EPA 908/3-86-001
A Thirty Day Flow-Through Bioassay Test on
Copper and Zinc Toxicity in the
Clark Fork River Near Deer Lodge, Montana
May 7 - June 6, 1985
by
Loys Parrish
Glenn Rodriguez
Analytical Support Branch
Environmental Services Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region VIII
Denver, Colorado
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has not been reviewd by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency and is not approved for publication.
Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use.
i1
-------
Abstract
Thirty-day flow-through bioassays were conducted on green eggs, eyed eggs
and fingerlings of the rainbow trout with Clark Fork River water from May 7
through June 6, 1985. Dilution water was obtained from Taylor Creek, near
Deer Lodge, Montana.
A two-bank vacuum diluter system was used to conduct tests with water
from the Clark Fork River near Deer Lodge, Montana. The tests were started in
May 1985 in order to catch predicted high spring runoff from the Silver Bow
Creek Basin with concomitant high concentrations of heavy metals (primarily
copper and zinc). A total of three tests were conducted at 10_+ 2 C; an eyed
egg test for 30 d^s, a green egg test for 30 days, and a fingerling trout
test for 13 days.
The expected spring runoff did not occur during the test period and
resulting metals concentrations in the Clark Fork River did not produce
significant mortalities In any test.
Rain events during the last half of the study period produced sharp,
brief increases in metals concentrations. These increased concentrations
exceeded calculated chronic and acute levels of copper that would protect
aquatic life. However, the increases in copper and zinc were neither high
enough nor long enough 1n duration to produce significant mortalities during
the test period.
Additional testing is recommended during a "normal" water year when
runoff would be expected to carry higher concentrations of metals.
iii
-------
CONTENTS
Abstract 111
Figures v
Tables vi
Acknowledgements ix
1. Introduction 1
Background 3
2. Methods and Materials 6
Mobile Lab 6
Test Species 8
Test Conditions 8
Test Parameters 10
Test Duration 11
Quality Assurance 11
3. Data Analysis and Interpretation 12
Chemical Analysis 12
Bioassay Tests 18
4. Conclusions and Recommendations 25
Literature Cited 27
Appendices 29
A. Chemical and Biological Data 30
B. Criteria Calculations 54
1 v
-------
Figures
Number Page
1. Map of the Upper Clark Fork River, Montana 2
2. A comparison of Clark Fork River water flows from
May 7-June 6, 1984 to the same period of time in 1985 . . .16
3. Average Daily Acid Soluble Copper Concentrations
Collected by Automatic Sampler and Analyzed by the
EPA Region 8 Lab 19
4. Average Daily Acid Soluble Zinc Concentrations Collected
by Automatic Sampler and Analyzed by the EPA Region 8
Lab 20
v
-------
Tables
Number Page
1. Test Results for the 30-Day Rainbow Trout Green Egg Test . . 21
2. Test Results for the 13-Day Fingerllng Rainbow Trout
Test (May 24-June 6, 1985 21
3. ' Test Results for the 30-Day Rainbow Trout Eyed Egg Test . . 22
4. Calculated Chronic and Acute Levels of Copper Compared to
Multitech and EPA Data 23
Appendix
1. Analysis of Grab Samples of Water Collected from the
Clark Fork River During the 30-Day Bioassay 30
2. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Temperatures (C) per
Test Concentration, for the Right Dlluter System,
May 8-June 6, 1985 31
3. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Conductivities per
Test Concentration, for the Right Dlluter System,
May 8-June 6, 1985 . 32
4. F1ve-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Dissolved Oxygen
Concentrations 1n mg/1, for the Right Dlluter System,
May 8-June 6, 1985 33
5. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum pH's per Test
Concentration, for the Right Diluter System,
May 8-June 6, 1985 34
6. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Alkalinities, as
mg/1 CaC03, for the Right Diluter System,
May 8-June 6, 1985 35
7. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Temperatures (C)
per Test Concentration, for the Left Diluter System,
May 8-June 6, 1985 36
8. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Conductivities, per
Test Concentration, for the Left Diluter System,
May 8-June 6, 1985 37
9. F1ve-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Dissolved Oxygen
Concentrations 1n mg/1, for the Left Dlluter System,
May 8-June 6, 1985 38
v1
-------
Tables
Number Page
10. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum pH's, per Test
Concentration, for the Left Diluter System,
May 8-June 6, 1985 39
11. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum A1 lealinities, as
mg/1 CaC03, for the Left Diluter System,
May 8-June 6, 1985 40
12. Thirty-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Values, per
Concentration, for Temperature, pH, Conductivity,
Alkalinity and Dissolved Oxygen, During the Combined
(Left and Right Diluters) Eyed Egg Test 41
13. Average, Maximum and Minimum Values, per Concentration for
Temperature, pH, Conductivity, Alkalinity and Dissolved
Oxygen, During the 13-Day Fingerling Trout Test 42
14. Thirty-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Values, per Test
Concentration, for Temperature, pH, Conductivity,
Alkalinity and Dissolved Oxygen, During the Combined
Green Egg Test 43
15. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Hardness Values
(mg/1 CaC03), per Test Concentration, for the Left
Diluter System 44
16. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Hardness Values, per
Test Concentration, for the Right Diluter System 45
17. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Total Copper Values,
per Test Concentration, for the Left Diluter System .... 46
18. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Mini mum Total Copper Values,
per Test Concentration, for the Right Diluter System .... 47
19. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Total Z1nc Values,
per Test Concentration, for the Left Diluter System .... 48
20. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Total Zinc Values,
per Test Concentration, for the Right Diluter System ... 49
21. Thirty-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Hardness, and Total
Copper and Zinc for the Eyed Egg Test 50
22. Provisional Flow Data from the U.S.G.S. Gauging Station on
the Clark Fork River at Deer Lodge, Montana, May 7 to
June 6, 1985 51
v11
-------
Tables
Number Page
23. Daily Average, Maximum and Minimum Acid Soluble Copper
and Zinc Values Collected by Automatic Sampler and
Analyzed by the EPA Region 8 Lab 52
24. Final Mean Dry Weights of Larval Trout in Each Waste
Concentration at the Termination of the 30-Day Eyed Egg
Test 53
viii
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The assistance of the following individuals is gratefully acknowledged.
Miss Maureen Martin of the Biological Sciences Section, Environmental Services
Division, EPA Region 8, assisted in conducting the on-site bioassays and in
data reduction. Glenn Phillips, Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and
Parks, provided information on the Clark Fork System and was instrumental in
obtaining both eggs and fingerling trout for the tests. Mr. George Kirsch,
Washoe Park Hatchery, Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks provided
assistance in egg counting and handling during the initial phase of the
tests. Mr. Ernest Hartley, Museum Director, Towe Ford Museum, provided secure
space, power and water for the on-site lab. Mr. Robert Trout, Multitech,
provided assistance in locating space, transporting samples, and contacting
local officials in Deer Lodge, Montana. Mrs. Irma Jacobsen provided valuable
secretarial assistance.
ix
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
On October 24, 1983, a memo was received from the EPA Region 8 Montana
Office exp-ressing an Interest in using the Region 8 Environmental Services
Division mobile bioassay lab to assist with biological investigations on the
Silver Bow Creek Superfund site. The memo referred to the "Silver Bow
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study Plan". In the plan, biological
investigations were recommended to assess the current ability of Silver Bow
Creek and the Upper Clark Fork River to support the reproduction of brown
trout. Copper was mentioned as one of the problem metals present; copper
attains levels during the winter and spring that have been shown in the lab to
kill incubating trout. Therefore, the study plan recommended on-site
bioassays at several sites including a site on the Clark Fork River "far
enough downstream to allow for complete mixing".
A statement of work for a Silver Bow Creek (SBC) Remedial Investigation
(RI) bioassay study was received from the EPA Montana Office on February 14,
1985. The study called for a bioassay using eyed rainbow trout eggs through
15 days post-hatch to test the toxicity of contaminants in the Clark Fork
River. Tin Cup Joe Creek was to be used as a dilution water. The tests were
to be conducted 1n the vicinity of Deer Lodge, Montana on about April 1, 1985,
Figure 1.
A reconnaissance of the area revealed that Tin Cup Joe Creek was
contaminated with drainage from an old railroad yard and could not be used for
dilution water. Several alternate sources were checked and Taylor Creek was
finally selected as a dilution water source.
-1-
-------
Garrisi
Deer Lodge ^
< -^Mobile Lab Location
.Anaconda Pond #3
Butte
j
L
miles
Figure 1. Map of the I'pper Clark Fork River, Montana.
-2-
-------
On April 28, 1985, an interagency agreement was received from the EPA
Montana Office listing the tests to be performed. Testing was to begin on May
4 and continue until June 3, 1985. Eyed rainbow trout eggs were to be used in
the bioassay since the state did not have a source of brown trout eggs. State
personnel also expressed an interest in trying to determine why rainbow trout
were not found in the upper Clark Fork in the vicinity of Deer Lodge, Montana,
since rainbows were present in the downstream reaches of the river. Green
rainbow trout eggs would also be used if a source of eggs could be found. The
object of the tests was to determine the potential effects of metals
(primarily copper and zinc) in the river water on trout eggs and larvae during
various stages of development. The metals entered the river during spring
runoff from an upstream Superfund site.
BACKGROUND
The Upper Clark Fork River has been impacted by mining wastes for over
100 years. Copper mining and processing wastes have been discharged to the
system through Silver Bow Creek for about 70 years. Metallic wastes have been
deposited in stream bank and flood plain areas from the headwaters to Mi 11 town
dam. During most of this time fish life in the Upper Clark Fork was
essentially eliminated (Peterman, 1985).
A biological and chemical survey of the Clark Fork River from Warm
Springs to Drummond, Montana, conducted from May through November 1970,
revealed that the river above Deer Lodge was severely polluted with wastes
from the Anaconda Company settling ponds and did not show signs of recovery
until it reached Garrison, Montana (EPA, 1972).
-3-
-------
In a memo dated July 8, 1971, Don Will ems, Acting Director of the
Division of Environmental Sanitation, Montana State Health Department noted a
"marked improvement over the years in the Clark Fork River below the Anaconda
Company ponding system". Both the Anaconda Company and State Health
Department were working cooperatively to improve the quality of water in
Silver Bow Creek and downstream from the Anaconda ponds. Will ems also wrote
that one of the basic problems remaining was the effect on the Clark Fork
River, of storm runoff in the area from Butte to Warm Springs.
The Clark Fork River has currently been described as an improved system
(Peterman, 1985). The river, downstream of the Anaconda ponds, supports a
high trout density (1500 to 2500 trout per mile). Unfortunately, the fish
population decreases from Deer Lodge to Drummond, due in part to decreasing
water quality.
A study of the Clark Fork river system in 1984 revealed a number of
problems. Analysis of water samples collected from 14 stations on the river
upstream from Mill town dam, during an April to mid-July period, revealed that
copper, iron and zinc were sometimes present at concentrations that exceeded
aquatic life criteria. Copper concentrations were the highest of the three
and may have been the most limiting. Conditions for aquatic life were
reported to be least favorable in the stream between Deer Lodge and the
confluence with Rock Creek. Fish populations were reduced in areas downstream
from Deer Lodge where metals concentrations were highest. Part of the reason
for the metals concentrations may have been the bypassing of untreated Silver
Bow Creek water into the Clark Fork during periods of high runoff. The
erosion of tailings deposited 1n the flood plain may also have contributed to
the problem (Phillips, 1985).
-4-
-------
An up-to-date review of copper and zinc toxicity can be found in recent
publications issued by the U.S. EPA (1985a and 1985b). Copper occurs in
natural waters and is a micronutrient to both plants and animals. However,
concentrations of copper at levels slightly higher than micronutrient
requirements have been reported as toxic to aquatic organisms. In the aquatic
environment copper exists as a divalent cupric ion in both free and hydroxy
complexed forms. The cupric ion in water is generally low in proportion to
bound complexes and precipitates which are less toxic and tend to reduce the
toxicity attributable to total copper. Increasing calcium hardness and
associated carbonate alkalinity, expressed as hardness, are both known to
reduce the acute toxicity of copper. As a result, copper criteria are
expressed as a function of hardness in order to adjust for water quality
effects. The acute toxicity of copper to rainbow trout, in water with a
hardness of 30 to 32 milligrams per liter (mg/1) CaC03, ranged from 0.02 to
O.OJ mg/1. In water of 194 mg/1 CaCO^ hardness, the toxicity of copper to
rainbow trout ranged from 0.08 to 0.5 mg/1 (U.S.EPA, 1985a).
Zinc is amphoteric and dissolves in both acids and bases. Zinc always
has a +2 oxidation state In water and 1s one of the most mobile heavy metals.
Low concentrations of zinc are required as a trace element by aquatic
organisms. However, all forms of zinc are potentially toxic at higher
concentrations 1f they can be sorbed or bound by biological tissues. Zinc
toxicity 1s apparently Influenced by a number of chemical factors including
hardness, pH and 1on1c strength. The toxicity of zinc appears to be less
athlgh hardness 1n fresh water. Therefore, hardness Is used as the best water
quality parameter to reflect changes in toxicity caused by differences in
water chemistry. For example, the 96-hour acute toxicity of zinc to juvenile
-5-
-------
rainbow trout in water with a hardness of 170-179 mg/1 CaC03 has been
reported to range from 1.9 to 2.9 mg/1. Juvenile rainbows in water with a
lower hardness of 44 to 47 mg/1 CaC03 had a 96-hour toxicity of 0.4 to 0.7
mg/1 (U.S.EPA, 1985b).
SECTION 2
METHODS AND MATERIALS
MOBILE LAB
Fish tests were conducted in a mobile bioassay lab that was set up behind
the old Montana Territorial Prison/Towe Antique Car Museum property in Deer
Lodge, Montana. This site provided both security and accessibility to the
Clark Fork River. Flow-thru fish tests were conducted from May 7 to June 6,
1985. Methods used were adapted from Peltier (1985) and ASTM (1985).
The mobile bioassay laboratory is contained in a self-propelled 2-1/2-ton
truck. Two wall mounted vacuum-siphon diluter systems mounted side by side
delivered Taylor Creek water (dilution water) plus Clark Fork River water
(toxicant) to 28 eight-liter aquaria, 14 aquaria per diluter, in a water
bath. Aquarium temperatures are maintained at specified test temperatures by
a recirculating heat/chill unit connected to the water bath. Ambient air
temperature In the lab 1s maintained by an exterior-mounted heat pump.
The vacuum-siphon diluter system is patterned after Peltier (1985), with
slight modifications. A set of glass chambers, constructed to contain
specified volumes of dilution water, are mounted above a second set of
-6-
-------
chambers that provide specified volumes of toxicant. Fluid metering pumps
activated by a float switch and time-delay relays were used to deliver Taylor
Creek water to the upper chambers and Clark Fork River water to the lower
chambers. Vacuum siphon tubes from each chamber delivered combinations of
Taylor Creek water and Clark Fork River water totaling 1000 milliliters per
concentration to mixing chambers. The test concentrations were 100, 75, 56,
32, 18, 10, and 0 (control) percent Clark Fork River water. From the mixing
chambers each concentration was split equally into two aquaria. Fourteen
aquaria or test chambers containing the test organisms were located below the
mixing chambers for each diluter system. During the 30-day test, the dlluters
cycled an average of 6.3 times per hour.
Two exterior-placed 1363-I1ter polyethylene tanks provided a reservoir
for Clark Fork and Taylor Creek waters. Taylor Creek water was pumped from
the creek, at a point where It left the Montana State Prison property, to 167
liter polyethylene tanks, transported to the mobile lab site, and pumped into
the large (1363-1 Iter) outside tank. Test water was continuously pumped from
the Clark Fork River near the lab through a covered hose to another large tank
beside the lab. A submersible pump was anchored six Inches off the river
bottom and covered with fiberglass screen to prevent leaves and debris from
clogging the pump.
Lighting in the laboratory was provided by incandescent lights controlled
by a dimmer switch. The eggs were shielded from direct sunlight, and the
sac-fry and fingerllngs from routine laboratory movements, by a black plastic
curtain that surrounded the dlluters plus the water bath containing the test
aquaria.
-7-
-------
TEST SPECIES
All trout eggs were collected from a DeSmet strain located in Willow
Creek Reservoir. Eyed rainbow trout eggs were obtained from the Washoe Park
Hatchery in Anaconda. The eggs were collected by State Department of Fish,
Wildlife and Parks personnel on April 10. The eggs were transported to the
hatchery for incubation and were approximately 27 days old when delivered to
the bioassay lab. Personnel from the hatchery transported the eyed eggs and
assisted 1n the distribution of both eyed and green eggs into the nursery
baskets. Green eggs were collected at the Willow Creek area, fertilized, arid
immediately transported to the lab by Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
personnel. The green eggs were less than 24 hours old when they were placed
in nylon nursery baskets hung in the aquaria.
Fingerllng rainbow trout were acquired from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
hatchery at Creston, Montana. Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks personnel
transported the fingerlings to the bioassay lab on May 24, 1985. The
fingerlings averaged 1.6 grams 1n weight and 5.1 centimeters in fork length.
TEST CONDITIONS
Eyed and green eggs were placed in their respective nursery baskets
constructed of a plastic frame covered with nylon webbing. The nylon webbing
permitted a full exchange of test solution, thus continually exposing the eggs
to any toxicant present In the aquaria. A total of 50 eggs were placed in
each basket. The baskets were hung from the aquaria frames with stainless
steel support hooks. Eyed eggs were placed in all 28 aquaria giving a total
-8-
-------
of 200 eggs per concentration. Green eggs were placed in the 14 aquaria
receiving test concentrations from the left diluter only, resulting in 100
eggs per concentration.
Both green eggs and eyed eggs were placed in the aquaria with hatchery
water flowing through the diluters. Hatchery water was added on the sixth of
May and continued until the seventh. On May 7, Taylor Creek water and Clark
Fork River water were slowly added to the tanks over a seven hour period and
the test was officially started at 3:30 PM. At this time any white (dead)
eggs were replaced with live eggs.
Since the eyed eggs had been exposed to a fungus 1n the hatchery,
hatchery personnel recommended a formalin treatment for all eggs. Both eyed
and green eggs were treated with a 5 percent formalin solution made up in the
respective concentration of dilution and test water 1n the aquaria. Eggs in
each aquarium were exposed to the treatment for 15 minutes. After that time
interval, the eggs were flushed with their particular test concentration
water. This procedure was carried out on May 9 and 11. The treatment was
discontinued when the first sac fry was noticed on May 12.
Fingerllng trout were acclimated to the test temperature of 10 + 2 C and
placed Into the 14 aquaria associated with the right diluter. Ten trout per
aquarium (20 per concentration) were used, except for the controls. Five fish
per aquarium were also placed in the controls for the left diluter giving a
total of 30 fish for the control. The fingerllng trout test was conducted for
13 days, May 24-June 6, 1985.
-9-
-------
All tests were conducted at a temperature of 10 + 2 C. Air was slowly
bubbled to all aquaria when finger!ing trout were added on May 24. Air was
required for the fingerlings and was added to all aquaria to expose all eyed
eggs to the same aeration conditions.
TEST PARAMETERS
The following parameters were measured daily from every aquarium:
dissolved oxygen (mg/1), conductivity, temperature (C)t alkalinlties (mg/1 Ca
CO^), and pH. Each aquarium was checked daily for mortalities and any dead
eggs or fish were removed.
Samples for total copper and zinc, dissolved copper and zinc, and
hardness were drawn from one concentration replicate throughout the bloassay.
These samples were analyzed by Multitech, a contract laboratory in Butte.
Copper and zinc were to be analyzed using ICP emission spectroscopy.
Analytical methods followed those listed by EPA (1983). ICP analyses were
conducted with a Perkin Elmer instrument, Model 5500-B (G. Huddleston,
Multitech, Personnel Communications, 1986).
Each week a priority pollutant and an ICP metal scan sample were taken
from both the Clark Fork River and Taylor Creek. These samples were analyzed
at the EPA Region 8 laboratory in Denver according to the methods outlined in
the EPA Chemical Methods Manual (EPA, 1983). Priority pollutant organlcs
analyses were less than detection limits and were not reported. The results
of the EPA lab ICAP metal analyses are reported in Table 1, Appendix.
-10-
-------
In addition to the above samples, an automatic sampler was Installed in
the outside Clark Fork River water tank. AHquots were taken every four hours
from the same depth and location as the intake lines from the diluters. These
samples were acidified and, at the end of 24 hours, filtered through a 0.45
millimicron membrane filter (EPA, 1985a).
Dissolved oxygen readings were taken with a Yellow Springs Instrument
(YSI) dissolved oxygen meter, Model 58. Conductivities were measured with a
YSI field/laboratory conductance meter, Model 32. An Orion Research Model 201
digital pH meter was used for all pH readings.
TEST DURATION
The green rainbow trout eggs were exposed to the test waters for thirty
days. During this time they developed to the eyed stage.
The eyed rainbow trout eggs also were exposed to the test waters for
thirty days. During this period the eggs hatched, absorbed the yolk sac, and
began sw1m-up feeding.
The fingerllng rainbow trout were exposed to the test waters for thirteen
days.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
All direct-reading bioassay laboratory instrumentation and equipment was
checked for accuracy prior to departure from Denver. Before each series of
-11-
-------
measurements was initiated on site, the instruments were calibrated
withstandardized solutions. Each test concentration in the aquaria was run in
duplicates, and a control concentration was run at the same time. Samples
sent to the contractor contained a duplicate and a blank. When the mobile
laboratory was set up on site, each diluter was checked and recalibrated to
deliver the specified amount of test and/or dilution water.
SECTION 3
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
CHEMICAL ANALYSES
Averages, maximums, and minimums are reported for the chemical analyses
conducted in the mobile lab during the tests. All tables of chemical data
have been placed in the Appendix. Tables 2-6, Appendix list the five-day
averages for the right diluter system during the 30-day test. Tables 7-11,
Appendix list five-day averages for the left diluter system during the 30-day
tests. Both sets of tables reflect the chemistries of the total 30-day eyed
egg test. Combined data from both diluters have been summarized in Table 12,
Appendix as 30-day average, maximum and minimum values per test concentration
for the total test.
Average temperatures in the test aquaria ranged from 10.2C in the
controls to 10.5C in the 100 percent concentrations. The maximum test
temperature was 11.8C and the minimum temperature was 9.1C (Table 12,
Appendix).
-12-
-------
The average pH for the controls was 8.28. As the concentration of Clark
Fork River water increased, pH decreased to an average of 7.99 in 100 percent
Clark Fork River water. The maximum pH was 8.45, and the minimum pH was 7.63
(Table 12, Appendix).
Values for both conductivity and alkalinity were also higher in the
controls and decreased in value as the percentage of Clark Fork River water
increased (Table 12, Appendix).
Thirty-day average dissolved oxygen (0.0.) concentrations ranged from 8.2
to 8.3 parts per million (ppm) with a maximum concentration of 10.2 ppm and a
minimum concentration of 6.1 ppm (Table 12, Appendix). A comparison of
five-day averages in Tables 4, Appendix (right diluter) and 9 Appendix (left
diluter) revealed a reduction in D.O. concentration in aquaria with the right
diluter system. This difference resulted from the introduction of fingerlings
on May 24 to the aquaria with the right diluter even though air was added to
all aquaria to keep the D.O. from dropping below 60 percent saturation. Table
13, Appendix lists the average, maximum, and minimum concentrations for
temperature, pH, conductivity, alkalinity and D.O. in the fingerling test.
These values have been averaged for the 13 days that the fingerlings were
tested.
Average, maximum, and minimum values are also listed in Table 14,
Appendix for the green egg test. Green eggs were placed in aquaria associated
with the left diluter system. Temperature, pH, conductivity and alkalinity
all followed the trends evidenced in Table 12. D.O. was slightly higher with
the minimum D.O. recorded being 6.5 ppm compared to 6.1 ppm in the right
aquaria 100 percent concentration (Table 4, Appendix).
-13-
-------
The hardness and metals analyses conducted by Multitech on dally samples
from the test aquaria are listed in Tables 15-21, Appendix. Five-day average
hardness values are listed in Tables 15 and 16, Appendix. In general,
hardness follows a similar pattern to pH, conductivity, and alkalinity.
Larger values are found in the control (Taylor Creek), and the values
gradually decrease as Clark Fork River water increases in the test aquaria.
Five-day averages for total copper and total zinc are presented in Tables
17-18 and 19-20 Appendix respectively. Dissolved metals are not included
since most of the reported values are less than the detection limits of the
instrumentation used in the analyses. Thirty-day average, maximum and minimum
values for hardness and total copper and zinc are listed in Table 21, Appendix.
During a pre-study meeting with EPA and Montana State personnel, the
decision was made, based on previous analyses of high-flow water, that metal
concentrations would be high enough to permit the use of ICP emission
spectroscopy.
In the past, spring runoff in the upper river basin added metals to the
Clark Fork from these sources: the Anaconda ponds, Warn Springs Creek and the
Mi 11-Willow bypass. Untreated high water flows from Silver Bow Creek also
were allowed to cut through a temporary dam at the upper end of the ponds and
flow into the Mi 11-Willow bypass. Downstream from the Anaconda ponds, high
stream flows cut Into stream side deposits of tailings and added another load
of metals to the upper Clark Fork (Phillips, 1905).
-14-
-------
Because of the above events, the study was conducted in May 1985 when the
high spring flows and resulting high metals concentrations were expected to
occur.
Unfortunately, the snowpack in the surrounding hills was less than
normal. The frequency and intensity of spring rains also was less than
expected, and high sustained flows from the Silver Bow Creek basin did not
occur.
Provisional flow data from a U.S. Geological Survey gauging station on
the Clark Fork River at Deer Lodge, Montana, about 1/4 kilometer (0.4 miles)
downstream from the study site, are listed for the May 7 to June 6, 1985 study
period (Table 22, Appendix). A comparison of flow data for the May 7 to June
6 period in 1984 to the same period in 1985 shows a decrease in flows during
the 1985 study (Figure 2).
A temporary staff gauge was set at the pump location for the Clark Fork
River water. Readings from the gauge were used to indicate fluctuations in
river level during the study. At the beginning of the test (May 7) the gauge
reading for river level was 15.2 centimeters (cm) or six inches. For the
following 17 days the general trend was a decrease 1n water level down to 1.27
cm (1/2 inch) below the gauge on May 23. Minor rain events occurred on May 26
and 3U but were not enough to breach the dam at the Anaconda ponds. During
the study the only significant rain event occurred on June 1-2. Sufficient
rainfall occurred to raise the Clark Fork to 19.1 cm (7 1/2 inches) on the
gauge for a brief 2-3 hour period. Water flow in Silver Bow Creek was high
enough to remove the temporary dam upstream from the Anaconda ponds and spill
-------
900
c
G
rj
1?
If?
IL'
a?
>4-
o
^ 'Z
cr> -»
' O
c
a:-
JZ
u
If.'
800 -
700
:.00 -
400 -fU—s_.
•10 0
20U
/ \
\
\
~ ~ P
-a
1984
1985
V-K
\
\
•+>
A
V
p....
P.
/ "N
El
~—£]
/
0
V
tr
•q-
Figure 2.
1—1—I—|—1—1—I—I—|—I—I—I—I—J—I—I—I—I—|—I—I—1—I |—I—I I I
5/12 5/17 5/22 5/27 6/1
Days
A Comparison of Clark Fork River water flows from May 7-June 6, 1984 to the same
period of time in 1985.
-------
untreated water Into the Mill-Willow bypass. By the next morning, June 3, the
Clark Fork had decreased to 14.0 cm (5 1/2 inches) on the gauge. An
inspection of the dam area revealed a small amount of water flowing into the
diversion canal. By June 4, water was no longer flowing into the bypass, and
the Clark Fork had dropped to 11.4 cm (4 1/2 inches) on the gauge.
Since the expected water flows and resulting high metals did not occur
during a majority of the study period, water samples shipped to Multitech were
lower in copper and zinc than expected. According to Mr. Huddleston,
Environmental Services Manager - Multitech, in a letter dated July 30, 1985,
"most of the samples were near or below the Silver Bow Creek Remedial
Investigation recommended detection limits . . "Since the MDL is in
effect, the 99% confidence interval for low level samples one should be
cautious in assigning significance to even relatively large differences in
measured analyte levels at concentrations near the MDL". As a result of the
problems with the unexpectedly low metals concentrations which were near the
MDL of the analytical method, copper and zinc data from the test aquaria have
been included in the report, but have been used with caution in the
Interpretation.
Water samples, collected every four hours by automatic sampler, were sent
to the EPA lab for analysis. These samples were collected from the outside
large tank containing continually cycling Clark Fork River water. Analysis of
these samples gave an indication of the levels of acid soluble copper and zinc
that were available 1n the river water before it was pumped Into the lab
diluter system. Table 23, Appendix lists the daily average, maximum and
minimum for both copper and zinc as acid soluble metal. Acid soluble metal is
-17-
-------
listed in the "Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Copper (EPA, 1985a) as the
best measurement of copper for determining aquatic life criteria. The
acid-soluble method measures all forms of copper that are toxic to aquatic
life or can be readily converted to toxic forms under natural conditions.
Average acid soluble copper values for each day ranged from 0.010
milligrams per liter (mg/1) on the 15th of May to 0.078 mg/1 on June 3, 1985.
Average acid soluble zinc ranged from 0.010 mg/1 to 0.090 mg/1 on the same
dates (Table 23, Appendix). Figures 3 and 4 show the daily fluctuations in
copper and zinc respectively. Peaks on the graphs near May 27, 30, and June 3
reflect rain events on May 26, 30 and June 1-2. The peak on May 13 was not
associated with any increase in water level and remains unexplained.
BI0ASSAY TESTS
Results of the flow-through bioassay tests were not conclusive. The
green-egg test, which was included per the recommendations of ASTM (1985)
showed no observable effects of metals in the Clark Fork River on the eggs
when percent mortality in the test concentrations is compared to the controls
(Table 1). The first 10 days of the test also coincided with a green-egg test
recommended by Birge and Black (1982) to test the effect of metals on a
critical initial development stage of the egg. Since only one mortality
occurred in the 100 percent concentration during the first 10 days, any metals
present in the Clark Fork had no observable effect on the eggs during the
recommended test period.
-18-
-------
C 08
0.07 -
0 06 -
0.05 -
0.04 -
0.03 -
0.02 -
0 01
Clark Fork Avg. Diss. Cu.EPA Data
i
3 0 Day Pe rio d, May 7 - J u ne 6,1985
Figure 3. Averaoe daily acid soluble copper concentrations collected by automatic sampler
and analyzed by the FPA Region 8 lab.
-------
Clark Fork Avg. Diss. Zn.EPA Data
0.09 -
0.08 -
0.07 -
0.06 -
0.05 -
0.03 -
0.02 -
3.01
5/12
5/17
5/22
5/22
6/1
3 0 Day Pe rio d, May? - J u ne 6,19 » 5
Fiaure 4. Average daily acid soluble zinc concentrations collected by automatic sampler and
analyzed by the EPA Region 8 lab.
-------
Table 1. Test Results for the 30-Day Rainbow Trout Green Egg Test
Concentration Mortalities % Mortalities
0 11 m
10 8 8%
18 5 5%
32 5 5%
56 4 4%
75 6 e%
100 10 10%
A fingerling trout test was included at the recommendation of Mr. Patrick
Davies, (Personal Communication, Patrick Davies Colorado Game, Fish and Parks,
April 1985), who found fingerlings to be sensitive to copper at certain stages
of their development. The fingerling trout test was Inconclusive, with 7
percent mortality 1n the control compared to 20 percent mortality in 100
percent (Table 2). The increased mortalities may Indicate a sensitivity to
the Increased metals 1n the Clark Fork River after rain events on May 26, 30,
and June 1-2 (Figure 3). Fingerl1ngs were Inactive for about 12 hours
following the rain event on June 1-2, but resumed active swimming and feeding
the following day.
Table 2. Test Results for the 13-Day Fingerl1ng Rainbow Trout Test
(May 24 - June 6, 1985)
Concentration Mortalities % Mortalities
0 2 1%
10 1 5%
18 2 10X
32 1 5%
56 .0 0%
75 3 15%
100 4 20%
Table 3 shows the results of the 30-day eyed egg test. Percent mortality
did not exceed 14.5 percent 1n 100 percent Clark Fork River water, compared to
5.5 percent 1n Taylor Creek water. Percent hatching ranged from 98.5 to 100
percent. Percent abnormalities were extremely low, ranging from 0.5 to 1.5
percent.
-21-
-------
Table 3.
Test Results
for the 30-Day
Rainbow Trout Eyed Egg Test
Cone.
Mortal itles
% Mortalities
% Hatch
% Abnormalities
0
11
5.5%
99.5
0.5
10
10
5%
98.5
0.5
18
12
6%
98.0
0.5
32
9
4.5%
99.0
0.0
56
13
6.5%
100.0
1.5
75
9
4.5%
100.0
0.0
100
29
14.5%
98.5
0.5
Even though mortalities were low, the percent mortality in 100 percent
was almost three times the mortality in the controls. The Increased mortality
in Clark Fork River water indicates a possible response to metals toxicity
that was not noted 1n lower test concentrations. Concentrations other than
100 percent Clark Fork River water may have been affected by the addition of
Taylor Creek water, which would dilute the metals in the river water and
increase the hardness levels. An Increase in hardness would also reduce
metals toxicity.
Table 4 lists chronic and acute values of copper calculated according to
the recommendations in Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Copper {EPA,
1985a). Formulas for the calculations are shown in Appendix B. The
calculated values are from the 100 percent concentrations of the right
diluter. Both the right and left diluters used the same water sources, and
hardness values are similar. Calculated values are compared to actual values
of total copper as measured by Multltech, and to actual values of acid soluble
copper measured by EPA. The report "Ambient Water Quality Criteria for
Copper" (EPA, 1986a) notes that there is no ideal method for expressing
aquatic life criteria for copper. In the past, criteria were expressed as
total recoverable copper. However, the "Methods for Chemical Analysis of
Water and Wastes" (EPA, 1983) requires the reporting of analyses for total and
total recoverable copper as "total" copper. Both analytical techniques for
-22-
-------
total and total recoverable copper produce essentially the same value
(Personal Communication, Mr. Steve CalHo, Inorganic Chemist, EPA Region 8,
May 7, 1986). The measurement of total or total recoverable copper may be too
rigorous in some cases and may indicate that more copper is available to
aquatic organisms than actually would be available in natural situations. The
analysis of acid soluble copper in water should measure all forms of copper
that are toxic to aquatic life (EPA, 1986a). For this reason, updated copper
criteria have been expressed as acid soluble copper. However, since the
acid-soluble method has not been officially approved, the criteria may also be
applied to total or total recoverable copper. The criteria recommend that
calculated chronic values should not be exceeded by a four-day average
concentration more than once every three years. Acute values should also not
be exceeded by a one-hour average concentration more than once every three
years. For purposes of general comparison, copper values have been calculated
using five-day average hardness values and compared to five-day average
maximum total and acid soluble copper values.
Table 4. Calculated Chronic and Acute Levels of Copper Compared to
Multltech and EPA Data
Calculated Actual
Chronic
Acute
Total
Cu
Acid Soluble I
Date
Avg.
Max.
Avg.
Max.
Avg.
Max.
Avg.
Max.
5/8-12
0.020
0.022
0.032
0.034
0.027
0.031
0.022
0.030
5/13-17
0.021
0.022
0.033
0.035
0.018
0.021
0.033
0.034
5/18-22
0.019
0.020
0.030
0.031
0.012
0.019
0.019
0.020
5/23-27
0.018
0.020
0.029
0.031
0.025
0.070
0.035
0.050
5/28-6/1
0.021
0.021
0.033
0.033
0.028
0.042
0.029
0.187
6/2-6
0.019
0.021
0.029
0.034
0.052
0.118
0.050
0.090
-23-
-------
A comparison of chronic and acute average and maximum criteria values to
the actual values in the aquaria 100 percent concentration (Multitech) reveal
that significant increases in average copper concentrations over the
recommended criteria occurred only during the last five-day period of the
test, 0.052 mg/1 compared to 0.029 mg/1 respectively (Table 4). Maximum
copper values exceeded maximum copper concentrations at the recommended safe
levels for acute criteria by approximately 1.4 to 3.5 times during the last 15
day period of the test.
An inspection of copper values in the samples from the outside large tank
containing Clark Fork River water reflect similar increases. Average acid
soluble copper during the last five days reflects a significant increase in
copper above recommended safe levels. Maximum values ranged from 0.050 up to
0.187 during the last fifteen days of the tests (Table 4). An inspection of
Table 23 (Appendix) and Figure 3 reveals that three significant peaks in acid
soluble copper occurred in the last fifteen days of the test. The copper
concentrations did not remain at elevated levels long enough to produce a
significant mortality. If normal spring runoff with its higher metals
concentrations had occurred as predicted, mortalities would probably have
increased.
When the dam was breached on June 2 and the highest levels of metals
flowed passed the lab on June 3 both the fry and finger!ings were noted to be
"sluggish" and not as active as usual. All fish were reacting normally by the
next day. The reaction of the fish to the increase 1n metals was not unusual
since 1t has been reported that "rapid excursions to near-lethal levels are
more harmful than continuous low-level exposure" (EPA, 1986a).
-24-
-------
It should be noted that acid soluble zinc reflected similar increases in
concentration levels as copper on May 27 and June 3 (Figure 4). For example,
when the dam was breached on June 2, the average amount of acid soluble zinc
measured on June 3 was 0.09 mg/1, and the maximum amount measured was 0.157
mg/1 (Table 23). Calculated water quality criteria for zinc show an average
chronic value for the Clark Fork of 0.058 mg/1 and an average acute value of
0.152 mg/1. (Formulas are listed in Appendix B.) Thus, concentrations of
zinc in the Clark Fork at the time of the dam removal were not high enough nor
sustained long enough to produce a toxic effect. Since zinc and copper have
been shown to react synergistically with each other both metals may contribute
to toxic problems 1n the Clark Fork River when spring flows and resulting
metal concentrations are higher.
An examination of fry weight from the 30-day eyed egg test, as dry
weight, did not reveal any significant differences in mean weights between
Increasing concentrations of Clark Fork River water (Table 24, Appendix). A
student's t test was used to analyze the means and no significant differences
were found.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Thirty-day flow-through bloassays using green and eyed rainbow trout eggs
and fingerling rainbow trout were not conclusive. Expected high spring runoff
with high metals concentrations did not occur 1n the Clark Fork River during
the 30-day study period. Brief rain events flushed copper and zinc into the
river system on May 27 and 30 and June 1-2. Metal concentrations in the river
following the rain events exceeded calculated chronic and acute copper values
for the protection of aquatic organisms, but were not high enough or present
-25-
-------
in the river long enough to produce significant mortalities of test organisms.
Mortalities in the green-egg test 100 percent concentration, Clark Fork
River, were not significantly different from control (Taylor Creek)
mortalities. The 13-day fingerling trout test was also inconclusive, although
an increased mortality in the Clark Fork River water compared to Taylor Creek
may reflect a reaction of the fingerlings to increased metals concentrations
following rain events.
The 30-day eyed egg test reflected a similar sensitivity to metals in the
Clark Fork as the fingerling test. Percent hatching and abnormalities did not
evidence a toxic effect. Percent mortalities were higher in the Clark Fork
River water than 1n the controls, indicating a possible response to metals
toxicity in the river during rain events that exceeded calculated chronic and
acute levels predicted to protect aquatic life. If normal spring runoff with
its higher metals concentrations had occurred, higher mortalities may have
occurred during the test.
It is recommended that a modified series of tests be conducted during a
"normal" water year when sufficient snowpack Is present to produce a higher
runoff than that in 1985. The green-egg test should be either shortened to
10-15 days or not conducted since the embryos appear to be relatively
unaffected by changes in metal concentrations after the initial critical
period suggested by Blrge and Black (1982).
Trout larvae should be tested from post-hatching to 30 days or, 1f time
is restricted, post-swim-up to 15 days with an emphasis on lethality and/or
growth effects.
-26-
-------
Literature Cited
1. ASTM, 1985. Proposed New Standard Guide For Conducting Fish Early
Life-Stage Toxicity Tests. Draft. American Society for
Testing and Materials. November 1985.
2. Birge, Wesley J. and Jeffrey A. Black, 1981. In Situ Acute/Chronic
Toxicological Monitoring of Industrial Effluents for the
NPDES Biomonitoring Program Using Fish and Amphibian
Embryo-Larval Stages As Test Organisms. 0WEP-82-001 USEPA
Office of Water Enforcement and Permits, Wash. D.C. 121 pp.
3. EPA, 1972. A Water Quality Study of the Upper Clark Fork River and
Selected Tributaries. EPA Region VIII, Dener, Colorado 1972.
4. EPA, 1983. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes.
EPA-600/4-79-020. Revised March 1983. EMSL, Office of
Research and Development. Cincinnati, Ohio
5. EPA, 1985a. Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Copper - 1985.
EPA-440/5-84-031. Office of Water Regulations and
Standards, Criteria and Standards Division, Washington, D.C.
142pp.
6. EPA, 1985b Ambient Aquatic Life Water Quality Criteria for Z1nc.
Draft. Office of Research and Development, Environmental
Research Laboratories, Diluth, Minn.
-27-
-------
7. Memo From Mr. Donald G. WHlems, Acting Director, Division of Environmental
Sanitation, Montana State Dept. of Health, July 8, 1971.
8. Peltier, William H. and Cornelius I. Weber (eds.) 1985. Method for
Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and
Marine Organisms. 3rd ed. EPA/600/4-85/013. Office of
Research and Develoment, Environmental Monitoring and
Support Laboratory, U.S. EPA. Cincinnati, Ohio. 216pp.
9. Peterman, Larry 1985. "The Clark Fork Legacy". Montana Outdoors, March/
April 1985. p28-32.
10. Phillips, Glen R. 1985. Relationships Among Fish Populations, Metals
Concentrations and Stream Discharge In the Upper Clark Fork
River. Draft Report. Department of F1sh, Wildlife and
Parks, Helena, Montana. April 1985. 23pp.
-28-
-------
Appendix A
TABULAR MATERIAL
-29-
-------
Table 1. Analyses of Grab Samples of Water-Collected from the Clark Fork River During the 30-Day Bioassay
Date 5/8/85 5/22/85 5/31/85 6/6/85 6/2/85 6/3/85
Time 1845 2225 0315
Parameter^
CFR2
TC3
CFR
TC
CFR
TC
CFR
TC
CFR
CFR
CFR
Silver
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
A1umi num
315
358
266
335
282
164
129
278
2240
2100
1740
Arsenic
17
7
16
7
16
8
19
8
32
43
44
Barium
29
74
34
75
35
78
32
79
49
63
56
Beryllium
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
Cadmi urn
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Cobalt
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Chromi um
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Copper
35
5
33
5
36
5
30
5
177
205
215
Iron
470
354
431
310
479
154
243
250
2100
3610
2990
Manganese
156
48
125
57
119
31
72
37
654
555
465
Molybdenum
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
14
11
Nickle
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
Lead
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
32
37
54
Antimony
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Selenium
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Vanadi um
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
Zinc
43
5
39
5
43
5
33
5
224
215
231
Thallium
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Calcium (mg/1)
54.6
72.1
53.9
73.8
61.1
79.3
61.1
78.9
61.9
60.5
58.8
Manganese (mg/1)
11.9
13.5
11.5
13.5
14.1
14.6
13.5
14.1
15.0
13.8
133.0
Sodium (mg/1)
12.2
21.1
12.8
22.3
17.8
24.5
17.1
24.1
17.0
16.3
16.7
1 Parameter as ug/1 unless designated otherwise.
2 Clark Fork River
3 Taylor Creek
-------
Table 2. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Temperatures (C) per Test
Concentration, for the Right Uiluter System, May 8-June 6, 1985
5/8-12/85
5/13-17/85
5/18-22/85
5/23-27/85
5/28-6/1/85
6/2-6/85
Rt
Temp avg
Max
Min
100
10.3
10.6
9.9
75
10.1
10.7
9.8
56
10.0
10.4
9.6
32
9.8
10.5
9.3
18
9.9
10.3
9.2
10
9.8
10.4
9.1
0
9.7
10.5
9.1
Rt
Temp avg
Max
Min
100
11.6
11.7
11.5
75
11.4
11.5
11.3
56
11.3
11.5
11.2
32
11.1
11.2
11.0
18
11.2
11.5
10.8
10
11.1
11.3
10.8
0
10.9
11.2
10.8
Rt
Temp avg
Max
Min
100
11.4
11.7
11.2
75
11.2
11.6
11.0
56
11.4
11.8
11.2
32
11.0
11.4
10.8
18
11.2
11.6
10.9
10
11.2
11.6
10.8
0
10.9
11.3
10.7
Rt
Temp avg
Max
Min
100
10.3
11.1
9.3
75
10.3
11.1
9.4
56
10.4
11.3
9.4
32
10.5
11.4
9.5
18
10.5
11.6
9.4
10
10.5
11.5
9.4
0
10.4
11.3
9.5
Rt
Temp avg
Max
Min
100
9.5
10.0
8.9
75
9.5
9.9
8.9
56
9.5
9.9
8.8
32
9.5
10.0
8.8
18
9.4
9.9
8.7
10
9.5
10.0
8.8
0
9.4
9.8
8.8
Rt
Temp avg
Max
Min
100
10.0
10.1
9.8
75
9.9
10.1
9.7
56
10.0
10.2
9.7
32
10.0
10.3
9.8
18
10.0
10.3
9.8
10
10.1
10.4
9.8
0
10.0
10.1
9.8
-31-
-------
Table 3. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Conductivities per Test
Concentration, for the Right Diluter System, May 8-June 6, 1985
5/8-12/85
5/13-17/85
5/18-22/85
5/23-27/85
5/28-6/1/85
6/2-6/85
Rt
Cond avg
Max
Min
100
425
445
408
75
450
466
437
56
470
482
460
32
493
503
477
18
510
517
498
10
518
523
507
0
527
531
516
Rt
Cond avg
Max
Min
100
454
463
447
75
471
476
466
56
484
487
480
32
501
503
497
18
511
515
507
10
518
521
516
0
524
528
520
Rt
Cond avg
Max
Min
100
415
426
408
75
442
449
436
56
463
469
459
32
488
492
483
18
504
507
499
10
514
518
508
0
524
528
519
Rt
Cond avg
Max
Min
100
385
391
373
75
425
432
415
56
455
465
447
32
491
500
485
18
512
521
506
10
525
534
517
0
538
548
528
Rt
Cond avg
Max
Min
100
449
475
412
75
474
496
444
56
495
513
472
32
519
533
503
18
534
544
521
10
542
551
533
0
551
557
545
Rt
Cond avg
Max
Min
100
462
474
453
75
485
494
478
56
503
510
499
32
525
529
521
18
537
540
533
10
545
548
540
0
553
556
547
-32-
-------
Table 4. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Dissolved Oxygen
Concentrations 1n mg/1, for the Right Dlluter System, May 8-June 6, 1985
5/8-12/85 Rt DO avg Max Min
100 9.0 9.7 8.4
75 8.9 9.5 8.5
56 9.0 9.6 8.6
32 9.1 9.9 8.6
18 9.0 9.7 8.6
10 8.9 9.7 8.4
0 8.9 9.7 8.5
5/13-17/85 Rt DO avg Max Min
100 8.9 9.2 8.7
75 9.0 9.3 8.8
56 9.1 9.3 9.0
32 9.1 9.5 8.9
18 9.2 9.6 8.8
10 9.1 9.5 8.9
0 9.2 9.7 8.9
5/18-22/85 Rt DO avg Max Min
100 8.4 8.6 7.9
75 8.4 8.6 8.2
56 8.5 8.7 8.2
32 8.5 8.7 8.3
18 8.6 8.9 8.4
10 8.5 8.8 8.3
0 8.5 8.8 8.4
5/23-27/85 Rt DO avg Max Min
100 7.6 8.3 6.7
75 7.7 8.4 6.7
56 7.5 8.1 6.5
32 7.8 8.3 7.0
18 7.6 8.2 6.8
10 7.7 8.4 6.8
0 8.1 9.2 7.3
5/28-6/1/85 Rt DO avg Max M1n
100 7.5 8.2 6.8
75 7.5 8.1 7.2
56 7.4 8.1 6.8
32 7.7 8.2 7.4
18 7.6 8.3 7.3
10 7.5 8.3 7.2
0 7.9 8.9 7.1
6/2-6/85
Rt
100
75
56
32
18
10
0
DO avg
6.3
6.7
6.6
6.6
6.6
6.4
7.0
Max
0
9
M1n
5.8
6.3
6.1
6.2
6.1
5.9
6.2
-33-
-------
Table 5. Five-Day Average, Maximun and Minimum pH's per Test
Concentration for the Right Diluter System, May 8-June 6, 1985
5/8-12/85
5/13-17/85
5/18-22/85
5/23-27/85
5/28-6/1/85
6/2-6/85
Rt
pH avg
Max
Min
100
8.22
8.35
8.10
75
8.23
8.30
8.15
56
8.26
8.30
8.18
32
8.31
8.35
8.20
18
8.26
8.38
7.95
10
8.29
8.45
7.95
0
8.33
8.40
8.25
Rt
pH avg
Max
Min
100
8.13
8.30
7.83
75
8.13
8.28
7.88
56
8.19
8.35
7.95
32
8.26
8.38
8.05
18
8.29
8.40
8.10
10
8.30
8.40
8.10
0
8.31
8.43
8.10
Rt
pH avg
Max
Min
100
8.06
8.10
8.00
75
8.16
8.18
8.08
56
8.26
8.28
8.23
32
8.34
8.35
8.30
18
8.37
8.40
8.35
10
8.38
8.40
8.35
0
8.39
8.45
8.35
Rt
pH avg
Max
Min
100
7.89
7.98
7.75
75
8.00
8.15
7.90
56
8.04
8.25
7.93
32
8.11
8.35
7.95
18
8.18
8.35
8.00
10
8.21
8.40
8.00
0
8.25
8.40
8.00
Rt
pH avg
Max
Min
100
7.92
7.95
7.88
75
7.95
7.95
7.95
56
8.05
8.10
8.03
32
8.16
8.20
8.13
18
8.20
8.25
8.15
10
8.24
8.25
8.20
0
8.27
8.35
8.20
Rt
pH avg
Max
Min
100
7.79
7.90
7.70
75
7.87
7.90
7.85
56
7.94
8.00
7.85
32
8.07
8.15
7.95
18
8.13
8.18
8.05
10
8.18
8.25
8.05
0
8.20
8.30
8.10
-34-
-------
Table 6. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Alkalinities,
as mg/1 CaC03, for the Right Diluter System, May 8-June 6, 1985
5/8-12/85
5/13-17/85
5/18-22/85
5/23-27/85
5/28-6/1/85
6/2-6/85
Rt
Alk avg
Max
Min
100
109
114
104
75
134
140
130
56
153
158
144
32
174
180
162
18
195
198
188
10
204
206
200
0
214
218
206
Rt
Alk avg
Max
Min
100
115
116
112
75
136
138
134
56
156
160
152
32
178
180
176
18
193
196
192
10
204
206
202
0
208
212
206
Rt
Alk avg
Max
Min
100
107
no
102
75
131
134
126
56
152
156
144
32
176
178
176
18
191
194
188
10
201
206
198
0
210
212
206
Rt
Alk avg
Max
Min
100
104
106
102
75
126
134
110
56
150
158
132
32
178
182
174
18
192
198
180
10
203
208
200
0
212
218
206
Rt
Alk avg
Max
Min
100
117
124
110
75
144
158
136
56
162
166
156
32
186
190
180
18
199
204
194
10
208
212
204
0
217
220
214
Rt
Alk avg
Max
Min
100
117
120
112
75
142
144
130
56
162
166
160
32
186
188
184
18
200
202
196
10
211
214
210
0
220
222
218
-35-
-------
Table 7. F1ve-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Temperatures (C) per
Test Concentration, for the Left D.iluter System, May 8-June 6, 1985
5/8-12/85
5/13-17/85
5/18-22/85
5/23-27/85
5/28-6/1/85
6/2-6/85
Lt
Temp avg
Max
Min
100
10.3
10.6
10.2
75
10.2
10.5
9.9
56
10.0
10.6
9.6
32
9.9
10.4
9.4
18
9.7
10.6
9.1
10
9.7
10.4
9.1
0
9.8
10.4
9.2
Lt
Temp avg
Max
Mi n
100
11.5
11.7
11.3
75
11.4
11.4
11.3
56
11.2
11.2
11.1
32
11.1
11.3
10.9
18
10.9
11.0
10.8
10
11.0
11.4
10.6
0
11.0
11.1
10.9
Lt
Temp avg
Max
Mi n
100
11.3
11.5
11.1
75
11.4
11.6
11.1
56
11.0
11.3
10.8
32
11.2
11.5
11.0
18
11.0
11.3
10.7
10
11.1
11.4
10.7
0
10.9
11.3
10.4
Lt
Temp avg
Max
Min
100
10.1
11.0
9.2
75
10.3
11.1
9.3
56
10.2
11.0
9.4
32
10.3
11.2
9.3
18
10.4
11.6
9.5
10
10.4
11.5
9.4
0
10.3
11.2
9.5
Lt
Temp avg
Max
M1n
100
9.5
10.0
8.9
75
9.4
9.8
8.8
56
9.4
9.9
8.8
32
9.4
9.8
8.8
18
9.3
9.7
8.7
10
9.3
9.7
8.7
0
9.4
9.8
8.8
Lt
Temp avg
Max
Min
100
10.0
10.1
9.8
75
9.9
10.1
9.7
56
9.8
10.0
9.6
32
9.9
10.1
9.6
18
9.8
10.1
9.6
10
9.9
10.1
9.6
0
10.0
10.2
9.7
-36-
-------
Table 8. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Conductivities per Test
Concentration, for the Left Diluter System, May 8-June 6, 1985
5/8-12/85
5/13-17/85
5/18-22/85
5/23-27/85
5/28-6/1/85
6/2-6/85
Lt
Cond avg
Max
Min
100
423
444
401
75
448
464
433
56
468
480
459
32
493
500
483
18
509
515
499
10
519
525
507
0
524
531
514
Lt
Cond avg
Max
Min
100
454
464
447
75
470
477
465
56
484
488
479
32
501
502
498
18
510
513
505
10
518
521
515
0
523
527
520
Lt
Cond avg
Max
Min
100
415
426
409
75
442
450
437
56
463
469
458
32
489
494
483
18
504
508
499
10
513
517
508
0
524
528
519
Lt
Cond avg
Max
Min
100
384
390
373
75
423
431
414
56
452
460
444
32
488
494
482
18
509
515
504
10
522
528
517
0
536
546
530
Lt
Cond avg
Max
Min
100
446
473
410
75
471
493
442
56
490
508
466
32
514
527
498
18
528
539
517
10
536
544
527
0
551
558
544
Lt
Cond avg
Max
Min
100
458
471
449
75
480
490
474
56
497
504
492
32
517
523
513
18
530
534
526
10
537
540
531
0
552
555
547
-37-
-------
Table 9. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Dissolved Oxygen
Concentrations in mg/1, for the Left Diluter System, May 8-June 6, 1985
5/8-12/85
5/13-17/85
5/18-22/85
5/23-27/85
5/28-6/1/85
6/2-6/85
Lt
DO avg
Max
Min
100
8.9
9.4
8.6
75
8.8
9.4
8.5
56
8.8
9.4
8.5
32
8.9
9.5
8.6
18
9.0
9.8
8.5
10
9.0
9.7
8.6
0
9.0
9.3
8.8
Lt
DO avg
Max
Min
100
8.9
9.1
8.9
75
8.9
9.1
8.9
56
9.1
9.4
9.0
32
9.2
9.5
9.0
18
9.2
9.6
9.1
10
9.2
9.6
9.0
0
9.3
9.8
9.1
Lt
DO avg
Max
Min
100
8.4
8.6
8.0
75
8.4
8.5
8.2
56
8.5
8.7
8.2
32
8.5
8.8
8.3
18
8.6
8.8
8.4
10
8.7
8.8
8.5
0
8.7
8.9
8.4
Lt
DO avg
Max
Min
100
8.5
9.5
7.7
75
8.5
9.5
7.9
56
8.6
9.7
8.1
32
8.7
9.8
8.2
18
8.8
10.2
8.2
10
8.8
10.0
8.2
0
8.6
9.6
7.3
Lt
DO avg
Max
Min
100
8.2
9.0
7.7
75
8.6
9.4
8.0
56
8.6
9.5
8.1
32
8.7
9.6
8.1
18
8.8
9.7
8.2
10
9.0
9.8
8.4
0
7.6
7.8
7.5
Lt
DO avg
Max
Min
100
7.4
7.9
7.2
75
7.9
8.5
7.7
56
8.2
8.6
8.0
32
8.3
8.6
8.1
18
8.4
8.7
8.2
10
8.5
8.8
8.3
0
6.7
7.0
6.5
-38-
-------
Table 10. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum pH's per Test Concentration
for the Left Dlluter System, May 8-June 6, 1985
5/8-12/85
5/13-17/85
5/18-22/85
5/23-27/85
5/28-6/1/85
6/2-6/85
Lt
pH avg
Max
Mln
100
8.09
8.20
8.00
75
8.12
8.25
8.03
56
8.17
8.30
8.08
32
8.24
8.38
8.15
18
8.27
8.38
8.20
10
8.31
8.40
8.23
0
8.18
8.35
8.05
Lt
pH avg
Max
M1n
100
8.08
8.25
7.83
75
8.09
8.25
7.85
56
8.16
8.30
7.93
32
8.24
8.35
8.03
18
8.28
8.40
8.05
10
8.29
8.40
8.10
0
8.24
8.40
8.10
Lt
pH avg
Max
Mln
100
8.05
8.18
7.98
75
8.14
8.20
8.05
56
8.21
8.25
8.15
32
8.30
8.35
8.23
18
8.33
8.38
8.28
10
8.36
8.40
8.30
0
8.37
8.43
8.30
Lt
pH avg
Max
Mln
100
7.88
8.03
7.63
75
7.97
8.13
7.85
56
8.08
8.15
7.90
32
8.20
8.33
7.95
18
8.23
8.35
7.95
10
8.29
8.40
8.00
0
8.30
8.45
8.00
Lt
pH avg
Max
M1n
100
7.94
8.00
7.85
75
8.07
8.15
8.00
56
8.18
8.20
8.15
32
8.29
8.35
8.25
18
8.33
8.35
8.30
10
8.38
8.40
8.35
0
8.26
8.30
8.20
Lt
pH avq
Max
M1n
100
7.86
7.95
7.78
75
8.06
8.10
8.00
56
8.16
8.23
8.10
32
8.27
8.35
8.20
18
8.33
8.40
8.25
10
8.37
8.45
8.30
0
8.20
8.28
8.10
nn
-------
Table 11. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Alkalinities,
as mg/1 CaC03, for the Left Diluter System, May 8-June 6, 1985
5/8-12/85
5/13-17/85
5/18-22/85
5/23-27/85
5/28-6/1/85
6/2-6/85
Lt
Alk avg
100
114
75
134
56
154
32
179
18
194
10
202
0
214
Lt
Alk avg
100
115
75
138
56
156
32
178
18
192
10
202
0
208
Lt
Alk avg
100
108
75
132
56
153
32
176
18
192
10
198
0
210
Lt
Alk avg
100
103
75
129
56
152
32
178
18
193
10
203
0
212
Lt
Alk avg
100
116
75
140
56
162
32
184
18
200
10
208
0
217
Lt
Alk avg
100
115
75
139
56
161
32
185
18
198
10
209
0
220
Max
Min
118
108
138
130
158
148
182
176
198
188
208
196
218
206
Max
Min
118
112
140
136
158
154
180
176
196
188
204
196
212
206
Max
Min
110
104
134
130
164
146
178
174
196
188
200
196
212
206
Max
Min
106
100
132
124
158
150
186
172
196
188
206
202
218
206
Max
Min
126
106
148
132
168
154
188
180
204
196
212
202
220
214
Max
Min
118
110
142
136
162
160
188
182
200
196
212
206
222
218
-40-
-------
Table 12. Thirty-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Values, per Concentration,
for Temperature, pH, Conductivity, Alkalinity and Dissolved Oxygen During
the Combined (Left and Right Dlluters) Eyed Egg Test
Temp (C)
LtARt
30 day avg
Max
Min
100
10.5
11.7
8.9
75
10.4
11.6
8.8
56
10.4
11.8
8.8
32
10.3
11.5
8.8
18
10.3
11.6
8.7
10
10.3
11.6
8.7
0
10.2
11.3
8.8
pH
LtARt
30 day avg
Max
Min
100
7.99
8.35
7.63
75
8.07
8.30
7.85
56
8.14
8.35
7.85
32
8.24
8.38
7.95
18
8.27
8.40
7.95
10
8.30
8.45
7.95
0
8.28
8.45
8.00
Cond
Lt&Rt
30 day avg
Max
Min
100
432
475
373
75
457
496
414
56
478
513
444
32
502
533
477
18
517
544
498
10
526
551
507
0
537
558
514
Alk (mg/1 CaC03)
Lt&Rt
30 day avg
Max
M1n
100
112
126
100
75
136
158
110
56
156
168
132
32
180
188
162
18
195
204
188
10
205
214
196
0
213
222
206
DO (mg/1)
Lt&Rt
30 day avg
Max
Min
100
8.2
9.7
5.8
75
8.3
9.5
6.3
56
8.3
9.7
6.1
32
8.4
9.9
6.2
18
8.5
10.2
6.1
10
8.5
10.0
5.9
0
8.3
9.8
6.2
-41-
-------
Table 13. Average, Maximum and Minimum Values per Concentration
for Temperature, pH, Conductivity, Alkalinity and Dissolved Oxygen
During the 13 Day Fingerling Trout Test
Rt Temp avg
100 9.7
75 9.7
56 9.7
32 9.8
18 9.8
10 9.8
0 9.7
Max Mi n
10.5 8.9
10.4 8.9
10.5 8.8
10.6 8.8
10.7 8.7
10.7 8.8
10.8 8.8
Rt pH avg
100 7.87
75 7.92
56 8.00
32 8.11
18 8.17
10 8.21
0 8.24
Max Min
7.98 7.70
8.10 7.85
8.10 7.85
8.20 7.95
8.25 8.05
8.25 8.05
8.35 8.10
Rt
100
75
56
32
18
10
0
Cond avg
439
467
489
515
531
540
550
Max
475
496
513
533
544
551
557
Min
373
415
447
485
506
520
535
Rt
100
75
56
32
18
10
0
Alk avg
114
139
159
184
198
208
218
Rt
100
75
56
32
18
10
0
DO avg
7.0
7.2
7.1
7.3
7.2
7.1
7.6
Max
124
158
166
190
204
214
222
Min
102
110
132
176
192
202
210
Max
8.3
8.4
8.1
8.3
8.3
8.3
9.2
Min
5.8
6.3
6.1
6.2
6.1
5.9
6.2
-42-
-------
Table 14. Thirty-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Values, per Test
Concentration, for Temperature, pH, Conductivity, Alkalinity and
Dissolved Oxygen During the Green Egg Test
Temp (C)
Lt 30 day avg Max Min
100 10.5 11.7 8.9
75 10.4 11.6 8.8
56 10.3 11.3 8.8
32 10.3 11.5 8.8
18 10.2 11.6 8.7
10 10.2 11.5 8.7
0 10.2 11.3 8.8
pH
Lt 30 day avg Max Min
100 7.98 8.25 7.63
75 8.08 8.25 7.85
56 8.16 8.30 7.90
32 8.26 8.38 7.95
18 8.29 8.40 7.95
10 8.33 8.45 8.00
0 8.26 8.45 8.00
Cond
Lt 30 day avg Max Min
100 431 473 373
75 456 493 414
56 476 508 444
32 501 527 482
18 515 539 499
10 525 544 507
0 536 558 514
Alk (mg/1 CaC03)
Lt 30 day avg Max Min
100 112 126 100
75 135 148 124
56 156 168 146
32 180 188 172
18 195 204 188
10 204 212 196
0 213 222 206
DO (mg/1)
Lt 30 day avg Max Min
100 8.4 9.5 7.2
75 8.5 9.5 7.7
56 8.6 9.7 8.0
32 8.7 9.8 8.1
18 8.8 10.2 8.2
10 8.9 10.0 8.2
0 8.3 9.8 6.5
-43-
-------
Table 15 Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Hardness Values
(mg/1 CaC03), per Test Concentration, for the Left Diluter System
5/8-12/85
5/13-17/85
5/18-22/85
5/23-27/85
5/28-6/1/85
6/2-6/85
Lt
Hard avg
100
193
75
191
56
201
32
216
18
216
10
220
0
227
Lt
Hard avg
100
190
75
205
56
214
32
213
18
219
10
223
0
225
Lt
Hard avg
100
173
75
185
56
191
32
204
18
219
10
211
0
218
Lt
Hard avg
100
162
75
177
56
194
32
205
18
217
10
228
0
232
Lt
Hard avg
100
182
75
194
56
207
32
218
18
224
10
209
0
224
Lt
Hard avg
100
171
75
220
56
205
32
217
18
219
10
201
0
222
Max
Min
252
168
200
182
218
192
236
210
220
210
226
212
245
218
Max
Min
195
184
232
197
234
205
221
209
222
216
228
218
228
222
Max
Min
186
165
190
180
197
182
211
190
231
207
222
182
224
212
Max
Min
171
153
184
168
198
192
211
203
219
213
246
221
244
221
Max
Min
196
166
204
180
214
196
221
211
229
218
247
132
241
159
Max
Min
200
123
272
190
.228
157
230
186
237
184
237
153
242
190
-44-
-------
Table 16. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Hardness Values
(mg/1 CaC03), per Test Concentration, for the Right Diluter System
5/8-12/85
5/13-17/85
5/18-22/85
5/23-27/85
5/28-6/1/85
6/2-6/85
Rt
Hard
avg
Max
Min
100
185
201
170
75
193
201
187
56
203
216
196
32
211
220
199
18
220
233
214
10
223
239
214
0
227
245
218
Rt
Hard
avg
Max
Min
100
195
205
187
75
201
212
193
56
205
207
204
32
217
222
215
18
219
226
212
10
225
242
209
0
225
228
222
Rt
Hard
avg
Max
Min
100
175
183
169
75
185
200
165
56
194
198
190
32
209
212
207
18
216
232
200
10
217
224
211
0
218
224
212
Rt
Hard
avg
Max
Min
100
167
182
161
75
182
190
175
56
197
203
192
32
209
215
205
18
218
223
213
10
234
267
224
0
232
244
221
Rt
Hard
avg
Max
Min
100
191
196
178
75
199
210
184
56
218
258
190
32
223
226
219
18
221
237
184
10
235
247
229
0
224
241
159
Rt
Hard
avg
Max
M1n
100
169
198
117
75
172
211
120
56
204
216
171
32
243
375
175
18
215
232
163
10
221
242
168
0
222
242
190
-At;.
-------
Table 17. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Total Copper
Values (mg/1), per Test Concentration, for the Left Diluter System
5/8-12/85
5/13-17/85
5/18-22/85
5/23-27/85
5/28-6/1/85
6/2-6/85
Lt
T Cu avg
Max
Min
100
0.027
0.031
0.020
75
0.022
0.029
0.016
56
0.043
0.122
0.014
32
0.128
0.579
0.011
18
0.058
0.212
0.009
10
0.019
0.054
0.007
0
0.016
0.026
0.006
Lt
T Cu avg
Max
Min
100
0.018
0.021
0.015
75
0.015
0.017
0.012
56
0.012
0.025
0.006
32
0.009
0.013
0.006
18
0.007
0.012
0.003
10
0.005
0.007
0.003
0
0.005
0.009
0.003
Lt
T Cu avg
Max
Min
100
0.012
0.019
0.003
75
0.012
0.018
0.003
56
0.013
0.027
0.003
32
0.007
0.010
0.004
18
0.007
0.011
0.004
10
0.004
0.008
0.001
0
0.004
0.007
0.002
Lt
T Cu avg
Max
Min
100
0.025
0.070
0.005
75
0.013
0.023
0.004
56
0.013
0.023
0.004
32
0.009
0.017
0.004
18
0.012
0.023
0.004
10
0.006
0.013
0.004
0
0.007
0.010
0.004
Lt
T Cu avg
Max
Min
100
0.028
0.042
0.019
75
0.019
0.025
0.013
56
0.019
0.035
0.012
32
0.017
0.028
0.008
18
0.014
0.021
0.010
10
0.011
0.018
0.005
0
0.018
0.027
0.004
Lt
T Cu avg
Max
Min
100
0.052
0.118
0.023
75
0.025
0.036
0.015
56
0.019
0.038
0.010
32
0.021
0.031
0.010
18
0.012
0.020
0.007
10
0.005
0.011
0.002
0
0.012-
0.025
0.003
-46-
-------
Table 18. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Total Copper
Yalues (mg/1), per Test Concentration, for the Right Diluter System
5/8-12/85
5/13-17/85
5/18-22/85
5/23-27/85
5/28-6/1/85
6/2-6/85
Rt
T
Cu avg
Max
Min
100
0.027
0.034
0.020
75
0.025
0.036
0.019
56
0.023
0.035
0.016
32
0.041
0.119
0.018
18
0.013
0.017
0.010
10
0.010
0.016
0.005
0
0.016
0.026
0.006
Rt
T
Cu avg
Max
Min
100
0.019
0.024
0.015
75
0.022
0.045
0.014
56
0.012
0.017
0.010
32
0.010
0.013
0.006
18
0.006
0.009
0.003
10
0.006
0.009
0.003
0
0.005
0.009
0.003
Rt
T
Cu avg
Max
Min
100
0.012
0.019
0.003
75
0.011
0.017
0.003
56
0.040
0.175
0.003
32
0.009
0.013
0.004
18
0.010
0.015
0.003
10
0.020
0.075
0.002
0
0.004
0.007
0.002
Rt
T
Cu avg
Max
Min
100
0.018
0.029
0.004
75
0.017
0.031
0.004
56
0.013
0.019
0.004
32
0.011
0.014
0.008
18
0.010
0.016
0.008
10
0.008
0.010
0.004
0
0.007
0.010
0.004
Rt
T
Cu avg
Max
Min
100
0.028
0.033
0.021
75
0.022
0.028
0.014
56
0.018
0.024
0.005
32
0.017
0.021
0.005
18
0.015
0.023
0.005
10
0.013
0.021
0.004
0
0.018
0.027
0.004
Rt
T
Cu avg
Max
Min
100
0.032
0.059
0.019
75
0.033
0.045
0.023
56
0.022
0.034
0.010
32
0.014
0.024
0.009
18
0.015
0.025
0.003
10
0.015
0.032
0.003
0
0.012
0.025
0.003
-47-
-------
Table 19. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Total Zinc
Values (mg/1), per Test Concentration, for the Left Diluter System
5/8-12-85
5/13-17/85
5/18-22/85
5/23-27/85
5/28-6/1/85
6/2-6/85
Lt
T
Zn avg
100
0.061
75
0.057
56
0.059
32
0.073
18
0.083
10
0.041
0
0.061
Lt
T
Zn avg
100
0.030
75
0.028
56
0.021
32
0.018
18
0.012
10
0.013
0
0.009
Lt
T
Zn avg
100
0.022
75
0.017
56
0.029
32
0.013
18
0.010
10
0.008
0
0.006
Lt
T
Zn avg
100
0.024
75
0.016
56
0.016
32
0.012
18
0.012
10
0.010
0
0.016
Lt
T
Zn avg
100
0.045
75
0.026
56
0.020
32
0.011
18
0.011
10
0.U09
0
0.025
Lt
T
Zn avg
100
0.062
75
0.028
56
0.024
32
0.025
18
0.016
10
0.015
0
0.008
Max
Min
0.155
0.024
0.125
0.024
0.125
0.017
0.156
0.015
0.306
0.010
0.098
0.010
0.098
0.007
Max
Min
0.040
0.016
0.033
0.022
0.027
0.018
0.022
0.014
0.015
0.008
0.022
0.009
0.010
0.007
Max
Mi n
0.032
0.016
0.027
0.007
0.083
0.007
0.028
0.008
0.013
0.008
0.013
0.004
0.009
0.004
Max
Min
0.032
0.014
0.020
0.014
0.020
0.013
0.016
0.007
0.024
0.006
0.016
0.006
0.046
0.004
Max
Min
0.130
0.021
0.052
0.018
0.036
0.015
0.011
0.010
0.015
0.010
0.011
0.006
0.097
0.004
Max
Min
0.153
0.027
0.U40
0.020
0.032
0.015
0.046
0.011
0.024
0.013
0.033
0.007
0.010
0.005
-48-
-------
Table 20. Five-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Total Zinc
Values (mg/1), per Test Concentration, for the Right Diluter System
5/8-12/85
5/13-17/85
5/18-22/85
5/23-27/85
5/28-6/1/85
6/2-6/85
Rt
T
Zn avg
Max
Min
100
0.110
0.204
0.023
75
0.055
0.082
0.033
56
0.183
0.688
0.020
32
0.058
0.101
0.018
18
0.036
0.048
0.010
10
0.114
0.337
0.009
0
0.061
0.098
0.007
Rt
T
Zn avg
Max
Min
100
0.034
0.039
0.027
75
0.036
0.068
0.022
56
0.021
0.025
0.016
32
0.019
0.027
0.015
18
0.013
0.014
0.011
10
0.009
0.011
0.008
0
0.009
0.010
0.007
Rt
T
Zn avg
Max
Min
100
0.018
0.022
0.012
75
0.015
0.018
0.013
56
0.054
0.219
0.007
32
0.017
0.031
0.011
18
0.012
0.026
0.007
10
0.010
0.013
0.006
0
0.006
0.009
0.004
Rt
T
Zn avg
Max
Mi n
100
0.024
0.029
0.019
75
0.027
0.046
0.017
56
0.020
0.031
0.013
32
0.011
0.016
0.002
18
0.010
0.013
0.009
10
0.008
0.010
0.005
0
0.016
0.046
0.004
Rt
T
Zn avg
Max
Min
100
0.025
0.028
0.021
75
0.019
0.020
0.018
56
0.017
0.025
0.013
32
0.023
0.068
0.011
18
0.012
0.023
0.008
10
0.009
0.011
0.007
0
0.025
0.097
0.004
Rt
T
Zn avg
Max
Min
100
0.033
0.053
0.022
75
0.032
0.045
0.018
56
0.057
0.185
0.017
32
0.016
0.021
0.012
18
0.011
0.013
0.010
10
0.011
0.018
0.004
0
0.008
0.010
0.005
-49-
-------
Table 21. Thirty-Day Average, Maximum and Minimum Hardness, and
Total Copper and Zinc (mg/1) for the Eyed Egg Test
Hardness
Lt&Rt
30 day avg
30 day Max
30 Day Min
100
179
252
117
75
192
272
120
56
203
250
157
32
216
375
175
18
218
237
163
10
221
267
132
0
225
245
159
T Cu
LtARt
30 day avg
30 day Max
30 day Min
100
0.025
0.118
0.003
75
0.019
0.045
0.003
56
0.021
0.175
0.003
32
0.024
0.579
0.003
18
0.015
0.212
0.003
10
0.010
0.075
0.001
0
0.010
0.027
0.002
T Zn
Lt&Rt
30 day avg
30 day Max
30 Day Min
100
0.041
0.204
0.012
75
0.030
0.125
0.007
56
0.043
0.688
0.007
32
0.024
0.156
0.002
18
0.020
0.306
0.006
10
0.021
0.337
0.004
0
0.021
0.098
0.004
-50-
-------
Table 22. Provisional Flow Data from U.S.G.S. Gauging Station on the
Clark Fork River at Deer Lodge, Montana, May 7 to June 6, 19851
Date
Flow (C.F.S.)
5/7/85
5/8/85
5/9/85
5/10/85
5/11/85
5/12/85
5/13/85
5/14/85
5/15/85
5/16/85
5/17/85
5/18/85
5/19/85
5/20/85
5/21/85
5/22/85
400
395
390
383
372
352
340
308
264
257
256
256
259
259
226
251
Date
Flow (C.F.S.)
5/23/85
5/24/85
5/25/85
5/26/85
5/27/85
5/28/85
5/29/85
5/30/85
5/31/85
6/1 /85
6/2/85
6/3/85
6/4/85
6/5/85
6/6/85
231
244
279
327
308
295
298
337
302
257
335
348
327
306
305
1 Data obtained from Mr. Mel White, U.S.G.S. Water Research Division,
Hydro!ogle Analysis and Research Section, Montana on 3/24/86.
-------
Table 23. Daily Average, Maximum and Minimum Acid-Soluble
Copper and Zinc Values (mg/1) Collected by Automatic Sampler
and Analyzed by the Region 8 Lab
Cu
Cu
Cu
Zn
Zn
Zn
Date
Daily Avg
Daily Max
Daily Min
Daily Avg
Daily Max
Daily Min
5-7
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.037
0.037
0.037
5-8
0.018
0.021
0.015
0.027
0.031
0.023
5-9
0.017
0.019
0.013
0.022
0.026
0.016
5-10
0.020
0.035
0.013
0.030
0.051
0.018
5-11
0.024
0.036
0.014
0.030
0.047
0.012
5-12
0.029
0.038
0.021
0.044
0.055
0.035
5-13
0.032
0.057
0.014
0.050
0.081
0.025
5-14
0.021
0.045
0.005
0.026
0.064
0.000
5-15
0.010
0.020
0.003
0.010
0.025
0.000
5-16
0.018
0.027
0.014
0.023
0.039
0.012
5-17
0.017
0.020
0.015
0.022
0.029
0.015
5-18
0.019
0.023
0.014
0.021
0.028
0.013
5-19
0.020
0.022
0.016
0.023
0.029
0.017
5-20
0.020
0.016
0.016
0.027
0.033
0.021
5-21
0.013
0.016
0.012
0.011
0.017
0.008
5-22
0.023
0.025
0.019
0.027
0.035
0.019
5-23
0.027
0.035
0.021
0.030
0.039
0.022
5-24
0.028
0.029
0.027
0.030
0.032
0.028
5-25
0.030
0.040
0.025
0.033
0.044
0.030
5-26
0.041
0.049
0.034
0.045
0.059
0.032
5-27
0.047
0.099
0.023
0.051
0.115
0.022
5-28
0.031
0.042
0.025
0.031
0.045
0.021
5-29
0.030
0.038
0.022
0.032
0.042
0.017
5-30
0.038
0.072
0.021
0.037
0.063
0.020
5-31
0.025
0.031
0.020
0.028
0.032
0.023
6-1
0.019
0.021
0.017
0.021
0.027
0.017
6-2
0.061
0.152
0.024
0.071
0.163
0.030
6-3
0.078
0.144
0.043
0.090
0.157
0.051
6-4
0.044
0.059
0.027
0.053
0.077
0.030
6-5
0.036
0.061
0.020
0.041
0.067
0.022
6-6
0.031
0.035
0.026
0.036
0.039
0.032
-------
Table 24. Final Mean Dry Weights of Larval Trout in Each
Waste Concentration at the Termination of the 30-Day Eyed Egg Test.
Right Diluter
Cone.
Mean Dry Weights (nig)
Standard Deviations
0
16.47
2.84
10
16.94
4.07
18
16.18
3.45
32
16.70
3.59
56
15.80
3.40
75
16.27
2.52
100
16.31
3.38
Left Diluter
Cone.
Mean Dry Weights (mg)
Standard Deviations
0
16.43
2.91
10
16.71
3.39
18
16.80
3.24
32
16.62
3.45
56
17.67
3.40
75
17.02
4.03
100
16.02
3.36
-53-
-------
Appendix B
Formulas for calculating copper criteria (EPA, 1985a).
Acute - one hour average concentration (in ug/1) not to exceed the
numerical value given by e^0,9422 ^ln ^hardness)] ~ 1,4^^more than
once every three years on the average.
Chronic - the four-day average concentration (in ug/1) of copper does
not exceed the numerical value given by (hardness)]
1,4^more than once every three years on the average.
Formulas for calculating zinc criteria (EPA, 1985b).
Acute - one hour average concentration (in ug/1) does not to exceed
the numerical value given by e^*®213 ^ln (hardness)] +0'8141)more
than once every three years on the average.
Chronic - the four-day average concentration (in ug/1) of zinc does
not exceed the numerical value given by 0,8213 ^ln (hardness)]
0 1541)
more than once every three years on the average.
-54-
------- |