HomeMy WebLinkAboutNC0074900_Report_20031201/1)00 Wye
Dilution Study for Hydraulics, LTD
Highway 150 WWTP
11` L DEC - 2 2003 III
Prepared for
Hydraulics, LTD
December 1, 2003
CH2MHILL
CH2M HILL
3125 Poplanvood Court Aspen Building
Suite 304
Raleigh, INC 27604
Contents
ExecutiveSummary.................................................................................................................1
Introduction..............................................................................................................................2
Objectivesof Study...................................................................................................................2
Physical and Environmental Setting.......................................................................................2
Waste Water Treatment Plant..................................................................
................... 2
LakeNorman................................................................................................................5
HydraulicsLTD Outfall ...............................................................................................7
Dye Study Methods and Results.............................................................................................9
Current Measurements..............................................................................................11
Other Observations - Air Entrained in Effluent.......................................................21
Discussion...............................................................................................................................21
Dye Measurements and Dilutions............................................................................21
Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen........................................................................23
Current Measurements..............................................................................................23
DilutionModel.......................................................................................................................24
Summary................................................................................................................................27
References....................................................................................................................27
AppendixA - Equipment and Calibration...................................................................... A-1
AppendixB - Dye Study Results....................................................................................... B-1
Appendix C - DO and Temperature Profile Data............................................................C-1
AppendixD - Current Meter Data.................................................................................... D-1
AppendixE - Model Files................................................................................................... E-1
Executive Summary
A dye study was conducted in Lake Norman on November 5, 2003 to determine the dilution
of the Hydraulics LTD Highway 150 WWTP effluent The data indicate that there is
significant dilution available. The average dilution within 25 feet of the outfall exceeded
100:1. Because the effluent is discharged in batch mode for short periods of time and with
long travel times to the end of the outfall, the dye study was not conducted under normal
discharge conditions. The dye study was conducted while temporarily setting the discharge
to operate in continuous mode. Observed dilution at these conditions substantially under
predicts the dilution that is occurring during normal operating conditions. In normal
operation, the effluent is released in a batch mode at a rate of 360 gpm. At the current
average effluent flow, water is released for approximately 2.8 minutes at a time, and on
average, over 100 minutes pass prior to the next release. The, effluent is discharged at a
high port velocity (4.4 fps). The high port velocity and momentum of the discharge cause a
rapid initial dilution with the lake water. Using the range of current velocities measured
during the dye study (0.03 to 0.43 fps), the center of the patch of effluent, diluted at over
100:1, moves 225 to 3330 feet from the outfall prior to the next release. As the effluent patch
moves away from the outfall due to lake currents, further dilution occurs due to mixing
caused by diffusion of the effluent with the lake water.
Data collected during the dye study show that air is entrained in the outfall line between the
batch releases. A large boil was observed on the lake during the study. This air causes the
effluent to rise when it is discharged, and thus, the effluent should not be impacting bottom
water DO.
The wind is primarily responsible for the current in the vicinity of the outfall. During the
dye study, the wind blew from the west-southwest while the predominate current was in
the opposite direction. In larger lakes, water moves at an angle to the wind due to the
ears rotation. In addition, when wind blows water to one end of the lake, gravity causes
it to return. Thus, the current velocity in the vicinity of the Highway 150 outfall is heavily
influenced by wind rather than the release from Lookout Shoals Dam.
Finally, a dilution model was developed to examine the impacts of the discharge under
summer temperature conditions. Available models account for neither batch discharges nor
air entrainment Thus the model will underpredict dilution. All model runs indicated
dilution in excess of 40:1 a short distance from the outfall. The available mixing zone
models cannot accurately predict mixing for this discharge situation, therefore the dye study
is the most accurate way to determine dilution.
Introduction
This document includes methods, procedures and results of a tracer study in the receiving
waters near the Hydraulics LTD's Highway 150 wastewater treatment outfall in Lake
Norman. A detailed description of study data collected, collection methods, equipment,
calibration procedures and results are presented. In addition, the document presents the
results of a dilution model that was developed based on the data collected.
Objectives of Study
The objectives of this study were:
1. To determine dilution of the Highway 150 WWTP effluent under existing conditions
2. To collect data to calibrate a Visual Plumes model that will be used to predict dilution
under permitted conditions.
3. To measure the deep water currents in the vicinity of the Hydraulics Ltd. outfall to
determine if there are large currents created by the Duke Energy Marshall Steam Plant
in the vicinity of the outfall that effect the dilution of the effluent.
Physical and Environmental Setting
Waste Water Treatment Plant
The Hydraulics WWTP discharges on a batch basis with the total volume discharged for the
day reported on the Daily Monitoring Reports (DMRs). The total daily discharge from the
Hydraulics WWTP by month is shown in Figure 1. The treated wastewater enters a 5000
gallon dechlorination tank prior to being pumped to Lake Norman When the tank fills to
about 3500 gallons, 1010 gallons are pumped out the force main with a 360 gpm pump. This
takes about 2.8 minutes with about 2490 gallons remaining in the tank (Table 1). After
discharging 1010 gallons, the pump shuts off and the tank begins to be refilled.
The total number of 2.8 minute batch discharges per day, is dependent on the flow rate into
the tank. For example if flow into the tank is constant such that 12,000 gallons is discharged
in one day (0.012 mgd or 8.33 gpm) it would take about 121 minutes to fill the tank from
2490 gallons to 3500 gallons, at which time the pump would remove 1010 gallons in about
2.8 minutes. This would result in about 12, 2.8 minute discharges per day. Figure 2 shows
the number of discharges per day for different total discharge volumes in a day.
Water leaves the WWTP via a 4 inch diameter force main. The distance of the force main to
the point of discharge in Lake Norman is about 9000 feet. Therefore, depending on how
long it takes to fill the dechlorination tank, the actual travel time from the WWTP can vary.
At the current average discharge of 12,000 gallons per day, it would take approximately 12
hours for water to reach the lake after first being pumped from the tank (Table 1).
Additional BOD decay will occur during this travel time. When the pump cycles on, air is
entrained into the water causing effluent reaeration This has implications for how the
wastewater mixes with the receiving water. These implications are discussed later in this
report.
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCRAROE OF HYDRAULNS UMnED DISCR ME TO LAKE NDRMAN
FIGURE 1
Hydraulics WWTP Total Daily Discharge (gallons) by Month for August 2002 - July 2003
60,000
50,000
w 40,000
a
m
m
N
p 20,000
f-
10,000
0
- Max Discharge
- Min Discharge
—Avg Discharge
TII*II 1 1
1 III
1
lug-02 Sep-02 Oct-02 Nov-02 Deo02 Je0-03 Feb-03 Mar-03 Apr-03 May-03 Jun-03 JU14
Month
FIGURE 2
Number of 2.8 Minute Discharges per day by Total Discharge Volume
s
0
0 10,000 2A000 30,000 60,000 90,000 6g000 ",000 00M 90,000 100,000
T.W Deily Dixherge Valume (gello�)
HYDRAULICS DILLMON REPORr.DDC 3
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCHARGE OF HYDRAUIICS LIMITED DISCHARGE TO LAKE NORMAN
TABLE 1
Travel Time and Number of Dischames Per Dav Based on Volume of Dischame Per Dav
Flow rate Into
tank - dally
discharge
volume (gpd)
Flow rate into
tank (gpm)
Time to Flil
water In tank
(min)
I
Time between
Discharges
(min)
I
Time to arrive
at end of outfall
(min)
I
Time to arrive
at end of outfall
(hours)
I
Number of 2.8
Minute
Discharges per
I day
1000
0.69
1454.1
1456.9
8476
141.3
1
4000
2.78
363.5
366.3
2131
35.5
4
8000
5.56
181.8
184.6
1074
17.9
8
12000
8.33
121.2
124.0
�21
12.0
12
16000
11.11
90.9
93.7
545
9.1
15
0000
13.89
72.7
75.5
439
7.3
19
24000
16.67
60.6
63.4
369
6.1
23
8000
19.44
51.9
54.7
318
5.3
26
L2000
22.22
45.4
48.2
281
4.7
30
36000
25.00
40.4
43.2
251
4.2
33
40000
27.78
36.4
39.2
228
3.8
37
44000
30.56
33.0
35.9
209
3.5
40
148000
33.33
30.3
33.1
193
3.2
44
52000
36.11
28.0
30.8
179
3.0
47
56000
38.89
26.0
28.8
167
2.8
50
60000
41.67
24.2
27.0
167
2.6
53
64000
44.44
22.7
25.5
149
2.5
56
68000
47.22
21.4
24.2
141
2.3
60
600
50.00
20.2
23.0
134
2.2
63
6000
52.78
19.1
21.9
128
2.1
66
80000
55.56
18.2
21.0
122
2.0
69
4000
58.33
17.3
20.1
117
2.0
72
88000
61.11
16.5
19.3
112
1.9
74
92000
63.89
15.8
18.6
108
1.8
77
96000
66.67
15.1
18.0
104
1.7
80
100000
69.44
14.5
17.3
101
1.7
83
HYDRAULICS DILUTION REPORT.DOC
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCHARGE OF HYDRAULICS LIMITED DISCHARGE TO LAKE NORMAN
Lake Norman
Lake Norman is the largest reservoir in North Carolina. It was completed in 1967, and
drains 1763 square miles of land. The lake has an average depth of 34 feet, 520 miles of
shoreline, and a volume of 356.1 billion gallons (CH2M HILL, 2001). The waters of lake
Norman are classified for use as a water supply and for recreation. Figure 3 illustrates Lake
Norman, the location of the Highway 150 W WTF, the location of water quality monitoring
stations, and the locations of the water supply intakes.
According to the DWQ (NCDENR,1998), Lake Norman is oligotrophic (low biological
productivity related to low concentrations of available nutrients), and fish tissue samples
from the lake have not exceeded U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or EPA criteria
for key pollutants. In addition, other water quality parameters sampled in the lake indicate
that the lake water quality is good. The major water quality concern is fecal coliform in
some cove areas related to septic tanks and occasional sewer/pump station failures.
DWQ most recently collected ambient data in June, July and August 2002 in Lake Norman.
At the Highway 150 bridge, the location in closest proximity to the Hydraulics LTD outfall,
the DO concentrations exceeded 7 mg/l. Chlorophyll a at this location during this same
period ranged from 4 to 9 ug/l, well below the state standard of 40 ug/l.
Lake Norman is a warm monomictic lake. This means that in the cooler months the lake
temperatures do not drop below 4' C and the lake is relatively isothermal with depth (Le.
temperature does not change with depth). Thus, the water freely circulates during the
cooler months. In the warmer months, the lake thermally stratifies where warmer waters
are located near the surface and cooler waters are located in deeper water. In the fall,
thermal stratification breaks down and the waters freely circulate from the surface to the
bottom. Typical temperature and DO profiles for February, May, August and November
are shown in Figures 4 and 5. These profiles were based on data compiled by Duke Energy
(2001). Similar profiles could be developed for other lake sampling stations.
FIGURE 4
Typical Lake Norman Temperature Profiles at Highway 150 Bridge for February, May, August, and November
Adapted from Data and Plots Presented in Duke Power, 2001
Temperature(C Wm)
15 20 26 20 M
FMu�T
�Mry
�p�Qd
—Normal
HYDRAULICS DILUTION REPORT.DOC
a
e
A I NP✓8A
Marshall
Steam Station yk,
Y DSO
Hydraulics Ltd
NCO074900
Duke Energy Discharge
NC0004987
h
1s
Legend
p USGS Ambient WQ
❑ DWQ WQ Station
{} Duke Energy WQ Station
Surface Water Intake
e USGS Stream Gage
NPDES
Major Road
— Hydrology
Municipality
County Boundary
®River Basin Boundary
2 t 0 2 Miles N
Figure 3
Lake Norman Site Overview
CH2IVIHILL Hydraulics, LTD Hwy 150 WWTP Outfall
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCHARGE OF HYDRAULICS LIMITED DISCHARGE TO LAKE NORMAN
FIGURE 5
Typical Lake Norman Oxygen Profiles at the Highway 150 Bridge for February, May, August, and November
Adapted from Data and Plots Presented in Duke Power, 2001
Ohmlved Oxygen(mSVL)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
10
L
L
fi 15
20
n
Hydraulics LTD Outfall
The Hydraulics W WTP outfall to Lake Norman is about 300 feet south of the Highway 150
bridge (Figure 6). The outfall is about 8 inches off the bottom in water approximately 40 feet
deep at the normal lake elevation of 760 feet The outfall was inspected on November 25,
2003 to ensure that it was built according to plan and that it was properly functioning. The
inspection confirmed that the pipe is 4 inches in diameter, has 15 rows of four, 3/4 inch
holes. These holes were spaced at 30°,150" 210 and 300° (Le. if looking at diameter of
pipe, would be positioned at 200, 4:00, 8:00, and 10:00). The holes were not clogged and
working properly. Approximately 0.3 miles across the lake from the end of the Hydraulics
W WTP outfall is the skimmer boom for the intake for the Duke Power Company Marshall
Steam Plant (Figure 6). Duke Energy data indicate that the steam plant withdraws an
average of 1064 mgd of water per day from the bottom of the lake for use as cooling water
(Wylie, personal conversation). One concern that has been expressed by Lake Norman
stakeholders is that the intake from the Marshall Steam Station results in little water for
assimilating the wastewater from the Hydraulics LTD W WTP.
As indicated above, Lake Norman stratifies in the summer and is mixed during the winter.
Based solely on density differences caused by cooler water being denser than warmer water,
the effluent plume will tend to sink or stay near the bottom when the effluent temperature is
cooler than the temperature in the lower water. When the effluent temperature is warmer
than the bottom water in Lake Norman as occurs in summer, the effluent plume will tend to
rise. When the effluent rises, the dilution will be greater than when the effluent sinks. Since
HYDRAULICS DILUUON REPORT.DOC
500 250 0 500 Feet N
Figure
40 a��12!l�IHILL Hydraulics, LTD Highway 150 WWTP Outfall Location
Hydraulics, LTD - Hwy 150 WWTP Outfall
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCHARGE OF HYDRAUUCS UMRED DISCHARDE TO LAKE NORMAN
air is entrained in the effluent from the batch pumping of the effluent, the effluent will
generally rise and have more turbulent mixing than if air was not entrained in the effluent.
Evidence of this entrainment is provided later in this document.
Dye Study Methods and Results
As previously discussed, the W WTP discharges in batch mode, and at the current average
flow rate of 12,000 gallons per day, the discharge is a series of 2.8 minute pulses into I.Ake
Norman, with about 124 minutes between pulses and a total travel time of about 12 hours to
the lake. Under these conditions, conducting a dye study to determine dilution in the lake
would have been, at best, difficult, if not impossible. Successful dye studies need to have a
continuous discharge. To make the discharge continuous, potable water was pumped into
the dechlorination tank at a continuous rate (Figure 7). The rate of discharge from the
dechlorination tank to the force main was set so that the water level in the tank remained
constant. This resulted in a discharge flow rate that is lower than the 360 gpm that is
normally discharged. Ideally it would have been best to pump 360 gpm into the tank (same
rate as what is normally discharged), but a source of water with 360 gpm was not available.
FIGURE
Potable Water Being Pumped in to Dechlodnation Tank
During the dye study, dye at a concentration of 69,429,981 µg/L was continuously injected
to the tank at a constant rate of 30 ml/min (Figure 8). Samples were taken from the tank
every 30 minutes and the dye concentration measured using a Turner fluorometer (See
Appendix A for further information on the fluorometer and its calibration and Appendix B
for dye concentration data). Based on an average dye concentration of 2532 µg/L in the
tank during the dye study, the average flow rate into and out of the tank was calculated at
212 gpm based on the following formula:
Where:
Qe = Cd xQd
Ce
Qe = Effluent pumping rate
Ce = Effluent dye concentration (2532 µg/L)
;P11 Cr_1111!"$]1111IG71I:Ia:11AIM
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCRAROE OF HYDRAULICS LIMBED DISCHARGE TO LAKE NORMAN
Cd = Injected dye concentration (69,429,981 µg/L)
Qd = Injected dye flow rate (30 ml/min)
FGIURE 8
Dye Being Injected into the Dechlorination Tank
A photograph illustrating the dye mixing and the effluent dye concentration is shown in
Figure 9.
FIGURE 9
Dye Mixing in the Dechlonnation Tank
I�1
d�a
OFA".R,m _
I:�U7Ad1IR.L�7RTRr I:1tl4d:1 P.' �
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCHARGE OF HYDRAULICS LIMITED DISCHARGE TO LAKE NORMAN
Effluent dilution was determined by measuring the concentration of dye in samples taken in
the receiving water at various points near the outfall in Lake Norman and comparing this
concentration to the average dye concentration of 2532 Ag/L that was discharged .
The dilution in the receiving water was calculated from the formula:
Where:
D— Ce
Cm
D = Dilution
Ce = Concentration of dye in the effluent (2532 µg/L)
Cm = Concentration measured in the receiving water
Dye concentrations and temperature were made in situ, from a boat at different depths and
locations in the vicinity of the outfall (Figure 10), using a Turner Digital Fluorometer
equipped with a flow -through cell and a pump. Dye was pumped from various locations
and depths and the depth, dye concentration and temperature recorded. The location of
each sample was determined using a Global Positioning System, and the location of each
sample was noted. The results of the dye measurements are presented in Tables in
Appendix B and Figures 11 through 15.
At two locations (Figure 16), vertical profiles of temperature and dissolved oxygen were
made with a Yellow Springs Instruments (YSI) dissolved oxygen and temperature meter.
The as built drawings of the outfall showed that the discharge pipe was in 26.5 feet of water.
However, the depth at the actual location of the outfall was 40 feet. The YSI instrument was
equipped with a 25 ft cable. Thus profiles from the surface to the bottom could not be made.
The results of the measurements of dissolved oxygen, temperature and the locations of these
measurements are presented in Figure 17 and 18 and Appendix C, Table C-1.
The temperature of the discharge measured in the dechlorination tank during the dye study
was 171 C.
Current Measurements
The speed and direction of the currents can influence dilution of the effluent with the
receiving water. Therefore during the dye study, current speed and direction were
continuously measured in 37 feet of water about 100 feet east of the end of the outfall and in
27 feet of water about 100 feet north of the outfall. All measurements were done using an S4
current meter (InterOcean Systems). Figure 19 illustrates the location of the current meter
and summarizes the current meter results, and Appendix D, Table D1 presents the detailed
results.
HYDRAULICS DILUTION REPORT.DOC
..
Outfall Location Map tow' 4
-�''y,J'�vl
*jLiT
O eidge^ .r
•
C
l;
C
C
❑
0000 00 0
00000
O 7
Q 0 r
7 Q
C C
Legend
O
Pump Depth (feet)
o surface to 1 foot
28-31
❑ 32-34
o 35-37
38-40
U Outfall Location
Radius from Outfall
Road
50 25 0 50 Feet N
Figure 10
CH2MHILL Location and Depth of Water Samples Analyzed for Dilution
s Hydraulics, LTD - Hwy 150 WWTP Outfall - November 5, 2003
50 25 0 50 Feet N
Figure 11
CH2MHILL Average Dilution at Depths 38 to 40 feet
dw Hydraulics, LTD - Hwy 150 WWTP Outfall - November 5, 2003
•1
•A
Legend
Average Dilution
No Dye
o > 1,000
0 101 - 1,000
0 51 - 100
21 -50
0 10-20
• <10
U Outfall Location
o Radius from Outfall
Road
50 25 0 50 Feet N
Figure 12
40 CH2MHILL Hydraulics LTD - Hwy 50 WWTP Outfall - November 5 2003
a
T,
4
Legend
Average Dilution
0 No Dye
0 > 1,000
0 101 - 1,000
0 51 - 100
21 - 50
0 10-20
• <10
O Outfall Location
Fo Radius from Outfall
Road
50 25 0 50 Feet N
Figure 13
40 CH2MHILL Average Dilution at Depths 32 to 34 feet
14P Hydraulics LTD - Hwy 150 WWTP Outfall - November 5 2003
Outfall Location Map
..:f=
Legend
Average Dilution
o
No Dye
0
> 1,000
0
101 - 1.000
51-100
n
21 -50
0
10-20
•
<10
U
Outfall Location
If o
Radius from Outfall
Road
50 25 0 50 Feet N
Figure 14
CH2MHILL Average Dilution at Depths 28 to 31 feet
4w _. Hvdraulio.¢. 1 TI7 - Hwv 1.rin WWTP 0iiffall - Nnvemhar r gnnz
r..
•
Q
n
O C
O O O O
O
r
Legend
Average Dilution
No Dye
o > 1,000
101 - 1,000
51 -100
21 -50
10-20
o <10
O Outfall Location
Radius from Outfall
Road
50 25 0 50 Feet N
Figure 15
CH2MHILL Average Dilution at the Surface to 1 foot Deep
AW Hydraulics, LTD - Hwy 150 WWTP Outfall - November 5, 2003
50 25 0 50 Feet N
Figure 16
CH2MHILL Location of Dissolved Oxygen Measurments
qw Hvrimidine Tn _ w,..ni 1 rr) \A/%A/TD ne.t;�u _ ni...,.,...t,,.. c onno
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCHARME OF HYDRAULICS LIMITED DISCHIWE TO LAKE NORMAN
FIGURE17
Dissolved Oxygen Profiles From November 5, 2003 Near Hydraulics, LTD WWfP Outfall
go
0
s
10
_ 15
t¢ 20
a
25
30
35
40
Dissolved oxygen 0q/1.)
2.0 4.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 12.0 14.0
FIGURE 18
Temperature Profiles from November 5, 2003 Near Hydraulics, LTD WWTP Outtall
Te Pp . (GW.)
> 4 10 14 24 0 30 W
o
a
10
=11NYAe)1216
11NYlM l6:Ot
16
00
0a
The current meter was deployed at approximately 11:00 AM on November 5, 2003 at a site
northeast of the outfall at a depth of 37 feet. Initial measurement indicated the current was
flowing in the direction of 45 degrees (NE). At about 11:30 and until the current meter was
moved at 14:00, the currents were flowing in the direction of approximately 255 degrees
(WSW). The average current speed at 37 feet deep was 0.28 fps with a range of 0.14 to 0.43
fps.
HYDRAULICS DILUTION REPORr.DCC 19
250 125 0 250 Feet N
Figure 19
40 CH2MHILL Current Meter Location and Current Direction
Hydraulics LTD - Hwy 150 WWTP Outfall - November 5, 2003
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCHAROE OF HYDRAULICS UMRED DISCHARDE TO LACE NORMAN
At 15:00 the current meter was moved to a location northwest of the Hydraulics outfall at a
depth of 26 feet The average current direction at this depth was similar to the 37 foot
depth, with an average current direction of 224 degrees (SW). The average current speed at
26 feet depth was 0.06 fps with a range of 0.3 to 0.14 fps.
Other Observations - Air Entrained in Effluent
Observations made during the dye study provide evidence of entrainment of air in the
effluent The addition of water and continuous pumping of effluent began at 8:00 AM on
November 5, 2003. At the pumping rate of 212 gpm, the effluent was calculated to arrive at
the end of the outfall in about 28 minutes. By 9:00 AM, a "boil", caused by entrained air in
the effluent, was observed from shore. This "boil' was observed throughout the dye study
until about 3:00 PM (Figure 20). The "boil" was about 2 to 3 feet in diameter. The boil was
continuously present from 9:00 AM until about 1:00 PM but it would occasionally disappear
for short periods of time (10 to 60 seconds). At about 3:00 PM the "boil" disappeared and
did not return. It is probable that the reason that the "boil' disappeared at 3:00, is that it
took about 7 hours for air trapped in the force main to be purged from the system by the
continuous pumping of the effluent. Without continuous pumping, as in normal operation
of the discharge, air is likely always present in the discharge. This was confirmed on
November 25, 2003 when the outfall was inspected. The WWTP operator turned the pump
on to discharge effluent while the diver and a field technician observed the outfall. When
the pump turned on, a large boil was observed on the lake, larger than that noted during the
dye study.
FIGURE 2D
Air Entrained in Ouffall Line Causes Effluent to Surface
Discussion
Dye Measurements and Dilutions
The dilution of the effluent is very rapid. The highest concentrations of dye were noted at
depths between 35 and 40 feet within a 25 foot radius of the outFA At a depth of 38-40 feet
within a 25 foot radius, the average dilution was 365 with dilution ranging from 6 to 5290.
Based on this average dilution, at an effluent BOD concentration of 15 mg/1, the BOD in the
surrounding water would be 0.04 mg/1 if there was no BOD in the lake. DWQ modelers
HYDRAULICS DILUTION REPOFFLDOC 21
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCHARGE OF HYDRAULICS UMRED DISCHARDE TO UJ(E NORMAN
typically assume 2 mg/l CBOD background when data are not available. Thus, Hydraulics
LTD's effluent will be diluted to background concentrations within a short distance of the
outfall.
At a depth of 35 to 37 feet within a 25 foot radius of the outfall, the average dilution was 134
with a range of 6 to 1072. At other depths and at locations within one foot of the surface,
dye typically was not measured by the fluorometer even at locations that were almost
directly above the outfall. Dye was observed at the surface in a small radius around the
outfall during the dye study. However, it was not possible to measure this concentration
because the turbulence of the air in the effluent did not allow the boat to maintain position
long enough to take measurements and it was only in a thin layer (less than 1 inch thick) at
the surface so stable measurements could not be made.
Under the conditions of the study, the intake at the Marshall Steam Station does not impact
the Hydraulics LTD dilution. Figures 11-15 show the lowest dilution in a direction
downstream of the Marshall Steam Station intake. The current data also indicate average
current in the southwest direction as shown in Figure 19. This was noted even when winds
were out of the southwest and caused the boat to drift upstream.
On the date of the study, Duke Energy was operating three of its four intake gates due to
cooler water temperatures. Thus, their intake was approximately 776 MGD as compared to
its average 1064 MGD. On November 5, 2003, the date of the dye study, the average flow
out of Lookout Shoals Lake was 1494 cfs with hourly flows ranging from 100 cfs to 4525 cfs
(Wylie, personal conversation). This minimum flow of 100 cis occurred during 9 of the 24
hours, and is close to the 60 cfs released through leakage alone. A minimum daily flow of
approximately 300 cfs is required from Lookout Shoals Dam. This flow is used by DWQ to
develop NPDFS permit limits in stream and river environments where the flow is regulated
per NCAC 02B .0206(b).
The difference in withdrawal from Marshall Steam Station on the day of the study versus its
long term average should not negatively impact the dilution available to Hydraulics. The
volume of water available in Lake Norman provides significant dilution. Similarly, the
higher volume of flow discharged from Lookout Shoals Dam during the study than that
released during summer conditions should not significantly impact the dilution. While flow
coming into the lake is lower under these conditions, the flow leaving the lake is also lower.
Thus, the volume of water does not significantly change. The current direction will not
impact the dilution available, however, the current velocity will impact the dilution. Higher
velocities /currents in the lake will result in higher dilution.
During the dye study the effluent was being discharged continuously. However during
normal plant operation the discharge is in batch mode. Thus, wastewater is discharged for
only 2.8 minutes at a time. Table 1 shows the time between discharges vs total daily volume
of effluent discharged. Based on the current velocities measured during the dye study (0.03
to 0.43 ft/sec), each batch of effluent will have moved anywhere from 225 to 3330 feet from
the outfall before another batch is discharged. After the initial dilution caused by
momentum of the discharge occurs, additional dilution caused by dispersion will occur as
each batch is carried away from the outfall by the currents in the lake. Thus it would be
difficult to detect any batch of effluent discharged or measure any effects of the effluent.
HYDRAULICS DILUTION REPORT.DOC 22
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCHARGE OF WDRAUUCS UMDED DISCHARGE TO LAKE NORMAN
In addition, the dye study was conducted at a lower flow rate (212 gpm) from the actual
flow rate (360 gpm). Therefore the actual dilution will be higher than what was observed
during the dye study. At a higher pumping rate, there will be higher dilution due to the
higher velocities and momentum of the discharge. Table 2 summarizes differences in
velocity based on different pumping rates. The single port line indicates what velocity out
of an open pipe would be while the values listed for 60 ports indicate the velocity coming
out of each 3/4 inch diameter hole in the Hydraulics, LTD outfall.
Table 2. Comparison of Flow Rate and Port Velocity
Port Diameter
Flow Rate
Port Velocity
NO. PORTS
(inches)
(9PM) (mgd)
(n/sec)
1
4.00
360 0.518
9.19
60
0.75
360 0.618
4.36
1
4.00
212 0.305
5A1
60
0.75
212 0.305
2.57
Finally, the presence of air in the effluent that was noted during the dye study will cause the
effluent to rise and will cause increased mixing due to turbulence cause by the air. The
presence of air in the effluent was noted again on November 23, 2003 when the operator
turned the pump on while the diver and field engineer observed the outfall. The presence
of air in the effluent does not confine the effluent to the bottom water of Lake Norman, and
provides reaeration of the effluent Thus any reduction of dissolved oxygen in the lower
water of Lake Norman cannot be attributed to the Hydraulics effluent
Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen
Lake Norman in the vicinity of the outfall had a slight thermal stratification with a small
thermocline at 5 feet of depth extending to 8 feet The difference in temperature from the
surface to the bottom water was 3.8 to 3.9 C. The dissolved oxygen showed a slight
clinograde curve with about 9.2 µg/L at the surface and 6.7 to 6.8 µg/L at the bottom. With
the high oxygen concentrations in the bottom water, it is probable that the lake had turned
over recently. The slight thermal stratification was probably a result of recent warm
weather.
Current Measurements
During the dye study, the intake from the Marshall Steam Plant did not setup localized
currents that impacted the Hydraulics LTD discharge. During the dye study, the
predominate current was toward the southwest.
During the dye study the wind was from the west-southwest (in the opposite direction of
the currents). The earth's rotation is an important factor in determining the direction of
currents. In larger lakes, such as Lake Norman, the water does not move in exactly the
same direction as the wind. It moves at an angle to the wind due to the rotation of the earth.
The deflection of the current may be as great as 45 degrees. The deflection of the current
direction increases with increasing depth. This is called an Eckman spiral. An additional
factor that influences the speed and direction of the currents is wind. When the wind
blows, water is blown to one end of a lake and because of gravity, must eventually return.
This can occur at both the surface or more usually in the deeper water. If the lake is
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCHARGE OF HYDRAULICS LIMBED DISCHARGE TO LAKE NORMAN
thermally stratified, the water will return just above the thermodne. If the lake is not
stratified, it will return along the bottom or in deeper water.
Other movements of water include seiches. Seiches are commonly generated when winds
blow fairly constantly from one direction, driving the surface water downward. The wind
piles up the water on the lee shore, holding it there until the wind drops, at which time the
driving force is released and the accumulated water mass flows back under the influence of
gravity. This produces a standing wave which rocks back and forth with gradually
decreasing motions. Often lakes can have several seiches occurring at once and usually at
different frequencies. It is probable that the flow reversals measured during the dye study
are due to seiches and/or return of water that had blown to the cove or bay northeast of the
outfall. If the current meters had be left in for a longer period, many flow reversals would
have been observed.
Dilution Model
In order to verify that a large amount of dilution would occur under summer conditions, a
dilution model was developed. The model selected was Visual Plumes (VP), a model
supported by EPA. VP simulates aquatic plumes. It actually includes several models to
estimate dilution. The Updated Merge (UM3) and the DKHW models within VP were
tested against the data collected during the dye study.
VP does not allow one to run the model with diffuser ports at different angles. Thus, all 60
outfall holes were aligned along the top of the outfall pipe. Since air is entrained in the pipe,
the effluent will travel up. Including all holes discharging at the same angle likely results in
more conservative estimates of dilution. Tables 3-4 summarize the model input parameters
for the calibration conditions.
TABLE 3
Diffuser Input Values Based on November 5, 2003 Data
Parameter
Value
Port Diameter (in)
0.75
Port Elevation (in)
12
Vertical angle (degrees)
90
Horizontal angle (degrees)
30
No. Ports
60
Spacing between ports (in)
3
Effluent flow (mgd)
0.305
Effluent temperature (0C)
17
Conservative substance (mgA)
100
A value of 100 was input as a conservative substance concentration to better illustrate
dilution. A concentration of 2 mg/l was included as the background ambient condition.
HYDRAULICS DILUTION REPORT.DOC 24
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCHARGE OF HYDRAULICS LIMITED DISCHARGE TO LAKE NORMAN
TABLE 4
Ambient Input Values Based on November 5, 2003 Data
Depth (ft)
Current Speed
(fps)
Current Direction
(degrees)
Temperature (°C)
Background
Concentration
(mgll)
0
23.5
2
25
0.06
0
19.5
2
41
0.28
0
19.5
2
The UM3 model predicted dilution of 87:1 within 45 feet of the outfall and 167:1 at 100 feet
This is in comparison to the average dilution of 134 seen during the dye study. DKHW
predicted dilution of approximately 306:1 within 75 feet of the outfall. The difference in
these model predictions is minimal given the outfall release conditions versus the conditions
allowed by the model.
There are no available dilution models that can predict dilution under a batch release mode.
Thus, to evaluate the impact of the discharge on surrounding water quality at permitted
conditions during summer ambient conditions, the model must be run in a continuous
discharge mode. This will underpredict the dilution available. As Hydraulics LTD expands
its WWTP, the batch releases will become more frequent, and the model will better predict
the dilution. It should be noted that the study was performed under a constant flow of 212
gpm; this is approximately the same flow as the permitted flow of the plant of 0.3 MGD.
The main ambient conditions that will change during the summer are lake temperature and
the inflow to Lake Norman (release from the upstream lake). The temperature profile data
illustrated in Figure 4 were used to estimate summer temperature within the lake. Since the
model is dependent on current velocity, the change in summer release will have little impact
on the model predictions. As described above, the currents in the lake in the vicinity of the
outfall are driven by wind rather than releases from Lookout Shoals Lake. To examine how
the dilution changes under different ambient currents, the model was run under the current
conditions observed in the lake on November 5, 2003 and at lower currents. Tables 5 and 6
summarize the model inputs.
HYDRAUUCS DILUTION REPORT.DOC 25
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCHARGE OF HYDRAULICS LIMITED DISCHARGE TO LAKE NORMAN
TABLE 5
Diffuser Input Conditions Based on Permitted Conditions
Parameter
Value
Port Diameter (in)
0.75
Port Elevation (in)
12
Vertical angle (degrees)
90
Horizontal angle (degrees)
30
No. Ports
60
Spacing between ports (in)
12
Effluent flow (mgd)
0.3
Effluent temperature (°C)
26.5
Conservative substance concentration (mg/I)
100
TABLE 6
Summer Ambient Conditions
Depth (ft)
Current Speed
(fps)
Current Direction
(degrees)
Temperature (OC)
Background
Concentration
(mg(l)
0
28
2
25
0 - 0.06
0
18
2
41
0.1 - 0.28
0
18
2
Using the current velocity detected on November 5, 2003, the dilution predicted 10 feet from
the outfall is 66:1 using UM3 and 43:1 using DKHW. When the lower current velocities are
used, both models show dilution of approximately 40:1 within 10 feet of the outfall.
In order to better predict the conditions observed during the dye study, other parameters
such as effluent and ambient temperature were modified in some model runs. When these
changes were made, UM3 predicted the effluent to surface 12 feet from the outfall. The
dilution at this location was 70:1. DKHW predicted similar dilution.
Since available models were not developed to examine batch discharges or entrainment of
air in the outfall pipe, the models are likely conservative in their predictions. Models must
be run in continuous mode, but the effluent flow rates can be modified. Models also cannot
predict the dilution that occurs with air entrainment Model inputs such as temperature and
salinity can be modified to ensure that the effluent surfaces as will happen when air is
entrained in the outfall line. Since there is a relatively high level of uncertainty in the model
predictions, more emphasis should be placed on the dye data when making permitting
decisions. However, it should be noted, that the models predict high levels of dilution
under a variety of effluent and ambient conditions.
HYDRAULICS DILUTION REPORT.DOC 26
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCHARGE OF HYDRAULICS LIMITED DISCHARGE TO LAKE NORMAN
Summary
Dilution of the Hydraulics effluent in Lake Norman is rapid and large. Based on the
November 5, 2003 dye study, dilution of the effluent within 25 ft from the outfall is greater
than 100:1 even at depths of 40 feet, the outfall depth. Dilution at the surface is greater. For
most surface measurements, no dye was detected with the fluorometer. Thus, the
Hydraulics LTD effluent is not impacting the water in Lake Norman used by boaters, skiers,
and swimmers.
Air entrained into the effluent by the batch mode of discharge and discharge pump
enhances the dilution because of increased turbulence caused by the rapid surfacing of the
effluent plume due to the air. The air in the effluent also prevents the effluent from
remaining near the bottom of the lake, despite any differences in density due to
temperature. Thus, based on the study data, the Hydraulics LTD effluent is not impacting
dissolved oxygen at the bottom of Lake Norman.
During the study, the Marshall Steam Station intake did not impact the dilution of the
Hydraulics LTD discharge even though it was operating. Current data indicated the
predominate current direction to the southwest, away from the Marshall Steam Station
intake structure.
Dilution models were also set up to determine if the effluent would have a greater impact
on water quality during summer ambient conditions. Available models do not model batch
releases, thus, a steady discharge was input to the models. This will underpredict available
dilution during permitted conditions. The models also do not incorporate air entrainment
in the outfall line which will cause the effluent to rise. Even with these levels of
conservatism, the models predicted dilution of approximately 40:1 within 10 feet of the
outfall.
References
CH2M HILL. 2001. Environmental Assessment for Charlotte Mecklenburg Utilities for the
Increase in Interbasin Transfer from the Catawba River Subbasin to the Rocky River
Subbasin.
Duke Power, 2001. Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program: 2000 Summary.
EPA, 2001. Dilution Models for Effluent Discharges, 4th Edition (Visual Plumes).
Environmental Research Division, NERL, ORD. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 960
College Station Rd. Athens, Georgia.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).1998.
Basinwide Assessment Report Support Document: Catawba River Basin. Raleigh, NC.
Wylie, Robert. Duke Energy. November 21, 2003. Personal conversation.
HYDRAULICS DILUTION REPORKDOC 27
Appendix A
Equipment and Calibration
A-1
Dye Measuring Equipment
All dye measurements were made with calibrated Turner Design Model 10-AU-005 Digital
Fluorometers equipped with a 25 mm x 150 mm continuous flow cell. The following light
sources were used:
Light Source 10-046 Clear Quartz Lamp
Excitation Filter Color Specification 546 Filter
Reference Filter Color Specification 16 Filter
Emission Filters Color Specification 3-66 Filter installed nearest the sample
Color Specification 23A Filter installed nearest the light source
Fluorometer Calibration and Standards
All dye standards were prepared on a volume basis.
The sensitivity of the Model 10-AU-005 fluorometer was set before calibrating. The percent
full scale (%FS) was set at 99% at the high range using a 500 µg/L standard with the span set
at 48 percent. Using this calibration scheme, the instrument's response was linear between 1
and 500 µg/L with a single point calibration with a 100 µg/L standard. (Model 10-AU-005
Field Fluorometer Users Manual, Turner Designs, January 1992). The fluorometer was set to
subtract the blank (background) from the concentration measurement. The calibration
checked at the end of the dye study. The check showed that the instrument maintained its
calibration.
The concentration and temperature of each dye sample was measured and recorded. All dye
concentrations were corrected for temperature using the following formula:
Where:
Cc = Cs x e(°•026(Ts-Tr))
Cc = Concentration corrected for temperature (ppb)
Cs = Concentration of the sample (ppb)
Ts = Temperature of the sample (Celsius)
Tr = Temperature of the calibration standard (Celsius)
The temperature of the calibration standard of 100 µg/L was 26.0 C.
A-2
Appendix B
Dye Study Results
TABLE B4
Dye Concentration and Calculated Dilution of Highway 150 WWTP Effluent in Lake Norman
Order
Time
Latitude
Longitude
Pump Depth
Pump
Dye
Temperature
Dye
Average
Distance
Measurem
(deg)
(deg)
M
Depth
Concentration
(C)
Concentration
Dilutions
from Outfall
ants Taken
Interval
(ppb)
Corrected for
(it)
Temperature
63
14:08
35.60441
80.94146
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
<25
64
14:09
35.60443
80.94135
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
<25
65
14:10
35.60443
80.94131
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
<25
86
14:31
35.60441
80.94146
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
<25
80
14:25
35.60474
80.94138
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
81
14:26
35.60471
80.94143
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
84
14:29
35.60463
80.94110
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
87
14:32
35.60470
80.94105
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
88
14:33
35.60486
80.94116
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
89
14:34
35.60455
80.94194
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
92
15:00
35.60472
80.94162
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
93
15:01
35.60469
80.94154
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
99
15:05
35.60412
80.94153
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
100
15:06
35.60412
80.94157
1
0 to 1
0.8
24.0
0.8
3004.8
>100
101
15:07
35.60418
80.94156
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
102
15:07
35.60411
80.94119
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
103
15:07
35.60413
80.94114
1
0 to 1
1.2
24.0
1.3
2003.2
>100
104
15:07
35.60416
80.94111
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
105
15:07
35.60419
80.94109
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
B-2
nvc erg tnv nconorr cnn ruorumw= nc uvnom n If-0 1 1►1MM rVOPUA12nC TA I A= MnMUAA1
Order
Time
Latitude
Longitude
Pump Depth
Pump
Dye
Temperature
Dye
Average
Distance
Measurem
(deg)
(deg)
(ft)
Depth
Concentration
(C)
Concentration
Dilutions
from Outfall
ents Taken
Interval
(ppb)
Corrected for
(ft)
Temperature
106
15:07
35.60422
80.94107
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
107
15:08
35.60424
80.94106
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
108
15:08
35.60426
80.94105
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
109
15:08
35.60433
80.94105
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
115
15:09
35.60459
80.94108
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
116
15:10
35.60460
80.94108
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
117
15:10
35.60462
80.94108
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
118
15:10
35.60464
80.94108
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
119
15:10
35.60466
80.94108
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
120
15:11
35.60470
80.94108
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
121
15:13
35.60476
80.94108
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
122
15:15
35.60484
80.94109
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
123
15:17
35.60487
80.94109
1
0 to 1
0
24.1
0.0
No Dye
>100
127
15:25
35.60467
80.94115
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
128
15:33
35.60518
80.94040
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
129
15:34
35.60522
80.94039
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
130
15:35
35.60527
80.94037
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
131
15:36
35.60532
80.94034
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
>100
55
14:00
35.60433
80.94147
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
25 to 50
56
14:01
35.60435
80.94151
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
25 to 50
57
14:02
35.60437
80.94152
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
25 to 50
HYDRAULICS DILUTION REPORT.DOC B-3
nviZ eT1 MV 0;:PnaT PAQ nicruncxaF n: WMAI n Irc I ruRPn n -W.WAQnC TA i euc MnOlAAM
Order
Time
Latitude
Longitude
Pump Depth
Pump
Dye
Temperature
Dye
Average
Distance
Measurem
(deg)
(deg)
(ft)
Depth
Concentration
(C)
Concentration
Dilutions
from Outfall
ants Taken
Interval
(ppb)
Corrected for
(ft)
Temperature
58
14:03
35.60441
80.94153
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
25 to 50
61
14:06
35.60440
80.94150
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
25 to 50
62
14:07
35.60441
80.94148
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
25 to 50
66
14:11
35.60445
80.94122
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
25 to 50
71
14:16
35.60441
80.94150
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
25 to 50
72
14:17
35.60447
80.94152
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
25 to 50
73
14:18
35.60448
80.94152
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
25 to 50
74
14:19
35.60453
80.94127
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
25 to 50
79
14:24
35.60438
80.94131
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
25 to 50
85
14:30
35.60455
80.94145
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
25 to 50
91
14:36
35.60455
80.94145
1
0 to 1
1.2
24.0
1.3
2003.2
25 to 50
59
14:04
35.60440
80.94155
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
60
14:05
35.60439
80.94156
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
67
14:12
35.60460
80.94118
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
68
14:13
35.60452
80.94115
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
69
14:14
35.60446
80.94114
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
70
14:15
35.60427
80.94130
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
75
14:20
35.60442
80.94115
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
76
14:21
35.60435
80.94108
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
Soto 100
77
14:22
35.60424
80.94123
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
78
14:23
35.60422
80.94135
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
HYDRAULICS DILUTION REPORT.DOC B•4
nvr erg inv nEOe% r CnD M01%JADnC nC LAMDAI 11 InL 1 MAITM 1VV%UA0nC WN I A= KV%MAAAIt• '
Order
Time
Latitude
Longitude
Pump Depth
Pump
Dye
Temperature
Dye
Average
Distance
Measurem
(deg)
(deg)
(ft)
Depth
Concentration
(C)
Concentration
Dilutions
from Outfail
ants Taken
Interval
(ppb)
Corrected for
(ft)
Temperature
82
14:27
35.60467
80.94140
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
83
14:28
35.60468
80.94138
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
90
14:35
35.60432
80.94110
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
94
15:01
35.60429
80.94140
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
95
15:02
35.60426
80.94143
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
96
15:02
35.60425
80.94144
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
97
15:03
35.60421
80.94146
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
98
15:04
35.60423
80.94148
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
Soto 100
110
15:08
35.60436
80.94106
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
W Dye
50 to 100
111
15:09
35.60440
80.94106
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
112
15:09
35.60443
80.94106
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
Soto 100
113
15:09
35.60446
80.94107
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
114
15:09
35.60451
80.94107
1
0 to 1
0
24.0
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
124
15:19
35.60449
80.94117
1
0 to 1
0
24.1
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
125
15:21
35.60456
80.94117
1
0 to 1
0
24.2
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
126
15:23
35.60460
80.94117
1
0 to 1
0
24.2
0.0
No Dye
50 to 100
11
11:25
35.60442
80.94137
28
28 to 31
0
19.9
0.0
No Dye
<25
10
11:25
35.60443
80.94137
30
28 to 31
0
19.9
0.0
No Dye
<25
54
13:59
35.60446
80.94122
30
28 to 31
0
20.4
0.0
No Dye
25 to 50
8
11:23
35.60443
80.94138
32
32 to 34
0
19.8
0.0
No Dye
<25
9
11:24
35.60443
80.94137
32
32 to 34
0
19.9
0.0
No Dye
<25
HYDRAULICS DILUTION REPORT.DOC B-5
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCHARGE OF HYDRAULICS LIMITED DISCHARGE TO LAKE NORMAN
Order
Time
Latitude
Longitude
Pump Depth
Pump
Dye
Temperature
Dye
Average
Distance
Measurem
(deg)
(deg)
(ft)
Depth
Concentration
(C)
Concentration
Dilutions
from Outfall
ants Taken
Interval
(ppb)
Corrected for
(ft)
Temperature
7
11:23
35.60444
80.94140
34
32 to 34
5
19.6
5.9
428.8
<25
53
13:58
35.60446
80.94123
33
32 to 34
0
20.2
0.0
No Dye
25 to 50
3
11:14
35.60444
80.94143
36
35 to 37
0
19.6
0.0
No Dye
<25
6
11:22
35.60444
80.94140
36
35 to 37
90
19.5
106.6
23.8
<25
30
12:47
35.60445
80.94134
37
35 to 37
50
19.4
59.4
42.7
<25
31
12:48
35.60445
80.94134
37
35 to 37
2
19.6
2.4
1072.0
<25
32
12:50
35.60445
80.94134
37
35 to 37
11
19.7
13.0
195.4
<25
33
12:53
35.60445
80.94133
37
35 to 37
146
19.7
172.0
14.7
<25
34
12:53
35.60445
80.94133
37
35 to 37
153
19.7
180.2
14.0
Q5
35
12:54
35.60444
80.94133
37
35 to 37
6
19.7
7.1
358.3
<25
36
12:59
35.60445
80.94133
37
35 to 37
109
19.9
127.7
19.8
<25
37
13:02
35.60445
80.94133
37
35 to 37
34
19.8
39.9
63.4
<25
38
13:07
35.60445
80.94133
37
35 to 37
137
19.9
160.5
15.8
<25
42
13:12
35.60437
80.94136
37
35 to 37
385
19.9
451.2
5.6
<25
43
13:13
35.60438
80.94136
37
35 to 37
71
19.9
83.2
30.4
<25
44
13:14
35.60440
80.94134
37
35 to 37
95
20.0
111.0
22.8
<25
45
13:14
35.60440
80.94134
37
35 to 37
150
19.9
175.8
14.4
<25
46
13:15
35.60441
80.94134
37
35 to 37
120
19.9
140.6
18.0
<25
47
13:17
35.60437
80.94130
37
35 to 37
9
20.1
10.5
241.3
<25
52
13:58
35.60445
80.94124
36
35 to 37
0
20.1
0.0
No Dye
25 to 50
39
13:11
35.60436
80.94135
37
35 to 37
385
20.3
446.5
5.7
25 to 50
HYDRAULICS DILUTION REPORT.DOC g.g
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCHARGE OF HYDRAULICS UMITED DISCHARGE TO LAKE NORMAN
Order
Time
Latitude
Longitude
Pump Depth
Pump
Dye
Temperature
Dye
Average
Distance
Measurem
(deg)
(deg)
(ft)
Depth
Concentration
(C)
Concentration
Dilutions
from Outfall
ents Taken
Interval
(ppb)
Corrected for
(ft)
Temperature
40
13:11
35.60436
80.94135
37
35 to 37
200
20.1
233.2
10.9
25 to 50
41
13:12
35.60436
80.94135
37
35 to 37
160
20.0
187.0
13.5
25 to 50
48
13:17
35.60442
80.94128
37
35 to 37
123
20.1
143.4
17.7
25 to 50
1
11:08
35.60444
80.94139
38
38 to 40
2.3
19.6
2.7
932.2
<25
2
11:13
35.60444
80.94142
38
38 to 40
7
19.4
8.3
304.7
<25
5
11:21
35.60444
80.94140
38
38 to 40
165
19.4
195.9
12.9
<25
4
11:17
35.60444
80.94141
39
38 to 40
130
19.3
154.7
16.4
Q5
15
12:14
35.60444
80.94133
39
38 to 40
20
19.4
23.7
106.6
<25
16
12:17
35.60445
80.94133
39
38 to 40
29
19.5
34.3
73.7
<25
17
12:17
35.60445
80.94133
39
38 to 40
40
19.5
47.4
53.5
Q5
18
12:25
35.60445
80.94132
39
38 to 40
40
19.5
47.4
53.5
<25
19
12:27
35.60445
80.94132
39
38 to 40
18
19.4
21.4
118.5
<25
20
12:30
35.60445
80.94131
39
38 to 40
15
19.5
17.8
142.6
<25
21
12:35
35.60438
80.94133
39
38 to 40
345
20.0
403.2
6.3
<25
22
12:36
35.60441
80.94134
39
38 to 40
371
19.8
435.9
5.8
<25
23
12:36
35.60444
80.94134
39
38 to 40
50
19.7
58.9
43.0
<25
24
12:37
35.60444
80.94134
39
38 to 40
10
19.5
11.8
213.8
<25
25
12:38
35.60445
80.94133
39
38 to 40
38
19.4
45.1
56.1
<25
26
12:38
35.60445
80.94134
39
38 to 40
48
19.4
57.0
44.4
<25
27
12:40
35.60445
80.94134
39
38 to 40
20
19.4
23.7
106.6
<25
28
12:41
35.60445
80.94134
39
38 to 40
28
19.3
33.3
76.0
<25
HYDRAULICS DILUTION REPORT.DOC B-7
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCHARGE OF HYDRAULICS LIMITED DISCHARGE TO LAKE NORMAN
Order
Time
Latitude
Longitude
Pump Depth
Pump
Dye
Temperature
Dye
Average
Distance
Measurem
(deg)
(deg)
(ft)
Depth
Concentration
(C)
Concentration
Dilutions
from Outfall
ents Taken
Interval
(ppb)
Corrected for
(ft)
Temperature
29
12:42
35.60445
80.94134
39
38 to 40
15
19.4
17.8
142.2
Q5
51
13:56
35.60445
80.94125
39
38 to 40
10
20.1
11.7
217.2
Q5
12
11:28
35.60442
80.94136
40
38 to 40
300
19.6
354.3
7.1
<25
13
11:31
35.60444
80.94140
40
38 to 40
0.4
19.1
0.5
5290.8
Q5
49
13:56
35.60443
80.94126
39
38 to 40
95
20.1
110.8
22.9
25 to 50
50
13:56
35.60445
80.94125
39
38 to 40
105
20.1
122.4
20.7
25 to 50
14
11:38
35.60463
80.94134
40
38 to 40
5
19.9
5.9
432.2
50 to 100
HYDRAULICS DILUTION REPORT.DOC B-8
TABLE B-2
Dye Concentration Measured in Dechlorination Tank Prior to Discharge
Replicate Sample Grab Time Fluorometer Temperature Dye Dye
Bottle # (ppb) (C) Concentration Concentration
corrected for corrected for
Temperature Dilution factor
1
2
9:00
25.40
26.30
25.2
2520
2
2
9:00
26.40
24.70
27.3
2731
3
4
10:00
20.60
25.10
21.1
2109
4
4
10:00
20.00
23.80
21.2
2118
5
6
11:00
19.50
24.50
20.3
2028
6
8
12:00
21.00
24.50
21.8
2184
7
8
12:00
20.00
23.80
21.2
2118
8
8
12:00
18.30
23.50
19.5
1953
9
10
13:00
34.70
25.00
35.6
3561
10
10
13:00
32.80
23.90
34.6
3464
11
10
13:00
33.30
23.50
35.5
3554
12
12
14:00
20.40
25.80
20.5
2051
13
12
14:00
20.40
24.50
21.2
2121
14
14
15:00
26.60
25.00
27.3
2730
15
14
15:00
26.10
24.10
27.4
2742
s-9
Appendix C
DO and Temperature Profile Data
G1
TABLE C-1
Dissolved Oxygen and Temperature Profile Data Collected November 5, 2003
Depth (ft)
Temperature (°C)
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/!)
12:15
15:00
12:15
15:00
0
23.3
23.8
9.15
9.2
2
23.3
23.8
9.3
9.2
4
23.2
23.8
9.2
9.2
6
23.1
23.7
9.3
9.2
8
20.4
21.4
9.5
8.5
10
20
20.9
8.2
8.1
12
19.8
20.3
7.4
7.9
14
19.7
20.1
7
7.4
16
19.6
20
6.9
7.1
18
19.5
20
6.8
7
20
19.5
19.9
6.7
6.9
22
19.9
6.8
G2
Appendix D
Current deter Data
0-1
EXHiBIT D-1
Current Speed and Direction Near the Hydraulics, LTD Outfall in Lake Norman
November 5, 2003
Time (EST) Speed at Speed at Direction Speed at Speed at Direction
37 ft depth 37 ft depth at 37 ft 26 ft depth 26 ft depth at 26 ft
(cm/sec) (ft/sec) depth (crn/sec) (ft/sec) depth
(degrees) (degrees)
11:00:00
10.04
0.33
44.2
11:10:00
4.40
0.14
50.5
11:20:00
11.46
0.38
47.1
11:30:00
8.07
0.26
228.0
11:40:00
4.66
0.15
301.0
11:50:00
7.84
0.26
232.3
12:00:00
10.05
0.33
238.8
12:10:00
7.89
0.26
239.6
12:20:00
6.93
0.23
236.8
12:30:00
11.87
0.39
237.4
12:40:00
13.04
0.43
237.5
12:50:00
11.94
0.39
238.7
13:00:00
7.42
0.24
274.6
13:10:00
6.60
0.22
268.3
13:20:00
7.47
0.25
262.3
13:30:00
8.25
0.27
292.8
13:40:00
7.14
0.23
258.7
13:50:00
7.20
0.24
270.0
14:00:00
7.27
0.24
277.9
15:00:00
4.20
0.14
244.7
15:10:00
1.71
0.06
200.6
15:20:00
0.89
0.03
243.4
15:30:00
0.89
0.03
206.6
Average
8.40
0.28
223.0
1.92
0.06
223.8
Min
4.40
0.14
0.89
0.03
Max
13.04
0.43
4.20
0.14
D-2
DYE STUDY REPORT FOR DISCHARGE OF HYDRAULICS LIMITED DISCHARGE TO LAKE NORMAN
FIGURE D-1
Current Speed and Direction at 37 Feet and 26 Feet of Depth in the Vicinity of Hydraulics, LTD outfall on November 5, 2003
360.0
m
y 315.0
u
L 270.0
m
`m
t a 225.0
0 m
o �
0
� 180.0
c
3
—° 135.0
c
0
c� 90.0
O
m 45.0
U
0.0
Current Direction
Current Speed
— Direction at 37 0 depth (degrees)
it —Direction at 26 0 depth (degrees)
Speed at 37 It depth (f /sec)
—A Speed at 26 It depth (ft+sec)
O O o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
° o° tip° o° . o° o° o° o° o° ° o° ° o° o° o° 0. o. 0 o d° ° o
;°° ;� 1• ^`•' 11 ,.43 ry0 ti Nti 4%O No4 by . �, �ti .9 !P .3 . yo° .N .1P .15
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ,1 1
Time
0.90
0.70
0.60
m
0.50
0.40 0.
el
0.30 a
U
0.20
0.10
HYDRAULICS DILUTION REPORT.DOC &3
Appendix E
Model Files
E-,
/ UM3. 11/30/2003 1:40:50 PM
Case 1; ambient file c:\plumes\VP plume 7.001.db; Diffuser table record 1:--------------------------------
Ambient Table:
Depth Amb-cur Amb-dir
Amb-sal
Amb-tem
Amb-pol
Decay Far-spd
Far-dir Disprsn
Density
m
m/s
deg
psu
C
kg/kg
s-1 m/s
deg m0.67/s2
sigma-T
0.0 0.0183
0.0
0.0
23.5
2.0000E-6
0.0 -
- 0.67 -
2.519
7.62 0.0183
0.0
0.0
19.5
2.0000E-6
0.0 -
- 0.67 -
1.631
12.5 0.0853
0.0
0.0
19.5
2.0000E-6
0.0 -
- 0.67 -
1.631
Diffuser table:
P-dia P-elev V-angle
H-angle
Ports
Spacing AcuteMZ ChrncMZ
P-depth Ttl-flo Eff-sal Temp Polutnt
(in) (in)
(deg)
(deg)
()
(in)
(ft) (ft)
(ft) (MGD)
(psu) (C) (ppm)
0.75 12.0
90.0
30.0
60.0
3.0
10.0 100.0
40.0 0.3
0.0 17.0 100.0
Simulation:
Froude number:
-82.02; effleunt density (sigma-T)-1.161;
effleunt velocity
0.769(m/s);
Depth Amb-cur
P-dia
Polutnt
Dilutn
x-posn y-posn
Step (ft)
(ft/s)
(in)
(ppm)
()
(ft) (ft)
0 40.0
0.266
0.75
100.0
1.0
0.0
0.0;
72 39.65
0.261
3.018
25.55
4.163
0.0524
0.0; merging;
100 39.41
0.258
6.439
15.62
7.2
0.172
0.0;
200 36.83
0.223
72.24
4.033
48.23
7.835
0.0;
206 36.45
0.218
82.39
3.805
54.31
10.33
0.0; acute zone;
228 35.01
0.198
133.6
3.179
83.14
37.29
0.0; local maximum rise or fall;
231 35.2
0.199
140.6
3.129
86.86
45.29
0.0; bottom hit;
264 40.61
0.272
262.3
2.589
166.5
100.8
0.0; chronic zone;
300 48.19
0.375
446.5
2.289
339.6
170.1
0.0;
400 81.83
0.836
1501.3
2.04
2460.6
934.7
0.0;
410 85.85
0.891
1700.1
2.033
2999.5
1113.1
0.0; stream limit
reached;
434 95.8
1.028
2315.0
2.02
4824.5
1688.1
0.0; surface;
1:40:51 PM. amb
fills: 2
/ DKHW
Case 1; ambient
file c:\plumes\VP plume 7.001.db;
Diffuser table
record 1:--------------------------------
Ambient Table:
Depth Amb-cur
Amb-dir
Amb-sal
Amb-tern
Amb-pol
Decay
Far-spd Far-dir Disprsn
Density
M. m/s
deg
psu
C
kg/kg
s-1
m/s deg m0.67/s2
sigma-T
0.0 0.0183
0.0
0.0
23.5
2.0000E-6
0.0
- - 0.67
2.519
7.62 0.0183
0.0
0.0
19.5
2.0000E-6
0.0
- - 0.67
1.631
12.5 0.0853
0.0
0.0
19.5
2.0000E-6
0.0
- - 0.67
1.631
Diffuser table:
P-dia P-elev V-angle H-angle Ports Spacing AcuteMZ ChrncMZ P-depth Ttl-flo Eff-sal
(in) (in) (deg) (deg) () (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (MGD) (psu)
0.75 12.0 90.0 30.0 60.0 3.0 10.0 100.0 40.0 0.3 0.0
Simulation:
Froude number:-82.02; effleunt density (sigma-T)-1.161; effleunt velocity
Depth
Amb-cur
P-dia
Polutnt
Dilutn
x-posn
y-posn
Step
(ft)
(ft/s)
(in)
(ppm)
()
(ft)
(ft)
0
40.0
0.266
0.75
100.0
1.0
0.0
0.0;
2
39.76
0.266
2.047
51.52
1.979
0.0108
0.0;
17
39.71
0.266
2.953
34.55
3.011
0.019
0.0;
18
39.71
0.266
3.071
33.39
3.122
0.0203
0.0; merging;
26
39.65
0.266
3.976
24.92
4.276
0.041
0.0;
27
39.64
0.266
4.094
24.02
4.45
0.0456
0.0;
31
39.61
0.266
4.685
21.2
5.104
0.0656
0.0;
36
39.54
0.266
6.024
17.38
6.373
0.122
0.0;
37
39.52
0.266
6.299
16.79
6.625
0.135
0.0;
42
39.46
0.266
7.835
14.62
7.767
0.211
0.0;
44
39.41
0.266
8.858
13.44
8.567
0.275
0.0;
48
39.32
0.266
10.67
11.83
9.971
0.412
0.0;
53
39.22
0.266
13.03
10.37
11.71
0.629
0.0;
57
39.11
0.266
15.63
9.196
13.62
0.927
0.0;
66
38.83
0.266
22.13
7.39
18.18
1.932
0.0;
74
38.53
0.266
29.45
6.233
23.15
3.505
0.0;
87
37.77
0.266
48.46
4.768
35.4
9.224
0.0;
89
37.63
0.266
52.17
4.601
37.68
10.5
0.0;
90
37.56
0.266
53.98
4.527
38.79
11.14
0.0; acute zone;
98
36.61
0.266
79.02
3.841
53.23
20.06
0.0;
Temp Polutnt
(C) (ppm)
17.0 100.0
0.769(m/s);
107
34.61
0.266
136.4
3.211
80.94
37.9
0.0;
114
30.6
0.266
260.2
2.788
124.4
60.57
0.0; bottom hit;
115
28.04
0.266
308.7
2.675
145.3
64.99
0.0;
116
24.26
0.266
327.4
2.584
167.7
68.42
0.0;
117
19.75
0.266
290.7
2.516
189.9
70.85
0.0;
118
14.94
0.266
264.7
2.455
215.3
72.63
0.0;
119
10.0
0.266
249.5
2.403
243.4
74.01
0.0;
121
-0.0412
0.266
237.5
2.32
306.4
76.06
0.0; local maximum rise or fall;
/ UM3.
11/30/2003
1:43:09
PM
Case 1;
ambient file c:\plumes\VP
plume 7.001.db;
Diffuser table
record 1:--------------------------------
Ambient Table:
Depth Amb-cur Amb-dir
Amb-sal
Amb-tem
Amb-pol
Decay Far-spd
Far-dir Disprsn
Density
m
m/s
deg
psu
C
kg/kg
s-1 m/s
deg m0.67/s2
sigma-T
0.0 0.0183
0.0
0.0
23.5
2.0000E-6
0.0 -
- 0.67
2.519
7.62 0.0183
0.0
0.0
19.5
2.0000E-6
0.0 -
- 0.67
1.631
12.5 0.0853
0.0
0.0
19.5
2.0000E-6
0.0 -
- 0.67
1.631
Diffuser table:
P-dia P-elev
V-angle
H-angle
Ports
Spacing AcuteMZ ChrncMZ
P-depth Ttl-flo Eff-sal
Temp Polutnt
(in) (in)
(deg)
(deg)
( )
(in)
(ft) (ft)
(ft) (MGD)
(psu) (C) (ppm)
0.75 12.0
90.0
30.0
60.0
12.0
10.0 100.0
40.0 0.3
0.0 17.0 100.0
Simulation:
Froude number:
-82.02; effleunt density
(sigma-T)-1.161;
effleunt velocity
0.769(m/s);
Depth Amb-cur
P-dia
Polutnt
Dilutn
x-posn y-posn
Step (ft)
(ft/s)
(in)
(ppm)
( )
(ft) (ft)
0 40.0
0.266
0.75
100.0
1.0
0.0
0.0;
100 39.47
0.259
4.938
15.58
7.219
0.137
0.0;
170 39.04
0.253
12.06
5.617
27.11
0.789
0.0; merging;
200 38.71
0.249
19.03
3.997
49.1
2.089
0.0;
240 37.82
0.237
40.65
2.904
108.4
10.44
0.0; acute zone;
263 37.1
0.226
64.99
2.573
171.0
38.85
0.0; local maximum
rise or fall;
273 37.75
0.234
79.76
2.47
208.4
66.12
0.0; bottom hit;
294 39.46
0.258
119.6
2.31
315.9
100.4
0.0; chronic zone;
300
40.01,
0.265
133.6
2.276
355.7
110.1
0.0;
400
55.55
0.477
643.2
2.038
2577.2
502.9
0.0;
408
57.33
0.501
719.7
2.032
3019.6
572.2
0.0; stream limit reached;
469
72.47
0.709
1688.7
2.01
10105.6
1526.2
0.0; stop dilution reached;
1:43:10
PM. amb
fills: 2
/ UM3.
11/30/2003 1:47:49
PM
Case 1;
ambient
file c:\plumes\VP
plume 7.001.db;
Diffuser table
record 1:--------------------------------
Ambient Table:
Depth Amb-cur Amb-dir
Amb-sal
Amb-tern
Amb-pol
Decay Far-spd Far-dir
Disprsn
Density
m
m/s
deg
psu
C
kg/kg
s-1 m/s deg
m0.67/s2
sigma-T
0.0 0.0183
0.0
0.0
28.0
2.0000E-6
0.0 - -
0.67
3.704
7.62 0.0183
0.0
0.0
18.0
2.0000E-6
0.0 - -
0.67
1.341
12.5 0.0853
0.0
0.0
18.0
2.0000E-6
0.0 - -
0.67
1.341
Diffuser table:
P-dia P-elev
V-angle
H-angle
Ports
Spacing AcuteMZ ChrncMZ
P-depth Ttl-flo Eff-sal
Temp Polutnt
(in) (in)
(deg)
(deg)
(}
(in)
(ft) (ft)
(ft) (MGD) (psu)
(C) (ppm)
0.75 12.0
90.0
30.0
60.0
3.0
10.0 100.0
40.0 0.3 0.0
26.5 100.0
Simulation:
Froude number:
40.23; effleunt density
(sigma-T)-3.288;
effleunt velocity 0.769(m/s);
Depth Amb-cur
P-dia
Polutnt
Dilutn
x-posn y-posn
Step (ft)
(ft/s)
(in)
(ppm)
{}
(ft) (ft)
0 40.0
0.266
0.75
100.0
1.0
0.0
0.0;
72 39.65
0.261
3.003
25.55
4.155
0.0521
0.0; merging;
100 39.4
0.258
6.372
15.54
7.224
0.172
0.0;
200 36.42
0.218
74.4
3.915
51.08
6.673
0.0;
213 35.28
0.203
99.05
3.48
66.07
10.28
0.0; acute zone;
258 23.17
0.06
294.4
2.61
160.2
43.82
0.0; trap level;
260 23.0
0.06
309.6
2.607
161.1
44.29
0.0; begin overlap;
294 22.62
0.06
341.9
2.603
162.3
46.47
0.0; local maximum rise or
fall;
1:47:49 PM. amb
fills: 2
/ DKHW
Case 1; ambient file c:\plumes\VP plume 7.001.db; Diffuser table record 1:--------------------------------
Ambient Table:
Depth Amb-cur Amb-dir
Amb-sal
Amb-tem
Amb-pol
Decay
Far-spd Far-dir Disprsn
Density
m
m/s
deg
psu
C
kg/kg
s-1
m/s deg m0.67/s2
sigma-T
0.0 0.0183
0.0
0.0
28.0
2.0000E-6
0.0
- - 0.67 -
3.704
7.62 0.0183
0.0
0.0
18.0
2.0000E-6
0.0
- - 0.67 -
1.341
12.5 0.0853
0.0
0.0
18.0
2.0000E-6
0.0
- - 0.67 -
1.341
Diffuser table:
P-dia P-elev
V-angle
H-angle
Ports
Spacing AcuteMZ ChrncMZ
P-depth
Ttl-flo Eff-sal Temp Polutnt
(in) (in)
(deg)
(deg)
()
(in)
(ft) (ft)
(ft)
(MGD) (psu) (C) (ppm)
0.75 12.0
90.0
30.0
60.0
3.0
10.0 100.0
40.0
0.3 0.0 26.5 100.0
Simulation:
Froude number:
40.23; effleunt density
(sigma-T)-3.288;
effleunt
velocity 0.769(m/s);
Depth Amb-cur
P-dia
Polutnt
Dilutn
x-posn y-posn
Step (ft)
(ft/s)
(in)
(ppm)
( )
(ft) (ft)
0 40.0
0.266
0.75
100.0
1.0
0.0
0.0;
2 39.76
0.266
2.047
51.37
1.985
0.0108
0.0;
17 39.71
0.266
2.953
34.48
3.017
0.019
0.0;
18 39.71
0.266
3.071
33.33
3.128
0.0203
0.0; merging;
26 39.65
0.266
3.976
24.88
4.283
0.041
0.0;
27 39.64
0.266
4.094
23.99
4.457
0.0456
0.0;
31 39.61
0.266
4.685
21.17
5.112
0.0656
0.0;
35 39.55
0.266
5.748
18.01
6.123
0.108
0.0;
36 39.54
0.266
6.024
17.35
6.386
0.121
0.0;
42 39.46
0.266
7.835
14.58
7.788
0.21
0.0;
43 39.43
0.266
8.346
13.95
8.198
0.241
0.0;
48 39.32
0.266
10.67
11.78
10.02
0.41
0.0;
51 39.27
0.266
11.93
10.95
10.95
0.517
0.0;
58 39.07
0.266
16.34
8.903
14.2
0.999
0.0;
63 38.93
0.266
19.65
7.918
16.56
1.458
0.0;
75 38.4
0.266
32.17
5.891
25.19
3.802
0.0;
86 37.56
0.266
52.72
4.555
38.35
8.536
0.0;
89 37.23
0.266
60.87
4.265
43.26
10.43
0.0;
90
37.12
0.266
63.62
4.184
44.88
11.06
0.0; acute zone;
95
36.21
0.266
87.01
3.694
57.84
16.11
0.0;
103
33.82
0.266
155.0
3.11
88.25
27.4
0.0;
105
32.68
0.266
192.7
2.971
100.9
31.77
0.0; trap level;
160
31.67
0.266
232.8
2.878
111.6
38.7
0.0; bottom hit, local maximum rise or
fall;
/ UM3.
11/30/2003
1:50:34
PM
Case 1;
ambient file c:\plumes\VP
plume 7.001.db;
Diffuser table
record 1:--------------------------------
Ambient Table:
Depth Amb-cur Amb-dir
Amb-sal
Amb-tem
Amb-pol
Decay Far-spd Far-dir
Disprsn
Density
m
m/s
deg
psu
C
kg/kg
s -1 m/s deg
m0.67/s2
sigma-T
0.0 0.0183
0.0
0.0
28.0
2.0000E-6
0.0 - -
0.67
3.704
7.62 0.0183
0.0
0.0
18.0
2.0000E-6
0.0 - -
0.67
1.341
12.5 0.0853
0.0
0.0
18.0
2.0000E-6
0.0 - -
0.67
1.341
Diffuser table:
P-dia P-elev
V-angle
H-angle
Ports
Spacing AcuteMZ ChrncMZ
P-depth Ttl-flo Eff-sal
Temp Polutnt
(in) (in)
(deg)
(deg)
()
(in)
(ft) (ft)
(ft) (MGD) (psu)
(C) (ppm)
0.75 12.0
90.0
30.0
60.0
3.0
10.0 100.0
40.0 0.3 0.0
30.0 100.0
Simulation:
Froude number:
32.67; effleunt density
(sigma-T)-4.291;
effleunt velocity 0.769(m/s);
Depth Amb-cur
P-dia
Polutnt
Dilutn
x-posn y-posn
Step (ft)
(ft/s)
(in)
(ppm)
( )
(ft) (ft)
0 40.0
0.266
0.75
100.0
1.0
0.0
0.0;
73 39.64
0.261
3.053
25.09
4.234
0.0541
0.0; merging;
100 39.4
0.258
6.339
15.53
7.224
0.172
0.0;
200 36.31
0.217
74.47
3.892
51.65
6.449
0.0;
214 35.01
0.199
101.3
3.434
68.15
10.07
0.0; acute zone;
256 23.31
0.06
273.3
2.633
154.3
37.25
0.0; trap level;
258 23.03
0.06
286.1
2.628
155.5
37.84
0.0; begin overlap;
300 22.39
0.06
330.5
2.621
157.4
40.55
0.0;
301 22.39
0.06
330.6
2.621
157.4
40.61
0.0; local maximum rise or
fall;
1:50:34 PM. amb fills: 2
/ DKHW
Case 1; ambient file c:\plumes\VP plume 7.001.db; Diffuser table record 1:--------------------------------
Ambient Table:
Depth Amb-cur Amb-dir
Amb-sal
Amb-tern
Amb-pol
Decay
Far-spd Far-dir Disprsn
Density
m
m/s
deg
psu
C
kg/kg
s-1
m/s deg m0.67/s2
sigma-T
0.0 0.0183
0.0
0.0
28.0
2.0000E-6
0.0
- - 0.67 -
3.704
7.62 0.0183
0.0
0.0
18.0
2.0000E-6
0.0
- - 0.67 -
1.341
12.5 0.0853
0.0
0.0
18.0
2.0000E-6
0.0
- - 0.67 -
1.341
Diffuser table:
P-dia P-elev
V-angle
H-angle
Ports
Spacing AcuteMZ ChrncMZ
P-depth
Ttl-flo Eff-sal Temp Polutnt
(in) (in)
(deg)
(deg)
()
(in)
(ft) (ft)
(ft)
(MGD) (psu) (C) (ppm)
0.75 12.0
90.0
30.0
60.0
3.0
10.0 100.0
40.0
0.3 0.0 30.0 100.0
Simulation:
Froude number:
32.67; effleunt density
(sigma-T)-4.291;
effleunt
velocity 0.769(m/s);
Depth Amb-cur
P-dia
Polutnt
Dilutn
x-posn y-posn
Step (ft)
(ft/s)
(in)
(ppm)
()
(ft) (ft)
0 40.0
0.266
0.75
100.0
1.0
0.0
0.0;
2 39.76
0.266
2.047
51.3
1.988
0.0108
0.0;
17 39.71
0.266
2.992
34.44
3.021
0.019
0.0;
18 39.71
0.266
3.071
33.29
3.132
0.0203
0.0; merging;
26 39.65
0.266
3.976
24.85
4.288
0.041
0.0;
27 39.64
0.266
4.094
23.96
4.462
0.0453
0.0;
31 39.61
0.266
4.685
21.15
5.118
0.0656
0.0;
34 39.57
0.266
5.433
18.73
5.857
0.0948
0.0;
35 39.55
0.266
5.748
17.98
6.131
0.108
0.0;
42 39.46
0.266
7.835
14.56
7.801
0.209
0.0;
43 39.43
0.266
8.346
13.93
8.214
0.24
0.0;
47 39.34
0.266
10.24
12.09
9.708
0.374
0.0;
52 39.25
0.266
12.32
10.69
11.28
0.552
0.0;
56 39.12
0.266
15.12
9.328
13.37
0.846
0.0;
65 38.83
0.266
21.81
7.395
18.17
1.762
0.0;
76 38.29
0.266
34.61
5.638
26.94
4.103
0.0;
86
37.4
0.266
56.1
4.412
40.63
8.502
0.0;
89
37.01
0.266
65.59
4.117
46.29
10.39
0.0;
90
36.88
0.266
68.86
4.034
48.18
11.01
0.0; acute zone;
95
35.78
0.266
97.2
3.545
63.42
16.02
0.0;
103
32.72
0.266
188.2
2.979
100.1
27.14
0.0; trap level;
157
31.48
0.266
238.3
2.868
112.9
33.9
0.0; bottom hit, local maximum rise or
fall;
/ UM3. 12/01/2003 9:31:05 AM
Case 1; ambient file c:\plumes\VP plume 7.001.db; Diffuser table record 1:----------------------------------
Ambient Table:
Depth
Amb-cur Amb-dir
Amb-sal
Amb-tem
Amb-pol
Decay
Far-spd
Far-dir
Disprsn Density
m
m/s
deg
psu
C
kg/kg
s-1
m/s
deg
m0.67/s2 sigma-T
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
28.0
2.0000E-6
0.0
-
-
0.67 -3.704
7.62
0.0
0.0
0.0
18.0
2.0000E-6
0.0
-
-
0.67 -1.341
12.5
0.0305
0.0
0.0
18.0
2.0000E-6
0.0
-
-
0.67 -1.341
Diffuser table:
P-dia
P-elev
V-angle
H-angle
Ports
Spacing AcuteMZ ChrncMZ
P-depth
Ttl-flo
Eff-sal
Temp Polutnt
(in)
(in)
(deg)
(deg)
()
(in)
(ft) (ft)
(ft)
(MGD)
(psu)
(C) (ppm)
0.75
12.0
90.0
30.0
60.0
3.0
10.0 100.0
40.0
0.3
0.0
30.0 100.0
Simulation:
Froude
number:
32.67;
effleunt density
(sigma-T)-4.291; effleunt velocity 0.769(m/s);
Depth Amb-cur
P-dia
Polutnt
Dilutn
x-posn
y-posn
Step
(ft)
(ft/s)
(in)
(ppm)
()
(ft)
(ft)
0
40.0
0.0938
0.75
100.0
1.0
0.0
0.0;
72
39.52
0.0908
3.054
25.55
4.151
0.0277
0.0;
merging;
100
38.91
0.0871
7.02
15.53
7.226
0.131
0.0;
191
22.87
0.0
79.0
4.231
43.79
5.791
0.0;
trap level;
198
20.99
0.0
113.9
4.114
46.23
6.406
0.0;
begin overlap;
200
20.86
0.0
121.9
4.11
46.32
6.457
0.0;
300
20.08
0.0
331.8
4.103
46.47
7.064
0.0;
316
20.07
0.0
336.7
4.103
46.47
7.104
0.0;
local maximum rise or fall;
9:31:06
AM. amb
fills: 2
/ DKHW
Case 1; ambient file c:\plumes\VP plume 7.001.db; Diffuser table record 1:----------------------------------
Ambient Table:
Depth
Amb-cur
Amb-dir
Amb-sal
Amb-tem
Amb-pot
Decay Far-spd
Far-dir Disprsn
Density
m
m/s
deg
psu
C
kg/kg
s-1 m/s
deg m0.67/s2
sigma-T
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
28.0
2.0000E-6
0.0 -
- 0.67
-3.704
7.62
0.0
0.0
0.0
18.0
2.0000E-6
0.0 -
- 0.67
-1.341
12.5
0.0305
0.0
0.0
18.0
2.0000E-6
0.0 -
- 0.67
-1.341
Diffuser table:
P-dia P-elev V-angle H-angle Ports Spacing AcuteMZ ChrncMZ P-depth Ttl-flo Eff-sal Temp Polutnt
(in)
(in)
(deg)
(deg)
()
(in)
(ft)
(ft) (ft) (MGD) (psu) (C) (ppm)
0.75
12.0
90.0
30.0
60.0
3.0
10.0
100.0 40.0 0.3 0.0 30.0 100.0
Simulation:
Froude number:
32.67;
effleunt density
(sigma-T)
-4.291;
effleunt velocity 0.769(m/s);
Depth Amb-cur
P-dia
Polutnt
Dilutn
x-posn
y-posn
Step
(ft)
(ft/s)
(in)
(ppm)
0
(ft)
(ft)
0
40.0
0.0938
0.75
100.0
1.0
0.0
0.0;
2
39.69
0.0938
2.047
0.972
1.945
0.00459
0.0;
23
39.6
0.0938
3.189
1.337
3.018
0.00951
0.0; merging;
24
39.59
0.0938
3.307
1.361
3.132
0.0105
0.0;
37
39.41
0.0938
5.236
1.585
4.816
0.0344
0.0;
49
39.05
0.0938
11.14
1.732
7.464
0.129
0.0;
50
39.01
0.0938
11.81
1.741
7.718
0.141
0.0;
60
38.35
0.0938
23.46
1.831
11.87
0.434
0.0;
61
38.28
0.0938
24.72
1.837
12.29
0.472
0.0;
70
37.14
0.0938
45.59
1.893
18.71
1.214
0.0;
79
35.09
0.0938
82.91
1.93
28.72
2.756
0.0;
87
31.71
0.0938
143.3
1.952
41.57
4.959
0.0; trap level;
114
29.25
0.0938
322.3
1.958
47.94
7.201
0.0; local maximum rise or fall;