United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
EPA-600 2-79-033
January 1979
Research and Development
&EPA
Disposal of an
Integrated
Pulp-Paper Mill
Effluent by
Irrigation
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECH-
NOLOGY series. This series describes research performed to develop and dem-
onstrate instrumentation, equipment, and methodology to repair or prevent en-
vironmental degradation from point and non-point sources of pollution. This work
provides the new or improved technology required for the control and treatment
of pollution-sources to meet environmental quality standards.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/2-79-033
January 1979
DISPOSAL OF AN INTEGRATED PULP-PAPER MILL EFFLUENT
BY IRRIGATION
by
Q. A. Narum
D. P. Mickelson
Nils Roehne
Simpson Paper Company
Anderson, California 96007
Grant No. S-803689-01-0
Project Officer
H. Kirk Willard
Food and Wood Products Branch
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio, 45268
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Industrial Environ-
mental Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that
the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade
names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recom-
mendation for use.
11
-------
FOREWORD
When energy and material resources are extracted, processed, converted,
and used, the related pollutional impacts on our environment and even on our
health often require that new and increasingly more efficient pollution con-
trol methods be used. The Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory-Cin-
cinnati (lERL-Ci) assists in developing and demonstrating new and improved
methodologies that will meet these needs both efficiently and economically.
Kraft pulp mills generally discharge large quantities of wastewaters to
the receiving waters near where they are located. Biological treatment of
wastewaters is normally effective only to 85 or 90% of the oxidizable organ-
ics. This report describes how one mill dramatically reduced their BOD,
Suspended Solids and other pollutants discharged to the receiving water by
disposing of approximately 1/2 of the treated waste volume on a special
flood irrigation agricultural field. The effluent percolate, which eventu-
ally enters the Sacramento River, is essentially devoid of organic material.
Other mills should find the material contained in this report useful for con-
sideration of possible application if land is available and their discharge
limits are severely restricted.
Appendix H, 'Analysis of Groundwater Flow Regimen1, was authored by
Clinton Parker, US-EPA, from data supplied by Simpson Paper Company. Its
content is the opinion of Dr. Parker and not necessarily that of the company.
For further information regarding this report contact H. Kirk Willard,
Food and Wood Products Branch, Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory-
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
David G. Stephan
Director
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio
m
-------
ABSTRACT
In January, 1974, the Simpson Paper Company decided to
enlarge its recently acquired, integrated bleached kraft pulp-
fine paper mill, near Anderson, California, (Shasta Mill). The
company concluded that conventional liquid waste treatment
methods would not assure compliance with the revised Waste
Discharge Permit issued by a State Agency. For five day bio-
chemical oxygen demand (BOD-5), and total suspended solids
(TSS), this permit prescribed limits which were substantially
lower than the guidelines published in December, 1976, by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
In anticipation of these events, Simpson initiated a re-
search program in 1973, to explore the use of the fully-treated
secondary effluent from its Shasta Mill for beneficial crop
irrigation. This program included the operation of laboratory
soil columns and field test plots, plus hydrological studies.
Potential problems were identified, and remedies for those
problems were developed.
After obtaining the necessary permits, construction of a 162
hectare irrigation project began in early 1975, with the first
effluent irrigation taking place in January, 1976. During the
next 20 months, over 5.3 million cubic meters (about 1.41
billion U.S. gallons) of effluent were applied to the carefully
prepared fields, using an innovative, highly automated, flood
irrigation system.
Several crops have ,been grown, including wheat, oats, corn,
alfalfa and beans. In most cases, the yields were equal to,
or better than, the California averages for those crops.
The effluent percolate, which eventually enters the
Sacramento River, is essentially devoid of suspended solids,
BOD-5, chemical oxygen demand (COD), color, and toxicity compo-
nents. Both the indirect percolate discharge and the direct
secondary-treatment effluent discharge to the river meet all of
the requirements of the Waste Discharge Permit.
The main problem,which was anticipated, is the control of
the composition and movement of groundwater, relative to local
Use Permit requirements. This has required the implementation of
a complex monitoring program, plus some revisions to the origi-
nal project design.
iv
-------
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Grant No.
S-803689-01-0, by Simpson Paper Company under the partial spon-
sorship of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. This re-
port covers the period July 1, 1975, to July 1, 1977, and work
was completed on September 30, 1977.
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword iii
Abstract iv
Figures viii
Tables , . ix
Abbreviations and Symbols x
Conversions and Metric Prefixes xii
Acknowledgements xiv
1. Introduction 1
2. Conclusions and Recommendations 6
3. Pre-operational Research Program 9
4. Physical Features of Project Area 17
5. Conceptual and Final Design of Full-Scale
Effluent-Irrigation Project 19
6. Physical Description of Effluent Irrigation
System 22
7. Crop Experience 26
8. Compliance with Waste Discharge Permit 29
9. Groundwater Management 32
10. Soil Management 36
11. Vector (Nuisance Insect) Management 39
12. Project Staffing - Manpower and Services 40
References 42
Appendices
A. Portions of Liquid Waste Discharge Permit
for the Shasta Mill 43
B. Portions of the Use Permit for Effluent
Irrigation Project 49
C. Results of Soil Column Experiments 53
D. Results of Gravel-Bar Sprinkler Irrigation
Project 6]
E. Operation Plan for the Simpson-Shasta Ranch ... 67
F. Groundwater Management Complications at the
Simpson-Shasta Ranch 73
G. Monitoring Data 88
H. Analysis of Groundwater Flow Regimen 100
vn
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 Simpson-Shasta River Ranch, general
groundwater movement 14
2 Simpson-Shasta River Ranch, field
identification 15
3 Simpson groundwater monitoring wells 21
4 Simpson-Shasta River Ranch, effluent
distribution lines 23
D-l Gravel bar sprinkler irrigation project. ... 64
H-l Groundwater Contours, December 1975 109
H-2 Groundwater Contours, April 1976 110
H-3 Groundwater Contours, June 1976 Ill
H-4 Groundwater Contours, September 1976 112
H-5 Groundwater Contours, December 1976 113
H-6 Groundwater Contours, March 1977 114
H-7 Groundwater Contours, June 1977 115
-------
TABLES
Numbei
1
2
3
4
5
6
C-l
G-l
G-2
G-3
G-4
G-5
G-6
H-l
H-2
H-3
1"
Typical Weather Data, Redding, California . . .
Corn Yield in Experimental Test Plots, 1975 . -.
Tissue Analysis - Corn
Soil Column Performance Data
Effluent Application to Simpson Shasta -Ranch. .
Fish Rinassay Results
Water Acceptance Rate versus Effluent
Application
Shasta Mill Effluent, Monitoring Report,
Discharge 001
Shasta Mill, Ranch Groundwater Monitoring,
Discharge, 002
Sacramento River Water Quality Monitoring . . .
Shasta Mill, Final Effluent, Miscellaneous
Data
Simpson-Shasta Ranch, Groundwater Quality
Data, Pre-project
Simpson-Shasta Ranch, Groundwater Quality
Data, Post-project
Irrigation Rates
End of Irrigation Period: Chloride Levels
in Ranch Test Wells
Page
3
10
11
12
30
31
57
90
92
93
95
98
99
116
117
118
IX
-------
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
ABBREVIATIONS
ACID
BD
BOD
BV
CEC
cf s
COD
DFG
DO
DWR
EC
FTU
gpam
gpd
gpd/ac
gpm
ha
kg
kg/ha
km
Ib
m
me/1
rag/1
MGD
MPN
NPDES
ppm
PVC
RWQCB
SAR
SMAD
SPC
Anderson-Cottonwood Irrigation District, a local
public utility
"bone dry" (moisture free)
biochemical oxygen demand, usually after five days
of incubation (BOD-5)
bed volumes (the quantity of liquid equal to the
volume of media, such as ion exchange media or
sand or soil, in a reaction column or tube)
cationic exchange capacity
cubic feet per second
chemical oxygen demand
Department of Fish and Game, State of California
dissolved oxygen
Department of Water Resources, State of California
electrical conductivity (of a water sample)
formazin turbidity unit
gallons per acre per month
gallons per day
gallons per day per acre
.gallons per month
hectare, 10000 square meters (approx. 2.47 acres)
kilogram
kilogram per hectare
kilometer
pound
meter
milliequivalent per liter
milligrams per liter
million gallons per day
most probable number
National Pollution Discharge Elimnation System (Re-
sulted from Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
1972 Amendments)
parts per million
polyvinyl chloride (a plastic used for construction
material, including piping)
Regional Water Resources Control Board, State of
California, Central Valley Region
sodium absorption ratio
Shasta Mosquito Abatement District
Simpson Paper Company
-------
SWRCB — State Water Resources Control Board, State of Cali-
fornia (parent of the nine RWQCBs)
TAG — Technical Advisory Committee
TCU — true color units (in water)
TDS — total dissolved solids (in water)
TER — toxicity emission rate (in a liquid effluent dis-
charged to a public waterway)
TLm — median tolerance limit, or the concentration of the
tested material in a suitable diluent at which
just 50% of the test animals are able to survive
for a specific period of exposure (in this report,
the tested material is the Shasta Mill effluent,
the test animals are salmonoid species of fish of
fingerling size, and the exposure time is 144
hours.)
tu- MGD — toxicity concentration, or 100/(TL-50)where TL-50
is median lethal dose with an empirical formula
to adjust for the condition where less than 50%
of the test fish are lost in undiluted effluent.
The tu value is multiplied by the discharge in
millions of gallons per day to get TER.
TL-50 — same as TLm
TSS — total suspended solids (in a water sample)
WAR — water acceptance rate (of soils)
SYMBOLS
B
Se
Cl
K
N
P
boron (as a discharge constituent)
selenium (as a discharge constituent)
chlorides (as a discharge constituent)
potassium (as a plant nutrient in soils or water)
nitrogen (as a plant nutrient in soils or water)
phosphorous (as a plant nutrient in soils or water)
XI
-------
CONVERSION FACTORS AND METRIC PREFIXES'
CONVERSIONS TABLES
To convert from
acre (ac)
acre feet (ac ft)
feet per second
(ft /sec, cfs)
foot (ft)
gallon (gal)
gallon/acre/month
(gal/ac/month,gpam)
galJon/day (gal/day)
inch (in)
pound (Ib)
pounds/day (Ib/day)
million gallon/day
(mgd)
ton (t)
ton/acre (t/ac)
to
hectare (ha)
3 3
metre (m )
metre /second
(m3/sec)
metre (m)
4. 3 , 3N
metre (m )
metre /hectare/month
(m3/ha/month)
metre /day (m /day)
metre (m)
kilogram (kg)
kilograms/day
(kg/day)
metre /day (m /day)
kilokilogram (kkg)
kilokilogram/hectare
(kkg/ha)
Multiply by
4.047 x 10"1
-2
1.335 x 10'
2.832 x 10
3.048 x 10
3.785 x 10
9.348 x 10
3.785 x 10
2.54 x 10"
4.536 x 10
4.536 x 10
3.785 x 10'
9.0718 x 10
2.242
-1
-3
-3
-3
-1
-1
-1
Xil
-------
METRIC PREFIXES
Prefix Symbol Multiplication factor Example
kilo k 103 2 kg = 2 x 103 g
centi c 10~2 2 cm = 2 x 10~2 m
Standard for Metric Practice. ANSI/ASTM Designtion: E380-76e,
IEEE Std 268-1976, American Society for Testing and Materials,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, February 1976. 37 pp.
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The credit for the success of Simpson Paper Company's effluent irriga-
tion project at its Shasta Mill can be attributed to a wide range of company
people - from the Chairman of the Board of Directors to the Waste Treatment
Plant Operators - and to several outside consultants and advisors.
The authors wish to recognize the contributions of the Redding,
California, office staff of the Cooperative Extension Service, University of
California (Farm Advisory), and the Simpson-Shasta Ranch contractor, the
Pacific Farms, of Gerber, California.
Simpson Paper Company thanks the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
for its recognition of the Company's project, and for its support of certain
portions of the monitoring programs in the form of a Demonstration Grant.
The cooperation of Dr. H. Kirk Willard (Project Officer, Cincinnati, Ohio),
Mr. Ralph H. Scott (formerly EPA-Corvallis, Oregon), and Jim Fedders, (EPA -
Cincinnati, Ohio), was greatly appreciated.
xiv
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
Simpson Paper Company, with headquarters in San Francisco,
California, operates an integrated, bleached kraft pulp plus
fine paper mill, near Anderson-Redding, California. For almost
13 years, this mill has discharged a secondary-treated effluent
to the Sacramento River. The upper reach of this river includes
several salmon spawning grounds, and also supports a popular
recreation industry. For these and other reasons, the Central
Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) has routine-,
ly imposed"very stringent limits on municipal and industrial
discharges to the river.
In January, 1974, the company announced an expansion at
this mill (henceforth, the Shasta Mill), including the installa-
tion of a second paper machine. In October of that year, the
RWQCB issued a revised Waste Discharge Permit for the enlarged
mill. Portions of this permit are shown in Appendix A.
The revised permit prescribed limits on BOD-5 and TSS dis-
charges which were well below the latest U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency (U. S.-EPA) recommendations for equivalent manu-
facturing operations. (Development Document, BPCTCA, EPA 440/1-
76/047b, Table I, p. 4, December 1976). After a detailed study,
Simpson concluded that the new conditions - and especially the
TSS requirement - could not be met on a sustained basis by con-
ventional primary and secondary treatment methods.
In mid-1972, being aware of the trends in water quality
regulation, and recognizing the unique attributes of the
Sacramento River, Simpson began to evaluate the use of the
Shasta Mill's treated effluent for irrigation. By the summer of
1974, the company's studies of this alternative had reached the
point where a decision could be made with minimum risk.
Fortunately, the Shasta Mill already owned a 430 ha. (1100
acre) "ranch", about 5 km. from the mill site. This property had
about 4200 m. frontage on the Sacramento River, was reasonably
level, and a major portion had high permeability soil. About 162
ha. of this property was selected for a full-scale effluent irr-
igation project. It was believed that the revised Waste Dis-lr
charge Permit conditions could be met by diverting up to 40$ of
1
-------
of the secondary effluent onto this land.
The Shasta Mill expansion project required an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR), as a result of which four Use Permits were
granted by the Shasta County Planning Commission, in November,
1974. Because some local and state officials expressed ap-
prehensions about the effluent irrigation project, one of the
Use Permits included an unusual number of constraints on this
activity. A portion of this Use Permit is shown in appendix
B.
The application of treated and untreated waste waters to
land is not new technology. In 1973, US-EPA published a compre-
hensive survey of this practice (1), and a pulp-paper research
group had also studied the subject in 1965 (2). However, the
Shasta Mill irrigation project was somewhat unusual in several
respects:
- The possible need to irrigate on a 365 day/year basis.
- The hydraulic loading on the soil, which was expected
to be as high as 0.3m./month equivalent precipitation.
(Actual average has been 1.96 m./year).
- Presence of up to 70 mg/1. of TSS in the treated ef-
fluent. (Actual average has been about 30 mg./l.)
- Presence of color bodies, equivalent to as much as 900
Pt-Co color units, a major portion of which was known to
be slowly biodegradable.
- From a crop irrigation standpoint, the treated effluent
had relatively high TDS (up to 1300 mg./l.) and rela-
tively high sodium ion concentration (up to 200 mg./l,
mostly as sodium chloride).
- The need for effective control of groundwater level,
movement and composition.
- Possibility of odor emissions from the irrigated fields.
During the period, 1972-1974, the company carried out a re-
search program oriented at these and other potential compli-
cations. This included the operation of laboratory soil
columns and field test plots, and advice from several consul-
tants. Based on this research, the company concluded that all
problems which might be associated with the full-scale project
were manageable. Subsequent events have verified this.
Simpson Paper Company realized that a key to the success of
the irrigation project was the achievement of a high qualtiy
effluent. Accordingly, the original primary treatment facilities
were upgraded, and an all-new secondary treatment facility was
installed at the Shasta Mill. The original secondary system
was the high-rate, contact-stabilization version of the acti-
vated sludge process. The new system consisted of two,low-rate,
-------
aerated stabilization basins. (A complete description of the
primary and secondary treatment facilities is given in re-
ference (3). This also includes a general description of the
irrigation system).
In most respects, the climate in north Central California
is favorable to an irrigation project such as that carried out
by Simpson's Shasta Mill. In fact, the very hot, dry, summers
make intensive agriculture virtually impossible without some
form of irrigation. The winters are cool and rainy. Snowfall
is rare, and while freezing temperatures are experienced, they
are not severe enough or of sufficient duration to cause the
ground to freeze. In most years, surface evaporation exceeds
total natural precipitation.
Table 1 summarizes typical weather data for the area.
TABLE 1. TYPICAL WEATHER DATA, REDDING, CALIFORNIA
Temperature
F° Rainfall Relative Humidity
Min. Max. Inches 4:00 pm 4:00 am 10:00 am
Jan.
April
July
Oct.
Year
35.6
47.6
65.8
51.1
49.7
44.8
73.3
98.8
78.9
75.6
6.72
3.05
0.08
2.10
37.76
76%
66%
46%
58%
60%
61%
39%
19%
32%
37%
65%
44%
26%
39%
43%
The data in Table 1 are monthly or annual means. In July
and August, daytime temperatures in the range 100° -105°
F. are common, with R. H. around 10%. In midwinter, temper-
atures seldom drop below 30°F. Over a 10 year period,
annual average natural precipitation has ranged from 20
inches to 60 inches. Calendar years 1976 and 1977 were
drought periods in north central California, with 22 to
25 inches of precipitation in Redding.
The Shasta Mill discharges its treated effluent to the
Sacramento River. Upstream of the discharge is a large, man-
made reservoir (Shasta Lake), which is operated by the U.S.
Bureau of Reclamation. Like all of the major fresh surface
waters of California, the flow from Shasta Lake is fully allo-
cated for specific beneficial uses. The largest use is for
irrigated agriculture in central California.
One consequence of this intensive water management program
is that river flows tend to be high during the normal crop sea-
son, and low during the winters, allowing the reservoir to re-
fill. Typically, summer flows are in the range of 340 cu. meters
-------
/sec., and winter flows of about 200 cu. m/sec. (up to 800 in the
late part of the wetter winters, and up to 1900 in flood years).
During the drought years of 1976-1977, summer flows were cur-
tailed somewhat (to about 280) while winter flows were reduced
to the uncommonly low levels of 75 to 100 cu. m/sec.
As can be seen in Appendix A, portions of the Shasta Mill's
Waste Discharge Permit are based on Sacramento River flow, with
the most stringent conditions applying when the flow is less
than 142 cu m/sec. Since the low flows occur during the winter,
when irrigation is more difficult to carry out, the Shasta Mill
faces an unusual challenge in the management of its liquid
effluent discharge.
RECEIVING WATER QUALITY
For water quality management, the entire Sacramento River
watershed is under the jurisdiction of the California Regional
Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Central Valley Region. In
June, 1971, this agency issued a management (control) plan (4)
for the area, to satisfy federal and state requirements for the
construction grant program, and to meet the requirements of the
California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1970. The
plan defined water quality objectives for different reaches of
the Sacramento River (sub-basins), in terms of turbidity, bottom
deposits, floatables, oil and grease, odors, pesticides, pH,
biostimulants, bacteria, temperature, dissolved oxygen, specific
conductivity, total dissolved solids, chloride ion, and trace
constituents (heavy metals plus chlorine, carbon-chloroform
extract, and methylene blue active substances). Based on these
criteria, and inputs from other agencies (e.g. California Dept.
of Fish and game (DFG), U.S. EPA, and others) the RWQCB issues
"Waste Discharge Permits". In this respect, the RWQCB has an
agreement with the U.S. EPA wherein RWQCB administers the
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) within
its geographical area. Thus, State Waste Discharge Permits are
also NPDES Permits, under the conditions of Public Law 92-500
and its amendments.
In April,1975, the California State Water Resources Control
Board (SWRCB), parent of the Regional Boards, published a
"Program for Water Quality Surveillance and Monitoring in CA."
In addition to the State and Regional Boards, this program is
carried out jointly with other agencies, including the State
Department of Health, DFG, and the California Department of
Water Resources (DWR). According to the Redding, CA, office of
RWQCB, the upper reach of the Sacramento River is not water
quality limited, and is in compliance with all water quality
criteria to the extent that these are affected by the activities
of man.
Annual macro-benthos studies of the Sacramento River by the
-------
Institute of Paper Chemistry, Appleton, Wisconsin (under cont-
tract with Simpson Paper Company) have shown that receiving
water quality above and below the discharge is "excellent" and
not adversely affected by the discharge from the Shasta Mill.
Shasta Mill's Environmental Laboratory also carries out a
regular receiving water quality monitoring program. Free-flowing
Sacramento River water is tested several times a month at five
stations, one above and four below the point of discharge (i.e.-
effluent diffuser). Testing includes dissolved oxygen (DO),
temperature, pH, color, and turbidity. In addition, interstitial
gravel waters - sampled at two or more stations along the west-
erly shore of the river - are tested weekly for DO, temperature,
pH, color, and monthly for fish toxicity. Subjective observa-
tions (for foam, oil slicks, discoloration, floating solids,
changes in animal and plant life in and near the river, etc.)
are included with the objective data in the monthly reports to
the RWQCB. In over ten years of intensive monitoring under this
or similar programs, there is no evidence that the Shasta Mill
discharge has had a significant adverse impact on receiving
water quality, or that the discharge has resulted in a condition
where river quality does not meet or exceed the standards of the
RWQCB.
-------
SECTION 2
CONCLUSIONS and RECOMMENDATIONS
Treated secondary effluent from the Shasta Mill can be
used in the place of "fresh water" for cash crop production on
irrigated fields which are properly prepared and managed. To
the extent that this effluent is 99.75% to 99.80% water by-
weight, versus 99.90% to 99.95% for "fresh water", most of the
considerations related to fresh water irrigation also apply to
the effluent. For example, the irrigation rate can exceed
evapo-transpiration rate without adverse effects on soil quality
(physical and chemical characteristics) or crop production if:
- The surface infiltration (water acceptance) rate of the
soil is high enough to prevent ponding of water for
more than about four hours after water application has
stopped.
- The subsurface permeability of the soil exceeds the
total liquid application rate, such that the root zone
is not flooded.
Since the climate in the project area is "mild" (i.e. soil
does not freeze in winter), soil quality and surface run-off can
be managed on a year-around basis. Therefore, effluent can be
applied to the fields all year, with or without vegetative cover.
However, the presence of vegetation, even if dormant or in the
form of non-viable stubble, helps maintain the water acceptance
rate and minimizes erosion.
From an agricultural standpoint, the differences between
the Shasta Mill effluent and "fresh water" fall into three
classes, based on the presence of:
- Total suspended soils (TSS). For the project period, the
10 to 70 mg/1. of TSS in the effluent did not appear to
cause any unmanageable problems. However, there may be
some long-term complications.
- Soluble inorganic components. The effluent contains
exchangeable sodium which was found to displace calcium
and magnesium from the soil. Both laboratory and field
tests by Simpson Paper Company suggest that this can be
compensated by addition to the soil of low-solubility
compounds containing calcium or magnesium. However, the
possibility of long-term adverse effects may exist. The
effluent also contains chloride and sulfate ions, which
-------
were not found to cause any agricultural problems in
the prevailing concentrations. Because of the language
of the County Use Permit, chloride ion posed a regula-
tory problem which was only partially resolved. (Natural
precipitation, and standard "fresh water" irrigation,
appear to be effective in correcting most if not all of
the identified unfavorable effects of effluent irrigation
in this particular project, except when the additional
water results in hydraulic overloading of the soil).
- Soluble organic components. Upon passage of the effluent
through the soil, essentially all of the BOD and COD
matter (including color bodies) was removed and most
likely destroyed (oxidized to simpler forms). The acute
fish toxicity of the effluent percolate was unmeasure-
ably low (nil), but bioassays with the undiluted secon-
dary effluent itself showed 95% or greater survival of
king salmon fingerlings after 144 hours of exposure,
continuous flow basis.
Based on extensive pre-project studies, control of ground
water level and movement beneath some of the effluent-irrigated
fields was expected to be difficult, and this was the case.
This was largely the result of pre-existing conditions, aggra-
vated by the occasional need to apply relatively large amounts
of effluent to those fields. For this and other reasons, the
application of treated industrial effluents to land is not some-
thing that can be done anywhere or under any circumstances. There-
fore such projects will usually require extensive and costly
groundwater monitoring programs, such as the one developed and
carried out by the Shasta Mill.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The "disposal" of industrial liquid effluents to land can
have some long-term consequences (measured in decades rather
than months or years) which are not necessarily apparent in a
relatively short-term project, let alone quantifiable. If,
despite the already known limitations of this activity, it is
believed that more "land disposal" projects should or will be
put into operation, an effort should be made to evaluate any
such long-term effects. To assure that this information is
properly derived and gets the widest distribution, the US-EPA
might consider the development and support of specific research
projects. Based on the Shasta Mill experience, these are
suggested:
- An investigation of the long-term effects of low mi-
cron and submicron sizes of inorganic particle filtra-
tion at soil surfaces.
-------
- Investigation of ion exchange mechanisms within different
soils. (The Shasta project indicated that sodium - cal-
cium exchange did not necessarily take place according
to textbook descriptions).
- Investigate the physical and/or chemical reactions in-
volving semi-refractory BOD and chemical oxygen demand
(COD) components of an effluent in different soils.
8
-------
SECTION 3
PRE-OPERATIONAL RESEARCH PROGRAM
FIELD TEST PLOTS
In the summer of 1973, twelve small test plots (total of
about 0.8 hectare) were established on an unused portion of the
Simpson-Shasta Ranch. Three of these plots were leveled, culti-
vated, and seeded, whereas the others were left In a natural
state, with mixed vegetative cover.
Garden-type "Rain Bird" sprinklers were used initially to
achieve uniform effluent application on all plots.
At this time it was believed that grass crops would be the
best choice. Accordingly, the early plantings on the tilled
plots were such crops as clover, alfalfa, fescue, orchard grass,
etc. Since soil chemistry was to be studied, no fertilizers or
chemical soil amendments were used in the early stages of the
project.
The effluent was applied at unusually heavy rates, corre-
sponding to about 2 cm./day, to accentuate any adverse effects
that might appear. When rainy winter weather arrived, the top-
soil became very wet, with occasional ponding in low areas. De-
spite this, and the lack of fertilizers, the vegetation on all
effluent-irrigated plots developed reasonably well.
The following spring, upon advice of our consultant agron-
omist, the existing tilled plots were redeveloped, and new plots
established. By this time it was apparent that not even the
legumes could fix nitrogen rapidly enough to compensate for the
high soil leaching rate, so a fertilizer program was developed.
Later, the cropping plan was enlarged to include field corn.
Simpson technicians had attempted to collect and test the
effluent percolate at various depths beneath the cultivated test
plots. This was not entirely successful, but in the meantime the
company had begun the operation of laboratory soil columns,
which provided the needed information. However, soil and tissue
(leaf) samplings were done at the test plots, with analyses by
outside laboratories.
-------
By late 1974, the company had decided that the full-scale
effluent irrigation project would not include sprinklers. Ac-
cordingly, the plots seeded to field corn were irrigated by the
furrow method. Also the irrigation rates, which had been as
high as 200,000 liters/ha./day, were reduced to rates which were
anticipated in the full-scale system (70,000 to 110,000 liters/
ha./day average).
Overall, the test plots gave the company confidence that
the treated effluent was not toxic to common commercial crops,
even at relatively high hydraulic loadings. For example, the
corn yields were equal to that achieved with river water irri-
gation. (Table 2). Likewise, plant tissue analyses showed that
the test crops had normal levels of basic elements and macro-
and micro-nutrients. (Table 3).
TABLE 2. CORN YIELD IN EXPERIMENTAL TEST PLOTS, 1975
Fertilizer, Lbs./AcreYield
Irrigated With N P K BD Tons/Acre
Effluent (1)
Effluent (2)
Effluent
River Water
River Water ,(1)
198
190
0
0
198
18
0
0
0
18
18
0
0
0
18
2.6
2.2
1.3
2.5
2.0
FULL SCALE SYSTEM, 1976
Effluent (3) 303 53 53 3.4
(1): 860 Lbs./Acre ammonium sulfate (21% N)
220 Lbs./Acre 8-8-8 (%N - %P - % K)
(2): 860 Lbs./Acre ammonium sulfate
(3): 120 Gallons/Acre aqua ammonia (32% N)
263 Lbs./Acre 6-20-20
Note: One Ib./acre equals 1.12 kg./ha.
One ton/acre equals 2240 kg./ha.
LABORATORY SOIL COLUMNS
These were set up principally to evaluate the effect of the
treated effluent on soil chemistry. Simpson also wanted infor-
mation on the composition of the leachate to the sub-soil.
Three fiberglass columns, 30.5 cm. diameter, were filled
with 180 cm. of Shasta Ranch soil. Treated effluent was ap-
plied at rates of 0.93 , 1.86, and 3.72 cm./day. The columns
were operated for over a year. (See Table 4)
10
-------
TABLE 3. TISSUE ANALYSIS - CORN*
Parameter Units
GREEN CHOP
Irrigated with
Effluent River Water
KERNELS
Irrigated with
Effluent River Water
TOTAL N
N03
S
P
K
Mg
Ca
Na
Fe
Mn
NH4
B
Cu
Zn
%
ppm
%
%
%
%
%
%
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
3.34
200
.23
.25
2.0
.14
.68
.02
180
59
1660
17
7
115
3.00
200
.22
.29
2.2
.16
.85
.01
225
49
1750
15
9
78
1.65
100
.16
.08
.33
.14
.02
.03
40
9
.10
5.5
2
29
1.74
100
.16
.11
.33
.17
.01
.01
35
9
.14
5.3
3
33
*A11 data reported on a dry basis
A more complete report of this activity is given in Appendix C,
and the results may be summarized as follows:
In the absence of vegetation, and without the use of soil
additives, typical ranch soil becomes saturated with sodium ion
after 2.5 to 3.2 bed volumes of effluent have been applied,
assuming a sodium ion concentration of 300 to 400 mg./l. (This
is about twice the sodium concentration in the Shasta Mill
effluent, since February, 1976). Exchangeable calcium and mag-
nesium are depleted at about the same (stoichiometric) rate.
Dolomitic limestone addition to the soil was found to be effec-
tive in reversing the sodium-calcium ion exchange reaction.
Substituting river water (low sodium, low salinity) for effluent
leached out the salts which had accumulated in the soil. With-
out tilling and in absence of vegetation, soil permeability de-
creased 60 - 80%, depending upon effluent application rate. BOD-
5 removal was essentially complete. At the 0.93 cm./day effluent
irrigation rate, or 10,000 gal./acre/day, the COD and color re-
moval were 80% and 83%, respectively. At the 3.72 cm./day rate,
the removals were 52% and 46%, with the same 180 cm. soil depth.
Chloride ion was found to be a suitable tracer for effluent per-
colate, since it is non-reactive and is not absorbed in the soil.
11
-------
TABLE 4. SOIL COLUMN PERFORMANCE DATA
Parameter
Application rate
BOD- 5 reduction
TSS reduction
COD reduction
Color reduction
Units
gpd/ac .
%
%
%
%
Col. 1
10,000
90
90
80
83
Col. 2
20,000
90
90
75
*
Col. 3
40,000
90
90
52
46
*Equilibrium not reached when river water leaching experiment
initiated.
NOTE: 10,000 gpd/ac. equals 93,455 liters per day per hectare,
or 0.93 cm./day.
GRAVEL-BAR DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
When Simpson was attempting to obtain the several permits
required for the effluent irrigation project, questions were
raised about the impact of the effluent percolate on the
Sacramento River, which bordered the Company's Ranch on the
generally east side. Hydrological studies by a company con-
sultant had already shown that this percolate would ultimately
enter the river, and the laboratory soil columns had shown that
the percolate would be innocuous. Nevertheless, the company
established a 2.5 ha. sprinkler irrigation project adjacent to
the river shoreline, where the treated effluent was applied
at rates up to 7.9 cm./day. This was at least 5.6 x the maximum
rate expected in the full-scale project.
Another purpose of this project was to evaluate odors re-
sulting from sprinkler operation, since some ranch neighbors
had expressed concern about this. (Kraft pulp mill effluents,
even after high-efficiency biological treatment, have a charac-
teristic odor some-times described as medicinal or earthy or
mildewy).
There was no intent to develop vegetation on the gravel
bar, and the cobbly, gravelly soil was generally unsuitable for
this purpose. However, some grasses did emerge during the ex-
periment, indicating that hydroponic gardening might have been
possible.
A detailed report of this experiment is attached as
Appendix D.
While operational problems were experienced and not all of
the project objectives were fully achieved, the overall con-
clusion was that the Sacramento River would not be adversely
affected by the full-scale effluent irrigation project.
12
-------
While this project was underway, and partly as a result of
it, the company decided that the full-scale effluent irrigation
system would not include sprinklers. This was based in part on
concerns about odor releases from the sprinklered effluent and
possible fog generation during the winter months. Therefore,
the full-scale system was designed for flood irrigation (checks
or borders) and later modified for row crops (furrow irrigation).
GROUND-WATER MOVEMENT STUDY
In 1974, the company engaged a professional ground-water
hydrologist to ascertain soil permeabilities and ground-water
movement beneath those portions of the Shasta Ranch that were
to be irrigated with the treated mill effluent. In addition to
several existing wells on or surrounding the ranch, the hydro-
logist drilled more than 20 additional wells. The general con-
clusion was that with one exception, the mass movement of ground-
water was easterly toward the Sacramento River. In the central
portion of the ranch, the hydrophiles were essentially perpen-
dicular to the river bank, the most desirable condition. How-
ever, at both the northern and the southern ends of the 4500
meter frontage, the hydrophiles shifted, including a small vec-
tor parallel with the river bank. This is shown in Fig. 1.
Since there was serious concern by some of the adjoining
private property owners that the sub-surface effluent percolate
might flow beneath their property with possible harmful effect
on their crops (including fruit and nut orchards), or might
affect their private wells, the company established "buffer
zones" at both the northerly and southerly portions of the
ranch. These zones were not to receive effluent until the
actual ground-water movement of the full scale project was con-
firmed.
In addition, the consulting hydrologist identified a
"ground-water divide" on the south-westerly side of the ranch,
also shown in Fig. 1. On the westerly side of this divide,
some ground-water appeared to flow toward a small stream
(Anderson Creek) bordering company owned land. Therefore, it
was recommended that no effluent be applied to lands subject
to this questionable ground-water movement until further infor-
mation was obtained.
As a result of the hydrological studies, about 162 ha. of
the Simpson Ranch were identified for receiving the treated ef-
fluent. This area was divided into fourteen, letter-coded
fields, depending on grade (slope) and soil characteristics.
These are shown in Fig. 2, Fields C, D, E, F,I, J, K, L, M, N,
0,P,Q, and R. It was indicated that some of the other fields
such as B, and G, might receive effluent at a later time, based
on experience with the initially-designated fields.
13
-------
S A c
FFLUENT
RRI&MED
AR.EA
• W/XTEiR QUALITY TE
-------
- UNDEVELOPED 6RU5HLWMD5 _
Figure 2. Simpson-Shasta River Ranch, field identification
-------
Other findings of the hydrologist included:
- On most of the fields to be irrigated with effluent,
depth to ground-water ranged from 2.5 to 7 meters
(relatively high water table). Among other things,
this was influenced by absolute river level and irri-
gation of adjoining properties.
- The slopes of the hydrophiles (gradient of ground-
water elevations) were generally small, ranging from
0.6% to 1%. (Note: Most of the fields were graded to
slopes of 0.3% to 0.8%, but these did not necessarily
correspond to ground-water gradients).
- The permeability of the soils which were to receive
the treated effluent were unusually high, ranging from
20,000 to 100,000 liters/sq.m./day. (20-100 m./day).
Earlier tests by Simpson technicians and others had
indicated that the water infiltration (acceptance) rates
at soil surfaces devoid of vegetation were as high as
2 m./day.
On the basis of this information, it was believed that
fields with vegetative cover could be irrigated for short
periods of time at rates up to 500,000 liters/ ha/hr, without
excessive run-off (return flows). However, sustained irrigation
at such a rate might result in localized ground-water "mounds",
in which case the effluent percolate could move in directions
not expected from the general hydrophiles. Therefore, the
irrigation schedule was an important aspect of the project,
especially where flood irrigation was to be practiced.
16
-------
SECTION 4
PHYSICAL FEATURES OP PROJECT AREA
LANDPORM - SIMPSON SHASTA RANCH
Geographically, the project area lies in the upper ex-
tremity of the Sacramento River Valley, about 8 km. east of
Anderson, CA, and adjoining the river shoreline for a distance
of about 4.2 km. The terrain in this area is essentially flat,
with the fields designated to receive mill effluent having
slopes of less than 1%. In general, this land slopes gently to-
ward the river, although there are some natural drainages which
are parallel with the river shoreline. In a 75 km. portion of
the river between Redding and Red Bluff, CA, the average hydrau-
lic gradient is 0.083?. In this area, the valley is about
40 km. wide, with the Cascade Mountains to the east, the Klamath
Mountains and Modoc Plateau to the north, and the Coast Range
to the west. Ranch Pield E is about 115 meters above sea level.
SOILS
The soils found in the Sacramento River Basin are generally
sedimentary deposits known as alluvium. These soils have been
deposited by periodic flooding of the river and the erosive
actions of its upper tributaries. In the local area, soil of
this kind is known as "river bottom sandy loam", and is often
mined for use as top dressing in residential areas. Prom a
technical standpoint, these soils are known as "Reiff" and
"Columbia", with U. S. Soil Conservation Service codes typically
1 M4-1C/1A1 and 1 L5-1C/2A1. These soils are suited to culti-
vation of many agricultural crops with minor limitations, and
capable of high productions if sufficient water and nutrients
are provided. These soils have moderate to moderately rapid
permeabilities.
SUBSURPACE - GEOLOGY
The geology in the project area indicates that the flood
plain deposits are composed of three distinct formations. The
uppermost is the "recent alluvium", with a thickness of 3 to 6
meters. The materials consist of unconsolidated gravel, sand,
silt, and clay. As previously indicated, the permeability is
typically 50 m. per day or higher.
17
-------
The second layer is the "Tehama Formation", which ranges to
a depth of 300 m. or more. This formation consists of semi-con-
solidated mixtures of clay, silt, sand, and gravel. Most of the
fresh ground-water in the basin is drawn from the Tehama Form-
ation, which is stratified with poor vertical permeability.
Water moving to the ground-water will not move to any signifi-
cant extent into this formation, below the recent alluvium.
Thus, water moving vertically belov; the root zone will enter the
shallow ground-water and then flow laterally toward the
Sacramento River.
The deepest geologic layer is the "Chico Formation", which
is composed of consolidated sedimentary rocks, including sand-
stone, shale, and conglomerate. Saline water predominates in
thi s format ion.
18
-------
SECTION 5
CONCEPTUAL AND FINAL DESIGN OP
PULL-SCALE EFFLUENT-IRRIGATION PROJECT
PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLANS
To assist in the design of the effluent-irrigation project,
Simpson Paper Company engaged a consulting firm, CH2M Hill and
Associates, Redding, California. Other consultants were engaged
directly by the company for specific purposes, such as the de-
velopment of cropping plans.
In June, 1974, CH2M-H111 submitted a "Conceptual Design",
which was based on a combination of sprinkler plus surface
(border-strip) irrigation. At this time, the plan was to apply
26,530 cu.m. of effluent per day to 282 ha. of prepared fields.
In the next five months the operating parameters were re-defined
to suit a two-phase mill expansion program, the second phase of
which was deferred.
The first phase included provisions for a new paper machine
plus an upgrading of the original paper machine and other minor
changes within the Shasta Mill, to be completed by January 1,
1976. On this basis, the final plans for the effluent-irrigation
project were prepared, with contract documents published in
February, 1975. As previously indicated, the company elected not
to install sprinklers. About 162 ha. of land area were desig-
nated to receive up to 4,55,000 cu. m. per month of the treated
effluent. The border-strip irrigation system and the return flow
systems were to be highly automated to assure uniform effluent
application and to minimize operating labor.
It was the company's intention to engage a local, qualifi-
ed, contractor to carry out the agricultural management, based
on established guidelines. To assist in this, CH2M-H111 prepared
an "Operation and Management Plan for the Simpson Ranch", dated
January, 1975. A copy of this plan is attached as Appendix E.
By the late summer of 1975, the company had made several changes
to the plan, one of the major ones being a decision to make the
initial field plantings with the oats and wheat instead of grass
(hay) crops.
It should be pointed out here that both the Conceptual and
19
-------
the Final Plans for effluent irrigation were based on the devel-
opment of "random-seeded-crops," as contrasted to row crops,with
the so-called hay or grass crops pre-dominating. The slopes of
the fields, the original checks or borders, and the placing of
the automated irrigation valves were all based on this thinking.
However, starting in the spring of 1976, and again in 1977, row
crops (corn, beans, onions) were planted with good results. Among
the reasons for the change in cropping plan in 1975-76 were:
- Questions as to the marketability of the hay crops.
Most likely, a major portion of the crop would have
had to be sold fresh (as "green chop") within a 10 km.
radius of the ranch, or cubed (pelletized), or ensiled.
Neither the company nor the ranch contractor had the
equipment to carry out such activities at the time the
project began, and there was concern that not enough
customers could be found for the product.
- Hay crops are usually allowed to field dry after mowing,
for as long as 3 weeks. During this period, it would not
be possible to apply effluent. On the other hand,
effluent could be applied to such crops as wheat and
corn during the final curing, just prior to harvest.
- The last stages of test plot operation in 1975 showed
that field corn did very well when irrigated with effluent.
- The cereal grains, including corn, were much more attra-
ctive as cash crops in 1975-76 than were hay crops.
(This situation reversed in 1977).
EFFLUENT APPLICATION, GROUND-WATER MONITORING.
On a weekly basis, a Shasta Mill representative would in-
form the ranch contractor of the volume of effluent which had
to be applied to the fields over the next seven day period. It
was expected that this would be based on the difference between
the total suspended solids in the effluent from the secondary
treatment system vs. the allowable discharge of TSS to the
Sacramento River (NPDES Permit Conditions). However, the con-
tractor could use a greater volume of effluent, at his
discretion.
Since two of the major concerns were groundwater compo-
sition and movement (including the effluent percolate), several
additional test wells were drilled. About 17 of the total
number were designated as "water quality test wells", while
these and more than 50 other wells were used to monitor the
absolute elevation of the ground-water. The locations of some
of those drilled during the research phase (Sec. 3), are shown
in Fig. 3 and Fig. 1.
20
-------
\
/ / 69 \
- k
•»A 16
74 O
lo™ 2
1 l8 <
Lv ' s *
0
V
\
5
o
o
l"= 1500'
BALLS
^ ^^ii::"^^^7:^^^"*"^^^ -> _____
*T3iT £ ~~-—^_
0 40 84 62
3 ° 0 A^
W
„_ 59 7O
1 78 79 1 o 0 63
0 8A7008 0 00 u •
0 64*
80O°8I 65Q
35 5AQg 53 6, &
22 26 31 O 40 ° O J66
• ° ° 41 o46 050O O56 1
76 34 2 37 g O42 .49 "«J
0 • o «^_39 J43 1
ou r ^^ J
023
77
O
•24 >4C v- ~ WQ-C B - QUALITY WELLS
O SIMPSON PAPER GROUNDWATER OBSERVATION WELLS
• SHASTA COUNTY QUALITY WELLS
1
FERRY ROAD
Figure 3.
SIMPSON GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS
6-28-77
-------
SECTION 6
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION OF EFFLUENT IRRIGATION SYSTEM
CONSTRUCTION
Construction began in January 1975 as initial clearing and
grubbing got underway. A minor portion of the area to be devel-
oped for fields was coverdd with oak trees, brush and berry
vines, all of which had to be removed in time for the heavy
land-leveling equipment which was to begin work in early April.
The larger portions of the Oak trees were chipped and sold for
conversion into wood pulp. The smaller limbs were cut and sold
locally as firewood.
The heavy equipment arrived in April on schedule and under-
took the enormous task of moving the more than 335,000 cubic
meters of earth required to produce the desired slopes and
cross-slopes on the irrigated fields. Depending upon soil char-
acteristics, length of fields, valve spacing and natural ter-
rain, the slopes were precisely established in the range of
0.2% to 0.8% fall.
In general, the system .consists of over 6100 meters of
buried, gasket-jointed, reinforced-concrete pipe, with outlets
at center-to-center spacings of 7 to 14 meters along the length
of the fields. A total of 470 automatic irrigation valves are
utilized, one for each outlet on the irrigation mains. These
automatic irrigation valves were developed by Paul Fischbach
of the University of Nebraska and are currently being distri-
buted by the Econogation Valve Company of Humboldt, Nebraska.
The bodies are constructed of a polyolefin resin, with opening
and closing being controlled by the admission of low pressure
air to a rubber bladder within each valve body.
The Fischbach valves are controlled by automatic, multiple-
port controllers distributed by the Toro Research and Develop-
ment Center, San Marcos, California. Each controller is equip-
ped with a timing mechanism, and an eleven-port valve. Each
port of the valve is connected, via buried PVC airlines, to up
to four Fischbach valves. More than 38,000 meters of PVC
airlines were installed.
The general location of the irrigation lines is shown in
figure 4. The effluent from the secondary treatment system is
transported to the Simpson Ranch via an existing 0.76 meter-
22
-------
TELEMtTRICJULi
CONTROLLED VfcU/E AMD
FLOW MtTtB
TREATED E.CPLUENT
/FROM STORA&E
RESERVOIB.
S1MP50M
ttt
AMD
6IMP50W
SHASTA ^AILL 5ITE
Figure 4. Simpson-Shasta River Ranch, effluent distribution lines,
-------
dia. buried concrete pipe. At the generally northwest corner of
the ranch, a tee was installed with the branch supplying
Main 1. At the upstream end, Main 1 is also 0.76 m. dia., de-
creasing in steps over its 2800 meter length. The flow into
Main 1 is regulated by a motor-operated (automatic) butterfly
valve, 0.61 m. dia., with a propellor-type flowmeter and inte-
grator. Main 1 serves eight of the letter-coded fields ( C, D,
E, F, J, K, L, M), with the Fischbach valves being operated in
a multiple of four per controller signal.
About 1140 meters downstream of the tee is a sub-branch
line known as Main 2, which is laid generally west toward
Anderson Creek and then southward, somewhat parallel with Main
1. This Main is 1460 m. long and starts out at a diameter
of 0.46 m. It serves three letter-coded fields (I,N,0). On
Main 2, each controller signal controls just one Fischbach
valve.
The run-off from the effluent-irrigated fields flows
through a 7630 meter long network of earthen ditches, termina-
ting at an east-central "Return Flow Sump". This is an earthen
basin of about 7,600 cu.m. capacity, equipped with level trans-
mitters and controllers. A 5,700 liter/min. Return Flow Pump
delivers this water to a buried Return Flow Main, which serves
three fields (P, Q, R) at the generally southwest end of the
ranch. The Return Flow Main is about 1900 m. long, and starts
out at 0.46 m. dia. A separate, manually-valved, branch line
was run from Main 1 to the Return Flow Sump, so that "first use"
effluent could be supplied should the need arise. Also, by
manual valve arrangement, Return Flow can be sent in reverse
flow through Main 2, or vice versa. On the Return Flow Main,
each controller signal controls just one Fischbach valve.
SYSTEM BASIC OPERATION
The Fischbach valves open as the timing mechanism vents
each of the individual eleven ports to the atmosphere, allow-
ing the water pressure in the irrigation main to push the air
out of the Fischbach valve bladder, thus opening an orifice al-
lowing discharge of water to the field. Each of the eleven
ports on the Toro timer is time-adjustable from 0 to 9 hours,
the actual field-selectable time setting being a function of
field slope and length, type of crop, maturity of crop, season
and soil permeability.
On command from a central control station, a 110V electri-
cal pulse activates the first of the irrigation controllers that
has been preset for automatic control. The pulse starts the
timing mechanism which rotates the multiport valve, allowing
the first set of Fischbach valves to discharge water for the
pre-set time interval. At the end of that time interval, the
timing mechanism automatically shuts the first set of valves
24
-------
and opens the second set of valves, this process continuing
until each of the 11 positions at that particular controller
has been satisfied. This controller then releases an electri-
cal pulse which is then picked up by the next successive con-
troller, perhaps 300 meters down the pipeline. The second
controller then cycles through the 11 positions and eventually
sends a pulse to the next controller, the cycle repeating until
all controllers on that main have been satisfied.
SAFETY CONTROLS
Significant design effort was spent in allowing the system
to operate with infrequent attention while at the same time
providing adequate protection against washouts, flooding or
water spills off the irrigated fields. The motor-operated flow
control valve, which regulates the amount of water released to
the irrigation system, is equipped with three interlocks de-
signed to curtail the basic irrigation rate in the event
potential problems should arise. A high-level switch is located
in a large concrete stand-pipe on irrigation Main 1. Should the
water foe discharged into the field at a rate less than the rate
water is entering the irrigation main, the level in the stand-
pipe will rise, the switch closes and the valve is closed after
an adjustable timer period of 0-15 minutes. The valve reopens
automatically once the level in the standpipe has dropped be-
low the level switch. If the water level in the Return Flow
Water Sump rises above a predetermined maximum level, indi-
cating near-overflow conditions, a level switch closes and a
telemetry signal closes the irrigation main flow control valve
until such time as the level in the return flow sump is below
the maximum level. Once the level has dropped sufficiently,
the main flow control valve opens automatically and irrigation
resumes. Finally, if the level in the No. 2 Aerated Stabili-
zation Basin (feeding the irrigation main from the pulp-paper
mill site) drops below a predetermined level, the irrigation
main flow control valve closes via a telemetry signal until
such time the Basin rises to the proper level. Each of these
basic pieces of information are telemetered back to a control
panel at the Shasta Pulp Mill, some 8 kilometers away.
25
-------
SECTION 7
CROP EXPERIENCE
FIRST SEASON
By the summer of 1975, Simpson people were confident that
almost any crop traditionally grown in the upper Sacramento
River Valley could be grown with the treated Shasta Mill ef-
fluent. This was based on the company's earlier research (par-
ticularly the test plot studies of 1973-1975) and information
from several consultants and other sources. Accordingly, in the
late fall of 1975, about 57 ha. were seeded to Montezuma red
oats and 105 ha. to Anza hybrid wheat.
The first effluent irrigation took place on January 7,1976.
Soon after, some portions of the juvenile crops showed an ab-
normal yellowing, with some wilting immediately after irriga-
tion. Naturally this was of great concern, and several special-
ists were brought in to identify the problem. Extensive tissue
analysis did not reveal any diseases or toxicants. The cause
was never fully explained, but it appears that temperature shock,
similar to frost damage, occurred when the warm effluent con-
tacted plants acclimated to colder ambient temperatures. (About
15 months later, a similar phenomenon occurred with a bean crop.
This time, an investigation resulted in the conclusion that two
factors were involved:
—Insufficient amounts of micro-nutrients were present in
the soil, specifically zinc, sulfur and possibly iron.
This was corrected.
- In leveling the fields in early 1975, some cuts of over
one meter were made, whereas other areas were filled to
an equal or greater depth. The yellowing of vegetation
was much more evident in the cut areas, due to:
— Removal of original organic matter (humus) and top-
soil nutrients, and
— Greater soil compaction, resulting from heavy
machine traffic not fully corrected by subsequent
cultivation.
It is now believed that these conditions were the main cause
or certainly contributed to, the abnormal yellowing of the
oat and wheat crops in February, 1976).
26
-------
The yields on the first two crops turned out quite satis-
factory, oats (as hay) at 8800 kg./ha. and wheat (as grain) at
4400 kg./ha. In the spring of 1976, field corn (Asgrow RX-70) and
some sweet corn were seeded to some of the recently-harvested
fields. These crops also did well, with the field corn taken as
grain in October, 1976, at about 7600 Kg./ha. The company's
consulting agronomist indicated that these yields of oats, wheat,
and corn were equal to or better than that achieved on comparable
fields irrigated with fresh water.
SECOND SEASON
During the winter of 1976-77, a major portion of the
Simpson Ranch was left fallow. Previously-planted fields were
given a very light discing, and effluent was applied as necessary
to assure compliance with the NPDES Permit requirements. While
the fallow fields accepted the effluent without major problems,
the company concluded that it would have been better to have live
vegetation, even if dormant. The future cropping plan was modif-
ied accordingly.
The 1977 crops included kidney beans, field corn and wheat,
plus experimental crops including barley, seed onions and alfalfa.
Only a small portion of the seed onions was irrigated with the
mill effluent, but that portion did as well as the rows irrigated
with PUD water originating from the Sacramento River.
The first two cuttings of alfalfa averaged about 2350 kg./ha,
per cutting, a satisfactory yield. On the basis of this success,
plus other reasons, the company decided to enlarge the alfalfa
fields to a total of about 43 ha., beginning in September, 1977-
The kidney beans were adversely affected by a combination of
problems not necessarily related to the use of mill effluent for
irrigation. The bean crop was being harvested at the time this
report was being prepared, and no yield data were available. How-
ever, the company's consultants indicated that kidney beans are
among the least salt-tolerant crops, and that the mill effluent
did not meet the usual standards for this crop.
FUTURE PLANS
As previously indicated (Section 5), the original cropping
plan did not include row crops. While the ranch contractor de-
vised ways to irrigate such crops, and the yields were fair-to-
excellent, the slopes or grades of some of the fields were too
steep, and erosion occurred in some areas. Further, furrow irri-
gation resulted in larger amounts of field run-off than with the
border-strip (broad-flood) methods, taxing the Return Flow System.
In 1976, these disadvantages were more than offset by the favor-
able market price for field corn.
27
-------
By early 1977 s the market prices of corn and wheat had
dropped to less than 50$ of the 1975 levels. This, plus the fact
that most row crops were not suitable for winter growth, resulted
in a company decision in mid-1977 to shift back to more fodder-
type crops such as alfalfa and oat hay.
It has become obvious to Simpson Paper Company that it must
maintain a high degree of flexibility in its cropping plan. While
a principal objective of the ranch effluent irrigation project is
to assure compliance with the Shasta Mill's Waste Discharge
Permit, the company also has to reckon with the well-known vaga-
ries of the agricultural marketplace.
Simpson's investment in its Shasta Mill effluent irrigation
project exceeds $10,000 per hectare, excluding land costs. With
such high fixed costs, the only way the effluent-irrigated por-
tion of the ranch could be made profitable, in the normal sense,
would be by the planting of high-risk crops or labor-intensive
crops (such as tomatoes or other "truck-garden" produce). At the
present time, these are not consistent with company objectives.
28
-------
SECTION 8
COMPLIANCE WITH WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT
For the past 20 months, the Shasta Mill has operated in
full compliance* with its unusually stringent Waste Discharge
Permit (Appendix A). Part of this is due to the exceptional
quality of the secondary effluent itself. However, for 8 of
those months, compliance was made possible only by the use of
this effluent for irrigation, in amounts up to ^5% of the month-
ly flow from the secondary treatment system. As anticipated,
the principal compliance difficulty during those eight months
was meeting the TSS criterion. This occurs mostly during the
winter months, when Sacramento River flows are normally the
lowest, and is compounded by the observation that TSS concen-
tration in the secondary effluent (mostly residual biofloc) is
higher during the colder months. Obviously, this need to
irrigate during the winter months is not consistent with usual
agricultural practices. While this poses some ideological
problems in dealing with otherwise successful, conventional,
agriculturists, Simpson and its consultants and contractors have
demonstrated that a common ground can be found, and that
effluent irrigation projects such as this can be managed
successfully.
For the other 12 months, effluent was used by the ranch
contractor at his discretion. For all practical purposes, this
was the only kind of water available to the contractor for the
support of the crops, a condition which was recognized as being
undesirable from a ground water management standpoint (See Sec.
9). Consequently, in the summer of 1977, the company began a
project which would make other (non-effluent) water available
to the contractor. It is expected that this alternative water
supply will be used at certain times, and especially during the
months of April through August, using components of the distri-
bution system originally provided for the effluent.
* This statement is limited to the physical and biochemical
properties of the effluent itself, as discharged to the
Sacramento River directly or indirectly (as effluent percolate
through the ranch soil).
29
-------
Table 5 shows effluent application to the Simpson Ranch, by
quarters. For the total period, it may be assumed that the aver-
age effluent flow from the secondary treatment system was in the
range of 3.7 to 4.2 million cubic meters per quarter (11.0 to
12.5 million gallons per typical operating day).
TABLE 5. EFFLUENT APPLICATION TO SIMPSON SHASTA RANCH
PERIOD QUANTITY, thousands
Cu. Meters Gallons U. S.
1976
1st Quarter 970 256,000
2nd Quarter 481 127,000
3rd Quarter 720 190,000
4th Quarter 1,452 383,000
1977
1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
July Only
August Only
534
697
303
125
141,000
184,000
80,000
33,000
TWENTY MONTH
TOTAL 5,282 1,394,000
Approximate percentage of total secondary effluent diverted
to irrigation system for 20 month period, average - 20.1%.
Highest Quarter (1976 - 4th) - 37.6%
Highest Month (December 1976) - 46.5%
A typical Shasta Mill monthly report to the Central Valley
Regional Water Quality Control Board is included in Appendix H,
Exhibit 1. Following that, as Exhibit 2, is an example of a
mill worksheet, showing the distribution of the secondary ef-
fluent between direct discharge to the river and irrigation.
This worksheet also contains the data on the two key effluent
quality parameters, BOD-5 and TSS.
FISH TOXICITY
Since the upper reach of the Sacramento River is a natural
spawning ground for king salmon and "steelhead" trout, there
was great concern on the part of the State regulatory agencies
about the impact of the Shasta Mill discharge on the fishery.
Among other precautions, the mill is required to perform 144
hour, continuous-flow, bioassays on a regular basis. Fingerling-
size king salmon or rainbow trout are used in these tests.
30
-------
Results for the period March-November, 1977 are summarized in
Table 6.
TABLE 6. FISH BIOASSAY RESULTS
Condition
Ave. Percent survival*
Control
100% effluent
75% effluent
56% effluent
99.82
94.82
99.46
99.64
*Twenty eight bioassays
Using California Fish and Game Department's reporting technique,
the average "toxicity emission rate" (TER) for the stated per-
iod was 0.94 tu-MGD, versus a permit limit of 10.0 tu-MGD
(Toxicity concentration, tu, is 100/(TL-50), where TL-50 is the
median lethal dose, with an empirical formula to adjust for the
condition where less than 50% of the test fish are lost in un-
diluted effluent. The tu value is multiplied by the discharge
in millions of gallons per day to get TER. While TL-50 (or TLm)
may be scientifically sound criterion for toxicity character-
ization, Simpson Paper Company has serious reservations about
the calculated tu values when fish survival exceeds 50% in an
undiluted effluent sample).
The Shasta Mill also performs bioassays on the mixture of
ground-water and effluent percolate taken from test wells on
the effluent-irrigated fields. In all cases, fish survival has
been 100%.
On the basis of these data, and the results of several
additional test programs carried out at the request of the
state regulatory agencies, Simpson Paper Company contends that
its Shasta Mill effluent is harmless to the Sacramento River
fishery.
31
-------
SECTION 9
GROUND-WATER MANAGEMENT
BACKGROUND
Even in the conceptual stage of the effluent irrigation
project, Simpson Paper Company recognized that effective ground-
water management was a key to the success of the activity.
Later, when the permits were being developed, it became apparent
that this was a matter of great concern for some of the neigh-
boring property owners and for the agencies charged with pro-
tecting their interests. At times, some of these concerns
threatened to result in regulatory actions which would have made
it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to carry out or con-
tinue the project.
Part of this reaction might be attributed to basic "fear
of the unknown", relative to the use of a treated industrial
effluent for irrigation. Tending to enhance this were such cir-
cumstances as the proposed, relatively high, irrigation rate and
the unconventional practice of year-around irrigation in an
area where ground-water levels were known to be high (i.e. rel-
atively close to the land surface).
The resources to be protected included:
- Potable ground-water supplies on properties adjoining
the Simpson Shasta Ranch.
- Non-potable ground-water beneath properties adjoining
the ranch (specifically because of fruit and nut or-
chards on some of those properties).
- The Sacramento River, especially the ecology of the
western shoreline, adjoining the ranch.
Two regulatory agencies, the California Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and the Shasta County Planning
Commission, exercised overlapping jurisdictional rights in
these matters, and their requirements are shown in Appendices
A and B.
Compliance with the RWQCB standards has not been a problem
for either party, and, in fact, that agency has made compliment-
ary statements about Simpson's entire water quality protection
program.
32
-------
In late 1976, almost a year after the Shasta Mill treated
effluent irrigation project began, a conflict arose with the
County Planning Commission over the interpretation of the Use
Permit condition. An account of this matter is given in Appendix
F. The conflict, which has been only partially resolved as of
this writing, could have handicapped the project to the point
where the company could not meet its Waste Discharge Permit
conditions.
The company did experience some operating difficulties
during 1976, especially during the months of October through
December. At no time did this result in any threat to the three
resources previously identified for protection. However, as a
result of the experience gained, Simpson modified certain aspects
of its management plan (Appendix F, Part 3), and is now confident
that the irrigation project can be controlled satisfactorily.
An analysis of the groundwater response to irrigation
practice is contained in Appendix H.
SPECIFIC DIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTERED
First Situation
In 1974, the company's consultant hydrologist identified
some anomalies in ground-water hydrophiles at the generally
south-western portion of the ranch (see Sect. 3), including a
"ground-water divide". Having thus been alerted to a potential
problem, the company was especially watchful of the test wells
in and surrounding Fields Q and R. (See fig. 2) .
Soon after effluent irrigation of these fields began, there
was some evidence that effluent percolate was moving in an unde-
sired westerly direction, this being a function of the rate of
irrigation. While investigating the causes of this, the company
voluntarily ceased effluent application to Field R and a portion
of Field Q.
After considerable study, the company concluded that there
were three inter-related causes for this condition:
- Very shallow slope to the ground-water hydrophile, thus
making the area susceptible to "water mounding" and
temporary reversal of this slope.
- Portions of Fields Q and R are underlain by a seam of
extremely permeable soil (approaching coarse gravel),
which can conduct the effluent percolate along a horizon-
tal plane at an unusually high rate.
- There was an impediment to ground-water movement toward
the easterly side of those fields. Working with its con-
sultant hydrologist, the company has undertaken a remedy
33
-------
in the form of a ground-water interceptor ditch on the east-
erly side of the fields in question. By pumping water from
this ditch, it is believed that the slope of the hydrophile
toward the east will be increased sufficiently to permit
effluent application to the fields. At the time of this
writing, pumping had not yet begun.
Second Situation
In the last quarter of 1976, the Shasta Mill had to apply
25% to 45% of its secondary effluent to the ranch to assure com-
pliance with its Waste Discharge Permit. This occurred at the
time when a major portion of the ranch was fallow, and the evapo-
transpiration rate for the three month period was less than -11.4
cm. (4.5 inches). (The corresponding effluent application rate
for that period was about 89 cm. or 35 in.).
This resulted in an undesirable degree of soil saturation,
with occasional, short-term, "ground-water mounding" in some
areas. The remedies for this area were:
- Maintain vegetative cover over a larger fraction of the
ranch during the winter months.
- Provide better control of amount of effluent applied to
any given field or portion thereof, to avoid localized
hydraulic overloading. (See Appendix F, Part 3).
- Intensify test-well monitoring at times when large amounts
of effluent must be applied to the fields to anticipate
and mitigate potential ground-water problems.
All three remedial actions were adopted in the summer of 1977.
In addition, the mill was encouraged to make further reductions
in fresh water usage, thus reducing the amount of treated
effluent which would have to be applied t<~ the fields during the
winter.
Third Situation
A few of the water quality test wells showed chloride ion
concentrations which approached the limits prescribed by the
County Use Permit. (See Appendix F, Part 1. The original limit
was about 123 mg./l. of chloride ion, this being changed to 200
mg./l. in July, 1977. The chloride ion concentration in the
effluent ranges from 180 to 270 mg./l., but it is not uncommon
to find effluent percolate constituting up to 80% of the ground-
water in the vicinity of some of the ranch interior test wells,
as well as those near the river shoreline).
The company believes that one of the better remedies for
this condition is a reduction in the amount of effluent (hence
chloride ion) applied to the ranch fields during an entire cal-
endar year. Accordingly, Simpson is installing new facilities
34
-------
which will provide another, low-chloride, water source for irr-
igating the ranch during those times (especially the summer
months) when permit conditions can be met without effluent irr-
igation.
A typical chemical analysis of the Shasta Mill's secondary
effluent is shown in Appendix G, Exhibit 2.
-Some examples of test well data from the Simpson-Shasta
Ranch are given in Appendix G, Exhibit 3.
35
-------
SECTION 10
SOIL MANAGEMENT
Beginning with its initial research program in 1972-74,
Simpson recognized three potential soil conditions which might
result from effluent irrigation:
- Accumulation of suspended solids in the topsoil, as the
result of filtration.
- Depletion of calcium and magnesium from the soil as the
result of exchange with sodium ions in the effluent.
- Depletion of soluble nutrients, especially nitrogen
(N) compounds, due to high leaching rates.
The pre-operational studies described in Section 3, were
intended to find ways of coping with these conditions, and
those findings were put into practice in the full-scale system.
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
The Shasta Mill secondary effluent contains from 10 to 60
mg./l. of TSS, with the long-term average being about 30 mg./l.
A major portion of this is biofloc residual from the biological
waste treatment process itself. The remainder is mainly cal-
cium carbonate and inorganic paper additives such as kaolin,
alumina, and titanium dioxide.
The biofloc, with its high organic fraction and low nutri-
ent content (N,P,K, and many micro-nutrients), is, if anything,
beneficial to the soil. It is analgous to a balanced compost and
not considered to be detrimental.
The other suspended solids are filtered out in the top-
soil and in some cases a whitish mineral residual is seen in
areas where vegetation is sparse or vhen there had been tem-
porary ponding of the effluent. While these insoluble minerals
are not necessarily incompatible with agricultural soils, the
particle size is quite small, generally less than 20 microns.
Thus, where they are allowed to accumulate in discrete, con-
tinuous layers, one possible result is a marked decrease in
the water infiltration rate. A slight manifestation of this
has been seen where furrow irrigation of row crops was
practiced.
36
-------
It has been found that the conventional tilling and soil
preparation associated with intensive agriculture is sufficient
to prevent a water-infiltration - rate problem due to the in-
organic suspended solids. Further, growing vegetation causes
minute movements or "disturbances" at the soil-air interface,
tending to prevent any "layering effect". In the case of per-
ennial crops, such as alfalfa or clover, this "disturbance"
effect at the soil surface is seen to be sufficient, thus not
requiring that the established stand be sacrificed prematurely
for mechanical tilling.
On a long-term basis, it may become necessary to do some
severe mechanical tilling, such as ripping or deep-plowing, to
blend the filtered mineral matter with the topsoil. Based on
experience to date, it appears that such treatment would not
have to be done at less than five year intervals, if at all.
CALCIUM-MAGNESIUM DEPLETION
The soil-column experiments (See Section 3) indicated that
this condition could be managed by the periodic addition to the
top-soil of limestone, gypsum, or dolomite, with the dolomite
having some advantages. Accordingly, full field-scale experi-
ments with these materials were carried out in 1976. This in-
cluded the application of a by-product of the local sugar beet
processors, which consisted mostly of calcium carbonate. The
application rate was about 4500 kg./ha. (2 tons/acre), based on
earlier soil analyses and other information.
In the late summer of 1977, as a part of the establishment
of the winter crops, all fields subject to effluent irrigation
received similar heavy applications of the several "soil sweet-
eners" ( a term sometimes used by gardeners in reference to
neutral calcium and magnesium compounds), and this program will
continue on an "as needed" basis.
It should be pointed out again that one component of the
suspended solids in the effluent is calcium carbonate (with a
small amount of magnesium carbonate), and that both calcium and
magnesium ions are also present in soluble form in the effluent.
While these are not sufficient to balance the sodium ions also
contained in the effluent, their presence does reduce the amount
which has to be applied in dry form to the top-soil, via broad-
casting.
The company's program to monitor the results of the field
applications of calcium and magnesium has revealed some anom-
alies. While these suggest that the mechanism of ion exchange in
the soil may not be as straight-forward as was originally be-
lieved, no changes to the program are planned at this time. How-
ever, the company is intensifying its studies in this area.
37
-------
DEPLETION OF SOLUBLE NUTRIENTS
Simpson expected that the fields subject to relatively
heavy effluent irrigation would require somewhat higher appli-
cations of fertilizers than for the same crops grown with "con-
ventional "irrigation. While the logic is reasonable, the com-
pany has not yet been able to quantify the difference.
In the local area, the most common method of adding nitro-
gen to the soil is via aqua ammonia or ammonia (gas). While this
is advantageous with acidic soils, it is known that the ammonia
must be converted to the nitrate form before it can be utilized
by the vegetation. Since this conversion requires some unknown
period of time, there was concern that too much of the N would
be lost to the sub-soil by leaching, or volatilization.
While the application of "slow-release" forms of nitrogen
(such as urea formaldehyde) would be highly desirable, the cost
is prohibitive . The company is investigating the several other
forms of nitrogen used in intensive agriculture, to see if there
is a better choice than ammonia.
The soils on the Simpson-Shasta Ranch were inherently de-
ficient in phosphorous (P), so this nutrient has been added. The
phosphorous compounds have a built-in "slow release" character-
istic, so there is no concern about abnormal leaching rate. In
the original ranch top-soil, potassium (K), was present in suf-
ficient amounts. While the retention mechanism is different
from the phosphates, potassium leaching is not a matter of con-
cern.
As indicated in Section 7, it has been seen that the exten-
sive earth moving in 1974 resulted in the "scalping" of top-
soils in some areas. While the mechanical or structural charac-
teristic of the exposed sub-soils in t;hose areas was satisfac-
tory for agriculture, there is an apparent deficiency of humus
and the major nutrients, as well as some micro-nutrients such
as sulfur, zinc, and possibly iron. The humus (organic matter)
will build up slowly in the normal course of events, and the
other deficiencies, once detected, were remedied by specific
soil supplements.
38
-------
SECTION 11
VECTOR (NUISANCE INSECT) MANAGEMENT
Simpson's Ranch is included in the Shasta Mosquito Abate-
ment District, a local public utilities district (PUD). Their
field crews have indicated to the company that due to the modern
irrigation practices carried out at the ranch, including good
water run-off management, the vectors are few in number and
easily controlled.
Those insects known to be harmful to agriculture are con-
trolled by the ranch contractor, using standard methods approved
by the State Health Department.
39
-------
SECTION 12
PROJECT STAFFING - MANPOWER AND SERVICES
The Shasta Mill effluent Irrigation project is managed
jointly by Shasta Mill and Corporate personnel.
The mill has responsibility for assuring compliance with
all permits. V/ith regard to the Waste Discharge Permit, mill
people inform the ranch contractor as to the quantity of ef-
fluent that has to be diverted to the ranch fields on a weekly
basis. With regard to County Use Permit, the mill staff carries
out the ground-water monitoring program. The mill staff also
does soil and tissue samplings, with testing done in its own or
outside laboratories, and carries out an extensive receiving
water quality monitoring program. (This last program was de-
scribed in Section 1).
Corporate personnel develop the contracts with the ranch
contractor and coordinate some of the relationships with the
mill. In addition, the corporate staff develops and/or carries
out the engineering projects (including engagement of contract-
ors and other special services), cropping plans, and long-range
ranch management plans.
The mill staff includes the Technical Director, an Environ-
mental Control Engineer, a salaried assistant to the Environ-
mental Control Engineer, and three technicians. Other techni-
cians from the Technical Department are utilized when necessary.
The corporate staff includes the Vice President-Administra-
tion, and his field deputy, the Environmental Projects Engineer.
Available for consultation are the Corporation Director of En-
gineering and the Corporation Director of Environmental Protec-
tion. Extensive use has been made of outside consultants in
specialized fields including water science, agronomy, horticul-
ture, geology, pomology, and ground-water hydrology.
The ranch contractor includes a General Manager,a part-time
Field Foreman, a full-time Irrigation Tender, and field laborers
as needed. The ranch contractor also retains an independent ag-
ricultural consultant on a part-time basis.
For assistance in the basic design of the Shasta Mill ef-
40
-------
luent irrigation project, including most of the detailed engi-
neering and preparation of equipment specifications, Simpson
engaged the general consulting firm, CH2M-H111 and Associates ,
of Redding, California.
41
-------
REFERENCES
1. Sullivan, R. H., Cohn, M. M., and Baxter, S. S. "Survey
of Facilities Using Land Application of Waste Water."
EPA - 430/9-73-006, U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D. C., 1973. 377 pp.
2. Blosser, R. 0., and Caron, A. L. "Recent Progress in
Land Disposal of Mill Effluents." Tappi 48 (5): 43A -
46A, 1965-
3. Narum, Q. A., and Moeller, D. J. "Water Quality Pro-
tection at the Shasta Mill." Tappi 60 (11): 137-141,
1977.
4. Anon. Interim Water Quality Control Plan, Central
Valley Basin, Volume One. California Regional Water
Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region,
Sacramento, CA., 1971.
42
-------
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A. PORTIONS OP LIQUID
WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT
FOR THE SHASTA MILL
California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley
Region, Sacramento, CA.
Order No. 74-468, NPDES No. CA0004065, amended May 19, 1977.
(Excerpts)
****************
Background Information
a. Simpson Paper Company discharges an average of 10 MGD
and proposes to discharge up to 17-8 MGD of treated
process and domestic wastewater from its integrated
pulp and paper mill and an undetermined quantity of
excess groundwater, effluent percolate, and irrigation
sump water (from a land disposal operation) into the
Sacramento River, a water of the United States, at a
point 4000 feet downstream from the Desehutes Road
Bridge. (Discharge 001).
b. Plow in the Sacramento River, in the vicinity of the
discharge, varies from approximately 3000 cfs to over
100,000 cfs. At approximately 28,000 cfs the river
overflows its banks.
c. Simpson Paper Company proposes to discharge up to 7.0
MGD of treated process and domestic wastes to a large
parcel of land adjacent to the Sacramento River.
(Discharge 002).
d. Simpson Paper Company, as part of a demonstration
project, proposes to discharge 0.06 MGD of treated
process and domestic wastewater to river gravels within
the flood plain of the Sacramento River just upstream
from the existing outfall. (Discharge 003).
e. Simpson Paper Company discharges an undetermined volume
of storm water runoff into a drainage course tributary
to Anderson Creek. (Discharge 004).
43
-------
Simpson Paper Company proposes to dispose of sludge
from the extended aeration lagoon on a 20-acre parcel
just south of the pulp and paper mill. (Discharge 005).
Order
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, Simpson Paper Company, in order to meet
the provisions contained in Division 7 of the California Water
Code and regulations adopted thereunder and the provisions of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and regulations and
guidelines adopted thereunder, shall comply with the following:
A. Effluent Limitations: (Discharge 001)
1. The discharge shall not have a pH less than 6.5 nor
greater than 8.5.
2. The discharge from the domestic sewage treatment plant
shall not contain a median most probable number (MPN)
of total coliform organisms in excess of 23 per 100 ml
nor a maximum MPN of 500 per 100 ml.
3. Bypass or overflow of untreated or partially treated
waste is prohibited.
4. The discharger shall use the best practicable cost
effective control technique currently available to
limit mineralization to no more than a reasonable
increment.
5. The discharger shall use the best practicable cost
effective control technique currently available to limit
the discharge of nutrients.
6. The maximum daily discharge rate shall not exceed 17.8
MGD
7. The toxicity emission rate (TER) of the discharge shall
not exceed a monthly mean of 10 tu-MGD nor a maximum of
20 tu-MGD for any one bioassay or when river flow past
the point of discharge is greater than 28,000 cfs.
8. The discharge of an effluent in excess of the following
limits is prohibited when river flow past the point of
discharge is less than 5000 cfs:
44
-------
30-day Daily
Constituent Units Average Maximum
BOD-5 Ibs/day 2130 4260
mg/1 — 50
Suspended Solids Ibs/day 2130 4260
120
Settleable Solids ml/1 — 0.1
9. The discharge of an effluent in excess of the following
limits is prohibited when river flow past the point of
discharge is in the range of 5000 cfs to 10,000 cfs:
30-day Daily
Constituent Units Average Maximum
BOD-5 Ibs/day 3320 6640
mg/1 — 50
Suspended Solids Ibs/day 3720 7440
mg/1 ~ 120
Settleable Matter ml/1 ~ 0.1
10. The discharge.of an effluent in excess of the following
limits is prohibited when river flow past the point of
discharge is in the range of 10,000 cfs to 28,000 cfs:
30-day Daily
Constituents Units Average Maximum
BOD-5 Ibs/day 4500 9,000
mg/1 ~ 50
Suspended Solids Ibs/day 5300 10,600
mg/1 -- 120
Settleable Solids ml/1 0.1
11. The discharge of an effluent in excess of the "daily
maximum" limits shown in A. 10, above, is prohibited
when river flow past the point of discharge is 28,000
cfs or greater.
B. Discharge Specifications: (Discharges 002 and 003)
1. The discharges shall not cause concentrations of
constituents in excess of the following limits in
groundwater leaving or adjacent to Simpson property,
excluding the shoreline of the Sacramento River:
45
-------
Constituents Units Maximum
Specific Conductance Micromhos/cm 1000
Sodium Adsorption Ratio Number 6.0
Boron mg/1 0.5
Selenium mg/1 0.02
Chlorides mg/1 200
2. The discharges to land shall not cause measurable 5-day
Biochemical Oxygen Demand and suspended solids in
groundwater entering the Sacramento River.
3. The survival of salmonoid test fishes in 96-hour
bioassays in groundwater percolating into the Sacramento
River shall not be less than:
Minimum for any one bioassay
Median of any three or more bioassays. . . 90$
4. Discharge of runoff from land irrigation to the
Sacramento River, Anderson Creek, or tributaries
thereof is prohibited.
5. Sediment from erosion of irrigated land or from con-
struction activities shall not enter the Sacramento
River, Anderson Creek or tributaries thereof.
6. The discharges shall not cause concentrations of
materials in groundwater leaving or adjacent to Simpson
property that would adversely affect beneficial uses.
7. The discharges shall not cause taste and odors in any
domestic water supply.
C. Discharge Specifications, Storm Water: (Discharge 004)
1. Storm water runoff to surface waters or surface water
drainage courses shall contain no process wastes or
sewage.
D. Discharge Specifications, Sludges: (Discharge 005)
1. The discharge of sludge or runoff from the sludge
disposal site to surface waters or surface water
drainage courses is prohibited.
E. Receiving Water Limitations: (Discharges 001, 002, 003, 004)
46
-------
1. The discharges shall not cause the dissolved oxygen
concentration in the Sacramento River to fall below
9.0 mg/1, nor fall below 7.0 mg/1 in the interstitial
gravel waters.
2. The discharges shall not decrease the concentration of
dissolved oxygen in the Sacramento River by more than
0.5 mg/1.
3. The discharges shall not cause visible oil, grease,
scum, or foam in the receiving waters or watercourses.
4. The discharges shall not cause concentrations of any
materials in the receiving waters which are deleterious
to human, animal, aquatic, or plant life.
5. The discharges shall not cause esthetically undesirable
discoloration of the receiving waters.
6. The discharges shall not cause fungus, slimes, or other
objectionable growths in the receiving waters.
7. The discharges shall not cause bottom deposits in the
receiving waters.
8. The discharges shall not alter the abundance of
diversity of bottom dwelling macroscopic fauna in the
Sacramento River.
9. The discharges shall not increase the turbidity of the
receiving waters by more than 10$ over background
levels.
10. The discharges shall not cause concentrations of
constituents in the Sacramento River below the Simpson
Paper Company outfall in excess of the following limits:
Constituents Units Maximum
Mercaptans mg/1 0.05
Crude Sulfate Soap mg/1 1.0
Patty Acids mg/1 1.0
Resin Acids mg/1 0.2
11. The discharges shall not cause the surface water
temperature of the Sacramento River to increase more
than 1°C.
12. The discharges shall not cause taste or odor in any
domestic water supply.
13. The discharges shall not cause a violation of any
47
-------
applicable water quality standard for receiving waters
adopted by the Board or the State Water Resources
' Control Board as required by the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act and regulations adopted thereunder.
If more stringent applicable water quality standards
are approved pursuant to Section 303 of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, or amendments thereto, the
Board will revise and modify this Order in accordance
with such more stringent standards.
F. Provisions:
1. The existing diffuser in the Sacramento River shall be
periodically inspected and maintained to insure maximum
initial dilution of wastewater.
2. Neither the discharge nor its treatment shall create
a nuisance as defined in the California Water Code.
3. The requirements prescribed by this Order amend the
requirements prescribed by Order No. 73-172, NPDES
No. CA0004o65s adopted by the Board on 23 February
1973 which shall remain in effect until production is
increased by 10 percent or more.
4. This Order includes items 1, 3, 5, 6, and 7 of the
attached "Reporting Requirements".
5. This Order includes items 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10,
and 11 of the attached "Standard Provisions".
6. The discharger shall comply with the Monitoring and
Reporting Program No. 74-468 and the General Provisions
for Monitoring and Reporting as specified by the
Executive Officer.
7. This Order expires on 1 September 1979 and the Simpson
Paper Company must file a Report of Waste Discharge
in accordance with Title 23, California Administrative
Code, not later than 180 days in advance of such date
as application for issuance of new waste discharge
requirements.
8. For the purpose of determining compliance with Effluent
Limitations A. 7 through A. 11, the discharger shall
install a gauging station within 1000 feet of the point
of discharge. Calibration shall be performed with the
assistance of the California Department of Water
Resources. A continuous flow recorder shall be provided.
48
-------
APPENDICES
APPENDIX B. PORTIONS OF USE
PERMIT FOR EFFLUENT
IRRIGATION PROJECT
Shasta County, California, Planning Commission and Board of
Supervisors.
Use Permit #90-74, September 26, 1974. (Excerpts)
****************
STANDARD CONDITIONS
1. Permits and/or requirements of all concerned governmental
agencies are to be met.
2. Construction shall be substantially in accordance with
plans and statements submitted. (E.I.R., Part G, pp. 28-37)
3. Current air pollution control requirements, or as they may
be revised, shall be met.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
Construction
4. All temporary parking areas shall be watered or oiled to
prevent dust.
5. Dust created during construction shall be controlled by
sprinkling or other suitable method.
6. Sanitary facilities in accordance with Department of Public
Health requirements, shall be established for construction
workers.
7. Construction on earth moving activity»shall be limited to
hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday.
Operational
8. A Site Location and Effluent Discharge Plan at an appro-
priate scale shall be submitted to and approved by the
49
-------
Technical Advisory Committee prior to commencement of land
disposal activity. Said plan shall indicate as a minimum
the following:
a. The specific area(s) proposed for spray and for flood
irrigation.
b. The areas proposed to be leveled, contoured, or sloped.
c. Vegetation which will be removed.
d. Vegetation which will be retained.
e. Existing and proposed pipelines and/or irrigation
channels.
f. Location and depth of monitoring wells. Also, an
Interior Area Irrigation Plan, the purpose of which
shall be to determine groundwater migration direction
and quality, shall be submitted.
g. Location and extent of interceptor drains, or plans
to achieve the same objective.
h. Location of access roads.
i. Adjoining property boundaries and ownerships.
9. Vegetation adjacent to and along the Sacramento River is
not to be altered in any manner which would reduce the
screening effect now provided.
10. No effluent disposal activity shall be conducted within
75 feet of the primary river channel, except as set forth
in Use Permit #6-75.
11. Spray or flood irrigation discharge shall be limited to
secondary effluent only.
12. There shall be no surface runoff of effluent to adjoining
properties.
13. A buffer strip along the property line to mitigate adverse
visual effects, which specific locational and dimensional
characteristics shall be determined in conjunction with and
approval by the Technical Advisory Committee upon submittal
of the Site Location and Effluent Discharge Plan, is to be
provided and maintained in a natural state. Supportive
vegetation may be required to further the buffering effect
in areas of critical concern.
14. Regional Water Quality Control Board standards shall be met,
50
-------
15. Monitoring wells shall be established on the periphery of
the disposal site. The total number and location shall be
in accordance with Department of Public Health recommend-
ations. Monitoring activity shall be conducted under
auspices of Department of Public Health. Analysis records
shall be maintained and shall be made available for juris-
dictional agency review. Minimum acceptable limits of
effect, as caused by the Simpson Lee Project, are listed as
follows:
a. No rise in the existing groundwater table at any point
along the Simpson Lee property line, based on
historical data.
b. Water samples from these test wells shall not show a
change in the chloride and/or sulfate ion which exceeds
5055 of the difference between pre-operational back-
ground levels and those prescribed by the United
States Public Health Service, nor shall the color
exceed 50 platinum cobalt units above background levels.
c. Water samples from the test wells shall not exceed the
upper ranges of the quality criteria for Class I
irrigation waters, as shown in Table 5-8, pp. 109,
"Water Quality Criteria", 2nd Edition, Publication
No. 3A, State Water Quality Control Board, 1963. If
background or pre-operational quality levels are already
within 25% of, or already exceed one or more of these
criteria, the permissable change shall not exceed 25%
of the background level, nor in any case shall this
result in a water quality beyond the Class II limits.
d. An increase of no more than 0.5 p=p.m. of boron over
existing levels. If water quality indicators are
exceeded, permittee shall within 30 days provide plans
for the remedy of this condition, and within 90 days
shall have implemented corrective measures. A
contingency plan for remedy of excessive concentrations
of boron, chloride and solium, shall be submitted to
and approved by the Technical Advisory Committee, prior
to initiation of land disposal activity.
16. Permission to inspect the site shall be given to all Local,
State and Federal Governmental agencies having permit, and/
or review authority at any time during the term of the
permit.
17. Noxious insects shall not be allowed to develop in any
manner, which may prove to be a nuisance to adjoining
property owners. Permittee shall take all steps necessary
to annex the subject property to the Shasta Mosquito
Abatement District (S.M.A.D.). Until such time as
51
-------
annexation is complete, permittee may either contract with
S.M.A.D. for mosquito control, or conduct their own program.
Such program or contract to be approved by the Technical
Advisory Committee prior to initiation of land disposal
activity. The T.A.C. shall secure advice of S.M.A.D. on
any such program or contract.
18. Lone Tree Road and Riverland Drive shall not be used by
permittee for purposes of entrance or exit of heavy equip-
ment, except during construction phase Riverland Drive may
be so used. A transportation permit shall be obtained from
the Department of Public Works for overweight loads.
19. The permittee shall notify the State Archaeological Clear-
inghouse of the intent to disturb identified sites of
potential archaeological value, and shall permit qualified
archaeologists to conduct field investigations of those
sites listed in the State Archaeological Clearinghouse
comments, contained within Part A of the Final Environ-
mental Impact Report, for a period of six (6) months from
the date of notice. Copy of such notice to be furnished
to the Technical Advisory Committee.
20. All natural drainage courses through the company's property
are to be retained or else re-routed to the same equivalent
receiver.
21. The permittee's "effluent disposal" operation shall not
cause an offensive odor level, measured at the dwelling on
the affected property, in excess of four (4) times the
threshold level, as determined by a method approved by the
Air and Industrial Hygiene Laboratory of the Shasta County
Department of Health. Such determination, as well as any
suggested remedies shall be made by the Shasta County Dept.
of Public Health.
22. All effluent irrigation to be no less than 100 feet from
the nearest property line.
23. Prior to installation of the number three paper machine,
the Technical Advisory Committee shall review all
conditions of the use permit and report to the Planning
Commission.
52
-------
APPENDICES
APPENDIX C. RESULTS OP SOIL
COLUMN EXPERIMENTS
Report by Shasta Mill Technical Department, Environmental
Control Group, December, 1975. (Excerpts)
Objectives
1. To evaluate typical ion exchange capacity of Simpson
Ranch soil under fully controlled conditions.
2. To determine effect of dissolved and suspended solids
on soil permeability, in the absence of chlorophyll-
containing plants.
3. To evaluate the ability of the soil to remove BOD,
COD and color from the effluent.
4. To discover ways of counter-acting any negative
effects of loading soil with effluent at high rates.
Summary
Simpson Ranch soil becomes saturated with sodium after 2.5-
3.2 bed volumes (BV) of effluent has been applied, assuming a
sodium concentration of 300-400 mg/1. Exchangeable calcium
and magnesium are depleted at the same rate. Chloride was
found to be a suitable tracer of effluent percolate, since it
is not adsorbed as it passes through the soil. Soil permea-
bility decreased from 57# to 84$, depending on effluent appli-
cation rate. BOD removal was essentially complete. COD and
color removal efficiencies are inversely proportional to the
effluent application rate. At the lowest rate (10,000 gal/acre/
day) the COD and color removal were 80$ and 83$ respectively.
At the highest rate (40,000 gal/acre/day) the reductions were
52$ and 46$. Dolemite lime addition was found to reverse the
sodium-calcium ion exchange reaction. Substituting river water
(ie. low sodium and salinity) for effluent showed that this
would leach out sodium as well as reduce the salinity of the
soil.
53
-------
Introduction
Three fiberglass columns, each 12 inches in diameter and filled
with 70 inches of ranch soil were used for the study. After
automatic metering proved infeasible, effluent was added batch-
wise Monday through Friday at 7/5 the average daily rate to
compensate for no additions on weekends. The leachates were
collected five times per week and tested as two-week composites.
The average addition rates for columns 1, 2, and 3 were 10,000,
20,000, and 40,000 gal/acre/day, respectively. The applied
effluent and the leachates were analyzed for pH, alkalinity,
electrical conductance, total and calcium hardness, sodium,
chloride, color, BOD, and suspended solids by Simpson Technical
personnel. COD, nitrate, ammonia and Kjeldahl nitrogen and
phosphate were determined by Cook Laboratories, Menlo Park,
California. The unit used to describe the amount of effluent
applied to the soil in this study is Bed Volume (BV). The BV
is the volume of effluent expressed as a fraction of the volume
of the soil tested. Another way of looking at this parameter
is that it expresses the inches of effluent applied as a
fraction of the depth of the soil (in inches). Thus, a BV of
1.0 has been applied when a total of 70 inches of effluent has
been added to a 70 inch column of soil. By comparing BV's
required to bring about certain changes in leachate chemistry
at different effluent application rates, reaction rates and
equilibria can also be compared. Another important aspect of
the study involved changing the effluent-soil relationship by
calcium addition or leaching with irrigation water to make the
soil more compatible with crop production.
Test Results
1. Ion exchange capacity of Simpson Ranch soil.
a. Cationic Exchange
The substitution of calcium and magnesium in the soil
by sodium from the effluent is of particular interest
since this can lead to a deterioration of soil permea-
bility and also shift the osmotic equilibrium of vege-
tation growing in that soil. About 95$ of the sodium
in the effluent is removed until 0.8-1.0 BV have been
applied. Then the adsorption rate decreases more or
less linearly with the amount of effluent applied until
the adsorption rate reaches zero. (i.e. sodium concen-
trations in leachate and effluent are identical). This
occurred after 2.5 to 3.2 BV had been applied. Highly
variable effluent sodium levels may be the cause of
some apparent inconsistencies in the test data. For
example, it was expected that due to a longer contact
time, the column with the lowest addition rate would
remove more of the sodium since the cationic exchange
54
-------
reaction should be more complete. The data we collected
indicate the opposite. However, by considering the
changing sodium content of the applied effluent and
actual contact time (since it was batch rather than
continuous addition) it appears that the ion exchange
rate is independent of effluent addition rate in the
range 10,000-40,000 gal/acre/day.
Initial total hardness levels in the leachates were
quite high, indicating a rapid depletion rate for
exchangeable calcium and magnesium in the soil. The
level of activity decreases as the total hardness level
approaches that of the effluent. The rate of depletion
was found to be basically independent of the effluent
application rate within the range investigated.
Exhaustion of exchangeable calcium and magnesium
occurred at 2.5-3.5 BV which corresponds to the volume
of applied effluent at which the sodium ion adsorption
capacity of the soil was depleted.
The amount of effluent required to reach an equilibrium
in the cationic exchange reaction depends on the sodium
concentration in the effluent as well as the cationic
exchange capacity (CEC) of the soil. Saturation of the
soil with sodium will occur more rapidly if the
effluent sodium concentration is high and/or the soil
CEC is low.
b. Other ion exchange, leaching, and bacterial activity.
(1) Chloride is not adsorbed by the soil and stays in
the leachate as it passes through the soil. The
chloride ion can therefore, be used as a tracer
when investigating leachate distribution in ground-
waters.
(2) Initially 'the application of effluent leached
soluble salts from the soil (as measured by EC)
faster than they were added by the effluent.
After about 0.5 BV had been added to the column,
the conductivity of the leachate had dropped to
the level found for the effluent.
(3) As expected, no P- alkalinity existed for the
effluent or the leachates. Total alkalinity was
variable, but generally leachate levels were lower
than those in the effluent.
(4) Initial concentrations of nitrate in the leachates
were extremely high (up to 1300 mg/1). This
caused some concern since high nitrogen concen-
trations in groundwaters entering the Sacramento
55
-------
River could cause eutrophication problems. A
second experiment was set up to specifically study
the nitrate problem. Two soil columns were used,
one was irrigated with effluent, the other with
river water. The application rate for both columns
was 20,000 gal/acre/day. Initial nitrate levels
in the leachates were only slightly higher than
those of the waters being added to the columns.
obviously the original three soil columns had
some peculiarity in their history to cause a
buildup of nitrate nitrogen in the soil prior to
the effluent application. An investigation of the
history of the soil columns revealed that they
were filled with soil in July 1973, but not put
into use until December 1973- During the five
months the columns were idle, protein from organic
matter in the soil would decompose to ammonia,
which then would be oxidized to nitrite which
further oxidizes to nitrate. In addition, non-
symbiotic bacteria in the soil may have fixed
atmospheric nitrogen which also would add to the
nitrate concentration in the soil. Since there
were no chlorophyll-containing plants growing in
the soil that would use nitrate nitrogen, the
level in the soil would build up, resulting in a
relatively high concentration after a period of
five months. Since nitrates are very soluble in
water, they were leached out quite rapidly when
the experiment began.
(5) Leachate phosphate levels were much lower than
those in the effluent. Since both acid and basic
conditions in the soil can convert water-soluble
phosphates to insoluble phosphates, this could
explain the reduction in phosphate concentration.
2. Effect on soil water acceptance rate (W.A.R.).
The water acceptance rate was determined by measuring the
rate at which a water column with an initial height of
8 inches would percolate into soil presaturated with water.
Variability of this method is high, but there was a
definite decrease in water acceptance rate as the study
progressed.
56
-------
TABLE C-l. W.A.R.* vs. EFFLUENT APPLICATION
Elapsed
time,
days
0
137
601
Col. 1
WAR BV
135 0
22 0.72
58 3.16
Col. 2
WAR BV
126 0
23 1.44
24 6.33
Col
WAR
81
71
13
. 3
BV
0
2.88
12.65
*WAR is water acceptance rate of soil in U.S. gal./sq. ft./
day.
The loss in W.A.R. is due to two factors. It is physically
reduced by inorganic suspended solids accumulating in the
surface of the soil by simple filtration. The layer
involved is thin, less\than 1/4 inch. A chemi-physical
change occurs throughout the soil as a result of cation
exchange, with the adsorbed sodium causing deflocculation
of the soil. The relative influence of each factor on
W.A.R. depends on the sodium and inorganic suspended solids
concentrations of the effluent. The influence of the latter
will be much less under actual irrigation because the root
systems and plant growth would break up the surface of the
soil.
3. BOD, COD and color removal.
a. BOD
To date, BOD removal for the effluent has been essen-
tially complete after it has passed through the 70
inches of soil, ie., the test results are of the same
magnitude as the variability of the BOD test.
b. COD
COD levels in the effluent were quite variable during
the study, ranging from 170 mg/1 to 985 mg/1. This
makes it difficult to calculate COD removal efficiency,
but based on average values after an equilibrium had
been reached, the following conclusions were made:
Col. 1 Col. 2 Col. 3
COD reduction,2 5075 52
57
-------
Since the COD level of the leachate increases or
decreases with the COD of the effluent, and since an
equilibrium was reached for each column, the conclusion
is that the reduction is a biochemical process rather
than physical adsorption, and that the COD reduction
efficiency is a function of the effluent loading rate.
c. Color
The color of the effluent was also variable during the
study, with a range of 1600-3600 TCU. Based on average
equilibrium values, the color reductions were:
Col. 1 Col. 2 Col. 3
Color reduction,% 83*%%
^Equilibrium not reached when river water addition
initiated.
It is interesting to note that for column 3 (the only
column with long-term equilibrium data base) the
reduction is relatively constant in magnitude, about
1000 TCU, rather than on a percentage basis. It
appears that the micro-organisms that break down the
color have a relatively constant capacity to oxidize
or otherwise destroy color which is not dependent on
the color concentration, but does vary with effluent
addition rate.
4. Ways to counteract negative effects of loading soil with
effluent at high rates.
The main negative effects are:
Reduced soil permeability
Increased soil alkalinity*
Increased soil salinity**
*Soil is considered alkali if Na > 2 meq/lOOg or exchange-
able Na > 15% of cationic exchange capacity.
**Soil is saline if soluble salts (EC) > 4 mmho/cm.
The above phenomena can have a severe effect on crop
production if not controlled, by disturbing the plant-
soil osmosis equilibrium and internal plant physiology.
Two methods of controlling the above adverse effects were
investigated: calcium replenishment and leaching the soil
with river water. Only chemiphysically-induced reduction
in permeability would be affected by these methods. The
58
-------
criterion for success would be a higher sodium level in
the leachate than in the column influent indicating
desorption of the sodium, and in the case of river water
addition, EC levels in the leachate higher than in the
river water, indicating removal of soluble salts (salinity).
a. Calcium replenishment
%
Columns 1 and 3 were used to study the effect of calcium
addition.
(1) Calcium carbonate was added to column 3 at 2 tons/
acre equivalent after 140 days (2.95 BV) of
operation. No significant changes occurred in the
leachate chemistry as a result of the CaCC>3
addition, probably because of the low solubility
of that compound.
(2) Gypsum (CaSOij) was added to columns 1 and 3 at a
2 tons/acre rate after 312 days of operation
(1.64 and 6.57 BV respectively). Definite changes
occurred in the leachate, but they were relatively
shortlived. COD and color levels dropped
temporarily, possibly due to the sulfate ion
providing additional oxygen to anaerobic bacteria
involved in the decomposition of those two para-
meters. The total hardness concentration of the
leachates increased considerably while there was
no noticeable effect on the sodium concentration,
indicating that in this particular circumstance,
gypsum may not be suitable for reversing the
sodium-calcium ion exchange reaction.
(3) Dolemite lime.
Dolemite lime is a combination of calcium and
magnesium carbonates. This mineral was added to
column 3 after 404 days of operation (8.51 BV) at
2 tons/acre. After the addition, the sodium level
of the leachate began deviating from the level in
the effluent to a point where the sodium concen-
tration in the leachate was over 100 mg/1 higher
than in the effluent. However, this could also
be partially explained by a simultaneous drop in
effluent sodium concentration which could have
changed the soil-effluent sodium equilibrium.
An unexpected change in the effluent-leachate
calcium relationship occurred simultaneously.
The total hardness of the leachate dropped consid-
erably lower than that of the effluent, in spite
of the dolemite addition. This would suggest
that in addition to the calcium and magnesium from
59
-------
the dolemite lime, the soil adsorbed these ions
from the effluent as well to replace the expelled
sodium. In view of these findings, it appears
that dolemite lime is quite suitable for reversing
the sodium-calcium ion exchange.
It should be remembered however, that while not
reversing the reaction, other types of calcium
addition to the soil on a regular basis may control
the adsorption of sodium by the soil to the point
where it is not a problem.
b. Leaching the soil with river water.
After effluent had been applied to column 2 at 20,000
gal/acre/day for 228 days (2.4 BV), river water was
substituted and added at the same rate for 240 days
(2.53 BV) to study the effects of "normal" irrigation
water. Then effluent was applied again to determine
whether any regeneration of the soil had taken place.
Leachate sodium levels decreased sharply about 40 days
(0.42 BV) after river water was substituted for
effluent. Seventy days (0.74 BV) after the change was
made, the sodium concentration began decreasing at a
slower, but fairly constant rate until effluent addition
was resumed. The sodium concentration then increased
rapidly until it reached an equilibrium with the
effluent.
c
River water addition did not have any noticeable effect
on the leachate total hardness reduction rate until 70
days (0.74 BV) after the change was made. At that time,
the rate of decrease lessened considerably and remained
fairly constant until effluent addition began again.
Then the total hardness concentration increased rela-
tively rapidly until it was the same as when river
water addition was initiated. After peaking, it
decreased at a rate comparable to pre-river water
conditions. At the time of this report there is not
sufficient data to draw any conclusions about how COD
and color removal rates are affected by leaching. EC
levels in the leachate remained higher than levels in
the river water during that part of the experiment,
which shows that accumulated salinity (soluble salts
including sodium) can be readily leached out by the
addition of normal irrigation water.
To summarize, dolemite lime addition or leaching with low
sodium water will remove soil alkalinity, and fresh water
leaching will also decrease soil salinity.
60
-------
APPENDICES
APPENDIX D. RESULTS OF GRAVEL-
BAR SPRINKLER IRRIGATION
PROJECT
Report by Shasta Mill Technical Department, Environmental
Control Group, May 7, 1975. (Excerpts)
Objectives
1. To verify predicted direction of groundwater flow.
2. To determine if effluent percolate can cause a
deterioration of Sacramento River gravel-waters, making
it unsuitable for salmon spawning.
3. To determine if aesthetically undesirable conditions
result from spray irrigation with Shasta Mill effluent.
Summary
The project was started up on 10/7/74. Initial application
rate was 42,100 gal/day/acre or about 1.5 inches/day. On
10/14/74, the application rate was doubled to 84,200 gal/
day/acre. Effluent was applied at this rate until percolate
infiltrated the Raney-type wells that supply river water to
the bioassay facilities, and sprinkling was terminated on
11/12/74. Three wells, all located between the irrigated
area and the Sacramento River, showed significant increases
in electric conductivity (EC), chloride, sodium and color.
None of the other seven wells showed significant changes in
water chemistry. In the three affected wells, the effluent
concentration in the groundwater began to decrease shortly
after sprinkling was terminated, and after three months
most parameters returned to pre-operational levels.
Results
1. A total of 14,880,000 gallons of effluent was applied
over a 36 day period. This corresponds to an average
of 72,510 gallons/day/acre.
2. About 5750 Ibs. of suspended solids (1009 Ibs. acre)
were captured by the filtering action of the sand.
61
-------
3. About 2700 Ibs of BOD-5 (486 Ibs/acre) were removed by
soil bacteria in reactions similar to those in
trickling filters.
4. No suspended solids were found in water drawn from any
of the test wells. Results of BOD analyses were so low
that they were within testing error.
5. The groundwater movement is essentially perpendicular
to the river. Only wells 5, 6, and 7 showed any change
(except well #2, but that was due to effluent from the
bioassay facilities). Chloride levels at gravel
stations B and C confirmed this as they increased
significantly while levels at stations A and D remained
constant.
6. Relatively little groundwater was available for
dilution. Data from wells 5 and 6 indicate that a
steady state condition would have been about 5 parts
effluent percolate to 1 part groundwater (83$) assuming
84,200 gallons/day/acre effluent application and little
or no precipitation or other irrigation which would
increase the groundwater flowrate.
7. There was no indication of vertical stratification of
effluent percolate in the groundwater table. Wells 5
and 6, with mean sampling depths oxf 6.5 ft. and 22.0
ft. respectively, had similar concentrations of chloride
and other chemical parameters throughout the duration of
the project.
8. The effluent sprinkling had no significant effect on
the temperature and pH of the groundwater.
9. Work done to determine the impact on gravel waters was
hampered by lack of suitable 'test locations. Heavy
silting of the river bank prevented meaningful analysis
for dissolved oxygen, the most important parameter of
gravel water quality. Beginning on 10/15/74, gravel
waters were also tested for chloride as an indicator of
effluent percolate concentration.
10. A very light musky odor could be detected on daily
startup. It was believed that this was caused by
anaerobic conditions developing in the project pipelines
when the sprinklers were idle overnight. The odor
disappeared in less than five minutes.
11. The irrigation system did not increase the vector
population in the vicinity of the project site.
12. No deleterious effects on vegetation were observed. In
62
-------
fact, some grasses began to grown within the irrigated
area.
Discussion
This project was scheduled to start up in July 1974, but
various delays, including getting necessary permits, shifted
the startup data, to early October. The sprinkler area,
Fig. D-l, is located on a gravel bar adjacent to the Sacra-
mento River, and is subject to flooding during the winter
months, usually beginning in December. The project would
have to be shut down prior to flooding, and sprinkler heads
and risers would be removed to prevent equipment damage.
Therefore, a maximum of two months operation was expected
for the project, and higher initial irrigation rates than
planned had to be used in order to assure a significant
change in groundwater chemistry in those areas affected by
effluent percolate.
When background data were collected, it was discovered that
there were no suitable locations for sampling interstitial
gravel waters because the river bank was heavily silted.
The dissolved oxygen content of the collected waters was
lower than that of river water and higly variable. Later
in the project these waters were also tested for chloride.
The background chloride levels at the gravel waters test
stations were estimated based on levels in nearby wells and
general changes in chloride levels as the project pro-
gressed.
Test Wells 1-7 showed high chloride background levels, pro-
bably caused by percolates from the bioassay facilities and
the nearby secondary sludge disposal system. Chloride is
very useful as a tracer, as this ion is not significantly
affected by ion exchange in most soils. Knowing background
chloride levels of the groundwater and effluent, the ef-
fluent percolate concentration in the wells can be calcu-
lated. Assuming background levels of 50 mg/1 and 400 mg/1
respectively, and an ultimate chloride concentration of
340 mg/1 in wells 5 and 6, the steady-state percolate
concentration would be 83% assuming no changes in the
groundwater flow rate or the effluent application rate
of 84,200 gal/acre/day. Percolate concentration at gravel
water test station C at the termination of sprinkling
was 61% (assuming background and termination chloride levels
of 20 mg/1 and 250 mg/1 respectively.) This shows that very
little river water permeated the silted riverbank. Sample
station B was somewhat better in this respect, but still far
from ideal. Stations A and D showed little change from
background levels. This, and the fact that only wells 5,
6, and 7 showed significant changes in water chemistry,
leads to the conclusion that the ground-water movement
63
-------
en
O8
-TEST WELLS
NUMBERED I-K
-OIO
SPRINKLED AREA
APPROX 5.7 ACRES
SECONDARY EFFLUENT
500 GPM
Figure D-l. GRAVEL BAR SPRINKLER IRRIGATION PROJECT
-------
pattern is basically perpendicular to the riverflow.
As mentioned above, the impact of effluent percolate on
Sacramento River gravel waters is difficult to assess
because of sampling problems. Nevertheless, some statements
can be made based upon the results of the 1974 salmon egg
bioassay. When it was initiated, it was discovered that the
dilution water to the bioassay facilities contained high
concentrations of chloride, indicating an influx of
effluent percolate and groundwater to Raney wells that
supply the dilution water. These wells were installed
below the river bottom to supply river water which, by
filtration through the sand and gravel, was essentially
free of silt and turbidity. The river bottom above these
well casings has become increasingly covered by silt in
recent years as a result of an upstream snag and the
percolation rate of river water to the wells has decreased
considerably. Gradually, more and more groundwater entered
the dilution water supply, and the problem became critical
in early November, 1974, when the riverflow dropped as low
as 6000 cfs and the groundwater flow in the area had
increased by about 480,000 gpd as a result of the gravel
bar demonstration project. As a result, the estimated
effluent percolate concentration in the dilution water at
times exceeded 30?, and the demonstration project was shut
down. The egg bioassay proceeded as planned with effluent
concentration up to 7.2? in spite of the above problem.
This bioassay produced excellent results; the hatching
rate in 1.2% effluent (98.6?) was as good as that for the
control, (i.e., dilution water (97-550. Both of these rates
were better than any from previous egg bioassays performed
at the Shasta Mill, even though the earlier tests had
dilution water chemistry approaching 100? river water. In
view of the above, it is unlikely that effluent percolate
will have a negative effect on the hatching rate of future
salmon eggs spawned in gravel waters adjacent to the
Simpson Eee River Ranch.
Other than the slight musky odor on daily startup, there
were no adverse environmental or aesthetic effects attri-
butable to the project. As mentioned earlier, vegetation
increased and no increase in the local vector population
was determined. There has been some concern about increased
mosquito generation as a result of irrigation with effluent,
but it appears that at least the existing Shasta Mill
effluent has repellant properties. In other studies
conducted in 1974, mosquitoes did not lay eggs in effluent.
The final polishing pond in the existing effluent treatment
system, a quiescent basin with grass growing on the banks,
would be considered an ideal location for mosquitoes. Yet,
in all the years it has been in operation, not a single
mosquito larva has been found there.
65
-------
Although this study was considerably shorter than planned,
it answered objectives No. 1 and 3 and partially answered
No. 2. In view of this, it is recommended that this project
be considered completed.
Testing Procedures
Sampling and testing procedures were audited by personnel
from Shasta County Department of Health and found satis-
factory. Samples from the wells were collected using a
hand-operated diaphragm pump after it was found that vacuum
pump arrangements were impractical. Water from the gravel
test stations was sampled by a siphoning arrangements
developed by Simpson Paper Co. personnel to eliminate
entrainment of air which could cause high dissolved oxygen
results.
Suspended solids and BOD removal figures of 5750 Ibs and
2700 Ibs respectively were calculated using the known
daily effluent application rate and suspended solids and
BOD concentrations as determined by the effluent operators.
Since samples from the test wells did not contain any sus-
pended solids of the type normally present in the mill
effluent and the BOD results were so low that they fell
within the precision range of the test, the above figures
were based on 100$ removal of the two components prior to
the effluent percolate/groundwater mixture being collected
in the test wells.
66
-------
APPENDICES
APPENDIX E. OPERATION PLAN FOR
THE SIMPSON-SHASTA RANCH
Report by a project consultant, CH£M Hill and Associates,
Redding, California, September, 1974.
Introduction
The operation of the River Ranch will involve two principal
areas: the agricultural operation and the monitoring of
conditions resulting from application of mill effluent. These
areas will overlap to a degree since each affects the other.
In both areas, a high degree of management is necessary. Since
the mill is producing effluent almost continuously, the manager
and lessee must have a well planned irrigation scheme that will
provide for disposal of varying portions of the effluent as well
as maximum utilization of the effluent for crop production.
Prior planning is essential, and the following recommendations
are intended to assist the manager in starting the operation.
It is possible, if not probable, that any program will change as
additional specific experience and information is developed and
accumulated.
All recommendations reflect the two-phase development of the
project, i.e., up to 4 MGD of effluent being available after
installation of a second paper machine at the mill, and 7 MGD
after installation of a third.
Cropping Plan
Under both initial and ultimate development conditions, a
majority of the effluent irrigated area should be planted to a
legume-grass forage mix. This is deemed to be the most likely
crop to accomplish maximum evapotranspiration and to keep the
surface open for fast water intake.
Although high value annual crops are more appealing from the
standpoint of maximizing returns, especially considering the
excellent soils at the ranch, it must be kept in mind that the
success of the project will be dependent upon the infiltration
rate of the soil during the winter months. Uptake of rainfall
and effluent by crops during much of this period will be negli-
67
-------
gible. Therefore, the capacity of the soil to filtrate water
through the surface will be at a minimum because of a high
moisture content. Because of the nature of the effluent, the
surface can also be sealed by accumulated organic solids and the
associated overgrowth of bacteria. When vegetation is present,
roots perforate the soil and maintain porosity, and surface
litter is often present to support biological activity. Peren-
nial forage crops are very effective because they cover much of
the soil surface, and their roots underlie most of the cropped
area.
Extensive application of effluent during the winter on bare soil,
or even on soil covered by stubble or residue from a summer crop,
should follow successful research conducted on a small acreage
basis. The experience gained during the initial period of less
than maximum effluent supply will establish the final pattern
of crops and the rotation.
The initial development is designed to give a similar treatment
to that expected under full development. To accomplish this, it
is suggested that Fields C, D, E, F, K, L, and M along Main 1,
and Fields 0, P, and Q on the Return Flow Main be initially
planted to a forage mix. It is likely that some of this acreage
will have to be supplemented in the irrigation season by the
Anderson-Cottonwood Irrigation District (ACID) Canal water.
The remainder of the ranch should be cropped and irrigated from
the ACID Canal.
A specific forage mix has been suggested by Milton D. Miller,
Consulting Agronomist, in his report dated 16 October 1974. In
addition to this mix, there are others that may be tried in
order to obtain additional experience that may lead to an
ideally adapted mix, or pure stand, for the conditions of high
water applications during the winter and maximum production in
the normal production season. All of the mixes would be appro-
priate for harvesting with animals or as hay or greenchop. Each
of the mixes can be altered individually to achieve a particular
purpose. Each variety has growing characteristics that achieve
specific objectives.
The suggested mixes are on the following table. The quantities
indicated are pounds per acre.
68
-------
SUGGESTED FORAGE MIXES, LB. PER ACRE.
1. Alfalfa (DeKalb 167) 20
Alta Tall Fescue 10
2. Alsike Clover 3
Broadleaf Trefoil 2
Salina Strawberry Clover 3
Meadow Fescue 6
Reed Canary Grass 5
Akaroa Orchard Grass 6
Red Top 5
3. Salina Strawberry Clover 6
Fawn Tall Fescue 10
Akaroa Orchard Grass 4
Ariki Rye Grass 10
4. Ladino Clover 5
Broadleaf Trefoil 3
Akaroa Orchard Grass 6
Ariki Rye Grass 8
Alta Tall Fescue 8
The first mix is suggested by Milton D. Miller. A measure of
the practicability of a pure stand of alfalfa can be obtained
from this. Mix No. 2 is one suggested by a seed company with
local experience. The third mix is one that has been successful
in the high rainfall area on the North Coast of California.
Mix No. 4 is suggested to get a measure, principally, of how
Ladino clover will do under project conditions in the event
Ladino seed production is desired, as suggested by Milton D.
Miller.
The remaining fields not required for effluent disposal during
the initial period can be used for annual crop production with
irrigation from the ACID Canal when required. These crops could
be wheat, milo, corn (grain or silage), or beans. Double-
cropping in these areas would be a possibility. It is suggested
that Field R be planted to wheat, also, and irrigated with
effluent during the winter to see if, in these light soils, it
will stand such treatment. If it will, a crop of wheat could
be grown during the winter and then a double-cropped summer
annual could be grown in the summer. This knowledge could be
important for future planning.
Irrigation System
The method of application to be used for the effluent disposal
areas initially will be the strip check or border method of
surface irrigation. This is the best method for the close-growing
forages planned for use. The factors considered in design of the
69
-------
border widths are valve discharge, lengths of run, irrigation
slope, cross slope, and width of machinery to be used. The
lengths of run of the borders are determined by local geography
of the fields and economical land development. One automati-
cally operated valve in each border will deliver effluent to
the border. The furrow method will be used in the fields where
annual crops are grown.
For the initial development, when up to 4 MGD of effluent will
be available, the effluent disposal will occur along Main 1, and
the runoff will be utilized on the Return Flow Main. Approxi-
mately 290 acres will be required On Main 1, and 60 acres on the
Return Flow Main. Those fields to be irrigated with effluent
initially from Main 1 are C, D, E, F, K, L, and M. The fields
on the Return Flow Main to be irrigated are 0, P, and Q. This
will result in an average effluent application rate of approxi-
mately 0.43 inch per day, which is the same as the expected
application rate after complete development when up to 7 MGD
are available.
The exact timing of the irrigation sets will be determined after
installation in the field. However, it is estimated that the
cycle will be completed in 10-14 days.
Four valves operating at one time, each discharging 1,200 gpm,
will be operating on Main 1, and one valve with the same unit
discharge will be operating on the Return Flow Main. Since this
flow represents the full 7-MGD delivery, it is planned to irri-
gate for only about 60 percent of the time during the initial
development period and to utilize pond storage for the remaining
time. This method will give a greater application efficiency
because the borders were designed for a flow rate of 1,200 gpm.
If effluent were applied at a lower rate for 24 hours per day,
the upper ends of the borders would he greatly overirrigated.
This application program, coupled with the irrigation of the
other cropped areas, will allow a representative picture,
through the complete monitoring program, of the affects on the
ground water level. The monitoring of the ground water will indi-
cate the need, if any, for corrective supplemental subsurface
drainage. The corrective measure can then be instituted prior
to full development.
Surface Drainage System
It is planned that all surface runoff of applied effluent will
be held on the project site and not allowed to flow into natural
surface channels or the river. This runoff will be reapplied
on the site. Surface drain ditches at the bottom of each field
receiving effluent will collect the runoff and convey it to a
sump from which it will be reapplied through the Return Flow Main.
70
-------
The surface drain ditches, the culverts under the roads, and the
flume, are designed to take emergency flows approximately equal
to the 7 mgd irrigation discharge. If such an emergency situa-
tion happened to occur, the ditches would utilize the bottom
portion of the fields as temporary storage to accommodate the
flow. Because of the very flat slope across the bottom of most
of the fields, it will be essential that these drain ditches be
maintained as free of vegetative growth as possible. This can
be accomplished by a regular spray program of herbicides or soil
sterilants along the ditches or by mechanically cleaning and
regrading the ditches regularly.
General System Management
Special management techniques will have to be developed to
obtain the maximum benefits from the project. Regular irrigation
and crop monitoring should continue until the optimum management
combinations of water use and cropping patterns are determined.
Complete familiarity with the operation of the automatic features
of the project must be obtained.
Initially, the correct time settings for the automatic valves
at each location will have to be determined. This will require
watching the flow down each border and setting the automatic
timer in accordance with the advance of the water. The rate of
advance will vary from field to field in relation to the slope
and border width as well as the soils. The initial setting may
have to be adjusted during later irrigations until an average
or optimum setting is determined.
Infiltration rates and depth of wetting of the soil at several
locations down the border should be determined initially, and
periodically thereafter, in order to determine the affect of the
effluent on soil properties. These measurements will be used in
conjunction with the ground water data to determine optimum
management of the effluent disposal.
A determination of the stand of individual plant varieties in
each forage mix seeded should be made as soon as the stand is
established and about every 3-4 months thereafter. This will be
the measure of the most desirable plant types to use in the
permanent rotation to be established. Also, tissue analysis of
the plants should be made periodically to determine the uptake
of nutrients from the effluent. This can also be used for
fertilizer application requirements. Records of effluent
quality can be correlated with the data from the ground water
sampling analysis to determine the effect that the land disposal
procedures has ont he effluent. It would also be apprdpriate
to periodically sample and analyze the surface runoff at the sump
to determine any effect that overland flow might have had on the
effluent.
71
-------
The operation of the complete system, as described previously,
involves a rather rigid schedule for irrigation. Because of
this, it will be necessary that the cutting, baling, and hauling
of the hay, if that is the way the crop is to be harvested, be
done within this rigid schedule. As pointed out by Milton D.
Miller, the necessary machinery will have to be available at
the specific time and in sufficient amount. Complete mechani-
zation will be necessary to accomplish this. Or, if animals
are to be used for harvesting, adequate fencing will have to
be installed to handle the appropriate number of animals to use
up the forage between the irrigations Even with this method,
some degree of mechanization will be necessary to clip and other-
wise manage the pasture.
72
-------
APPENDICES
APPENDIX P. GROUNDWATER
MANAGEMENT COMPLICATIONS
AT THE SIMPSON-SHASTA RANCH
DISAGREEMENT WITH SHASTA
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Part 1. History of Disagreement
In February, 1977, more than a year after the Shasta
effluent Irrigation project began, a disagreement arose with
the Shasta County Planning Commission over the meaning of Use
Permit Condition 15, the key being the first sentence:
"Monitoring wells shall be established on the periphery of the
disposal site". Those Company officials and Company consultants
who participated in the development of the Use Permit Conditions
in the summer of 1974, understood that the concern was for
private agricultural properties adjoining Simpson's Ranch, and
specifically those owned by two persons who also attended the
Use Permit negotiating sessions. Therefore the Company inter-
preted "periphery" as referring to the land boundaries of the
Ranch. On this basis, the Company identified for County
officials seventeen water quality test wells near the land
boundaries, to be monitored by both parties for the purpose of
satisfying Condition 15. This went unchallenged until Feb. 17,
1977, at which time the Planning Commission ruled, in effect,
that Condition 15 was applicable to any and all test wells on
the Company's Ranch, irregardless of location or purpose. For
Simpson Paper Co., this created an extremely difficult situation.
Consequently, the Company asked the Commission to reconsider the
decision.
Part of the difficulty involved several test wells along
the Sacramento River shoreline, drilled to monitor compliance
with the NPDES Permit. During the project design stage, the
Company recognized that essentially all of the effluent percolate
would migrate slowly toward, and become a part of, the River.
Because of the nature of the groundwater gradient and other
factors, it was also recognized that beneath some portions of the
Ranch - and especially the easterly portion (nearest the River) -
effluent percolate could at times comprise as much as 80% of the
groundwater. However, based on the consultant hydrologist's
studies, it was considered most unlikely that such conditions
73
-------
could exist at the land boundaries.
In a June 30, 1977, letter to the Planning Commission, a
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board represen-
tative wrote, "Our Board did not include limits on concentrations
of salt-related constituents in groundwater percolating to the
river, because evidence indicated downstream beneficial uses
would not be adversely affected under proposed discharge rates.
Prior to implementation of the land disposal project, all salt
associated with the mill effluent was discharged directly to the
Sacramento River with no documented adverse effect". In view
of this, the Company assumed that the Planning Commission's
concerns about the composition of water from the River shoreline
test wells, and other interior Ranch test wells, were related to
agriculture. Accordingly, another consulting firm was engaged
to study this matter in some detail, and their report (Appendix
F, Part 2) was presented to the Commission. The essence of this
report is that the effluent-groundwater mixture, as sampled at
test wells along the land boundaries of the Ranch represents a
water whose concentration of crop-sensitive constituents is
less than half of that generally accepted as safe for the crops
grown on adjoining properties (i.e. - a safety factor greater
than 2 prevails at the property line).
Concurrently, the Company revised its management plan for
the effluent irrigation project, including, among other things,
additional safeguards for neighboring agricultural activities
(Appendix F, Part 3). This was also presented to the County
Planning Commission, along with other written and oral testimony.
On July 14, 1977, the Commission modified its February
decision, voting to apply a 200 mg./l. limit on chloride ion
concentration in test wells other than those at the land bound-
aries of the Simpson Shasta Ranch, for which the original Use
Permit Condition No. 15 would still apply. In reaching this
decision, the Commission also took into account the latest State
of California "Drinking Water Standards", wherein the maximum
chloride ion concentration is shown as 500 mg./l. While still
disputing the Commission's decision, the Company believes that
it can comply with that limitJ and all other rules and regu-
lations currently applicable to the Simpson Shasta Ranch
effluent irrigation project.
Part 2. Summary of Reports by Consultants
All consultants are members of Baier Agronomy, Inc.,
Woodland, CA.
Dwight C. Baier, President of Baier Agronomy, Inc. and
formerly Agricultural Water Quality Specialist, Division
of Planning and Research, California State Water Resources
Control Board.
74
-------
J. L. Meyer, Area Soil & Water Spec. Member of the Advi-
sory Committee to the National Commission on Water Quality.
Member of the UC Committee of Consultants which prepared
the below reference, which has been accepted as agricul-
tural water guidelines by California, the U.S. and FAO,
Rome.
Milton D. Miller, Agricultural Consultant and Agricultura-
list Emeritus, University of California. After serving the
University of California for 40 years, he retired to private
consulting practice. During his career he has also served
as an agricultural consultant to Australia, Thailand and
to the World Bank in Eastern Europe.
"Soils and Hydrology," by Dwight C. Baier.
Using reliable data collected by competent independent and
Simpson Paper Co- technicians, 1977 hydrologic studies of the
Simpson Paper Co- (SPC) Ranch property have been compared with
similar studies that were conducted before a 400 acre block on
the Ranch was developed for stop check irrigation. Using
Simpson Paper Co. plant treated effluent, irrigation of the new
area was begun in January 1976, continuing to the present. In
the first 13 months of operation the new fields received a total
of 3162 acre feet (3.9 million cubic meters) of effluent plus
approximately 2.2 acre feet of rainfall per acre. This totals
to about 10.74 acre feet to each of the 300 acres used to re-
ceive the effluent. These studies indicate the following:
1. There has been no significant change in water table
elevations on the Ranch.
2. There has been no significant change in the direction
of water movement due to SPC Ranch irrigation.
3. Groundwater under fields R and S is now and has always
been flowing under the neighboring property to the
south.
4. It is unlikely that any leachates from SPC irrigation
will flow under neighboring properties, so long as
effluent is not used for irrigation on field S and
part of Field R. (Note by Company reviewer of con-
sultants' reports: There never has been any intent
by the Company to apply effluent to Field S. The
groundwater condition at Field R is under continuing
study.)
5. As proposed in the original development plans, it is
possible to construct a hydraulic barrier to prevent
water from flowing under neighboring properties.
75
-------
6. As originally thought, the soils on the Simpson Ranch
have proven to be unusually permeable and have readily
accepted the applied effluent. During the last quarter
of 1976 the fields received a total of 1175 acre feet
of effluent plus rainfall. Each irrigated acre received
about 3.9 acre feet of effluent plus the rainfall.
7. There has been no apparent change in the permeability
of the Ranch soils due to application of large amounts
of effluent. The soil monitoring program has shown no
significant change in the salt balance. Some areas in
some fields are showing a slight decrease in calcium
and magnesium. This can economically be corrected when
needed by application of Gypsum.
"Irrigation Water Quality with Respect to Deciduous Trees," by
Jewell L. Meyer.
The Simpson Paper Co. (SPC) effluent irrigation project, as
planned and implemented under Shasta Co. User Permit # 90-74
(Nov. 12, 1974) and the original Simpson Lee (Shasta Mill)
Expansion Program Environmental Impact Report is an outstanding
example of good waste water management and conservation of a
very valuable natural resource, water. This has been accomplished
since 1974 through the implementation of up-to-date Technology
by Simpson engineers within the paper plant and in new field-
related facilities. Collectively, these new practices and faci-
lities are conserving water and have improved the quality of
and reduced the quantity of plant effluent originally targeted.
The company has upgraded the original primary waste treatment
facility and installed a new secondary treatment, low-rate
biological system for better suspended solids (TSS) management.
All of these steps have resulted in a significantly reduced
volume of improved quality effluent beyond that as originally
provided in the EIR. Conclusions enumerated below are based on
records supplied by Simpson Paper Co. personnel and on a trip
to the Plant facilities and the Ranch.
1. Water Quality Guidelines, (University of California,
Jan. 1977) and Water Quality for Agriculture (FAO Bulletin 29,
Dec. 1976) establish salinity and chloride tolerance levels for
the above listed crops considerably higher than records show us
as those characterizing the SPC effluent.
2. Provided essential leaching requirements are met, cur-
rent SPC effluent quality parameters including those of EC
1.0 to 1.5 and chlorides Of 4.8 me/1 (180 mg/1) to 7.6 me/1
(270 mg/1), will not harm deciduous orchards or tolerant field
and vegetable crops on or adjacent to the SPC Ranch, even if
applied directly as effluent in surface irrigation for long-term
periods.
76
-------
3. The potentially phytotoxic substances boron and selenium
in the effluent are far below established critical levels for
these crops. Similarly, sodium is also below troublesome con-
centrations in the effluent.
4. With the improved effluent treatment system now used by
SPC, the suspended solids content of the effluent reaching the
Ranch for irrigation is very low, and has proven to be no pro-
blem from the standpoint of impeding water penetration.
5. Numerous examples in the San Joaquin Valley have been
studied by the authors. They have found numerous cases where
water of poorer quality than the present SPC effluent is regu-
larly used for agricultural purposes. Using gravity irrigation
or under-tree sprinklers, these poorer quality waters have been
used successfully over long periods on walnuts, pears, plums
and prunes with no damage to trees or yield.
6. The good field crop yields achieved in 1976 and those
projected for 1977 by SPC Ranch management are proof that the
effluent is very satisfactory for their irrigation purposes.
"An Agronomic Appraisal of Progress on Simpson Ranch Develop-
ment" , by Milton D. Miller.
Excellent progress has been made by The Simpson Paper
Company (SPC) since 1974 in developing 500 acres of their Ranch
for the production of crops, using paper plant effluent. That
property is now efficiently using about 2 MGD. For short
periods of time it could utilize up to 4 MGD. (Note by company
reviewer of consultants' reports: The project was designed for
effluent application up to 4 MGD. on a sustained basis. However,
the actual average irrigation rate for the first 20 months of
operation was about 2.3 MGD.) As contrasted with just serving
as an effluent disposal site, the property in 1976 contributed
to Shasta Co. agricultural income crops having a gross value
in excess of $100,000. In future years, as the project develop-
ment continues, the value will be much greater. The exceptional
progress which has been achieved is due to the close cooperative
working relationships which have been nurtured between SPC
personnel and the thoroughly experienced,competent rancher
selected to farm the property.
As originally expected, Ranch soils, after development for
irrigation, have proven very productive. In the first year
after leveling, the fields in 1976 per acre produced 3.9 tons
of oat hay, 3,925 pounds of wheat and 6,760 pounds of corn. In
1977 additional crops have been added to the system including
alfalfa, seed onions and red kidney beans. Beans are beirig used
to test the reaction of a known salinity-sensitive crop to the
qualities of the effluent water.
77
-------
Four major changes have been made by Simpson officials in
the original CH2M Hill conceptual plan for developing the Ranch
for effluent irrigation: (1) The proposed Return Flow Main in
Field Q was relocated to avoid possible ground water contour
problems. (2) The land grading, irrigation and drainage designs
were changed to better accommodate row crop production. (3) In
response to concerns of neighbors, no sprinkler irrigated area
was developed. (4) The return flow system capacity was approxi-
mately doubled to maximize the capture and reuse of irrigation
tail water. None of these changes have resulted in any adverse
effects on the agricultural potential of the property. Rather,
the results have been to economically improve the project.
Considering the natural slope of the terrain towards the
Sacramento River and the predominance of very permeable soil
types, the SPC Ranch has been proven to be especially well
suited as a site for an effluent utilization project. In 1976
a total of 10.74 acre feet of water per acre (including rain-
fall) was easily absorbed into the 300 acres on which the
effluent was applied. Through proper monitoring of the soil
salt balance and use of corrective measures, which are economi-
cally available if needed, there is no reason to believe the
area presently developed could not indefinitely continue to
receive the average daily projected volume of 2 MGD.
Planning should begin soon for continued development of the
property to enhance its agricultural productivity. Such plan-
ning should include: (1) Early development of supplemental
sources of water for irrigation. (2) Releveling of portions
of some fields to reduce soil erosion problems and to fill in
areas of subsidence. (3) Provision of additional irrigation water
lines so that excessively long runs can be reduced. (4) Develop-
ment of suitable portions of remaining undeveloped arable land
for surface irrigation.
Part 3. Revised Plan for Management of the Effluent Irrigation
Project at the Simpson-Shasta Ranch
A report submitted to the Shasta County Planning Commission,
Technical Advisory Committee, dated June 16, 1977. Prepared
by Simpson Paper Company.
This report, based on the first 17 months of actual opera-
tion, modifies the original "conceptual plan" for the Ranch as
developed by Simpson's consultants. (See Appendix E.) There is
a new section on project staffing, the section on groundwater
management has been expanded and reconciled with actual exper-
ience and the sections on soil management and cropping have been
revised slightly.
78
-------
Organization
A. For overall management purposes, Simpson's Shasta Ranch is
under the Vice President, Administration, K. A. Perkins.
1. His on-site field agent (project coordinator), on special
assignment from the Corporate Engineering Dept., is the
Environmental Project Engineer, D. P. Mickelson.
2. The principal contractor for Ranch operations is Pacific
Farms, Gerber, CA (Mr. Vincent Flynn, President, who,
besides his own services, provides a field foreman and
a full-time, on-site, irrigation tender. Mr. FlynnNalso
retains Agricultural Advisers, Inc. of Yuba City, CA,
as a consultant).
3. Recognizing that the principal objective of the effluent
irrigation system is water quality management, the
Shasta Mill indicates its needs directly to the Pacific
Farms field foreman. This is coordinated by the Mill
Environmental Control Engineer, Nils Roehne, a member
of the Mill Technical Dept.
4. The Environmental Control Engineer also manages the
several monitoring programs, which include the testing
of water, soil, seed and leaf.
5. Simpson Paper Co. also engages its own consultants,
independently of the principal contractor. In the
past three years, these have included an agronomist,
a pornolegist, a water scientist, and a hydrologist.
6. The Corporate staff also provides consulting services
to the Environmental Project Engineer and the Environ-
mental Control Engineer. This includes the Director
of Engineering, Dave Moeller, and the Director of
Environmental Protection, Quintin Narum.
B. To carry out the extensive environmental quality assur-
ance programs, the Mill Environmental Control Engineer has
a salaried Laboratory Supervisor and three full-time
Technicians. Two modern and well-equipped laboratories
are located at the Simpson Shasta Ranch.
a. A Biological-Chemical Laboratory, which among
other things, is used to carry out bioassays with
fish and fish eggs.
b. A new Soils and Water\Laboratory.
These laboratories are certified by the California Health
Dept., and are inspected regularly by that authority and
79
-------
also by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.
To supplement the in-house testing, soil and biomass
(leaf) samples are also sent to two independent laboratories
for special tests. Agricultural Advisers, Inc., the Ranch
contractor's agent, also performs certain laboratory
functions.
In 1975, Simpson's effluent-irrigation project attracted
the attention of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Subsequently, this agency awarded the Company a special
Research and Development Grant of $142,000 to expand and
assist with the monitoring program. The resulting infor-
mation will be made available to other interested parties
through EPA's Technology Transfer publications.
Groundwater Management
A. Introduction
The Simpson Paper Co. treated effluent irrigation system
was designed to receive an annual average of 4 million gal./
day (MGD) with short term applications up to 7 MOD. For
calendar year 1976, the actual average was about 2.7 MQD.
This was distributed over 400 acres of land which had been
prepared to receive the effluent and grow cash crops. The
layout was such as to minimize changes to ground water
composition at the land boundaries, consistent with Shasta
County Use Permit #90-74.
During the first 17 mo. of operation, groundwater
composition changes and groundwater movement were closely
monitored via more than 70 test wells. In general, these
conditions were found to be in accordance with the predic-
tions of Company consultants (hydrologists) who studied the
original plan in 1974. However, the actual operating
experience of the past 17 mo. has given Company officials
good basis for refining the groundwater management plan.
Hydrophiles (groundwater contours, absolute elevations)
plotted in 1974 indicated that groundwater flow was toward
the Sacramento River. Measurements since that time have
not revealed any significant changes, with the slopes
continuing to show mass flow toward the River. The basic
concept, which is established fact, is that groundwater (like
surface water) seeks to flow toward a lower absolute ele-
vation relative to sea level. (Stated another way, water
flows "downhill" by the influence of gravity). The rate of
flow or movement is dependent upon the steepness of the
slope (gradient), and, in the case of groundwater, this is
also related to soil permeability (capability of the soil
to allow water to pass through it).
80
-------
The subsoil on the effluent-irrigated fields of the
Simpson Shasta Ranch is characterized by unusually high
permeabilities, in the range of 1,000 to 5,000 gallons per
day per square foot. While the surface infiltration or
water-acceptance rate is also high, it is only a small
fraction of the subsoil permeability. Thus, any water
admitted at the surface, upon becoming a part of a con-
tinuous groundwater mass, will rapidly move in the direction
of the lower absolute elevation, namely the River bed.
While natural rainfall can raise the absolute ground-
water level, this does not necessarily change the slope of
the contour lines, especially in high permeability soils.
The contour of the soil surface (i.e. topography) does
not necessarily give a reliable clue as to the groundwater
hydrophile - in fact, this can be deceptive. Hence, to
properly establish the hydrophile, it is necessary to place
a number of test wells in accordance with the judgment of
a qualified geologist or hydrologist. As previously
indicated, the Company has done this, and also engages the
same specialists to help interpret the results.
As previously stated, the Ranch soils have high infil-
tration rates, in the range up to two million gallons per
acre per day (if uniformly flooded). On any given day,
the actual application rate is less than IQ% of this, and
over a period of a month, the average rate is less than
10,000 gal./day per acre. This is only 0.5$ of potential
water admittance rate of the soil.
Of the water (effluent) applied to the Company's Ranch,
a sizeable amount is ultimately taken up by the atmosphere.
Some of this is by direct evaporation from the topsoil.
However, a much larger amount leaves, by the process called
evapo-transpiration, from the vegetation growing on the
soil. On a typical summer day, this can amount to as much
as 9,500 gal./acre.
All of the above-mentioned factors, plus several more,
were taken into account by the Company and its several
consultants in the original project design and management
plan. Each month of operation adds to the knowledge which
can be employed to improve the management plan, but the
evidence to date shows that the original concepts were
correct.
One fact that is sometimes overlooked or misunderstood
is that the fully-treated effluent from Simpson's Shasta
Mill is 99.85% water, and is the product of "best practi-
cable control technology" as defined by the U. S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency. (Actually, this effluent meets
81
-------
State standards which are more stringent than those shown
in EPA's criteria). Prom a water quality standpoint, this
effluent is superior to many of the irrigation waters now
used within the State of California - especially that now
used in the rich farm lands of the Sacramento River delta
area. Further, scientists at (or affiliated with) the
University of California have demonstrated or otherwise
become aware that almost all of the crops grown in
California can accept irrigation water of an overall quality
similar to, or inferior to, that of the Shasta Mill
effluent. This includes fruit and nut trees, cereal grains,
and hay crops. To verify this, the Company has engaged
independent consultants who are familiar with this subject,
and their reports will be provided to the Planning
Commission staff.
B. Groundwater Management Concepts
1. Groundwater movement can be and is determined via
development of general or specific hydrophiles. There
are a sufficient number of observation wells on the
Simpson Shasta Ranch for this purpose. Static water
depths in these wells can be measured precisely,
since the absolute elevation of each casing has been
carefully ascertained.
2. Groundwater composition can be and is determined via
samples from a network of fourteen specifically-
identified "U.P. water quality test wells".
While a number of tests are done, a key test is
chloride ion measurement. Chloride ion was selected
as the effluent tracer because:
(1) It is stable, non-reactive, non-substitutional.
(2) The analysis is simple and accurate.
(3) Background levels are low relative to chloride
ion concentration in the treated effluent.
It should be understood that most other components
of the effluent are changed upon contact with soils.
In particular, the organic components are biodegraded
by soil bacteria to essentially unmeasurable levels.
On this basis, supported by extensive measurements,
the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
has concluded that the effluent percolate entering
the Sacramento River is not, in this case, a pollutant.
Separate monitoring requirements by that Agency include
routine testing of six "WQCB water quality test wells"
located along the shoreline of the River. The Agency
82
-------
did not prescribe a limit for chloride ion concentration,
but did include it among the substances to be tested in
the shoreline wells. In more than 17 mo. of operation,
the Company's treated effluent and the subsurface effluent
(percolate) entering the Sacramento River have met all of
the very stringent requirements of the Central Valley Board,
including a fish toxicity limit (no acute toxicity as
defined).
a. The biomass (vegetation, soil bacteria) growing on and
in the effluent-irrigated fields can indirectly reflect
the quality of the irrigation water and its manner of
use. Barren fields will not be a good receptor of the
effluent - or any water. While maintaining the simplest
forms of vegetative cover would meet the basic project
objective, it has been the Company's objective to
produce crops which have a greater benefit to society
as a whole and to itself. Accordingly, the grains and
legumes are to be grown to the most practicable extent,
with a portion of the total acreage set aside for
experimental crops.
It should be pointed out that the extensive leaf test-
ing done to date has not shown any indication that
the vegetation grown on effluent-irrigated fields has
a composition significantly different from similar
vegetation irrigated with other kinds of water.
b. Soil chemistry is closely integrated with groundwater
composition and cropping plans, and to assure perpetual
beneficial usage of the fields, the Company has under-
taken a continuing evaluation of the physical and
chemical aspects of soil quality.
C. Groundwater Management Practices
1. Effluent distribution to the fields.
a. The project includes a semi-automated flood irri-
gation system, relatively uncommon in California.
Ordinarily, this would have reduced manpower
requirements, but in this case the Ranch con-
tractor also has a full-time irrigation tender
on the site. This combination provides a high
degree of flexibility (via human judgment) plus
better process control.
b. With a diversified cropping plan (including
some row crops and some random-seeded crops), with
83
-------
differences in field slopes or grades, with
differences in soil composition and structure, it
is not practicable to apply the effluent uniformly
over all of the fields. However, the Company is
developing control charts which will assure that
no field receives a hydraulic loading beyond its
capabilities. The Environmental Project Engineer
will manage this program, working with the Ranch
foreman, and the Environmental Control Engineer.
c. At any given time and upon short notice, it is
possible to change the irrigation program. The
flow to any given field or portion thereof can
be reduced, ceased, or increased (within the
constraint of item Ib, above), to suit groundwater
management needs as indicated in following sections
of this program.
2. Groundwater movement.
a. Static depths to groundwater are measured for each
observation well on a monthly basis. The absolute
groundwater elevation is then computed and plotted
on a contour map (hydrophile). This map becomes
a part of the several sources of information used
in managing effluent distribution to the fields.
b. If an unfavorable hydrophile develops, the fre-
quency of static depths measurements is increased
and/or the rate of application of effluent to
the particular field or fields is reduced or
temporarily ceased.
3. Groundwater chemistry.
a. While the hydrophiles are useful in predicting
the rate and direction of groundwater movement,
the several "water quality test wells" are
monitored concurrently. Once a month, these are
tested for chloride ion, pH, electrical conductance,
color, alkalinity, sodium ion, total and calcium-
only hardness, potassium ion and nitrate ion.
b. As previously indicated, the chloride ion is the
effluent "tracer". If the hydrophiles appear to
become unfavorable, the Environmental Control
Engineer may elect to increase the frequency of
testing of chloride ion in the wells in the
affected area, to assure that appropriate corrective
action is taken before Use Permit Conditions are
violated.
84
-------
4. Corrective actions for adverse conditions described in
C2 and C3, above.
a. The principal corrective action is described in
Clc. In this respect, the Company has considerable
flexibility, as follows:
(1) Up to ten days of effluent storage are
provided at the Mill, in the #2 Aerated
Stabilization Basin.
(2) As River flow increases, the proportion
of the effluent that may be discharged to
the River also increases. (Based on 17
months of actual experience, essentially
all of the effluent can be discharged to the
River when River flow past the point of
discharge exceeds 10,000 cfs. In any case,
all of the effluent can be so discharged if
the River flow exceeds 28,000 cfs. With River
flows between 5,000 and 10,000 cfs, the amount
of effluent used for irrigation has been found
to be less than 2 million gal. per day, or less
than half of the original design criterion).
(3) The use of PUD (ACID) or well water for
irrigation on properties generally west of the
effluent-irrigated fields (including some
Simpson-owned properties) tends to cause a
more favorable hydrophile, and also dilute the
effluent percolate.
(4) Natural precipitation ultimately results in
greater River flow past the point'of discharge,
with the benefit explained in a(2), above.
However, rainfall is not unfavorable to the
hydrophile and tends to dilute the effluent
percolate.
(5) In extreme cases, there are procedures which
can be employed at the Mill liquid waste
treatment systems which can temporarily change
the effluent parameters to the point where
larger discharges to the River can be made
without risking Permit violations.
Soil Management Concepts and Practices
A. The treated effluent contains minute amounts of suspended
solids, most of which are the biomass residual from the
biological waste treatment process itself. The remainder
is an inert paper coating mineral (kaolin, calcium carbon-
85
-------
ate, etc.). In development work done prior to the full
scale project, It was found that these solids were filtered
out in the first inch of soil. In this layer, the organic
matter (biomass) composts to stability, and the ash or
mineral becomes incorporated into the soil. The standard
tilling has been found sufficient to blend the residuals
with the topsoil without any adverse effects.
B. The sodium absorption ratio (SAR) was also given intensive
study in the years preceding the startup of the full-scale
system. (Among other things, SAR influences subsoil
permeability, an important consideration in the Company
project). These studies showed that SAR values in the soil
could be maintained within the acceptable limits for
intensive agriculture by the controlled addition of gypsum,
limestone, or dolomitic limestone. While no permeability
problems have been encountered in the full-scale system,
the Company has made field applications of three calcium
and magnesium compounds, over a 15 acre test plot, to
verify the laboratory data.
C. In general, the Company believes that soil chemistry is
now, and will continue to be, properly managed. Soil
samples are taken at intervals more frequent than in
conventional agriculture, and analyzed in the Company's
Soil and Water Laboratory and by independent laboratories.
The results are interpreted by qualified consultants who
make appropriate recommendations.
Cropping Plans, Pest and Disease Control
A. After four years of experimentation with effluent irri-
gation, the Company has concluded that any crop historically
grown on its property with other irrigation water can also
be grown with the treated effluent, and with comparable
yields.
B. To date the following crops have gone full cycle: field
corn, wheat, oats. The following crops are now on the
fields: seed onions, alfalfa (.experimental), field corn,
wheat, kidney beans (experimental), plus several smaller
experimental plots growing different varieties of barley
and wheat.
C. Leaf and seed samples are taken at intervals more frequent
than in conventional agriculture and analyzed by an inde-
pendent laboratory. Among other things, this information
is used to determine fertilizing schedules and any other
treatments that may be necessary to ensure a high quality
product.
D. The Company and its agents are alert to possible insect,
86
-------
fungus, and weed problems. In addition to the expertise
of the principal contractor, advice on pest control is
obtained from an independent consultant. No extraordinary
controls have been found necessary.
Simpson's Shasta Ranch, and adjoining properties, are
now within the Shasta Mosquito Abatement District. The
District provides on-site mosquito control, and advises
the Ranch contractor on other procedures and practices
which will minimize nuisance-insect problems.
87
-------
APPENDICES
APPENDIX G, EXHIBIT 1. TYPICAL
SHASTA MILL MONTHLY REPORT
TO THE CENTRAL VALLEY REGIONAL
WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
Following are excerpts from the report for July, 1977'
Discussion of Compliance
Discharges 001 and 002. All measured parameters were in
compliance.
Discharge 003. Ceased as of February, 1975.
Discharge 004. No discharge this month.
Discharge 005. Project not yet in operation, no discharge.
Discharge Data - 001
Station IE. "Packaged" Sanitary Sewage Treatment System.
Plow, MGD Total Coliform
Range Average MPN/100 ml
0.029-0.109 0.046 <3 (7/7/77)
Station 2E. Industrial Discharge to River.
1
(Salmonoid
144 Hour Bioassay
species of
fish -
fingerlings)
Percent Survival by Effluent Concentration
Date
6/29-7/5
7/6-7/12
7/31-7/19*
7/20-7/26
Ave.
Tu-MGD
0
0
0
0
Control
95
100
0
100
100$
100
100
0
100
75%
100
100
0
95
56%
100
100
0
100
42?
100
100
0
100
32%
100
95
0
100
*Chiller failure on 7/18 resulted in bioassay temperatures of
79 deg.F, killing all test specimens. Survival to date of
failure was 100% in all dilutions.
88
-------
CHEMICAL ANALYSES
Date; Constituent; Cone., mg/1
7/8 Mercaptans <0.3
7/21 Resin Acids <0.7
Sulfate Soaps 14
Ammonia (N) 1.2
Nitrate (N) 1.2
Nitrate (N) <£0.03
Total Kjeldahl (N) 2.6
Total Phosphorus (P) 0.41
Other Data
Other data reported to the RWQCB are shown in Tables G-I/
G-2, and G-3. In addition, the data in Table G-4, under the
headings pH, Temperature, and Settleable Solids, are also
reported to RWQCB on a routine basis.
89
-------
July
1977
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
TABLE G-l. SHASTA MTT.T. F.PPT.TTOWT MT»X
Flows
River
cfs
10,800
10,800
10,100
—
11,800
9,500
9,400
9,300
6,900
10,100
9,700
9,300
8f800
9,300
9,700
9,700
9,700
9,600
Effl.
MGD
11.17
11.20
6.36
3.42
3.43
3.48
6.71
6.55
6.77
5.40
6.82
7.16
10.55
9.65
10.56
10.59
8.82
7.92
TSS
Suspended Solids
Permit
Ib/day
5,300
it
H
H
ii
3,720
H
H
H
5,300
3,720
ti
H
ii
H
ii
H
H
Effluent
mg/1
12
__
11
_ _
13
6
10
13
21
40
' 57
46
68
46
39
13
14
16
Ib/day
1,120
_ _
580
__
370
170
560
710
1,190
1,800
3,240
2,750
5,980
3,700
3,430
1,150
1,030
1,060
HTQRING REPORT DTSf'frA'RCT: nm
BOD- 5
Permit
Ib/day
4,500
ii
ii
n
H
3,320
n
n
M
4,500
3,320
M
n
n
n
»
n
ii
Effluent
mg/1
8
_
6
7
7
8
8
10
9
15
21
20
19
15
13
11
9
8
Ib/day
750
320
200
200
230
450
550
510
680
1,190
1,190
1,670
1,210
1,140
970
660
530
True
Color
TCU
625
625
•M
600
600
600
625
750
875
750
750
750
1,000
875
740
750
750
EC
Spec .
Cond.
Micro
Mho/cm
1.250
1.300
_ —
1,200
1,200
1,250
1,375
1,425
1,375
1,400
1,550
1,550
1,300
1,300
1,450
1,400
1,350
-------
TABLE G-l (continued). SHASTA MILL EFFLUENT. MONITORING REPORT, DISC
July
1977
••••••••••••••••••••••••••VVMtovi
Date
19
I— il •••M^ll • l.i —
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Ave.
Flows
River
•••••••^••VMaalBHBVMMH^WWV
cfs
9,700
n i
9*800
9,800
9,600
9,800
10,000
9,800
9,800
9,300
9,300
9,700
10,050
10,000
9,692
Effl.
MI*bHBBIMMMMMIIIMIIMIIWWWIIMHM^^^
MGD
9.39
•^^•^•••••^••^^WMmKIMIMMV
9.48
10.13
10.63
11.29
11.88
12.13
10.04
11.58
11.05
11.22
11.30
11.20
8.96
TSS
Suspended Solids
Permit
VMlMI^M^HWWHMHMBBIWIVM^*
lb/day
3,720
ii
ii
ti
ii
5,300
ii
ii
ii
ii
M
5,300
5,300
4,179
Effli
••^•^••^.^^^•••^••••^•••^^•M
mg/1
1
14
•^MkMBWtVMMH^MM^HPIMBMWM
19
19
13
16
16
21
25
15
17
16
18
16
22.4
uent
^^Hiv«m*VBihMiM^HHM«b^M*
lb/day
1,100
1,500
1,610
1,150
1,510
1,590
2,120
2,090
1,450
1,570
1,500
1,700
1,490
1,594
BOD-5
Permit
••^••^^••^•^•••IMV^MMPVMM-
lb/day
3,320
••"••^•MOKMIHIH^^MIIIIIIHIABW^^W
3,320
H
M
M
4,500
H
ii
n
M
ii
4,500
4,500
3,663
Eff]
^-^^••^•^MMmMIMMHHMMIIIIllfW
mg/1
10
^l»^-*-WIBM*W^WI^^VhM*-V^-l
11
11
11
10
8
13
8
8
6
5
6
6
10.2
Luent
MMOM«l«*H«nllMHMH*M.^PdVM
lb/dav
780
^^^M^M«*>V^V*MM*B*4WW"MI
870
930
980
940
790
1,320
670
770
550
470
570
560
755
HARGE 01
True
Color
••••••••VBVIIIHIIHIIbmaMHMIIlaMMW
TCU
625
- -• rr
625
750
750
625
625
625
625
750
625
750
750
750
709
EC
Soec.
Cond.
Micro
Mho /cm
1,350
1,225
1,350
1,325
1,200
1,225
1,400
1,200
1,325
1,150
1,100
1,250
1,200
1,309
-------
TABLE G-2. SHASTA MILL, RANCH GROUNDWATER MONITORING, DISCHARGE 002
July
1977
Date
6
21
28
Test
Well
No.
9
25
32
45A
62
70
9
25
32
45A
62
70
9
25
32
45A
62
70
BOD-5
mg/1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
True
Color
TCU
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
EC
Spec.
Cond.
Micro-
Mho/cm
290
640
1,060
360
340
460
280
575
1,025
470
350
420
280
560
1,040
550
345
450
PH
6.6
6.4
6.4
6.6
6.6
6.7
7.2
6.8
6.6
6.7
6.8
6.7
6.8
6.7
6.9
7.0
6.9
6.9
Temp.
CO
18.8
17.1
17.8
17.8
17.7
17.7
19.0
17.7
17.0
18.2
17.2
18.0
18.8
17.8
16.6
18.5
17.1
17.4
SAR
Ratio
0.46
0.63
0.69
0.79
0.95
0.77
Specific Ion Cone.
mg/1
Cl
4
70
170
30
16
20
4
60
173
51
19
20
5
55
171
51
18
18
B
0.12
0.09
0.05
0.12
0.08
0.23
Se
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
-------
U)
TABLE G-3. SACRAMENTO RIVER. WATER QUALITY MONITORING
July
1977
Date
1
1
6
6
6
7
7
11
11
11
14
14
28
28
28
29
29
Sample
Station
No.
11
12
11
12A
14
11
12
11
12A
14
11
12
11
12A
14
11
12
Temp.
C°
15.2
15.6
15.8
15.8
16.3
16.3
16.5
16.0
16.0
16.3
17.1
17.6
19.0
19.3
19.3
18.5
19.0
pH
7.3
7.1
7.2
7.0
7.0
7.1
6.7
7.2
7.2
7.2
6.9
6.4
7.3
7.2
7.3
7.2
6.9
DO
mg/1
8.9
9.4
10.5
10.6
10.4
8.6
7.6
10.4
10.5
10.5
8.5
7.3
9.9
9.8
9.8
8.4
7.6
True
Color
TCU
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
c.
5
§
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Tur-
bidity
FTU
4.0
4.3
4.8
3.4
4.2
4.6
6.4
7.2
7.8
Fish
Toxic-
ity
Percent
Survival
95
100
River Condition
.
Interstitial gravel
ii H M
Free flowing water
H ii H
H ii ii
Interstitial gravel
ii ii H
Free flowing water
H H H
" ii H
Interstitial gravel
ii ii H
Free flowing water
ii H H
» ii ii
Interstitial gravel
ii H „
-------
APPENDIX G, EXHIBIT 2. ADDITIONAL
EFFLUENT DATA FOR SHASTA MILL
Table H-4 shows typical data for the month of July, 1977.
Data in the first two columns headed "Effluent Flows" are not
routinely reported to the RWQCB, but are available for the
agency's inspection.
As indicated elsewhere in this Report, the application of
effluent to Ranch fields during the summer months is done almost
exclusively to satisfy agricultural needs, not to assure com-
pliance with the Waste Discharge Permit or receiving water
quality standards. As can be seen in Table H-l, the effluent
quality for July, 1977, was well within Permit limits. Tables
H-2 and H-3 show that for the same month, the quality standards
were met for both the Ranch groundwater (which, in a sense,
is a "receiving water") and the Sacramento River. (During
the thirteen years that the Shasta Mill has been in operation,
an intensive monitoring of Sacramento River water quality has
shown that the Mill discharge has not caused any violations of
receiving water quality standards, relative to the principal
indicators.)
Theoretically, a reduction in a waste discharge should
bring about some degree of improvement of receiving water
quality. However, the upper reach of the Sacramento River has
exhibited, historically, a very high quality, most of the
measureable variations being due to non-man-made causes. The
improvement in the quality of this water as a result of the
Simpson-Shasta effluent irrigation project appears to be below
the range of detection. Therefore it might be said that this
project was carried out primarily to meet uncommonly stringent
waste discharge requirements which do not necessarily reconcile
with receiving water needs.
94
-------
TABLE G-4. SHASTA MILL, FINAL EFFLUENT, MISCELLANEOUS DATA
July
1977
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
^^HV^**^B*M^B^^ll*l^BBV*l*W*
Effluent Flows
Total
MGD
15.17
14.70
6.36
3.42
9.50
4.14
6.71
7.49
11.90
8.30
10.45
7.56
10.55
'^•^••waVi^^^H^VW^M^^^^
12.12
12.00
10.59
13.52
15.07
Ranch
MGD
4.00
3.50
0.00
0.00
6.07
0.66
0.00
0.94
5.13
2.90
3.63
0.40
0.00
^ ^^— ^••^^-^•™™--^—
2.47
1.44
0.00
4.70
7.15
River
MGD
11.17
11.20
6.36
3.42
3.43
3.48
6.71
6.55
6.77
5.40
6.82
7.16
10.55
HMBMIII1IIIIII-IIMHBHB1MM0MIIIMIMIMIIIIII1I
9.65
10.56
10.59
8.82
7.92
Mi-^iWH^vpva»*^Biiiiiiii»mipai*iii«iiii*
Effluent Properties
PH
7.3
—
7.6
__
7.4
7.4
7.2
7.5
7.6
7.5
7.3
7.3
7.3
^M^^M^HMI^mBIPmlllBHIIIIIII^HVaM
7.3
7.4
7.4
7.6
7.5
1 Temp .
C°
30
—
30
--
28
28
27
27
25
25
27
29
28
^A^MMI«llll«l«IMIIIB^P^f^^MWIHBBIHV
28
29
29
30
30
Set.
Solids
ml/1
<0.1
—
<0.1
--
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
^^^^V^M^H^OIB^^HWaHI^^V
O1
-------
01
TABLE G-4
July
1977
Date
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Ave .
(continued) , SHASTA MILL EFFLUENT, MISCELLANEOUS DATA
Effluent Flows
Total
MGD
14.76
12.65
12.32
11.37
11.89
13.90
13.03
14.08
15.62
15.08
15.25
15.33
13.06
11.545
Ranch
MGD
5.37
3.17
2.19
0.74
0.60
2.02
0.90
4.04
4.04
4.03
4.03
4.03
1.86
2.581
River
MGD
9.39
9.48
10.13
10.63
11.29
11.88
12.13
10.04
11.58
11.05
11.22
11.30
11.20
8.694
Effluent Properties
PH
7.4
7.4
7.5
7.5
7.4
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.3
7,38
Temp.
C°
,30
, 30
30
30
29
30
30
30
31
29
29
29
30
28.9
Set.
Solids
ml/1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
-------
APPENDIX G, EXHIBIT 3. EXAMPLES
OF TEST WELL DATA FROM
MONITORING WELLS AT THE
SIMPSON-SHASTA RANCH
Table G.-5 gives an example, for the month of December, 1975,
of the pre-project groundwater characteristics at the Simpson-
Shasta Ranch, as indicated by six of the test wells. Table
G-6 gives similar data for the month of July, 1977, by which time
the Ranch fields had received about 4854 cu. meters of effluent,
and an "equilibrium" was assumed to prevail in the groundwater.
While not all of the Ranch groundwater data are routinely
reported to the RWQCB, the complete records are available for
inspection by that agency and also by the Shasta County Health
Department. The Health Department also performs independent
tests on samples taken from the Ranch wells, to assure com-
pliance with Use Permit conditions (Appendix B).
97
-------
00
TABLE G-5 SIMPSON-SHASTA, GROUNDWATER QUALITY DATA. PRE-PROJECT
Test
Well
No.
9
11A
15
19
22
24
25
32
34
42
45A
47
49
53
57
59
62
70
Dec.
1975
Date
2
2
2
2
3
3
11
11
3
4
11
4
4
4
4
4
4
11
BOD-5
mg/1
MO
Alka-
linity
mg/1
106
98
100
112,
64
152
88
106
138
90
72
70
52
62
68
90
92
154
True
Color
TCU
6
10
10
9
8
10
5
6
10
35
12
14
10
10
8
8
5
8
EC
Spec.
Cond.
Micro-
Mho/cm
300
300
320
325
210
375
340
340
330
220
250
220
190
220
220
270
280
660
pH
7.1
7.1
7.0
7.2
7.3
7.6
7.0
6.9
7.4
7.3
7.0
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.4
7.5
7.0
Total
Hard-
ness
CaC03
mg/1
118
112
126
136
76
168
134
120
146
100
80
86
72
80
88
106
110
250
Specific Ion Cone.
mg/1
Na
12
12
9
10
6
13
9
16
9
6
7
7
5
7
6
8
10
30
Cl
12
13
13
12
7
14
5
5
11
6
8
7
7
7
6
6
8
47
N03
2
3
3
2
1
1
2
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
12
-------
VD
VO
Test
Well
No.
9
11A
15
19
22
24
25
32
34
42
45A
47
49
53
57
59
62
70
TABLE G-6. SIMPSON-SHASTA RANCH, GROUNDWATER QUALITY DATA. POST-PROJECT
July
1977
Date
21
20
20
20
20
20
21
21
— Ina
21
21
22
21
22
22
22
21
21
BOD- 5
mg/1
<1.0
—
—
—
--
—
<1.0
<1.0
ccessibl*
—
<1.0
--
—
—
--
—
<1.0
<1.0
MO
Alka-
linity
mg/1
92
50
62
60
60
100
116
128
; due to
120
80
70
64
62
50
84
80
110
True
Color
TCU
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
irrigati-
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
EC
Spec.
Cond.
Micro-
Mho/cm
280
340
220
140
135
190
575
1,025
m —
340
470
280
155
340
135
350
350
420
PH
7.2
7.3
7.0
6.8
6.8
6.7
6.8
6.6
6.7
6.7
7.2
7.1
6.9
7.0
6.9
6.8
6.7
Total
Hard-
ness
CaCOs
mg/1
98
118
50
54
50
78
214
426
106
140
68
56
108
42
130
112
150
Specific Ion Cone.
mg/1
Na
11
13
9
9
8
12
21
33
13
22
8
8
11
8
11
11
22
Cl
4
5
4
4
4
5
60
173
5
51
5
5
30
4
26
19
20
NO 3
3
6
1
1
1
1
4
2
1
1
1
1
3
1
3
3
6
-------
APPENDICES
APPENDIX H. ANALYSIS OF
GROUNDWATER FLOW REGIMEN
Dr. Clinton Parker
General
Due to changes in chemical form, ion exchange, adsorption
and oxidation of organics in the soil, groundwater movement
can best be related to irrigation practice by changes in
groundwater contours and changes in conductivity or chlorides.
(From a practical standpoint chlorides and conductivity are
sufficiently related for either to be used in monitoring
groundwater and irrigation management.) In this study both
changes in chlorides and groundwater elevations were documented.
An important part in this study was the response of the
groundwater flow regimen to the fields irrigated and the
rate of irrigation. Chloride content, direction of groundwater
flow and changes in groundwater elevation were response
variables that reflected soil condition and types, infiltra-
tion, geological characteristics, and hydraulic characteristics
(including aquifer permeability). From groundwater level
data collected during this work groundwater contours and
flow nets for successive periods of irrigation were constructed
to assess groundwater movement and aquifer permeability. The
application of flow net theory to the operating field data
and the use of geological information gathered prior to the
undertaking of this study provides logical extension of the
pre-operational field hydrologic investigation. Data based
on the irrigation practices provide a new'segment of knowledge
upon which to quantify aquifer performance and, as a result,
were used to obtain a better estimate of aquifer permeability
in this complex hydrologic setting.
Irrigation Data
At the beginning of the project in 1976, the emphasis
was mainly on the total amount of effluent applied to the
project, with the assumption that the distribution of effluent
would be fairly uniform. It turned out that some fields
received more effluent than others, so in December 1976 an
accounting system was set up to determine the amount of
effluent applied to each field. The irrigation data for
100
-------
months prior to this program were prorated on the basis of
acreage and subsequent application rates.
Data from January 1976 through June 1977 were divided
into six periods identified with changes in irrigation
practice. These periods were: January - April 1976; May -
June 1976; July - September 1976; October - December 1976;
January - March 1977; and April - June 1977. Table H-l gives
the amount of effluent applied to the fields for each period
and the average application rate. The amount of water entering
the groundwater table was less than the amounts shown in the
table due to evapotranspiration losses. Pre-operational
analyses estimated evapotranspiration losses for forage crops
to range from 19,000 gallons per acre per month (gpam) in
winter to 240*000 gpam in the summer. Based on actual irriga-
tion practice, crops grown and crop management, these estimates
were higher than experienced during the study. A more
realistic estimate of the total effluent losses experienced
during this study is from 5 percent during winter to 20 percent
during summer. Due to the dry weather conditions from January
1976 to June 1977 water addition from precipitation did not
significantly contribute to changes in groundwater levels.
Groundwater Data
Groundwater contours prior to the study and at the end
of each irrigation period are shown in Figures H-l through H-7.
These contours provided a means for examining groundwater flow
patterns and estimating aquifer permeability. Initially
it was assumed that Anderson Creek was part of the groundwater
contours. Since this was not substantiated, groundwater
contours in Figures H-l through H-7 were based only on well
data.
Chloride data obtained at the end of each irrigation
period is presented in Table H-2. Changes in chloride
concentrations were related to effluent application and shifts
in groundwater contour patterns.
Groundwater levels measured prior to the study showed a
groundwater divide near the southern corner of the ranch,
therefore, it was recognized that the application of effluent
to fields near the divide would have a significant affect on
the groundwater flow pattern. Because of the sensitivity of
the flow regime near the divide, the water level and chlorides
in the test wells played a vital role in selecting the
fields to be irrigated.
101
-------
January - April 1976
The first of the irrigation periods was from January
through April 1976. During this period effluent was applied
to fields C, D, E, F, I, J, K, L, M, N, 0, P, Q and R (for
field designation see Figure 2). The average application
rate for this period was 180,000 gpam. Changes in groundwater
contours during this period can be seen from a comparison of
Figure G-l, December 1975, with Figure H-2, April 1976. As
a result of irrigation, groundwater levels over most of the
ranch rose about 2 feet. The southern and southeastern part
of the ranch (near the groundwater divide) experienced a
groundwater level increase of 2 to 4 feet.
Since the ranch fields that received effluent were
located along a northwestern - southeastern axis and the
natural groundwater slope was toward the Sacramento River,
the contour changes between December 1975 and April 1976
followed a predictable pattern. The groundwater flow
pattern along the eastern boundary of the ranch showed some
movement toward the northeast. In addition, the contours in
this area moved closer together. These changes reflect the
increase in groundwater table slope caused by addition of
irrigationwater to the groundwater. Prior to the application
of effluent, Figure H-l, the water movement under fields 0,
P, Q and R was in an eastern direction and part of the
groundwater divide was under the southwestern edge of these
fields. The significance of irrigating the fields in this
area from January to April 1976 can be seen from the contour
changes in this part of the ranch. The close proximity of
P, Q and R to the divide, the application rate, and the
mounding of irrigated effluent resulted in a northeastern
movement of the divide and a steeping of the groundwater
table slope. These changes caused the flow pattern under
fields in the southern corner of the ranch to become more
southerly oriented. Sensitivity of groundwater addition by
infiltration in this area is reflected in the shift of the
372, 374, 376, 378, 380 and 382 foot contours under fields
N, 0, P, Q and R. Since a southern groundwater flow was
undesirable, the application of effluent to fields P, Q and R
ceased in April 1976, and, as a result it is not Known wheth-
er the April 1976 contours represent a steady-state condition
for the irrigation practiced during this four month period.
Chloride data for April 1976 supports the changes
observed in the groundwater flow regimen. Movement under
fields Q and R shifted to a more southern direction, toward
wells 57 and 66. The general direction of groundwater
movement was away from wells 22, 24 and 34, however, the
increase in groundwater level under fields I, J, K, L, N and
0 accounted for chloride changes in these wells. The only
102
-------
abnormality that may have occurred was in the area of fields
0, P, Q and R. Based on flow lines in the vicinity of
these fields the original eastern movement had shifted to a
more southern direction by April 1976. Chloride data for
wells at the southern edge of field Q (well numbers 42 and
49) should have increased to reflect mounding in this area
and the change in flow direction, however, no increase in
chlorides was observed.
May - June 1976
Contours at the end of the May - June 1976 period reflected
changes in the groundwater regimen after irrigation of
fields P, Q and R ceased. During these two months application
rates were: 140,000 gpam to fields L, M, N and 0; 150,000
gpam to fields C, E and F; 190,000 gpam to fields D, I and
K; and 210,000 gpam to field J. Irrigation rate changes and
a change in season had a profound affect on the groundwater
system. A comparison between Figure H.-l and Figure H-3
shows that the groundwater contours reverted to the general
configuration found in December 1975 and water levels were
approximately one to two feet above levels observed in
1975. Although the general direction of groundwater movement
remained eastnortheast, a comparison with the April 1976
contours shows that the groundwater divide in the area of
fields P, Q and R became less pronounced and the flow in
this area changed from the southeastern direction observed
in April 1976 (Figure H-2) to the more eastern direction,
observed in the December 1975 flow pattern.
July - September 1976
The same fields were irrigated during this period as
were irrigated in May - June 1976. The average application
rate was 170,000 gpam. Except for the 380 and 382 foot
contours in the vicinity ,of field I, J, K, N, and 0, the
groundwater system remained approximately as observed in
June 1976. Based on the groundwater contours for this
period, Figure H-4, and the previous period, Figure H-3,
it appears that the flow regimen reached a steady state
for the application rate of 170,000 gpam to fields C, D, E,
F, I, J, K, L, M, N and 0.
Between April 1976 and September 1976 a significant
change in chlorides was observed in wells 25 and 32. A
shift in the direction of flow appears to account for this
change. The result of applying effluent to fields I, J, K,
E, D and L was realignment of the contours along the eastern
and northeastern boundary of the ranch. Contours in this
area essentially became parallel to the Sacramento River,
Shifting the direction of flow to more of a northeastern
103
-------
direction, i.e. perpendicular to the river. In addition to
this shift in flow direction, contours 380 and 382 migrated
to a position closer to the river. Flow nets constructed in
this area indicate a substantial amount of effluent that
infiltrated from fields D, E, I, J, K and N and parts of L
and 0 moved in the direction of wells 25 and 32. It appears
that approximately 65 percent of the total infiltrated
effluent between May and September 1976 flowed in the general
direction of these two wells. The chloride data suggests
that the full impact on water quality due to irrigation
practice between May and September. 1976 did not occur until
late summer.
October - December 1976
Significant variations in irrigation rates were recorded
for this period and fields P and Q received effluent for the
first time since April 1976. Field P received 150,000 gpam
and field Q received 60,000 gpam. Application rates to
other fields were: C, D, I, N and 0, between 270,000 and
330,000 gpam; E, F and M, between 200,000 and 240,000 gpam;
and J, K and L, between 600,000 and 700,000 gpam. Changes in
irrigation practice for this period caused a drastic shift
in the 378, 380 and 382 foot groundwater contours (see
Figure H-5), lesser (but significant) changes in the 372,
374 and 376 contours, and a mounding trend under fields I,
J, K, L, M and O. In the general location of the original
natural groundwater divide at the southern boundary of the
ranch, groundwater levels rose approximately 2 feet above
September 1976 levels (or 4 feet above the groundwater
elevation in December 1,975) . At the end of this period
groundwater contours along the northeastern boundary moved
closer and more parallel to the river than in September
1976.
Impact on the groundwater (additions to the groundwater
and a decrease in evapotranspiration) was reflected by
chloride concentration changes in wells 25, 32 and 45A. The
chloride concentration in well 34 supports the change in
groundwater flow to a southernsoutheastern direction along
the southern boundary of the ranch (towards Anderson Creek).
January - March 1977
Effluent was restricted to fields I, J, K and L during
this period. Application rates were: I, 470,000 gpam; J and
K, 180,000 gpam; and L, 810,000 gpam. Although the application
of effluent was highly localized and the rate was higher
than previously used, the groundwater contours, Figure H-6,
conformed to a pattern very similar to those in December
1975 (Figure H-l) , June 1976 (Figure H-3) and September. 1976
104
-------
(Figure H-4). A comparison of contours formed at the end of
this period with previous contours suggests that the limiting
constraint of effluent application was aquifer permeability
and not soil infiltration rate. These data indicate that
localized high rates of 200,000 gpam to 800,000 gpm to
fields in the central and south-central part of the ranch
can be used if fields that contrubute to the groundwater
table north, northeast and east of these fields are not
being irrigated with effluent. Soil infiltration rates were
high but aquifer constraints controlled the hydraulic system.
As a result, if mounding is to be avoided in the future,
application rates when all fields are in service, except P,
Q and R, should be limited to 170,000 gpam. (The areal
extent and thickness of the aquifer may be a limiting constraint
on groundwater movement, see aquifer permeability discussion
in this section). These data indicate continous application
of 170,000 gpam to fields C, D, E, F, I, J, K, L, M, N and 0
can be adequately handled by the hydraulic system, but at
higher rates field selection becomes important.
Wells with high chloride concentrations during the
previous period (September - December 1976) remained high.
The most significant chloride change was in well 22. The
concentration in this well appeared to reflect mounding of
effluent due to high application rates in the vicinity of
the well during September - December 1976 and January - March
1977.
May -June 1977
The fields irrigated during this period were the same
as those used in October - December 1976. The average rate
applied to all the fields was about the same as May through
September 1976. Application rates to fields F, M and P were
390,000 gpam, 340,000 gpam and 310,000 gpam, respectively.
Fields D, E, I, J, K and L received between 150,000 gpam
and 230,000 gpam; and fields C, N, 0 and Q received 30,000
gpam to 90,000 gpam. Groundwater contours, Figure H-7,
returned to a pattern similar to those in September. 1976,
Figure H-4. Based on application rates of previous periods
and fields irrigated, a similarity with previous contours
was as should be expected. The only major exception to
similarity with the previous contours was the 380 foot
contour in the southern part of the ranch. The lowering of
the groundwater table and the movement of this contour to a
position similar to the December 1975 contour, Figure H-l,
reflects the very low rates applied to fields N and 0.
Except for wells 25 and 22 the chloride content of the
test wells in March 1977 and June 1977 were approximately
the same. The concentration in well 25 decreased by about
105
-------
50 percent and in well 22 the concentration returned to the
preirrigation value. A like variation in well 25 occurred
between September 1976 and December.1976. High chloride
concentrations in well 25 were consistent with the groundwater
movement, as defined by the contours, but the variation was
unexplainable. Also, a drop in chlorides in well 22 was
predictable but the return to a preirrigation concentration
was unexplainable.
Aquifer Permeability
Based on the preirrigation geological data from test
borings that defined the shallow aquifer under the ranch and
irrigation data and groundwater contours from well water
level measurements from this study, the field permeability
of that part of the aquifer along the eastern and northeastern
edge of the ranch (east of the irrigated fields) was better
defined. Since groundwater flow under irrigated fields
varied due to addition to the groundwater table by infiltration,
permeability determinations were limited to that part of the
aquifer that lay between the easternnortheastern most irrigated
fields and the Sacramento River.
When viewing changes in the groundwater contours it
must be recognized that as a result of infiltration the
volume of water flowing under irrigated fields varied.
Although changes in aquifer permeability could have existed,
changes in contour spacing under the irrigated fields were
not taken as changes in aquifer permeability. In this study
changes in contour spacing and flow lines observed under
irrigated fields were assumed to reflect only incremental
increases in groundwater due to infiltration.
The aquifer permeability along the eastern and northeastern
boundary of the ranch was quanitified by flow net construction,
changes in groundwater table slope and elevation, and water
balances (irrigation rates less evapotranspiration). Table
H-3 presents groundwater table slopes that were determined
from preirrigation conditions and from contours at the end
of each irrigation period for that part of the ranch between
the river and the irrigated fields. If an aquifer thickness
of 10 to 20 feet is assumed (as indicated from preirrigation
geologic and hydrologic studies), analyses using the slopes
in Table H-3 give field permeabilities from 20,000 to 30,000
gallons per day per square foot (gpd/ft2). This estimate
for aquifer permeability is higher than estimates made in
preirrigation studies.
Well pump test data collected prior to this study wer.e
analyzed by ideal aquifer well equations and these data
indicated an aquifer permeability between 2,000 and 8,000
106
-------
gpd/ft2. (it should be noted here that although the pre-
irrigation hydrologic assessment fully utilized all available
geological and hydrological data, the quantative determination
of aquifer permeability was limited by many constraints;
e.g., a suitable mathematical model, limited field data, and
boundary condition assumptions.) The preirrigation hydro-
logic assessment of the groundwater regimen used 2000 gpd/ft2
as aquifer permeability. Groundwater table slopes generated,
using 2000 gpd/ft2, an aquifer thickness of 10 to 20 feet
and the irrigation data and groundwater table elevations
changes observed in this study are much higher than the
slopes shown in Table H-3. These results indicate that an
aquifer permeability higher than 2000 gpd/ft2 must exist
along the eastern boundary of the ranch.
Although the data collected from this study could not
be used to calculate aquifer permeabilities for many parts
of the ranch, it provided a suitable data base for estimating
aquifer permeability along the eastern and northeastern
boundary of the ranch. It is believed that 20,000 gpd/ft2
represents a reasonable estimate for permeability along this
boundary. The disparity between computed pre -irrigation
permeabilities using test wells, and 20,000 gpd/ft2, can be
attributed to variations that could have existed in the
aquifer underlying the ranch and how adequate the assumptions
upon which the well equations were based, were met by the
actual field conditions.
EFFLUENT APPLICATION AND GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICE
Results from this study provide a basic understanding
of the criteria necessary for establishing good irrigation
management practice for the ranch.
All fields except P, Q and R can be irrigated at an
average rate of about 170,000 gpam on a routine basis without
exceeding NPDES limitations and without significantly
contributing to the groundwater south or west of the ranch.
Irrigation of fields along the southern boundary of the
ranch, (including field P, Q and R) can be practiced, however,
water level and water level and water conductivity measurements
along the boundary must be monitored on a continuous basis.
On a limited basis irrigation rates In excess of 170,000
gpam (up to 300,000 gpam on 100 to 120 acres) may be used on
fields located in the central, northern or eastern parts of
the ranch, however, careful consideration must be given to
field selection. Due to high soil infiltration rates more
water can reach the groundwater table than can be effectively
transmitted by the groundwater flow regimen, therefore,
application of effluent to a field near the eastern boundary
while a central, southern or southweatern field is being
107
-------
irrigated at a high rate can result in significant mounding
and changes in groundwater flow direction. At rates higher
than 170,000 gpam irrigation of fields that contribute to
the groundwater flow regimen along what might be considered
the same flow lines (indicated by a flow net constructed
from groundwater contours) should not be practiced, e.g.,
fields I, J, K and L should not be irrigated in excess of
170,000 gpam at the same time fields D and E are being
irrigated.
Irrigation management practices should be made at least
three months in advance and significant deviations should be
limited to conditions dictated either by changes in groundwater
contours, color, well water conductivity (chlorides) or un-
usually low flows in the Sacramento River (flows of <5000 CFS
restricts allowable discharge rates to the river and the
amount of effluent discharged to land must be increased
accordingly).
Control of water quality and groundwater movement can be
satisfactorily implemented by well monitoring. Measurement
of water level and water conductivity (chlorides) in selected
wells should be the only measurement routinely needed. Reliable
instrumentation is available for recording changes in both
parameters on a continuous basis. The best candidates for
use in monitoring along the northeastern and eastern boundary
of the ranch are wells 70, 25, 32, 45A, and 62. Wells along
the southeastern and southern boundary should be further
evaluated to establish which wells will best describe this
sensitive area. Water quality in wells 19, 22, and 24 along
the western and northwestern boundary should be sufficient
to follow critical changes in this part of the ranch.
108
-------
o
<£>
^362
370
FIGURE H-l. GROUNDWATER CONTOURS - DECEMBER 1975
Elevation in feet above mean sea level
-------
FIGURE H-2. GROUHDVATER CONTOURS" - APRIL 1916
x
Elevation in feet above mean sea level
372
-------
372
FIGURE H-3. GROUNDWATER CONTOURS - JUNE 1976
Elevation in feet above mean sea level
-------
362
FIGURE H-U. GROUNDWATER CONTOURS - SEPTEMBER 1976
Elevation in feet above mean sea level
-------
I-1
U)
FIGURE H-5. GROUNDWATER CONTOURS - DECEMBER 1976
Elevation in feet above mean sea level
-------
FIGURE H_6. GROUNDWATER CONTOURS - MARCH-1977
Elevation in feet above mean sea level
-------
Ul
FIGURE H-7. GROUNDWATER CONTOURS - JUNE 197T
Elevation 'in feet above mean sea level
-------
Jan-April 1976
TableH.-l. Irrigation Rates
May-June 1976^ July-Sept 1976 Oct-Dec 1976
Jan-March 1977
April-June 1977
Field
No.
C
D
E
F
I
J
K
L
M
N
0
P
Q
R
Acres
80
25
104
8
28
22
15
35
9
22
15
10
25
16
For period
MG
57.74
18.05
75.07
5.76
20.21
15.87
10.82
25.26
6.48
15.87
10.81
7.23
18.05
11.54
gpam
rlOOO
180
180
180
180
180
180
180
180
180
180
180
180
180
180
For period
MG
23.25
9.52
30.21
2.32
10.66
9.40
5.71
10.17
2.62
6.39
4.36
0
0
0
gpam
ilOOO
150
190
ISO
150
190
210
190
140
140
140
140
0
0
0
For period
MG
40.79
12.75
53.00
4.07
14.26
11.22
7.64
17.84
4.59
11.22
7.64
0
0
0
gpam
*1000
170
170
170
170
170
170
170
170
170
170
170
0
0
0
For period
MG
73.44
24.51
74.64
4.91
24.23
39.55
27.73
70.37
5.60
19.17
12.08
4.62
4.50
0
gpam
41000
310
330
240
200
290
600
610
670
210
290
270
150
60
0
For period
MG
0
0
0
0
39.59
12.09
8.24
85.22
0
0
0
0
0
0
gpam
rlOOO
0
0
0
0
470
180
180
810
0
0
0
0
0
0
For period
MG.
8.34
14.71
63.17
9.29
13.61
14.96
9.18
15.97
9.29
6.25
1.47
9.30
3.44
0
gpam
-MOOO
30
200
200
390
160
230
200
ISO
340
90
30
310
40
0
(1) 1 acre (Ac) - 4.05 x 101 hectare (he)
1 million gallons (MG) = 3.78 x 10' cubic (ms)
1 gallon per acre per month (gpam) = 9.34 x 10" 3 cubic meter per hectare per month (nr/ha/Mo)
-------
Table H-2. End of Irrigation Period: Chloride Levels in Ranch Test Wells '
h-1
M
-J
Well No.
9
11A
15
19
22
2U
25
32
3U
J»2
1*5A
1*7
1*9
53
57
59
62
66
67
70
May 1975
3
-
3
3
2
5
5
U
2
2
-
2
2
1+
2
It
3
5
-
83
Dec. 1975
12
13
13
12
7
ll*
5
5
11
6
8
7
7
7
6
6
8
7
-
-
Jan. 1976
through
Apr. 1976
5
6
5
3
3
21*
10
10
6
1*
•13
29
1*
1*3
3>*
21
8
31
-
1*5
May 1976
through
June 1976
6
8
-
3
2
3
11
30
3
1*
18
1*
1+
99
3
ll*
10
1*8
-
31
July 1976
through
Sept. 1976
6
7
-
5
5
6
ii*i*
1*2
6
7
9
6
6
1*0
6
27
lU
39
8
29
Oct. 1976
through
Dec. 1976
5
1*
1*
1*
19
5
68
9U
18
5
31*
1*
3
23
5
17
16
17
3
23
Jan. 1977
through
Mar. 1977
5
5
6
3
102
6
128
139
22
5
31*
5
3
22
5
19
ll*
26
5
19
May 1977
through
June 1977
1*
6
k
h
k
9
79
178
-
-
23
5
5
15
1*
26
16
27
5
2U
(1) All results in mg/1
-------
Table K-3. Groundwater Table Slopes
Last Month of East of Field C East of Field F
Irrigation Period .J^ZS-HIJL _^_^ __percent ____
December 1975 .50 .71
April 1976 .83 .83
June 1976 .59 .71
September 1976 .83 .77
December 1976 .91 .91
March 1977 .56 .69
June 1977 .55 .71
118
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Imtntctions on the reverse before completing)
i. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/2-79-033
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION>NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Disposal of an Integrated Pulp-Paper
Mill Effluent by Irrigation
5. REPORT DATE
January 1979 issuing date
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Q. A. Narum, D. P. Mickelson and Nils Roehne
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Simpson Paper Company
Anderson, California 96007
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1BB610
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
S-803689-01-0
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Industrial Environmental Research Lab-Cinn, OH
Office of Research and Development
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final 7/75-10/78
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/12
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
ACT
In 1973, Simpson Paper Company initiated a research program to ex-
plore the use of the fully-treated secondary effluent from its Shasta
Mill for beneficial crop irrigation. This program included the opera-
tion of laboratory soil columns and field test plots, plus hydrological
studies. Potential problems were identified, and remedies for those
problems were developed.
After obtaining the necessary permits, construction of a 162 hec-
tare irrigation project began in early 1975, with the first effluent
irrigation taking place in January, 1976. During the next 20 months,
over 5.3 million cubic meters of effluent were applied to the carefully
prepared fields, using an innovative, highly automated, flood irrigation
system.
Several crops have been grown, including wheat, oats, corn, alfalfa
and beans. In most cases, the yields were equal to, or better than,
the California averages for those crops.
The effluent percolate, which eventually enters the Sacramento
River, is essentially devoid of suspended solids, BOD-5, chemical oxygen
demand (COD), color, and toxicity compontnts. Both the indirect per-
colate discharge, and the direct secondary-treatment effluent discharge
the river mee^all of^r^s^
jb. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
DESCRIPTORS
Pulp Mills, Paper Mills,
Industrial Waste Treatment,
Waste Disposal, Wastewater,
Irrigation, Farm Crops,
Secondary Effluent
ColorvRemoval
COSATl Field/Group
13B
3. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to Public
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
133
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page}
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
119
J. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979 — 657-060/1582
------- |