FINAL REPORT
DEVELOPMENT OF EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
FOR IDAHO FISH HATCHERIES
July 23, 1984
Submitted to:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water Enforcement
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C.
Submitted by:
JRB Associates
A Company of Science Applications, Inc.
13400-B Northup Way, Suite 38
Bellevue, Washington 98005
EPA Contract No. 63-01-6514, Work Assignment No. 6, Task 3
JRB Project No. 2-334-03-438-08

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY		1
1.0 BACKGROUND		4
1.1	Initial Permit Limitations		5
1.2	IP AC Recommended Permit Limits		6
2.0 OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH		9
2.1	Monitoring Studies		9
2.1.1	Industry Study		9
2.1.2	JRB Associates Study		9
2.2	JRB Study Design and Receiving Water Issues		ID
3.0 METHODS			12
3.1	Field Program		12
3.1.1	Blue Lakes		12
3.1.2	Crystal Springs		16
3.1.3	Rim View				IS
3.1.4	Pisces		21
3.1.5	Clyde Hughes Farm Pond		22
3.1.6	Fish Breeders		23
3.1.7	Hagerman State		26
3.1.8	Rangen		28
3.1.9	Jones				31
3.1.10	Billingsley Creek		34
3.1.11	Riley Creek		34
3.1.12	Sand Springs Creek		37
3.1.13	Salmon Falls Creek		37
3.2	Sampling Methods		39
3.2.1	Hatchery Sampling		39
3.2.2	Stream Sampling		41
3.3	Laboratory Sample Analysis		43
3.3.1	Hatchery Samples		43
3.3.2	Stream Samples		43
i
JRB Associates

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(cont'd)
4.0 RESULTS		45
4.1	Total Discharge.		45
4.1.1	JRB Study		45
4.1.2	Industry Study		53
4.2	Cleaning Waste Settling Pond Discharge		54
4.3	Strean Surveys		56
4.3.1	Billingsley Creek		56
4.3.2	Riley Creek		59
4.3.3	Sand Springs Creek		61
4.3.4	Salmon Falls Creek		63
4.3.5	Cedar Draw Creek		65
5.0 FEASIBILITY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF WITHIN-BASIN SCREENING
DEVICES				66
5.1	Objectives and Approach		67
5.1.1	-Screen Design		69
5.1.2	Raceways Selected	71
5.1.3	Screen Positioning		77
5.2	Results		80
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS		93
6.1	Categorization of Fish Hatcheries in Idaho		93
6.2	Hatchery Effluent Limitations		94
6.2.1	Total Hatchery or Combined Raceway Discharge		96
6.2.2	Raceway Cleaning Effluent Limitations		97
6.3	Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology:
Within-Basin Fish Screens		99
6.4	TSS and Biomass Ratios		105
6.5	Treatment System Effluent Limitations		106
6.6	Hatchery Discharge Monitoring Program		107
6.6.1	Sampling Location		108
6.6.2	Sampling Procedures				108
6.6.3	Sampling Frequency		109
		—	-	——— JRB Associates
il

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(cont'd)
6.7	Best Management Practices for Water Quality Purposes		109
6.7.1	Raceway Solids Removal		110
6.7.2	Flow Augmentation		112
6.7.3	Undisturbed Flow-Through Settling		113
6.7.4	Off-Line Settling Ponds or Basins		114
6.8	Stream Conclusions		116
7.0 REFERENCES CITED		119
!
APPENDIX A - JRB Sampling Results		A-l
APPENDIX B - Industry Study.		B-l
APPENDIX C - Screen Study Results		C-l
APPENDIX D - Particle Settling Velocity Rates		D-l
—————— JRB Associates
ill

-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents the field results and evaluation of effluent discharges
and receiving water effects related to fish hatchery operations In the Snake
River area of south Idaho. The project was designed to provide the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, and EPA Region X In particular, the back-
ground Information necessary to establish effluent limitations for trout
hatcheries, for the purposes of protecting or enhancing receiving water
quality. The results of this project will be useful to the EPA Permits Branch
for development of NPDES permits for Improved quality of raceway discharges
and the management of waste sludge residuals.
The project focused on a detailed water quality monitoring program at seven
hatcheries in the Magic Valley region of the lower Snake River. These same
hatcheries (in the spring of 1983) participated in a 30-day raceway effluent
monitoring program sponsored by the seven hatcheries. The JRB study collected
additional effluent data and also monitored In-stream effects of discharge,
and during the course of the project extended Its discharge monitoring program
to two additional hatcheries. Finally, to test the adequacy of wlthln-basln
fish screens as a Best Conventional Pollutnat Control Technology (BCT), tech-
nology, the JRB study conducted 24-day monitoring Investigations at three
hatcheries retrofitted with fish screens at different locations within and
between raceways.
All available historical data, together with study results from the industry
and JRB surveys were evaluated using statistical techniques to assist our
interpretations. Based on multiple sampling events extended over several
years and across several hatchery types and unit processes we recommend the
EPA adopt the following effluent discharge criteria:
Total Hatchery Discharge
Net 30-day Average TSS:
Instantaneous Maximum TSS:
Net Average Dally Settleable Solids:
5 mg/1
15 mg/1
0.1 ml/1
JRB Associates
1

-------
Cleaning Waste Treatment Pond
Average Daily Minimum TSS Removal Efficiency:
Instantaneous Maximum TSS:
Average Daily Minimum Settleable Solids
Removal Efficiency:
Instantaneous Maximum Settleable Solids:
85 percent
100 mg/1
90 percent
1.0 ml/1
These effluent limitations are similar to those proposed by the Idaho Policy
Advisory Committee in the development of its water resources and waste manage-
ment programs developed in accordance with §208 of the Clean Water Act. The
JRB study findings demonstrate that the recommended effluent limitations can
be achieved when hatcheries implement improved techniques to raceway cleaning
operations! and construct treatment facilities and institute best management
practices for sludge containment, treatment and discharge. Specifically, we
note or recommend:
•	Control of effluent TSS can be achieved by either downstream
settling In a quiescent detention basin or by the Installation
of fish screens In the lower end of active raceways.
•	Raceway fish screens should be placed no closer to the effluent
weir than 1.3 times the critical length as determined by raceway
hydraulics and particulate settling rates. The ten-year annual-
ized cost to construct and maintain fish screens is estimated to
be $8.80 per lineal foot of screen. TSS removal costs are esti-
mated to range from 0.75 to 1.5 cents per pound. No economic
dislocations in the industry are anticipated should hatcheries
elect to install screens.
•	Raceway fish screens provide operational benefits by concentra-
ting and collecting all settled solids downstream of the screen.
This minimizes fish exposure to potential disease, and the total
area of raceway floor requiring frequent cleaning is reduced.
•	Vacuum cleaning using siphon techniques causes less disturbance
to settled solids and less frequent raceway overflow of TSS than
vacuum cleaning with mechanical pumps or the use of standpipes.
•	Greater care in raceway cleaning can reduce the overflow loss of
TSS. Entry into the raceway should be avoided when possible.
Floats should be attached to all hoses to avoid disturbance of
settled sludges.
JRB Associates —_i
2

-------
•	The hydraulic flow rate through a raceway should be reduced to a
level sufficient to maintain fish stock when a raceway is being
cleaned, or fish are being sorted or removed. The reduced flow
rate will help to minimize the loss of resuspended solids over
the effluent weir.
•	Wasted raceway solids are effectively treated by dewatering and
drying in sludge holding lagoons or drying beds, or wasted to
holding lagoons and disposed of as a liquid sludge. Hatcheries
are encouraged to coordinate with agricultural or silviculture
industry representatives for ultimate disposal of raceway
sludges.
Finally, the JRB study findings demonstrate that in selected water courses
hatcheries and unquantlfied agricultural return flows or runoff are causing
water quality Impacts and negative effects on resident ecosystems. The data
suggest and we believe that existing water quality and stream effects are
reversible and that receiving waters can be restored to a higher quality upon
institution of improved management practices in hatchery and agricultural
endeavors. Unless capital expenditures and operational Improvements are made,
however, we do not foresee any capability of the effected streams to recover
from current uaste discharge practices and would Instead discourage additional
point or non-point loadings to the receiving waters.
M754
, JRB Associates

-------
1.0 BACKGROUND
One priority of Che U.S. EFA Region X water permits program is to issue
updated permits or authorizations for trout hatcheries and/or fish rearing
facilities in Idaho to discharge into Idaho receiving waters. Under the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) these permits will be
issued in accordance with the effluent limitations, monitoring requirements
and any other conditions that EPA establishes in compliance with the pro-
visions of the Clean Water Act.
Currently, there are approximately 70 to 85 hatchery or fish culturing
facilities in the state of Idaho; of these, 63 must receive permits while the
remaining are exempt due to size limitations. (The NPDES regulations [40 CFR
122.24] exempt from the permitting process those facilities which produce less
than 20,000 pounds of fish per year and feed less than 5,000 pounds of food
per month during the maximum month of feeding.) The State of Idaho, the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (Department of Interior), and Idaho Power, operate a
total of 15 hatcheries throughout the state. The states of Idaho and Wyoming
operate an additional hatchery in Idaho through a Cooperative Agreement.
These hatcheries rear trout or steelhead (Salmo gairdnerl) for stocking
purposes. The remaining hatcheries are private enterprises that produce trout
for commercial purposes. It has been reported that Idaho fish growers raise
approximately 90 percent of all processed (for food) commercial rainbow trout
reared in the United States.1 The bulk of Idaho commercial hatcheries are
found in the Magic Valley Region which includes Twin Falls, Jerome, and
Gooding Counties. This region provides ideal fish culturing conditions
because of the numerous natural springs that emanate from canyons along the
Snake River.
In general, trout hatcheries in Idaho consist of several flow-through channels
called raceways that draw water from springs or small streams. The hatcheries
then discharge this water Into local receiving waters directly or through
4
JRB Associate

-------
settling systems. Hatchery effluent discharges from raceways and waste treat-
meat systems include suspended and settleable solids composed primarily of
fecal matter and waste food particles. This organic material characterizes
the pollutant component of hatchery discharge that must be permitted to comply
with approved effluent limits.
1.1 INITIAL PERMIT LIMITATIONS
Previous NPDES permits issued to Idaho trout facilities were based on proposed
effluent limits established by the U.S. EPA in its 1974 "Draft Development
Document for Effluent Limitation Guidelines for Fish Hatcheries and Farms."2
Permitted discharges from raceways were identified as Total Discharge (from
raceways), Cleaning Discharge, and Treatment System Effluent. The effluent
guidelines as proposed in that document are as follows:
A.	Total Discharge
1.	Suspended Solids
•	lbs/100 lbs of Fish	2.2 lbs
•	Instantaneous Maximum	15 rng/1
2.	Settleable Solids
•	Dally Average	0.1 ml/1
B.	Cleaning Raceway Discharge
1.	Suspended Solids
•	Instantaneous Maximum	15.0' mg/1
2.	Settleable Solids
•	Instantaneous Maximum	0.2 ml/1
C.	Treatment System Effluent
1.	Suspended Solids
•	Instantaneous Maximum	15 tng/1
2.	Settleable Solids
•	Instantaneous Maximum	0.2 ml/1
By the end of 1979 most of these permits had expired and replacements or
extensions were not prepared by EPA Region X.
< v
v /
:.7S5
5
JRB Associates

-------
1.2 IPAC RECOMMENDED PERMIT LIMITS
During the spring and sunnier of 1982, EPA Region X began Co develop a general
permit for trout hatcheries in Idaho that would include the newer effluent
limits. These limitations were derived from the 1978 study titled "Wastewater
Treatment and Control for Commercial Fish Hatcheries in the Magic Valley
Region of Idaho.This report was prepared by Hydrosclence, Inc. after
studying- selected hatcheries and their operations. Based on data derived from
this study, the Idaho Policy Advisory Committee (IPAC), a §208 water quality
planning committee, recommended the State of Idaho adopt new effluent limits.
The IPAC identified hatchery discharge as a water quality problem, particu-
larly In small lakes and streams along the Snake River where the bulk of
commercial trout rearing racilltles are located. As a result of the IPAC's
recommendations, these new limits were Incorporated into Idaho's 1979 State
Water Quality Management Plan as guidance for the development of permits.
These limits are as follows:
A. Total Hatchery Discharge
1. Suspended Solids
•	lbs/100 lbs Fish
•	Dally Average
•	Instantaneous Maximum
0.5 lbs
5.0 mg/1
15.0 mg/1
2. Settleable Solids
•	Daily Average
•	Instantaneous Maximum
0.1 ml/1
0.2 ml/1
B. Cleaning Raceway Discharge
1. Suspended Solids
• Instantaneous Maximum
25 mg/1
2. Settleable Solids
• Instantaneous Maximum
1.0 ml/1
6
JRB Associates

-------
C. Treatment System Effluent
1. Suspended Solids
•	Average Dally Minimum Removal Race
•	Instantaneous Maximum
85% removal
100 mg/1
2. Settleable Solids
•	Average Daily Minimum Removal Rate
•	Instantaneous Maximum
9QX removal
1.0 ml/1
When commenting on this general permit the Industry recommended 1.5 lbs of
total suspended solids in the discharge rather than the 0.5 lbs as recommended
by the IPAC, and the deletion of the 5 mg/1 TSS daily average limit. EPA
Informed the Industry that supporting data had to be submitted before EPA
could accept the 1.5 lbs TSS limit. In September, 1982, EPA Region X met with
Industry representatives and agreed to a proposed industry-sponsored monitor-
ing program designed to collect the data that would reflect current operating
practices of the hatcheries. The monitoring program began In the spring of
Subsequent to the start of the Industry study, EPA contracted with JRB
Associates for their technical assistance. JRB's assignment was to collect
data from cleaning waste treatment systems, conduct in-stream water quality
surveys, analyze the data from the two studies, and finally, to develop
effluent limits.
In August 1983, JRB submitted the draft report to EPA. This report
recommended that solids collection could Improve with the installation of
screens In the ends of the raceways. Hence, the amount of total suspended
solids (TSS) and settleable solids discharged could be reduced further. The
report recommended a TSS limit of 5 mg/1 for raceway effluent. However, there
was some disagreement over the adequacy of the data in support of chat
recommendations. Consequently, EPA decided to examine screening technology
further, and again requested JRB's technical assistance. Three facilities
1983
— / S-iO
7
JRB Associates

-------
were selected Co study Che screening cechnology. This study began In March
1984. Results of Chat study have been Incorporated InCo the August 1983 draft
report. That combined report is presented here.
The organization of this report is as follows: Sections 1.0 through 4.0
discuss the 1983 industry and JRB studies and results.- A discussion about the
additional 1984 study objectives, approach, and results is presented in
Section 5.0. The conclusions and recommendations for all the studies are
presented in Section 6.0.
8
. JRB Associates

-------
2.0 OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH
2.1 MONITORING STUDIES
In order for EPA Region X co consider chat Che Industry's suggested effluent
limits be incorporated into the new permit, a monitoring program was estab-
lished by the Industry to collect supportive data.. In addition, EPA sought
technical assistance from JRB Associates which included additional field
studies to complete the data needed co develop the draft permit, to analyze
all the data, and to recommend permit effluent limics.
2.1.1	Induscry Scudy
By March 1983, che format and che selected study sices for the industry spon-
sored monitoring program were agreed upon by industry and EPA Region X. The
Industry study included seven representative hatchery sites. The partici-
pating hatcheries were: Blue Lakes, Crystal Springs, Pisces, Clyde Hughes,
Fish Breeders, Rangen Research, and Hagerman State. The hatcheries were
considered to be a close approximation of the types of hatcheries, sizes and
cleaning methods found within che induscry. The objective of the monitoring
plan was co collecC. data wlch regard co che discharge of CoCal suspended
solids (TSS) and seccleable solids (SS) is raceway effluencs. Composite
samples ac selected represencadve raceway ouCfalls were collecced eighc hours
per day (collection frequency * 15 minutes) for 30 consecutive days. Log
sheets, analytical data, monitoring costs and a written report were then
submitted to EPA-X by each facility.
2.1.2	JRB Associates Study
The industry scudy was designed to characterize the discharge stream of race-
way effluents. In most instances, however, there is at lease one other dis-
charge. This discharge is associated with the hydraulic overflow of ponds
used to settle solids from wastewaters coming from raceway cleaning opera-
tions. EPA-X believed that .reformation concerning any side stream overflows
• >1.757
9
JRB Associates

-------
would be valuable in the ultimate permit development. Therefore, EPA-X
decided to expand the current hatchery study by obtaining technical assistance
to fill in any gaps related to monitoring all discharges and finally to incor-
porate all study and historical data In a concise manner. JRB Associates was
selected to provide EPA the technical assistance.
Based on EFA's concern for complete discharge data from all sources, JRB
Associates was engaged to design and implement an additional- field study,
gather and analyze all available information, and prepare a report on the
development of effluent criteria. This technical assistance work assignment
Included the review and evaluation of EPA file data and currently available
effluent criteria information; a field study which characterized total
effluent discharge streams, Including any cleaning waste treatment systems, at
Che seven hacchery sites in the Magic Valley Region as well as cwo additional
hatcheries; and the submission of a draft And final technical report on the
development of effluent discharge criteria. Under EPA contract No. 68-01-6514,
Work Assignment No. 6, Task 8, JRB Associates was requested to develop a
specific scope of work for the field study and effluent guidelines. Notice to
proceed was given to JRB Associates in May, 1983 after EPA approved the pro-
posed scope of work.
2.2 JRB STUDY DESIGN AND RECEIVING WATER ISSUES
Based on a preliminary review of the 1974 EPA draft document, the 1978 Hydro-
science Report, and the 208 Advisory Committee's findings, and on recommenda-
tions by JRB Associates staff investigators, it appeared that an Important
element of establishing effluent limits may have been overlooked, specifically
che effluent's impact on the receiving water. Previous efforts to establish
limits for hatchery effluents had been directed at identifying only che
effluent characteristics of a hatchery unit. However, the ultimate rationale
for establishing hatchery effluent limits Is to insure potectlon of ambient
water quality. Indeed, local water quality issues were relevant: Billlngsley
Creek in Gooding County had become a source of local conflict. This conflict
10
JRB Associate*

-------
arose over the application for water rights for a new hatchery on the creek.
Water quality problems related to existing hatcheries were cited as a justi-
fication for prohibiting the new installation. The dispute was recently
settled in the Fourth District Court of Idaho which reversed the Idaho
Department of Water Resources' approval for water rights of the hatchery. The
court stated that a new hearing oust be scheduled and it provided guidelines
for the new hearing which included environmental considerations.^
In order that both hatchery processes and receiving waters were considered,
JRB Associates developed a monitoring study that would gather data from each.
A 30-day field program was designed to evaluate all waters influent to and
discharged from the same seven hatcheries being studed by the industry. (The
study was subsequently amended to characterize two additional hatcheries—Rim
View and Jones.) JRB also examined hatchery sludge disposal practices.
In-stream water quality montitoring was conducted to Investigate potential
Impacts of hatchery discharge on selected receiving waters. Finally, the JRB
study plan was designed to serve as a quality control check of data and inter-
pretations forthcoming from the industry study. To supplement the field
study, JRB Associates contacted members of a citizen group concerned about the
water quality of Billlngsley Creek, State Fisheries employees to determine
natural fish production and local stream conditions, University of Idaho and
Idaho State authorities regarding current research on local streams, and
hatchery staff including biologists for specific hatchery maintenance prac-
tices.
11
(,1.758
JRB Associates

-------
3.0 METHODS
3.1 FIELD PROGRAM
Sampling was carried ouC at nine haccherles in Che Magic Valley Region
(Figure 1) and at four screams on Che north and south sides of the Snake River
in an effort to characterize waste loading of effluents from haccherles and
potential Impacts on the receiving waters. Seven of the nine hatcheries
sampled were chosen to provide quality assurance of the industry monitoring
study undertaken in the spring of 1983. These seven hatcheries represent the
wide range of variability in rearing, cleaning, and sludge management methods.
Two additional hatcheries were chosen to provide supplemental data particu-
larly on cleaning methods. Each of the hatcheries and sampling points are
briefly described below followed by a brief description of the four study
streams.	t
3.1.1. Blue Lakes
Blue Lakes Hatchery is a large hatchery with 78 raceways and a fish processing
plant. These raceways may be partitioned into one, two, or three divisions
and carry the vater stream through each division. This is commonly called
"cwo or three water uses," corresponding co the number of raceway sections
through which the water flows. Some raceways ac Blue Lakes are concrece,
while ochers are earchen wich gravel bottoms and boarded sides.
t
Alpheus Creek, a spring-fed creek, provides all the influent waters for this
hatchery. Monitoring of Blue Lake's Hatchery occurred at point M-3 which
carries the outfalls of 33 raceways, 10 single use ponds or partitions, and 23
double use ponds. All water passes through a channel which discharges into
the Snake River. Out of an approximate total of 170 cfs (110 MGD) of water,
53 cfs (34 MGD) passes through the M-3 outfall. Figure 2 depicts the basic
layouc and the JRB monitoring location of the Blue Lakes Facility.
12
JRB Associates

-------
§o t	>;
A'
<*

Figure 1
LOCATION OF MONITORED HATCHERIES IN THE MAGIC VALLEY REGION

-------
To other
Hatcheries
c.	Figure 2
30
|	SCHEMATIC OF »»>R UilCES HATCHEOT

-------
Raceways not presently equipped with settling areas are cleaned by drawing
down water from a raceway pond (water is diverted to the nearest pond not
being cleaned) and manually extracting the waste solids. Raceways are left to
dry until the solids can be shoveled out. The spoils are placed around the
hatchery and the road. A mobile vacuum device is used to clean the
accumulated solids froa raceways equipped with settling areas in the lower
sections of the raceways and transfer these solids, through an underground
piping system, to a series of treatment lagoons. Raceways are reported to be
vacuumed every two to three weeks.5 Solids removed during vacuum cleaning
were disposed of in three sludge leach pits recently excavated south of M-2.
An update of these streatment facilities reveals that there are now five
sludge leach pits or treatment lagoons ranging in length from 50 to 140 feet
with capacity ranging from 11,520 to 28,000 cubic feet. During the course of
this study (May 23 through June 5, 1983, eight total sampling days), water in
the leach pits percolated through the pit walls into the Snake River and its
supernatant was evaporating. However, these pits were filled to capacity and
subsequently dredged with the wet solids piled adjacent to the pits. It is
noted that the bottom of the leach pits encroach seasonal water table levels
and the stability of the unlined earthen pit walls is uncertain. Furthermore,
the physical location of these pits is extremely confined by raceway effluent
channels and the river, limiting the areal extent of expansion and number of
sludge pits.
Since there- was no surface overflow at the leach pits during the study, our
sampling was restricted to the Raceway Discharge outfall at M-3. A composite
sampler was installed at that point collecting 24 samples per day in 500 ml
allquots. These were Chen combined for one composite sample that was analyzed
in a commercial laboratory for total suspended solids and in the field for
settleable solids. Routine hatchery activities which occurred during our
field visit included feeding, grading, fish removal, screen and raceway
cleaning.
1,1760
15
JRB Associates

-------
3.1.2 Crystal Springs
Crystal Springs Hatchery is a large commercial hatchery with four blocks of
raceways on either side (east and west) of the office and hatchery building.
The west side consists of 50 ponds. Spring water is shunted through 25 upper
raceways which then discharges into the 25 lower ones. This raceway water is
then discharged to Crystal Springs Lake, west of the hatchery. On the east
side of the hatchery, a similar arrangement occurs where spring water flows
through 12 raceways which constitute the upper tier. That water flows down to
33 more raceways located in three descending tiers. The dimensions of the
raceways are 100 feet long, 18 feet wide, and 3.5 feet deep. Thus, east side
spring water is used four times before it is discharged to the Snake River.
Although Crystal Springs is composed of two distinct hatchery units, only one
segment was included in the industry/JRB studies. The east hatchery section
was chosen because it is designed for four water uses rather than the two uses
of water which occur through, the west section. Figure 3 depicts the east
section and the JRB monitoring locations at the Crystal Springs facility.
Average flows through this section are reported to be 55.3 cfs (35.8 MGD).6
Cleaning is achieved by vacuuming the raceways. Solids are pumped through a
PVC pipe into an earthen settling basin below the last tier or block of
raceways. The settling basin is approximately 100 ft by 72 ft with an eight
foot maximum depth. During this study (May 21 through June 9, 1983; 14 days
sampling) the basin did not exceed 4.5 ft in depth. The vacuum pump is a
trash pump reported to move 9,000 gph. Estimated waste sludge quantities vary
from 40,000 to 70,000 gpd depending upon sludge accumulations and duration of
cleaning activities. Approximately seven raceway partitions are vacuumed each
day. Thus, hatchery personnel estimate that a total raceway is cleaned about
once a week. Screens used for grading fish are cleaned dally. Fish carcasses
are removed and disposed of on land east of the hatchery complex.
A 24-hour composite sampler was installed in the southeastern corner of the
discharge channel in order to collect a sample of the hatchery's total raceway
16
JR8 Associater

-------
,1

Crystal Springs
Influent
Spring
	1	
Kaceways



1

1

1


TIER 1
TIER 2 >

»

1





\

r
ia
-~Head Dltctr-
"I
Future
Nursery
Bldg.
Site

1

i

I

l

I
TIER 3
TIER 4 I

1








41 Snake River
Jttl SAHTLIMG
LOCATIUNS
Localloo
JjfES
1 Screaa loflmnl
Crab
2 Ractway Dl«ch«i|e
Conpoalt*
) Seic. N. lafliMHi
Cunp. 4 Crab
4 S*tt. N. Effluent
Ci ab
Raceway
Effluent 2
CO
Figure 3
CRYSTAL SPRINGS HATCHERY
(EAST SECTION)

-------
effluent prior to its discharge into the Snake River. The 24-hour composite
samples obtained from this site were analyzed for total suspended solids in a
laboratory, while settleable solids were measured in the field.
Since cleaning and vacuuming activities were usually ongoing, grab samples
were.taken at the influent and effluent points of the settling pond on May 20,
May 23, and May 24, 1983. In addition, three complete individual raceway
cleaning events were sampled on May 22, June 8, and June 9, 1983 to charac-
terize an entire raceway's contribution of solids to the settling basin.
Samples were collected every 30 seconds in 250 ml aliquots, then composited
for field analysis of settleable solids and delivery to a laboratory for
analysis for total suspended solids. Finally, a single grab sample of the
settling basin discharge was collected during each of these three cleaning
events surveys to estimate settling basin solids removal efficlences.
During the course of this study, routine hatchery maintenance practices were
observed which included grading fish, feeding using automatic rail-fed and
self-feed feeders, moving and harvesting fish, raceway cleaning by vacuuming
and sweeping. At the close of this field study, Crystal Springs was also
experimenting with a new cleaning system.? This system uses an eight-inch PVC
pipe routed through the dam boards and reduced to accept a four-inch flexible
hose. When a siphon is created, the hose vacuums raceway solids which are
shunted through the pipeline to the settling basin. It is unclear at this
time how practicable and effective this siphon vacuum will be for Crystal
Springs. Hatchery personnel will need time to evaluate and compare it to I
their existing vacuum/pump system.
3.1.3 Rim View
Rim View is a large hatchery with over 100 concrete raceways and 46 tanks for
egg incubation and juvenile rearing. Most raceways are extremely large, 32 ft
wide by 183 ft long, and they are arranged in three or four descending tiers
for reuse of water. Figure 4 depicts the Rim View Hatchery arrangement and
the JRB sampling point.
18
JRB Associates _

-------
From Niagara Springs
•a

c

o

a*
~—N

a>
u
(0
q

a»

B
c
u
•H
CO

a>
U
u
O
H
c


01

4-»

(A

aj

3

To
Snake Klver
3J
00
>
8
o
£'
r4
CD
M
+• 18 Ponds •+
+ 13 Ponds
8 Ponds

12 i
Ponds •
18 |
Ponds
18 t
Ponds
18
Ponds
I
Jll SAMPLING
LOCATIONS
Locttloa
IlBS
1 IMlu«nt
Compotif
1 S«Ktl. fd. Influent
CafQ»lU
) S«((I. 94. Ov«rflow
Crab
V -s
€0
To
Snake River
	 Cleaning Lines
Figure A
RIM VIEW IIATCIIERY
*o
*0
C
c
O
o
P«
o«
4J
4-*
c
e
0)
a»
a
e
u
u
CO
<0
Q)
at
u
i-.
H
H
0)
0)
4-1
4J

-------
Nlagra Springs is the source of all influent water. The Rim View hatchery
currently uses approximately 130 cfs (84 MGD) of water, although their water
appropriation permits a greater flow rate. Expansion and development plans
for the hatchery will utilize the total appropriation. Raceway effluent
discharges flow out of the hatchery over three weirs into ditches that enter
the Snake River. One weir site was used to sample combined raceway dis-
charges. A 24-hour composite sampler provided samples to be laboratory
analyzed for total suspended solids and field analyzed for settleable solids.
Raceway cleaning at Rim View is accomplished by standpipe sweeping. The
frequency of cleaning is determined by the hatchery manager and is performed
when fish are removed. Each raceway, however, is screened at its lover or
downstream end in order to segregate fish from the overflow weir. Fish
activities generally keep raceway solids in suspension. Water flow moves this
matter through the screens into the lower quiescent zone of the raceway where
the solids settle. This section of the raceway is cleaned more frequently,
approximately every other week, with a flexible hose that is Inserted into a
PVC elbow fitting that is mounted on each standpipe. When the elbow is
rotated and submerged, a siphon is created that is used to suction the settled
solids. A hatchery employee stands in the quiescent zone of the raceway and
removes waste matter by vacuuming the bottom. This siphoned material is then
piped to a concrete waste treatment pond. There are three such treatment
ponds at Rim View, all of them former raceways (39 ft x 250 ft size) which are
used to hold solid wastes. Only two ponds were being used at the time of this
study (June I through June 9, 1983; nine sampling days) and neither was
actively discharging into the Snake River. A small amount of leakage between
the upper dam boards is continuous, however, and a single sample of this
leakage was collected on June 1, 1983 for waste water characterization. The
supernatant in the sludge holding basin either evaporates or is held for
ultimate removal with the sludge. When the ponds are filled, the solids are
removed and either applied to land as a soil conditioner and fertilizer, or
stockpiled on adjacent land. Local gardeners are reported to use the dried
sludge material.8 One cleaning event was sampled during the study. Samples
20
JRB Associates _

-------
were collected every 30 seconds in 250 ml aliquoCs, composited, and analyzed
for total suspended solids and settleable solids.
Routine hatchery activities including feeding (self-feed), grading, fish
transfers and removal, and screen and raceway cleaning occurred during our
field visit.
3.1.4 Pisces
Pisces Hatchery is basically a small flow-through hatchery with intake waters
coming from Cedar Draw Creek. This creek is a stream heavily Impacted by
agricultural activities. Figure 5 depicts the hatchery layout and all JRB
sampling points. Incoming hatchery water is sometimes passed through a
settling basin before it reaches the seven 300 ft raceways due to the high
sediment content of the influent waters. The raceways are concrete and are
each divided Into three 100-foot long and 20-foot wide sections or ponds.
Depending on the time of year (if Cedar Draw is being used for irrigation) and
the amount of solids loading, the* flow may or may not be settled before
entering the raceways. Maximum flow is approximately 50 cfs (32 MGD). Once
the wacer has passed through a downstream earthen settling basin it is dis-
charged back to Cedar Draw. The dimensions of both Che upstream and down-
stream settling basins are approximately 200 feet long, 40 feet wide, and
eight feet deep.
Both settling basins are drained once a year during which time the solids are
removed. Large quantities of these solids were observed stockpiled adjacent
to the settling ponds. Due to Che settling of influent uacers, as many as
four major sampling points were established. A composite sampler was
installed at the effluent of the first settling pond, at Che combined effluenc
of che raceways, and at che effluenc of Che final downscream seeding basin.
One additional sampler was installed at the influent scream of Cedar Draw to
characterize this scream's sedimenc loading Co che hatchery. All samples
collected were 24-hour composites that were analyzed for total suspended
solids and settleable solids.
M763
21
JRB Associates

-------
JRB Associates

-------
Raceways are oot cleaned when fish are present. Once fish are removed,
however, the water is drained and solids are removed. The frequency of
dewatering and cleaning varies from three to eight months depending on the
size of fish that are moved. Routine hatchery operations such as fish feeding
using automatic feeders (self-feed) were observed during the course of our
study (May 12 through May 17, 1983; six days of sampling).
3.1.5	Clyde Hughes Farm Pond
The Clyde Hughes trout farm consists of two earthen ponds, the dimensions of
which are approximately 200 feet in length by 20 feet in width, and 4.5 to 6
feet deep. Figure 6 depicts the hatchery layout and JRB monitoring points.
The influent source is an unnamed stream with flows varying from approximately
2 to 8 cfs (1.3 to 5.2 MGO). The hatchery overflow is returned to the creek
downstream of the second pond. Three crops of fish are usually raised each
year depending on local weather and market conditions. Fish are hand-fed
twice each day. A composite sampler was installed at each of the influent and
effluent points of the two-pond hatchery. All samples collected were combined
for 24-hour composites, and the samples were then analyzed for total suspended
solids and settleable solids.
Ponds are cleaned only when fish are removed for market. At that time the
ponds are drained and solids hauled out. This operation was not observed
during the course of our field study (May 13 through May 16, 1983; four
sampling days).
3.1.6	Fish Breeders
Fish Breeders is a warm water hatchery in the Magic Valley. Figure 7
illustrates Fish Breeder's general arrangement and Che JRB-monitoring points.
The warm water is obtained from a geothermal aquifer and when mixed with cold
water springs provides adequace temperatures to raise both native and exotic
warm water fish species. At this hatchery two species of catfish, Ictalurus,
and three species of Tilapia are raised for commercial sale. The hatchery
1,1764
23
JRB Associates _

-------
Influent
Overflow Control
(Influent)
ill SAMPLING LOCATIONS
Lfeaclon
Tvp«
1 Influent
Coopeilt*
2 Efflume
Coapetltt
Weir Control Boards
(effluent)
Figure 6
CLYDE HUGHES FARM PONDS
24
JRB Associates_

-------
Influent: Nixed
Hoc/Culd Springs
JRB Associates __

-------
consists of 'numerous raceways and ponds. Hoc and cold water is blended from
nine different wells. The water Is used as many as 17 times passing first
through the upper raceways and ponds for catfish culturing and then Into the
lower Tllapla raceways before finally discharging into a large settling pond.
The settling pond then overflows a weir control structure and flows through a
natural drainage course Into the Snake River. According to hatchery personnel
the total flow rate is approximately 10 to 14 cfs (6 to 9 M(35).9
Cleaning of raceways is achieved by a standpipe drain system. Standplpes in
the raceways are raised two to three times per week which then discharge clean-
ing wastes into an aerated sludge digestion tank. A portion of the aerobic-
ally .digested sludge stream is pumped back into the Tllapla raceway influent
stream. The bacterial growth within the digested sludge provides food for the
Tllapla. The remaining sludge Is sent to an earthen waste sludge sump where
It is cleaned every few weeks. Solids are removed and were seen piled
adjacent to the pit.
Raceway discharge passes over a weir and flows into a settling pond approxi-
mately 350 feet long and a mean width of 40 feet. Pond depth ranges from one
to six feet. During the study period (May 19 through June 10, 1982; 10
sampling days) the settling pond was filled with thousands of Tllapla which
caused resuspenslon of silts in the settling lagoon, particularly at the weir
outlet structure.
Sampling points for this hatchery Included the Influent to the settling pond
and its effluent point. Sampling a distinct cleaning event was not done since
this waste is aerated and returned to the raceways.
3.1.7 Hagerman State
The Idaho State Hatchery near Hagerman consists of 42 concrete raceways and 28
smaller units known as vats to rear fry. Figure 8 depicts the hatchery layout
and JKB sampling points. Not all raceways were in operation during the study
26
JRB Associates _

-------
period (May IS through May 21, 1983; seven sampling days). Rainbow trout are
raised at this facility for stocking local streams in the Magic Valley and
Twin Falls Area. Fish in the Hagerman facility are raised for stocking or
planting are removed from the hatchery at a smaller size and weight than fish
raised in commercial hatcheries. Influent waters for the Hagerman facility is
drawn from Riley Creek and Tucker Springs which when combined total approxi-
mately 133 cfs (86 MGD). The total flow from all raceways is settled in a
rather extensive earthen settling basin before it is discharged downstream
into Riley Creek. This settling basin, approximately 500 ft long and 50 to 80
ft wide, is designed with three tiers of baffles to reduce hydraulic short-
circuiting and promote solids retention. Depth of the basin ranges from two
to eight feet.
Three sampling stations were established at the Hagerman facility for
continuous monitoring: one sampler was located at the influent of Riley Creek
into the hatchery, one sampler at the westernmost combined raceway effluent
point of discharge into the settling basin, and the final sampler at the
basin's discharge into downstream Riley Creek. All discrete samples were
composited at the end of the 24-hour period and analyzed for total suspended
solids and settleable solids. A fourth sampling point at Tucker Springs was
used to take grab samples for influent water TSS samples.
Cleaning is accomplished by sweeping raceways to resuspend solids. These
solids then overflow the raceway weirs and are discharged into the settling
basin. The settling basin was constructed in 1975 and as of this time has not
been dredged. Broadcast feeding, fish removal, and cleaning occurred during
this study period.
3.1.8 Rangen
The Rangen hatchery consists of three sets of fish rearing raceways: one sec
of fry rearing ponds and two sets of production raceways. Utilizing water
collected in a small reservoir Immediately downstream of Curren Springs, the
28
. JRB Associates

-------

-------
headwaters of Btllingsley Creek, flow rates within raceways vary from 1.5 to
43 cfs (1 to 28 MGD) with high flows occurring in the winter months. Fish are
fed using automatic (self-feed) feeders. During the field study period, fish
were graded and some removed for market on several different days. Two JRB
sampling points were located at Rangen; one sampler was installed at the point
of total raceway discharge into Billingsley Creek, while the remaining sampler
was Installed at the rock dam which serves as the bottom end of the ln-stream
settling basin discharge. All 24-hour samples were combined and analyzed for
total suspended solids and settleable solids. Figure 9 identifies the
locations of these sampling points as well as the hatchery layout.
The hatchery has three settling areas for solids. The first is the "fish out"
pond next to the upper set of fry raceways. The cleaning wastes from the fry
raceways are discharged into this pond. A standpipe drain cleaning system is
used dally to clean the set of fry raceways. The lower half of each of these
raceways is swept and the standpipe pulled to allow solids to enter the "fish
out" pond. The second settling area is adjacent to the upper set of produc-
tion raceways. When these raceway standplpes are pulled, cleaning wastes are
discharged at a rate of about 0.5 cfs for three to four minutes (approximately
900 gallons) Into an in-stream settling area which is a dammed-up portion of
Billingsley Creek. Two techniques are used to clean these raceways. The
first method is to sweep down the lower half of the raceway, then to pull the
standpipe and continue sweeping for three to four minutes. During this
cleaning activity, the water level is drawn down about six Inches to a level
below the overflow weir. The second method of cleaning, used in those race-
ways which have quiescent settling zones created below fish screens, is to
pull the standpipe and insert a plug with a hose attached to it. Using
suction created through the now plugged standpipe drain, the raceways are
vacuumed and the cleaning wastes discharged Into the settling basin.
The third area used for cleaning waste detention is a set of two empty race-
ways adjacent to the lower set of production raceways. The lower set of race-
ways are vacuum-cleaned, and the cleaning waste is discharged into one of the
1-^.7 G7
					, JRB Associates __
29

-------
JRB SAMPLING LOCATIONS

location
lid
1
Raceway Influent
Crab
i
Setcl. Area Effluent
Composite
)
Raceway Effluent
Composite
A
Irrigation Outfall
Crab
Irrigation
Hunof f
Figure 9
RANGEN HATCHERY

-------
two empty raceways. The two lower sees of raceways are cleaned every 30 to 60
days, depending on Che size and number of fish, and Che amount of solids
accumulation at the lower end of the raceways. Other than a minimal amount of
leakage, there is no discharge from these settling basins. These basins are
periodically cleaned and the material hauled to a terrestrial dump site above
the hatchery.
Screens have recently (within the last six months) been placed in the down-
stream quarter of some of the raceways to settle solids. Fish activities in
the upper portion of these raceways keep the solids suspended and carried
toward the screened sections. By excluding fish from the lower quarter of the
raceway, a quiescent settling area is provided in the raceway itself.
Hatchery personnel estimate that cleaning these areas can take place on an
average of every 90 days, thus minimizing labor and expenses.
3.1.9 Jones
The Jones Hatchery (formerly Jones and Sandy) consists of 30 concrete raceways
divided into three sections each, totalling 90 ponds to raise rainbow trout
for processing. Eight of the 30 raceways are small nursery ponds while the
remaining 22 are large ponds for rearing fish to market size. Figure 10
depicts the hatchery design and the JRB sample sites. The hatchery water
source is provided by two springs entering from the east; the larger,
Weatherby Spring, flows through the large ponds, while the smaller unnamed
spring is piped to the nursery area. According to the hatchery manager, water
flows vary from 35 cfs (23 MQ)) in spring and summer to 48-50 cfs (31-32 MGD)
in the winter. Fish are fed by automatic (self-feed) feeders. During our
sampling period (May 29 through June 9, 1983; ten sample days) routine
hatchery operations included grading and fish removal occurred.
Raceway cleaning is accomplished by sweeping solids to a standplpe drain which
discharges the cleaning effluent to a cement settling pond approximately 100
ft long, 50 ft wide, and eight ft deep. Nursery ponds are cleaned dally while
31
JRB Associates

-------
JRB SAMPL1MG LOCATIONS
Location
Typg
1 l«c«wa)f Influent
Crab
2 fticiwajf Clflirtot
Coapoalie
J Tr«M. P4. Influent
Coapoilt«
4 Tftac. Pd. Bffloaat
Crab
5 Downitra. Illltn|*l«y

Cfc.
Coapoilu
2 Raceway
Effluent
<_
30
00
>
CO
o
0
S'
r4
®
W
1
Influent
Weatherby
Springs
Water Line
Sludge Line
Figure 10
JONES HATCHERY

-------
the large ponds are cleaned every two weeks. The supernatant in the settling
pond is used during the irrigation season to water crops grown on adjacent
fields. When not irrigating, the settling pond supernatant discharge to
Billingsly Creek. Once a year the solids are dredged from the ponds and
applied to these fields. As a rule, the settling pond does not discharge into
Billingsley Creek (there are some small leaks in the basin). However, on June
2, 1983, the settling pond was overflowing and discharging into Billlngsley
Creek.
Jones Hatchery is in the process of installing screens on all raceways to
concentrate waste solids in the downstream portion of raceways • and segregate
this matter from fish and their movements. The hatchery is also planning to
convert their cleaning technique to the siphoning system that is in use at the
Rangen and Rim View hatcheries.
Two sampling locations were selected at this facility: one sampler was located
at the point of total raceway discharge into Billlngsley Creek; the other
sampler was located on Billlngsley Creek 150 feet downstream of the hatchery.
Cleaning wastes were sampled on June 7, 1983 when the four west raceways were
cleaned. Solids were swept to the lower pond, the standpipe removed, and the
solids swept into the standpipe drainhole. The entire cleaning operation took
32 minutes. Samples were collected at the pipe discharging into the settling
basin every 30 seconds in 250 ml allquots. These were then combined to pro-
vide a composite sample for laboratory analysis of total suspended solids and
field analysis for settleable solids. The influent flow rate to the settling
pond before raceway cleaning was approximately 0.5 to 1 cfs (0.3 to 0.6 MO).
This base flow is believed to be a result of raceway leakage through the
standpipe drains. During the cleaning activity, the flow rate increased to
approximately 3.5 cfs (2.2 MGD). Finally, a grab sample was taken at the
downstream end of the settling pond to determine percent removal efficiency of
the waste solids settling system. This was estimated using analytical testing
for influent and effluent total suspended solids and settleable solids.
1,1769
33
JRB Associates

-------
3.1.10	Billingsley Creek
From iCs Curren Springs , headwaters at the Rangen Hatchery, this stream flows
generally northwest for approximately seven miles prior to discharging into
the Snake River. Small spring-fed streams and irrigation ditches drain into
this creek primarily from the hillsides to the north and east. The creek
drops approximately 250 feet in elevation from its headwaters to its
confluence with the Snake River. Land use along Blllingsley Creek consists of
hatcheries, agriculture, grazing, and some residential development. Seven
monitoring points were selected along this stream. Figure 11 depicts the
monitoring locations and the course of Blllingsley Creek. Stations 1 and 2
are upstream and downstream, respectively of the Rangen Trout Hatchery and
Research Lab. Station 2a is located along the Wendell Road at the entrance to
the Jones Hatchery Facility. Station 3 is located immediately upstream of
this hatchery, while Stations 4 and 5 are downstream of it. Stations 6 and 7
were located further downstream: Station 6 is located immediately upstream of
that reach of Blllingsley Creek which flows through the "Fish and Game"
stretch, and Station 7 is located at the Highway 30 bridge crossing north of
the town of Hagerman.
3.1.11	Riley Creek
Riley Creek's headwaters are a series of springs that are located above the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Hagerman Fish Hatchery. Land use along this
two-plus mile long stream Includes hatcheries and some agriculture. Because
much of the land is owned by the State of Idaho or the Federal Government,
extensive stretches are either not developed or are impounded for wildlife
habitat. This is particularly true at the state fish hatchery where impound-
ments upstream of the hatchery are important waterfowl nesting and feeding
sites. From its headwaters this stream flows northwest for approximately 1.3
miles until It reaches the intake to the Idaho State fish hatchery. Below
this point, it flows generally south and east through an Impoundment, and
eventually converges with Hunt Ditch (which enters from the west) and
discharges into the Snake River upstream of River Mile (RM) 584. Figure 12
34
JRB Associates

-------
2" • I ail*
|Scr«*a Honl-
' coring Slca
Valley Trout
tUcctiary
FmJioc
Figure 11
BILLINGSLEY CREEK
t,j.770
35
JRB Associates _J

-------
Hagerman
4 miles
Note: For location reference, see Figure 1.
Figure 12
RILEY CREEK
36
JRB Associates

-------
depicts Riley Creek and the JRB monitoring stations. Three monitoring
stations were located on Riley Creek: Station 1 was located in the Riley Creek
headwaters where an unnamed spring forms a pool which flows into the head of
Riley Creek, Station 2 was located upstream of the state hatchery approxi-
mately 0.5 miles from its headwaters, and Station 3 was located downstream of
the State hatchery prior to the Riley Creek and Hunt Ditch confluence.
3.1.12	Sand Springs Creek
Sand Springs Creek is a spring-fed creek located near Wendell, Idaho in the NE
1/4 of Sec. 21, T. 8 S., R. 14 C. The land use along this stream does not
Include any hatcheries and is almost exclusively grazing with some agriculture
and residential units. This stream flows for approximately two miles in a
northerly direction until it reaches the Snake River near the Thousand Springs
power plant. Sand Springs Creek is impounded in several places to provide
water for grazing cattle or for irrigation diversions. Figure 13 depicts Sand
Springs Creek and the single JRB monitoring station established to serve as a
control station for both Blllingsley and Riley Creeks. This station was
located approximately 0.5 miles downstream of its headwaters.
3.1.13	Salmon Falls Creek
Salmon Falls Creek Is located on the south bank of the Snake River and up
river from the three forementioned streams. Being across the river, its water-
shed is hydraulically connected to a separate aquifer. Salmon 7alls Creek was
selected because there are no hatchery facilities occupying its watershed.
Due in part co the absence of fish hatcheries as veil as access difficulties,
the single JRB sampling location was placed at Balanced Rock Park. Additional
information on this stream was .available from Che State of Idaho's Division of
Environment which routinely samples this stream at the point where it flows
beneath Highway 30. Together these two stations, allow for a very limited com-
parison between upstream and downtream water quality and stream bed condi-
tions. Land use along this stream includes agriculture, grazing, low-head
hydro development, reservoir impoundment, and rural residential development.
t,:.77i

-------

-------
The stream is extensive, flowing northward from below the Idaho/Nevada state
line into Twin Falls County. Near Salmon Butte, Idaho, the creek is dammed and
forms a large reservoir. Flowing north from the dam, it passes through
agricultural and grazing lands until it finally discharges into the Snake
River near Highway 30 about eight miles south of Hagerman. Figure 14 depicts
the portion of Salmon Falls Creek that includes JRB's monitoring station and
its outfall into the Snake River.
3.2 SAMPLING METHODS
3.2.1 Hatchery Sampling
In order to characterize the solids load of the nine hatcheries sampled in
this study, 24-hour composite samples and supplemental grab samples were col-
lected over a period of 5 to 17 days per site. Samples were collected where
applicable from hatchery influent, raceway effluent, and sludge settling pond
influents and effluients. The 24-hour composite samples were collected using
an ISCO automatic water sampler, Model #1680, with 28 discrete sampling
bottles. This type of sampler permitted adjustable sampling intervals using a
variable timer (one sampler, however, would only collect samples at a preset
60-minute Interval). These samplers were powered using standard 12 volt auto-
motive batteries. Sample collection intervals were 15 minutes or 60 minutes
depending on the sampler used. In all cases, at least 24 discrete samples
were collected and examined in the field to determine if any peaks occurred in
the solids loading during the discrete time intervals. Equal volume allquots
from all samples were then combined in the field and refrigerated until
analyzed in the laboratory. Century Laboratories in Boise, Idaho performed
all laboratory sample analyses. Grab samples consisted of either a single one
liter sample, or in the case of a raceway cleaning effluent, 250 ml allquots
taken at varying intervals during cleaning and then composited for a
representative sample of the entire cleaning event.
39
!, 1.772
—_ JRB Associates

-------
Figure 14
SALMON FALLS CREEK
40
JRB Associates-.

-------
Water temperature was measured at the sampling sites whenever the automatic
water samplers were checked. Raceway or settling pond flow rates were
estimated by measuring depths of flows over sharp cresting weirs, or through
flowing pipes, and using mathematical expressions to approximate the
instantaneous rates of flow. Settleable solids were determined In the field
using Iahoff cones and reported to the nearest 0.1 ml/1. On an unscheduled
basis, field measurements were made of pH, dissolved oxygen, and total ammonia
in total hatchery raceway discharges and/or cleaning wastes influent po or
discharged from the cleaning uaste settling ponds. All field analyses were
performed in accordance with Standard Methods^ or EPA approved protocols
established by the manufacturer of field Instrumentation or test kits.
In addition to water sampling, field technicians obtained Information from
hatchery managers and personnel regarding hatchery maintenance practices,
particularly during actual cleaning operations as to the methods employed for
cleaning, and the advantages and disadvantages of Che various cleaning sys-
tems. In selected hatcheries, samples were obtained during cleaning opera-
tions to examine solids loading into and oat of settling ponds.
3.2.2 Stream Sampling
Field investigations were carried out on four streams in the Magic Valley to
determine whether there were gross changes in stream characteristics within
selected reaches of the same stream which could be attributed to hatchery
effluents. In addition, the use of multiple streams would allow limited com-
parisons of stream quality between streams influenced by hatchery activities
and those that are not. Streams investigated included Blllingsley Creek, Riley
Creek, Sand Springs, and Salmon Falls Creek (Figures 11 through 14). Hatch-
eries are found on both Billingsley and Riley Creeks. At selected hatchery
sites, JRB conducted ln-stream monitoring at three to four locations:
•	Upstream of hatchery influent, for the purpose of establishing a
control
•	At site of effluent discharge
•	Downstream of hatchery effluent discharge
l,..773
41
JRB Associates

-------
Salmon Falls- Creek and Sand Springs Creek served as control streams since they
were not occupied by any fish culturing facility. Sampling stations on these
streams were selected to approximate as closely as possible the physical char-
acteristics of the hatchery stream sites. Stream gradient, conformation, and
vegetation were the main criteria used in selecting comparable stream sites.
Additional data on Sand Springs, Salmon Falls Creeks, and Cedar Draw were
obtained from the State of Idaho, Including the University of Idaho and Idaho
State University; the Department of Health and Welfare, Division of
Environment; and Department of Fish and Game. At each stream station the
following characteristics were evaluated:
•	Stream Conformation
•	Pool/Riffle Ratios
•	Substrate Type
•	Aquatic Vegetation - type and percent cover
•	Bank Vegetation - type and percent cover
•	Temperature, pH, Dissolved Oxygen, and Total Ammonia
•	Benthic Macroinvertebrates - types and approximate relative abun-
dance
These parameters were evaluated qualitatively to assess possible Impacts of
hatchery practices on overall stream quality.
All water samples were taken at surface and mid-depth levels across the
stretch of stream and composited for laboratory analysis for total ammonia
(NH3), total kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), and ortho-phosphate (PO4) determination.
Composite sediment samples randomly selected were collected for laboratory
determination of volatile solids on dry weight basis.
42
JRB Associates

-------
3.3 LABORATORY SAMPLE ANALYSIS
3.3.1	Hatchery Samples
Water samples from hatchery Influent and effluent were examined for total
suspended solids (TSS) using analytical procedures defined In Standard
Methods.*0 Randomly selected total raceway discharge water samples and
cleaning waster sludge samples were also examined for total volatile solids
(TVS) to determine the percent of solids attributable to volatile organic
material. Values of TSS and TVS were reported to the nearest 0.1 mg/1.
Selected raceway effluent and cleaning waste samples were also examined for
total ammonia, total kjeldahl nitrogen and ortho-phosphate, again using
Standard Methods. All values were reported to the nearest 0.01 mg/1.
TSS was analyzed to determine what levels of suspended solids were discharged
from a hatchery facility. This Included the sum of all raceways (total dis-
charge) and any waste treatment systems. This information was evaluated to
determine attainability for effluent limits that were being considered in the
permit development. All other parameters were analyzed to provide supple-
mental information; namely to determine if other chemical parameters were
potentially critical and therefore needed to be incorporated in the permit
development, and also to better identify the hatchery discharge characteris-
tics. This information was hoped to provide some useful data to assess and
correlate possible receiving water impacts and to possibly distinguish
hatchery effects from agricultural or other non-hatchery related impacts.
3.3.2	Stream Samples
Water samples from the streams investigated were examined for total ammonia,
total kjeldahl nitrogen, and ortho-phosphates and reported in og/1. Sediment
samples were tested for percent volatile solids to determine the amount of
organic material present. It is important to note that the volatile solids
test does not distinguish between different organic material sources, in this
case hatchery effluents, feedlot runoff, and detrltal material resulting from
aquatic plant and animal materials naturally present in the stream. It is,
t/„.774
43
JRB Associates

-------
however, a -useful Indicator of organic loading. Comparisons could therefore
be made between hatchery effluent and wlthin-stream control stations upstream
of the hatcheries and between the stations on Sand Springs and Salmon Falls
Creeks and those stations on those streams which receive hatchery wastewaters.
All of these analyses were conducted to determine if any gross water quality
changes were apparent as a result of hatchery discharge. They were also used
to pinpoint, If possible, the source of measurable stream Impacts. For
example, ortho-phosphates were analyzed because they are applied to
agricultural lands as fertilizers, and storm runoff and Irrigation stream
flows may carry this matter to receiving surface waters.
Laboratory results and biological evaluations were examined to determine if
there were noticeable differences in hatchery stations from control streams or
control stations established upstream. This Information is Incorporated where
relevant when considering criteria for Best Management Practices and the
compliance requirements of the permit development.
44
JRB Associates -

-------
4.0 RESULTS
4.1 TOTAL DISCHARGE
4.1.1 JRB Study
A sunmary of Che JRB sampling results are presented by hatchery In Appendix A.
The data presented therein are raw data results with no correction for back-
ground or baseline water quality conditions. Hatchery raceway discharges have
been characterized by flow rate, water temperature, total suspended solids
(TSS) in mass permit volume, and concentration of settleable solids. For
interpretive purposes the suspended solids data used in the body of this
report represent net change in concentration across each hatchery influent and
effluent flow streams. In some cases these changes are negative, representing
net removal of influent solids across the hatchery. When hatchery fish bio-
mass data were made available, pounds of effluent total suspended solids were
determined per 100 pounds of fish. Table 1 presents a comparative sunmary of
effluent TSS per 100 pounds of fish from the studies performed by JRB and the
industry using the biomass data supplied by hatcheries during their study.
Upon statistically examining the laboratory and field sample analyses, JRB
detected that the observed frequencies distribution were assymetric.
Typically, hatchery TSS values collected during this study tended to include
high values which appear as outliers to the central tendency of the rest of
the data. We have no reason to believe that these high outliers do not
reflect routine hatchery activities, even though they occur infrequently.
Cleaning, sample counting, and fish grading or transfers of fish between
raceways accounted for some of the high values observed. Results from the
industry study also exhibited this assymetry or right skewed distribution.
f 
-------
Table 1
POUNDS OF EFFLUENT TSS PER 100 POUNDS OF
HATCHERY FISH INVENTORY
Hatchery
Industry Study
#TSS/100# fish
JRB Studya
//TSS/1000 fish
Blue .Lakes
0.6040
1.64
Crystal
0.4778
0.7247
Rio View
Not in study
—
Pisces
Not Meaningful*5
Not Meaningful*5
Clyde Hughes
Not Meaningful^
Not Meaningful*5
Fish Breeders
Not Available
—
Rangen
0.7797
0.8418
Jones
Not in study
—
Hageraan
0.948
1.18
hatchery fish inventory (pounds) were estijnated from averages
reported during the 30-day industry study.
^Designation of pounds of effluent TSS per 100 pounds of fish
is not meaningful when net TSS concentration is a negative
value.
IPP Associates.
46

-------
For purposes of testing the statistical significance of the data and the high
outliers, it was hypothesized that the data represent a right skewed distri-
bution. JRB performed a logarithmic transformation of the data to test this
hypothesis. Logarithmic means and confidence Intervals (a ¦ 0.05) were
calculated for each hatchery using the sets of T5S data obtained during
studies performed both by JRB and industry. Table 2 presents a comparative
summary of the statistical treatment applied to raceway TSS sample results.
The results in general show slmillar trends and variabilities, but the JRS
study results report higher means and larger confidence intervals. Although
the sampling locations within each hatchery were in general the same between
the studies, the reported differences may be a result of different sampling
procedures, and possible variations in sample preparation and laboratory
procedures.
The JRB study results indicate that based on net TSS discharge, a total of
five hatcheries out of the nine studied would meet the 5 mg/1 raceway effluent
limitation as recommended by the IPAC. This Interpretation was made following
the transformation of all log normal data back to the original mg/1 scale and
generation of statistical confidence intervals. The reader should realize
that as long as the mean of the data of the confidence interval about the mean
extends to a TSS concentration below 5 mg/1, there is a 95 percent level of
confidence that any value between the confidence limits, including those at or
below 5 mg/1, are representative values of the total raceway discharge.
Water quality improvement as measured by net TSS was evident at the Clyde
Hughes and Pisces hatcheries. Both hatcheries use Influent stream flows that
are Impacted by agricultural practices such as grazing and irrigation return.
JRB sampling results indicate that at Clyde Hughes hatchery there was a 33
percent overall reduction in suspended solids, and at Pisces there was a L6
percent reduction. In both cases, the lower limit of the confidence interval
indicated negative values which reflect this reduction. However, based on the
nature of hatcheries situated below streams with heavy solids loaing the
Interval or the variability in total TSS can be quite extreme. Therefore,
^_—— JRB Associates
47

-------
Table 2
COMPARATIVE STUDIES OF STATISTICAL TREATMENT OF RACEWAY TSS CONCENTRATIONS
BETWEEN STUDIES PERFORMED BY JRB AND INDUSTRY
00
3J
09
>
K
o
o
CD



JHB
ASSOCIATES STUDY



INDUSTRY STUDY

SSDp
Sire
<«)
Total
Discharge
TSS Averane

Sofb
log n
Data

Meets
5 ng/t
Unit
Total
Discharge
TSS AveraRe

¥ ofb
log n
Data

Meets
5 Bg/t
Limit
Hatchery
¦
8
TSS 951 Cl®
a
n a
TSS 95* Cl"
B
Blue Lakes
a
6.12
1.96
(4.27,7.89)
5.80
1.5
YES
47 a 0.89 1.40
b 2.20 0.69
(1.19,1.57)
1.36
1.6
YES
Rangen
u
8.00
3.60
(5.63,9.47)
7.31
1.6
NO
30 .8.23 2.84
(6.9,8.9)
7.81
1.4
NO
Clyde Hugkii












Influent
Efflueut
4
61.2 TL
40.7S_y)
10.8
14.7
NET
(-34.6,-2.34)
NET
-31.B
3.9
YES
26.3 19.0
30 26.7 14.1
NET
(-20.7,9.0)
-10.7
3.2
YES
llagerman












Influent
Raceway
Settling
7
5
6
4.1
9.4
7.5
2.5
7.0
3.6
NET
(0.52.7.29)
NET
1.74
2.4
YES
30 2.4 1.6
(1.66,2.59)
2.08
1.8
YES
Crystal Springe
12
11.42
5.05
(7.76,14.11)
10.5
1.6
NO
30 7.5 3.64
(5.87,7.94)
6.88
1.5
NO
Fish Breeders
10
10
29	j
9.4
5.6
NET
(15.0,38.5)
NET
24.0
2.0
HO
Insufficient data to permit determination of net TSS
Pieces












Inf Set Pond
fnf Raceway
Eft Raceuay
Eff Set Pond
4
6
6
5
U0 1
144 1
(f>
ni xy
u?_J
31
42
27
23
NET
(-65.4,174.3)
NET
-42.3
6.2
YES
(Ml)73.64 62.10
31
(M3)75. 32 54.45
NET
(-61.0,17.0)
NET
-27.8
2.6
YES
it (a View
6
a. 16
7.13
(2.97, 13. 34)
6.3
2.1
YES
Did Not Participate In Industry Study


Jones
a
9.8
5.6
(6.57.9.97)
8.1
1.8
NO
Did Not Participate in Industry
Study


°9il CI froa In
duta
and trauaforned
back









of log it data, transformed back,
be nulled to the rlfllit. The median
Tills
<50*
estimates median of
value) la actually
original distribution. For a right-skewed
a better eutlnate of "central tendency" for
distribution, 1/	 . the mean
right-skewed distributions.
tends to
cFor Blue Lakea«
a -
April Study; b
- January Study.








^Represents 31X
net reduction In Influent
l'SS.








^Represents 461
above
settling pond
Influent.








^Represents 16Z
net reduction in Influent
TSS, Stations A and
0.








-------
predictions of an average or representative TSS output bears little practical
significance. The confidence intervals around the sample means of Blue Lakes,
Rim View, and Hagerman State hatcheries indicate general compliance with the
proposed 5 mg/1 limitation. However, these confidence intervals are wide-
ranged and based on a small sample size. Higher values, therefore, often
constitute the upper limit of the interval. Figure IS plots the means and
confidence intervals for raceway results In these hatcheries.
Crystal Springs, Fish Breeders, Rangen, and Jones hatcheries would fail to
meet the recommended 5 mg/1 limitation based on the study results by both JRB
and Industry. Fish Breeders settles all of its discharge, but the effec-
tiveness of this settling system could not be determined during the course of
this study due to the presence of thousands of Tilapla in the pond. The move-
ment of these fish, particularly near the effluent weir, causes a high level
resuspension of solids. JRB sampling results indicate that the average
settling pond discharge was 46 percent higher in suspended solids than the
raceway effluent. Figure 16 depicts photographs of the Fish Breeders settling
pond; cloudy or murky water Is a result of colloidal material or resuspension
of settled solids.
Crystal Springs, Rangen, and Jones hatcheries exceeded the recommended
effluent limit with mean TSS concentrations of 10.5, 7.3, and 8.1 mg/1 res-
spectively. Figure 15 plots the means, and confidence intervals for raceway
results for these facilities. Confidence intervals calculated from trans-
formed sample data and tests of significance (Table 3) comparing the hatchery
means with the precision of standard laboratory protocols using the 5 mg/1
limit produced similar results; namely the same hatcheries would achieve or
fail to comply with the IFAC proposed raceway effluent limitation.
The settleable solids limit for the total discharge as recommended by IPAC was
0.1 ml/1 daily average. All fish hatcheries sampled met this limitation
during the course of the JRB study.
M777
49
JRB Associates

-------
Raceway TSS (mg/I)
0	1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS
Hatchery/CI	|	I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Blue Lakes	—
(4.27 - 7.89)		•	
Crystal Springs
(7.76- 14.11)
Rim View
(2.97 - 13.3)
Rangen
(5.63- 9.47)
Jones
(6.57 - 9.97)
llagerman
(0.52 - 7.29)
	 Industry Study
	 JRB Study
• In x transformed
Figure 15
M	MEANS AND CONFIDENCE INTERVALS FOR IIATCHERY TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
oo
>
u
u
o
2.
5'
o
(A

-------
mart
«
Figure 16A
FISH BREEDERS SETTLING POND
Figure 16B
RESUSPENDED SEI'TMENTS DUE TO FISH PRESENCE
1,1778
	JRB Associates —
51

-------
Table 3
COMPARISONS OF MEAN TSS CONCENTRATIONS WITH 5 mg/1
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS RECOMMENDED BY IPACa
Sample Mean and	. c
Hatchery	Standard Deviation	Significance
Rim Vlev	6.30 ± 2.10	No
Jones	8.08 t 1.80	Yes
Rangen-	7.31 ± 1.60	Yes
Pices	-42.3 ± 6.2	N/A
Crystal Springs	10.5 ± 1.6	Yes
Blue Lakes	5.8 t 1.50	No
Fish Breeders	24.0 i 2.0	N/A
Hagerman	1.74 i 2.4	No
Clyde Hughes	-31.8 £ 3.9	N/A
a
The conservative estimate of laboratory precision is 33% at
the 5 mg/1 concentration level (Standard Methods, 15th Edition
1980, p. 95).
^Mean of logarithmic values transformed back to linear scale
(mg/1) .
Ca < 0.05
52
JRB Associates

-------
4.1.2 Industry Study
The statistical Interpretations of the Industry study have been summarized in
Table 2. This table presents both JRB and industry sampling results including
average (x and In 10 total suspended solids generated from each hatchery.
Fish Breeders' data was incomplete and therefore, is not analyzed in this
section. All other hatcheries sampled their raceway discharge for 30 or 31
days with the exception of Blue Lakes which sampled effluent discharges for 47
days. Blue Lakes also submitted two separate data-sets: one for the industry
study, and another summary reflecting an independent sampling period in
January, 1983. Both data sets from the Blue Lakes hatchery reflect monitoring
at the M-3 location, the same station used in the later JRB study.
All Industry results were analyzed for compliance with the IP AC recommended
5 tng/1 raceway effluent limitation using confidence intervals constructed from
log transformed data (Table 2). These intervals and the means were plotted
against the JRB Study results In Figure 15. Industry study results compare
favorably with JRB's findings, namely that four hatcheries (Clyde Hughes,
Pisces, Blue Lakes, and Hagerman State) achieve Che limit and two hatcheries
(Crystal Springs and Rangen) do not. Crystal Springs with a mean TSS concen-
tration of 6.9, and Rangen with one of 7.8 would exceed the recommended 5 mg/1
TSS effluent limit. (Rim View and Jones did not participate in the Industry
study.)
TSS results expressed in pounds per 100 pounds of fish were sunmarized in
Table 1. Based on the IPAC recommended limitation of 0.5 pounds TSS per 100
pounds fish, only Crystal Springs would achieve compliance during the industry
study period. Using the JRB study results, however, no hatchery would meet
that limit. Based on the IPAC recommendation of 0.1 ml/1 for settleable
solids, all industry study results were comparable to the JRB study which
together indicated general compliance with the proposed effluent limitations.
Crystal Springs is a lone exception, for its self-monitoring data report an
inordinately high number of samples exceeding the 0.1 ml/1 limit. The JRB
study did not confirm this rate of frequent noncompliance. We suggest that
Crystal Springs re-examine their sampling methods or analytical procedures.
w-«. < * ^
			JRB Associates
53

-------
4.2 CLEANING WASTE SETTLING POND DISCHARGE
The JRB study analyzed Che effectiveness of cleaning waste settling ponds and
solids removal. Of the nine hatcheries studied, Clyde Hughes settles its
entire flow in a fish pond, while Pisces, Hagerman State, and Fish Breeders
use total discharge flow-through settling systems that receive all raceway and
cleaning (for Hagerman State) discharges. These hatcheries, therefore, could
not be assessed for solids removal of cleaning wastes since they do not have a
separate settling system for the cleaning wastes. The Blue Lakes hatchery
settling system consists of three leach pits which were not discharging during
the study period. Consequently a discharge from this system was not sampled.
Figure 17 is a photograph taken of one sludge leach pit taken during field
sampling activities.
Raceway cleaning events were sampled over time of discharge at the remaining
hatcheries (Crystal Springs, Rim View, Rangen, and Jones). Sampling consisted
of equal volume aliquots which wre then composited prior to analysis.
Settling pond Influent and effluent composite samples were analyzed for TSS
and settleable solids concentrations, and an assessment was made of solids
removal effectiveness across the settling pond.
Crystal Springs settling pond influent flow is continuous for as many as eight
hours per day as a result of frequent raceway vacuuming activities. The
effluent discharge from this pond, however, is intermictant and the discharge
is a function of the pond's holding capacity and weather conditions. Sampling
was conducted every 30 seconds throughout a 0.5 hour period on four separate
occasions. Unlike Crystal Springs, Rangen, Jones and Rim View hatcheries only
sporadically discharge cleaning solids to settling ponds. Each of these
hatcheries was sampled on at least one occasion when their systems were dis-
charging, thus permitting analysis of the respective settling system's
effectiveness. IPAC recommends an 85 percent solids removal rate. The JRB
sampling results indicate that this removal rate was achieved in all cases,
and usually by a greater factor (90-99%). Results of the appropriate hatchery
54
JRB Associates

-------
Figure 17
BLUE LAKES LEACH PIT
i .1750

-------
settling pond sampling activities are presented in Appendix A below raceway
discharge summaries. It should be noted that in the Crystal Springs summary,
two grab samples taken on May 20 and May 23, 1983 indicate only 64 and 62
percent removal, respectively. These removal rates, however, do not reflect
entire cleaning events because they are representative of one-time grab
samples which may only sample a portion of the entire cleaning discharge. The
instantaneous maximum limitation for suspended solids recommended by IPAC was
100 mg/1. Crystal Springs Hatchery did not meet that recommended maximum in
five out of six grab sampling efforts during the JRB study. Settleable solids
instantaneous maximum was recommended by IPAC to be 1.0 ml/1. Crystal Springs
similarly exceeded this limit in two out of the six samples taken during the
JRB study.
4.3 STREAM SURVEYS
4.3.1 Billingsley Creek
Water quality parameters sampled in the field included ammonia (NH3,) pH and
dissolved oxygen (DO). Parameters analyzed in the laboratory included
ammonia (NH3), total kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), orthophosphate (PO4), total
sediment volatile solids (TVS) and total suspended solids (TSS). The
Billingsley Creek results are summarized in Figure 18. All Billingsley Creek
water quality parameters, particularly NH3 and TVS, compare favorably to the
Falter data presented in the Shokol vs. Trout Co. hearing, H while the NH3 and
PO4 data compare well with the Winners report.*2 Increases in nitrogen and
phosphorous were observed downstream of all hatchery facilities. TKN increased
downstream at each station of Billingsley Creek until Stations 6 through 7
(the Fish and Game stretch to Hagerman). All nutrient levels began to recede
at this point and water quality improved. Sediment TVS was highest at
Stations 1 and 2 near the headwaters, and Stations 4 and 6 in the middle
reaches of the stream but downstream of hatcheries. Dissolved oxygen levels
were at or above saturation levels throughout all the stations sampled. TSS
was sampled at the headwaters as less than 2 mg/1 (the limit of the laboratory
analysis precision). The mean TSS values reported at Stations 2 and 4 were
56
JRB Associates

-------
2" • 1 alia
^Screta Nonl-
™coring Sice




Sedlaenc

Dissolved


NHj
TO
roM
TVS

Oxygen
TSS
Scatloo

-------
Chose taken downstream of the Rangen and Jones outfalls during hatchery efflu-
ent monitoring activities. Individual values are presented in the hatchery
sample results in Appendix A. Based on JRB sampling results, Blllingsley
Creek water quality is Inferior to comparable spring fed streams and is indic-
ative of a stressed stream system which is conducive to eutrophic conditions.
Biological community surveys at Station 1, upstream of the Rangen hatchery the
control site, revealed a wide diversity of macroinvertebrates Including
Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, Diptera, Odonata, Amphipoda, Gastropoda, and
Bivalvia. As one proceeded downstream the diversity and species richness was
reduced to primarily Amphipoda, Oligochaeta, Nematode and Gastropoda.
Mayflies (Ephemeroptera) and caddisflies (Trichoptera) were less numerous in
the stream segments downstream of hatcheries (Stations 2, 4 and 5) but in-
creased in abundance by Station 6, the Fish and Game stretch.
Aquatic macrophytes observed in Blllingsley Creek included Nasturtium, Zani-
chellia, Potamogeton and Lemna. Watercress was only observed at Station 1,
upstream of the Rangen hatchery. Zanichellla was the most abundant macrophyte
observed in Stations 3 through 5. All macrophytes increased downstream of
hatcheries, sometimes forming large floating mats of dense vegetation where
the substrate provided root anchorage. Within the Fish and Game stretch below
Station 6 the water depths were ouch greater and hence the vegetation was re-
stricted to the shallow water along the streambank.
Stream sediments upstream of Rangen at Station 1 consisted primarily of gravel
and a silty sand. The silt appeared to be inert in composition. As one pro-
ceeded downstream the substrate included cobbles, more gravels and sand/silts.
The fine particulate component increased and became very flocculent indicating
the presence of organic matter. Downstream of the Jones Hatchery heavy
accumulations of organic material were observed, particularly along the right
or east bank. Organic accumulations at Stations 4 and 5 reached depths of 18
inches or more. The organic sediment material was very fibrous and gave off a
58
JRB Associates

-------
putrid odor when disturbed or resuspended. It was at this point that iron
bacteria (Sphaerotilus natans) was observed in large floating sheets. At
Station 6, immediately above the Fish & Game stretch, the substrate consisted
of clean washed sands and silts with some gravels. Like Station 1, the fine
particulate matter appeared to be composed of inert material.
Land uses along' the stream Included hatcheries at Stations 2, 3, and 4.
Cattle feed lots were located upstream of Station 2A and downstream of Station
5. Agricultural activities were found along Stations 1, 3, 4 and 5. Sheep
were observed grazing along the right bank of Blllingsley Creek at Jones
Hatchery. Below Station 6, the Fish and Game stretch, the stream passed
through an extensive marsh or wetland.
4.3.2 Riley Creek
All water quality parameters sampled in the field and analyzed in the labora-
tory for Riley Creek are presented in Figure 19. NH3 levels Increased
slightly, but not appreciably from Station 1 near the headwaters to Station 3
downstream of Hagerman State hatchery. TKX levels were elevated only at
Station 3. Orthophosphate levels were similar throughout the stream stations
sampled. TVS concentrations were highest at the upstream or control station,
reduced at Station 2, and increasing again at Station 3. Dissolved oxygen
concentrations remained high throughout the stream stations sampled. TSS
levels were not significant at Stations 1 and 2 but increased slightly at
Station 3, downstream of the state hatchery.
Macroinvertebrates sampled at Station 1 revealed the widest diversity and
abundance seen in all streams. Stations 2 & 3, however, were comparable to
the headwaters of Blllingsley Creek. Invertebrates sampled from all three
stations Include Ephemeroptera, Odonata, Trlchoptera, Diptera, Amphlpoda,
Oligochaeta, Nematoda, Gastropoda, and Bivalvla. Stoneflies (Plecoptera) were
observed only at Station 1. Likewise, a Shoshone sculpin (Cottus greenei),
considered a fish species of special concern by Idaho Chapter of the American
13
Fisheries Society, was observed only at Station 1 on Riley Creek.
M782
^______^JRB Associates
59

-------
Hagerman
4 miles
U.S. FWS
Hatchery
N
2.25'*- 1 mile
^Stream Moni-
toring Site
Sediment
Dissolved
Station
nh3
ms?/1
TKN
PO^
m «/4
TVS
m s/g
pH
Oxygen
ms/2
TSS
mg/i
1
<0.01
0.03
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
122
7.65
9
<2
2
0.05
0.01
0.14
0.11
0.12
0.15
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
25
8.20
9
<2
3
0.12
0.03
0.20
0.58
0.22
0.92
<0.10
<0.10
<0.10
39
8.20
11
2.37
Figure 19
SELECTED WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS
SAMPLED DURING MAY/JUNE 1983
RILEY CREEK
60
JRB Associates

-------
Aquatic macrophytes at Station 1 included Nasturtium, Lemna, Chara, and green
algae. Chara, seen only at Station 1, utilizes calcium silicate in its cell
wall structure. At Stations 2 and 3, Zanichellia and green algae were the
dominant macrophytes.
Streambed composition at Station 1 consisted of boulders, gravel, sand and a
clayey silt which probably provided habitat and nutrient matter for the Chara.
All sediments appeared to consist primarily of' inert matter. Substrate
sampled at Stations 2 and 3 on Riley Creek consisted of sandy gravels and
silts but without the clay. Although there was evidence of organic material
present, no flocculent matter was seen in the stream sediments such as that
observed in Billingsley Creek downstream of hatcheries.
4.3.3 Sand Springs Creek
One station was established on Sand Springs Creek as a control site since this
creek has no hatchery facilities located within the watershed. Ambient land
use is primarily range and agricultural. Results of all water quality para-
meters are listed in Figure 20. Stream NH3, TKN, and PO4 concentrations
compare favorably with Station 1 of both Billingsley and Riley Creeks, but
concentrations of these nutrients in Sand Springs Creek are significantly
lower than the stations of Billingsley and Riley Creeks downstream of the
hatcheries. Both pH and DO also compare favorably to Billingsley and Riley
Creeks, with oxygen at a saturated level at both stations and pH between 7.5
and 8.
Macroinvertebrates sampled Included Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, Nematoda, and
Gastropoda. The instream fauna at this station was most similar in composi-
tion and abundance to Riley Creek at Station 2. In a final report to the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service regarding Shoshone sculpln, stomach analyses of fish
taken from Sand Springs Creek included Ephemeroptera, Odonata, Trichoptera,
Dlptera, Coleoptera, Amphlpoda, and Copepoda.^ Aquatic macrophytes observed
include Nasturtium, green algae and Zanichellia.
(,1783
61
JRB Associates

-------
Sediment	Dissolved
NH3 TKN PO^ TVS	Oxygen
Station mg/& mg/& m g/1 mg/g	pH mg/£
1 <0.01 <0.10 <0.10 21	7.6 10
Figure 20
SELECTED WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS
SAMPLED DURING MAY/JUNE 1983
SAND SPRINGS CREEK
62
JRB Associates

-------
Actual streambed composition of the sampling station was not determined since
the entire stream section sampled was covered with sediments apparently
resulting from agricultural runoff. The sediments were primarily composed of
Inert matter and did not resemble the flocculent material seen at Stations 3
through 5 on Bllllngsley Creek. Cattle grazing constitutes the major land use
for this stream section. Grazing cows were observed along several portions of
the stream.
4.3.A. Salmon Falls Creek
Salmon Falls Creek has no hatchery facilities located within the wasteshed,
but It Is heavily impacted by such agricultural activities as grazing, irriga-
tion and feedlot runoff. Sampling results from the station established by JRB
Associates and a summary of mean water quality paramaters^ representing 24
months of sampling near Highway 30 on Salmon Falls Creek are presented in
Figure 21. The ammonia concentration at the upstream (JRB) sampling station,
together with the downstream TKN concentrations, are comparable to the
nitrogen concentrations measured in Bllllngsley Creek downstream of hatcheries
(Stations 2, 3, and 4). However, PO4 concentrations at the Highway 30
sampling point were lower than those observed at Stations 2 through 5 in
Bllllngsley Creek. DO levels at Station 2 were near saturation.
Stream surveys conducted by JRB Associates at Balanced Rock State Park
(Station 2) revealed a stream seriously impacted by agricultural runoff.
Macroinvertebrate populations were extremely depressed; only amphlpods were
collected during our sampling effort. Aquatic nacrophyces, likewise, were
low in diversity; only Zanichellia was present and was restricted in distri-
bution and size because it was smothered by ln-stream silt deposits.
The streambed composition at Station 2 consisted entirely of fine well sorted
silt. Silt deposits averaged 29 inches deep throughout the 200-foot stretch
surveyed. Although the chief component of these sediments appeared to be
inert, evidence of organic decomposition was seen along the bank. No doubt
this can be accounted for by the aquatic macrophytes that were smothered
during periods of runoff.
M784
^— JR8 Associates
63

-------
NHi
TKN
Stat. mg/& mg/g.
1* 0.065 0.603
2 0.36 —
POtf
mg/t
0.027
Sediment
TVS
mg/g
36
)H
7.9-
8.5
8.0
Dissolv
Oxygen
mg11
* Represents mean values for 24 months of sampling
by Idaho Division of Environment, Department of
Health and Welfare from 5/81 to 4/83.

Balanced Rock
Park
Figure 21
SELECTED WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS SAMPLED DURING
MAY/JUNE 1983, SALMON FALLS CREEK
64
. JRB Associates

-------
4.3.5 Cedar Draw Creek
Although Cedar Draw was not surveyed by JRB Associates information is avail-
able from the United States Geological Survey which has inventoried five
stations on this creek, some for as long as 13 years. A gross summary of
selected water quality parameters are presented below:
CEDAR DRAW - USGS SUMMARY15
NH3	TKN	PO4	DO	TSS
mg/1	mg/1	mg/1	pH	mg/1	mg/1
0.27	2.28	0.075	8.25	10.0	102.0
Nutrient Levels of NH3 are comparable to Blllingsley Creek Stations 2 through
7, and Riley Creek Station 3. TKN levels are greater than those observed at
the JRB stations on Blllingsley, Riley, Sand Springs, and Salmon Falls
Creeks. PO4 concentrations are less than that observed downstream of
hatcheries on Billingsly Creek. Total suspended solids average 102 mg/1 with
maximum concentrations reported at 330 mg/1. These solids levels are com-
parable to the solids measured In the Influent to the Pisces Hatchery.
65
! ,'785
JRB Associates —

-------
5.0 FEASIBILITY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF WITHIN-BASIN SCREENING DEVICES
Following Che water quality monitoring program of fish hatcheries in Idaho's
Magic Valley Region performed by JRB Associates and representatives of the
fish culturing industry, JRB concluded that the proposed effluent limitations
can be achieved when hatcheries construct facilities for improved capture of
suspended solids, implement improved techniques to raceway cleaning operat-
ions, and institute best management practices for sludge containment, treat"
ment, and discharge. One such treatment recommendation was the installation
of fish screens to sequester resident fish from the lower end (approx. 10-20
feet) of a raceway. This partitioning serves to.provide a settling zone for
solids separation and storage at the end of each fish raceway or holding
basin. The settled solids can then be removed more efficiently and thoroughly
using various vacuuming or siphoning technologies than solids captured in race-
ways not fitted with fish screens. JRB concluded in their draft report that
the use of screens would be most beneficial in enabling a hatchery to avoid
exceeding the proposed instantaneous maximum TSS concentration of 15 mg/1
while also furthering the ability of the hatcheries to comply with the 5 mg/1
average TSS limitation.
Questions arose regarding the reported effectiveness of fish screening devices
during an industry review of the JRB study. Industry representatives argued
that there was no specific or hard evidence in the JRB study that supported a
5 mg/1 effluent limitation based on the use of fish screens. Furthermore, the
hatchery industry was doubtful chat a 5 mg/1 limit could be achieved at all.
They responded that they would be reluctant to remove a portion of a raceway
from production, purchase the screening equipment, and face the difficulties
associated with determining the optimally effective location of the screen
without a demonstrated foreknowledge these actions would result in reduced TSS
output.
While the original intent of the JRB study was to characterize hatchery
effluent discharges and propose effluent limitations, and not to assess Che
effectiveness of screening devices, it was apparent to the research team that
66
JRB Associates

-------
hatcheries with screens were on the whole achieving lower TSS effluent dis-
charges than those hatcheries without screens. This observation was compli-
cated by many factors including the extreme variability in hatchery size and
design, water supply and quality, fish species and size, feed type and rates,
and maintenance practices and equipment. Based on all of the above, EPA-X
requested an additional field study dedicated to investigating the use of
screens and the resultant TSS effluent discharge of such devices. JRB
Associates was requested to design this field monitoring effort for two hatch-
eries in the Magic Valley Region of Idaho. The study would serve as an amend-
ment to the existing Work Assignment No. 6, Task 8 in order to develop BCT
limits.
5.1 OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH
The theory behind the use of screens Is based on particle (food and fecal mate-
rial) settling behavior which Is dependent on velocity of water, detention
time of the particles, and the length and depth of the settling zone. Figure
22 illustrates the predicted behavior of particle settling in a hypothetical
raceway which is screened to isolate fish from the settling zone and thereby
prevent the resuspension of particles.
In order to test the theory that screens will significantly reduce TSS efflu-
ent discharge, JRB proposed a 24-day field effort at two hatcheries. Crystal
Springs and Jones Hatcheries in the Magic Valley Region of Idaho agreed to par-
ticipate in the proposed study. During preparation for the field effort,
Rangen Research contacted EPA-X and requested that their facility also be
included in this effort.
At Jones and Crystal, movable screens were constructed to fit in each raceway
studied and these screens were shifted to three different locations within the
raceway during the study. Each screen remained in one position for eight
days. Rangen, however, had recently installed screens throughout its facility
and these screens were permanently mounted in one location within the raceway.
Therefore, Rangen would provide a continuous 24-day sample of one screen loca-
tion.
t ,1.786
67
JRB Associates _

-------
Particle Settling Velocity For Irregular Shapes And Reynolds Number Of 10.
| (e/cD) 
8
O
o

WATER SURFACE
SET.TLED SOLIDS ZONE	, /	rid
Kiting Velocity (Hydraulic Over Ilow Rate) "V - Q/^
Detention Tin* • Volii»t • L * A
flow Rate
All particle* with V V can be removed.
r	sx o
The proportion of settled solids (V) Iron total solids in eysteis
l« a function of length, depth, and detention tine.
t/t - It/ll - V /V - V htfhm
Effluent
Condult
V. ¦ areal displacement velocity • Q/
d	aa
H, H • depth to aludge storage tone
o
L • length
M • ^./v^ ».
Cenerally rt*ed Variable: Q, |lo, U, V». A , Wj,
Variables: L. A., 0, . VQ. H
Figure 22 - I'KKIHCTED PARTICLE SETTLING BEHAVIOR IN A
SCUIilliNED RACDWAY

-------
5.1.1 Screen Design
The following section provides a brief description of the type of screening
devices used by each hatchery.
Jones
Materials: 1" ID, thin walled PVC pipe vertically mounted with 1/2" spacing
to a 2 x 4 frame (9' 10" length, 3' 4" depth). Galvanized 6 and 8 penny nails
were used to mount the PVC. The outside vertical edge of the 2x4 frame was
covered with weather stripping to provide a seal to raceway walls.
Mounting: The screens were placed upstream of a permanent aluminum angle iron
frame and wedged to raceway walls using wooden wedges.
Approximate Costs: Labor and materials - $75.00 per screen ($10.00/ft.)
RACEWAY
WALL	'
i
Is



\_
9'-10'
PVC PIPE

1

* A*
£4
-2«*
FRAME
Crystal Springs
Materials: 1/2" diamond stretch plastic mesh screen affixed to the upper and
lower rail of a 1 1/4" 00 galvanized electric conduit tubing. The tubing
frame was welded to achieve a length of 17' 8" and was approximately 3' deep.
Mounting; Fastened by a metal pin to the concrete raceway wall.
1,1787
. JRB Associates
69

-------
Approximate Costs - Labor and materials - $150.00 per screen ($10.00/ft.)
Rangen
Materials: - 3/4" ID aluminum pipe mounted vith approximately 3/8" spacing to a
2x4 frame. Lengths vary from 8' to 16' according to the width of the race-
way screened and depths were approximately 36".
Mounting; Screens were mounted to concrete raceway wall in angle iron tracks.
This permits removal for cleaning but not repositioning.
Approximate Costs - 8 ft ponds - $177.50 per screen ($22.00/ft.);16 ft ponds -
$266.25 per screen ($16.60/ft.)
RMS WAY
VMLL—¦
invz£
ALUMINUM PIPE
	Varies (S'-iO'

S I 5 SiB SiiiB !!¦ H ! H B B.B'S'PiBlB B ¦•!! BIB lifiBjliBiEiCiB P (

v
S3
• • • • •

!
3'*0'
2 >4 FRAME
As noted above, the screens were constructed of various materials at each
hatchery; these materials reflected each facility's preference for a screen
70
JRB Associates

-------
design. The choice of components used were primarily based on conditions
existing at that hatchery or upon physical constraints of the facility. For
example, both Jones and Rangen used either PVC or aluminum piping vertically
mounted on a wooden frame instead of netting materials. The managers at each
facility believed these pipes effectively segregate fish from the solids
accumulation, but in addition, they also resist algal growth which could more
easily accumulate on a mesh net and soon obstruct flow. Crystal Springs, on
the other hand, preferred to use standard aqua net materials because it was
more llghtweight-an important consideration because of the width of the race-*
ways (20'). Jones and Rangen used 2x4 wooden frames while Crystal used alum-
inum pipe as the frame for holding the "netting". Aside from these material
differences, the function of the screens was the same, namely, to isolate fish
from a segment of the raceway which could then serve as a settling area for
solids.
5.1.2 Raceways Selected
Figure 23 depicts the raceways studied and the positioning of screens within
the Crystal Springs facility. Crystal Springs was studied to determine the
effectiveness of screens within a single raceway. A single screen was
installed in each one of two second-use raceways (3D and 4D) on the west side
of the hatchery. The screens were shifted every eighth day to the first (X),
second (Y) and third screen (Z) location. An ISCO Model 1580 sampler was
installed at the point of outfall of each raceway and it collected a daily
24-hour composite sample for the duration of the study. These samples were
analyzed for TSS concentration by Century Laboratories in Boise and for settle-
able solids using an Imhoff cone by the field researcher. Simultaneous to the
sampling of these raceways, another raceway (10B), identical to the first two
but without screens, served as a control and was sampled and monitored for TSS
and settleable solids. In addition to determining the effectiveness of
screens for settling solids, the three raceways chosen also represented two
different feeding methods currently utilized by this hatchery. Fish In race-
ways 10B (control) and 4D (study) are rail fed while fish in 3D use self-
feeding devices. It was hoped that this study would also determine that self-
feeding devices are more efficient and produce less wasted food matter in
terms of gross TSS discharged than Che mechanized rail feeders.
05.788
JRB Associates
71

-------

-------
Figure 24 depiccs Che positioning of screens and raceways studied at Jones.
Jones is a hatchery vich many large raceways in series flows. Raceway 4 was
selected as the study raceway. It is 300 feet In length, located south of the
waste treatment pond, and consists of three 100 foot concrete sections (4a,
4B, 4C). Three screens and samplers were used, one at each tailrace of the
three raceway sections. The location of the screens was shifted every eight
days (Period X, 7 and Z) to settle solids in varying sized quiescent zones.
As with Crystal, dally composites were collected for a total of 24 days and
each day's sample was analyzed for TSS and settleable solids. Simultaneously,
another raceway (3ABC) identical to the study site was monitored without
screens to provide control data. Finally, at both hatcheries, approximately
ten random samples (5 at each hatchery) were analyzed for volatile residues.
This provided an approximation of organic matter present in the discharged
solids.
At both Crystal and Jones, inventories of fish within each raceway studied
were determined at the onset and completion of the study (Table 4). Numbers
and pounds of fish were generally the same between control and study raceways.
Therefore the frequency of cleaning, feeding, and other hatchery maintenance
procedures were identical. Furthermore, while the numbers and pounds of fish
were different between Jones and Crystal due to the size of their raceways,
their ages were similar (7-8 months) which would enhance any comparisons
regarding screen effectiveness at the completion of the study.
Figure 25 depicts the position of screens within Rangen Hatchery. The inter-
mediate raceways were screened at 24' from the tailrace. The remaining produc-
tion ponds were screened from 20' to 28* from their" outfalls. Fry ponds are
not screened because they are swept daily. A composite sampler was installed
at the discharge of the final two production raceways (A/B) before entering
Billingsley Creek. Raceway D was not in use during this study so any samples
collected reflected the entire flow from the Rangen Hatchery with the excep-
tion of the settling pond.
The sampling scenario of Jones and Crystal was believed Co provide useful data
regarding Che effluenC characceriscics of two represencacive raceway config-
urations. The sampling scenario ac Che Rangen hacchery provided information
73
1^.753
— JRB Associates

-------
Raceways south of the treatment pond

I

11

I
i





I
I


I I I
	>







I unscreened I

I screened I
c
B
A
















































1

2

"4
4



5



6


7
8
9
*	*	/1
*Study Raceways
Influent Flow
Screen Positions and Periods
I - Sampler location
Position X - 3/8/84 - 3/15/84
Position Y - 3/16/84 - 3/23/84
Position Z =» 3/24/84 - 3/3L/84
Figure 24
SELECTED STUDY AREAS AND RACEWAYS AT JONES HATCHERY
74
JRB Associates

-------
Table 4
FISH STOCKS AT JONES AND CRYSTAL SPRINGS HATCHERIES DURING 1984
JONES HATCHERY
Raceway	No. of Fish
INVENTORY 3/8/84
4A
12,390
4B
12,396
4C
12,360
3A
13,137
3B
13,128
3C
13,146
Lbs of Fish	Age
5,250	7 mo.
4,380	7 mo.
3,552	7 mo.
4,920	7 mo.
4,420	7 mo.
2,981	7 mo.
INVENTORY 3/31/84
4A	12,371
4B	12,365
4C	12,099
3A	13,112
3B	13,089
3C	13,106
8,139	8 mo.
7,274	8 mo.
6,402	8 mo.
8,981	8 mo.
6,088	8 mo.
4,428	8 mo.
CRYSTAL SPRINGS HATCHERY
INVENTORY 3/9/84
3D	*38,505
4D	33,170
10B	30,080
14,530	8 mo.
15,500	8 mo.
16,000	8 mo.
INVENTORY 4/2/84
3D	34,944
4D	34,445
10B	• 35,344
17,560	9 mo.
18,420	9 mo.
18,800	9 mo.
*Reduction in raceway 3D's fish stocks from 3/9 to 4/2/84 is
attributed to sample counting error and not mortality.
«.-1730
75
JRB Associates

-------
Irrigation
Runotf
/
Sampler
Location
Screened
Lower Production Raceways
Screened
Upper Production Raceways
Billlngsley Crk.
Headwaters from
Curren Springs
F r Jm
S.JC 11 ing
Pond
n.it Jischjrge)
Figure 25
SELECTED STUDY AREA AND SCREENED RACEWAYS AT RANGEN HATCHERY
Irrijdtion
Kuiiuf f

-------
regarding an enelra haechary'a raceway discharge, and chic daea vu dir«e£ly
comparable eo JBB's seudy tha previous year. It has been suggested ehae dar-
ing of baech#ry raceways say contribute an azeaaa TSS load. Thia aonieorlag
plan waa designed eo exaalna thia poaeibility aa vail aa provide overall iafor-
aacloa on the effectiveness of aereenlog devices to trap and aectle auapendad
aaeerlal. Figure 26 preaenca Che anticipated relaeionahlpa between acreened
and unscreened racavaya of hatchery typea identified eo daea la this study.
Ie waa aneicipaead ehae eha anacreened control raceways would discharge the
greatest aaoune of TSS and ehae screened raceways would reduce eoeal solids
discharge. It was also believed ehae aolelple raceways would discharge tha
greatest aaoune of TSS and ehae the use of screens in each aegnene would pro-
vide a correapondlng reduction in suapended solids discharged.
5.1.3 Screen Positioning
The placeaene of the fish screene within Jonee and Crystal Springs waa pre-
dicated on the relationship of fecal and food particle seeding rates with
respect eo ehe hydraulic traneporc of thoae aollda through tha raceway baain.
Tha tvo-dloenelonal velocity vactor of a particle settling to the bottoa of
Che raceway eonelscs of a horizontal- .valocley- which. Is that associated with
water mass movement (a function of flow rate and cross-sectional area of tha
raceway) and the discrete settling velocity of the partlele (see Figure 22).
A number of simple equations were used to determine the L^, or critical length
ae which the fish screen Bust be located away from che valr so that a surface
partlele (P^) will fall to the bottoa or Into the sludge storage zone of cha
raceway and noe be carried over the weir by the upward hydraulic overflow
water velocities. It waa aaauaed that screen distances less than L would
c
result in increaaed loaa of solids, while screen distances significantly in
excess of length I. would result in a greater solids storage zone, but have
little net improvement in effluent TSS, all at the expense of reducing che
available fish rearing capacity of the raceway. Figure 27 la an example of
the expected relationship between effluent TSS and screen distance.
In an effort co determine che Initial positioning of che fish screens, esti-
mates were made on che effects of wetted specific gravity and parcicle shape
and sizes. For purposes of estimating particle settling rates it was asauaed
chat fish raceway solids have a specific gravity of L.O co 1.1, and chac
JRS Associate*
77

-------
09
VJ
6-
e
41
* *
1	2
Number of Raceways

Figure 26
SCATTERPLOT OF HYPOTHESIZED RESULTS AS A
FUNCTION OF SCREEN POSITION WITHIN THE RACEWAY
78
JRB Associate

-------
(a) Effluent TSS in raceway wichouc screens
Figure 27
PREDICTED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EFFLUENT
. TSS AND FISH SCREEN SEPARATION DISTANCE
79
i
» 'J.f
JRB Associates

-------
solids have a mean particle six* of approximately 1 m. Using ehes« aasuap-
Cioas, » particle seeding velocity of 1.2 cajsac was projected. Based upon
Che aforeaensioned analyses screen position X, or the first eight-day period,
was see ae 6' and 8' In the Crystal and Jones hatcheries, respectively. Upon
arriving at the hatcheries, actual field trials were performed at each
facility la order to sore accurately characterize the settling rates of the
hatchery's particle seeellng veolocley. Adjustments to the initial Lg for
Crystal were required as a result of these field trials because the settling
rates were found to be 29 percent slower than the predicted rate. Figures 28
and 29 present the calculated critical length Le for Jones and Crystal
Springs. The for Crystal changed froa a predicted 6' to 10' due to the
results of field settling eests; however, the tfirst screen position remained
ae the 6' distance.
Vhlle it would have been fruitful to have tested the full range of separation
distances la order to atteapt to produce the TSS relationship drawn in Figure
27, considerations of the Halted resources and tlaa available deaanded any
errors be on the side of laproved performance, first to establish the effec-
tiveness of screens, and second to help deteralne the .cost iapaces associated
with their use. Because of these Halts, screen positions ? and Z (the second
and third 8-day periods) ware located at aultlples of 1.5 and 2.0 at Jones and
2.0 and 3.0 at Crystal Springs.
Rangen's L^ was not useful In selecting screen position due co che permanent
mounting of the screen. Locations of these screens, however, were froa 20' co
28' froa the tallrace of its ponds, well over the projected L of 18.2' based
on that hatcheries flow race (12.2 cfs) and settling characteristics which
were similar co Jones.
3.2 RESULTS
k suaoary of che screen study sampling results are presented by hatchery in
Appendix C. Raceway discharges have been characterized by flow rate, cocal
suspended solids (TSS) la mass per unit volume and concentrations of settle-
able solids.
80
JRB Assooatw

-------
Figure 28
COMPUTATIONS OF CRITICAL SCREEN DISTANCE L - JONES HATCHERY
c
Weir Boards
'Fish Screen
H " maximum water depth to settle
L • length of screen from overflow weir
Vj - fluid velocity through raceway
Vs ¦ particle settling velocity
From engineering design basis:
a - ^ • t
Vj » Q/A » Flow/Width • Depth
vs s [3*38 (Ss - 1) d J*5 at Reynolds number
in the transitional zone between laminar
and turbulent flow in open channels.
A table of constants and resultant settling properties at Jones Hatchery is:
Typical Raceway Dimensions (ft)
Maximum Measured Flow (cfs/raceway)
Maximum Particle Settling Depth H (ft)
Mean Particle Settling Velocity (cm/sec)
Mean Horizontal Velocity (ft/sec):
V o	»
d A(f?)
vd
Critical Length. Lc ¦ H • ¦=— «
(L is screen distance from weir)
c
100'L X 10'W x 4'D
3.96 cfs
3.6
1.57 cm/sec or 0.052 ft/sec
0.124 ft/sec
7.6 ft
(,2.793
81
JRB Associates

-------
Figure 29
COMPUTATIONS OF CRITICAL SCREEN DISTANCE L - CRYSTAL SPRINGS
c
Weir Boards
'Fish Screen
H ¦ maximum water depth to settle
L • length of screen from overflow weir
Vd » fluid velocity through raceway
Vs - particle settling velocity
From engineering design basis:
H - Lc * —-
^ Vd
Vd » Q/A ¦ Flow/Width • Depth
Vs = [3.3g (Ss-l)d] at Reynolds number
in the transitional zone between laminar
and turbulent flow in open channels.
A table of constants and resultant settling properties at Crystal Springs is:
Typical Raceway Dimensions (ft):	10'L x 18'W x 2.8'D
Maximum Measured Flow (cfs/raceway).:	5.4
Maximum Particle Settling Depth H (ft):
Mean Particle Settling Velocity (cm/sec):
Mean Horizontal Velocity (ft/sec):
v , 9 (cff> =,
d A (ftz)
vd
Critical Length, Lc = H * rr-
2.8
0.86 cm/sec or 0.03 ft/sec
0.107 ft/sec
10 ft
(L is screen distance from weir)
c
82
JRB Associates

-------
As with Che first JRB study, TSS values collected during this study included
high values which are outliers to the rest of the data. Exact normal distri-
butions in real data occur infrequently, often they exhibit some degree of
skewness. The TSS data collected during the screen study for both Jones and
Crystal exhibits a right skewed or positive distribution where infrequent but
consistently higher TSS values occurred. These values, while not representa-
tive of the overall hatchery TSS discharge,, do occur, and we believe that they
reflect specific activities within the hatchery, particularly cleaning. Table
5 presents a chronological summary of the occurrence of highest TSS values
(>10 og/1) and a summary of corresponding hatchery maintenance activities.
Rangen is not Included in this table because TSS values never exceeded 4 mg/1
during the entire study. A correlation can be seen between the frequency of
cleaning or sample counting and high TSS values. Furthermore, the effects of
cleaning activities may extend over a longer period than one day: counts of
6ng/l or more occurred within 24 hours at Jones following the highest TSS
observations in position X. This would suggest that possible residual set-
tling effects may be common following these hatchery activities. The spotty
occurrence of TSS values at Crystal of 6 or more mg/1 could not be directly
correlated to maintenance, but it is known that the fry ponds upstream receive
regular and frequent cleaning which may account for these high values. Altera-
tions in raceway flow may also account for increased TSS. On March 24th at
Crystal Springs, for example,, the effluent TSS in raceway 3D was 13 mg/1. On
the same day a virus outbreak in 3C resulted in higher than usual fish mortali-
ty. The hatchery later confirmed that the flow rate had been increased in
raceway 3C (and subsequently 3D) to enhance Che accumulation and collection of
fish at the tail end. Therefore, the high TSS value reported for that day is
assumed to be a result of these flow manipulations.
Testing the statistical significance of the data to determine if screens were
effective in reducing TSS discharge was performed by logarithmic (natural log)
transformation. The purpose of this transformation is twofold: first to make
the frequency distribution more symmetrical or to bring the data closer to
normality; and second, to make the variance independent of the means. These
steps are necessary in order to perform the t- and F-statistlcal tests that
will determine significance between treatment (screened) and control
(unscreened).	/hQA
83
JRB Associates

-------
Table 5
CORRELATION OF HIGHEST TSS VALUES® AND HATCHERY ACTIVITIES
JONES
TSS
(mg/1)
13
12
16
Raceway
3 (A.B&C)
4A
4C
Activity
Study and control raceways cleaned;
screens installed in position X.
CRYSTAL
3/9/84
3/17/84
3/21/84
3/24/84
3/25/84
3/30/84
10
13
17
13
10
10
4D
10B
40
3D
3D
10B
Study and control raceways cleaned;
screens installed in position X.
Study and control raceways cleaned
on 3/16; screens repositioned to Y.
Fry ponds 3C and 4C (first use)
were cleaned.
3C experienced die-off from virus;
water levels raised to enhance
collection of mortalities thereby
subjecting 3D to increased velocities.
Study and control raceways cleaned;
screens repositioned to Z.
Fish sample counted.
Reporting TSS values greater than or equal to 10 mg/1.
JRB Associates
84

-------
Table 6 presents the results of statistical tests comparing the mean TSS dis-
charged from screened and unscreened raceways for Jones, Crystal, and Rangen
hatcheries. Throughout the study at Jones, the screened ponds 4ABC reflected
a lower mean TSS concentration than that of the unscreened raceway 3 which was
measured only at Pond C. When t- tests were performed Co compare the mean TSS
discharges of raceways 3 and 4C, the results indicated that during the first
8-day period or position X, the 8' screen position, there were no statistical-
ly significant differences between the total TSS discharged from either race-
way. However, positions Y (12') and Z (16*) demonstrate that differences
between the mean TSS discharged are significant. Mean TSS concentrations are
less in the screened raceway 4 (measured at C) than in the unscreened control
raceway 3. This would Indicate that the for Jones falls somewhere between
8 and 12 feet. Figure 30 presents the actual relationship between mean efflu-
ent TSS and screen separation distances at Jones. The control raceway 3 dis-
charged the greatest amount of TSS while the screened positions In raceway 4C
reflect increasing reductions in effluent TSS discharge. The L£ 1.5 or 12',
however, displayed the lowest TSS effluent discharged (1.68 mg/1), while
2.0 or 16' reflected a slight increase over 1.5 (2.03 mg/1). This Increase
is attributed to the occurrence of high TSS values (7-9 mg/1) in ponds A and B
possibly associated with a hatchery activity. Overall, the relationship
between screened and unscreened raceways is evident; a reduction in effluent
TSS occurs when screens are utilized, and the trend towards increased reduc-
tions in effluent TSS can be correlated to the positioning of screens at 1.5
and 2.0 times the length.
If one pools all positions and compares the raceways over the entire 24 day
study, a statistical difference is again observed. The mean TSS for pooled
screen positions and periods in raceway 4C is equal to 2.18 mg/1 (data trans-
formed back to scale); the mean TSS for pooled periods in raceway 3 is 3.72
mg/1. It can be concluded, therefore, that during this study period, screened
raceway 4 was discharging 40 percent less solids than the control. It is also
useful to recall that fish stocks and frequency of hatchery maintenance activ-
ities were basically the same. The range of mean TSS values recorded during
this study was from 1.68 (raceway 4, position Y) to 4.46 mg/1 (raceway 3,
position Z). Due to the similarity in hatchery treatment or maintenance prac-
tices observed during this study, an explanation for the variability in mean
85
l .1795
—- JRB Associates

-------
Table 6
RESULTS OF STATISTICAL TESTS COMPUTED TO DETERMINE SIGNIFICANT
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN STUDY (SCREENED) AND CONTROL RACEWAYS
JONES HATCHERY
Control	Test
Raceway	Raceway	t-Test*	Significance
Position X (8')
3

4
t,. ¦ 0.42
14
No
Position
Y (12f)



3

4
tu - 2.55
Yes
Position
Z (16')



3

4
tu - 3.47
Yes
Pooled X,
3
,Y&Z
4
t4fi - 2.89
Yes


CRYSTAL SPRINGS HATCHERY

Position
X (6')

F-Test*

10B
Position
Y (12')
3D.4D
F2,21 " l-61
No
10B
Position
Z (18')
3D ,4D
F2,21 " °'77
No
10B

3D.4D
F2,21 ¦ 6'03
RANGEN HATCHERY
Yes
t-Test*
1983 JRB	1984 JRB	t3? » 2.37	Yes
S tudy	S tudy
*A.lpha = 0.05.
86
JRB Associates.

-------
Screen Separation Distance for Overflow Weir
Figure 30
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MEM EFFLUENT TSS AND
DISTANCES AT JONES HATCHERY
;,'.736
87
JRB Associates

-------
TSS discharged is unclear but may possibly be affected by Che technique
utilized during any activity such as cleaning, grading, or sample counting.
Results of statistical tests (ANOVA) performed to compare the mean effluent
TSS discharges of Crystal Springs raceways 30, 4D, and 10B indicated that
in positions X (6') and Y (12') there were no statistical differences. In
position Z (18'), a significant difference was reported among the raceways.
By performing a multiple comparison test to identify which raceway was differ-
ent, it was determined that the mean TSS of raceway 40 (study) was signifi-
cantly less than the effluent TSS in either raceways 10B (control) or 3D
(study). Unexpectedly, raceway 3D utilizes self-feeding devices which were
anticipated to have the lowest of all TSS discharged. Figure 31 presents the
actual relationship between the mean TSS effluent and screen separation dis-
tances at Crystal Springs. Data from this effort are inconclusive reflecting
highest and lowest TSS effluent at L 1.0 or 6' and L 3.0 or 18'.
c	c
It can be said that the .results of screening single raceways, particularly
those that receive effluent streams from other unscreened raceways or hatchery
segments appear to provide little benefit with regard to reducing effluent
TSS. Furthermore, the raceways under study receive untreated effluent from
fry ponds that are cleaned frequently and for hygienic reasons are cleaned by
sweeping rather than vacuuming. The range of mean TSS reported during the
entire study period was 2.74 mg/1 (raceway 3D, position X) and 5.99 mg/1 (race-
way 3D, position Z). As with Jones, the variabilitry of TSS is interesting
when one considers that fish stock within raceway activities were the same.
However, due to the second-use status of these ponds, activities upstream
could account for TSS value variability.
Statistical comparisons were made of the data taken at the Rangen Hatchery
last year when it was not completely screened and this year's screen study.
The tests show the statistical differences to be quite significant. The mean
effluent TSS concentration for Rangen during the entire 24-day study in 1984
was 1.68 mg/1 (data transformed back to scale). Compared to the 1983 JRB
study of the same raceways a 75 percent reduction in effluent TSS concentra-
tion was achieved. The 1984 study results also display no high outliers that
were common during Che 1983 studies. At no time in Che 1984 evaluacion of
88
JRB Associates

-------
12 -
[^1 Control Raceway 10B, value is
mean TSS concentration dis-
charged over entire study.
0 Study Raceways 3D and 4D.
10-
aa
s
8 -
t/J
V)
H
S 6
3
W
E
(4.6)
(4.9)
(4.21)
SE
(3.23)
2 -
1.5
L
2.0
L
c	c
Screen Separation Distance from Overflow Weir
3.0
L
Figure 31
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MEAN EFFLUENT TSS AND
SCREEN SEPARATION DISTANCES AT CRYSTAL SPRINGS HATCHERY
v/^.737
89
JRB Associates

-------
wlchin-basiir screens did a TSS value exceed 4 mg/1. The results of 1984's
study also suggests that a hatchery that screens all Its raceways reflects not
only lower TSS values but also less extremes. Figure 32 presents the actual
relationship between all screened and unscreened raceways and hatcheries
examined In this study. While the control raceways discharge the greatest
mean TSS effluent as hypothesized In Figure 26, It was determined that screen-
ing multiple raceways achieved the lowest average TSS effluent concentration
as evidenced by the Sangen Hatchery results. Correlating reductions in sus-
pended solids to an increasing number of screened raceways, while variable,
generally did support this hypothesis. However the data suggests that by
installing screens within an entire hatchery facility, the greatest reduction
in effluent TSS is achieved.
One might also postulate that screening an entire facility, therefore, reduces
the occurrence of the occasional high values associated with routine hatchery
maintenance practices. This reduction may be manifested only in the entire
hatchery effluent as in Rangen rather than at Jones where only a raceway was
studied and outliers were observed.
Settleable solids tests performed using an Imhoff cone were similar to the
results of the 1983 JRB study. Never did Che studied raceway's effluent exceed
trace levels.
Settling rates of the fecal and wasted food matter were tested at each hatch-
ery to determine more precise settling velocities. A summary of these tests
is presented in Appendix D for Crystal Springs and Jones hatcheries. At
Jones, an overall average particle settling rate of 1.57 cm/sec. was recorded.
Rangen's settling rates were similar, averaging 1.46 cm/sec. Crystal Spring's
particle settling velocity at 0.86 cm/sec averaged roughly one-half that of
either Jones or Rangen. Possible reasons for the difference in settling rates
may be attributed to the feed ingredients, the proportions of these ingre-
dients, or the method by which the feed is milled or produced. It is noted
Jones and Rangen use the same feed while Crystal uses a different feed pro-
duct. Visual inspections of the particles indicate that Crystal's is larger
and flakelike while both Jones' and Rangen's are more compact spheres or
cylinders. These physical variabilities undoubtedly play a role in the dif-
ferences in settling characteristics.
90
JRB Associates

-------
y>
oo
>
8
o
g
£'
10-
v .
'•O
CO
GO
8-
00
a
i/i
01
H
£
at
P
w
p
m
a)
S
6-
2-
IS	Rangen (with partial screens, 1983)
~	Rangen
t	Crystal Springs
E	Crystal Springs Control (unscreened)
X	Jones
m	Jones Control (unscreened)
ffl(7.3)
¦jjjj(4.6)
XI <3-72)
(4.1)
X (2.56)
X (2.17)
X(»-75)
~ (1.68)
0
3	4
Number of Screened Raceways
T
5
Figure 32
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MEAN TSS RESULTS AND NUMBER OF SCREENED RACEWAYS
AT RANGEN. CRYSTAL SPRINGS, AND JONES HATCHERIES

-------
The volatile residue of selected samples collected randomly at both Crystal
Springs and Jones were analyzed to determine approximate content of organic
matter* Five samples were collected at Jones and the volatile content
averaged 33 percent of the total solid fraction. The volatile matter of five
samples collected at Crystal Springs averaged 54 percent of the total solid
fraction. The Jones samples were reported by Century Labs to be sandy which
may account for the lower volatile fraction. In fact, rain occurred on each
day that a sample was taken at both hatcheries, and it is possible that inert
matter was blown or washed into the raceways. Both hatcheries, however,
reflect lower than anticipated volatile matter present. This data is consis-
tent with the range of volatile fractions reported in 1983 (30 - 70 percent).
The volatile content of the hatchery samples Is less than other fecal matter.
The lab results suggest that a higher fraction of inert matter may occur in
the idiet or that the physical layout of raceways in fish hatcheries is more
accessible to windblown or ralnwashed silts, sands, or other inert particu-
lates.
92
JRB Associates

-------
6.0 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 CATEGORIZATION OF FISH HATCHERIES IN IDAHO
One objective of this work assignment is to gather information that will be
useful to EPA Region X to better classify or identify hatcheries. Based on
size, hydraulic characteristics, and the product of the facility, JRB Asso-
ciates recognizes three major hatchery categories: Commercial with Flow-
through Settling; Commercial with Off-line Settling; and Noncommercial Rear
for Release. These categories and their representative hatcheries are defined
as follows:
•	Commercial with Flow-through Settling - A hatchery engaged in the
commercial production of fish whereby suspended and settleable
solids separation occurs in the total flow either in raceways,
fish ponds, or a distinct settling pond located downstream of and
accepting the total hatchery flow with its solids content. Clyde
Hughes, Pisces and Fish Breeders hatcheries are examples of this
subcategory.
•	Commercial with Off-line Settling - A hatchery engaged in the
commercial production of fish with sludge treatment facilities
designed to remove raceway solids in a fashion that is hydraull-
cally separated from the total hatchery effluent. Said facili-
ties can either be non-overflow, intermittent overflow, or con-
tinuous discharge systems. Crystal Springs, Blue Lakes, Rim
View, Rangen, and Jones hatcheries are examples of this category.
The reader is also reminded that the Fish Breeders hatchery also
has a separate waste cleaning aerobic digestion treatment system
which serves both as a nutrlenc recycle and as a waste destruc-
tion facility.
•	Non-Commercial Rear for Release - A hatchery not engaged in
commercial fish production, but which propagates fish for the
stocking of appropriate receiving waters or for other noncom-
mercial purposes. This category may Include either flow-through
or off-line cleaning waste seeding or other treatment systems.
Hagerman State hatchery is an example of this category.
While JRB Associates believes these three categories can provide a useful tool
to distinguish hatcheries, we recognize the immense variation between the
JRB Associates
93

-------
hatcheries studied. If the EPA intent in distinguishing hatchery categories
is to establish or differentiate differences that may occur in effluent dis-
charges, we do not believe this grouping to be especially useful. The JRB
data demonstrate that the only statistical difference as measured by effluent
discharge was that observed between Hagerman State and Crystal Springs hatch-
ery. In summary, while it is possible to categorize hatcheries by the above
physical descriptions or other common denominators of effluent discharge, ve
do not find any real measure of differences in waste discharge character-
istics. For this reason we discourage EPA Region X from attempting to relate
effluent or other discharge criteria to hatchery categories If the effluent
characteristics are intended to be the only standard of differentiation
between hatchery categories.
6.2 HATCHERY EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Based on the results of the studies performed by JRB and Industry, as well as
a review of the IPAC effluent discharge recommendations and the Hydroscience
reporc, JRB Associates recommends ¦ modification and adoption of the IPAC
effluent limitations for hatcheries within the State of Idaho. Table 7 sum-
marizes these proposed hatchery effluent limitations. These recommended
effluent limits suggest four major variations from those suggested by IPAC:
•	That a 5 mg/1 daily average net increase above background Total
Suspended Solids be instituted as a final effluent limitation of
the total hatchery discharge, with an interim 8 mg/1 daily
average TSS limit assigned at the discretion of EPA-X.
•	That the 0.2 ml/1 instantaneous maximum settleable solids limita-
tion on total hatchery effluent be discontinued.
•	That the permit not attempt to establish an effluent TSS mass
emission rate based upon fish biomass.
•	That the permit not distinguish between Total Discharge and
Cleaning Raceway Discharge, but continue to distinguish between
Total Discharge and Treatment System Effluent.
The rationale for these changes is presented in the following sections.
JRB Associates

-------
Table 7
RECOMMENDED IDAHO HATCHERY EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Type of Discharge
A. Total Hatchery or Combined Raceway
1.	Suspended Solids (above background)
•	30-day Average (BCT Limitation)
•	30-day Average (BPT Limitation)3
•	Instantaneous Maximum
2.	Settleable Solids
•	Daily Average
Recommended
Effluent Limitation
5 mg/1
8 mg/1
15 mg/1
0.1 mg/1
Treatment System Effluent
1.	Suspended Solids
•	Instantaneous Maximum
•	Average Daily Minimum Removal Efficiency
2.	Settleable Solids
•	Instantaneous Maximum
•	Average Dally Minimum Removal Efficiency
100 mg/1
85 percent
1.0 ml/1
90 percent
aThe BPT limitation reflects best practicable control technology currently
available.
0-
95
JRB Associates

-------
6.2.1 Total liatchery or Combined Raceway Discharge
After the compilation and statistical analysis of JRB's results, it became
apparent that the Hydroscience study reported lower levels of total suspended
solids at the Crystal Springs, Hagerman State, and Jones hatcheries than did
either the JRB or the industry study. Comparisions of all the available data
(tests of significance and one-way ANOVA) revealed statistically significant
(^2,42 " 7.52) differences. After a careful review of the monitoring loca-
tions and methods, it was determined that the Hydroscience study generally
characterized only single raceway discharge and not the discharge of the total
hatchery. One primary function of the Hydroscience study was to describe
cleaning methods and operating procedures in order to assess their effec-
tiveness. Therefore, it was necessary for raceway cleaning events to be
monitored and the discharge characterized. The Hydroscience report states that
"these samples were collected over the duration of the cleaning cycle for
Individual raceways and composited to give one sample representative of the
cleaning wastes from the raceway that was cleaned."3 The IFAC based its
recommendations on the data from the Hydroscience report. However, 1PAC was
making recommendations for effluent limitations that would affect a hatchery's
entire discharge. When one considers that many hatcheries reuse their water
through multiple series or tiers of raceways it becomes apparent that TSS
loads may be cumulative. Thus the average range of 1-5 rng/1 TSS reported by
Hydroscience for the twice-used water in the west raceways at the Crystal
Springs hatchery may compare favorably with the 1983/1984 study reported range
of 6-11 mg/1 TSS monitored across the east section where water is used four
times. Similar situations arise at the Jones and Hagerman State hatcheries
where Hydroscience sampled one or two raceway sections while the 1983/1984
study monitored those hatcheries' total raceway discharges.
Although we question the resultant application of the Hydroscience data by
IP AC and others, we are led to believe by the 1983 and 1984 data that the
recommended 5 mg/1 average daily and 15 mg/1 instantaneous maximum TSS and the
0.1 ml/1 settleable solids effluent limitations are reasonable and achievable.
Obviously, the arrangement of raceways within existing hatcheries is a
96
JRB Associates .

-------
critical factor but particular maintenance practices when adopted will contri-
bute to improved raceway TSS effluent. Figure 33 presents the confidence
Intervals calculated from JRB's study results with our recommended TSS final
effluent limitation of 5 mg/1 and an Interim limitation of 8 mg/1. Figure 33
illustrates that most of the hatcheries studied are approaching or have
achieved the proposed limits. Furthermore, we believe that the recommended 5
mg/1 effluent limit is attainable through the use of proven treatment tech-
nology and best management practices. This belief is supported by recent
Rangen study results that show the effectiveness of within-basln screens in
reducing TSS effluent. Currently, the 1983/1984 data indicate that an 8 mg/1
TSS limitation can be achieved by all but two hatcheries. Excluding those
two, the remaining facilities are meeting this value without utilizing recent
BCT technologies or fully Implementing best management practices. The two
facilities that were greater than the 8 mg/1 limit have been experimenting
with such technologies since the 1983 study. Based on this, it is suggested
that an 8 mg/1 TSS limit be established as an interim effluent limitation to
serve as a benchmark for enforcement of the NPDES permits until the hatchery
achieves the 5 mg/1 TSS final effluent limitation on either a voluntary basis
or a mandated compliance schedule contained in the discharge permit.
6.2.2 Raceway Cleaning Effluent Limitations
JRB recommends that the IF AC proposed 0.2 ml/1 instantaneous maximum settle-
able solids limitation be dismissed. The significance of this numerical limit
when compared against the 0.1 ml/1 daily average, and Che data bases which
reveal general compliance with the same, make this effluent limitation of
questionable benefit to the environment. Both hatchery performance data and
the study data suggest that the 15 mg/1 TSS instantaneous maximum would be
violated before the 0.2 ml/1 settleable solids limitation, and Chat Che TSS
limitation controls the pollutant parameter of greatest ecological signifi-
cance .
(,1801
97
JRB Associates

-------
Raceway TSS (mg/£)
Hatchery/CI
Blue Lakes
(A.27 - 7.89)
Crystal Springs
(7.76- 14.11)
Rim View
(2.97 - 13.3)
Rangen
(5.63- 9.47) 1983
(1.40 - 2.01) 1984
Jones
(6.57 - 9.97)
llagennan
(0.52- 7.29)
12 13 14 15
I I I I
		Industry 1983 Study
		JRB 1983 study
•	In ic transformed back
...	JRB 1984 Study
Figure 33
MEANS AND CONFIDENCE INTERVALS FOR HATCHERY TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS

-------
The IPAC recommended a dlscinccion between "total discharge" and "raceway
cleaning effluent." Cleaning effluent was defined as "the water discharged
from a single raceway being cleaned or the total flow from a facility after
settling in a pond."3 It no longer appears useful to distinguish between
these discharges with regard to the final effluent limits since JRB has
proposed differentiation of hatcheries by categories that account for off-line
or flow-through settling systems. Furthermore, to permit an Instantaneous
maximum discharge of IS mg/1 TSS for raceway effluent and 25 mg/1 TSS effluent
for raceways during cleaning, as recommended by IPAC, is not justified. The
data do not show such levels of variation either within or between hatchery
types as measured at the point of discharge to the receiving water.
6.3 BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY: WITHIN-BASIN FISH SCREENS
A number of hatcheries have experimented with the use of fish screens to keep
resident fish from congregating within more than 10-20 feet of the effluent
weir in each raceway. The effect of this action results in keeping the fish
out of the lower end of each raceway and provides an in-line settling zone
with the settled solids stored on the floor of the raceway until removed by
mechanical or siphon vacuuming, or by draining through opened standplpes. The
effectiveness of these screens is readily apparent when one observes that the
screened off area still allows solids to settle even when the fish are excited
creating much turbulence in the active portion of the raceway (upstream from
the screen). The results of the screen studies demonstrate chat hatcheries
can achieve the proposed 5 mg/1 effluent limitation when screens are installed
in all raceways, while those without screens frequently exceed that value.
The use of the screens has been demonstrated to also enable the hatchery to
avoid exceeding the proposed instantaneous maximum TSS concentration of 15
mg/1. Because of their success in helping to achieve the proposed effluent
limits, and their reasonable construction and low operations costs, fish
screens installed within the raceways are selected as Best Conventional
Pollutant Control Technology (BCT).
8'
99
JRB Associates

-------
Section 5.0 presented the rationale employed in the design and location of the
raceway fish screen. The data demonstrate that there is a critical distance
based upon raceway configuration and hydraulic properties at which the screen
must be physically separated from the overflow weir. If this distance is not
achieved, the probability is high the effective TSS removal will not take
place and the hatchery will violate the proposed S mg/1 effluent TSS limita-
tion. To help the hatchery manager determine that point known as the critical
length in the fish raceway, Table 8 has been prepared and summarizes a
step-by-step approach for determining that critical point for screen location
in the raceway. The data support the concept of the critical length, and also
suggest that the hatchery manager experiment with the placement of the screen
at a distance of 1.5 to 2.0 times the critical length. Screen placement at a
multiple of the critical length is recommended to provide optimum solids
settling under varying flow conditions and fish production capacities, and to
better accomodate turbulence in the raceway when fish are disturbed during
feeding or cleaning, or when they are subject to harassment by predators or
pests.
The cost of the fish screens are two-fold: (1) the capital and installation
cost of the screens, and (2) the reduction in raceway volume useable for fish
rearing or production. The screens themselves can range from a simple wood
with nylon or metal mesh constructed on site, to prefabricated plastic or
metal screens custom manufactured for the hatchery. The screens presently in
use in the Magic Valley area are constructed with both wood and metal frames
and use 1/2-lnch to 5/8-inch square mesh or small diameter plastic or metal
pipes attached to the screen frames. The spacings between the pipes is small
to preclude fish passage. Section 5.0 presented construction and installation
costs of some screened facilities. Those screens constructed of nylon mesh or
plastic pipe and wood frames have a cost of approximately $8 per lineal foot
of screen. The estimated life of these screens is approximately three years
as both the plastic pipe or nylon mesh degrades due to ultra violet radiation
and the chemically untreated wood loses its strength over time because they
are submerged in the raceways. The costs to construct metal screens using
100
JRB Associates .

-------
Table 8
COMPUTATION OF CRITICAL SCREEN DISTANCE (L )
FOR FISH SCREEN INSTALLATION3,
Step	Process Parameter
1	Raceway Width (ft)
2	Water Depth (ft)
3	Cross-Sectional Area (sq ft)
(Step 1 x Step 2)
4	Raceway Flow Rate (cfs)
5	Mean Water Velocity (ft/sec)
(Step 4 * Step 3)
6	Particle Settling Velocity (cm/sec)
(as measured by field test)
7	Particle Settling Velocity (ft/sec)
Step 6 t 30.48 cm/ft)
8	Water to Settling Velocity Ratio
(Step 5 + Step 7)
9	Critical Screen Length (ft)
(Step 2 x Step 8)
Typically
Observed
Values
10-30
3-4
30-60
2.0-5.0
0.05-0.20
0.5-2.0
0.015-0.70
2.0-5.0
6-15
Example^	Hatchery ofc
Hatchery	Interest
12		
3.25		
39
3.8
0.097
1.05
0.034
2.85
L -9.3 L «
c	c
a
Critical length Lc is defined as that minimum distance between fish screen and
overflow weir to enable capture of waste particles with mean settling rates
and physical characteristics.
^Hypotehtical situation for purposes of example.
Workspace to be used by hatchery manager for determination of critical
length Lc.
i,i.803
101
JRB Associates _

-------
thin wall aluminum pipe and steel frame has been shown to range from $16 to
$22 per lineal foot of screen. However, the estimated life of these screens
is believed to be 10 or more years. As a consequence, over a 10-year
operating period the costs to screen with either construction method are quite
comparable, and can be estimated to be approximately $20 to $24 per lineal
foot of screen. Any extended life to either the wood frame or metal frame
screens will only reduce the annualized cost of the screens.
A second cost of fish screens is that associated with the loss of fish rearing
capacity of the raceway zone now isolated between the screen and the effluent
weir. In those hatcheries which have installed screens, and in the JRB
investigations, it has been found that 10 to 15 percent of the raceway volume
is lost to fish production and is now being ¦ used for solids settling and
storage. • However, no hatchery which has installed the screens has reported
any adverse impacts to fish rearing capacities and Instead have reported
actualized and potential benefits as a consequence of screen installation.
For example, screen installation physically separates the fish from
accumulating fecal and waste food solids and reduces the potential for fish
contact with disease causing organisms. Second, raceway cleaning has been
made easier in that less effort needs to be taken across the entire length of
the raceway now that most solids are captured at the lower end of the raceway.
However, because the solids accumulate to depth at a faster rate below the
screen, this screened zone must be cleaned more frequently. Because the net
solids capture is better with screens than without, the total labor effort
expended to clean and waste sludge from the raceways is likely to remain the
same or increase slightly.
The economic consequence of hatcheries installing screens is anticipated to
have little or no impact on current employment conditions. The Idaho
Department of Employment estimates that as recently as February 1984, 410
people in the three-county Magic Valley area were gainfully employed in fish
rearing and production. This number is near the historical range of employ-
ment which varies from the 1982 low of 270 people to the 1979 high of 750
102
JRB Associates.

-------
people. While the 10 million dollar annual payroll is substantial, the
current workforce represents only 1.5 percent of the 32,700 currently employed
people in the Magic Valley.^
That screens can significantly decrease solids discharge is well documented by
example of the Rangen Hatchery. Having Installed aluminum and steel screens
at a total investment of approximately $8,000, the effluent TSS as measured in
1984 reflects a 7SZ removal from effluent TSS as measured one year earlier.
Given the three-year average daily flow of 29.4 cfs and a measured TSS reduc-
tion of approximately 6 mg/1, the recently installed screens appear to be
capturing an additional 960 pounds of solids each day, solids which heretofore
were discharged to Billlngsley Creek. When projected over the expected
10-year life of the screens, the fish screens have the potential to reduce the
solids discharge loading by 3.5 million pounds of solids. For purposes of
appreciating the cost benefit of the screens, the annualized capital cost to
remove excess suspended solids at the Rangen hatchery is approximately $4.50/
ton of effluent TSS removed. Added to this capital equipment cost are the
screen maintenance costs, expenses to store and dewater the wasted sludge
solids in the raceways currently used for sludge holding, and ultimate dis-
posal of the liquid or dried sludge. These added costs may be low for those
hatcheries which have previously installed sludge holding lagoons or drying
beds and which currently waste sludge residues either through disposal on
agricultural lands or burial pits. However, the costs can be significant for
those hatcheries with no current sludge treatment or disposal systems or
minimal land space to provide for such facilities. Greater discussion on
sludge wasting practices is contained in Section 6.7.4.
The capital costs to install screens and maintain their effective operation
for ten years in all production raceways in the state of Idaho is estimated to
be approximately $615,000 (see Table 9). This cost is based upon an estimated
1,640 raceways in 42 hatcheries statewide known to have concrete raceways, and
is predicated on the assumption that one-half of the hatcheries will install
metal framed screens with a ten-year useful life, while the other half will
103
JRB Associates

-------
Table 9
ESTIMATED CAPITAL AND OPERATION COSTS FOR BPT
SCREEN PLACEMENT IN IDAHO FISH HATCHERIES
Number of Affected Hatcheries ®	42a
Estimated Number of Raceways »	1,640
Average Raceway Width »	15 ft
Total Racevay Width ¦	24,600 lineal feet
10-Year Statewide Capital Costs
Year 1 - Metal Screen, 12,300 ft @ $22/ft -	$270,600
- Wood Screen, 12,300 ft @ $8/ft «	$ 98,400
Year 4 - Wood Screen, 12,300 ft @ $9.30/ftb -	$114,390
Year 7 - Wood Screen, 12,300 ft <3 $10.70/ftb -	$131,610
Total 10-Year Capital Cost »	$615,000
Annualized Capital Cost *	$ 61,500
Statewide Annual Operation and Maintenance Costs
$30/screen/year x 1,640 screens -	$	49,200
Total Capital and O&M Costs
Annualized Industry Cost in Idaho *	$110,700
Annualized Cost per Hatchery ¦	$	2,635
Annualized Cost per Raceway =	$	131.80
Annualized Cost per Lineal Foot of Screen =	$	8.80
Estimated Cost per Ton of TSS Removal ¦	$	29.77/tonc
Estimated Cose per Pound of TSS Removal ¦	$	0.015/lb
a
3Assumes 5% annual inflation rate.
Source: EPA Region X NPDES Permit Files.
b,
Annualized hatchery cost divided by projected minimum of 3 mg/1
TSS removed in 30 cfs average daily flow (88.5 tons per hatchery
per year).
104
JRQ Associates

-------
install che less expensive buc shorter life wood framed screens. Because of
the shortened life, however, the screens are assumed to be replaced twice
within the ten-year period following their original installation. For pur-
poses of capital costs the average raceways width has been estimated to be 15
feet, with metal screens costing $23 per lineal foot, and wood screens costing
$8 per foot.
The operation and maintenance costs are generally those associated with
cleaning the screens. Screens can be brushed down dally as part of routine
maintenance, whenever fish mortalities are removed from in front of the
screens, and when raceway sidewalls are cleaned. While the screens will be
kept dean In part by self-scouring of the water flow, it is estimated that
the screens may need to be pulled, rinsed off and replaced three times per
year. This activity will take two people approximately 30 minutes per screen,
or an equivalent labor cost anticipated not to exceed $30 per year per screen.
From Table 9, the combined annualized capital and 0&M cost per raceway screen
is estimated to be $131.80 per year, or approximately $2,635 for a hatchery
with 20 raceways. Given an average flow rate of 30 cfs, and a net reduction
in effluent TSS of 3 to 6 mg/1, the costs per hatchery to reduce the suspended
solids currently discharged by 480 to 960 pounds per day ranges from $29.77 to
$14.90 per ton of suspended solids. When expressed in cents per pound, the
estimated treatment costs are 1.5 to 0.75 cents per pound of TSS removed.
These costs are but 10 to 20 percent of costs to remove and treat suspended
solids in municipal wastewater treatment plants and industrial facilities
required to remove suspended and settleable solids. This low cost per mass of
solids removed helps support our recommendations that raceway fish screens be
designated as a Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology (BCT).
6.4 TSS AND BIOMASS RATIOS
After reviewing the relationship of pounds of TSS per 100 pounds of fish, JRB
concurs with the Hydrosclence study that an inverse relationship exists
between pounds of TSS generated and the size of fish present whereby "smaller
105
JRB Associates

-------
fish tend to generate higher suspended solids loads.1PAC recommended a
limit of 0.5 pounds of TSS per 100 pounds of fish. If that limitation were
instituted, all hatcheries which reported biomass data during the studies by
Industry, and later used with the JRB results, would be in violation of the
proposed numerical value. This limitation is violated by a facility such as
Hagerman State which meets the 5.0 mg/1 TSS total raceway limitation and yet
discharges but one-half the solids emission In twice the flow volume as does
the Crystal Springs hatchery. However, while the Crystal Springs data
demonstrate the non-compliance with the 5.0 mg/1 TSS total discharge limita-
tion, the industry survey results show that this hatchery achieves the 0.5
pounds of TSS per 100 pounds fish limitation. Another difficulty JRB recog-
nizes with establishing such a limitation relates to the ability of EPA to
determine compliance with the effluent limitation. A fish hatchery exists in
a dynamic situation with regard to the biomass on hand. Fish species and age
classes, metabolic rates, seasonal changes in metabolism and diet, and similar
variables influence the numerical significance of the biomass. Most of these
parameters are not easily measured. Monitoring requirements for hatcheries
would undoubtedly result in subjective estimates that may not reflect the
actual or up-to-date biomass characteristics. Due to these factors, JRB
recommends that this effluent control parameter be dispensed with.
6.5 TREATMENT SYSTEM EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Selective monitoring of cleaning activities were performed at Crystal Springs,
Rangen, Rim View, and the Jones hatcheries. Although utilizing off-line
sludge disposal pits, the Blue Lakes hatchery did no raceway cleaning while
the field technicians were present at the hatchery. The JRB data suggest a
mixed performance of the current hatchery cleaning waste settling systems in
meeting the IPAC proposed 100 mg/1 instantaneous maximum TSS discharge limit.
However, the data do indicate general compliance with the minimum 85 percent
TSS removal limit and that both the minimum 90 percent and 1.0 ml/1 settleable
solids limits can be achieved.
106
JRB Associates

-------
Based upon the limited available data and estimated cleaning waste flow rates
It is suggested that under current practices perhaps 30 to 50 percent of the
solids generated within the hatchery raceways are uasted to off-line settling
systems for treatment or storage prior to ultimate disposal. We believe that
Che percentage of solids capture could increase with Improved cleaning waste
management practices. While effectively capturing the readily settleable
solids, most existing waste settling ponds do not provide adequate hydraulic
detention time, surface area to minimize hydraulic or solids loading on an
areal basis, or adequate freeboard to allow an active settling zone above the
stored quantities of thickened sludge. The particle sizes exhibited by the
raceway solids, and their apparent settling properties under quiescent flow
conditions, make them a waste which should routinely physically separate out
of the water column. JRB recommends that the treatment system effluent dis-
charge limitations as proposed by IFAC be retained and Implemented in the
NPDES permit program.
6.6 HATCHERY DISCHARGE MONITORING PROGRAM
The NPDES discharge permit will identify and Institute discharge limits on one
or more outfall discharges at each hatchery.- Table 7 presented our recom-
mendations for effluent limitations to be applied to those discharges.
Associated with the establishment of the effluent limitations themselves will
be the attendent task of prescribing a compliance assurance self-monitoring
program which will require Industry to measure effluent discharges. An
effective monitoring program requires that sampling and analysis be performed
with care and precision.
Sampling locations should be selected to enable one to fully characterize the
medium being sampled. Equally Important is the selection of sampling method
and the frequency of sampling. Based upon our observations of the hatcheries
in Magic Valley, we offer the following suggestions on any future compliance
assurance monitoring activities.
1,1806
—___——— JRB Associates
107

-------
6.6.1	Sampling Location
The tocal hatchery discharge monitoring point should be positioned downstream
of all raceway and other recycling or treatment system discharges which pass
through the outfall line. The sampling point should not be influenced by
surcharge of receiving water. Similarly, the treatment system discharge line
downstream of all pond discharges should be sampled, even where that line
later connects to the above combined raceway outfall line Instead of as a
direct outfall to the receiving water.
Hatchery influent waters are those springfed or surface water sources first
tapped by the hatchery as the principal water supply for the hatchery. That
point at which the water first enters the hatchery should always be the point
of reference for determining net effluent effects above background TSS concen-
trations, even if the hatchery must pretreat their water supply prior to
ln-hatchery use. Cleaning waste treatment system Influent wastes, however,
should be sampled Immediately prior to pretreatment or discharge into settling
ponds or other treatment or storage facilities.
6.6.2	Sampling Procedures
JRB recommends that total hatchery discharge samples be collected as an eight-*
hour composite sample comprised of equal volume aliquots collected on 60-
minute Intervals during normal daytime operating hours. Visual inspection of
the eight grab samples should be made to determine if a sample high in TSS
should be split and analyzed for compliance with the 15 mg/1 Instantaneous
maximum limitation. Hatchery influent flows, because of their great stability
in races of flow and water quality, can be monitored using a single grab
sample.
Cleaning waste treatment systems should be monitored using comparable grab
sampling techniques to develop a flow proportioned or equivalent time Interval
composite sample over the duration of a single raceway cleaning event, or over
the course of the day during which discharge from the treatment systems
occurs. Settleable solids tests can be performed in the field using the grab
samples prior Co their addition co the composite sample.
108
JRB Associates

-------
6.6.3 Sampling Frequency
The statistical credibility of monitoring increases with the frequency of
sampling. Unfortunately, so do the labor efforts to collect the samples and
the costs to perform the analyses. While the ultimate frequency of sampling
will be determined by EPA Region X, we recommend that total hatchery effluent
TSS limitations be monitored no less frequently than once per month, that
settleable solids tests be performed at least once per week, and that treat-
ment system Influent and effluent wastewater flows be monitored at least once
every three months for determination of TSS removal efficiencies and once per
week for compliance with settleable solids limitations. Based on the occur-
rence of random but consistent high TSS values observed at all hatcheries in
the 1983 study and at two out of the three studied during the 1984 study, it
could be useful for the hatcheries to perform more frequent analyses to better
characterize the effluent TSS concentrations. Any increase in monitoring
effort over the required frequency will, of course, be at the discretion of
the facility's management.
6.7 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR WATER QUALITY PURPOSES
Previous studies and the current investigation have examined the purpose and
measured directly or indirectly the performance of one or more sludge manage-
ment practices as used in the fish hatchery industry. In review of the data
It is our belief that the Idealized hatchery would be one which reuses its
raceway effluent in no more than two raceways in series. All raceways would
be equipped with fish screens located near the effluent weir. Combined race-
way effluents would pass through a quiescent settling basin for removal of low
level TSS concentrations prior to discharge to a surface water body. Settled
solids would be vacuumed off the raceway floor at least once per week and
conveyed to an off-line sludge treatment system. Finally, non-overflow
lagoons, spray irrigation or other land application techniques, or continuous
discharge treatment facilities will treat or separate settleable solids.
M8C7
———————» JRB Associates	
109

-------
None of che -hatcheries investigated in this study are either designed to or
actually operate In accordance with the above scenario. Fortunately, all of
the hatcheries employ at least one of these solids management practices, and
some practice all of these management techniques but at levels less than total
application. We believe that much of the variability in effluent TSS and
settleable solids both within and between hatcheries Is related to the degree
and commitment on behalf of hatchery management to implement a number of Best
Management Practices (BMPs) which demonstrate their effectiveness in control-
ling the release of effluent TSS concentrations. A discussion and general
application of some BMPs to fish hatchery solids management follows.
6.7.1 Raceway Solids Removal
Hatcheries with off-line solids treatment facilities utilize standplpes or
vacuum techniques to remove settled solids from the raceways. Standplpes,
when pulled, utilize the flow of water near the bottom of the raceways to
carry settled solids into the draw-off line and out to the solids disposal
facilities. An operator may walk within the raceway and push settled solids
towards the open standpipe drain. This walking, or even ttjp flurry of fish,
creates a high level resuspenslon of solids which overflow the raceway
effluent weir unless the water elevation within the raceway drops below the
cresting elevation of the weir. The volume of water associated with standpipe
sludge withdrawal is high compared to the more positive vacuum sludge with-
drawal techniques. The Increased water volume necessitates a greater volume
in the sludge treatment unit. However, because the settled solids in the
raceway are subject to little or no shear forces in the drainage through the
raised standplpes, the sludge particle size remains more intact and may settle
faster and with less disassociated fines in the sludge treatment system
effluent than when subjected to vacuuming removal techniques.
Field observations and analytical data show positive correlation between high
effluent TSS and hatchery maintenance events (see Section 5.0). Because of
the human element involved in the cleaning process, absolute controls will
110
JRB Associates

-------
always be difficult to achieve. However, care in cleaning practices can help
minimize solids discharge. For example, it was observed that vacuum hose
lines were frequently allowed to drag through and across the bottom of the
raceways which disturbed the settled solids. Had floats been attached to the
hoses the settled solids would not be disturbed. Similarly, the water flow
through rates were not lowered during raceway cleaning. If the flow rate is
lowered by adjusting drop boards or other influent gates, the water velocity
will slow and allow solids which are disturbed and resuspended during raceway
cleaning to settle prior to hydraulic overflow.
Positive control over the rate and location of sludge pick-up can be accom-
plished using a cleaning wand with an applied vacuum which acts to suck up
solids from the floor of the raceway. This cleaning technique is increasingly
popular because it does not require the significant drawdown of raceway water
levels to prevent solids washout, it utilizes less water to convey the solids,
and is more efficient in wasting solids from the raceway than are the conven-
tional standpipes. The source of the vacuum applied to the cleaning wand is
derived either from a vacuum pump, or from the vacuum created by the siphon
effect of the settled solids being discharged through standplpe drains fitted
with an adaptive collar which prevents the atmospheric break of the hydraulic
siphon. The advantages to mechanical vacuum systems include a more positive
control over the vacuum, and thus flow rates, plus the increased vacuum allows
the operator to stand alongside the raceway and avoid disturbing the settled
solids. Disadvantages to mechanical vacuum systems are their relatively in-
creased cost, noise which can frighten the fish, and the shear forces which
can break apart the settled sludge particles. Siphon created vacuum cleaning,
however, may require the operator to stand in the raceway while cleaning due
to the less vacuum created through the standpipe. This lower vacuum will also
decrease the uptake velocity and require additional time for cleaning. How-
ever, this lower vacuum also applies less shear on the sludge particle.
M808
111
- JRB Associates

-------
Based upon the limited sampling programs employed in the recent surveys by JRB
and Che industry, field observations and the data suggest that vacuuming sys-
tems, and particularly siphon created vacuum systems, are more effective in
solids removal and less disrupcive to raceway effluent TSS concentrations than
raceway cleaning by standpipe drainage. A number of hatcheries including
Rangen, Crystal Springs, Rim View, and Jones either routinely use or are
experimenting with vacuum sludge removal using standpipe siphon hydraulics.
We recommend that Che industry monitor Che performance of these practices, and
if siphon vacuuming proves to be an unqualified success thaC ic be employed
wherever standpipe drains exist. We also recommend that floats be attached to
all vacuum or other hose lines that enter the raceway, and that wherever
practical, the water flow rate be reduced to the raceway undergoing cleaning
to a level that will not stress the fish but will reduce solids carryover
across the weir.
6.7.2 Flow Augmentation
Comparative interpretation of the Hydroscience and the 1983/1984 data suggest
that multiple pass and reuse of raceway effluents has a cumulative effect on
suspended solids and other water quality parameters. In most instances Chese
effects degrade water quality to levels below that acceptable for use by the
hatchery, at which time the flows are returned to the water course. The
1983/1984 data suggest that effluent TSS concentrations may exceed the 5 rag/1
proposed limitation when water is used through three or more raceways operated
in series even when best management pracclces such as vacuum sweeping of
settled solids are employed in an effort to minimize the raceway effluent TSS
concentrations.
Flow augmentation is a measure which may be employed to minimize the cumu-
lative effects of water reuse where process piping or channels allow. The
hatchery operator should consider passing less than the total flow (e.g., 70
percent) through the first and all subsequent raceways in series, and augment-
ing the reduced flow rate with the unused raw water at a point influent to the
112
JRB Associates

-------
third or fourth raceway. The cost to perform this redistribution of flow will
in many instances be nonexistent or negligible, if the flexibility to reroute
water flow was provided during design and construction of the facility. This
alternative would likely not be practical for a hatchery without the inherent
design capability. A secondary, and non-capital cost with flow augmentation
may be associated within the upper raceways if the flow velocities and dis-
solved oxygen levels attendant with the reduced flow rate are insufficient to
support the customary fish inventory. The benefits of such a flow. augmenta-
tion or redistribution are, however, those associated with achieving the pro-
posed 5 mg/1 effluent TSS limit, and probable costs avoided with having to
treat all the effluent flow by construction and operation of effluent settling
basins or through advanced mechanical systems such as filtration.
6.7.3 Undisturbed Flow-through Settling
Flow-through hatcheries and farm ponds can hope to achieve a high quality
effluent by constructing a downstream settling basin to provide for quiescent
removal of solids in Che total raceway effluent. The size of this facility
should provide a minimum 60 minute hydraulic detention time, mean depth of 5
to 7 feet, and sludge decomposition and storage capacity for at least 20 years
unless cleaning facilities are constructed or seasonal dewaterlng or dredging
can be accomplished. The settling basin constructed at the Hagerman State
hatchery represents an engineered basin which utilizes baffles for reducing
short circuiting, zonal storage of settled sludge solids, and an effluent weir
control structure to control the rate of release and prevent bottom scour of
solids. This facility provides continuous control of effluent TSS and enables
this facility to meet the proposed 5 mg/1 effluent limitation with a high de-
gree of certainty.
There are no comparable basins constructed at other hatcheries, even recog-
nizing those constructed at Pisces and Fish Breeders. The configuration of
the effluent pond at Pisces allows for hydraulic short circuiting down the
center of the basin and across the effluent weir. This basin could be
113
JRB Associates

-------
expanded to -a U-shaped or S-shaped structure (i.e., increasing the length-
to-width ratio) to reduce the short circuiting. The basin at Fish Breeders,
while large In volume and length-to-width ratio, Is grossly Impacted by the
presence of fish for production within the basin. It is probable that the
settling basin as constructed will enable Fish Breeders to meet a 5 mg/1
effluent limitation. However, it will be unable to do so until all fish stock
are removed from the basin, and until screens or other controls are Installed
in the influent channel to prevent the escape of fish Into the settling basin.
Capital .costs to construct downstream flow-through settling basins are a
function of land requirements and a combined excavation and roller compaction
cost of approximately $5.00 per cubic yard of material. Baffles to control
hydraulic short circuiting, and screens to minimize fish release into the
basin, are small Incremental costs. Sludge thickening, facultative decom-
position, and granulation of detritus should enable the hatchery to success-
fully operate for periods up to 20 years before settled solids would need to
be dredged or otherwise removed from the settling basins. In some Instances,
notably cold water hatcheries with species with low reproduction potential,
the accidental release or escapement of a limited number of fish into the
settling basin may have negligible effect on effluent water quality. Sport
fishing for trout in the settling pond at the Hagerman State hatchery, for
instance, appears to keep under control the population of fish which could
otherwise result in degradation of effluent water quality.
6.7.4 Off-line Settling Ponds or Basins
Effective separation of fish offal and tank detritus can be accomplished by
off-line settling in a quiescent basin. Such settling structures can vary
from earthen-lined ponds to concrete structures, including fish raceways taken
out of production. In general, fish raceway solids have an estimated specific
gravity of 1.0 to 1.1 based upon observed settling rates, and the solids often
appear to have a granular texture with a particle size of approximately 1 ram.
These physical properties all contribute to good settling and sludge
thickening.
114
JRB Associates

-------
Sludge settling of raceway solids can be efficiently accomplished in a quies-
cent basin with a hydraulic detention time of 60 minutes or more. Detention
times should not be less than 30 minutes even under peak flow conditions. The
basin should be designed with a surface area sufficient to keep the hydraulic
loading rates below 1,000 gallons per day per square foot (1,000 gpd/ft2). The
use of chemical coagulants to increase particle density and settling veloci-
ties can help offset short detention times or high surface hydraulic loading
rates. Except under unusual circumstances, rectangular or square basins will
be preferred by hatcheries over circular units. The former structures are
more compatible with existing land use and tankage construction, and are
easier to maintain. In general, a length-to-width ratio in excess of three is
recommended to maximize capture of solids and minimize hydraulic washout of
settled sludge. Baffles, either serpentine or over-under, can be easily
installed to reduce hydraulic short circuiting. The depth of the settling
basin, regardless of Its surface geometry, generally need not exceed six feet.
At this depth construction can be accomplished without excessive ground de-
waterlng, yet sludge storage is provided in the bottom two to three feet of
the basin. Sludge removal can be accomplished using a simple hydraulic vacuum
system, or range to more elaborate and costly mechanical or air-lift pumping.
Sludge can be stored in hoppers within the basins and removed, or can simply
collect on the bottom and be removed on a selected withdrawal basis through
perforated pipes or underdrains which extend across the floor of the basin.
Space requirements (and costs) for fish hatchery sludge settling can be kept
low by designing the system to operate on a small flow volume which will be
wasted to the settling basin on a dally or other uniformly frequent basis.
Cleaning waste flows were measured to an approximate one percent of the total
raceway Influent flow. For a hatchery with a 30 CFS (19.4 MGD) intake flow,
the approximate volume of raceway sludge produced during an eight-hour shift
would be 65,000 gallons. Using a safety factor of 1.5, the resultant hourly
rate of flow for design purposes should approximate 12,500 gph. Using the 60
minute detention time as a design paramenter, and a mimimum basin depth of six
feet, a basin 30 feet long and 10 feet wide would provide the required
< rSi.Q
115
JRB Associates

-------
detention time and sludge storage, and meet the mimimum design criteria
described. A second basin constructed parallel to this unit could serve as a
stand-by basin for peak flow conditions and as the primary unit when the first
basin is dewatered for cleaning and inspection. In this way continuous
treatment of raceway sludges can be accomplished.
Capital cost for the construction of an earthen basin with sloped side walls
and sludge removal facilities for the two basins above would approximate
$2,050 based upon a $5.00 per cubic yard excavation and roller compaction cost
basis. Concrete basins of the above dimension, together with hydraulic suc-
tion or airlift sludge withdrawal lines, would cost approximately $5,500 based
upon an estimated cast-in-place concrete cost of $200 per cubic yard. Costs
for raceway sludge transfer lines into and out of the basins, estimated at
$1,000 plus sludge disposal costs, would be in addition to the capital costs
above. Sludge disposal alternatives Include land application of liquid solids
by spray irrigation, ridge and furrow flow, or surface application or injec-
tion. Sludge can also be hauled wet to a landfill or burial pit, or dewatered
on drying beds or other contained area on the ground and subsequently removed
as dried sludge and disposed of by burial or land utilization.
6.8 STREAM CONCLUSIONS
Based on qualitative and analytical' surveys of Billlngsley, Riley, Sand
Springs, and Salmon Falls Creeks as well as a review of data available
concerning Cedar Draw Creek, it is apparent that portions of Billlngsley Creek
exhibit symptoms of a stressed stream system with certain water quality para-
meters reaching concentrations that contribute to this condition. Riley
Creek, however, does not exhibit stress nor do the selected water quality
parameters change appreciably from its control station (upstream) to the
station established downstream of the Hagerman State hatchery.
Increases in concentrations of NH3 and PO4 in Billlngsley Creek were evident
immediately downstream of hatcheries. These concentrations were significant
116
JRB Associates

-------
when compared againsc either the upstream control station on the creek or the
control streams (Salmon Falls and Sand Springs Creeks). While portions of
Salmon Falls Creek and Cedar Draw also reflect higher NH3 levels (0.36 and
0.27, respectively), both Stations 2 and 4 on Billingsley Creek reflected the
highest NH3 levels observed (ranging from 0.38 to 0.49 at Station 2, and 0.21
to 0.48 at Station 4). Furthermore, the NH3 levels dropped significantly at
Stations 3 and 5 farther downstream from hatchery discharges (0.13 to 0.23,
and 0.19 to 0.23, respectively). TKN concentrations increased downstream of
each station until the stream coursed through the wetlands in the Fish and
Game stretch. It is believed that NH3 levels can be attributed to hatcheries
while the TKN concentrations appear to be more related to a combined influence
of hatchery discharges and feedlot runoff. Orthophosphates and phosphorus
concentrations increased downstream of hatcheries. The sources of phosphorus
compounds were originally hypothesized to be agricultural fertilizers that are
carried into the stream as irrigation return or storm related runoff. How-
ever, Billingsley Creek orthophoshate concentrations were greater than those
measured in either Sand Springs or Salmon Falls Creeks, two streams heavily
Impacted by agriculture and soil erosion. After reviewing the nutrient
requirements of salmonlds it is possible that trout diet supplements that are
high in phosphorous may be the source of phosphorus loading to Billingsley
Creek. For example, the modified Bemhart-Tonarelll salt mix, a typical salt
mixture supplement, comprises 0.6 pounds of phosphorus per 100 pounds of fish
feed. I? While this specific diet may not be used by commercial trout
producers, It is quite likely that whatever diet preparation used provides
similar phosphorus concentrations due to the basic nutritional requirements of
trout. An unknown percentile of this phosphorus will find Its way Into a
receiving water either through decomposition of uneaten fish food or fish
offal.
While Billingsley Creek does display stream degradation effects attributable
to hatcheries, fish culturing is not the sole source of its problems. Sand
Springs and Salmon Falls Creeks are highly Impacted by erosional runoff from
agricultural activities such as irrigation, grazing, and feedlots.
117
« * R'51
\ .• j.o-—
JRB Associates _

-------
Billingsley Creek also shows effects of agricultural Impacts, particularly
from feedlot runoff and grazing. Probably Che greatest Impact of hatcheries
to Billingsley Creek Is the accumulation of hatchery-suspended solids settled
in the stream which are conducive to eutrophic conditions and are aestheti-
cally unpleasant. These solids-related Impacts to Billingsley Creek could be
significantly Improved by better maintenance practices by hatcheries. Rangen
Hatchery uses in stream detention that appears to have reached its capacity
for holding settled sludge matter. Routine dredging of this detention system
would result in better solids capture and subsequent detention. Construction
of sludge treatment facilities separate from the creek Is the preferred alter-
native to sludge management at Rangen. On-site improvements within each
hatchery as described in Sections 6.3 and 6.7 would also contribute to stream
quality improvement. Finally, in-stream or stream habitat Improvement pro-
jects that do not necessarily require major capital expenditures could be use-
ful to Billingsley Creek. Stream bank stabilization, supplementing existing
riparian vegetation or marsh development, and installation of artificial bar-
riers and related instream structures if used approplately could Impede the
downstream migration of solids as well as contribute to natural fish habitat
in selected reaches of Billingsley Creek.
In conclusion, we recommend that some or all of the above BMP's and restora-
tive techniques be applied to hatcheries and land use activities in the Bil-
lingsley Creek watershed prior to further development of the water resources
by existing or additional private or public bodies.

-------
7.0 REFERENCES CITED.
1.	State of Idaho Water Quality Management Plan. November, 1979. Dept. of
Health and Welfare, Dlv. of Environment, Water Quality Bureau. P.3-53-3-60.
2.	Draft Development Document of Effluent Limitation Guidelines for Fish
Hatcheries and Farms. 1974. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of"
Enforcement, Denver, Colo. 237 p.
3.	Wastewater Treatment and Control for Commercial Fish Hatcheries in the
Magic Valley Region of Idaho, july, 1978. prepared by hydrosdence, inc.,
for Idaho dept. of health and welfare. 79 p. plus appendices.
4.	Memorandum Decision and Order; Case No. 79512; Shokal vs. Dunn. June 14,
1983 in the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District of the State of
Idaho.
5.	Michael Green, Blue Lakes Hatchery, Personal Communication, July 1983.
6.	Bruce Corson, Clear Springs Hatchery, Personal Communication, May 1983.
7.	David Erickson, Clear Springs Hatchery, Personal Coomunclatlon, July 1983.
8.	Jerry Foster, Rim View Hatchery, Personal Communication, June 1983.
9.	Hatchery Personnel, Fish Breeders Hatchery, Personal Communication, June
1983.
10.	American Public Halth Assoc., Amer. Water Works Assoc., and Water
Pollution Control Fed., Standard Methods, 15th Ed., Amer. Public Haalth
Assoc., Washington DC 1981. 1134 p.
11.	Memorandum Decision and Order; Case No. 79512; Permit Application No.
36,7834 by Trout Co. May 5, 6 and June 22, 23, 1981 hearing by Idaho Dept.
of Water Resources, Exhibits by Michael Falter, University of Idaho, Nos.
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20 and 21.
12.	Billingsley Creek Water Quality. 1981. Prepared by J.E. Winner, Idaho
Dept. of Water Resources. 36 p.
13.	Distribution, Relative Abundance, Life History and Habitat Preferences of
Shoshone Sculpln. Final Report. 1982. Prepared by R.L. Wallace, J.S.
Griffiths, P.J. Connelly, D.M. Daley and G.B. Beckham for U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. Boise, ID. 23 p. plus appendices.
14.	Water Quality Report: Chemical Report. State of Idaho Division of
Environment. Sample Analysis Results from Salmon Falls Creek enar
Hagerman. Two years data from May 1981 to April 1983. STORET # 151057.
15.	Water Quality Report: Chemical Report. U.S. Geological Survey. Sample
Analysis Results for Five Stations for Cedar Draw. Miscellaneous data for
1970-co 1983. STORET If 2060153, 2060154, 2060155, 2060157 and 2060121.
16.	Idaho Dept. of Employment, March 1984.
( ^
17.	Nutrient Requirements of Trout, Salmon and Catfi-s->W'*i
-------
APPENDIX A
JRB SAMPLING RESULTS
The information presented in this appendix is raw data, with the exception of the
lb/day and the kg/day of TSS, which were calculated based on the raw data.
Raw data includes both field measurements, and laboratory results of field sampl-
ing. These data include flow rates, temperatures, mg/l TSS, ml/l settleable
solids, ammonia, TKN, dissolved oxygen, and ortho-phosphate.
JRB Associates

-------
ItUIK IJVKKS IIATCIIKKY (cont.)
1KB Station 1	Alphcua Creek
Settle.
TSS Solids	Nil 3 TKN	P0H
Date (mg/t) (mfc/JQ	(mft/t) (mR/ft) (me/*)
5/23/83 <2 Trace
6/02/83 — —	0 <0.1 <0.1
JKU Station 5	Snake River
5/25/83 28 Trace
6/01/83 —	—	0.10 — <0.1

-------
BLUE 1JVKES HATCHERY
JRB Station 1	M-3 Raceway Discharge
_____ _________

Flow
Flow
Temp.
TSS
TSS
TSS
Solids

DO
nh3
Date
(cfa)

-------
CRYSTAL SPRINGS I1ATCHERY
JRB Station 1	Crystal Springs Hatchery Influent
TSS	Set. Slds.
Date	(mft/fc)	(mft/ft)
5/20/83	3	Trace
JRB Station 2
Raceway Discharge

Flow
Flow
Temp.
TSS
TSS
TSS
Set. Slds.

D.O.
nh3
Date
(cfs)
(MCD)
°C
(mg/ft)
(lb/day)
(Kg/day)
(ml/i)
PH
(mg/£)
(mg/ft)
5/20/83
55.3
35.7
15.5







5/21/83
55.3
35.7
15.5
12
3600
1640
Trace
—
—
—
5/22/83
55.3
35.7
15.5
8
2400
1100
Trace
—
—
—
5/23/83
55.3
35.7
15.5
11
3300
1500
Trace
—
—
—
5/24/83
55.3
35.7
15.5
5,7a
1500
680
Trace
—
—
--
6/01/83
55.3
35.7
16.5
24
7200
3270
Trace
7.1
7.0
0.8
6/02/83
55.3
35.7
15.5
11
3300
1500
0.3
—
—
—
6/03/83
55.3
35.7
16.0
11
3300
1500
0.1
—
—
—
6/04/83
55.3
35.7
16.0
14
4200
1900
Trace
7.0
7.0
0.7
6/05/83
55.3
35.7
17.0
16
4800
2200
Trace
—
7.0
1.2
6/06/83
55.3
35.7
15.5
8
2400
1100
Trace
7.2
5.0
0.8
6/07/83
55.3
35.7
16.0
6
1800
812
Trace
—
—
	
6/08/83
55.3
35.7
16.0
—

—
Trace
—
—
	
6/09/83
55.3
35.7
16.0
11
3300
1500
Trace
—
—
	
* " TSS (mg/ft): n
I1"	x
V"*
12
11.42; In x = 2.35 (transformed back
5.05; a2 =25.5; In s = 0.43;
10.5)

-------
CRYSTAL SPRINGS IIATCIIERY (cont.)
JRU Stations 3 & A	Cleaning Waste Treatment System Effluent ^ ^

Inf.

Eff.


Inf.
Eff.


TSS
TVS
TSS
TVS
TSS
Set. Slds.
Set. Slds.

Date
(mg/ft)
(nig/*)
(mgM)
(mg/fc)
% A
(m£/l)
(ml/£)
Z A
5/20/83
730

264
__
64c
18
2.5
86
5/22/83
3875
—
142
—
96
115
0.5
99
5/23/83
495
—
186
—
62c
45
11.0
76
5/24/83
10840
—
128
—
99?
21
Trace
>95
6/08/83
3650
2995
124
92
97
75
Trace
>95
6/09/83
2965
2395
22
—
99
40
Trace
>95
'Ropilcate sample for QA purposes.
^Settling pond maximum influent flow rate did not exceed 9000 gph (pumping capacity of the pump).
CDoes not represent a complete cleaning event.
^Turbidity, color and solids concentration precluded the use of colorlmetric methods for field analysis
of dissolved oxygen and ammonia, pll was 6.9 on 6/02/83.

-------
JKB Station 1
RIM VIEW HATCHERY
Raceway Discharge

Flow
Flow
Temp
TSS
TSS
TSS
TVS
Set. SldSa

D.O.
nh3c
Dale
(cfs)
(MOD)
°c:
(mg/1)
54a
(lb/day)
(kg/day)
(mg/£)
(ml/i)
PH
(mg/1)
(mg/l)
6/01/83
56.4
36.43
15
16400a
7460®

0.4

—
—
6/02/83
56.4
36.43
16
98a
29780°
13500
57
1.0
	
——
—
6/03/83
56.4
36.43
15
43®
13100a
6000
30
0.5
7.5
7.0
0.9
6/04/83
56.4
36.43
15.5
5
1520
690
—
Trace
7.6
8.0
0.6
6/05/83
56.4
36.43
16
22
6700
3000
11
0.1
—
7.0
0.8
6/06/83
56.4
36.43
16
8
2400
1100
—
Trace
7.3
9.0
0.7
6/07/83
56.4
36.43
16
8
2400
1100
—
Trace
—

— ~
d/08/83
56.4
36.43
15
3
910
410
—
Trace
—
——
——
6/09/83
56.4
36.43
16
3
910
410
—
Trace
——

——
TSS (rng/fc): n = 9,6
x ¦= 8.16; In x = 1.84 (transformed back ¦ 6.30)
s = 7.13; s2 = 50.83; In s = 0.75;
JRB Stations 2 & 3	Cleaning Waste Treatment System

Inf.

Eff.

Inf.
Eff.




TSS
TVS
TSS

Set. Slds.
Set. Slds.

Nil 3
TKN
Date
(wg/e)
(mg/1)
(mg/1)
XA
(ml/1)
(ml/1)
ZA
(nig/*)
(mg/1)
6/01/83
724
540
42
94
20
Trace
95
8.65
13.48
6/07/83
3885
3075
(b)
(b)
110
(b)
—
	

o	.	
V'** '^1
rri Discarded due to procedural sampling error.
Settling Fond not discharging on 6/07/83.
c Turbidity, color and solids concentrations precluded the'\ide of colorimetrlc techniques for dissolved
oxygen and Nil 3.

-------
PISCES
JRB Station 1 Total Hatchery Influent (Influent Settling Pond)

Flow
T low
Teap
TSS
TSS
TSS
See. Slds
Date
(cfs)
(HGP)
aC
(an/I)
(lb/day)
(Kg/day)
(mt/1)
3/16/83
22
14
13
112
13,080
3.940
Trace
5/15/83
23
16
12.3
117
13,610
7,100
Trace
5/14/83
30
20
13
175
29.190
13,270
Trace
3/17/83
30
20
15
156
26.020
11,820
0.1
rSS (ag/t):
n •
4






1 •
140.0;






I •
30.5; la
s •




JU Station 2

Racevav
Influent



3/12/83
29
19
10.3
120
19,010
8,640
Trace
5/13/83
20
13
14
123
13.340
6,060
Trace
3/14/83
22
14
15
108
12.610
3,730
Trace
3/13/83
23
16
12.5
125
16.680
7,380
Trace
5/16/83
30
20
13
218
56,360
16.320
0.1
5/17/83
30
20
15
169
28.190
12.810
0.13
JRB Station 3	Raceway Effluent
3/12/83
29
19
10.5
131
20.760
9.430
Trace
5/13/83
20
13
14
132
14,310
6.300
0.2
3/14/83
22
14
15
96
11.210
3,090.
¦ Trace
3/15/83
25
16
12.5
105
14.010
6,370
Trace
3/16/83
30
20
13
167
27,860
12,660
0.13
5/17/83
30
20
15
153
23.320
11,600
0.1
JUS Station 4
Total
Hateherv
Effluent
(Effluent
Settling
Pond)
5/12/83
29
19
10.5
132
20,920
9,510
Trace
5/13/83
20
13
14
110
11.930
5,420
Trace
5/14/83
22
U
15
92
10.740
<•,380
Trace
5/15/83
25
16
12.5 -
103
13,740
6,200
Trace
5/16/83
30
20
13
150
25,020
11,370
Trace
TSS (a»/l): n • 5
S • 117.4
s - 23.36; s: ¦ 545.8;
TSS Net (og/1):
n • 5
T • -42.3; In T • 3.23*
In s - 1.82
•Due to net TSS discharge being lover than TSS Influent, In net x were
standardized by adding a constant (It) to permit log nopnal calcula-
tions. Determination of 7 net reflects reduction of (VO.
NOTE: Turbidity, color, and solids concentrations precluded the use of
coloriaecrlc field techniques for dissolved oxygen and laonl*.
A.-6
JRB Associates

-------
CLYDE HUGHES
JRB Station
1 Influent




Flow
Flow Temp
TSS
TSS
TSS
Set. S]
Date
(cfs)
(MCP) °c
(mg/&)
(lb/day)
(Kg/day)
(mHI)
5/13/83
4.0
2.6 8^5
56
1210
550
0.1
5/14/83
6.6
4.3 9.4
75
2690
1220
0.1
5/15/83
7.3
4.7 11
64
2510
1140
Trace
5/16/83
5.2
3.4 8.5
50
1420
640
Trace
TSS (mg/i)
: n ¦
4





x ¦
61.3; In x- 4.10(60.55)




s ¦
10.81; s2 - 116.
91; In s
- 0.17;


JRB Station 2	Effluent
5/13/83
4.0
2.6
8.5
22
480
220
Trace
5/14/83
6.6
4.3
9.4
41
1470
670
Trace
5/15/83
7.3
4.7
11
42
1650
750
Trace
5/16/83
5.2
3.4
8.5
58
1640
750
Trace
TSS (mg/Z): n - 4
* - 40.75; In x - 3.65(38.5)
s - 14.8; s2 » 216.91; In s- 0.405 ;
TSS net (mg/1):
n ¦ 4
T[ » -31.8; In "x ¦ 1.16*; In s » 1.36
*Due to net TSS discharge being lower than TSS influent, In net x
were standardized by adding a constant (k) to permit log normal
calculations. Determination of x net reflects the reduction of (k).
\ /
JRB Associates—
A

-------
FISH BREEDERS
JRB Station 1

Settling
Pond
Influent3




Flow
Flow
Temp
TSS
TSS
TSS
Set. Slds.

Date
(cfs)
(MGD)
(°C)
(mg/1)
(lb/day)
(Kg/day)
(ml/l)
XL
5/19/83
7.62
4.92
28
18
740
340
Trace
NA
5/20/83
6.81
4.40
29
21
770
350
Trace
NA
5/21/83
9.31
6.01
27
10
500
230
Trace
NA
5/22/83
7.62
4.92
29
26
1100
500
Trace
NA
5/23/83
11.10
7.20
29
19
1200
550
Trace
NA
5/24/83
6.81
4.40
29
20
740
340
Trace
NA
5/25/83
8.50
5.50
30
14
640
290
Trace
NA
6/08/83
7.62
4.92
27
35
1440
650
Trace
NA
6/09/83
7.62
4.92
27
4
160
75
Trace
NA
6/10/83
8.50
5.50
27
32
1470
670
Trace
NA
TSS (mg/1) : n - 10
x - 19.9; In x- 2.85(17.26)
s » 9.4; s2 ¦ 88.3; In s»0.63;
JRB Scacion 2	Settling Pond Effluent*9
5/19/83
7.62
4.92
28
33
610
1350
Trace
+452
5/20/83
6.81
4.04
29
25
420
920
Trace
+19%
5/21/83
9.31
6.01
27
30
680
1500
Trace
+200%
5/22/83
7.62
4.92
29
22
410
900
Trace
-15%
5/23/83
11.10
7.20
29
36
1000
2200
Trace
+89%
5/24/83
6.81
4.40
30
25
500
1100
Trace
+25%
5/25/83
8.50
5.50
30
24
500
1100
Trace
+71%
6/08/83
7.62
4.92
27
37
690
1500
Trace
+8%
6/09/83
7.62
4.92
27
23
430
940
Trace
+475%
6/10/83
8.50
5.50
27
35
730
1600
Trace
+30%
TSS (mg/I): n -
10







x -
29; In x " 3
.35(28
.47)





3 ¦
5.85; s2 -
34.2;
In 3" 0
.202;



TSS net
(mg/1):








n ¦
10







x ¦
24.0; In x
- 3.18
; In s
- 0.67




s »
1.95






aColorioetric water quality tests on 6/9: pH ¦ 7.9; DO » 7 mg/1; NHj a 0.8 mg/1.
^Colorlmetric water quality tests on 6/9: pH ¦ 7.8; DO » 7 mg/1; NH3 ¦ 0.8 mg/1.
IPP Associates
A-8

-------
HAGERMAN HATCHERY
JRB Station 1	Influent (Riley Creek)

Flow
Flow
Temp
TSS
TSS
TSS
Set. SI
Date
(cf 3)
(MGP)
°C
(mg/n
(lb/day)
(Kg/day)
(ml/I)
5/15/83
98
63
15
< 2 3
530
240
Trace
5/16/83
100
65
16
4
270
990
Trace
5/17/83
100
65
16
6
3300
1480
Trace
5/18/83
102
66
16
6
3300
1500
Trace
5/19/83
100
65
17
3
1600
740
Trace
5/20/83
94
61
17
6
3050
1390
Trace
5/21/83
98
63
17
2
1050
480
Trace
TSS (mg/i)
: n ¦
7






X ¦
4.0 (using 2
- 1)




s •
2.08; ;
s2 ¦ 4.
33



JRB Station 2

Raceway Effluent


5/15/83
98
63
15
__ b
_


5/16/83
100
65
16
13
7050
3200
Trace
5/17/83
100
65
16
6.
3300
1480
Trace
5/18/83
102
66
16
D
— -
—
—
5/19/83
100
65
17
4
2170
990
Trace
5/20/83
94
61
17
4
2030
920
Trace
5/21/83
98
63
17
20
10500
4800
Trace
TSS (og/£)
: n »
5






H -
9.4






s ¦
6.98;
s2 = 48
.8



JRB Station 3	Settling Effluent
5/16/83
100
65
16
13
7050
3200
Trace
5/17/83
100
65
16
6
3300
1500
Trace
5/18/83
102
66
16
11
6050
2800
Trace
5/19/83
100
65
17
4
2170
990
Trace
5/20/83
94
61
17
5
2600
1160
Trace
5/21/83
98
63
17
6
3150
1430
Trace
TSS (mg/I): n » 6
x » 7.5
s - 3.,61; s2 - 13.1
TSS net (mg/1):
n » 6; In x ¦ 1.32
T ¦ 1. 74 ; in s ¦ 0.39
aGrab only of influent. Flow and temperature taken of effluent and
raceways while installing sampling equipment.	-
h	* ¦ w 4
Sample lost due to malfunction of sampling equipment-
ina Associates—J
A-9

-------
HANGEN HATCHERY
JRB Station 1
Total Hatchery Influent
Date
TSS
(me/*)
5/15/83'
<2
JRB Station 3
Raceway Discharge

Flow
Flow
Temp.
TSS
TSS
TSS
Set. Slds.
TVS

D.O.
Nil 3
Date
(cfs)
(MGD)
°C
(mg/t)
(lb/day)
(Kg/day)
(ml/I )
(mg/£)
pH
(mg/i)
(mg/l)
5/15/83
\, . it
18
12
16
11
1100
155
Trace
	
	
	
—
5/16/83
18
12
14
4
400
180
Trace
	
	
——
——
5/17/83
18
12
16
6
600
270
-0-
	
	
——

5/19/83
18
12
16
6
600
270
Trace
——
	
——

5/20/83
18
12
16
14
1400
640
Trace
——
——
——
—»
5/25/83
18
12
16
11
1100
500
Trace
—-
——
	

5/26/83
18
12
17
11
1100
500
Trace
—•
——
— —

5/28/83
18
12
17
8
800
360
Trace
4
— —
	
——
5/29/83
18
12
16
5
500
230
Trace
1
	
	
——
5/30/83
18
12
16
4
400
180
Trace
3
— —

— —
6/01/83
18
12
17
14
1400
640
Trace
7
7.8
11
1.2
6/02/83
18
12
18
5
500
230
Trace
——
7.3
8
1.0
6/03/83
18
12
17
8
800
360
Trace
——
7.3
	
1.1
6/04/83
18
12
17
5
500
230
Trace
~~



TSS (mg/A): n
- 14










X
=>8; In x
= 1.99
(transformed back
- .7.32)






s
= 3.6; s2
= 12.8;
In s =
0.45







-------
KANCEN HATCHERY (cont.)
JHB Station 2	Cleaning Waste Treatment Syatem (Effluent)
Date
Flow
(c fa)
Flow
(MOD)
Teiup.
°C
TSS
(mg/l)
TSS
(lb/day)
TSS
(Kg/day)
Set. Slds.
(mi/I)
PH
D.O.
(mg/l)
Nil 3
(ng/t)
5/27/83a
0.5b
0.3
_ _
14
35
16
. ^



5/29/83
0.5
0.3
16
8
20
10
0.1
—
—
—
5/30/83
0.5
0.3
17
9
22
10
Trace
—
—
—
6/01/83
0.5
0.3
18
34
85
38
0.3
7.6
—
1.2
6/03/81
0.5
0.3
17
8
20
10
Trace
—
—
—
6/04/83
0.5
0.3
17
22
55
25
0.2
7.6
5
0.8
JKB Station 4	Agricultural Runoff Pipe
TSS	Nil 3	TKN POi,
Date	(n>fi/t) (mg/fc) (mg/t) (mg/t)
5/27/83 <2
6/11/83	~ 0.07 0.33 0.17
aDuring the cleaning event monitored, tlie settling pond Influent had a TSS load of 702 ng/t (TVSa31A mg/l).
The settling pond effluent had a TSS concentration of 30 mg/l (TVS of 17 ng/t), thus attaining a 95Z
reduction in TSS.
''Ambient flow rate through the settling pond, as a result of residual flow through the creek. Estimated
sludge volume during cleaning is 900 gallons per raceway.

-------
JONES
JRB Station 2
Raeewav Discharge a

Flov
Flow
Temp
TSS
TSS
TSS
Set. Slda.
TVS
Dace
(cfs)
(MGD)
°C
(ag/1) (lb/day)
(Kg/day)
(a&/Q
(mg/i)
3/29/83
54
33

11
3200
1460
Trace
7
5/30/83
54
35

11
3200
1460
Trace
6
6/01/83
54
35
16
10
2900
1300
Trace
5
6/02/83
54
35
16.5
7
2000
930
Trace
—
6/03/83
54
35
17
6
1750
800
Trace
—
6/04/83
54
35
16.5
7
2040
930
Trace
—
6/05/83
54
35
16
11
3200
1400
Trace
_
6/07/83
54
35
16
8
2340
1060
Trace
—
6/08/83
54
35
16
24
7000
3200
Trace
—
6/09/83
54
35
16
3
880
400
Trace
—
TSS (ag/l)
n ¦
10







* »
9.8; la 7-2.15
(transformed back " 8.58)



s •
5.6; s2
- 31.7;
In 3 •
0.54



JRB Station S Dovnatream Billlngslev Creek
6/05/83
6/07/83
6/08/83
6/09/83
TSS (ag/Z): n » 4
"2" 12.5; lnT"2.43 (transformed back - 11.35)-
3 • 6.45; s2 ¦ 41.6; In 3"0.5l
34
35
17
8
2345
1060
0.1
54
35
16
7
2040
928
Trace
54
35
17
21
6130
2800
1.5
54
35
16
14
4090
1860
Trace
JRB Seationa 3 & 4	Cleaning Waste Treatment System

Inf.
Eff.

Inf.
Eff.




TSS
TSS
TSS
Set. Slds.
Set. Slds.
tra3
TKH
P0U
'Date
(og/Z)
(mg/Z)
Z&.
(ml/l)
(ml/l)
Z A (tng/i)
(mg/1)
(ng/ <¦)
6/02/83

13



— 1.27
2.71
0.56
6/07/83
147
49
66
4
Trace
95 —
¦—
—
aInfluent grab shoved <2 mg/i TSS and TVS on 5/28/83.
JRB Associates —

-------
APPENDIX B
INDUSTRY STUDY
-
JRB Associates _

-------
BLUE LAKES
INDUSTRY STUDY
LOG TRANSFORMATIONS
TSS a
n	(ranked) In x
1	1	0
2	I	0
3	I	0
4	1	0
5	1	0
6	1	0
7	1	0
8	I	0
9	I	0
10	I	0
11	1	0
12	1	0
13	1	0
14	1	0
15	1	0
16	1	0
17	1	0
18	1	0
19	1	0
20	1	0
21	1	0
22	1	0
23	1	0
24	1	0
TSS n
n	(ranked) In x
25	1	o
26	1	o
27	1	o
28	1	o
29	1	0
30	1	0
31	1	0
32	2	0.69
33	2	0.69
34	2	0.69
35	2	0.69
36	2	0.69
37	2	0.69
38	2	0.69
39	2	0.69
40	2	0.69
41	2	0.69
42	3	1.10
43	3"	1.10
44	3	1.10
45	3	1.10
46	4	1.39
47	6	1.79
x - 1.55
s - 0.995
s2 - 0.991
In3c « 0.31
Ins ¦ 0.47
In x transformed back= 1.
95% CI transformed back (1.19, 1.57)
B-l
J Kb Associar

-------
RANGEN
INDUSTRY STUDY
LOG TRANSFORMATIONS

TSS x

n
(ranked)
In x
1
4.7
1.50
2
5.0
1.61
3
5.0
1.61
4
5.2
1.64
5
5.4
1.68
6
6.0
1.79
7
6.3
1.84
8
6.7
1.90
9
7.0
1.94
10
7.0
1.94
11
7.2
1.97
12
7.2
1.97
13
7.3
1.98
14
7.3
1.98
15
7.4
2.00
16
7.5
2.01
17
8.0
2.08
18
8.0
2.08
19
8.3
2.11
20
8.55
2.14
21
9.0
2.19
22
9.0
2.19
23
11.0
2.39
24
11.2
2.41
25
12.0
2.48
26
13.0
2.56
27
15.0
2.70
28
15.2
2.72
x ¦ 8.23	In x ¦ 2.056
3 - 2.88	las - 0.3198
s2 - 8.29
lnx trans formed back • 7.81
95% CI transformed back (6.9,8.88)
3-2
JRB Associates

-------
CLYDE HUGHES
INDUSTRY STUDY
NET DISCHARGE
n	TSS In TSS Out	In Net x**
1	34	10	1.95
2	*	10
3	34	12	2.2
4	20	12	3.1
5	*	12
6	*	13.33
7	8	14	3.6
8	*	14
9	*	18
10	*	18
11	14	20	3.6
12	18	20	3.5
13	15	20	3.6
14	*	20
15	28	22	3.2
16	*	24
17	32	26	3.2
18	*	28
19	*	30
20	16	30	3.8
21	*	36
22	*	36
23	*	38
24	*	40
25	*	42
26	*	46
27	80	50	0
28	L6	56	4.3
29	*	58
In 3c a 3.01
In s - 1.15
In 7 transformed back and
corrected for net reduction
in TSS - -10.7
95Z CI transformed	back and corrected for net discharge (-20.7, 9.00)
*Industry did not report incoming TSS on these days.
**Due to net TSS discharge being lower than TSS influent, In
net x were standardized by adding a constant (k) to permit
log normal calculations. Determination of 7 and CI net
reflect reduction of (k).
B-3
. JRB Associates.

-------
HAGEE1AN STATE
INDUSTRY STUDY
LOG TRANSFORMATIONS

TSS x

n
(ranked)
In x
1
0.7
-0.36
2
1.0
0
3
1.0
0
4
1.0
0
5
1.0
0
6
1.1
0.10
7
1.3
0.26
8
1.3
0.26
9
1.4
0.34
10
1.6
0.47
11
1.6
0.47
12
1.7
0.53
13
1.8
0.59
14
1.8
0.59
15
1.8
0.59
16
1.9
0.64
17
2.0
0.69
18
2-. 6
0.96
19
2.6
0.96
20
2.6
0.96
21
2.7
0.99
22
3.0
1.10
23
3.0
1.10
24
3.1
1.13
25
3.4
1.22
26
4.0
1.39
27
4.1
1.41
28
5.6
1.72
29
6.1
1.81
30
6.9
1.93

x « 2.46
In x ¦ 0,

s ¦ 1.57
In s » 0,
s2 - 2.45
In If transformed back » 2.08
95% CI transformed back (1.66,2.59)
\;
100 Associates
B-4

-------
CRYSTAL SPRINGS
INDUSTRY STUDY
LOG TRANSFORMATIONS
TSS z
n	(ranked)	In x
1	4	1.39
2	4	1.39
3	4	1.39
4	4	1.39
5	5	1.61
6	5	1.61
7	5	1.61
8	5	1.61
9	5	1.61
10	5	1.61
11	6	1.79
12	6	1.79
13	6	1.79
14	6	1.79
15	6	1.79
16	7	1.95
17	7	1.95
18	7	1.95
19	7	1.95
20	8	2.08
21	8	2.08
22	8	2.08
23	9	2.20
24	9	2.20
25	9	2.20
26	11	2.40
27	12	2.48
28	12	2.48
29	14	2.64
30	21	3.04
Y - 7.5	_ In* - 1.92
3 ¦ 3.64	In x transformed back" 6.88
95£ CI cransformed back (5.37, 7.94)
JRB Associates
B-5

-------
PISCES
INDUSTRY STUDY
LOG TRANSFORMATIONS

TSS in
TSS out

£
(ranked)
(ranked)
In net x*
1
16
6
4.87
2
24
13
4.86
3
18
16
4.03
4
10
19
5.00
5
24
19
4.91
6
63
29
4.66
7
23
29
4.98
8
69
31
4.67
9
62
38
4.75
10
41
38
4.92
11
30
39
5.0
12
95
49
4.54
13
63
60
4.92
14
81
64
4.81
15
79
64
4.83
16
150
67
4'. 04
17
126
69
4.42
18
80
69
4'. 86
19
81
73
4.88
20
42
80
5.18
21
63
82
5.07
22
71
92
5.08
23
123
95
4.72
24
37
107
5.35
25
246
107
0.00
26
61
118
5.28
27
93
128
5.16
28
45
133
5.43
29
60
191
5.60
30
19
205
5.42
31
288
208
4.09
In "x =¦ 4.72
In x transformed back and corrected
for net discharge ¦ -27.8
In s » 0.95
95Z CI transformed back and corrected for net discharge ¦ (-61.0, 17.0)
*Due to net TSS discharge being lower than TSS influent, In net x were
standardized by adding a constant (k) to permit log normal calculations
x and CI net reflect reduction of (k).
— JRB Associates .
B-6

-------
APPENDIX C
SCREEN STUDY RESULTS
JRB Associate

-------
CRYSTAL SPRINGS HATCHERY
STATISTICAL COMPARISONS OF STUDY (SCREENED) AND CONTROL RACEUAYS
(settleable solids for all samples were trace or less)
i 
1/26/84
4
la a - 0.12 (1.18)
) 1/11/84 2

3 3/19/04
6
1
1/27/84
6

4 1/11/84 1

4 3/20/64
J
4
1/28/84
4

i 1/11/84 S

S 3/21/64
6
J
1/29/84
1

6 1/14/84 1

6 3/22/64
6
6
1/10/84
1

7 1/IS/84 i

I 3/23/64
5
J
1/11/84
8

t 1/16/84 1

6 3/24/64
13
8
4/01/84
6

Rjl cimv 40 (SluJy - a rail feJ iaceway)
Ijicwjy 40 (Study
- a rail fad racaway)
Racaway 40 (Study
- a rail lad racaway)
1 1/9/84 10
In R - 1.34 (3.60)
1 3/17/64
4* In 1 - 1.43 (4.17)
1
1/2S/84
2
In I - 1.09 (2.98)
1 1/10/84 6
In • - 0.46 (Ii8)
2 3/16/64
4 lo • - 0.70 <2.02)
2
1/26/84
2
la a - 0.44 (I.J6)
1 1/11/84 1

3 3/19/64
4
1
1/27/84
4

4 1/11/84 1

4 3/20/64
2
t
1/28/84
6

S 1/11/84 1

* 3/21/64
17
1
1/29/84
2

A 1/14/84 1

6 3/22/64
2
6
1/10/84
4

J 1/15/84 1

7 3/23/64
7
J
1/11/84
4

8 1/16/84 1

6 3/24/64
3
8
4/01/84
2

Kiceull 108 (Cunt Iu1 -
• rail fid riccuay)
gateway 10ft (Control - a rail 1*4 ric«uay)
Racaway i08 (Control - a
rail lad racaway)
1 1/9/84 1
lo I - J. >6 (4.74)
1 3/17/84
13 lo I - 1.36 (4.01)
1
1/2S/84
2
la I - I.M (J. 14)
2 1/10/84 2
lu • - 0.63 (167)
2 3/16/64
2 lo a - 0.49 <1.99)
2
1/26/84
4
la a - 0.48 (1.62)
1 1/11/84 •

3 3/19/64
4
1
1/22/84
6

4 1/12/84 >

4 3/20/84
6
4
1/28/84
7*

S 1/11/84 7

* 3/21/64
2
»
1/29/84
6

6 1/14/84 6

6 3/22/64
2
6
1/10/84
10

1 l/IJ/84 9

1 3/23/64
S
7
1/11/84
4

8 1/16/84 2

6 3/24/64
4
8
4/01/84
6

Ai alpha • 0.05 thara ara nu algnlfleant
At alalia - 0.0* thara ara no •igolflCMt
At alpha • O.Oi tbara la
a significant dlf-
dtllarancaa katwaan 
that
Man TSS of 4D la algal! Icaatly dlffaraal
1,(1

•

(laaa) thao mama
TSS ol Racawaya 105 and 10


*l«prci«nia avara|« of (wo upllcalM.
(0 -
0.69 for ID;
0.JJ far 108)
CO
K>
W

-------
JONES HATCHERY
STATISTICAL COMPARISONS OF STUDY (SCREENED) AND CONTROL RACEWAYS
(settleable solids for all samples were trace or less)
30
00
>
8
o
D>
H
CD
licawav 1 (Control
. »
i* screen)



Be
cewav 3 (Control
. oo
ecreea)


lacaway 3 (Control
na scr.Mk)

n Date T5S(nft/l)

TSS

n
Date TSS(bm/1>
TSS

a D.t. TS8(.»/l>
IIS
i 3/8/64

13
In V
•
1.29
(3.61)
1
3/16/84
3
lo I •
1.16
(3.19)
1 1/24/64
la i •
I.JO (4.46)
2 3/9/64

8
la e
•
0.84
(2.31
2
3/17/04
4
In a
0.32
(1.66)
1 1/2S/64
lo i "
0.40 (1.49)
3 1/10/84

4




3
3/18/84
1



1 1/26/84


4 3/11/84

2




4
3/19/84
3



* 1/21/64


* 3/12/84

3




5
3/20/84
3



J 1/28/64


6 3/13/84

2




6
3/21/84
5



6 1/19/84


7 3/14/84






7
3/22/84
5



I 1/10/64


8 3/IS/84

6




8
3/23/84
4



6 1/11/64


Becewep 4. fotni
A
Isctttenttd)



Baceway 4, Pood k
(screened)


R.c.wfty 4. food A
screened

1 3/8/84

12
In i

0.91
(2.48)
1
3/16/84
6
ln¥ -
0.9)
(2.34)
1 1/24/64
la * «
0.96 (2.67)
2 3/9/84

6
In a
•
0.9S
(2-59)
2
3/17/84
1
Id a -
0. J4
(1.72)
2 1/21/64
la * •
0.64 (1.90)
3 3/10/84






3
3/18/84
4



1 1/26/64


4 3/11/84

2




4
3/19/64
3



4 1/27/64


5 3/12/84

5




S
3/20/64
2



1 1/26/64


6 3/13/84

1




6
3/21/84
2



6 1/29/64


7 3/14/84

I*




I
3/22/64
2



7 1/10/64


8 3/1 J/84

2




8
3/23/84
3



6 1/11/64


freeway 4, food
»
("c
reeued)



Baceway 4. fond 8
(screened)


beewty 4. Food 6
ICIMMdl

1 3/8/84

2
lo I
m
0.13
(1-71)
1
1/16/64
3
UI-
0.62
(1.66)
1 1/24/64
la i -
0.11 (1.71)
2 3/9/84

6
In m

0.66
(194)
2
3/17/64
2
In • •
0.36
(1.15)
2 1/21/64
la • -
0.47 (1.41)
3 3/10/84

2




3
3/18/64
1



1 1/26/64
S

4 3/11/84

1




4
3/19/64
3



4 1/21/64


S 3/12/84

1




S
3/20/64
2



J 1/26/64


4 3/13/84

1




6
1/21/64
1



6 1/29/64
S

7 3/14/84

1




7
3/22/64
1



1 1/10/64


8 3/15/84

1




8
3/21/84
4



• 1/11/64


Raceway 4, fond
C
4«c
reencd)



ftacewey 4. fond C
(ecreened)


ticeu** 4. Pond C
screened)

1 3/8/84

16
lo 1
m
1. II
(3.02)
1
3/16/84
1
lo I •
0.52
(1.66)
1 1/24/64
la ¥ •
0.70 (2.01)
2 3/9/84

9
In a
m
0.92
(2.JO)
2
3/17/64
4
lo • •
0.49
(1.63
t 1/21/84
In ¦ •
0.M (1.61)
3 3/10/84

3




3
3/16/84
2



1 1/26/64


4 3/11/84

1




4
3/19/64
1



4 1/27/84


S 1/12/84

2




5
3/20/64
2



1 1/28/64


6 1/13/84

2




6
3/21/64
1



6 1/29/64


7 3/14/84

2




7
3/22/64
I



7 1/10/64


8 1/1 J/84

2




8
3/23/84
2



8 1/11/84


T-Tmu lor (accuay mad TSS by I 1m par to J end acciea position rtiiulli «N «• follovn
1	PuaUlua 1 (6 ft) - Mo algnlfleant dlffcrenct between Batcwajra ) end 4» t|4 • 0.42.
2	Poalilon V <11 It) -Significant difference between Bacewaya 3 end 4, tj^ • 2.53.
) foeitJoa 2 (16 it) -Slgnlfleant difference between Beceweye ) end 4# t|4 " J.4?..
(SlgnlfIcanca la deuiaintd 1ro« 1-1 ualng a reference t-Value of 1.76, alpha • 0.0S)
4 Foul**! poeltlone (el) iMblned) - SlgnlfIcent difference between lactvaya 1 and 4» • 2.99*
(Significance le determined In 4 uelng • reference i-Velue of 1.47, alpbe * 0.0%; Pooling all ^oafttlooa and Cf pn log Man 188 valuea at the tallrece of 3 and 4j
Svictu* npiaavnt a 402 reduction In Man TSS dtecharged)

-------
RANGEN HATCHERY
LOG TRANSFORMATIONS OF 1984 SCREEN STUDY DATA
(settleable solids £or all samples were trace or less)
11
Date
TSS
1
3/08/84
2
2
3/09/84
2
3
3/10/84
1
4
3/11/84
4
5
3/12/84
2
6
3/13/84
3
7
3/14/84
3
8
3/15/84
3
9
3/16/84
2
10
3/17/84
4
11
3/18/84
2
12
3/19/84
3
13
3/20/84
3
14
3/21/84
1
15
3/22/84
1
16
3/23/84
2
17
3/24/84
1
18
3/25/84
1*
19
3/26/84
1
20
3/27/84
1
21
3/28/84
1
22
3/29/84
2
23
3/30/84
1
24
3/31/84
1*
25
4/01/84
1
TSS
In x - 0.52 (1.69)
In s - 0.51 (1.67)
*Less than 1, recorded as 1.
Statistical comparison (t-test) of the mean TSS concentration
discharged betveen the 1983 and 1984 studies indicate there
is a significant difference (t-- • 2.37) in mean TSS values
betveen the unscreened (7.32 mg/1) and the screened (1.69 mg/1)
hatchery effluent. Screened raceways represent 752 reduction
in TSS discharged. (Significance is determined using a ref-
erence t-value of 1.68; alpha - 0.05).
C-3
JRB Associates

-------
JONES HATCHERY
FLOWS AND DEPTHS OF STUDY AREA
Flow Raceway	Depth
STUDY INITIATION
3.23 cfs 4A	38"
4B	38"
4C	37.5"
3.96 cfs 3A	38"
3B	38"
3C	38"
STUDY COMPLETION
3.64 cfs 4A	38-7/8"
4B	39-1/4"
4C	38-3/8"
4.31 cfs 3A	39-1/8"
3B	39-1/8"
3C	39-1/8"
CRYSTAL SPRINGS HATCHERY
FLOWS AND DEPTHS OF STUDY AREA
STUDY INITIATION
5.4 cfs 3D	21.8"
4D	32"
10B	32"
STUDY COMPLETION
5.4 cfs 3D	32"
4D	32"
10B	32"
____________________ JR8 Associate? -
C-4

-------
APPENDIX D
PARTICLE SETTLING VELOCITY RATES
U8Z5
. JRB Associates _

-------
CRYSTAL SPRINGS
PARTICLE SETTLING RATES
Trial
Time
Rate
Trial
Time
Rate
No.
(sec)
(cm/sec)
No.
(sec)
(cm/sec)
1
20.55
1.14
26
36.62
0.64
2
48.09
0^49
27
19.33
1.22
3
50.69
0.46
28
28.41
0.83
4
28.39
0.83
29
36.63
0.64
5
28.59
0.82
30
44.81
0.52
6
37.58
0.63
31
22.86
1.03
7
18.96
1.24
32
28.54
0.82
8
27.21
0.86
33
36.09
0.65
9
24.59
0.96
34
18.93
1.24
10
21.09
1.11
35
27.91
0.84
11
20.73
1.13
36
35.39
0.66
12
32.17
0.73
37
41.85
0.56
13
31.83
0.74
38
29.12
0.81
14
17.09
1.38
39
35.92
0.65
15
28.36
0.83
40
43.23
0.54
16
28.18
0.83
41
53.48
0.44
17
28.19
0.83
.42
24.69
0.95
18
17.64
1.33
43
22.88
1.03
19
46.87
0.50
44
43.99
0.53
20
25.22
0.93
45
28.09
0.84
21
27.05
0.87
46
21.18
1.11
22
12.39
1.90
47
32.32
0.73
23
23.65
0.99
48
42.51
0.55
24
25.75
0.91
49
28.99
0.81
25
20.67
1.14
50
31.63
0.74
Avg Particle Settling Rate: x = 0.86 cm/sec
s = 0.28
s2 - 0.08
D-l
JRB Associates

-------
JONES HATCHERY
PARTICLE SETTLING RATES
Trial
Time
Race
Trial
Time
Race
No.
(sec)
(cm/sec)
No.
(sec)
(cm/sec)
1
10.71
2.19
26
17.52
1.34
2
11.09
2.12
27
21.66
1.08
3
17.08
1.38
28
16.62
1.41
4
14.09
1.67
29
12.23
1.92
5
15.38
1.53
30
13.57
1.73
6
20.37
1.15
31
28.09
0.84
7
13.39
1.76
32
15.69
1.50
8
15.09
1.56
33
16.09
1.46
9
18.87
1.25
34
18.03
1.30
10
12.31
1.91
35
14.09
1.67
11
13.49
1.74
36
19.33
1.22
12
16.78
1.40
37
33.19
0.71
13
13.36
1.76
38
27.09
0.87
14
12.58
1.87
39
14.55
1.62
15
15.05
1.56
40
7.86
2.99
16
18.04
1.30
41
13.24
1.77
17
13.42
1.75
42
22.21
1.06
18
12.91
1.82
43
9.83
2.39
19
13.42
1.75
44
31.57
0.74
20
11.09
2.12
45
25.36
0.93
21
19.52
1.20
46
11.09
2.12
22
11.68
2.01
47
12.94
1.82
23
15.19
1.55
48
14.57
1.61
24
18.15
1.29
49
10.83
2.17
25
16.26
1.45
50
18.39
1.28
Avg Particle
Seeding Race:
x ¦ 1.57 cm/sec
s ¦ 0.44
s2 - 0.196

JRB Associates.
D-2

-------