The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNC0021555_wasteload allocation_19921214 NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNIMS COVER SHEET NPDES Permit: NCO021555 Town of Newport WWTP Document Type: Permit Issuance Wasteload Allocation Authorization to Construct (AtC) Permit Modification Engineering Alternatives Analysis 201 Facilities Plan Instream Assessment Permit History Date Range: Document Date: December 14, 1992 THIS DOCUMENT IS PRINTED ON REUSE PAPER - ICNORE ANY CONTENT ON THE REVERSE SIDE NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION V PERMIT NO.: NC0021555 Modeler Date Rec. # PERMITTEE NAME: Town of Newport F l FACILITY NAME: Newport Wastewater Treatment Plant Drainage Area(mi ) yb.g Avg. Streamflow (cfs):4_ Facility Status: Existing 7Q10 (cfs) o-y Winter 7Q10 (cfs) 0.9 30Q2 (cfs) z Permit Status: Renewal Toxicity Limits: IWC 66 % Acute(Chronic Major Minor Instream Monitoring: Pie No.: 001 n �d p Parameters ] �2[a�COG rm, ! o do�rV� Design Capacity: 0.500 MGD Upstream V Location "'SD 4�h ill Jv fa(� Domestic (% of Flow): 100 % Downstream I/ Location 7 tutl Industrial (% of Flow): �� r)OA 5rf, Effluent Summer Winter Comments: Characteristics FOTW BOD5 (m ) 11.0 zz.p NH3-N (mg/1) 1-1 3.6 STREAM INDEX: 2141) RECEIVING STREAM:Newport River D.O. (mg/1) 5. 0 6.0 Class: C TSS (mg/1) 30 30 Sub-Basin: 03-05-03 F. Col. (/100 ml) Reference USGS QuadH31SE, Newport (please attach) zoo Zoo County: Carteret pH (SU) Carteret 5-9 6- 9 Regional Office:_Wilmington Regional Office p�� •1N1QU i MON,'Y Q_. Previous Exp.Date: 1/31/93 Treatment Plant Class: II?, III? Classification changes within three miles: 0, t \ 00(&) CJ'%4 MAX' Ca. 8 mi, to SA(a Little Creek Swamp (— n - "( 2� a� Mori -�Orz Requested by: Jul hanklin J Date: 10/5/92 Prepared bye — — Date: 17- Comments: Reviewed by: Date: /a L!Gk3- za•8 `44.z, FACT SHEET FOR WASTELOAD ALLOCATION Request# 7129 Facility Name: Town of Newport WWTP NPDES No.: NCO021555 Type of Waste: 100% Domestic Facility Status: Existing Permit Status: Renewal Receiving Stream: Newport River Stream Classification: C Subbasin: 03-05-03 County: Carteret Stream Characteristic: Regional Office: Wilmington USGS # 02.0926.9865 Requestor: Shanklin Date: 1985 ? Date of Request: 10/6/92 Drainage Area(mi2): 46.8 Topo Quad: H 31 SE Summer 7Q10 (cfs): 0.4 Winter 7Q10(cfs): 0.9 Average Flow (cfs): 63 30Q2 (cfs): 2.8 IWC (%): 66 Wasteload Allocation Summary (approach taken,correspondence with region, EPA, etc.) DO's in area naturally low -- "The Newport River Estuarine System",Duke Univ. attatched T-phosphorus monitor readings somewhat high -- continue to monitor "Grease globules ...in chlorine contact basin" per staff report calls for effluent [monitoring Chlorine letter S ecial Schedule Requirements and additional comments from Reviewers: lr lr/ cc 'J",J/eAj /1 i L era f D-U$ /Yl1r &,24 %zGQ ' bulls o, ?`Z ?M6/,C/ US)f Z,Jt �cv /I)f 7 Recommended by: L Date: 11,IZ_/ Farrell Keough Reviewed by Instream Assessment o 4� �--i�y��h 1-'�-�r- Date ' Regional Supervisor:)` __ J Date: /i I( W Permits&Engineering:( /7 w� Date: /Z y� 1992 RETURN TO TECHNICAL SERVICES BY: 2 CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS Existing Limits: Summer Averages Winter Averages Monthly Weekly Monthly Weekly Wasteflow (MGD): 0.50 0.50 BOD5 (mg/1): 11 22 NH3N (mg/1): 5 10 DO(mg/1): 5 5 TSS (mg/1): 30 30 Fecal Col. (/100 ml): 1000 1000 pH (SU): 6-9 6-9 Residual Chlorine (µg/1): �-,•yv,.�t Oil&Grease (mg/1):TP ,,q TN (mg/1): Recommended Limits: Summer Averages Winter Averages EL/WQ Monthly Weekly Monthly Weekly Wasteflow (MGD): 0.50 0.50 BOD5 (mg/1): 11 22 EL NH3N(mg/1): 1.4 3.64 WQ DO(mg/1): 5 5 EL TSS (mg/1): 30 30 EL Fecal Col. (/100 in]): 200 200 WQ pH (SU): 6-9 6-9 Residual Chlorine (µg/l): r' - Oil &Grease (mg/1): "V�V.,(V'Q ; .u' TP (mg/1): `r, TN (mg/1): Limits Changes Due To: Parameter(s) Affected Change in 7Q10 data Change in stream classification Relocation of discharge Change in wasteflow Other(onsite toxicity study, interaction,etc.) Oil&Grease Instream data New regulations/standards/procedures Ammonia and Chlorine New facility information (explanation of any modifications to past modeling analysis including new flows, rates, field data, interacting discharges) _x_ Parameter(s) are water quality limited. For some parameters, the available load capacity of the immediate receiving water will be consumed. This may affect future water quality based effluent limitations for additional dischargers within this portion of the watershed. OR _ No parameters are water quality limited, but this discharge may affect future allocations. A 3 ' INSTREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Upstream Location: at least 50 ft.upstream of discharge Downstream Location: two downstream sites:Hwy 70 bridge and Hwy 70A bridge Parameters: Temperature,Fecal Coliform,DO, ,Conductivity Special instream monitoring locations or monitoring frequencies: wj4pd, ra4 N0#0141/ MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION&SPECIAL CONDITIONS la l 1l Adcquacy of Existing Treatment Has the facility demonstrated the ability to meet the proposed new limits with existing treatment facilities? Yes No If no,which parameters cannot be met? Would.a"phasing in"of the new limits be appropriate?Yes No If yes,please provide a schedule(and basis for that schedule)with the regional office recommendations: If no, why not? Special Instructions or Conditions Wasteload sent to EPA? (Major) (Y or N) (If yes,then attach schematic, toxics spreadsheet,copy of model,or,if not modeled, then old assumptions that were made, and description of how it fits into basinwide plan) Additional Information attached? (Y or N) If yes,explain with attachments. V5 -) 02-0 9 2_6 •5 8Eti5 ' N=�oR.T ww�cP A1C01)Z ISS s Q A = 63 NewPo2T (Z. W Rio- o"{c�s - ----- - - -- 306t-7- ------ 77=Phps- fLt*JY�Iorl'ida(Z8. /� � i - t,Jc—c�ct�c_— -�al.N� N i �CW trM nr-,rOtQ . t I - -----------'-� nlaeeot.t7s �--�-'--�w�6,.,5 t�w�G __.�z--_t►cl \ _cy 54_. =;;� -,,_..._ ---.,.,. ="-; —--— wtdE —UAea l�-t►U N---A —2A �C>- — q1i H�C 1�5.—.. ------- -- af V.PCs MQO ilj CR. F WIEC"tM—' O-R . -- ii Q- � i S Nam _ --- - - Q10 - 0.q rj5 a - - -------li�_f�R�Y�I- � ._—�C!_�►n��1-- IAI row bmc b� r� .-_bc►au) - � ►3 . - .vA►u� wcn! fYlaYoe- -sow+a oi- NZ14POILT _SC NG�Gl 1p.fL.t.�J E Cam= _— P>O.$ox q-8 NE.)poe,T, NC, ZV40 ---------- ------------- -- -------- ---- ----- ' t i+ Newport WWTP - Allowable Waste Concentrations SUMMER Residual Chlorine Ammonia as NH3 = 7010 (CFS) 0.4 7010 (CFS) 0.4 DESIGN FLOW(MGD) 0.5 DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 0.5 : DESIGN FLOW(CFS) 0.775 DESIGN FLOW(CFS) 0.775 STREAM STD (UG/L) 17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L) 1.0 UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL(UG/L) 0 UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL(MG/L) 0.22 IWC (%) 65.96 IWC (%) 65.96 Allowable Concentration(ug/1) 25.77 Allowable Concentration (mg/1) 1.40 WINTER Ammonia as NH3 7Q10 (CFS) 0.9 DESIGN FLOW(MGD) 0.5 DESIGN FLOW(CFS)' 0.775 STREAM STD (MG/L) 1.8 UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL(MG/L) 0.22 IWC (%) 46.27 Allowable Concentration (mg/1) 3.63 h r t t NC0021555 FK 10/22/92 G69 - - _ 3s89-04y - - The Newport River Estuarine System N. C. OF IVATj;p,& f.La• ' William W. Kirby-Smith John D. Costlow Duke University Marine Laboratory Beaufort, North Carolina 28516 a S • r c i j i f UNC-SG-89-04 Table of Contents 5 Preface 6 Thanks To 7 List of Tables g List of Figures g Summary and Recommendations 11 History of Scientific Research 13 The Newport River Estuarine System 13 Geography 15 B athymetry 18 Tides and Hydrography 24 Mixing and Exchange Rates 25 Temperature 28 Salinity 33 Rainfall 33 Stream Discharge 34 Dissolved Oxygen 36 pH 36 Light 38 Sediments 45 Trace Metals 48 Nutrients 53 References L. t 3 1 ee S stem, done: His torical aerial photography(1940-pres- w,port River Estuarin Y ent)should be used to provide detailed maps and low coastal plain estuary; stem that may be Tom' s,l rn mar. ,a Small shai of changes in the sy y ) North Carolina just q� .Y in should include F"'commen" located central eastern m1 and man-made. Such mapping Lookout:Thc system ears that- seem is tripartite t l00 y • - es in land use in the 1�a natural south of Cape giver estuary Proper, Chang system. consisting of the Newport might have an impact upo orth River estuary to the;east and. dro h of the NRES is controlled by - Back.Sound/N Hy graP Y - ooil to the west.All share a mi-diurnal tides of approximately 1 m(3 ft) Bogue Sound(a lag r.,) common,oPeeMng ib-ihe sea,Beaufort Inlet. Al hei ht 'The time and height of the tides decrease though physically small,the system has received g stream from. mouth ' wave moves up - aerab • - le attention.because of more than 100 � as the tide cons _,.. headwater of the system. Currents are ears of scientific research..'This research is Pr- in the channels near the inlet,decrease in y product of work done at fow marine �sections and increase again in. _ Y atonlabores: e National Marine Fish- own hea waters. It has been estiScience - D 'vise nne eries.Servmce,the mated that apProxunate Division of Marine Fisher ° .t of the total N. Dr ly 43 percer► ties,Duke.LJniversity Marine tort' moves:in and out o lurua Institute. Marine high tide volume of the water stein nearly - Uniye�rsit of North , .. the estuary„nth each tide::Ilse sy y 'e resealch project has at- homogenous well mixed except. . -Sl slid Sciences• No sin sical/chei11ica vertically homog fresh surface water tempted to describe either the phy the riverine headwaters where stem. :, ... .. . .. � m water. „.. environment or the biology of the ensue system. frequently overlies more saline'botto But rather the numerous projects have been sepa- Y the time and/or space within Residence time of the water depen upon„ rated by subject matte% rate o f freshwater inflow coupled:with wmd=and the system. Much of the research has used the For water entering at the hand has not . tide-induced mixing..For. NRES as a place to conduct research narrows,the.average flushing time through the specific character of the system. estimated to be ��`�the what is known of the estuary t..-I .. itIn. . has:been This report synthesizes roximately 12 tidal cycles or six days. Dis- physi 1ii and chemical nature of the NRES. In the aPP volume and an extensive bibli- crepancies exist in estimates of total de- process of preparing this paper intertidal volume of the NRES. An accurate °gtuphy of approximately 1,400 papers was as _ scrip approximately lion of water volume and mixing dynamics, sembled.From those selected,appro under diffeient wind and tidal regimes,is needed 1,400 that dealt with the physical/chemical en vi- to adequately describe natural biolo 'cal - ronment or the field biology of organisms or eco- acts. addition,the history S A computerized Fdone. s and human imp l�s not been logical systems of the NRE g activities in the NRES bibliography of these references is available from a detailed investigation of how dredg- theNatural Histrny Resour ce Center of the Dukeh sisal and chemi- Ofthe approxi- ave influenced the.p Y University Marine Laboratory• teristics of the NRES has not been here to +• = for mately 800 references,i116 have been usedan, �,u,�.� se remain prim stone. discuss the physical and chemical characteriza- standing of howthe estuarylion of theNRES. in the NRES vary with r temperatures reaching a Mle NRES is a relatively small estuary wld► �re on a se 5 a total area of approximately 163 km2(63 mi2) air tempe of approximately mean minimum temperature draining a]and area of 595 km2(230 mi2). Geol- C(�p)in late January and early February and a drains y the system consists of an unconsolidated. mean maximum of approximately 30 C(86 F)in ogicamixam of sand,silt and clay with oyster reefs and early August:During the spring and natural hard substrate. The late July providing the only e depth of.1 fall rapid shifts of 5 C to 10 C(8 F to 18 F)can NRES is very shallow with an aver ag ep . Patterns in daily,seasonal and annual wa- m(3.3 ft),a ur maximum depth in natural channels temperature. the NRES are well known and of approximately 6 m(20 ft)and a depth in require no additional study. .dredged channels up to 1-2m(40 ft). The middle req Salinity is highly variable in the upper estu- and upper portions of the estuarine system ark �,where it is frequently 0 ppt following heavy s of 1 to 2 m(3-6 ft)at rains or wet periods and more than 36 ppt during relatively flat with depth to one�� low tide. In the upper teaches in the rivers and droughts. Rapid changes of,20 ppt streams,water'depths of up to 4 m(12 ft)are en- . are possible. In the lower etuary,salinities are centered. Numerous marshes and intertidal higher and less variable,approaching seawater shoals are common in the lower estuary and along At any one plaCe,tides com- <, Detailed and ac sahmties(34 es of 3 w 5 ppt Salinities in the edges of the upper estuary monly cause changes Curtiss mapping of the location and aerial extent Bogie Sound are higher and less variable than of the marine habitats,especially the salt marshes, those in the NewportRiver Estuary• Salinities are intertidal shoals and open water has not 9 influenced by local rainfall and rate of evapora- mentation in areas nearby. Additional studies of ton and transpiration in surrounding marshes• sediments of the Newport River and North River Annual rainfall is equally distributed throughout are not needed except as they are related to spe- the year with no pronounced wet or dry season. cific local questions. A detailed study of the sedi- + However lower temperatures reduce evaporation ments on Bogue Sound is needed, f w and transpiration,so that salinities are generally Extensive investigations of trace metals have lower in the winter%spring compared with the resulted in a wealth of data for distribution and summer/fall..The importance of salinityin deter- cycling cycling of the elements in water,sediments and mining the biological nature of the various Parts organisms. These data are the results of studies A, of the NRES is obvious. Any hydrographic stud should include y by National Marine Fisheries Laboratory that' 1 descriptions of salinity.SQecifi- have been aimed at understanding the behavior of mllY needed>S a dam_ •,�.,., rP*s _ t trace metals in all estuaries. These studies will I velopment and the presence of the, ed_ continue to provide data on trace metal cycles in channeI u et,influencetempo- the NRES. r Land cnat;at patterns of iagw!ro horit the In .amc plant nutrients ' 'NRES. In addition,a stream dischar� � P � (N and P)are gon- g orally low in abundanc.But the system has mod- ing station should be p m e dwateas'of erate productivity so that recycling is probably the Newport River important and rapid. Major inputs of nutrients are Dissolved oxygen is generally at or ruear; r river,rainfall and runoff from adjacent land. As saturation due to tidal and wind mixing. Some with most estuaries,the NRES is slightly nitrogen low oxygen values occur in bottom water or'pro- limited in terms of productivi try teeted embayments during the summer. DisazY An as- sessment of the impacts of additional nutrient solved oxygen should be'a concern in assessing loading of the NRES is n22SMSuc an assess- furtherwatershed ve o menZ especov in Meet shMd-describe how devel r j gas of restricted circulation during—sum ` ''"`j'; opment may � ' changed nutrients in the fast as well as loo)C- ; �! However,no additional studies of dissolvedoxy- mg toward the effects of increased development 4 11 gen are needed except as may relate to specific' in the f�e, Recent publications from a National questions. Science Foundation project at the Duke Univer- The pH of NRES waters is generally 8 to 82 sity Marine laboratory promise to answer a num- except in the low salinity sections where pH var- ber of questions concerning nutrient cycling in . ies between 6 and 7. No additional studies of pH the NRES.' are needed to understand PH values in the NRES. In summary the major gaps in our knowledge Lightpenetration in the NRES is low,gener- of the physical nature"of the NRES are(1)the ally between 1 to 2 m(3-6 ft).It is greadyinflu- lack of detailed habitat mapping with a historical enced by wind-generated wave resuspensions of perspective and(2)an extremely limited under- silts and by phytoplanktT. . Clearest periods are standingof the h dro y graphy of the system,espe- in late fall and early winter. Minimum values are cially with regards'to wind and tide effects on wa- Q1 common in the'shallow upper estuarine areas ter movements. This knowledge is particularly t with incrrasin.> a y upstream .:. Y � g transparency u tream into fresh needed to assess impacts of land development, water and in the lower estuary near the inlet. At ulation .. wth and industrial expansion in the ) PoP Sro any one P the water is usually much clearer a watershed- h pde than at low tide. D` ue to deepE - f - - _ channels of r1CreaSm ning ` h i SUSPen� Se(lmerlfS,dPr� turn I I creases in light penetration influence primarypro- " ducdon thus shouldJ_&an impO assessing enviioirmeirtal impacts of an n tvrtes wrthme NRES and its_ is adiacerudrainage� , .. l3ottoiri�sediments in th . e NRES are generally sand and shell fragments in the lower estuary and t varying mixtures of silt,clay and sand in the up_ )')� P estuary. Organic content is inversely related to mean grain size. More protected areas gener- ally have finer 1' Y sediments. Sedimentation rates are similar to other East Coast estuanes with rates of 3 to 4 mm/year'(0.12-0.16 in/yr). Sedimenta- tion rates are higher in eelgrass'beds and marshes. Dredging dramatically increases rates of sedi- tO . � t F - „ a Table 1. a he nanddal Figure 7. rics of Study Depth(m)A B C D E Exchange ratios o j °v v (residua()currents Nl 0.0 -21.1 -9440 andffushing times(r/t)jot segments of in the Narrows of July 1-5 0.5 .19A -8660 the Newport River the Newport River 1977 1.0 17.7 7880 estuary(from Ayle, estuary averaged 1.5 -15.5 -6940 over several tidal 2.0 -13.6 -6090 8 0 2.4-3.7 1976). b o w cyclesforfow : ° m �7 distinct time q2 0.0 -7.6 -3400 periods.Upstream Aug.27-29 0.5 -5.8 -2590 ti O values are positive; 1977 1.0 -3.8 -1710 Q Q downstream are 1.5 -1.8 -780 �y / negative(Cronin 2.0 0.0 0 e0 N 1979).A=average 2.5 +1.1 +470' 4 2.00 3.0-3.8 residual nont(daf current in cmisec; fl3' 0.0 `' -5.5 -2480 d e B=average July 7-11 0.5 4.2 -1870 a dis laceme t er p n p 1978 1.0 -2.8 -1260 '- •Q, � o tidal cycle in 1.5 -1.6 -700 ;''` r meters;C=number 2.0 -OA -160 tV ° ojridal cyder 2.5 - +1.1 +470. - 7 2.13 3.0-4.1 tD N Ww averaged;D=depth d V t o of no net motion in N4 0.0 -2.5 -1110 0 teeters;E=tidal Aug.29-Sept.1 0.5 -2.0 -870 depth range in 1978 1.0 -1 A -620 w , tv meters. 1.5 +0.2 +80 �. V T. 2.0. +1.5 +670 U ` 2.5 +3.9' +1750 5 1.45 3.0-3.8 "' - 0 e o M '0 • 'E to H v Mixing and Exchange Rates et al.(1970)estimated flushing times,i.e.the. G O N time necessary for material entering the system o9 20 E . The NM is usually well-miye"cally via the Newport River to pass through the estu-. '• +- by the winds and tidal currents.Occasionally, try.These flushing rate calculations werebased N o ~'z•-- slight density gradients exist in the shallow open upon estimates of river Dow rates,tidal volume 0 r- p c waters during periods of calm winds and/or and bathymetry of the estuary.The report used a ' C 0 N heavy rainfall.More frequently,slight density modified tidal prism method but showed no cal- lsX.l li stratification can be found in the deeper channels culadons and gave no references for the method. ` due to small differences in temperature and/or Their flushing times varied from 4.5 days(8.7 n tit salinity between surface and bottom waters.Only tidal cycles)during a period of estimated high in the protected and deep headwaters,such as the- river flow(112 mr/sec,17.8x1(fi fP/tidal cycle) calculated by r•=P (P+V ,where�is the ear= mixing occurs within a,/ � B segment.'Thus within estuary above the Narrows,does strong density to 9.6 days(18.4,tidal cycles)during estimated change ratio,P�is the intertidal volume,and V" each segment these exchange rates should be e;c stratification occur"very often The NRES can ;peritxls of low flow(0.4 mr/sec,0.6x106 ftr/udal is the low tide volume of the"n"th segment' >:. considered theoretical maximum rates. thus be classified as a-typical vertically homoge- cycle)with a mean of 6A days(113 tidal Hyle apparently used the same technique as Mo-'' Mixing and exchange rates for Bogue Sound nexus estuary. cycles).Jennings et al.(1970)also suggested That hammad(1961),except that Hyle divided the es- +and for the Back Sound/North River area have t e Several estimates of exchange rates and a there was some exchange of water with the Ne- trrary into seven segments.Mohammad consid not been estimated.Hyle's(1976)sea bed drifter horizontal mixing have been made for the New- utse River estuary via the Care Creek Canal,but I tied the whole estuary as one segment data and Kararian's(1983)dye movement data j port River estuary..Mohammad(1961)esu they did not quantify it. 33 The results of Hyle's(1976)calculations show that wafer from the Newport River estuary mated an exchange ratio of 28 percent,with this 9%"The most complete estimates of flushing i (Figure 7)slaw flushing times increasing down-. i .is probably mixed into the two other parts of the ratio defined as the propotion of water moving r•'tates have been made by Hyle(1976).He used I stream as the volume of the segments becomes system with every tidal cycle.The rate of this seaward during each tidal cycle that does not re-, the tidal prism method of Ketchum(1951),plot- greater.Total flushing time was estimated to be mixing and how it is influenced by winds re- turn on the following flood tide.He assumed ting high tide,low tide and tidal prism volumes 12.06 tidal cycles of 626 days,using 1.925 tidal mains to be investigated. complete mixing of waters within the estuary and as a function of distance down the estuary from cyelos/day is'a conversion factor.'This flushing no=earn into the inlet of water that exited on the the Narrows to the Beaufort/Morehead City time is very close to the mean of 12.3 tidal cycles Temperature ebb tide.These two assumptions are undoubtedly causeway(Figure 2).Hpthen divided the esm- estimated by Jennings eta].(1970). ' false.Mohammad's exchange ratios should be ary into seven segments using the tidal prism --_ --- These estimates assume that none of the The water temperature data available for the considered as a theoretical maximum.Jennings ` method.Exchange ratios for each segment were:i,., tidal water ebbing out of the lower segment re- NRES is voluminous.The National Marine rums on the next flood tide and that complete Fisheries Service(NMFS)and the Duke Univer- 24 25 t 1J I Jennings u al.(1970)estimated stream flow port oxygen concentrations over time at several ; ; ` in the Newport River for 1968 based upon rain- places.Mohammad(1961),Pirtschmidt(1963) OXYGEN (ppm� _ Fr, fall,my"aahreand Ute area of the watershed. and Hyle(1976)provided data for the Newport j �f and O N O N Monthl values ranged from a low of 0.4 m/sec River estuary.Campbell(1973)presented de- (0.52 yd'/sec)in August to a high of 11.2 m'/sec tailed Oxygen data for Gales Creek estuary off i' disso ten, o (14.6yd'/sec)in January.'Ileannual Jan (January- Bogue Sound.The oxygen concentrations re- I (PPn't 1 0 December 1968)average was 4.2 m3/sec(5.5 locatic t z ' Y('/sec).Evans(1977)states that the average p0f N the Cost three studies are very similar so N 0) o g only those of Pinschmidt(1963)will be dis- flow of the Newport River is 3.6 in'/sec(4.7 yd'/ cutssed i estuary.. - sec).This estimate was based u (F(Figure a 11).In the main body of the ! monthly r. ="" O � I'�ember 196 Newport River estuary(stations I to 3 the ox - ; O Jennings u al.(1970)and used November 1967 ) y I weekly co,-_,roes a 10 October 1968 for averaging. Sce concentrations in surface water were all N. hi h ran • ablafnedalrernarefy ; 8 ranging from 6 mg/1 to 10 mg/1(ppm)de_ @ � Pending upon seasonal rem at low and high de- Dissolved Oxygen , Peratures.At rides(from � - 3,in the middle of Ihe.estuary,the bopatrr waters Pitnschmidt,1963). a The amount of dissolved oxygen is an im.• were I mg/I to 2 mg/1 lower in oxygen than Sur- 'r O face waters during the summer.This was the to 0 Portent indicator of the biological activity in the , same'Iocation that had the least salinity variabd- I O z Owater and the ability' the water to support life. hty with tidal changes and the weakest.tidal ciu- o 0, YSen enters the water though diffusion across:- rents.'Ihas low bottom oxygen concentrations in. the air/water interface and is subsequently mixed:•,,,;` i q Y the summer at station 3 were probably a result of o c through the water column.Oxygen also enters 9 reduced mixing.U. pstream of the mouth of the a the water via the Photosynthetic activities of Narrows(stations4 and r " green plants during the daylight hours.Abnost 5)r oxyge l values de- ` O t e t all organisms.plant and animal, creased dramatically,especially dicing the sun- require oxygen mer when they ranged between 1 mg/i and 4 mg/ i for metabolism.However,some organisms are I in surface and bottom waters.These low oxy- a O more tolerant of low oxygen concentrations than y others.At saturation,the amount of oxygen en in Ben values may the result of high bacterial j i O o O the water Y8 metabolism due to the high concentrations of tits- I z utcreases with decreasing temperature solved and Particulate organic material found en- and decreasing salinity.In addition to the actual, teiing the system in the fresh water of the river. ` O' amount of oxygen in the water,the percent oxy- Campbell(1973)observed the same general pat- I ; Ul Ben Mutation of the water is often reported tem oCoxygen concentrations in Gales Creek off i to a O This is a normalizing technique that allows com- Bogue Sound.Kirby-Smith and Barber(1979) (.4padsons of oxygenperature and salinity.from samples which differ r ; O in tem reported consistently low oxygen values in fresh nity. waters entering the headwaters of North River. j 0 Oxygen has rarely been report cl in field A more ecologically meaningful way to ex- ! n r^ studies of the HIRES.Four systematic studies re- amine oxygen concentrations is in terms of per- N Tab le7. 0 o I O z Percent Saturation With • I � q I .. . oxygen ojsurjace(S) Station r N and bottom(B)waters ; (1960-1961)forflve Month N 1 2 3 stations in the NRES S B S B (Fig.9).Data were S.- B S g S B calculated using the Aug.. '3 96 96.. 92 92 92 v: 0 oxygen concentration, SePL 5 98 95 92 88 . !85. — 47 29 27 y remperatwe and satin- Oct...: :. : 4 96 95 94 58 49 24 20 I I 0 itYfromPinscWdr Nov. 97. 96' 84 7 I, 96 ;,95; 98 98 2 69• 5 "32 3 i i . (JA53)combined with Dec.' ,. �-0`'33` —. _:89 88 49 42 3 101 100 101 98,- :.112;107--.,.97 .102 oxygen satwarion Jan-, 2 72 70 values 99..,;.98 104 98 96< 106: 83. 82 99 71 67 ojseawater Feb.:;, ; (temperature and Mar. 3 106 104 100 96 gq 90 70 55 57 47 i salinity)from a table by APT. 3 93 92 91 92 90 69 67 *59 #58 I el ic W.Ilan Winkle, May 3 91 92 IS 82 56 59 51 48 j College of William and June 4 90 87 87 76 55 55 40 34 98 99 97 95 _ 102 97 53 47 30 23 I Mary,based upon July 4 - 97 97 91 91 95 87 formulae in Green and 59i 48 22 22 Carrirt(-- 7). Averages of N(number)samples ate - " - - _--� _ ■ --- - - presented except those were N=1 and 4 were N=2. I 34 i I 35 ` r cent saturation of the water.Table 7 contains 7)of natural waters. Seawater normally has a data recalculated from Pinschmidt(1963)to give pH of 8.2,which is slightly alkaline. It resists mean monthly percent saturation-of oxygen in changes in H the surface and bottom at each station. Several g P Primarily through a carbonate/bi- . generalizations can be made from this carbonate and ion buffering system. The fresh data., waters of coastal plain streams have a pH aver- The open waters of the Newport'River estuary aging 5 to 6(Kuenzler et al. 1977). Small"black have average oxygen saturation values of 90 to water"streams drainingthe 100.Percent year-round with values Pam swamp for- greater than ests in Carteret County are naturally extremely 100 Pit frequently occurring,Probably as a acidic with an average pH of 4.2(range of 3.4 to result of either rapid changes in temperature;or 5.4),and fresh water draining from developed high phytoplanldon productivity. (2)The aver- land has a pH of near 7(Kirby-Smith and Barber age bottom water Percent saturation values are 1979). In addition to the effects of fresh water almost always lower than the surface values, runoff,PH can also be influenced by the pr6duc- suggesting a relatively high biological oxygen tivity of the water. Uptake of CO2 by plants can demand(BOD)in the water column and sedi- raise the H while ments. (3)Up the smaller P respiration of organisms pro- i Protected rivers.and creeks from duces CO2,lowering the pH.Changes in C0from the main body of the estuary,the -due to productivityand I Percent saturation values respiration and the asso- �Pce�IY crated shifts in pH are most noticeable in small low in surface and bottom waters during the I .summer months. protected bodies of water with slow mixing Low oxygen concentrations or percent satu- (�Fm and Hoskin 1958). rations occur naturally in several situations in the for five stations a Ne oporure 12 presents mean pH values NRES: (1)in the bottom water of verticallywPort River estuary (Pinschmidt 1963). The pH of the high salinity stratified areas in the summer,where mixing and open waters of the estuary is fairly constant with diffusion of oxygen from the surface cannot keep values of 8 to 8.2. In areas where salinities are up with the BOD of the sediments and.bottom lowered,the PH begins to drop,reflecting the water;(2)in eutrophic(nutrient-enriched)areas additions of more acidic fresh water. In the where supersaturation with oxygen may occur freshwater section of the Newport River near' during the day when the plants are actively pho- Newport, tosynthesizing,followed by near total depletio n investigations the PH varies between 6 and 7: Other have reported very similar results of oxygen during the night as the plants and ani- (Wells 1958,Mohammad 1961,Campbell 1973, mats use the oxygen faster than it can diffuse Culliney 1979,Palumbo and Ferguson 1979), 'through the air/water interface;(3)in organic and there is no reason to doubt that pH follows rich sediments where the bacterial use of oxygen the same trends throughout the NRES.-`Diurnal ,t exceeds diffusion or transport of oxygen into the changes in pH can be expected,sediments. Pce ,especially during It is warmer months. Cycles of primary production probable that man y summer or early fall and respiration cause increases in CO2 at night fish kills frequently reported in North Carolina and decreases during the day. Thus minimum estuaries are associated with morning(7 to 9 pH values would be found in the early morning I ;; am.)oxygen minima and with the mixing of and maximum values in the early evening: i I oxygen-depleted bottom waters.with surface wa- tern such that for a short time the water column Light .: .may have too little oxygen for some species of fish. This would be particularly evident if there had been an accumulation of hydrogen sulfide in The transparency of estuarine waters is im- . portant because of the influence of light on rates -the.bottom waters.It would cause:;a chemical primary productivity and the effects of light i - of �, oxgen demand as the.deoxygenated water on the behavior of organisms. Transparency is I+ mixed with the oxygeated water:The oxYgce- most frequently m depletion would be quickly e Y by secchi disc al- though electronic instruments are sometimes sion of oxygen from the atmosphere into.the wa- used to measure the quantity-and quality of light ter and photosynthesis during the day,leaving no d clue to the dead fish." g as a function of water depth. Secchi depth is de- fined as the water depth at which a 30 cm white PH disc disappears from view as it is lowered 1 through the water. I In addition to the water molecules,there are I 1 The inverse log of the hydrogen ion concen- dissolved acid tration(pH)is used as a measure of the acidityParticulate materials that result in (pH less than 7)and alkalini H eater than �tight penetration in estuarine waters. ty(P The high concentrations of dissolved humic ac- ' I 36 i � Gross luhology of I i . • ' the sediments of the NC1V %1 River. - 76045 76040' 1 estuary(from Johnson;7959). r t..�+. Via F •••• ,_:.:. 4. i - •: . • '• U t a r L AT f•Sx Fb X.S.. -+ , GROSS LITHOLOGY °•' ,. MOREHEAO ,::., . ..�.. rP... NEWPORT RIVER EST,UARY. . .BEAU FORT p I mile �. ' � � ,:•;'Cap:: - ® SILTY CLAY ® CLAYEY SILT ; ® SLIGHTLY CLAYEY,ARENACEOUS SAND r VERY FINE TO FINE ARGILLACEOUS SAND VERY FINE TO FINE,WELL SORTED,CLEAN SAND FINE TO COARSE, MEDIUM SORTED, CLEAN SAND lop ORGANIC4,REEF • • J cent sand,silt and clay and produced a map sediments had a strong positive correlation with showing the distribution of these sediments(Fig- . silt/clay content and an equally,strong negative ure 15). These data provide a quantitative con- correlatiori with'percent sand. ,Organic carbon is firrnation of the qualitative observation of gross usually about 50 percent of organic matter. In lithology.. the upper part of the estuary,organic matter On their six transects of the,NRES,Price et ranged from 1 percent near the shore to 10 per- _" al.(1976)and Chester et al.(1983)found a simi- cent in'the deeper waters in,the center of this sec- ' lar pattern in size distribution of sediments as did tion. Organic carbon values range from less than Johnson(1959). They reported that the sedi- 1 percent to greater than 4 percent in the same ments of the estuary were characterized* well area. In the middle and lower part of the estuary sorted,free grained particles with a maximum (except Calico Creek),sand content of the sedi- diameter of 0.25 to 0.50 mm'(0.099-0.197 in; ment averaged 90.6 percent(range:81%-939b), fine to medium sand). The upper estuary and silt averaged 3.5percent and clay averaged 5.9 Calico Creek have areas with high silt/clay con- percent. Organic matter and organic carbon con- tent in some of the samples. In these muddy • tent were low,averaging 0.7 percent and 0.4 per{ sediments,sand averaged 51 percent(range: l6 cent respectively: 1 percent.to 92 percent),silt averaged 38 percent According to Johnson(1959),the calcium (range:3 percent to 68 percent)and clay aver- carbonate content of the sediments in the NRES aged 1 I percent(range:5 percent to 14 percent). ranged from 0.10 percent to 100 percent(in an Organic matter and organic carbon content of the oyster reef). Half of his samples had less than 1 • 41