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 ------- |