vvEPA
             United States
             Environmental Protection
             Agency
             Great Lakes National
             Program Office
             536 South Clark Street
             Chicago, Illinois 60605
                                      EPA-905/4-79-029-J
             Volume 10
The  IJC  Menomonee
River Watershed Study
             Effects of Tributary Inputs
             On Lake Michigan
             During High Flows
  Menomonee River

-------
                                   FOREWORD
The Environmental Protection Agency was established to coordinate adminis-
tration of the major Federal programs designed to protect the quality of our
environment.

An important part of the Agency's effort involves the search for information
about environmental problems, management techniques, and new technologies
through which optimum use of the nation's land and water resources can be
assured and the threat pollution poses to the welfare of the American people
can be minimized.

The Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) of the U.S.  EPA, was
established in Region V, Chicago to provide a specific focus on the water
quality concerns of the Great Lakes.  GLNPO also provides funding and
personnel support to the International Joint Commission activities under
the U.S.- Canada Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.

Several land use water quality studies have been funded to support the
pollution from Land Use Activities Reference Group (PLUARG)  under the
Agreement to address specific objectives related to land use pollution to
the Great Lakes.  This report describes some of the work supported by this
Office to carry out PLUARG study objectives.

We hope that the information and data contained herein will  help planners
and managers of pollution control agencies make better decisions for
carrying forward their pollution control responsibilities.

                              Madonna F. McGrath
                              Director
                              Great Lakes National Program Office

-------
                                                       EPA-905/4-79-029-J
                                                       December 1979
                    Effects of Tributary Inputs on
                    Lake Michigan During High Flow
                              Volume 10
                             R. Bannerman
                             J.G. Konrad
                                 and
                              D. Becker
              Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
                                 for
                 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                          Chicago, Illinois
                         Grant' Number R005142
                            Grants Officer
                         Ralph G. Christensen
                 Great Lakes National Program Office


This study, funded by a Great Lakes Program grant from the U.S.EPA, was
conducted as part of the Task C-Pilot Watershed Program for the International
Joint Commission's Reference Group on Pollution from Land Use Activities.
                 GREAT LAKES NATIONAL PROGRAM OFFICE
              ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, REGION V
                   536 SOUTH CLARK STREET, ROOM 932
                       CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60605
                                      U.S.
                                      Region 5, Ubr.vy (PL-i2Jj
                                      77 West Jackson GpulsvarcL 12ft f tear
                                      Chicago, IL  60604*3590

-------
                                DISCLAIMER
        This report has been reviewed by the Great Lakes National
Program Office of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  Region V,
Chicago, and approved for publication.  Mention of trade names or
commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation
for use.
                                    ii

-------
                                  PREFACE
        The effects of 1. the combined loadings of the Menomonee, Milwaukee
and Kinnickinic Rivers during high flows and 2. wind-induced suspension of
sediment on the water quality of the Milwaukee Harbor and its vicinity are
investigated.  Estimates indicate that a significant portion of the annual
loadings of pollutants—suspended solids, total- and soluble-P—from the
rivers and a sanitary treatment plant are retained in the habor due to
deposition.  About 70% of the suspended solids discharged from the Menomonee
River is retained annually in the  inner harbor.  The dispersion pattern of
pollutants entering the inshore zone is manifested as small islands of
turbid water and continuous plume is observed during heavy storm events.
The transport and amount of pollutants reaching the inshore zone is modified
by harbor current patterns and structures and wind direction.  Resuspension
and/or shoreline erosion contributes a significant increase in the suspended
solids annual loading to the inshore zone.
                                   iii

-------
                                  CONTENTS
Title Page	     i
Disclaimer   	    ±±
Preface	   iii
Contents	    iv
Figures  	     v
Tables	    vi

   1.  Introduction  	     1
   2.  Summary and Conclusions 	     4
   3.  Recommendations 	     7
   4.  Field Activities  	     8
          Water Quality Surveys  	     8
          Sediment Surveys 	     8
          Current Measurements 	    14
   5.  Results and Discussion	    15
          Annual River and Sewage Treatment Plant Loadings 	    15
          Water Quality Survey	    16
          Current and Dispersion Patterns  	    36
          Annual Lake Loading Estimate 	    37
             Bottom sediments  	    42
             Resuspension	    45

References   	    46
                                      iv

-------
                                     FIGURES
Number                                                                     Page

  1     Milwaukee Harbor 	      2

  2A    Sampling locations on 2/13/1976  	     10
   B    Sampling locations on 2/25/1976  	     10
   C    Sampling locations on 7/28/1976  	     10
   D    Sampling locations on 8/28/1976  	     10

  3A    Sampling locations on 9/9/1976   	     11
   B    Sampling locations on 6/28 and 6/30/1977 	     11
   C    Sampling locations on 7/18/1977  	     11

  4A    Sampling locations for baseflow and resuspension survey on
          4/8/1976	     12
   B    Sampling locations on 5/11/1977  	     12
   C    Sampling locations on 5/19/1977  	     12

  5     Locations of bottom sediment sampling sites on 4/8/76 in the
          Harbor and on 4/19/76 in Lake Michigan proper	     13

  6     Visible plumes following 7/18/1977 event 	     38
                                       v

-------
                                    TABLES


Number                                                                     Page

  1     Sampling trips 	      9

  2     Annual water (m3 x 107) and pollutant (kg x 101*) loadings to
          the Milwaukee Harbor 	     17

  3     Water quality data in mg/L for two plume transects on 2/13/1976.     18

  4     Water quality data in mg/L for two plume transects on 2/25/1976.     19

  5     Metal concentrations in yg/L for two plume transects on
          2/25/1976	     20

  6     Water quality data in mg/L for three plume transects on
          7/28/1976	     21

  7     Metal concentrations in yg/L for three plume transects on
          7/28/1976	     22

  8     Water quality data in mg/L for three plume transects on
          8/28/1976	     23

  9     Metal concentrations in Ug/L for three plume transects on
          8/28/1976	     24

 10     Water quality data in mg/L for two plume transects on 9/9/1976 .     25

 11     Water quality data,  current velocities and directions at
          harbor stations during three events  	     26

 12     Water quality in mg/L in plume beyond breakwater during
          7/18/1977	     27

 13     Water quality data in mg/L for three plume transects on
          4/8/1976	     28

 14     Metal concentrations in yg/L for three plume transects on
          4/8/1976	     29

 15     Baseflow measurements of water quality at harbor stations  ...     30

 16     Averages and ranges of baseflow water quality data in mg/L at
          three harbor sites	     31
                                       vi

-------
17     Water temperatures and current velocities and directions at
         harbor stations on 5/19/1977 	    32

18     Water temperatures and current velocities and directions at
         harbor stations  	    33

19     Water temperatures and current velocities and directions at
         harbor stations on 7/28/1977 	    34

20     Mean annual surface concentrations of pollutants in mg/L in the
         harbor region  .	    40

21     Sediment analyses (% of oven-dried weight) for Menomonee River,
         Milwaukee Harbor and Lake Michigan 	    43

22     Metal concentrations in mg/kg in sediments of Menomonee River,
         Milwaukee Harbor and Lake Michigan	    44
                                      VII

-------
                               1.  INTRODUCTION
     The water quality of Lake Michigan in the vicinity of the Milwaukee
Harbor is impaired relative to the water further offshore (1,2).  One source
of pollutants to the Milwaukee Harbor and its vicinity is the combined dis-
charge from the Milwaukee, Menomonee and Kinnickinnic Rivers.  The overall
objective of this study was to determine the effects of the inputs from these
three urban river basins on Lake Michigan water quality during high river
flows.  Since the three rivers discharge to the Milwaukee Harbor, the effect
of the Menomonee River inputs on Lake Michigan water quality were not iso-
lated from the other two rivers.

     The study was part of Task D of the Pollution from Land Use Activities
Reference Group (PLUARG) objective to diagnose the degree of impairment of
Great Lakes water quality.  Since the three urban rivers are tributary to the
Milwaukee Harbor, the study also provided an opportunity to observe the ef-
fects of a large enclosed harbor on the transport of pollutants to Lake
Michigan.  The specific objectives of the study, as outlined in subactivities
3-1 and 3-3 of Task D, were 1. to determine the effect of pollutant materials
discharged from the rivers on water quality in the vicinity of the Harbor
during high flows, 2. to determine the extent of dispersion in Lake Michigan
of particulate and soluble material contributed by the rivers and 3. to
investigate the question of wind-induced resuspension and its relative impor-
tance as a pollutant source.  While previous studies (3) have documented the
degraded water quality in the Milwaukee Harbor and its vicinity in general
terms, the present study objectives address the quantification of pollutant
loadings and description of the mechanisms controlling the transport and dis-
persion of pollutants.

     To fulfill the specific objectives of the project, the study plan cen-
tered on obtaining estimates of water quality throughout the Milwaukee Harbor
and its vicinity during periods of high river flow and during wind-induced
suspension of sediment.  Water quality surveys were conducted on 11 occasions,
starting with a snowmelt event on February 13, 1976.  Overflights during
three of these surveys provided imagery from which water quality values could
be extrapolated to non-sampled areas and dispersion patterns of pollutants
could be evaluated.   Measurements of current velocities and direction in the
Milwaukee Harbor were used to evaluate the pollutant transport mechanism.

     For purposes of analysis, the Lake Michigan-Milwaukee Harbor study area
was divided into four regions:  The inner harbor, the outer harbor, the in-
shore zone and the offshore zone (Fig.  1).   The inner harbor was bounded
upstream by the point on the rivers where the lake and harbor seiche effects
were no longer apparent and downstream by the outermost point of the shipping
channel.   The outer harbor is delineated by the inner harbor and shoreline on
the west and the breakwater on the east.  The inshore zone is that portion of

-------
MILWAUKEE
                                             LAKE

                                         MICHIGAN
         MILWAUKEE
                                                     Jf
                                                     i,
                                            Jones Island STP  X

                                            Inner Harbor      H

                                            Outer Harbor      0
         Fig. 1.   Milwaukee Harbor.

-------
the lake within 5 km of the breakwater or the shoreline.  The offshore zone
is the lake beyond the inshore zone.

     The Milwaukee, Menomonee and Kinnickinnic Rivers drain watersheds that
contain rural and urban land uses and have a combined area of approximately
2200 km  (850 mi ).  These rivers have a combined mean annual flow of 14.7
cms (520 cfs) discharging to the inner harbor.  Individual mean annual flows
are:  The Milwaukee - 11.6 cms (410 cfs), the Menomonee - 2.6 cms (90 cfs),
and the Kinnickinnic - 0.6 cms (20 cfs).  The Jones Island Sewage Treatment
Plant (STP), which discharges into the outer harbor, had a mean flow for 1976
of 6.2 cms (219 cfs).  For purposes of this analysis the inner harbor was
considered to discharge into the outer harbor.

     The physical characteristics of the inner and outer harbors make each
distinct from the other.  The inner harbor has depths in the range of 2.1 to
8.8 m (7 to 29 ft), and an approximate surface area and volume of 92 ha (227
acres) and 6.2  x 106 m3 (220 x 106 ft3), respectively.  The outer harbor
has a wider range of depths (1.2 to 11 m or 4 to 36 ft) and greater surface
area and volume [525 ha (1300 acres) and 36.8 x 106 m3  (1300 x 106 ft3),
respectively].  The inner harbor includes primarily a shipping channel,
docking areas and the channelized downstream reaches of the three rivers.
The outer harbor closely resembles a lake with two tributaries (the inner
harbor and the STP) and the three points of discharge, i.e., the three major
openings along the 8.6 km (5.3 mi) breakwater.

     The inshore zone, which shares the breakwater as a boundary with the
outer harbor, is the recipient of the discharge from the three breakwater
openings, and, in turn, interfaces with the offshore zone in a much less
controlled manner.  The inshore zone depths range from 8..5 to 16.5 m (28 to
54 ft), with greater depths occurring with greater distance from the shore-
line and breakwater.

     The bottom sediments of the outer harbor and the inshore zone have been
characterized (2).  The dominant sediment type reported for the outer harbor
was organic silt, with a thickness of 1.3 to 15 cm (0.5 to 6 in).  The in-
shore zone bottom was primarily silty clayey sand, with significant areas
of gravel, hard bottom, and till.

-------
                         2.  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
     The effects of the combined inputs from the Menomonee, Milwaukee and
Kinnickinnic Rivers on Lake Michigan water quality were investigated.
Estimates of annual river loadings indicated the Menomonee River usually
discharged  50% of the annual river loadings reaching the Milwaukee Harbor
and the effect of the Menomonee River on Lake Michigan water quality could
not be isolated from that of the Milwaukee and Kinnikinnic Rivers.  The study
focused on the area around the Milwaukee Harbor and the area was divided into
four regions:  The inner and outer harbors and inshore and offshore zones.
The inner harbor was bounded upstream by the point on the river where the
lake and harbor seiche effects were no longer apparent and downstream by the
outermost point of the shipping channel.  The outer harbor was separated from
the inshore zone by the breakwater and the inshore zone extended 5 km (3.1 mi
into the lake.  Water quality surveys were conducted in the study area during
periods of high and low flow in the rivers.  The parameter list included
nutrients, suspended solids and metals.

     The water quality surveys indicated that the concentration levels of the
measured parameters decreased with increasing distance from the confluence of
the rivers.  Each of the four regions were characterized by a different set
of concentrations.  Average concentrations of suspended solids in the inner
and outer harbors, and inshore and offshore zones were 19, 9, 3 and 1 mg/L,
respectively.  This phenomenon occurred during baseflow and runoff event flow
periods.  The large concentration gradient of the parameters from the outer
harbor to the inshore zone indicated the effectiveness of the breakwater as
a barrier to mixing of the waters in the two zones.  This pattern of degrada-
tion of water quality points both to the rivers and the Jones Island Sewage
Treatment Plant (STP) as sources of pollutants to the harbor and the inshore
zone.  The STP has a mean annual flow of 6.2  cms ('219 cfs) and contributes a
major portion of the total annual pollutant loading to the harbor.  The run-
off events surveyed had an immediate effect on harbor water quality.  However,
only the concentrations for suspended solids and total organic-nitrogen were
higher than the baseflow values in the inner harbor for most events.  The
water quality of the inshore zone usually was not degraded during high flow
periods.  Although more pollutants were available in the harbor for transport
to the inshore zone, an insufficient portion of the pollutants were trans-
ported during most events to increase concentrations in the inshore zone.
Only the February 13 and 25, 1976 snowmelt runoff surveys showed slightly
elevated suspended solids concentrations, and the exceptionally large rain
event on July 18, 1977 produced elevated suspended solids and chlorides in
the  inshore zone.  The results of the event surveys indicated that the current
patterns in the harbor and harbor structures were modifying the transport of
pollutants to the inshore zone.

-------
     Current directions and velocities at the harbor mouth opening  (between
the inner and outer harbors) and at the central breakwater opening  (between
the outer harbor and the inshore zone) were measured to characterize the
mechanism controlling the transport of pollutants between regions.  Measure-
ments indicate this transport to be controlled more by the action of the lake
and harbor seiches than by the combined flow from the rivers.  The  seiche has
been observed to cause the direction of flow for different strata or for the
entire water column to reverse itself during runoff events at the harbor
mouth and at the central breakwater opening.  This oscillation of flow be-
tween regions results in a pulsing of the event-generated pollutants from
the more polluted region to the less polluted region across these two bound-
aries.  The pulsing phenomenon also was verified by the water quality at the
central breakwater opening alternating between that of the inshore  zone and
the harbor.  The size of the plug of pollutants is dependent largely on the
characteristics of the seiche for any period.  This apparent pulsing occurs
during times of event and baseflow.  An exception to the pulsing, seiche-
controlled pattern probably occurs during times of exceptionally large event
flows, when a relatively consistent flow of water could be expected to move
outward into the inshore zone with short residence time in the harbor.  On
July 18, 1977, the flow at the surface was not observed to reverse  direction
for the period of measurement.  Although the results of watershed studies
have indicated a large portion of the pollutants were discharged to the
harbor during high flow periods, the net transport of event and baseflow
water to the inshore zone was apparently more dependent on harbor current
patterns.  The harbor current patterns and structures were able to  impose a
significant residence time on all pollutants discharged into the harbor be-
fore entering the inshore zone.

     In an attempt to quantify the average annual amounts of pollutants
reaching the inshore zone, a mass balance equation was used.  Residence
times were estimated to be 5 and 6 days for the inner and outer harbors,
respectively.  The residence times were averages for all conditions and
probably decrease significantly for the portions of pollutants discharged to
the inner harbor during periods of high flows.   The percentage of the total
annual loadings to the harbor entering the inshore zone was estimated to be
45% for suspended solids, 61% for total-phosphorus, and 35% for soluble-
phosphorus.  Although the percentages were only gross estimates, they
demonstrated that a significant portion of the annual lo'ading from  the river
and STP were retained in the harbor.   Although the portion of the event pol-
lutants retained in the harbor was not known, it was estimated that 70% of
the suspended solids discharged from the Menomonee River during events was
retained annually in the inner harbor.  The amount of suspended solids in
the plume for the July 18, 1977 event was estimated to be 5% of the total
suspended solids entering the inshore zone each year.   The pollutants asso-
ciated with the particulate matter obviously were settling out during their
residence time in the harbor.   Higher concentrations of  total-phosphorus,
organic-nitrogen and metals in the harbor bottom sediments relative to the
river and lake sediments provided further evidence that pollutants were
deposited in the harbor.

     The dispersion pattern of pollutants reaching the inshore zone was mani-
fested as small islands of turbid water in the  inshore zone or a narrow band
of turbid water along the outside of  the breakwater.   Only during the July 18,

-------
1977, event was a continuous plume observed (4 km directly east into the
lake from the breakwater central opening).   A plume from the Dreakwater
northern opening extended approximately 2.5 km in a northeasterly direction
on July 18, 1977.  On July 19, the breakwater central opening visible plume
had not dispersed but rather had grown slightly larger (to 5 km in east-west
extent), and a plume out of the breakwater southern opening extended approx-
imately 2.5 km parallel to the shore.   Since the surface values of suspended
solids were higher than the bottom values,  it is assumed that the plume
extended down to the thermocline.  The dispersion of pollutants in the in-
shore zone would be highly variable and dependent upon the direction of the
wind.  The summer current has a weak tendency to go in a southerly direction
and the winter currents have a strong tendency to go in a northerly direction.

     Resuspension and/or shoreline erosion was responsible for elevating the
levels of suspended solids along the shore in the vicinity of the Milwaukee
Harbor on April 8, 1976.  A significant runoff-event had not occurred for
almost 2 weeks.  The values for suspended solids were higher than those ob-
served in the inshore zone during the July 18, 1977, rain event.  Approxi-
mately twice as much suspended solids was in the water column of the inshore
zone in the vicinity of Milwaukee as a result of this resuspension/erosion
event than was in the July 18, 1977 rain event plume.  The amount of suspended
solids in the inshore zone on April 8, 1976 represented about 12% of the
annual suspended soli3s loading to the lake from the harbor.  Resuspension
and shoreline erosion could cause a significant increase in the suspended
solids loading to the inshore zone each year.

-------
                              3.   RECOMMENDATIONS
1.  Determination of the effect of the Milwaukee Harbor on pollutant trans-
port to Lake Michigan is important in understanding the fate of land use
related contaminants.  The mass balance calculation for estimating the annual
loadings to the inshore zone was limited by the availability of pollutant
concentration values in the inner and outer harbors, the inshore zone, and in
the Milwaukee River.  Pollutant concentrations should be obtained on a sea-
sonal basis at the USGS station on the Milwaukee River, at three sites in the
inner harbor, at five sites in the outer harbor and at five sites in the in-
shore zone near the breakwater.  Future mass balance calculations should be
limited to seasonal loadings to avoid the potential distortion of averaging
residence times for the entire year.  Mass balance calculations for indivi-
dual events would require more detailed sampling in the harbor before, during
and after events.

2.  Remote sensing data have been obtained to observe the dispersion pattern
of the July 18, 1977 inshore zone plume.  Extensive water quality data were
collected concurrently in the lake, harbor and Menomonee River.  The occur-
rence of this event near the end of the project period has not allowed time
to evaluate all of the concentration data in conjunction with the remote
sensing imagery.  This evaluation should be continued to further characterize
the dispersion patterns of the plume and possible event related loadings to
the inshore zone.  Future investigation of plume dispersion patterns should
continue to use remote sensing imagery as a tool.

3.  Although a large portion of the annual pollutant loading entering the
inshore zone was discharged by the rivers, the amount and rates of loading
to the inshore zone was regulated for the most part by the current patterns
at the breakwater openings.  Continuous monitoring of flow direction and
velocity, and water quality indicators at the breakwater openings would
improve the understanding of the net loading of pollutants to the lake.

4.  Estimates of pollutant loading to the Lake Michigan inshore and offshore
zones from the Menomonee, Milwaukee and Kinnickinnic River Watersheds should
be reduced by some proportion  to account for the retention of pollutants in
the inner and outer harbors.

5.  The inner and outer harbors should be considered areas of impaired water
quality as a result of point and nonpoint source pollution.

-------
                            4.  FIELD ACTIVITIES
                            Water Quality Surveys


     Water quality surveys were conducted from February 13, 1976 to July 18,
1977 during eight runoff events (including two snowmelts), two periods of
baseflow and one period of wind-induced resuspension of sediment.  All samples
were collected from a Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources  (WDNR) 6 m
(20 ft) Starcraft.  On event days, samples were collected as soon as possible
after the event flows were detected.  The dates, meteorological conditions and
the peak Menomonee River flows during the water quality surveys are summarized
in Table 1.  The locations of the individual sampling sites for each survey
are shown in Figs. 2 to 4.   Sampling sites for event surveys were chosen
along straight line transects from the end of the inner harbor, through the
breakwater openings, into the inshore zone.  The number of event survey sam-
pling sites varied from two to six, depending on visible plume characteristics.
The sampling sites for the wind-induced resuspension survey on April 8, 1976,
were determined to enable interpretation of concurrent satellite imagery.

     The samples were collected from the surface and at 7m below the surface
in the harbor and at the surface and 10 m below the surface for the inshore
area.  The samples were collected with a clear PVC Kemmerer bottle and stored
under ice in polypropylene bottles.  The water samples were analyzed within 24
hr  at the Wisconsin State Hygiene Laboratory using established procedures (4,5),
The analyses performed for each survey included all or part of the following
parameter list:  Total- and suspended-solids, total- and soluble-phosphorus,
organic-nitrogen, (nitrate + nitrite)-nitrogen, ammonia-nitrogen, chloride,
alkalinity, total organic carbon, lead, zinc, cadmium, chromium, nickel and
copper.  Temperature and dissolved oxygen profiles were measured with a YSI
dissolved oxygen meter, and secchi disc depths were recorded.

     Remote sensing data were obtained during three of the water quality sur-
veys.  Overflights by NASA coincided with water quality surveys on February
25, 1976 and April 8, 1976.  Information from these overflights has been
described in a NASA report (6).


                              Sediment Surveys


     Bottom sediment samples were collected in the harbor on April 8, 1976,
and in the lake on April 19, 1976.  Samples were collected using a weighted
Ponar dredge and stored in widemouth jars.  These sampling locations (Fig. 5)
were chosen to represent areas of different sediment types and depositional
rates.  The harbor had not been dredged for 6 'yr prior to  the bottom sediment

                                      8

-------
Table 1.  Sampling  trips
Sampling
date
2/13/76
2/25/76
4/8/76

7/28/76
4/19/76
8/28/76
9/9/76
5/11/77
5/19/77
6/28/77
6/30/77
7/18/77*
Rainfall ,
Comments cm
Snowmelt
Snowmelt
Baseflow and
resuspension;
Harbor sediment
Rain event 1.07
Sediment outside
breakwater
Rain event 3.05
Rain event 2.29
Baseflow
Baseflow
Rain event 2.49
Rain event 3.43
Rain event 4.80
Wind
direction
NW
SW
E

S-SE
SE
SW
NW
NW
SE
W
SE
SW
Avg . wind
velocity,
kmph
21
16
14

16
13
21
19
13
13
19
24
19
Peak flow
at 70th St.
cms time
2.2
17.0 1845
2.2

9.7 0945
0.34
30.0 0305
19.7 0320
0.54
0.54
11.7 0930
33.6 1025
83.4 0500
Sampling
times

1430 to 1650


1220 to 1630

1430 to 1830
1530 to 1750
1045 to 1440
1120 to 1625
1430 to 2000
1530 to 1930
1315 to 1900
* Rain event started on 7/17/77; the amount of rainfall on this date was 3.38cm with a peak  flow
  of 88 cms observed at 70th St. at 0155 hr.

-------
                                      LAKE
                                   MICHIGAN
                                                              MILWAUKEE
    LAKE
MICHIGAN
                                                                                                               mile
                                                                                                           kilometer
     Fig.  2A.   Sampling  locations  on  2/13/1976.
                                                                   Fig.  2B.   Sampling locations on 2/25/1976.
MILWAUKEE
                                      LAKE
                                   MICHIGAN
                                                             MILWAUKEE
   LAKE
MICHIGAN
                                                                                       3  9  10  11  2   1    12
     Fig.  2C.   Sampling locations on 7/28/1976.
                                                                   Fig. 2D.   Sampling  locations  on  8/28/1976.
                                                     10

-------
                                 LAKE
                              MICHIGAN
                                                       MILWAUKEE
   L A K E
MICHIGAN
                                                                                                                 MILWAUKEE
   LAKE
MICHIGAN
                                                                                                                                                                           mile
                                                                                                                                                                       kilometer
Fig.  3A.  Sampling locations on 9/9/1976.             Fig, 3B.  Sampling  locations  on  6/28  and 6/30/1977.
                                                                                                                          Fig. 3C.  Sampling  locations  on  7/18/1977.

-------
MILWAUKEE
                                      LAKE

                                  MICHIGAN
                                                               MILWAUKEE
                                                                                                                     MILWAUKEE
                              LAKE

                           MICHIGAN
       Fig. 4A.  Sampling  locations for baseflow
                 and resuspension survey on 4/8/1976.
                                                                  Fig. 4B.  Sampling locations on 5/11/1977.
Fig. 4C.  Sampling locations on 5/19/1977.

-------
  MILWAUKEE
                                               LAKE

                                           MICHIGAN
                                     M4 LM
                                 lilwaukee
           MILWAUKEE
5 LM
Kinnlcklnnic
         R.
1
1
•DEE
0
0
• — • ' 	
1
	 ' mi le
1
	 . kilometer
                                                                  6 LM
  Fig. 5.  Locations of bottom sediment sampling sites on 4/8/76
           in the Harbor and on 4/19/76 in Lake Michigan proper.
                                 13

-------
survey.  The sediments were analyzed for particle size, total phosphorus
and Kjeldahl nitrogen by the Wisconsin Soil and Plant Analysis Laboratory,
for chlorinated hydrocarbons by the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation
(WARF) Institute, Inc., and for total metals by the Wisconsin State Hygiene
Laboratory.
                            Current Measurements
     The direction and velocity of the currents at the end of the inner har-
bor and in the breakwater central opening were measured on May 19, 1977,
during a baseflow survey, and on June 28, June 30, and July 18, 1977, during
runoff event surveys.  Measurements were taken using an ENDECO current meter,
which provides current direction and velocity, temperature and depth informa-
tion.  These measurements were recorded at 1.5 m  (5 ft) intervals throughout
the water column.  The sampling boat, anchored and stabilized as much as pos-
sible during the time when readings were taken, was positioned near the middle
of the 152 m (500 ft) wide, 9.1 m (30 ft) deep channel which occurred at both
stations.
                                      14

-------
                       5.  RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
                     Annual River and STP Loadings


      The annual loading of pollutants to the Milwaukee Harbor from the three
rivers and Jones Island STP were determined as an integral part of inter-
preting the results of the study.  The annual loading of pollutants from the
Milwaukee and Menomonee Rivers was calculated using a ratio estimator tested
by the International Joint Commission staff and PLUARG investigators to be an
efficient means of estimating tributary loadings (7).  The ratio estimator
(Eq. (1)) is a product of flow adjusted instantaneous load times a bias factor
which accounts for bias in the form of negative or positive correlations
between concentrations and flow.
                                  +  -
                       mv            ln
             y  = y  • -3-  •   -- ~ -                      Eq. (1)
              y    *
                                     n
where y  is mean daily load, yx is mean daily flow for the water year,
m^ is mean daily flow for days concentrations were determined, m^ is mean
daily load for days concentrations were determined, and n is number of days
concentrations were determined.  The covariance Sxy and variance Sx are
estimated by:
           s
                        n
                        Z  x.y .  — nm m
                     _ 1=1  x x     y y
                  xy         n - 1
                       n                                             Eq. (2)
                       £  x. - nm2
                  x       n - 1
where
respect
x. and y. are the individual measured flows and calculated loadings,
.tively,   for each day concentrations were determined.
                                     15

-------
The equation produces an estimate of the mean daily load (py).   The ratio
estimator also develops an estimate of the error in the loading value.  The
values used for concentrations in the Menomonee River were 1976 data obtained
by the Menomonee River Pilot  Watershed Study at the 70th Street Station.   The con-
centration of various pollutants in the Milwaukee River were obtained from
1973, 1974 and 1975 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) data obtained from the
Estabrook Park Station in Milwaukee.  Necessary flow data were obtained from
USGS water year reports for the above station.  The yearly loading values
are shown in Table 2 for both rivers.  The loading values from the Milwaukee
River were generally higher with the values of soluble-P and chloride similar
for both rivers.  Based on the proportion of flow, the Kinnickinnic River
pollutant loadings were considered to be 3% of the total loadings from the
other rivers.  The percentage of the combined river loadings due to runoff
events was not calculated due to insufficient event data on the Milwaukee
River.  However, the results of the Menomonee River study have indicated
about 20% of the suspended solids and about 50% of the other parameters were
discharged during events.  The annual loading of some pollutants for the
Jones Island STP was determined by multiplying the average 1976 flow by the
average effluent concentration for 1976  (Table 2).  The STP had higher load-
ings of total-P and chloride than the combined loadings of the three rivers.
The STP was a significant source of pollutants to the harbor area relative
to the rivers.  The combined loading from the river and STP obviously produced
enough of an annual load to affect the water quality of the harbor area.
                            Water Quality  Survey


      The  results  of  the  event  and baseflow water quality surveys demonstrated
  a  general trend of improving water quality with each successive station  from
  the  inner harbor  to  the  inshore zone,  (Tables  3-19).  An example of  this
  trend was the  decrease on August 28, 1976 in total- and suspended-solids,
  total-  and soluble-P concentrations from  285,  18,  0.13 and  0.011 mg/L, res-
  pectively,  at  station 7  in the inner harbor to 185, 3, 0.02 and 0.003 mg/L,
  respectively,  at  station 1 in  the inshore zone (Table 8).   Averages  of all
  the  water quality data obtained in each zone further demonstrate the consis-
  tent differences  in  pollutant  concentration between each zone.  Part of  the
  observed  decreases in pollutant concentration  was  probably  due to  simple
  dilution.   The magnitude of the differences, however, in such small  distances
  indicated that water movement  between  the different zones was restricted.
  The  results pointed  out  the effectiveness of the breakwater as a barrier to
  mixing  between the water in the outer  harbor and inshore zone.  The  dif-
  ferences  in the levels of pollutants between the zones demonstrated  that the
  water quality  in  the harbor zones was  always impaired relative to  the inshore
  zone.   At all  times  the  harbor zone was expected to be relatively  degraded
  since it  directly receives discharge from the  rivers and STP.  The concentra-
  tions in  the harbor  zones usually were higher  at the surface, while  the  con-
  centrations in the inshore zone usually were similar at both the surface and
  bottom.   The exceptions  to these trends were the high bottom concentration
  observed  at all stations on February 13,  1976  and  higher surface concentration
  in the  inshore zone  on July 18, 1977.  The  trend of higher  surface concentra-
  tions was probably a result of the river  and STP discharges staying  at  the
  surface when the  harbor  zones  were stratified.
                                    16

-------
Table 2.  Annual water (m3 x 107)  and pollutant  (kg x 104)  loadings to the Milwaukee Harbor
Solids P
Source Water
Menomonee
River 8
Milwaukee
River 36
Three Rivers
combined** 45
STP 20
Total

6,200

16,000

23,000
16,000
Suspended Total Soluble

1,500 2.8 1.2

1,430 7.6 5.5

3,000 10.7 6.9
780 12.8 2.9
(N03+N02)-
N Cl Pb

13 1,250 0.87

36 1,200 3.5

50 2,520 4.5
3,900
  *Menomonee  River  pollutant values were based on 1976 data, Milwaukee River values were  based  on
   1973,  1974,  1975 data, and the STP values were 1976 data.  The water data were averages  of long
   term records.
 **The  Kinnickinnic River loading was considered to be 3% of the total loadings  from  the  other  two
   rivers.

-------
             Table  3.   Water quality data in mg/L for  two plume transects on 2/13/1976.  See Fig 2A for
                       station locations
oo
Station
No . and
depth*

1-Surface
Bottom
2-Surface
Bottom
3-Surface
Bottom
4-Surface
Bottom

5-Surface
Bottom
6-Surface
Bottom
Solids
Total

584
1086
288
994
274
400
168
458

274
536
290
286
Suspended

15
15
10
17
8
22
4
13

5
166
5
5
Total-P
EAST
0.16
0.30
0.08
0.26
0.06
0.16
0.02
0.12
SOUTHEAST
0.77
0.06
0.12
0.06
Total
alkalinity

182
238
134
222
130
142
104
154

128
136
130
131
Cl

200
450
58
380
45
96
13
125

50
100
56
52
             *Bottom  samples were  taken  7  to  10 m below  surface.

-------
          Table 4.  Water quality data in mg/L for two plume transects on 2/25/1976.  See Fig. 2B for station locations
vo
Station
No . and
depth*
1-Surface
Bottom
2-Surface
Bottom
3-Surface
Bottom
8-Surface
Bottom
7-Surface
Bottom
6-Surface
Bottom
Solids
Total
580
585
305
455
275
305
230
300
180
180
170
165
Suspended
18
19
15
13
11
13
10
13
8
9
6
6
Total
0.21
0.21
0.08
0.17
0.07
0.08
0.04
0.08
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
P
Soluble
0.090
0.089
0.036
0.087
0.027
0.033
0.016
0.033
0.006
0.008
0.005
0.005

Total
organic
0.90
0.87
0.38
1.12
1.50
0.32
0.26
0.53
0.54
0.18
0.11
0.50
N
(NO 3+ N02 )
EAST
1.76
1.78
0.68
1.44
0.59
0.66
0.48
0.66
0.28
0.28
0.25
0.24
Cl
140
150
50
90
40
50
29
55
11
10
8
8
Temperature,
DO °C
12.0
10.8
11.9
11.8
12.0
10.7
12.6
11.0
13.1
12.0
13.0
13.2
2.1
4.0
2.2
1.8
2.0
2.0
1.7
1.9
1.2
1.5
1.2
1.0
EDGE OF PLUME
4-Surface
Bottom
9-Surface
Bottom
5-Surface
Bottom
255
305
280
345
175
170
18
62
11
12
7
9
0.06
0.16
0.07
0.06
0.02
0.02
0.024
0.027
0.027
0.047
0.005
0.005
0.37
0.49
0.34
0.46
0.10
0.15
0.53
0.57
0.55
0.73
0.26
0.25
35
40
45
70
10
8
12.1
11.4
12.2
11.2
13.0
13.2
1.8
1.7
2.0
2.2
1.2
1.0
          *Bottom samples were taken at 7 to 10 m below surface.

-------
Table 5.  Metal concentrations in yg/L for two
          plume transects on 2/25/1976.   See
          Fig.  2B for station locations
Station No.
and depth*

1-Surface
Bottom
2-Surface
Bottom
3-Surface
Bottom
8-Surface
Bottom
7- Surf ace
Bottom

5-Surface
Bottom
Cd

0.3
—
0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
EDGE
<0.2
<0.2
Cr
EAST
5
—
7
4
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
OF
<3
<3
Pb

27
—
5
4
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
PLUME
<3
<3
Zn

40
—
20
30
20
20
<20
20
<20
20

<20
<20
Cu

13
—
8
14
19
6
7
6
6
6

8
14
*Bottom samples were taken at 7 to 10 m below
 surface
                     20

-------
Table 6.  Water quality data in mg/L for three plume transects on 7/28/1976.   See Fig. 2C for station locations
Station No.
and depth*

1-Surface
Bottom
2-Surface
Bottom
3-Surface
Bottom
4-Surface
Bottom
5-Surface
Bottom
17-Surface
Bottom
6-Surface
Bottom

33-Surface
Bottom
34-Surface
Bottom

32-Surface
Bottom
29-Surface
Bottom
Solids
Total

346
292
312
•254
262
184
234
204
210
154
156
190
162
158

216
176
180
166

224
234
216
168
Suspended

6
4
6
5
2
3
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
1
0
1

0
0
0
0
Total

0.11
0.12
0.12
0.08
0.09
0.07
0.07
0.06
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.02

0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01

0.04
0.06
0.04
0.02
P
Soluble

0.032
0.052
0.048
0.030
0.038
0.019
0.004
0.005
0.003
0.003
<0.003
0.003
<0.003
<0.003

<0.003
0.005
<0.003
<0.003

<0.003
0.003
0.003
<0.003
N

Total
organic (N03+N02)
EAST
0.55
0.48
0.94
0.38
0.44
0.30
0.56
0.51
0.47
0.20
0.48
0.31
0.20
0.15
SOUTHEAST**
0.41
0.42
0.25
0.22
NORTHEAST**
0.55
0.51
0.52
0.39

0.23
0.21
0.21
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.35
0.30
0.32
0.20
0.17
0.25
0.16
0.21

0.32
0.22
0.20
0.20

0.33
0.33
0.33
0.20
Total
alkalinity

138
142
140
120
132
110
112
110
114
112
108
112
110
108

116
106
108
108

112
112
112
108
Cl

50
35
44
32
40
14
30
22
22
8
8
6
9
7

24
10
11
8

29
30
25
13
DO

4.0
3.5
3.5
4.5
5.0
6.5
8.6
7.5
9.3
10.2
__
—
10.2
10.5

9.2
9.5
10.2
9.8

9.8
9.4
10.0
10.0
Temperature,
°C

26
20
24
17
22
15
20
14
21
11

—
19
11

20
12
19
10

21
20
21
14
 *Bottom samples were taken 7 to  10 m below surface.
**Stations 1, 2 and 3 are also included in these transects.   See EAST transect for data.

-------
Table 7.  Metal concentrations in yg/L for
          three plume transects on 7/28/1976.
          See Fig. 2C for station locations
Station No.
and depth*

1-Surface
Bottom
2-Surface
Bottom
3-Surface
Bottom
4-Surface
Bottom
5-Surface
Bottom
17-Surface
Bottom
6-Surface
Bottom

33-Surface
Bottom
34-Surface
Bottom

32-Surface
Bottom
29-Surface
Bottom
Cd

<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.34
<0.2
<0.2

<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2

<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
Cr Pb
EAST
4
8
5
3
4
<3
5
7
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
SOUTHEAST**
<3
<3
<3
<3
NORTHEAST**
<3
4
<3
<3

6
5
<3
4
3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3

<3
<3
<3
<3

<3
<3
<3
<3
Zn

30
120
20
20
30
40
20
20
20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20

<20
<20
<20
<20

<20
<20
<20
<20
Cu

42
15
20
16
16
11
32
14
12
11
5
18
10
12

10
10
18
11

16
9
12
7
 *Bottom samples were taken at 7 to 10 m below
  surface.

**Stations 1, 2 and 3 also are included in these
  transects.  See EAST transect for data.
                       22

-------
Table 8.  Water quality data in mg/L for three plume  transects  on  8/28/1976.  See Fig. 2D for station locations
Station No.
and depth*
8-Surface
Bottom
7-Surface
Bottom
6- Surface
Bottom
5-Surface
Bottom
4-Surface
Bottom
3-Surface
Bottom
2-Surface
Bottom
1-Surface
Bottom
9-Surface
Bottom
10-Surface
Bottom
11-Surface
Bottom
12-Surface
Bottom
13-Sur£ace
Bottom
14-Surface
Bottom
15-Surface
Bottom
16-Surface
Bottom
Solids
Total
310
285
305
300
285
270
240
250
245
205
240
215
210
205
185
195
225
190
205
190
205
190
190
190
210
205
200
210
245
260
195
180
Suspended
41
68
22
21
18
32
8
8
6
6
4
3
3
2
3
4
2
0
2
2
3
2
1
0
2
4
2
14
2
48
1
0
Total
0.26
0.22
0.20
0.20
0.13
0.15
0.09
0.09
0.07
0.03
0.05
0.05
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.05
0.02
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.05
0.16
0.04
0.02
P
Soluble
0.011
0.008
0.008
0.005
0.011
0.013
0.015
0.012
<0.003
0.003
0.005
0.005
<0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.004
O.003
0.003
<0.003
0.003
<0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
<0.003
<0.003
<0.003
0.004
0.003
O.003
<0.003
N
Total
organic (NO
EAST-I**

3+N02)

1.8 <0.02
1.8 0.52
1.4 <
1.4
1.1
0.87
0.75
0.63
0.81
0.33
0.69
0.63
0.46
0.27
0.49
0.23
EAST-I I***
0.66
0.35
0.41
0.47
0.42
0.26
0.57
0.16
EDGE OF PLUME
0.42
0.25
0.29
0.20
0.63
1.1
0.51
0.33
0.02
0.02
0.12
0.18
0.20
0.21
0.22
0.24
0.23
0.23
0.21
0.24
0.16
0.21
0.23
0.25
0.24
0.26
0.23
0.26
0.17
0.24
0.24
0.25
0.23
0.27
0.23
0.25
0.23
0.24
Total
alkalinity
84
64
110
118
120
120
116
114
116
110
114
118
112
108
108
108
116
110
112
110
110
110
108
110
110
110
108
110
114
110
114
110
DO
0.2
2.0
0.3
0.2
2.9
4.8
5.1
8.3
7.5
9.0
7.6
7.4
8.5
8.6
8.8
9.0
7.7
9.6
9.0
9.6
9.2
9.8
9.0
9.6
9.4
9.7
9.5
9.8
7.7
8.8
8.8
8.8
Temperature,
°C
23
21
26
24
21
17
18
11
18
9
20
19
16
16
19
18
18
8
13
7
13
7
17
7
13
7
12
7
19
10
17
10
  *Bottom samples were taken 7  to 10 m below surface.
 **Samples collected between  1430 and  1615 hrs.
***Samples collected between  1650 and  1725 hrs.
                                                         23

-------
Table 9.   Metal concentrations in yg/L for three plume
          transects on 8/28/1976.  See Fig.  2D for
          station locations
Station No.
and depth*
Cd
Cr
Pb
Zn
Cu
Ni
EAST-I**
8-Surface
Bottom
7-Surface
Bottom
6-Surface
Bottom
5-Surface
Bottom
4-Surface
Bottom
3-Surface
Bottom
2-Surface
Bottom
1-Surface
Bottom
2.5
3.1
2.6
2.0
4.5
2.5
0.7
2.3
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
1.0
<0.2
15
12
13
29
18
36
11
12
3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
9
10
11
6
6
25
8
5
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
100
80
90
40
80
80
60
70
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
47
32
47
10
40
32
24
28
19
9
9
6
4
5
18
3
4
4
4
5
6
4
4
4
2
2
_
_
_
_
_
-
EAST-II***
9-Surface
Bottom
10-Surface
Bottom
11-Surface
Bottom
12-Surface
Bottom

13-Surface
Bottom
14-Surface
Bottom
15-Surface
Bottom
16-Surface
Bottom
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2

<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
2.1
<0.2
<0.2
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
EDGE
<3
<3
<3
<3
3
40
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
OF PLUME
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
5
<3
<3
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20

<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
80
<20
<20
20
6
18
4
8
5
4
10

8
3
8
4
13
33
6
6
2
1
2
3
2
3
2
3

2
2
6
4
3
6
4
3
  *Bottom samples were taken 7 to 10 m below surface.
 **Samples collected between 1,430 and 1,615 hr.
***Samples collected between 1,650 and 1,725 hr.
                            24

-------
Table 10.  Water quality data in mg/L for two plume transects on 9/9/1976.  See Fig. 3A for station locations
Station
No . and
depth*
1-Surface
Bottom
2-Surface
Bottom
3-Surface
Bottom
4-Surface
Bottom
5-Surface
Bottom
6-Surface
Bottom
Solids
Total
280
260
285
200
260
175
205
165
180
175
160
160
Suspended
21
16
68
12
12
8
8
3
4
4
2
4
Total
0.17
0.17
0.16
0.07
0.12
0.07
0.06
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.01
0.02
P
Soluble
0.010
0.007
0.008
0.020
0.011
0.008
0.010
0.004
<0.003
<0.003
<0.003
0.020

Total
organic
1.11
0.76
1.04
0.46
0.73
0.24
0.42
0.18
0.32
0.25
0.10
0.12
N
(NO 3+ N02)
EAST
0.28
0.21
0.24
0.24
0.20
0.27
0.41
0.24
0.30
0.26
0.14
0.23
Total
Alkalinity
110
126
128
114
126
112
114
108
110
108
106
108
Temperature,
DO °C
0.2
2.2
0.9
5.2
3.4
6.2
7.4
7.2
9.1
9.2
9.1
8.8
26
19
23
16
21
15
18
12
18
12
18
17
SOUTHEAST**
12-Surface
Bottom
11-Surface
Bottom
10-Surface
Bottom
9-Surface
Bottom
8-Surface
Bottom
200
160
225
205
180
180
170
175
170
160
5
3
3
5
6
5
6
6
5
6
0.05
0.03
0.06
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.004
0.004
0.008
0.004
<0.003
<0.003
<0.003
<0.003
0.004
<0.003
0.39
0.90
0.59
0.36
1.59
0.43
0.24
0.23
0.74
0.18
0.38
0.25
0.39
0.35
0.25
0.29
0.20
0.23
0.21
0.21
112
110
114
112
108
110
106
108
106
108
8.4
7.4
7.6
7.9
8.7
8.8
9.2
9.0
9.2
9.2
18
13
18
18
17
15
17
11
17
17
*Bottom samples were taken 7 to 10 m below surface.




**Stations 1, 2 and 3 also are included in this transect.  See EAST transect for data.

-------
Table 11.   Water  quality data, current velocities and directions  at  harbor stations during three events
Time, hr

1510
1515
1630
1635
1815
1830
1905
1910

1530
1540
1720
1725
1845
1850
1925
1935

1550
1555

1400
1405

1515
1520
1700
1710
1905
1915

1615
1620
1730
1740
1845
1850

1330
1335

1445
1450
1715
1720
1740
1745
*See Fig.
**See Fig.
Depth, Suspended
m solids, mg/L

0
7
0
7
0
7
0
7

0
7
0
7
0
7
0
7

0
7

0
7

0
7
0
7
0
7

0
7
0
7
0
7

0
7

0
7
0
7
0
7
3B for
30 for

12
14
10
9
9
6
8
6
STATION
6
4
6
3
4
4
4
2
STATION
3
3
STATION
2
2

35
40
27
34
23
25
STATION
26
22
25
22
25
26

57
41
STATION
25
6
16
2
22
15
station locations.
station locations.
P^
Total
STATION
0.11
0.07
0.12
0.04
0.09
0.05
0.10
0.04
NO. 2*
0.04
0.02
0.05
<0.02
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.02
NO. 3*
0.03
<0.02
NO. 4*
<0.02
<0.02
STATION
0.12
0.16
0.12
0.12
0.11
0.08
NO. 2*
0.04
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.04
0.04
STATION
0.20
0.10
NO. 2**
0.12
0.02
0.06
0.02
0.08
0.06


mg/L
Soluble
Temperature,
Cl, mg/L DO, mg/L °C
Current
Velocity,
kmph
Direction,
degrees
NO. 1* - HARBOR MOUTH - 6/28/1977
0.039
<0.004
0.031
0.004
0.017
0.004
0.014
0.004
5.0
8.6
3.8
8.6
4.6
9.4
8.0
12.0
19
12
20
12
19
11
18
12
1.3
0.28
0.74
0.56
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.46
100
350
80
285
65
310
75
265
- BREAKWATER CENTRAL OPENING - 6/28/1977
<0.004
<0.004
0.006
<0.004
<0.004
<0.004
<0.004
<0.004
- 0.8 km EAST
<0.004
<0.004
- 1.6 km EAST
<0.004
<0.004
10.0
9.8
8.2
9.1
11.2
12.0
9.0
12.0
OF BREAKWATER - 6/28/1977
12.0
12.0
OF BREAKWATER - 6/28/1977
10.8
11.6
16
14
17
8
16
10
16
8

15
12

12
10
0.93
0.56
0.37
0.46
0.93
0.37
0.83
0.28

	
—

	
—
90
135
140
250
120
140
115
140

	
—

	
—
NO. 1* - HARBOR MOUTH - 6/30/1977
0.011
0.040
<0.004
0.012
0.009
0.009
- BREAKWATER
<0.004
<0.004
<0.004
<0.004
0.004
0.006
8.9
8.8
3.7
5.7
4.8
7.4
CENTRAL OPENING - 6/30/1977
10.5
10.7
10.5
10.4
—
—
16
13
18
16
17
13

10
10
10
10
12
12
0.56
0.56
1.20
0.65
0.74
0.30

0.37
1.57
0.74
0.83
0.65
0.46
277
240
90
208
37
218

283
227
158
345
104
172
NO. 1** - HARBOR MOUTH - 7/18/1977
0.041
0.012
- BREAKWATER
0.019
O.004
<0.004
<0.004
0.010
0.050


36 3.0
24 9.4
CEtlTRAL OPENING - 6/30/1977
26 6.3
11 11.0
20
9
21 6.6
20 8.5


24
14

20
10
19
8
20
15


1.11
0.37

0.56
0.83
0.46
0.93
1.11
1.20


90
70

120
290
330
250
95
90


                                                         26

-------
Table 12.  Water quality in mg/L in plume beyond breakwater during 7/18/1977 event
Station*
3.


4.


5.


6.


7.


8.

9.


East of
Breakwater
5 km
East of
Breakwater
2.5 km
NE of
Breakwater
1.5 km
East of
Breakwater
1 km
SE of
Breakwater
1.5 km
South Exit
Breakwater
SE of South
Breakwater Exit
1.5 km
Time,
hr

1535
1540

1550
1555

1600
1605

1615
1620

1630
1635
1645
1650

1700
1705
Depth, Secchi
m disc, m

0 1.5
10

0 2.0
10

0
10

0 2.0
10

0 1.5
10
0 0.75
7

0 1.0
10
Suspended
Solids

6
4

4
4

4
3

6
4

6
4
12
4

6
4

Total

0.02
0.02

0.02
0.02

0.02
0.02

0.02
0.02

0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02

0.03
0.02
P
Soluble

<0.004
<0.004

0.008
<0.004

<0.004
<0.004

<0.004
<0.004

<0.004
<0.004
<0.004
<0.004

0.008
<0.004
Cl

14
8

11
8

11
8

13
8

12
8
13
8

11
8
DO

18
10

17
9

16
8

15
8

14
9
17
10

14
8
Temperature,
°C

10
12

10
12

10
12

10
12

11
12
9
11

10
12
*See Fig. 3C for station locations.

-------
Table 13.   Water quality data in mg/L for three  plume  transects  on  4/8/1976.   See  Fig.  4A for  station locations
Station
No . and
depth*

1-Surface
Bottom
2-Surface
Bottom
3-Surface
Bottom
4-Surface
Bottom
5-Surface
Bottom
Bottom
7-Surface
Bottom
14-Surface
Bottom
Solids
Total

590
408
438
422
446
348
348
288
216
258
174
210
160
164
152
158
Suspended

8
9
6
8
17
12
5
11
8
7
5
30
0
0
1
2
Total

0.18
0.12
0.14
0.12
0.16
0.12
0.10
0.07
0.03
0.05
0.02
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.01
P

Soluble

0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
EAST
058
060
058
060
061
036
036
022
Oil
022
0.005
0.005
0.
0.
0.
0.
005
005
003
003

Total
organic

0.96
0.83
0.76
0.82
0.77
0.77
0.57
0.54
0.29
0.44
0.24
0.24
0.15
0.21
0.12
0.23
N
(N03+ N02)

1.12
0.78
0.85
0.80
0.88
0.59
0.59
0.52
0.38
0.49
0.28
0.29
0.25
0.26
0.24
0.24
Total C

::
	
—
10
8
—
—
4
4
—
Cl

90
38
50
42
52
46
48
30
16
25
9
9
8
8
8
8
Temperature,
DO °C

7.8
9.0
8.9
8.7
8.4
9.0
9.4
9.4
11.0
10.0
12.4
12.0
12.0
12.0
—

18
14
14
13
12
10
10
8
7
7
'5
5
3
3
3
3
SOUTHEAST**
11-Surface
Bottom
12-Surface
Bottom
13-Surface
Bottom
322
310
224
288
186
198
4
6
7
7
8
10
0.09
0.09
0.04
0.08
0.03
0.03
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
039
033
015
029
005
006
0.58
0.57
0.39
0.44
0.23
0.22
0.66
0.61
0.44
0.59
0.31
0.33
—
	
—
41
39
20
33
10
13
9.8
9.5
11.2
10.4
12.0
11.4
9
8
7
7
7
6
NORTHEAST**
3-Surface
Bottom
9- Surface
Bottom
10-Surface
Bottom
15-Surface
Bottom
262
260
238
264
182
188
152
152
5
10
15
14
14
19
0
1
0.05
0.07
0.05
0.06
0.03
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
022
022
016
022
005
005
003
003
0.43
0.37
0.29
0.50
0.21
0.14
0.29
0.11
0.51
0.50
0.43
0.49
0.28
0.28
0.24
0.26
::
::
::
—
26
27
20
26
10
8
8
8
10.5
10.0
10.6
9.0
13.0
13.0
—
7
7
8
8
6
6
3
3
 *Bottom samples were taken 7 to 10 m below surface.
**Stations 1,  2 and 3 also are included in these  transects.   See  EAST  transect  for  data.
                                                      28

-------
Table 14.  Metal concentrations* in pg/L for
           three plume transects on 4/8/1976.
           See Fig. 4A for station locations
Station No.
and depth**

1-Surface
Bottom
2-Surface
Bottom
3-Surface
Bottom
4-Surface
Bottom
5-Surface
Bottom
6-Surface
Bottom
7-Surface
Bottom
14-Surface
Bottom

11-Surface
Bottom
12-Surface
Bottom
13-Surface
Bottom
Cr

4
7
8
11
10
8
7
6
<3
4
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3

6
6
3
6
<3
<3
Pb
EAST
8
8
5
10
12
6
5
5
4
3
3
5
5
8
<3
<3
SOUTHEAST***
4
3
<3
4
3
<3
2n

20
30
40
<20
30
20
30
40
30
20
<20
<20
30
20
<20
<20

20
20
<20
20
<20
20
Cu

30
30
22
17
12
12
30
12
44
6
30
20
25
36
3
<3

16
13
11
19
17
8
Fe

1000
600
620
120
960
780
520
640
100
360
280
980
100
100
—
—

420
500
360
480
360
400
NORTHEAST***
8-Surface
Bottom
9-Surface
Bottom
10-Surface
Bottom
15-Surface
Bottom
<3
5
4
3
<3
<3
<3
<3
3
4
<3
4
<3
7
<3
<3
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
7
11
11
21
13
30
3
<3
520
520
780
780
840
700
— —
"
  *Cd levels were <0.2 or 0.2 pg/L.

 **Bottom samples were taken 7 to 10 m below surface.

***Stations 1,2 and 3 also are included in these
   transects.  See EAST transect for data.
                      29

-------
Table 15.   Baseflow measurements of water quality at harbor stations
Time,
hr
1045
1335
1115
1440
1225
1355
Depth,
0
4
8
0
4
8
0
4
8
0
4
8
0
4
8
0
4
8
Suspended
solids, mg/L
6
5
94
6
6
138
8
10
14
82
195
153
15
19
27
96
93
100
P,
Total
0.22
0.24
0.38
0.22
0.24
0.51
0.19
0.14
0.14
0.36
0.65
0.54
0.16
0.16
0.14
0.36
0.35
0.37
»g/L
Soluble
STATION NO.
0.093
0.108
0.092
0.092
0.115
0.092
STATION NO
0.091
0.050
0.045
0.066
0.059
0.057
STATION NO
0.051
0.039
0.024
0.045
0.044
0.042
STATION NO. 6**
1205
1210
1340
1345
1540
1545
0
7
0
7
0
7
4
3
5
4
4
4
0.08
0.02
0.05
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.021
O.004
<0.004
<0.004
0.006
0.008
Current

1* - 13th STREET BRIDGE - 5/11/1977
20 3.5 20
60 2.3 19
90 0.6 16
30 4.2 21
50 2.4 19
730 0.2 17
. 2* - 2nd STREET BRIDGE - 5/11/1977
710 2.5 22
490 4.8 14
420 6.0 12
610 3.2 18
610 3.7 17
580 4.0 16
. 3* - BROADWAY BRIDGE - 5/11/1977
500 5.1 15 —
510 6.4 12
330 7.2 11
490 5.4 15
450 5.2 14
430 6.0 13
- BREAKWATER CENTRAL OPENING - 5/19/1977
8.0 15 1.75 0.28 90
11.8 10 0.28 255
8.9 15 1.65 0.28 320
8.5 12 0.37 263
9.1 14 1.70 0.28 85
12.4 8 0.37 270
STATION NO. 7** - HARBOR MOUTH - 5/19/1977
1135
1140
1420
1425
1625
1630
1305
1308
1455
1500
0
7
0
7
0
7
0
7
0
7
3
4
3
4
5
4
9
6
14
14
0.12
0.04
0.12
0.07
0.12
0.07
0.16
0.09
0.16
0.17
0.066
0.005
0.063
0.014
0.068
0.011
STATION NO
0.087
0.018
0.068
0.072
STATION NO. 2**
1525
1530
0940
0945
1030
1035
1045
1050
1135
1140
1235
1240
1342
1347
1600
1005
1010
1110
1115
1200
1205
1300
1305
1405
1410
0
10
0
7
0
5
0
7
0
7
0
7
0
7
0
0
7
0
7
0
7
0
7
0
7
2
2
3
78
4
40
4
40
2
112
3
20
56
87
49
2
8
3
13
37
7
3
6
3
233
<0.02
0.02
0.22
0.31
0.20
0.21
0.20
0.21
0.20
0.35
0.20
0.18
0.30
0.36
0.75
0.17
0.12
0.17
0.11
0.16
0.10
0.16
0.12
0.19
0.20
<0.004
<0.004
STATION NO.
0.116
0.049
0.110
0.055
0.110
0.055
0.105
0.034
0.110
0.064
0.073
0.065
0.024
STATION NO.
0.096
0.046
0.088
0.033
0.077
0.032
0.080
0.043
0.105
0.069
5.2 17 — 0.37 115
10.2 9 0.28 270
5.6 17 1.5 0.18 170
8.9 10 0.18 105
5.2 18 1.5 0.28 130
7.1 11 0.28 95
. 1** - BROADWAY BRIDGE - 5/19/1977
4.6 20 1.5 0.37 150
8.0 10 0.46 340
5.5 19 1.9 0.18 125
6.7 13 0.18 345
- 1.6 km EAST OF BREAKWATER - 5/19/1977
13.1 — 3.2
12.9
3** - 13th STREET BRIDGE - 5/19/1977
700 1.5 23
500 3.2 15
3.5 18 — 0.18 285
3.0 15 0.18 310
690 1.8 23
480
690 2.1 23
480 2.9 16
690 2.4 23
490 3.2 16
690 2.4 23
510 2.5 16

5*» - 2nd STREET BRIDGE - 5/19/1977
610 2.4 22
390 6.2 13
610 3.4 23
350 6.7 12 	
610 3.5 23
330 6.9 12
610 3.4 23
400 7.4 11
530 3.6 20
510 3.9 19
    i Fig. 4B for station locatio
                                                               30

-------
Table 16.  Averages and ranges of baseflow water quality data in mg/L at three harbor sites
Solids
Total Suspended
Spring
Average 420 17
Range 350 to 510 6 to 22
Summer
Average 300 10
Range 270 to 380 5 to 14
Average 175 2
Range 155 to 180 3 to 18
Average 155 1
P
Total Soluble
INNER HARBOR*
0.15 0.06
0.13 to 0.18 0.032 to 0.011

0.18 0.04
0.12 to 0.23 0.020 to 0.056
INSHORE ZONE**
0.014 0.004
0.008 to 0.032 0.003 to 0.005
OFFSHORE ZONE**
0.009 0.001
N
Total organic (N03+N02)
0.78 0.85
0.71 to 0.95 0.73 to 1.84

0.76 0.20
0.56 to 0.98 0.14 to 0.32
0.21 0.25
0.01 to 0.70 0.10 to 0.29
0.19 0.19
Cl
52
28 to 110

34
25 to 42
12
8 to 16
7
 *Baseflow samples obtained at Broadway bridge during 1976.
**Based on data from other studies summarized (1)  and baseflow survey from this study.

-------
          Table 17.  Water temperatures and current velocities and directions at harbor stations on 5/19/1977.  See Fig. 4C for station locations
w
Samples taken at depth,
Time, hr

1300
1305

T

20
—
0
V D

0.37 160
105
5
T V D

19 0.28 145
105

T

15
—
10
V
STATION
0.18
—

D
NO. I
185
330
STATION NO.
1235
1400
1405
1410
1415
1620
1625
17
17
—
—
—
18
—
0.37 115
0.18 30
170
290
50
0.18 50
130
17 0.28 105
15 0.18 225
115
75
65
17 0.46 80
80
12
13
—
—
—
16
—
0.18
0.18
—
—
—
0.46
—
65
290
70
80
80
80
80
STATION NO. 6 —
1120
1125
1200
1325
1330
1540
1545
1550
18

15
14
—
14
—
"
0.28 70
150
0.28 90
0.28 350
290
0.28 270
85
__ __
	 	 	

15 0.28 95
14 0.28 240
300
14 0.18 260
75
110
13

12
11
—
10
—
—
0.18

0.28
0.28
—
0.18
—
—
85
150
100
300
270
270
235
100
15
T V
— BROADWAY
12 0.28
—
7 — HARBOR
9 0.28
11 0.18
—
—
— —
13 0.37
—
m of
20
D T V
BRDIGE
310 10 0.46
335
MOUTH
250 9 0.28
235 10 0.18
270
90
100
110 11 0.28
100


D

340
—

250
265
105
—
—
130
95

25 28
TV D TV D


-----

8 0.28 260
_ — — _ — 	
_ — 	 _ 	 	
— — _ — 	
_ — 	 _ 	 	
_ — — _ — 	
-
BREAKWATER CENTRAL OPENING
-_

9 0.28
9 0.28
—
9 0.28
—
— —
9 0.28

235 9 0.28
270 8 0.37
250
275 7 0.37
285
140
250

255
260
265
275
265
300
_^

----- 6 0.28 300
7 0.37 240
_ — 	 _ 	 	
7 0.37 235
260
— — _ — —
          T is temperature  in °C, V and D are current velocity in kmph and  direction  in degrees, respectively.

-------
Table 18.   Water temperatures and current velocities and directions at harbor stations.   See Fig.  3B for  station locations
Time, hr
1430
1440
1450
1625
1635
1645
1650
1815
1825
1900
1910
1925
1530
1540
1715
1725
1735
1840
1850
1930
1940
1950
2000
1530
1540
1550
1700
1710
1715
1900
1930
1615
1625
1730
1740
1750
1800
1810
1825
1840


T
19
20
20
20
20
19
18
18
18
18
16
16
17
17
17
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
15
18
18
17
17
17
10
10
10
10
12
13
10
11
12

0
V
0.37
1.30
1.39
0.74
0.74
0.46
0.37
0.74
0.56
0.46
0.93
0.93
0.93
0.37
0.93
0.93
0.65
0.83
0.65
0.37
0.37
0.56
1.11
2.26
1.20
0.18
0.74
2.22
0.37
2.26
0.74
0.37
0.37
2.78
1.57
2.96
0.65


D
85
100
65
80
40
65
70
70
65
75
90
45
120
140
155
120
130
115
80
70
45
277
53
74
90
208
37
77
283
232
158
138
271
87
227
278
104


T
20
18
20
18
20
20
17
18
17
18
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
14
15
18
16
17
16
16
10
10
11
10
12
13
11
11
12

5
V
0.28
0.46
1.20
0.74
0.37
0.65
0.37
0.18
0.37
0.56
0.37
0.74
1.11
0.37
0.37
0.56
0.56
0.93
0.83
0.83
0.37
0.46
0.93
1.11
1.67
0.74
0.56
0.28
2.22
1.39
1.85
0.93
0.18
0.28
1.85
2.22
2.41
0.46


D
75
130
85
70
65
40
160
155
65
45
75
STATION
105
90
100
145
135
90
40
115
40
35
30
270
88
75
97
251
5
83
STATION
248
223
137
138
45
97
255
286
72
Samples
10
T V
STATION NO
16 0.18
16 0.28
17 0.46
15 0.28
16 0.56
16 0.56
16 0.93
15 0.65
16 0.65
16 0.18
16 0.18
15 0.28
NO. 2 — ]
16 0.56
16 0.56
16 0.46
9 0.1S
9 0.74
16 0.93
16 0.37
16 0.93
16 0.74
16 0.28
14 0.18
STATION NO,
14 0.93
15 1.39
17 1.39
16 0.83
16 0.46
13 0.74
15 0.74
16 2.22
NO. 2. —
10 1.20
10 1.67
12 1.20
10 0.37
12 0.65
13 2.22
12 2.59
11 1.85
12 0.65
taken at depth, m of
15
D T V D


T

20
V


D

25
T V


D I

28
V D
. 1 — HARBOR MOUTH - 6/28/1977
200 14 0.28 165
85 14 0.28 350
335 13 0.28 75
195 14 0.56 235
15 14 0.83 240
215 — 	 	
270 14 0.46 315
210 14 0.28 320
345 14 1.02 220
50 14 0.28 330
330 14 0.18 290
iREAKWATER CENTRAL OPENING
105 16 0.74 135
45 16 0.74 150
85 14 0.28 170
315 8 0.93 345
12
13
12
12
0.28
0.28
0.37
0.56

11 0.46
12 0.37
10 0.56
12 0.93
12 0.46
- 6/28/1977
14
13
10
8
55 16 0.56 150 10
100 15 0.18 120 9
40 12 0.56 150 8
155 12 0.18 120 8
75 10 0.28 165 8
85 8 0.46 185 8
. 1 — HARBOR MOUTH - 6/30/1977
285 14 1.11 270
83 14 1.20 74
83 16 1.11 90
57 16 0.93 172
251 14 0.93 228
233 14 0.65 223
218 14 0.56 337
80 15 1.85 80
BREAKWATER CENTRAL OPENING
256 11 1.48 268
226 10 1.85 232
113 12 0.93 75
46 10 0.46 360
337 11 0.74 242
93 13 1-76 82
218 12 0.93 352
286 11 1.67 285
145 12 0.46 80
13
14
16
16
14
0.56
0.74
0.37
0.46
0.37
0.56
0.28
0.28
0.28
0.37
1.30
1.30
0.74
0.28
0.65
14 0.46
14 1.57
- 6/30/1977
11
10
11
10
10
12
12
11
13
1.57
1.57
0.83
0.46
0.83
1.30
1.30
1.76
0.37
315
350
160
285

310
310
250
210
265
135
135
305
250
140
345
140
200
220
190
268
83
85
247
203
320
80
256
227
88
293
320
53
315
285
82

	 	









121 0.37
10 0.46
8 0.56
8 0.37
S 0.28
8 0.46
8 0.56
8 0.28
8 0.28
8 0.37
13 0.56
— 	


13 0.30


10 0.46
10 0.83
10 0.94
12 1.20
12 1.67
12 0.46

— -









120 9
315 -
270 -
300 -
50 -
310 -
345 -
280 -
195 -
190 -
240 -
— -


218 -


113 -
345 -
14 -
17 -
262 -
172 -

	 	









0.28 180
	
	 —


	 	


	 —
 T  is temperature in °C, V and D are current velocity in kmph and direction  in degrees, repectively.
                                                                       33

-------
           Water temperatures  and  current velocities and directions at harbor stations on 7/28/1977,
           locations
See Fig.  3C for station
Samples taken at depth, m of
Time , hr

1315
1325
1350
WOO
1415

T

24
24
24
23
24
0
V

0.93
1.11
0.65
0.93
0.74

D

65
90
75
75
80

T

22
23
23
23
23
5
V

0.83
0.93
0.37
0.83
0.56

D

80
80
95
80
80

T

19
21
21
22
20
10
V
STATION
0 83
0.83
0.28
0.56
0.37
STATION NO. 2
1445
1450
1500
1505
1705
1710
1715
1730
1735
1740
1745
1750
1800
1815
1820
1835
1900
20
20
20
20
20
19
19
20
20
20
20
19
19
20
20
16
19
0.56
0.74
0.37
2.78
0 65
0.46
0.46
0.56
0.56
1.11
0.65
0.74
0.28
1.11
1.39
0.46
0.74
120
125
150
345
100
70
330
105
105
95
5
110
330
105
85
250
90
19
19
17
15
20
19
16
18
20
19
19
19
14
20
20
15
19
1.11
0.74
0.46
0.65
0 65
0.46
0.83
0.56
0.65
1.39
0.46
0.65
0.74
0.83
1.20
0.28
0.65
125
135
185
215
105
115
290
1251
110
95
15
110
250
140
95
205
125
14
12
13
14

15
13
14
16
19
17
17
14
18
20
15
19
0.74
0.46
0.74
0.65

0.46
0.65
0.46
0.37
1.48
0.46
0.65
0.74
0.74
1.11
0.46
0.56

D
NO.

90
115
80
85

T
1 —

17
16
18
19
15
V
HARBOR

0.56
0.28
0.46
0.28

D
MODTH

75
345
75
50

T


14
13
14
15
20
V


0.37
0.46
0.18
0.18

D


70
270
25
265

T


	
	
	
—
25
V


	
	
	
	

D


	
	
	
	
— BREAKWATER CENTRA! OPENING
165
IfiO
240
220

315
240
165
115
90
110
340
250
175
90
225
170
11
12
13
12

13
10
10
14
18
11
13
12
14
20
14
14
0.46
0.37
0.83
0.65

0.74
0.93
0.28
0.28
1.30
0.46
0.37
1.02
0.46
1.20
0.74
0.37
240
220
240
230

240
230
215
125
80
140
325
235
140
80
240
135
10
10
10
10

10
8
10
10
15
11
12
9
12
15
12
11
0.83
0.46
0.83
0.56

0.93
0.93
0.28
0.18
1.20
0.28
0.28
1.02
0.56
1.39
1.02
0.56
290
185
190
240

240
250
235
225
90
225
180
245
75
100
230
175

	
	
20

__
	
9
10
12
10
12
9
12
12
12
10

	
	
0.74

	
	
0.37
0.37
1.39
0.56
0.28
0.83
0.65
1.39
0.83
0.37

	
	
70

	
	
285
330
115
255
180
260
70
105
220
195
T is temperature in °C,  V and  D  are current velocity in kmph and direction in degrees, respectively.
                                                            34

-------
     Determination of the degree of water quality impairment in the
harbor and inshore zones during runoff events was dependent on defining
the ranges of pollutant concentrations during baseflow.  The mean and ranges
of several parameters at the surface for the inshore zone near Milwaukee
(Table 16) were obtained from the literature (1).  For the purpose  of
this report the eastern boundary of the inshore zone is 5 km from the break-
water.  Surface concentration observed during background surveys an May 19,
1977 and April 8, 1976 also were used.  Inner harbor surface water quality
data collected over a 2-yr period in the Menomonee River Pilot Watershed
Project were used to estimate average baseflow pollutant levels for the inner
harbor area.  The inner harbor trends were assumed to hold true for the
outer harbor, since insufficient baseflow data were available.  Most base-
flow surface water quality values for inshore and harbor zones contained
considerable variability; because of this and the fact that different
laboratories analyzed the inshore zone samples emphasizes the need for
caution in examining the results.  In contrast, most of the offshore zone
surface concentrations obtained from the literature (1)  and this study,
showed less variability (Table 16).  Baseflow water quality data for the
various zones showed that not only were the harbor zones always impaired
relative to the inshore and offshore zones but that the inshore zone was
always impaired relative to the offshore zone.

     A comparison of the above baseflow values with event surface water
quality in the inner harbor indicates that the water quality of the harbor
was usually degraded during runoff events (Tables 3 to 19).   During an
event the levels of total and suspended solids and total organic N were
usually elevated whereas total- and soluble-P levels were seldom increased.
In contrast to water quality in the harbor zones, the inshore zone usually
was not lowered during an event (Tables 3 to 16).  Noticeable exceptions to
this trend in the inshore zone occurred on February 25, and September 9,
1976 at two sampling sites (sites 5 and 7 in Figs. 2B and 3A) and July 18,
1977 for suspended solids and chlorides.   Although the levels of these
parameters were within the range for background values, the values were
significantly higher than the means.  The event values for these two
parameters and the other three parameters were usually close to the mean
of the baseflow values for all event surveys in the inshore zone.  The two
stations with higher values on September 9, 1976 were just outside the
south breakwater opening and represented a very small area of contamination
in the inshore zone.  The higher levels of suspended solids were expected
on July 18, 1977 because of the appearance of large areas of turbid
water in the inshore zone.  The February 25, 1976 values were probably a
result of an extended period of high flow during a snowmelt.  The trend
for the inshore zone obviously indicates that the offshore zone usually
was not affected during runoff events.

     Although water quality in the harbor was affected during runoff events,
the inshore zone was rarely altered significantly.  Only the July 18, 1977
event with relative high flows [85 cms (3000 cfs) at 70th Street] and rainfall
(5 cm) impaired the water quality for a large area of the inshore zone.
All the other events were considered more normal with peak flows <42 cms
(<1500 cfs) at 70th Street and <2.5 cm rainfall.  However,  water quality in
the inshore zone was definitely degraded  relative to the offshore zone.
                                     35

-------
Thus, the data indicate that the input from the harbor was affecting the
inshore zone, but this was not noticeable during high flow periods of a
commonly occurring event.  Transport of event-related pollutants to the
inshore zone appears to be controlled by the physical confinement of the
harbor and current movement in the harbor.
                      Current and Dispersion Patterns


     Transport mechanism of pollutants from the inner to outer harbor and
through the central breakwater opening to the inshore zone was investigated
by observing the direction and velocity of currents during runoff events
(Tables 17 to 19).  A current direction of approximately 270 degrees
indicated that the direction of flow was to the harbor and 90 degrees
indicated flow was towards the lake.  Currents were observed to reverse
direction and stratified flows were recorded for most of the sampling
days.  The reversal of current direction has been observed as far as 3.2 km
above the end of the inner harbor.  The current velocity usually varied
considerably during a sampling day and represented brief intervals of
flow ranging from 62 to 620 cms (2V200 to 22,000 cfs) at the central
breakwater opening; and current measurements for events on June 28 and
July 18, 1977, indicated that there were periods of stratified flow at
each end of the inner harbor and the central breakwater opening.  The
surface 3 m was observed to have more periods of outward flow than the
lower depths.  The current direction changed significantly at least
once during the brief sampling period for depths below 5m.  A reversal
of current direction resulted in a change in water temperature.

     Lake water coming into the harbor significantly lowered the temperature
in the upper layers.  Pollutant concentrations were higher in the strata
flowing towards the lake for both stations on June 28 and July 18 (Tables
18 and 19).  Current velocities ranged from 0.28 to 2.8 kmph and usually
were higher in the upper 3 mof the water column.  The flow was not stratified
on June 30, 1977 and the whole water column reversed direction frequently
during the period of record (Table 18).  Current velocities on this date
were generally higher than on other sampling dates.  The entire water column
at the breakwater opening reflected the temperature of the hypolimnetic
water of the inshore zone.   Flows were stratified and reversed direction
during the period of measurement at both stations for the low flow survey
on May 19, 1977 (Table 17); current velocities were consistently low and
ranged from 0.18 to 0.37 kmph (0.1 to 0.2 knots).  The data from all the
sampling days demonstrated the variability in current movement from day
to day, however insufficient flow measurements were recorded to predict
any long term trends in current direction and velocities.

     The results of the current measurements suggest that the current pattern
in the harbor controls the transport of pollutants to the inshore zone
during runoff events.  The lake and harbor seiches were probably responsible
for the observed current patterns.  The pattern of reversing current
directions at the central breakwater opening could alternate the discharge    '
of harbor water to the inshore zone with lake water coming into the harbor.
                                    36

-------
Pollutants discharged to the harbor during events could have entered the
inshore zone in plugs during the event and for some time afterwards with
the size and frequency of the plugs probably varying considerably through-
out the year.  Some portion of the event loading was discharged to the
inshore zone after a residence time in the harbor but the relative portion
of the event loading that reached the inshore zone during the brief period
of high flows was probably small and the amount reaching the inshore zone
during most events was insufficient to alter noticeably water quality.
An exceptionally large event, such as the one on July 18, 1977, immediately
lowered water quality of the inshore zone because a portion of the river
water flowed along the surface and reached the inshore zone during the
event.  The results indicate that the effect of event flows was modified
by the harbor current pattern and harbor structures, and the degradation
of the inshore zone was probably a more gradual process.

     The dispersion pattern of the pollutants reaching the inshore zone
was difficult to assess in the study, since the only surface plume observed
was on July 18, 1977.  This plume had dispersed sufficiently in about a day
or so as to extend approximately 5 km into the inshore zone from the center
breakwater opening (Fig. 6).  The plume dispersed symmetrically on either
side of an east-west axis.  The plumes emerging from the north and south
breakwater openings were much smaller in size.  The long term dispersion
pattern of the plume will not be known until remote sensing data from the
two WDNR DC-3 overflights and the LANDSAT satellite have been interpreted.
The dispersion of pollutants from the other events surveyed was only visible
in the form of small islands of turbid water in the inshore zone or a narrow
line of turbid water along the outside edge of the breakwater, however,
those conditions existed during baseflow.  The dispersion pattern can vary
from day to day because of the significant effect of wind on  the direction
of the surface currents in the inshore zone.  Past investigations of the
inshore currents in the Milwaukee area indicated that the general flow in
spring and summer  is highly variable and that small residual flows exist
to the south at this time.  During the fall and winter, the flow is north
past  the Milwaukee area with minimum variability.


                       Annual  Lake  Loading  Estimate


     The results  of this study indicate that  the transport of  pollutants
to the inshore zone was modified  by harbor  currents  and structures and
therefore the water discharged to the harbor  had an  undetermined residence
time.   The pollutant  load in the  discharge  waters was probably reduced by
settling processes  during residence.   Enough  of  the  river inputs have
been deposited annually to require dredging to maintain shipping canals.
The question remains  to determine how much  of the annual harbor loadings
from events and baseflow ware retained in the  harbor  zones.  Determination
of the retention of pollutants from individual events was not attempted
from the available  data.

     A mass balance relationship  was used to  estimate annual inputs to
the inshore area from the rivers  and the Jones Island STP.  The relationship
was based on comparing the inputs to the inner or outer harbor for an

-------
    MILWAUKEE
         MILWAUKEE
Fig. 6.  Visible
Plumes following 7/18/1977
                                            event.
                       38

-------
average residence time with the average mass of a pollutant present in
those areas.  If the amounts of a nonconservative pollutant (e.g., total
P)  in the  inner or outer harbors was exceeded by the inputs for the residence
time, part of the nonconservative pollutant was considered to have been
retained in these areas.  The residence time for the inner and outer
harbors was calculated using the concentration gradients of chloride in
a residence time equation (Eq.(3)) developed for coastal regions (8).
                                  v    (css-cL)
                              =  -
where          V = volume in the coastal zone
              QQ = volumetric flow from rivers and discharges
             Cgg = mean concentrations in the coastal zone
              CD = concentration in the river and discharges
              CL = concentration in the outer lake
               t = residence time

     Equation (3) states that the coastal residence time is the mean mass
excess divided by the total discharged mass excess.  Chloride was used for
the calculation of residence times because its mass was assumed to be
conserved during transport.  The residence time of the harbor areas cal-
culated with the chloride concentrations was used in the mass balance
equation for determining retention of nonconservative pollutants.

     The inner harbor was the coastal zone when the outer harbor was
considered to be the lake.  The concentration values for the terms Cgg ar*d
CL used for the inner harbor residence time calculations were averages from
available data sources from this study and the Menomonee River Watershed
Project (Table 20).  Since the inner harbor was not a well-mixed area,
the mean concentration of chloride and other parameters were weighted for
different areas in the inner harbor.  The mean river concentrations of
chloride and the other pollutants were obtained by dividing the combined
yearly loadings by the combined yearly volume of water discharged (Table 20) .
Long term water discharges were obtained from the USGS to determine total
water loadings for the river.  The residence time of the inner harbor was
estimated to be 4.6 days using Eq.(3).  The natural residence time of the
inner harbor was determined to be 5.2 days; natural residence time being
determined by dividing the volume of the harbor by the tributary flow.
The estimated residence time represents an average of all possible conditions
and probably varies with significant changes in river flows and current
movement.   The similarity in the natural and estimated residence times
probably means a significant increase in discharge to the inner harbor
substantially reduces the residence time for a portion of the pollutants.
The inner harbor was determined to be flushed 79 times/yr.

     The outer harbor was the coastal zone when the inshore area was the
lake in Eq.  (3).   The inner harbor was considered to discharge to the outer
harbor at a higher rate than the combined river flows.   The rate of 1.3 x
10  cms/day was determined by increasing the combined river rates by the
ratio of the inner harbor residence time.   This rate could  be highly
                                    39

-------
        Table 20.  Mean annual surface concentrations of pollutants in mg/L in  the harbor  region*
Region or tributary
Inner Harbor
Outer Harbor
Inshore Zone
Menomonee River
Milwaukee River
Combined Rivers**
Jones Island STP
Mean
flow, cms
—
—
—
2.5
11.3
14.4
6.2
Solids
Total
405
245
180
780
460
510
840
Suspended
19
9
3
190
40
67
40
Total
0.17
0.06
0.02
0.35
0.21
0.24
0.66
P
Soluble
0.070
0.016
0.003
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
(N03+N02)-N
0.70
0.40
0.22
1.7
1.0
1.1
— —
Cl
54
31
8
160
33
56
200
.p-
o

         *Means include values from this study and the literature.


        **Combined Menomonee, Milwaukee and Kinnickinnic Rivers.

-------
  variable and was the best;available estimate for an average rate.  Discharges
  from Jones Island STP were included as inputs to the outer harbor.  The values
  used to solve Eq. (3) were mean values of data obtained from this study and
  the literature (Table 20) •.  The mean concentrations for chloride and other
  parameters in the inshore zone were obtained by combining historical
  data with results of this study. The residence time calculated for the
  outer harbor was 5.2 days, which was adjusted to 6 days to allow the
  chloride inputs and outputs to balance.   This adjustment resulted from
  the need to average chloride concentrations that were highly variable
  with time and location in the outer harbor.  Ideally the residence times
  should have been calculated for a specific time period like a season
  for both harbor zones instead of an average  residence time throughout
  the year.   Data were not available for such an estimate.  The natural
  residence time of the outer harbor was determined to be 20 days.  The
  higher natural residence time indicates  that the current pattern of the
  breakwater openings increased the transport of water out of the outer harbor.
  The outer harbor was determined to be flushed 61 times/yr.

       The percentage of the annual inputs retained in the inner and outer
  harbors was calculated using the mass balance equation (Eq.  (4)).
                  Retained =
                              (QD x CD x t) - (V x Css)
                                      QD x CD x t
100        Eq. (4)
The terms have the same definitions as in Eq.  (3).

     Equation (4)  states  that the percentage of material entering the harbor
area that is retained depends on the difference between the amount of material
input during the residence time and the average amount of material present in
the harbor area.

      The concentration values  used for  the  nonconservative parameters  are
 shown in Table  20.   From Eq.  (4)  the  annual river  inputs  retained in the
 inner harbor  were 70,  22,  52 and  35%  for  suspended solids, total- and  soluble-P
 and (N03+ N02)-N,  respectively; annual  inputs from the  inner harbor  and from
 Jones Island  STP  retained in the  outer  harbor were 1, 33  and 43%  for suspended
 solids and total- and  soluble-P,  respectively.   The 1%  value for  suspended
 solids is probably low and represents the sensitivity of  the equation  to
 inaccurate estimates of  concentrations.   The  mass  balance results from the
 inner and outer harbors  were used to  calculate the total  amount of all the
 harbor inputs entering the inshore area/yr.   The quantities and percentages
 of suspended  solids, total- and soluble-P discharged annually  from the river
 and STP that  enter the inshore area/yr  were 17 x 106  (45%), 144 x 103  (61%),
 and 35 x 103  (35%)  kg, respectively.  Although the numbers represent gross
 estimates,  the  percentages indicate that  a  significant  portion of the  pol-
 lutants entering  the harbor area  did  not  reach the inshore area.   The  most
 obvious mechanism of retention of the particulate  pollutants is deposition
 during their  residence time in the harbor.  Soluble pollutants such  as
                                    41

-------
soluble-P might be sorbed onto particulate matter or incorporated in the bio-
mass in the harbor.

     The percentage of suspended solids entering the inshore zone/yr was
compared to the suspended solids in the inshore plume of July 18, 1977.  A
concentration of 6 mg/L of suspended solids was assumed over the entire
surface area of the plume to the bottom of the thermocline at 10 m.  An
estimate of 850,000 kg was calculated which was 5% of the annual suspended
solids loading to the inshore zone.  The amount of suspended solids in the
plume was small relative to the total input/yr.  The size of the input during
one of the only events at which a plume was observed, supports the conclusion
that only a small portion of the event loading enters the inshore zone during
the brief period of high river flows.

     Preliminary results from the Menomonee River Watershed Project have
shown the annual event loading of suspended solids, total- and soluble-P to
be roughly 80, 50 and 50% respectively, of the total annual Menomonee River
loadings.  Thus, a significant portion of the total annual inputs from these
three rivers that were retained in the harbor could have originated from
runoff events.  Without a great deal of information to verify the adequacy
of Eq. (4), it must be assumed that the 70% value calculated is a reasonable
estimate of suspended solids retention in the inner harbor.  Data from the
Menomonee River Watershed would indicate that approximately 80% of the total
suspended solids loadings arises during events and without evidence to the
contrary it must be assumed that retention in the inner harbor is the same
for events and baseflow.  Based on these calculations, 8 to 9 x 10  kg of
suspended solids was retained in the inner harbor and 3 to 4 x 10  kg entered
the outer harbor.  Similar calculations could be made with total- and soluble-P
with lesser degree of certainty that the estimates are reasonable because
of the possible effect of suspended solids concentration on P transformations
and most of the P retained in the inner harbor did not arise from annual event
loadings.  Although the mass balance results indicate that a small amount of
suspended solids was retained in the outer harbor, any calculation of event
pollutant loading retained in the outer harbor is considered difficult because
of the significant contribution from the Jones Island STP.  For example,
differences in the characteristics of the suspended solids in the sewage
effluent and the river make it difficult to assume that the percentage of
total inputs are the same for both sources.  The above estimates of the amount
of the annual event loading retained in the inner harbor are only gross esti-
mates.  The numbers demonstrate that loading estimates to the lake from land
use activities should be significantly reduced.
                           Bottom sediments
      Bottom sediment  survey  data  indicate  that pollutants  from  the  rivers
 are  retained in the harbor area  (Tables  21 and 22).  Total-P, total-N
 and  metal  concentrations were higher  in  the harbor  than  in the  river and
 lake sediments.   All  but one of  the sediment  samples consisted  mostly  of
 sand and silt size fractions.  Stations  11H and  12H to the south  of the
 main channel in the outer harbor  had  lower pollutant values than  other
 harbor stations.   A large portion of  the pollutants discharged  must have
 been deposited in the main channel and a lesser  amount was transported
                                  42

-------
Table 21.  Sediment analyses (% of oven-dried weight) for Menomonee
           River, Milwaukee Harbor and Lake Michigan.  See Fig. 5 for
           station locations
Station No.
413008*
413006*
413004*
2H**
3H
4H
8H
11H
12H**
4LM
2LM
5LM
6LM**
Sand
46
91
60
54
28
20
16
6
34
39
0
32
60
Silt
46
9
34
40
66
72
76
80
56
56
30
50
32
Clay
8
0
6
6
6
8
8
14
10
5
70
18
8
Total N
0.07
0.03
0.16
0.21
0.25
0.20
0.12
0.13
0.12
0.03
0.03
0.10
0.04
Total P
0.05
0.04
0.06
0.19
0.30
0.34
0.27
0.18
0.08
0.06
0.09
0.09
0.04
  * Mainstem monitoring stations on the Menomonee River.

  **Pesticide concentrations were below detection limits  at these.
    stations.  PCB concentrations were 1.6 and 8.3 mg/kg at stations 12H
    and 6LM, respectively.
                                43

-------
Table 22.  Metal concentrations in mg/kg in sediments of Menomonee
           River, Milwaukee Harbor and Lake Michigan.  See Fig. 5
           for station locations
Station No.
413008
413062
413004
2H
3H
4H
8H
11H
12H
4LM
2LM
5LM
6LM
Cd
1.2
1.4
10
8.4
17
23
18
14
5.8
1.5
2.0
1.0
' 0.2
Cr
11
32
110
124
1240
1420
880
790
175
15
37
27
6
Pb
83
62
690
440
380
330
250
210
66
30
30
33
7
Zn
180
75
510
370
470
600
570
430
150
42
52
86
21
Cu
18
18
18
63
108
125
104
73
30
8
25
23
5
Fe
30,000
15,000
40,000
—
40,000
40,000
40,000
40,000
30,000
7,000
19,000
50,000
20,000
Ni
20
20
33
—
45
43
39
41
21
12
37
36
7

-------
to parts of the outer harbor.  Pollutants associated with the particulates
discharged during events were probably responsible for the observed
enrichment of pollutants in the harbor bottom sediments.
                             Resuspension
     Aerial photographs obtained by NASA during the overflight on April 8,
1976 confirmed the presence of a narrow band of turbid water along the
shoreline extending a number of miles north of the Milwaukee embayment (6).
The embayment includes the area between the Linwood Water Purification
Plant just north of the outer harbor to Sheridan Park just south of the
outer harbor.  The turbidity extended further into the lake north of
Milwaukee and the suspended material was entering the outer harbor through
the north opening.  There also was a band of turbidity along the outside
edge of the breakwater wall.  The suspended material was not discharged
into the lake from a runoff event because a significant amount of rainfall
had not occurred for almost 2 weeks.  Instead, the suspended material may
have originated from shoreline erosion and/or resuspension of bottom sedi-
ments.  Areas of active erosion have been identified just north of the
Milwaukee embayment and inshore currents could have transported the sus-
pended material to the breakwater.  Resuspension was also a possibility,
since the inshore area was not stratified.  On April 8, 1976 an easterly
wind was recorded and the highest turbidity was in relatively shallow
(2 to 6 m) water.

     Concentrations of suspended solids in the areas of turbid water
(Station Nos. 10, 6 and 13) were higher than baseflow averages for the
inshore zone and areas of low turbidity on April 8, 1976 (Table 13).  Some
of the concentrations of total-P and total-solids were higher at Stations
10, 6, and 13 than at Station 7 in a low turbidity area.  The total-P and
total-solids concentration, however, did not usually exceed baseflow
averages.  The concentration gradients of suspended solids mapped by
NASA (6) for April 8, 1976 were used to estimate the amount of suspended
solids in the turbid water inside the Milwaukee embayment.  Approximately
1.8 x 106 kg of suspended solids were found in the turbid water, which
represents about 4.5% of the total annual loading of suspended solids to
the harbor or about 12% of the total annual loading leaving the harbor.
This amount of suspended solids was about twice as much as suspended
 olids observed in the July 18, 1977 runoff event plume in the inshore
area.   The suspended solids concentration was also higher on April 8, 1976
than on July 18,  1977.  The annual contribution of suspended solids to the
inshore area from a combination of resuspension and shoreline erosion
could be significant when compared with the annual input to the inshore
area from the Milwaukee harbor.  Shoreline erosion or resuspension did
not appear to degrade water quality in the inshore zone.
                                     45

-------
                                  REFERENCES


1.   Torrey, M.  S.  Chemistry of Lake Michigan, Vol. 3, Environmental Status of
    the Lake Michigan Region, Argonne National Laboratory/ES-40, 1976.  418 pp.

2.   Ayers, J. C. and J. C. K. Huang.  Studies of Milwaukee Harbor and Embayment.
    In:  Studies on the Environment and Eutrophication of Lake Michigan, J. C.
    Ayers and D. C. Chandler, (eds.).  Special Report No. 30, Great Lakes Research
    Division, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1967.  415 pp.

3.   Envirex, Inc.  Compilation, Analysis and Interpretation of Selected Lake
    Michigan Water Quality Data.  Envirex, Inc., Environmental Science Division,
    1974.  286 pp.

4.   American Public Health Assoc.  R. C. Rand, A. E. Greenberg, and T. J. Taras
    (eds.).  Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 14th
    ed.  Washington, D. C., 1975.

5.   U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Manual of Methods for Chemical
    Analysis of Water and Wastes, 2nd ed.  EPA 625/6-76-003A,  U.S, Environmental
    Protection Agency, 1976.  317 pp.

6.   Raquet,  C. A., J. A. Salzman, T. A. Coney, R. V. Svehla, D. F. Shook and
    R. T. Gedney.  Coordinated Aircraft/Ship Surveys for Determining  the Impact
    of River Inputs on Great Lakes Water—Remote Sensing Results.  NASA Lewis
    Research Center, 1977.

7.   Bannerman,  R., J. G. Konrad, D. Becker and G. V. Simsiman.  Surface Water
    Monitoring Data.   Part I:  Quality of Runoff from Mixed Land Uses.  Final
    Report of the Menomonee River Pilot Watershed Study, Vol. 3, U.S.
    Environmental Protection Agency, 1979.

8.   Palmer, M. D.  Coastal Region Residence Time Estimates from Concentration
    Gradients.  J. Great Lakes Research 1:130-141, 1975.
                                        46

-------
                                    TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                             (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing/
 1. REPORT NO.
   EPA-904/79-029-J
                                                             3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
  Effects  of Tributary  Inputs on Lake  Michigan During
  High Flows-Volume 10
              5. REPORT DATE
                December 1979
              6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)

  R. Bannerman, J. G.  Konrad and D.  Becker
                                                             8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
  Wisconsin Department  of Natural Resources
  Post  Office Box 7921
  Madison,  Wisconsin  53707
              10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
                A-42B2A
              11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.


                R005U2
 12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS

  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
  Great  Lakes National Program Office
  536 South Clark Street, Room 932
              13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                Final  Report 1974-1978
     r*p0*o   Tl 1 TTio"i '
              14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                                                               U.S. EPA-GLNP
 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
  University of Wisconsin-Water Resources Center and Southeastern  Wisconsin
  Regional  Planning Commission assisted.
 16. ABSTRACT
  This  study was in part  of TASK D of  the Pollution  from Land Use Activities
  Reference Group (PLUARG) objective to diagnose the degree of impairment of
  Great Lakes water quality.  The overall objective  of this study was to
  determine the effects of input from  the Milwaukee,  Menomonee and
  Kinnickinnic Rivers.
17.
                                 KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                  DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS  C. COSATI Field/Group
  Metal
  Water Quality Data
  Sediment
  Pollutants
  Organic
  Total-pho sphorus
  Soluble phosphorus
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
                                               19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
  Document  available to the  public through
  the National Technical Information Service
  Springfield. VA .  2?.1 61	
                            21. NO. OF PAGES
                                  56
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
                            22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
                                                               D. S. Government Printing Office  1981 750-8

-------