r

' 1

WATER QUALITY AND SANITARY SURVEY


GULF SHORES, ALABAMA


AUGUST-NOVEMBER, 1977

L

-4
S7*;v
o
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SURVEILLANCE AND ANALYSIS DIVISION
ATHENS, GEORGIA

-------

WATER QUALITY AND SANITARY SURVEY
GULF SHORES, ALABAMA
AUGUST-NOVEMBER, 1977

-------
INTRODUCTION
The Alabama State Health Department (ASHD) requested technical assistance
from the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to assess the effects of
septic tank/drainfields on ground and surface waters of the general area of
Gulf Shores, Alabama. The purpose of these investigations was to provide
technical assistance to the ASHD by means of on-site investigation and by
data interpretation so that the ASHD can then ascertain the viability of
continued use of septic tank/drainfield systems in this area.
The US-EPA in conjunction with the ASHD conducted water quality investigations
in the Gulf Shores area during the period of August 15-22, 1977. The ASHD is
continuing the investigations; however, for purposes of this report,only data
taken during the period of August 15 to November 8, 1977 will be discussed.
Objectives of these studies were:
•	To determine the effect of leachates on the water table aquifer
by conducting water quality investigations of the aquifer upgradient
and downgradient from septic tank/drainfield systems;
•	To determine the residence time of the leachates in the soil/water
systems by using dye tracers to track the movement of domestic wastes
through the septic tank/drainfield system to the aquifer and to
surface waters, and
•	To determine the effect of leachates on ambient estuarine waters
by conducting limited water quality studies in the estuarine system
in the vicinity of septic tank/drainfield systems.

-------
Groundwater gradients were very small and did not always follow the
ground surface contours during the study period.
The distances from the ground surface to the water table were extremely
small. With the exception of the high dune area, the minimum unsaturated
soil zone was less than four feet and in most instances less than three
feet.
During wet periods of the year, the groundwater surface can be expected
to be at the same elevation as the draintile invert in many locations
in the area.
In most instances, the nutrient levels in the well points indicate a
significant increase in concentration above background levels. Increases
up to 81 fold above background were detected.
Leachates traced with dye were not detected in any of the near shore
surface waters. With the exception of well points located in very
close proximity to the drainfields, no significant movement of leachates
was noted.
Mean fecal coliform bacteria levels in the well points were generally low.
Mean fecal coliform bacteria levels in all three surface water stations
exceeded proposed shellfish harvesting standards and in two locations
exceeded body contact (swimming) standards.
Salmonella organisms were isolated in all three surface water stations.
These sites were in canal or lagoon waters immediately adjacent to septic
tank/drainfIeld systems and the waters were subject to body contact
activities.

-------
RECOMMENDATIONS
1.	Development of the Gulf Shores and surrounding area should proceed under
a developed and implemented areawide wastewater management plan.
2.	Shellfish harvesting and body contact activities in this resort area are
in jeopardy. These activities should be curtails ir, *	r.
urcaxied in areas where faacterio-
logical parameters indicate the existence of public health hazards.
3.	The use of private, shallow wells for potable water supply should be
discouraged.
4.	Until such time that an adequate wastewater Hi'«nnc i	j
isposal system can be developed,
these shallow wells and surface water bodies <3hr.i,i^ u
should be routinely monitored
for bacteriological parameters.
5.	Further studies, using some of the existing well „ • t
g well points with the addition
of others, should be conducted during periods u-
of high groundwater levels to
enumerate fecal coliform levels.
6.	The following abnormalities which were dism™.^ ,
during this study should
be investigated further:
A)	Extremely low fecal coliform levels
S in several septic tanks.
B)	The absence of sewage in one sentir	,
location (possibly
leakage through the tank floor).
C)	The poor distribution of wastewater •
lnto the drainfield system.

-------
BACKGROUND
Prior to discussing the field study, three excerpts of work of others will
be cited. These references serve as a guide to the scope of the problem of
employing septic tank/drainfields in high water table areas and in proximity
to surface water bodies.
1.	Hydrology for Urban Land Planning - A Guidebook on the Hydrologic
Effects of Urban Land Use, Geological Survey Circular 554, states:
"... observations indicate that, for soil cleansing to be effective,
contaminated water must move through unsaturated soil at least 100
feet. Owing to the gentle gradient of the water table near perennial
streams and the fact that seepage water moves vertically as well as
toward a nearby channel, it would seem prudent that no septic tank
should be as close to a channel as about 300 feet, if protection of
the stream water quality is to be achieved. The distance should
probably be greater from a perennial than from an ephemeral channel.
(An ephemeral stream is one which contains flowing water only in
storm periods.) In general, it might be advisable to have no source
of pollution such as a seepage field closer than 300 feet to a
channel or watercourse."
"Even this minimum setback does not prevent the dissolved materials
(nitrates, phosphates, clorides) from enriching the stream water
and thus potentially encouraging the proliferation of algae and other-
wise creating a biotic imbalance."
2.	The Manual of Septic Tank Practice, U. S. Department of Health, Education
and Welfare, 1957, recommends "the maximum seasonal elevation of ground-
water table should be at least four feet below the bottom of the trench
or seepage pit."

-------
3- Septic Tanks and the Environment, Illinois Institute for Environmental
Quality, Chicago, Illinois, 1971 states:
"Tables A and B summarize the available data on time and the distance
of travel of fecal bacteria in the septic system and soil absorption
field. The results of some of the early investigations seem extreme,
particularly in view of the rather imprecise identification techniques
available in the 1930's. The data indicate that fecal organisms may
survive for quite long-periods in the septic tank and soil, during
which time they may be transported by groundwater movement over rela-
tively long distances. As the bacteria concentration in septic tank
effluent may be quite high, as many as 93 million coliforms per 100
milliliter being reported by Polkowski and Boyle (1970), large quantities
of fecal organisms are carried each day into the soil absorption field."
TABLE A. DISTANCE OF TRAVEL OF FECAL MICROOGRANISMS
Distance Transported, ft.
Type of Organism	Vertical	Horizontal
Reference
E. coli
E. coli
E. coli
E. coli
Coliform bacteria
Coliform bacteria
Coliform bacteria
Coliform bacteria
10-30
2-3
150
232
80
400
10-400
180
Warrick & Muegge, 1930
Mom & Schaafsma, 1933
Caldwell, 1937
Dappert, 1932
Miller, et al, 1957
Malia & Snellgrove, 1958
Randall, 1970
Hickey & Duncan, 1966
TABLE B. TIME OF SURVIVAL OF FECAL COLIFORMS
Type of Organisms
Salmonella typhosa
Salmonella typhosa
Salmonella typhosa
Salmonella typhosa
E. coli
E. coli
Coliform bacteria
Coliform bacteria
Survival Time
Septic Tank	Soil
27 days
24 days
24-41 days
2 years
3 months
4-7 days
Reference
Caldwell, 1933
Warrick & Muegge, 1930
Beard, 1938
Green & Beard, 1938
Warrick & Muegge, 1930
Mom & Schaafsma, 1933
Mail & Snellgrove, 1958
Surbrahamanyan &
Bhaskaran, 1950

-------
STUDY AREA
The Gulf Shores area along with the surrounding land mass make up the
southeastern boundry of Mobile Bay. The land mass is principally a barrier
peninsula featuring high energy beaches/dunes and inland troughs which in some
locations are marshes and in other locations are water masses (Figure 1).
The bay side of the peninsula features gently sloping marsh environs. Develop-
ment of the area has been very spotty with isolated areas of single and multiple
housing units. Gulf Shores proper is the most densely populated area while the
western extremes (toward Fort Morgan) are sparsely populated.
Study sites were selected to provide coverage of: (1) western portion
of the peninsula (Fort Morgan area), (2) high dunes (Cabana Beach), (3) Gulf
Shores (Little Lagoon area) and (4) Eastern extremes near FL-AL stateline
(Terry Cove area).
STUDY RESULTS
Groundwater Hydrology
The groundwater hydrology phase of the study was broken into two facets;
(1) groundwater, ground surface and tide water elevations and (2) dye tracing
leachates through the groundwater system. The first task was accomplished
throughout the study period by standard leveling techniques and tape downs via
well points. Leachate tracing was conducted by use of well points and automatic
samplers positioned upgradient, downgradient and at surface water bodies in the
vicinity of drainfield systems. Seven drainfield systems were used for the
study (Figure 1). The individual sites are depicted in Figures 2 through 8.
Results of the hydrographic" study are summarized in Table I. Two major points
are salient in this table. The groundwater gradient at each system was nearly
non-existent. Secondly, the vertical distances from the ground surface to the

-------
water table were extremely small. Other than the high dune area, the minimum
unsaturated zone was less than four feet and in most instances was less than
three feet. The lack of rainfall experienced throughout the spring and summer
of this year has undoubtedly produced shifts in the hydrologic regime. Under
normal conditions, the unsaturated soil zone could be expected to appreciably
diminish.
One gallon of Rhodamine WT dye was injected into the septic tank at each of
the seven locations via the house drains. Automatic samplers were then employed
at downgradient well points and/or surface waters to collect the traced leachate
at hourly intervals as it traveled through the groundwater system. A micro-
fluorometer was used to detect the presence of dye in the collected samples.
During the study period, dye was detected at only one station (W-8). At
this station (located very close to the drainfield), the dye was detected within
two hours after injection. With the minimal groundwater gradients experienced
during this survey, the lack of horizontal movement of leachate was not surprising.
Groundwater Chemical Quality
Groundwater samples were collected with automatic samplers at each of the
installed well points, i.e., W-l, W-2, W-3, W—4, W-5, W-6, W-8, W—9, W—11, W-12,
W-13, W-14, W-16, and W-17. Automatic samplers were also positioned at the surface
water bodies adjacent to the well networks, i.e., stations W-7, W-10, and W-15.
Samples were collected hourly and composited daily for three consecutive 24-hour
periods. Additional grab samples were collected on 9/8/77 by ASHD personnel at
stations W-l, W-2, W-13, W-14, and W-15. All samples were preserved in the field
and transported to the EPA Laboratory in Athens, Georgia for analyses.
Results of the groundwater sampling are given in Table II and summarized in
Table III. Owing to the fact that groundwater gradients were small and thus direction
of flow was poorly defined, chemical data from well points "upgradient" from the

-------
septic tank/drainfield systems cannot be used for background values for
comparison purposes. Background values applied for the various nutrient
parameters are based on data from the three surface water stations, i.e.,
W-7, W-10, and W-15 (Table III). These values are similar to those experienced
in September, 1976 in the estuarine areas of Dauphin Island. The mean back-
ground values for the Gulf Shores study were: total phosphorus - 0.09 mg/1,
total nitrogen - 0.27 mg/1, and total organic carbon of 4.6 mg/1 as compared
to mean values of 0.06, 0.20, and 6.5 mg/1, respectively from the Dauphin
Island study.
Each of the seven well systems are discussed separately in the following
paragraphs.
Well system W-l and W-2 is located in the vicinity of Fort Morgan at mile
point 2.2 off of Route 180 (Figure 2). Even though the topography at this
system depicts a ground elevation gradient (2.2 feet differences in elevation)
from W-l toward W-2, the groundwater levels reveal little (0.03 feet difference
in elevation) if any gradient (Table I). Average total nitrogen and total
phosphorus levels at well point W-l were up to 34 and 37 times, respectively,
those of W-2 and up to 81 and 57 times, respectively, those of background levels
(Table III),
Well system W-3 and W-4 is located east of the above system at Route 180
mile point 2.9 (Figure 3). No significant differences are noted between the
well points and background nutrient levels.
Well system W-5, W-6, and W-7 is located along Route 182 and is adjacent
to Little Lagoon. Note from Figure 4, Station W-7 is in the lagoon. Station
W-6 had nutrient values well above background levels (total phosphorus concen-
trations were 57 fold those of background) indicating a movement of wastewater
toward Little Lagoon. Station W-5 located within the draintile system had

-------
nutrient values only slightly above background levels. This presents a con-
clusion that the drainfield may not receive any wastewater beyond the header
pipe.
On-site investigations at both this system and well system W-16 and W-17
revealed no tracer dye in the drainfield lines beyond the header pipe. Rapid
perculation through the porus sands appears to have defeated the concept of
distributing the wastewaters over the entire drainfield area.
Well system W-8, W-9, and W-10 is in the Terry Cove area (Figure 5). Station
W-10 is in a salt water canal. Station W-8, immediately adjacent to the drainfield,
revealed the highest nutrient concentrations. The soils at this site were much
less porus than those of the other six sites. Nutrient levels at Station W-9
indicate movement of wastewaters toward the canal but nutrient concentrations
were much less than those experienced at W-6 in the previously discussed system.
Well system W-ll and W-12 is in the Little Lagoon area, but on the beach side
of Route 182 (Figure 6). Both well points had nutrient concentrations well above
background levels. Again, groundwater gradients fail to define flow paths for
the wastewaters.
Well system W-13, W-14, and W-15 (Figure 7) is also in the Little Lagoon area
in the general vicinity of system W-5, W-6, and W-7. Station W-15 is in Little
Lagoon. Nutrient levels at well points W-13 reveal some wastewater movement in
its direction; however, the nutrient levels at well point W-14 reveal the primary
flow direction to be toward the lagoon. Average total nitrogen concentrations
at W—14 were up to 26 fold those of background.
The final system (W-16, W-17) is located in the high dunes area near Cabana
Beach at Route 180 mile point 8.8 (Figure 8). Nutrient concentrations at this
system were relatively low. Similarly to many of the previously discussed
system groundwater gradients did not follow the surface topography. In this
case, the ground surface at W-16 was four feet higher than that at W-17; however,
the groundwater elevation was lower at W-16.

-------
Bacterial Quality
Samples for fecal coliform bacteria analyses were collected twice per day
for four days during the period of 8/18-21/77 from stations W-l thru W-17.
Additional samples were collected on 9/16, 10/7, 10/13, 10/27, and 11/8/77.
At the well stations (W-l, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, and 17),
samples were collected by a small pump and sterilized tubing. Samples from
the open water stations (W-7, W-10, and W-15), adjacent to the drainfields,
were collected directly into sterile bottles. In addition, swabs were installed
at stations W-7, W-10, and W-15 to detect the presence of members of the bacterial
genus, salmonella.
Results of the groundwater system bacteriological analyses are given in
Tables IV and V. Appendix A provides Alabama water quality criteria for bac-
teriological parameters in body contact and shellfish harvesting waters.
Body contact criteria of 100 fecal coliform(fc)/100 ml were exceeded in
both of the Little Lagoon near shore sampling stations (W-7 and W-15). At the
remaining surface water station (W-10 in the Terry Cove area), proposed shell-
fish harvesting standards (14 fc/100 ml) were exceeded. Salmonella organisms
were isolated at all three surface water stations. The presence of Salmonella
is proof of fecal contamination from either man or animals and establishes the
potential of disease contraction from the waters.
Fecal coliform levels in the groundwater well systems were relatively low
with the exception of station W-14 where the values average 4,774 fc/100 ml.
As a result of low fecal coliform densities measured in the well systems, an
investigation of fecal coliform densities in the septic tanks was initiated.
Samples collected from the septic tanks located near stations W-l and W-3 revealed
normal levels; however, septic tanks near stations W-5, W-14, and W-16 had abnormally
low densities. In addition, the septic tank near W-ll contained no sewage. No
samples were collected at the septic tank near W-8. The reasons for these abnormal
occurences are enexplained.

-------
FIGURE 1
STUDY SITES
GULF SHORES, ALABAMA
SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER, 1977

-------
FIGURE 2
WELL SYSTEM
W-l, W-2
GULF SHORES, AL
SEPTEMBER, 1977
RTE 180
Gulf

-------
FIGURE 3
WELL SYSTEM
W-3, W~4
GULF SHORES, AL
SEPTEMBER, 1977
RTE 180
60'
OW-4
0
O W-3
10'

-------
FIGURE 4
WELL SYSTEM
W-5, W-6, W-7
GULF SHORES, AL
SEPTEMBER, 1977
O W-7
80'
Little Lagoon
t
25 'I
;~
-Uv-
RTE 182
Gulf

-------
FIGURE 5
WELL SYSTEM
W-8, W-9, W-10
GULF SHORES, AL
SEPTEMBER, 1977

-------
FIGURE 6
WELL SYSTEM
W-ll, W-12
GULF SHORES, AL
SEPTEMBER, 1977
RTE 182
W-12
.10'
4 jjj
30'
~'O w-ii
230'
Gulf

-------
FIGURE 7
WELL SYSTEM
W-13, W-14, W-15
GULF SHORES, AL
SEPTEMBER, 1977
RTE 182

-------
FIGURE 8
WELL SYSTEM
W-16, W-17
GULF SHORES, AL
SEPTEMBER, 1977
RTE 180
Mile Point 8.8
Gulf

-------
Table I
Ground Surface & Water Level Data (Average)
Gulf Shores, AL
Sept, 1977
vertical distance^vertical distance
Ground	Water lagoon/canal from ground	from water table
Surface table	surface	surface to	to lagoon or
Station Elevation Elevation Elevation	water table	canal surface
W-l
9.84
4.91
-
4.93
(3.47)
—
W-2
7.64
4.88
—
2.76
(1.21)
-
W-3
8.01
2.95
-
5.06
(2.74)
	
W-4
7.14
2.66
-
4.48
(2.27)
-
W-5
6.18
3.26
-
2.92
(2.04)
1.26
W-6
5.98
2.97
-
3.01
(2.25)
0.97
W-7
-
-
2.00
-

-
W-8
4.64
0.93
-
3.71
(2.87)
0.37
W-9
4.92
0.97
-
3.95
(3.44)
0.41
W-10
-
-
0.56
-

-
W-ll
5.15
1.42
-
3.73
(2.49)
_
W-12
5.40
1.38
—
4.02
(2.74)
-
W-13
6.03
3.06
-
2.97
(2.06)
1.05
W-14
7.39
2.76
-
4.63
(3.74)
0.75
W-15
-
-
2.01
—

—
W-16
10.45
3.46
-
6.99
(5.14)
—
W-17
6.44
3.53
-
2.91
(0.99)
-
Note: All elevations in feet SLD
1/ minimum values are in parentheses

-------
TABLE II
CHEMICAL DATA
GULF SHORES, ALABAMA
AUGUST-NOVEMBER, 1977

DATE






STATION
SAMPLED
T-P
NH3-N
TKN
no2-no3
T-N
TOC
W-l
8/18-19/77
6.35
0.21
2.07
25
27.07
10.4 :

8/19-20/77
5.35
0.21
1.88
25
26.88
16.2

8/20-21/77
4.74
0.51
1.77
24
25.77
26.6

9/8/77
4.10
0.06
0.92
7.4
8.32
7.4

MAX
6.35
0.51
2.07
25
27.07
26.6

MIN
4.10
0.06
0.92
7.4
8.32
7.4

AVG
5.14
0.25
1.66
20.4
22.01
15.2
W-2
8/19-20/77
0.21
0.16
0.35
0.45
0.08
7.2

8/20-21/7
0.11
0.12
0.27
0.32
0.59
6.6

9/8/77
0.18
0.27
0.54
<0.01
0.55
5.7

MAX
0.18
0.27
0.54
0.45
0.80
7.2

MIN
0.11
0.12
0.27
<0.01
0.55
5.7

AVG
0.14
0.18
0.39
0.26
0.65
6.5
W-3
8/18-19/77
8/19-20/77
8/20-21/77
MAX
MIN
0.13
0.14
0.16
0.16
0.13
0.14
0.21
0.20
0.12
0.21
0.12
0.18
0.23
0.23
0.15
0.23
0.15
0.20
0.10
0.12
0.10
0.10
0.12
0.11
0.33
0.35
0.25
0.35
0.25
0.31
4.3
3.3
3.7
4.3
3.3
3.8
W-4
8/18-19/77
8/19-20/77
8/20-21/77
MAX
MIN
AVG
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.12
0.12
0.05
0.18
0.27
0.18
0.27
0.15
0.04
0.45
0.42
0.22
3.0
3.3
3.7

0.07
0.05
0.06
0.12
0.05
0.10
0.27
0.18
0.21
0.27
0.04
0.15
0.45
0.22
0.36
3.7
3.0
3.3
W-5
8/18-19/77
8/19-20/77
8/20-21/77
MAX
MIN
AVG
0.08
0.07
0.05
0.08
0.05
0.07
0.13
0.05
•0.05
0.13
0.05
0.08
0.15
0.18
0.12
0.18
0.12
0.15
0.53
0.50
0.50
0.52
0.50
0.51
0.67
0.68
0.62
0.68
0.62
0.66
3.9
2.5
2.2
3.9
2.2
2.9

-------



TABLE II
(con't.)



STATION
DATE
SAMPLED
T-P
NH3-N
TKN
N02-N03
T-N
TOC
W-6
8/18-19/77
8/19-20/77
8/20-21/77
0.16
0.10
0.12
4.2
3.8
3.2
6.44
5.55
5.20
11.0
8.7
9.8
17.44
14.25
15.0
6.0
4.8
4.3

MAX
MIN
AVG
0.16
0.10
0.13
4.2
3.2
3.7
6.44
5.20
5.73
11.0
8.7
9.8
17.44
14.25
15.56
6.0
4.3
5.0
W-7
8/18-19/77
8/19-20/77
8/20-21/77
0.08
0.09
0.10
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.23
0.23
0.15
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.26
0.24
0.16
4.3
3.3
3.3

MAX
MIN
AVG
0.10
0.08
0.09
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.23
0.15
0.20
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.26
0.16
0.22
4.3
3.3
3.6
W-8
8/18-19/77
8/19-20/77
8/20-21/77
5.75
4.84
4.44
14.0
10.0
8.1
10.-5
9.4
8.0
4.3
4.6
3.9
14.8
14.0
11.9
14.2
13.5
11.8

MAX
MIN
AVG
5.75
4.44
5.01
14.0
8.1
10.7
10.5
8.0
9.3
4.6
3.9
4.3
14.8
11.9
13.6
14.2
11.8
13.2
W-9
8/18-19/77
8/19-20/77
8/20-21/77
0.09
0.07
0.08
1.2
1.2
0.61
1.26
1.67
0.69
0.12
0.08
0.39
1.38
1.75
1.08
21.0
15.0
17.3

MAX
MIN
AVG
0.09
0.07
0.08
1.2
0.61
1.00
1.67
0.69
1.21
0.39
0.08
0.20
1.75
1.08
1.40
21.0
15.0
17.3
W-10
8/18-19/77
8/19-20/77
8/20-21/77
0.10
0.08
0.07
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.31
0.23
0.35
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.32
0.24
0.36
7.4
6.8
6.5

MAX
MIN
AVG
0.10
0.07
0.08
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.33
0.23
0.30
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.36
0.24
0.31
7.4
6.5
6.9
W-ll
8/18-19/77
8/19-20/77
8/20-21/77
MAX
MIN
AVG
0.06
0.08
0.07
0.11
0.11
0.15
0.23
0.35
0.27
2.5
1.8
2.0
2.78
2.15
2.27
5.8
2.5
2.5

0.08
0.06
0.07
0.15
0.11
0.12
0.35
0.23
0.28
2.5
1.8
2.1
2.78
2.15
2.40
5.8
2.5
3.6

-------



TABLE II
(con't.)



STATION
DATE
SAMPLED
T-P
NH3-N
TKN
no2-no3
T-N
TOC
W-12
8/18-19/77
8/19-20/77
8/20-21/77
0.33
0.21
0.24
1.4
0.11
0.11
1.25
0.27
0.44
2.9
2.2
2.1
4.15
2.47
2.54
8.1
3.0
3.0

MAX
MIN
AVG
0.33
0.21
0.26
1.4
0.11
0.54
1.25
0.27
0.65
2.9
2.1
2.4
4.15
2.47
3.05
8.1
3.0
4.7
W-13
8/18-19/77
8/19-20/77
8/20-21/77
9/8/77
0.16
0.10
0.10
0.14
0.71
0.30
0.25
0.61
1.30
0.60
0.27
0.87
1.9
0.67
0.45
<0.01
3.20
1.27
0.92
0.88
13.2
8.7
6.2
6.0

MAX
MIN
AVG
0.16
0.10
0.13
0.71
0.25
0.47
1.30
0.27
0.76
1.9
<0.01
0.76
3.20
0.88
1.57
13.2
6.0
8.5
W-14
8/18-19/77
8/19-20/77
8/20-21/77
9/8/77
0.40
0.22
0.18
3.7
7.7
0.77
2.4
7.8
7.56
4.10
2.44
9.23
2.4
1.6
0.91
0.32
9.96
5.70
3.35
9.55
5.3
4.2
2.7
9.5

MAX
MIN
AVG
3.7
0.18
1.13
7.8
0.77
4.67
9.23
2.44
5.83
2.4
0.32
1.31
9.96
3.35
7.14
9.5
2.7
5.4
W-15
8/18-19/77
8/19-20/77
8/20-21/77
9/8/77
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.09
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.11
0.23
0.31
0.18
0.35
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.24
0.32
0.19
0.37
3.6
;3.0
3.0
3.4

MAX
MIN
AVG
0.09
0.06
0.08
0.11
0.05
0.07
0.35
0.18
0.27
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.37
0.19
0.28
3.6
3.0
3.3
W-16
8/18-19/77
8/19-20/77
8/20-21/77
MAX
MIN
AVG
0.05
0.05
0.04
0.05
0.04
0.05
0.05
0.15
0.05
0.15
0.05
0.08
0.18
0.23
0.22
0.23
0.18
0.21
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.61
0.66
0.65
0.66
0.61
0.64
3.4
3.7
2.7
3.7
2.7
3.3

-------
TABLE II (con't.)
DATE
STATION	SAMPLED	T-P	NH3-N	TKN	N02"N03	T-N	TOC
W-17	8/18-19/77 0.04	0.05	0.17	0.12	0.29	3.0
8/19-20/77 0.05	0.05	0.17	0.14	0.31	3.6
8/20-21/77 0.05	0.03	0.17	0.03	0.20	2.2
MAX	0.05	0.05	0.17	0.14	0.31	3.6
MIN	0.04	0.03	0.17	0.03	0.20	2.2
AVG	0.05	0.04	0.17	0.10	0.27	2.9

-------
TABLE III
CHEMICAL DATA SUMMARY
GULF SHORES, ALABAMA
AUGUST-SEPTEMBER, 1977
Avg % of Avg % of Avg % of
STATION	T-P	Background	T-N Background	 TOC	Background
*Background
0.08 mg/1

0.27 mg/1

4.6 mg/1

W-l
5.14
6,425
22.0
8,148
15.2
330
W-2
0.14
175
0.65
241
6.5
141
W-3
0.14
175
0.31
115
3.8
83
W-4
0.06
75
0.36
133
3.3
72
W-5
0.07
88
0.66
244
2.9
63
W-6
0.13
163
15.56
5,763
5.0
109
W-8
5.01
6,263
13.6
5,037
13.2
287
W-9
0.08
100
1.40
519
17.3
376
W-ll
0.07
88
2.40
889
3.6
78
W-12
0.26
325
3.05
1,130
4.7
102
W-13
0.13
163
1.57
581
8.5
185
W-l 4
1.13
1,143
7.14
2,644
5.4
117
W-16
0.05
63
0.64
237
3.3
72
W-17
0.05
63
0.27
100
2.9
63
*Note: Background based upon average of surface water stations W-7, W-10 and W-15

-------
Table IV
Fecal Coliform Bacterial
Gulf Shores, AL
Sept-Nov, 1977
Date
8/18
8/18
8/19
8/19
8/20
8/20
8/21
8/21







Arith.
Station
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
9/16
10/7
10/13
10/27
11/8
MAX
MIN
Mean
W-l
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
15
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0

15
<3.0
<4.0
W-2
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0

<3.0

<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
W-3
<3.0
<3.0
3.6
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
3.6
<3.0
<3.0
W-4
3.6
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0

<3.0
<3.0
3.6
<3.0
<3.0
W-5
43
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
75
<3.0


<3.0
<3.0

75
<3.0
<14.2
W-6
93
15
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
3.6
<3.0
<3.0


<3.0
<3.0

93
<3.0
<13.3
W-7
230
93
1500
23
230
430
150
9.1


75
23

1,500
9.1
276.3
W-8
430
430.
230
210
430
430
230
93
43

23
<3.0
9.1
430
<3.0
213.4
W-9
<3.0
3.6
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0


<3.0
<3.0
3.6
<3.0
<3.6
W-10
9.1
3.6
93
23
23
93
43
43
7.3


93

93
3.6
43.1-
W-ll
9.1
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0


<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
9.1
<3.0
<3.6
W-12
23
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
3.6
150
230


<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
230
<3.0
38.9
W-13
230
93
150
43
23
93
230
150
<3.0

<3.0
<3.0

230
<3.0
92.8
W-14
4,300
46,000
930
430
230
93
430
93
<3.0

<3.0
<3.0

46,000
<3.0
4,774
W-15
430
15
93
43
43
9.1
750
3.6
3.6

7.3
75
3.6
750
3.6
123
W-16
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0

<3.0

<3.0

<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
W-17
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
<3.0

<3.0

<3.0

<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
Kugler Residence (tap water)
3.6





<3.0



3.6
<3.0
<3.3
Vickers
Residence (tap water)<3.0





<3.0



<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
Luchtes
Residence (tap water)<3.0





<3.0



<3.0
<3.0
<3.0
W-1T
(from septic tank)









^110,000


*410,000
W-3T
(from septic tank)









=>110.000


>110,000
W-5T
(from septic tank)









21


21
W-13T
(from septic tank)









14


14
W-16T
(from septic tank)









1,200


1,200
1 MPN fc/100 ml

-------
Station
W-7A
W-7B
W-10A
W-10B
W-15A
W-15B
Table V
Salmonella Colonies
Gulf Shores, AL
Sept, 1977
	Organisms Isolated
Negative
Negative
Salmonella (Muenchen)
Negative
Salmonella (Madelia)
Salmonella

-------
Appendix A
SECTION VII
SPECIFIC WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
SWIMMING AND OTHER WHOLE BODY WATER-CONTACT SPORTS
Best Usage of Waters; Swimming and other whole body water—contact sports.
Conditions Related to Best Usage: The waters, under proper sanitary super-
vision by the controlling health authorities, will meet accepted standards of
water quality for outdoor swimming places and will be considered satisfactory for
swimming and other whole body water-contact sports. The quality of waters will
also be suitable for the propagation of fish, wildlife and aquatic life. The
quality of salt waters and estuarine waters to which this classification is
assigned will be suitable for the propagation and harvesting of shrimp and crabs.
Items	Specifications
6. Bacteria Waters in the immediate vicinity of discharges of sewage or other
wastes likely to contain bacteria harmful to humans, regardless
of the degree of treatment afforded these wastes*, are not ac-
ceptable for swimming or other whole body water-contact sports.
In all other areas, the bacterial quality of water is acceptable
when a sanitary survey reveals no source of dangerous pollution
and when the geometric mean fecal coliform organism density does
not exceed 100/100 ml. in coastal waters and 200/100 ml. in other
waters. When the geometric mean fecal coliform organism density
exceeds these levels, the bacterial water quality shall be con-
sidered acceptable only if a second detailed sanitary survey and
evaluation discloses no significant public health risk in the use
of the waters.
The policy of nondegradation of high quality waters shall be
stringently applied to bacterial quality of recreational waters.
Note No. 1:	In assigning this classification to waters intended for swimming
and water-contact sports, the Commission will take into considera-
tion the relative proximity of discharges of wastes and will
recognize the potential hazards involved in locating swimming
areas close to waste discharges. The Commission will not assign
this classification to waters, the bacterial quality of which is
dependent upon adequate disinfection of waste and where the in-
terruption of such treatment would render the water unsafe for
bathing.

-------
SECTION VIII
SPECIFIC WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
SHELLFISH HARVESTING
Best Usage of Waters: Propagation an.d harvesting of shellfish for sale
or use as a food product.
Conditions Related to Best Usage; Waters will meet the sanitary and
bacteriological standards included in the latest edition of the National
Shellfish Sanitation Program Manual of Operations. Sanitation of Shellfish
Growing Areas, published by the Public Health Service, U. S. Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, and the requirements of the State Department
of Public Health. The waters will also be of a quality suitable for the
propagation of fish and other aquatic life, including shrimp and crabs.
Items	Specifications
7. Bacteria Not to exceed the limits specified in the latest edition of
the National Shellfish Sanitation Program Manual of Operations,
Sanitation of Shellfish Growing Areas, published by EPA (USPHS).
Note:	Proposed shellfish standards (federal) are 14 fc/100 ml.

-------
EPA Library Region 4
lllllflll
1010782
DATE DUE

-------