospio benedi cti
Mediomastus ambiseta
Ostracoda
Guekensia demissa
Orchestia sp.
Pelecypoda
Insecta
Tabam'dae
Chironomidae
Chrysops sp.
Pal pomyi a complex"
Tabanus sp.
Uca sp.
Eunice sp.
Nereidae
AUG
05
13
9
7
15
4
4
1
2
2
OCT
05
23
16
2
3
1
4
1
4
1
CONTROL
DEC AU6 OCT DEC AUG OCT DEC
05 10 10 10 20 20 20
25 2211
4 2
7124 22
23 21
434 1
4 1
3 1
1
1
2
1
AUG
05
32
20
2
3
27
1
13
1
3
3
1
QUARTER
OCT DEC AUG OCT DEC AUG OCT DEC
05 05 10 10 10 20 20 20
9 22 12 1 1
9 1
89133 1
1
6 1 10 4 1 4
2
6 3
4 2 1
1
2 1
1
1
1
-------
Table 28. Concluded.
CO
i
co
CTi
MONTH
DEPTH
TAXA (LPIL)
Capi tel 1 a capitata
Ollgochae'ta sp. B
Ollgochaeta sp. C
NamalycastTs abiuma
Ollqochaeta sp. A
Ampharetldae
Hobsonia florida
Cyrenoi da floridana
Gammarus mucronatus
Melita sp.
Eteone heteropoda
Glyptotendlpes ba'rbipes
Dicrotendlpes barblpes
Xeanthes succi nea
Streblospio benedicti
Medlomastus ambiseta
Ostracoda
Guekensla demissa
Orchestia sp.
Pel ecypofla
Insecta
Tabanidae
Chironomidae
Chrysops sp.
Pal pony la complex"
Tabanus sp.
Uca sp.
Eunice sp.
Nereidae
AUG
05
29
5
12
3
28
3
13
1
2
1
OCI
05
17
9
2
1
2
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
HALF
DEC AU6 OCT DEC AUG OCT DEC
05 10 10 10 20 20 20
33 2 1
13 6 1
3156
1 1 2
46221 1
2 1
3
1 1
1 1
1
1
1
1
AUG OCT
05 05
23 15
20 4
5 7
4 1
10 17
3 1
9
1
2
3
1
1
1
DEC AUG OCT
05 10 10
38
16 14 1
222
15
873
2
1 1
2 2
1
2
1
1 1
1
FULL
DEC AUG OCT DEC
10 20 20 20
7
2
422
2 1 2
2 22
1
-------
A more diverse community of thirty-three taxa was delineated from
post discharge samples (Jan.-June, 1985). This probably represents the
majority of potential community components, as this period comprised the
largest number of samples, but added only three new rare taxa to the
community. Total abundance increased significantly on the plots receiving
1.82 cm of wastewater relative to the control plots, due primarily to
increases in populations of the annelids, Capitella capitata, Oligochaete A
and Hobsonia florida (Figure 6" and Table 29),
Canal Fauna
Polychaete worms dominated the predischarge canal benthic community
(Table 30). Most abundant taxa, of the, 16 identified, were Mediomastus
ambiseta, Streblospio benedicti, Heteromastus fil iformis and Sigambra
bassi.Abundance of individuals and number of taxa was greatest at the
shallow Station 3 near the mouth of the canal. The benthic community was
depauperate at Station 1, the deepest portion of the canal, comprised of
only 4 taxa with a maximum species abundance of 13 individuals. Other than
polychaetes only the bivalve Macoma sp. and rare individual Rhynchocoela
were collected.
Streblospio benedicti and NL_ ambiseta were most abundant in the
discharge benthos (Table 31). Of 25 taxa identified, only these two
occurred in significant numbers. The abundance of S. benedicti remained
high through December, but M. ambiseta declined significantly after August.
Station 3 supported the greatest diversity of benthic organisms as seen in
the pre-discharge period. Additional bivalve species, crustaceans and fish
were added to the benthic community, especially during December.
Abundance of benthic organisms remained high through February of the
post discharge study. Species richness increased with 33 taxa collected.
Numbers of individuals became more evenly distributed between stations in
February but declined at Station 3 in April and June. Total population
abundance was lowest in April and June (Table 32). This decline is
directly related to a decline in Streblospio benedicti. Community
composition in June, 1985, was very similar to that in June, 1984. No
dramatic changes in species relative abundances or overall benthic
community structure were detected during the study.
Table 33 presents species abundance data for canal fauna collected in
lift nets. Collections were dominated by crustaceans including grass
shrimp (Palaemonetes pugio) and two penaeids (Penaeus aztecus and F\_
setiferusli Crustaceans declined significantly in December and February
when fish were most abundant in the collection. Only four individuals were
collected in June, 1985, the most depauperate of all collections.
Palaemonetes pugio dominated the samples in summer and winter and were
replaced by Penaeus setiferus as dominant in August.
Fish were rarely taken in lift nets and were only abundant in
collections made in December and February. Most abundant species in these
months were resident marsh species including Fundulus spp. and Cyprinidon
yariegatus who were probably forced into the deeper waters of the canal
because of dry conditions on the marsh surface.
3-37
-------
Gill nets, as expected, were dominated by larger fish species. Only
three invertebrates were collected in gill nets and only incidentally.
Total numbers of individuals per sample were small ranging from a low of 5
in February to a high of 37 in December, again due to an emigration, of
marsh fish into the canal (Table 31). A total of 19 species of fish and
invertebrates and a total of only 148 individuals were collected over the
sampling year.
~ 11,500-,
jr 9,500-
CM
£ 7,500-
Q
f= 5,500J
3,500
10.85810,577
8.835
5,793
5,252
2,169
1351^,558.442,'.603 fl
1,500 .
JUN JUL AUG OCT DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
LJ 1984 1985
2 PREDISCHARGEHI—DISCHARGE—II POSTDISCHARGE-
SAMPLE PERIOD
Figure 6. Total marsh infaunal abundance.
3-38
-------
Table 29. Post discharge marsh infaunal abundance.
co
i
oo
MONTH:
DEPTH (CM):
TAXA (LPIL)
Capitella capitata
Hobsom'a florida
Oligochaeta sp. A
Oligochaeta sp. B
Ampnaretidae
Cyrenoida floridana
Gammarus mucronatus
Oligochaeta sp. C
NamalycastTs abiuma
Glyptotendipes barbi pes
Palpomyia "complex"
Tabanidae
Callinectes sapidus
Capitellidae
Melampus bidentatus
Oligochaeta
Ostracoda
Pelecypoda
Guekensia demissa
Eteone heteropoda
Polydora cornuta
Streblospio benedicti
Gastropoda
Sabellidae
Dicrotendipes barbi pes
Insecta
Uca sp.
Unidentified larvae
Corophium louisianum
Tabanus sp.
Nereidae
Hydrpbiidae
MeTita sp.
TOTAL
JAN
05
9
6
1
4
2
4
2
1
1
30
FEE MAR
05 05
10 2
13 10
3 3
1 2
1 5
3 2
1
1
1
1
1
34 26
APR
05
188
85
10
55
3
35
19
36
2
3
3
1
1
441
MAY
05
160
38
12
82
5
7
8
3
8
2
2
1
2
26
356
JUN JAN
05 10
228
36
23 2
50
2 1
1
47
13 1
5
1
1
4
2
1
2
13
427 6
CONTROL
FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JAN FEE MAR APR MAY JUN
10 10 10 10 10 20 20 20 20 20 20
1318 2
1 1 1
736 5
1814 3 1
1
211 1
2 4 6 10 11 1 1
1 2
2 2 1
1 1
1
1
2 9 22 13 32 0 1 2 20 5 4
-------
Table 29. Continued.
QUARTER
MONTH:
DEPTH (CM):
TAXA (LPIL)
Capitella capita ta
Hobsonia florida
Oligochaeta sp. A
Oligochaeta sp. B
Ampnaretidae
Cyrenoida floridana
Gammarus mucronatus
qiigpchaeta sp. C
Namalycas'tTs abiuma
Glyptotendipes barbi pes
Palpomyia "complex"
Tabanidae
Callinectes sapidus
Capitellidae
Melampus bidentatus
01 i gochaeta
Ostracoda
Pel ecypoda
Guekensia demissa
Eteone heteropoda
Polydora cornuta
Streblospio benedicti
Gastropoda
Sabellidae
Dicrotendipes barbi pes
Insecta
Uca sp.
Unidentified larvae
Corophium louisianum
Tabanus sp.
Nereidae
Hydrobiidae
Melita sp.
TOTAL
JAN FEB MAR APR
05 05 05 05
12 17 36 126
6 9 11 90
4 6 3 21
33 14
1
2446
2 1 5 13
5 31 4
1 5 5
1 2
1 2
1 1
1
3
2
36 43 96 ?8Q
MAY
05
135
80
8
71
9
12
25
3
9
1
1
26
3
2
W
JUN JAN FEB MAR
05 10 10 10
249 3 24 1
17
58 1
30
6
1 1
15
4 3 1
8
1
1
2
7
51
d^d 1 90. 1Q
APR MAY JUN JAN FEB MAR APR MAY
10 10 10 20 20 20 20 20
613 1 1
1 1
14 23 1 2 12
1 10 8 14
4 142
11 11 1 25
1 1 2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
JUN
20
1
1
2
11 27
-------
Table 29. Continued.
CO
i
MONTH:
DEPTH (CM):
TAXA (LPIL)
Capitella capitata
Hobsonia fieri da
Oligochaeta sp. A
Oligochaeta sp. B
Ampnaretidae
Cyrenoida floridana
Gairanarus mucronatus
Oligpchaeta sp. C
NamalycastTs abiuma
Glyptotendipes barbi pes
Palpomyia "complex"
Tabanidae
Callinectes sapidus
Capitellidae
Melampus bidentatus
Oligochaeta
Ostracoda
Pelecypoda
Guekensia demissa
Eteone heteropoda
Polydora cornuta
Streblosplo benedicti
Gastropoda
Sabellidae
Dicrotendipes barbi pes
Insecta
Uca sp.
Unidentified larvae
Corophium louisianum
Tabanus sp.
Nereidae
Hydrobiidae
Melita sp.
Hargeria rapax
Chi ronomi dae
TOTAL
JAN
05
37
16
6
7
8
2
7
1
1
1
1
1
1
89
FEB MAR
05 05
46 33
49 66
6 2
3 4
5 4
9 17
7
1 1
1
1
1
128 128
APR
05
117
65
42
25
5
16
27
5
8
1
1
1
313
MAY
05
339
90
13
75
9
5
18
3
13
1
2
1
143
1
1
10
1
725
JUN JAN FEB
05 10 10
122 2 10
12 1
99 3
32
1
1
116 4
1 1 4
6
4
4
1
1
2
50
2
2
454 12 15
HALF
MAR APR MAY JUN JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
10 10 10 10 20 20 20 20 20 20
1 1 66
1 1 2
21 11 71 2 1 523
2 29 24 28
1 2 2
13 11 22 10 7 2
1 1
2 2 1
1
0 41 56 118 4 1 2 27 23 5
-------
Table 29. Concluded.
oo
i
-Pa
ro
FULL
MONTH:
DEPTH (CM):
TAXA (LPIL)
Capitella capitata
Hobsonia florida
Oligochaeta sp. A
Ollgochaeta sp. B
Ampnaretidae
Cyrenoida floridana
Gamtnarus mucronatus
Oligochaeta sp. C
Namalycastis abiuma
Glyptotendipes barbi pes
Palpomyia "complex"
Tabanidae
Callinectes sapidus
Capitellidae
Melampus bldentatus
Oligochaeta
Ostracoda
Pelecypoda
Guekensia demissa
Eteone heteropoda
Polydora cornuta
Streblospio benedlcti
Gastropoda
Sabellldae
Dicrotendipes barbi pes
Insecta
Uca sp.
Unidentified larvae
Corophium louisianum
Tabanus sp.
Nereldae
Hydrobiidae
Melita sp.
Mediomastus ambiseta
Chironomidae
Orchestia sp.
TOTAL
JAN
05
47
7
10
3
2
4
3
1
5
3
1
86
FEE MAR APR
05 05 05
18 39 125
10 9
2 . 2 60
3 9 136
3 6 1
1 2 2
10
7 4
1 1 12
4
3
1
28 76 367
MAY
05
150
10
35
98
3
8
11
4
16
1
2
1
5
26
370
JUN JAN
05 10
144 2
65 1
95
2
24
6
1
6
1
2 1
9
354 5
FEB MAR
10 10
13 1
2
1
1
1
13 6
APR
10
10
1
17
23
1
3
1
3
1
1
61
MAY JUN JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
10 10 20 20 20 20 20 20
1 2
24 23 4
5 42 2
2 3
10 5 1
3 1 4
3 7 2
1
1
1
6
47 84 0 7 0 7 7 1
-------
Table 30. Pre-Discharge benthic faunal abundance from canal grab samples.
MONTH: JUNE
STATION: 2Sta. Sta.
1 2
TAXA (LPIL)
Rynchocoel a
Leitoscoloplos fragilis
Cossura soyeri 1
Streblospio benedicti
Capitella capitata
Mediomastus ambiseta 3 27
Heteromastus filiforrm's 3
Parandalia americana
Sigambra bassi 2
Laeoneris culveri
Gom'adidae (LPIL)
Diopatra cuprea
Pectinaria regal is
Mel inna maculata
Hobsonia florida
Macoma sp. (LPIL) 11
ABUNDANCE
JULY
Sta. Sta. Sta. Sta.
3123
1 1
2 1
41 13 217 53
10 4
92 151 204
23 2 28
1
24 1 4 3
4
5
1
1
1
1
8 11 7
TOTAL
44 198
14
389
1. Total of three replicates at each station.
2. See Figure 2 for station locations.
314
3-43
-------
Table 31. Discharge benthic faunal abundance from canal grab samples.
MONTH: AUGUST
STATION: 2Sta. Sta.
1 2
TAXA (LPIL)
Rynchocoela
Leltoscoloplos fragi'lls
Cossura delta 1
Paraprionospio pinnata
Streblospio benedicti 44 81
Capitella capitata
Mediomastus amblseta 1 14
Heteromastus filiformis
Parandalia americana 1
Sigambra bassi 3
S. tentaculata
flesionidae (LPIL)
Laeoneris culveri
Glycinde solitaria
Neanthes succlnea
Goniadldae (LPIL)
Diqpatra cuprea
Podarkeopsis levi f usci na
Hobsonla f lor Ida
Nereidae (LPIL)
Pelecypoda (LPIL)
Macoma sp. (LPIL) 2
Rangia cuneata
Ampelisca abdita
Cerapus benthophilus
Clibanarius vittatus
Callinectes sp.
Call Inectes sapidus
AmphipocTTLPIL)
Gobionellus hastatus
Gobidae
TOTAL 47 100
Sta.
3
9
5
315
4
235
9
1
1
5
1
1
1
2
1
590
ABUNDANCE
OCTOBER
Sta. Sta. Sta.
1 2 3
1 8
1 2
1
117 83 3
1
4 70
7
1 2
20
9
2
1
2
117 90 128
NOVEMBER
Sta. Sta.
1 2
1
4
126 54
2
1
1
1
1
1
127 65
Sta.
3
5
4
4
57
1
193
5
2
3
2
1
5
2
1
1
286
DECEMBER
Sta. Sta.
1 2
Sta.
3
1 4
5
1
252
308 176 97
1 1
4 125
5 2
2 6
4 9
1 3 2
2
1
1
1 1
1
1
316 198 260
1. Total of three replicates at each station.
2. See Figure 1 1. A. 2 for station locations.
-------
Table 32. Post-discharge benthic fauna! abundance from canal grab samples.
1
ABUNDANCE
MONTH:
JANUARY
FEBRUARY
APRIL
JUNE
in
STATION:
TAXA (LPIL)
Rynchocoela
Oligochaeta A.
Oligochaeta C.
Lei toscoTopI os fragilis
Cossura delta
Paraprionospio pinnata
Streplpspio benedicti
Capitella capi tata
Mediomastus amblseta
Heteromastus filiformi s
Eteone heteropoda
Glycinde sol i tar i a
Podarkeppsl s levifuscina
Paramphl home sp. B.
Glycera sp. (LPIL)
Ampharetidae (LPIL)
Sigambra sp. (LPIL)
Si gambra bassi
Parandalia americana
Hesionldae (LPIL)
Laeoneris culveri
Neanthes succinea
Gonladldae (LPIL)
Dippatra cuprea
Hobsonia florlda
Pelecypoda (LPIL)
Macoma sp. (LPIL)
Rangla cuneata
Chirononridae (LPIL )
Grandidierella bonnierdides
Edotea montosa
Paracaprella pusi 11 a
Ampellsca abdlta
TOTAL
1. Total of three replicates
2. See Figure 2 for station
2Sta. Sta. Sta.
123
1 1 12
1
18
4
3 7 10
47 183 196
34
140
2
2 3
2 6
1
1
2
5
1
11
2
190
5
54 197 450
at each station.
locations.
Sta. Sta.
1 2
1 4
1
8
271 170
4
8 22
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
282 214
Sta.
3
6
5
3
97
16
112
2
3
4
7
1
2
1
10
1
1
1
6
278
Sta. Sta. Sta.
1 2 3
1
1 1
3 21
1 6 2
61 99 19
7 3
6 66 9
69
4
1
7
2 1
1
1
2
68 184 142
Sta. Sta. Sta.
1 2 3
9
1 1
1 2 1
24 50 39
1
1 44 146
25
1
2 2
5
1
1
1
6
26 99 239
-------
Table 33. Canal faunal abundance collected in lift nets.
YEAR: 1984
PERIOD: PRE DISCHARGE
MONTH: JUNE JULY AUG. OCT. DEC.
SPECIES
LIFT NETS (3)
Fish:
Anchoa mitchelli 2
Fundulus sinvilis 4
Fundulus grandis 71
Fundulus jenkinsi 1
Cypn'ngdon vanegatus 45
Poecilia lati pinna 2
Sygnathus floridae 1
Mugil cephal us
Lagodon rhomboi de s
Bairdiella chrysura 6 14
Cynoscion nebulosus 1
Cynoscion arenarius 1 1
Leiostomus xanthurus 5
Gobionellus boleosoma 1
Symphurus plagiusa 1
Monocanthus hispiflus 1
TOTAL 67 4 6 125
INVERTEBRATES
Penaeus setiferus 48 100 19
Penaeus aztecus 10 1
Pal aemonetes pugio 81 148 6 11 8
Probopyrus pandalicola
Aegathoa oculata 1
Callinectes sapidus 1 11
Clibanarius vittatus 1 11
juv. xantmdae
1985
POST
JAN. FEB. APR. JUNE TOTAL
2
2 6
25 96
1
1 46
2
1
3 3
3 3
11
1
2
7 1 13
1 2
1
1
0 35 7 1 191
167
32 16
251 83 3014 3602
28 28
1
1 2 6
1 4
1 1
TOTAL
92
199
107
32
251
85 3047
3825
-------
Table 34. Canal faunal abundance collected in gill nets.
CO
YEAR: 1984
PERIOD: PRE- DISCHARGE
MONTH: JUNE JULY AUG. OCT. DEC.
SPECIES
GILL NET (3)
Fish:
Elops saurus 1
Brevoortia patronus 2 52
Dorosoma petenense 12
Arius fell's 1
Strongylura marina 1
Fundulus similis 1 4
Fundulus grandis 1 21
Mugil cephalus 2 137
Prionotus tribulus 1
Oligqplites saurus 1
Bairdiella chrysura
Cynoscion nebulosus
Cynoscion arenarius 52 32
Leiostomus xanthurus 1 42
Sciaenops oscellata
Micropogom'us undulatus 144 1
TOTAL 24 8 20 6 37
Invertebrates:
Penaeus setiferus 2
Callinectes sapidus 2 4
Lolliguncula brevis 1
1985
POST
JAN. FEB. APR. JUNE
3 1
8212
3231
T
1
2 3
2 1
2
1 2
12 4 13 12
\
1 1 1
TOTAL
1
13
12
1
1
18
31
14
1
1
1
5
12
10
2
13
136
2
9
1
TOTAL
0 2
12
-------
4.0. DISCUSSION
4.1. WATER QUALITY
Experimental Plots
During pre-discharge sampling, the surface water of the experimental
plots exhibited conditions characteristic of tidal marsh areas. Elevated
salinities were noted due to the shallowness of the water (when it existed)
and intense evaporation. Depressed dissolved oxygen ( 4.0 mg/1) values
were frequently observed, also characteristic of an area with a large
amount of biogenic activity, high salinities and high temperatures.
Observations of supersaturated conditions were also observed in areas of
intense algal productivity.
Salinities recorded during the discharge period were not
significantly different from the pre-discharge or post discharge values
(Figure 7). A slight decrease in the salinities on the full loading plots
was observed, due to the effect of the hydrologic loading of low salinity
waters on those particular plots. During the post discharge period,
patterns in salinities were similar to those found during pre-discharge.
Q.
Q_
c
•r—
to
Salinity on Experimental Plots
Ail Periods
I
Cont Quart
f\. ] Pro-Discharge
Hoif
Full
Loading Level
1K77 Discharge
Post-Discharge
Figure 7. Mean salinity on the experimental plots during the
pilot study.
4-1
-------
Mean disolved oxygen during discharge showed a trend of decreasing
levels concomitant with the level of loading delivered to the respective
loading plot. However the difference was not statistically significant
according to ANOVA. It is worthy to note that although many individual
readings indicated periodic anoxic conditions, the mean dissolved oxygen on
these plots was 5.7 mg/1. This is above the usual 5 mg/1 level that is
usually thought of as the minimum level acceptable by most regulatory
agencies. One must also keep in mind that all of the readings were taken
in the day; if measurements were taken during early morning and night, a
much Ibwer average may have resulted.
Therefore, it is important that the range of dissolved oxygen be
considered rather than the mean. The dissolved oxygen levels were
indicative of a hyper-eutrophic situation with mid-afternoon readings
showing supersaturation levels and those earlier in the day sometimes
showing anoxic conditions.
-tJ,
Nutrients in the surface waters on the plots during pre-discharge were
also elevated compared with what one would encounter in most estuarine
waters, again attributed to the effects of evaporative concentration and to
some extent the abundance of sedimentary materials. This is consistent
with other studies that have shown an abundance of mineral and organic
nutrients in marsh surface waters (Bender and Correl 1974) There was a
consistency across the plots designated to receive the various loadings.for
TKN, TOC and TP. Overall nitrogen to phosphorus ratio (4.00) was indica-
tive of marginal nitrogen limitation in the surface waters on the plots.
Nitrogen parameters (TKN, N02-N03 and NH4) were impacted the most on
the surface of the plots. Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen was significantly higher
during the discharge period and showed highly significant differences
between the various loading plots (Figure 8). The increase in TKN paral-
leled the loading levels that each plot received. Ammonium ion (Figure 9)
also exhibited highly significant differences ( alpha 0.001) between the
pre-discharge, discharge and post discharge periods when tested by ANOVA
and significant differences between plots. As with TKN, ammonium levels
reflected the level of waste loadings with the highest values observed dn
the full loading plots. Nitrite-nitrate levels did not exhibit statisti-
cally significant differences between plots but showed an elevation on the
discharge plots during the post discharge period (Figure 10).
During the discharge period, total nitrogen on the plots, as indicated
by total bar in Figure 11, went from less than 4 mg/1 to a high of 29.52 in
the full loading plots. Much of the difference between the plots can be
attributed to the increased ammonium ion levels. Recalling that the nitro-
gen species in the wastes were approximately 50 percent ammonium ion and 50
percent Total Organic Nitrogen, the increase is directly attributable to
the experimental loading levels.
Figures 12 and 13 illustrate the temporal variations in TKN and
ammonium ion, respectively, for the full loading and control plots. Some
cross-over between the plots is indicated, but most sampling indicated
that it was an infrequent event. Of note, is the rapid return to
background levels of these parameters following the end of the discharge
period.
4-2
-------
TON on the Experimental Plots
21
20 -
19 -
18 -
17 -
16 -
15 -
14 -
13 -
12 -
11 -
10 -
9 -
8 -
7 -
6 -
5
4
3
2 -
1 -
0
Cent
Quart
Half
Full
Loading Level
{5T1 Pro-Discharge V/ A Discharge
k*^J Post—Discharge
Figure 8. Mean TON on the experimental plots during the pilot study.
Ammonium ion on Experimental Plots
9 -
8 -
7 -
6 -
5 -
4 -
3 -
2 -
1 -
I
... \// A. VM mr— // J
^ N.N1 1 «
\
^^
^S
Cont Quart Half Full
Pre-dischar
Post-Discharge
Loading Level
Y/ A Discharge
Figure 9.
Meanjammonium ion concentrations on the experimental plots
during the pilot study.
4-3
-------
N02-N03 on the Experimental Plots
o
X
Post-Discharge
Quart Half
Loading Level
Discharge
Full
Figure 10. Mean nitrite-nitrate levels on the experimental plots during
the study period.
4-4
-------
30
Nitrogen on the Experimental Plots
Discharge
28 -
26 -
24 -
22 -
20 -
18 -
16 -
14 -
12 -
10 -
8 -
6 -
4 -
2 H
0
Cent
IViTON
Quart
E23NH4
Half
N02-N03
i
Full
Figure 11. Nitrogen species in the surface waters on the experimental
plots during the discharge period.
4.5
-------
Nitrogen - Control Plots
0i
%-*
c
o
I
o
o
0.00
Jun~84
Ju!-85
Nitrogen - Full Loading Plots
o
1
•E
c
o
o
50.00
45.00 -
0.00
Jun-84
Ju!-85
Figure 12. Temporal variations in total kjeldahl nitrogen concentration for
the control and full loading plots for the entire study period.
4-6
-------
Nitrogen — Control Plots
0
••§
I
2
+>
c
o
o
0
o
0.00
Jun—84
Jul-85
NH4
Figure 13.
Temporal variations in ammonium ion concentration for the control
and full loading plots for the entire study period.
4-7
-------
Nitrite-nitrate-N levels in the wastes were generally at the limits of
detection in the wastewater stream (0.04 mg/1). However, on the quarter and
half-loading plots during discharge , nitrite-nitrate levels more than
tripled their background levels (Figure 14). While the increase was not
statistically significant at the 0.05 level, it did indicate a significant
biological activity was occurring on the quarter and half loading plots.
The increase in the nitrite-nitrate levels indicated that significant
nitrification, the conversion of ammonium to nitrite-nitrate by microbial
action, was taking place on these plots.
Al so worthy of note are the low level s (about 0.04 mg/1) of nitrite-
nitrate observed on the full loading plots during discharge. Since the
nitrification process only occurs under aerobic conditions, low levels of
NO£-N03-N indicate that on the full loading plots, nitrification was
suppressed, presumably due to the high reducing conditions brought about by
the high oxygen demand of the carbonaceous portion of BOD.
In contrast to the above observations, nitrite-nitrate was
significantly higher during the post discharge period. This indicates that
much of the highly reduced nitrogen bearing materials (NH4 and TKN) were
being oxidized to N02-N03 by nitrifying microorganisms.
The findings discussed above illustrate the fate of the nitrogen
bearing wastes applied to the experimental system. Nitrogen rich wastes,
high in ammonia and organic nitrogen, were rapidly oxidized on the surface
of the quarter and half loaded plots. This oxidation was somewhat slower
on the full loading plots, presumably due to the high oxygen demand of the
carbonaceous portion of the wastes. There is some indication that some of
the reduced nitrogen (ammonium) was taken up by the microflora on the plot
surface and was slowly released by mineralization of the organic materials
to nitrate-nitrate long after the discharge had stopped. This would
account for the "memory" of the system in terms of the release of nitrite-
nitrate nitrogen in the months following the discharge. Presumably, some
of the ammonium was lost due to volitization of this compound in the
circumneutral pH of the marsh environment.
Total Organic Carbon (TOO was not significantly different between the
pre-discharge, discharge and post discharge periods or between loading
levels. Highest TOC values were observed on the full loading plots during
the discharge period (Figure 15). The mean concentration of TOC on the
plots during this time reflected the level of loading applied. During post
discharge, TOC averaged less than the pre-discharge period. This reduction
could be due to the demand of the nitrifiers for carbon substrate in the
nitrification process.
Biochemical oxygen demand , ranging from 3 mg/1 to 13 mg/1 was
relatively high compared to most natural waters (usually in the range of
0.5-3 mg/1) during pre-discharge due to the large amount of naturally
occurring biogenic material present with the corresponding large microbial
populations in the marsh surface waters. The inclusion of detrital
materials derived from the sediments may have contributed to the somewhat
higher readings.
4-8
-------
0.3
0.28 -
0.26 -
0.24 -
0.22 -
0.2 -
0.18 -
0.16 -
O.H -
0.12 -
0.1 -
0.08 -
0.06
0.04 -
0.02 -
0
Nitrogen on the Experimental Plots
Discharge
Cont
Quart
Loading Level
N02-N03
r
Half
Full
Figure 14. Mean nitrite-nitrate on experimental plots during the
study period.
4-9
-------
TOC on the Experimental Plots
80
70 -
60 -
50 -
40 -
20 -
10 -
Cont
IX J Pre-Discho
Post—Discharge
Quart Half
Loading Level
Discharge
Full
Figure 15. Mean Total Organic Carbon (TOC) on the experimental
plots during the polot study.
4-10
-------
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) showed significantly elevated levels
during the discharge period directly attributable to experimentally
increased BOD loadings (Figure 16). Levels on the half and full loading
plots were only slightly elevated (19 - 20 mg/1 BOD) while levels on the
fully loaded plots showed marked elevation (78 mg/1) indicating that the
capacity of the system to readily oxidize the wastes may have been
exceeded. It should be emphasized that these average values represent
condition after initial mixing and dilution with the receiving waters on
the surface of the experimental plots. It should be noted that this value
occurred after initial dilution with the receiving waters had occurred.
Post discharge BOD levels averaged slightly higher than the pre-
discharge levels (3-13mg/1 for pre-discharge versus 11-13 mg/1 for post
discharge means) but below that of the discharge period. It is unclear
whether the higher BOD was due to seasonal differences between the pre- and
post discharge levels or a result of the waste loading.
Chlorophyll ^values during pre-discharge were quite variable and were
in the range of eutrophic to hypereutrophic conditions (eutrophic mean of
10 ng/m3; hyoereutrophic mean of 25 mg/m3; Gakstetter et_ al. 1975.).
Many of the high readings were no doubt the result of concentration due to
evaporation of the surface waters as well as interference from plant
materials from the sediment which frequently contaminated the water
samples, an unavoidable result due to the very shallow nature of the
surface water. However, much of the chlorophyll £ was due to both
phytoplankton in the shallow surface waters of the marsh as well as from
the inclusion in the samples of periphytic or epipsammic materials.
Chlorophyll £ levels on the plot surface showed a similar high
variability during the discharge period. This was due to the variability
introduced to this parameter by the sampling as well as the inherent high
variability with this parameter. The observed high values on the
experimental plots reflected the increased loading from the waste
application. The high levels during the post discharge period indicate
that the nutrients applied on the marsh system remained, to some extent at
least, on the surface of the plots tied up in the microbiota, especially
the algae. This "memory" of the system for chlorophyll £ points to some of
the "assimilative capacity" of the system. This suggests that the
nutrients assimilated by the surface flora remain in the system and are
recycled for some time before released in a more refractory form.
The Nitrogen to Phosphorus (N:P) Ratio on the plots showed increases
at all loading levels during the discharge period except for the full
loading plots (Figure 17). The intermediate loading plots showed the
greatest increase, going from less than 2.0 to greater than 20.0 and 14.0,
respectively, for the quarter and half loading levels. This change would
indicate that at these two plots, conditions went from a nitrogen limited
situation to near limiting conditions due to lack of phosphorus. This
nitrogen enrichment can be directly attributed to the waste loadings on the
marsh. The enrichment however appears not to be the only cause of the
shift since it was also observed at the control plots. Possible seas.onal
shifts in the ratio may be the ultimate causative factor.
4-11
-------
BOD on the Experimental Plots
All Periods
70 -
60 -
50 -
_i
cT 40 -
s
30 -
20 -
10 -
\
s
^
1
^
I
Cortt
l\ [ Pre-Discharge
2
s
\
*
^
1 !
Quart Half
Loading Level
1773 Discharge
^
s
I
Full
Post-Discharge
Figure 16. Mean biochemical oxygen demand on the plots during the
•pilot studv.
study.
N:P ratios on the Plots
Pre—discharge and Discharge
Cent
Quart
|\ ] Pre—Discharge
Loodin
Half
el
[ Discharge
Figure 17. N:P ratios during the pre-discharge and discharge
periods.
4-12
-------
Groundwater and Sediments
Pre-discharge water quality in the sampling wells continued to
illustrate the trend of increasing concentration in most parameters
measured. Total organic carbon was elevated compared to the surface waters
and this trend continued with increasing well depth (Figure nnx
18).
Total nitrogen was elevated in the shallowest wells but had a trend of
decreasing concentration in the deepest wells (Figure 19). This trend is
most apparent in comparing the inorganic and organic nitrogen forms in the
wells (Figure 20). Total organic nitrogen (and thus total nitrogen)
decreases as one moves deeper in the wells and the inorganic forms,
ammonium and nitrite-nitrate tend to increase. The reduction in total
nitrogen is due, most probably, to denitrification in the deeper sediments
and the increase of the inorganic forms because of decreased biological
utilization of these forms in the deeper sediments.
Total Phosphorus in the wells was of a comparable level to those of
the surface of the plots. No consistent trend was noted with depth in the
wells for this parameter. However the range was such to indicate that
comparable levels existed in all wells.
Ratios of Nitrogen to Phosphorus in the 10 and 20 cm wells were at
levels indicative of slight nitrogen limitation (5.62 and 5.02
respectively). Nitrogen limitation was indicated by the overall N:P ratio
of 2.2 in the deepest wells.
100
o
i
90 -
80 -
70
60
50
40
30
20
10 -
Pre-
i
Control
Quarter
I
Half
T
Full
Loading Level
L3ZJTOC
Figure 18. Total organic carbon in sampling wells
during the pre-discharge period.
4-13
-------
MO/L
Concentration (mg/Q
a>
ro
o
o
£'
3
5'
(-+•
0
z
Ol
o
o
o
b
o
o
o
pi
b
o
p>
b
o
o
-o —I
fl> O
O
(O
ua
(O
o>
-a
-s
rt)
I
Q.
O
Ol
-s
n>
-------
During the discharge period, trends in water quality parameters inthe
wells were consistent with the findings during the pre-discharge period as
well as with the conditions in the overlying waters. Total Phosphorus and
Total Organic Carbon both had significant depth differences but no
significant difference between either plot or periods. Ammonium ion showed
significant differences for plots, period and depth and had a significant
plot-date interaction term. Ammonium ion levels increased significantly in
the loaded plots at both the 10 and 20 cm levels indicating at least some
movement of these constituents into this zone (Figure 20). No other
parameters showed any significant differences between pre-discharge,
discharge or post discharge periods, or between loading level or depth.
Concentration of most constituents in the pre-discharge sediments were
at levels several orders of magnitude greater than in the water samples.
Trends with sediment depth were generally consistent with those observed in
the well samples. For example, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in the sediments
showed a variable trend across the plots, but within the range expected due
to sampling and analytical variation. The trend of decreasing nitrogen in
the deepest sediment samples was consistent with the results of well water
sampling.
Surficial sediments (5 cm) showed slight increases in all measured
parameters during the discharge period. The highest levels were noted in
the most heavily loaded plots. It is indicative of a buildup of all of
these parameters in the top layers of the sediments. During the post
discharge period, levels of TOC and phosphate had returned to near the
levels observed during the pre-discharge period. TKN remained elevated
when compared to pre-discharge and averaged slightly higher than the
discharge period. This elevation in the post discharge sediments is
attributed to sampling artifact.
Canal Water
Water quality in the canal adjacent to the test area was good during
the pre-discharge period, exhibiting little evidence of degraded
conditions. No significant stratification was noted in the shallow canal
in any physico-chemical parameter. Dissolved oxygen was at, or near,
saturation in the canal at least during the sampling days. In spite of
these observations, a fish kill was noted during the pre-discharge period
early in the sampling program. This indicates that, at least for some
brief periods, conditions stressful to common estuarine fishes do occur.
It is notable that most of the fishes involved were Atlantic menhaden
(Brevoortia patronas), a fish very susceptible to, and intolerant of any
stressful conditions. Mean chlorophyll a levels were in the eutrophic
range and may also indicate the conditions in the finger canal are not
representative of typical estuarine open waters.
No significant trends were noted during the pre-discharge period in
the nutrient data from the canals. Inorganic nitrogen forms, ammonium and
nitrite-nitrate were at, or below the detection limits during the pre-
discharge period. Ammonium was below the detection limits of the ADEM
laboratory during this period. Nitrite-nitrate values (0.06-0.10 mg/1)
ranged near values found in other southeastern estuarine canals 0.01-0.08
(Hicks and Cavinder 1978) (Figure 21). Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (1.1-1.7
mg/1) and Total Phosphorus (0.08-0.37) were both at levels commonly
4-15
-------
I
§
0
o
0.22
0.2 -
0.18 -
0.16 -
0.14 -
0.12 -
0.1 -
0.08 -
0.06
0.04 -
0.02 -
0
\
m
m
1S
L\ I Pne-Dischorge
?\
s\
S/ v\
^
25
Post-Discharge
i
28
Station
Discharge
^
r^
3B
Figure 21. Mean nitrite-nitrate levels in the canal during the pilot
study.
observed in similar canal systems (Hicks and Cavinder 1978). Nitrogen to
Phosphorus ratios in the canal were not indicative of any nutrient
limitation.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand during pre-discharge were in the range of
values determined for Alabama estuarine canals in a previous study (1-10
mg/1; Vittor 1980). Chlorophyll £ values were indicative of moderate
algal production and in the range observed in mildly eutrophic waters ( <20
mg/m3).
During the discharge period, the physico-chemical parameters measured
were more indicative of fall conditions with lower temperatures and higher
salinities recorded at all stations. Dissolved oxygen was also higher
reflecting the response of this parameter to the changes in temperature and
the resulting change in saturation capacity.
The pH levels were lower for the discharge period than during the
pre-discharge period which is the opposite one would expect in light of
increasing salinities. Further, if pH was impacted by an increase in
primary production, the values expected would be higher due to the shift in
carbonate equilibria. Thus no satisfactory explanation can be offered for
the differences in pH other than the possibility of differences in
instrument behaviour between the two periods and the stabilizing effect of
more observations available for the discharge period.
4-16
-------
Nutrient levels at the canal stations showed no significant
differences between stations for any parameter when tested by ANOVA. Two
parameters, TOC and ammonium ion showed significant differences between
pre-discharge and discharge periods. Total Organic Carbon (TOC) decreased
during the discharge period below levels found in the canals before
discharge. Ammonium ion levels also showed a significant decrease during
the discharge period. Both of these decreases reflected more a response to
the seasonal fluctuations rather than a response to the project.
Nitrite-nitrate levels in the canal doubled at some of the canal
stations during discharge but the difference was not significant according
to ANOVA (Figure 21). During post discharge nitrite-nitrate levels
returned to near the pre-discharge levels. Possible reasons for not
detecting a significant difference are the wide variations seen in the
nitrite-nitrate data as well as the disparity in the number of samples
between the pre-discharge and discharge periods. Assuming there was no
direct short-circuiting of the wastes from the plots to the canals,
nitrite-nitrate levels would be the first to increase if an impact to the
canals was occurring as a result of the discharge in the marsh.
If nitrite-nitrate levels had increased to a biologically significant
level (even if not detectable statistically), the response in the canal
would be a rise in the chlorophyll a^ levels. However, chlorophyll a_
actually decreased slightly in the canals during the discharge period but
the decrease was not statistically significant. The slight decrease is
most likely a seasonal response of the system.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand levels in the canals were not significantly
different between stations or between pre-discharge, discharge and post
discharge periods in canal waters.
Based on the above observations, no detectable changes occurred, in
the chemistry of the canal adjacent to the marsh during any period that was
directly attributable to the application of waste to the marsh system.
4.2. FLORA
No significant differences in plant species composition, growth
parameters or productivity were detected between loaded and control plots.
Juncus roemerianus is tolerant of a wide range of salinities and the
slight alterations in sediment interstitial salinity appear to have had no
effect on the competitive advantage of this species. Krucynski, et al
(1978) found decreasing height of Juncus in marsh zones with higher
salinities. Mean height of Juncus during our study (88 cm) was the same as
found in the upper marsh in northwest Florida (Kruczynski, et al 1978) and
similar to the mean value of 84.5 cm found by Stout (1978) in the study
marsh under natural conditions.
4-17
-------
CO
LOAD RATE
H CONTROL
8 FULL
• HALF
mQUARTER
JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
1984
PREDISCHARGEHI DISCHARGE Ih
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
1985
POSTDISCHARGE
Figure 22. Live stem densities.
-------
Stem diameters showed only slight seasonal variation with no apparent
increase in robustness due to fertilization effect of the wastewater
application. Applications of ammonium nitate fertilizer to a similar
Juncus marsh (de la Cruz, et al 1981) resulted in both increases in height
and diameter of Juncus stems in fertilized plots (Stout personal
observation). However, mean stem diameter during conduct of our pilot
study was 3.5 mm compared to unaltered marshes in Florida (3.6 mm)
(Kruczynski, et al 1978).
Between plot differences in live stem density were greater than
between loading effects. Stem density is quite variable due to the
rhizomatous growth pattern of Juncus. Stems have been shown to persist for
from 8 months to 4 years (Eleuterius and Caldwell 1981) and this may
contribute to the variability in densities seen. A slight decrease in
density was evident in late spring early summer and an increase in late
fall coincident with new growh periods (Figure 22). Mean live density of
650 m~2 was intermediate between the low marsh in Florida (885 m~2) and
previous Alabama density of 553 m~2 (Kruczynski, et al 1978; Stout 1978,
respectively).
Results of water quality analyses for nutrients in the surface waters,
wells and sediments indicated only slight significant increases in nitrogen
species in the upper 5 cm of sediment and to 20 cm in the wells. It is
probable that the increases in nutrient availability to the plants were not
sufficient to increase plant productivity or growth. Mean aboveground
standing biomass was 2,177 gm~2 for the study period, higher than
previously measured (1,449 gm~2) for the same marsh (Stout 1978) and
approximately twice values found in Florida (973 gm~2) (Kruczynski, et al
1978). There were, however, no significant application rate related
differences and only seasonal variability in standing crop were detected
(Figure 23).
O)
2.5-
2?
CD £ 2.0-1
QH
Z^ I.5H
o Q
LU o>
> * 0.5H
GD
LOAD RATE
— FULL
— HALF
QUARTER
J J
PREDISCHARGE I
A S 0
1984
DISCHARGE
N
F M A
1985
•POSTDISCHARGE
M
SAMPLE PERIOD
Figure 23. Aboveground biomass.
4-19
-------
Similarly, belowground standing crop was unaffected by wastewater
application. Previously reported values for Alabama (4,558 gm-2) and
Florida Juncus (4,573 - 5,140 gm-2) were comparable to the mean belowground
standing biomass of Juncus in the study marsh (5,100 gm-2).
De la Cruz, et al (1981) applied ammonium nitrate (34% N) at rates of
136 g m-2 to Juncus marshes in Mississippi and Alabama. Fertilization
resulted in an increase in productivity of 59% in Alabama population and
85% in Mississippi marshes. However, there is no evidence of enhancement
of either plant growth or plant productivity due to nutrient enrichment
consequent to the application of seafood wastewater for the period of the
study. Inversely, there is also nothing in the data to indicate that
increasing organic loading and anaerobic conditions were damaging to the
plant community.
4.3. FAUNA
Little information is available on variability in abundance of marsh
macroinvertebrates (Kneib 1984). Even less is known about the fauna of
high Juncus marshes. Humphrey (1979) deals only with macrofauna which are
predominantly epifauna. Subrahmanyam et al (1978) and Subrahmanyam and
Coultas (1980) provide the most comprehensive assessment of Juncus
macroepifauna and infauna. However, much of their analyses combine the two
habitats. In addition, they utilized a 1.0 mm mesh screen for sample
sorting. Smaller macroinvertebrates (< 1.0 mm) were thus omitted from
their data.
Epifauna of the study site are depauperate, particularly in numbers of
individuals, when compared to other studies. The most frequent species
(Melampus bidentatus and Geukensia demissa) are common elsewhere in Juncus
marshes, but their abundance is greatly diminished in the study marsh.
Littorina irrorata, a dominant in Florida marshes (Subrahmanyam et al
1976), i s rare in al 1 test plots.
The Point aux Pins narsh is only flooded on infrequent high tides and
covered with standing water for 2-4 days after heaviest rains. The marsh
sediment surface is exposed most of the time and frequently so dry that the
sediments crack. This presents a suite of environmental conditions which
are quite stressful to the macroinvertebrates. In fact, most motile forms
were absent from the study area during lowest fall and winter tide
conditions. The hydraulic loads of wastewater were apparently inadequate
to reverse this situation, since there was no significant differences in
species or abundance between treatments or between treatments and
controls).
The strong dominance of the infaunal community by Capitella capitata
is further evidence of the stressful nature of the marsh environment^ThTs"
physiologically "tough" species is often abundant in stressful
environments. Co-dominant taxa (Hobsonia florida, Cyrenoida florida and
Oligochaetes) are reported in other studies as important infaunal species
(Ivester 1978; Cammen et al 1974). The significant seasonal variability in
abundance of marsh infauna, increased in spring and lowest in summer, is
consistent with previous studies (Cammen 1979; Kneib and Stiven 1982; and
Kneib 1984) (Figure 24).
4-20
-------
ro
4000 J
3500-
Capitella cap/fata
Hobsonia florida
Cyrenoida floridana
------- Oligochaetes
/x \/
' v-
,.
/\ / \
< 1000-
UJ
T 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r
JUN JUL AUG OCT DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
1984 1985
PREDISCHARGE h- DISCHARGE -H I POSTDISCHARGE 1
SAMPLE PERIOD
Figure 24. Monthly abundance of dominant marsh infaunal species.
-------
Canal benthos demonstrated between station differences in abundance of
dominant species, with lowest densities typical of Station 1 (Figure 25).
This was the deepest station and frequently had lower oxygen levels than
either Station 2 or the shallow Station 3. Station 1 was also the greatest
distance from tidal exchange with the estuary. Higher DO conditions during
the winter months and wind mixing during winter frontal passes appear to
have improved benthic conditions at Station 1. A significant increase in
Streblospio benedicti at this station during the winter contributed to an
increased density of benthic organisms during this period. McBee and Brehm
(1979) and Sikora et al (1981) have seen similar increases in overall
abundance in Gulf of Mexico estuaries during cooler months.
Natant species collected by lift nets and gill nets were in such low
densities that analysis is difficult. Trends in species presence and
absence, and abundance noted may be readily explained by species
reproductive cycles and recruitment patterns of larvae and juveniles.
Thus, the fauna! communities of both marsh and canal further support
the findings within the plant population. Seasonal variability was
demonstrated, but effects of wastewater discharge were minor.
4-22
-------
0
0
ABUNDANCE
ro OJ .& 01
O O O O
o o o o
ro
in
3
O.
a»
o
o
-s
o
Cu
cr
ro
3
c_
C
c_
C
m
no
o
m
o
o
3
ro
fa
3
ex
Tl
m
DO
to
oo
01
c_
d
•z.
w to w
£ §. °
5" 5 o'
y///////////tffi&
CO
II II II II II
Q i5*
-------
5.0. PILOT FACILITY OPERATION
During the 1984 study year, the Point aux Pins Seafood Wastewater
Pilot Facility was in operation from mid-August through early December.
Over this period of time, about 640,000 gallons of wastewater were applied
to the study area; approximately 8,000 gallons per day, five days each
week.
Based on the volume of wastewater distributed and the relative
application rates for each experimental plot the following hydraulic
loading rates have been calculated.
Observed Hydraulic Loading Rate
Experiment cm / week GPD / acre
Full Loading
Half Loading
Quarter Loading
3.56
1.82
1.33
5,440
2,780
2,025
The differences between the original design loading rates of 5.0
cm/wk, 2.5 cm/wk, and 1.25 cm/wk and those observed primarily reflects the
change in the pilot facility operation schedule from the original 7-day per
week design to the actual 5-day week due to the costs for hauling the
wastes.
The relative application rates achieved by the pilot facility for the
three experiments closely approximated those designed. The design ratios
of 4.0:2.0:1.0:0 compare well with the observed ratios of 4.0:2.0:1.5:0, as
determined through the dye study (described below) for the full loading,
half loading, quarter loading, and control plots.
5.1. GENERAL SYSTEMS APPROACH
For the purposes of this study, a general systems approach was taken
for the development of the mass-balance models which were utilized to
characterize the hydraulic and chemical behaviour of the marsh waste
management system. The models also allow for the objective estimation
of parameters that were not measured during the study. This approach
involves identifying the major driving variables for the system,
identifying the major storages to be modelled and makes certain simplifying
assumptions about the system under consideration such that the data
requirements and the cost of modelling are reasonable.
The simplifying assumptions start at the level of deciding whether one
wishes the model to be: (1) general, (2) precise or (3) realistic.
Optimization for one of the above necessarily reduces the ability of the
model to satisfy the other objectives. For the purpose of this study, it
was desired that the model be precise and realistic and, in general, ignore
applicability to the general case.
5-1
-------
The purpose of the models for this study are generally to predict the
mass dynamics of various storages in the system. No attempt was made to
couple the individual components (for instance the rate of nitrification to
pH and salinity) into a more comprehensive ecosystem model. This in itself
is a limitation in its applicability both for other areas as well as the
same area under different regimes (such as seasonal).
The following is a list of simplifying assumptions that apply to the
mass-balance models developed for this report:
1. Storages for most of the models developed will represent a single
storage of the constituent that represents its concentration (mass/volume)
in the surface waters of the plots.
2. All natural inputs to the systems will be combined into a single
inflow. The waste input will be considered as a separate inflow to the
system.
3. All models will assume steady state conditions and will be designed
to predict the average resultant steady-state concentration based on
difference in loadings.
4. Most systems will be represented to have a single outflow that will
serve for all sinks to the system. Sedimentation will also be included as
will uptake by macrophytes and benthic algae.
5. Groundwater flow will be considered to be small for all models.
6. All models will simulate periods with no rainfall or tidal
flooding.
5.2. HYDROLOGY
The hydrologic budget to a tidal marsh comprises the sum of the inputs
to the system, including precipitation, tidal influx, surface runoff and
groundwater flows and the outflows from the system from tides and effluent
streams and channels. Expressed in terms of an equation we have:
S = ( P - ET )A + Vi + Vo + G
where
S = change in storage
P = precipitation on marsh surface
ET = evapo-transpiration
A = area of plot
Vi = sum of the inputs (influent channels and tidal)
Vo = sum of the outputs (channels and tidal)
G = net groundwater flux.
This equation can be combined and normalized such that on an area!
basis the equation in its differential form becomes:
dS/dt = Sum of Inputs - Sum of Outputs +- Groundwater Flux
5-2
-------
This is the simplest form of the equation that can be utilized for
estimating the dynamic water balance for the system. For the case of the
experimental plots, a slightly finer resolution for the inputs needs to be
defined since we are artificially loading the system with wastewaters.
Hence, the input needs to be divided into inputs from natural sources (I)
and the wastewater source (W).
Further, since we are trying to resolve whether the discharged waters
are infiltrating the groundwater system, we need to include an additional
storage (G) in our equations. This simplified hydrodynamic system then
becomes a system of two storages and two inputs and two outputs as depicted
in Figure 26. The system of equations to be modelled then becomes:
dSl/dt = I(s) + W(s) - 0(s) - G
dGl/dt = Kg) + W(g) - o(g)
Simplifigd Hydrologic
Figure 26. Systems diagram of the simplified hydrologic model used in
this study. SI indicates the surface storage compartment and Gl represents
Groudwater storage.
5-3
-------
Rainfall and evaporation data reported by the weather service during
the study are presented in Table 35. Table 36 presents precipitation
volume data from the on-site bulk precipitation collector.
Data from the Coden and Dauphin Island stations more closely
paralleled the volume collected at the site. For instance, from the period
June 7, 1986 to July 19, 1986 the volume collected at Point aux Pins was
twice that observed for Mobile, Al. The monthly data indicated it more
closely represented conditions at Point aux Pins. Since on-site volume
data are an underestimate of actual precipitation due to the filling and
overflowing of the bulk collector, rainfall data for the Coden and Dauphin
Island stations were averaged for modelling purposes.
Tidal data for the sampling periods indicated diurnal tides with
amplitudes ranging from approximately 15 cm to 93 cm. A representative
tidal record is presented in Figure 27. Some variation due to local wind
conditions was observed, especially during periods when intense
thunderstorms were prevalent in the area. The available mean tidal
amplitudes were averaged for each month resulting in the values reported in
Table 37. Overall mean tidal amplitude recorded was 47.08 cm.
Some surface water flow was indicated by the dye studies performed on
the experimental plots (Table 38). The dye was applied during a high tide
when the marsh was flooded and the dye concentrations were followed during
a falling tide. Within two hours following application, evidence of dye
movement out of the plot system was noted near the edge of the marsh and
the drainage slough. No cross contamination between plots was noted but
drainage of the plots was facilitated by the sampling footpaths in the
marsh. The results, however, were highly variable with some of the plots
retaining their dye concentration for over 2 hours following discharge.
Height of the groundwater levels recorded during the sampling days are
presented in Table 39. Generally, little change was noted in the
groundwater levels based on the average height recorded from the wells.
The greatest change noted was in the 10 cm level wells.
Well heights continuously measured over several days corroborated the
results of the discrete measurements above. For instance, during the
periods 27 July - 29 July, 1984 a maximum change in well height of 1.0 cm
was noted in the 30 cm wells (Figure 28). A similar pattern of constancy
in height was also noted in the 20 cm wells. Recharge of the wells was
also extremely slow, as indicated during the recharge of the 20 cm well
after sampling .
5-4
-------
Table 35. Rainfall and evaporation data for stations in the
proximity of the pilot project. All units are in centimeters.
Dates
1984
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
1985
January
* missi
Mobile
5.26
5.99
38.58
1.88
15.72
4.24
5.38
12.85
ng data.
Rainfall
Coden Dauphin Island
2.48
32.33
44.53
1.88
9.82
6.91
*
*
3.68
-
41.99
1.23
10.82
5.92
*
*
Evaporation
Fairhope
18.87
16.96
15.24
15.62
11.55
7.92
*
*
Table 36. Precipitation volumes collected at Point aux Pins.
Volume
(ml)
Centimeters
1984
6/7 -
-
-
-
-
-
8/18 -
-
-
-
-
-
™
7/5
7/13
7/19
8/6
8/15
8/29
9/13
9/26
10/10
10/24
11/7
11/26
12/6
3700 (F)
3250
3450
6800 (F)
2750
3700 (F)
100
500
NONE
650
3750
650
3850 (F)
7.30
6.41
6.81
13.42
5.42
7.30
0.19
0.98
0.00
1.20
7.30
1.20
7.60
(F) indicates vessel was full when sampled and
represents a minimum rainfall volume.
5-5
-------
CD
h— I
LU
O OJ
i— i OJ
LU
o:
6 -
5 -
3 -
2 -
~T
8
12
Hour
-7—
16
20
Figure 27. Representative tidal records from the canal on 13-14 July 1985.
Time 0 for this record was at 0900.
Table 37. Monthly averages of the daily tidal amplitudes
(centimeters) for the period June through December 1984.
Mean Amplitude
(cm)
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
51.21
36.21
32.73
28.34
42.06
65.84
73.15
Mean
47.08 cm.
5-6
-------
Table 38. Results of the Dye study performed on the experimental plots.*
Tapwater Reference
Wastewater w/ Dye
Control
Quarter
Half
Full
Edge of Marsh
Near Slough
Confluence of
Slough
Mean Fluorescence
Pre-discharge
0.0002
0.2532
-
-
-
0.0003
-
-
Immediately
Following
Discharge
_
-
0.0002
0.0180
0.0240
0.0450
-
-
2 Hours
After
Discharge
_
-
0.0002
0.0140
0.0220
-
0.0067
0.0019
* Expressed as Flourescent Units.
Table 39. Mean well heights recorded during water quality
samplings. Height from bottom of well tubes. All well tubes were
placed with tops 1 meter from the marsh surface.
Well depth (cm)
10
20
30
Pre-discharge
16.7*
26.9
31.6
Discharge
17.02
21.86
32.89
Both
17.00
21.91
32.86
*16.7 cm above the bottom of the well tube or 6.7 cm above the
marsh surface.
5-7
-------
10 cm
20 cm
30 cm
i i i i i i i i iii i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
Figure 28. Representative continuous well height records for the 10 20 and
30 centimeter sampling wells. Since only one water level recorder was
available, the data were taken on different days as indicated on the
charts. The arrows noted "D" represent approximate time of discharge.
5-8
-------
For much of the pre-discharge period, little water was present on the
surface of the experimental plots. Only during periods of extremely high
tides or intensive rainfall was there significant standing water in the
marsh.
During the discharge period, the plot surfaces were more frequently
flooded. This was the result of higher tidal amplitudes during this period
as well as a decrease in evapo-transpiration. Also, the wetter conditions
on the plots loaded with wastewaters is a direct result of the hydraulic
loadings imposed by the experiment. The monthly hydraulic loading on the
full loading plots (approximately 18.0 cm/month) doubled and in some cases
quadrupled the amount of water available from precipitation.
Little penetration of water was noted into the groundwater. Data from
the 20 and 30 cm wells consistently indicated that these layers were
relatively stagnant at the resolution of the measuring apparatus. During
pre-discharge it was noted that the more variable well heights observed in
the 10 cm wells indicated some movement of waters into this layer. Well
observations during the discharge period with the continuous monitoring
device indicated that on the fully loaded plots some movement of waters
into the groundwater aquifer was occurring at least on some of the plots
(Figure 28). The continuous well sampling on the half loaded plots showed
that this loading level was having little impact on the groundwaters on
these plots. This stagnation has been noted by a recent researcher working
in salt marsh systems (Dacey and Howes 1984).
All of the preceding information was integrated to develop a water
balance for the experimental plots and then used to drive the hydrodynamic
model. The results of the steady state simulation under conditions of no
rainfall and no tidal inundation are presented in Figure 29. The
simulation of surface water on the plots under average pre-discharge and
discharge conditions indicated saturated soil conditions with about 1 cm of
water existing on the plots. Simulation of the hydrologic condition of a
plot receiving the full wastewater loading (0.51 cm/day) showed slightly
higher water levels with the steady state around 1.5 cm.
These results indicated that even under prolonged periods of dry
spells, the fully loaded plots would have some water on the surface for
most of the time.
5-9
-------
Hydrologlo Simulation
•Tlmo (Doy>)
Groundvratw
1 -
0 2
CONTROL
—1 1 1 1 1
10 12 u
Tlrm (Doyi)
FUU. LOADING
Figure 29. Results of the Steady state simulation of the hydrologic model.
The upper graph illustrates the surface and groundwater conditions and the
lower graph contrasts the differences between a fully loaded plot (0.51
cm/day) and a control plot.
5-10
-------
5.3. WATER QUALITY
Water quality parameters were monitored on the experimental system in
order to determine the ultimate fate of the wastes applied to the
saltmarsh. By following these "tracers" as they pass through the system,
the efficiency of the system can be estimated and the impact to the
chemical and biological systems of the marsh can be more fully assessed.
The chemical parameters were divided into two classes, conservative
substances and non-conservative substances. Conservative substances are
defined as those materials which do not react physically, chemically or
biochemically as they pass through the system. They are used primarily to
determine the physical dilution of the wastes applied to the system. The
only conservative parameter measured during this study was salinity, a
measure of the total salts in the water. In contrast are the non-
conservative substances which are those materials that undergo some
reaction or transformation within the system of interest. In most waste
studies this includes the biogenic elements and their associated compounds
including the various species of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus.
Conservative Species Model
As mentioned above, the only conservative (ie. does not undergo
transformation) substance considered for this study is salinity which will
be used to investigate and verify the hydraulic nature of the loading
plots.
The systems diagram of the simplified salinity model utilized to
determine steady-state conditions on the plots are presented in Figure 30.
Salinity is represented as a single storage with two inflows and one
outflow. The storage volume represented is that of an individual plot.
This model was coupled with the hydro!ogic model to determine the dilution
factor attributed to the waste loading. By coupling it directly to the
hydrologic model it provides a check on the adequacy of the water balance
calculated previously. A listing of the FORTRAN program used to simulate
the model is presented in Appendix C.
Sampling on the plots had demonstrated that mean salinities during the
pre-discharge period and on the control plots during the discharge period
ranged from 18 to 22 parts per thousand (ppt) . On the plots receiving the
full loading of wastewaters the salinity fell to about 14 ppt. The
simulation of salinity agreed with the above findings and showed the system
approaching steady state under control conditions at about 22 ppt and
around 14 ppt under full loading (Figure 31).
5-11
-------
SimplifiGd Salinity
Figure 30. Systems diagram of the simplified Salinity model used in this
Study. The symbols represent Tidal (T) and Wastewater inputs (W) and the
main storage (Salin).
5-12
-------
a
a
of Sa/rnffy
(Days)
LOADED
31 D
- '"'""»««-'"*"-""......,»„„„,„
5-13
-------
Non-Conservative Species Models.
Three non-conservative species were investigated for this study:
Total Organic Carbon; Nitrogen, including the three components Total
Organic Nitrogen, Ammonium ion and Nitrite-nitrate; and Phosphorus
including Total and ortho-phosphorus. Each of these biologically important
elements undergo major transformations in saltmarsh systems. It was
expected that the cycling of these materials would exhibit major changes
resulting from the wastewater discharge.
Total Organic Carbon (TOO was a major constituent in the wastewater
flow averaging 751.5 mg/1. This collection of compounds contributed great-
ly to the carbonaceous portion of the Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) noted
in the surface waters of the plots which averaged as high as 78 mg/1 on the
full loading plots. However, analysis of the water quality data presented
in Part I of this report showed that no consistent trend was evident for
this component of the wastewater and differences across time were insigni-
ficant due to the high variability. The labile portion of these compounds
were rapidly metabolized by microorganisms on the plot surfaces.
The levels of TOC on the plots during the period of waste discharge
directly reflected the hydraulic loading level and behaved more like a
conservative substance on the plots. The levels observed were at levels
one would predict based on simple dilution alone. Since this was the
case, no further modelling for this constituent was performed.
A similar situation existed for phosphorus compounds on the surface of
the plots. High levels of total and ortho-phosphorus were present in the
wastes (means were 18.9mg/l and 11.7 mg/1, respectively) but no significant
trends could be noted on the plots either across loading levels or time.
Thus like TOC, no further effort was put into the modelling efforts.
Nichols (1983) stated that numerous wastewater application studies
have shown that wastewater phosphorus did not move far in the soils but was
rapidly absorbed near the surface and he reported that with continued
application, phosphorus removal declined. The decline was due to
presumably the saturation of the physical and chemical sites for adsorption
and reaction. Once saturated, the excess nutrients would simply be washed
off.
Since both carbon and phosphorus compounds were well above the levels
normally considered limiting in saltmarshes it is likely the system was
saturated. This then resulted in the observed behaviour of these
constituents which closely followed the hydrologic regimen of the
experimental system.
Because nitrogen exists in so many forms (nitrogen gas, nitrite,
nitrate, ammonia, nitrogen oxides and organic nitrogen) it usualy exhibits
an extremely complex cycle in a saltmarsh system (Figure 32). The major
sink for nitrogen in this cycle is to the atmosphere through the
denitrification of nitrate which occurs under anaerobic conditions. It has
been demonstrated that the denitrification rate is dependent on the
availability of carbon substrate (Reddy et, al. 1984). Nichols (1983)
reported that up to 90 percent of nitrate is removed within a few days
either by denitrification or some other microbial immobilization.
5-14
-------
Detritus-
microbial
complex
•f6J
Ammonia
soil Minera»
Figure 32. Conceptual Model of the Nitrogen Cycle in a Saltmarsh System.
(Gosselink et al. 1979).
5-15
-------
The rate of nitrification is dependent on both the levels of ammonium
and dissolved oxygen. The process is carried out under aerobic conditions
by Nitrobacter and Nitrosomonas. The ammonification process, the
conversion of organic nitrogen compounds to ammonium, is performed by a
number of aerobic and anaerobic microbes.
Nitrogen has been shown to be the most frequently limiting nutrient in
saltmarsh systems (Gosselink et alI. 1979). This fact coupled with the high
potential for transformation of nitrogen within saltmarshes as illustrated
above, indicates that large amounts of nitrogen may be absorbed. This has
been shown by several investigations which were summarized by Nichols
(1983).
For the purposes of this study, a simplified conceptual model of
nitrogen was developed (Figure 33). Storages were represented for total
organic nitrogen (TON), ammonia nitrogen (NH4) and combined nitrite-nitrate
nitrogen (N03). The inputs were divided in two sources, natural sources
and wastewater loadings and the sinks (outputs leaving the system) were all
combined to a single flow.
Wastewater loadings provided large amounts of ammonium and total
organic nitrogen to the system as reflected in the average concentrations
in the parameters during the period of waste discharge (Figure 11, Chapter
3). As with all parameters studied, the level of loading each plot
received determined the resulting level of these parameters on the plot.
Total organic nitrogen exceeded ammonium levels in the wastewaters which
were loaded on the system (TON:NH4 =1.26). On the plots receiving the
maximum level of loading, average ammonium levels were greater than total
organic nitrogen (TON:NH4 = .93). This change in the ratio of these two
species indicates that the ammonification process was occurring on the
plots receiving the wastewaters. On the basis of the average ratios,
approximately 20-25 percent of the organic nitrogen discharged was
converted to the more labile ammonium ion in the surface waters of the
plots on a very rapid basis.
5-16
-------
Simplified Nitrogen Model
Figure 33. Simplified Conceptual Model of Nitrogen for this study. Tl
indicates natural sources of Nitrogen and Wl indicates Wastewater Sources.
5-17
-------
Mean nitrite-nitrate levels on the plots during loading also indicated
intense microbial activity on the plot surface waters (Figure 14, Chapter
3). On the plots receiving the lowest loading rates, nitrite-nitrate
averages 4 times (0.17 mg/1 verses 0.04 mg/1) the level observed in the
raw wastewater. On the fully loaded plots, however, the mean nitrite-
nitrate level was the same as the wastewaters (0.04 mg/1). This difference
in the pattern of the activity illustrates the inhibition of the
nitrification process due to high ammonia levels and lower dissolved oxygen
levels. This has several implications in the utilization of saltmarsh
systems as wastewater renovators. The first of these is that, presumably,
at the highest level of loading utilized, the carbonaceous portion of
oxygen demand depressed oxygen enough to inhibit the nitrification process
thereby limiting the loss of this substrate through the denitrification
process. Secondly, the inability of the heavily loaded system to keep up
with the oxidation of ammonium would allow this material to be flushed into
adjacent waters and exert an oxygen demand there. Finally, the buildup of
ammonium in the marsh could present many invertebrates and fishes with a
toxic environment within which they could not survive.
A further illustration of the intensity of the nitrogen cycle in the
loaded marsh is presented in a time course of the major nitrogen species
over several days (Figure 34). The record was obtained when tidal
amplitudes were not sufficient to inundate the marsh and followed a dry
spell. The automated sampler was initiated on a Sunday afternoon, over 48
hours after the last spraying (Friday) and remained in operation until
Thursday. The record also includes a light rainfall (black arrow on Figure
34) which occurred sometime before sampling on Wednesday.
Initially, nitrite-nitrate levels were very high (1.2 mg/1) but fell
precipitously after dark. The reduction in nitrite-nitrate could be due to
denitrification coupled with the cessation of nitrite-nitrate production
resulting from anaerobic conditions in the heavily loaded marsh waters
during the night. On Monday morning there is a sharp rise in total organic
nitrogen and ammonium on the plots in response to the discharge. A decline
in TON is noted, presumably due to ammonification. Ammonium levels rise
and level out at about 4.0 mg/1. The leveling could possibly be due to
volitilization, uptake by benthic algae and macrophytes, and the
nitrification process during daylight hours (note small peak in nitrite-
nitrate). A similar scene is repeated on the following day until a
dilution of the surface waters ocurred due to an approximate 1.8 centimeter
rainfall event. Following the rainfall, nitrite-nitrate levels increase
due to the influx of oxygen rich rainwater and runoff.
5-18
-------
Nitrogen on the Surface Plots
800
800
800
TIME
Figure 34. Time course of nitrogen species on a plot receiving the Maximum
Hydraulic Loading Level (3.56 cm/week) during the week of 6 October 1985
through 10 October 1985. Open arrows indicate approximate time of
wastewater irrigation and the black arrow indicate the approximate
occurrence of a 1.8 cm rain event. No tidal flooding occurred during the
time of record.
5-19
-------
Based on the above data, a computer model of nitrogen was constructed
to simulate the steady state conditions for the loaded plots. The model
was simulated using transfer rate coefficients derived from the continuous
record discussed above and resulted in a reasonable approximation of the
average conditions on the surface of the plots. The listing of the computer
program used and the transfer rate coefficients utilized are presented in
Appendix 3. Figure 35 presents the simulation of the fully loaded plot.
Based on the modeling results, the previous approximation of the
ammonification of 20-25 percent per day of the TON is reasonable (final
transfer rate coefficient for ammonification was 0.20 per day). Using a
moderate transfer rate coefficient for nitrification (KS(9) = 0.10) forced
the transfer rates for the loss of ammonium and nitrate through other means
to high levels and indicated that about 50 percent of the ammonium was
assimilated and 95 percent of the available nitrite-nitrate could be
assimilated on a daily basis.
Simulation of Nitrogen
Figure 35. Simulation of the Nitrogen Species Model for a fully Loaded
Experimental Plot.
5-20
-------
6.0. DESIGN DISCHARGE CRITERIA
A primary consideration in determining the appropriate loading rate
for a salt marsh is the ability of the system to retain the hydrologic load
for sufficient time to allow all the material transformations to take
place. Due to the strength of seafood wastewaters and the low
permeability of salt marsh soils, hydraulic loading rates for this type of
waste will need to be relatively low. Based on the modelling results from
data determined during this study, the maximum hydraulic loading rate of
3.56 cm/week (5,400 GPD/acre) used did not result in any runoff from the
high marsh system. It should be emphasized that the major assumption here
is that the marsh is not frequently inundated by tides. Obviously,
additional loading from rainfall could result in runoff at this (or any)
hydraulic loading rate.
The relationship between the hydraulic loading and resulting mean
concentration of organic materials on the plots (represented as five day
BOD) is presented in Figure 36. The "break-point" or major inflection
point for the curve occurs between the half loading and full loading level.
This indicates that the "safe" loading level for Juncus marshes in Alabama
would be somewhere near 2.0 cm/week of screened shrimp processing wastes of
similar characteristics. This level of hydraulic loading would result in a
BOD load of 3.096 grams per square meter-day (20.1 Ibs BOD/acre-day)
so
70 -
T3
a
a
c
a
o
o
.o
5
60 -
50 -
40 -i
30 -
20 -
10
Hydraulic Loading (cm/w«ek)
Figure 36. Relationship between Hydrologic loading and Biochemical Oxygen
Demand for the Saltmarsh System receiving Screened Seafood Process Waters.
6-1
-------
The hydraulic loading rate of 2.0 cm/week is also justifiable based on
the results of the nitrogen modelling efforts described previously. The
behaviour of the marsh system at the higher loading rate indicates that the
marsh system could experience problems due to extended periods of anaerobic
conditions 'resulting in a loss in overall efficiency of the system and
possible ecological implications.
The total nitrogen loading rate for the recommended hydraulic loading
rate of 2.0 cm/week would be approximately 0.73 grams of total nitrogen as
N per square meter-day or 4.72 Ibs N/acre-day.
The modelling results indicated that under the high loading rate,
about 37.0 percent of the total nitrogen loaded would be assimilated each
day (25 percent of the TON and 50 percent of the NH4). This assimilation
rate is low compared to studies involving experimental systems reviewed by
Nichols (1983). However, if the loading rate in this study were to be
applied for a full year, an annual loading rate of 183 grams per square
meter per year would result. This is three times the loading level of the
most heavily loaded experimental system reported by Nichols (1983).
Increased efficiency would probably result from operating the system at the
lower recommended rate of 2.0 cm/week rate.
The efficiency of a saltmarsh system to assimilate a wastewater load
is also dependent on the frequency and duration of the loading schedule as
well as the season in which the wastewaters are applied. In this study,
the practice of spray irrigating the wastes in a short period of time each
day for only five days out of the week resulted a system behaviour that was
similar to a batch sequencing reactor. This resulted in a series of
dramatic dynamics in terms of microbial activity as demonstrated in Figure
34 in the previous section. More than likely this had a positive effect on
system efficiency in that it was allowed to "rest" for some time between
loadings.
In Coastal Alabama, the most efficient time for spray irrigating a
saltmarsh would be in the summer and fall of the year. Not only would the
increased temperature result in more rapid microbial degredation of the
wastes but it would correspond with the growing season of the plants.
Additional advantages during this time would be higher evapotranspiration
allowing for higher hydrologic loads and lower average tidal amplitudes
which would increase the time between tidal flushing of the system.
As mentioned previously, due to the strength of seafood wastewaters
and the low permeability of salt marsh soils, hydraulic loading rates for
this type of waste will need to be relatively low. Correspondingly, the
area required for application may be considerable. A 1 MGD seafood
wastewater treatment facility would require an application area of 330
acres to accomodate a loading rate of 2.00 cm/wk. While this may not pose a
problem in areas with extensive coastal marshes, in areas where appropriate
sites are limited it may prove necessary to increase the degree of
pretreatment in order to achieve higher hydraulic loading rates. Given
this limitation, this method of disposal is probably not practical for
areas where there are large concentrations of seafood processors. However,
for a smaller processor located adjacent to a coastal saltmarsh it is a
practical option.
6-2
-------
Consider a coastal seafood processor with one shrimp peeler who
operates on a seasonal basis. Assume that the average daily volume of
wastewater produced is about 27,000 GPD when operating at capacity, based
on the data presented in Chapter 4. At the recommended loading rate of 2.0
cm/week a saltmarsh with an area of 46 acres would be adequate to
accomodate these loads with a reasonable margin of safety for the
environment.
Costs Associated with the Land-Application of_ Seafood Wastewaters
Costs of both facility construction and facility operation for a
seafood waste system utilizing screening and land application should be
considerably less than the cost of conventional treatment.
Non-land costs associated with land-application systems would be
expected to vary greatly. EPA (1984) provided estimates for the non-land
costs of constructing and operating various components of a wetland
treatment facility. Utilizing some of those figures (based on 1984
dollars), an estimate of the cost of construction of a 1 MGD and a 30,000
GPD system were prepared (Table 40). Maintenance costs for each system
would be about $21,750 per year for the 1 MGD system and about $8,000 per
year for the 30,000 GPD system.
Table 40. Estimated non-land capital costs associated with
wetland wastewater disposal.
Cost Element 1 MGD 30,000 GPD
Pumping Station & Force Main 42,000 11,200
Piping in wet soils (1000 ft) 11,000 3,700
Distribution system (Aluminum) 170,000 27,000
TOTALS 220,000 41,000
6-3
-------
7.0. CONCLUSIONS
7.1. WATER QUALITY
Discharge of seafood processing wastewater onto the surface of a
Juncus saltmarsh resulted in the elevation of levels of several nitrogen
species (Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen and ammonium ion) and Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (BOD) in the surface waters of the plots. Impact of the wastes was
most evident on the marsh receiving the heaviest waste loads of 3.56 cm per
week.
The loading also resulted in the- elevation of nitrogen in the
surficial sediments (0-5 cm) which remained somewhat elevated after the
discharge of waste had ceased. These findings, along with the persistence
of high chlorophyll £ levels and increases in nitrite-nitrate levels in the
water on the plots during post discharge, indicated that the surficial
sediments retain much of the materials loaded and release these materials
slowly after continued cycling and mineralization. Little or no
penetration into the groundwater was noted for any of the parameters
measured.
The canal adjacent to the marsh receiving the waste showed no water
quality impacts from the project. No significant elevations were noted in
nutrients, chlorophyll a_ or BOD that could be attributed to the waste
loadings.
Based on the water quality of the experimental plots during the
discharge period, an optimal loading level of 2.0 cm per week is
recommended. The 3.56 cm per week loading level resulted in the disruption
of the normal nutrient cycling observed for the control plots and exceeded
the apparent capacity of the marsh to rapidly assimilate the waste.
7.2 BIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS
No differences in plant species composition, growth parameters or
productivity were detected between sprayed plots and control plots. Only
expected seasonal variability was demonstrated. Mean values for stem
density (650 m-2), diameter (3.5 mm) and height (88 cm) were within the
range of values for similar gulf coast Juncus marshes. Mean aboveground
biomass production (2,177 gm~2) was higher than reported in previous
studies but did not differ significantly between study plots.
Increased nutrient loads to the marsh had no measureable enhancement
effect on plants present. The long term impact of residual nitrogen in the
shallow sediments, subsequent nutrient transformations and applications
over greater than four months, or at other times of the year, cannot be
predicted from this study.
Application of the wastewater resulted in few significant changes in
fauna! communities of the marsh or the adjacent canal. Significant
seasonal changes in species composition were similar between plots and
reflected population dynamics and cycles of the component species. During
the post-discharge period total abundance increased significantly on the
plots receiving 1.82 cm of wastewater relative to the control plots, due
7-1
-------
primarily to population increases of the annelids. Marsh infauna abundance
patterns over the study period were similar to reports in the literature
with a spring-summer increase and a late summer-early winter decline in
species abundance. Few reports are available, however, for the faunal
group and the strong dominance of Capitella capitata is somewhat unique to
this study and may explain the dynamics observed.
7.3. FACILITY OPERATION
Based on the operation of the pilot facility during this study the
following conclusions can be made:
The application of screened seafood wastewater at a loading rate of
1.82 cm/week was the optimal level observed during the project. This level
of loading did not produce any appreciable runoff during periods of no
rainfall and no tidal inundation.
About 37 percent of the nitrogen applied to the Juncus saltmarsh was
assimilated per day of operation.
The spray irrigation of seafood process waters is a potential
alternative for wastewater management for single processors along the
northern Gulf of Mexico coastal region.
7.4. RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations are made for further study.
1. Laboratory studies of the nitrogen cycle to determine more
accurately the assimilation of nitrogen and specifically the rates of
ammom'fication, nitrification and denitrification.
2. Development of more sophisticated models of the nutrient cycling
and hydraulic response of the marsh.
3. Long-term (multiple-year) impacts of wastewater application on the
marsh system, effectiveness of system assimilation and biological impacts.
4. Biological impacts of application of wastewater during other
seasons.
7-2
-------
REFERENCES CITED
APHA, AWWA 1980. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastes.
14th Edition. Amer. Water Works, Asso., Water Poll. Control Fed.
Bender, M. E. and D. L. Correl. 1974. The use of wetlands as nutrient
removal systems. Chesapeake Res. Consortium. Publ. No. 29.
Cammen, L. M. 1979. The macro-infauna of a North Carolina salt marsh.
Amer. Midi. Nat. 102(2):244-253.
Dacy, J. W. H. and B. L. Howes. 1984. Water uptake by roots controls
water table movement and sediment oxidation in short Spartina marsh.
Science 224:487-489.
de la Cruz, A. A., C. T. Hackney and J. P. Stout. 1981. Aboveground net
primary productivity of three gulf coast marsh macrophytes in
artificially fertilized plots, pp. 437-445. ln_ B. J. Neil son and L.
E. Cronin eds. Estuaries and nutrients. Humana Press, Clifton, N. J.
Eleuterius, L. N. and J. D. Caldwell 1981. Growth kinetics and longevity
of the salt marsh rush Juncus roemerianus. Gulf Res. Rept. 7(1): 27-
34.
Gakstetter, J. M., M. 0. Allum, and J. M. Omernik. 1975. Lake eutrophica-
tion: Results from the national eutrophication Survey. Eutrophica-
tion Research Lab. U.S. EPA, Corvallis, Ore.
Gosselink, J. G., C. L. Cordes and J. W. Parsons. 1979. An ecological
characterization study of the Chenier Plain coastal ecosystem of
Louisiana and Texas. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-78/9
thrugh 78/11. 3 Vols.
Hardisky, A. M., R. M. Smart and V. Klemas. 1983. Growth response and
spectral characteristics of a short Spartina alterm'flora salt marsh
irregited with freshwater and sewage effluent. Remote Sensing of
Envir. 13: 57-67.
Hicks, D. B. and Cavinder, T. R. 1975. Finger fill canal studies:
Florida and North Carolina. U.S. EPA Surveillance and Analysis
Division, Athens, GA 427 pp.
Humphrey, W. D. 1979. Diversity, distribution and relative abundance of
benthic fauna in a Mississippi tidal marsh. Ph.D. Dissertation, Miss.
St. Univ., Mississippi State. 93 p.
Ivester, M. S. 1978. Fauna! dynamics, p. Ill 1-36 _IN_ L. R. Brown, A. A.
de la Cruz, M. S. Ivester and J. P. Stout. Evaluation of the
ecological role and techniques for the management of tidal marshes on
the Mississippi and Alabama gulf coast. Miss.-Ala. Sea Grant Publ.
No. MASGP-78-044.
8-1
-------
Kneib, R. T. 1984. Patterns of invertebrate distribution and abundance in
the intertidal salt marsh: Causes and questions. Estuaries 7(4A):
392-412.
Kneib, R. T. and A. E. Stiven. 1978. Growth, reproduction and feeding of
Fundulus heteroclitus (L.) on a North Carolina salt marsh. J. Exp.
Mar. Blol. Ecol. 31: T21-140.
McBee, J. T. and W. T. Brehm. 1979. Macrobenthos of Simmons Bayou and an
adjoining residential canal. Gulf Res. Repts. 6(3): 211-216.
Meo, M. 1974. Land treatment of menhaden waste water by overland flow. M.
S. thesis, Dept. of Mar. Sci., La. St. Univ. Baton Rouge.
Meo, M., J. W. Day, Jr. and T. B. Ford, November 1975. Overland Flow in
the Louisiana Coastal Zone. Center for Wetland Resources, L.S.U.,
Baton Rouge, LA.
Nichols, D. S. 1983. Capacity of natural wetlands to remove nutrients from
wastewater. Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed. 55(5): 495-505.
Perry, A. 1984. Personal communication.
Sikora, W., J. Sikora, and A. Prior. 1981. Environmental effects of
hydraulic dredging for clam shells in Lake Ponchartrain, Louisiana.
La. St. Univ. Publ. No. LSU-CEL-81-18. 140 p.
Stout, J. P. 1978. An analysis of annual growth and productivity of
Juncus roemerianus Scheele and Spartina alterm'flora Loisel in coastal
Alabama. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. of Ala., Tuscaloosa. 95 p.
Stout, J. P. 1984. Irregularly flooded Juncus roemerianus marshes of the
northeastern Gulf of Mexico: A community profile. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Serv., Publ. No. FWS/OBS-84/. In Press.
Subrahmanyam, C. B., W. L. Kruczynski, and S. H. Drake 1976. Studies on
the animal communities in two north Florida salt marshes. Part II.
Macroinvertebrate communities. Bull. Mar. Sci. 26(20): 172-195.
Subrahmanyam, C. B., and C. L. Coultas, 1980. Studies on the animal
communities in two north Florida salt marshes. Part III. Seasonal
fluctuations of fish and macroinvertebrates. Bull. Mar. Sci. 30(4):
790-818.
Teal, J. M. and I. Valiela. 1973. The salt marsh as a living filter.
Mar. Tech. Soc., Jour. 7:19-21.
U.S. EPA, 1973. Biological field and laboratory methods for measuring the
quality of surface waters and effluent. EPA-670/4-73-001.
U.S. EPA, 1974. EPA development document for effluent limitations
guidelines and new source performance standards for the catfish, crab,
shrimp and tuna segment of the seafood industry. EPA-0440/l-74-020-a.
8-2
-------
U.S. EPA, 1979. Methods for chemical analysis of water and wastes. EPA-
600/4-79-020.
U.S. EPA, 1984. Saltwater wetlands for wastewater management:
Environmental Assessment, EPA 904/10-84 128.
Valiela, I., J. M. Teal and W. J. Sass. 1973. Nutrient retention in salt
marsh plots experimentally fertilized with sewage sludge. Est. Coast
Mar. Sci. 1:261-269.
Vittor, B. A. 1980. Relationships between residential canal design and
estuarine habitat quality. Report to the Alabama Coastal Area Board,
Daphne, AL. 50 pp.
Vittor, B. A. and J. P. Stout. 1975. Delineation of ecological critical
areas in the Alabama coastal zone. Dauphin Island Sea Lab, Spec.
Rept. 75-002 and Atlas Appendix. 32 p.
8-3
-------
APPENDIX A
Quality Assurance - Quality Control
A-l
-------
A.I. Introduction.
The purpose of any field collection effort is to provide essential
information on the system under investigation such that the questions asked
by the study are sufficiently answered. This requires that samples
collected for analysis and other data provided by the field study must be
safely returned to the laboratory. Once in the laboratory, the
transcription of the field data and the chemical and biological analysis of
the samples must be performed accurately and completely. Subsequent coding
of the data for statistical analysis and the final reporting of that
information must also be done with precision.
It is the purpose of the quality assurance - quality control (QAQC)
program that the above objectives are met. For the Utilization of a
Saltwater Marsh Ecosystem for the Management of Seafood Processing
Wastewaters project, the coordination of the multi-disciplinary team, with
scientists from the Marine Environmental Sciences Consortium (MESC),
Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) and Taxonomic
Associates, Inc. (TAI) required that the transfer of samples and
information be performed in an efficient manner. The QAQC plan was
implemented to monitor and maintain that efficiency.
A.2. Statistical Approach to Sampling.
The outcome of any technical investigation is limited by its initial
design. In experimental studies, such as the subject of this report, the
statistical design selected at the beginning of the project will determine
the resolution of the analyses ultimately performed on the data. Some
knowledge of the variability of each of the parameters studied must be
known in order to select the appropriate sampling frequency and the proper
number of replicates.
The entire sampling regime for the current project was based on a
statistical design to test the hypothesis that there are no differences
between experimental plots at different waste loading rates and control
plots (Ho = 0, null hypotheis) . The experimental plot layout followed a
randomized block design with replication. Additional replication within
each plot was performed for those parameters (eg. BOD, macroinvertebrates)
with known high variability in sampling and analysis. No stratification
between the plots was assumed to exist. This design allowed for natural
inter-site (experimental plot) variability to be controlled for maximum
resolution with the minimal amount of sampling.
A.3. Sample Collection.
The primary objective of sample collection was to insure that field
sampling obtained a reasonable representation of existing environmental
conditions. Sampling sites in the adjacent canal as well as within each of
the experimental plots were selected using randomized methods wherever
possible.
Sampling was performed by experienced field staff acquainted with
the sampling gear and conditions within the local environment.
A-2
-------
All samples were collected in pre-labeled (numbered) containers to
ensure all field samples were collected or at least collection was
attempted. A variety of field sheets prepared and utilized to: 1. track
the samples from the collection point to the Marine Environmental Sciences
Consortium's (MESC) laboratory; 2. record field measurements taken with
instrumentation; and 3. other collection notes. See Figures 1 and 2 for
examples of the field collection sheets.
A.4. Sample Preservation.
Field samples were given appropriate treatment, either cold ( 4 deg
C.) storage or chemical fixation (Acid fixation), for preservation during
shipment and storage prior to analysis. Table A-l lists the preservation
methods utilized for various parameters.
A.5. Transfer of samples.
Samples for biological parameters, Chlorophyll a^ and BOD were
returned directly to the MESC laboratory on the day of sampling by those
individuals who performed the laboratory analyses. Since the chain of
custody for these samples was direct, no special forms were prepared for
these internal transfers.
Samples collected for chemical analysis were transferred by car to the
Mobile Alabama ADEM office for transfer to the main laboratory in
Montgomery, Alabama. Effective transfer to the Montgomery lab was
accomplished within 24 hours of collection. Samples that were transferred
to the Alabama Department of Environmental Management's (ADEM) laboratory
were tracked using the standardized custody form utilized by the agency
(Figure A-3).
A-3
-------
CANAL DATA
DATE
STATION
/
IS
23
28
33.
!£MP-
/3.0
5
i6k.
DQ_
PH
Ii/!QD BQI NQ_
CHL A BQI NQ__
ADEM BQI NO
COf
02.
0/3
/io
DROP NETS:
GILL NET:
Figure A-l. Field sampling sheet #1.
A-4
-------
SAMPLE DA'TE: •
5~"1£~IT ~?
1 j
HIE \
gUR/WIiB__
_._ '_
EEEUUEN1
FLOWS
TEMPt
3o
39.5
5k
5ALI
al
21
00 J
X
X
l.S
6.5
&V-
PHl
&.$
14.'
6,5
tf.6
4. .5
fS/BOD NOl
Tjj5\t>23
_
W.O
20/2. 20//la
20 /T2.
22//0
Ui5
iQ///
/7-S2B5
SSL:
X
32^
-25
J^ ^/ 35 ^ ^
At
PHi
8fc.3
tf
fe.J'
6.5
800. NO:
V
X
01'
*6«55CH$X^Y
WJ'flK
02^
S3)
ADEM
w/
*
_____ 6 _____ 7 _____ B _____ 9 ____ o ____ 11 ____ 12_.
EPTHS:
£? I FAUNA:
•**
Figure A-2. Field sampling sheet #2.
A-5
-------
Table A-l. Methods of preservation and analysis.
Parameter
Temperature
PH
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Susp. Sol.
Salinity
Biochemical Ox. Dmd.
Total Kjeldahl Nitr.
Organic Nitrogen
Ni trate
Nitrite
Ammoni a
Total Phosphate
Ortho-phosphate
Total Org. Carbon
Chlorophyll a
Method of
Preservation
in situ
Tn situ
Th~ situ
ch~iTTed~
in situ
chlTTed"
HoSO* & chilled
C N/A
HoS04 4 chilled
HoSOj 4 chilled
HpS04 & chilled
HoS04 4 chilled
HgSOa 4 chilled
sulfuric acid
chilled/dark
Analytical
Method
Thermistor
Electrode
Electrode
Gravimetric
Electrode
Incubation
phenate proc.
TKN-NH4
Cd-reduction
Cd-reduction
phenate
molybdate
molybdate
TOC analyzer
Spectrophoto.
Ref.
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
A-6
-------
. Wtt-
STATE OF ALABAMA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRDNMENTAL MANAGEMENT
MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA
LABORATORY:
Montgomery
( ) Mobile
C ) B i rmi ngham
Sample Type: Potable Water [ ] l.andfi'l Leachate [ ] Toxic Extraction [ ] Composite [ _.
Surface Water [ ] Hazardous Wastesite [ ] Ignitability [ ] Grab [ "
Soil/Sediment [ ] Groundwater [><1 Corrosivity [ ] Container P [ ]
Wastewater [ ] Waste (Special Handling) f ] Reactivity [ ] G [ '
Source Sea-food Wastes Project, Shrimp Plant Wastes and Waters
Location Bayou La Batre, Al.
( ) Discharge from EPft Sea-food Waste Project to
(Point Source)
Mgc;r Cjampl a .»
-------
A.6. Analytical Laboratory Methods
The Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) chemistry
laboratory is the state operated laboratory responsible for certifying all
water and air quality laboratories in the state of Alabama. As such the
lab follows all U. S. Environmental Protection Agency procedures and
guidelines pertaining to sample handling, preparation and subsequent
analysis.
All chemical analyses of water samples followed the methodology of
Standard Methods for the Examination of Waters and Wastes (APHA.AWWA 1980),
or Environmental Protection Agency methodology (U.S.EPA 1973,1979) as
indicated in Table A-l. Sediment sample analysis followed the methods of
the U.S. EPA and Corps of Engineers Technical Committee on criteria for
dredge and fill material (U.S.EPA/COE 1981).
All laboratory procedures for both the ADEM laboratory as well as the
MESC laboratory utilized QAQC procedures given in "Handbook for Analytical
Quality Control in Water and Wastewater Laboratories" (U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency 1979).
A.7. Data Handling and Reporting.
All quantitative data underwent a vigorous QAQC procedure which
insures that the data undergo proper analysis and are prepared in a final
form for interpretation and storage in a data storage facility. An outline
of the QAQC procedure performed beginning with the analysts reporting form,
through entry onto an automated system and subsequent data management
report, including statistics, are presented in Figure A-4. Several control
points occur in the procedure to qualify the data before entry into the
subsequent modules. Preliminary statistical reports of the data are
utilized (both tabular (Table A-2) and graphical methods (Figure A-5) to
check the data for completeness and to screen out questionable information.
Statistics utilized include the arithmetic mean, the range (minimum and
maximum) and standard deviation. These procedures are used to detect
outliers in the data.
Simple descriptive statistics (Mean, Range, Standard Deviation) of the
data were performed with the Symphony (T.M.) software package. All
statistics were calculated on the basis of deleting all missing values,
hence n, the number of observations, changes due to missing or invalid
data. When data were at the limits of detection of their respective
analytical procedure, a value of 80 percent of the detection limit was
assigned for that constituent. If the mean value of the constituent was
below the detection limit, the number reported then was the detection
limit. This procedure then allowed for data to be included in the
statistics that were at or near the detection limit but did not allow
values below the detection limit to be reported directly as valid data.
Listings of all final water quality data for surface, and groundwaters are
presented in Appendix B along with the descriptive statistics utilized in
the QAQC process.
A-8
-------
Visual
Check
No
No
Field Sheets
yes
Descriptive
Statistics
yes
Audit by
f— Data
Manager
Sample and
Tracking Sheets
ADEM-MESC
Analytical Labs
Tracking Forms
and
Reports
Analytical Statistics
and
Reports
_Audit By
"investigators
Visual
Check
Figure A-4. Outline of the QAQC procedure.
A-9
-------
The BMDP statistical software package running on an IBM-XT was
utilized for all analytical statistics. Multiway analysis of variance for
repeated measures and unequal cell sizes was performed on all water quality
data utilizing the program BMDP-2V. Analysis of the BOD data to obtain
the rate constants k was performed with program BMDP-3R, nonlinear
regression.
Table A-2. Example of tabular information for QAQC purposes.
Well Data - Stats by Depth
FULL
6
11
12
Mean
2.07
0.10
5.79
91.74
1.12
1.19
Min.
0.02
0.01
0.20
1.61
0.03
0.42
Max.
8.20
0.60
12.00
250.00
3.85
3.20
Std Dev
2.U7
0.12
3.07
65.37
0.70
0.59
Count
30 NH3
30 N03
30 TKN
30 TOC
30 TP
24 P04
Depth
10
10
10
10
10
10
I
I
o
o
0.17 -T
0.16 -
0.15 -
0.14 -
0.13 -
0.12 -
0.11 -
0.10 -
0.09 -
0.08 -
0.07 -
0.06 -
0.05 -
0.04 -
0.03 -
Surface water data - N02-N03
Pro-discharge _ tyti'^
\ ,
5678
Plot Number
10 11
12
Figure A-5. Sample of gaphical output utilized for QAQC screening.
A-10
-------
APPENDIX B
QAQC Data Listings for Water Quality Parameters
B-l
-------
Table B-l. Plot surface water: Nutrients.
Station = 1
Date
20-Jun-84
19-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
26-Sep-84
24-Oct-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
03-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Min.
Max.
Std. Dev.
NH4
0.800
0.400
0.100
0.400
0.300
0.100
0.300
0.200
0.050
0.300
0.200
0.100
0.300
0.273
0.050
0.800
0.189
N02-N03
0.100
0.035
0.020
0.010
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.010
0.080
0.120
0.080
0.040
0.040
0.046
0.010.
0.120
0.035
TKN
1.20
4.90
4.20
1.60
0.40
1.00
1.20
0.20
0.20
1.00
2.40
0.80
1.80
1.61
0.200
4.900
1.397
TOC
21.70
7.30
24.70
13.70
18.10
10.00
9.60
10.90
18.20
15.90
13.10
4.80
14.70
14.05
4.800
24.700
5.461
TP
0.320
1.700
0.200
0.290
0.080
0.000
0.080
0.110
0.060
0.070
0.150
0.060
0.210
0.28
0.060
1.700
0.437
P04
0.000
0.000
0.300
0.320
0.060
0.030
0.010
0.040
0.060
0.110
0.070
0.110
0.090
0.11
0.010
0.320
0.099
13 13 13 13 12 11
B-2
-------
Table B-2. Plot surface water: Nutrients.
Station = 2
Date
20-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
19-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
24-Oct-84
07-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
03-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
M1n.
Max.
Std. Dev.
NH4
0.800
0.800
0.100
2.000
8.000
2.500
2.300
0.200
4.300
0.050
0.500
0.100
0.200
0.100
0.100
0.200
1.391
0.050
8.000
2.073
N02-N03
0.060
0.120
0.035
0.020
0.010
0.120
0.020
0.200
0.020
0.040
0.010
0.020
0.120
0.120
0.100
0.060
0.067
0.010
0.200
0.054
TKN
5.60
1.50
4.90
4.00
9.50
4.90
3.90
1.00
13.60
0.20
0.50
0.20
0.50
1.60
0.40
2.60
3.43
0.200
13.600
3.629
TOC
23.90
38.20
7.30
15.90
18.90
18.00
21.30
13.00
24.00
16.50
11.10
22.50
8.80
11.20
5.20
32.40
18.01
5.200
38.200
8.684
TP
0.490
13.200
1.700
0.230
0.780
0.670
0.180
0.030
0.420
0.120
0.630
0.090
0.050
0.010
0.150
0.090
1.18
0.010
13.200
3.132
P04
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.350
0.700
0.670
. 0.170
0.210
0.390
0.210
0.540
0.010
0.070
0.010
0.010
0.090
0.26
0.010
0.700
0.237
16
16
16
16
16
13
B-3
-------
Table B-3. Plot surface water: Nutrients.
Station = 3
Date
20-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
19-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
10-Oct-84
24-Oct-84
07-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
03-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Min.
Max.
Std. Dev.
NH4
0.800
0.800
0.300
16.400
0.600
10.400
3.000
7.400
0.700
23.200
4.400
1.400
0.400
0.400
0.200
0.200
0.800
4.200
0.200
23.200
6.434
N02-N03
0.120
0.120
0.035
0.020
0.020
0.260
0.020
0.040
0.060
0.040
0.020
0.020
0.120
0.080
0.020
0.120
0.120
0.073
0.020
0.260
0.063
TKN
2.80
0.80
4.00
22.50
1.70
12.00
3.60
10.00
0.40
36.80
12.80
1.40
0.20
2.20
2.20
1.00
2.20
6.86
0.200
36.800
9.476
TOC
43.00
20.30
8.50
50.90
9.90
20.80
9.10
30.60
8.00
109.00
27.10
10.10
17.90
41.60
9.70
4.60
13.20
25.55
4.600
109.000
24.853
TP
1.600
0.015
0.800
0.580
0.140
0.800
0.400
0.690
0.010
1.710
1.200
0.230
0.400
0.110
0.090
0.050
0.240
0.53
0.010
1.710
0.523
P04
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.640
0.200
0.700
0.170
0.740
0.150
1.690
0.660
0.160
0.140
0.230
0.050
0.100
0.120
0.41
0.050
1.690
0.430
17 17 17 17 17 14
B-4
-------
Table B-4. Plot surface water: Nutrients.
Station = 4
Date
20-Jun-84
19-Jul-84
29-Aug-84
26-Sep-84
26-Nov-84
03-Jan-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Min.
Max.
Std. Dev.
N
NH4
0.800
0.080
2.900
1.300
1.900
0.400
0.100
0.900
1.047
0.080
2.900
0.905
8
N02-N03
0.080
0.035
0.010
0.020
0.040
0.120
0.240
0.280
0.103
0.010
0.280
0.097
8
TKN
3.10
2.00
6.00
1.30
10.00
4.00
0.60
2.80
3.72
0.600
10.000
2.839
8
TOC
31.00
12.00
25.70
20.40
34.60
20.50
5.70
10.70
20.07
5.700
34.600
9.500
8
TP
5.000
0.200
2.480
0.170
0.430
0.250
0.180
0.210
1.12
0.170
5.000
1.643
8
P04
0.000
0.000
1.700
0.150
0.240
0.240
0.050
0.120
0.42
0.050
1.700
0.578
6
B-5
-------
Table B-5. Plot surface water: Nutrients.
Station = 5
Date
2Q-Jun-84
19-Jul~84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
07-Nov-84
26-NOV-84
06-Dec-84
03-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Min.
Max.
Std. Dev.
NH4
0.800
0.200
0,100
0.200
0.300
0.200
16.000
0.050
0.400
0.300
0.500
0.100
0.200
0.400
1.411
0.050
16.000
4.051
N02-N03
0.080
0.035
0.020
0.020
0.140
0.025
0.180
0.040
0.010
0.100
0.040
0.020
0.260
0.060
0.074
0.010
0.260
0.071
TKN
3.60
4.00
2.50
1.60
2.80
0.40
28.00
0.40
1.20
0.30
0.50
1.80
0.20
2.00
3.52
0.200
28.000
6.894
TOC
28.90
11.00
15.50
12.70
5.80
19.30
99.00
10.80
14.30
15.50
14.60
5.30
5.30
17.70
19.69
5.300
99.000
22.803
TP
0.540
0.600
0.240
0.290
0.160
0.050
1.770
0.020
0.060
0.050
0.040
0.010
0.170
0.170
0.30
0.010
1.770
0.445
P04
0.000
0.000
0.300
0.280
0.230
0.040
1.770
0.020
0.010
0.080
0.100
0.020
0.030
0.160
0.25
0.010
1.770
0.468
14 14 14 14 14 12
B-6
-------
Table B-6. Plot surface water: Nutrients.
Station = 6
Date
20-Jun-84
19-Ju1-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
24-Oct-84
07-NOV-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
03-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Min.
Max.
Std. Dev.
N
NH4
0.800
0.100
22.500
0.300
48.500
27.600
1.500
47.000
12.100
4.000
0.400
0.400
0.100
0.100
0.400
11.053
0.100
48.500
16.658
15
N02-N03
0.060
0.035
0.020
0.020
0.060
0.020
0.140
0.080
0.020
0.020
0.040
1.360
0.100
0.160
0.140
0.152
0.020
1.360
' 0.326
1
15
TKN
4.80
28.80
34.50
2.10
70.00
36.60
3.20
80.00
60.00
4.00
0.20
5.20
3.20
0.60
3.00
22.41
0.200
80.000
26.863
15
TOC
58.00
18.00
91.60
22.60
99.40
108.00
10.00
130.00
108.00
10.40
31.00
27.70
26.40
5.80
14.70
50.77
5.800
130.000
42.357
15
TP
0.970
2.500
1.000
3.300
4.040
2.750
0.160
6.600
3.800
0.460
0.150
0.110
0.140
0.120
0.280
1.76
0.110
6.600
1.914
15
P04
0.000
0.000
1.180
3.500
2.600
1.950
0.350
6.000
3.100
0.380
0.060
0.230
0.130
0.160
0.160
1.52
0.060
6.000
1.755
13
B-7
-------
Table B-7. Plot surface water: Nutrients.
Station = 7
Date
20-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
19-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
24-Oct-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
03-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Min.
Max.
Std. Dev.
NH4
0.800
0.800
0.080
15.200
18.400
17.500
4.500
0.100
2.500
0.300
0.100
0.400
0.300
0.100
0.300
4.092
0.080
18.400
6.598
N02-N03
0.060
0.100
0.035
0.020
0.010
0.160
0.020
0.080
0.040
0.020
0.060
0.500
0.080
0.160
0.020
0.091
0.010
0.500
0.119
TKN
2.80
3.50
10.80
19.60
50.00
21.60
8.80
10.00
16.40
0.40
0.50
1.20
2.00
0.40
2.40
10.03
0.400
50.000
12.748
TOC
43.20
25.10
11.00
75.50
60.90
58.00
35.90
33.00
30.00
6.50
19.70
16.70
5.50
5.30
13.70
29.33
5.300
75.500
21.161
TP
0.880
0.300
1.700
0.860
1.230
1.700
0.400
0.160
0.610
0.610
0.100
0.070
0.090
0.150
0.110
0.60
0.070
1.700
0.549
P04
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.070
1.050
1.640
0.360
0.360
0.410
0.070
0.050
0.100
0.030
0.010
0.100
0.44
0.010
1.640
0.508
15 15 15 15 15 12
B-8
-------
Table B-8. Plot surface water: Nutrients.
Station = 8
Date
20-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
18-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
24-Oct-84
07-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
03-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Min.
Max.
Std. Dev.
NH4
0.800
0.800
0.200
0.700
3.700
26.000
0.900
0.300
3.100
0.900
0.400
0.500
0.400
0.100
0.400
0.600
2.487
0.100
26.000
6.149
N02-N03
0.060
0.170
0.035
0.020
0.010
0.040
0.020
0.080
0.080
0.600
0.010
0.020
0.160
0.060
0.120
0.080
0.098
0.010
0.600
0.138
TKN
5.60
2.60
1.60
4.40
6.20
38.00
1.60
1.60
45.60
3.80
2.40
0.80
1.40
3.60
0.80
1.20
7.57
0.800
45.600
13.102
TOC
48.10
23.20
11.00
17.90
25.20
63.00
9.40
8.00
125.00
18.00
57.80
19.10
20.60
13.60
10.90
14.00
30.30
8.000
125.000
29.516
TP
3.200
1.490
0.200
0.100
0.610
2.020
0.250
0.080
3.450
0.270
0.140
0.070
0.070
0.200
0.170
0.230
0.78
0.070
3.450
1.099
P04
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.140
0.580
1.600
0.200
0.270
3.300
0.140
0.140
0.070
0.110
0.220
0.190
0.400
0.57
0.070
3.300
0.879
16
16
16
16
16
13
B-9
-------
Table B-9. Plot surface water: Nutrients.
Station = 9
Date
20-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
18-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
24-Oct-84
07-NOV-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
03-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
13-Mar-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Min.
Max.
Std. Dev.
NH4
0.800
0.800
0.080
0.100
0.100
0.500
0.300
0.300
1.100
1.700
0.400
0.100
0.200
0.100
0.200
0.800
0.300
0.463
0.080
1.700
0.432
N02-N03
0.050
0.035
0.035
0.020
0.040
0.060
0.020
0.580
0.660
0.040
0.010
0.040
0.020
0.040
0.160
0.040
0.040
0.111
0.010
0.660
0.189
TKN
2.10
0.80
1.90
2.10
2.60
4.80
11.20
0.30
1.40
11.20
0.20
0.20
0.50
1.40
74.00
1.00
1.60
6.90
0.200
74.000
17.095
TOC
19.20
30.20
10.00
8.40
9.80
12.20
18.60
11.00
9.00
31.60
8.60
16.40
11.40
11.60
22.40
6.30
8.80
14.44
6.300
31.600
7.371
TP
0.060
0.740
0.200
0.080
0.140
0.180
0.010
0.020
0.270
0.720
0.070
0.120
0.040
0.020
0.110
0.100
0.070
0.17
0.010
0.740
0.214
P04
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.090
0.170
0.190
0.040
0.010
0.350
0.460
0.030
0.030
0.070
0.010
0.070
0.110
0.060
0.12
0.010
0.460
0.129
17 17 17 17 17 14
B-10
-------
Table B-10. Plot surface water: Nutrients.
Station = 10
Date
20-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
lS-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
24-Oct-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
03-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
M1n.
Max.
Std. Dev.
NH4
0.800
0.800
0.100
0.100
0.200
0.100
0.700
0.500
3.600
0.100
0.050
0.300
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.510
0.050
3.600
0.867
N02-N03
0.040
0.040
0.035
0.020
0.010
0.100
0.020
0.040
0.100
0.010
0.080
0.120
0.040
0.040
0.120
0.054
0.010
0.120
0.037
TKN
6.00
1.00
1.20
1.20
4.20
2.50
5.60
0.20
14.00
0.20
0.20
1.20
3.40
0.60
2.80
2.95
0.200
14.000
3.480
TOC
73.60
20.40
15.00
12.50
12.20
10.40
14.50
6.00
38.10
11.10
19.60
17.50
25.40
8.00
64.90
23.28
6.000
73.600
19.621
TP
0.160
0.090
0.300
0.080
0.220
0.070
0.010
0.020
0.750
0.020
0.100
0.040
0.220
0.040
0.170
0.15
0.010
0.750
0.180
P04
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.180
0.010
0.010
0.020
0.050
0.540
0.010
0.010
0.070
0.170
0.100
0.130
0.11
0.010
0.540
0.143
15 15 15 15 15 12
B-ll
-------
Table B-ll. Plot surface water: Nutrients.
Station =11
Date
20-Jun-84
18-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
24-Oct-84
26-NOV-84
06-Dec-84
03-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Min.
Max.
Std. Dev.
N
NH4
0.800
0.080
10.500
37.400
27.000
37.600
1.600
4.100
1.500
0.500
0.500
0.200
0.300
7.600
9.263
0.080
37.600
13.446
14
N02-N03
0.060
0.035
0.020
0.010
0.180
0.020
0.070
0.060
0.040
0.140
0.240
0.100
0.200
0.060
0.088
0.010
0.240
0.071
14
TKN
3.80
6.90
16.80
70.00
28.00
39.20
2.80
11.60
1.80
0.60
0.00
2.80
1.40
12.60
15.25
0.600
70.000
19.324
13
TOC
23.80
17.90
44.10
102.00
116.00
136.00
20.00
24.40
8.60
25.40
10.20
12.00
35.40
80.90
46.91
8.600
136.000
41.528
14
TP
0.320
0.410
0.520
4.360
3.750
4.000
0.550
0.980
0.220
0.450
0.640
0.090
0.080
0.590
1.21
0.080
4.360
1.496
14
P04
0.000
0.000
0.560
4.400
3.250
2.200
0.540
0.880
0.140
0.300
0.720
1.100
0.120
0.360
1.21
0.120
4.400
1.305
12
B-12
-------
Table B-12. Plot surface water: Nutrients.
Station = 12
Date
20-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
18-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
10-Oct-84
24-Oct-84
07-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
03-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Min.
Max.
Std. Dev.
N
NH4
0.800
0.800
0.100
0.100
0.200
38.000
0.900
6.400
0.600
51.000
0.500
0.400
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.200
0.800
5.947
0.100
51.000
14.325
17
N02-N03
0.080
0.100
0.035
0.020
0.010
0.040
0.040
0.100
0.120
0.160
0.040
0.010
0.080
0.020
0.080
0.240
0.140
0.077
0.010
0.240
0.060
17
TKN
3.80
0.80
5.60
15.70
2.00
62.00
3.20
40.00
1.60
94.00
0.40
1.60
0.50
3.20
1.80
1.20
3.00
14.14
0.400
94.000
25.687
17
TOC
14.10
22.90
17.50
25.00
0.00
84.40
14.80
33.00
19.00
152.00
10.60
21.50
23.80
37.30
7.30
27.40
25.00
33.47
7.300
152.000
34.985
16
TP
0.030
0.200
0.600
0.780
0.870
5.200
4.700
3.600
0.020
6.400
0.090
0.680
0.070
0.080
0.030
0.210
0.130
1.39
0.020
6.400
2.063
17
P04
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.000
0.700
3.200
0.600
2.600
0.270
6.400
0.090
0.360
0.050
0.210
0.040
0.150
0.170
1.13
0.040
6.400
1.736
14
Table B-13. Surface water nutrients: Overall Means
Means
Min.
Max.
Std. Dev.
3.608
0.050
51.000
9.057
0.086
0.010
1.360
0.136
8.41
0.200
94.000
16.152
27.36
4.600
152.000
28.259
0.78
0.010
13.200
1.543
0.56
0.010
6.400
1.035
177
177
176
176
176
146
B-13
-------
Table B-14. Statistical summaries for surface water nutrient
data, all months, across each loading strata.
Mean
0.826388
0.052222
2.952777
19.22777
0.256285
0.169655
Mean
2.135952
0.093095
7.480952
21.47619
0.716428
0.605454
Mean
3.330857
0.076142
7.4
29.16
0.841571
0.541851
Mean
9.6795
0.097125
19.31025
45.24871
1.6405
1.487575
Min
0.05
0.01
0.2
5.3
0.01
0.01
Min
0.05
0.01
0.2
5.5
0.01
0.01
Min
0.08
0.01
0.2
8
0.01
0.05
Min
0.08
0.01
0.2
7.3
0.02
0.05
Max
16
0.18
28
99
1.77
1.77
Max
18.4
0.66
74
75.5
1.77
10
Max
26
0.6
45.6
125
5
3.3
Max
51
1.36
94
152
6.6
6.4
Std_Dev
2.631446
0.042889
4.945283
17.79688
0.401526
0.327934
Std_Dev
4.413585
0.143543
13.58874
15.20413
2.004038
1.699673
Std_Dev
6.170494
0.105228
10.99859
26.05074
1.136210
0.721490
Std_Dev
15.81989
0.208683
25.88567
41.99125
1.939398
1.698296
Count
36
36
36
36
35
29
Count
42
42
42
42
42
33
Count
35
35
35
35
35
27
Count
40
40
39
39
40
33
Parameter
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Parameter
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Parameter
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Parameter
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Loading
Control
Loading
Quarter
Loading
Half
Loading
Full
B-14
-------
Table B-15. Statistical summaries for surface water nutrient
data, pre-discharge, across each loading strata.
Mean
0.557142
0.052142
3.128571
25.41428
0.53
Mean
0.562222
0.058888
3.766666
23.12222
2.141111
Mean
0.5725
0.081875
2.8125
24.6375
1.563125
Mean
0.5725
0.497142
0.057857
7.785714
24.6
0.718571
Min
0.1
0.035
1
7.3
0.09
Min
0.08
0.01
0.8
7.3
0.01
Min
0.08
0.035
0.8
8.5
0.015
Min
0.08
0.08
0.035
0.8
14.1
0.03
Max
0.8
0.1
6
73.6
1.7
Max
0.8
0.12
10.8
43.2
1.7
Max
0.8
0.17
5.6
48.1
5
Max
0.8
0.8
0.1
28.8
58
2.5
Std_Dev
0.292072
0.024619
1.864490
20.76160
0.507289
Std_Dev
0.336312
0.029418
2.892903
11.87871
3.950478
Std_pev
0.298820
0.047099
1.391435
13.94246
1.627630
Std_Dev
0.298820
0.349763
0.023430
8.755802
13.98059
0.778999
Count
7
7
7
7
7
Count
9
9
9
9
9 TP
Count
8
8
8
8
8
Count
8
7
7
7
7
7
Parameter
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
Parameter
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
Parameter
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
Parameter
NH3
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
Loading
Control
Loading
Quarter
Loading
Half
Loading
Half
Full
B-15
-------
Table B-16. Statistical summaries for nutrient surface water
data, discharge, across each loading strata.
Mean
1.639285
0.053214
4.564285
20.01428
0.293076
0.242142
Mean
3.785294
0.124705
10.08235
24.80588
0.449411
0.434705
Mean
5.66875
0.085
11.9625
33.9875
0.919375
0.780625
Mean
19.01666
0.066111
33.70555
70.01176
3.065
2.368333
Min
0.05
0.01
0.2
5.8
0.01
0.01
Min
0.05
0.01
0.2
9
0.01
0.01
Min
0.3
0.01
0.4
8
0.01
0.14
Min
0.2
0.01
0.4
10
0.02
0.14
Max
16
0.18
28
99
1.77
1.77
Max
18.4
0.66
50
60.9
1.77
1.64
Max
26
0.6
45.6
125
3.45
3.3
Max
51
0.18
94
152
6.6
6.4
Std_Dev
4.076508
0.052358
7.365518
23.20618
0.467569
0.450954
Std_Dev
5.564323
0.188776
11.58864
15.01671
0.450639
0.392265
Std_Dev
7.627804
0.145129
14.15873
34.21077
0.968145
0.849988
Std_Dev
19.16400
0.051869
31.14932
50.14756
2.079717
1.860442
Count
14
14
14
14
13
14
Count
17
17
17
17
17
17
Count
16
16
16
16
16
16
Count
18
18
18
17
18
18
Parameter
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Parameter
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Parameter
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Parameter
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Loading
Control
Loading
Quarter
Loading
Half
Loading
Full
B-16
-------
Table B-17. Statistical summaries for surface water nutrient
data, post discharge, across each loading strata.
Mean
0.211111
0.070555
1.155555
16.48888
0.097222
0.076111
Mean
0.252631
0.085263
4.821052
12.84736
0.141052
0.077368
Mean
0.48
0.104
1.78
18
0.176
0.156
Mean
0.983333
0.176111
2.747058
23.93333
0.251666
0.268888
Min
0.05
0.01
0.2
4.8
0.01
0.01
Min
0.1
0.01
0.2
5.2
0.01
0.01
Min
0.1
0.01
0.2
4.6
0.05
0.05
Min
0.1
0.01
0.2
5.8
0.03
0.05
Max
0.5
0.26
3.4
64.9
0.22
0.17
Max
0.8
0.5
74
32.4
0.22
0.54
Max
1.4
0.28
4
57.8
0.4
0.4
Max
7.6
1.36
12.6
80.9
0.68
1.1
Std_Dev
0.131820
0.059017
0.972523
12.87084
0.065473
0.048549
Std_Dev
0.175824
0.108500
16.32246
7.088490
0.168300
0.114010
Std_Dev
0.329039
0.076146
1.071986
13.61244
0.088979
0.087772
Std_Dev
1.834923
0.295468
2.800024
16.81074
0.207799
0.255905
Count
18
18
18
18
18
18
Count
19
19
19
19
19
19
Count
15
15
15
15
15
15
Count
18
18
17
18
18
18
Parameter
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Parameter
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Parameter
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Parameter
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Loading
Control
Loading
Quarter
Loading
Half
Loading
Full
B-17
-------
Table B-18. Physico-chemical parameters in surface waters - Plot 1.
DATE
06-Jun-84
07-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
26-Sep-84
24-Oct-84
26-NOV-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
STAT
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
TEMP
34
27
39
27.5
27
28
20
10
_
19
13
29.5
36
SALINITY
18
14
14
15
24
26
30
22
8
15
14
22
27
Diss02
3.0
1.7
7.4
5.6
5.4
7.7
9.2
13.2
_
10.4
10.2
0
6.3
PH
6.1
6.5
6.5
6.3
6.4
6.6
6.5
6.7
6.4
6.6
6.8
6.5
6.3
B-18
-------
Table B-19. Physico-chemical parameters in surface waters - Plot 2.
DATE
06-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
07-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
24-Oct-84
07-NOV-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
STAT
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
TEMP
38
37
33
34
30
27
28
26.5
20
19
9
-
16
12
26
31
SALINITY Diss02 pH
20
18
25
14
12
26
26
26
20
29
18
8
11
10
21
32
3.1
2.2
1.6
2.0
3.9
3.5
4.0
3.9
10.2
6.3
10.2
_
7.1
9.5
6.2
3.1
6.1
6.6
6.6
6.6
6.8
6.2
6.2
5.5
6.1
6.4
6.9
6.4
7.1
7.0
6.1
6.4
B-19
-------
Table B-20. Physico-chemical parameters in surface waters - Plot 3.
DATE STAT
06-Jun-84
07-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
10-Oct-84
24-Oct-84
07-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
TEMP
39
34
40
28.5
26
26
23
26.5
20
22
8
_
17
9
26
35.5
SALINITY Diss02 pH
18
24
10
10
12
26
5
14
7
29
28
8
15
7
22
33
4.6
2.1
2.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.5
6.9
10.4
3.4
9.8
_
6.4
9.2
8.4
4.5
6.4
6.6
6.7
6.5
6.5
6.4
7.2
6.2
6.3
6.1
6.3
6.4
7.1
7.0
6.8
5.8
B-20
-------
Table B-21. Physico-chemical parameters in surface waters - Plot 4.
DATE STAT TEMP SALINITY Diss02 pH
DATE
06-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
07-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
10-Oct-84
24-Oct-84
07-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
STAT
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
TEMP
36
34
34
35
35
29
28
25
24
16
19
10
_
19
10
27
33
SALINITY Diss02 pH
20
20
25
10
12
10
24
5
23
5
28
20
8
11
8
22
32
1.4
2.9
3.7
9.8
12.4
0.8
7.0
3.3
1.8
12.5
7.5
11.4
_
9.2
11.1
6.1
4.4
5.9
6.2
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.7
6.1
7.4
6.5
6.1
5.9
7.2
6.4
6.5
7.1
6.5
6.2
B-21
-------
Table B-22. Physico-chemical parameters in surface waters - Plot 5.
DATE
06-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
07-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
24-Oct-84
07-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
STAT
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
TEMP
34
36
27
32
29
31
27
30
22
20
12
_
18
12
30
34
SALINITY
20
22
13
15
15
24
24
25
20
28
18
10
15
10
20
28
Diss02
2.5
2.0
0.3
2.5
1.7
6.9
2.6
11.7
17.0
9.6
19.0
-
11.7
10.2
0
3.8
PH
5.8
6.7
6.4
6.6
6.2
6.2
6.4
6.3
6.3
6.5
6.5
6.1
7.4
6.7
6.8
6.2
B-22
-------
Table B-23. Physico-chemical parameters in surface waters - Plot 6.
DATE
06-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
07-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
10-Oct-84
24-Oct-84
07-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
STAT
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
TEMP
37
36
25
35
29
31.5
27
30
28.5
17.5
20
12
_
19
13
29
34
SALINITY Diss02
20
20
10
10
15
18
25
24
24
10
25
20
10
11
12
20
36
4.5
5.2
0.8
1.5
7.6
5.9
4.5
12.0
5.2
7.5
3.4
9.5
_
7.2
10.5
0
2.9
pH
7.1
6.6
6.7
6.6
6.4
6.3
6.2
6.1
6.8
6.4
5.8
6.6
6.3
7.5
7.5
6.9
6.2
B-23
-------
Table B-24. Physico-chemical parameters in surface waters - Plot 7.
DATE
06-Jun-84
07-Jul-84
29-Aug-84
26-Sep-84
24-Oct-84
07-NOV-84
26-NOV-84
02-Jan-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
STAT
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
TEMP
31
26
31
28
30
20
22
_
30
35.5
SALINITY
22
12
14
23
25
12
30
16
18
30
Diss02
2.0
1.0
6.2
4.1
4.9
12.7
10.3
_
2.8
2.4
PH
6.7
6.3
6.4
6.2
5.8
6.6
6.3
6.2
6.5
6.2
B-24
-------
Table B-25. Physico-chemical parameters in surface waters - Plot 8.
DATE
06-Jun-84
07-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
24-Oct-84
07-NOV-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
STAT
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
TEMP
39
33
39
32
31
28
26
20
22
12
_
18
14
29
33.5
SALINITY
20
24
15
15
22
22
26
10
30
20
4
13
10
22
28
Diss02
1.6
3.3
11.8
9.8
15.0
7.5
6.5
9.8
9.9
12.5
_
7.4
8.2
8.5
5.9
pH
6.0
6.6
6.4
6.5
7.0
6.3
6.8
6.4
6.4
6.7
6.3
7.2
0.0
6.8
6.4
B-25
-------
Table B-26. Physico-chemical parameters in surface waters - Plot 9.
DATE
06-Jun-84
07-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
10-Oct-84
24-Oct-84
07-NOV-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
STAT
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
TEMP
40
32
34
30
36
30
27
29
19
21
10
_
21
20
29
34
SALINITY
20
25
10
15
9
16
2
14
8
15
18
6
15
12
22
27
Diss02
4.6
2.0
1.4
4.5
0.6
4.3
6.2
15.0
10.5
4.0
8.0
_
11.8
10.9
5.8
7.0
pH
6.3
6.5
6.7
6.4
6.7
6.3
7.4
6.7
6.5
5.8
6.6
6.5
8
6.8
6.5
6.2
B-26
-------
Table B-27. Physico-chemical parameters in surface waters - Plot 10.
DATE
06-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
07 -J ul -84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
24-Oct-84
07-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
STAT
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
TEMP
38
36
34
35
30
26
27
28
21
20
9
_
16
14
28
33
SALINITY
20
20
25
10
10
20
25
25
15
25
18
5
9
10
22
30
Diss02
3.5
1.6
2.4
8.4
2.0
0.6
5.8
9.3
8.7
3.8
9.9
-
7.0
12.2
8.4
3.8
PH
6.1
6.6
6.9
6.8
6.6
6.1
6.4
6.1
6.6
6.2
6.7
6.3
6.8
6.8
6.5
6.0
B-27
-------
Table B-28. Physico-chemical parameters in surface waters - Plot 11.
DATE
06-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
07-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
24-Oct-84
07-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
STAT
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
TEMP
37
36
30
33
28
30
28
26
16
20
10
_
16
9
29
33
SALINITY
18
20
24
12
15
11
26
28
10
26
18
8
14
12
20
30
Diss02
4.3
1.6
2.0
3.9
2.3
5.5
5.8
3.2
6.5
7.5
11.2
-
7.7
11.2
6.5
4.8
PH
6.1
6.5
6.3
6.8
6.4
6.3
6.2
6.5
6.5
7.2
6.7
6.4
7.5
7.5
6.6
6.2
B-28
-------
Table B-29. Physico-chemical parameters in surface waters - Plot 12.
DATE
06-Jun-84
05-Ju1-84
07-Ju1-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
24-Oct-84
07-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
13-Mar-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
STAT
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
TEMP
36
36
33
35
28
30
27
24
16
22
12
_
15
10
27
27
31
SALINITY
20
18
25
14
12
25
22
26
18
25
20
8
11
10
14
22
30
Diss02
2.8
2.0
1.2
5.5
5.2
5.8
5.0
2.9
4.4
7.8
12.4
_
7.1
11.7
6.7
9.0
4.2
PH
6.1
6.4
6.6
6.6
6.3
6.2
6.1
6.0
6.4
6.2
6.6
6.4
8.2
6.9
6.5
6.4
6.9
B-29
-------
Table B-30. Canal nutrients: Station 1 - Surface.
Date
06-Jun-84
20-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
18-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
10-Oct-84
24-Oct-84
07-NOV-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
13-Mar-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Mln.
Max.
Std. Dev.
NH4
0.080
0.800
0.800
0.080
0.100
0.200
0.100
0.050
0.050
0.500
0.050
0.100
0.400
0.050
0.500
0.100
0.400
0.200
0.100
0.245
0.050
0.800
0.242
N02-N03
0.100
0.080
0.035
0.035
0.020
0.010
0.260
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.010
0.020
0.040
0.040
0.080
0.160
2.600
0.189
0.010
2.600
0.572
TKN
2.00
1.20
0.80
0.40
0.10
1.00
1.00
2.40
0.10
0.50
0.20
0.40
0.40
0.20
0.50
1.80
0.20
0.80
1.40
0.81
0.10
2.40
0.66
TOC
6.90
12.40
9.70
11.00
3.30
2.40
5.00
8.20
3.50
14.00
5.00
10.40
8.10
11.10
13.20
8.80
7.10
4.60
4.50
7.85
2.40
14.00
3.46
TP
0.180
0.050
0.015
0.000
0.010
0.010
0.080
0.080
0.020
0.030
0.070
0.050
0.070
0.090
0.040
0.010
0.050
0.070
0.100
0.057
0.010
0.180
0.041
P04
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.010
0.010
0.080
0.030
0.010
0.030
0.700
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.050
0.030
0.040
0.110
0.040
0.078
0.010
0.700
0.169
19 19 19 19 18 15
B-30
-------
Table B-31. Canal nutrients: Station 2 - Surface.
Date
06-Jun-84
20-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
18-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
10-Oct-84
24-Oct-84
07-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
13-Mar-85
10-Apr-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Win.
Max.
Std. Dev.
NH4
0.800
0.800
0.800
0.300
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.100
0.050
0.400
0.200
0.500
0.100
0.200
0.100
0.900
0.100
0.290
0.050
0.900
0.292
N02-N03
0.180
0.040
0.060
0.035
0.020
0.020
0.080
0.050
0.020
0.260
1.200
0.020
0.010
0.040
0.260
0.040
0.080
0.120
0.100
0.040
0.134
0.010
1.200
0.255
TKN
0.80
1.20
0.80
1.60
0.80
1.30
2.30
0.40
0.10
0.20
0.20
2.00
0.40
0.40
0.50
1.40
0.40
0.80
1.00
1.20
0.89
0.10
2.30
0.59
TOC
7.60
15.90
6.80
10.40
2.30
2.10
5.60
9.70
4.50
5.00
3.00
17.80
4.80
13.30
9.30
7.90
9.10
5.90
4.90
10.40
7.81
2.10
17.80
4.17
TP
0.210
0.050
1.200
0.015
0.010
0.050
0.050
0.070
0.060
0.030
0.040
0.030
0.060
1.050
0.040
0.010
0.120
0.160
0.080
0.090
0.171
0.010
1.200
0.322
P04
0.000
0.000
o.coo
0.000
0.010
0.090
0.020
0.010
0.020
0.050
0.080
0.010
0.020
0.550
0.060
0.010
0.050
0.010
0.110
0.020
0.070
0.010
0.550
0.128
20 20 20 20 20 16
B-31
-------
Table B-32. Canal nutrients: Station 2B - Bottom.
Date
06-Jun-84
20-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
18-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
10-Oct-84
24-Oct-84
07-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
13-Mar-85
10-Apr-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Win.
Max.
Std. Dev.
NH4
0.080
0.800
0.800
0.080
0.100
0.400
0.100
0.050
0.200
0.500
0.050
0.100
0.300
0.100
0.200
0.100
0.100
0.400
0.100
0.100
0.233
0.050
0.800
0.227
N02-N03
0.220
0.040
0.060
0.035
0.020
0.020
0.120
0.020
0.080
0.020
1.320
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.120
0.020
0.080
0.020
0.060
0.080
0.120
0.020
1.320
0.280
TKN
0.80
2.00
0.80
0.40
0.40
1.60
1.30
0.80
0.20
0.50
0.20
7.20
0.20
0.10
0.50
1.60
0.20
1.20
0.60
1.60
1.11
0.10
7.20
1.50
TOC
8.80
12.00
7.00
7.80
3.00
2.30
4.30
7.40
10.70
9.00
2.00
8.50
8.90
11.20
6.70
3.00
6.70
5.80
5.60
6.30
6.85
2.00
12.00
2.83
TP
0.310
0.040
0.220
0.030
0.010
0.880
0.090
0.300
0.030
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.050
0.040
0.070
0.010
0.080
0.200
0.860
0.120
0.170
0.010
0.880
0.250
P04
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.060
0.920
0.170
0.350
0.030
0.030
0.100
0.010
0.010
0.030
0.070
0.030
0.030
0.040
0.830
0.040
0.172
0.010
0.920
0.278
20 20 20 20 20 16
B-32
-------
Table B-33. Canal nutrients: Station 3 - Surface.
Date
06-Jun-84
20-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
18-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
10-Oct-84
24-Oct-84
07-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
13-Mar-85
10-Apr-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
M1n.
Max.
Std. Dev.
NH4
0.080
0.800
0.800
0.080
0.100
0.100
0.200
0.050
0.050
0.500
0.050
0.050
0.100
0.300
0.500
0.200
0.500
0.100
0.800
0.100
0.273
0.050
0.800
0.267
N02-N03
0.100
0.040
0.080
0.035
0.020
0.020
0.100
0.020
0.040
0.020
1.720
0.020
0.010
0.020
0.120
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.100
0.060
0.129
0.010
1.720
0.367
TKN
0.80
2.80
0.80
2.40
0.20
1.10
1.00
0.40
0.20
0.50
0.20
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.50
2.40
0.20
1.00
1.30
1.00
0.90
0.20
2.80
0.76
TOC
9.30
15.90
9.90
5.20
2.90
3.90
4.60
3.10
8.20
12.00
4.00
13.50
9.80
10.00
8.70
5.40
8.80
4.70
4.50
8.80
7.66
2.90
15.90
3.55
TP
0.170
0.020
0.040
0.015
0.010
0.020
0.010
0.020
0.010
0.030
0.020
0.020
0.030
0.040
0.030
0.040
0.050
0.210
0.090
0.160
0.052
0.010
0.210
0.057
P04
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.010
0.020
0.010
0.020
0.030
0.030
0.140
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.040
0.010
0.050
0.010
0.110
0.040
0.038
0.010
0.140
0.035
20 20 20 20 20 16
B-33
-------
Table B-34. Canal nutrients: Station 38 - Bottom.
Date
06-Jun-84
20-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
18-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
10-Oct-84
24-Oct-84
07-Nov-84
26-NOV-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
13-Mar-85
10-Apr-85
OS-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Min.
Max.
Std. Dev.
N
NH4
0.080
0.800
0.800
0.080
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.200
0.050
0.500
0.050
0.050
0.100
0.200
0.500
0.100
0.200
0.100
0.200
0.200
0.225
0.050
0.800
0.228
20
N02-N03
0.240
0.080
0.040
0.035
0.020
0.020
0.120
0.020
0.040
0.020
0.900
0.020
0.010
0.020
0.100
0.120
0.140
0.040
0.280
0.020
0.114
0.010
0.900
0.195
20
TKN
0.80
1.20
0.80
2.20
0.60
1.60
0.40
1.20
0.10
0.50
2.20
2.20
0.40
0.50
0.50
1.60
0.80
2.00
0.70
1.20
1.07
0.10
2.20
0.66
20
TOC
6.80
16.50
7.80
4.10
6.10
3.30
2.10
5.10
8.70
10.60
3.00
11.30
9.80
8.30
7.90
11.90
12.10
4.80
3.90
11.10
7.76
2.10
16.50
3.69
20
TP
0.230
0.050
0.015
0.035
0.010
0.050
0.070
0.860
0.080
0.070
0.010
0.070
0.030
0.030
0.020
0.100
0.100
0.190
0.160
0.090
0.113
0.010
0.860
0.181
20
P04
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.010
0.080
0.010
0.030
0.020
0.080
0.070
0.010
0.030
0.010
0.060
0.050
0.040
0.070
0.010
0.040
0.039
0.010
0.080
0.026
16
B-34
-------
Table B-35. Canal physical-chemical data: Station 1 - Surface.
Date
06-Jun-84
20-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
18-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
10-Oct-84
24-Oct-84
ll-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
13-Mar-85
10-Apr-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Win.
Max.
Std. Dev.
Temperature
26.00
31.00
31.00
30.00
29.00
28.00
27.50
27.00
24.00
26.00
18.00
19.00
11.00
17.00
14.00
9.00
22.00
17.50
25.50
28.50
23.050
9.000
31.000
6.553
Salinity
18.00
17.00
24.00
25.00
20.00
20.00
21.00
22.00
24.00
24.00
23.00
26.00
21.00
14.00
20.00
15.00
11.00
22.00
20.00
25.00
20.600
11.000
26.000
3.878
Diss02
8.10
6.70
6.40
6.60
7.00
5.30
6.20
6.40
7.40
6.90
9.30
8.40
10.90
10.30
6.80
9.50
12.20
8.10
10.40
5.10
7.900
5.100
12.200
1.907
PH
7.900
8.600
6.900
6.900
6.500
6.300
7.200
6.800
6.700
6.000
6.600
6.500
6.600
6.300
6.500
6.800
6.800
6.400
6.500
6.800
20 20 20
B-35
-------
Table B-36. Canal physical-chemical data: Station 2 - Surface.
Date
06-Jun-84
20-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
18-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
10-Oct-84
24-Oct-84
ll-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
13-Mar-85
10-Apr-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Win.
Max.
Std. Dev.
Temperature
26.00
32.00
32.00
29.00
29.00
28.50
27.00
27.00
24.00
25.50
17.00
20.00
11.00
17.00
13.00
7.00
22.00
16.50
25.50
28.00
22.850
7.000
32.000
6.955
Salinity
17.00
16.00
24.00
24.00
20.00
18.00
21.00
21.00
24.00
24.00
24.00
26.00
20.00
15.00
20.00
15.00
11.00
22.00
20.00
24.00
20.300
11.000
26.000
3.848
Diss02
8.30
6.20
6.30
6.30
7.00
5.30
6.90
6.70
7.00
7.00
9.60
7.60
10.20
11.50
7.20
9.10
12.80
9.00
10.40
5.60
8.000
5.300
12.800
1.994
PH
8.000
8.300
7.200
7.000
6.600
6.200
7.300
6.700
6.600
6.300
6.600
6.300
6.500
6.500
6.500
6.800
6.500
6.400
6.200
6.400
20 20 20
B-36
-------
Table B-37. Canal physical-chemical data: Station 2 - Bottom.
Date
06-Jun-84
20-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
18-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
24-Oct-84
ll-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
13-Mar-85
10-Apr-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Min.
Max.
Std. Dev.
Temperature
26.00
32.00
32.00
29.00
29.00
28.50
27.50
27.00
26.00
18.00
19.50
11.00
16.00
13.00
7.00
22.00
16.50
25.00
28.50
22.816
7.000
32.000
7.188
Salinity
18.00
16.00
25.00
24.00
22.00
20.00
20.00
22.00
24.00
23.00
26.00
20.00
14.00
20.00
15.00
15.00
22.00
20.00
24.00
20.526
14.000
26.000
3.485
Diss02
6.70
4.60
6.00
6.60
5.80
4.40
6.50
6.00
6.70
9.60
7.80
10.60
10.60
6.90
9.80
12.50
9.00
9.30
5.10
7.605
4.400
12.500
2.223
PH
8.100
8.700
6.800
6.700
6.500
6.500
7.400
6.700
6.500
6.700
6.500
6.600
6.600
6.400
6.700
6.400
6.500
6.400
6.500
19 19 19
B-37
-------
Table B-38. Canal physical-chemical data: Station 3 - Surface.
Date
06-Jun-84
20-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
18-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
10-Oct-84
24-Oct-84
ll-Nov-84
26-Nov-84
06-Dec-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
13-Mar-85
10-Apr-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Min.
Max.
Std. Dev.
Temperature
26.50
35.00
32.00
29.00
29.00
28.00
27.00
26.50
24.00
25.50
17.00
21.00
12.50
15.00
13.50
9.00
22.00
17.00
25.00
29.00
23.175
9.000
35.000
6.880
Salinity
18.00
15.00
24.00
25.00
21.00
18.00
20.00
21.00
26.00
24.00
24.00
25.00
18.00
14.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
22.00
20.00
24.00
20.200
10.000
26.000
4.202
Diss02
8.40
6.10
6.80
6.40
6.90
6.80
7.30
7.20
6.80
7.60
9.20
8.90
8.90
10.70
8.80
8.20
12.30
9.20
9.30
5.30
8.055
5.300
12.300
1.628
pH
8.100
8.000
7.100
6.800
6.500
6.100
7.300
6.400
6.500
6.000
6.600
6.300
6.300
6.900
6.800
6.800
6.500
6.500
6.400
6.400
20 20 20
B-38
-------
Table B-39. Canal physical-chemical data: Station 3 - Bottom.
Date
06-Jun-84
20-Jun-84
05-Jul-84
18-Jul-84
15-Aug-84
29-Aug-84
12-Sep-84
26-Sep-84
10-Oct-84
24-Oct-84
ll-Nov-84
26-l\lov-84
02-Jan-85
31-Jan-85
13-Feb-85
13-Mar-85
10-Apr-85
08-May-85
05-Jun-85
Means
Min.
Max.
Std. Dev.
Temperature
26.50
35.00
31.00
29.00
29.00
28.50
27.00
26.50
25.00
25.50
17.00
20.00
15.00
13.50
9.00
21.00
17.00
25.00
29.00
23.658
9.000
35.000
6.602
Salinity
20.00
15.00
24.00
24.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
22.00
26.00
24.00
24.00
28.00
14.00
21.00
16.00
12.00
22.00
20.00
24.00
20.842
12.000
28.000
4.082
Diss02
7.70
6.10
6.70
6.50
6.30
5.30
7.40
8.80
6.90
8.00
8.90
8.40
10.50
7.50
6.60
12.60
9.20
10.00
6.10
7.868
5.300
12.600
1.767
pH
8.100
8.000
6.900
6.700
6.300
6.400
7.300
6.600
6.600
6.500
6.600
6.200
6.800
6.800
6.800
6.400
6.500
6.600
6.400
19 19 19
B-39
-------
Table B-40. Statistics for well data; all plots combined, depth in cm.
ALL PLOTS Mean
1.22
0.11
5.94
70.61
1.75
1.73
Mean
1.81
0.16
5.2-9
54.17
1.22
1.03
Mean
1.07
0.12
3.46
53.88
0.88
0.84
Min
0.02
0.01
0.20
1.61
0.03
0.15
Min
0.05
0.01
0.10
18.00
0.01
0.02
Min
0.00
0.01
0.20
13.30
0.01
0.03
Max
8.20
3.14
100.00
262.00
13.50
9.20
Max
11.10
1.96
43.00
214.00
13.50
6.40
Max
4.30
1.24
12.40
272.00
11.50
7.20
Std_Dev
1.47
0.31
9.97
51.54
1.95
1.67
Std_Dev
1.73
0.27
4.47
29.20
1.59
0.99
Std_Dev
1.06
0.17
2.22
35.62
1.43
1.23
Count
111
110
110
110
110
87
Count
175
171
168
170
165
136
Count
82
81
71
75
71
65
Parameters
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Parameters
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Parameters
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Depth
10
10
10
10
10
10
Depth
20
20
20
20
20
20
Depth
30
30
30
30
30
30
B-40
-------
Table B-41. Statistics for well data.
depth in cm.
Control plots (Plots 1, 5 and 10) by
CONTROL Mean
0.59
0.06
5.61
82.97
2.28
2.39
Mean
1.14
0.16
3.83
58.75
1.35
1.18
Mean
0.49
0.11
2.76
53.79
0.61
1.07
Min
0.10
0.01
0.40
22.00
0.20
0.35
Min
0.05
0.01
0.20
20.90
0.01
0.18
Min
0.00
0.01
0.60
19.40
0.01
0.12
Max
1.60
0.16
16.00
169.00
10.60
8.50
Max
5.70
1.68
8.70
214.00
10.60
5.75
Max
1.30
0.38
6.80
272.00
2.04
7.20
Std_Dev
0.34
0.05
3.67
40.68
2.35
2.19
Std_Dev
0.99
0.26
1.78
36.20
1.41
1.12
Std_Dev
0.40
0.10
1.64
59.87
0.59
1.89
Count
25
25
24
25
25
20
Count
46
46
45
45
46
37
Count
17
17
14
15
15
12
Parameters
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Parameters
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Parameters
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Depth
10
10
10
10
10
10
Depth
20
20
20
20
20
20
Depth
30
30
30
30
30
30
B-41
-------
Table B-42. Statistics for well data.
and 9), by depth in cm.
Quarter plots combined (Plots 2, 7
QUARTER Mean
2 1.05
7 0.12
9 8.44
53.36
1.87
1.69
Mean
2.03
0.20
5.96
52.45
1.27
1.18
Mean
1.49
0.11
3.23
45.26
1.05
0.82
Min
0.05
0.01
0.20
15.40
0.27
0.23
Min
0.40
0.01
0.20
22.. 50
0.01
0.12
Min.
0.05
0.01
0.20
21.70
0.03
0.03
Max
3.80
0.74
100.00
150.00
13.50
9.20
Max
3.80
1.96
43.00
98.90
13.50
2.90
Max
4.20
0.54
6.40
96.60
11.50
6.80
Std_Dev
0.91
0.16
19.31
36.58
2.57
1.93
Std_Dev
0.89
0.33
6.02
21.04
0.90
0.67
Std Dev
1.4T
0.13
1.78
20.75
2.38
1.47
Count
26
25
26
25
25
20
Count
48
47
47
47
42
38
Count
24
23
20
22
21
19
Parameters
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Parameters
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Parameters
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Depth
10
10
10
10
10
10
Depth
20
20
20
20
20
20
Depth
30
30
30
30
30
30
B-42
-------
Table B-43. Statistics for well data.
and 8), by depth in cm.
Half plots combined, (Plots 3, 4
HALF Mean
1.03
0.17
4.18
53.56
1.81
1.75
Mean
1.34
0.14
4.07
36.63
1.07
0.79
Mean
0.88
0.15
3.40
48.65
0.63
0.64
Min
0.10
0.01
1.40
25.20
0.09
0.15
Min
0.05
0.01
0.10
18.00
0.01
0.02
Min
0.10
0.01
0.40
13.30
0.04
0.11
Max
7.30
3.14
20.50
262.00
6.40
6.40
Max
7.70
0.78
20.50
77.50
6.40
6.40
Max
3.00
1.24
12.40
116.00
1.90
1.67
Std_Dev
1.33
0.55
3.48
43.11
1.63
1.46
Std Dev
1.59
0.17
3.57
13.80
2.31
1.22
Std Dev
0.83
0.26
2.72
23.14
0.47
0.44
Count
30
30
30
30
30
23
Count
43
42
42
42
42
35
Count
23
23
23
23
23
21
Parameter
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Depth
10
10
10
10
10
10
Parameter Depth
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
Parameter
NH3
N03
TKN
TOC
TP
P04
20
20
20
20
20
20
Depth
30
30
30
30
30
30
B-43
-------
Table B-44. Statistics for well data.
depth in cm.
Full plots (Plots 6, 11 and 12), by
FULL Mean
2.07
0.10
5.79
91.74
1.12
1.19
Mean
2.89
0.15
7.80
71.13
1.16
0.92
Mean
1.32
0.10
4.57
74.63
1.40
0.99
Min
0.02
0.01
0.20
1.61
0.03
0.42
Min
0.20
0.01
0.20
18.00
0.01
0.07
Min
0.40
0.02
1.20
33.00
0.23
0.17
Max
8.20
0.60
12.00
250.00
3.85
3.20
Max
11.10
1.22
16.80
133.00
3.85
3.40
Max
4.30
0.20
8.80
130.00
3.12
2.65
Std_Dev
2.07
0.12
3.07
65.37
0.70
0.59
Std Dev
2.6U
0.28
4.14
30.19
1.38
0.72
Std Dev
0.89
0.06
1.97
26.96
0.88
0.79
Count
30
30
30
30
30
24
Count
38
36
34
36
35
26
Count
18
18
14
15
12
13
Parameter Depth
NH3 10
N03 10
TKN 10
TOC 10
TP 10
P04 10
Parameter Depth
NH3 20
N03 20
TKN 20
TOC 20
TP 20
P04 20
Parameter Depth
NH3 30
N03 30
TKN 30
TOC 30
TP 30
P04 30
B-44
-------
APPENDIX C
Hydro!ogic - Salinity Models
C-l
-------
Listing 1. FORTRAN listing of the Coupled Hydro!ogic-Salinity
models.
C
C SIMDAT Mode!
C
C Created by Eldon C. Blancher II
C Taxonomic Associates Inc.
C
C A FORTRAN model useful in simulating the behaviour of
C chemical species in Aquatic Systems.
C
C Version 1.0 20 December 1985
C
C The model here utilizes a Fourth Order Runge-Kutta
C solution to the system of differential equations.
C
C Developed in Microsoft FORTRAN Ver 3.31
C
Q*****************************
C
C Hydrodynamic - Salinity Model
C
Q*****************************
COMMON /BLK1/ B(3,3), W(4), DQ(4), DS(4), DG(4), A(3)
DIMENSION KS(25)
REAL*8 B,W,DS,A,DG,DQ
REAL*8 XN,TF,DT,S,SS,Q,QS,KS,G,GS
C
C Initialize I/O Units
C
OPEN (5,FILE='SIMDAT.OuT',STATUS='NEW')
OPEN (6,FILE='KSHYD.DAT',STATUS='OLD')
C
C Prompt Time Limits from User
C
1 WRITE (V(A^)1)1 Enter End Time : '
Read (*,3) TF
3 Format (D10.0)
N = 5
DT = 0.0200DO
C
C Print out Time Step
C
Write (*,4) DT
4 Format (5X,1 Delta T = ',F12.6)
C
C Initial Conditions
C
T = 0.0
S = 18.0
Q = 6.0
C-2
-------
G = 1.0
XN = N
FLOW1 = 1
WASTE = 1
C
C Be sure to place all specific K's for
C equation here or Include Them in a BLOCK DATA
C Subprogram
C
C Dimensioned for 25 Coefficients. Change Dimension or
C Common accordingly
C
DO 12 N=l,10
READ (6,'(D10.7)') KS(N)
12 CONTINUE
5 SAL = S/Q
Write (*,6) T, Q, G, SAL
WRITE (5,6) T, Q, G, SAL
6 Format (1X,F5.1,3X,4F12.7)
IF(T.GE.TF) GO TO 1
DO 7 1=1, N %
C
C Enter Differential Equations For System Here
C
DQ(1) = DT*(KS(1)*FLOW1+KS(2)*WASTE-KS(3)*Q+KS(6)*(G-Q))
DG(1) = DT*(KS(4)*FLOW1+KS(5)*WASTE-KS(7)*G+KS(6)*(Q-G))
DS(1) = DT*(KS(8)*FLOW1+KS(9)*WASTE-KS(10)*Q)
DO 8 J=l,3
C
C Initialize Segment here for each equation
C
QS = Q
GS = G
SS = S
DO 9 K=1,J
C
C Apply Runge-Kutta Equations Here
C
QS = QS+B(J,K)*Q
GS = GS+B(J,K)*G
9 SS = SS+B(J,K)*S
C
C Calculate Next Derivative
C
DQ(J+1) = DT*(KS(1)*FLOW1+KS(2)*WASTE-KS(3)*QS+KS(6)*(GS-QS))
DG(J+1) = DT*(KS(4)*FLOW1+KS(5)*WASTE-KS(7)*GS+KS(6)*(QS-GS))
8 DS(J+1) = DT*(KS(8)*FLOW1+KS(9)*WASTE-KS(10)*QS)
DO 10 J = 1,4
C
C Calculate Endpoint derivative
C
C-3
-------
Q = Q+W(J)*DQ(J)
G = G+W(J)*DG(J)
10 S = S+W(J)*DS(J)
7 Continue
T = T+XN*DT
GO TO 5
STOP
END
C
C BLOCK DATA SUBPROGRAM
C
C RUNGE-KUTTA Coefficients
C
C
C Coefficients used are those of Ralston
C as per Lafarra, 1973 Computer methods for Science and Engineering
C
C
BLOCK DATA
COMMON /BLK1/ B(3,3), W(4), DS(4), DG(4), DQ(4), A(3)
REAL*8 B,W,DS,A,DG,DQ
DATA B/0.4000000000,0.2969776100,0.2181004000,0.00000,
$0.1587596400,-3.0509651600,0.000000,0.000000,3.83286476DO/
DATA W/0.1747602800,-0.55148066DO,1.2055356000,0.17118478DO/
DATA A/0.4000000DO,0.45573725DO,1.00000000DO/
END
Coefficients for Simulation
KS(1) = 0.01
KS(2) = 0.51
KS(3) = 0.55
KS(4) = 1.00
KS(5) = 0.001
KS(6) = 1.01
KS(7) = 0.1
KS(8) = 0.1
KS(9) = 0.01
KS(10)= 0.001
C-4
-------
Listing 2. Nitrogen Species Model
C
C SIMDAT Model
C
C Created by El don C. Blancher II
C Taxonomic Associates Inc.
C
C A FORTRAN model useful in simulating the behaviour of
C chemical species in Aquatic Systems.
C
C Version 1.0 20 December 1985
C
C The model here utilizes a Fourth Order Runge-Kutta
C solution to the system of differential equations.
C
C Developed in Microsoft FORTRAN Ver 3.31
C
Q*****************************
C
C Nitrogen Species Model
C TON - NH4 - N03
C
Q*****************************
COMMON /BLK1/ B(3,3), W(4), DTON(4), DNH4(4), DN03(4), A(3)
DIMENSION KS(25)
REAL*8 B,W,A,DTON,DNH4,DN03
REAL*8 XN,TF,DT,TON,TONS,KS,XNH4,XNH4S,XN03,XN03S
C
C Initialize I/O Units
C
OPEN (5,FILE='SIMDAT.OUT1,STATUS='NEW1)
OPEN (6,FILE='KS.DAT',STATUS='OLD')
C
C Prompt Time Limits from User
C
1 WRITE (V(A%)')' Enter End Time : '
Read (*,3) TF
3 Format (D10.0)
N = 5
DT = 0.0200DO
C
C Print out Time Step
C
Write (*,4) DT
4 Format (5X,1 Delta T = '.F12.6)
C
C Initial Conditions
C
C-5
-------
T = 0.0
TON = 2.0
XNH4 =2.0
XN03 =0.05
XN = N
FLOW1 = 1
WASTE = 1
C
C Be sure to place all specific K's for
C equation here or Include Them in a BLOCK DATA
C Subprogram or Read them in from a file.
C
C Dimensioned for 25 Coefficients. Change Dimension or
C Common accordingly
C
DO 2 L=l,12
READ (6,'(D10.5)') KS(L)
2 CONTINUE
5 Write (*,6) T, TON, XNH4, XN03
WRITE (5,6) T, TON, XNH4, XN03
6 Format (1X,F5.1,3X,3F12'.7)
IF(T.GE.TF) GO TO 1
DO 7 1=1, N
C
C Enter Differential Equations For System Here
C Calculate First Derivative
C
DTON(l) = DT*(KS(1)*FLOW1+KS(2)*WASTE+KS{3)*TON-KS(8)*TON)
DNH4(1) = DT*(KS(4)*FLOW1+KS(5)*WASTE+KS(8)*TON-KS(9)*XNH4-
$KS(10)*XNH4)
DN03U) = DT*(KS(6)*FLOW1+KS(7)*WASTE+KS(9)*XNH4-KS(11)*
$XN03)
DO 8 J=l,3
C
C Initialize Segment here for each equation
C
TONS = TON
XNH4S = XNH4
XN03S = XN03
DO 9 K=1,J
C
C Apply Runge-Kutta Equations Here
C
TONS = TONS+B(J,K)*TON
XNH4S = XNH4S+B(J,K)*XNH4
9 XN03S = XN03S+B(J,K)*XN03
C
C Calculate Next Derivative
C
C-6
-------
DTON(J+1) = DT*(KS(1)*FLOW1+KS(2)*WASTE+KS(3)*TONS-KS(8)*TONS)
DNH4(J+1) = DT*(KS(4)*FLOW1+KS(5)*WASTE+KS(8)*TONS-KS{9)*XNH4S-
$KS(10)*XN03S)
8 DN03(J+1) = DT*(KS(6)*FLOW1+KS(7)*WASTE+KS(9)*XNH4S-KS(11)*
$XN03S)
DO 10 J = 1,4
C
C Calculate Endpoint
C
TON = TON+W(J)*DTON(J)
XNH4 = XNH4+W(J)*DNH4(J)
10 XN03 = XN03+W(J)*DN03(J)
7 Continue
T = T+XN*DT
GO TO 5
STOP
END
C
C BLOCK DATA SUBPROGRAM
C
C RUNGE-KUTTA Coefficients
C
C
C Coefficients used are those of Ralston
C as per Lafarra, 1973 Computer methods for Science and Engineering
C
C
BLOCK DATA
COMMON /BLK1/ B(3,3), W(4), DTON(4), DNH4(4), DN03(4), A(3)
REAL*8 B,W,A,DTON,DNH4,DN03
DATA B/0.4000000000,0.2969776100,0.2181004000,0.00000,
$0.1587596400,-3.0509651600,0.000000,0.000000,3.83286476007
DATA W/0.17476028DO,-0.5514806600,1.2055356000,0.17118478DO/
DATA A/0.400000000,0.45573725DO,1.OOOOOOOODO/
END
C-7
-------
Simulation Coefficients for Nitrogen species model.
KS(1) = 0.01
KS(2) = 0.57
KS(3) = 0.01
KS(4) = 0.01
KS(5) = 0.44
KS(6) = 0.00001
KS(7) = 0.00002
KS(8) = 0.20
KS(9) = 0.10
KS(10)= 0.50
KS(11)= 0.95
KS(12)= 0.001
C-8
-------
APPENDIX D
Pilot Facility Design
D-l
-------
D.I. Pilot Facility.
M_a_stew_ater 1j3_ading_s_ -_ Quantity and_ Quality
In order to properly design a treatment system for wastewaters from
seafood processors, some knowledge of the quantity and quality of the
wastes is necessary. Since accurate flow data from the processors were
unavailable, some assumptions about the flows had to be made. Effluent
flow data from the existing Bayou La Batre treatment plant were obtained
for the period October 1978 to September 1979. Monthly means were
calculated and peak flows above an assumed background of 0.6-0.7 MGD were
isolated (residential background obtained using Sunday flows). These
results are presented in Figure 1 (Main Report).
Wastewater flows to the treatment facility for the period October 1978
through August 1979 show that the plant's design capacity was exceeded for
four of the eleven months on a volumetric basis alone. Peak flows occur
during the months of May through September, when the bulk of processing
occurs. Recently, during the summer of 1981, when shrimp processing plants
were operating at peak capacity, daily flows at the 1-MGD a treatment plant
exceeded 3-MGD. Most of the excessive loading is attributed to the seafood
processors.
Effluent quality of several Bayou La Batre seafood processing plants
was assesed by Polyengineering Inc. (1979) and are presented in Table 4
(Main Report). These data indicate that BOD loading was also in excess of
treatment plant design averaging 616 mg/1 during a 5 day sampling period
in August 1984. The Environmental Protection Agency found that the
treatment plants effluent BOD and suspended solids were averaging 69 mg-1
and 223 mg-1 respectively. These values were well in excess of the
Environmental Protection Agency's NPDES permit limitations.
Experimental Plot Layout
Approximately six acres of land were utilized for the pilot plant.
Twelve - 90X90 foot plots enclosing 8100 square feet (753 sq. m.) were
established on the Juncus saltmarsh adjacent to Portersville Bay on Point
aux Pins. A schematic of the experimental layout including control areas
was shown previously in Figure 3 (Main Report). The array was designed to
minimize any apparent differences in vegetation or substrate character
between the test^sites. The design included 3-replicate plots each for the
control areas, and the experimental plots respectively. The experimental
plots included three levels of waste loading (3-replicates each) to
determine optimal loading rates. All plots were located along a elevation
isocline and type of treatment was selected by using a random number table.
This type of randomized block design maximized the probability of
obtaining statistically significant results from the experiment and allowed
for variation due to undetected environmental gradients.
D-2
-------
Wastewater Sources. Treatment and Transportation
Screened seafood wastewaters were obtained from a single seafood
processor (Deep Sea Food, Bayou La Batre) and transported on every weekday
by a 9000 gallon tank truck to the site. The transportation contractor was
obtained by competeitive bid and furnished sufficient backup facilities in
the event of breakdown. Wastes were screened at the processor's site by
fine mesh stainless steel screen (SWECO) prior to transportation to the
site. Wastes were further screened between the truck and discharge pump
on-site.
D.2. Engineering details of the Pilot Facility.
Distribution System
The distribution system consisted of two centrifugal pumps (type "c")
and associated Poly-Vinyl Chloride (PVC) pipes and associated valves (see
Table 4-1). One pump serviced the wastewater stream for the full loading
plots and the other delivered wastewater to the half and full loading
plots. The experimental plots were supplied with their respective loadings
by regulating the flow from each pump utilizing gate valves and pressure
gauges. Wastewaters were delivered to the site utilizing agricultural type
sprinklers. Detailed piping schematic of the distribution system is
presented in Figure D-l.
All piping was laid on the surface of the marsh and secured with
reinforcing rod stakes to prevent movement of the pipes but limiting the
amount of impact to the marsh due to the facility.
Treatment Plots
Each of the 12 experimental plots were treated as separate hydrologic
units (Figure 3, Main Report). Wastewaters were delivered to the center of
each plot using agricultural type sprinklers that delivered the wastes in a
circle of 50' diameter. This insured adequate distribution of the
materials while limiting the amount of cross contamination of the plots due
to wind. The integrity of the system in terms of cross circulation and
loading rates was verified by a dye study.
Three sampling wells, located within the radius of the irrigation
sprayer, were installed to sample the quality of subsurface waters on each
plot. The depths sampled included 10, 20 and 30 centimeters (3.9 in., 7.9
in. and 11.8 in. respectively). Measurement of water table elevations and
recharge times also aided in the hydraulic modelling and the evaluation of
the treatment process. Sample wells were constructed of inch-and-a-half
PVC pipe fitted with a plankton mesh filter. Each well was installed with
clay grouting to prevent vertical migration along the sides of the wells.
D-3
-------
Table D-l. Materials list.
Item
Description
Sprinkler
Pipe
Gate valves
Pressure Gauges
Pressure regulator
Water Flow meter
200 mesh filters
Pumps
Rainbird model 30EWA
Nozzle = 11/64"
Operating pressure = 50 psi
Maximum diameter (no wind) = 100 ft
Flow rate = 6.05 GPM
1-1/4 PVC (160 psi rated)
1-1/2 PVC mainlines
1-1/2 in.
0-100 psi
20 gpm capacity
1 in. nominal size. flow= 20 gpm
AMIAD model 39-11
Model Cl-1/4 TPLS, Berkeley
Full diameter 2 HP = 5 15/16 in.
Pump operating conditions
Case 1. 18.2 gpm @ 144 ft.
Case 2. 9.1 gpm & 144 ft.
D-4
-------
Pressure Gauge
0-LOO psi
t 55 psi discharge
'Pressure Regulator
o-p—Df
20 gpm
Flow Meter
0-100 psi
Pressure Gauge
0-100 psi
Pressure Gauge
Gate Valve
-IS
—l/i in. PVC
"Valva
'overflow
(See above for details) —
Figure D-l. Detailed schematic of piping layout.
D-5
-------
Vlastewater Loading and Discharge Frequency.
Approximately 8,950 gallons (33.9 cubic meters) of screened seafood
wastewaters were required for pilot plant operation on a daily basis, five
days each week. On the morning of each work day, Deep Sea Foods, Inc.
collected the required wastewater in a 10,000 gallon tank truck for
transport to the pilot facility. At the site, the wastewaters were sprayed
onto the marsh directly from the tank truck.
Table D-2 presents the amount of materials loading for each of the
experimental plots. All loading values were calculated assuming waste
characteristics are as those described in the report by Polyengineering
(1978).
Operations and Maintenence
Operation of the pilot facility commenced in August 1984 and continued
through December, 1984. Daily operations consisted of pump and valve
checkout, cleaning any necessary filters and the discharge of the waste
materials. An onsite inspector was available during all operational steps
of the waste discharge.
Routine maintenance of the pumps, valves, sprinklers and plots was
performed along with periodic inspections of the pilot facility test plots.
Any problems were noted and promptly remedied.
Table D-2. Materials Loading for the Pilot Facility.
Plot
Full load
Half load
No load*
Concentrations
(mg/1 )
BOD TSS
617 163
308 81
3 2
Loadings
(g/d)
BOD TSS
23.2 6.17
11.6 3.05
0.1 0.07
* Assumed present in dilution waters.
------- |