NOC-AE-11002734, Transmittal of Document to Support Review of the License Renewal Application
| ML11259A031 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 09/12/2011 |
| From: | Gerry Powell South Texas |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NOC-AE-11002734, TAC ME4938, TAC ME5122, G25, STI: 32937720 | |
| Download: ML11259A031 (399) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:Nuclear Operating Company South Texas P1roject Electric Generatln Station PIO. Box 289 Wadsworth. Texas 77483 September 12, 2011 NOC-AE-1 1002734 10CFR54 STI: 32937720 File: G25 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2746 South Texas Project Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. STN 50-498, STN 50-499 Transmittal of Document to Support Review of the South Texas Proiect License Renewal Application (TAC Nos. ME4938 and ME5122)
References:
- 1. STPNOC Letter dated October 25, 2010, from G. T. Powell to NRC Document Control Desk, "License Renewal Application," (NOC-AE-1 0002607) (ML103010257)
- 2. NRC letter dated August 4, 2011, "Requests for Additional Information for the Review of the South Texas Project License Renewal Application" (ML11201A062)
- 3. NRC letter dated August 31, 2011, "Transmittal of Documents to Support Review of the South Texas Project License Renewal Application" By Reference 1, STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC) submitted a License Renewal Application (LRA) for South Texas Project (STP) Units 1 and 2. By Reference 2, the NRC staff requested the transmittal of a number of documents needed to complete the review of the STP LRA. By Reference 3, STPNOC transmitted the requested documents with the exception of the document designated AQ-6, "South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2, Environmental Report," Docket Nos. 50-498 and 50-499, July 1, 1974, and Subsequent Amendments". By an electronic mail received from the NRC on September 7, 2011, the NRC agreed that only Sections 2.5, 5.1.2, 5.1.3, 5.1.4, 5.7.2, 6.1.1 and 6.1.2 of the subject report are required to be submitted. This letter transmits the agreed upon sections of the 1974 Environmental Report.
There are no regulatory commitments in this letter. Should you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact either Arden Aldridge, STP License Renewal Project Lead, at (361) 972-8243 or Ken Taplett, STP License Renewal Project regulatory point-of-contact, at (361) 972-8416. G. T. Powell Vice President, Technical Support & Oversight KJT
Enclosure:
South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2, Environmental Report, Docket Nos. 50-498 and 4 j//, 50-499, July 1, 1974, Sections 2.5, 5.1.2, 5.1.3, 5.1.4, 5.7.2, 6.1.1 and 6.1.2
NOC-AE-1 1002734 Page 2 cc: (paper copy without enclosure) (electronic copy without enclosure) Regional Administrator, Region IV A. H. Gutterman, Esquire U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Kathryn M. Sutton, Esquire 612 East Lamar Blvd, Suite 400 Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLP Arlington, Texas 76011-4125 Balwant K. Singal John Ragan Senior Project Manager Catherine Callaway U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Jim von Suskil One White Flint North (MS 8B1) NRG South Texas LP 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Ed Alarcon Senior Resident Inspector Kevin Polio U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Richard Pena P. 0. Box 289, Mail Code: MN1 16 City Public Service Wadsworth, TX 77483 C. M. Canady Peter Nemeth City of Austin Crain Caton & James, P.C. Electric Utility Department 721 Barton Springs Road C. Mele Austin, TX 78704 City of Austin John W. Daily Richard A. Ratliff License Renewal Project Manager (Safety) Alice Rogers U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Texas Department of State Health Services One White Flint North (MS 011-Fl) Washington, DC 20555-0001 Balwant K. Singal Tam Tran John W. Daily License Renewal Project Manager Tam Tran (Environmental) U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North (MS O11F01) Washington, DC 20555-0001
SOUTH TEXAS* 11PROJEC LUNITS 2 VOLUME I
STP-ER 2.5 HYDROLOGY The proposed generating facility and associated cooling reservoir for South Texas Project (STP) is located near the west bank of the Colorado River in Matagorda County, Texas. The site is 12 miles south-southwest of Bay City, Texas, and 8 miles north-northwest of Matagorda, Texas. The site is located 10 miles north of Matagorda Bay and 15 miles north of the Gulf of Mexico. Major surface water features of the STP site area are dis-cussed in Section 2.5.1. A general description of the groundwater conditions is presented in Section 2.5.2. Water quality standards as established by the Texas Water Quality Board are set forth in Section 2.5.3. 2.5-1
STP-ER 2.5.1. SURFACE WATER Ground slopes and general topographic relief in the immediate area of the STP site are minimal. Surface elevations range from approximately elevation 30 Mean Sea Level (MSL) at the north end of the site to elevation. 15 MSL at the southwest end of the site, approximately 4.5 miles distant. Several irrigation canals are present throughout the site but are not interconnected with the natural drainage features. The westerly divide of the Colorado River Basin passes through approximately the center of the site in a northwest to south-east direction. To the west of this divide is Little Robbins Slough. The Colorado River flows along the easterly side of the STP site and is a navigable channel from its mouth at the Gulf to about 23 river miles upstream. The river intersects the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW) approximately 5.6 river miles above the Gulf. To the east and west of the Colorado River between the GIWW and the Gulf are-East Matagorda Bay and Matagorda Bay, respectively. Features of the Colorado River Basin and the coastal area near the -STP site are shown in Figures2.5-!1', 2.5-2, and 2.5-3. Figure 2.1-4 shows the major features of the STP site. 2.5.1.1 Colorado River The main stem of the Colorado River meanders a distance of approximately 890 river miles from its upper reaches in New Mexico to its mouth at the Gulf of Mexico-
- shown in Figure 2.5-1. Along the main stem are a number o -dams, including Mansfield Dam which retains Lake Travis ani is located ap-proximately 28 river miles upstream from Atin, -Texas. This structure is the most downstream point c*n~mor control of flood flow in the Colorado River. All .he: p rincipal tributar-ies.of.the Colorado River are upstreameOf--Tke Travis. Normal and flood flows in these streams are regulkted] by reservoirs.
Downstream from Austin, only a few minor t, 'butariies are to be found. Below Columbus, Texas, definable tributaries are almost nonexistent, Other impoundments on .the Colorado River below Mansfield Dam, but of a lesser signdifcanc~e on the con-trol of the river flow, are Tom Miller Dam and Austin Dam, both above the USGS gage at Austin,. and the Fsabridam, an in-fiatable rubber dam located at river milwJ-*32.5, approximately 1,000 feet upstream. from the USGS gage 'Bay C-ty, Texas. Physical data pertinent to the river charl.~.te-ristics are shown in Table 2.5-1. The Colorado River Basin, flow rates, tidal influence, river* chemical characteristics, and river wateremperatures are discussed in the-following. subsections."---, Z 2.5-2
STP-ER 2.5.1.1.1 The Colorado River Basin The Colorado River Basin is oriented generally along a north-west to southeast direction and contains approximately 41,800 square miles, of which approximately 12,880 square miles are noncontributing (see Figure 2.5-1). The 6 00-mile length of the basin extends from the southeastern portion of New Mexico to Matagorda Bay which is located in southeast Texas at the Gulf of Mexico. The width of the basin increases from 85 mi-les in the upper portion to about 170 miles in the area of Stacy, Texas, narrowing to about 30 miles near Austin, Texas. From Austin, it gradually continues to narrow to about 4 miles wide near Matagorda, Texas. 1 Average annual rainfall in the basin varies from approximately 15 inches in the upper portion to 40 inches in the lower portion. 2 The average annual gross natural evaporation varies from 73 inches in the upper portion to 53 inches in the lower portion. Average annual runoff ranges from 50 acre-feet per square mile- in the upper reaches to about 350 acre-feet per square mile in the lower reaches. Floods occur in the basin on an average of every 4 to 5 years. 3 Near the STP site area, the average annual rainfall is 42.11 inches. The Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP), which is defined as the theoretically greatest depth of precipitation for a given duration that is meteorologically possible over the applicable drainage area that would produce floVd flows of which there is virtually no risk of being exceeded, at the site is 45.82 inches based on a duration of 48 hours. 5 The Standard Project Storm (SPS), which is defined as the most severe flood-producing rainfall depth-area-duration relation-ship and isohetal pattern of any storm that is considered reasonably characteristic of the region in which the drainage basin is located, given consideration-to the runoff character-istics and existence of w.ater- regulation structures in the basin, for the site area is 25.28 inches for a 48-hour rainfall duration. 6 Although the Colorado Ri-ver has undergone changes in course along portions of its path over recent history, it is antici-pated that the probability of a change in course is not a significant consideration for that area near the site. This conclusion is based on the following facts:
- 1. it is concluded that floods are the most probable cause of channel realignment in the area, and the result of upstream control has been to reduce these floods; and.,,
- 2. the Corps of Engineers maintains the channel of the Colorado River opposite and' n:orth of the site as a navigable channel through frequent dredging.
August 2, 1974 2.5-3 Amendment 1
STP-ER 2.5.1.1.2 Flow Rates The Colorado River historically has demonstrated a wide range of flow rates. At the Bay City gage, located approximately 16 Aug.ust 2, 1974 2 3a Amendment 1
STP-ER river miles upstream from the site, the average flow is 2,353 cfs based on records from 1948 through 1970.7 The maximum discharge recorded at the Bay City gage is 84,100 cfs which occurred on June 26, 1960. The 7-day, 10-year low flow for this gage is 1.0 cfs. The mean monthly flows for the Bay City gage are shown in Figure 2.5-4. A frequency curve for mean daily discharge is presented in Figure 2.5-5. This mean daily frequency curve reflects upstream reservoir control. The dis-charge-frequency curve shown in Figure 2.5-6 was developed by the Corps of Engineers and reflects the existing conditions of all upstream diversions and reservoir control. Pertinent stream flow gage data including maximum, minimum, and mean values for the five active gages and two abandoned gages below Mansfield Dam are shown in Table 2.5-2. Continuous long term discharge data for the Colorado River below the Bay City gage (river mile 32.5) are not available. At the point of diversion (river milel14.6). Discharges in the river are under tidal influence, which would tend to lessen the accuracy of any discharge measurements made at that point. The uncontrolled drainage area at the proposed diver-sion point is estimated to be 3,600 square miles compared to 3,520 square miles at the Bay City gage, an increase of about 2 percent. In view of the foregoing it is expected that the average annual discharge for the Colorado River at the pro-posed diversion point, for all practical purposes, is the same as that for the Bay City gage, or 1,658,600 acre-feet per year. 2.5.1.1.3 Tidal Influence The lower portion of the Colorado River is under the tidal in-fluence of the Gulf of Mexico for a maximum distance of approxi-mately 32 miles upstream from the Gulf. The extent of tidal influence at any time is dependent on both the tidal conditions at the mouth of the Colorado River and the freshwater flow rate of the river. The range of tides in the Gulf of Mexico is small. Along the Texas coast, the mean diurnal tidal range varies from 0.3 to 2.8 feet. At Port O'Connor on Matagorda Bay, approximately 30 miles southwest of the mouth gf the Colorado River, the mean diurnal tidal range is 0.5 feet. However, the type of tide differs considerably.depending on the location as shown in Figure 2.5-7. At Key West, near the entrance to the Gulf of Mexico, the tide is semi-diurnal. At Pensacola, the tide is usually diurnal. At Galveston, the tide is mixed; it is semi-diurnal around the times the moon is on the equator but becomes diurnal around the times of maximum north or south declination of the moon. Tidal elevations are influenced by wind condi-r tions. In general, the heights of both high and low waters are increased by onshore winds and decreased by offshore winds. August 2,19742 2.5-4 Amendment I
STE-ER The tide at the mouth of the Colorado River was assumed to be similar to that observed at Port O'Connor. The tide at Port O'Connor is mixed as can be seen in Figure 2.5-8. The hydro-dynamic response along the length of the Colorado River under varying tidal conditions and river inflows was calculated using a numerical two-dimensional (area-wise) tidal model designated HYDTID as presented in Appendix 2.5-A. The tidal data presen-ted in Appendix 2.5-A was derived utilizing the data shown in Figure 2.5-8 and forms the basis of analyses shown in Section 1. Included in the Appendix is a "Typical Model of Exciting Tides," (see Figure A2.5-1), the calculated tidal flows (see Figures A2.5-2 through A2.5-6), the maximum flood and ebb flows (see Figures A2.5-7 through A2.5-11), and the 1974 predicted sequence of semi-diurnal and diurnal tides (see Figure A2.5-12). August 2, 1974 2.5-4a Amendment 1
STP-ER 2.5.1.1.4 River Chemical Characteristics The.U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB), began a water resources investigation of estuaries in Texas in September, 1967.10 Properties or constituents measured in the field are dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, temperature, pH, and turbidity. Laboratory analysis included the principal inorganic ions, biochemical oxygen demand, ammonia nitrate, nitrite, ortho and total phosphate, and several other selected ions such as bromide, iodide, strontium, lithium, and iron. The sampling stat:.ons a~e shown on Figure 2.5-9. Data collected by the USGS 10,11) are shown in Tables 2.5-3 through 2.5-9. Inspec-tion of these tables reveals that there is a saltwater wedge existing in the Colorado River. The stratification is identi-fied by an increase of total dissolved solids (TDS) concentra-tion values from water surface to the river bottom for those sampling stations located near the mouth of the Colorado River. As part of the South Texas Project, a biological and water sampling program was initiated in June, 1973. Methodology is discussed in Section 6.1.1 and sampling station locations are shown in Figure 6.1-1. All biological and water resources (quality) data generated from the sampling program have been tabulated and are presented in Reference 2.5-28. Biological data collected during the ongoing investigation are summarized in Section 2.7. The water quality data collected during the STP study and those collected by USGS in the water resources investigation of estuaries in Texas are discussed briefly in the following subsections. 2.5.1.1.4.1 Specific Conductivity, Salinity, Chlorides, Dissolved Oxygen, and pH Parker and Blanton12 reported that salt water traverses the Colorado River bottom for a distance of 24 miles up-stream at times, but may be absent from the river during floods. Similar fluctuation was observed in the STP investigation (June through October, 1973), with maximum salt water intrusion being observed at station 3 (see Figure 2.7-5) in July, 1973 (see Table 2.5-10). At river mile 14, bottom salinities13 ranged from 4 to 6 percent from March, 1968 through March, 1969. During 1973, salinity values at mile 14 did not exceed 0.4 percent due to unusually high river flow. Chloride values for June and August, 1973 show a general increase in chloride ion concentration downstream. 2.5-5
STP-ER 1 3 Parker, et al., report an average dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration in the Colorado River of 7.5 to 8.5 ppm. Data collected during the 1973 study show a slight decrease in mean DO, with an observed range of 4.2 to 10.4 ppm (see Table 2.5-11). Percent saturation ranged between 52 and 115 percent. The pH ranged from 7.7 to 8.7 throughout the study area during June through October 1973. 2.5.1.1.4.2 Alkalinity, Bicarbonates, Carbonates, Hydroxide, and Acidity During the 1973 study, total alkalinity values in the Colorado River ranged from 94 to 233 ppm as calcium carbonate (CaCO 3 ), with an average surface value of 152 ppm and an average bottom value of 150 ppm. Generally higher total alkalinity values occurred in surface waters at upstream stations. Generally, bicarbonate values were low, and within 40 to 180 ppm, the rapge for most fish-producing waters in the United States.14 This range provides for an efficient buffering effect, thereby precluding hydroxide formation. Total acidity values ranged from 0 to 7 ppm during the 5-month period. 2.5.1.1.4.3 Total Hardness, Calcium, and Magnesium USGS total hardness data at Wharton, Texas during 1969, provide the means to establish a basis for classifying Colorado River water as hard (150-300 ppm CaCO 3 ). 1 5 STP hardness values meet these criteria at freshwater stations (see Table 2.5-12).. Saltwater intrusion produced a general increase in hardness at downriver stations with bottom waters being of consistently higher hardness than surface waters. STP data on calcium and magnesium concentrations are greater than those of the USGS (1969)16 for samples collected at Wharton, Texas, because of saltwater intrusion in the study area. Bottom water calcium and magnesium concentrations' were greater than corresponding surface samples, particu-larly when a saltwater wedge was observed. Calcium values ranlged from 40 to 402 ppm (see Table 2.5-13) and magnesium from 1 to 1,346 ppm (see Table 2.5-14). 2.5.1.1.4.4 Sodium and Potassium Data accumulated during the 1973 study for sodium and potassium levels at freshwater stations on the Colorado River are consistent with those reported by the USGS1 6 at Wharton, Texas. Sodium and potassium values increased
- 77 substantially with salinity as would be expected at down-stream stations (see Tables 2.5-15 and 2.5-16).
2.5-6
STP-ER 2.5.1.1.4.5 Nutrients: Phosphate and Nitrogen Mean total phosphate values at STP freshwater stations 1, 2 and 3 declined from June through August, 0.47 to 0.39 ppm P04, respectively, and increased in September to 0.47 ppm (see Table 2.5-17). Total phosphate values increased at down-river stations in both surface and bottom waters. Biologi-cally utilizable orthophosphate concentrations generally decreased at all stations throughout the sampling period. Nitrate (NO 3 ) concentrations fluctuated erratically during the sampling period, June through October, 1973. Mean values at freshwater stations ranged from 3.0 (September) to 8.6 ppm (October). Saline water stations generally had higher nitrate levels (see Table 2.5-18). Nitrite (N0 2 ) values were generally less than 0.05 ppm and showed no appreciable fluctuation during the study period. Kjeldahl nitrogen (total organic nitrogen plus ammonia) concentrations tended to be higher in surface waters at freshwater stations and showed an increase during the October flood. 2.5.1.1.4.6 Sulfate and Sulfide Sulfate concentrations (measured during June and August, 1973) displayed a general increasing trend toward down-stream stations, ranging from 29.0 ppm at station 1 (August) to 1947.0 ppm at station 15 (August). Bottom waters contained higher average concentrations of sulfate ithan surface waters. Sulfide concentrations were uniformly low throughout the study area. 2.5.1.1.4.7 Total and Soluble Iron Total iron concentrations varied from less than the detection threshold (0.01 ppm) to 21.0 ppm. Total iron concentrations increased sharply during October following heavy river dis-charge. Soluble iron concentrations were generally below detection limits (less than 0.02) in all samples. 2.5.1.1.4.8 Total Silica STP data on total silica values at Colorado River upriver freshwater stations were generally higher than those re-ported by the USGS1 6 at Wharton, Texas and, were sl~ightly less than STP values at downriver stations, except for station 15 located in the Gulf of Mexico .(see Table 2.5-19). October values were an order of magnitude great-er than those load prb-of previous months, a result of the heavy- silt sampling'.. to. the, duced by flooding which occurred prior-2.5-7
STP-ER 2.5.1.1.4.9 Oily Matter, Surfactants, Phenol, and Heavy Metals With the exception of copper and manganese, all analytical values for oil matter, surfactants, phenol, and heavy metals listed in Reference 2.5-28 were below analytical detection limits during June-October, 1973. Copper con-centrations existed in measurable quantities only during October. Manganese existed in measurable quantities during June and August, 1973. 2.5.1.1.4.10 Total, Suspended, and Dissolved Matter Dissolved matter concentrations in the freshwater portion of the Colorado River ranged from 350 to 625 ppm in June, 1973; 347 to 3,597 ppm in July; 346 to 357 ppm in August; 348 to 429 ppm in September; and 255 to 273 ppm in October. Saltwater intrusion at downstream stations resulted in high values. The October flood decreased the total dis-solved solid concentration at nearly every station and resulted in a simultaneous increase in suspended matter (see Tables 2.5-20 and. 2.5-21). 2.5.1.1.4.11 Turbidity and Color Turbidity values for Colorado River stations were generally less than 50 Jackson Turbidity Units (JTU) during June through September. Stations located in the GIWW exhibited consistently higher values during the same period. Turbidity values at all river stations exceeded 1,000 JTU following the October flood. Color values ranged from 8 to greater than 70 color units, with lowest values occurring in August. 2.5.1.1.14.12 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD 5 ) The highest BOD value recorded in the study area was 3 ppm at station 9 in July. BOD 5 values were low and indicate good water quality in this regard. 2.5.1.1.4.13 Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) Freshwater stations averaged less than 10 ppm COD with the exception of station 2 surface waters in June. Saltwater intrusion into the study area produced increased COD values with highest values occurring in bottom samples (see Table 2.5-22). 2.5.1.1.4.14 Total, Inorganic, and Organic Carbon Total carbon concentrations in- the Colorado River remained relatively stable at 29 to 6.11 ppm during June through 2 5--8
STP-ER October, 1973, with 'a slight, seasonal decrease noted from June through September. A slight increase occurred fol-lowing the October flood. 2.5.1.1.5 River Water Temperature Since there is no continuous historical river water tempera-ture record other than a few miscellaneous data 1 7 shown in Table 2.5-23 taken at the Colorado River at Bay City gage, variations in river water temperature opposite the plant site are calculated ut lizing the theory and method developed by Edinger and Geyer.18 The hourly wind speed, air temperature, and relative humidity data collected at the Victoria, Texas weather station over a period from July 1, 1961 through December 31, 1970 and the solar radiation data collected at the San Antonio weather station over the same period were utilized to calculate -natural river water temperature variations. The Victoria weather station was chosen because of its proximity to the STP site area. The data used 1 9 consisted of hourly data
- from 1961 to 1964, and 3-hourly data from 1965 to 1970.
River water temperatures were calculated utilizing the fol-lowing assumptions:.
- 1. The response, of' river water to the changing of ambient weather' condition wa's assumed to be slow.
- 2. The weather data for Victoria are applicable to the
*"STP site.
- 3. The effect of Gulf tidal variation resulting in a
-. '*saltwater wedge moving upstream from, Colorado River mouth was considered 'to have an insignificant-.,effect on surface temperatures since the salt water is heavier and stays near the river bottom."
The validity of these assumptions were verified by the close agreement between the calculated river water temperature and the water temperatures taken near the-site during the field trip on the sixteenth and seventeenth of July, 1973, as shown in Figure 2.5-10. °'The '-daily Colorado River water t-emperatures near the site were then calculated for the period from July 1,
"`1961,:-ýthrough Decembe'r<31,i 1970.* The' calculated daily river 'water.temperature -was *further averaged to derive mean monthly "'river-water temperatures which a're shown in Figure 2.5-11.
Surface water temperature values measured during the :biological and water sampling program (Section 2.5.1.1.4) during August,
ýSeptemlxer, -and October-,l973 averaged 86*F, 84 F, and 73%F, respectively (see Table 2.5-11). This correspondsl avorably "to: the-:seasonal.:pattifn.:presented by Parke~r et al'.
.,<2ý. 5_-9
STP-ER 2.5.1.2 Little Robbins Slough The total acreage of open-water marsh within a 10-mile radius of the site is approximately 10,577. The acreage of open-water marsh fed by Little Robbins Slough is approximately 4,343 and includes the area of Crab Lake (199 acres) and Runnells Reservoir (143 acres). The principal drainage feature other than the Colorado River in the STP site area is Little Robbins Slough. This drainage course becomes definable just south of road FM 521 and flows directly south to a coastal marsh area north of the GIWW (see Figure 2.1.4). The total drainage area of the Little Robbins Slough, East Fork of the Little Robbins Slough, and the Little Robbins Slough-Marsh Complex north of the GIWW is estimated to be approximately 23,480 acres. Approximately eight miles northeast of the Little Robbins Slough basin is the basin of Big Boggy Creek. This basin contains 10.3 square miles, compared to 9.33 square miles in the basin of the main fork of Little Robbins Slough. See Figure 2.5-2a. In June of 1970 the USGS installed a stream-flow gaging station and rainfall recording station on Big Boggy Creek, where it passes under FM 521. Table 2.5-2A shows a comparison of the hydrologic characteristics of Big Boggy and Little Robbins Basins. It can be seen that the two ,basins are hydrologically homogeneous, permitting the appli-cation of the hydrologic regime of the gaged basin to the ungaged basin. In order to estimate historic responses in the Little Robbins Slough drainage area, a rainfall-runoff correlation by multiple regression analysis was made for the 41 months of gage data available for the Big Boggy Creek basin. The correlation coefficients thus derived were applied to rainfall records for the USWB stations at Matagorda and Bay City for the period 1949 thru 1970 in order to generate synthetic runoff data for Little Robbins Slough. This cor-relation was made on a monthly basis and an accounting was made for return flows from rice crop irrigation. The differ-ence in rice crop acreage in the two basins also were taken into account. Based on the results of the correlation analysis, Table 2.5-2b presents acreages and estimated average annual discharge for Little Robbins. Slough and its East Fork. 7 These flows apply at the point where each of these streams crosses the east-west irrigation canal on the south side of the STP site. Physical and chemical parameters investigated in Little Robbins Slough are presented in Reference 2.5-28, Tables 2-1 through 2-22, and indicate values obtained from sample station 16. The results of all chemical parameters evaluated show a marked simi-larity- to those obtained for freshwater samples in the Colorado June 6-. 1975 2.5-1-0 Amendment 7
STP-ER River. This is to be expected on the basis that the water in Little Robbins Slough is surface drainage. The results of microbiological analyses run on samples from Little Robbins Slough indicate high total plate counts (2,160/ml), total coliforms (870/100 ml) compared to other freshwater samples taken in the STP site area. These high counts are likely related to the fact that cattle graze in the drainage area of Little Robbins Slough. 2.5.1.3 Irrigation Canals Several irrigation canals exist in the area to be encompassed by the STP. Irrigation canals supplying water to areas out-side the site boundary are independent irrigation systems. Most of them derive their makeup from above the Fabridam impoundment above the Bay City gage. 2.5.1.4 Gulf Intracoastal Waterway The GIWW, as shown on Figure 2.5-3, is a shallow draft channel approximately 12 feet deep and 125 feet wide, extending along the Gulf Coast from Apalachee Bay, Florida to Brownsville, Texas. The waterway crosses the Colorado River at a point 6.5 miles above the river mouth near the town of Matagorda-,: Texas. Locks are provided in the main channel of the waterway on the east and west sides of the Colorado River to fdcilitate navi-gation crossing during floods on the river and to prevent excessive currents and sedimentation in the waterway. The GIWW at the Color~do River crossing is also under the tidal influence of Gulf of Mexico. Water level at the crossing is regulated by locks as mentioned above. A stage-duration analy-sis performed by the Galveston Office of the Corps of Engineers August 2, 1974 2.5-10a Amendment 1
STP-ER utilizing hourly water stage data collected at the north side of the west lock at the GIWW for a period from 1957 to 1972 (see Figure 2.5-12) indicated that for 98 percent of time the water level at the Colorado River crossing was at, or above, elevation 0.0 MSL and 0.015 percent of time the water level at the same location was below elevation (-) 1 MSL. The physical and chemical parameters of the GIWW are similar to those for Matagorda Bay (see Section 2.5.1.5). 2.5.1.5 Matagorda Bay The Colorado River divides the bay system into two distinct parts: on the west, Matagorda Bay and on the east, East Mata-gorda Bay. Matagorda Bay, including the small adjoining Bays', covers more than 300 square miles (see Figure 2.5-3). Pass Cavallo, the natural entrance to the Bay, is located in the southwest end of the Bay about 29 miles southwest of the mouth of the Colorado River. The deep-draft Matagorda Ship Channel crosses the Matagorda Peninsula at a point 24 miles southwest of the mouth of the Colorado River and 5 miles northeast of Pass Cavallo (see Figure 2.5-3). Matagorda Bay is separated from the Gulf of Mexico by the long narrow barrier island known as Matagorda Peninsula. Natural depths of 11 to 12 feet occur over a large portion of Matagorda Bay. The mean diurnal tidal range in Matagorda Bay is about 0.7 feet. Lavaca Bay has average depths of 6 to 7 feet. East Matagorda Bay, the severed portion of the Bay northeast of the Colorado River mouth, has average depths of 4 to 5 feet. No information is available on the tidal range in East Matagorda Bay. The only opening from this bay to the Gulf of Mexico is Brown Cedar Cut located 21 miles northeast of the mouth of the Colorado River. This small cut fosters intermittent flows and has a very small tidal provision and at present is practically closed. Physical and chemical parameters investigated for STP in the GIWW and Matagorda Bay are presented in Reference 2.5-28, Tables 2-1 through 2-22, and indicate values obtained from sample stations 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, and 13 (see Figure 6.1-i). The results of chemical analyses performed on samples from the GIWW indicate very little influence or mixing of brackish water 'with.fresh water from the river during normal flow per-iods when locks on the GIWW remain open. The physical and chemical characteristics of the GIWW are included with those of Matagorda Bay because of their similarity.~ Specific con-ductance and chloride values as well as calcium, magnesium, sodium, ilkalinities, etc., determined on GIWW and Bay waters during periods of normal rainfall and Colorado River flow, are 40 to 60 percent of 'the concentrations measured at sample station 15, which reflects the Gulf of Mexico water quality (3,000 to 12,000 ppm TDS as opposed to 30,000 to 35,000 ppm). 2.5-11
STP-ER S.. All of the water-related parameters in the GIWW and Matagorda Bay are, however, subject to large variations depending on weather and rainfall. Significant dilution of these bodies of water occurs as a result of heavy rains. This effect is demon-strated by the results of analyses performed on samples taken after the October, 1973 flood. An approximate tenfold dilution occurred at this time which is typical of estuarine bodies of water along the Texas coast confined behind sand bar peninsulas. 2.5.1.6 Gulf of Mexico The Gulf of Mexico is a large ocean basin that covers nearly 700,000 square miles and is almost surrounded by the United States and Mexico (see Figure 2.5-13).20 It is approximately 500 miles long (north to south) and 1,100 miles wide. The coastline of the Gulf is about 3,000 miles long and contains hundreds of lagoons and many salt marshes bordered by sand bars. The water of the Gulf is deepest (12,700)feet) near the coast of Mexico. The greatest depth in other areas is about 10,000 feet. The Gulf contains many shallow areas with gently sloping beds, formed by the silt deposits of rivers emptying into it. The.Gulf immediately off the coastline around the mouth of the Colorado River is rather shallow, ranging from elevation 0 to (-) 30 feet Mean Low Water (MLW) within 2.9 nautical miles of the coast. The distance from the coast to the edge of the Continental Shelf opposite of Colorado River mouth is approximately 57.5 nautical miles. The datum for MLW at the Colorado River mouth is (-) 1.43 MSL. 7 In-the Gulf of Mexico, the principal variation of tide along the Texas coast is due to the declination of the moon. The tide changes from semidiurnal during times when the moon is on the Equator to diurnal during times of maximum north or south. declination of the moon. The range of tide in the Gulf of Mexico is small. The mean diurnal tidal range varies from 0.3 to 2.8 feet at different locations along the Texas coast with 0.7 feet of tidal range at Matagorda Bay. The mean tide level at Matagorda Bay is +0.3 MLW based on the daily tide predic-tions of Gulf of Mexico at the Galveston gage, Galveston, Texas by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 8 The maximum normal high tide would be at elevation +1.9 MLW and the minimum normal low tide would be at elevation (-) 0.8 MLW. Several sets of field measurements of temperature and specific conductance were taken from Gulf of Mexico at various estuary sampling stations along Texas coast, as shown on'Figure 2.5-13, by the USGS in their water resources investigation of estuaries in Texas. The data collected are shown in Table 2.5-24. The Gulf of Mexico is subject to hurricanes° A study performed by Bordine in 1969 indicates a frequency of-occurrence Of a 2.5-12
STP-ER hurricane once every 3 years. The abnormal rise of sea surface caused by a single hurricane can flood vast areas of land. In 1961, Hurricane "Carla" produced a maximum surge elevation of 15.2 MSL at Matagorda, Texas 2 2 and flooded more than 1.5 million acres of low lying coastal area. Physical and chemical parameters investigated in the Gulf of Mexico are tabulated in Reference 2.5-28, Tables 2-1 through 2-22 under sample station 15 which is located approximately 2 miles offshore. The physical and chemical results obtained from samples at this station are not completely typical of waters in the open Gulf of Mexico; however, under normal flow conditions the station reflects a reasonable representation because freshwater influence from the river is insignificant. The results of samples taken after the October, 1973 flood are of particular interest because specific conductance measurements on surface samples were considerably less than normal (24,000 pmhos as opposed to 36,000 Iimhos). Bottom samples at this time, however, were essentially the same as normally measured (33,000 jtmhos). These results indicate that at times of high flow in the Colorado River, fresh water is carried well off-shore before complete mixing occurs. 2.5.1.7 West Branch of Coiorado River Under existing conditions, water flowing within the West Branch of the Colorado River originates north of the STP site as well as above Kelly Lake and flows in a path which is west of, and parallel to, the Colorado River, continuing until it reaches the GIWW. No discharge measurements have been made in the West Branch onsite other than a random observation made during a field trip on February 6, 1975, in which the flow that day was estimated to be approximately 5 cfs. Historically, the West Branch was once the main branch of the 5 Colorado River, diverting from the existing alignment at a point just west of the northern tip of Exotic Isle. Circa 1936 (See Appendix 2.3-A, pages 8 and 9) a log jam below that point was removed, and since then the river as it exists today has been the primary channel. This has been encouraged by dredging operations by the Corps to maintain it as a navigable channel. Early dredge deposits were apparently spoiled in the mouth of the West Branch opposite Exotic Isle, thus cutting off direct access to the Colorado River. Also, a short distance down-stream from that point, an earthen embankment completely plugs the former river course, with no provision for allowing low flows to pass downstream. S*..... o _ Amendment 5 C_ . j---Lj March 10, 19(5
STP-ER 2.5.2 GROUNDWATER 2.5.2.1 Regional Occurrence of Groundwater ,In Matagorda County, groundwater exists in several formations of different ages but similar lithology. At the plant site, the shallow aquifer zone lies within the Beaumont Formation. However, the various waterbearing sand units do not necessari-ly correspond to geological units. Therefore, all usable, water-bearing strata within the county are collectively termed the Gulf Coast aquifer. Two different and distinct hydrologic units can be defined within the Gulf Coast aquifer. These units, termed the shallow aquifer zone, and the deep aquifer zone, are separated by an impervious confining zone of thickness approximately 200 feet near the proposed plant. Furthermore, hydraulic separation of these units is suggested by differences in water quality, dif-ferences in water level elevations and fluctuations, and dif-ferences in direction of groundwater flow. Because the sands of the deep aquifer zone are capable of yielding larger amounts and higher quality water, the deep aquifer zone has been more extensively developed in preference to the shallow aquifer zone. This deep zone has been termed the "heavily pumped zone" by Hammond. 2 3 According to Hammond, the potential yield of the deep aquifer zone of Matagorda County far exceeds the present pumpage in that zone. Aquifers below a depth of 250 to 300 feet are the primary source of production and are under artesian pressure,. Water quality is acceptable for irrigation and for domestic use and most indus-trial uses; however, below a depth of approximately 900 feet
- these aquifers contain saline water. Overlying the deepaquifer zone is a thick confining zone of predominantly clay materials which extends beyond the site boundary. Above this confining zone is a shallow aquifer zone, occuring above depths of" 90 to 150 feet, which provides minor amounts of water for stock and for a few domestic wells. Water quality is marginal to poor in the shallow aquifer zone and deteriorates progressively southward toward Matagorda Bay.
It can be assumed that prior to 1900, before development of the groundwater. supplies of Matagorda County had begun, ground-water- conditions were in a' state of equilibrium. Some of the very shallow isolated water sands near the coast contained salt water which had been entrapped when the sands were deposited. Water levels have declined in the county as a result of increas-ing groundwater development for industrial, public supply, and domestic and livestock uses. Intensive pumping at Old Gulf has lowered water levels to approximately 100 feet below sea level resulting in a reversal of the hydraulic gradient on the coastal 2.5-14
STP-ER side of this depression cone and causing the salt water - 2 1resh water interface to shift to an inland direction. Hammond notes that at the present time, salt-water encroachment does not appear to be a serious problem in Matagorda County with the possible exception of the Old Gulf area. 2.5.2.2 Hydrogeology 2.5.2.2.1 Lithology In general the subsurface materials composing the Gulf Coast aquifer in Matagorda County were deposited by a complex series of coalescing alluvial and deltaic plains. Except for moderný river channel and coastal sands, the surface lithology is mainly silt and clay. Deposits of various mixtures of clay, silt, and sand grade vertically downward to slightly coarser deposits of the same overall gross lithology. There are re-latively more deposits of coarse sand and gravel in the lower 8 portions of the Gulf Coast aquifer. Generalized cross sections of the subsoil stratification across the project site are shown in Figures 2.5-14 and 2.5-15. An impervious zone, composed mainly of silty clay, extends down to about 5 to 10 feet below the surface and acts as a confin-ing layer. Below this zone is a semipervious zone of sandy silt with an average thickness of approximately 17 feet. Un-derlying this zone is a fine sand layer of high permeability and approximately 20 feet thick. This is underlain by another impervious silty clay zone from about 35 to 60 feet thick, which in turn is underlain by a pervious zone of fine sand varying from 60 to 140 feet in thickness. In some places, this fine sand is interbedded with clay and silt layers of varying thickness. The three pervious layers constitute the shallow aquifer zone. Acting as a confini:ng layer below the shallow aquifer zone, is a continuous zone of impervious silt and clay, approximately 90 to 180 feet thick. Under this.im- 8 pervious zone are the relatively fine sands, interbedded with the silts and clays of the deep aquifer zone. At the plant site, the deep aquifer zone begins at approximately 275 feet and extends to approximately 900 feet below the ground surface with brackish water appearing at 750 ft. 18 2.5.2.2.2 Aquifer Characteristics All original aquifer characteristics are based on aquifer pumping tests performed by the Texas Water Development Board. -*Four aquifer pump tests within the shallow aquifer zone and one aquifer pump test in the deep aquifer have been performed to 18 supplement this information as a part of the site evaluation studies for STP. The locations of these pump tests are shown in Figure 6.1--3, "Pump Test and Piezometer Location Map." Analyses of these tests confirm the confinement of the shallow aquifer 8 zone and the deep aquifer zone. 8 September 22,1975 2. 5-15 Amendment 8
STP-ER Representative values for the coefficient of permeability for -the sand at depths of 60 to 146 feet ra~ge from 410 to 600 gallons per day per square foot (gpd/ft ) or 1.94 x 10-2 cm/sec. Representative values for the coefficient of storage range from 0.0004 to 0.0007, typical for artesian aquifers. The coefficient of permeability of the sandy silt layers near the top of the shallow aquifer zone is much lower at about 65 gpd/ft 2 or 3.07 x l0-3 cm/sec. This layer has a coefficient of storage of about 0.002. The fine sand layer between 6 and 23 feet from the surface, has a coefficient of permeability of 3 x 10-3 cm/sec. Representative values for the coefficient of permeability for the sands within the deep aquifer zone range from 200 to 330 gallons per day per square 8 foot or 1.55 x 10-2 cm/sec. Representative values for the coefficient of storage range from 0.0002 to 0.0007 which are typical for artesian aquifers. 2.5.2.2.3 Groundwater Flow Contour maps of the piezometric surface of the deep aquifer zone and the shallow aquifer zone are presented in Figures 2.5-16, 2.5-17, and Figure 2.5-18. The contours show that the two zones have entirely different flow patterns and directions of flow based on evaluation of equipotential lines for piezo-metric contours-. Water in the shallow zone flows to the southeast with a gradient of approximately 3 feet per mile and a rate of approximately 15 feet per year. Flow in the deep aquifer zone near the site is to the west with a gradient of about 6 feet per mile and a rate of approximately 45 feet per year. 2.5.2.2.4 Artesian Pressure The deep aquifer zone has a lower artesian pressure than the shallow zone as verified by the piezometers. The elevation of water in the deep aquifer zone is approximately (-)20 feet MSL; beneath the plant site, the water level in the shallow aquifer zone varies from approximately +17 to +20 feet MSL. 2.5.2.2.5 Areas of Recharge The deep artesian zone is recharged from* infiltration of precipitation and stream percolation at higher elevations north of the project site area where aquifers outcrop and are unconfined. Considering the formation dip, the southerly extent of the deep zone recharge area should be a minimum of 8 to 10 miles distant and extendsbeyond the'northern bound-aries of Matagorda County. Shallow zone replenishment noes not originate Within the project site, except where the upper portion may be locally unconfined. On:the basis of present data,"it-appehrs that,.'
- there is no significant-shallow recharge from sources iwthin
,or to the south of the proposed site.
September 22, 1975 .2.-5-16 Am en dm e.n t -8
STP-ER 2.5.2.3 Groundwater Elevations 2.5.2.3.1 Water Fluctuations A water level monitoring program at the site was initiated in mid-July, 1973. Fluctuations of water in piezometers set in various sand layers are shown in Figure 2.5-19. Locations of the piezometers are shown in Figure 6.1-3 "Pump Test and Pie-zometer Location Map," and depths are shown in Figure 6.1-4, "Borehole Depth Chart." A maximum rise of about 4 to 6 feet occurred in the water level of the very shallow pervious zone (20 to 4o feet deep) between mid-July, 1973 and mid-January, 1974. The water level fluctuations in the 60- to 140-foot-deep pervious zone were measureably less, rising about 2 feet maximum. According to available data, seasonal fluctuations in the deep zone also are very minor (less than 2 feet total) near 2 3 the proposed power plant. Long-term water level observations for the deep aquifer zone near the site are shown inFigure 2.5-20. The well showing the maxi-mum decline is situated approximately 7 miles to the southwest of the'plant site and reflects the results from heavy pumpage for rice irrigation in western Matagorda County. While there is potential for future industrial development along the Colorado River to the east of the proposed plant site, it is anticipated that resulting groundwater withdrawals will be localized within the deep aquifer zone. No sustained pumping will be permitted within at least 4,000 feet of the proposed power plant structures. All land within 4,000 feet surrounding the power station will be owned by and under full control of the South Texas Project utility companies. The minimum distance to the site boundary from the power station is in excess of 4,000 feet. The law of percolating groundwater rights in Texas upholds the principle that the person who owns the ground surface may use any and all the groundwater he can capture for any reasonable use. Furthermore, "a landowner is entitled to protection against an appropriation of the percolating water in his land by one who goes on the land, digs a well thereon, and takes the water away 2 9 without his permission." Sustained pumping due to future groundwater development in the area outside the STP site boundary could remotely affect the power station site through regional groundwater drawdown. Localized drawdown effects would tend to dissipate laterally with proximity to the power station. Therefore, the resulting
-piezometric decline beneath the power station will be uniform and regional in nature.
If the piezometric decline were permanent and of sufficient .. magnitude, regional ground surface-subsidence throughout the area would occur,-
.June 6, 1975 2. 5-17 Amendment 7
STP-ER On the basis of observation and analysis of information concerning subsidence in the Houston-Galveston area and on the basis of soil consolidation tests from boreholes beneath'the proposed STP power station, estimates of the ratio of subsidence to piezo-metric head decline have been derived. For an estimated future artesian pressure decline of 87 feet in the area, future regional land surface subsidence will not exceed 3.0 feet . 7 over the design life of the South Texas Project. Regional sub-sidence such as that observed in the Houston-Galveston area with the magnitude estimated for the South Texas Project area will have no effect on the safe operation of the facility. Differential subsidence such as has been observed in the vicinity of preexisting shallow growth "faults" within the zone of groundwater decline in the Houston-Galveston area if it occured at the site would have an effect on the safe operation of the South Texas Project structures. However, subsurface geologic investigations in the project area indicate that growth "faults" are present only at great depth below the deep aquifer zone of pumping. Reflection geophysical surveys completed to date indicate that the shallowest of these growth "faults!' is a depth of., at least 6,000 feet below the ground surface at the site, well below the deep aquifer zone, which is between,-250 and 900 feet for the area. Therefore differential ground.-, surfacesubsidence across shallow growth "faults" is not conceivable at the site of the South Texas Projectstructures. Another potential source of differential ground surface sub-sidence, sharp lateral changes in sand-slit-clay ratios in aquifer zones, is not present at the site. Subsurface invest-igations completed to the present time indicate that the deep aquifer geometry and composition throughout the project area are relatively uniform. Consequently differential ground surface subsidence from sharp lateral compositionaldchanges in the deep aquifer will have no effect on the South Texas Project structures. The shallow-aquifer zone beneath the site extends from near, the surface to a depth of approximately 100 to 150 feet; its peizometric level is generally between 2 and 15 feet below ground surface. Because of the poor quality and low volume of ground water in the shallow-aquifer zone, there has been very little exploitation of the ground-water contained therein. Con se-quently,.there has been no historical decline of the-,piezometric 7 level in the shallow-aquifer zone, and none is expected in- the future because of constraints on the use of the water becau~se of its poor chemical quality. Because of the geohydrologic separation of the shallow-aquifer zone from-the deep-aquifer zone and because piezometric levels in this zone are expected to be static, throughout plant operation,-this.:shallow-aq.quifer7 sys-tem will *not participate or.contribute- significatnly tog-r.ound. surface subsidence at the STP. . ,- J-un e-:6-., _.19 7 5 2 .5-17a n7 Amendment 7
STP-ER 2.5.2.3.2 Regional Depression Cones Concentrated groundwater withdrawals and sulfur mining near the Old Gulf (Big Hill Dome) Salt Dome, located approximately 10 miles southeast of the site, had previously created a local cone of depression as shown in Figure 2.5-16. However, this condition has become less severe since the termination of sulfur mining operations subsequent to 1967. There are no localized or regional cones of depression that affect the plant site. 2.5.2.4 Groundwater Quality Groundwater samples for water quality analyses were collected from three wells (Wells 114-A, 2, and 115-D) located on the STP reactor site (Figure 6.1-3). The objectives of the sampling program were to provide baseline data and to determine any short- or long-term variability in groundwater quality. Samp-ling was conducted in two phases. Phase I consisted of a short-interval sampling program commencing on December 11, 1973, and terminating on January 10, 1974'. Phase II involved a long-interval sampling program commencing in late January 1974 and terminating in early September 1974. The relsults of these investigations are presented in Tables 2.5-25, 2.5-26, and 2.5-27. The concentration ranges discussed below represent mean values from these tables. Groundwaters of Matagorda CQuqnty are almost entirely alkaline, with reported pH values ranging from 6.7 to 8.5.23 During the current study, pH values ranged from 7.2 to 7.6 at Well 115-D, from 7.5 to 9.6 at Well 2, and from 7.9 to 9.2 at Well 114-A. These ranges, although slightly higher, are generally consis-tent with values previously reported. 2 3 Throughout the sampling program, pH values tended to be highest from Well 114-A, the deepest zone sampled. Phenolphthalein alkalinity (a measure of caustic alkalinity, attributable primarily to hydroxides and carbonates) was zero in all samples collected at Well 115-D, ranged from 0 to 44 mg/l (CaCO 3 ) at Well 2 and from 0 to 28 mg/l (CaC0 3 ) at Well 114-A. Methyl orange alkalinity (bicarbonate alkalinity) was highest in shallow groundwaters at Well 115-D and ranged from 271 to 405 mg/l (CaC0 3 ). Ranges of 148 to 380 mg/l (CaC0 3 ) and 129 to 249 mg/l (CaCO 3 ) were recorded at Wells 2 and 114-A, respec-tively. High bicarbonate alkalinities are common_.in groundwater where the princi-pal cation is sodium. Acidity, both free and total, of groundwaters was determined during the Phase I sampling. Free acidity values were zero for all wells on all colLection dates. Total acidity was high-est in the clay strata of Weil 115-D and ranged from 8.1 to 37 mg/l. Ranges of 10 to 20 mg/I and 0 to 5.4 mg/I were reported for Wells 2 and d14-A, respectively. June 6, 1975 2 -5 17 b Amendment 7
STP-ER Groundwaters of Matagorda County ranged from 13 to 1,820 ppm hardness, with 124 of the 177 wells sampled having hardness values greater than 120 ppm.2 3 5 Gro'undw.aters of the STP site ranged from moderately, hard to very hard, with a general 1ý 1. , J-.un-6-.6:,: 1975 6,1975 June ~2. 5-17c , n'e,-ndmý.ent
'A, 7 Annmn
decrease in hardness in deeper waterbearing strata. Reported hardness ranges were 570 to 780 mg/i (CaC0 3 ), 91 to 449 mg/i (CaCO 3 ), and 61 to 317 mg/i (CaCO 3 ) for Wells 115-D, 2, and 114-A, respectively. Calcium and magnesium concentrations paralleled total hardness values ranging from 113to,140 mg/i, 9.6 to 137 mg/i, and 7.5 to 58 mg/l for calcium, and 70 to 104 mg/l, 16 to 50 mg/l, and 9.6 to 42 mg/l for magnesium at Wells 115-D, 2, and 114-A, respectively. Chloride is important in assessing the usability of a water supply for industrial purposes. The Federal Water Pollution Control Administration24 (Table. 2.5-28) recommends that water for use in steam generation and as a coolant in heat exchange applications not exceed 60*0 ppm chloride for once-through use and 500 ppm chloride for recirculation. Chloride levels in STP groundwaters ranged from 990 to 1,133 mg/l at Well 115-D, from 238 to 402 mg/l at Well 2, and from 160 to 384 mg/l at Well 114-A. Throughout the sampling program, chloride concen-trations generally were-higher at the shallower wells (115-D and 2) and lower at the deepest well (114-A). Specific conductanc~e decreased with well depth and ranged from* 3,390 to 4,020 limhos/cm at Well 115-D, 1,080 to 1,900 iimhos/cm at Well 2, and 845 to 1,363 Vmhos/cm at Well 114-A. Hammond 2 3 reported silica concentrations in Matagorda County groundwaters ranging from 7 to 35 ppm, with most values between 12 and 22 ppm. Silica concentrations during the current study ranged from 6.9 to 136 mg/il at Well 115-D, to 0.58 to 20 mg/l at_ Well 2, and 6.2 to 28 mg/il at Well -114-A. Total and inorganic carbon concentrations were lowest at Well 114-A and ranged from 38 to 66.6 mg/l and from 27.9 to 59 mg/l, respectively.- Well 2 exhibited ranges of 31 to 90 mg/l for total carbon and 28.6 to 87 mg/l for inorganic carbon. Water from the most --shallow well, 115-D, generally had highest levels for these constituents. Ranges were from 69 to 100.3 mg/l and 53.6 to 97.6 mg/i for total and inorganic carbon, respectively. Organic carbon levels ranged from <1.0 to 15.4 mg/l at Well 115ID, 1:3 to 8.9 mg/l at Well 2, and <1.0 to 10.4 mg/l at Well .114-A. Concentrations _of phenolic compounds ranged from below the dejtection limit (0.001 mg/i) for all wells to 0.012, 0.016, and 0.018 mg/il at Wells 115-D, 2, and 114-A, respectively. &Chemical oxygen. demand, a measure of the oxygen equivalent required for complete chemical oxidation of reduced organic components in water, wasohighest at Wells 115-D and 114-A. Reiorted~vaiues inthese 4 4 wells ,ranged. from 6.3 to mg/i and 3 q . g TI*6mgI,
*s Pectively **y Much lower oxygen requirements, rpai gin from <5 t6 17.3 mg/l, were recorded for Well 2.-
Ilarc i
- 10. .. ;
.1_1 97
- w.
- 2.5-18 Amendment
.. i*
5
. ..
Nitrate concentrations ranged from 0.2 to 1.5 mg/l at Well 1l5-D, <0.2 to 0.6 mg/i at Well 2, and <0.2 to 1.4 mg/i at Well 114-A. Nitrite concentrations ranged from <0.1 mg/i at all three wells to 0.3 mg/l at Wells 115-D and 114-A, and to 0.4 mg/i at Well 2. Highest concentration of ammonia occurred at Well 2, where a maximum value of 1.03 mg/i was reported on June 27, 1974. Minimum reported concentration for this well was below analytical sensitivity (0.07 mg/i). Ammonia concentrations for other wells were lower, ranging from <0.07 to 0.73 mg/l at Well 115-D, and 0.10 to 0.68 mg/l at Well 114-A. Total phosphorus ranged from 0.09 to 0.43 mg/l at Well 115-D, 0.04 to 0.54 mg/l at Well 2, and <0.01 to 0.74 mg/l at Well 114-A. Orthophosphate exhibited a similar trend toward increased concentrations in deeper aquifer zones; values ranged from 0.01 to 0.24 mg/l at Well 115-D, 0.01 to 0.37 mg/l at Well 2, and <0.01 to 0.6 mg/i at Well 114-A. Sulfate concentrations were highest in near-surface wells and decreased in deeper zones of the aquifer. Ranges were 25 to 34.1 mg/l (Well 115-D), <1.0 to 13.3 mg/l (Well 2) ,and 4.4 to 8.7 mg/l (Well 114-A). Concentrations of sulfide ranged-from <0.02 mg/l at all wells to 0.12, 0.95, and 3.29 mg/1 atWells 115-D, 2, and 114-A, respectively. 5 Cyanide concentrations were consistently below detection limit (0.01 mg/1). Fluoride concentrations ranged from 0.6 to 1.4 mg/1 at Well 115-D, 0.6 to 1.3 mg/i at Well 2, and 0.6 to 1.4 mg/i at Well 114-A. Sodium concentration decreased with aquifer depth with values ranging from 557 to 615 mg/i at Well 115-D, 196 to 280 mg/i at Well 2, and 175 to 203 mg/i at Well 114-A. Similarly, highest concentrations of potassium were present in near-surface groundwaters, with values ranging from 4.r7 to 8 mg/1 at Well 115-D. Somewhat higher levels were reportedfor Well 114-A (range - 2.9 to 9.9 mg/1) than for Well 2 (range - 3.0 to 4.5 mg/i). Iron concentrations, ranged from 1.8 to 7.4'mg/l, 0.02to i28 mg/i, and 0.03 to 4.4 mg/l at"Wells 115-D, 2 and ll4 -A,.respec-tively. The extremely high levels recorded for Well 2 may have resulted from the steel casing used to line the well (other wells sampled had PVC liners). Man'ganese doncentrations were highest in Well 115-Diand.ranged from 0.4! to 1.01 mg/l. Deeper' wells exhibited lower:concen-trations, ranging frbm <0.02 to 0.35. mg/land'from'<0ý 02 ,to 0.22 mg/i in Wells 2 and l14-A respectivel.y. March 10,, 1.975 : 2.5 -110 Amendme'ntý' 5
Aluminum concentrations ranged from 0.2 to 5.4 mg/l at Well 115-D, <0.1 to 0.43 mg/l at Well 2, and <0.1 to 0.9 mg/l at Well 114-A. Highest zinc levels were in samples from Well 2 (equipped with steel casing), where a range of 0.05 to 4 .7 mg/l was recorded. Wells 115-D and 114-A exhibited ranges of 0.04 to 0.97 mg/l and <0.02 to 0.34 mg/l, respectively. Arsenic concentrations were genei~ally less than 0.01 mg/l and exceeded this level on only one occasion, on January 10, 1974, at Well 2. Copper concentrations were highest in near-surface aquifer zones. Reported values ranged from <0.02 to 0.06 mg/1'at Well 115-D, and <0.02 to 0.03 mg/l at Well 2, and were consis-tently below detection limits (0.02 mg/i) at Well 114-A. Concentrations of mercury ranged from less than analytical detection limit (0.2 Pg/1) at all wells to 0.5, 1.6, and 0.6 Pg/l at Wells 115-D, 2, and 114-A, respectively. Boron concentrations ranged from 0.1 to 1.1 mg/l at Well 115-D, 0.1 to 0.4 mg/l at Well 2, and <0.1 to 0.6 mg/l at Well 114-A. Cadmium levels were generally less than minimum detection limits (0.01 mg/i), but ranged as high as 0.03 mg/l at Well 115-D and Well 1114-A. Consistently below minimum analytical detection limits at all three wells were barium (0.2 mg/i), lead (0.5 mg/i), selenium (0.01mg/l), silver (0.02 mg/i), and the hexavalent form of chromium (0.002 mg/i). Total dissolved solids concentrations ranged from 2,337 to 2,730 mg/l (Well i15-D), 590 to 1,107 mg/l (Well 2), and 5.25 to 949 mg/l (Well 114-A). Bacteriological analyses showed groundwaters (Tables 2.5-25 through 2.5-27) to be of generally good sanitary quality. Incidence of fecal bacteria was low and generally confined to groundwaters located near the surface. Total bacterial counts were highest at Well 115-D. United States Public Health Service 2 5 drinking water standards, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 3 0 proposed drinking water criteria, and EPA3 proposed criteria for preservation of aquatic life are compared to the grandmean and maximum value reported for each parameter investigated during the current study '(Table 2.5-29). Dewatering during plant construction will be from the shallow aquifer zone and will extend to a depth of .80 ft below the March 10-.,-1975 2.5-20 Amendment 5 -
surface. Effluents from site dewatering operations will be released to the Colorado River at rates up to 5.6 cfs (Section 4.1.2.5). A comparison of EPA proposed criteria for the preservation of aquatic biota and the grand means of chemical constituents of groundwater indicate that no.toxic effects are to be expected as a result of dewatering opera- 5 tions. All reported concentrations for heavy metals also comply with regulatory standards promulgated by Texas Water Quality Board Order No. 70-0828-5., which establishes effluent limitations for certain hazardous metals including arsenic, barium, boron, cadium, copper, chromium, lead, maganese, mercury, selenium, silver, and zinc. 3 1 March 10, 1975 -..- ,22.5-21 - Amend.ment 5
STP-ER 2.5.3 WATER QUALITY STANDARDS The Texas Water Quality Board has set the following specific water quality criteria for the Colorado River in the site vicinity: 1o Dissolved oxygen (not less than 5.0 mg/1).
- 2. pH range (6.7 to 8.5).
- 3. Fecal coliform (logarithmic average not more than 200 per 100 milliliters).
- 4. Temperature, maximum upper limit 950F and 1.5'F above, natural condition during summer season and 4'F above natural condition for spring, fall, and winter.
- 5. Mixing Zones "Where mixing zones are specifically defined in a valid waste control order issued by the Texas Water Quality Board or a National Pollutant Discharge Elim-ination System permit, the defined zone shall apply.
"Where the mixing zone is not so defined, a reasonable zone shall be allowed. Because of varying local phy-sical, chemical, and biological conditions, no single criterion is applicable in all cases. Inno case, however, where fishery resources are considered signi-ficant, shall the mixing zone allowed preclude the passage of free-swimming and drifting aquatic organisms to the extent of significantly affectingtheir popula-tions. Normally mixing zones should be limited to no more than 25 percent of the cross-sectional area and/or volume of flow of the stream or estuary, leaving at least 75 percent free as a zone of passage unless otherwise defined by a specific Board Order or permit."
The above water quality standards are presented in Texas Water Quality Standards2 6 and are currently in effect in Texas. A complete text of Texas Water Quality Standards is presented in Appendix 2.5-B. 2 .5-22
STP-ER REFERENCES 2.5-1 U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers, January, 1971; "Water Resources Development." 2.5-2 Texas Water Development Board Report 52, July, 1967; "The Climate and Physiography of Texas." 2.5-3. Texas Water Development Board, 1968; "The Texas Water Plan." 2.5-4 Regulatory Guide 1.59, Design Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Plants, Appendix A, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Regulatory Guide, Directorate of Regulatory Standards, August, 1973: 2.5-5 Riedel, J.T., J.F. Appleby, and R.W. Schloemer, April 1956; "Seasonal Variation of the Probable Maximum Precipitation East of the 105th Meridian for Areas from 10 to 1000 Square Miles and Durations of 6, 12, 24 and 48 Hours," Hydro-meteorological Report No. 33, Hydrologic Service Division, Hydrometeorological Section, U.S. Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau.. 2.5-6 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, March, 1952; "Standard Project Flood Determinations," Civil Engineer-ing Bulletin No. 52-8. 2.5-7 U.S. Geological Survey, 1970; "Water Resources Data for Texas, Part 1, Surface Water Records." 2.5-8 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1974; "Tide Tables, High and Low Water Predic-tions, 1974. East Coast of North and South America Including Greenland." 2.5-9 Texas Water Development Board, April 1972; "Chemical and Physical Characteristics of Water in Estuaries of Texas, October, 1968.- September, 1969," Report 144. 2.5-10 Texas Water Development Board, May 1970; "Chemical and Physical Characteristics of Water in Estuaries in Texas, September, 1967 - September, 1968," Report 117. August 2, 1974 "2.5-23 Amendmentl1
STP-ER 2.5-11 Texas Water Development Board, June, 1973; "Chemical and Physical Characteristics of Water in Estuaries of Texas, October, 1969 - September, 1970," Report 171. 2.5-12 Parker, R. H. and W. G. Glanton, 1970; "Environmental Factors Affecting Bay and Estuarine Ecosystems of the Texas Coast," Coastal Ecoysytems Management, Inc., Fort Worth, Texas. 2.5-13 Parker, R. H., W. G. Blanton, J. F. Slowey, and T. H. Baker, 1969; "Comparative Study of Two Estuarine Ecosystems: the Brazos and Colorado River Estuaries," Report No. 1, TCU Research Foundation, Texas Christian University. 2.5-14 Meller, J. E. and Wolf, H. W., 1963; "Water Quality Criteria;" Research Agency California Water Quality Control Board, 1963. 2.5-15 Sawyer, C. L., and McCarty, P. L., 1967; "Chemistry for Sanitary Engineers," McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York. 2.5-16 U. S. Geological Survey, 1969; "Water Resources Data for Texas, Part 1, Surface Water Records." 2.5-17 Texas Water Development Board, November, 1967;
'"Temperature of Texas Streams;", Report 65.
2.5-18 Edinger and Geyer, June 1, 1965; "Heat Exchange in the Environment;" The John Hopkins University, RP-49. 2.5-19 Data Tape from Texas Water Development Board, Data Bank. 2.5-20 Defense Mapping Agency Hydrographic Center, April 1949; "Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea Includ-ing The West Indies," N. 0. 410; 108th Ed., Revised September 24, 1973. 2.5-21 B. R. Bodine, February 1969; "Hurricane Surge Frequency Estimated for the Gulf Coast of Texas,." TM No. 26, U. S. Army, Corps of Engineers, Coastal Engineering Research Center. 2.5-22 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Environmental Data Service, June, 1972; "Tropical Storm and Atlantic Hurricane Articles from. the Monthly Weather Review," U. S. Depart-ment of Commerce. 2.5-24
STP-ER 2.5-23 W. W. Hammond, 1969; "Groundwater Resources of Matagorda County, Texas," Texas Water Develop-ment Board Report 91. 2.5-24 Federal Water Pollution Control Administration; "Water Quality Criteria." 2.5-25 American Public Health Association, 1971; "Standard Method for the Examination of Water and Waste-water," 13th edition. 2.5-26 Texas Water Quality Board, October, 1973; "Texas Water Quality Standards." 2.5-27 U. S. Geological Survey, 1971; "Water Resources Data for Texas, Part 1, Surface Water Records." 2.5-28 Groover, R.D., Sharik, T.L. and Morgan, P.V. "An Ecological Study of the Lower Colorado River - Matagorda Bay Area of Texas," R-24-05-04-606, NUS Corp. Rockville, Md. (1973). 2.5-29 Hutchins, Wells A., 1961, The Texas law of water rights; State of Texas, Board of Water Engineers, pp. 557-600. 2.5-30 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1973; "Proposed Criteria for Water Quality. Volume l." 2.5-31 Texas Water Quality Board, August 1970; Board Order No. 80-0828-5, "Hazardous Metals"; TWQB, Austin, Texas. March 10 1975 2"5-25 Amendment 5
1' TABLE 2.5-1 PHYSICAL DATA FOR LOWER COLORADO RIVER Bankfull Distance Capacity from Gulf Avg. Bottom Avg. Bottom Avg. Top Avg. Elev. Bankfull Return Gauge (River Slope Width Width Low Bank Capacity Interval Location Miles) (ft/lO00 ft) (ft) (ft) (ft MSL) (cfs) (Years) Austin 290.3 420 740 427 91,000 21.3 0.347 Bastrop* 236.8 0 0.34o 450 680 339 80,000 10.0 Smithville 212.0 400 680 299 83,000 7.5 0.304 co 1-3 LaGrange** 174.o .500 700 251 136,ooo 16.o It 0.252 cyn 400 600 209 73,000 5.7 '0 Columbus 135.1 0.247 Wharton 66.6 2,40 370 98 89,000, 9.5 0.279 Bay City 32.5 250 40o 50 100,000 10.5
*Discontinued in 1973. **Discontinued in 1955.
TABLE 2.5-1 PHYSICAL DATA FOR LOWER COLORADO RIVER Bankfull Distance Capacity from Gulf Avg. Bottom Avg. Bottom Avg. Top Avg. Elev. Bankfull Return Gauge. (River Slope Width Width Low Bank Capacity Interval Location Miles) (ft/l,000 ft) (ft) (ft) (ft MSL) (cfs) (Years) Austin 290.3 420 740 427 91,000 21.3 0.347 Bastrop* 236.8 450 680 339 80,000 10.0 0.340 Smith-viile 212.0 4oo 680 299 83,000 7.5 0.304 M-3 174.o 500 700 251. i-3 LaGrange" 136,000 16 o, I.I \.n 0.252 Columbus 135.1 400 600 209 73,000 5.7 cr) 0.247 Wharton 66.6 240 370 98 89,00o 9.5 0.279 Bay City 32.5 250 400 50 100,000 10.5
*Discontinued in 1973.
**Discontinued in 1955.
TABLE 2.5-2 GAGE DATA FOR THE UOWER COLORADO RIVER Gauge Period of Record Drainage Historical Daily Flow Rive- Mile No. of Area (cfs) Location From Gulf Years From To (mi 2 ) Max. Min. Avg. Au St in 290.3 75.- 1898 1972 38,400. 481,ooo 13 2,394 JBAstroptX* 236. 8 13 1960 1972 39,400 79,600 75 2,040
. '.hviii e 212.0 43 1930 1972 39,880 305,000 76 2,701
- 4-o 17 .1939 1955 40,430 200,000 210 2,372 0o I-135 .i 57. 1916. 1972 41,070 190,000 93 2,245 N?
r\ 66.6 35 1938 1972 41,380 159,000 0 2,799
£ayt niy Bay City 32.5 25 1948 1972 41,650 84,1oo 0 2,291
*Data based on Reference 2.5-27. Data for periods beyond 1972 are available in uncompiled format. Drainage area includes 12,880 square miles of noncontributing area.
**Discontinued in 1973.
***Discontinued in 1955.
STP-ER TABLE 2.5-- 2a HYDROLOGIC CHARACTERISTICS LITTLE ROBBINS SLOUGH AND BIG BOGGY CREEK Parameter Little Robbins Slough* Big Boggy Creek Drainage Area 9.33-Square Miles 10.28 Square Miles Length of Stream 6.87 Miles 9.1i Miles Overall Slope of Stream Bottom 0.00061 ft/ft 0.00033 ft/ft Distance Along Stream From Gage (or Canal) to Centroid. of-Basin 3.12 'Miles -4..88 Mi-les Vegetation Cover Grains (maze, rice) and Grains-'(maze, rice) Pasturage and Pas~turage Forest.Cover None except fringe~ al6ng None ekxcept fringe stream -along stream Soil Types Clay Clay Average Annual 1,990 Acres :.l,1O0 Acres Rice Acreage Average Overland Slope Normal- to Stream 2.4% 3.9%
- This data applies only t6 the di'ainage ara north :of the southernmo~st boundary of the site (that aiea 'directly af~fected by plant construction).
1 August 2, -197.Ae e Amendment 1
STP-ER TABLE 2.5-2b LITTLE ROBBINS SLOUGH CHANGES IN DRAINAGE CHARACTERISTICS DUE TO RESERVOIR CONSTRUCTION Little Robbins East Slough Fork Total* 2 Existing drainage area (miles ) 9.33 4.43 13.76 Drainage area after reservoir 2 construction (miles ) 4.57 0.23 14.30 Percent reduction 51 95 Estimated 22 year average annual discharge in ac-ft from rainfall 6,300 3,000 9,300 Estimated 22 year e*verage annual discharge in ac-ft from irrigation return flow 1,300 64o 1,940 Estimated 22 year average annual total discharge in ac-ft 7,600 3,640. 11,240 1 Estimated average annual discharge in ac:ft after reservoir construction 3,760 190 3,950 4This data applies only to the drainage area north of the southernmost boundary of the site (that area directly affected by plant construction). August 2,-197;m 2,. 5 7 b Amendment 1
TABLE 2.5-3 NUTRIENT AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF WATER IN THE COLORADO ESTUARY, 1968* Depth Dissolved Oxygen Bio-Below Specific Turbidity chemical Date of Time Water Conductance Temper- by Sacchi Percent Oxygen Ammo- Phaosphate Coilec- (2L Surface (micromhos sture Disk Concentra- Satura- Silica Nitrate . nium Nitrate (PO4) Demand (sio.,) tion _
-- Site (ft) at 25°C)** PH. (OC)** c tion" tion (BoD) (Noý (N4 (NO2)
Ortho Total Line 5. Colorado River May 9 1220 1 360 7.9 22.9 -- 0.1 105 -- 16 360 8.3 23.0 9. 108 -- Line 6. Colorado River May 9 1210 1 350 7.6 23.2 -- 8.8 101 -- ... .. 15.5 340 7.7 23.2 8.3 95 . . ." .. Line 8. Colorado River Ma~r 9 1322 1 350 7.8 23.5 9.1 107 31 360 7.7 23.6 9.7 114 C/) Line Colorado Piver r. ~R) Kay 9 1340 1 1,000 -- 23.6 -- 8.7 102 -- -- -- .- .-- - -- 10 1,300 -- 23.6 9.0 106 16 2,000 -- 23.6 F.6 102 Line 10. Colorado River may 9 1403 1 990 5.0 23.5 -- 8.7 102 cn 1,500 7.9 23.5 9.2 10 108 15 1,700 7.9 23.4 9.8 113 Line 11. Colorado River May 9 1412 1 1,500 7.6 23.4 -- 8.8 101 10 1,500 7.6 23.4 9.2 106 17 1,700 7.7 23.4 9.3 107 Line 13. Colorado River May 9 1427 1 3,100. 8.0 23.4 -- 9.0 93 5 1.7,000. 8.1 23.4 8.3 98, 6 31,000 8.1 23.7 P . 108 7 35,000 8.1 23.7 7.8 i04 10 .38,000 8.1 23.8 7.5 100
- 1. 5 38,000 8.1 23.9 8.9 119 Line 14. Colorado River 1508 1 37,000 7.8 23.9 -- . 7.4 May 9 99 7 37,000 7.8 23.9 " 7.8 1O0
*Data from Reference 2.5-9. Results in milligrams per liter, except as indicated. **Determined at data-collection site.
TABLE 2.5-4 NTUTRIENTS AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF WATER IN THE COLORADO ESTUARY, 1969 WATER YEAR* Ortho-Depth Specific 0 c- phms-Onion Conduct- Decchi Dissolnec oxygen chenni c- hlei-rhat, as Total Date no Water once Temper- Disk trann- Percent Oxygen 9 Oxygen il feiltrate Ammonia Nitrate phenih,- Phosphn-0 Collen- Time Surface (micromhns ature parency Concer- Saturn- Demand Demand ($N02) Nitrogen Nitrogen Nitresem rua tiIn__ (24 Or) Cite (ft) at 25*C) pp.. (-C) (c) -nrtionn tint I&2ftL (COD) (2 (N)l (N (?).L.... Line 0. Colorado River May 7 1530 2 1 15o 7.7 2L.O 0 7.2 S5 I.0 20 9.4 0. 3 QRe. Q0 1 0.15 0.33 5 180 7.7 7L.0 7.1 8h --
!C 180 7.6 23.5 6.6 78 2.0 16 0.6 D. 6 QN QN o.16 036 1537 0 0 coo 4. 30.3 -- Q.2 120 .1 -- 5 0.0 0.11 June 11 D.O Q0 QN 0.06 1510 2 i 580 8.3 29.7 70 9.2 121 3.1 0.8 9.0 QR QN 0,08 2.2 06. 0.0 QN 0.08 560 C.1 29.8 9.2 120 3.5 QR 0.Oi QN QN 0.08 0.08 1535 3 560 0.1 30.7 -- 9.0 115 3.3 - - 9.1 Line '... Colorado River 12 9.7 0.2 QN 0.03 0.21 May 7 05L5 2 1 290 7.6 yL.6 9 6.0 80 1.9 QN 0.14 5 290 7.6 2h.0 c. 78 --
10 260 7.5 2375 6,c 78 -- 07.5, 280 7.1 23.6 6.2 73 2.3 17 9.9 0.7 Q0 Q0 0.12 52 80. 0 28.8 -- 12.26 156 4.5 1.8 10 0.0 QN QN 0.05 o.o8 June I' irhn 520 8.4 28.4 !0. 1 -- 073 7no -- 7.5 -, - i 27.a 8.5 520 7.9 26.9 5.0 O62 60o1 .2 2S. 9 0.2 21 2.2 0.1 iN QN 0.11 0.12 11 nO Line 2b. Colorado River 1.6 ii May 7 16oo 2 7.2 3,800 10.( 26.9 -- I. 0F3 1.8 1.8 1.7 0.55 0.20 0.29 110 14 2.200 9.8 25.5 6.7 0? 6.9 1.4 3.2 0.30 0.25 0.33 3 no1 Line 3. Colorado Rhoe, '.0 Jan 20 1315 2 1 700 0.0 10.9 18 0.2 89 1.0 -- 6.4 0.0 0.00 0.00 -- 0.12 13 i,000 7.9 20.0 8.0 16 1.6 "- 6.2 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.12 Jan 31 0905 2 10 23.000 7.2 16.5 0.0 0 -- 13 23.000 7.0 16.1 0.0 0 -- 0 ! 560 7.5 29.3 27 9.0 115 3.1 "- 8. 5 0.0 Q7N N 0.07 June 50 1500 "" 0.12 s - 8.5 0.2 Q1, N- 0.08 115: 5 3 7. 9" n. n 09 -0 00 .10 75C ".1 02:. -- 0.6 0.17 1L52. 3 5,7 7,1 29.2 27 9.0 _115 3.3 -" 8.8 0.0 Q07 Q o0.07 0.09
-- 6.1 Line 4. Colorado River
-- 9.2 99 1.0 0.0 D.D0 0.00 0.11 Jan 2n 1300 2 0 0,000 0.j 10.6 5 1.0O0 6.1 19.4 e.9 96 --
00 2.200 a.1 19.1 7.6 81 -- OhC 0 2.0 0.0 0.10 0.00 - 0.22 12.5 24.000 7.2 16,7 9-. 2 16 -- -- 6.4 June 11 1135 2 1 560 8,3 25.4 24 56o 7.9 28.2 0.6F 109 -- 5 15 560 7.0 27.9 7.L 91 -- Line 5. Colorado River q.O 96 0.1 0.0 0.00 0.00 -- 0.09 Jan 29 1230 2 1 1,800 8.1 19.2 20. 5 2.000 8.2 19.3 8.0 96 -- 8.9 96 -- -- 3.0h 7.5 2,000 8.0 19.1 1.5 15 -- 10 23,DCD 7.1 17.3 -- 730 0.0 0.20 0.00 -- 0.10 13.5 32.000 7.1 - 17.5 0. 8 1.9 560 7.7 29.8 -- 8.7 i10 -- J-ne 11 1425 2 1 5 560 7.7 29.7 8.6 113 -- 14 560 7.6 29.1 7.T 99 -- Line 6. Cclorado River 9.6 002 2.2 0.0 0.00 000 -- o.08 Jan 29 1353 2 1 3.700 0.i 00.7 -1
.71 18.1 9.L 100 --
57.5 1 .600 18.L t ,6.O0 e, 9.0 -- i0 37.0^O 7.7 15.9 7.1 30 . -- 1.l 40h 2:3* -- 01. 0.0 0.00 0.00 -- 0.10 15 37.000 7.8 15.5 8,0 28.1 31 7.5 95 -- June 01 llo 2 0 520 7.1 9F. -- 5 L80 80. 20.4 28.1 7.0 09 -- 00 520 0.3 16 640 8.1 28.0 6.08 6 --
TABLE 2.5-4 (Continued) NUTRIENTS AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF WATER IN THE COLORADO ESTUARY, 1969 WATER YEAR* Ortho-Depth Specific Bio- Phot-Below Conduct-o Secchi Dissolved Oxygen cheeaicl Chemical phste a. Total Date of .... Water once Temper- Disk Tr*m- Percent Oxygen Oxygen Silies Nitrste Assosis Nitrate Pospo- Phospho-Collec- Time Surface (micromhos atu.e parency Concen- Satsur- Demand eins) Sesad Nitrogen Nitroges Nitrogen rus roe tion (24 hr) Site t) at 25C PH. ('C)-- c.).'" tration" tion (B__) (COD) 2 JN 1L . .- &L-- L .4.L----- Line 7. Colorado River Jan 29 1115 2 1 5,000 8.1 18.5 20 9.6 102 1. 4 - 6.1 0.0 0.00 0.00 -- 0.08
-5 5,300 8.1 18.5 9.6 102 -- "- -- .... .. ..
7.5 5,500 8.2 18.2 9.1 99 .. .. .. .. .... .. 10 40,001 7.9 11.7 5.1 52 --.. -...... -" -- 20 12.000 7.8 11.6 1.7 46 2.2 -- 1.7 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.10 June 11 1350 2 1 451 8.1 20 .8 28 8.2 108 .. .... ...... .... 5 4 S0 8. 2 2 8. 6 7 .2 92 . .. .. .. .. .. . . .. . i 0 6 4o 8. 2 28. 1 6. 8 86 . .. .. ... .. . .. .... . 13 150 8. 3 28 . 0 6. 8 86 . .. .. . - - - - 15 611 8.5 28.0 6.7 85 .... .. 16 7 50 8 .1 2 8 .0 6 .7 85 . . . .. .. .. .. . . .. . 19 T700 0 8 .2 2 7 .14.0 51 .. ... . ... ... . .. . Line 8. Colorado River-Jas 29 1435 2 1 7,700 8.2 18.4 .56 10.2 1i07 h.1 -- 5.7 0.0 0.00 0.01 -- 0.08 5 11,000 8.2 18.3 10.1 4. 110 .. .. - 7.5 31,000 7.8 - 18.5 - 7.0 79 . . .. -- -- -- -- 10 37, 000 8 .0 1 6. 0 7. 8 78 -- -- - .. . - .. . 20 12.000 8.0 11. 518 5 - -1 "" 4 --
- 0. 0.0 26 42,000 7.9 11.6 5.- 53 " 2.5 . . . 0. 0.0 0.00 0.08 -- 0.02 co) 5 7.0 82 2.6 -- 9.77N 0.7 00 olD 0.22
- 0) May 7 11o0 2 10 1 290 290 7.5 7.5 23.6 23.5 7.0 82 .. .. - ....-
t.i 20 310 7.5 23.5 6.F 80 . . .... n 0.28 39 290 7.5 23.5 6.9 81 3.1 -- 18 0. Q QN .16 z 1 6 50 7 .1 2 8 .5 29 7 .7 09 . ... - .. ... ... J un e 1 1 13 35 0 7.5 900 7.2 28.0 7.3 92 .....- .. 10 . 1.400 7. 3 27 .8 7 .1 90 .. .... ...... . .. . 12.5 8,800 6.9 27.3 1.5 57 .. .. .. .. -- -- .. .. 15 20,000 7.14 2T.0 2.1 30
!2 .. .... .... --
20 2 3,000 7 .1 27 .2 1 .6 21 .. . . - . . .. ... . .. . Day 7 9 : QN 0.18 0.32 5 310 7.1 23.5 ON 10 3100 7.1 23.5 80-... o - 15 710 7,1 23.5 60.6 *. - o.6 0. 14l 0.33 20 310 7.5 23.6 6.7 79 2 ,6 -- 9, ON 0.07 0. 2 2 0 2,200 6.9 20.2 1l v 103 0.9 0.0 10 0.4 June 11 1255 3 2,800 6.0 28.3 .2 105 8,800 6.7 27.0 7.2 o . 10 . 0 00 6.
- 6. 7 2 7 .1 90 . .. .
10 31 ,000 7.0 27,7 .0 58(. "- "- N 0.05 o.o6 s18 h0,000 7.1 27., 6.2 91 1.5 -- 1.8 0.0 Line l. Coloradn Siyer QN -- .o06 Jan 29 1515 2 1 837, 0.1 17. ? C 2 -- 3.0 8.0 5 37.002 8. oD. Dl . - -- 10 - o0 o 9.1 :L.L 80 - 0R -- "O*Oh 13 12.000 8.0 16.8 .0.5 18,70 811 May 7 1105 2 : L10 7.1 2 5 0 9 -- .. .. 5 11 7. 21 10 00 7.1 2 3. 15 311 7: 23.5 C 20 h-7 - .1 27. 73 -
.. 21 - LP n '3 21.,I;r 7 June 11 1235 2 1 0,5 0 '.77 2F.
3 1,7
- ý .7 2 0 - - - -
5 13 , 7 7 .9 27 . -' 9 2
- 0. 07,002 7.9 -7. 7 18 :2,200 7-
TABLE 2.5-4 (Continued) NUTRIENT AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF WATER IN THE COLORADO ESTUARY, 1969 WATER YEAR Depth Specific Bio- DOrbos-BSlon Conduct- ec chiI Dissolved Oxygen c.emi.al Chemical ph.., Date of water ance Temper- Disk trace- Percent Oxygen Oxygen Silica Nitrate Ammonia Nitrite phte -Total Collec- Time Surface (micromhos ature parency Concec- Saturs- Demand Demand (DOD2) Nitro- Nitro- Nitro- as phos- Phospho-tion (24hr) Site (ftL) aty cCo Isa.q,.___ta n tioo - (BOD) (COD) - sen (N) sea (N) gee (N) mhors. (P) nusL(P) Line 11. Colorado River May 7 1345 2 1 560 7.6 23.9 -- 6.2 73 2.8a - 9.5 0.6 QN!*! QN 0.13 0.29 5 580 7.6 23.8 6.2 73 .. .. . . --.. . 10 "18 580 7.6 23.8 6.2 7. -- 580 7.5 23.8 6.0 71 3. 3 - 9.6 0.5 QN QN 0.13 0.30 June 11 1225 2 1 21,000 7.8 27.9 65 7.7 105 .. .. .... .. 5 21,000 7.9 27.8 7 .4 101 .. .. .. .. .. 7.3 31,000 8.0 27.7 6.5 . 94 - 10 42,000 8.1 27.4 6.5 96 - "- -- '. -- t6 L2.000 8.0 - 27.7 6.2 93 . .. .. .. . .-.. Line 12. Colorado River Jan. 29 1535 2 1 29,000 8.2 17.6 .107 9,0 94 2.3 -- 3.4 0.0 0.00 0.00 -- 0.05 5 14,000 8.2 16.2 8.o 80 .. .. .. .... 00 14,000 8.2 15,9 7.9 79 .. .. .. .. .. 16.5 14,000 8.2 !6.0 7.1 7 7 -- 0.1 0.0 0.00 0.00 -- 0.05 Ray 7 1330 1 310 7.5 23.7 6 6.6 78 .. .. .. .... 5 360 7.5 23.6 6.6 78 .. .. ... co 10 380 7.5 23.6 6.6 78 .. .. .. .. .. .N9 15 400 7.6 23.6 6. 75 . . .. .. .... F3 22 2,100 7.6 23.6 5.9 79 Mfl
.Jue 11 1215 2 31,000 7.8 27.9 62 7.5 109 .. .. .. ....
5 38,000 7.8 27.7 7.5 . 120 .. . .. .. .. 10 10,300 7.9 27.6 7:. 109 .. ... .. .. .. 17 10,000 8.0 27.3 6.5 94 .. .. .. .. .. Parkera Cut "May 7. 1725 4110 7.7 23.8 1 6.3 74 -7 .. -. -r 5.5 520 7.7 24.0 6.2 73 .. --..- June 11 1200 1 31,000 7.9 28.0 25 7.7 112 .. . . _ _ 5 36,000 7.0 20.4 7.1 107 .. .. .. .. .. Line 13. Colorado River Jet. 79 1555 2 1 16.o00 P., 15.9 -- 8.3 83 2.0 -- 0.2 0.0 0.00 0.00 -- 0.05 5 16,000 8.3 15.9 8.3 83 ... -. -- -- 11.5 16,oOO 8.3 15.8 8.5 85 1.4 -- 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 -- 0.19
.ay 7 13105 2 1 1.700 7.6 23.6 8 7.0 82 2.2 -- 8.9 0.5 QN QN 0.10 0.18 5 6.000 7.7 23.6 7.0 81 .. .. .. -- --
7 6,200 7.7 23.6 7.0 81 .. .. .. .... 10 17,000 7.9 23.5 7 .1 89 .. .. .. .. .. 17 30,000 8.0 23.7 7.0 92 2.1 -- 2.3 0.2 QN 00 .05 0.08 1700 2 1 190 7.7 21.0 -- 6.1 75 -- .. .. ..-- 5 150 7.7 24.0 6.1 75 .. .. -- -- 10 470 7.8 21.0 6.4 75 .. .. .. I- -- 17.5 520 . 8.0 21.1 5.0 59 .. .. .... June 01 1115 2 1 36,000 8.3 27.1 35 7.3 103 1.5 -- 2.7 0.1 80 Q0 0 .O 5 38,000 8.3 27.1 7.0 100 .. .. .. .. -- 10 0,o000 0.h 27.3 6.8 99 -- .. .-.. .. 15 10,000 8.4 27.3 6.7 97 .. .. .. .... 18 12,000 8.1 27.1 6.5 96 1.6 -- 1.6 0.1 QI 0rl 0.02 0.04 Line IL. Colorado River May 7 1235 1 1 2,400 7.8 21.1 8 7.1 85 .. .. .. .. .. 3 8,000 7.8 23.6 7 .0 8h .. .... ... 5 22,000 .o, 23.9 7.2 91 .. .. .. .. r-10.5 30,000 0.1 21.0 7.0 92 .. .. .. -- 1225 2 1 2,000 7.8 24.0 8 7.0 93 3 6,200 7.7 23.1 76 -.- -- -- -- - 5 20,00 0.0 23.? 7.1.9 90 .. .. .. .... 6.5 26,ooo 0.o 27.9 e5 .. . . .. 1710 2 1 1,200 7.7 73.9 -- 3 1,200 7.7 23.9 6.6 0.1 70 75 ..
..
..
..
..
..-
..
..
..
..
6 1.300 7.7 21.7 Ju1e 1050 1i 2 1 30,002 0.3 '7.5 7 .6 110 .. .. .. .... 5 36,000 8.3 27.4 7., 007 .. .. .. .... oDate from'Reference 2.5-10. Results in illigrans per liter, except c . mDetermined at da.ta-ollectioc nite. 555QN . qualitative teet negative
TABLE 2.5-5 CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF WATER FROM THE COLORADO ESTUARY, 1969 WATER YEAR* Hardness CaCO 3 Depth Bi- Cal-Below Specific Mag- Po- car- D issolved cium, No n-Date Time Water Conductance Cal- ne-, tas- bon- Solids Mag- ca r- Density (24 Surface (micromhos 5 cium sium Sodium sium ate Sulfate Chloride (Calcu- ne- bo )n- (g/ml0 Co1l ection hr) Site at 2 0C) (Ca) .LMg) (Na) ~K~ (HC0 3 ) (S014) lated) sium at Ce at 20 C) ft Line 1. Colorado River May 7 1530 2 10 212 27 60 9.1 97 10. 13 126 92 12 June I1 1510 2 4 549 54 19 34 200 36 59 310 212 48 Line 2. Colorado River May 7 1545 2 17.5 291 34 7.3 14 118 17 19 163 115 18 Line 2b. Colorado River May 7 1600 2 1,880 54 14 367 135 646 150 1,320 192 82 Line 3. Colorido River I' 68o Jan. 29 1315 2 53 19 65 200 56 91 389 212 48 I. Line 6. Colorado River tlj WJ May 7 144o 2 39 311 36 8.3 15 125 20 22 175 124 22 Line 9. Colorado River May 7 1425 2 20 319 36 9.0 17 - 128 20 24 182 127 22 June 11 1255 2 18 2,180 58 50 351 161 114 610 1,270 352 2 20 18 35,100 278 998 6,910 136 1,860 12,600 22,700 4,800 4,6 90 1.015 Line 11. Colorado River 9 1 May, 7 1345 518 38 14 49 128 28 86 291 154 49 7-Line 13. Colorado R iver Jan. 29 16oo 11.5, . 46,500 345 1,160 8,770 - 142 - 2,490 15,600 28,400 ' 5,650 5,5: 30 1.018 May '7 1305 2 1 " 1,570 42 32 ,212 120 - 68 372 797 238 114o 17 29,200 210 670 5,730 125 1,480 10,000 18,200 3,280 3,1E80 June 11 1115 2 1 32,500 270 828 6,670 140 1,760 1i,800 21,400 4,080 3,9'7o 1.013 18 35,000 272 992 6,680 136 1,880 12,200 22,100 4,750 4,6140 1 .o14 Data from Reference 2.5-10. Results in milligrams per ]iter, except as indicated. m Included in sodium-ion concentration. . . . .. .'
TABLE 2.5-6 ANALYSES FOR SELECTED IONS IN WATER FROM THE COLORADO ESTUARY, 1969 WATER YEAR* Specific Depth Conduct-Below ance Man- Fluo- Chro- Bro- Io-Date Time- Water (micro- ga- Lithi- ride mium Cop- Arse- Sele- Cad- mide dide Stron-of (24 Surface mhos at Iron nese um (F) Boron VI per Lead Zinc him alum mium (Br) (I) tium Collection hr) Site (ft) 259C) (Fe) (Mn) (Li) (mg/i) (B) (Cr) (Cu) (Pb) (Zn) (As) (Se) (Cd) (mk/j ) (ml/1) (Sr) Line 1. Colorado River May 7 1530 2 10 212 .. .. .. 0.2 -. . .. . . --... . June -11 1510 2 4 549 .. .. .. 0.3 .. . .. ..- . ... . Line 2. Colorado River May 7 1545 2 17.5 291 .. .. .. 0.2 .. . .. ..- . ... . Line 2b. Colorado River May 7 16 0oo 3 1,880 .. .. .. 0.3 .. .. . .. ... .... Line .3. Colorado River 0 . 62 - - Mn J an . 29 1315 2 1 68o . . . . . . 0.2 . . . . . . . . . .. . 0 .052 F-3 £ Line 86 Colorado River May?7 14hO 2 39 311 .. .. .. 0.2 -.. .. .. .- .... ...... ! Line 9. Colorado River U) May 7 1425 2 20 319 .. .. .. 0.2 .. .. .. .. .... .. -- -- LA) June 11 1255 2 1 2,180 .. .. .. 0.3 .. .. .. .. .... .... .. 18 35.100 .. .. .. 0.7 .. .. .. .. .... ...... Line 11. Colorado River May ? 13L5 2 1 518 .. .. .. 0.2 .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. Line 13. Colorado River Jan. 29 16oo 2 11.5 46,500 .. .. 0.9 .. .. .. ... .... 62 0.035 -- May ? 1305 2 1 1,570 .. .. -- 0.2 .. .. .. .. .... ...... 17 29,200 .. .. .. o.6 .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. June 11 1115 2 1 32,500 .. .. .. 0.7 18 35,000 .. .. .. 0.7 .. .. .. .. .... ...... fData from Reference 2.5-10.. Results in micrograms per liter, except as indicated.
- 1. I : 4*
TABLE 2.5-6 ANALYSES FOR SELECTED IONS IN WATER FROM THE COLORADO ESTUARY, 1969 WATER YEAR* Specific Depth Conduct-Below ance Man- Fluo- Chro- Bro- Io-Date Timc Water (micro- ga- Lithi- ride mium Cop- Arse- Sele- Cad- mide dide Stron-of (2L Surface mhos at Iron nese um (F) Boron VI per Lead Zinc nic nium mium (Br) (I) tium Collection he) Site __Lt) 25oC) (Fe) (M) (Li) (mg/i) (B) (Cr) (Cu) (Pb) (m)1 (As) iPSe (Cd) ( (mg/1) (Sr) Line 1. Colorado River May T 1530 2 10 212 .. .. .. 0.2 .. - . .. .. .. Jule l 1510 2 4 549 .. .. .. 0.3 -. . .. ..- ..... Line 2. Colorado River May 7 15h 5 2 17.5 291 .. .. .. 0.2 .... .. .. "" -" Line 2b. Colorado River May 7' 1600 2 3 1,.80. 0.3 .- . . .. . ... ... Line .3'. Colorado River an. 29 1315 2 1 680 .. .. .. 0.2 -_ - . .. .... 0.62 o 0.052 --
- 4) Line 8. Colorado River May 7 144o 2 39 311 .. .. , 0.2 .. .. .. .. . -.... -
Line 9. Colorado River La) May 7 1k25 2 20 319 .. .. .. 0.2 .. .. .. .. .... .. -- -- w June 11 1255 2 1 2,180 .. .. .. 0.3 -- -- .. .. .... .. .. ..
. "."18 35,100 .. ... .. 0.7 .. . .. . ..... . ..
Line-l;. Colorado River May 7' 1345 2 1 518 .. .. .. 0.2 -- -* .. .. .... Line 13. Colorado River Jan. 29 1600 2 21.5 46,500 .. .. ...- 0.9 .. ... .. .. .. -- 62 0.035 -- Hay 7 . 1 305 2, 1 1,570 . .. .. .. 0.2 .. . . .. 17 29,200 .. .. .. o0.6 -* --- .. .. .... June 115 2 .0i 32,500 .. .. 0.7--- -- , ...--
.18 35,0,00 -- *- -- 0.7 -- -- .. ..... .
*Data from Reference 2.5-10. Results in micrograms per liter, except as indicated.
TABLE 2.5-7. QUALITY OF WATER IN THE COLORADO ESTUARY, 1970 WATER YEAR NUTRIENT AND OHTER ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS* Depth Specific Secchi Dissolved Oxygen Sic-Selow Conduct- Disk chemical Chemical Ortho-Dai.+/-of Water ance Temper- Trans- Concen- Percent Oxygen Oxygen Nitrate Ammonia Nitrite pho.phate Total Collec- Time Surface (micromhos mtxr pareac ir.- Saturn- Demand Demand Silica Nitrogen Nitrogen Nitrogen as Phospho- Phospho-tio (24 Or) Site (rt) at 25cC)'.x.t (.". tixx'" tion (DOD) (COD) (i2_ ____ ) ) .. J11...... (N)L.....roe (P) -a (P) Line 1. Colorado Dive' Feb. 25 113.0 2 760 8.3 15.1 41 10.3 101 3.8 11 1O 0.1 0.05 0.07 0.16 10 590 8.3 15.1 10.3 101 -.. .. .. . 17 600 8.1 15.0 1i0.4 102 5.9 -- ii O.4 0.00 0.06 0.1L Apr. 20 1610 2 1 360 8;2 23.5 25 9.2 107 .. .. .. .. 5 360 8.2 23.5 9.0 105 " -. .. .. .. 17 370 8.1 23.6 9.0 105 0.8 5.0 7.2 0.4 0.12 0.00 0. 00 o.6o Line 2. Colorado River Feb. 25. 1130 2 I 540 8.3 15.0 -- 9.9 97 3.4 -- 9,1 9,4-- -0.3 0 0.00 0.13 0'.0 0.20 540 8.3 15.1 9.8 96 5 Apr. 20 1630 2 16 1 550 370 8.3 8.1 15.1 23.8 37 9.6 8.6' 1 94 6.9 --
--
9.5 0.2
-1 o.06 0.02 0.11 o734
*0. 3 15 390 8.i 23.9 8.0 91 0.8 6.4 7.4 0.2 0.05 0.01 0.05 Line 3. Colorado River Feb. 25 1145 1 O 570 8.3 15.0 5? 9.8 96 ....
5 570 8.3 15.0 9.8 97 .... 15 570 8.3 15.0 10.2 100 .... co Lire L. Colorado Ricer ha3 FeO, 25 1300 2 O 560 - 8.3 15.1 5i 9.9 96 .. .... R) 5 560 8.3 15.4 10.0 99 .. .... 16 560 8.3 15.4 9.8 97 .. .... Ml Line 5. Colorado Ricer Feb. 25 1320 2 56o 8.1, 15.7 10.9 105 .. ... .. i4c) 5 56o 8.4 15.7 10.8 107 .. .. .. 13 56o 8.4 15.8 1o.6 106 .. .. .. Line 6. Colorado River Feb. 25 1310 2 980 8.4 15.5 -- 10.9 108 3.7 6.7 9.0 0.2 0. 00 O.o6 0.16 S,OOO 8.4 15.5 10.8 b0 .. .. .. .. 5 11,000 8.1 15.L 10.5 107 .. .. .. .. 1O 16,OOO 8.1 15.1 7.9 81 .. .... 32 33,000 7.9 1i .8 5.0 56 1.7 42 3.5 0.1 0.35 0.10 0.07 0.13 Lino 7. Clorado Dicer rer. o5 100 2 I 1,6oo 8.5 15.7 6i 11.7 116 ... .. .. .. 5 2.200 9.4 159.4 10.7 107 .. .. .. .. 8 11,0 0 8.3 13.2 9.5 96 .. .. .. .. 9 30,000 8.0 11.8 6,5 71 .. .. .. .. 10 34,000 8.0 11.7 6.o 67 .. .. ... ..
!2 3h,000 S.0 14.6 5.5 62 .. .. .. ..
15 31,000 70 9 14.9 5.1 61 .. .. .. .. Lino 8. Colorado River Feb. 25 1420 2 1 2,400 8.5 15.6 64 11.6 116 4.6 -. 9.0 0.1 0.00 0.06o 0.15 0.05 2,600 8.5 15.5 11.5 115 --.. .. .. 8 2,700 8.5 15.5 ii. 1 -L.. .. .. .. 10 32,000 8.0 1 .8 " .i 79 05 37,000 8.0 i4.6 5.7 64 20 41,000 5.O 14.5 5.2 6 - -- 27 42.000 8,0 IL.. 5.1 59 1.5 -- 1.6 0.1 0.07 o.14 Apr. 20 1530 2 1 370 8.3 23. 4 9.0 106 .. .. .. . 5 30 8.2 21.9 N 109 7 . 0.5] 15 370 8.2 2 .0 9. l1 .. . - 22 390 8.2' 24.1 9-9 116, 0.9 -- 7.7 0.3 0.06 3.0! 0.12 May 21 0905 2 1 400 7.6 5.5 8.0 93 - -- i. 1- 0.12 0.20 0.17 0.11h 5 44o 7.6 2- 0 9 "- 20 45 7.6 2 . 91 . . . 1 6o 7-* 2ý. 20 L55 7.ý 23.5 .I 9L . . . . 23 850 7-7 23.95..5 -- 9.2 1.1 0.01 0.12 0.10 0.52 June 9 1310 2 1 55C 7.9 26.1 2D 5.] 101 2.1 -- 9.0 0.5 0.14 0 . 550 0.o 26.1 9.2
& 00 .. .. ..
10 550 7.9 26.2 1.3 152 . . .. .. *0.0 0.30 15 655 7.9 26.2 8.2 100 . -... . 22 750 7.9 26.2 0,2 100 1.9 -- 9.6 o.6 0.01 .0.15
II TABLE-2.5-7 (Qontinued)
*QUALITY OF WATER IN'THE COLORADO ESTUARY, 1970 WATER YEAR NUTRIENT AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS*
-e O e BI. .Ortho-Depth-. Specific Seochi Dissolved Oxygnen Pic- "" h ph e eth on Beo oduct-Cordot- D Disktitis chemical Chemical phosphate Date of water ance Tempev- Trans- Conoen- Percent Opgend OxyDen (Sin02 Nitroie -Asonit . Eitite a. Phns, Tetal Cllec- Time S Surface (micromhos . ature parency tpa- Saina- Demand Demand ((8O) Jitrngen Nitregen uitrngen ph(cus ?hssph) rua tian ivt (ft) 25-C___
________ _____ !I."..__ ___ tins CBODS) (COD) (N)_.AL A. L1 Z Line B8. Intracoa taD WatervU Apr. 20 1515 2 1 2,h00 8.3 2h.i8 6 9.2 111 .... 5 37400 8.2 24 .7 9.2 ill1 .. .. 9 6,500 8.0 24.3 7.8 9 . nay 21 1025 2 1 20D 000 7.7 24.2 56 6.6 8i - .. - -.... 3 25,000 7.7 2h.1 6.3 a .* -. ... - -- - .. 5 33,000 7.7 24.2 6.0 80 -.. - __ . _. 100, 0 r.T. 21. 2- 1.7 78 .. .. . - .5.. -- 17 ho,03o 7.7 2h.6 6.2 86 5 -0 0.. June 9 15 0 2 1 3.600. 8.0 26.5 36 8.2 102 2.0 -- 8. 5 0. 05 Oil .8O0 0.10 5 5,200 8.0 26.5 .7.8 98 ... . -" 10 7.070 7.6 26.4 7.4 92 4. 0.3 ;.06 0.0 0.03 O.-i 16 I1,000 7.8 26.6 7.9 , 89 2.5 -- 7. Line 9. Cl rado River eh. 25 S1450 2 1 18,909 6.3 15.6 76 10.9' "1i1 3.0 -- 6.8 0.5 0.90 0.06 0.05 0.10 5 6,ooo" 8.2 15.3 9.7 102 ... ...--
'"s 8 2 8,000 8.1 151. 8.0 .88 -- " 0 .... 0.06 0.12 11 30,000 8.0 15.1 .77.- *82 3.R -. 0 o: .;
N) Apy. 2O i.25 2 15 310 370 . 6.3 8.2 2b.0 223 , 39 8..9 9.9 105. 10o - ... - - . - -- ... "- "" _- S5 390 8.2 23.9 8.6 191 .7. 6.1 7.5 o.7. - 0.03 0.81 .07 0.12 May 21 0930 2 1 0OO 7.5 23.5 a 8.o .93 2.4 -- 9.5 1.1 i,06 0.10 0.18 0.33 - 5 44o 7.5 23.1 8o--0,. 9 . .-- 11 720 7.6 23.5 8.o 97 8... ._ 0.1i 0.05 o-o- o. 41 5,900 7.5 23.5 8.0 95 3.1 -- 9.2 1. 0 0.17 00 807'.01 June 9. 1330 2 . 1 46o 9.0 26.7 30 6.6 105 2.4 o.6 9.8 t.6 0.10 2.07 0.07. .10 5 550 8.0 26.7 8.4 102 ...... "- -- 10 850 8.0 26.3 8.2 100 ...... - ... __ 1I 2,6oo 7.9 26.3 7.7 95 .. .. .. ...... 16.5 7,500 7.7 27.0 6.8 86 1.9 19 7.T 0.2 0,07. 0.01 0.00 0.09 ADDo 2 3 550 7.9 26.3 28 8.7. -- -- -"- - __ 5 590 7.9 26.3 0.7 102 .... -- "- "- 8 650 7.9 26.3 8.2 101 -- - 10 2,500 7.8 26.3 7.8 -96 12 11.500 7.3 27.1 - 6.3 81 .. "" Line 10. Colorado Ricer Apr . 20. 5 14 15. z 60 8 .2 -. 23 .6 -- 8.7 191 1' .............. -- 5 360 8.2 "23.6 . 8.8 '.102-02. -- . ", . " lo. 360 8.2 23.7 9.5 150 11)- -- . .... -- i7 370 7.9 23.7 9.6 11. .... " .. . "- " May, 21 0945 2 1 560 -7.6 23.5 08 8.9 93 .... :.' .. . ._ 5 650 7.6 23.5 , 8.0 93 .. -- 11 -- _- iO 950 7.6 23.5 8.0 . 93 ...... .. __ i1 5 2,300 .5 23.5 8.1 g5 .. .. . . ....---- Line 11. Colorado River 7eb. 25 1515 2 i 11,000 8.3 11.7 77 11.5 117 ,., -- -- .... 12,000 8.3 15.6 11.3 1i6 1- " - ... ......... 19,000 3.2 15.2 9.6 100 .. .... .... -- " . in 31,700 8.0 15.7 8.0 89 ...... ........ -- 1 7.1,O00. 8.0 15.0 6.5 76 .... - . .... -- "" Apr. 7. 13551 2 1 370 9.3 23.9 4.6 . 9.8 1i5 " -- . ... ......... 5 730 8.3 23.9 9 fi15 . *- .- ... . .. . . "- -" --- 10 'c 790 8,3 23.7 5.5 9" n- 0 1i n, - - -.. . .. . -" -- _. 12 1,200 8.2 23.7 9-':5 ' 1 1-, 0 - .- . .. -- , . -- .- li 10,007 8.2 23.0 9.3 179 ...... .... "" s" -- 15.5 .1,00o 8.0 21.i 7.1 99 ...... .... .... -- 1730 2 1 560 7 .9 £3. 5 .. . - ... .- . . .. .. .. .. .. . - " 15.5 6,oo0 7.8 23.3 .- .. ..... 7- "e .... -- M-y 21 0955 2 i 600 7.5 23.5 0 8.0 93 ...... -- "" -- j 1 000 7.5 23. 0 92-10 1LD0 7.6 23.5 9.O 95 ...... "- "" -- -" 15 6,500 7.6 23.5 0.0 95 .. .. .. " ..--
TABLE. 2.5-7 (Continued) QUALITY OF MATER IN THE COLORADO ESTUARY, 1970 WATER YEAR NUTRIENT AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS* Depth Specific SDcchi Dissolved Ornen. Bin- t Ornto-as Ph-te Below Conduct- Disk chemisl ChIemiial. Date oC Wster - anne Temper- Trann- Coocen- Percent DOygen Osygen Dilics Nitrate Aumonia Coilec- Time Sonface (micromhos sture parency tra- Dsturs- Demand Demand (Oo) Nitrogen NJtrogen Nitrogen phruss Phosphorus tion - (24 hr) Dite (f) nt 25*Cl* cti* (0C)5* Ic-). tion** tion (,2O.+/-.. (COD) ) (N)___LL... Line 12. Colorado River Apr. 20 1330 2 1 590 8.3 24.0 57 8.7 102 .. .. 5 920 i.4 24 .0 8.3 100 10 1,000 8.5 23.7 6.7 i01 .. 12.5 1,200 8.2 23.8 8.6 101 ... .. T .9 94 . . i4 9,500 8.1 23.5 15 35.000 8.0 22.0 6.5 83 -- -- 15.5 :0,DOO 8.0 21.6 6.0 79 .. .. 1341 2 1 560 T.9 23.5 43 .. .. ....
'h 1 4.000 7.8 23.0 1 4.0OO 7.6 20.5 0.0 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.05
--. . 0.1 37 1.6 May 21 4120 2 i 1 17.6
.hOO 21.0 10 8.o 00 "-- --
4,6D0 7.6 23.0 80 9. .. 10 4,200 7.7 23.0 70.8 6 o ..-. 228,010 7.9 25.0 20 28,900 7.9 7 2 95 ... J-Ie 9 oý0 2 1 2,4D0 80.2 3ý . 8.6 7.2 10690 ...
-... ..
5 3,500 8.i 4 0,26.0 7 -3 91 .. ... 9 22 030 79 250.8 ? 2 99 .. .
; 3r31.001i 8 .7 Co 39,1 0 7 3.0 ",.1 7 ti) 20 3ý000 81.C 25.7 . 3 10' .. ..
I narker _ ut cc .2 . 23 1617 1 13,00- 8.3 15-5 76 . . 5 16,ooo 0.2 15 3 Nd 10 32,0700 .0 2.4.ý Ju-, 9 144a0 i 6,500 7.4 2' LL 7.9 10O 100 .. 3 i2,000 7.4 27 7.7 99 .. ..
;6,000 7.3 27.5 7.3 96 .. . .
7 24,000 7.3 28 6.8 03 ..
!445 -5.000 8 0 26.8 36 0.6 009 .. ...
3 43,OOO 3,0 26.6 b-5 100 .... .. 6 14.000 7 2-.5 59 8.2 105 1605 .1 4,80c 27.5 -- 8.1 0001 . . 3 6,500 -f.5 8.0 103 .. .. 10,000 27.5 7.6 121 .. ... S 6, Goo, 27 7.4 100 .. .. 12 22,000 27 7.5 i00 .. .. A63-5 - 1 12,000 7 27-5 54 -- 08.9 116 .. . 5 14,o00 7.3 27 8.1 105 .. .. 7 00,00 7.3 -7 7.4 99 .. .. 10 41,000 7.3 26 6.1 6.2 80 00 -'- "-- 12 42,000 7.3 26 6.2 9go . . Line 13. Colorado River Peb. 25 1510 2 1 12,000 0.3 15.6 64 ..- 3 .0 1L 7.0 0.2 0.06 o.o6 o.o6 0.17 3 13,000 8.3 15.6 23,000 8.3 05.3 8 23,000 8.2 15.1
.. ... 2.7 -- 3 .8 0.2 0.06 0.00 0.04 0.08 10 31.000 8.0 15.0 Apr. 20 1300 2 0 980 0.3 24.2 44 0.0 101 0.0 -- 0.8 0.00 0.01 o.06 0.10 3 2 o600 0.2 24.0 8.6 102 .. ..
5 3,T00 8.2 .23.8 8.2 8. 960 -- . , -- 6.5 4,000 8.1 23.7 0.2 98 -- 0.5 6,50D 8.i 32.0 1.7 0.03 0.00 0.OT O.OT 8.1 98 1.2 --
- o. 16 May 21 1015 2 0 6,000 7 ;5 7.5 94 ,6 -- 1.6 0.09 0.04 0.05 5 9,500 71 7.08 4 --..
0.33 0.03 0.03 o.16 11.5 30:000 7.9 -. 0 7.3 . 97 2,0 , -. 3 0.3 0.08 1340 2 1 4,700 7.2 27 -- *.0 0 101 1 0 . .0 -- 0.17 0.01 0.04 JeeN 0.5 3 3-:010 7' ^ 7.? 99 .. ... 4 11,000 71 7.7 97 .. .. 5 25,000 7 27 7.5 101 -- -- 42 44,000 7. 6 6.7 g3 2.4 -- 0.1 0.11 0.00 0.03 O. 08
TABLE ,2.5-7 (CO'ntinued) QUALITY 'OF WATER IN THE CQLORADO ESTUARY, 1970 WATER YEAR-NUTRIENT AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS* tepti Specific Secchi Disaslved Oxygen Bin- Ortho-phosphate Betlow Conatt- Dick chemical Chemioa! Ou-ygen Phas-0v Total Sate of Water tce . Temper - Tra-n- Coocen- Percent OSygen Silica Nitrate Ammonia Nitrite Phosphoras parency Ira- Satura- D-erd Nitrogen Bitrogen Nitrogen Collar-tie lime ( 24 hr ) Site Surface _(fSt 7J amicromhos at 25'CfP' P" a tue ('Ca-0 Ssm). _ tiaa 0 tiot (BOD) Scova Sd S1B2) (N () M Line 13a. Col.rado Rivcr Apr. 20 1315 2 1 4.300 8.2 2L 3 41 8.4 10S --
. 2 5 8,500 8-1 24.3 8.0 - 96 --
i2,000 8.1 24.2 T-7 94 -- 6.5 22,000 79' 24;0 6. " 78 -- 1.3 7.3 1.0 0.32 0.05 0.87 M0y 21 1030 2 i ,0.O00 7.8 24.5 19 .7 7 94 0.07 24.000 7.8 25.0 7 6 95 0.00 6.o 0.7 0.20 0.05 o.14 10 16,000 7 .8 25.0 7 5.5 " .95 , Line i. Colorvau River FablO25 2 1 14,SO0 8.2 15.:7 76 l6tt 3 1. 000 8.3 -- 15 .8 Apr, 20 1240 2 T,'500 8.1 23 .,9 42 8.3 100
*',V 3.5 12,000 8.p. 23.7
- A May 21 10t0 2 3 32,000 8.o 26.0 19 7.7 105 0'~ 4 30,030 8.0 26.0 .7-8 107 1 4h7,oo0 30 7 2 i06 2.6 0.3 0,0 0.11 0.00 0.01 0.07 200~ June 9 1320 7 4,7000 7.4 26.5 3.1 0.8 0,0 0.11 0.00 0.07 0.11 Il) 7 .4. 27 74.4-. 13O Hx "DasL fro Nefep~e-nc 25-11 . Re~sults in milligrams .pe, liter', except as indicated. uJ -Determined at data-eullection asite. 02>, S~t'..'- ,
- C -e - - . . , . - . . -
................................
S,..a -
TABLE 2.5-8 QUALITY OF WATER IN THE. COLORADO ESTUARY, 1970 WATER YEAR CHEMICAL ANALYSES* Hardness as CaCO 3 Depth Specific Bi- Cal-Below Conduct- Mag- Po- car- Disolved cium, Non-D~te of Water ance Cal- ne- tas- ban-solids car- Density Time Surface (mieromhos* cium sium Sodiuim sium ate Sulfate Chloride (calcu- mag-he- bon- (g/ml
,;on (24 hr) Site JILL at 250 C) (Ca) £M)&L (a. slum
___ (so 03)L -LS-04)- (Cl) . lated) ate Line 1 Cnolrsdn R~yce F-b. 25 Ii10 2 17 647 71 19 42 253 41 66 376 256 48 Apr. 20 1615 2 17 506 38 17 34 126 32 54 261 166 39 Line 6. Cooradoive Fe,. 25 1346 2 12 30,400 260 815 5,950. 175 1,510 10,800 19,400 4,000 3,860 Line 8. Colorado River Fet. 25 1420 2 1. 2,810 8O 68 424 246 133 750 1,590 48o 278 Cf) 2 27 4l,200 330 1,1,70 1 7,910 170 2,030 14,600 26,100 5,650 5,510 1-3 Line 9. Colorado River 1-d Apr. 20 1425 2 11.5 526 -- 32 56 I kii.y21 0930 2 1 28 20 Lt 14 5,920 80 127 981 92 284 1,740 3,290 720 w 618 June 9 133C 1 624 44 16 52 168 35 75 322 co 174 30 16.5 11,100 107 227 1,990 149 480 3,480 6,370 1,200 1,080 Line 12. Colorado River Apr. 20 -T4c 2 16 45,100 350 1,200 8,46o 141 2,280 15,400 . 27,800 5,800 5,680 Line 13. Colorado River Fet. 25 154L 1 11,700 145 272 220 522 3,600 6,650 1,990 1,480 1,300 28,600 235 781 5,050 181 1,320 9,400 16,900 3,800 3,650 Apr. 20 1300 2 8.5 6,9t90 82 163 1,070 161 320 1,930 3,660 875 736 May 21 '015 2 11 .5 30,800 253 942 5,740 136 1,580 10,800 19,400 4,520 4,410 ourne 9 . ;L(" 2 1 4,600 71 440 1,110 89 753 171 2,570 544 388 Line 14. Colorado River June 9 1320 7 48,400 378 1,550 9,190 156 2,4oo 17,500 31,100 7.300 7,170
*Dtta from Reference 2.5-11. Results in milligrams per liter, except as indicated. "Included in sodium-ion concentration.
TABLE 2.'5-9 QUALITY OF WATER IN THE COLORADO ESTUARY, 1970 WATER YEAR ANALYSES FOR SELECTED IONS* Depth, Specific , Below Conduct-Water ance Man- Fluo- Chro- Bro- Io-Date Tinme Sur- (micrc- ga- Lithi- ride mium Cop- Arse- Mer- Cad- mide dide Stron-of" (24) face mhos at Iron nese um (F) Boron VI per Lead Zinc nic cury mium (Br) (I) tium Collection hr)i ajýLS (ft, 25'C) fjf (Mn) .(Li) (ag/1) (B) (Cr (Cu) (Pb) (Zn) (As) (HA) (Cd) (mg/iL) {pSgfl) (Sr) Line 1. Colorado River Feb. 25 i11.0 2 17 647 .. .. .. 0.2 100 .. .. .. .. .. .. ... 0.8 0.035 -- Apr. 20 1615 2 17 506 .. .. .. 0.2 80 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1.0 0.018 -- Line 6. Colorado River Feb. 25 134f 2 12 30,400 -- 0.6 o.- 2,700 ..... .. . .. ..- - -- 19 0.037 -- Line 8. Colorado River' Feb. 25 1420 2 1 2,810 .. .. .. 0.7 250 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.9 0.034 -- 27 41,200 .. .. .. 0.3 3,500 -- 38 0.037 S11" .. ." Line 9. Colorado River Apý-. 2C 1L25 2 11.5 526 .... -.. 0.2 120 - --- *- 0-3 M.4!y 21 093 2 1- -- 0.3 80 .. .. .. .. . 1.3 0.013 -- 'di} ." " .' 14 5,920 .. .. .. 0.4 o- 500 -- .
--. . . . 7.1 0.017 -- In Jun, 9 1330 2 i 624 -. .. .. 0.2 80 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2.9 0.018 --
16.5 11,100 .. .. .. 0.3 850 .. .. 14 0.026 Line 12. Colorado River Apr. 20 1740 2 16 45,100 0.7 1,500 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 60 0.029 -- Line 13. Colorado River Feb. 25. 1540 2 1 '11,700 .. .. .. . 4.o.1 88o0"*' -.. .. .. .. .. .. .. 14 0.033 --
', 11 28,600
*!*
*-- ?' ....
*," 0.6 2,200 -. .. .. . .. . *- 32 0.023 0.028 -
Apr. I 20' ý1300 1 '. " 2 8.5 6,99o 7-. .. . 0.3 610o .. .. - - - - 76 7.6 0.018 - May 21 1015 2 11.5 30,800 -- -- .. 0.7 1,700 .. .. .. .. .. . .- 37 0..026 --
.Tune 9 .134 2 1. 4-,60 .. . .0.2 - 380o , ---.. .. .. .. .. -- -- 8.6 0.021 --
Line 14. Colorado River J1s 'e91 1320 2 7 ', 48,400 .. .. .. . 0.7 4,6oo. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. 55 0.020 --
*Data from Reference 2.5-11. Results in micrograms per liter, except as indicated.
'.4
TABLE 2.5-10 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, 1973, SALINITY* CALCULATED FROM FIELD MEASUREMENTS OF SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE AND TEMPERATURE Station June July August September October November Surface Bottom Decemoer Surface Bottom (Figure,2.7-5) Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface bottom 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 o.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 2 0,2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 o.4 G.4 0.2 0.2. 0.1 0.1 3 0,2 C.7 0.3 7.8 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.2 4 0.7 15.2 0.3 7.0 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.7 o.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.1 9.6 5 3.6, 15.2 0.7 16.7 0.5 16.8 2.0 2.6 0.4 o.4 0.7 8.7 0.5 7.2 6 11.0 11.2 1.2 11.5 -- * -- 1.1 3.2 1.4 1.4 5.8 16.3 7.2
'-3
- 0) 7 .- . . . 4.5 7.2 8.4 8.6 2.2 2.6 -- --.....
8 ,-i Id
.. .. 6.2 7.8 10.2 i0.2 2.6 2-8 4.4 5.2 ... . 8.9 11.7 0 12.1 9 11.2 11.2 10.7 10.7 9.0 9.6 3.3 3.4 9.1 9.2 .... 11.8 21 .5 10 11.2 11.2 1.6 -- 2.8 9.8 0.8 2.8 1.4 8.9 1.8 9.1 0.9 12.4 11 -- 4.8 8.4 6.2 20.4 2.8 2.9 1.3 6.3 6.3 12.3 4.3 11.6 12 i4.4 14.h 7.8 7.9 8.0 7.8 3.8 -- 0.5 0.8 7.8 13.2 8.6 1 .3 . ... .. .. .. . - - 3 .6 - - 1 .8 -- 12 . 9 -- - -
22.2 14 .-- 6.7 25.8 16.8 21.8 4.0 31.8 15 . 16.3 32.2 20.6 27.8 31.8 16 .-- 0.8
- Parts per thousand.
** Not sampled.
TABLE 2.5-11 . SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, 1973, DISSOLVED OXYGEN (ppm DO) TEMPERATURE (T, 0 C) AND PERCENT SATURATION (Sat.)* Station August September October November December (Figure 2.7-5) DO T Sat. DO T Sat. DO T Sat. DO T Sat. DO. T Sat. 1 Surface 7.8 29 100 8.3 29 105 7.8 22 88 9.2 18 95 8.2 13 77 Bottom 7.3 28 93 7.9 29 100 8.0 22 91 9.1 17 94 8.1 13 76 2 Surface 8.0 30 lo4 8.1 29 104 7.9 22 90 9.3 18 97 8.2 13 77 Bottom 7.7 29 98 7.4 29 924 7.9 22 90 ,9.2 18 95 8.1 13 76 Surface 8.4 31 110 8.1 29 o104 7.8 22 88 9.2 19 97 8.0 124 76
.2ottom 7.7 .29 98 6.8 29 87 8.0 22 91 9.1 18 94 8.0 13 75 R) 24 Surface 8.2 31 108 8..0 29. 103 ,. 7.8.. 22 '88 9.0 19 95 7.8 124 75 Bottom 8.0 29 103 6.0 29 77 77.2 22 81 9.0 18 924 7.3 '13 6,8 Surface 8.6 30 112 7.8 29 100 8.0 22 91 9.2 19 97 7.8 15 76 H Bottom 8.0 29 103 6.2 29 78 8.0 22 91 8.7 18 91 8.0 15 78 6 Surface 7.8 29 100 .. .. .. 7.7 22 87 8.6 19 92 9.24 15 93 Bottom 6.5 29 82 -- 7.7 22 87 9.0 17 93 9.6 15 924 7 .S.urface 6.8 30 88 .. ..-- -- -- 8.7 18 91 Bottom 5.8 29 72 .. .. .... .. ..- 9.3 17 95 Surface 6.9 30 9o 4.5 29 57 .9 23 90 9.1 17 94 8.8 14 824 Bottom 6.3 29 80 -24.24 29 55 7.6 22 86 9.1 17 924 8.8 14 824
'9-
- Surface'*.'7.2. 30 *93 95 .24.7 24.6 28 28 " 58.
57' 8.2 23 .95 .9.2 20 95 7.8 .16 78 Bottom 7.24 29 8.2 23 95 9.1 19 96 7.7 16 77
.............. ,..'
TABLE 2.5-11 (Continued) SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, 1973, DISSOLVED OXYGEN (ppm Do) TEMPERATURE (T, 00) AND PERCENT SATURATION (SAT.)* Stat i on August September October November December
- Figure 2.7--5) DO T Sat. DO T Sat. DO T Sat. DO T Sat. DO T Sat.
10 Surface 8.6 30 112 5.2 29 66 8.2 20 88 7.7 20 83 8.6 15 84 Bottom 6. 2 29 78 5.0 29 64 7.2 19 76 8.1 19 86 -- 16 --
!i Si)rface 8.4 31 i10 4.6 28 57 7.6 19 81 8.2 20 89 1J.3 16 103
.1 2 0:ttcn 90 4.4 28 55 7.6 17 78 7.9 19 84 10.0 16 100
]2 So'arfa;(- e 7.8 31 !L 4.6 28 57 .9.0 25 108 10.4 22 115 9.3 17 95
-T:ottc .. ..-- -- -- 7.6 24 88 9.3 16 95 r\.
Surf arce - --. -. -2 2A 7.923 70 90go-- - - - -
;c t 1-Cm Surface .. .. ... .. .. .. .. 8.8 23 100 8.0 21 88 1c.4 16 lO1 Bcttem .. .. ..- .. .. .. 6.4 26 78 7.8 21 85 8.8 15 86 Surface .. .. .... .. .. 8 .1 25 96 8.4 21 84 8.1 16 82 ot -..om . . . . . .. . . . . . 8 .0 26 97 7.8 20 84 8.8 16 89
*August and lovember data from Water Quality Monitor; September, October and December data from field measurements.
"Not sampled.
TABLE 2.5-12 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, 1973, MEAN VALUE OF, TRIPLICATE SAMPLES FOR TOTAL HARDNESS*- Station June July August September October (Figures 2.7-5) Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom 222 213 197 210 211 211 196 193 290 293 2 219 211 2o6 211 211 215 183 187 294 299 3 229 288 206 747 212 215 191 195 295 301 4 1,358 215 218 212 254 298 305 247 1,814 217 224 2,05'5 278 1,320 281 351 528 658 293 293 6 300 2,131 429 2,197 :761 1,837 647 778 749 300 7 384 2,184 802 2,174 2,110 2,447 617 775 219 222 8 1,658 2,578 1,818 2,180 1,930 2,383 822 847 228. 4-233 9 2,072 2,389 2,058 1,913 2,127 2,237 1,158 1,204 793 487 10 458 817 381 3,120 *523 2,570 687 746 262 291 ii 2,512 5,224 1,017 2,603 1,193 3,187 748 -- 208 209 12 3.,900 3,968 1,527 1,549 1i370 1,450 1,113 180 203 S13 1,931 1,883 -- 1,740 1,100 293 2,169 2,363 -- 204 208 15 6 519 4,523 5,303 -- 3,033 4 ,250 161
*In ppm CaCo
- Not.measure
TABLE 2.5-13 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, 1973, MEAN VALUE OF TRIPLICATE SAMPLES FOR CALCIUM* Station ;June July August September October Surface Bottom 'Surface Bottom Surface Bottom .' Surface Bottom Surface Botton
- (FLige ý.7-5) 54 52 52 55 55 49 48 80 81 57 56 55 55 47 48 82 82 2 55. 51 54 84 55 55 46 47 82 83 3 52 55 54 55 125 55 56 46 49 82 84 53 158 121 58 63 59 61 80 81 5 4o 170 57 65 173 143 62 65 81 83 6 62 173 9.9 C-3 I\)
88 131 117 180 61 64 .58 58 7 63 l6-69 I 145 132 150 177 66 71 54 55 8 132 191. 153 127 150 160 81 82 74 110 9 165 178 63 216 76 180 62 63 73 81 1O 57 89 65 150 110 220 59 70 70 192 354 89 120 3.20 84 60 70
!2 258 280 83 140 80 81 13 152 18l 16o 67 68 L1 127 402 293 180 24o 15 343 43
*In ppm Ca
**Not measured
TABLE 2.5-14 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, 1973, MEAN VALUE OF TRIPLICATE SAMPLES FOR MAGNESIUM* Station June July August September October (Fiure 2.7-5) Surface Bottom -Surface Bcttom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom 21 20 18 18 18 17 14 14 20 17 19 16 16 14 14 18 19 14 14 23 36 17 131 18 19 19 225 19 19 23 32 14 14 28 346 33 248 33 48 93 123 14 13 65ý 4ýO 360 150 14 13 to 6 5_ K12 130 120 U, 101 050 7 55 573 447 487 113 150 15 15 '3~1 23 5-12 20 23 8 55 453 380 473 160 163 389 427 233 243 148 52 9 397 473 408ý 447 I0 60 629 81 516 130 143 13 13 11 208 503 223 643 1ý7 1 1 i2a L97 i ,058 26O 280 220 2 6 793 797 122 323 13 7 7 435 220 13 2 2730 3-
' 2 - 1 1 14 920 630 890 15 in -.
TABLE 2,5-15 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, 1973, MEAN VALUE OF TRIPLICATE SAMPLES FOR SODIUM* Station June August Fi gure 2.7- 5) Surface Bottom Surface Bottom
-i 52 443 44 41 2
46 44 45 42 67 114 46 45 4 38 3,300 43 45 5 587 4,233 18o 377 r\) 6 1 193 4,45o. 1,000 3,967 \~fl w 7 4,167 1,227 2,800 5,467 8 4,067 5,450 3,633 5,467 0 5 ,3637 5,533 4,433 4,400 1,053 12 1,230 720 4,933 5,333 10,933 2,233 6,467 12 7,217 8,533 2,633 2,700 4,4oo 4; 350 3 ,40o 4,700 15 9,500 10,833 16 42
*Sodium measured during major surveys only, values in ppm Na.
**Not measured
TABLE 2.5-16 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, 1973, MEAN VALUE OF TRIPLICATE SAMPLES FOR POTASSIUM* Station June August (Figure 2.7-5) Surface Bottom Surface Bottom
.1 4.7 4.6 4.4 4.5 2 4,9 4.6 4.4 4.4
- 5. 5 7.3 4.4 4.5 4 16.1 13.0.7 4.4 5 22. 0 165. 0 1.1 1.6 r\) 6 .44.7 157.0 51.0 140.o 7 45.7 151.3 86.7 196.7 8 158.7 180.7 143.3 190.0
-9 204.7 185. 0 170.7 180.0 10 58.0 6O0. 27.0 193.0 209. 0 405.0 93.0 257.0 12 298.0 285. 0 110.0 130.0 113 166.0 167.6 130 .0...
14 190.0 -- 347.0 417.0 16 4.8
*Potassium measured during major surveys only, values in ppm K ** Not measured
TABLE 2.5-17 SOUTH T'EXAS, 1973, MEAN'VALUE OF TRIPLICATE SAMPLES FOR TOTAL PHOSPHATE* june July August September October Station Fjgure 2.7-5) Surface Bot tom- Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom 1 o.44 0 *53 0.38 0.42 0.43 0.39 0.46 0..45 0.62 0.74 2 o.336 0 *52 0.38 0.38 C0.37 0.39 0.50 o.47 0.96 0.82 3 0.46 0 *5,' 0.34 0.38 0.34 0.42 0.46 0.46 0.85 o.84 0.50 0 ,49 0. 33 0.37 0.49 0.52 0.84 0.79 o.45 0 .47 0.30 0.30 0. 40 0.35 0.42 0.43 o.49 0.67 5 0 . l,- 0 .52 0.25 0.25 o.41 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.82 0.68 0, , L. 0 .39 0.51 7 0.33 0.29 0.38 0.38 0.41 0.37 0.50 8 0.33 0 .44 0.37 0.33 o. 45 0.38 0.44 0.48 0.43 9 . 51 0 34 0.33 0.49 0.39 0.42 0.34 0.26
.4c; 0D22 0.35 0'.18 0.37 0.38 0.59 0.89 0.26 0 .20 0.24 0.21 0.33 0.28 0.34 -- *~* 0.49 0.66
- 0. 30 0 12 .42 0 31 0.)27 0.39 0.35 0.54 0.66 0.71 13 o.61 .78 -- -- 0.29 .o.4o 0.80 6I.
16--
-- 0.69 0.35 0.81 0.74 0-.o6 0.22 0. ii 0.27 0.23 0.18 *In ppm P0 4
- lNot measured
TABLE 2.5-18 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, 19735 MEAN VALUE OF TRIPLICATE SAMPLES FOR NITRATE* Station June July August September October Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottoml (Figure 2.7-) Surface Bottom 3.7 3.5 2.8 3.6 8.1 6.4 3.2 2.1 9.3 7.9 4.2 3.3 2.9 2.9 2.9 8.7 7.0 7.0 5.2 3:4 4.2 3.0 2.2 3.3 9.0 2.6 2.9 7.3 3 6 '0 1.7 5.1i 7. 5 2 .0 3.3 9.1 11.9 4, 3.9 2 ."5 5* 6.2 5.7 i.6-" 0.7 9.4 1.2 1.9 -100.9ý 11.5 6 6.6 6 ;,3 !L. 8
- 0 .9o .- 8.4 7.2 2.9 2,7 10.5 11.5 0.3' 15 .9 25 .0 2.2 1.9 6.5 6.7 3.3 423 2,.2, 0.9 0.9 0.2 26.0 26 .3 2.3 1.7 4.9. 5..5 3.5 8-.0 0.2 0.3 26.7 25.9 1.7 1.2 5.9 2.4 4.8 3-.1 0.9 5 .jO,.. 21.8 2.6 1.8 9.0 8.8 1.9 0.2 1.2 0.8 9.3 8.8
.3 0 5 0.3 12 0.7 0. 5 19 .1 12.0 1.5 7.0 17.2 1.3 1,.6 9 2i, 7,. 1.0 20.0 C.,37' 0 .0 3 8.6 14 3.5 2.7 15 --
.. 0,.2.2-- 3.0 18. 8
" '! :; L .% * ,9.,, *, :s -- ."."
16
*In pp m 1O;0
- Not measur'ed
TABLE 2.5-19 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, 1973, MEAN VALUE OF TRIPLICATE SAMPLES FOR TOTAL SILICA* June . July August September Octo ber
....
"'3U1'r 7-<5) SiS:urface Bottoni Su.rface B~ottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom 16.2 '20.8 21.9 38.3 19.0 20.2 21.0 21.3 148.0 142.0 17.5 21.2 18.3 26 9 18.3 17.9 24.7 25.0 158.7 132.0 16.1 27.3 16.9 19 .3 15 .9 17.2 20.3 23.3 148.0 152.0 25 .1 25.0 17 .1 13.5 16.9 26.0 24.3 28.3 167.0 105.0 11.9 12.7 16.9 12.4 1* .2 24.o 19.7 22.3 127.7 103.7 CD) 15.8 34.2 i9 oi 12.6 17.3 6o.o 21.7 33.7 146.7 90.7 12.7 20.1i 16.9 29 .7 44.7 22.7 0 31.0 60.7 34.3 8 10.7 32.5 14.3 19.3 23.7 27.7 32.3 31.7 41.0 25.3 9 58.2 40.8 22.0 23.7 27.7 47.3 11.0 36.3 59.0 25.3 18.7 11.8 15.3 10.5 21.0 32.0 23.0 29.0 111.0 134.0 14.5 5.2 12.1 11.8 15o7 14.7 21.0 00.0 1** 59.0 26.3 18.0 15.0 15.o 28.0 32.0 46.0 -- 45.0 56.o 58.2 87.8 22.0 0.0 30.0 -- 94.0 I4 18.4 14.0 --.. 6o.o 135.0
,3.1 6.4 8.7 .... 9 .0 3.8 36.7 *In ppm 502
- Not measured
TABLE 2.5-20 H SOUTH TEXAS 'PROJECT, 1973, MEAN VALUE OF TRIPLICATE
~i.
0: SAMPLES FOR TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS* Station June July August September October 0 (Figure: 2.7-5) Surface Bottom; Surface Bottom Surfac'e Bottom Surface Bottom. Surface Bottom 421 350 347 485 346 349 372 372 273 267 2 447 359 351 427 351 348 349 348 262 261 3 476 625 377 3,597- 3 57 353 425 429 255 267 4 54o 1O,86o 457 9,974 36o0- 356 556 916 269 279 5 2,049 13,017 792 7,703 759 1,240 2,697 3,575 257 305 f5 6 4,430 13,491 i,668 1,510 4,074'; i ,424 4,391 244 301 3,482 Cl) 7 4,413 13,994 4,154 14,184 6,828 18,229 3,207 4,523 366 430ý F-3 1-d t-I 11,979 16,336 10,923 15,140 12,537 15,123 4,961 4,874" 571 708 9 15,901 14,951 12,717 13,834 13,999 15,872 7,256 7,490 4,680 10,197 10 3,219 4,563 1,317 20,073 2,230 18,273 3,846 4,290 263 275 24,066 34,485 6,300 17,o86 7,300 19,842 4,377 303 273 8 ,302 498 1,.497 23,291 9,36,960 9,895 9,981 8,326 6,30y 14,698 16,596
- in *aoP __- 6,397 252 14 19,090 14,590 -- 240 283 (D 15 .... 43,683 -- 29,138 34,881 .... 18,956 36,003 16
-- 39ý 0, --- . ... - Js5 (Dl
- In ppm
** Not measured
TABLE 2.5-21 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, 1973, MEAN VALUE OF TRIPLICATE SAMPLES FOR SUSPENDED MATTER* Station. June July August September October (Figure 2.7-5) Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom 1 46 41 32 74 39 50 26 .25 454 456
.242 44 o24 39 32 36 28 27 493 462 3 38 36 22 32 24 31 22 22 460 539 24 28 52 22 36 21 29 21 30 529 517 20 65 19 29 19 20 21 27 485 597 6
24 125 24 44 33 10 3 32 47 505 554 7 24 34 25 44 46 182 19 32 175 142 8 18 59 53 74 37 54 29 38 i1 120 267 171 79 99 51 213 58 99 54 33 1.0 16 21 19 26 20 54 25 28 358 46o 19 23 24 53 21 29 31 703 391 2.2 76 50 49 68 89 251 337 57 217 227 27 43 437 14 65 25 388 437 15 3,9 17- .16 32 10 16 35
*In ppm
- %Not measured
TABLE 2.5-22
--- SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, 1973, MEAN VALUE OF TRIPLICATE SAMPLES FOR CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND*
June .August Station Surface Bottom Surf ace Bottom
-I 10.7 8.0 5 .1 5.5 2 36.8 7.8 5 .3 5.9 3 8.5 9.0 9 .9 6.5 4 7.9 13.7 10.0 6.1 5 14.3 17.0 11.8 11.9 6
24.4 21.6 23.5 57.5
'-d 7 21.3 17.8 32.8 65.8
!ýd 8 16.7 13.4 50.2 65-.3 9 21.9 19.2 65.1 64.i 10 16.5 7.3 14.0 67.7 11 17.0 25.0 44.5 80.2 12 20 .3 22.3 43.7 33.5
- 13 22.6 24.0 50.0 --
- 14 68.0o-15 78.2 77.0 16 21.2 --
*In ppm **Not measured
TABLE 2.5-23 RIVER WATER TEMPERATURE USGS GAGE NO. 8-1625 COLORADO RIVER NEAR BAY CITY, TEXAS* Temperature Temperature Temperature Date (OF) Date (OF) Date (OF) Apr. 78 1949 71 May 31, 1952 75 June 27, 1957 82 May 16 82 June 7 82 July 17 86 July 21 88 July 1 85 Jan. 8, 1958 50 Aug. 27 85 July 30 87 Oct. 21 76 Sept. 1 89 July 31 84 Dec. 17 50 Sept. 19 82 Aug. 31 84 May 12, 1959 79 Oct. 31 62 Aug. 31 84 May 14 78 N0\ ° 29 70 Sept. 30 81 July 31 84 1950 59 Nu*.v 7 65 Feb. 8, 1960 57 co 6o De.e. 2 47 Aar. 16 56 I 66 Jan" 7, 1953 65 Apr. 20 72 M rU. -7h Febý- 1
,-2 May 26 83 81 Feb. 28 .62 June 21 87
'01 May 31. '6 Mar,. 71 Sept. 20 84 June 3 79 Apr. 25 78 Nov. 2 67 June 4 77 Apr. 30 76 Nov. 3 70 June 1i 83 May 1 74 Dec. 19 50
-.TU 18 90 June 2 88 Apr. 10, 1961 63 JuLy Aug. 208 88 Aug 5 '87 May 11 75 88 .Aug 14 88 Aug. 9 85 Sept . 19 81 Aug 17 87 Jan. 10, 1962 42 Oct 17 75 Aug 27 84 Mar. 27 72 Nov 16 70 Oct 2 85 May 9 81 Dec 12 55 'Oct. 16 76 June 12 88 Jan- 4, 1951 57 Oct 27 72 July 18 88 F eb 7 51 Oct 28 73 Oct. 26 70 Feb 27 72 Nov 8, 1954 64 C.cv. 21, 1963 72 Mar 9 75 Ncv. 18 71 Dec. 18 48 Mar. 17 69 Dec . 7 56 Jan. 29, 1964 59 ApDr 1i 765 Jan. 6, 1955 59 Mar. 10 62 Apr. 12
.67" Feb 3 - 68 Apr. 8 71
TABLE 2.5-23 (Continued) RIVER WATER TEMPERATURE USGS GAGE NO. 8-1625,COLORADO RIVER NEAR'iBAY CITY, TEXAS* Temperature Temperature Temperature
'Dat e (OF) Date 1(OF) Date (OF)
May- 11 8o Mar . 8 56, May 20 86 May 23 84 Mar. 31 66 Aug. 24 84 May- 29 87 Apr. 7 71 Sept. 28 78 May 87 May- 4 60 Oct. 8 72 June' 7. 78 May- 31 80 Nov. 4 74 June' 11 86 July 7 84 Dec. 9 52 J.,uly -2. 87. Aug. 5. 85 Jan. 13, 1965 56 u y,;U l 9. Aug 2 93 Oc.t. 5 79. Mar. 24 63 0 .° 87 Dec.. 13.. 58 Apr. 28 70 Aug-,, i 0 88 Jan.. 17, 1956 56- Aug.. 10 87 Se~ 88 .Fle,e.. 22-. o7. Seit. 14 86 Id. 80 ,Mar,. 28'. 73' Nov. 23 *.. 74 "'I* Nct. 3 85 May 10 * . 80 Jan. 7, 1966 56 59 June 312 84 Feb. 3 47 Dec* 70 July 18 90 Mar. 10 62 S 1952 19, 59 Aug. 21 86 Apr. 19 71 Feb. 6 57 Sept . 25 83 June 28 87 61 Jan. 11, 1957 53 July 29 88 76 Feb. 15 66- Sept. 1 89 Ma y Ma'r 30* 81 May i 72 Sept. 12 82 75 'May 2 72
... . .
w "L.# -: 2..
...... . .... . .... ... . .
*Data from Reference
STP-ER TABLE 2.5-24 GULF OF MEXICO, TEXAS COAST, SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE AND TEMPERATURE Specific Time Depth of Water Conductance Temp 0 Location Date of Collection (24 hr) (ft) (mhos) ( C) Sabine May 2, 1968 1 35,000 25.6 1557 Neches 30 48,000 22.5 47.5 50,000 22.5 Dec. 2, 1970 1145 1 50,000 15.5 10 50,000 16.0 20 50,000 16.o 32 50,000 16.5 Nueces Dec. 8, 1967 0900 0.2 48,000 Mar. 26, 1969 lO45 1 44.000 15.4 3 45,000 15.0 Sept. 17, 1969 *1225 1 45,000 30.1 5 45,000 -29.7 10 45,000 29.4 20 47,000 29.2 30 49,000 29.2 36 59,000 29.2 Lagune Madre April 21, 1968 1420 1 55,000 26.4 10 56,000 26.0 20 56,000 25.3 34 56,000 24 .5 Sept. 9, 1969 0935 1 56,ooo 29.6 5 56,000 29.5 10 56,ooo 29.5 20 56,000 29.5 30 56,000 29.5 48 56,000 29.4
*Data from References 2.5-9, 2.5-10, and 2.5-11.
H TABLE 2.5-25 o MEAN VALUE OF TRIPLICATE SAMPLES DURING GROUNDWATER QUALITY STUDIES, H WELL 115-D (STP, 1973-1974)
.Parameters 1973 1973 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974
,mg/lexcept Dec Dec Jan Jan Jan April May June July Sept as noted) 11 18 02 10 24 25 23 27 30 06 Acidi ty free ,CaCO3) 0 0 0 0 - * -
Acidity.. total i (CaCO 8.1 .37 29 25 - 3 M.O. Alkalinity (CaCO3) 271 405 381 380 377 364 362 366 370 363 Pht. Alkalinity (CaCO3) 0 0 0 0 0 n 0 0 .0 0 Aluminum (Al) 3.4 0.5 1.4 1 1 .3 0.8 1.2 5.4 3.2 0.2 Ammonia (N) 0.73 0.10 <0.07 <0.07 <0 .07 0.09 0.07 0.13 0.30 0.14 C-9 V1f Arsenic (As) <0.01 <0. 01 0.01 <0.01 <0 .01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <03.01 <0.01 5 It Cadmium (Cd) 0.03 <0.01 0.01 <0.01 <0 .01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Calcium (Ca) 113 140 137 140 1 36 140 137 140 140 137 Carbon, inorganic (C) 53.6 87.4 95.7, 89.4 8 1.4 97.6 92 93 93 95. Carbon, organic (C) 15.4 6.3 2.9 6.1 1 0.9 <1 5 5.3. 3.3 5.3 Carbon, total (C) 69 93.7 98.7 95.5 9 2.3 98.3 97 98.3 94.6 100.3 Chem. Oxygen Demand (02 44 12 8 10 8 40 9 7.6 6.3 7.6 Chloride (Cl) 990. 1012 1023 1083 1100 1100 1120 1133 1100
+6 Chromium (Cr <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0 .002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0. 002 0.06 <0 .02 0.023 Copper (Cu) 0.03 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.023 0.023 Cyanide, total (CN) 0.01 0.01 <0.01*
0 <0.0i <0 .01 <0.01"* <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 (D Fluoride 0.65 (F) 0.62 0.78" ., 0.93 1 .4 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.6 (D
.11 TABLE 2.5-25 (Continued) 0 MEAN VALUE OF TRIPLICATE SAMPLES.DURING GROUNDWATER QUALITY STUDIES, H WELL 115-D (STP, 1973-1974) H-
'0 Parameters 1973 1973 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 (mg/l except Dec Dec Jan Jan Jan April May June July Sept as noted) 11 18 02 10 24 25 23 27 30 06 Hardness (CaCO) 570 703 704 726 733 763 757 780 770 760 Iron, total (Fe) 7.4 2.6 4.1 4.7 2.3 3.6 1.8 5.4 3.3 2.4 Lead (Pb) <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Magnesium (Mg) 70 86 88 92 99.3 100 100 104 101 100 Manganese (Mn) 1.01 0.82 0.63 0.63 .0.61 0.61 0.51 0.48 0.52 0.41 co Mercury (Hg), ,g/l <0.2 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 <0.2 0.4 0.23 <0.2 '-3 5
Nitrate (N) 1.5 1.4 1 1.3 ý0.4 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.4 Cdl Nitrite (N) <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.02 0.03 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 pH, units 7.8 7.2 7. 2 7.4 7.6 7.3 7,4 7.4 7.4 7.3 Phenolic Cpds (Phenol) 0.007 0.007 0.009 0.002 <0. 001 0.006 0.012 <0. 001 0.009 0.001 Phosphorus, ortno (P) 0.01 0.02 0.01 0,01 0.03 0.09 0.07 0.03 0.24 0.08 Phosphorus. total (P) 0.17 0.18 0.09 0.15 0.18 0.43 0.29 0.43 0.26 0.17 Potassium (K) 7.9 6.4 7.5 8 6.8 4.7 5.2 7.5 5.2 6.3 Silica, total (Si) 6.9 57 35 136 69 49.3 28.6 67.3 33.3 33.3 Sodium (Na) 613 610 590 573 588 615 560 557 578 Solids, dissolved 2360 2371 2337. 2630 2523 2547 2503 2730 2450 Sp. Conductance, 25 0 C, imhos/cm 3390 34i7 3600 3800 3947 3890 3913 4020 3950 Sulfate (S) 25 27 - 29 29 30.7 32.1 30.4 30 34.1 30.8 (D C1 t Cr
TABLE 2'5-25 (Continuded) 0 *MEANVALUE OF .TRIPLICATE. SAMPLES DURING GROUNDWATER QUALITY STUDIES, WELL 115-D (STP, 1973-1974) H.Y Parameters ' 973 1973 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 (mg/lexcept D ec Dec Jan Jan Jan April May June July Sept as'-noted) 1.1 18 02 10 24 25 23 27 30 06 Sulfide (S): 0. 03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.04 0.65 0.12 0.06 <0. 1 Zinc (Zn) 1 0. 97 0* 50 0.07 0.09 0..73 0.04 0.07 0.12 0.076 0.11 Barium (Ba) <0. 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.3 <0.2 <0. 2 <0.2 0.2 Boron (B) 0..2 0.2 .. 6 0.6 1.1 0.4 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.7 Selenium (Se) <0. 01 <0.01 <0. 01 <0.01 <0. 01 <0. 01 <0. 0i <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Silver (Ag) <0 02 <0.02 <0.002 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0o N) <0.02 <0.02 Bacteria 5 - Std. Plate Count, No./ml 88, 200 19,800 12,800 17,600 >30,000 48,600 .4333 12,633 6500 21,000 Coliforms, No./100 ml 13 17 100 3 67 6233 563 4033 2300 4167 Fecai Coliforms', No./100 ml 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Feca! jtreptococci, 3 7 112 0 0. 90 35 1.3 1 0 ' No./I00 ml
* ,-. .4*! !. -1
"- ,P" (..
- Parameter not measured.
** Only two replicates.
(D
- Data considered erroneous; therefore, not reported.
~fl TABLE-2'.5"2b I-i C
MEAN VALUE OF TRIPLICATE SAMPLES LU'ING GROUNDWATER QUALITY STUDIES, H WELL 2 (STP, 1973-1974) 0 FJ Parameters 1973 1973 1974 1974 1974 1974 1.974 1974 1974 1974 (mg/lexcept Dec Dec Jan Jan Jan April May June July Sept as noted) 11 18 02 10 24 25 23 27 30 06
.~*
- Acidity, free (CaCO 0 0 0 3
Acidity, ýtotal (CaCO 13 20 0 3 4.,. Alkalinity (CaCO 380 376. .201 .361 337 221 148 149 302 Iiht..A*,alinity (CaCO3 0 0 .44' 0 0. 17 35 32 2.6
<0.1 *<0 .i <0. -i <0.1: 0.43 <0.I
,lum~inumx (Al) <0.I <0. I 0.4
..jI *Znl)J (N) 0.11 0.07 0.39 <0.07 0.07 1.03 0.91 <0.07 5
'ON 0 A-s e.ic As) <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Cadmij.umn (Cd) <.0]. <0.01
<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Cacium I Ca) 66 65 137 70 58 22 10 9.6 31.6
.arboi, inorganic (C) 82. 7 81.5 34 81. 1 87 48 28.6 29.6 72 Carbon,. organic (C) 2.96 5.8 2.2 8.9 1.3 4 4.6 2.6 7.6 rnr,0 total (C) 85.7 87.3 36.2 90 87.6 52 33.3 31 79.6 Chem. Oxygen Demand (02 <5 <5 <5 <5 8 17.3 <5 5.6 <5 Chloride (C!) 238 238 238 402 363 300 255 256 300 Chromium (Cr+6 <0. 002 <0.002 <0.002 <0. 002 <0.002 <0. 002 <0. 002 <0.002 <0.002 Copper (Cu) <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.03 0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Cyanide, total (CN) <0.01 <0.01 <0.01i <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 01 Fluoride (F) 1.13 1:1 1 1 1.3 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6
I. I , C) TABLE 225-26'(Continued) .0. MEAN VALUE OF TRIPLICATE SAMPLES DURING GROUNDWATER QUALITY:ýSTUDIES,
' WELL 2 (STP, 1973-1974)
,,Parameters 1973 1973 1974 i974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974
.:-mg*/1, except Dec Dec Jan Jan Jan Apri 1 May June 'July Sept asnoted). 11 18 02 10 24 25 23 27 30 06 Hardness (CaCO3) 308.3 307 449 -377 329 190 91.6 91 240 3
,iron, total (Fe) 0.17 0.13 °'0 2 11 28 1.6 1 0.79 '3.8 L-ad (Pb) <0.05 <0.05 <0 .05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 agnesium ; (Mg) 35 35 26 50 45 33 16 16 39.3
'.1 Mangaaese (Mn) 0.16 0.-'16 "<0-.02 03'.35 0.29 0".10 0':04 0.03 0. 16 Mercruy (Hg), pg/l <0.2 <0.2 6 0.4 06 2 :0.2 0.33 0.4 <0.2 CD)
Nitrate (N) <0.2 0.6 <0.2 0.4 0.4 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.3 Nitrite (N) <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.04 0.02 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 L-iI pH, units 7.5 7.5 9.6 7.5 7.5 8.9 9.3 9.4 8.3 Phenolic Cpds (Phenol) 0.005 <0.001 0.008 <:001 0.00 9 0.016 0.009 0.003 0.007
.. ;Pt osphorus, ortho (P) 60.03 0..02 0.01O 0-08' 0.02 0.37 0.0d53 0.06 0.09 horus, total (P) 0.05 010.04
.1 0.30 0.54
.Phosphous 0.13ý 0.45 0.066 0.12 ,0. ii
-4 Potassium (K) 4.3 4 .3.,9 4.5 3 3..2 3.9 3.1 3.6 Sil'ica7- total (Si) 10.3, 13.7 .
.-. 8 10. 5 20, 0.60, 1.46 0.58 10.6 Sodium (Na) 227 230 220 280 250 217 196 209 226 Solids, dissolved 844 857 . 63,2" 11* 7 975 745 590 598 748 Sp. Conductance, 25°C, omhos/cm 1187 1187 1080 .1900"2 1710 1173 1160 1490 Sulfate (S) 11.3 12 K'B.:. S1*-'i . 13.3 7.9 6.7 10 9.3 <1 (D~
TABLE 2.5-26 (Continued) bi MEAN VALUE OF TRIPLICATE SAMPLES DURING GROUNDWATER QUALITY STUDIES,
,WELL 2 (STP, 1973-1974) 0q Parameters 1973 1973 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 (mg/l,except Dec Dec Jan Jan Jan April May June July Sept as noted) 11 18 02 10 24 25 23 27 30 06 Sulfide (S) <0.02 <0.02 * <0.02 0.95 <0.02 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.1 Zinc (Zn) 0.05 0.07 4.7 2.4 0.15 0.23 0.32 0.13 0.43 Barium (Ba) <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 Boron (B) 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.4 Selenium (Se) <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 ca Silver (Ag) <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.'02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 f-3i NJ, Bacteria 5 OrA 3200 Std. Plate Count, No./ml 37.,307 837 8000 1990 1187 4300 16,333 4300 Coliforms, No./100 ml 33 3.3 3 0.7 0 0 0 0 4.3 Fecal Coliforms, No./100 ml 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fecal Streptococci, 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 0.3 9.3 No./100 ml
**Well 2 not sampled this date.
Parameter not measured. (D Cl- \11
STP-ER This page intentionally blank. 10-), 1975 1., 1 ý7. .1. r )
- 2. ý, - Mae. U 14. : .- 6-Amexndment 5
TABLE 2..5-27 0 MEAN VALUE OF TRIPLICATE SAMPLES DURING GROUNDWATER QUALITY STUDIES, WELL 114-A. (STP,. 1973-1974) Parameters* 1973 1973 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 (mg/1,except Dec Dec Jan Jan Jan April May June July Sept as noted) 11 18 02 10 24 25 23 27 30 06 Acidity, free (CaCO) 0 0 0 0 - --
- 3 Acidity, total (CaCO ) 5.4 0 0 0 - - -
M.O. Alkalinity (CaCO 3) 193 129 136 206 240 200 219 218 234 249 Pht. Alkalinity (CaCO ) 0 6.8 8.2 17.7 17.3 26.3 12.6 17.3 28 7.3 Aluminum (Al) <0.1 0.5 <0.1 <0.1 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.9 . 0.5 0.1 N) Ammonia (N)' 0.18 0.27 0.31. 0.10 "0.20 0.50 0.55 0.63 0.68 0.49 Arsenic (As) <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Cadmium (Cd)'- 0.03 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Calcium (Ca) 58 16 20 8 8.8 8.5 7.5 8 8.8 9.6 Carbon, inorganic (C) 41.5 27.9 30 41 50.4 43.6 48 49 50.6 59 Carbon, organic (C) 8.2 10.4 8 3.7 7.8 10 <1.0 6 4.6 7.6 Carbon, total (C) 49.7 38.3 38 44.7 58 53.6 48.3 55 55.3 66.6 Chem. Oxygen Demand (0 ) 14 36 16 6 6.1 13.3 12.6 8.3 5.3 5.3
* . Chloride (Cl) 384 279 264 168 168 180 170 172 167 160
'Chromium (Cr+ 6 ) <0.002 <0,,002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 Copper (Cu) <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Cyanide, total (CN) <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.'01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Fluoride (F) 0.68 0.60 0.64 0.99 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.9 0.93 0.7 Pý (D
- 'V TABLE 2.5-27 (Continued)
MEAN VALUE OF TRIPLICATE SAMPLES DURING GROUNDWATER QUALITY STUDIES, WELL 114-A. (STP, 1973-1974) Parameters 1973 1973 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 \J1 (mg/l,except Dec Dec Jan Jan Jan April May June July Sept as noted) 11 18 02 10 24 25 23 27 30 06 Hardness (CaCO 3) 317 116 127 70 81 61 62 67 64.3 74.6 Iron,,total (Fe) 1.9 4.4 0.04 0.03 0.22 0.36 0.12 0.24 0.27 0.22 Lead (Pb) <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0..05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Magnesium (Mg) 42 *.18. 19 12 14 9.6 10.6 11 10 12
- Mangarese (Mr.) ,0.-22 :10,07 <0>.02 0.02 :<0.,02 0.03 <0.02 <0.02 0.03 <0.02 Mercury (Hg), ug/l <0.2 <0.2 '0.23 0.27 - 0..6 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.33 <0.2 Nitrate (N) 0.4 1.4 0.67 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.53 0.43 <0.2 <0.2 ......
Nitrite (N) <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0101 <0.01 0.03 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 pH, units 7.9 8.6 .8.7 9.1 9 9.2 8.9 8.7 9 8.6 Phenolib Cpds (Phenol) 0.018 0.009 0.006 0.004 .<0.001 0.011 0.017 0.008 0.003 0.009 Phosphorus, ortho (P.) <0.01 0.01 0.06 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.1 0.16 0.6 0.08 Phosphorus, total (P) 0.03 0.03 0.08 0.03 <0.01 0.24 -0.14 0.20 0.74 0.09 Potassium (K) 9.9 6.3 6.6 4.6 3.8 3.2 3.5 4.2 2.9 3.4 Silica, 6.2 8.7 8.2 10.5 10.6 25 15.6 20 20.3 28 S1ctotal (Si) 105 1. 3 2 Sodium (Na) 203 200 200 190 200 182 183 175 199 193 Solids, dissolved 949 644 609 530 ... 577 557 543 527 538 525 Sp. Conductance, 25'C, pmhos/cm 1363 1083 '1048 885 '937 920 845 961 987 990 (D C+
TABLE 2.5-27 (Continued) MEAN VALUE OF TRIPLICATE SAMPLES DURING GROUNDWATERQUALITY STUDIES, WELL 114-A (STP, 1973-197-4) Parameters 1973 1973 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 1974 VJ1 (mg/l,except Dec Dec Jan Jan Jan April May June July Sept as noted) 11 18 02 10 24 25 23 27 30 06 Sulfate (S) 8.7 6.7 6.9 5.3 5.8 5.3 4.7 4.4 5.3 5.1 Sulfide :(S) <0.02 0.04 <0.02 <0.02 0.04 0.49 <0.02 3.29 2.19 0.8 Zinc -Zn) 0.31 0.34 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.06 0.05 0.14 0.06 0.07
<0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.3 03 0.1 0.2 <0.1 0.4 0'2.01 (0.01 <0.0i 0. 01 <0.01 <0.01 <0. 01 <0. 01 <0.01 Silver (Ag) <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02
<0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0..02 <0.02 0-1, 5
Bacteria Std. Plate Count, No./ml 19,460 16,600 17,400 29,200 >30,000 13,500 12,067 3500 14,067 8000 47 17 3 47 7 0 273 143 990 0.6
-.oliforms, No../100 mg Fecal Coliforms, No./100 ml 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 15 0 0 0 5 0 7.7 0
-.. Fecal Streptococci, No./100 ml P
Parameter not measured. (D~ (D
TABLE 2.5-28 QUALITY REQUIREMENTS OF WATER AT POINT OF USE FOR STEAM GENERATION AND COOLING IN HEAT EXCHANGES* Boiler feed water Cooling water Quality of water prior to the addition of substances used for internal conditioning Electric Makeup for Industrii utilities Once through recirculation Inter-Low nediate High pressure pressure pressure 0 to 150 150 to 700 700 to ,5c0 1,500 to Characteristic Psig psig psig 5,000 psig Fresh Brackish** Fresh Brackish" Silica (Si0 2 )------------- 30 10 0.7 0,01 50 25 50 25 Aluminum (Al')-------------- 5 0.1 0.01 0.01 0.1 0.1 Iron (Fe)- ----------------- 1 0.3 0.05 0.01 0.5 0.5 Manganese (Mn)------------- 0.3 0.1 0.01 ft 0.5 0.02 Calcium (Ca) t t tt 200 420 50 420 1-d Magnesium (Mg)- .............. M t tt .
- ro Ammonia (NH 4 )-------------- 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.7 bonate (1,Cc 3 )---------- 170 tf 6O0 lhO 24 140
'~~~1 *1 4-u Sulfate (SO4)-------------- ft 68c 2,700 200 2,700
-"Chloride (Cl)-------------- t tt 6c0 19,000 500 19,000 a>
Dissolved solids------------ 700 500 2o6 0.5 1,000 35,000 500 35,000 Copper (Cu)---------------- 0.5 D.C5 t 0.05 0.01 Zinc (Zn)------------------- t tt t t 850 Hardness (CaC0 3 )----------- 20 6,250 130 6,250 Free mineral acidity ------ f t t t t t t t
-(CsaCO3)
Alkalinity (CaCD2)--------- 14o lOO 40 t 500 115 20 115 pH 8.0-l.0 8.2-10.0 8.2-9.0 8.8-9.2 5.0-8.3 6.0-8.3 **t
*4* *4* 4*4 Color, units---------------
Organics: t Methylene blue active --- 1 1 0.5 1 1 substances. f ttt ttt Carbon tetrachloride --- 1 1 0.5 1 2 extract t 75 75 Chemical oxygen demand --- 5 5 0.5 75 75 I (0 2 ) Dissolved oxygen (02) --- 2.5 0.007 0.007 0.007 ** Temperature, 'F 100 Suspended solids 10 5 t 4 5,000 2,500 100
*Unlessotherwise, indicated; units are mg/l and values that normally should not be exceeded. No water will have all the maximum values shown. Data from Reference 2.5-25. . -
**Brackish water--dissolved solids more than 1,000 mg/l by definition 1963 census of manufacturers.
***Accepted as received (if meeting total solids or-other limit ing .alues);..has. never been a problem at concentrations encountered.
tZero, not detectable by test. fiControlled by treatment for other constituents. tNo floating oil. NOTE: Application of the above values should be based on Part 23, ASTM book of standards or APHA Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater.
]
TABLE 2.5-29 ,0 COMPARISON OF GROUNDWATER QUALITY TO DRINKING WATER STANDARDS H* AND PROPOSED CRITERIA FOR PRESERVATION OFfAQUATIC LIFE 0 U.S. Public Health EPA Proposed EPA Proposed. Grand Mean, STP Maximum Value Parameter Service Drinking Drinking Water Criteria for Groundwater Reported During (mg/l, except Water Standards* Criteria** Preservation of Current Study as noted) Aquatic life** Acidity, free (CaCO3) 0 0 (all) *** Acidity, total (CaCO3 13.0 37 (115-D) M.O. Alkalinity (CaCO 281 405 (115-D) 3 Pht. Alkalinity (CaCO.) 19.4 44 (2) Aluminumm (Al) 1.5 0.81 5.4 (115-D)
- Ammaonia (N) 0.5 0.4 0.29 1.03 (2)
.-Arsenic. (As) 0.05 0.1 0.05 <0.01 0.013 (2)
Cadmium (Cd) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 (115-D, 114-A ) 5 ON Calcium (Ca 68.4 140 (I15-D)
....Carbon.i-fnorganic (C) 64.3 97.6 (115-D)
Carbon,.organic (C) 0. 2 (CCE) t 0.3 (CCE) t 5.8 15.4 (115-D) Carbon, 'total (C) 69.9 100.3 (115-D) Chem. Oxygen Demand (02) 11.6 44 (115-D) Chloride (Cl) 250 250 513 1133 (115-D) Chromium (Cr+6 0.05 0.05 0.1"- <0.002 <0.002 (all) Copper (Cu) 1.0 1.0 0.05 <0.024 0.06 (115-D) Cyanide, total (CN) 0.2 0.2 0.01 <0.01 0.01 (115-D) (D
- 1. 4-2.4tt 1.5 0.89 1.4 (115-D, 114-A)
Fluoride (F)
'D \-n
- p. TABLE 2.5-29 (Continued) 0~ "COMPARISON OF,GROUNDWATER QUALITY TO DRINKING WATER STANDARDS AND PROPOSED CRITERIA FOR PRESERVATION OF, AQUATIC LIFE H
0. H U.S. Public Health EPA Proposed EPA Proposed Grand Mean, STP Maximum Value '.0 Parameter Service Drinking Drinking Water Criteria for Groundwater Reported During ~-1 Criteria**' Preservation of Current Study (mg/i, except Water Standards* as noted) __Aquatic life** Hardness -'(CaC0 369 780 (115-D)*** 3. Iron, total (Fe) o. 3 tt4 0.3ttt 0. 3 ttt <3.2 28 (2) Lead (Pb) 0.05 0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 (all) Magnesium. (Mg) 48.1 104 (115-D) Manganese (Mn) 0.05 0. 5 0.1 <0.3 1.01 (115-D) Mercury (Hg) o0.002 1.0 Wg/l <0.3 Wg/l 1.6 pg/l (2) [N) Cn 45 10 <0.5 1.5 (115-D) Nitrate. (N) i Nitrite (N) 1.0 <-0.01 0.04 (2) ON 5 tl~j pH, units 5.0 to 9.0, 6.5 to 8.5, 7.2-9.6 9.6 (2) units units Phenolic Cpds (Phenol) 0.001 1.0 Wg/l <0.006 0.018 (114-A) Phosphorus, ortho (P) <0.08 0.6 (114-A) Phosphorus,. total (P) 0.1i Pg/l <0.20 0.74 (114-A) Potassium (K) 5.1 9.9 (114-A) Silica, total (Si) 25.5 136 (115-D) Sodium (Na) 331 615 (115-D)
*
- Solids, dissolved 500 1270 2730 (115-D)
> ' Sp. Conductance, 25°C, 1998 4020 (I15-D)
CD *Imhos/cm
;" Sulfate (S) 250 250 <15.1 34.1 (I15-D)
(D ci-
-1!
TABLE 2.5-29 (Continued) C COMPARISON OF GROUNDWATER QUALITY TO DRINKING WATER STANDARDS H AND PROPOSED CRITERIA FOR PRESERVATION OF AQUATIC LIFE o U.S. Public Health EPA Proposed EPA Proposed ,Grand Mean, STP Maximum Value "0 Parameter Service Drinking Drinking Water Criteria for.. Groundwater Reported During '31 (mg/l, except Water Standards* Criteria** Preservation of Current Study as noted) Aquatic life** Sulfide (S) <0.30 3.29 (ll4-A)*** Zinc (An) 5.0 5.0 0.1 <0.43 4.7 (2) Barium (Ba) 1.0 1.0 1.0 <0.2 0.3 (115-D) Boron (B) 1.0 0.1 <0.3 1.1 (115-D) Selenium (Se) 0.01 0.01 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 (all) Silver (Ag) 0.05 0.c5 0.5 ig/il <0.02 <0.02 (all) Bacteria 5 Std. Plate Count, No./ml >17353 88,200 (115-D)
---I Coliforms, No./100 ml 10,000/100 ml 658 6233 (115-D) 0 Fecal Coliforms, No./100 ml 2,000/100 ml <1 3 (114-A)
Fecal Streptococci, 10 112 (115-D) No./100 ml
- From Reference 2.5-25.
** From Reference 2.5-30.
- Well number given in parentheses.
t Organic contaminants determined by carbor:-chloroform extraction. tt The concentration of fluoride may be between 0.6 and 1.7 mg/l, depending on annual average maximum daily air temperature. ttt Criteria given in terms of soluble iron and therefore may not be used to directly evaluate reported iron Hconcentration. P, ID
STP-ER
,ia
"- - < -
CD4 N 0 0 I - .- 00 0 U
* =e 0
0
- 0 Z.
UNIT I&2
.r=
-- I- J0DAR
- U- IGUR. T 2.-2 4-&
-
- WTERLEVE OBERVAION if) DEP AUIFE ZON i: .e~oM
.... FIGU E. 2 5--0 DEE AQIE ZONE
STP-ER 4 3 U) 0 0 0 0 z 2 0 -J ILL - 1-.....................~-.. Lii cr I I-0 _____ _____ _____ ______ -~ _____ _____ _____ Feb. IMar. I Apr. May June July Aug. Sept Oct. Nov. _____ _____ I IDec. MONTHS NOTE BASED ON U S G S GAGE 08-1625, COLORADO RIVER SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT NEAR BAY CITY, TEXAS. PERIOD OF RECORD 1948-1970 UNITS 1 & 2 (REFERENCE 2.5-7) MEAN MONTHLY HISTORICAL RIVER FLOWS USGS GAGE AT BAY CITY FIGURE 2.5-4
STP-ER 300 200 _______ - - ______ - - ________ ________ -I ILA 0 100 0 90 0 0~ 80 U-U 70 ) z 60 ____ _ __ __ __ ___0 0)
~0 ) 00or
.I LUj 50
-- Tc,\0 0 40 (I) in 30 20 i i
'I 1 1 0
0 0 I U 0-o 0 0 0 I (. 0 0 0 0 0 Lo L-0) 0 0 - U. 0 0
-
-
( ~T.
/
o RrI 0 0 Return Intervo(, Years -' 10 98 95 90 80 70
/ 60 50 40 30 20 *10 5 2 I 0.5 020.1 PER CENT CHANCE OF OCCURRENCE NOTE:
BASED ON U S G S GAGE SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT 08-1625, COLORADO RIVER UNITSI & 2 NEAR BAY CITY, TEXAS. PERIOD OF RECORD. 1948-1970 DISCHARGE - FREQUENCY CURVE (REFERENCE 2.5-7) USGS GAGE AT BAY CITY, FIGURE 2.5-6
STP-ERh BASIN 2b
- LOCATION MAP r
SITE----*,1 AREA LEGEND 1 DATA-COLLECTION 10 RANGE-LINE NUMBER 7 0 I 2 MILES RDA 28040' 0. BAY 0 IC Amendment 7, June 6, 1975 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 & 2
,0 NOTE: USGS DATA COLLECTION SITES BASED ON SAMPLING STATIONS IN THE COLORADO ESTUARY OUTLINED IN REFERENCE 2.5-9 FIGURE 2.5-9
STP-ER w z z 0
-J w
a Q0(Q1 aQ20.5 1 2 5 N) 20 30 40 50 670 PERCENT OF TIME GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO NOTE: DATA BASED ON WEST SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT LOCK ON COLORADO UNITS 1 & 2 RIVER AT G I W W AND TIME PERIOD 1957-1972 COLORADO RIVER LOCKS RIVER ELEVATION VS. PERCENT OF TIME GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO FIGURE 2.5-12
STP-ER APPENDIX 2.5-A TIDAL PREDICTIONS FOR THE ESTUARIAL REGIONS OF THE COLORADO RIVER A2. 5-1
STP-ER TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page Tidal Predictions for the Estuarial Regions of the Colorado River A2.5-5 REFERENCES A2.5-11 I r.. J 4' A2.5-2
STP-ER LIST OF TABLES Page Title Table Mean Sea Level A2.5-6 Element -Assigned A2.5-1 Bottom Depths A2.5-1O Diurnal Tide Predicted A2.5-2 A2. 5-3
STP-ER LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title A2.5-1 Typical Model Exciting Tides A2.5-2 Tidal Flow Opposite Plant Site With Average Diurnal Exciting Tide A2.5-3 Tidal Flow Opposite Plant Site With Low Range Diurnal Exciting Tide A2.5-4 Tidal Flow Opposite Plant Site With High Range Diurnal Exciting Tide (North Wind) A2.5-5 Tidal Flow Opposite Plant Site With High Range Diurnal Exciting Tide (South Wind) A2.5-6 Tidal Flow Opposite Plant Site With Average Semidiurnal Exciting Tide A2.5-7 Tidal Flow Range Along Colorado River For Average Diurnal Exciting Tide A2.5-8 Tidal Flow Range Along Colorado River For Low Range Diurnal Exciting Tide A2.5-9 Tidal Flow Range Along Colorado River For High Range Diurnal Exciting Tide (North Wind) A2.5-10 Tidal Flow Range Along Colorado River For High Range Diurnal Exciting Tide (South Wind) A2.5-11 Tidal Flow Range Along Colorado River For Average Semidiurnal Exciting Tide A2.5-12 Predicted Diurnal Tidal Patterns For 1974 at Port O'Connor A2.5-4
STP-ER TIDAL PREDICTIONS FOR THE ESTUARIAL REGIONS OF THE COLORADO RIVER Tidal predictions for the estuarial regions of the Colorado River were calculated for the STP site based on the data presented in Figure 2.5-8 of the STP Enviromental Report and the mathematical model and computer code as presented in Reference A2.5-1. This model solves explicitly the basic unsteady equations of motion in two orthogonal directions coupled with the unsteady flow continuity equation. A basic assumption of this model is that vertical velocity distribu-tions are uniform and hence, computed flows are integrated over the depth. Since application of HYDTID to the Colorado River involved flow in only one direction (longitudinal), the computer code was restructured to more efficiently solve this one-dimensional problem. The HYDTID model uses a series of interconnected square ele-ments to describe to physiography of a prototype system with the basic equations applied and solved over this grid arrange-ment. The model was adapted to handle rectangular elements to more effectively describe the river system. The length of these elements was specified as one-half mile (2,640 feet) and the width was varied between 150 and 185 feet as a func-tion of river inflow. Average mean sea level bottom depths were assigned to 6ach element based on profile data. The mean sea level bottom depths assigned to each element in the model are given in Table A2.5-1. The index J refers to the element number starting with J-1 at the river's mouth; Element "1" is defined as the first element immediately off-shore of River Mile (RM) 0.0 and Element "2" lies between RM 0.0 and RM 0.5. A2 .5-5
STP-ER TABLE A2 .5-1 ELEMENT ASSIGNED MEAN SEA LEVEL BOTTOM DEPTHS Average Bottom Elevation Element Number, J MSL feet 1 -15 .00 2 -15 .10 3 -15 .20 4 -15 30 5 -15 .4o 6 -15 .4o 7 -15 .50 8 -15 .60 9 -15 .60 10 -15.70 11 -15 .8o 12 -15 90
.13 -15.90 14 -16.00 15 -16.10 16 -16.20 17 /
-16.20 18 -16.30 19 -16.20 20 -16.20
-16.10 21 22 -15.20 23 -14 .60.
A2 .5-6
STP-ER TABLE A2.5-I (Continued) ELEMENT ASSIGNED MEAN SEA LEVEL BOTTOM DEPTHS Average Bottom Elevation Element Number, J MSL feet 24 -13.80 25 -13.00 26 -12.40 27 -12.60 28 -12.80 29 -13.00 30 -13.20 31 -13.40 32 -13.60 33 -12.00 34 -11.60 35 -12.40 36 -12.90 37 -13.20 38 -13.60 39 -13 .60 40 -13.40 41 -13.30 42 -11.60 43 -13.00 44 -16.00 45 -12.4o 46 -12.50 A2 ý 5-7
STP-ER TABLE A2.5-1 (Continued) ELEMENT ASSIGNED MEAN SEA LEVEL BOTTOM DEPTHS r Average Bottom Elevation Element Number, J MSL feet 47 -12.6o 48 -15.00 49 -13.80 50 -12.50 51 -11. 30 52 -10.00 53 - 8.75 54 - 7.50 55 - 6.25 56 - 5.00 57 - 3.75 58 -2.50 59 - 1.25 6o 0.00 61 1 .30 62 2.50 63 3.80 64 5.00 65 6.30 66 7.50 A2,5-8
STP-ER To adjust the mean level of the downstream exciting tides for the effect of increased river inflow, a stage-discharge correlation was established using the available tide records at the GIWW. These data were initially screened to elimin-ate those where wind effects were dominant. The following relation was used to adjust the mean tidal elevations for the effect of river inflow. Ah = 0.530 Q0*17 8 - QR. 0.750 A constant channel width was specified in the model for the entire length of the estuary for each river inflow considered. The following values were used as determined from available data. QR Width, feet 800 150 1,500 155 2,500 170 3,500 185 A Manning's "n" bottom roughness of 0.027 was used for Mann-ing's "n" for all simulations. The calculations were performed with five model exciting tides and with four freshwater inflows. The exciting tides, shown in Figure A2.5-l,were identified from an analysis of tidal records at Port O'Connor:
- 1. average semidiurnal,
- 2. average diurnal,
- 3. low range diurnal,
- 4. high range diurnal with a south wind, and
- 5. high range diurnal with a north wind.
The calculated tidal flows at the plant site (River Mile 12.5) are shown in Figures A2.5-2, A2.5-3, A2.5-4, A2.5-5 and A2.5-6. The maximum flood and ebb flows for the first 32 miles of the Colorado River are shown in Figures A2.5-7, A2.5-8, A2.5-9, A2.5-10, and A2.5-11. The five model exciting tides were combined to form a syn-thetic annual tidal cycle. The 1974 predicted sequence of 2 semidiurnal and diurnal tides shown in Figure A2.5-12, was the basis for developing the synthetic annual tidal cycle. The model average semidiurnal tide was used when a predicted semidiurnal tide occurred. The model diurnal tides were distributed as listed in Table A2.5-2.
-A2 .5-9
STP-ER TABLE A2.5-2 PREDICTED DIURNAL TIDE Height Number of (feet) Occurrences Model Diurnal Tide Selected 0.9 1 High Range with North Wind 1.0 7 1.1 3 Low Range 1.2 2 1.3 6 Average 1.4 13 1.5 12 1.6 10 1.7 7 High Range 1.8 4 The high range diurnal tide with a north wind occurs in the winter while the high range diurnal tide with a south wind occurs in the summer. A2 .5-10
STP-ER REFERENCES A2.5-1. Masch, F.D., and Brandes, R.J., August 1971; Tidal Hydrodynamic Simulation in Shallow Estuaries; Hydraulic Engineering Laboratory, The University of Texas at Austin, Tech. Rep. HYD 12-7102. A2.5-2. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra-tion, 1974; "Tide Tables, High and Low Water Predictions, 1974. East Coast of North and South America including Greenland."
- A2.5-11
STP-ER ( H z 0 w 25 TIME IN HOURS AVERAGE DIURNAL TIDE SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT HIGH-RANGE DIURNAL TIDE (S. WIND) LOW-RANGE DIURNAL TIDE UNITS1 &2
-- AVERAGE SEMI-DIURNAL TIDE -- - -%,-- HIGH-RANGE DIURNAL TIDE (N. WIND)
I TYPICAL MODEL EXCITING TIDES FIGURE 1 A2.5-12
STP-ER 2 I 0 0 0 u-1-0 U, 0 0 -1 0 z w
-2 0
In In
-3
-4
-5 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 TIME (HOURS)
SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 & 2 TIDAL FLOW OPPOSITE PLANT SITE NOTE,: WITH Qo= FRESH WATER INFLOW AVERAGE DIURNAL EXCITING TIDE FIGURE 2
.A2.5-13
STP-ER 2 a 0 0
-j Li.
F0 LL 0 - 1 0 z LLU
-2 0
w
-3
-4
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 TIME (HOURS)
SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 & 2 NOTE: TIDAL FLOW OPPOSITE PLANT SITE Qo= FRESH WATER INFLOW WITH LOW RANGE DIURNAL EXCITING TIDE FIGURE 3 A2.5o-14
STP-ER 0 0 0-J U-u-) 0 0 (D 0r w TIME (HOURS) SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 & 2 NOTE: TIDAL FLOW OPPOSITE PLANT SITE 0 o= FRESH WATER INFLOW WITH HIGH RANGE DIURNAL EXCITING TIDE (NORTH WIND) FIGURE 4 "A2 - 5:--*l 5'
STP-ER i 2 (, 0 0 0
-j U-1- 0 ci, L-,
0 0 0 - I 0 U, -2 w uii
-3
-4
-5 0 5 I0 15 20 25 TIME (HOURS)
SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 & 2 NOTE; TIDAL FLOW OPPOSITE PLANT SITE Qo= FRESH WATER INFLOW WI TH HIGH RANGE DIURNAL EXCITING TIDE (SOUTH WIND) FIGURE 5
STP-ER A 2 0 0 0-J I-0 C.L 0 0 0 -I z w
-2 I
Q) ir nw
-3 0l
-4
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 TIME (HOURS)
SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS1 & 2, NOTE:- TIDAL FLOW OPPOSI TE'PLANT SITE Qo: FRESH WATER INFLOW WITH AVERAGE SEMIDIURNAL'EXCITING TIDE FIGURE 6 17
STP-ER 4 (" 0
-J U,
(f) LL-0 0 0 0 z 0 cf) 0 O O-- d 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 RIVER MILE (FROM MOUTH AT GULF) SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 & 2 NOTE: Qo= FRESH WATER INFLOW TIDAL FLOW RANGE ALONG COLORADO RIVER FOR AVERAGE DIURNAL EXCITING TIDE FIGURE 7 A2.5-1
STP-ER 4 a 0 0
-j C,)
0 0 0~ z 0 cr) 0i m w 6-0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24. 26 28 30 32 RIVER MILE (FROM MOUTH AT GULF) SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 & 2 NOTE, Qo= FRESH WATER INFLOW TIDAL FLOW RANGE ALONG COLORADO RIVER FOR LOW RANGE DIURNAL EXCITING TiDE FIGURE 8 A2.5-19
STP-ER 4 0 0 0
-J Ll cf)
LL-0 0 +/- 0 0~ z -1 0 -2 cr-m
-3 w
tr- 6 01, , 2 4 6 8 10 12 i 14 i 1 16 i1 18 i 1 20 1 22 1i 24 i1_ 26 1 28 30 32 RIVER MILE (FROM MOUTH AT GULF) SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 & 2 NOTE: Qo= FRESH WATER INFLOW TIDAL FLOW RANGE ALONG COLORADO RIVER FOR HIGH RANGE DIURNAL EXCITING TIDE (NORTH WIND) FIGURE 9
STP-ER 4 3 0 0 2 u-1 0 0 0~ z -I
-2 (D) 0 ujm_
-4
-5
-6 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 I
RIVER MILE (FROM MOUTH AT GULF) SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 & 2 NOTE: Qo=.FRESH WATER INFLOW TIDAL FLOW RANGE ALONG COLORADO RIVER FOR HIGH RANGE DIURNAL EXCITING TIDE (SOUTH WIND) FIGURE 10
STP-,ER 1 4 0 o 2
-j U-U) 0 0
0 0 z w CD w 61 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -j 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 RIVER MILE (FROM MOUTH AT GULF) 41 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS1 &2 NOTE: QO= FRESH WATER INFLOW TIDAL FLOW RANGE ALONG COLORADO RIVER All, FOR AVERAGE SEMIDIURNAL EXCITING TIDE FIGURE 11 A2.5-22
STP-ER APPENDIX 2.5-B TEXAS WATER QUALITY STANDARDS TEXAS WATER QUALITY BOARD P.O. BOX 13246, CAPITOL STATION AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 OCTOBER, 1973 B2.5-1
STP-ER TABLE OF CONTENTS Title PBage - PREFACE .......................................... B2.5-5 GENERAL STATEMENT................................... B2.5-6 I. Authority ................................. B2.5-6 II. Policy Statement ......................... B2.5-6 III. Antidegradation Statement ............... B2.5-6 IV. Classification of Surface Waters .......... B2.5-7 V. Description of Standards .................. B2.5-7 VI. General Criteria .......................... B2. 5-10 VII. Numerical Criteria ....................... B2 .5-13 VIII. Application of Standards. .............. B2 .5-18 IX. Determination of Compliance .............. B2 .5-20 X. Comment .s ....... ........................... B2 5-22 TEXAS WATER QUALITY STANDARDS ...................... IB2 .5-29 f* B2. 5-2:
STP-ER LIST OF TABLES Title Page TABLE 1 B2.5-16
-B2ý5-3
STP-ER LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title Page 1 Lavaca-Tres Palacios Estuary ...... B2.5-29 4 B2.5-4
STP-ER PREFACE Following the passage of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, the Texas Water Quality Board submitted the State's water quality standards to the Environmental Protection Agency Region VI office in Dallas, Texas, for their review and approval. Subse-quently, revision of the water quality standards became necessary within a deadline date of April 18, 1973. A public hearing was held on April 6, 1973 to adopt the proposed water quality standards prepared by the staff of the Texas Water Quality Board. Presentations and testimonies submitted during and immediately following this public hearing resulted in amendments to the pro-posed water quality standards. The standards were then adopted for the State of Texas by the Texas Water Quality Board on April 12, 1973. They were then submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency Region VI. office in Dallas, Texas, by the Governor's office on April 18, 1973. Following review by the Environmental Protection Agency staff, recommended changes were made during a series of meetings and conferences with the Texas Water Quality Board staff. Another public hearing was held on September 10, 1973. Some changes suggested by par-ticipants at the hearing were~incorporated into the standards. The proposed standards were adopted by the Texas Water Quality Board on September 25, 1973 and forwarded to the Environmental Protection Agency on October 11, 1973. The Texas Water Quality Standards were approved by the Environmental Protection Agency on October 25, 1973 as shown on the following pages. These water quality standards are subject to review at any time and are required to be reviewed every three years. As appropriate, changes will be made and adopted by the Texas Water Quality Board.
,B2.5-5
STP-ER GENERAL STATEMENT I. Authority Pursuant to the authority contained in Sections 21.075 through 21.078 of the Texas Water Code (60th Legislature, Chapter 313, Sections 3.14 through 3.17, as amended by House Bill 343 during the regular session of the 62nd Legislature in 1971), the Texas Water Quality Board adopts the following stream standards. II. Policy Statement It is the policy of this state and the purpose of this chapter to maintain the quality of water in the State consistent with the public health and enjoyment, the propagation and protection of terrestrial and aquatic life, the operation of existing industries, and the economic de-velopment of the State; to encourage and promote the develop-ment and use of regional and area-wide waste collection, treatment, and disposal systems to serve the waste disposal needs of the citizens of the State; and to require the use of all reasonable methods to implement this policy. (Texas Water Code Chapter 21, Section 21.002, 60th Legislature, Chapter 313, Section 1.02, as amended). III. Antidegradation Statement In implementing the legislative policy expressed in the Texas Water Quality Act, it is the policy of the Texas Water Quality Board that the waters in the State whose existing quality is better than the applicable water quality standards described herein as of the date when these stan-dards become effective will as provided hereafter be main-tained at their high quality, and no waste discharges may be made which will result in the lowering of the quality of these waters unless and until it has been demonstrated to the Texas Water Quality Board that the change is justifiable as a re-sult of desirableeconomric or social development. Therefore, the Board will not authorize or approve-any waste discharge which will result in the quality of any of the waters in the State being reduced below the water quality standards with-out complying with the Federal and State laws appl-icab-le to the amendment of water quality standards. Anyone making a waste discharge from any industrial, public or private project or development which would constitute a new-source_. B2. 5-6
STP-ER of pollution or an increased source of pollution to any of the waters in the State will be required, as part of the initial project design to provide the highest and best degree of waste treatment available under existing technology con-sistent with the best practice in the particular field affected under the conditions applicable to the project or development. The Board will keep the Environmental Protec-tion Agency informed of its, activities and will furnish to the agency such reports in such form, and containing such information as the Administrator of the Environmental Pro-tection Agency may from time to time reasonably require to carry out his functions under the Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972. Additionally, the Board will consult and cooperate with the Environmental Protection Agency on all matters affecting the federal interest. IV. Classification of Surface Waters The surface waters of the State have been divided into the following categories for ease of classification.
- 1. River Basin Waters - those surface inland waters com-prising the major rivers and their tributaries, including listed impounded waters, and including the tidal portion of the river to the extent that itis confined in a channel.
- 2. Coastal Basin rqaters - those surface inland waters, in-cluding listed impounded waters, exclusive of 1 above discharging or flowing or otherwise communicating with bays or the gulf including the tidal portion of streams to the extent that they are confined in channels.
- 3. Bay Waters - all tidal waters exclusive of those included in river basin waters, coastal basin waters, and gulf waters.
- 4. Gulf Waters - those waters which are not included in or form a part of any bay or estuary but which are a part of the open waters of the Gulf of Mexico to the limit of Texas' jurisdiction.
V. Description of Standards The (eneral Statement is an integral part of the standards and the-standards shall be. interpreted in accord with the General Statement. B2.5-7
STP-ER These standards consist of three parts:
- 1. General Criteria applicable to all surface waters of the State at all times to the maximum extent feasible
- 2. Numerical Criteria applicable to specific surface waters designated in the standards
- 3. Water Uses In determining the suitability of waters of the State for various uses, the following water quality criteria were used as guidelines. Nothing in these water quality standards limits the authority of the Commissioner of Health of the State of Texas to take such public health protective measures as he may deem necessary.
- a. Contact recreation waters Surface waters suitable for contact recreation shall not exceed a logarithmic mean (geometric mean) fecal coliform content from a representative sampling of not less than 5 samples collected over not more than 30 days, as determined by either multiple-tube fermentation or membrane filter techniques, of 200/100 ml, nor shall more than 10 percent of total samples during any 30-day period exceed 400/100 ml.
Simple compliance with bacteriological standards does not insure that waters are safe for primary contact recreation, such as swimming. Long-standing public health principles mandate that watershed sanitary surveys be conducted in order to adequately evaluate the sanitary hazards potentially present on any natural watercourse.
- b. Noncontact recreation waters Surface waters for general or noncontact recreation should with specific and limited exceptions, be suitable for human use in recreation activities not involving significant risks of ingestion. These waters shall not exceed-a logarithmic mean (geometric
- mean) fecal coliform content of 2,000/100 ml and a maximum of 4,000/100 ml, except in specified mixing zones adjacent to outfalls.
B2.5-8
STP-ER These waters should not exceed a logarithmic mean (geometric mean) fecal coliform content of 1,000/- 100 ml, nor equal or exceed 2,000/100 ml in more than 10 percent of the samples, except in specified mixing zones adjacent to outfalls.
- c. Domestic raw water supply it is the goal that the chemical quality of all surface waters used for domestic raw water supply conform to the U. S. Public Health Service, Drinking Water Standards, revised 1962, or latest revision.
However, it must be realized that some surface waters are being used that cannot meet these standards. Since in these cases it is the only source available, these surface waters may be deemed suitable for use as a domestic raw water supply, where the chemical constituents do not pose a potential health hazard. It is desirable that the total coliform content shnuld not exceed 100/100 ml and the fecal coliform content 20/100 ml. The monthly arithmetic averages should not exceed 10,000/100 ml total coliforms or 2,000/100 ml fecal coliforms. The evaluation of raw water cannot be reduced to simply counting bacteria of any kind and the fore-going must be used with judgment and discretion and. this paragraph is not intended to limit the responsibilities and authorities of responsible local governments or local health agencies.
- d. Irriqation waters The suitability of water for use as irrigation water is influenced by:
(1) the total salt concentration or salinity hazards; (2) the amount, of sodium and its relation to other cations; (3) the concentration of boron and other constituents that may be toxic; and (4) the bicarbonate content in relation to calcium and magnesium. B2.5-9
STP-ER The suitability of water for irrigation will be based on the irrigation water classification system pre-pared by the USDA salinity laboratory. The various salinity classes are: Class #1 - low-salinity water can be used for irrigation with most crops on most soils with little likelihood that soil salinity will develop. Class #2 - medium-salinity water can be used if a moderate amount of leaching occurs. Plants with moderate salt tolerance can be grown in most cases without special practices for salinity control. Class #3 - high-salinity water cannot be used on soil with restricted drainage. Class #4 - very high-salinity water is not suitable for irrigation under ordinary con-ditions but may be used occasionally under special circumstances. The soil must be permeable, drainage must be adequate, irri-gation water must be applied in excess to provide considerable leaching and highly salt-tolerant crops must be selected. The SAR (sodium adsorption ratio) should not exceed 8 for waters safe for irrigation. Sampling and analytical procedures and schedules are not speci-fied but would be as appropriate for adequate pro-tection of irrigation waters.
- e. Shellfish waters In shellfish areas in the bays and outside the buffer zones, the coliform criteria shall be limited and guided by the U. S. Public Health Service Manual, "Sanitation of Shellfish Growing Areas," 1965 revision, or latest revision.
VI. General Criteria The general criteria enumerated below are applicable to all surface waters of the State at all times and specifically-apply with respect to substances attributed to waste dis-charges or the activities of man as opposed to natural B2.5-10
STP-ER phenomena. Natural waters may, on occasion, have charac-teristics outside the limits established by these criteria; in which these criteria do not apply. The criteria adopted herein relate to the condition of waters as affected by waste discharges or man'.s activities. The criteria listed following do not override a specific exception to any one or more of the following if the exception is specifically stated in a specific water quality standard.
- 1. Taste and odor producing substances shall be limited to concentrations in the waters of the State that will not interfere with the production of potable water by reasonable water treatment methods, or impart un-palatable flavor to food fish, including shellfish, or result in offensive odors arising from the waters, or otherwise interfere with the reasonable use of the waters.
- 2. Essentially free of floating debris and settleable suspended solids conducive to the production of putrescible sludge deposits or sediment layers which would adversely affect benthic biota or other lawful uses.
- 3. Essentially free of settleable suspended solids con-ducive to changes in the flow characteristics of stream channels, to the untimely filling of reservoirs and lakes, and which might result in unnecessary dredging costs.
- 4. The surface waters in the State shall be maintained in an aesthetically attractive condition.
- 5. There shall be no substantial change in turbidity from ambient conditions due to waste discharges.
- 6. There shall be no foaming or frothing of a persistent nature.
- 7. There shall be no discharge of radioactive materials in excess of that amount regulated by the Texas Radiation Control Act, Article 4590(f), Revised Civil Statutes, State of Texas and Texas Regulation for Control of Radiation.
B2.5-11
STP-ER Radioactivity levels in the surface waters of Texas, in-cluding the radioactivity levels in both suspended and dissolved solids for the years 1958 through 1960, were measured and evaluated by the Environmental Sanitation Services Section of the Texas State Department of Health in a report prepared for and at the direction of the Health Department by the Sanitary Engineering Research Laboratory at the University of Texas. The document is entitled, "Report on Radioactivity -- Levels in Surface Waters -- 1958-1960" pursuant to contract No. 4413-407 and is dated June 30, 1960. This document comprises an authoritative report on background radioactivity levels in the surface waters in the State and quite importantly sets out the locations where natural radio-active deposits have influenced surface water radioactivity. The impact of radioactive discharges that may be made into the surface waters of Texas will be evaluated and judg-ments made on the basis of the information in the report which was at the time made, and may still be the only comprehensive report of its kind in the nation. Radioactivity in fresh waters associated with the dissolved minerals (measurements made on filtered samples) shall not exceed those enumerated in U. S. Public Health Service, Drinking Water Standards, revised 1962, or latest revision, unless such conditions are of natural origin.
- 8. The surface waters of the State shall be maintained so that they will not be toxic to man, fish and wildlife, and other terrestrial and aquatic life.
With specific reference to public drinking water supplies, toxic materials not removable by ordinary water treatment techniques shall not exceed those enumerated in U. S. Public Health Service, Drinking Water Standards, 1962 edition, or later revision. For a general guide, with respect to fish toxicity, receiving waters outside mixing zones should not have a concentration of nonpersistent toxic materials exceeding 1/10 of the 96-hour TLm, where the bioassay is made using fish indigenous to the receiving waters. Similarly, for persistent toxicants, the concentrations should not exceed 1/20 of the 96-hour TLm. In general, for evaluations of toxicity, bioassay tech-niques will be selected as suited to the purpose at hand. However, bioassays will be conducted under water quality B2.5-12
STP-ER conditions (temperature, hardness, pH, salinity, dissolved oxygen, etc.) which approximate those of the receiving stream as closely as practical.
- 9. As detailed studies are completed, limiting nutrients identified, and the feasibility of controlling excessive standing crops of phytoplankton or other aquatic growths by nutrient limitations is determined, it is anticipated that nutrient standards will be established on the surface waters of the State. Such decisions will be made on a case-by-case basis by the Board after proper hearing and public participation. The establishment of a schedule for decisions as to the need for nutrient standards for specific waters and what standards should be adopted is not feasible at this time.
- 10. The surface waters of the State shall be maintained so that no oil, grease, or related residue will produce a visible film of oil or globules of grease on the surface, or coat the banks and bottoms of the watercourse.
VII. Numerical Criteria The numerical criteria apply to the specific waters identified. Stream standards apply only to waters where standards are established and specifically apply with respect to substances attributed to waste discharges or the activities of man as opposed to natural phenomena. Chemical concentration parameters, with the exception of dis-solved oxygen and pH, apply to the approximate midpoint of the segment with reasonable gradients applying toward segment boundaries. The numerical values shown represent arithmetic average conditions over a period of one year. Whenever an unusual chemical concentration is found, an investigation of its origin will be made and such action as is warranted initiated. Salinity levels in estuarine areas are discussed in Section X, 3, Estuarine Salinity. The dissolved oxygen values are minimum values which are applicable except as qualified in Section VIII. For short periods of time, diurnal variations of 1.0 mg/l below the standard specified in the table shall be allowed for not more than 8 hours during any 24-hour period. The pH range represents maximum and minimum conditions through-out the segment except as qualified in Section VIII. B2, 5-13
STP-ER The temperature limitations are intended to be applied with judgment and are applicable to the waters specifically identified herein with the qualifications enumerated in Section VIII. Temperature standards are composed of two parts, a maximum temperature and a maximum temperature dif-ferential attributable to heated effluents. Natural high temperatures, in excess of 961F, occur regularly in Texas waters during the summer months. For example, 2.3% of United States Geological Survey measurements made during the summer months on the Double Mountain Fork of the Brazos River near Aspermont, Texas, during the period 1958 through 1971 exceeded 96*F. It is consequently concluded that the 90OF maximum temperature suggested by the National Technical Advisory Committee is not applicable to Texas conditions. Fresh Water Streams: Maximum Temperature See Table for Specific Waters Maximum Temp. Diff. 5°F rise over ambient Fresh Water Impoundments: Maximum Temperature See Table for Specific Waters Maximum Temp. Diff. 3°F rise over ambient Tidal River Reaches, Bay and Gulf Waters: Fall, Winter, Spring Summer Maximum Temp. Diff. 40 F 1.5 0 F Maximum Temperature 95 0 F* 95 0 F The temperature requirements shall not apply to off-stream or privately owned reservoirs, constructed principally for indus-trial cooling purposes and'financed in whole or in part by the entity or successor entity using, or proposing to use, the lake for cooling purposes. Heated wastes will not be discharged into the waters listed in Table 1, pages 11-and 12, without individual evaluation by the Texas Water Quality Board. These waters are construed to be cool waters and thereby potentially or presently suitable for cool water fisheries. B2.5- 14
.
STP-ER In effluent dominated streams, the specified temperature differentials shall not apply where the temperature increase is due to the discharge of a treated domestic (sanitary) sewage effluent. Bacteriological water quality standards consist of two parts: (1) a measure of general quality, and (2) a limit on vari-ations from the general quality. For all waters except gulf and bay waters, the measure of general quality is the logarithmic mean (geometric mean) of fecal coliform determinations. The number specified in the tables applies to the logarithmic mean (geometric mean) of data from a representative sampling of not less than 5 samples collected over not more then 30 days. All aspects of the sampling shall be such that a truly representative result is obtained. For routine observation and evaluation of water quality, lesser numbers of samples collected over longer periods will be used. In bay waters (exclusive of bay waters in the buffer zone), the number specified in the tables applies to the median total coliform density as specified in the "National Shellfish Sanitation Program Manual of Oper-ation, Part 1, Sanitation of Shellfish Growing Areas," 1965 Revision, or latest revision. The limit on variations from the general bacteriological quality on all waters except gulf and bay waters is a fecal coliform density which shall not be equaled or exceeded in more than 10% of the samples. This density is twice the numerical criteria specified in the table. In the instance of gulf and bay waters (exclusive of the buffer zone), the criteria for shellfish growing water shall apply. B2.5-15
STP-ER TABLE 1 San Marcos River Headwaters to confluence at Blanco River Blanco River Headwaters to Halifax Creek Guadalupe River Headwaters to Ingram, Guadalupe River Canyon Dam to Mountain Creek confluence Llano River Headwaters to SH 16 bridge in Llano Nueces River Headwaters to Northern Uvalde County Line Brazos River Below Possum Kingdom Dam for approximately ten miles Frio River including Headwaters to IH 35 bridge Leona River crossing Sabinal River Headwaters to southern Bander a County Line Medina River Headwaters to southern Bander a County Line Lampasas River Headwaters to Stillhouse Holl ow Dam Canyon Reservoir Comal County Lake Meredith Hutchinson County Greenbelt Lake Donley County Somerville Reservoir Burleson County Belton Reservoir Bell County Medina Reservoir Medina County B2.5-16
STP-ER TABLE 1 (continued) Lake Lewisville Denton County Diversion Reservoir Archer County San Angelo Reservoir Tom Green County Twin Buttes Reservoir Tom Green County Lake Conroe Montgomery County Tule Canyon Lake Swisher County Lake J. B. Thomas Scurry County Lake Cypress Springs Franklin County B2. 5-17
STP-ER VIII. Application of Standards
- 1. Flow Conditions The flow conditions specified herein apply to river and coastal basin waters. They do not apply to bay and gulf waters, or lakes and reservoirs.
- a. Chemical parameters: The water quality standards for chemical parameters, including chlorides, sulfates and total dissolved solids, exclusive of dissolved oxygen and pH, represent annual arith-metic mean concentrations which will not be exceeded for any year where the sampling median flow for the year under consideration equals or exceeds 50% of the median flow for the period of record for the existing hydrological conditions.
The sampling median flow for the year under consid-eration is defined for the purposes of this section to be the median of the flow measurements made on the days samples were collected. The "median flow for the period of record" is defined as the 50% value secured from a flow probability graph con-structed from available data. Existing hydrologic conditions means, for the purpose of this section, the existing major physical features of the water-shed, i.e., dams, diversion structures, etc.; the existing consumptive water uses; or any other factor which would significantly affect the hydraulic regime of the flow measuring station or other point under consideration. When the flow is zero, no data will be collected and the annual arithmetic mean concentration is defined as the mean of.the data collected when a flow exists.
- b. The dissolved oxygen concentrations represent mini-mum values and shall apply at all times that the daily flow exceeds the 7-day minimum average flow for the existing hydrologic conditions with a recurrence interval of two years, except where this flow is zero. When the flow is zero, the dissolved oxygen standards shall not apply.
- c. Temperature: Same as dissolved oxygen B2.5-18
STP-ER
- d. Other Parameters and General Criteria: The general criteria and the numerical criteria not specifi-cally discussed above shall apply at all times regardless of flow unless specifically excepted under Section VIII - 2, 3, and 4.
- 2. Mixing Zones Where mixing zones are specifically defined in a valid waste control order issued by the Texas Water Quality Board or a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit, the defined zone shall apply.
Where the mixing zone is not so defined, a reasonable zone shall be allowed. Because of varying local physical, chemical, and biological conditions, no single criterion is applicable in all cases. In no case, however, where fishery resources are considered significant, shall the mixing zone allowed preclude the passage of free-swimming and drifting aquatic organisms to the extent of significantly affecting their populations. Normally mixing zones should be limited to no more than 25 percent of the cross-sectional area and/or 'volume of flow of the stream or estuary,leaving at least 75 percent free as a zone of passage unless otherwise defined by a specific Board Order or permit.
- 3. Buffer Zones in Bay and Gulf Waters For all bay and gulf waters, exclusive of those con-tained in river or coastal basins as defined in Section IV, a buffer zone of 1,000 'feet measured from the shore-line at ordinary high tide is hereby established. In this zone, the bacteriological requirements enumerated in other sections of these standards shall not apply.
In these zones, the logarithmic mean (geometric mean) density of fecal coliform. organisms shall not exceed 200/100 ml, nor shall more than 10% of the total samples exceed 400/100 ml. The foregoing percentages are appli-cable when examining data from not less than 5 samples collected over not more than 30 days. For routine obser-vation and evaluation of water quality, lesser numbers of samples collected over longer periods will be used. B2.5-19
STP-ER
- 4. Exceptions-The water quality standards will not apply to treated effluents.
The Water Quality Standards, except General Criteria, will not apply to:
- a. water in mixing zones as defined in this section or in a valid waste control order issued by the Texas
.Water Quality Board or a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit, or
- b. inland effluent dominated streams during periods when the daily flow is totally composed of effluent excluding minor amounts of bank seepage, or
- c. dead-end barge and dead-end ship channels constructed for navigation purposes unless specifically designated in the tables.
In cases where the exceptions enumerated in VIII - 4.b. and VIII - 4.c. are applicable, such waste treatment as is required to maintain a minimum of 2.0 mg/l of dissolved oxygen in the receiving stream will be required, taking full recognition of other provisions of the General Statement. Nothing in this statement precludes requiring waste treatment over and above that required to meet a 2 mg/l dissolved oxygen standard. IX. Determination of Compliance In making any tests -or analytical determination on classified surface waters to determine compliance or noncompliance with water quality standards, representative samples shall be collected at locations approved by the Texas Water Quality Board.
- 1. Collection and Preservation of Samples Samples for determining compliance with the standards, excepting temperature as explained below, will be collected one foot below the water surface unless the water depth is less than. 1.5 feet, in which case the collection depth shall be one-third of the water depth measured from the water surface..
B2.5-20
STP-ER For impoundments, the temperature standards enumerated shall apply to the representative temperature of the receiving water outside the mixing zone measured by
.averaging temperature measurements made at equal and appropriate intervals from the surface to the bottom except where-the impoundment is stratified. In these cases, the bottom is defined as the thermocline and the temperature measurements for determining compliance shall be confined to the epilimnion. The thermocline shall be that point of rapid temperature change with vertical depth as defined in standard textbooks on the subject. (The thermocline as defined in A Treatise on Limnology, Volume I, page 428, by G. Evelyn Hutchinson is the plane of maximum rate of decrease in tempera-ture.)
In tidal river reaches, the temperature standards apply to the fresh water layer in stratified situations r similar to impoundments above. Samples will be collected from the present established sampling stations to insure continuance in monitoring with that done in the past. In those cases where there are not sufficient established points, it may be necessary to establish additional stations. This statement does not preclude sampling at other points. in the conduct of field investigations. Collection and preservation of samples will be in accordance with accepted procedures to assure repre-sentative samples of the water and to minimize alterations prior to analysis.
- 2. Analysis of samples Numerical values in the water quality standards will be determined by analytical procedures outlined in the latest edition of "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater" as prepared and published jointly by the American Public Health Association, the American Waterworks Association, and the Water Pollution Control Federation. Also, tests may be in accordance with other acceptable methods which have proven to yield reliable data to the satisfaction of the Texas Water Quality Board..
B2.5-21
STP-ER X. Comments
- 1. Inadequate Data In accord with the Environmental Protection Agency's letter of January 18, 1973, addressed to the Honorable Dolph Briscoe, Governor of Texas, we have identified streams and other waters which were not covered by previous stream standards. For some of these waters, adequate water quality and flow data to establish standards were not available. In these instances, standards were established based upon the best infor-mation available, however inadequate. In these instances, the Board reserves the right to amend these standards when data becomes available.
The Board also reserves the right to amend these standards following the completion of extensive studies presently under way or being planned in the near future on some of the major river basins.
- 2. Errors in these water quality standards resulting from clerical or human errors, or erroneous data, will be subject to correction by the Texas Water Quality Board; and the discovery of such errors does not render the remaining or unaffected standards invalid.
- 3. Estuarine Salinity It is recognized that the maintenance of proper salinity gradients during various periods of the year within es-tuarine waters is very important to the continuation of balanced and desirable populations of estuarine dependent marine life. The dominant force in determining salinity gradients is weather -- although gradients can be af-fected by waste discharges; modifications in the flow regime of in-flow rivers and streams, by the construction of impoundments, water diversions, etc.; and by physical alterations of gulf passes and other interconnections between estuarine and gulf waters. Since the dominant force controlling salinity gradients is beyond control, meaningful salinity standards cannot be enforced. Careful consideration, however, should always be given to all activities of any nature which can or might detrimentally affect salinity gradients in estuarine waters.
B2.5-22
STP-ER All phases of the natural mineral composition of estuarine and marine waters commonly known as salinity or salinity gradient are outside the scope of these standards, but are not outside the scope of the interest, responsibility, and authority of the several State agencies concerned with water quality, quantity, development, regulation, and administration. For the State's purposes, using both existing data and data yet to be collected, the State proposes to adopt carefully considered estuarine salinity criteria upon which future State evaluations and regula-tory actions might be based. Each action requiring approval by any State agency or subject to the control of any State agency shall be evaluated by that State agency or any other State agency ,having an interest, responsibility, and authority, on the basis of biological, economic, water rights, and prop-erty rights impacts in order that the agencies might be fqlly guided in their actions. Such evaluations shall not be precluded because of the absence of established salinity standards. B2-5-23
I TEXAS WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FRESH AND TIDAL WATERS ir iT WATER USES QUALITY DEEMED SUITABLE/ CRITERIA KNOWN USES 41- -r r---------, p COL IFORM 0 0 (U r-4 M0) z 0) COLORADO RIVER BASIN* U 4j OH >1 00r~ E~ W -U 0U 4-W 00 W. TO z 44 D '4J U)01 0.1-- 0 E 0 0H H (1> 0 H
*Eý 4- -441 C0 OC > V z 4 0OW El 0-4 U-'OWQ E E U W EE-~ 0* CEx r-1 l P W2>(9 SEGMENT 0o OU W >r. c A1 4-rý M 0 W &q -.
-0 U)(1 (-3 NUMBER DESCRIPTION 41 4 + + 4+ 1- - I' 4 I 1401 !Colorado River Tidal s/k s/k s/k 5.0 6.7-8.5 200 95 1402 Colorado River - aboye tidal to Tom Miller JDam, including Town Lake s/ s/k s/k s/k 100 75 500 5.0 6.7-8.5 200 95 5
1403 'Lake Austin s/k s/k s/k s/k 100 75 400 5.0 16.5-8. 200 90 1404 Lake Travis s/k s/k s/k s/k 100 75 400 5.0 6.5-8.5 200 90 1405 Laka Marble Falls s/k s/k s/k s/k 100 75 400 5.0 6.5-8.5 200 94 1406 Lake Lyndon B. Johnson s/k s/k s/k s/k 100 75 400 5.0 6.5-8.5 200 94 1407 Inks Lake s/k s/k s/k s/k 100 75 400 5.0 6.5-8.5 200 90 1408 Lake Buchanan s/k s/k s/k s/k 100 75 400 5.0 6.5-8.5 200 90 1409 Colorado River - Lake Buchanan headwater I to San Saba River confluence s/k s/k s/k s/k 200 200 500 5.0 16.5-8.5 200 91
- Standards to be reviewed upon completion of Corps of Engineers Colorado River Study, if necessary
TEXAS WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FRESH AND TIDAL WATERS WATER USES QUALITY DEEMED SUITABLE/ CRITERIA KNOWN USES r 1 II- r 1 1 1 COL IFORM 00 01 4ýi 04 W00 COLORADO RIVER BASIN* I 4JS OH .4~ 4J W0 0-4 E-Z z a -4J 0* W4u) 0 U 0 r0 H H cJ> E-U)d ,-4j a H U3 1100 4.) trp 0
.0 zo 0*
SEGMENT zo 0 U) 0 < U 015W td DESCRIPTION 01 P- a)0 NUMBER U0r I0 1410 Colorado River - San Saba River confluence r\0 to E. V. Spence Reservoir (Robert Lee Dam) s/k s/k s/k s/k 400 300 1,250 5.5 6.5-8.5 200 91 1411 E. V. Spence Reservoir s/k s/k s/k s/k 500 500 1,500 5.0 6.5-8.5 200 93 1412 Colorado River - FM 2059 near Silver to Lake J. B. Thomas (Colorado River Dam) s/k s/k' 18,000 2,500 20,000 5.0 6.5-8.5 1,000 93 1413 Lake J, B. Thomas s/k s/k s/k s/k 50 60 500 5.0 6.5-8.5 200 90 1414 Pedernales River s/k s/k s/k 80 50 500 5.0 6.5-8.5 1,000 91 1415 Llano River s/k s/k s/k 50 50 300 5.0 6.5-8.5 1,000 91 1416. San Saba River s/k s/k s/k s/k 80 50 500 5.0 6.5-8.5 200 90 1417 Pecan Bayou - Colorado River confluence to Lake Brownwood Dam I s/k s/k s/k 250 200 1,000 5.0 6.5-8.5 1,000 90
- Standards to be reviewed upon completion of Corps of Engineers Colorado River Study, if necessary
TEXAS WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FRESH AND TIDAL WATERS
.I WATER USES QUALITY DEEMED SUITABLE/ CRITERIA KNOWN USES U) -O COL IFORM 0
COLORADO RIVER BASIN* z 4~J 00 W OH -0)
-0. 0 44 o4 -(D 0 E 0J 0*
z 0~)0 U) r> 0 U0 4H H H HO 0 Q H 0 z 4 0-4 z E4-) E-sEU 0 K 00 > a-IC) W 0~ U4J SEGMENT zUo EN 0.) O 0 W 0E- x' Ow.r,. &I Q X NUMBERI DESCRIPTION 1418 Lake Brownwood s/k s/k s/k s/k 100 i 100 500 5.0 6.5-8.5 200 90 1419 Lake Coleman s/k s/k s/k s/k 100 100 500 5.0 6.5-8.5 200 93 1420 Pecan Bayou -above Lake Brownwood s/k s/k s/k 500 500 1,500 5.0 6.5-8.5 200 90 142. Concho River - Colorado River confluence to Fork in San Angelo, including South Fork to L~ke Nasworthy Dam and North Fork to San Angelo Reservoir Dam s/k s/k s/k 600 500 2,000 5.0 6.5-8.5 1,000 90 1422 Lake Nasworthy s/k s/ s/k 450 400 1,500 5.0 6.5-8.5 200 93 1423 Twin Buttes Reservoir s/k s/k s/k s/k 150 150 700 5.0 6.5-8.5 200 90 1424 South and Middle Concho Rivers - above _Twin Buttes Reservoir s/k s/k s/k s/k 150 150 700 5.0 6.5-8.5 200 90 1425 San Angelo Reservoir s/k s/k s/k s/k 150 150 700 5.0 6.5-8.5 200 90
- Standards to be reviewed upon completion of Corps of Engineers Colorado River Study, if necessary
TEXAS WATER NLITY STANDARDS FRESH AND TIDAL WATERS WATER USES QUALITY DEEMED SUITABLE/ CRITERIA KNOWN USES 7 II . 7* 7 COLIFORM 00 U4J z -0 c COLORADO-LAVACA COASTAL BASIN 0r OH tp0 -4 5*4 ON. E0' w0) 0* >4 z E-4Z E0M E4. u 0 E-4 1 04 4 H H04 0 -4 4- C Eý E-4 -00( 0w z o< z c u 0 tro 0-4 u Ci2 0* U)4 u~ *o ( SEGMENT u cl) z u 0 w 0 ul HnO4 ~> NUMBER DESCRIPTION z 0: E (v 1501 Tres Palacios Creek Tidal s/k s/k s/k 5.0 7.0-9.0 200 95 1.502 Tres Palacios Creek - above tidal s/k s/k. s/k 250 100 600 5.0 6.5-8.5 200 90
-T TEXAS WATER QUALITY STANDARDS BAY & GULF WATERS Fr- II
-WATER USES QUALITY DEEMED SUITABLE/ CRITERIA KNOWN USES
-~41 .4 7 1 COLIFORM TEMP.
0 4V E4 r H 43 d) LAVACA-TRES PALACIOS ESTUARY* z 10 0 04 4j
>4r '-06
~4) 4.1 4) z E-4 Z 0 X C-U 4).-
0 H_ H H 4 H E-4: E0 4) .4) Cz:1
-a: 0- .- ) 43 zo SEGMENT o L 0c .4.) En H .0 0 - =).j~
NUMBER DESCRIPTION E 2451 'Matagorda Bay - including Powderhorn Lake s/k s/k s/k 5.0 7.0-9.0 70 95 2452 Tres Palacios Bay - including Turtle Bay s/k s/k s/k 5.0 7.0-9.0 70 95 2453 Lavaca Bay - including Chocolate Bay s/k s/k s/k 5.0 7.0-9.0 70 95 2454 Cox Bay s/k s/k s/k 5.0 7.0-9.0 70 95 2455 Keller Bay s/k s/k s/k 5.0 7.0-9.0 70 95 2456 Carancahua Bay s/k s/k s/k 5.0 7.0-9.0 70 95
* (See Figure 1)
2453 I. 77 I--
-V ~2452 77
-2456~'
A
/ 24551*
fl
\ '-.
E 9 N/~N\1 .1 2451 L. P,- CI a
.9
,,,' .\ 9.
.-. ~ ~
9
- .1*
- ~
, 7.-.
- 1. Lavaca-Tres Palacios Estuary Figure
SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 & 2 19HW0n@,HN19H7LrA\L VOLUME 4
STP-ER ( 5.1.2 EFFECTS ON COLORADO RIVER WATER QUALITY Blowdown water from the STP cooling reservoir will be discharged to the Colorado River at a point approximately 12.5 miles from the Gulf. The discharge structure consists of seven, 3-foot diameter discharge ports, spaced 250 feet apart, at a center-line depth of 5.5 feet below mean low water, and an angle of 45 degrees with the shore on the downstream side of each port. The ports will discharge water at velocities ranging from 4.14 fps to 6.22 fps. Detailed descriptions of the discharge struc-
*ture and operation, and the temperature and total dissolved solids content of the blowdown are given in Section 3.4.
Makeup for the cooling reservoir will be taken at a point on the Colorado River approximately 15 miles from the Gulf. The maximum pumping rate is 1,200 cfs. This pumpage will indirectly affect the water quality of the river. The diversion of fresh water will lower the resistance to Gulf penetration upstream,thus raising the salinity at all points in the river below the intake. Plant heat-dissipation-system operations and their environmental evaluation are based on adjusted, rather than actual, river flows as discussed in Section 5.1.1. This approach is more conserva-tive, since the change in salinity due to plant operations is in-versely proportional to fresh water flow rate (the lower the flow rate, the greater the change in salinity for a given deviation in plant operation). 5.1.2.1 Thermal Water Quality Standards The thermal standards applicable to the Colorado River are given in the Texas Water Quality Standards as discussed in Section 2.5. These standards were approved by the Environmental Protection Agency on October 25, 1973 and provide for mixing zones as follows:
"Because of varying local physical, chemical, and biological conditions, no single criterion is applicable in all cases. In no case, however, where fishery resources are considered significant, shall the mixing zone allowed preclude the passage of free-swimming and drifting aquatic organisms to the extent of significantly affecting their popula-tions. Normally,mixing zones should be limited to no more than 25 percent of the cross-sectional area and/or volume of flow of the stream or estuary, leaving at least 75 percent free as a zone of pass-age unless otherwise defined by a specific Board 5
Order or permit."' Additionally, the maximum temperature difference outside of the mixing zone is limited tg 4*F in the fall, winter, and spring and 1.5'F in the summer. 5.1-8
STP-ER 5.1.2.2 Physical and Chemical Discharge/Intake Effects Several major variables were considered in estimating the effects of thermal additions and water volume additions/withdrawals from the Colorado River, including:
- 1. the ambient thermal and flow history of the river in the vicinity of the site, including seasonal variations;
- 2. the volume and temperature of waters discharged from the reservoir into the river, including their seasonal variations;
- 3. the changes caused by thermal discharges on normal river temperatures;
- 4. the extent of the physical areas that are expected to be involved;
- 5. the rate of change of thermal additions;
- 6. the interactive effects of thermal additions on other physico-chemical parameters; and,
- 7. the volume of waters withdrawn from the river including their seasonal variations.
5.1.2.2.1 Near Field Thermal Effects Near the discharge location, the discharge structure design determines the effect of the excess temperature and salinity of the blowdown water upon the receiving water body. This region is called the near field region. As explained in 5.1.1.2, the near field thermal model calculates the block-age temperature, ATb , resulting from the discharge of blowdown water for each hour of the 40-year plant life. The blockage temperature is defined as the maximum temperature of all iso-therms whose area, projected upon a vertical surface perpen-dicular to the shoreline, is greater than or equal to 25 percent of the river cross-sectional area. The river cross-sectional at the discharge location is assumed to be 12.4 feet by 150 feet, based on the tidal flow model described in Section 2.5. Figures 5.1-12 and 5.1-13 show the fraction of the time that the daily average blockage temperature is less than or equal to 1F, and 0.5'F for each month over the 40-year period. The daily average blockage temperature is always less than 2 0 F. The maximum daily average blockage temperature occurring over the 40 years of plant life is 1.95'F during March of the twenty-second year of operation. The maximum daily average blockage temperature during the summer is 0.82 0 F, occurring in June of the twelfth and thirty-fifth years of operation. 5 1, 9
STP-ER Figures 5.1-14, 15, 16 and 17 show the fraction of the time that the daily maximum blockage temperature, as determined from the maximum of the daily hourly values, is less than or equal to 3'F, 2'F, 1F and 0.5'F for each month over the 40-year period. The highest daily maximum blockage tempera-ture occurs in March of the tenth year of plant operation, at which time the blockage temperature is 3.26'F, well under the criterion of 4 0 F. The highest daily maximum blockage temperature for the summer season is 1.10OF in September of the thirteenth year of plant operation, well under the criterion of 1.5 0 F. Figures 5.1-18 and 5.1-19 show the monthly average blowdown flowrate, and the number of hours per day during which blow-down occurs for the 40-year period. These figures show that during approximately 60 percent of the 480 months of plant operation, no discharge will occur. To better visualize the overall effect of the plant on water temperatures during its 40 years of operation, Figures 5.1-20 through 5.1-22 are presented. Figure 5.1-20 depicts the fraction of the time that the daily average blockage tempera-ture is less than or equal to 1F, and 0.5%F for an average 'year, as determined by the average of each month. Daily av-erage blockage temperatures never exceed 2*F. The fractions of the °1F and 0.5 0 F blockage temperatures range from 1.Q'each for August to 0.775 and 0.7i8 respectively for the month of February. The average over the 40 years for 1lF is 0.924 and for 0.5'F is 0.891. This means that for 100 percent of the time the daily average blockage temperature is less than 2 0 F, and for 89.1 percent of the time it is less than 0.5 0 F. Figure 5.1-21 depicts information similar to Figure 5.1-20, except that the daily maximum blockage temperatures are shown. These fractions range from 1.0 for each temperature during August to 0.996, 0.816, 0.762, and 0.701 during February for 3F, 20 F, 1F and 0.5 0 F. The averages over the 40 years for the four blockage temperatures are, in descending order, 0.999, 0.934, 0.916, and 0.884. This mean.s that for 99.9 percent of the time the daily maximum blockage temperature is less than 3 0 F and for 88.4 percent of the time it is less than 0.5 0 F. The discharge flow rates and the hours per day of discharge for the average year, assuming discharge during the total time period, are shown in Figure .5.1-22. The flow rates range. from 53 cfs during February to. 0 .cfs during August. The correspond-ing hours per day of discharge operation are 5.7 for February and 0.-for. August., The months during which the maximum and minimum flow rates occur correspond to the months during which the frequency of occurrence of blockage temperatures is also a maximum and minimum. Over the 4.0 years, the average discharge flow rate is 18.5 cfs. The average hours per day of discharge is 2 (discharge occurs for approximately 8.4 percent of the
- 5..1-10
STP-ER pi time during 40 years of the plant life). The average discharge flow rate during actual discharge is 221 cfs. To illustrate the variation within a single month, two sample months were chosen: March of year 21 and September of year
- 13. Figure 5.1-23 shows the daily variation of the daily average blockage temperature, the discharge flow rate during discharge operation, and the hours per day during which dis-charge occurred, for March of year 21. Daily average block-age temperatures ranged from 0.21OF to 1.87 0 F. Discharge occurred on every day but the thirteenth. The discharge flow rate ranged from 104 cfs to 308 cfs during the hours of op-eration, which ranged from 16 to 22. Figure 5.1-24 shows similar information for the daily maximum blockage temperature.
These values ranged from 0.21 0 F to 2.94 0 F. Figure 5.1-25 shows the daily average blockage temperature, the discharge flow rate during discharge operation, and the hours per day during which discharge occurred for September of year 13. Daily average blockage temperatures ranged from 0.13 0 F to 1.800 F. Discharge occurred during each day of the month. Figure 5.1-26 shows similar information for the daily maximum blockage temperature. These values ranged from 0.13 0 F to 2.83 0 F. The maximum value for the summer part of the month was 1.10°F. Figures 5.1-27 and 28 show the hourly values of the blockage temperature for the periods March 17 through 19 of year 10, and September 19 through 21 of year 13. As explained above, these periods contain the maximum blockage temperatures over the 40-year period for the fall, winter, spring, and summer seasons. During March 17 through 19 of year 10, the discharge was opera-ting at a flow rate of 308 cfs, 21 hours per day. Figure 5.1-27 shows that, although the maximum for this time period was 3.26 0 F, the values for most of the period were considera-bly less, reaching a minimum value of 0.89 0 F. During September 19, 20, and 21 of year 13 the discharge was operating at a flow rate of 308 cfs during the hours of dis-charge operation. The discharge was operating for 24, 17 and 20 hours during the nineteenth, twentieth, and twenty first, respectively. Figure 5.1-28 shows that although the maximum blockage temperature for this time period was 1.10 0 F, the values for most of the period were considerably less, reaching a minimum value of 0.42 0 F. Figures 5.1-29, 5.1-30, and 5.1-31 show the shape of the dis-charge plume. Figure 5.1-29 gives surface isotherms due to one-port for the following discharge conditions: Ta = 70OF Ud = 4.14 fps 5 .1-li
STP-ER AT = 6.90F Ua = 1 fps Figure 5.1-30 gives surface isotherms for the same conditions, except that U = 6.22 fps. Background temperatures from pre-vious heat discharges have not been considered, as these iso-therms are simply for illustrative purposes. If a background temperature was present, the temperature of the indicated isotherms would be increased by the value of the background temperature. Figure 5.1-31 shows surface isotherms for all seven ports operating simultaneously. Figures 5.1-32 and 5.1-33 show the isotherms for the above two caaes projected on a vertical surface which is perpendicular to the shoreline. The temperature of the isotherm whose area is 25 percent of the river cross-section is the blockage tem-perature. From the equation developed in Section 5.1.1.2, the blockage temperatures predicted for these two cases are 0.50'F (Ud = 4.20 fps) and 0.92 0 F (Ud = 6.22 fps). These values agree well with those depicted in Figures 5.1-23 and 5.1-24. The preceding analysis clearly shows that the blockage criteria will be met under all combinations of plant operating conditions and river conditions. 5.1.2.2.2 Far Field Thermal Effects The effect of the discharge upon the river away from the immedi-ate area of the discharge ports is governed by the discharge and ambient river characteristics. The effect in this region, called the far field region, is independent of the discharge structure design. In this region, the jet momentum has been dissipated, and therefore, no velocity effects are noticed. Areas along the river corresponding to excess temperatures greater than or equal to a given temperature have been calcu-lated (see Section 5.1.1.3) for the 40 years of plant operation. The river widths used to arrive at these results are those given in Section 2.5. Specifically, the widths corresponding to fresh water flow rates of 800, 1,500, 2,500 and 3,500 cfs are 150, 155, 170 and 185 feet, respectively. Widths at flow rates other than those that are given have been interpolated. For fresh water flow rates greater than 3,500 cfs, the river width was maintained at 185 feet. Areas given are exclusive of those of the near field discharge plume which are insignificant when compared with the area of the river downstream from the discharge port. For the 40 years of plant operation, due to the minimum river flow required in order to blowdown, the discharge effects are always limited to locations lessthan 0.5 miles upstream from 5.1-12
STP-ER the discharge port closest to the intake. Therefore, the discharge never affects the intake which is located 2.5 miles upstream. Figures 5.1-34 and 35 depict A(1.0) and A(l.5), those areas with excess temperatures greater than or equal to 1.0F and 1.5'F for the 40 years of plant life. The three sets of data presented each month are the average for that month, the maximum of the daily averages for that month, and the hourly maximum for that month (defined as the area occurring when the daily maximum of the blockage temperature exists). For A(1.0) and A(1.5) these areas are zero for approximately 80, and 98 percent of the months. The highest values of the daily and hourly maxima of A(1.0) correspond to those of approximately 9 and 15 percent of the river downstream from the discharge. For A(1.5) they correspond to those of approximately 2 and 3 percent of the downstream river area. For A(1.0) and A(1.5) the maximum monthly averages correspond to 3 and 0.06 percent of the downstream river area. Figures 5.1-34 and 35 indicate that the hourly maximum areas deviate little from the daily maximum areas during a month. This implies that the temporal variation of areas within the river subject to excess temperatures is slight. Figures 5.1-36 and 37 show the same kind of information as Figures 5.1-34 and 35; however, the time period consists of an average year, determined by averaging the results from each month. For all curves except A(1.5), the largest area occurs in February. The maximum values of A(1.5) occur in November. Zero areas are found for each temperature in August, while A(1.5) occurs only during the months of Febru-ary, March, April, November, and December. 5.1,2.2.3 Effects on River Hydraulics Operations of the makeup and blowdown facilities will cause small changes in the flow pattern of the river in the immediate vicinity of discharge and withdrawal points. However, the operations will not create conditions that do not exist na-turally but will simply change their frequency of occurrence slightly. 5.1.2.2.3.1 Discharge Flows The selected operating scheme of the discharge facility restricts discharges to time periods when river velocity is approximately 0.4 fps or greater in the downstream direction. In addition, the discharge flow is equal to or less than 12.5 percent of the net river flow past the point of discharge. The maximum discharge velocity of 6.22 fps will quickly dissipate as the plume entrains dilution water and is bent in a direction parallel to the shore. Directing the discharge ports at an 5.1-13
STP-ER angle of 45 0 F in the downstream direction limits the impinge-ment of the plume on the river bank opposite the discharge port. Locating the port at a depth of 5.5 feet below mean low water (approximately 6 feet above the river bottom) elimi-nates the potential for significant bottom scour. The area of significant induced velocity will be limited to less than 25 percent of the river cross section. 5.1.2.2.3.2 Makeup Flows Diversion of water from the river is limited to 55 percent of the river flow in excess of 300 cfs. The maximum diversion rate is 1,200 cfs at a river flow of 2,480 cfs or greater. The average river velocity is approximately 1.4 fps. Assuming isotropic flow into the intake structure, plant-induced velocity components in the direction of the intake would be approximately 0.3 fps which is small compared with the up-stream river velocity. Since the river is essentially pooled (average water elevation at the intake similar to the eleva-tion at the Gulf) there will be no measureable changes in water elevation due to intake facility operation. 5.1.2.2.4 Total Dissolved Solids Effects Salinity is modified by power plant makeup and discharge operations. Modified salinities have been simulated using plant modified adjusted fresh water flow rates. These simu-lations are based on adjusted river flow, plant makeup flow, and plant discharge flow each day over the 40 years of the simulated operating scheme. In the plant impact analysis, salinity changes attributed to intake operations are determined first. The simulation is used to calculate the ambient salinity over the top 4 feet of water at river mile 15 based on the adjusted fresh water flow rate. This is the salinity of the water that will be diverted. Since this water is not necessarily all fresh water, the volume of makeup must be corrected for the volumethat is fresh water before this volume can be subtracted from the fresh water flow rate. The resultant net fresh water flow rate is then used to simulate the salinity distribution in the Colorado River. Any change of the salinity distribution from the am-bient condition represents the impact from makeup operations alone. Discharge impact is determined by a simple salt balance between the discharge and the previously determined river salinities (ambient or makeup induced). The monthly average blowdown salinities and volumes averaged over the period of plant life are presented in Table 5.1-5. The impact of discharge operation is limited to less than 13 miles upstream from the Gulf, or 5 .1-14
STP-ER approximately 0.5 miles above the discharge. Figures 5.1-38 through 5.1-40 show the change of salinity resulting from plant operation for each month averaged over the 40-year plant life. Data are given for river miles 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 and for the depth/depth ranges of 0-4 feet, 8-16 feet, and 16 feet. The corresponding ambient salinities (those which would exist if the plant were not operating) have previously been presented in Figures 5.1-3 through 5.1-5. Figure 5.1-41 shows the monthly variation of ambient salinity, and change in salinity due to plant operation over a 23-year period at river mile 12. The greatest change in salinity due to plant operation occurs when ambient salinities are low; however, this change in salinity is always less than 2 0/oo. These lower salinities occur during the higher flow months. Plant induced temperature increases have been correlated with plant induced salinity changes. The frequency of occurrence of a given salinity and maximum temperature increase at specific locations in the Colorado River are tabulated in Tables 5.1-6 through 8. The salinities are taken from the above far field analyses. Temperature information is provided at each mile, daily, by application of the far field thermal distribution model (see Section 5.1.1.3). The general re-lationship between temperature increase and salinity depends primarily on flow rate. The higher the flow rate the lower the temperature change and the salinity at a given depth and distance. 5.1.2.2.5 Effects on Dissolved Oxygen The concentrations of dissolved oxygen at the Gulf resulting from plant operations were calculcated for an average summer and winter month using reasonably conservative assumptions and the Streeter-Phelps equation. July and December are the representative months during which blowdown occurred when the river temperatures were the historical extremes, 89 0 F and 41hF (based on 10 years of river temperature measurements, see Section 2.5). The maximum blowdown temperatures during these months were 4.3 0 F and 6.9'F above ambient, 93.30F and 47.9'F (see Section 5.1.1.2). During the months of July and December the average blowdown flow rate was 180 cfs (see Table 5.1-5). The minimum summer and winter river flow rates into which this volume of water could be discharged are 800 cfs and 1440 cfs, respectively. Weighted averages of temperature, BOD, and dissolved oxygen, were calculated based on combined river and blowdown flows and concentrations. 5.1-15
STP-ER ( _The after weighted average summer and winter river blowdown are 89.4 0 F and 41.7 0 F, respectively. temperatures The average dissolved oxygen concentration in the river (no blowdown) was 92 percent of saturation. Based on the above summer and winter river temperatures and chloride concentra-tion of 5000 ppm, the 92 percent adjusted saturation values Sare 6.5 and 11.0 mg/l, respectively. Blowdown dissolved oxygen is conservatively assumed to be zero at both times. The river BOD is assumed to be 1.5 mg/l (see section 2.7). A BOD of 35 mg/l is conservatively assumed for the reservoir effluent based on a study by the EPA of lagoon performance. 6 8 This value represents the average effluent BOD from tertiary treatment lagoons. It represents algae and zooplankton growth in a lagoon. The cooling reservoir is not a tertiary treatment lagoon in the strict sense, hence the value of 35 mg/l is conservative. Other parameters used in the analysis include deoxygenation coefficients, reoxygenation coefficients, and river veloci-ties. The deoxygenation coefficient, 0.17, usually associated *with laboratory BOD analyses was adjusted for temperature differ-ences in the field situation. The reoxygenation coefficient was based on O'Connor's formula for natural rivers. This value depends on the diffusivity of oxygen in water, the river flow velocity, and the depth of flow.. The river was assumed to be 12.4 feet deep and 150 feet wide. Using the average summer and winter river flow rates and the cross-sectional area, average velocities are deter-mined. The above information was used in the Streeter-Phelps equation to calculate the summer and winter dissolved oxyge.n concentra-tions at the Gulf (12.5 miles downstream from the point of discharge, the point of maximum oxygen depletion before enter-ing the Gulf)' for both power plant. and natural conditions: k1L -kIt -k't -k't T o (e -e ) + D e D 21 0 where, k' temperature-adjusted deoxygenation rate k' = temperature-adjusted reoxygenation rate __ 2 L = initial weighted average BOD of river and 0 blowdown 5.1-16
STP-ER D = initial dissolved oxygen deficit t = time for water to travel desired distance (12.5 miles). Based on the above assumptions, values, and equations, the following values were calculated: Summer: D deficit due to plant discharge = 0.95 mg/l D concentration in river = 6.5 mg/l Net Do concentration in river at Gulf = 5.55 mg/il Winter: Do deficit due-to plant discharge = 1.24 mg/i Do concentration in river = 11.0 mg/l Net Do concentration in river at Gulf = 9.76 mg/l. These values do not reflect reoxygenation due to Gulf pene-tration and vertical mixing. 5 ,1-17
STP-ER ( 5.1.3 EFFECTS ON AQUATIC BIOTA Environmental impact on aquatic organisms derived from opera-tion of the heat dissipation system may be characterized by the following three catagories:
- 1. Effects associated with operation of the makeup water intake structure on the Colorado River.
- 2. Effects associated with the cooling water reservoir and the condensers.
- 3. Effects on the Colorado River due to blowdown oper-ations.
The specific effects on aquatic organisms include:
- 1. Impingement and entrainment associated with the makeup water pump station located on the Colorado River and the cooling water intake structure located on the cool-ing water reservoir.
- 2. Thermal effects in condensers, the cooling water reservoir, and in the Colorado River due to blowdown of the cooling water reservoir.
- 3. Mechanical damage associated with any of the above structures.
- 4. Salinity effects in the Colorado River associated with the makeup and blowdown of the cooling water reservoir.
The expected effects of operation of the heat dissipation system on primary producers, zooplankton, benthos, ichthyo-plankton, and larger fishes and invertebrates are discussed below. 5.1.3.1 Effects of Makeup Water Pumping on the Colorado River 5.1.3.1.1 Effects on Primary Producers In general, the primary producer community near the selected intake is comprised primarily of diatoms and green algae, with other groups, notably blue-greens and dinoflagellates contributing only a small percentage to the total community. A review of phytoplankton community ecology is presented in Section 2.7. Aquatic macrophytes were noticeably absent in the STP study area, therefore, impacts of plant operation on primary producers will be limited to the phytoplankton. The principal impact of operation of the makeup pumping station on primary producers is that phytoplankton entrained 5.1-18
STP-ER in the makeup water will experience some fractional mechanical disruption due to pump turbulence and physical abrasion. For conservatism in the evaluation of the potential impact of plant operation on the phytoplankton community of the Colorado River, it has been assumed that all plankton entrained are lost from the Colorado River. This provides an upper limit to the estimated impact of plant operation; during the warmer seasons it may be approached but will not be exceeded. Based on standing crop data for all seasons at the STP site, the annual mean concentration of chlorophyll a is approxi-mately 460 micrograms per cubic foot. This value may be multiplied by 60 to estimate the corresponding weight (as carbon) of phytoplankton 7 ; therefore, 27,600 micrograms per cubic foot, or 6.07 x 10-5 pounds per cubic foot represent the mean weight. On this basis, the amount of phytoplankton as carbon removed from the Colorado River annually will be 1.9 x 105 lb. These data are taken largely from Strickland (1960), who gives 7 0 the relationship: mgC = F x mg chlorophyll, where C is organically combined carbon and chlorophyll is either E-6 chlorophyll a or a mixture of chlorophyll a and b. Table 5.1-8a shows values calculated for F, based on references listed within. Strickland points out that no value for F can be quoted which has significance less than a whole order of magnitude. Apparently the wide range of reported values for F depends mainly on the species, location, and state of nutrition of the phytoplankton organisms. 2 Strickland suggests a value of F = 30 for cultures or natural populations known to be without nutrient deficiencies and F = 60 for mixed natural populations subject to high light intensities or in warm, nutrient-deficient waters. With respect to phytoplankton communities of the Colorado River, an intermediate value (30<F<60) is perhaps more appropriate than the value of 60 used, particularly since the river is not nutrient deficient. However, in the interest of conservatism in the estimation of standing crops, the larger value was used, and provides an upper-limit estimate of the mass of phyto-plankton as organically combined carbon which will be removed from the Colorado River make-up water intake for the cooling reservoir. Salinity changes in the Colorado River, attributable to make-up operations, are not expected to have an adverse effect on the phytoplankton community. Natural changes of greater magni-tude occur within the area and result in temporary range exten-sions for some species. Amendment 2 5.1-19
STP-ER 5.1.3.1.2 Effects on Zoop~lankton The zooplankton community of the Colorado River in the vicinity of the intake structure has been discussed in Section 2.7. The STP nuclear power facility will entrain large numbers of zooplankton from the waters of the Colorado River. The principal impact being mechanical damage from pump turbulence and physical abrasion. Less than 12 percent mortality among entrained zooplankton at the Waukegan Generating Station was reported 8 , with mechanical damage as the primary source of zooplankton mortality. It was also found that mechanical damage was a linear function of organism size, with larger organisms such as Limnocalanus macrurus and Daphnia retrocurva experiencing higher mortality rates than smaller organisms such as copepod nauplii, Bosmina longirostris, and Cyclops bicuspidatus. These studies showed that entrainment had no lethal impact on zooplankton egg viability. Zooplankton standing crop estimates, described in Section 2.7, predict a mean number of 3.0 x 104 organisms per cubic foot, therefore an estimated 7.0 x 1013 zooplankton organisms(based on projected makeup water requirements) will be removed from the Colorado River per year. Amendment 2 5.1-19a
STP-ER ( 5.1.3.1.3 Effects on Benthos Quantitative benthic data collected in 1973 indicate very low species number and density per square meter of infaunal organ-isms in the Colorado River near the STP site, (stations. 1-4). See Section 2.7 for discussion of the benthic fauna. The observed sparsity of benthic organisms at upriver stations can be attributed in part to stressful conditions created by the fluctuating nature of the habitat from freshwater to estuarine and vice versa. In addition, substrates at mid-stream range from sandstone to hard clay or packed sand with occasional pockets of mud and shell. Substrates near the bank range from hard clay to sand or silty sand. With the exception of mud and silty sands, such substrates generally support few benthic organsims and are maintained by river flow. Softer sediments which are more productive build up through deposi-tion during low flow conditions but are scoured during high flow. The makeup pumping station on the Colorado River has been designed to minimize entrainment of benthos. Makeup water will be taken from the top four feet of the river, precluding entrainment of infaunal benthic organisms due to currents induced by~the makeup station. There should be no scouring of the river bottom during pumping. Entrainment of benthic macroinvertebrates will be greatest during periods of extremely high river flow. During floods, turbulence will displace and temporarily suspend sediments and associated organisms in the water column. This condition will result in a maximum concentration of drifting benthos in makeup water. Because of the continuing redistribution by natural phenomena, the relatively small populations potentially available for entrainment under these conditions and the short term duration of heavy flood conditions, the impact of benthic entrainment at the STP site will be negligible. 5.1.3.1.4 Ichthyoplankton Ichthyoplankton (fish eggs and larvae) collected from the Colorado River near the STP site from June,,1973 to March, 1974 were examined to determine densities and species compo-sition with the..results being discussed in Section 2.7. To predict the potential loss of ichthyoplankton per year at the STP makeup facility on the Colorado River, the following assumptions were made:
- 1. -Ichthyoplankton densities are uniform throughout the sampling area in the vicinity of the site.
5.1-20
STP-ER
- 2. Species composition and species densities determined from the monthly samples are representative of the potential monthly entrainment.
- 3. Species composition and species densities for each month are constant throughout the pumping operations during that month.
- 4. The ichthyoplankton populations near the makeup are not being depleted but are constantly repopulated.
- 5. At makeup salinities between 0.0 and 1.5 0/oo, Ichthyoplankton data from station 2 are represen-tative of the species composition and species densities of the makeup water; at makeup salinities between 1.5 and 5.0 0/00, from the closest downriver station having a bottom salinity above 1.5 0/6o were chosen.
- 6. The standing crop per cubic foot is equal to the num-ber. of fish eggs. or larvae caught divided by the amount of water strained by the net. -
- 7. All fish 4.0 inches total length (TL) or less are subject to .entrainment. 9 1, 0
- 8. The numbers of fish eggs or larvae entrained is equal to the standing *crop in number per cubic foot 'multi-plied by the percent entrainable (percentage of larvae less than 4 inches). This figure was then multiplied by thye intake.volume in cubic f-eet.
Based on 10 months ,of. data collected during'the 1973-74, STP study, ,potential entrainment of ichthyoplankton by species is shown in Table 5.1-9. The two larval fish species most likely to be entrained are the.-Gulf menhaden, Brevoort-ia.patronus, (1,200,000 per year) and the Atlantic croaker, Micrbpogon undulatus, (700,000). Of the remaining potential entrainable species, only cyprinids and gobies may be taken in appreciable numbers. The above estimates are somewhat low, since they were based on 10 months of *data. Gulf menhaden, bUdy a-nchovies, and gobies may have higher yearly entrainment* valtues by' perhaps
-10 percent. The relatively few eggs subject.:to entrainment indicates that little 'or no'spawning o-ccurs near the' ST-P site.
.- To determine the total n.umber. of eggs :ant'lariae th'at may be entrained per year, monthly-standing crop estimates were made (see Table 5.1-10) and the mean of these monthly estimates was used to estimate entrainment values for April and May, the two months not i.s'ample-d as" yet d~tririgzthei" ST:P study (see Table 5.1-10). It is :estimated that :oVer-J2.6'million fish eggs and larvae may be entrained each year. Highest entrain-ment losses may occur during months of high pumping rates and high standing crop (November and February).
" .5.. 1-21
STP-ER Calculations were also made of the number of adults that could have been produced from the entrained ichthyoplankton (see Table 5.1-11). These estimates were calculated by determing average female fecundity and mortality rates between the egg and adult stages. 1 1 Fecundity estimates were available for some taxa, and were extrapolated for others. Information on mortality rates between eggs and adult stages is scarce. It is reported 1 2 that mackerel had a daily loss of 5 percent at the egg stage but a loss of 10 to 14 percent at the larval stage. Einselel1 found that~only 1 to 10 adults-will result from 10,000 naturally spawned coregonid eggs, and that sur-vival among larvae of many fishes is one in several thousand. It is postulated14 that in the course of a fish's life it belongs to three or more populations (larval, young and adolescent, and adult), and that each population has its own mortality rate. Using this approach, mortality rates were estimated for the egg to larval stage, and for the larval to adult stage. -For those species exhibiting little parental care and having a high fecundity, a 75 percent egg to larvae mortality was assigned. For those species exhibiting parental care and having a low fecundity, a mortality value of 25 percent was assigned. Mortality rates between larvae and adult were based on the fact that to maintain a stable population, one femalý must produce two fish. Accordingly, the number of surviving larvae was divided into two to obtain a percentage survival between larvae and adult stages.. This figure was multiplied by the number of larvae entrained to obtain the number of adults that would have been produced from those larvae lost by entrainment. It is estimated that over 1,900 adults of all species would have been produced from the estimated 2.6 million eggs and larvae lost annually by entrainment (see Table 5.1-12). Although the majority of the larvae expected to be entrained are of commercial- importance, few commercially important adults would have been produced from the entrained ichthyo-plankton. Over* 85 percent of the adults would probably have been in the families Cyprinidae and Gobiidae. The estimated number of larvae entrained yearly may be high since lifetime fecundity values were not used. Lack of information on the age structure -of important species makes using lifetime fecundity vales impractical at this time. The entrainment of fish eggs and larvae at the STP site will probably not affect fish populations in.the Colorado River
. .....- significantly. The low number of eggs taken near the site
-indicate-the lack of major spawning areas in that section of
. the river. Although the majority of the larval fish that might be subject to entrainement are of commercial importance,
-- ~ ~~:-the adult stock should not be significantly affected since relatively few adults would have been produced from those larvae lost. Local populations of ichthyoplankton near the STP site may be depressed, however the effect on the Colorado River ecosystem should be slight. 5.1-22
STP-ER ( 5.1.3.1.5 Effects of Impingement on Juvenile and Adult Fish, Shrimp, Crabs and Other Invertebrates Effects of operation of the STP makeup pumping facility on Juvenile and adult fish, shrimp, crabs and other inverte-brates in the Colorado River are discussed below. The most important design consideration for reducing fish impingement at. makeup structures is velocity through the travelling screens. Intake velocities are usually measured in two ways; approach velocity and net screen velocity. Approach velocity is the most common measurement and is the velocity in the screen channel mea-sured immediately upstream of the screen face. Net screen velocity is the velocity throu h the screen and is always higher than approach velocity. 1 5
,1 6 ,17,'18 These reviews indicate that in the past, intake structures have usually been designed solely on debris removal consider-ations and with little regard for alleviating fish impingement.
Typical net screen velocities have ranged from 2.0 to 3.0 fps which correlate to approach velocities of 0.8 to 1.1 fps or higher. As recently as 1971, many workers considered that an approach velocity of 1.5 fps would permit most fish to escape impingement. 7 However, a more recent theory of how to decrease fish impingement is to lower intake velocities to the point where all healthy fish can escape. 1 9 Selection of intake velocities should be based on swimmin' speed data of fishes at each particular site in question.'20 Fish swimming ability is a function of species, age, size, temperature and dissolved oxygen. Swimming speeds were found 2 l to double at temperature increases from 5 to 20 0 C. It is reported 9 that swimming speeds are generally directly proportional to body length with most fish having sustained speeds three to six times their body length. Swimming speed studies on fishes of the lower Colorado River Delta are rare. Indications are that most sunfish smaller than 4 inches can-not outswim a current of 0.55 fps. 1 0 The corresponding speed for 4 inch channel catfish is 1 fps. Channel catfish larger than 4 inches generally avoid or can outswim these currents. 1 0 A summary of intake design specifications, which will minimize impingement hazards, aids in evaluating the impact of STP intake operation on the aquatic ecosystem. Based on results of field studies presented earlier, incorporation of a 0.55
. fps approach velocity will reduce potential impingement~
effects considerably. Screens mounted flush with the 5.1-23
STP-ER shoreline and without protruding sidewalls will reduce lentrapment and fish concentrations, lessen the impact of eddy currents on the downstream side of the makeup structure, and allow organisms free passageway. The trash racks also permit open passage to the river. Incorporated in the intake design is a fish handling and bypass system which will return impinged organisms to the river downstream of the intake structure. Reduced makeup water intake during late spring, summer, and early fall months will minimize impingement of young-of-the year freshwater species. The use of upper strata river water as makeup, will reduce the potential for entrapment of estuarine organisms found in the lower strata salt wedge. Determination of the potential effects of the proposed STP makeup water intake design and operation on subadult and adult macrocrustaceans and fishes, is based on impingement estimates calculated from trawl data collected near the STP site during 1973 and 1974. Estimates of standing crop per cubic foot of water were extrapolated to yield annual number and weight of impinged organisms. The procedure and assump-tions used in calculating impingement totals are as follows:
- 1. Species present in monthly trawl samples and estimates of standing crop by month at the STP intake site based on trawl data are representative of potential aver-age monthly impingement. Estimates are based on June, August and October, 1973, data presented in Section 2.7 and on July, September and November, 1973, through March, 1974, data subsequently analyzed in part for the purpose of this Section.
- 2. No trawl catch data are available for estimation of standing crops in April or May. Estimated standing crops for these months are thus based on average values from the remaining 10 months (January through March 1974, and June through December 1973).
S3. At intake salinities between 0.0 and 1.5 °/oo, trawl catch data from station 2 are indicative of average standing crops of the intake water in terms of species present, numbers of individuals and biomass. At intake salinities ranging between 1.5 and 5.0 /oo, standing crop estimates for a given month are based on trawl catch data from the nearest downriver station (3, 4, 5 or 10) having a bottom salinity greater" than 1.5 0/00.
- 4. Fish and crustacean species are equally distributed as to number and weight throughout the water column in the intake area.
- 5. Estimated s-tanding crop and impingement for each month are constant throughout pumping operations during that 5.1-24
STP-ER month, the area near the intake structure not being de-pleted but constantly repopulated.
- 6. Number or pounds of fish impinged is equal to the standing crop in number or pounds per cubic foot mul-tiplied by the percent of the standing crop estimate that is available to impingement multiplied by the volume of intake in cubic feet.
- 7. Standing crop per cubic foot is equal to the number or pounds of fish in a trawl sample divided by the estimated average volume of water sampled by the trawl.
- 8. The percent of the standing crop susceptible of impinge-ment is equal to the number or pounds of fish in the trawl sample susceptible to impingement divided by the total number or pounds of fish. All fish 4.o inches in total length or less and all crustaceans present in standing crop estimates are subject to impingement.
- 9. The estimated average volume of water sampled by the trawl, during the collection of one sample, equals 87,280 cubic feet.
Monthly average intake volumes in cubic feet for projected salinity ranges of 0.0-1.5 0/oo are given in Table 5.1-13. Months with maximum and minimum impingement potentials (based on intake volume) are February (5.01 x 108 ft 3 at 0.0-1.5 and 1.98 x 107 ft 3 at 1.5-5.0 O/oo) 0/oo and August (zero intake at both salinity ranges), respectively. Species contributing to monthly standing crop estimates and the percent of standing crop subject to impingement based on trawl data are presented in Tables 5.1-14 and 5.1-15. Approxi-mately 96 percent of the total number (i.e., fish 4.0 inches long or less) and 24 percent of the total weight of trawled organisms are considered susceptible to impingement. Table 5.1-16 presents an example for monthly estimates of standing crop and impingement totals (number and weight) of river shrimp. Similar estimates were prepared for those species of commercial and forage importance, and are summarized in Table 5.1-17. Combined species estimates indicated that 6.25 million crustaceans and fishes totalling about 16,100 pounds will be subject to impingement per year. These weight totals represent less than 0.03 percent of the annual harvestable fish and crustacean catch (70,091,000 pounds) estimated to be produced in the lower ColoradoRiver and Matagorida Bay areas.22 5.'.:l - 2 5
STP-ER Species of commercial and forage importance constitute 99.3 percent and 98.6 percent of the impinged number and weight totals, respectively. Species with highest annual impinge-ment totals include the white shrimp (33,200 individuals weighing 77 pounds), river shrimp (2,916,000 individuals weighing 6,375 pounds), Gulf menhaden (261,260 individuals weighing 901 pounds), bay anchovy (207,680 individuals weigh-ing 168 pounds), blue catfish (246,580 individuals weighing 6,890 pounds), and Atlantic croaker (2,508,000 individuals weighing 793 pounds). Impingement totals for commercial species near the STP site constitute less than 0.1 percent of the annual Texas-commercial finfish and shellfish landings. Since a majority of the individuals subject to impingement generally are considered too small for commercial harvest, the above comparisons may not present a true picture of the impact of STP impingement upon finfish and shellfish stocks of the lower Colorado River and Gulf of Mexico. However, compari-son of these estimated impingement totals with the standing crops of zero-year-class and one-year-class fishes and crus-taceans necessary to produce harvestable, adult populations indicates that potential impingement losses at the STP site will have no substantial effect on standing stocks of fishes and cqustaceans in the Colorado River Delta. Therefore, the STP intake design and operation will produce negligible impact on the aquatic fauna of the Colorado River and Gulf of Mexico. 5.1.3.2 Effects of Blowdown.Operations on the Colorado River The STP discharge facility has been designed to preclude the existence of significant volumes of Colorado River receiving waters with elevated temperatures. Rapid dissipation of max-imum AT during summer (6.1'F) and winter (6.90F) will reduce the potential impact of blowdown upon the aquatic biota. Maximum impact from blowdown should be limited to receiving waters experiencing a AT above 2.0%F. However, temperatures greater than 2.0 0 F above ambient will exist only a relatively short distance downstream (<30 ft) from each diffuser and will not form an effective barrier to fish and crustacean migra-tion. 5.1.3.2.1 Effects on Primary Producers Some thermal stimulation of phytoplankton growth and reproduc-tion in the area Of the Colorado River affected by blowdown is expected during winter. Thermal depression of productivity rates in the Colorado River during summer may occur for short distances, butlwill be minimal. A shift in phytoplankton community structure due to thermal effects is not anticipated for the Colorado River. i.126
5.1-3.2.2 Effects on Zooplankton There will be a potential for increased productivity of zoo-plankton in the area of the Colorado River affected by blow-down due to thermal and nutrient enrichment. However, any increase in zooplankton productivity in the river is expected to be slight due to the intermittent nature of blowdown. Blowdown-induced salinity changes in the Colorado River are not expected to produce a change in zooplankton community structure. A considerable variation in salinity occurs naturally, resulting only in temporary range extensions for a few species. 5.1.3.2.3 Effects on Benthos A potential mode of impact on the benthic infaunal community involves the interaction between intermittent blowdown and Colorado River benthos in the vicinity of the discharge facil-ity. Possible detrimental effects are related to increased temperatures and scouring as a result of the multiport dif-fuser. Maximum projected AT at the point of blowdown is 6.90F and is not expected to affect benthic organisms. Rapid dis-persion of blowdown water and loss of temperature will result in a low AT downstream from the blowdown facility. *Effe6ts of scouring due to blowdown is precluded by natural scouring as a result of river flow. Blowdown will not occur at river flows below 800 cfs, a level at which natural scouring will be in effect. 5.1.3.2.4 Ichthyoplankton The STP blowdown should have little effect on the abundance or distribution of ichthyoplankton in the Colorado River. No eggs or yolk sac larvae were taken near the discharge site during field sampling, and apparently little or no spawning occurs in this section of the river. Larvae taken near the
- site were probably spawned above or below the site. These larvae are probably motile enough to avoid the higher AT's near the discharge, and the impact on larvae may be similar to that discussed for adult fish.
5.1.3.2.5 Effects on Fish and Crustaceans Data on preferred, upper tolerance, lower lethal, and/or avoidance temperatures for ,some of the fishes and crustac-eans known to occur in the lower Colorado River are found in Table 5.1-18. Low AT, infrequency of blowdown, relatively high preferred and avoidance temperatures exhibited by these organisms, and the ability~hf these motile organismstAo0 avoid any potentially lethal temperature by going under or-around the discharge plume indicates that STP discharge operations will have no significant impact on fishes and crustaceans`
STP-ER during summer conditions. In addition, laboratory experi-ments and field observations have shown that sudden increases in temperature up to lo0 C caused by intermittent discharge, similar to that designed for the STP site, are effective in driving fish away from thermal plumes. 2 3 Some fishes and crustaceans will probably be attracted to the discharge plume, particularly during the colder months. How-ever, the rapid deterioration of discharge temperatures, the intermittent nature of.discharging, and the small area affected by temperatures greater than 2 0 F above ambient will prevent blowdown from having any significant, adverse impact on fishes and crustaceans. Generally, temperature different-ials between discharge and Colorado River waters will not be high enough or sustained over long enough periods to cause these organisms to become acclimated, to become physiologi-cally incapable of leaving the area for adjacent waters of cooler temperature, or to induce premature spawning. Most fish in the Colorado River receiving waters near the discharge will be subjected only to a 20F or lower rise above ambient and should experience little or no increase in incidence of disease. Discharge velocity and the associated turbulence will not be sufficient to supersaturate the receiv-ing *waters to a point where gas bubble disease is induced. The majority of temperature differentials experienced in STP receiving waters will not be great enough to significantly alter metabolic rates of fishes and crustaceans and, in turn, should cause no significant weight loss or reduction in con-dition of or enhance the uptake of pollutants by these organisms. 5.1.3.3 Effects in Reservoir and Condensers In Section 5.1.3.1 it was conservatively assumed that all entrained organisms are lost from the Colorado River biota. Actually, the entrained organisms will be passed to the 7,000-acre cooling water reservoir, which will provide a new habitat which should support abundant aquatic life. Fluctuating salini-ties will dictate whether freshwater and/or estuarine-dependent species inhabit the reservoir. Effects of the reservoir and passage of organisms through the plant condensers are discussed below. 5.1.3.3.1 Effects on Primary Producers exper-Phytoplankton entrained in the condenser intake will from pump turbulence and physical ience mec-h-anical disruption At abrasion when passing through the condenser system. present the amount of mechanical damage is difficult to although smaller phytoplankton species are less quanti-fy' likely to be injured.Losses due4 -to mechanical damage have been estimated at 15 percent.? 5.1-28
STP-ER Entrained phytoplankton will experience thermal damage in the condensers, particularly during the summer months. In general, lethal temperatures range from 91OF to 1130F for many species of algae. 2 5 Diatoms, which tend to be the most ther-mally sensitive group of algae and in general prefer cooler waters, can withstand only limited temperature increases up to approximately 180F above ambient. Green algae, as a group, are somewhat more adaptable to thermal change and have toler-ances covering a broad range of temperatures. The blue-green algae are the most tolerant to thermal change and to high ambient temperatures. Certain blue-green species have been 6 observed in hot springs at temperatures up to 1670F.2 Cairns 2 7 presented an idealized graph of the relative perfor-mances of these groups at different temperatures. Thermal stimulation of growth and reproduction of algal cells may occur in the discharge plume within the cooling water reservoir. Increases in water temperature have the potential for increasing the rate of photosynthetic activity during cooler seasons of the year and inhibiting the photosynthetic rate during warmer seasons, especially summer. Warriner and Brehmer2 8 studied the response of phytoplankton in the York. River, Virginia, to passage through condensers. They deter-mined that temperature rises increased the productivity of winter communities andlincreases of 6.3%F or more depressed the productivity of communities in July and August. Morgan and Stross2 9 found similar results in the Patuxent estuary. Phytoplankton photosysthesis was stimulated by 14.4 0 F increases; when ambient temperatures exceeded 68 0 F, this temperature rise inhibited photosynthesis. Principal factors expected to influence algal growth in the reservoir are temperature, nutrient availability, rate of light attenuation, and detention time of water within the reservoir. 27 Cairns has presented an idealized representation of the response of algal populations to increased temperature. In E-12 general, diatoms are predominant in a community at temperatures below 85%F, green algae become most abundant in the range 85 to 95%F, and blue-green algae dominate a community at temper-atures above 95%F. Table 5.1-18a presents predicted temperature means at the circulating water discharge. During the period 2 April through October, temperatures in the immediate vicinity of the circulating water discharge are expected to stimulate growth of blue-green algae. Nutrient loading in the reservoir is expected from two primary sources: leaching from soils in the-reservoir bed during filling, and nutrients present as dissolved minerals in makeup water. Additional in-plant, sources of nutrjients, principally phosphate, are described in Section 5.4.4 of.the STP-ER.' Concentration of ortho-phosphate, as P, based upon' mea'nvalues determined for water samples collected at station 2 (locatded 5.1-29 Amendment 2
in the vicinity of the location of the intake structure), is 0.09 ppm. The concentration of nitrate plus nitrite, as N, based upon mean values determined for similar samples collected at station 2, is 1.06 ppm. Concentration effects within the cooling reservoir (Section 3.4) aýre expected to raise levels of soluble phosphorus and inorganic nitrogen to 0.27 and 3.18 ppm, respectively. Vollenweider 7 1 , in a study of nutrient loadings of natural lakes, reported that nuisance growth of algae occurs at phosphorus concentrations greater than 0.2 ppm and nitrogen concentrations greater than 3.0 ppm. The siltation basin incorporated into the proposed makeup water intake design will provide a quiescent area in which setteable sediments conveyed by the makeup water can settle E-12 out. Thus, the cooling reservoir may be less turbid than similar Texas impoundments. Decreased turbidity may result in increased algal productivity through extension of the euphotic zone. Figure 3.4-14 shows that during summer months blowdown occurs 2 at reduced frequency with no blowdown during August. During such periods of reduced blowdown frequency, which coincides with maximum blue-green algae abundance, the reservoir may function as an effective nutrient trap. Figure 3.4-17 shows that under extreme drought conditions a period of several years may occur in which there is no blowdown discharge. The reservoir thus will operate as a closed-system with essentially little or no outflow for extended periods of time. In summary, it is assumed that a probability exists that phytoplankton densities will occur in the cooling reservoir, and during the period of April through October, the dominant component of this community will be blue-green species. How-ever, a plankton community of this type will not affect the performance capability of the reservoir as a heat-sink. Loss of aesthetic quality due to discoloration is of little conse-quence as no recreational usage is planned for this reservoir. 5.1.3.3.2 Effects on Zooplankton Effects on zooplankton include the following:
- 1. thermal stress from rapid temperature increases during passage through the co.ndenser;
- 2. the potential for increased productivity of zoo-plankton-in the area of discharge into the cooling water reservoir.
Numerous references discuss the effects of entrainment on zooplankton communities, although few have been able to distinguish between mechanical thermal, arid chemical in-hibitory effects. Whitehouse3 6 studied a cooling pond used by a nuclear power plant and found no change in composition, 2 5.1- 9a Amendment 2
\_ abundance, or timing of periods of increase or decrease in zooplankton concentrations that could be attributed to ther-31 mal discharge. Youngs found that 19 percent of the Cayuga Lake zooplankton were killed after passage through a cooling system that raised temperatures from 50 0 F up to 77 0 F. Zooplankton have been shown to adjust to temperature changes 5: 1 Amendment 2
STP-ER within their range of tolerance by altering various metabolic functions. i7 Similar studies 32,33,34 suggest that mortality rates may exceed 80 percent when ambient temperatures are elevated above 98.6 0 F (37 0 C). During warmer months (May through September), zooplankton mortality, attributable to thermal effects in the condenser system and the area of the cooling water reservoir affected by condenser discharge may approach 100 percent. Studies of the Paradise Power Plant 35 indicate that acceler-ated rates of reproduction of zooplankton organisms occurred in areas marginally affected by heated effluents. Thermal acceleration of zooplankton reproductive rates may occur in a large portion of the cooling water reservoir. 5.1.3.3.3 Effects on Benthos Effects of plant operation on benthic populations of the cooling water reservoir which become established during the three-year filling period are expected to be negligible. Expected AT values will not result in thermal stress of benthic organisms except in the immediate vicinity of conden-ser discharge outfall into *the reservoir. Similar effects were observed3 6 in the 2, 6 00-acre brackish water cooling pond of the Cedar Bayou Electric Power Station near TrinitU Bay, Texas. Depressed diversity and abundance were noted3 where the heated discharge entered the reservoir as compared to high diversity and abundance in other areas of the reservoir. The benthic fauna was found3 6 to be dominated by polychaetes molluscs, chironomids, and amphipods. Most forms observed6 also occur in brackish water areas of the STP study area. These forms are tolerant of very low salinity waters as projected for the STP cooling water reservoir and are expected to contribute in large part to the benthic fauna during operation. 5.1.3-3.4 Effects on Fish and Crustaceans The impact of condenser cooling water discharge upon fishes and crustaceans in the 7,000-acre reservoir will be minimal. As shown in Figure 3.4-18 thermal conditions in reservoir areas outside the immediate vicinity of condenser discharge are not greatly different from those in the Colorado River. The large area and depth of the reservoir should provide areas of refuge from most elevated temperatures during the summer, areas of more favorable, warmer temperatures in the winter, and areas for spawning of freshwater fishes and crustaceans in the spring. The similarity between temper-at ures-in most parts of -the reservoir and ambient river temperatures should negate any thermally induced effects of 'pollutants, -incre.easd incidec6e of disease, loss of weight or reduction in condition, or extensive, premature spawning by freshwater 'fishes and crstatceans. 5 3.0O
STP-ER 5.1.3.4 Discussion of Effects on Aquatic Organisms The effects on aquatic organisms resulting from operation of the heat dissipation system as described above are not of sufficient magnitude to produce discernible changes in popu-
.lations in the Colorado River or adjacent waters. Impinge-ment and entrainment associated with the STP makeup water pumping station located on the Colorado River will have the greatest impact of all potential sources. However, loss of organisms through impingement and entrainment has been mini-mized by intake design and plan of operation and will be of such low magnitude that the aquatic biota in the immediate area of the STP site will exhibit only negligible effects.
This is because the Colorado River near the STP site is a transition zone, fluctuating between fresh and estuarine conditions. The zone is characterized by lower diversity and numbers of organisms than either freshwater or estuarine portions of the river. The relative effect of entrainment and impingement at the STP site is difficult to quantify because populations of.many
- species (estuarine-marine).oc,curing at the STP site are-not confined to the Colorado River-but occur throughout much' of
. the. Gulf of Mexico. Thus, estimation of total populations for comparison would.be impossible. In general,., estimat es of
.impingement and entrainment presented above would haye a minute relative effect, even when compared to total popula-tions of the Colorado River-Matagorda. Bay .system.....
Operation of the cooling. waýter reserv'oir will haVe l`ittle impact on the aquatic biota of the Colorado River' beyond the impact associated with the makeup-water pumpi:.ng stat.ion. This is because organisms affected by pon'd operation were previously sconsidered lost from rive.r populations through-entrainment and thus, are not additive. Under the projected hydrological conditions for t~he cool'ing water reservoir, a large .-por-tion of the reservoir will be suitable for rapid.gro.w.th .and reproduction of aquatic. o rgan-isms and will support lar-ge,.p~opulations... Although the dooling water intake structure and ;c~ondenser discharge will ,exe~rt a continuous detrimental effect. on aquatic life of tthe r eservoir, reservoir populations will be sufficiently large enough to readily-absorb these pot~ential losses.- The reservoir will be
-. *51-31
STP-ER supplied with a constant source of nutrients and will probably act to some. extent as a nursery area for many estuarine species, with emigration occurring during blowdown operations. Release of reservoir water into the spillway will be infrequent. Based on operational constraints outlined in Section 3.4, spill-way release during a 23-year period from 1949 through 1971 would have occurred 0.18% of the time or one day out of 560 days. Hence, subjecting of aquatic organisms to thermal shock or cold shock would occur infrequently. The chance for development of a resident population of fishes or other motile aquatic organisms in the spillway and stilling basin is small. Normally there will be. no Colorado River water in the stilling basin. Water found in the stilling basin generally will E-1 be groundwater which has entered the basin through seepage and attained a. level equal to that of the groundwater table. The infrequency of spillway release and those flood periods during which Colorado River water may enter the stilling basin greatly 2 reduces the chances for resident aquatic populations to develop in the spillway and associated basins. Entry of aquatic life from the Colorado River directly into the stilling basin can occur only during flood conditions. However, flooding of the Colorado River pushes the salt wedge and asso-ciated oroganisms from the area into the lower reaches of the estuary and into the Gulf of Mexico, and thereby reduces the probability that estuarine organisms enter the spillway basin. Freshwater organisms are discouraged from entering the stilling basin by the velocity of the flows associated with spillway release. Water being released from the reservoir will be travel-ling at 60 fps upon entry into the spillway channel, 6 fps upon entry into the stilling basin, and 2.5 fps upon entry into the discharge channel. The majority of organisms entering the spill-way structure from the reservoir will be swept by these high-velocity flows into the Colorado River. A survey by Tilton7 2 of 210 Job Completion Reports entitled "Pollution studies in fish population determinations", authored by Texas Parks and Wildlife Department aquatic biologists, has E-13 shown no increased incidence in noxious vegetation or algal growths resulting from thermal additions into 30 Texas reser-voirs. These reports also show no reduction in fish condition, angler use or aesthetic qualities due to algal blooms in Texas - reservoir. Fruh7 3 1hasý 6nducted extensive limnological research in Texas Lakes and reports that data on eutrophication experience do not exist fo'r these impoundments. This pronounced lack of data would seem to support the fact that eutrophication does not present a problem in Texas impoundments. 5.1-32 Amendment 2
STP-ER Environmental effects in the Colorado River and adjacent waters resulting from blowdown will be negligible. The multiport blow-down design will affect rapid mixing of blowdown water with Colorado River water resulting in rapid heat loss and a small mixing zone. Generally, blowdown will result in a slight increase in ambient temperatures and salinity downstream, with the effect decreasing with distance (Section 5.1.1). Projected salinity and temperature changes due to blowdown are not expected to have significant effects on aquatic organisms either at the point of blowdown or in the Colorado River between the blowdown structure and Gulf of Mexico. Likewise, blowdown operations will have no effect on aquatic life in the adjacent bay systems or in the Gulf of Mexico. Overall, detrimental effects on the aquatic ecology of the Colorado River due to operation of the STP heat-dissipation sys-tem with controlled'makeup and blowdown of the cooling water reservoir will be negligibl-e and restricted to the portion of the river near the STP site. There should be no effect on parent stocks or availability of harvestable size individuals of commer-cial or sport-fishery species. No effects are expected upstream from the plant site, in the lower Colorado River, in Matagorda or East Matagorda Bays, in the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway or in the Gulf of Mexico. 5 .1-32a Amendment 2
STP-EE 5.1.4 EFFECT ON GROUNDWATER A description of the hydrogeology of the plant area is given in Section 2.5.2.2. In general, the groundwater regime con-sists of a deep aquifer zone located at a depth of approxi-mately 275 feet and a shallow aquifer zone located above approximately 90 feet. The deep zone is confined under artesian pressure by a thick (more than 150 feet) confining or aquiclude zone of predominantly clay sediments. The aquifer recharge area is far removed, at higher elevations where the aquifers crop out at the surface. This artesian zone, the region's only important source of usable ground-water (see Section 2.2), is therefore sealed from surface or cooling-reservoir seepage in the site area. In view of these conditions, the deep-zone aquifers will not be affected by heat-dissipation-system operation. Groundwater in- the shallow zone flows southeasterly from the plant site, to the Colorado River and possibly to Matagorda Bay. Existing water quality is known to be marginal to poor in intervening areas (see Section 2.5.2). Test holes show that this condition prevails in the site area also. Shallow wells are rarely employed for any use except occasional dom-estic and stock watering anywhere in the region; only one shallow (107 feet deep with screens between 104 and 107 feet), low-production wel-l is reported to be in present use downstream of the site. Considering water quality and quan-tity limitations of this zone, there is very low probability of any new use of shallow water in the general area and downstream from the site. 5.1.4.1 Modification of,Water Table Position Based on the following discussions, it is shown that the reservoir seepage will flow vertically in the shallow aquifer displacing, in a pistonlike fashion, the groundwater ahead and that no change will take place in the position of the water table except immediately under the reservoir. The -seepage of water from the cooling reservoir is estimated to be at about 2 cubic feet per second (1,448 acre-ft/yr) under steady-state condition. Several models (see Appendix 6.1-C) designed to determine the type of flow emanating from the STP cooling reservoir, have indicated that such a flow is essentially vertical in the unsaturated zone and upper shallow aquifer zone. The seepage flow will first--saturate the unsaturated four feet-of forma-tion before meeting the groundwater level. When this happens two possibilities must be considered: either the reservoir water will move la-terally- (parallel to water table) -or it will flow vertically displacing the groundwater ahead of it. If the first alternative takes place, the reservoir 5.1-33
STP-ER water will move laterally four a certain distance before .
- gravity pulls the flow vertically. Moreover, the perme-ability of the underlying sandy silt is 100 times greater than the permeability of the silty clay harboring the piezo-metric level. (See Section 2.5). Thus, in either case the flow would be vertical in these strata.
Other evidence to support the theory of vertical flow exists. Field tests conducted on wells bottomed in the upper aquifer reveal the existence of vertical fluid migr~ation before the emplacement of the cooling reservoir. After juxtaposing the gradient of a head of water (equal to approximately 20 feet), the vertical flow would be more accentuated.- A third reason supporting the theory of vertical flow may be that, if the flow is vertical, the displaced fluid will be chan-neled to the lower Colorado River via a 20-foot section of fine sand about 10,000 times more permeable than the bed of silty clay lying below the pond. If the flow were to be considered horizontal, a permeability of 10-7 cm/sec would have to be sufficient to channel the flow-which is obviously not the case. Withdrawal of potable and service waters from the deep aquifer zone (see Section 5.7.2) will not affect the cooling-reservoir seepage nor the shallow aquifer water level because of the thick confining layer separating the shallow- and deep-aquifer zones. 5.1.4.2 Infiltration Into The Groundwater System The results presented below indicate that reservoir water will invade the upper parts of the shallow aquifer before it is channeled to the Colorado River in a southeasterly direction. It should be noted that all water used for human consumption comes from the strata constituting the lower aquifer. As described in Section 3.4, the water elevation in the reservoir will assume a different value during each month throughout the plant life. For any one year, it is found that the difference between the highest and the lowest ele-vations is of the order of 5 percent. Because of the slight effect of water elevation on the dispersion phenomenon, it was deemed advisable to use one value for the average water head for a full year. ,Using the value for the first year, the water encroachment into the dry soil was evaluated.. followed by the resulting dispersion after the front reached the groundwater system. The advance of the water front in the unsaturated formation was determined by th6 following expression: 5.l-34
STP-ER t f K L -P) in w (I) w w w Hw Pw where: t t ime f porosity K hydraulic conductivity Lw depth of water penetration at time t Hw depth of water in reservoir PW capillary rise in silty clay layer The derivation of this formula is given in Appendix 6.1-C. The first year of dispersion was determined by the following partial differential equation: ac+ v DC __c - D(2) 2C
ý_t + V x x *-x-2'(2 The solution of this equation for a constant velocity v and a constant initial value C is:
0 C/C- = 01/2 erfc 2 Xvt (D t) T27)xp + exp erfc ) ((t D 2 (D t) where: C = initial concentration 0 C = concentration at time t x = is spatial coordinate v = the velocity of flow D = the dispersion coefficient t = time Because this formula applies only when the velocity and the boundary condition are constant, it was used to calculate the concentration distribution of the total dissolved solids for the first year of operation. In Figure 5.1-42, which shows the contaminant co.ncentration vs depth.-.
.
- - 5
STP-ER distribution, this curve is labeled H = 25.96, year 1. Because of the constraints imposed in obtaining the solution of equation 2, equation 3 was not used to calculate any other concentration distribution. Instead, the partial differen-tial equation was written in the following difference form: AC = At vL- + D A2xc (4) To calculate the -concentration distribution at year two for Hw = 24.93, the average velocity was calculated for the depths 2, 3 and 4 feet. The concentration distribution at year one was u ed to evaluate the slope and the curvature: AC/Ax and A 2 C/ x . Replacing these and other terms by the appropriate values, AC was calculated for many of the points on the curve for year one (Hw = 25.96). In this manner, the entire concentration distribution corresponding to year two (Hw = 24.93) was obtained. This water head is the average of 12 monthly readings for the second year of operation. All other concentration distributions corresponding to '60 years* of dispersion have been calculated and shown in Figure 5.1-42. As can be seen on this graph, the inter-section of these curves with the x-axis gives the positions of the dispersion front at various times. For example, a half-year after dilution begins, the dispersion front reaches -a depth of two feet. After five years and for the conditions assumed in the solution of the problem, the dispersion front will have penetrated 7.5 feet. Between the depths of 2 and 19 feet below the piezometric level lies a stratum of sandy silt. Therefore, the dilution phenomenon will take place in the sandy silt stratum be-tween the second and twenty-seventh years. After 27 years of dilution, the dispersion front will reach the top of the fine sand located 23 feet below the ground surface. From this point on., the dispersion moves hori-zontally in the stratum of fine sand with a constant velo-city of 5 x 10 ft/sec. The flow will occur in a south-easterly direction paralleli't'o the regional migration in the upper aquifer. The concentration of total .dissolved solids in the fine sand will be approximately fifty percent of the original value 60 years after the seepage front meets the water table. The i-ncrease in concentration in the Ilayer of fine'-sand will o'c~cur very slowly beyond.the median value of fifty.' percent. t However, if t he concent-ration of total diss61ved so loids is held constant. fifty.percent of the original
- 5.-13-i- 36
STP-ER ( value and for a velocity of 5 x 10-6 ft/sec, it is estimated that the dilution front will reach well number 42 (see Sec-tion 2.2) 185 years after dispersion begins. Well 42 is located 3.5 miles from the geographic center of the pond measured in a direction parallel to the regional flow and is the closest existing groundwater use. Flow from the reservoir will reach some parts of the Colorado River sooner than well number 42 (approximately 150 years), on account of the shorter distance to the river. 5 1-37
STP-ER REFERENCES 5.1-1 Bryan, C.E., February 28, 1974; Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, letter to K.A. Wood. 5.1-2 Pritchard, D.W. and H.H. Carter, April 1972; Design and Siting Criteria for Once-Through Cooling Systems Based on A First Order Thermal Plume Model; AEC Document No. COO-3062-3, p. 6. 5.1-3 Pritchard, D.W. and H.H. Carter, April 1972; Design and Siting Criteria for Once-Through Cooling Systems Based on a First Order Thermal Plume Model; AEC Document No. COO-3062-3, p. 7. 5.1-4 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1972; Local Climatological Data, Victoria, Texas, U.S. Department of Commerce. 5.1-5 Texas Water Quality Standards, October 1973, p. 14. 5.1-6 Texas Water Quality Standards, October 1973, p. 9. 5.1-7k Vollenveider, R.A., 1969; Primary Production in Aquatic Environments;'-Blackwell Scientific Publications, Edinburg., Scotland. 5.1-8 McNaught, D.C., 1972; The Potential Effects of Condenser Passage on the Entrained Zooplankton
- at Zion Station; Presented at Lake Michigan
>-Enforcement Conference, Chicago, Illinois.
5.1-9 Bainbridge, R., 1958; "Speed and stamina in three fish"; J. Exp. Biol. 37(1): pp. 129-153. 5.1-10 King, L.R., 1969; "Swimming speed of the channel
. catfish, white crappie and other warm water fishes from Conowingo Reservoir, Susquehanna River, Pa."; Ichthyological Associates Bulletin 4: pp. 1-7h.
5.1-11 Carlander, K.D., 1969; "Handbook of freshwater fishery biology"; The Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames, Iowa, p. 752. 5.1-12 S`ette, O.E., 1943; "Biology of the Atlantic
-- mackerel (Scomber scombrus) of North America,
-P"ar t I, Early -life history"; U.S. Fish Wildl.
.~Serv., Fish. Full., 50(38): pp. 149-237.
5 .1- 42
STP-ER REFERENCES (Continued) 5.1-13 Einsele, W., 1965; "Problems of fish-larvae sur-vival in nature and the rearing of economi-cally important middle European freshwater fishes"; Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest., Rept. 10: pp. 24-30. 5.1-14 Hempel, G., 1965; "On the importance of larval survival for the population dynamics of marine food fish"; Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest., Rept. 10: pp. 13-23. 5.1-15 Ebasco Services Incorporated, 1972; "Ce-dar Bayou Unit 3 intake design study"; Ebasco Services Incorporated for Houston Lighting and Power Company, p. .32. 5.1-16 Moore, R. E., 1972; "Survey of large volume intake system velocities and fish swimming speeds in the Great Lakes"; C.W. Rice Division, NUS Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pa., Submitted to the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, Cleveland, Ohio, Contract No. 2065, p. 27. 5.1-17 Maxwell, W.A., 1973; "Fish diversion for elec-trical generating station cooling systems - a state-of-the-art report for Florida Power and Light Company"; NUS Corporation, Southern Nuclear Department, Engineering Consulting Division, p. 78. 5.1-18 Sonnichsen, J.C., Jr., Bentley, B.W., Bailey, G.F., and Nakatani, R.E., 1973; "A review of ther-mal power plant intake structure designs and related environmental considerations"; Hanford Engineering Development Laboratory, Richland, Washington, Prepared for the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Contract No. AT(45-l)-2170, p. 93. 5.1-19 Quirk, Lawler and Matusky Engineers, 1973; "Astoria impingement study for Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc."; Q, L and M Project No. 115-16, Tappan, New York, p. 75. 5.1-20 U.S. Environmental Pr'otection Agency, 1973; "Cooling Water Intake Structures"; Federal Register,-Vol. 38, No. 239, Part II. 5.1-21 Clay, C.H., 1961; "Design of fishways and other fish facilities"; Dep. Fish. Canada, Ottawa,
Canada, p. 301.
5.1-.43
STP-ER (* REFERENCES (Continued) 5.1-22 Krummes, W.T., 1967; Interim Report on. Colorado River and Tributaries, Texas - Mouth of Colorado River; Appendix III, Dept. of the Army, Galveston District, Corps of Engineers, Galveston, Texas, p. 149. 5.1-23 Coutant, C.C., 1970; Biological Aspects of Thermal Pollution.I. Entrainment and Discharge Canal Effects; CRC Critical Reviews in Environ-mental Control, 1(3): pp. 341-381. 5.1"-24 Ayers, J.C., Anderson, R.F., O'Hara, N.W., and Kidd, C.C., 1970; "Benton Harbor Power Plant Limnological Studies"; Part IV, Cook Plant Preoperational Studies 1969, Special Report No. *44, Great Lakes Research Division. 5.1-25 Patrick, R., 1969; Some Effects of Temperature on Freshwater Algae; In, Biological Aspects of Thermal Pollution, Krenkel, P.A. and Parker, F.L. (Ed.), Vanderbilt Univ. Press. 5.1-26 Patrick, R., 1971; The Effects of Increasing Light and Temperature on the Structure of Diatom Communities; Limnology and Oceanography, Vol. 16, pp. 405-421. 5.1-27 Cairns, J., 1956; Effects of Increased Temper-atures on Aquatic Organisms; Ind. Wastes, Vol. 1, pp. 150-152. 5.1-28 Warriner, J.E. and Brehmer, M.L., 1966; The Effects of Thermal Effluents on Marine Organisms; International Journal Air and Water Pollution, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 277-289. 5.1-29 Morgan, R.P. and Stross, R.G., 1969; Destruction of Phytoplankton in the Cooling Supply of a Steam Electric Station; Chesapeake Science, Vol. 10, pp. 165-172. 5.1-30 Whitehouse, J.W., 1971; Some Aspects of the
- Biology of Lake Trawsfynydd: A Power Station Cooling Pond.; Hydrobiologia, Vol. 38, No. 2, pp. 253-288.
5-.l-32 Youngs, W.D., 1969; Milliken Station Studies; In, Ecology of Cayuga Lake and the Proposed Bell Station (Nuclear Powered), Oglesby, R.T., and Allee, D.J. (Ed.), Publ. No. 27, Water Resources and Marine Sciences Center, Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N.Y., pp. 315-386. 5 . s-44
STP-ER REFERENCES 4 (Continued) 5.1-32 Churchill, M.A. and WoJtalik, T.A., 1969; Effects of Heated Discharges: The T.V.A. Experience; Nuclear News, pp. 80-86. 5.1-33 Normandeau, D.A., 1970; The Effects of Thermal Releases on the Ecology of the Merrimack River; In, A Report to Public Service Company of New Hampshire, Institute Res. Services St. Auselin's College, New Hampshire, pp. 199-210. 5.1-34 Badger, R.G. and Roessler, M.A., 1971; Zooplankton, In, An Ecological Study of South Biscayne Bay and Card Sound; Progress Report to U.S. Atomic Energy Commission and Florida Power and Light Co., Univ. of Miami, pp. 1-29. 5.1-35 Welch, E.G., 1969; Ecological Changes from Waste Heat; In, Engineering Aspects of Thermal Pollution, Parker, F.L. and Krenkel, P.A. (Ed.), Vanderbilt Univ; Press, pp. 58-71. 5.1-3ý Personal Communication from M.J. Poff to G.E. Williams, NUS Corp., 1974. 5.1-37 Baxter, J.L., 1967; Summary of biological infor-mation on the northern anchovy; Engraulis mordax Girard, Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest., Rept. (11): pp. 110-116. 5.1-38 Hayasi, S., 1967; A note on the biology and fish-ery of the Japanese anchovy; Engraulis japonica (Houttuyn), Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest., Rept. (11): pp. 44-57. 5.1-39 Dz de Ciechomski, J., 1967; Present state of the investigations on the Argentine anchovy; Engraulis anchoita (Hubbs, Marini), Calif. Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest., Rept. (11): pp. 58-66. 5.1-O4 Mansueti, A.J. and Hardy, J.D., 1967; Development of fishes of the Chesapeake Bay region, An atlas of egg, larvae, and-juvenile stages; Part I, Port-City Press, Baltimore, p. 202. 5.1-41 Hildebrand, S.F. and Schroeder, W.C., 1928; Fishes of Chesapeake Bay; U.S. Fish Wild!. Serv., Fish. Bull. .43, (1927), doc. 102ý4: 366 p. -
STP-ER (_ REFERENCES (Continued) 5.1-42 Moe, M.A., Lewis, R.H., and Ingle, R.M., 1968; Pompano mariculture: preliminary data and basic considerations. Fla. State Board Conserv. Tech. Ser., 55: p. 65. 5.1-h3 Breder, C.M., Jr. and Rosen, D.E., 1966; Modes of reproduction in fishes; American Museum of Natural History, Natural History Press, Garden City, N.Y., p. 941. 5.1-44 Hildebrand, S.F. and Cable, L.E., 1938; Further notes on the development and life history of some teleosts at Beaufort; N.C., U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv., Fish. Bull., 48(24): pp. 505-642. 5.1-45 Topp, R.W. and Hoff, F.H., Jr., 1972; Flatfishes (Pleuronectiformis), Memoirs of the Hour-glass Cruises, Vol. IV, Pt. II, Fla. Dept. Nat. Resources Mar. Res. Lab., p. 135. 5.1,4- Meldrim, J.W. and Gift, J.J., 1971; Temperature preference, avoidance and shock experiments with estuarine fishes; Ichthyological Associates Bull., 7: PP. 1-75. 5.1-47 Gift, J.J. and Westman, J.R., 1971; Responses of some estuarine fishes to increasing thermal gradients; Ichthyological Associates Bull.
- p. 154.
5.1-48 Wiesepape, L.M. and Aldrich, D.V., 1970; Effects of temperature and salinity on thermal death in postlarval brown shrimp, Penaeus aztecus; Sea Grant Publication TAMU-SG-71-201, p. 70. 5.1-49 Zein-Eldin, Z.P. and Griffith, G.W., 1966; The effect of temperature upon the growth of laboratory-held postlarval Penaeus aztecus; Biol. Bull., 131: pp. 186-196. 5.1-50 Copeland, B.J. and Bechtel, T.J., 1971; Some environmental limits of six important Galveston Bay species; N.C. State Univ., Pamlico Mar. iLab., 20: pp. 1-108. 5.1-51 Chin, E., 1961; A trawl study of an estuarine nursery area in Galveston Bay with particular reference to nenaeid shrimp; Ph.D. Disserta-tion, Univ. Washington, 113 pp. K
- 5. -- 46
STP-ER REFERENCES (Continued) 5.1-52 Holland, J.S., Aldrich, D.V. and Strawn, K., 1971; Effects of temperature and salinity on growth, food conversion, survival and temperature resistance of juvenile blue crabs, Callinectes sapidus Rathbun; Sea Grant Publication TAMU-SG-71-222, 166 pp. 5.1-53 Tagatz, M.E., 1969; Some relations of temperature acclimation and salinity to thermal tolerance of the blue crab, Callinectes sapidus; Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc., 98(h): pp. 713-716. 5.1-54 Gallaway, B.J. and Strawn, K., 1973; Species diversity, seasonal abundance, and distribu-tion of marine fishes at a hot water discharge in Galveston Bay, Texas; Manuscript submitted to Publ. Inst. Mar. Sci., Univ. Tex., p. 177. 5.1-55 Johnson, K.W., 1973; Occurrence and abundance of fishes in the intake and discharge areas of the Cedar Bayou Power Station before and during the first year of plant operation;. Ph.D. Dissertation, Tex. A&M Univ., p. 348. 5.1-56 Jensen, L.D., Carpenter, J.H., Hargis, W.J., Odum, E.P., Patton, V.D., Samsell, T.R., Scott, D.H., Strawn, K. and Warriner, J.E., 1970; Environmental effects; p. 86-105, In, W.W. Eaton (Task Force Chairman), Nuclear
.. Power in the South, A Report on the Southern Governor's Task Force for Nuclear Power Policy, Southern Interstate Nuclear Board, Atlanta, Georgia, p. 138.
5.1-57-- Whitford, W.G., 1969; The effect of water quality and environmental factors on freshwater fish; New Mexico St~ate Univ. , p. 6. 5.1-58 Smith, H.M., 1907; The fishes of North Carolina; North Carolina Geological and Economic Survey,
'Vol. II, Raleigh, p. 453.
5.1-59-- Suttkus,' R.D. ahnd *Sundararaj, B.I., 1961; Fecun-
- dity and r.eprbduction in the largescaled men-haden; Brevoortia patronus Goode, Tulane Studies Zool. 8(6): pp. 177-182.
5.1-60 Baxter, J.L., 1960; A study,'of the yellowtail; Seriola dorsalis (G1117)*,Calif. Dep. Fish Game, Fish"Bull. , llO p. 96.
STP-ER REFERENCES (Continued) 5.1-61 Petterssen, S., 1956; Weath~r Analysis and Fore-casting, Volume II, McGraw-Hill, New York. 5.1-62 Hrischke, R.E., 1959; Glossary of Meteorology, American Meteorological Society, Boston, pp. 227-228. 5.1-63 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1972; Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with. Comparative Data, U.S. Depart-ment of Commerce. 5.1-64 Traffic Map, Matagorda County, Texas State High-way Department, Planning Survey Division, 1970. 5.1 Personal communication from Charles Studzenbater (Texas Parks and Wildlife Department), and Gordon Folzenlogen (Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife) to Terry L. Sharik, NUS Corp., February, 1974. 5.1-66 Treshow, M. , 1970; Environment and plant response; McGraw-Hill, New York, 422 p. 5.1-67 Warren, C. E., 1971; Biology and Water Pollution; W. B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia, Pa.; 43h pp. 5.1-68 Barsom, G., June 1973; Lagoon Performance and the State of Lagoon Technology; EPA-R2-73-144. 5.1-69 Chabrek, R.H., 1971; Ponds and Lakes of the Louisiana Coastal Marshes and Their Value to Fish and Wildlife, Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Annual Conference, South-eastern Association of Game and Fish Commis-sioners, October 17-20, 1971, Charleston, South Carolina. 5.1-701. Strickland, J.D.M., 1960; Measuring the Pro-
- duction of Marine Phytoplankton, Bull.
Fisheries Research Boards of Canada, No. 122, 2 pp. 1-172. 5.1-71 *llenweider, Vo R.A., 1968; Scientific fundamentals of eutrophication of lakes and flowing waters, with particular reference to nitrogen and
. phosphorus as factors of eutrophication.
Directorate for Scientific Affairs, Organi-zation for Economic Cooperation and Develop-ment, Paris.
- 5. 1-48, Amendment 2
STP-ER REFERENCES (Continued) 5.1-72 John Tilton, Personal Communication, Texas Electric E-13 Service, Fort Worth, Texas, July 17, 1974. 2 5.1-73 Dr. E. Gus Fruh, Personal Communication, Environ-mental Health Engineering Program, University of Texas, Austin, Texas, July 14, 1974. 5.1-74 Okubo, A. and Pritchard, D. W. "Summary of Our Present Knowledge of the Physical Processes of Mixing In the Ocean and Coastal Waters." Chesapeake Bay Institute, USAEC Report Number NYO-3109-40, September, 1969. 2 5.1-75 Koh, R.C.Y. and Fan, L. "Mathematical Models For The Prediction of Temperature Distributions Resulting From The Discharge of Heated Water Into Large Bodies of Water." Water Quality-Office, Environmental Protection Agency, October, 1970. 5...." l -4 mnmn
.5 .i1-48a Amendment 2
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-1 TEMPERATURE AND SALINITY DATA TAKEN IN THE GULF OF MEXICO NEAR THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER* Depth Temperature C0 Salinity 0/00 Date (Fathoms) Location Surface Bottom Surface Bottom 6/67 8 5 Miles offshore 27.8 27.5 31.1 32.2 5/68 4 SE Brown Cedar Cut 26.7 23.6 20.7 22.7 5/68 10 SE Brown Cedar Cut 25.9 22.9 26.1 31.7 5/68 7 Between Colorado River 28.0 24.o 22.8 29.5 and Pass Cavallo 5/68 10 Between Colorado River 27.6 23.6 25.0 31.7 and Pass Cavallo 6/68 10 28 0 23'N-96 0 09'W 29.5 24.0 24.2 34.1 4 28 0 44'N-95 0 38'W 30o6 6/68 24.7 21.9 32.5 0 0 28.6 35.0 6/68 10 28 35'N-95 29'W 29.0 24.5 4/72 4 28 0 41.'N-95 0 43'W 26.1 22.3 13.6 17.0 0 22.3 20.8 16.6 26.2 4/72 8 28 37'W-95°39'W
- See Reference 5.1-1 5.1-49
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-2 AVERAGE MONTHLY MAKEUP SALINITIES AND PUMPING RATES AVERAGED OVER PLANT LIFE Average Average Pum ping Month Salinity (0/00) Rate (cfs ) Janua:ry 0.46 398 Febru ary 0.46 467 March 0.59 288 April 0.46 445 May 0.49 448 June 0.35 745 July o.96 200 Augus t 0.0 0.0 Septe:mber 0.46 428 Octob er 0.48 452 Novem'ber 0.60 286 December 0.60 340 Avera ge 0.49 375 Yearl y 5,;-.50
STP-ER ( TABLE 5.1-3 SURFACE COOLING COEFFICIENTS* The Surface Cooling Coefficient, mp (Btu.ft-2.(OF)-.hr-1) as a Function of the Wind Speed, W (mph), the Natural Surface Water 0 0 Temperature, Ta( F), and the Excess Temperature, AT( F) wAT+ Wind Speed (mph). 20 60 100 140 180 For T = 4o0 F 2 1.39 1.51 1.65 1.83 2.07 4 1.90 2.05 2.21 2.42 2.68 6 2.42 2.58 2.78 3.00 3.29 8 2.94 3.12 3.33 3.59 3.89 10 3.46 3.66 3.90 4.18 4.50 For T 6o0 F 2 1.73 1.87 2.05 2.30 2.61 4 2.47 2.69 2.88 3.17 3.52 6 3.23 3.45 3.70 4.02 4.42 8 3.98 4.23 4.53 4.89 5.32 10 4.73 5.02 5.36 5.75 6.21 For T = 80OF / 2 2.26 2.44 2.68 3.03 3.47 4 3.43 3.66 3.97 4.38 4.88 6 4.59 4.90 5.27 5.74 6.31 8 5.77 6.11 6.57 7.08 7.71 10 6.93 Wi37 7.86 8.45 9.13
*see Reference 5.1-3
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-4 MONTHLY AVERAGE WIND SPEED AT VICTORIA, TEXAS Month Mean Speed (mph) January 10.7 February 11.2 March 11.7 April 12.2 May 11.0 June 9.8 July 9.2 August 8.5 September , 8.6 October 8.7 November 9.7 December lo.4 I:
-- 1-52
STP-ER (_ TABLE 5.1-5 MONTHLY AVERAGE BLOWDOWN SALINITIES AND DISCHARGE RATES AVERAGED OVER THE PERIOD OF PLANT LIFE Average Average Discharg e Mon th Salinity (0/oo) Rate (cfs) Jan uary 2.0 164 Feb ruary 1.7 189 Mar ch 1.7 170 Apr ri 1.7 207 May 1.7 179 Jun e 1.7 200 Jul y 1.8 178 Aug ust 0.0 0
'Sep tember 1.9 211 Oct ober 2.0 208 Nov ember 1.7 196 Dec ember 1.7 179 Yea rly 1.63 173 Ave rage 51.-53
TABLE 5.1-6 FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PARTICULAR VALUES OF MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT RIVER MILE 0.0 AVERAGE FREQUENCY OVER PERIOD OF RECORD FOR MONTH INDICATED Salinity Range (0/oo) Depth/Depth Month Range (ft)_ AT-O 0-0.8 .8-i. 5 1.5-3 3-5 5-8 .8-12 12-16 16-20 20-24 24-27 January n-4 0 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.003 0.012 0.025 0.056 0.013 0.605
>0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 o.oo7 0.007 0.25-0.5 0.000 0. 000 0.002 0.007 0.013 0.001 0.000 0.003 0.007 0.006 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0,000 0.000 0.002 0.012 0.031 0.061 0.027 0.028 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.007 0.002 0.002 0.000 January 0 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.000 O:O00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.024 0.690
>0-0.25 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.007 r.)
F-3 0.25-0.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.025 0.O14 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 o.096 0.066 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.O00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.009 0.003 t-'iI January 8-16 0 o.oo6 0.0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 o.o48 o.664
>0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.007 0.25-0.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.022 0. 004 0. 013 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.094 0.065' 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.009 0.003 o.ooo O.oo6 0.004 0.000 0.000 O.OO4 0.018 0.043 0.026 0.016 0.540 February o-4 0 0.007 o.o4o
>0-0.25 0.012 0.000 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0. 0*00 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.o14 0.001 0.001 0.005 0.005 0.5-1.0 0.001 0.000 0. 004 0.003 0.006 0.060 o.o66 0.050 0.027 0.000 0.0400 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.011 O.OO8 0.002 o.oo4 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 o.ooo 0.040 O.OO4 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 o.637 February 16 0 0.004
>0-0.25 0.012 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 .0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.002 0.000 0.'000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.022 O.O14 0.001 o.ooo 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.172 0.059 0.5-1.0 0.. 000
.
i.o-i.5 G. 000 0.000 0;.o0o 0.000 0.000 - 0.000 0.000 0.020 0.002 B-16 0.004 0.000 0.000 0o.:ooo Too 0 .'000 o.'0ooo 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.069 0.602 February 0
>0-0.25 0.012 0.000 0.000 0..600 0..000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.002 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.020 0.005 0.011 0.5-1.0 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.011 o.166 0.055 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.019 0.002 1.O-1.5
TABLE 5.1-6 (Continued) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PARTICULAR VALUES OF MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT RIVER MILE 0.0 AVERAGE FREQUENCY OVER PERIOD OF RECORD FOR MONTH INDICATED Salinity Range (°/oo), Depth/Depth Month Range (ft) AT ('F O-o. 8 0.8-1.5 3 58- 8-12 12-16 16-20 20-24 24-27 March o-4 0 0-000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.006 0.005 0.019 0.012 0.721
>0-0.25 0..001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.020 0.25-0.5 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.002 0.012 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.018 0.062 0.014 0.018 O.O4O 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.000 March 16 0 0.000 0.000 0..000 .0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.754
>0-0.25 0.001 01 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.020 0.25-0.5 0.001 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.005 o. oi4.
0 . 5-1o 0 0.000 0. 010 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.092 0.060
.1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 to 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.000
,-
March 8-16 0 00 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0; 019 0.748 LzJ
>0-0.25 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.020 0.25-0.5 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.002 o.o14 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0. 092 o.o6o 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.012 0.000 April 0-4 0 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.002 0.007 0. 007 0.738
>0-0.25 0.010 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.047 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.006 0.009 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.011 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.001 0.003 0.021 0.012 0.017 0.012 0.017 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 April 16 0 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004. 0.752 0.010 0. 000 0.000
>0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 o.o47 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0015 0.012 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.034 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 April 8-16 0 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.752 0.010 0.000 0.000
>0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.047 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.015 0.001 0.011 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 o.oo4 O.O49 0.031 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000
TABLE 5.1-6 (Continued)- FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PARTICULAR VALUES OF MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT RIVER MILE 0.0 AVERAGE FREQUENCY OVER PERIOD OF RECORD FOR MONTH INDICATED Salinity Range(°/oo) Depth/Depth Month Range (ft) AT (-F) o0-0.. 0.8-1.5 .3-5 5-8 8-12 12-16 16-20 20-24 24-27 May 0-4 0 0. OCO 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.003 0.006 0.008 0.009 0.768
>0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.049 0.25-0.5 0.000 0.000 0. 000 0.003 0.004 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.010 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.008 0.013 0.011 0.006 0.012 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 May 16 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.010 0.790
> 0-0.25 0; 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.049 0.25-0.5 0. 000 '0.000 0. 00.0 .0.000 0.000 0.000 .0.000 0.000 0.008 0.010 0.5-1.0 0;000 '02.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.031 0.020 1..0-1.5 0.000 0.00,0 0.000 0.000 0..000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.000 mi May 8-16 0' 0.000 0.000 0. coo 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.017 0.782 c\.f >0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0.00 o. 049 0.25-0.5 ).000 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.000 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.002 0.010
.0,5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.031 0.019 1.0-1.5 0.000 .0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.000 June 0-4 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.022 O.O08 0.005 0.007 0.012 0.683
>0-0.25 0.012 0.000 0.000 0.000 o.0o4 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.o45 0.25L-0.5 0.002 0.000 0.000 0. 001 0.010 0.009 0.001 0.008 0.003 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.003 0.005 0.010 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 June 16 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.032 0.705
> 0-0.25 0.012 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.o45 0.25-0.5 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.024 0.OO8 0.5-1.0 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.018 0.001 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0R.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
'June,,:., 8-16 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 -. '.0000 0.000 0.000 ,0.000 0.000 0.035 0.702
> 0-0.25 0.012 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00.0 0.000 0.000 o.oo4 0.000 0.045
- o. O08 0.25-0.5 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 o.004 0.020 0.5-1.0 0.002 0.000, dOO'oo 6 - 6. obo 0..000" 0. 000 0.000 0.001 0.017 0.001 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
TABLE 5.1-6 (Continued) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PARTICULAR VALUES OF MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT RIVER MILE 0.0 AVERAGE FREQUENCY OVER PERIOD OF RECORD FOR MONTH INDICATED 0 Salinity Range ( /oo) Depth/D epth Month Range (:ft)- AT (OF) 0-0.8 0.8-1.5 1 3-5 5 8-12 12-16 16-20 20-224 24-27 July 0-24 0 0.000 0.000 0-.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.696
>0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0. 002 10.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0. os24 0.25-0.5 0. 000 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.002 0.003 0.000 0.005 0.000 0.005 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1. 5 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 July 0 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.699
>0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0. 000 0.002 0.056
- 0. 000 1.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.008 O.OO6 0.5-1.0 0. 000 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0. 000 0. 000 0.000 0 000 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5
,.n 0.000 0.000 o.699 July 8-16 0 0. 000 0.000 0. 000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000
>0-0.25 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 "0.000 0.000 0.00- 0.002 0.6000 0.056 0.25-0.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0. oo6 o.oo6 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 August 0-14 0 0.000 0, 00C 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.725
> 0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0. 000 August 16 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.725
> 0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0,000 0.000 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.725 August 8-16
> 0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 *0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0. 000 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
TABLE 5.1-6 (Continued) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PARTICULAR VALUES OF MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT RIVER MILE 0.0 AVERAGE FREQUENCY OVER PERIOD OF RECORD FOR MONTH INDICATED Salinity Range (0/00) Depth/Depth Range, (ft) AT (OF) Month -o-o. 8 0.8-1.5 1.5-3 8-12 12-16 16-2C 20-24 2L-27 September -0..000 o-4 0 0. 000 0.000 0.003 0.000 ,0.002 0.007 0.CO7 0.002 0.687
>0-0.25 0.007 0. 000 0.000 0.002 '0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.005 o.o14 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.,0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.0C07 0.002 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0 .0 00 .0..-000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 September 16 0 0. 000 0.000 o. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.702
' >0-0.25 '0.007 0.6000 0..o00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.-000 0.000 0 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.023 ,0.000 0.5-1.0 0.-b000 0. 000 0.000 O0 00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.000 0.0.00 1.0-1.5 o.obo 0.,000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000
- 0. 000 September 8-16 0 .0-007 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.009 0.696
>0-0.25 0.002 b. boo 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.000 0b.000 "0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.020 0.000 0.5-1.0 .0.000 00.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.00.0 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 Octcber 0-4 .0. 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.009 0.006. 0.039 O.O14 0.677
>0-0.25 o. co0 0.000 0.000 0. 001 o.oo,6 0.00.6 0.000 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.001 0.000
- o. ooo 0.006 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.003 0.25-0. 5 o.oo04 0.000 0.o00 0.000
.0.000
- 0. 000 0.000 -0. 002 0.003 0.010 0. 006 0.005 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.015 1.0-1.5 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.000 0. 000 0.000 October 0 0.010 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.022 0.738
>0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 *0.001 0.001 0.25-0.5 0.000 0.000 0.000, .0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.005
- 0.000
[ * -" ,.:5i1.0-0 .5 -' 0.,000 0.000 . 000 0.000 0.000 ,0.000 0. 000 0.035 0.019
-0. 000 t0o.000 , ,0.000. .0.000 0.000 . 0 000 0.Q03 0. 000 o.ooo October 8-16 0 0.010 0.000 0. 000 o.. 00.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 o.008 0.022 0.7-30
>0-0.25 0.00h o: ooo -6!o6o o.oo0 -0.000 0.00 0 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.25-0.5 0.00h 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.002 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 o.oo4 0.037 0.014 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000
TABLE 5.1-6 (Continued) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PARTICULARýVALUES OF MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT RIVER MILE 0.0 AVERAGE FREQUENCY OVER PERIOD OF RECORD FOR MONTH INDICATED Sal.inity Range ( 0 Ioo) Depth/Depth Month Range (ft) AT (OF 0-0-8 0.8-1. c 1.5-3 3-5 8-12 12-16 16-20 20-24 21-27. November 0-4 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0. 000 0.062 0.051 0.057 o.61.
- 0. 005 .0.019
>0-0.25 0.007 0. 000 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0. 000~ 0.000 0. 002 0.25-0.5 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.003 0. COo 0.002 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.5-1.0 G.000 0. 0~00 0.002 0.000 0.002 0.035 0.030 0.031 0.012 0.007 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.001 Novenber 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.coo 0. o00 0.020 0.81ih
> 0-0.25 0.007 0.000 0.000 0..000 0.O00O 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.25-0.5 0.. 000 0.000 0.000 0.,000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.013 0.003 0.5-1.0o 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0C0 0.000 0.000 0.094. 0.021 tn 1.0-1.5 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.008 0.001 November 8-16 0 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 o. o84 0.750
> 0-0.25 0. 007 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.25-0.5 o0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.002 0'.003 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.092 0.022 1.0-1.5 0. a00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.007 0.001 December 0-4 0 0.000 C.000 0.000 a0.000 0.0)05 0.006 0.036 0.063 0.062 0.565
>0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0. 001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.001 0. 000 0.000 0.00( 0.002 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.001
- 0. 013 0.5-1.0 ,.000 0. 000 0.000 o.oo6 0.029 0.052 0.033 0.032 o.018 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.012 0.000 0.002 0.000 December 16 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.015 0.722
>0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.023 0. 002 0.5-1.0 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.106 0.065 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.015 0.002 December 8-16 0 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.042 0.695
>0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0. 5 0. 001 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.o19 0.005 0. 001 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.o06 0.109 0.056 1.0-1.5 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.01L 0.002
K> TABLE 5.1-7 FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PARTICULAR VALUES OF. MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT RIVER MILE 6 AVERAGE FREQUENCY OVER PERIOD OF RECORD FOR MONTH INDICATED Salinity Range (0/oo) Depth/ Month Depth RanEL (ft AT(°F) 0-0.8 0.8-1.5 1.5-3 3-5 5-8 8-12 12-16 16-20 20-24 24-27. January 0-4 0 0.014 0.009 0.007 0.015 0.044 o *o69 - 0.070 0.148 0.282 0.069
>0-0.25 0.004 0.000 0. D000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005. 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.000 0;. 5-1.0 0.007 0.004 0.0,07 0.C29 0.052 0.043 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.002 0.008 0.02-1 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.660 January .16 0 0.009 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.003 O.OO6 0.044
>0-0. 25 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.0 00c 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.25-0.5 0.008 0.000 0.001 0.003 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.0o6 I-3 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.005 0.004 0.000 0.084 0.049 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.005 0.027 0.004 I-January 8-16 0 0.009 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 o.oo6 0.002 0.009 0.054 0.641
>0-0. 25 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.25-0.5 0.009 0.003 0.0o6 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.006 0.5-1.0 0.001 0.002 0.001 0.004 0.003 0.001 0.002 0.044 0.043 0.045 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.025 0.003 0.002 February o-4 0 0.023 0.007 O.0O4 0.028 0.027 o.145 0.129 0.111 0.154 0.050
>0-0. 25- 0.019 6.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.020 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.004 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.038 0.019 0.014 0.666 0.050 0.032 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.004 0.006 0.019 0.015 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 February 16 0 0.009 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.007 0.005 0.004 0.041 o.6o8
>0-0.25 0.019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.25-0.5 0.006 0.004 0.005 0.002 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.004 0.5-1.0 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.006 0.019 0.020 0.005 0.121 0.039 1..0-1.5 0.002 .0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 o.004 0.011 0.026 0.003 February 8-16 0 0.011 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.002 0.007 0.002 o.o16 0.041 0.590
>0-0.25 0.019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0'.000 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.o001
*" 0.0"0"I b.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.002 0.004 0.25-0.5 0.014 0.005 0.5-1.0 0.007 0.004 0.004 0.017 O.016 0.011 0.003 0.084 0.043 0.032 1.0-1.5 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.002 0.004 0.013 0.021 0.003 0.000
TABLE 5.1-7 (Continued)- FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PARTICULAR VALUES OF MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT RIVER MILE 6 AVERAGE FREQUENCY OVER PERIOD OF RECORD FOR MONTH INDICATED Depth/ Month Deoth Range (ft) AT (OF) 0-0.8 0.8-15 1.5-3 3-5 5-8 8-12 12-16 16-20 20-24 24-27' March 0-4 0O 0.008 0.002 0.000 0.005 0.013 0.081 0.057 0.125 0.119 0.373
>0-0.25 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.019 0.25-0.5 0. 00L 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.002
- 0. 5-1.0 0.005 O.OO8 0.015 0.037 0.019 0.026 0.006 0.002 0.002 0.002 1.0-1. 5 0.002 0.001 0.011 0.023 o.oo6 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 March 16 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.002 0.005 0.000 0.005 0.769
>0-0.25 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.020 0.25-0.5 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 o.o06 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.006 o.oo4 0.069 0.036 H co.
1.0-1.5 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.0O0 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.o06 0.032 0.005 March 8-16 0.000 0 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.003 j.002 0.003 0.015 0.756
>0-0.25 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.020
- 0.25-0.5 0.002 0.001 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 o.006 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.001 0.005 o.oo6 0.002 O.O49 0.019 0.036 1.0-1.5 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.001 n . oo0( 0.001 0.007 0.027 0.005 0.002 April 0 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.014 0.028 0.025 0.052 0.632
>0-0.25 o.o16 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 o.o47 0.25-0.5 0.017 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.5-1.0 0.015 0.005 0.005 0.012 0.021 .0.013 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.005 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 April 16 0 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.755
>0-0.25 0.016 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.047 0.25-0.5 O.O08 0.003 0.002 0. 001 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.012
- 0. 5-1.0 0.001 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.002 0.007 0.032 0.022 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.000 April 8-16 0 0.005 0.000 0.000. 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.752
>0-0.25 0.016 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.047 0.25-0.5 0.013 0.002 0.001 0.000 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.5-1.0 O.OO4 0.000 0.002 0.007 0.002 0.00h 0.004 0.017 0.017 0.020 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.003 0.002 0.000
TABLE 5.1-7 (Continued) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OFIPARTICULAR VALUES OF MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT RIVER MILE 6 AVERAGE FREQENCY OVER PERIOD. OF RECORD FOR MONTH INDICATED Salinity Range (0/oo) Depth/
'Month Depth Range (ftj AT (OF) 0-0.8 0.8-1.5 1.5-3 3-5 5-8 8-12 12-16 16-20 20-24 24-27 May 0 0.006 0.000 0.006 0.002 0.005 0. 031 0.040 0.007 0.003 0.652
>0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0. COo 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.007 0.076 0.25-0.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.012 D. 5-1.0 0.005 0.002 0.010 0.011 0.013 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 1.0-1. 5 0.001 *o.oo6 0o002 0.001 0.c01 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 May 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.1005
!.; 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.009 0.736
>0-0.25 0.000 O.o00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0"- 0.077 c12 1'3 0.25-0. 5 0.004 0.002 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.00 0.014 ýr3
- 0. 5-1.0 0 . 000 O..00 0.000 0.002 0 .00 3 0. 002 0.002 0.023 0.000 0.017 1.0-1. 5 0.000 0.0.00 0.000 O.o00 G
.00 0.001 0.000 0.008 0.002. Iz w'
May 8-16 0 0.002 0.000 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 o.oo6 0.732
>0-0 .25 0.000 0.000 0 .000 10..000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.077 0.25-0.5 0;.0"00 0.001 0.0,01 0.000 0;000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.014 D .5-1.0 0'. 0000 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.015 0.009 o.o16 1.0-1. 5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.002 O.oo6 0.001 0.001 June 0-~4 0 0.030 0.0,00 0.002 0.002 0.005 0.045 0'. 013 0.013 0.000 0.575
>0.-C. 25 0.017 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.046 0.25-0. 5 0.008 0.003 0.007 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.5-1.0 0.00L 0.001 o.oo06 0.008 0.005
- 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 1.0-1. 5 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 June 16 0 0.000 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.013 0.007 0.002 0.000 0.005 o.650
>0-0.25 0.012 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 o.o46 0.25-0.5 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.004 0.0O8 0.008 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000' 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.001 0.002 0.017
'0'. 000-11 0.-000 1.0-1: 5' 0 ."000 0. 000,0 0o.,.000 0.060 0.000 '0.000 0.001 June 8-16 0 0.003 0.010. 0.012 0.003. 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.005
>0-0.25 0.015 0.002 0 .000- o -oob - .02000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.046 0.25-0.5 0.004 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.008 0.000 O.OO8 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.002 0.001 0.002 0.012 0.005 0.003 1.0-1. 5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000
TABLE 5ol-7 FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PARTICULAR VALUES OF MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT RIVER MILE AVERAGE FREQUENCY OVER PERIOD OF RECORD FOR MONTH INDICATED Salinity Range (0/oo) Depth!
ý . .*. L.ept h Range (ft) AT(°F) 0-0.8 0.8-1.5 1.5-3 3-5 8-12 12-16 16-20 20-24 24-27 July 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.026 0.000 0.000 0.625
>0-0.25 0.002 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.046 0.25-0.5 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.003 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
,.0-1.5 o. 000 0. 000 0.O000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 "0.O000 0. 000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.652 kj*
ul y 16
* >0-0.25 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 *0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.049 0.25-0. 5 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.002 0.003 0.010 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0*0O0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 OO 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1. 5 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.652
>0-0. 25 0. 002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.049 0..25-0 .5 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.008
- 0. 5-3.0o .,000 O .O000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0 ; 000 0.300 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 August 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.675
>0-0.25 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 o . 25-0 . 5 0 . 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 August 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.675
>0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.000 0.0 00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.675 August 8-16
>0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
TABLE 5.1-7 (Continued) FR~EQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PARTICULAR VALUES OF MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT RIVER MILE 6 AVERAGE FREQUENCY OVER PERIOD OF-RECORD FOR MONTH INDICATED Salinity Range (0/00) Depth/ Month Depth Range (ft) AT 0 ( F) 0 -0.8 o 8-1.5 -1. 5-3 3-5 5-8 8-12 12-16 16-20 20-24 24-27 September 0-L .0 0 0C05 ,0.002 0.002 0.007 0.002 0.008 '0.032 0.032 0.022 0.552
>0 -0o25 -0 010 0 ý000 *:0. 090 ..0.000 .0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25 0.5 Q0, .08 1 .007 :,-0.007 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
*'0.002 0.000 0.5-1. 0 0C000 ,,o.oo6 .0o002 0.002 o .;boo 0.000 0.000 0.000
,.0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.002 9.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 September 16 '0 " 0.003 ,<.0. 000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.002 0.009 0.647 0.
0000
>0-0.25 *0.008 04000 - 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0o,000 0.25-0.5 0.002 ".0.000 S0.060 0.003 "0.003 0.002 0.000 0.017 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 000 0.002 0.002 0.008 0.000 0-,000 47 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000
*0.000 0 "
'0.003 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.002 0.007 o.646 September d-16 0.000
>0-0.25 0.1010 0. 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.002 .0, 002 0.003 0.000 0.002 0.013 0.002 0.000 0.002 0.000 0 .5-1
- 0 0O.0 0.0 0.000 "0.000 0.002 0.002 o.007 0.002 0.0 00 0.000 0.000 1.0-1. 5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.031 0.057 0.075 0.026 0.000 o. 43 October 0-4" 0 0.003 0.000
>0-0. 25 0.0o4 0.000 0.002 0,000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.017 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.009 0.003 0.002 o.o06-0.006 0.015 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1. 5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.000 October 16 0 0.019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.717 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
. 0-0.25,
, 0.002 "0.002 0.25-0.5 0.010 o.oob - 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.00 0.002 0.5-.0 0.002 0.0o0 0.000 o.oo4 0.004 0.001 0.019 0.012 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.*010 0.00o06"5 0.002 8-16 0.020 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.003 0.008 0.039 0.700 October 0 0.000
>0-0.25 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.25-0.5 0.012 0.003 0.002 0,000 0.003 0.000 0.009 0.013 0.010
- 0. 5-1.0 0.002 0.000 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.002 1.0-1. 5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.006 0.000 0.000
TABLE 5.1-7 (Continued) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PARTICULAR VALUES OF MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT RIVER MILE AVERAGE FREQUENCY OVER PERIOD OF RECORD FOR MONTH INDICATED Salinity Range (°/oo) Depth/ Month Depth Range (ft) AT (F) 0-0.8 0.8-1.5 1.5-3 5 5-8 8-12 12-16 16-20 20-24 November o-4 0 0.013 0.014 0.051 0.022 0.038 0.078 0.102 0.152 0.123 0.245
>0-0.25 0.007 0.000 0A00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.012 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000. 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.027 0.008 o.o16 0.029, 0.018 0.014 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 o.006 0.003 0.002 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.003 0.008 0.011 0.078 0.733
>0-0.25 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 HJ 0.25-0.5 0.003 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.002 0.000 ,0.000 0.002 0.005 0.019 o.oo4 0.006 0.062 0.019 0.000
\.i 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.009 0.002 November 8-16 0 0.002 0.002 0.005 0.002 0.005 0.009 0.'010 0.054 0.047 0.705
>0-0.25 0.007 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.005 0.002 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.001 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.002 0.003 o.006 0.010 0.009 0.006 0.003 o.o48 0.012 0.019 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.005 o.oo4 0.002 0.001 December 0 0.010 0.002 0.007 0.053 0.039 0.16.4 0.130 0.117 0.136 o.o84
>0-0.25 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 o.o16 o.o16 0.014 0.032 0.040 - 0.025 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.001 0.016 0.021 0.002 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 December 16 0 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.003 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.070 0.660
>0-0.25 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 O.OO6 0.002 0.002 0.005 0.005 - 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.001 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.000 o.oo6 00014 0.012 o.oo6 0.085 0.027 1.0-1i5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.033 o.006 8-16 0 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.005 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.043 o..056 o.631 December
>0-0.25 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.010 0.005 0.005 0.000, 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.001 0.5-1.0 0.003 0.000 0.006 0.002 0.009 0.011 0.000 o.o047 0.039 0.027 1.0-1. 5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.009 0.028 0.001 o.o06
TABLE 5.1-8 FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PARTICULAR VLAUES OF MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT RIVER MILE 12 AVERAGE FREQUENCY OVER PERIOD OF RECORD FOR MONTH INDICATED Salinity Range ('l/oc) I I Depth/ 0 4onth Depth Range (ft) AT( F) 0-0.8 0.8-1.5 1.5-3 3-5 5-8 8-12 12-16 16-20 20-24 24-27 January o-4 0 o.o44 0.031 0.077 0.051 0.152 0.175 0.159 0.032 0.029 0.055
>0-0.25 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0. 5 0.019 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.010 0 .04h 0.031 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1. 5 0.052 0.016 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 January 16 0 0.023 o.oo6 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.008 0.ob3 0.003 0.059 0.697 0.,000
>0-0.25 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.001 0.5-1.0 0.007 0.001 0* 000" 0.000" 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.015 0.030 0.030 v" 1.01i 5 0.010' o.odo6 0.013O o.0*15 0.003 0.010 0.005 0.000, o.oo6 0.002 F-3 January. 8-16 0 0.023 0.001 0.006 0.002 0.005 0.010 o.oo6 0.072 0.098 0.585 I
>0-0.25 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Sti 0.25-0.5 0.019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.001 0.000
- 0. 5-1.0 0.oo6 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.002 o.oo4 0.033 0.027 0.022 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.007 0.002 0.0fo 0.020 0.007 0.015 O.O06 0.002 0.000 0.000 February 0-4 0 o.o6o 0.007 0 122 0 . if8 0.145 0.120 0.074 0.023 0.021 .0.003
>0-0.25 0.024 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.029 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.050 0.030 0.021 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1. 5 0.095 0.035 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 February 16 0 0.034 0.000 0.009 0.005 0.011 0.002 o.0o4 0.000 0.043 0.586
>0-0. 25 0.024 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.029 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.5-1.0 0.048 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.002 0.007 0.034 O.Ol4 1.0-1. 5 o.oo8 0.027 0.017 0.012 0.009 0.003 0.020 0.002 0.027 0.017 February.- 0.032 0*.000 ~o.oo4-O6.O66b-' 0.012 0.011 0.004 0.002 0.063 0.229 0.338
>0-0.2 5 0.024 0.000 0.000, 0".000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 '0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.029 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.046 0.002 0.000 -.0..000- 0.001 0.004 0.014 0.029 0.012 0.000 1.0-1. 5 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.024 0.031 0.019 0.015 0.009 0.002 0.000
TABLE 5.1-8 (Continued) S'REQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PARTICULAR VALUES OF MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT RIVER MILE 12 AVERAGE FREQUENCY OVER PERIOD OF RECORD FOR MONTH INDICATED Salinity Range (U/oo) Depth/ Month Depth Range (ft) AT (OF 0-0.8 o.8-1.5 1.5-3 3-5 5-8 8-12, 12-16 16-20 20-2_ 4 24-27 March o-4 0 0.013 0.005 0.084 o.o44 0.121 0 .138 0.075 o.o48 0.057 0.267
>0-0. 25 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 o.o14 0.009 0.015 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1. 0.076 0.013 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 March 0.010 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.037 0.799
>0-0.25 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000" 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ca 0.25-0.5 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 I3 i 0. 5-1.0 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.003 o.o14 o.o16 w-1.0-1.5 0.016 0.010 0.026 0.020 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.005 0.003
--q. w~ March 8-16 0: 0.010 0.600 0.002 0.002 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.059 0.089 o.689
>0-0.25 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000' 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00o0 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000
- 0. 5-1.0 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.005 0.014 0.o14 0.001 1.0-1. 5 0.010 0.006 0.018 0.035 0.007 0.005 0.008 0.000 0.003 0.000 Apri! o 0.005 0.002 o.o16 0.024 0.030 0.036 0.031 0.000 0.000 0.675
>0-0.25 0.018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 o.o46 0.25-0.5 0.018 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0:000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.5-1.0 0.014 0.009 0.011 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.oo4 I. 0-1. 5 0.020 0.011 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 April 16 0 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.007 0.807
>0-0.25 0.018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0146 0.25-0. 5 0.o18 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0:000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.012 0.5-1.0 0.012 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.003 0.001 0.010 0.011
- 1. 0-1. 5 0.009 0.001 0.002 0.004 0.003 0.004 0.001 0.001 0.00'7 0.001 April 8-16 0 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.010 0.0142 0.762
>0-0.25 0.018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 O.046 0.25-0.5 0.018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.011 0.5-1.5- o .012 0.00CC 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.006 0.008 0.007 o.004 1.0-1.5 0.005 0.00L 0.002 0.003 0.005 0.005 o.o06 0.002 0.001 0.000
TABLE 5.1-8 (Continued) FREQUENCY OF, OCCURRENCE OF PARTICULAR VALUES OF.MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT R IVER MILE 12 AVERAGE FREQUENCY OVER PERIOD OF RECORD FOR MONTH INDICATED Salinity Range (0/00) Depth/ Month Depth Range (ft) AT (OF) 0-0.8 0.8-1.5 1.5-3 3-5 5-8 8-12 12-16 16-20 20-24 24-27 May 0-4 0 0.015 0.000 0.026 0.037 0.029 0.003 o.oo6 0.005 0.003 0.718
>0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.028 0.25-0.5 O.O08 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.5-1.0 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.o16 0.008. 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 May 16 .0 0 .010 0.003. 0. 000. 0.000 0.o02 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.819.
>0-0. 25 0.000 0.000, 0.000. 0'.000 0.000. 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0. 0o8 Fa OH 01 -" 0.25-0.5 o.oo8 0.000 0,000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.5-1.0 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 o.oo4 0.006 0.007 t*lj CC) 1.0-1.5 O.OO4 0.005 0.002 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.005 0.000 May 8-i6 0 O.OO6 0.003 0.003 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 o.o16 o.o6o 0.751
>0-0.25 0.000 0.0003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0.00 0.000 0.000 0.028 0.25-0.5 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 .000'. 0.000 0.006 0.5-1.0 0.0o6 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.002 0.002 0.0O6 0.003 0.002 o.oo4 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.000 June o-4'" 0 0.033 0.003 O.O43 0.012 0.017 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.675
>0-0.25 0.021 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.029 0.25-0.5 0.017 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.5-1.0 0.011 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 1.0-1.5 0.006 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 June 16 0 0.032 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.743
>0-0.25 0.021 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.029 0.25-0.5 O.O14 0.002 0.002 0.000 o0.000 0 .'002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.007 0..5-1.0O 0.007 0.000 0.000- :,0.000 0.004 0.000. 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.002 1.0-1.5 0.002 0.002 0.001 0'.000 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.000 0.000 June 8-16 0 0.030 0.000 d.'b02" 0.*o002" 0.1000 0.000 0.000 0.010 b.053 0.688
>0-0.25 0.021 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.029 0.25-0.5 0.011 0.003 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.5-1.0 0.001 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.000 0.002 0.003 0.000 0.002 1.0-1.5 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.001 0.000 0.002 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000
TABLE 5.1-8 (Continued) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PARTICULAR VALUES OF MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT RIVER MILE 12 AVERAGE FREQUENCY OVER PERIOD OF REOCRD FOR MONTH INDICATED Salinity Range ('/oo) Depth/ Month Depth Range (ft) & fF)O0-0.8 0.8-1.5 1.5-3 3-5 5-8 8-12 12-16 *16-20 20-24 24-27 July o-4 0 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.023 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.750
>0-0.25 0,003 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.030 0.25-0.5 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.000 0,000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
.T.... 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
,6 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.784
>0-C.25 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.030 0.25-0.5 0.003 0.0O0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.005 0.002 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ca 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1-3
'-d July 8-16 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.031 0.750 týjI
>0-0.25 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.030 w 0.25-0.5 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 August 0-4 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 o.80o
>0-0. 25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00o 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 August 16 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.800
>0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 August 8-16 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.800
>0-0.25 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5
TABLE 5.1-8 (Continued) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PARTICULAR VALUES OF MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT RIVER MILE 12 AVERAGE FREQUENCY OVER PERIOD OF-RECORD FOR MONTH INDICATED Salinity Range (0/oo) Depth/ Month Depth Range (ft) AT(*F 0-0.8 0.8-1.5 1.5-3 3-5 5-8 8-12 12-16 16-20 20-24 24-27 September 0-4 0 o.o16 0.000 0.008 0.013 0.048 0.024 0.013 0.0o4 0.007 0.664
>0-0.25 0.012 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.020 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.002 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.008 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000' 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 September 16 0.000 0 .b0l 0. 00'2 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.781 00
>.0-0.25 0.012 0.0oo 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00,0 0.25-0.5 0.012 o.oo4 0.000 0.004 '0.000 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.5-1.0' 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.001 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.000 0.000- 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 September 8-16 0 0.009 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.005 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.033 0.746
>0-'0.25 0.012 0.000 0.000 0'.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.008 0.003 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.003 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.'5-1.0 0.002 0:.060 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.001 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.002 -6:ooo 0.007 40 .000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 zl' October 0-4. 0 0.056 o.o16 0.04,3 0.064 o.o6o 0.069 0.067 0.018 0.018 o.451
>0-0.25 0.009 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.014 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.010 0.010 0.004 0.002 0,000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.020 0.005 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 October 16 0 0.035 0.002 0.003 0.008 0.006 0.002 0.003 0.006 0.022 0.775
,, .>0-0.25 0.009 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0..000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0".5 0.014 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002.
0.5-1.0 .0.010 0..000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.009 0.004 1.0-1.5 0.0il 0.001 0.004 '-'2 0.000, 0.004, . 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.002 October 8-16 0 o.o34 0.002 ,0.002 0..011 .0.005 o.oo6 0.026 0.123 o.648
>0-0.25 0.009 0.000 oo.o6oo' o..ooo
*0.o000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.014 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.009 0.004 0.003 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.002 0.008 0.002 O.OO4 0.004 0.000 0.004 0.001 0.002 0.000
2 TABLE 5.1-8 (Continued) FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF PARTICULAR VALUES OF MAXIMUM AT AND SALINITY AT RIVER MILE 12 AVERAGE FREQUENCY OVER PERIOD OF RECORD FOR MONTH INDICATED Salinity Range (o/00) Depth/ Month Depth Range (ft)- AT (OF0-0.8 0.8-i 5 1.5-3 3-5 5=8 8-12 12-16 16-20 20-24 24-27 November 0-4 0 0.099 0.024 0.072 0.072 0.188 0.121 O.O44 0.055 0.122 0.058
>0-0.25 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.015 0.000 0.002 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.028 0.011 0.008 0.002 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1.5 0.038 0.026 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 November 0 o.o44 0.034 0.007 0.005 0.003 o.oo6 0.007 0.003 0.037 0.708
>0-0.25 o.o08 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.015 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 Hk1 0.5-1.0 0.028 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.007 0.003 0.009 Cl) 1.0-1. 5 0.012 0.008 0.007 0.002 0.005 0.017 0.002 0.002 0.008 0.000 H- 0.052 t':
November 8-16 0 0.032 0.005 0.042 0.008 0.005 0.007 0.008 0.137 0.556
>0-0.25 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.015 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.027 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.008 0.007 0.006 0.000 1.0-1. 5 O.OO4 0.008 0.012 0.005 0.005 0.019 0.010 0.001 0.000 0.000 December 0-14 0 0.070 0.021 0.115 0.162 0.111 0.175 0.005 0.074 o.o56 0.000
>0--o. 25 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.025 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.022 0.023 0.026 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.0-1. 5 0.073 0.026 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000. 0.000 0.000 December 0 0.012 0.010 0 .025 0.007 0.007 0.009 0.005 0.002 o.o0o 0.673
>0-0.25 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.025 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.5-1.0 0.020 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.030 0.023 1.0-1.5 0.017 0.017 0.026 0.007 0.005 0.0oo4 0.010 0.000 0.015 0.000 December 0 0.011 0.000 0.012 0.029 0.007 0.015 0.002 0,065 0.258 0.391
>0-0.25 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.25-0.5 0.025 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.5-1.0 0.020 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.027 0.022 0.000
- 1. 0-1. 5 0.008 0.009 0.031 0.017 0.007 0.015 0.011 o.oo4 0.000 0.000
ý11T TABLE 5.i-8a 7 0 F VALUES, CALCULATED FROM "EXPERIMENTAL DATA Mean- F Nature of Plankton Value Key measurement Reference to key70 Dunaliella euchlora 45 From mean chlorophyll: N ratio Yentsch, private comm.
Mixed lake population 50 From HPPU and dry weight Riley, 1938b E-6 Mixed population 61 From HPPU and cell volume Riley, 1941b Mixed population 20 From HPPU and phosphorus Harvey, 1950 Chlorella sp. .6 Pigment per cell volume Atkins and Parke, 1951 Coscinodiscus centralis 4 Pigment per cell volume Atkins and Parke, 1951 --4 P Thalassiosira gravida 7o Pigment per cell volume Atkins and Parke, 1951 Diatoms 17 Pigment per cell volume Gillbricht, 1952. Gymnodinium sp. 12 Pigment per cell volume Atkins and Parke, 1951 Dinoflagell~ates 33 Pigment per cell volume Gillbricht, 1952 Chaetoceros gracilis 11 Pigment per cell volume Krey, 1939 Chlorella sp. 16 Pigment per unit dry weight Data from Rabinowitch, 19 Nitzschia closterium 13 Pigment per unit dry weight Pace, 1941 CD-Coscinodiscus sp. 70 Pigment per unit dry weight Riley et al., 1956 Mixed population 66 Pigment per unit dry weight Riley, 1941b
Lj TABLE 5.1-9 NUMBERS AND KINDS OF LARVAL FISH THAT WOULD BE ENTRAINED AT THE STP SITE BASED ON MONTHLY STANDING CROP OF LARVAE AND PROJECTED AVERAGE MONTHLY INTAKE VOLUMES. Month and Standing Crop
'Salinity of Per Cubic Foot Intake volume Entrainment Species Intake (°/oo) (Number) In Cubic Feet (Number)
Ophichthidae January (snake eels) 0.0 -1.5 Myrophis punctatus 1.5 5.0 o.ooo6 1.42 x 107 4,000 TOTAL Clupeidae (herrings) January Brevoortia 0.0 - 1.5 patronus 1.5 - 5.0 0.0036 1.42 x 107 H 51,000 February 0.0 - 1.5 o.oo16 5.01 x 108 800,000 1.5 - 5.0 0.0047 1.98 x lO1 93,000 March 0.0 - 1.5 o.oo16 1.57 x 108 250,000 1.5 - 5.0 0.0002 1.35 x 107 3,000 April - May* December 0.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 0.0002 1.47 x 107 3,000 TOTAL 1,200,000 Collections not made in April or May; for other months not listed, no standing crop existed.
TABLE 5.1-9 (Continued) NUMBERS AND KINDS OF LARVAL FISH THAT WOULD BE ENTRAINED AT THE STP SITE BASED ON MONTHLY STANDING CROP OF LARVAE AND PROJECTED AVERAGE MONTHLY INTAKE VOLUMES.
.Month and Standing Crop Salinitý of Per Cubic Foot Intake Volume Entrainment eci es Intake ( /oo) (Number) In Cubic Feet (Number)
Engraulidae January (anchovies) 0.0 - 1.5 Anchoa mitchillli 1.5 - 5.0 o.ooo8 1.42 x 107 10,000 February 0.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 0.0004 1.98 x 107 8,o0o April - May* CD I-t June -.) 0.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 o.oo14 2.20 x 106 3,100 July 0.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 .0.0001 2.20 x 106 200 September 0.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 0.0003 4.20 x 107 10,000 TOTAL 31,300. Cyprinidae October (minnows and carps) 0.0 - 1.5 Unidentified species 1.5 - 5.0 0.o:0o6- 1.92 x 108 100,000 TOTAL 100,000 Collections not made in-April or May; for other months not listed, no standing crop existed.
*71 TABLE 5.1-9 (Continued)
NUMBERS AND KINDS OF LARVAL FISH THAT WOULD BE ENTRAINED AT THE STP SITE BASED ON MONTHLY STANDING CROP OF LARVAE AND PROJECTED AVERAGE MONTHLY INTAKE VOLUMES. Month and Standing Crop Salinitý of Per Cubic Foot Intake Volume Entrainment ci e s Intake ( /oo) (Number) In Cubic Feet (Number)
'Ictaiuridae September (freshwater 0.0 - 1.5 o.ooo6 42x 107 30,000
- catfishes) 1.5 - 5.0 Ictalurus un c tat us TOTAL 30,000 Syngnathidae September oD (pipefishes and 0.0 - 1.5 H seahorses) 1.5 - 5.0 0.0003 2.75 x 106 800 t-I ayngnathus sp.
TOTAL 8oo Carangidae June (jacks and 0.0 - 1.5 pompanos) 5.0 0.0001 2.20 x 10 6 200 1.5 - Caranx hiLpnos TOTAL 200 Sciaenidae (drums) January Micropogon 0.0 - 1.5 x undulatus 1.5 - 5.0 0.0035 1.42 x 107 50,000 November 0.0 - 1.5 0.0283 2. 31 x 107 654,ooo 1.5 -. 5.0 TOTAL 704,000
71 TABLE 5.1-9 (Continued) NUMBERS AND KINDS OF LARVAL FISH THAT WOULD BE ENTRAINED AT THE STP SITE BASED ON MONTHLY STANDING CROP OF LARVAE AND PROJECTED AVERAGE MONTHLY INTAKE VOLUMES. Month and Standing Crop Salinitt of Per Cubic Foot Intake Volume Entrainment Intake ( /00) Species (Number.) In Cubic Feet (Number) Gobiidae (gobies) November Gobionellus 0.0 - 1.5 boleos oma 1.5 - 5.0 o.ooo4 2.31 x 107 9,000 December 0.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 0.0002 1.47 x 107 3,000 TOTAL 12,000 April - May* Gobiosoma bosci June 0..o - 1.5 1.5 -. 5.0 o.o145 2.20 x 10 31,900 July 1'..
.t..
0.0 - 1.5 10
*~,~'** T~' 1.5 - 5.0 0.0001 2.20x 200 September 0.0.- 1.5., o.Qof6- ..
1.5 - 5 .,-. 2.75. x lO1 4,4oo October 0.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 0.0005. 6.82 x l06 3,000 TOTAL 39,500
- Collections not made in April or May; for other months not listed, no standing crop existed.
TABLE 5.1-9 (Continued)
,NUMBERS AND KINDS OF LARVAL FISH THAT WOULD BE ENTRAINED AT THE STP SITE BASED CON MONTHLY STANDING CROP OF LARVAE AND PROJECTED AVERAGE MONTHLY INTAKE VOLUMES.
Month and Standing Crop Salinitý of Per Cubic Foot
'(Number) Intake Volume Entrainment
;Spec ie~s Intake ( /oo) In Cubic Feet (Number)
Gobiosoma October ro:bustum 0.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 0.0005 6.82 x 106 TOTAL 3,000 Gobiidae, November (Type 1D) 0.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 0.00o4 2.31 x 107 9,000 H TOTAL 9,000 Gobiidae February (Type F) 0.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 0.0007 1.98 x 10 10,000 TOTAL 10,000 Bothidae December (lefteye flounders) 0.0 - 1.5 7 Paralichthys 1.5 - 5.0 0.0007 1.47 x lO 10,000 lethostigma TOTAL 10,000 Unidentified June Eggs 0.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 0.0001 2.20 x 1O6 200 TOTAL 200
TABLE 5.1-9 (Continued) NUMBERS AND KINDS OF.LARVAL FISH THAT WOULD BE ENTRAINED AT THE STP SITE BASED ON MONTHLY STANDING CROP OF-,LARVAE AND PROJECTED AVERAGE MONTHLY INTAKE VOLUMES. Month and Standing Crop Salinitý of Per Cubic Foot Intake Volume Entrainment Species Intake ( /oo) (Number) In Cubic Feet (Number) Larvae February-0.0 - 1.5 10 1.5 - 5.0 0.0002 5.01 x 100,000 April - May* June 0.0--1.5 1.5- -5.0 0.0001 2.20 x 106 200 FJ September I 0.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 0.0006 2.75 x 1O6 2,000 October 0.0 - 1.5 0.0006 1.92 x 108 100,000 1.5 - 5.0 December 0.0 - 1.5 1.5 - 5.0 0.0002 3.18 x 108 TOTAL 262,200
- Coi1e&tiond'-hotmade in April bi May; for;'other..mpnths not listed, no standing crop existed.
STP-ER C__ TABLE 5.1-10 NUMBER OF EGGS AND LARVAL FISH EXPECTED TO BE ENTRAINED BY MONTH AT THE STP SITE BASED ON MONTHLY STANDING CROP AND PROJECTED AVERAGE MONTHLY INTAKE VOLUMES Month and Standing Crop Salinity of Per Cubic Foot Intake Volume Entrainment Intake O/oo (Number) In Cubic Feet (Number) January 0.0-1.5 0.0000 3.68 x l08 120P,000 1.5-5.0 0.0085 1.42 x 107 TOTAL 120,000 February 0.0-1.5 0.0018 5.01 x 108 900,000 1.5-5.0 0.0058 1.98 x l0 110,000 TOTAL 1,010,000 March 0.0-1.5 O.oo16 1. 57 x 108 250,000 1.5-5.0 0.0002 1.35 x 107 . 3,000 TOTAL 253,000 April 0.0-1.5 0.0006* 1.08 x i0 60,000 0.0065* 2.80 x l06 18,000 1.5-5.0 TOTAL 78,000 May 0.0-1.5 0.0006* 1.32 x 108 80,000 1.5-5.0 o.0o65* 5.53 x 106 36,000 TOTAL 116,000 June 0.0-1.5 0.0000 1.61 x 108 1.5-5.0 o.o162 2.20 x 106 35,000 TOTAL 35,000 5 1- 78
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-10 (Continued) NUMBER OF EGGS AND LARVAL FISH EXPECTED TO BE ENTRAINED BY MONTH AT THE STP SITE BASED ON MONTHLY STANDING CROP AND PROJECTED AVERAGE MONTHLY INTAKE VOLUMES Month and Standing Crop Salinity of Per Cubic Foot Intake Volume Entrainment Intake O/oo (Number) In Cubic Feet (Number) July 0.0-1.5 0.0000 1.03 x 107 1.5-5.0 0.0002 2.20 x 106 4oo TOTAL 400 August 0.0-1.5 0.0000 0 0 1.5-5.0 0.0000 0 0 TOTAL 0 September 0.0-1.5 0.0009 4.20 x 107 4o,000 1.5-5.0 0.0025 2.7.5 x 106 6,900
. TOTAL 46,900 October 0.0-1.5 0 .0012 1.92 x 108 230,000
- 1. 5-5.0 0.00110 6.82 x 106 6,800 TOTAL -236,800 November 0.0-1.5 0.0000 2.56 x lO1 1.5-5.0 0.0291 2.31 x 107 672,000 TOTAL 672,000
',* . .
*- 5,. E-179
STP-ER K. TABLE 5.1-10 (Continued) NUMBER OF EGGS AND LARVAL FISH EXPECTED TO BE ENTRAINED BY MONTH AT THE STP SITE BASED ON MONTHLY STANDING CROP AND PROJECTED AVERAGE MONTHLY INTAKE VOLUMES Month and Standing Crop Salinity of Per Cubic Foot Intake Volume Entrainment Intake O/0o (Number) In Cubic Feet (Number) December 0.0-1.5 0.0002 3.18 x l08 60,000 1.5-5.0 0.0011 1.47 x lO7 16,000 TOTAL 76,000 Mean Density = *.O703 = .0070 eggs and larvae/ft 3
.
12 Yearly Total = 2,645,000 eggs and larvae., M Mean Values
- 5. 3--8o
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-11 CALCULATION OF THE NUMBER OF ADULTS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN PRODUCED BY SPECIES OR FAMILY FROM THE ESTIMATED NUMBER OF LARVAE KILLED A. Ophichthidae Myrophis punctatus (Speckled worm eel):
- 1. Fecundity = 30,000 eggs (extrapolated from fecundity 8
values of the Conger eel (Conger oceanicus).5
- 2. 25% survival to larvae stage = 30,000 xO.25 7,500 larvae survived.
- 3. 2 adults = 0.0002667 probability of survival to 7,500 larvae adult stage.
- 4. 4260.000 larvae lost by entrainment 0.0002667 probability of. survival to- adult stage 1 adult that would have been produced.,
B. Clupeidae Brevoortia patronus (Gulf menhaden): 5 9
- 1. Fecundity = 72,000 eggs.
- 2. 25% survival to larvae stage = 72,000 xO.25 18,000 larvae survived 2 adults_
- 3. 18,000 - 0.0001111 probability of survival to adult stage.
- 4. 1,202,620 larvae lost by entrainment 0.0001111 probability of survival to adult stage 134 adults that would have been produced.
C. Engraulidae Anchoa mitchilli (Bay anchovy):
- 1. Fecundity = 23,000 eggs (from other species of engraulids;37,38,39
- 2. 25% survival to larvae stage = 23,000 x 0.25 5,750,larvae survived.
.s~ .~5.i8l
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-11 (Continued) CALCULATION OF THE NUMBER OF ADULTS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN PRODUCED BY SPECIES OR FAMILY FROM THE ESTIMATED NUMBER OF LARVAE KILLED 3 adults 52 0.0003478 probability of survival to 5,750 adult stage.
- 4. 35,180.00 larvae lost by entrainment 0.0003478 probability of survival to adult stage 12 adults that would have been produced.
D. Cyprinidae Unidentified
- 1. Fecundity0= 1,000 eggs (based on other Notropis species) 140
- 2. 50% survival to larvae stage = 1,000 xO.50 500 larvae survived.
2 adults_ 2 aduls 0.0040000 probability of survival to adult 50 stage.
- 4. 115,200.0 larvae lost by entrainment 0.0040000 probability of survival to adult stage 461 adults that would have been produced.
E. Ictaluridae Ictalurus punctatus (Channel catfish): 40
- 1. Fecundity = 36,000 eggs
- 2. 75% survival to larvae stage = 36,000 x 0.75 27,000 larvae survived.
2 ad ult s
- 3. 2 000 0.0000741 probability of survival to adult stage.
- 4. 25,0.00.00 larvae lost by entrainment 0.0000741 probability of survival to adult stage 2 adults that would have been produced.
K 5.1-82
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-11 (Continued) CALCULATION OF THE NUMBER OF ADULTS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN PRODUCED BY SPECIES OR FAMILY FROM THE ESTIMATED NUMBER OF LARVAE KILLED F. Syngnathidae Syngnathus sp. (Pipefishes): h1
- 1. Fecundity = 300 eggs
- 2. 75% survival to larvae stage = 300 xO.75 225 larvae survived.
- 3. 2 adults - 3.0088889 probability of survival to adult 225 stage.
- 4. 825.0000 larvae lost by entrainment 0.0088889 probability survival to adult stage 7 adults that would have been produced.
G. Carangidae Caranx hippos (Crevalle Jack):
- 1. Fecundity = 1 400,000, eggs. (extrapolated from other carangids ;60,42
- 2. 25% survival to larvae stage = 1,400,000
,xO.25::
350,000 larvae survived. 2 a~dult s
. 350,a000 0.0000057 probability of survival to stage.
adult
- 4. 220.0000 lost by entrainment 0.0000057 probability of survival to adult stage
.1 adult would have been produced.
H. Sciaenidae Micropogon undulatus (Atlantic croaker): 41
- 1. Fecundity = 180,000 eggs.
- 2. 25% survival to larvae stage = 180,000 xO.25 45,000 larvae survived.
1..- 83
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-11 (Continued) CALCULATION OF THE NUMBER OF ADULTS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN PRODUCED BY SPECIES OR FAMILY FROM THE ESTIMATED NUMBER OF LARVAE KILLED 2 adults = 0.0000444 probability of survival to 3 45,00 adult stage.
- 4. 703,430.0 lost by entrainment 0.0000444 probability of survival to adult stage 31 adults that would have been produced.
I. Gobiidae
- a. Gobionellus boleosoma (Darter goby):
- 1. Fecundity = 200 eggs.43
- 2. 75% survival to larvae stage = 200 x0.75 150 larvae survived.
2 adults
- 3. 2 = 0.0133333 probability of survival to adult stage.
- 4. 12,180.00 larvae lost by entrainment 0.0133333 probability of survival to adult stage 162 adults that would have been produced.
- b. Gobiosoma bosci (Naked goby)!:
141
- 1. Fecundity = 250 eggs.
- 2. 75% survival to larvae stage = 250 xO.75 188 larvae survived.
3.2 adults 0.0106667 probability of survival to 188 adult stage.
- 4. 39,930.00 lost by entrainment 0.0106667 probability of survival to adult stage 1426 adults that would have been produced.
- c. Gobiosoma robustum (Code goby):
144
- 1. Fecundity = 250 eggs;
- 2. 75% survival to larvae stage = 250 xO.75 188 larvae survived.
5o 1-84
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-11 (Continued) CALCULATION OF THE NUMBER OF ADULTS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN PRODUCED BY SPECIES OR FAMILY FROM THE ESTIMATED NUMBER OF LARVAE KILLED 2 adult s 188 2d = 0.0106667 probability of survival to adult stage.
- 4. 3410.000 lost by entrainment 0.0106667 probability survival to adult stage 36 adults that would have been produced.
- d. Gobiidae (types D and F):
4 4
- 1. Fecundity = 200 eggs (mean value).43'
- 2. 75% survival to larvae stage = 200 xO.75 150 larvae survived.
- 3. 2150a adult t s 0.0133333 probability of survival to adult stage.
- 4. 234100.00 lost by entrainment 0.0133333 probability of survival to adult stage 308 adults that would have been produced.
J. Bothidae Paralichthys lethostigma (Southern flounder):
- 1. Fecundity = 123,000. eggs (extrapolated from other bothids) .45
- 2. 25% survival to larvae stage = 123,000 xO.25 30,750 larvae survived.
2 adults_
- 3. 2.0000650 probability of survival to adult 30,750 stage.
- 4. 10,290.00 lost by entrainment 0.0000650 probabilit y of survivaalto adult stage 1 adult would have been produced.
K. Others (unidentified.):
- 1. Fecundity =1142,000 eggs (mean of fecundity for all taxa).
- 2. 50% survival to larvae stage = 142,000 xO.50 71,000 larvae survived.
*.5<i-85
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-11 (Continued) CALCULATION OF THE NUMBER OF ADULTS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN PRODUCED BY SPECIES OR FAMILY FROM THE ESTIMATED NUMBER OF LARVAE KILLED
- 3. 2 adults = 0.0000282 probability of survival to adult 71,000 stage.
- 4. 280,870.0 lost by entrainment 0.0000280 probability of survival to adult stage 8 adults would have been produced.
5.1-86
.STP-ER TABLE 5.1-12 CALCULATED NUMBER OF ADULTS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN PRODUCED FROM THE ESTIMATED LARVAE LOST BY ENTRAINMENT Species or Estimated Number of Family Adults Lost Per 10 Months Ophichthidae (snake eels)
Myrophis punctatus 1 .Clupeidae (herrings) Brevoortia patronus 134 Engraulidae (anchovies) Anchoa mitchilli 12 Cyprinidae (minnows and carps) Unidentified Ictaluridae (freshwater catfishes) Ictalurus punctatus 2 Syngnathidae (pipefishes and seahorses) Syngnathus sp. 7 Carangidae (jacks and pompanos) Caranx hippos <1 Sciaenidae (drums) Micropogon undulatus 31
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-12 (Continued) CALCULATED NUMBER OF ADULTS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN PRODUCED FROM THE ESTIMATED LARVAE LOST BY ENTRAINMENT Species or Estimated Number of Family Adults Lost Per 10 Months Gobiidae (gobies) Gobionellus boleosoma 162 Gobiosoma bosci 426 Gobiosoma robustum 36 Types D and F 308 Bothidae (lefteye flounders) Paralichthys lethostigma 1 Others 8 TOTAL (10 months)* 1,590 Estimate for 12 months 1,908 5.1-88
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-13 I MONTHLY AVERAGE PROJECTED INTAKE VOLUME FROM THE COLORADO RIVER PER INTAKE SALINITY RANGE AT THE STP SITE Intake Volume (Cubic Feet) Total Intake At Salinities of At Salinities of Volume Month 0.0 - 1.5 0/0o 1.5 - 5.0 0/00 (Cubic feet) January 3.61 x l08 1.42 x 107 3.752 x 108 February 5.01 x 108 1.98 x lO7 5.208 x 108 March 1.57 x 108 1.35 x l07 1.705 x 108 April 1.079 x 108 2.80 x 106 1.107 x 108 May 1.32 x 108 5.53 x 106 1.3753' x 108 June 1.611 x 108 2.20 x 106 1.633 x 108 July 1.03 x l07 2.20 x 106 1-.25 k .07 August 0 0 .' September 4.20 x l07 2.75 4..475 x 107 October 1.92 x 108 6.82 x 106 1.9882 x 108 November 2.56 x 108 2.31 2.791 x 108 December 3.18 x 108 1.47 x jo 7 3.327 x 108 5.1-89
TABLE 5.1-14 ESTIMATED PERCENT OF STANDING CROP (NUMBER) SUBJECT TO IMPINGEMENT AT PROJECTED INTAKE SALINITY RANGES FOR THE STP SITE. DASH INDICATES SPECIES NOT CONTRIBUTING TO STANDING CROP ESTIMATE 0/00 Species Range Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Shortfin o.0-1.5 squid 1.5-5.0 - - - 100 100 -- - -- 100 Net-clinger 0.0-1.5 shrimp 1.5-5.0 - - - 100 100 - - 100 - - 100 Hn River 0.0-1.5 100 100 - 100 100 - - 100 100 100 100 shrimp 100 100 - . - 100 - - 1.5-5.0 100 100 - a Brown 0.0-1.5 - - shrimp 1.5-5.0 - - - 100 100 100 - 100 100 - - - White 0.0-1.5 - - - 100 100 - - 100 - shrimp 1.5-5.0 - - - 100 100 - 100 100 100 100 100 - Blue 0.0-1.5 - - - 100 100 - - - 100 - 100 100 crab 1.5-5.0 100 - - 100 100 - - - 100 - 100 - Mud 0.0-1.5 crab 1.5-5.0 100 - - 100 100 American 0.0-1.5 0 - - 0 0 eel 1.5-5.0 Gulf 0.0-1.5 - 100 100 100 100 100 menhaden 1.5-5.0 100 100 100 100 100 98 100 70 100 - 100
TABLE 5.1-14 (Continued) ESTIMATED PERCENT OF STANDING CROP (NUMBER) SUBJECT TO IMPINGEMENT AT PROJECTED INTAKE SALINITY RANGES FOR THE STP SITE. DASH INDICATES SPECIES NOT CONTRIBUTING TO STANDING CROP ESTIMATE 0/o 9n/00 Species -Rang~e Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Threadfin 0.0-1.5 shad 1.5-5.0 - . 100 100 100 - 100 100 Bay - 0.0-1.5 100 - 100 100 100 100 - 100 - 100 anchovy 1.5-5.0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Speckled 0.0-i.5 100 100 100 100 - - - - 100 100 02 chub 1.5-5:0 H
'-ti HJ 10I Blue 0.0-1.5 0 16 - 100 100 - 100 100 - 3 L*rJ P catfish 1.5-5.0 0 0 - 100 100 0 0 Channel 0.0-1.5 - - - 100 100 - - - 100 43 100 catfish 1.5-5.0 Sea 0.0-1.5 catfish 1.5-5.0 -.. .. 0 100 - - 0 0 13 10 -
Gafftop-sail 0. 0-1. 5 catfish 1.5-5.0 .... 0 0 - - 0 .... Bluefish 0.0-1.5 1.5-5.0 - - - 100 ,100 .- :- - 100 Crevalle 0.0-1.5 jack 1.5-5.0 - - - 100 100 100 - 0. -
TABLE 5.1-14 (ContinuedY ESTIMATED PERCENT OF STANDING CROP (NUMBER) SUBJECT TO IMPINGEMENT AT PROJECTED INTAKE SALINITY RANGES FOR THE STP SITE. DASH INDICATES SPECIES NOT CONTRIBUTING TO STANDING CROP ESTIMATE 0/0
°/oo Species Range Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
Sheeps 0. 0-1. 5 head 1.5-5.0 - - - 0 0 - - 0 - - - 0 Silver 0.0-1.5 perch 1.5-5.0 - 0 0 0 0 ..... 25 - Sand 0.0-1.5 - - - 100 100 100 seatrout 1.5-5.0 - - - 100 100 85 100 96 1oo 1oo 80 N Spot 0. 0-1.5 - 0 - 100 100 100 1.5-5.0 0 0 100 100 96 - 100 - -- - F32
- 100 100 Atlantic 0. 0-1. 5 - 100 - 100 100 croaker 1.5-5.0 91 100 - 100 100 - - - 100 0 100 100 Black 0.0-1.5 drum 1.5-5.0 - 0 0 ...... 0 Star 0.0-1.5 drum 1.5-5.0 - - - 100 100 - 100 .50 Striped 0.0-1.5 mullet 1.5-5.0 - 0 - 0 0 - - 100 100 -0 Southern 0.0-1.5 flounder 1.5-5.0 0 - - 0 0
1-rn li-m TABLE 5.1-14 (Continued) ESTIMATED PERCENT OF STANDING CROP (NUMBER) SUBJECT TO IMPINGEMENT AT PROJECTED INTAKE SALINITY RANGES FOR THE STP SITE. DASH INDICATES SPECIES NOT CONTRIBUTING TO STANDING CROP ESTIMATE
°/oo Species Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
I;::i, *e, d 0.0-1.5 sole 1.5-5.0 - - - 100 100 ..... - 10 0 -
.Hog-e 0.0-1.5 - - - 100 100 - 100
. choker 1.5-5.0
\11
',0 w0
ý
TABLE 5.1-15 ESTIMATED PERCENT OF STANDING CROP (POUNDS) SUBJECT TO IMPINGEMENT AT.PROJECTED INTAKE SALINITY RANGES FOR THE STP SITE. DASH INDICATES SPECIES NOT CONTRIBUTING TO STANDING CROP ESTIMATE. 0/00 Species Range Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Shortfin 0.0-1.5 squid 1.5-5.0 - - - 100 100 ..... 100 - Net-clinger 0.0-1.5 shrimp 1.5-5.0 - - - 100 100 - - 100 - - 100 \- River 0.0-1.5 100 100 - 100 100 S- - 100 100 100 100
!0 shrimp 1.5-5.0 100 100 - 100 100 100 -ro Brown 0.0-1.5 - -
shrimp 1.5-5.0 - - - 100 100 100 - 100 100 White 0.0-1.5 - - - 100 100 - - 100 - - - shrimp 1.5-5.0 - - - 100 100 - 100 100 100 100 100 Blue 0.0-1.5 - - - 100 100 - - 100 - 100 100 crab 1.5-5.0 100 - - 100 100 S- - 100 - 100 Mud 0.0-1.5 crab 1.5-5.0 100 - - 100 100 American 0.0-1.5 0 - - 0 0 eel 1.5-5.0 Gulf 0.0-1.5 - 100 100 100 100 - 100 menhaden 1.5-5.0 100 100 100 100 100 79 100 22 100 - 100
TABLE 5.1-15 (Continued) ESTIMATED PERCENT OF STANDING CROP (POUNDS) SUBJECT TO IMPINGEMENT AT PROJECTED INTAKE SALINITY RANGES FOR THE STP SITE. DASH INDICATES SPECIES NOT CONTRIBUTING TO STANDING CROP ESTIMATE. Species Range Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Threadfin 0.0-1.5 shad 1.5-5.0 - - 100 100 100 - 100 100 Bay 0.0-1.5 - 100 - 100 100 100 100 - 100 - 100 anchovy 1.5-5.0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Spedcked 0.0-1.5 100 100 - 100 100 .... 100 100 chub 1.5-5.0 L*J 10.o Blue 0.0-1.5 0 4 - 100 100 - 100 100 10 - 1 7 catfish 1.5-5.0 0 0 - 100 100 0 0 Channel 0.0-1.5 S- - 100 100 - - - 100 22 100 catfish 1.5-5.0 Sea 0.0-1.5 catfish 1.5-5.0 - - - 0 100 - - 0 0 2 1 Gafftop-sail o.b-1.5 catfish 1.5-5.0 .. .. O. .. 0 - - 0 .... Blue 0.0-1.5 fish 1.5-5.0 - 100 100 - S 100 Crevalle 0.0-1.5 jack 1.5-5.0 - - - 100 100 10 0- - - 0 -
TABLE 5.1-15 (Continued) ESTIMATED PERCENT OF STANDING CROP (POUNDS) SUBJECT TO IMPINGEMENT AT PROJECTED INTAKE SALINITY RANGES FOR THE STP SITE. DASH INDICATES SPECIES NOT CONTRIBUTING TO STANDING CROP ESTIMATE. 0/00 Species Range Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep= Oct. Nov. Dec. Sheeps- 0.0-1.5 head 1.5-5.0 0 0 0 0 Silver 0. 0-1. 5 m-perch 1.5-5.0 0 0 0 0 9 Sand 0.0-1.5 100 100 100 0a seatrout 1.5-5.0 100 100 98 100 89 100 100 66 F3 I~t Nd 10 ON Spot 0.0-1.5 0 100 100 100 1.5-5.0 0 0 100 100 67 100 Atlantic 0.0-1.5 100 100 100 100 100 1.5-5.0 1 100 100 100 100 0 100 100 croaker Black 0.0-1.5 drum 1.5-5.0 0 0 0 Star 0.0-1.5 drum 1.5-5.0 100 100 100 18 Striped 0.0-1.5 mullet 1.5-5.0 0 0 0 100 100 0 Southern 0.0-1.5 flounder 1.5-5.0 0 - - 0 0 .. ...
I-] TABLE 5:1-15 (Continued) ESTIMATED PERCENT OF STANDING CROP (POUNDS) SUBJECT TO IMPINGEMENT AT PROJECTED INTAKE SALINITY RANGES FOR THE STP SITE. DASH INDICATES SPECIES NOT CONTRIBUTED TO STANDING CROP ESTIMATE. 0/00 Species fRange. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Lined' 0. -1.5 sole', 1.5-5.0 - - - 100 100" ..... 100 Hog- 0. 0-1. 5, ....- 100 100 - 100 choker 1.5-5-5.0
, , . ,1 L-3 wI I'D
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-16 MONTHLY ESTIMATES OF STANDING CROP AND IMPINGEMENT OF RIVER SHRIMP FOR PROJECTED INTAKE SALINITIES (ppt) AT THE STP SITE Standing Crop Per Cubic Foot Impingement Month and Salinity Range Number Weight (1b) Number Weight (lb) January 0.0-1.5 i.60 x l0o 2.12 x 10-7 58,000 90 1.5-5.0 1.15 x 10-5 1.57 x 10-7. 163 2 Total 58,163 92 February 1.31 x 10 2.76 x 106 654,000 1380 0.0-1.5 1.5-5.0 1.15 x 10-5 8.00 x 10-9 227 0.1 Total 654,227 1380 March 0.0-1.5 0 0 0 0 1.5-5.0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 April 0.0-1.5 9.38 x 10-4 2.01'x 10 101,000. 217 1.5-5.0 6.87 x 10-6 2.20 x 10-8 19 0.1 Total 101,019 217 May
- 0. 0-1.5 9.38 x I0"4 2.01 x 10-6 124,ooo0 266 1.5-5.0 6 . 8 7.x 10-6 2.20 x 10-8 38 0.1 Total 1124,038 266 5.1-98
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-16 (Continued) MONTHLY ESTIMATES OF STANDING CROP AND IMPINGEMENT OF RIVER SHRIMP FOR PROJECTED INTAKE SALINITIES (ppt) AT THE STP SITE Standing Crop Per Cubic Foot Impingement Month and Salinity Range Number Weight (ib) Number Weight (ib) June 0.0-1.5 0 0 0 0 1.5-5.0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 July 0.0-1.5 0 0 0 0 1.5-5.0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 August 0.0-1.5 0 0 0 0 1.5-5.0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 September 0.0-1.5- 2.29 x 10-5 5,.4o x lO--8 962 2 1.5-5.0 0 0 0 0 Total -. 962 2 October
- 0. 0-1. 5 2.02 5 1 .. ,99 x 10.-6 387,000 382
. -, 1.5-5.-0 i 1' 1.15-5 .I0 5*.20. - X11o.-8 -: 78. 0.3
'Total . 387,078 .3382
ý: .-_'.-ý 9 9
-,"
STP-ER ( TABLE 5.1-16 (Continued) MONTHLY ESTIMATES OF STANDING CROP AND IMPINGEMENT OF RIVER SHRIMP FOR PROJECTED INTAKE SALINITIES (ppt) AT THE STP SITE Standing Crop Per Cubic Foot Impingement Month and Salinity Range Number Weight (lb) Number Weight (ib) November 0.0-1.5 4.49 x 10o- 1.22 x 10-5 1,150,000 3,130 1.5-5.0 0 0 0 0 Total 1,150,000 3,130 December 0.0-.1.5 1.39 x 10-3 2.84 x 10-6 441I~,ooo .902 1.5-5.0 0 0 .0 0 Total 144i ,ooo 902 Annual Total 2,916,000 6,375.6 5.1-100
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-17 ESTIMATES OF ANNUAL IMPINGEMENT OF SPECIES OF COMMERCIAL AND FORAGE IMPORTANCE AT THE STP SITE Spec ies Number Weig ht (lb) River sh rimp 2,916,000 6 ,375 Brown sh rimp 216 <1 White sh rimp 33,200 77 Blue cra b 8,365 294 Gulf men haden 261,26o 901 Bay anch ovies 207,680 168 Blue cat fish 246,580 6 ,89o Channel catfish 12,480 206 Sea catf ish 6o4 *30 Sand sea trout 9,555 113 Spot 5,245 48 Atlantic croaker 2,508,000 793 Black dr um <1 <1 Striped mullet 32 5 Southern flounder <1 <1 Total 6,210,000 15,900
'-5t. -101
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-18 (0/oo) AND UPPER TOLERANCE, TEMPERATURE AND SALINITY ACCLIMATION LD 5 0 TEMPERATURES FOR CRUSTACEANS PREFERRED, AVOIDANCE AND THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER. AND FISHES OCCURRING IN Temperature Acclimation Grep .hri. Upper Tolerance Preferred Avoidance j..50 Reference Species
.91.8- 46
ý7 Grass shrimp 770F 3.2 ---
---- 92O°01.89°F 91FSP
) j. 68°F ....--..- ....
(Palaemonetes o ---- 6"
. .72.0OOF ---- 46 74 F h. 8 3 .0 . .
7l °F 1 .0 ---- Brown Shrimp 210c 5.0 6.6- 6. 6 33 .6-36.8OC 3 8 C .- -8 2l°C 15.0 ---- 48 (Penaeus aztecus) 25.0 36.6_36.8oc 8 2100 C ---- --- -- - 8 294C 5.0 6< .- 0 ---- ---- 29.C 15,0 <38,OOC 3 48.~01 48
<38-.0 C ---- ------
2900 29° 215 .0 .0 ---- ---- 48 290c 25.0 <38.O C '8 5.0 <38.600 ---- ---- 34100 <38.6 C. 48 310c 15.0 ---- ---- 341c 25.0 <38.61C ---- 49 250C 5.0 35.0C.
---- 19 250C 25.0 35.0- C ----
250C 50.0 35.00C
> 35.oOc ---- 509
.... .20.0-35.O0C
- - .. 0 C ---- 50
- ---- 20.0-3 . - 50 Pink Shrl-p ....
(Penaeus duorarum)
..- -
White shrimpsetifer-*) -- .. . 3 "5C. . ---- ---- 50 (Penaeus ....
-u...- 30 0 20. 38.o~c (Poe fr.
-- "-
300C ---- 39.41c 94"-DF -...- 52-5- Blue crab 4 o.0 --- enodun) 790F (Cslllocates 4.5 ..-- 770O-6 -- -56 57-F ---- 77.. 2 °F5 17 68 F ...... ...-- 99. 55--06 'F 106.28nF 30 C 68p------- 34.o 38.7oC ---- ---- 53 300C 6.8 370.
-- 53 320..8 37.000 --- 53 220C 31.0 36.90 c - ---
.. .. - - -- 53 6.8 3 6 .90 ---- ----
2 20 C 39.00C ---- 300C 31.0 ---- 53
. ---- 53 300C 6.8 39.0 C ---- ----
37.2C. ---- 53 220C 34.0 ---- 6.8 37.0-c 220C ---- ---- 53 50
---- ---- 10.0-35.0OC
---- 55
° o023C
- 0[[....
Gulf menhaden - ---- . 12.0-30.03 0 ---- 55 (Brevoortia oar onu s)3 3O'O°C
......---- 50 Gizzard shad>35.00- 73.0-74.5-F - - ---
---- ---- 97,50F aDoroshad
- - ---- 55 an hovy Bay(Ancho - - - -- 23.0-30"°C 0 -
51 o.y...mitchilli) 24.5-32.5 C 33.0C ----
---- ----
- -- 1 1.O .... 60.OOF 59 F .... ---- 6
'.0 .... 86.0-F 7202 -6 ----
45 .... 65.0F0 6102F .6 4.5 ---- 68.loF 16 610F ---- So.02F 46 61pF 1.2 ---- 75.0. 60 --- 421 6102F 4
---- 51
--- 55 catf ish ----
>2.- .. .-----
S ea ---- 50 (A rius felis) ---- 68 02 2 b oF 47 Sheepshead ninnow 68.. 5oF ( rnodon ,Sarie atu )
----. . . 8 130 .0 26 51 Rough silverside -- 1 .0 . . . .. 46 6 80 2 ---. 46 (Me mb r a s ma r t i ni ca ) ... 8] O 0 FF ----
4.0 ---- 720F
-- 5LS 39.000 ---- 16 Tidewater silverside 6802 6.0 ---- ---- 91.00F (Beoldis heryllilao) 557 20c ---- 35.O C ---- 5T Green sunfish -
13500C 31.0* . .-
)Lepon. cyocolCos) 10°C . . -- 657
----0 0.0 --- -
77 0F ---- 46 Large touth bass 87100F 77pF 0.0 .... ---- 56 (Micronteru naimoides) 96.0oF 82.0_86.0oF Bluefish
---- 146 72°F 4.0 .89.0F Bluefish . ---- ---- 96.300F 47 6802
(?nmatomus saltatrix) 88.09F 6.o 72. hoF 650F 16 6.o 70.00F 46 70°F 4.0 83.00F 75 p H--- 5.1-102
STP-ER ( TABLE 5.1-18 (Continued) ACCLIMATION TEMPERATURE AND SALINITY (0/oo) AND UPPER TOLERANCE, PREFERRED, AVOIDANCE AND LD 5 0 TEMPERATURE FOR CRUSTACEANS AND FISHES OCCURRING IN THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER. Acclimation Temperature Upper Speciee Tep Sal Tolerance Preferred Avoidance L5 Reference Crevalie Jack , 68-F ........ ---- 89.0-F 99.74*F 47 (Caranx hippos) Pinfiah 68 1F ........ ---- 96.0OF 555*550- 47 (bagodon rhombiode.) Silver perch 680F ---- .... 85.501 95-61-F (Bairdiella chrysure) Sand seatrout 55.0-33505C None at 54 (Cynosclon arenarlus) 0 20.0-35.SeC >35. *C 50 0 Spotted seatrout 15.0-34.9. C 35. -C 50 (CynosclOn nebulosut) 0 Spot 25.0-34..0 C 37.5'C 54 (Leiostomus oanthur-s) >l5. 0 C 55 680F .5 .. .. 65.0 F 78.0-F 46 Atlantic croaker ---- 38.0Oc 5' (Mucropogon Undulatus) 0 77 7 Slack drum 85 . OF 46 (Pogonias cromls) 650F 4 .5 --- 46
- 79. OF---
8L'F h.0 ---- 97.SOP 46 0 Red drum 15.0-29.9 C >33.0*C 50 (Sclnops ocellata) 0 Atlantic threadfln ---- 33. OC 54, (Polydactylus octonemus) logehoker 79-F 4.0 91.00F b.6 (Trineptes maculatuo) 6301F 4.o 68.o 0np '6 75°F 4.o 8'.0-F 46 5.1-103
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-18a APPROXIMATE MONTHLY TEMPERATURE (OF) AT CIRCULATING WATER DISCHARGE INTO RESERVOIR* MONTH TEMPERATURE January 75.5 February 78.4 March 83.6 April 92.7 May
- 97. t E-12 June 102.8 July 105.2 August 104.7 September 1oo.8 2 October 92.8 November 84.6 December 79.1
- Values were obtained by adding condenser AT to mean monthly plant intake temperature (Figure 3.4-20).<
5 .1-10 3a Amendment 2
STP-ER TABLE 5.1-19
SUMMARY
OF REDUCED VISIBILITY OCCURRENCES AND ELEVATED VISIBLE PLUME OCCURRENCES AT SELECTED LOCATIONS AROUND THE STP SITE Frequency of Occur rence** hour/year Reduced Visibility Elevated (to less than Visible Location 1,000 meters) Plumes State Highway 60 1 4 State Highway 35 0 18 Farm to Market Road 1095 1 11 Farm to Market Road 521 34 197 Colorado River 4 16 Gulf Intracoastal Waterway 0 13 Matagorda Bay 0 13 Gulf of Mexico 0 12 Port of Bay City 0 1 Southern Pacific Railroad 0 9 Missouri Pacific Railroad 0 20 Atchison-Topeka and Santa Fe RR 0 4 Matagorda 0 4 Bay City 0 0 Palacios 0 4 Wadsworth 0 0 Blessing 0 4 Markham 0 1 Celanese Chemical C.ompany 0 1
- Based on heat load from two 1,250 Mwe generating units.
operating at 100% load factor. For locations covering wide areas, maximum values are presented. 5.1-104
10,000. 1,000 Lu 0 -3 U.
'UlUUI SOUTH TEXAS SURFACE 8 FEET PROJECT O 16 FEET UNITS 1 &2 o ALL DEPTHS RELATIONSHIP FRESH WATERBETWEEN FLOW RATE ADJUSTED AND SALINITY LOCATION: RIVER MILE 14 FIGURE 5.1-1
SURFACE uj 10-12-14 16-20 19 .18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 GULF DISTANCE FROM GULF (MILES) FRESHWATER FLOW RATE = 500 cfs Iz t HITU TrY AC DDWImlT UNITS 1 & 2 EXAMPLE SIMULATED SALINITY ISOPLETHS (0/00) ON COLORADO RIVER FIGURE 5.1-2
STP-ER 0z Lu LA 4-La Lu 0
"-l LU*
cc 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 DIMENSIONLESS BLOCKAGE TEMPERATURE- ATb / ATO SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 &2 RELATIONSHIP AMONG DIMENSIONLESS BLOCKAGE TEMPERATURE, RIVER VELOCITY AND DISCHARGE VELOCITY FIGURE 5.1-9
STP-ER
+0.02 U-0 a
I, I-
+0.01 I 0-
-0.01
-0.02-0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DISCHARGE EXCESS TEMPERATURE- AT'0-DEGREES FAHRENHEIT SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 &2 THE VARIATION OF DIMENSIONLESS BLOCKAGE TEMPERATURE WITH DISCHARGE EXCESS TEMPERATURE FIGURE 5.1-10
STP-ER
.05
.04
.03
.025
.02-
.015
.
i-- .010
%.009
,-. .008
.007 B .006 0
.005
* ~.004
.003
.0025
.0020
.0015
.001 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 RIVER TEMPERATURE-Ta-DEGREES FAHRENHEIT SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 &2 THE VARIATION OF DIMENSIONLESS BLOCKAGE TEMPERATURE WITH RIVER TEMPERATURE FIGURE 5.1-11
STP-ER LJ u-0 z 0 U-1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TIME (MONTHS) SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 &2 FRACTION OF THE TIME THAT THE DAILY AVERAGE BLOCKAGE TEMPERATURE IS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO 3, 2, 1, AND O.50 F FOR AN AVERAGE YEAR AVERAGING PERIOD = 40 YEARS FIGURE 5.1-20
STP-ER LJ U.L 0 0 TIME (MONTHS) SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 &2 FRACTION OF TIME THAT THE DAILY MAXIMUM BLOCKAGE TEMPERATURE IS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO 3, 2, 1, AND O.5°F FOR AN AVERAGE YEAR AVERAGING PERIOD = 40 YEARS FIGURE 5.1-21
STP-ER 0 z 100 UO Lu Ln c-
.L Li 0
cJ 50 I-.. LU 0 LA. a-z 00 0-
*0
- 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 12 TIME (MONTHS)
SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 &2 MONTHLY AVERAGE BLOWDOWN FLOW RATE AND NUMBER OF HOURS PER DAY OF BLOWDOWN OPERATION FOR AN AVERAGE YEAR AVERAGING PERIOD = 40 YEARS FIGURE 5.1-22
STP-ER PERPENDICULAR DISTANCE FROM DISCHARGE -FEET 70 e-I- 0-, w* 0 zATO=6.9 F 0 Ta =7 0F Ua =l1fps BLOCKAGE AREA (0.5 F) = 22% OF TOTAL AREA SOUTH TEXAS. PROJECT UNITS 1 &2 VERTICAL ISOTHERMS DUE TO A DISCHARGE VELOCITY OF 4.20 fps FIGURE 5.1-32
STP-ER PERPENDICULAR DISTANCE FROM DISCHARGE -FEET I-w 0~ TO =6.90 F Ta=70 0 F Ua=l fps
........... BLOCKAGE AREA (0.92 OF) = 22.7% OF TOTAL AREA SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 .&2 VERTICAL ISOTHERMS DUE TO A DISCHARGE VELOCITY OF 6.22 fps FIGURE 5.1-33
STP-ER 107 I 106 D~gLw. 10 5-
- -m 04 LL 10o4 =-
4U \-.-- N
/ /
13- ( I 10 I
/
I I I 101~ 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 I 7 1 I 9 I 10 I 11 I 12 MONTH' SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 &2 AVERAGING PERIOD = 40 YEARS AREA OF RIVER WITH EXCESS TEMPERATURE ->1°F FOR AN AVERAGE YEAR
...... Hourly Maximum for Month Maximum of Daily Averages for Month FIGURE 5.1-36
....-. Monthly Average
STP-ER cr 4101 MONTHS SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 &2 AREA OF RIVER WITH EXCESS TEMPERATURE l1.50 F FOR
....... Hourly Maximum for Month AN AVERAGE YEAR Maximum of Daily Averages for Month
..... Monthly Average FIGURE 5.1-37
STP-ER 5.7.2 CHANGES IN WATER USE Water for consumption by STP is withdrawn from the excess unappropriated water in the estuarine portion of the Colorado River. At present, the Colorado River water below the Fabridam impoundment near Bay City, Texas (see Figure 2.5-2) in the area where the STP makeup will be withdrawn is used for some irrigation (see Section 2.2). The method of withdrawal is expected to result in a minimal change in water use by off-site Colorado River water users. This method removes water from the Colorado River only after all water users, both upstream and immediately across the river from the site, have had the opportunity to obtain their full water allotments. Potable and service water will be drawn from wells as described in Section 3.3. The effect of continuous pumping. of site wells on local offsite wells was investigated using the Theis equ~a-tionI for pumping at a constant rate from an extensive con-fined aquifer. This aquifer is not hydraulically connected to the shallow aquifer zone as discussed in Section 2.5.2.1. The Theis equation is as follows: 114.6Q W(u) T W Where s = drawdown (feet) Q = well discharge (gpm) T = coefficient of transmissibility (gpd/ft) W(u) = well function 7 The argument of the well function1 W(u) is as follows: 1.87r2 S Tt Where r = distance from center line of well (ft) 7! S = storage coefficient t = pumping time (days) Calculations were made for pumping rates of 130 gpm and 560 gpm; 130 gpm represents the average pumping rate over the life of the plant and 560 gpm represents the peak pump-ing rate. The results are shown in Table 5.7-1 and in Figures 5.7-1 and 5.7-2. The radius of influence is June 6, 1975 5 .7 - 2 Amendment 7
STP-ER obtained by extrapolating the linear portion of the curves to a drawdown of 0 feet. The results are shown in Table 5.7-2. As discussed in Section 2.5, the deep-water aquifer at the site is located at approximately (-) 260 feet MSL and has a normal piezometric level of approximately (-) 20 feet MSL. The piezometric head is approximately 240 feet. As shown in Figure 5.7-2, the maximum drawdown at a distance of 7 10 feet from the site well is approximately 42 feet after 40 years of continuous pumping at the peak pumping rate of 560 gpm. Thus, the cone of depression does not inter-cept the aquifer. The drawdown at 0.5, 1, 2 and 5 miles from the site well will be approximately 21, 17, 15 and 12 feet, respectively. Thus, wells located at 0.5, 1, 2 and 5 miles from the site well will have a piezometric head of 219, 223, 225 and 228 feet, respectively, as com-pared to the original piezometric head of 240 feet. This small decrease in piezometric head will require additional energy to lift the water but will not decrease the yield of offsite wells. A more realistic estimate of drawdown over the plant life is to consider the average pumping rate of 130 gpm. The drawdown at 10 feet and at 0.5, 1 and 2 miles from the site well will be approximately 10, 5, 4 and 3 feet. June 6, J 1975 I D 573 Amendment 7I
STP-ER LIJ L-z 0 7 8 9 10 I I i ,,,,I I 11111 1 I x I ,I 1 l, I I I III, it I 1 1 1 10 100 1000 10,000 100,000 DISTANCE FROM WELL CENTERLINE (FEET) Amendment 7, June 6, 1975 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 &2 CONTINUOUS PUMPING AT 130 GPM FOR 1, 20 AND 40 YEARS FIGURE 5.7-1
STP-ER 10 100 0 1 II 2 I 4-6 8 10 12 14 16 18
- 20--
3: 22 0 24 0 26-28. 30-32-0 34- .4-P .8-I w 36 1.2- / z 1.6 38 -2.0 40 2.40 cc 2.8-3.2 - 3.6 I I IIIiI1II 1ii11 I 11I11 I I III1 1 11 I I I II 10 100 1000 10,000 100,000 DISTANCE FROM WELL CENTERLINE (FEET) Amendment 7, June 6, 1975 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 &2 CONTINUOUS PUMPING AT 560 GPM FOR 1, 20 AND 40 YEARS FIGURE 5.7-2
STP-ER 0.1 8
. * . *,'... .. "* :',.*
.. i*. . .,,*
.I,...... 1 1 '*% / ,.. '........,,._ ' ..
.............. .. .......
........
V ........ *
".
"410'WlDE TRANSMISSION LINE /,W
......... .............
-- I NTERMlTTE
--- NT OPERATIO**N.OF.. 0 5 PA OPERATION A RAILONTINPUOUPATPRTO I.....
.............. TAVELLN WATRSRENS . * :, .*_. , 7TJn AAmendmentCA . , t ' .. ...,17 .. .
'.*---- ---- ---
*.~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ TRVELI ', Aedet7 bo40CENS ue6I=
.I,"!* .*" I 8 11 rl
- ........ , S UTHRTEX SLPRJC
- CONTOURINTEOVUL PT OPFIGUR MESTA7I3 L DATUM ISTEANSEL PEVE
- " SPLWY OD- 2 o* ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ dAr ~~~. 2xl
,,**....... .... /......
CONTINOUR PLRA NT OPFET RAIGUEI57-MIAN ....... U N IE &EV2
SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS I & 2 D¶W~\EL VOLUME 5
STP-ER 6.1 APPLICANTS PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS 6.1.1 SURFACE WATERS To adequately predict and evaluate the environmental impact of South Texas Project (STP) Units 1 and 2 on associated sur-face waters, a program designed to provide pertinent chemical, physical, and biological baseline data was initiated in June, 1973. This program involves an intensive effort to gather previously existing data and a field survey program to supple-ment existing data. Available information.from various state and federal agencies and from scientific literature relative to the STP site and the surroundiing region are reviewed in Sections 2.5 and 2.7. Data gathered through this program prqvides the bases for estimating. environmental impact of various plant systems, when operational, on ecological parameters of associated sur-face waters. Water temperature and sza-rinity arL the only parameters with potential lethality that could be modified by STP plant discharges. As the STP p-lant discharge will be the only discharge in the area which will affect these para-meters, there will be no interactive effects of multiple discharges. The following discussion addresses methods used in the field study program and procedures used in evaluating data obtained. 6.1.1.1 Physical and Chemical Characteristics Water survey sampling is divided into two schedules. Major physical and chemical water quality characterization surveys (see Table 6.1-1) are conducted on a quarterly basis and minor physical and chemical water quality characterization surveys (see Table 6.1-2) at monthly intervals between major surveys. All stations shown on Figure 6.1-1 and discussed in
.Section 2.7 of this report are sampled during both major and minor surveys, with the exception of station 16 which is sampled only during major surveys. Two water quality para-meters not listed in Tables 6.1-1 and 6.1-2, bacteria and chlorophyll a, are scheduled for major surveys only. However, during June-September, bacteria samples were taken on a monthly basis.
Although station 15 (open Gulf) is scheduled for monthly sur-veys, it was not possible to sample this station during June or September due to unfavorable weather conditions and/or interruption of boat traffic from the Colorado River to the Gulf by the buildup of sand bars at the mouth of the river and subsequent filling of the river channel. June 6, 1975 6.1-2 Amendment 7
STP-ER 6.1.1.1.1 Physical Parameters Physical parameters measured during major and minor physical and chemical water quality characterization surveys include water temperature, specific conductance, pH, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, color, and odor. Odor is measured only during major surveys; all other physical parameters are measured during both major and minor surveys. Color and odor are determined in the laboratory from water samples collected in the field. Turbidity is determined in the laboratory each month and also in the field during major aquatic surveys. Specific conductance, salinity, pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen are determined in the field at each 5npling station at two depths (surface and bottom). Additiolnal measurements of specific conductance and salinity,.at V-a2ical intervals of approximately 3 feet, are taken when th!Fpresence of a salt-water tidal wedge is noted. This is -" icated by wide ranges in conductivity and salinity betwe%pir*surface and bottom measurements. Specific conductance is measured with a BecmnSolu-Bridge conductivity meter, model RB3-3341 (+/-2 perpc t). This instru-ment, equipped With conductivity probe, model CEL-VS0,2-2VH20-KP-XlO, provides temperature-compensated (to 25°C) conductivity measurements'over the range 40 to 400,000 micromhos/cm. The conductivity cell is calibrated with standard solutions before and after each field. survey to determined2Mi't Salinity is determined with a Beckman Electg,d'eless Induction Salinometer, model RS5-3. This instrument.# ovides salinity measurements over the range 0-4o0/0/o(+/-0.3(.", conductivity measurements-over the range 0-60 millimho/aA+*.(+/-0.5 millimhos/' 0 cm); and temperature measurements over the~ajge-0-40 C 0 (+0.5 C). Periodic checks on calibration of the in-st-.ment are made ip the field with a fixed resistor. Before anýfter each field survey the instrument is calibrated against* t' n.oiwn' standards. The-pH is determined using a Leeds & Northrif tmodel 7417 pH/Specific Ton/mV meter (+/-0.1 units). This-instrument is field calibrated daily-with standard-buffer0olutions. Subsurface water samples are obtained using... all-plastic Kemmerer water sampler. Dissolved oxygen is' measured at the time o &ter chemistry sample collection using a YST (model 51A) .eter. and probe (+/-0.2 ppm). This instrument is field ca?-ýAated daily using Hach chemistry for inodified Winkler techni..f9-and a mercury thermometer. " - 6.3 1 --
STP-ER In addition to the above instruments, a portable water quality monitor is used during major surveys. This instrument is a model RM925 Robot Monitor manufactured by the Schneider Instrument Company, Cincinnati, Ohio. This instrument is used to measure the following parameters on a continuous horizontal basis.
- 1. Temperature
- 2. DO
- 3. pH
- 4. Turbidity
- 5. Chloride
- 6. Conductivity Water is pumped separately from two depths, surface then bottom, through ,the monitor to obtain measurements of the above parameters.
Additional measurements of surface and bottom water tempera-ture, specific conductance and dissolved oxygen and surface" pH are obtained monthly during the biological sampling at each station. 6.1.1.1.2 Chemical Parameters Triplicate water samples for chemical analysis of parameters indicated in Table 6.1-3 acquired at each sampling station from two depths, surface and bottom, with a submersible pump. Exceptions exist at stations 12 and 13 where very shallow water (<4 feet.),frequently dictates that only surface samples be taken. It is assumed that complete mixing of the water -column occurs at these shallow water stations due to turbii-lence generated by tidal currents and wave action. Three: 6 .5-gallon plastic carboys are filled one at a time as the research vessel makes three consecutive passes. along the transect. All water chemistry samples.were obtained on the same date during September, .October, January, March, April and May., Two consecutive. days were required during June, July, December 2 and February,- while three consecutive days were required in August and November. Station 13 (Figure..2-.7-5) is.located *in Matagorda Bay at. the mouth of a .narrow. (30 ft.)., 'shall1o-,T (1-4 ft.) outlet from.: F-1-5 Parker's Cut to Matagorda Bay. A small channel extends into the bay for a. s'hort distance before shallow water is reached. 2 Samples are taken in the channel proper as low tides frequently Amendment 2
STP-ER result in complete drainage of the alluvial sand and mud flats around the channel. The channel itself is normally so shallow that, once'instrument probes are situated for surface measure-ments, they are also situated for bottom measurements. Thus, only one measurement is taken. Deeper waters (3-4 ft.) exist in the channel only during periods of heavy runoff or high tides. During either condition, strong and turbulent flow has always been observed at this stationand it has been assumed that the water column is vertically mixed. Station 12 is similar to station 13, but in a slightly wider and deeper channel at the mouth of Culver's Cut where it empties into Matagorda Bay. There is generally less turbulent flow at station 12 than at station 13. *Some surface-bottom data do exist for station 12 which substantiate that the water column is vertically mixed (June, July, August, October) during periods of flow, whether runoff or tidal induced. Thus, during F-15 both low and high water conditions, the water column is Verti-cally mixed, if flow exists. There are similar data (November and December) which indicate that during slack water conditions, the water column is not vertically mixed. Measurements made under these conditions at both surface and bottom show that exceptions exist when the water is too shallow to allow adjust-ment of probe position as at station 13. Available surface-bottom field measurements of temperature, dissolved oxygen, salinity and conductivity for STP sampling 2 6 6 s~tation 12 are given below. Temp °C D.O.. Sal. Cond. Month S B S B S B S B June 28 - 28 14.4 - 14.4 25,000 - 25,000 July 32 - 31 7.8 - .7.9 15,000 - 15,000 Aug 31 - 32 8.0 - 7.8 15,220 - 14,700 Oct 25 - 24 9.0 - 7.6 0.05 - 0.8 976 - 1,520 Nov 19 - 20 7.8 - 13.2 12,050 - 19,700 Dec 17 - 16 9.3 - 9.3 8.6 - 11.6 12,700 - 15,900 Contents of each carboy. are mixed by agitation and transferred b6 means of a spigot to properly labeled sample bottles. Label.s bear sufficient information to identify the sample as t'o;location, replicate number, time and date of collection, and ..sample type. PerkShable samples such as BOD and bacteria a3'eý'.immediately stored on ice and transported to a local analytical lab for' processing. Other samples, containing appropriate stabiiizing agents, are stored without refrigera-tion and shipped to an analytical laboratory. Preservatives, holding time, and analnIytical techniques for each parameter 6 . 1-4 a Amendment 2
STP-ER are as specified in the methods referenced in Table 6.1-3. Water samples are filtered (Millipore, 0.45smicron) in the field for chlorophyll a analysis. 6.1.1.1.3 Calculational Models Three major calculational models have been used to assist in predicting the effect of plant operation upon the physical/ chemical characteristics of the Colorado River. The salinity distribution within the estuary portion of the river has been predicted for both ambient and plant operating conditions using an empirical model, designated "SALTY", which is based upon observed salinity distributions. The basis and complete description of the model are given in Appendix 6.1-A entitled "An Empirical Model for the Determination of Salinity Distributions in the Lower Colorado River."I The excess. temperature distribution in the Colorado River resulting from the discharge of the reservoir blowdown is predicted usingia model, designated MUDSUB,, based on the work of Koh and'Fan. The model has been modified to adequately treat the water surface 'and river bottom boundary conditions. which are present at the STP site. A detailed description of the model is given in Appendix 6.1-B, entitled "Mathematical. Dispersion Models for Heated Discharges. i A mathematical model was used to estimate the tidal flow and stage. variations in the Colorado River near the proposed discharge point of the reservoir blowdown. Specifically calculations have been carried out for one complete tidal the temporal variations of the long-cycle to determine itudinal vertically integrated tidal/river flow at River Mile 12.5 (R.M. 12.5) for a range of gaged inflows up to 3,500 cubic feet per second (cfs). To describe the hydrodynamic response along the length of the Colorado River under varying tidalinputs and river- in-flows, a numerical two-dimensional (area-wise) tidal hydro-dynamic model (HYDTID 2') has been employed. This model solves explicitly the basic unsteady. equations of motion in two orthogonal directions coupled with the unsteady flow continuity equation. A basic assumption of this model is that vertical, velocity distributions are uniform and hence, computed flows are integrated over the depth. Since application of HYDTID to the. STP site involved flow in only one direction (long-itudinal), the computer code was restructured to more effi-ciently solve this one-dimensional problem. The only m6difi-cation to the HYDT!D. model as applied to the Colorado River. 2 wastouniform input condition-s .in values*-foracross 1ateral parameters which would result the width 0f the river*.F1 6.1l.- 5 Amendment 2
STP-ER The !HYDTID model has been verified using prototype data from the San Antonio-Espirito Santo Bays. A detailed description 2 of the verification is given in Chapter V (pages h0-53) of the referenced report. F-15 The HYDTID model uses a series of interconnected square ele-ments to describe to physiography of a prototype system with the basic equations applied and solved over this grid arrange-ment. The model was adapted to handle rectangular elements 6.1-5a Amendment 2
STP-ER to more effectively describe the river system. The length of these elements was specified as one-half mile (2,640 feet) and the width was varied between 150 and 185 feet as a function of river inflow. Average mean sea level bottom depths were assigned to each element based on profile data. 6.1.1.1.4 Continuous Measurement System The conductivity of the Colorado River is expected to show both long term variations, dependent on the concentrations and nature of the chemicals present, and short term fluctua-tions due to the intrusion of saline water from the Gulf of Mexico. Short term fluctuations in temperature, flow, and current direction are also expected. To measure the rate and extent of fluctuations, a continuous measurement system to monitor conductivity, temperature, and stream flow direction and velocity has been installed in the Colorado River. Data from the continuous monitoring program, will be used in con-firming predictions made with mathematical models of the mixed quality of intake water from the lower Colorado River and the consequent blowdown composition. The monitoring system will also verify predictions of dispersive character-istics near the discharge point of the STP plant and pre-dictions of the dilution profiles of the near field discharge plume region and the farfield estuary. The monitoring system consists of four stations, A, B, C, and D (see Figure 6.1-2). All stations are capable of continuously determining temperature and conductivity. Additionally, three of the four locations (stations A, C, and D) have the capabil-ity of recording river level and one station (station C) river flow. Temperature and conductivity are monitored at three water depth-s at stations B, C, and D. At station A they are monitored at only two depths because of the water shallowness. The temperature sensors are the Thermistor-Sensitor, model RM-25, manufactured by the Scheider Instrument Company, Cincinnati, Ohio. These sensors measure over the range 0-50 0 C with an accu-racy of +/-0.5 0 C, full-scale: Beckman direct reading electrodeless conductivity meters (Solu Meter), models SMS 905 and SMS 950, are used for conductivity measurements. Each element has automatic temperature compen-sation, a cell constant of 0.75/cm, and accuracy of +/-3 percent, fullscale. Dual conductivity channels are used at each water depth for each station. The low-range channels (model SMS 905) a range of 0-5,000 micromhos/cm and the high-range channels (model SMS 950) a range of 0-40,000 micromhos/cm. For flow measurements, the Marsh-McBirney Electromagnetic Water Current Meter (model 711) was selected. This instrument pro-pagates an electromagnetic field which is sensed on dual flow-measuring axes and will measure water flow velocities 6.1-6
STP-ER up to 10 fps on each axis. The overall accuracy of the instru-ment is composed of four factors:
+
- 1. Long term zero drift Less than - 0.07 fps
+
- 2. Linearity of response - 2 percent of reading
- 3. Wideband electronic noise 0.03/V-T rms fps Where T is the output time constant expressed in seconds (standard value is one second)
+
- 4. Absolute calibration - 2 percent of reading.
The river level is monitored with a Water Level Parametric System, SIC model RM25, Scheider Instrument Company. The subsurface sensors are cabled to wooden pilings anchored in the river, 20 feet below the river bed. Each piling is equipped with a U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) approved day marker. Prior to placement of the pilings, necessary permits were obtained'from the Ariy Corps of Engineers and the USCG. The sensors are hardwired to shore-based strip chart recorders by flexible shielded cabling. The cabling is enclosed in conduit which is anchored to the river bottom. The chart recorders function as a back-up, with the primary data transfer system being a telemetry channel linked to a central data.acquisition station in Pittsburgh. The shore-based chart recorders are housed in Cary-Way portable buildings equipped with air conditioning,, heat, lighting and telephone. The continuous monitor at station C became operational during the first week of January, 1974, and, at the remaining sts-tions, during the first week of March. These monitors are expected to be in operation for a period of one to two years. 6.1.1.2 Ecological Parameters A biological field study program is being conducted in parallel with the physical and chemical field program described in Section 6.1.1.1. This program is similarly divided into major and minor surveys. Major surveys (see Table 6.1-4) are con-ducted on a three-month basis and minor surveys (see Table 6.1-5) are made at monthly intervals between major surveys. All locations (see Figure 6.1-1) previously described in Section 2.7 are sampled. Just prior to plant operation aquatic sampling stations will be established in the cooling reservoir. Data collected will be used for later comparison with data col- 8 lected during plant operation. The operational aquatic ecological monitoring program is discussed in Section 6.2.5.1. September 22, 1975 Amendment 8
STP-ER The biological program is designed to assess the natural and seasonal variation in populations and interrelationships of fish, phytoplankton, zooplankton, ichthyoplankton and benthos by repetitive monthly sampling in several localities. Taxo-nomic identification of organisms are made by qualified biologists with specialties in the respective areas above, using standard and accepted local and regional taxonomic keys and other scientific literature. Bacterial populations are also being investigated using standard methods as referenced in Table 6.1-3. During each survey, visual observations were made for aquatic macrophytes. The contents of benthic and trawl samples were also observed for such plants. Since no aquatic macrophytes were observed, methodology for their study is omitted in the discussion below. 6.1.1.2.1- Plankton Phytoplankton and zooplankton samples are obtained concurrently with the collection of water chemistry samples from two depths, surface and bottom, by use of a submersible pump. A 500-milliliter portion is refrigerated and shipped immediately to the laboratory for microscopic examination. Three one-gallon replicate samples are fixed and preserved with acid Lugol's solution (approximately one percent ýfdnal concentration). These samples are shipped to the labdratories for a detailed species composition analysis. Additional zooplankton samples are collected using an Isaacs-Kidd high speed plankton sampler. This unit, equipped with a flowmeter is towed for 10 minutes at each station, and the sample obtained is preserved in 10 percent formalin. To further implement the sampling of planktonic organisms, a 10-inch, No. 20 mesh Wisconsin plankton net is towed for one minute -at the surface to collect highly buoyant forms. This sample also is preserved in 10 percent formalin. Ichthyoplankton and larval shrimp, crabs, and larger members of the macrozooplankton are taken with a plankton sled equipped with a half-meterNo.10(0.5-millimeter) mesh, tapered net and an integral flowmeter which permits volu-metric determinations. The sled is towed by boat at each station at or near the bottom for.five,.minutes, and again near the surface for five minutes. Each sample is preserved with 10 percent buffered formaýlin. Approximately one gram per liter of Rose Bengal is added to facilitate the sorting and-identification of larval fish* and eggs. S ..- 6.1-8
STP-ER Cooled plankton samples are concentrated by centrifugation and examined at 200x and 400x for motile algae. A qualitative species list is prepared to aid ini the subsequent identification of preserved phytoplankton. A similar qualitative examination is made for live zooplankton. For quantitive enumeration of phytoplankton, a 50-milliter aliquot of the well-mixed preserved plankton sample is con-centrated by centrifugation at 3,000 rpm for 10 minutes. The supernatant liquid is decanted and precipitated material is suspended in five milliliter of water. An aliquot of the concentrated sample is placed into the well of a Palmer counting chamber and all algal forms present are identified and enumerated. Hyrax mounts of cleaned diatoms are pre-pared to facilitate the identification to species level. Samples collected with the Wisconsin plankton net are examined qualitatively to ascertain whether significant numbers of highly buoyant algal species were present at or near the surface. Using a No. 20 mesh net, a 1.0-liter portion of the preserved plankton sample is filtered and allowed to settle. The zoo-plankers present are then identified and enumerated at lOOx in a Sedgewick-Rafter cell. A 1.0-milliliter aliquot of the well-mixed sample obtained with the Isaacs-Kidd plankton sampler is examined at 1OOx in a Sedgewick-Rafter cell. Samples collected with the plankton sled are hand sorted in the laboratory. Both larval fish and eggs are identified (when possible) and counted using a stereomicroscope. Following removal of larval fish and eggs, the samples are retained for the later examination for larval shrimp and crabs and other macrozooplankton. All specimens are stored in 10 percent formalin and deposited in a permanent collection of vouche.r specimens. 6.1.1.2.2 Benthos Benthic macroinvertebrates were collected in June, 1973, with a Birge-Ekman dredge. All subsequent samples were taken with a Ponar dredge which is better suited for use on substrates common to the Colorado River and Matagorda Bay estuaries. Nine samples, three near each bank and three from mid channel, are taken at each station. Exceptions occur at stations 13, 15, and. 16 which are sampled with three grabs, due to the open-water characteristics of these areas. After collection-, benthic samples receive an initial separation from sediments by washing in a 0.595-millimeter mesh sieve-bottom bucket. Samples are preserved in 10 percent formalin and returned to the laboratories for further' processing. 6..i-9
STP-ER Emergent adult insects are collected with an insect light trap, preserved in 70 percent ethyl alcohol, and returned to the laboratories. These samples provide'necessary data for estimating seasonal life-cycle variations of important fish food species. Also, adult specimens are used to verify identifications of larval forms collected in benthic samples during previous field studies. Benthic samples are washed in U.S. Standard Series sieves in the laboratory and hand sorted. Organisms not requiring special preparation prior to identification, are classified and enumerated using approprate optical aids. These specimens are then placed in 70 percent ethyl alcohol and deposited in a permanent collection. Chironomid larvae are cleared by digestion of muscle tissue, in heated five percent potassium hydroxide solution. This process renders the taxonomic features more readily visible. Cleared specimens are then washed and mounted on glass slides for identification and enumeration. Oligochaete worms are mounted on glass slides in Ammans lactophenol solution and stored on trays for a period of 3 to 7 days. This procedure clears the specimen, rendering both internal and external characters visible under magnifi-cation, and facilitates identification and counting of individuals present. Both chironomid larvae and oligochaetes are placed in 70 percent ethyl alcohol, after identification and deposited in a permanent collection of voucher specimens. 6.1.1.2.3 Fish and Associated Organisms Fish populations are sampled consistently with one or more types of collecting gear at each station (see Table 6.1-6). Experimental gill nets, consisting of five panels, each 25 feet wide and 6 feet deep, with an open mesh ranging from 1.5 to 3.5 inches, are set at selected stations for periods ranging from 12 to 24 hours. All fish and crabs collected by this method are identified, weighed and measured. An otter trawl, with an aperture of 20 feet (headrope length), upper bag mesh of 0.75 inch and cod end mesh of 0.25 inch, is towed for 5 minutes at those stations (see Table 6.1-6) where water and bottom conditions permit its proper deployment and use. Upon retrieval of the catch, larger fish specimens are identified, weighed, measured and returned to the water; all smaller fish, shrimp, crabs, and other organisms are preserved in 10 percent formalin and returned to the laboratory. Addi-tional-estimates of the fish population are provided by the use of a two-man, 20-foot bag seine in shallow areas of Mat'agorda Bay and surrounding waters. Large specimens captured by this method are identified, weighed and measured in the f'ield and released; smaller fish, crustaceans and other or-ganisms are preserved as described above' and returned to the laboratories. 6.1-10
STP-ER Organisms collected by trawl or seine gear and returned to the laboratory are identified, enumerated and measurements of length and weight are obtained. These data are collected on a repetitive monthly basis, and yield valuable information on the following topics:
- 1. Seasonal variation in biomass
- 2. Growth rates of important estuarine-dependent species such as shrimp, crab, and many fish, and
- 3. Extent of utilization of the study areas by these organisms at various stages in their life-histories.
- 4. The type specimens for each species are preserved in 10 percent formalin and deposited in a permanent collection.
6.1.1.3 Special Studies 6.1.1.3.1 Little Robbins Slough Marsh Complex Construction of the South Texas Project Reservoir will result in reduced freshwater flow and nutrient input into the Little Robbins Slough marsh complex. A possible result could include shifts in salinity gradients in the lower marsh and loss of an undetermined amount of freshwater marsh to brackish marsh and coastal prairie. Due to the possible change in salinity regimes, population sizes of freshwater fish, invertebrates and aquatic plants may be reduced. To provide information regarding utilization of the Little Robbins Slough ecosystem as a nursery area by estuarine depend-ent organisms, baseline studies are being conducted to gather data on existing salinity regimes, temporal and spatial spe-cies distribution and species population sizes. The monitor-ing program includes sampling at two Matagorda Bay control stations to provide information on organism migration into and utilization of the eastern portion of the Matagorda Bay estuary. Station 99, originally located in Matagorda Bay, was to have monitored the movement of estuarine organisms through an unnamed barge canal. However, it was learned that this canal has been plugged, precluding any movement through it. Therefore, it was decided that a station in Crab Lake would be more meaningful to the program. Hence, Station 99 has been relocated to the middle of Crab Lake. Such data can be used on a comparative basis with lower open-marsh data to establish the slough's relative role as a nursery. Salinity monitoring of Little Robbins Slough environs will be conducted concurrently with biological sampling to ensure detection of organism-salinity correlation. Nutrient input studies will be conducted monthly at selected stations to assess potential impact of reduced freshwater in-flow and associated nutrients on the lower marsh's role in meeting developmental needs of young estuarine dependent organisms.* May 2 5 197"5 6.1-11 Amendment 6
STP-ER Field studies began in April of 1975 and will continue for one year to document seasonal changes. Thirteen stations will be sampled including 11 stations in the Little Robbins Slough marsh complex and two stations in Matagorda Bay (Figure 6.1-1a). Stations 12, 13 and 16 were sampled during the June, 1973 - May, 1974 baseline environmental survey. Salinity, specific conductance, water temperature, pH and dis-solved oxygen will be measured (in the field) concurrently with collection of biological samples at each station. Water level variation will also be observed at each station. Water samples for nutrient levels including nitrates, orthophos-phate, inorganic carbon, total organic carbon and total carbon will be taken monthly during collection of biological samples at eight stations (stations 16, 91, 92, 93, 94,.95, 96 and 97 - see Figure 6.1-1a). Fish, ichthyoplankton, crustaceans and macrozooplankton will be sampled monthly at all stations with frequency increasing to once every two weeks at the station in Crab Bayou, (station 98) and stations 12, 13 and 99 during March through May and August through December. These periods of intensive sampling are. repre-sentative of the expected highest influx of estuarine dependent organisms. Benthos, phytoplankton, periphyton, macrophyton and microzooplankton will be sampled quarterly at all stations in May, August, November and February. Macrophyton studies will include quarterly sampling of any forms present and qualitative estimates of dominant forms and relative abundance. Qualitative observations will be made during other trips. Emergent hydro-phytes will be included in a terrestrial survey of the marsh ecosystem. Duplicate water samples will be taken monthly and duplicate sedi-ment samples will be taken quarterly during collection of biolog-ical samples at 12 stations. Water samples will be analyzed for dissolved nutrients and when applicable (i.e., high turbidity), suspended matter will be analyzed using procedures for analyses of sediment nutrients. Parameters will include nitrates, ortho-phosphate, inorganic carbon, total organic carbon and total carbon. 6.1.1.3.2 Entrainment Monitoring Program The location of the STP makeup pump station on the Colorado River is such that a potential exists for entrainment of eggs, larvae, and/or juveniles of commercial-ly and recreationally valuable fish, shrimp and crabs. Low river flow allows some salt water intrusion and associated migration of these organisms into the.vicinity of and upstream from the intake. Under the proposed intermittent makeup water pumping scheme, the magnitude of any entrainment can be expected to vary with season-and salinity regimes in the river. Although STP baseline data were gathered during an extremely wet May 2, 19.75 6-. 1-11a Amendment 6
STP-ER year, density calculations for these organisms in the vicinity of the proposed intake were made in a conservative manner and are believed representative. To confirm predicted entrainment under low flow conditions, an additional study will be conducted to determine the densities of planktonic organisms adjacent to the proposed makeup intake structure during low flow conditions. The przogram will be divided into two phases: the first phase will be prior to actual pumping and the second phase will be during cooling lake filling operations. The first phase began during April, 1975 and will continue until such time that adequate data have been acquired during low river flow conditions to character-ize the plankton populations under those low flow conditions. The second phase will begin upon initiation of cooling lake fill oper-ations and continue for one year to assure that adequate data have been acquired to measure actual entrainment., During phase one, four stations in the Colorado River willbe sampled (stations 1, 2, 3, 5 - Figure 6,1-i) to enable characteri-zation of population densities in the Colorado River under various flow conditions. Distance between stations 1 and 2 and 2 and 3 is 6 not considered sufficient for intermediate stations. During phase two emphasis will be on documentation of actual entrainment under various flow-salinity conditions and sampling will thus be limited to station 2 and the siltation basin. Salinity, specific conductance, water temperature, pH and dissolved oxygen will be measured in the field concurrently with collection of biological samples at each station. Tidal excursion will be determined from the specific conductance data to indicate the presence of a salt wedge. Freshwater flow will be obtained from USGS records. Fish, ichthyoplankton, crustaceans and macrozooplankton will be sampled at each station at least quarterly in May, August, November and February during the first phase. Additional samples will be taken when a salt-wedge is present in the vicinity of the makeup pump station as evidenced by a salinity of 30/- 'at a depth of 8 to 10 feet. Salinity will be checked daily at station 2 by on-site personnel to determine the need for intensive sampling., Intensive sampling will not exceed weekly intervals during March through May and August through December and will not exceed once every two weeks during January, February, June and July. An inten-. sive sampling frequency will be followed only for the duration of low flow conditions (i.e., salinity at a depth of 8 to 10 feet is 30/- or greater). Bottom-fishing otter trawls and bag seines will be used to sample fish and crustaceans. One trawl and. one seine sample will be taken per Station. Single, oblique plankton tows (0.5 mm) near each shore and separate tows at the surface, May 2, 1975 6.L--1Lb Amendment 6
STP-ER middepth and bottom at midstream will be used to sample ichthyoplankton and macrozooplankton. During cooling lake filling operations, sampling procedures and frequency will be as during the initial phase except for the following: (1) Sampling will be conducted only during periods 6 of actual pumping during which the above salinity and sampling interval guidelines will be applicable; (2) Exact sampling procedures (i.e., use of trawls, seines, and ichthyoplankton nets) in the siltation basin will be adjusted as necessary to meet physical sampling restrictions. May 2, 1975 6-.1-li~c M1lAmendment 6
STP-ER Organisms collected by trawl or seine gear and returned to the laboratory are identified, enumerated and measurements of length and weight are obtained. These data are collected on a repetitive monthly basis, and yield valuable information on the following topics:
- 1. Seasonal variation in biomass
- 2. Growth rates of important estuarine-dependent species such as shrimp, crab, and many fish, and
- 3. Extent of utilization of the study areas by these organisms at various stages in their life-histories.
- 4. The type specimens for each species are preserved in 10 percent formalin and deposited in a permanent collection.
6o1i-1
STP-ER 6.1.2 GROUNDWATER The STP site is located in Matagorda County, Texas. In the site area, shallow and deep aquifer zones are separated by an impervious confining zone of considerable thickness. The known major differences in the water quality data and the direction of groundwater flow confirm the substantial thickness of the impervious zone. The deep aquifer zone is recharged from infiltration of precipitation and stream percolation outside the site area. The shallow aquifer zone is also replenished from outside the site area (see Section 2.5.2). 6.1.2.1 Physical and Chemical Parameters 6.1.2.1.1 Physical Parameters A weekly water level monitoring program was initiated for the STP in July 1973. Piezometers were installed at various depthf3 in each aquifer zone. In addition to these onsite water level] measurements, previous Texas Water Development Board measure-ments for wells in the offsite area have been utilized. Piezometer locations are shown in Figure 6.1-3, (Pump Test and Piezometer Location Map). Typical piezometer installa-tion details are shown in Figure 6.1-5, (Typical Piezometer Installation). Locations and depths of piezometers are shown in Figures 6.1-6 (Borehole Location Map), and 6.1-4, (Borehole Depth Chart). The onsite water level measurements were obtained using piezo-meters consisting of slotted plastic (PVC) screens 2 inches in diameter and 3 feet long with 0.010-inch slots connected to plastic (PVC) rise pipes. The pipes are either 0.75 or 2.0 inches in diameter. The top of the riser generally pro-jects about 2.5 feet above ground surface and is protected with metal covers. Installation of piezometers followed drilling, surging, and electric logging of the holes. Clean uniform sand was placed in the borehole around the screen and riser to near the top of the particular sand unit in which the water level was to be monitored. Bentonite seals were placed in specified wells. The remainder of the hole was grouted with cement up to the ground surface, providing an effective seal. Holes for the piezometers were drilled using the hydraulic rotary method using only the natural muds while drilling. Several days after the cement grout had set, each of the piezometers was checked to ensure that it was functioning properly. Each riser was filled to the top with'fresh water, and the rate of fall was then observed. When the response was sluggish, the piezometer was flushed by pumping. 6.1-12
STP-ER Measurements of water level were taken using an electric fluid conductivity probe. When the probe at the end of the cable on the instrument touched the top of the water in the piezometer, a red light flashed on. The depth to water was measured using an engineer's field scale with the probe which is accurate to +.02 foot. The tops of the riser pipe and ground surface elevations were determined for all piezometers. 6.1.2.1.2 Chemical Parameters The preoperational program of groundwater quality sampling is divided into two phases. Phase I consisted of a monitor-ing program in which the well samples were collected and analyzed at weekly intervals. Phase I was completed in December, 1973. The purpose of this program was to determine the short term variability of the ground water quality. The Phase II sampling began February 1974. During Phase II the sampling programs will be conducted at monthly intervals for a 6-month period. Samples for groundwater quality analysis are secured from three separate test wells located on the plant site (see Figure 6.1-3). These wells provide water from three distinct zones of the Gulf Coast Aquifer. The wells and the zones sampled are identified below:
- 1. Well No. 115-D 39.5 ft clay
- 2. Well No. 2 60-80 ft sand
- 3. Well No. 114-A 125 ft sand Triplicate water samples from each well for bacteriological and chemical analysis of parameters indicated in Table 6.1-7 are acquired with an aspirator sampling device. This appar-atus consists of 0.5-inch I.D. polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe cut into 5-foot lengths for portability and handling ease and fitted with threaded couplings, a 5-gallon glass contain-er for sample collection and connecting tubes of Tygon (flex-ible PVC). The required lifting force is supplied by a vacuum pump (Millipore Corporation) and power supply is from a gasoline-powered generator.
Each well is pumped prior to sample collection to ensure a fresh inflow of water from the aquifer being sampled. Sample bottles are filled by reversing the connecting tubes, thus pressurizing the collection vessel and forcing the water into the sample bottles. 6.1-13
STP-ER Water samples collected as described above are stored on ice and shipped to analytical labs for processing. Analy-tical techniques used for each parameter are referenced in Table 6.1-7. The proposed monitoring program will be extended into Phase III to determine the effect of plant construction on the ground water quality. Similarly, the effects of plant opera-tion on the ground water quality will be monitored by the continuation of the surveillance program into the postopera-tional phase. 6.1.2.2 Models Models may be used to predict effects such as changes in groundwater level, dispersion of contaminants, and eventual transport through aquifers to surface water bodies. Descrip-tions of basic subsurface and groundwater parameters and comments relating to their reliability are presented in this section. The parameters to be discussed are those determined by one of the following methods: analysis of pump test data, laboratory permeability testing procedure, or establishment of aquifer geometry. 6.1.2.2.1 Analysis of Pump Test.-Data Theis12 developed the nonequilibrium well formula, which takes into account the effect of pumping time. Theis's formula is based on the following assumptions:
- 1. The aquifer is uniform in character and permeability in both vertical and horizontaldirections.
- 2. The formation has uniform thickness and the well penetrates the formation fully.
The formation is of infinite. areal extent and has no recharging source.
- 4. The water removed from storage. is discharged instan-taneously with lowering of head.
In its simpliest form the Theis formula is T T= 114.6QW(u) s where s = drawdown in feet Q = pumping rate in gpm T coefficient of transmissibility W(u) = well function of (u)
STP-ER uTt 2 and S 1. 87r where S = coefficient of storage t = time in days r = distance in feet from pumped test well to observation well The Theis curve-matching technique is used to get T and S. This technique is very well explained by Todd. 1 3 Jacob14 modified the Theis formula for small values of u. If time is plotted on a log scale and drawdown on an arith-metical scale, then the curve becomes a straight line. The coefficient of transmissibility is T =264Q As where T coefficient of transmissibility in gpd/ft Q = pumping rate in gpm As = slope of time-drawdown curve and and sS = 0. 3Tt~ o-T r, 2 where t = intercept of straight line at zero drawdown in days r = distance in feet from pumped well to observation well where drawdown measurements were made Data from the test well sand piezometers were analyzed by this procedure. To provide a check of results the Theis method was also utilized and found to agree. The Theis nonequilibrium equation is applicable for analysis of the recovery of a well pumped at a constant rate. If a well is pumped for a known period and then shut down, the drawdown thereafter will be the same as if the well were being pumped continuously and a recharging well of the same capacity were superimposed at the time the pumping was stop-ped 6.1 1
STP-ER Calculated recovery can be computed and plotted against logged time since pumping stopped. The values of T and S are then T 264Q A(s-s' )
- 0. 3Tt0 rT where A(s-s' )= change in water level recovery per log cycle due to the recharging well A second method of plotting the data permits direct use of residual drawdown without calculating the recovery from any extension of time-drawdown curves. It can be shown that in this case the coefficient of permeability is given by the following relation:
T 264Q As'. where As'= the change in residual draw-down per logarithmic cycle of t/t' where t is the time since pumping began and t' is the time since it stopped 6.1.2.2.2 Laboratory Permeability Testing Permeabilities have been obtained on representative clayey samples from various borings using falling-head permeability tests and consolidation tests. Because of in situ soil fabric (root holes, silt seams, desiccation cracks and so forth) the in situ permeability may be considerably larger than (ten to one hundred or more times) the laboratory permeability. Deviations from Darcy's law are most severe at low gradients, and gradients in the field seldom are much greater than unity On the other hand, the gradients used in laboratory permeabil-ity tests and developed during consolidation tests are usually very lar~ge.'(,one hundred or more). Therefore, the applicabil-ity of lab'or&tory test results for analysis of field behavior is subject to scrutiny. Estimates of seepage rates and con-solidation rates may be considerably greater than those actu-ally developed in the field, if true non-Darcy flow exists. 6.1.2.2.3 Establishment of Aquifer Geometry The subsurface explorations were reviewed and interpreted by ground water hydrologists, who prepared generalized cross 6.1--16
STP-ER sections of the subsurface aquifer conditions. These evaluations are presented in Section 2.5 Hydrology and shown in Figures 2.5-14 and 2.5-15, Generalized Hydrogeologic Cross Sections. The accuracy of these subsurface sections is known only at the actual locations of the subsurface borings. The inter-polation between borings and the generalization of the figures represents the best professional interpretation. The presence of an intervening confining clay layer, separ-ating the shallour aquifer zone from the deep aquifer zone is strongly suggested by the following findings:
- 1. Drillers logs from water wells in the site vicinity indicate a highly consolidated clay at depths of approximately 120 to 200 feet.
- 2. Site exploration borings and electric logs indicate a clay zone at depths of approximately 120 to 200 feet.
- 3. Different hydrostatic heads exist in the deep and shallow aquifer zones.
- 4. Ground water gradients are oriented in almost opposite directions in the two primary aquifer zones
- 5. Water quality in the two aquifers is noticeably different.
- 6. Onsite pump tests and previous offsite (water well) pump tests by others indicate confined conditions.
Present onsite information pertaining to the shallow aquifer zone, indicates that it consists of interbedded sand, silt, and clay layers which extend under much of the site. Between the surface and the 100-foot depth are a surface clay, a silty sand, a second sand, and a third clay. Although exploration borings and electric logs have not found these clays and sands to be perfectly uniform and continuous, they do indicate that the individual deposits are continuous under wide areas of the site. Relatively small, differing hydro-static heads have been observed between some piezometers installed at different elevations within the upper aquifer zone. The first pump test near the southeast side of the cooling reservoir indicated that this layer is confined with-in the 5,800-foot radius of influence developed during the test. 6.1--17
STP-ER Although the clay layers within the shallow aquifer zone have not been proven to be complete barriers to groundwater movement, present data indicates that vertical movement of groundwater must be retarded. Therefore, a generalized "layered" system of pervious and impervious zones may be inferred as shown in Figures 2.5-14 and 2.5-15. 6.1.2.2.4 Ground Water Infiltration Model Quantification of the infiltration of water from the 7,000-acre cooling reservoir into the groundwater system of the site area is achieved by developing a mathematical model. Seepage source dilution characteristics are traced further into the local aquifer by another mathematical model of the contaminant dispersion in the aquifer zone. Environ-mental impacts of the cooling reservoir predicted by these mathematical models are presented in Chapter 5. The mathe-matical models used for these predictions are presented in this section. 6.1.2.2.4.1 Seepage Model A closed-form approximate mathematical model was used to characterize the nature of the flowfield generated by the seepage from a 7,000-acre cooling reservoir. The selected mathematical analog movement of seepage through the unsaturated zone was used to define the time of arrival of the seepage at the saturated zone interface. The mathemat-ical development of the seepage analysis is presented in Appendix 6.1-C. The predicted seepage characteristics are presented in Chapter 5. 6.1.2.2.5 Contaminant Dispersion Model The transient two-dimensional dispersion of the seepage into the water table is predicted by a two-dimensional transport model. To solve the nonlinear partial differential time-dependent equations, a numerical scheme is developed. The method of developing a mathematical dispersion model is described in Appendix 6.1-B. The predicted spatial and temporal variation in contaminant buildup is presented in Chapter 5. 6.1-18
.1-TABLE -. 1-1 WATER CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICAL PARAMETERS MAJOR FIELD AND LABORATORY STUDIES Physical Measurements Temperature Color Specific Conductance Turbidity pH Odor Dissolved Oxygen Chemical Analyses Alkalinity
- Organic carbon Oily Matter Acidity, total Inorganic carbon Aluminum Bicarbonate Silica, total Chromium, total ON Carbonate Phosphate,total Chromium, hexavalent 0"
Hydroxide Phosphate, ortho Copper Chloride Nitrate Manganese Calcium Nitrite Cadmium Magnesium Sulfate Nickel Hardness, total Sulfide Zinc Suspended matter Sodium Lead Dissolved matter Potassium Tin Total matter Iron, total Mercury Surfactants Iron, soluble BOD 5 Phenol Ammonia COD Total carbon Kjeldahl nitrogen Pesticides (selected)
- Phenolphthalein and methyl orange.
j i STP-ER TABLE 6.1-2 WATER CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICAL PARAMETERS MINOR FIELD AND LABORATORY STUDIES Physical Measurements Temperature Dissolved oxygen Specific conductance Color pH Turbidity Chemical Analyses Alkalinity* Silica,total Acidity, Total Phosphate, total Bicarbonate Phosphate, ortho Carbonate Nitrate Hydroxide Nitrite Calcium Surfactants Magnesium Iron, total Hardness, total Kjeldahl nitrogen Suspended matter Copper Dissolveýd matter Mercury Total matter BOD 5 Total carbon Sulfate (begun in March) Organic carbon Inorganic carbon
- Phenolphthalein and methyl orange
'6. 1--67
TABLE 6.1-3 WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS AND METHODS OF ANALYSIS Parameter Reference Alkalinity,acidity *APHA p. 54 Bicarbonate, carbonate, hydroxide Calculated from acidity and alkalinity Chloride APHA p. 307 section 203C Calcium ** AA - Tnstrumentation Laboratory Magn e si uIm AA - Instrumentation Laboratory Hardness Calculated from Ca and Mg Sodium AA - Instrumentation Laboratory Potassium AA - Instrumentation Laboratory Hexavalent chromium APHA p. 157 section 117C
*Other metals AA - Instrumentation Laboratory Specific, conductance APHA p. 323 section 154 Sargent - Welch NX pH meter co 0> Color APHA p. 160 section 118 F-3 Turbidity Hach Photometric Turbidimeter Model 1860 t*d Phosphate, total & ortho *** EPA p. 235 Silica, total APHA p. 306 except sulfuric acid is used instead of oxalic acid Sulfate APHA p. 331 section 156A Sulfide APHA p. 558 section 228C Nitrate APHA p. .461 section 213C Nitrite APHA p. 230 section 134 Ammonia APHA p. 226 section 132B Kjeldahl nitrogen Total Kjeldahl APHA p. 469 section 216 Suspended matter Membrane Filter Dissolved matter Evaporation Total matter Calculated - Dissolved + Suspended Inorganic carbon By IR with. Beckman Model 915 Total Carbon Analyzer Total carbon By IR with Beckman Model 915 Total organic carbon Calculated from IC&TC Oily matter tAPI Method 733-58 Odor APHA p. 248 section 136
TABLE 6.1-3 (Continued) WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS AND METHODS OF ANALYSIS Parameter Reference
.:Pheno1 APHA p. 505, section 222C
- Su~rfactant APHA p. 339, section 159A COD APHA p. 495, section 220 BOD APHA p. 489, section 219 Bacteria, plate count APHA p. 660, section 4o6 Bacteria, coliform APHA p. 679, section 4o8A
.-- act~eria, fecal streptococcus APHA p. 690, section 4o9B
-Chlorophyll a ft Lorenzen (1967) ca H-H
*See Reference 6.1-3.
**See Reference 6.1-4.
***As listed in Table 6.1-1.
- tSee Reference 6.1-5.
ttSee Reference 6.1-6. tttSee Reference 6.1-7.
STP-ER TABLE 6.1-4 MAJOR ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION SURVEY MEASUREMENTS Bacteria, total plate count Bacteria, total coliform Bacteria, fecal coliform Bacteria, fecal streptococcus Chlorophyll a Phytoplankton Zooplankton Ichthyop1ankton Benthos Fish and other nekton Light trap (insects) 0 ~ *u
STP-ER TABLE 6.1-5 MINOR ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION SURVEY MEASUREMENTS Phytoplankton Zooplankton Ichthyoplankton Benthos Fish and other nekton 1 71
STP-ER TABLE 6.1-6 SCEEDULE OF GEAR UTILIZATION (X) FOR SAMPLING OF FISH AND ASSOCIATED ORGANISMS AT EACH SAMPLING STATION (STP 1973 - 1974) Station (Figure 6.1-1) Trawl Gill Net Seine 1 x x 2 x x 2.5 x 3 x 4 x x
- 4. 5 x 5 x x 6 x x 7
8 x x 9 x x x 10 x x 11 x x 12 x x 13 x 14 x x 15 x 16
- Majors only 6.1-72
STP-ER Amendment 7, June 6, 1975 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 & 2 MAP OF THE LOWER COLORADO _RINER SHOWING SAMPLING STATIONS FIGURE 6.1-1
STP-ER Turning Basin NOTE SHORE BASED STATIONS FOR MONITORS 'A' THRU 'D' ARE ON THE EAST BANK OF THE RIVER AT DESIGNATED LOCATIONS. THE SENSORS ARE MOUNTED TO PILINGS IN THE RIVER, EAST OF THE CHANNEL.
\ S.T.P. SITE Exotic Island Baxter 6600' 0 6600' APPROX. SCALE
BORING NO, 01 1o.1 h I 200 Q250 300 4 m *
- m
- 4 4 4 4 BORING N 0 0 00444 0 - N 0 4
4 4~ oo 00 - 0
-
00 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 B 0 00 N 0 B 0 0 0 N
-
0
- -
4 NO. 01
' I I I 11 r
VtIL T 0. . I .V . V I I- I Y Irf I~ . .rT. t- 7 w IL
.00 I
S0 ISO-I II 111t1 I 0200-, 250. 300] TO 75C oM
't]ITl 4
BORING 0~ ~ ~~~ý N. .1.N010N00 4 4 4* 4 4o F ]Ii III1 NO. 4 071 II Ulililljil1 5 0 III 10-ISO, I-0 2000 20 111 BORING NUMBERS LEGEND AREA POWER PLANT 400- COOLING LAKE 603A GENERAL SITE 250 600-70t OFF SITE 300 NOTES: I BORINGS WITH PIEZOMETERS I VERTICAL SCALE AS SHOWN 0 NO HORIZONTAL SCALE IMPLIED 3 SITE INVESTIGATION IN PROGRESS AT THE TIME THIS DRAWING WAS PREPARED, JAN. 1974. SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 & 2 BOREHOLE DEPTH CHART FIGURE 6.1-4
STP-ER I' 2*- stickup (varies) Confining layer above aquifer L2 I.~0I 3"P
" or 2" blank PV.C. pipe I.*oI josi Coarse sand filter Bentonite plug (omitted in some piezometers Cement grout backfill 9." --. . -- " " S!o t
.:.:: ,. .. :i"
- 0. 00-2" Screen Detail
.0 Aquifern yr eo F
L E L= 2.0' I. D. 0.D. Slots 1.5 2.0" 0.010" ed PV.C.-screen I1 aquifer NOT TO SCALE: SOU. TEXAS PROJECT
- NITS 1 & 2 TYPICAL .P*I*IEZOMETER INSTALLATIoN FIGURE 6.15.
MENNE
STP-ER APPENDIX 6.1-B MATHEMATICAL DISPERSION MODELS FOR HEATED DISCHARGES by A. Toblin B6 .1-1
STP-ER TABLE OF CONTENTS APPENDIX 6. 1-B MATHEMATICAL DISPERSION MODELS FOR HEATED DISCHARGES Section Title Page SUBSURFACE THERMAL DISPERSION MODEL B6 .1-5 I SUBSURFACE 'JET DISPERSION ANALYSIS B6. 1-6 II PASSIVE TURBULENT DIFFUSION ANA-LYSIS B6 .i-lo IiII B6. 1-1o ANALYTICAL APPROACH IV METHOD OF SOLUTION B6. 1-12 LIST OF SYMBOLS B6. 1-16 REFERENCE B6. 1- 19 B6 1- 2.
STP-ER LIST OF TABLES Table Title Page B6.1-1 Summary of Pertinent Equations for B6 .1-20 Subsurface Buoyant Jets B6.1-3
STP-ER LIST OF FIGURES APPENDIX 6.1-B Figure Title Page B6.1-1 Submerged Cooling Water Discharge B6 .1-23 Plume Regions B6.1-2 Submerged Jet Definition Sketch B6 .1,24 B6 .1-3 Flow Configurations for Steady Sur- B6 .1-25 face Flow B6.1-4 Flow Configurations for Steady Sub- B6 .1-26 merged Flow B6 .1-
STP-ER MATHEMATICAL DISPERSION MODELS FOR HEATED DISCHARGES The performance evaluation of the discharge structures has been conducted using state-of-the-art mathematical models implemented on a high speed digital computer. A computer code has been developed. This code treats submerged discharges (slot, multiport, and single-port diffuser structures) and has been designated MUDSUB. The analytical formulation of this model is described in the following sections. SUBSURFACE THERMAL DISPERSION MODEL When hot cooling water is realeased from a power plant through a discharge structure, the effluent induces a strong momentum transfer resembling a jet. Since the heated effluent is usually warmer than the receiving water, there is a tendency for the effluent to float upward as it propagates in the direction of the release of the discharge. As the effluent travels in the direction of the release it begins to dissipate its forward thrust (due to momentum transfer) and.buoyant thrust (due to mixing with colder ambient water). When the effluent has dis-sipated most of its momentum, it ceases to behave as a jet and continues to disperse as a passive layer of water where mixing is dominated by the ambient currents and turbulence of the receiving body of water. The passive flow region could begin either when the effluent field is trapped below the water surface or after it has reached the surface. It is possible that in the case of shallow freeboard (depth of the diffuser) the effluent may arrive at the surface of the water with a high horizontal velocity. The effluent may continue to travel as a surface jet until the momentum of the plume is comparable with the receiving body. The plume then continues to be dispersed by the ambient currents as a passive layer. For the purpose :of mathematical model development the effluent discharge is divided into regions comprising:
- 1. the dynamic jet discharge region
- 2. the passive diffusion region.
The entrainment contribution of this transition region will slightly increase the dilution of the effluent and somewhat decrease the surface temperatures beyond those predicted. Figure B6.1-1 shows the propagation and regions of interest of a submerged buoyant jet which arrives at the surface of the
-- B6oi-5
STP-ER water and a buoyant jet which loses its buoyancy before it reaches the surface of the water. The following sections dis-cuss the analytical models describing the effluent dispersion in a subsurface region of the jet and in a surface passive turbulent diffusion region. I. SUBSURFACE JET DISPERSION ANALYSIS A mathematical model has been developed to predict the tem-perature distribution due to a discharge of heated water into a stratified receiving water. The model, based on the approach of Koh and Fan,I is capable of analyzing a two-dimensional slot jet or an axisymmetric (round) jet discharge from a single-port or multiport diffuser system. The mixing of a submerged buoyant jet discharge is assumed to be governed by the magnitudes of the discharge velocity, ambient velocity, and buoyant momenta and by the profiles of ambient tem-perature and density stratification. Significant discharge and ambient characteristics of a typical jet are presented in Figure B6.1-2, which illustrates the angle (eo) of the discharge direction to the horizontal, the assumed cross-sectional velocity (u*) profiles, and the reference coordinates (x,y) and (s). The figure also shows typical ambient density[Pa(y)] and temperature [Ta(y)] stratification profiles. The analytical approach for .power plant waste water discharge is based on the generalized integral equations describing the transport characteristics of the jet as well as its interactions with the ambient water. Assuming Gaussian cross-sectional velo-city, temperature and density profiles across the jet, which are superimposed upon the velocity, temperature, and density profiles of the ambient, the equations for momentum, density-difference field, and temperature-difference field can be ex-pressed in terms of integrals of the cross-sectional variations. of the Gaussian functions for ciruclar and rectangular jets. In any discharging jet there exists a zone of flow establish-- ment extending a few diameters from the exit plane where the cross-sectional velocity profile changes from a rectangular profile (uniform velocity at the exit plane) to a Gaussian. pro-file. Experimental investigationsI show that the zone of flow establishment extends 6.2 port diameters from the exit point. This model, therefore, starts the calculations at 6.2 diameters away from the exit point. The cross-sectional variation is described as follows (All symbols are defined in the List of Symbols at the end of this appendix):
- a. Circular Jet Cross-Sectional Variation 2
u* (s,r) u(s) exp (-r /b2) + Ua cose cosA (1) pa - P (s') [a -exp(-r/X2rb) (2) B66. :J.-6
STP-ER T* (sr) aT - T(s)] exp (-r 2 /2
= rb2 (3)
- b. Slot-Jet Cross-Sectional Variation u* (s,n) = u(s) exp (-T2 /b 2) + Ua cos o o (h) p- **a (s ,n) = Pa- P(s)1 exp (-T. 2 /2 2 b2 ) (5)
Ta - T* (s,r) = jTa T(s)1 exp (-TI 2 /X 2 5 b 2 (6) Invoking the conservation of mass, momentum, density deficiency (the difference between the jet-water density and the ambient-water density) and temperature deficiency (difference in jet-water temperature and ambient-water temperature) a set of characteristic equations can be defined in terms of the Gaussian velocity~profiles as illustrated by Equations (7) and (8) for each slotJet. Su* (s,)d Area [ u(s)exp -Ti 2 2 a dT Area -hL
=L u(s) b\'_ erf (h U/b) + e~rf (h L/b~l 2 [
+ LU cos, cosc (hu+hL') oa B 6,.,l -7
STP-ER F = [Pa - P* (sT)l u* (sfl) d Area Area (-T12 /Xb2) u(s)exp () 2/b2) Lfhu [P )
+ [P,-P(sj exp() 2 /X 2b 2) Ua cose coso }dr)
= L a_(s) beX N p 7 as 2 us {erf (hAIXý'I/'xsb),+erf(hL4727/*b) +Ua cos e cos 4 erf (hu/X Sb) +erf(hL /X-sb }(8) The pertinent equations for round and slot jets are developed in a similar fashion and are summarized in Table B6.1-1. The equations in Table B6.1-1 define all the quantities needed for either a round-jet or a slot-jet thermal analysis. However, a multiple-jet submerged discharge consists partly of distinct round jets and partly of merged jets which can be treated as slot jets.- In-order to compute the propagation variations of the-properties of multiple-jet discharges it is necessary to identify the jet -interference threshold and to switch ýthe computational sequence from the round-jet equations to the slot-jet equations. The transition from round jet to slot jet occurs when, the entrainment as calculated by round-jet equations is equal to that calculated by slot-jet equations. The transition is defined by the following equations: B6 .1-8
STP-ER b= L u' +UaU 1-cos ( 2a cs2A) (9) r =a r '1 u U2 +2(1- o 2 e6C os'() r a\ o (From experimental results reported by Koh and Fan1 a = 0.16 and a = 0.082, for Ua = 0) The model equations use the distance(s) along the jet center-line as the independent variable. The variable of distance along the centerline is related to variations in the x,y,z coordinates by the following: dx = ds cos e sinq6 (10) dy = ds sin e (11) dz = ds cos e cos (12) Starting with the initial jet conditions and invoking the conservation of mass, momentum, density deficiency and tem-perature deficiency, the conditions at the end of the zone of the established flow (6.2 port diameters from the exit plane) are calculated. The equations defining Q,.M, 0, 4, F, G, x, y and z as functions of s are used to calculate the jet characteristics along the centerline. dQ = E (13) ds d(M' cosesinO) = F sine cos (14) ds D cosecoso) =(M' = P EU +F sine siný (15) ds a a D d(M' sine) = f + F cose (16) ds D dF dpaQ (17) ds ds dT dG _ a ds (18) A computer program has .been developed to solve these equations. The method of solution consists of calcidIating the init"ial conditions QI,M 1 ,FI,GI fromlthe given discharge characteristics. B6.1-9
STP-ER Starting with these values the equations are integrated using the round-jet relations in Table B6.1-1. When transition, given by Equation (9), is reached the solution is continued but with the slot-jet equations for E and f as shown in Table B6.1-1. The results obtained are then converted from the variables Q,M, F, and G to the physical variables u,p, T and b. The conversion is determined from the relations in Table B6.1-1. The effects of surface and bottom boundaries on the diepersion of a subsurface discharge have been incor-porated by checking at each step of the calculations for the wetted surface area of the plume. This modification accounts for the fact that those portions of the plume in contact with the surface and/or bottom of the receiving body cannot entrain new cooling water from their surroundings. II. PASSIVE TURBULENT DIFFUSION ANALYSIS When warm water effluent loses its discharge and buoyant momenta and spreads as a passive turbulent layer, the dis-persion of the effluent is primarily governed by the ambient turbulence and natural currents. A mathematical model has been developed to calculate the dis-tribution of the excess temperature function (or dilution func-tion) due to the effect of ambient turbulence, ambient currents, and the surface heat exchange. It is assumed that the effluent discharges from a continuous source in a steady shear current and undergoes only passive turbulent diffusion. The continuous source can be either on the surface of the water or below the surface of the water. The case of a passive turbulent layer below the water surface arises due to a subsurface discharge being trapped by the ambient density stratification. III. ANALYTICAL APPROACH The basic equation governing the mode of effluent dispersion is the diffusion equation. The constant release of waste heat effluent into steady environment, where longitudinal transport by diffusion is small compared with transverse transport by diffu-sion, is defined by the following equation: u () Ky z1T(7 ax 3y 6zz where T is defined as the temperature excess above ambient iassumi~ng a constant specific heat. B6. 1-10
STP-ER The equation can be generalized to represent either an excess temperature field or a concentration field. The generalized governing equation may be expressed as: 6u : C- ay
-1 ,K Sy + 6Z z 6z
' d K c (18)
The boundary conditions may now be developed as follows:
- a. On the surface of the water the vertical transport of heat or molecular species is equal to transport due to exchange to the atmosphere.
K (c K at y = 0 (19) y 6y e where K e is the coefficient for exchange of heat or mass.
- b. The rate of change of the field property normal to the propagation vanishes at the effluent and water body interface.
ýc 3Y 0. at y = hb (20)
The field source is assumed to be located at x = 0 and y = y The. thickness and the width of the source are defined in 0 Figure B6.1-3 for the case of surface flow and in Figure B6.1-4 for the subsurface flow. Assuming the source field distribution in the y and z direction to be Gaussian, as it would be for a single subsurface jet discharge which has lost its momentum, the source field function can be expressed (in terms of the subsurface round-jet width characteristic a ) as: r c(0,y,z) = c (Oyo) exp (y-y 0 ) 2 (ZZ)21 (21) y r The source field for a slot jet which is initially directed along the direction of ambient flow can be expressed as: (Y-yo) 2 Wt Wt (22) c(O,y,z) = C (O,y,) exp 2 for > z > ( 0 22 2 y B6i.-ll
STP-ER c(.O,y,z) =C (,y exp 2 (z-z) 2 (23) max e 2 22 y r for IzI > 2 The pr.eceding equations are developed on the assumption that the end jets of a multiple-jet diffuser system are different from the other jets. The end jets are assumed to have a round configuration on one side and a slot configura-tion on the side adjacent to the intervening jet. In this way the increased entrainment of the end is accounted for in the temperature prediction calculation. IV. METHOD OF SOLUTION The equations developed for the passive turbulent effluent diffusion are complicated by the three independent variables and the complex coefficient functions. This difficulty is partially overcome by using the method of moments to reduce the number of independent variable. The moments of the distribution may be defined as: 0o C(xy) c(x,y,z) dz (24) 00 c 1 (zy) =f-00 zc(x,y,z) dz (25) o0 c 2 (x,y) = z2 c(x,y,z) dz (26) The zeroth moment co is the integrated amount of excess temperature transverse to the plume in the z-direction. The first moment cI is related to the z-coordinate of the centroid of the c-distribution. In the present model, it is zero because of the symmetry of the distribution in the z-direc-tion. The second moment c 2 defines the spread in the z-direction. The width of the effluent field is usually taken to be 4a where a 2 = c /c z z 2 0 The equations governing the moments are: S0 -Kc
ý6 yx y do (27 B6 .1-12
STP,-ER uC2 - c2 K " )- Kdc + 2K c (28)
ý3x 21y y d 2 z o a 2 Using the relation = c2/c 20 , an equation can be written in terms of a Z as:
60z2 z2 c0 BY + 2Kz u x u y y (K 6y
) + 2K y c y ( +z (29)
The boundary conditions expressed in terms of the moments are:
. o K = K c y , y e o at y = 0 (30)
*c 2 K - K c y ay e or 2
k=0 at y 0 (31) y 21y = and oy Oy 0y 0 at y = hb (32) The source condition for a single round-jet discharge expres-sed in terms of the moments is: exp - YYo c (0,y) = c (Oy (3 3) 0 0 0 202 where: co (0,yo) C cmax (0oY 0 ) ar C and: 2
*(Y-yo)
C2 (0,y) = C2 (O.,Yo) exp (34) 2a y
. B6.1-13
STP-ER where: c2 (,yo) = Cmax (O'yo) ar3 or alternately: 2 2 a z 2 (0,y ) = Tz 2 ( °'yo) = ar The source condition for a multiple-port dischargethat results in a slot jet in terms of the moments is: co (OOy) c (O,y) exp L o 2 y (35) where: c (O'Yo) max ( 0O'yo) [Wt + 2a 00 OWr 2 t-a] and: 2 (y-yo) 2 c2 (0,y) = exp
+(oYof - 2a +
where: 3 Ths,(OYo) m mec (OmYo) d2 num + +br + 2Wt ar c2t
+a a rrT27 or alternatively:
2 (oy 72Joo = -- + 'C3.2-7 -+ 2Wta 2 + t G7 - az (0 ) = z ( ' ) 2r t r 1 4- .r V T Wt + crr V2T Thus, by the moment method, the number of independent vari-ables is reduced by one. Since the c-distribution in the z-direction is usually found to be of Gaussian form from both field and laboratory experiments, 1 the diffusion process can be adequately described by knowing the zeroth moment and the second moment. In fact, if c is exactly Gaussian in the z-direction, then it is completely specified by its zeroth and second moments. Equations for higher moments can be formulated in a similar way. The higher moments are neces-sary if the c-distribution is distinctly non-Gaussian in the z-direction. B6 . 1-14
STP-ER A computer code (MUDSUB) based on the models described above has been developed to calculate the thermal dispersion due to either a single or multiple subsurface discharge. Start-ing with the independent variables describing the jet char-acteristics.such as port diameter, effluent flow rate, temperature at the port exit, spacing between the ports, the location of the diffuser in relation to the ambient water and the variables describing the ambient waters (ambient diffusion coefficients and velocity), the code generates the temperature profiles in the ambient receiving wate'r when warm water is discharged from a subsurface diffuser assembly. The output of the computer program is suitable for plotting isotherms in horizontal planes at selected ambient depths and for vertical planes using the data of the iso-thermal contours. The program also calculates isothermal surface areas and isothermal volumes. B6.1-15
STP-ER LIST OF SYMBOLS A = dissipation parameter (K z =A.Gz 14/3
/
C = drag coefficient D0 = jet diameter E = entrainment function F density deficiency FD drag force F fraction of the plume perimeter which is wetted w G temperature deficiency G1 initial value of temperature deficiency Ke e kinematic surface heat exchange coefficient Kd decay coefficient K vertical diffusion coefficient y K yl = vertical diffusion coefficient at the surface K characteristic vertical diffusion coefficient yo Kz = lateral diffusion coefficient (horizontal) L = jet spacing M = kinematic momentum M1 =momentum M = initial value of kinematic momentum Q = volume flow
= initial value of volume flow T = temperature or temperature excess T.a = ambient temperature T*.. local temperature U = ambient velocity a
B6Jo-1 6
STP-ER Wt width of the region which may be considered a slot jet be subsurface jet characteristic width in the unrestricted direction br jet characteristic width as defined by the round-r jet equations c concentration or field strength function c = zeroth moment of c 0 c = first moment of c c = second moment of c c max maximum value of c along z d.3 = jet discharge depth f buoyancy force g = gravitational acceleration h = source thickness of the passive region of a sub-0 surface discharge hb = depth of water hL = minimum of YL and b 2"- h = minimum of y and b42 r = coordinate normal to subsurface jet path r = radius of circle whose area is equal to that portion c of a subsurface round jet between the surface and bottom boundaries s = coordinate along the subsurface jet path t = time u = local velocity in the Jet U = velocity ur = velocity as calculated by the round-jet equations u = velocity as calculated by the slot-jet equations x = horizontal coordinate _B6 .1-17
STP-ER y = vertical coordinate YL = distance between plume centerline and intersection of plume with the lower boundary Y = distance between plume centerline and intersection of plume with the upper boundary Z = lateral coordinate Mr =entrainment coefficient for round jet
= entrainment coefficient for slot jet AT = temperature difference
= coordinate normal to s in a slot jet o = angle of jet trajectory to the horizontal in a sub-surface jet E0o0 initial angle of subsurface jet discharge 1 = angle formed by the radii subtending the chord which is defined by the intersection between a round jet and the lower boundary 2 = -angle formed by the radii subtending the chord which is defined by the intersection between a round jet and the upper boundary.
r =spreading ratio for round jet X = spreading ratio for slot jet p = density p = ambient density P* local density a0 source depth for passive region of subsurface dis-charge a = width characteristic of a round jet r y 0 B6 .i.
STP-ER REFERENCES B6 .1-1 Koh, R.C.Y. and L.N. Fan, Oct. 1970; Mathematical Models for Predicting Temperature Distribu-tions Resulting from Discharge of Heated Water Into Large Bodies of Water. Water Pollution Research Series. 16130 DW 010/70 Environmental Protection Office, Water Quality Office, Washington, D.C.
.,.
B6 .l-Y 9
TABLE B6.1-1
SUMMARY
OF PERTINENT EQUATIONS FOR SUBSURFACE BUOYANT JETS Quantity For Round Jet For Slot Jet of Lenath L Volume flux, Q ub2 l-exp -r 2/b 21+ fT U cos 0 cos ý r 2 iT Lub-7 [erf(hu/b) + erf(hL/b)1 1 ] a C
+ LUa cos Cos $ hu + hi)
Momentum flux, M = T u 2b2 [1-exp(-2r 2/b2)] er /b2 PO 2T OS l-e2 -F//b) 2S [erfh + erf"(L vF /bh] Ot co In-
+ 2TTub 2 U cSoso [" exp r2/b2 + LubUa cosecos4 F~i erf(hu/b) + erf hL/b ro 0 2 2 2 aU coa e 2 2 c + LU a
2 cos2e cos + hL L) Density deficiency flux, F iTQ a_)X~2 b 2+l [ -exp -r 2(A2 + ) /X2b 21] LQ-P~~bX erf h
+Q...-
4 7
/ )
+ erf (hL VXUS + /Xb)l+ Ucscs
+ Ua cos 6 cos ¢
( ex(r2/ b)] I
+ Ierf(hu/Xb) + erf (h L /'s)Al
TABLE B6.1-1 (Continued)
SUMMARY
OF PERTINENT EQUATIONS FOR SUBSURFACE BUOYANT JETS Quantity For Rocund Jet F,, r : ý I ýýt, .1 ý. (, , , f* I ý,ýri r t, h L, Temperature deficiency ,T(T,7T)X2b 2 u -- xp -rIPX + flux, G r2+ (r ,r
+ Ua Cee6 coo [lcXJ) ( r2r I ru) + +PiTT/ )
W Cf
+ ) .) I' ++ r )
I-I) H0 Buoyancy force, f r arArb Iep rc/ 11(.P bA g 'ýT [er f i, A b)
+ orfh /A b) 2 2 2 2 Entrainment function, E 21Ta bFw u + U (l-cbs co ¢ 2, LF u' + 1' Ocozr r a :; w
TABLE B6.1-1 (Continued)
SUMMARY
OF PERTINENT EQUATIONS FOR SUBSURFACE BUOYANT JETS Quantity For Round Jet For Slot Jet of Lenath L 2 U2 Co2 Cs2 6 Cos Cbp
ý-2 Drag Force, FD '[27 C bp aU (1-cQ2 CDb a (a cs o~
r Ib 2 (2'.-81-62)- ýb (h Ls i n [e12] + h sin [a/2) 7T td 0"w FH 61 2 cos- I (h L/ ýI'b) 62 =2 cos-1( 7
6T.E-hi-Region of Dynamic Spreading Region of Passive Turbulent Diffusion and Buoyant Mixing (a) EFFLUENT FIELD ESTABLISHED AT WATER SURFACE Region of Dynamic Spreading- - Region of Passive Turbulent Diffusion and Buoyant Mixing / (b) EFFLUENT FIELD TRAPPED BELOW WATER SURFACE SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 &2 SUBMERGED COOLING WATER DISCHARGE PLUME REGIONS FIGURE B6.1-1 B6.1-23
6 T.I - E-N
-- 41 S CL 0-C3 M
x Distance Density Temperature (a) Jet Definition (b) Ambient Density Profile (c) Ambient Temperature Profile SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 &2 SUBMERGED JET DEFINITION SKETCH FIGURE B6.1-2 B6.1-24
STP-ER y=O x Source Thickness ho/2 t
- Current y
(a) Depth Profile t Source Width Lo = 4%~ X _- (b) Surface Profile SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 &2 FLOW CONFIGURATIONS 4 FOR STEADY SURFACE FLOW FIGURE B6.1-3
~B6.1-.25
STP-ER Source Thickness ho y=O x Source Level YO Ii-T- WCurrent Y (a) Depth Profile Z T- .. ........ . Source Width L o = 4% I_ (b) Horizontal Profile SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNITS 1 &2 FLOW CONFIGURATIONS FOR STEADY SUBMERGED FLOW FIGURE B6.1-4 B6.1-26
STP-ER APPENDIX 6.1-c MATHEMATICAL MODELS TO PREDICT SEEPAGE FROM COOLING RESERVOIRS
STP-ER MATHEMATICAL MODELS TO PREDICT SEEPAGE FROM COOLING RESERVOIRS APPENDIX 6.1-C Prepared for HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER COMPANY 611 WALKER STREET Houston, Texas 77001 by Habib S. Rahme San L. Lien Fang C. Chen April 1974 Approved____
.
?J. Perez r. Mrv Hydrological & Geological Dept.
NUS CORPORATION 4 Research Place Rockville, Maryland 208550 c6. 1-2
STP-ER TABLE OF CONTENTS Part Title Page GROUND WATER MODELS c6. 1-5 INTRODUCTION c6. 1-5 APPROXIMATE TRANSIENT TWO-DIMENSIONAL MODEL C6.1-6 TWO-DIMENSIONAL NUMERICAL MODEL FOR UNSATURATED SOIL C6. 1-9 TRANSIENT LINEAR MODEL C6. 1-12 IV. STEADY-STATE SEEPAGE MODEL C6. 1-13 V. DISPERSION MODEL C6. 1-17 NOMENCLATURE c6. 1- 20 REFERENCES c6. 1-21 C6,. l-3
STP-ER LIST OF FIGURES APPENDIX 6.1-c Figure Title c6.1-i Profile of Soil Underlying the STP Cooling Reservoir c6.1-2 Schematic Diagram Showing the Flux Lines Out of the Reservoir c6.1-3 Schematic Diagram of the Groundwater Seepage Model c6.1-4 Flow Configuration for a Time Increment C6.1-5 Boundaries Translated to the cM' Plane C6.1-6 Diagram for Transient-Linear Model C6.1-7 Diagram Showing Steady-State Model c6.1-8 Schematic Diagram for Dispersion Model c 6, >.I.
STP-ER GROUND WATER MODELS INTRODUCTION The STP site is located in Matagorda County. Covering an area of approximately 7,000 acres, it is a small part of the Gulf Coastal Plain which is composed of thousands of feet of semiconsolidated to unconsolidated sediments sloping gulf-ward at a regional angle of three degrees. In the immediate vicinity of the site, the inclination is smaller and approxi-mates one degree. Because the surface of the plant site is nearly flat, there is no unusual relief and no visible drainage. Below the surface, an impervious zone about 6 feet thick is present. The permeability of this confining layer is 1.53 x 10-7 cm/sec. A stratum of sandy silt 17 feet thick and slightly more permeable (10-5 cm/sec) underlies the top layer. The piezo-metric surface is located approximately 4 feet below the surface-. Several wells drilled in the area of the cooling reservoir indicate the presence 6f a permeable (3 X *lo0 3 cm/sec) strip-'of fine sand sloping gently toward the lower Colorado River. This layer tends to act as a fracture for fluids draining from the upper layers. A detailed description of the geological cross section of the plant site is found in Section 2.5.2 of the South Texas Project Environmental Report. However, for the purpose of designing the seepage models a schematic diagram of the soil profile is shown in Figure C6.1-1. c6ý1-5
STP-ER PART I. APPROXIMATE TRANSIENT TWO-DIMENSIONAL MODEL The flowfield under the STP cooling reservoir can be described by the mathematical techniques of potential theory. In the x,y plane, a complex potential W may be defined by means of the following relationl: z = Hwe -w/Q - i + 2 2 (1) (See Nomenclature for definition of terms.) If Equation (1) is separated into real and imaginary parts, one obtains: x H e-WQ cos o + + w Q 2 and (2) y = -H e- sin w Q The shape of the reservoir may be obtained by setting c 0 in equations (2) and then eliminating ' by appropriate manipulations. This gives: x cos- 1 Y)2 + y2 H 2 (3) If the shape of the reservoir is given by (3), then steady-state seepage flux will be obtained by setting y = 0 and x = B/2. After performing these operations one obtains: Q = B - 2H (4) The flux lines out of the reservoir are shown in Figure C6.1-2. The stream functions passing through A and B are the free surfaces, i 0, and 4 -Q, bounding the flow. If we use the steady-state distribution of velocities"(u, v) obtained from this system and combine it with the Kelvin frontal-advance equation DF'/Dt = 0, we will have a formula with which it is possible to predict an approximate transient advance of a seepage front whose initial position is AOB in Figure C6.1-2. Expanding the Kelvin equation, it is possible to write: DF' D t + uF'
+F' u --- + vF v - -y = 0 0 (5) c6.1-6
STP-ER The functions F' (x,y,t) represents lines AOB,. A'O'B' and A"O"B" at different times. At t = 0 F' (x,y,0) describes line AOB. Similarly F' (x,y,tl) and F' (x,y,t 2 ) describe the frontal positions at time tI and t 2 . Now if we change the x,y coordinates to the orthogonal system tP, Equation (5) may be written after incorporating the porosity f in the form:
?1 1* 2 F 0 (6)
The solution of (6) can be readily obtained as: F(=,4).t + f 2 + g(M) = 0' (7) where: g(i) is a function dependent on , resulting from the integration, and j~ 1~~If- 2 which can be obtained by differentiating (1) with-respect to z and then separating the real and imaginary parts. Hence: 12= [Real (*z)12 + Imag (3dj2 (8) If we replace IV12 by its value, perform the integration and apply the condition: for t = 0, g(4) = F(O,4) we get: 2 . trw ( - ee I) + 2H (1 - e ) sin (9) f = - 2Q w Q For reservoirs as large as the one planned for STP, the rate of flux Q is much larger than the largest value of c in the system. Several calculations carried out for a r servoir 20,000 feet wide have shown that e-27P/Q and e- c/Q are essentially equal to one. Under these c'onditions formula (9) reduces to the form: t = -re (.10) This ifidi-cates first, that the seepage from a'large reservoir is'ess'entially vertical-and second that the transient flood 'front 'is" parallel to the:p6tential lin.es, , .
STP-ER Although Equations (9) and (10) may be used to calculate the transient seepage flow from reservoirs, ditches or ponds, their use is limited to homogeneous formations. Because heterogeneity is more predominant in real formations, it was felt necessary to develop a two-dimensional numerical model which can be used for all types of underground strata. The development of Equation (9) was basically used to determine the type of flow from a reservoir into a homogeneous medium. c6. .- 8
STP-ER PART II. TWO-DIMENSIONAL NUMERICAL MODEL FOR UNSATURATED SOIL A schematic diagram of the groundwater seepage model. is shown in Figure C6.1-3. The first 4 feet of formation lying below the bottom of the pond is initially dry. The seepage flow will have to saturate this layer of silty clay before it connects with the piezometric surface. If we assume that the properties of the contaminated water, such as viscosity, density, and surface tension, are identical to the properties of groundwater then it is possible to state that at the time the hydraulic connection occurs nearly steady-state conditions prevail. Therefore, the first task to perform was to evaluate the two-dimensional case of transient flow occurring under a constant water head equal to Hw. This was accomplished by assuming that at a certain distance Ay below the bottom of the pond (origin of problem), a constant potential 4i exists and corresponds to an increment in time At 1 . Both and At 1 were found by solving Laplace's and Kelvin's equations simultaneously. This agreement preceded the second step which was calculated in a similar fashion. The position of the front at At 1 was used as the origin of the next time increment. The potential drop was calculated for an incre-ment in time equal to At 2 . The major difficulty in a problem of this kind is to deter-mine the position of the free surfaces. Even though these lines can be determined by a trial-and-error procedure in the p(x,y), p(x,y) system, R. Jeppson 2 showed that it is preferable to change the 4,i coordinates into x(ý,ý) and y(ý,i) planes. In this manner, the free surfaces would be defined by definite values of i. The relations used for this conversion are: ix 1 j _!
- J Dy' D J Dx'
- J 3y' D J 3x J Hax ayJ I ru Lv vi
(.12)
- c6~.19
STP-ER Relations (12) can be used to transform Equations (13) 92ý + 2= 0 and 2ý +2 = 0 y2 ay2 ax2 to Equations (14) 92x +2 *2y 2y
+ = 0 and + = 0 (14) 3ý2 a*2 Dý2 Dý2 In the x,y plane the flow configuration for a time increment is shown in Figure C6.1-4. Because of symmetry, the following boundaries are sufficient:
Along OB B 4 = 0 Along the BD 1 (free surface) 4 = Q/2 Along CD 4 = ¢i Along OC~9x (axis of symmetry) - 0 and 4 = 0 If we translate these boundaries to the 4,i plane we obtain the result shown in Figure C6.1-5. After fixing the boundaries, the Laplace's equation in y must be solved, subject to the above conditions. The numeri-cal procedure and the iterative steps are described in Jeppson's paper and need not be repeated here. It suffices, however, to say that the solution in the 4,4 plane is con-sidered final only after all calculated variables in the
),t plane agree with the boundary conditions specified in the x,y plane.
The adjusted position of the water front at time At 1 would be used as the initial condition of the next step. The procedure is repeated until the summation of the Ay terms add to the total distance between the surface and the water table. The technique described above was used to calculate stepwise the transient seepage from the STP cooling reservoir. The width of the reservoir was taken to be 20,000 feet. The calculations were made for homogeneous, heterogeneous, and anisotropic media. All these computations have shown that the lateral spread of the seepage beyond the vertical line is less than 7 feet per 10,000 feet width. Considering the flow to be vertical would be equivalent to committing an error of less than 0.07 percent. This conclusion coupled c6.l-l_,0
STP-ER with the result we found using Equation (9) proved con-clusively that the flow from the STP cooling reservoir is essentially one-dimensional and vertical in the layer under-lying the cooling reservoir.
..............................
. . . ..
~.. .. . ~.
STP-ER PART III. TRANSIENT LINEAR MODEL The previous sections dealt in great detail with the type of flow which takes place when water seeps from a reservoir into the underlying unsaturated formation. The problem is essentially a water encroachment occurring under the driving force of a constant head H . To derive a relation giving the time as a function of water penetration the following balance should be made: (see Figure C6.1-6) Let us suppose that at time t, the seepage front reaches a depth of Lw. The volume and rate of water at that instant can be written as: V = AfLw (15) dLw and Q = Af-d (16) dt The rate of linear flow can also be written as Q = K w : (17) Equating (17) with (16) and integrating the resulting equa-tion between the appropriate boundaries we obtain: t= Lw - (Hw - P ) in (w Hw - w w (18) This equation gives the time t required for the contaminated water to penetrate to a certain depth Lw in a soil whose permeability, porosity and capillary pressure are K, F, and Pw. For K = 1.53 x 10-7 cm/sec, f = 0.25, Pw = 1 foot, the con-taminat6d water will require 0.50 years to saturate 4 feet of formation underlying the reservoir area. This result applies only if Hw = 21.62 feet, which is the average head to b-e maintained in the reservoir. c6.--12
STP-ER PART IV. STEADY-STATE SEEPAGE MODEL The geologic configuration for the steady-state model is shown in Figure C6.1-7. As indicated in this sketch there is a layer of silty clay about 6 feet thick below the base of the reservoir. The permeability of this bed is 1.53 x 10-7 cm/sec. The piezo-metric surface is located 4 feet below the ground surface. Models described in the previous pages prove beyond doubt that the flow from a large reservoir is vertical. This direction does not change until the vertical flow touches the groundwater table. The groundwater steady state model may be obtained by solv-ing Laplace's equation: V2 = 0 (19) BOUNDARY CONDITIONS The boundary conditions of the system are shown in Figure C6.1-7. As indicated on this diagram, along the base of the reservoir @ = constant. Because the fiow is essentially vertical, the boundaries along AIA 2 A 3 and BIB 2 B 3 are: (20) xIAAA Ia 111A1A2 A3 1I2B3 where 4 is equal to ýl in zone A A 2B 2B equal to and 'is t 22 in zone' A A B B 2 33 2 At the junction A B and A B3 between two layers of differing permeability, the continuiýy of the flow dictates that c6.1-13
STP-ER 1 ý2
@y 3(21)
KI K2 Along segments CA 3 , B 3 E and DF,.-the confined nature of the aquifer suggests that the normal flow is negligible, there-fore, a common condition here would be: 0 (m is the normal to the direction (22)
@m considered)
The boundaries on faces CD and EF would be respectively equal to:
-T ax3 Q 2
(23) and T ax-= 1 + 2 (4 (24) ý3 is the potential distribution in zone CA 3 B 3 EFD. Q 2 is the rate of flow in the small aquifer located between CA 3 BýE and DF. This rate was calculated from piezometric readings and was verified by comparison with the regional migration of fluid in that area. QI is the steady-state rate of flow out of the reservoir. An approximate value for this variable may be obtained by evaluating the velocity of the vertical flow at line A B 3 and then multiplying it by the cross-sectional area A 3 ý 3 " If this calculation is made for one foot of width we would get a rate equal to 0.100 x 10-3 ft 3 /sec-ft. The rate of flow at race CD was calculated and found to be equal to 0.623 x 10-6 ft 3 /sec-ft. Hence, the rate of flux at face EF must be equal to 0.1006 x 10-3 ft 3 /sec-ft. STEADY-STATE NUMERICAL MODEL if we discretize Laplace's equation using an (i,j) grid system, we obtain: i+IIJ - 24'.
-
12
. +
+ i-lj +
-- 2
-
. +
..... 0 (
(Ay)2 (Ax) 2 C6. 1-14
STP-ER In general Ax would be taken equal to Ay and Equation (19a) would be reduced to a much simpler form. However, in this problem the horizontal coordinate extends fromi 0 to 10,000 feet whereas the vertical demension varies from 0 to 43 feet. A grid based on Ax = Ay is possible but would make the system too lengthy and too tedious .to solve. A more efficient solution dictates that we take Ax much larger than Ay. The conditions expressed in Equations (20), (21), (23), and (24) can be expressed numerically in the following way",
~x BB x AIA2A3 I - =0 3IB2B 123 (20a)
-n+l -n- 1 n+l -n-l 2Ax 2Ax 0 Where +/-n represents the boundaries of the system.
Above line A B,2 continuity of the flow requires that Equa-tions (21a) £e' verified: a A B a A B 2 2 2B2 1 i~~l-¢ i j- 2,i,j+1,'-12,*i j-1. (2 a 2Ay 2Ay K1 K2 On faces CD and EFthe following numerical approxima-tions must beverified:
-T Q2 (23a) 2Ax2
-T2A'x- . ' + Q °(24a)
The potential distiribution of the system was"-otained by so].ving Equation (19a) subject to all the boundary
%c6. 1-15
STP-ER considerations of the system. The Gauss-Seidel method was used, except in cases when we were able to determine the over-relaxation coefficient. In most cases, the overrelaxation method was used, reducing the number of iterations necessary to obtain the solution from about 600 to 250.
STP-.ER PART V. DISPERSION MODEL The seepage of contaminated water from the cooling reservoir will invade the first four feet of unsaturated soil. ,.Assuming there is no exchange of salt concentration between the *water and the soil the calculation of the transient water movement can be easily made by means of Equation (18). The time re-quired by the contaminant to reach the piezometric surface depends on the properties of the fluid and formation as well as the head of water maintained in the reservoir. For the condition cited above, the concentration of contaminant above the water table would be equal to the original concentration existing in the reservoir. Dispersion takes place when the contaminated water touches the piezometric surface and begins to displace the ground-water. In order to predict the movement and dispersion of the contaminant a predictive dispersion model was developed. The transport of contaminants can be described by means of the following equation: U- !+v - D xL) + (Dy (25) ay x D The velocities u, v which appear in Equation (25) or their distribution throughout the system are given by the transient and steady-state models previously described. In the de-scription of the present model, it is therefore implied that u and v are known at each grid point. The-hydrodynamic dispersion coefficients may be calculated as-a function of the molecular diffusion and the Peclet number by these following formulas: D xmx= O.7Dm + x PeDm (26) D ymy= 0.7Dm + y PeDm where:
-D is the molecular diffusion coefficient m
Pe is the Peclet number. It is defined as Pe q(d 5 0/Dm) q is the resultant velocity of flow c,,q6,. -:-17
STP-ER d is the median grain diameter of the porous material under study x and y are empirical constants. For isotropic media xBx= By=
ýy 1.8.
Figure C6.1-8 is a schematic diagram of the model where dis-persion will take place under prescribed conditions. The boundary conditions of the system are as follows: Along A2A and B2B 1y 0 for t > 0 2 1 2 1 3y Ofr O Along A2 B 2 C = C0 1.00. for t > 0 On segments CA 3 , B3 E and DF: y= 0 for t > 0 On EF, at a large distance from the reservoir, C 0 METHOD OF ANALYSIS Because of the complexity of the boundaries and for the bene-fit of using variable dispersion coefficients, a numerical scheme was sought. We considered first an explicit scheme. This procedure consists of calculating a variable at time t + At as a function of others evaluated at time t. This technique is simpler to program and requires less core space than other methods and less computer time. However, the time step is constrained by stability considerations. The implicit method is unconditionally stable but requires more space, more computer time and is generally more tedious because it involves the simultaneous solution of n equations with n unknowns.. A compromise was adopted by using the alternating-direction method. This consists of a three-point formula calculating three variables at time t + At and taken along the x direc-tion as a function of three known values taken along the y direction at time t. This scheme combines the stability of the implicit method with the ease and speed of the explicit procedure. Under some conditions, this finite difference method produces mild oscillations and local numerical error which tends to dis-sipate quickly. Of all the various versions of the A.D.!. scheme described in the li.terature, the Peaceman and Racheford procedure was selected because of its suitability to the conditions of the problem under consideration. c6,-18
STP-ER Following this scheme, the discretization of the partial differential equations give, for the first half time step:
- u. j + +
At+ C. - C n - n 2At U j 2Ay 2Ax+v DC x i+l~ j
- (Dx i+lj+ D x~'2) Cit +ID ,_,j (Ax)2 2 (AX) + D , i ,.I+i Cn i ,.i+i - D,.i 1 +1 + D Y~i') Ic.1 .C.n (27)
For the second half time step:
/ n+l C+ N + U + + n+l n+l
("2- ti - + \ 1i,/) i+lj i-lj +
.C
.2-iAt 2Ax V. ;
- i., j 2Ay D + D D C,+ + Dx Ci
-D i.i J x.2.+l..! I 1.. 1.1 2
(Ay)
+ (28)
The solution of these equations subject to the boundary con-ditions of the model would give the concentration distribu-tion.o~f the contaminant atvarious times. From these results, lines of .equal concentrations can be drawn which' show how the-dispersion invades the .system and the. speed withwhich - the increase in contaminant concentration occurs., c6'.-l- 19
STP-ER NOMENCLATURE A Cross sectional area of flow B Total width of the cooling reservoir measured at water level C Concentration of the contaminant C.j Concentration of nAt, iAx, jAy
+
Concentration at (n+l/2)At, iAx, jAy i,j D Dispersion coefficients in the x and y directions x,1,j at iAx, jAy Dy,i,j D m Molecular diffusion coefficient f Porosity of the medium F' (x,y,t) Position of Seepage front at time t pg-rho Gravity force Hw Water height maintained in the cooling reservoir K Hydraulic conductivity k Coefficient of permeability L Water penetration Viscosity of the fluid P Capillary suction of the soil w Q,Ql2 Rate of flow, rates of flow in Regions 1, 2, 3. Q3 Velocity potentials and velocity potentials in Zones 1, 2, 3. Stream function t Time T Thickness of the aquifer u,v Velocity components in.x~y directions Complex potential ý + ii z Complex plane x. + iy C 6 .1-20
STP-ER REFERENCES C6.1-I Muskat, M., 1946; The Flow of Homogeneous Fluids Through Porous Media, J. W. Edwards, Ann Arbor, Mich. C6.1-2 Jeppson, R. W., January 1968; "Seepage From Ditches: Solution by Finite Differences." Journal of the Hydraulics Division, Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers.
.. C61" l-2 1
STP-EH GROUND SURFACE 4' FIGURE c6.1-I Profile of Soil Underlying the STP Cooling Reservoir
STP-ER A B -* X Hw B' t~t~i ~
-0*- -
B" I . -2 V FIGURE C6.1-2 Schematic Diagram Showing the Flux Lines. Out of ,the Reservoir
STP-ER 7- - a 0- - 0A-**04 0-40406. *oooooooO O O O00000400444.
...
4" FIGURE c6.1-3 Schematic Diagram of the Groundwater Seepage Model A ---.- j x
-0 = + 0/2 ax =0 0.= 0.
D. 0= =1 V FIGURE c6.1-4 Flow Configuration for a Time Increment
STP-ER H + Ay, y=O , = Q/2 U y = (Hw + 6Yl)0/01 B 1 y= I-II I!
-1~ --
0 FIGURE c6.1-5 Boundaries Translated to the q Plane
STP-ER LF6 FIGURE c6.1-6 Diagram for Transient-Linear Model
20,000' I-I
- II DEPTH (FT) 0-61-C'7 23'-
C
- 43' F D
FIGURE c6.1-7 Diagram Showing Steady-State Model
IT,-ER
+ P!EZOMETRIC SURFACE c =i ~1 A2 B A7 0--
-
ac= 19' v 0 \7y A3 20' Th
~~KQNNNNNNNN'\NNN'\NNN F Sc,k at1. c . . u:, for
- Dispersion Model}}