Determination of Sludge Dumping Rates for the 106-Mile Site (June 1992) (PDF) - PDF by rfj18871

VIEWS: 11 PAGES: 74

									            United States              Office of Water   EPA 842-S-92-006
        -   Environmental Protection   (WH-556F}         June 1992
            Agency



":EPA       Determination of Sludge
            Dumping Rates for the
            106-Mile Site
                  FINAL REPORT




DETERMINATION OF SLUDGE DUMPING RATES
         FOR THE 106-MILE SITE




                   March 15, 1989




U.S.     ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                       Region II
                 New York, New York
                          and
       Office of Marine and Estuarlne Protection
                   Washington, DC




       Prepared Under Contract No. 68-03-3319
                    FINAL REPORT


DETERMINATION OF SLUDGE DUMPING RATES
         FOR THE 106 MILE SITE




                      June 1992




      U.S.   ENVIRONMENTALPROTECTION AGENCY

                      RegionII
                 New York, New York

                        and

               Office of Wetlands, Oceans
                     and Watersheds
                    Washington, D.C.
                                       TABLEOF CONTENTS



EXECUTIVE          SUNHARY       ...................                                       t

1.   INTRODUCTION              ..................                                        1-I

2.   BACKGROUND INFORMATION                         .............                        2-1

     2.1 REVIEWOF EXISTING DILUTION MODELS.....                                          2-1

     2.2 CHARACTERIZATION SLUDGE
                       OF      TRANSPORT
                                      BARGES                                             2-4

           2.2.1    Ba~Je Characte¢ist~cs   ,                                            2-4
           2.2.2    Dump,rig Methods . . . : : . : : : : : .......                       2-7

     2.3 NEARFIELD STUDIES OF SLUDGEPLUME BEHAVIOR .......                              2-13

3.   DEVELOPMENTOF DUMPING RATE EQUATION ..............                                  3-1

     3.1   SLUDGE PLUME DILUTION                              ..................         3-2

           3.1.1     Wake-Induced    Initial        Nixing       ............            3-3
           3.1.2      Oceanic    Mixing      ...................                         3-7

     3.2   DUMPING RATE EQUATION                             ...................         3-9

     3.3   BARGE SPEED CONSIDERATIONS                                ................   3-14

4.   RECOMMENDED DUMPING BATES ...................                                       4-1

     4,1 DUMPING RATES FOR INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICANTS ...... 4-1

                  OF
     4.2 NOMOGBAPH DUMPINGBATES FOR SPECIFICDILUTION
          REQUIREMENTS    .....................                                          4-6

5.   STRATEGIES        FOR MULTIPLE                 DUMPING           .............      5-I

     5,1 BULK LOADING             CONSIDERATIONS                      .............      5-I
                         AT            RATE OF 15,500gpm
     5.2 DUMPINGSTRATEGIES COURT-ORDERED                                                 5-3
     5.3 DUMPING STRATEGIES AT REDUCED RATES .........                                   5-6

6.   RECONNENDATIONS                  ......................                             6-1

7.   REFERENCES             ........................                                     7-i
                              LIST OFTABLES




                  OF
TABLE2.1 ASSESSMENT MODELS             OF
                           FORPREDICTION INITIAL
          MIXING OF SLUDGE      AT
                          DUHPED THE 106-NILE SITE ......           2-3

               OF
TABLE2.2 SUMMARY VESSELS THATTRANSPORT   SEWAGE     SLUDGE
          TO THE lOB.-MILE   SITE .................           ;    2-6
              CAPACITY VESSELS
TABLE2.3 SLUDGE      OF        THAT TRANSPORT
          SEWAGESLUDGE TO THE 106-MILE SITE ...........             2-8
                DIHEHSIONS VESSELS
TABLE2.4 PHYSICAL        OF        THATTRANSPORT
          SEWAGESLUDGE TO THE lOB-NILE SITE ...........            2-9

TABLE2.5 SLUDGEDISCHARGE        AND
                        METHODS MAXIMUM          RATESFOR
          VESSELS             SEWAGE
                  THATTRANSPORT                  TO
                                          SLUDGE THE
          lO6-MILE     SITE  ...................              2-11

                DILUTIONSANORATES DILUTIONFORSLUDGE
TABLE2.6 OBSERVEO                OF
                          IN
          PLUMES SURVEYED SEPTEHBER  1987 AND 1988 ....           2-22

             SLUDGE
TABLE4.1 WHOLE                         RESULTS
                    HETALCHARACTERIZATION    FROM
                              JERSEY
          THENINE NEt4 YORK-NEW          AUTHORITIES.
                                   SEWERAGE                         4-3
             SLUDGE
TABLE4.2 WHOLE                    FROM
                   TOXICITY RESULTS   THE NINE
          NEWYORK-NEI~ JERSEY SEWERAGE AUTHORITIES .....           4-4

                  OF     DUMPING
TABLE4.3 COMPARISON SLUDGE     RATESBASEDON
          TOXICITY AND TRACE METAL RESULTS .........               4-5
                   SLUDGE
TABLE4,4 RECOMMENDED      BUMPING                  REQUIRED
                                         RATESVERSUS
          DILUTION     .....................                      4-9
                                 LIST OFFIGURES

                                                                          Pa__.9~

FIGURE1.1           DIAGRAIt OF ACTIVITIESASSOCIATED THE
            SCHEMATIC                                      WITH
                     AND            OF
            REGULATION HONITORING SLUDGE                   RATES
                                                     DUMPING    FOR
            THE I06-MILE      SITE   .....................                 1-3

FIGURE2.1          OF
            DIAGRAM SLUDGE CONPARTNENTS                       OPERATED
                                                   WITHINBARGES
            BY THENEW    CITY DEPARTNENT ENVIRONMENTAL
                      YORK                           OF
            PROTECTION     .........................                      2-10

FIGURE2.2               OF
            TIME HISTORY SLUDGE                    EVENT
                                 DILUTIONWITHINPLUNE
            DB-3 AT THE 106-NILE SITE DURINGSEPTEMBER1987 ......          2-16

FIGURE2.3   CORCEPTUAL       OF                  PARCELS
                      DIkGRH4 THEDILUTIONOF SLUDGE
            WITHIN PLUMESFORTWOCASES MIXIfiG CONDITIONS
                                    OF                 ......             2-18

                      OF
FIGURE2.4 TIRE HISTORY SLUDGE DILUTIONWITHINTHE COREOF
           SLUDGE PLUMES        IN
                        SURVEYED SEPTEMBER  1987 AND1988 .....            2-20
                   MODEL SLUDGE
FIGURE3.1 CONCEPTUAL    OF      PLUNEDILUTIONFROM
           OBSERVATIONSDURING PLUME EVENT DB-3 ............               3-11

FIGURE3.2 PLOTOF VOLUMEDUMPING  RATE(gal/min) VERSUS    BARGE
           SPEED.THESHAOEDREGION                    EPA
                                      REPRESERTS OUMPIRG
           REGULATIONS     ........................                       3-15
FIGURE3.3 PLOTOF VOLUME                            BARGE
                       DUNPIflG RATE(gal/min) VERSUS
           SPEED.BARGEDUMPING                 FROM
                              CHARACTERISTICS SEPTEMBER
                                        BY
           1987 AND1988 AREREPRESENTED INDIVIDUAL POINTS.....             3-17
                   OF
FIGURE4.1 ROI~RAPH SLUDGE   OUHPIRG     RATES      (in g~,l/min) VERSUS
           REQUIRED SLUDGEDILUTION4-h AFTER                   AT
                                                        DUMPING THE
           106-NILE     SITE    .......................                    4-7
                                     SIJ~RY
                             EXECUTIVE

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), under the Marine
Protection,Research,              Act
                    and Sanctuaries of 1972,is responsible for
regulating            of
          the disposal sludgeat the 106-MileDeepwaterMunicipal Sludge
Site (106-Mile                        100
              Site)locatedapproximately nmi offshore New York and New
Jersey.EPA has developeda monitoringplan ( EPA , ig92a) for the 106-
Mile Site whichensuresthat regulatory              are
                                      requirements met, and that field
             are
measurements made to supportsite management                As
                                                decisions. part of the
monitoring plan, a seriesof fieldmeasurement surveyshas been conducted  to
monitor the nearfieldbehavior and fate of sludgedumpedat the 106-Mile
Site. Thesemeasurements           a
                        represent high-quality   data set from which to
              of
base analyses nearfield,   short-termsludgeplomedilution and compliance
with marinewaterqualitycriteria.
     EPA received                                 for
                 sludgedumpingpermitapplications continued     use of the
106-Hile Site fromnine sewerage           in
                               authorities New York and flew Jersey, and
is in the processof reviewing                to
                              the applications determine whetherthe
proposed dumpingoperations                                        As
                           will complywith waterqualitycriteria. part
of this reviewprocess, EPA must determinewhetherthe court-ordereddumping
                     is
rate of 15,500gal/min suitable  for the 106-MileSite,or whetherdumping
                   must be altered.
rates and strategies               This reportpresents analysesthat
                                    decislons’concerning dumpingof
wild aid EPA in makingsoundmanagement                   the
sewagesludgeat the 106-Mile Site.The study focuseson threemajor
objectives:

     ¯               of
          Development an empirical equation              optimum
                                           for calculating
          sludgedumping                                 of
                        rates,basedupon fieldobservations sludgeplume
                  at
          behavior the 106-Mile Site.
     ¯              of                               permit
          Calculation sludgedumpingratesfor individual
                    basedupon sludgecharacteristics.
          applicants,
     ¯              of        strategies
          Development candidate        for multipledumpingat the
                 Site.
          I06-~ile

            activities
The following                     as        objectives:
                     were conducted secondary




                                     i
     ¯                 of
          An assessment whetherthe existing modelsof wasteplume
          dilutionare suitable             of                    at
                              for prediction sludgeplumedispersion
          the 106-MileSite.
     ¯    A preliminarysurveyof the physical                and
                                             characteristics dumping
          proceduresfor the bargesthat dump sludgeat the 106-MileSite.


             of
     Analyses the physicaland chemical           obtained
                                      measurements       duringthe
nearfield monitoring surveysin SeptemberI987 and 1988 indicatethat sludge
plumesare not dispersed rapidlyduringsummerconditions;   plumesare
generally          to
          confined the upper25 m of the water columnduringthe first4 h
after dumping.           of
               Dilutions sludgeparcelswithinthe core of the plumes
were on the order of 4,000:14 h afterdumpingat ratesbetween12,000and
15,000gal/min.
             of
    Analyses tracemetalsand toxicity                 in
                                        data provided the dumping
                  and
permitapplications obtained                of
                              from analyses wholesludgesamples
        in
obtained August1988 indicate                       at
                              that sludgedilutions 4 h must be much
greaterthan I0,000~Ifor many of the sewerageauthorities.These dilution
             are
requirements based upon compliance   with specific waterqualitycriteria
                       4
for metalsand toxicity h after sludgeis dumped.Metal-based     and
toxicity-based dilutionrequirements                     for
                                   differsignificantly each sewerage
authority,                     are
           and largedifferences observed                             in
                                            among the nine authorities
New York and New Jersey.To achievethese high dilutions,  sludgedumping
                                                              at
ratesmust be reducedgreatlybecauseoceanicmixingprocesses, least
duringsummer,are not sufficient   for attaining  this degreeof dilution over
a periodof 4 h; wintermonitoring                              to
                                   surveyswill be necessary determine
whetheroceanographic  mixingprocesses  are significantly  more intenseduring
winter.
     An empirical equation has been developed                  the
                                              for calcuTating optimum
sludgedumpingrate for each permitapplicant,    basedupon the field data from
the September 1987 and 1988 monitoring  surveys.  The resultsindicate that
dumpingratesshouldbe less than 1,000gal/minfor three of the permit
applicants and less than 5,000 gal/minfor the remaining   six applicantsto
ensurecompliance                               4
                  with water qualitycriteria h after dumping. is   It
recommended that additional nearfield data be acquired  duringplume
monitoring surveysin order to validate                    in
                                        the coefficients the empirical

                                    ii
dumpingrate formula:however,the resultsfrom the September1987 and 1988
surveysare viewedas an excellentdata set from whichto base a conservative
                            at
modelof sludgeplumedilution the 106-Mile   Site.




                                 iii
                             1. INTRODUCTION


                         Protection
    The U.S. Environmental        Agency(EPA),underthe Marine
          Research,
Protection,                      Act
                  and Sanctuaries of 1972 (MPRSA,PL 92-532)
          for
responsible regulating             of
                       the disposal municipalsewagesludgein ocean
                                                   to
waters.As a resultof an April 11, 1985, decision deny petitions      to
            the
redesignate 12-MileSludgeSite offshore      New York,EPA RegionIf halted
                   in
all sludgedisposal New York Bight.Effective     JanuaryI, 1988, all
               in
municipalities the New York and New Jerseyhave shiftedsewagesludge
disposal           to
        operations the IO6-Mile    Deepwater Municipal SludgeSite (106-Mile
Site).
     EPA has developeda monitoring  plan ( EPA , 1992a) for the 106-Mile
Site whichensuresthat regulatory               are
                                  requirements met, and that field
             are
measurements made to supportmanagement     decisions concerning (I) site
              or               (2)
redesignation dedesignation, issuance,                     or
                                             continuation, revocation
sludgedumpingpermits,  and (3) continuation,               or
                                             modification, termination
the monitoring                                      of
               programitself.The overallstrategy the monitoring      plan,
and its companion implementation plan ( EPA , 1992b),focuseson two areas
of concern=           of
            assessment compliance   with permitconditions  and assessmentof
potential                           on
          impactsof sludgedisposal resources     and other aspectsof the
marineenvironment.
     As part of the 106-MileSite monitoring                        a
                                            plan,EPA has conducted series
of fieldmeasuremeet  surveysto monitorthe nearfield  behaviorand fate of
sewagesludgedumpedat the IO6-Mile    Site ( EPA    ]992c;1988a;1988b).
Thesesurveys(in September  1987 and Marchand September  1988)provided
accurate, high-resolution             of        I
                         measurements physica and chemical    properties
withinsludgeplumesimmediately   after dumping.  The physicalmeasurements
were used to determine the physical                 of
                                    characteristics the sludgeplumesand
            of
the effects oceanographic              on
                             processes sludgeplumedilution     and
advection. The chemical measurements  were used to determinerates of sludge
dilution and to test compliance with marinewaterqualitycriteria.
     EPA received                             for
                  dumpingpermitapplications continued      use of the 106-
Mile Site from nine sewerage             in
                             authorities New York and New Jersey,and is
in the processof reviewing                   to
                            the applications determine   whetherthe
proposed sludgedumpingoperations   will complywith marinewater quality

                                    I-I
         As
criteria. part of this reviewprocess,  EPA must determine whetherthe
court-mandatedsludgedumpingrate of 15,500gal/minis suitable  for the 106-
Mile Site,or whetherdumpingratesand strategies must be alteredto ensure
         with waterqualitycriteria
compliance                                              limiting
                                  (WQC)and toxicity-based
permissible             (LPCs).Thesemanagement
           concentrations                     decisionswill require
       of         studiesfollowed regulatory
analyses monitoring              by                as
                                           decisions
          in                                 of
illustrated Figure1.1;the four majorcomponents this
                  schemeare described
regulation/monitoring                below.

    ¯              wherebysludgedumpingratesare established
         Regulation,                                       and
                 monitored
         routinely                     with waterqualitycriteria.
                          for compliance
    ¯    DumpingOperations,whereinthe effectiverate of sludgedisposal
         is basedupon volumedumpingratesand bargespeed.
    ¯                    whichis governed dumpingrates,barge
         SludgeDispersion,               by
                       and
         characteristics, oceanographic         processes.
                                       dispersion
    ¯    Monitoring,                        and
                    wherebyfieldmeasurements watersamplesare used
                          with waterqualitycriteria
         to test compliance                        and recon~end
                                 of,
         changesto, or maintenance sludgedumpingrates.

                  1-111of Contract
    Work Assignment                            was initiated
                                  No. 68-03-3319           to
provideEPA with technical         on
                         assistance variousoperational aspectsof the
106-MileSite sludgedumpingprogram,including              of
                                           the evaluation appropriate
sludgedumpingrates.This reportpresents the resultsof Task I of Work
Assignment                         of
          1-1ll. The majorobjectives this task include

    ¯                 of
         An assessment whetherthe existing modelsof wasteplume
         dilutionare suitable             of                    at
                             for prediction sludgeplumedispersion
                    Site.
         the 106-Mile
    ¯    A surveyof physical               and              for the
                            characteristics dumpingprocedures
                                             Site.
         bargesthat dump sludgeat the 106-Mile
    ¯               of
         Development an empirical                     optimumsludge
                                 formulafor calculating
                                                of
         dumpingrates,baseduponfieldmeasurements sludgeplumesat
         the 106-MileSite.
    ¯              of                               permit
         Calculation sludgedumpingratesfor individual
                   baseduponsludgecharacteristics.
         applicants,
    ¯              of        strategies
         Development candidate        for multipledumpingat the
                Site.
         lO6-Mile

                                   1-2
              OPERJ~TIONS
        DUMPING                                                      REGULATION

                  DUMPINGRATE
                   (gal/min)


                   BARGE
                     SPEEO                       L
                      (kn)

                    EFFECTIVE
                  DUMPINGRATE                   fail                 pass
                    (gal/ft)
                                  r


                      ’i                           WATERQUALITY
                                                      TESTS

   Barge        I WAKE DILUTION                        WATERSAMPLE
Configuration        (0-5min)
                1                                       COLLECTION
                      3                     ~              I
Oceanographic    OCEANICDILUTION                   OCEANOGRAPHIC
 Conditions         (0-4h                          MEASUREMENTS

       SLUDGEDISPERSION                                          MONITORING




FIGURE1.1   SCHEMATIC                   ASSOCIATED
                     DIAGRAMOF ACTIVITIES        WITH THE
            REGULATION             OF
                      AND MONITORING SLUDGEDUMPINGRATESFOR THE
                   SITE.
            106-MILE




                                      i-3
                             in
     This reportis structured sections  that addressthe specific
objectives given above.Section2 presents            on
                                        information existing   modelsof
waste plumedilution,                      and                  of
                     bargecharacteristics, fieldobservations sludge
              at
plumebehavior the 106-Mile                       of
                             Site.The derivation an empirical   formula
for calculatingoptimumsludgedumpingratesis givenin Section3. Section
4 presents recommendeddumpingratesfor individualpermitapplicants, in
         to
addition a homograph                       of
                      for quickdetermination optimumdumpingratesfor
                                in
a wide varietyof sludgedilutions receiving water.Section5 presentsa
                   strategies
numberof operational         for dumping sludgeat the 106-MileSite.
              for
Recommendations additional analyses and fieldstudiesare givenin
                   are listedin Section7.
Section6. References




                                 I-4
                                     INFORHATION
                          2. BACKGROUND

      This section presents background information on three topics that
pertain to ocean disposal of sewage sludge. Subsection 2.1 provides a brief
review of existing models of waste plume dispersion; rationale is given for
the use of field data over existing models when estimating sludge dilution.
Subsection 2.2 describes the physical dimensions, sludge capacity, and
dumping procedures of the barges that transport sludge to the 106-Mile Site.
Field observations of sludge plume dilution from a rocent EPAc~uise to the
lO6-Mile Site are discussed in Subsection 2.3.


                   2.1         OF
                         REVIEW EXISTINGDILUTIONMODELS


    The oceandumpingregulations                      of
                                  requirecalculation the limiting
permissible concentration(LPC)for wastesthat are to be dumpedin the
                                   of
ocean.The LPC is the concentration a constituent,    after allowancefor
initial mixing,that does not exceed(I) applicable marineWQC and (2)
toxicity threshold,definedas 0.01 of a concentration shownto be acutely
toxic to appropriate,sensitive marineorganisms. The LPC is used to
calculate the maximumallowable dumpingrate based on the initialmixingof
the waste.Initialmixingis definedas the mixingthat occurswithin4
hoursof dumping.
                               allowfor severalmethodsof calculating
     The oceandumpingregulations
initial                     in                  are as follows:
       mixing.These methods, order of preference,

     1.   When fielddata on the proposeddumpingactivities are adequatefor
                    of
          prediction initialdispersion               of
                                         and dilution the waste,these
          data shall be used.If necessary,the field data shouldbe used in
          conjunction                   mathematical
                      with an appropriate           modelof wastemixing
          and dilution.

    2.                                    and dilution a wastesimilar
          When field data on the dispersion            of
                             to
          in characteristics that proposed  for discharge are available,
          thesedata shallbe used in conjunction with an appropriate
          mathematical model.
     3.                                  theoretical
          When no fielddata are available,         oceanicturbulent
          diffusion              may                              of
                    relationships be appliedto known characteristics
          the wasteand the disposalsite.


                                     2-1
    4.   Whenno other means of estimation are feasible, a procedure for
         calculating                            in
                    initialmixingis presented the regulations.

    The regulations thus emphasize                                 these
                                  that when fielddata are available,
                                    of
data shouldbe used in the estimation initialmixing.As a resultof the
recentnearfieldmonitoring   studiesat the IO6-MileSite ( EPA , 1992c;
1988a;1988b),high-quality  fielddataare now available              the
                                                      for estimating
initialmixingof sludgedumpedat the IO6-MileSite.The question that
       is
remains what model,if any, shouldbe used with thesedata to estimatethe
amountof initialmixing,and hence, the optimumratefor dumpingsludgeat
the 106-MileSite.
                         statethat the procedure for calculating
    Becausethe regulations                                     initial
                      in
mixingwhichis specified Part 227 of the Code of FederalRegulations
(CFR)shouldbe used only "whenno othermeansof estimationare feasible,"
                              for
this "model"is not appropriate estimating the initialmixingof sewage
sludgedumpedat the 106-Hile Site.
     Sincethe mid-lg7Os,                    modelshave been used to
                        ten "stateof-the-art"
predictinitialmixingof dumpedwastes(see Table 2.1).These modelshave
             (
been reviewed EPA   1986) to determinethe extentto which they had
             with fielddata,and to ascertain
been validated                                                 for
                                           the typesof materials
                           The
whichthey are appropriate. following   statementsare based upon the
above-mentioned reviewof mixingmodels.
                               in
     Of all the modelspresented Table2.1, none are presently capableof
predicting                      of
           maximumconcentrations isolated parcelsof sludgein ocean
water.These modelspredicteitheraverageor Gaussian-distributed
               of
concentrations disposed            in
                          material receiving waters.With the exception
of the Walkeret al. (1987)sewagesludgemodeland the Offshore Operators
Committee (OOC)Mud Discharge              et
                             Model(Brandsma el., 1983),all of
modelsare inappropriatefor,or wouldrequiremajorrevisions  beforeuse in,
estimatinginitial mixingof sewagesludgein oceanicwaters.
    The Walkeret al. modelwas developed             for
                                        specifically analyses  of
                      at
sewagesludgedisposal the IO6-Mile                             is
                                    Site, Its major application
predictingfarfield dispersion               of
                             characteristics sewagesludge.The model
predictsaverage, steady-state              of
                             concentrations sludgeconstituents over the
farfield,but the resultsare basedupon an empiricalalgorithm(with
inherenttnon-conservativeassumptions)                         solution.
                                     ratherthan a deterministic
                                  2-2
TABLE2.1               OF      FOR        OF                       DIn4PED THE106-NILE SITE.
               ASSESSMENT MODELS PREDICTION INITIAL NIXING OF SLUDGE      AT

Authors                    Year       Material                   Validation          Appropriate for
                                                                                     Initial  Mixing


       and Divoky
Brandsma                   1976             material
                                      Dredged                    Fieldand lab            No
Brandsma,
        Sauer,and Ayers    a
                           1983              muds and
                                      Drilling                   Fieldand lab         Potentially
                                             water
                                      produced

Christodoulou
            eta].          Ig74               sediments
                                      Suspended                      Some                No
       Analysis
Economic      and ASA      1986       Spilledoil                     None                No
          and
Goldenblatt Dowers         1978       Dredgedmaterial                Lab                 No
Koh and Chang              1973       Dredgedmaterial            Fieldand lab            No
Krishnappen                1983       Dredgedmaterial         Lab and othermodels        No
      et
Lavelle al.                1981               sediments
                                      Suspended                     Field                No
Walker,Paul,and Bierman    1987       Sewagesludge                  None               Doubtful
Wu and Leung               1983              muds
                                      Drilling                   Othermodels             No



               of
aFinalversions produced   waterand drilling                           in
                                            mud modelswill be available February 1989.
 The drillingmud modelwas fieldvalidated                 convective
                                         for the important          descentphase(O’Reillyet.al,1988),
 and laboratoryvalidatedfor convectivedescentand dynamiccollapse phases(Brandsmaand Sauer,1983).
Although the model cannot he validated by field measurements, the general
concensus is that it overestimates long-term dilutions.
    The OOC Mud Discharge                            to
                         Model,whichis beingexpanded includefluids
withoutparticles,                        and farfield
                  can predictthe nearfield                    of
                                                     dispersion
almostany type of discharged  fluid,including sewagesludge,for most
current regimes. The model contains the appropriatephasesof dispersion
         to                  of
dynamics predictdilution dumpedmaterial;        convectivedescent, dynamic
collapse, and passivediffusion.  The first two phasesthat are importantto
initial mixinghave been laboratory and fieldvalidated for drilling fluid
discharges. Although this model only considers dischargesfrom a fixed
                                to
point,it can easilybe modified predict     dilutionsfro~ a movingbarge.
                           to
It also has the capability consider   wake effectsand particle
flocculation.
     Presently, the computer modelsthat are availablefor use in modeling
dispersion and initialmixingof sewagesludgedumpedin the IO6-Mile Site
are inapplicable. Thereare, however,candidate modelsas notedabovethat
                   of
have the potential beingused for sewagesludgedispersion   determinations
aftermodification                     At
                   and/orverification. this time,the recentnearfield
monitoring surveysat the 106-Mile                               for
                                 Site providethe best alternative
evaluating initialmixing.


                                OF               BARGES
              2.2 £HARACTERIZATIDN SLUbGETRAHSPORT

                  presents preliminary
     Thissubsection       a                                    of
                                     surveyof the characteristics
                              sewagesludgefrom New York and New Jersey
bargesthat are usedto transport
to the 106-Mile                on
               Site.Information thesebargeswas obtained   from files
          by                             the New York City Department
maintained EPA RegionII, and by contacting
of Environmental         and
                Protection the varioustransportation companies
         below.
identified


                        2.2.1 Barge Characteristics

    Sludgetransport                   by                         of
                   vesselsare operated the New York CityDepartment
            Protection
Environmental         (NYCDEP)                       companies.
                              and fourprivatetransport
        thesetransport
Together,                    and NYCDEPhave permitsto use 23 barges
                     companies

                                     2-4
                                 of
and motor vesselsfor the transport sewagesludgeto the 106-Mile  Site,
Individual sludgedumpingpermitsare issuedfor each transportvesselby EPA
RegionIf. Table2.2 lists the 23 vessels,their ownership,and the
sewerageauthorities         by
                    serviced each vessel.
     Of the 23 sludgevessels, only 14 travelto the 106-Mile Site on a
                            g
regularbasis;the remaining are primarily   used for sludgetransport  and
transfer withinthe variousNew York and New Jerseyharbors.   The 14 barges
that dump regularlyhave a collective carrying         of
                                             capacity nearly46 million
        of                           of
gallons sludgelthe totalcapacity the g standbybargesis 5.5 million
gallons.Santoroand Fikslin(1987)indicate    that the 9 New York and New
Jerseysewerage authorities produced1.5 billiongallonsof sludgein 1985.
If this volumeof sludgewere dumpedat the IO6-Mile  Site by the 14 regular
          on
carriers, average,                         to
                     each wouldbe required make 32 tripsto the site.
                             a
     NYCDEPowns and operates fleetof four identical  bargesthat have a
collective carrying         of
                   capacity 14 milliongallonsof sludge,whichis
roughly          of
        one-third the totalcarrying            of
                                      capacity the 14 bargesthat
regularly transportsludgeto the 106-Mile Site.
     106-M|le Transport          is              of
                       Associates a consortium threetransportation
companiesthat carry sludgeto the 106-Mile                      Co.,
                                         Site: WeeksStevedorings
A & S Transportation                                 Marine.Together,
                    Co., and GeneralTransport/Standard
these three companiesown and operate15 sludgebarges.Nine of these barges
are regulardumpersat the 106-Mile Site, with a totalcarryingcapacityof
22.5 million gallonsof sludge,and roughlyhalf the carrying        of
                                                          capacity the
entire23-barge fleet.
     National Seatrade Inc. owns one largesludgebarge and threesmaller
vessels.                                     ~,
         Only the largebarge,the Seatrader regularly     transports sludge
to the 106-Mile Site. The other vesselsare primarily  used for sludge
transport withinharbors,  but in rare cases,these smallvesselsdo transport
sludgeto the 106-Mile                      I
                       Site. The Seatrader is the largestbargethat
transports sludgeto the 106-Mile  Site;its carrying          is
                                                    capacity 9.3 million
        of                               20
gallons sludge,whichis approximately percentof the carrying        capacity
                     fleetthat regularly
of the entire14-vessel                 dumpssludgeat the 106-Mile
Site.




                                   2-5
TABLE2,2            OF
             SBNHARY VESSELS               SEWAGE
                               THATTRANSPORT           TO
                                                 SLUDGE THE
             IO6oMILESITE.. SEWERAGE          SERVICED EACH
                                    AUTHORITIES      BY
             BARGE         ARE
                  OPERATOR INDICATED,

BargeOperator                Vessel               Sewerage
                                                  Authority

New York City                LemonCreek           New York City
Department of                SpringsCreek         Department of
Environmental                TibbettsBrook        Environmental
Protection                   UdallsCove           Protection
               Co.l
WeeksStevedoring             Weeks701             New Jersey:
                             Weeks702             Passaic Valley,
                             Weeks703             Middlesex County,
                             Weeks704             Bergen County,
                                                  Linden-Roselle,
                                                  RahwayValley,
                                                  Essexand Union
                                                  Counties.
                                                  New York:
                                                  Westchester
                                                  County
                   Co.1
A & S Transportation         Dina Marie           sameas Weeks
                             Eileen
                             KimberleyAnn
                             Lisa
                             Maria
                             VeronicaEvelyn

GeneralTransport/Standard    Leo Frank            sameas Weeks
Marinel                      MorrisJ. Berman
                             PrincessB.
                             RebeccaK.
                             SusanFrank
       Seatrade
National       Inc.          OBI IV               NassauCounty
                             SeatraderI                    of
                                                  Department
                             SotocoII             PublicWorks
                             E-S7




                                      authorities Westchester
iTheseownersservesix New Jerseysewerage           and
                                                Associates.
Countyundera jointventurecalled106 Mile Transport

                             2-6
    Table 2.3 presentsthe sludgecarrying capacity for each of the 23
vessels;                                       to
        the 14 vesselsthat are regularcarriers the 106-Mile    Site are
listedseparately from those that are standbycarriers. The standby
carriersare much smallerthan the regularcarriers.Table2.4 presentsthe
       dimensions each of the 23 vesselsin the fleet.
physical          of
    Sludgetransport                                       unpowered
                    vesselshave two generalbull categories:
bargesor motor vessels.Unpoweredbargesare typically           with a
                                                    constructed
pointedbow, a rectangular               and
                         cross-section, a flat bottom.Some
(includingthe NYCDEPbarges)have a notchin the sternfor use by tugs when
                   in
pushingis necessary harborsand alongside    piers.All unpoweredbarges
               of
are constructed weldedsteel and are towed,usinga long (mI/4mile)
towingcable,to the 106-Mile Site. Motor vesselsare basicallyself-powered
sludgetankers. These diesel-poweredvesselsoperateunder theirown
control,with nothingin tow.
                        for
     Typicalconstruction any vesseltransporting   liquidincludes
internalcompartmentalization,         to
                             primarily preventinstability  and
          A            and         plan for the New York City barges
capsizing. cross-section compartment
is shownin Figure2.1.


                          2.2.2 DumpingMethods

    The vesselsthat dump sludgeat the 106-MileSite use three different
       of
methods dumping:  gravity-inducedbottomdumping;          or
                                                pumping; an.eductor
                 of
system.Regardless the dumpingmethod,the individual   sludgecompartments
on a vesselare equippedwith separatedischargelines,valves,or pumps so
that dumpingratescan be controlled,eitherby on-boardpersonnelor, in the
case of unmanned                           by                    on
                bargessuch as thoseoperated NYCDEP,by personnel the
towingvessel(tug).
     Table2.5 lists the 14 vesselsthat regularly        sludgeto the
                                                transport
106-MileSite and their individualdumpingprocedures. Bottomdumpingis the
most commonmethod(11 barges),          to
                              compared 2 vesselsthat pump sludge,and
                       I)                     A
I vessel(the Seatrader that uses an eductor. briefdescription
each dumpingmethodis givenbelow.




                                   2-7
TABLE2.3        SLUDGE        OF      THATTRANSPORT
                       CAPACITY VESSELS               SLUDGE THE
                                                 SEWAGE    TO
                106-MILESITE.


                    RegularCarriers           StandbyCarriers
Barge                           Capacity                   Capacity
Operator          Vessel      (ShortTons)   Vessel       (ShortTons)
New York City     LemonCreek      15,000
Department of     SpringCreek     15,000
Environmental     TibbettsBrook   15,000
Protection        UdallsCove      15,000
Weeks          Weeks701            6,400    Weeks703         4,000
           Co. Weeks 702
Stevedorings                      17,832    Weeks704         3,000
A&S Transpor-     Eileen          18,132    Dina Marie       2,900
tationCo.                 Ann
                  Kimberley        8,000    VeronicaEvelyn   2,900
                  Lisa             8,000
                  Maria            7,900
General        Leo Frank        5,500             K.
                                            Rebecca          1,620
Transport/     MorrisJ. Berman )2,DO0       SusanFrank
Standard-MarinePrincessB.      12,000
National          Seatrader
                          1       38,528    OBI IV             g96
       Inc.
Seatrade                                    SotocoII           954.5
                                            E-57             6,200




                                   2-8
TABLE2.4     PHYSICAL         OF                    SEWAGESLUDGETO THE I06-MILE
                     DIMENSIONS VESSELSTHAT TRANSPORT                         SITE.


                                                    Dimensions     Loaded       Sludge
BargeOperator             Vessel       Type      Length" Width     Draft     Compartments

New York CityDepartment    LemonCreek    Barge    380’    84’      21’-6"        10
of EnvironmentalProtection SpringCreek            380’    84’      21’-6"        10
                           TibbettsBrook          380’    84’      21’-6"        10
                           UdallsCove             380’    84’      21’-6"        10
               Co.
WeeksStevedoring          Weeks701                266’    56’      II’            8
                          Weeks702                400’    80’      25’           10
                          Weeks703                290’    53’      16’-8"         8
                          Weeks704                 78’    43’      13’-7"         8
                Co.
A&S Transportation        Dina Marie              211’    42’-9"   12’-6"         2
                          Eileen                  390’    78’      27’           10
                          KimberlyAnn             272’    68’      18’-4"         6
                          Lisa                    272’    68’      14’-11"        6
                          Maria                   300’    64’      18’-4"        12
                          VeronicaEvelyn          211’    42’-9"   12’-6"         2
GeneralTransport/Standard Leo Frank               298’    50’      15’           8
Marine                   MorrisJ. Berman          303’    90’      15’-10"       9
                          PrincessB.    M/V       303’    90’      15’-10"       9
                          RebeccaK.    Barge      260’    46’-6"   11’           6
                          SusanFrank    M/V       260’    46’-6’   11’           6
National
       Seatrade
              Inc.        OBI IV         M/V      180’    38’      12’-6"       16
                          SeatraderI    Barge     430’    105’     35’-6"        6
                          SotocoII       M/V      180’    38’      13’-6"       14
                          E-57          Barge     300’    50’      13’          10
                                                                                       VALVE
                                                  ~       $CUDG;           ~RGE

                                                                       j
                                                            J
                                              SLUDGE TANK

                                          J
                                                      P1$
                                                  ¥A1-¥1~
                                                            e~S



                                                                                                            FOREPEAK 8AI.LAST
C~                                                                                                                i
                                                                                                                      /BOW
                 ~               ~            /             ~      ~         "~          7        ~   ~,~      ~/THRUSTER
         SPACE
                                      ,,P,            ,     )IP)                  liPI         (P ~ 9
                                                                                               I               ""~
     I                                                                                                            I


                     .ISi,            .Is,            ,     7
                                                            ~lS,
                 7                   ~"                     f                 ¯
                                                                              "ilS’/           |j~J                    i

     ?,,.s-’;,s.o-                        ,o
                                      ,B’B" ,o’o" ss’s" ’; ,,," l ’"s"
                                                ;’                I
                                                                                                                           FP




         FIGURE2.1                   OF
                             DIAGRAH SLUDGE   COt4RARTMENTSWITHIN BARGES         BY
                                                                         OPERATED THE
                                                    OF
                             NEWYORKCITY DERARTHENT ENVIRONHENTAL    PROTECTION: REAR
                             VIE#OF PORT SIDE OF BARGE(UPPER); PLAN VIE# (LOWER).
    2.5
TABLE            SLUDGEDISCHARGEMETHODS HAXIHUMRATES
                                      AND                   THATTRANSPORT
                                                   FORVESSELS               SLUDGE
                                                                       SEWAGE    TO
                 THElOB-NILESITE.


                                                                             Average        Estimated
                                                Capacity     Discharge       Discharge       Maximum
Barge Operator          Vessel           (Million Gallons)    Method         Duration (h) Discharge Rate
                                                                          At 15,500 gal/min (gal/min)


NewYork City            LemonCreek           3.513           Bottom Dump       4           150,0001
Department of           Spring Creek         3.513           Bottom Dump       4           150,0001
Environmental           Tibbetts Brook       3.513           Bottom Dump       4           150,0091
Protection              Udalls Cove          3.513           Bottom Dump       4           150,0001

WeeksStevedoring Co.    Weeks701             1.504           Bottom Dump      1.5           46,0002
                        Weeks702             4.190           Bottom Dump      4.5          139,5002
A&S Transportation   Co. Eileen              4.200           Bottom Bump      4.5           31,0003
                                Ann
                         Kimberly            2.000           BottomDump         2           31,0003
                         Lisa                2.000           BottomDump         2           31,0003
                         Maria               1.850           BottomDump         2           31,0003
GeneralTransport/       Leo Frank            1.290           BottomDump       1.5           31,9003
StandardMarine          MorrisJ. Berman      2.820           PumpOut           3            3
                                                                                            31,OOO
                        PrincessB.           2.820           PumpOut           3            31,0003
NationalSeatradeInc. SeatraderI              9.290           EductorSystem 12.5             13,500


IAttained all 20 valveswereopenedat once.
         if
        of
2Capable dischargingfullload in 30 minutes.
3Rateswithvalvesfullyopened.
BottomDumpinq

    In bottom-dumping operations, sludge exits the bottom of the barge via
dumpvalve openings that are installed in the bottom of each sludge
compartment. Dumpvalves are hydraulically operated and may be throttled    to
vary sludge levels in each tank compartment. The sludge dumpvalves are
approved by the U.S. Coast Guard for the specific category of service in
which they are utilized. Although the valves can be closed somewhatmore
than the position used to achieve dumping rates of 15,500 gal/min, extremely
low dumping rates would most likely lead to clogging of the valves.
      For bottom-dumping barges, the maximumattainable discharge rate is a
function of the available pressure head, the viscosities of sludge and
seawater, and the configuration and diameter of the dumpvalve. The rate of
discharge varies with the square root of the pressure head, according to the
        expression:
following

     Q=CA     (2gAh)½

     where:         Q =   flow (ft3/sec)
                    C =   a constant
                    A =   2)
                          dischargearea (ft
                    g =           32
                          gravity; ft/sec2
                    Ah=   pressure                (ft)
                                  head differential

Pum

                                                               B.
     Sludgeis pumpedout of the MorrisJ. Bermanand the Princess using
variablespeed,submersible slurrypumps.Discharge  rates can be controlled
by varyingthe speedof the pumps.Pump discharge                    by
                                               ratesare affected the
pressurehead in the individual                  but
                              sludgecompartment, the effectof head on
dischargeratesis muchless for pumpersthan bottom-dumping barges.


Eductor System


                                            I
     The eductorsystemused on the Seatrader is unique.It operates  on
              of
the principle aspiration  causedby a pressure differentialbetweentwo
fluids.Seawater, servingas the motivating fluid,is pumpedinto the sludge
compartment againstthe low head of the sludge.Seawaterand sludgeare
                                   2-12
           mixedto achievea 1:1 dilution the mixtureis expelled
consequently                            as                     into
the receivingwater beneaththe barge.This processdoes not requirea
                                     is
slurrypump becauseonly cleanseawater pumpedinto the barge;the sludge
mixtureexitsthe bargedue to the pressurewithinthe compartment.
                                      I
     The eductorsystemon the Seatrader was installedless than 2 years
                     its              and
ago, and consequently, effectiveness maintenance    requirements have
                     It
yet to be evaluated. is expected   that the eductorsystemwill require
less maintenance than standardsludgepumpingsystems,  whichuse slurrypumps
that are proneto mechanical failure.
     Table 2.5 also presentsthe averagetime for each bargeto discharge  a
                             a
full load of sludge,assuming constantrate of 15,500gpm. With the
          of              !,
exception the Seatrader which requires     12.5 h to dump its load of 9
million gallons,the remainingbargesrequirebetweenI and 5 h for dumping.
     The maximumattainabledischarge               in
                                   ratespresented Table2.5 are
estimates basedon informationobtained              barge operators.
                                     from individual
Although the individualbargerepresentativesstatedthat the barges
          at
discharge a maximumrate of 15,500gpm, they indicated  that the bargesare
                      at                                if
capableof discharging much higherrates.For instance, the valves
                                        of
were openedfor all 10 sludgecompartments a New York City barge,then the
discharge                                                ~,
          rate could reach 150,000gpm. Only the Seatrader which has an
eductorsystem,has a maximumdischarge  rate that is belowthe permissible
dumpingrate of 15,500gpm.
     If dumpingratesare to be loweredby factorsof 10 or more (see Section
4), representativesfrom 106-Mile TransportAssociates indicate(C. Hunt
personal communication) that severeengineering problemswill arise.One
resultis that only one sludgecompartment will be dumpedat a time, which
would pose seriousvesselstability        Other considerations given
                                 problems.                  are
in subsection5.3.


              2.3 NEARFIELDSTUDIESOF SLUDGEPLUME BEHAVIOR

                   presents summaryof recentfield observations
     This subsection       a                                    within
sludgeplumesthat were dumpedat the 106-Mile Site. These observations
          a
represent high-resolution                     of
                         data set for analyses the nearfield,  short-
              of
term behavior sludgeplu~es.The resultswere obtainedduringEPA surveys

                                  2-13
to the 106-MileSite in Septemberof lgB7 and 1988 ( EPA , 1992c~]9BBb).
Although          was         on
        information acquired the physica]   behaviorand transportof
sludgeplumesduringthe nearfieldsurveyin March1988,the chemicaldata
                               for
from the surveywere insufficient accurate              of
                                          determinations sludge
dilution versustime.
     The primaryscientific         of                surveyswere to
                          objectives the two September

    ¯    Tracka specificportionof a sludgeplumeto monitorits movement
         withinand outsideof the 106-MileSite.
    ¯                                                     of
         Remainwith the plumefor at least4 h for collection water
                            of
         samplesfor analyses chemical  and biologicaltracersand total
                 solids.
         suspended
    ¯                              of
         Conductin situ measurements near-surface currentsand water
                   to
         properties identify  physicalfeaturesand processesthat may
         affectsludgeplumebehavior and transport.
    ¯    Acquire                         to
                watersamplesfor analysis determine actual
                       of                  in
         concentrations sludgecomponents a plume.Resultsare to be
         used for testing         with marinewaterqua]itycriteria
                         compliance                              and
         calculatingratesof sludgedilution.
    ¯    Performall sampling         for a numberof sludgeplumesto
                            activities
                          on
         acquirestatistics plumebehavior  for differentbargesunder
         variousoceanographicconditions.
    ¯    Evaluate        instrumentation sampling
                 shipboard             and                for
                                                 procedures
                        in          of
         theirsuitability monitoring sludgeplumes.


                                   to
     A majorfactorthat contributed the successof thesesurveyswas the
instrumentationused for in situ samplingwithinthe sludgeplumes.In order
to achieverapid,high-resolution            of
                                measurements physical waterproperties
           with the collection watersamples
concurrently                 of             for chemical        a
                                                        analyses,
       pumpingsystemwas integrated
seawater                          witha CTD (conductivity-
                 profiling
temperature-depth)       system.With the real-time samplingand display
            of                          to
capabilities this system,it was possible locatethe mostconcentrated
       of
parcels sludgewithinthe plumeand position               unit at the
                                           the underwater
                    maximum,
depthof the turbidity                           of
                            whichwas indicative the highest
              of
concentrations sludge.Thus, the profilingactivities yieldedaccurate
            of
¯ easurements


                                 2-14
    ¯                           as           of
         Plumedepth and thickness a function time,from which
         plumecross-sectional                      dilution
                             areazand plume-averaged       can be
         estimated.
    ¯                  of
         Concentrations chemical               tracerswithin
                                  and biological
         samplesof plumewater,from whichsludgedilution can be
         estimated                        parcelsof sludgewithina
                  for the most concentrated
         plume.

                       a
     Figure2.2 presents time seriesplot of sludgedilutionderivedfrom
data collected                                  3,
              duringplumeevent DB-3 on September 1987. Note that
         is
dilution plottedon a logarithmic                      the
                                  scale to accommodate wide rangeof
dilutions observedduringthe g-h survey.This figurepresents information
on the plume-averageddilution               as
                             (soTidcircles) well as the dilution
discrete parcelsof plume water(open symbols),derivedfrom analyses
tracemetals.
                 dilutions,
    Plume-averaged                                     area of the
                          derivedfrom the cross-sectionaT
plumeand the averagedumpingrate per unit of plumelength,suggesta high
rate of dilutionduringthe first 2 h afterdumping.Initialdilutions
       5
(within min after dumping)                  2,500:1;
                           were approximately               30
                                                    dilutions min and
2 h afterdumpingwere on the orderof 10,000:I            respectively.
                                            and 80,000~I,
                in
    As indicated Figure2.2, the plume-averaged        were much
                                              dilutions
greater             derivedfrom chemical
       than dilutions                           of
                                        analyses water samples
collected withinthe core of the plume.One may suspectthat the high plume-
averaged dilutions                              the
                  were a resultof overestimating widthof the plume,
but the error associatedwith this estimateis less than 10 percent. During
the first2 h afterdisposal,  the plumesspreadlaterally, but they remained
intact,                   turbidity
       such that horizontal         profilesalong the plumetransects
         no
exhibited significant  patchesof "clean"receiving waterinsidethe
distinctouter edges of the plume.Thus, these high plume-averaged
dilutions                       of            of
         were not a consequence "streaking" the plumeand
              of
overestimation plumewidth.
    Detailed          of
             analyses turbidity                            plume
                                   data withinthe individual
transectshave revealed                                     are
                       that the highestsludgeconcentrations maintained
withina concentrated                                        a
                     core which,on a volumebasis,represents small
          of                           by
percentage the plume.As i11ustrated the open symbolsin Figure2.2,
discreteparcelsof sludgefrom the core of the plume were much less dilute
than the "average                                         At
                 plume"derivedfrom the plumedimensions. the various
                                  2-15
           100,000                                                                                o

                                    ~PLUME


     Z                      i///
     _o ~o,oao ¯                                         0
                                                         /I"



     121                                  ~                        REI’E


     t13                                                                            UEI,~I..S
                                                                                 TRACE
r~   03                   1,000           -~
-    m
o~   0                                                                           Cu    o--o
                                                                                 Pb ~--~,
                     ~                                                           Zn n--~
                      I     PLUMEEVENTDB-3
                                          1987
                                   SEPTEMBER
                      I

                     0              1          2    3          4       5   6       7          8
                                                           TIME (hours)

                          2.2
                     FIGURE                           OF
                                          TINE HISTORY SLUDGE DILUTIONWITHINPLUNE EVENTDO-3 AT THE
                                                           SEPTERBER
                                        IO6-HILE SITE DURING        1987.   SOLIDCIRCLESREPRESENT
                                        AVERAGE         OF
                                                DILUTION ENTIREPLUNE;  OPEN SYNBOLSREPRESENT TRACE
                                        HETALS RESULTS ENOH       RATER
                                                           OISCRETE            MITHIN THECORE THE
                                                                         PARCELS               OF
                                        PLUHE.
samplingtimesindicated,  separate        of
                                 analyses copper,lead,and zinc were
         on
performed the samplescollected   withinthe most concentratedportionof
the plume.Dilutions                by
                    were calculated dividing   the measuredconcentrations
                                        of
of a tracemetal by the mean concentration that specific trace metal
                       by
withinsludgegenerated the Port Richmond   treatment facility(Santoroand
Fikslin,1987),whichwas the sourceof the sludgedumpedduringeventDB-3.
The final report for the September1987 survey ( EPA    Igg2c)provides
detailed            on
        information sludgedilution   calculations.
    The solid linesconnecting the tracemetalresultsin Figure2.2
illustratethat (I) parceldilutions were much lower than plume-averaged
dilutions,                        of
          (2) the rate of dilution concentrated  parcelswas much less
                              dilution
than the rate of plume-averaged       duringthe first4 h after the dump,
and (3) the resultsfrom threetrace metalswere very similar.Within5 min
after dumping,  parceldilutions                      at
                                were roughly1,000:1; 4.4 h, parcel
dilutions were on the order of 4,500:1. The highersludgedilutions
          at
indicated 3.4 and 4.3 h were obtained   from waterparcelssituated outside
the most concentrated portionof the sludgeplume,and consequently, they
                    in
are not appropriate estimating   minimumdilution.
     BeyondS h afterdumpingfor event DB-3,the sludgeplume was broken
into patchesof undetermined  sizes.Using the real-time samplingsystem,it
             to
was possible locaterelatively    concentrated parcelsof sludgewater
        5
between and 9 h afterdumping,   but therewas no way to ensurethat a single
parcelw~s being surveyedrepeatedly.Chemicalanalysesof the most
concentratedportionof sludgewater located8.5 h after the dump
            a               of                                 of
demonstrated parceldilution 77,000:1(Figure2.2).Attainment these
dilutions         an         in
         required increase the rate of dilution    over the rate that is
demonstrated                                 dilutionwas most likely
            between1 and 4 h. This accelerated
          to              of
attributed the break-up the plume;with the directed    sampling
capabilityduringthe survey,we are relativelyconfident that this sample
                                  portionof the plumethat existedat the
was takenfrom the most concentrated
time of the observation.
                       a
     Figure2.3 presents conceptual diagram(with lineardilution axis)
the threephasesof plume dilutionthat may have occurredduringeventDB-3:
initial,            mixing,gradualoceanicmixing,and accelerated
         wake-induced                                            mixing
after plume break-up.The solidline in this figurerepresentsa

                                  2-17
           10,000 -
                                                                                   /      MIXING AFTER
                                                                               /        PLUME BREAK-UP
                                                                           /                  (Dbu)
                                                                       I
     Z                                                                i
     0
     F-                                                           /
                                                              I
     d
     --                                                   I
     D
     d
     LL~                                              /
     0      5,000.                                /
     .<                                       /
     Q-                                   /                                                  MIXING(Do)
co   LLI                              /
     (.3
     Q                            /
     d                        /
     (n                   /                                                    --      WEAKMIXING CONDITIONS
                                                                               ....    ACTIVE MIXING CONDITIONS


                0                                                               I
                     0                                                         4                                  8

                                                              TIME (hours)


           FIGURE 2.3    CONCEPTUAL        OF                   PARCELS
                                   DIAGRAM THE DILUTION OF SLUDGE      WITHIN PLUHESFOR TWO
                         CASESOF NIXING CONDITIONS.
           case of weak mixingconditions
hypothetical                           (e.g.,low winds,calm seas)
                        duringplume eventDB-3. Plume break-up
such as those encountered                                    and
accelerateddilutionapparently occurred after 4 h. The brokenllne in
                    a
Figure2.3 represents case of activemixing,wherebythe rate of oceanic
mixingwould be greaterthan the rate duringweak mixingconditions.  During
activemixing,plumebreak-up   may occurwell before4 h.
     All four of the plumesmonitored duringthe September1987 survey
exhibited dilution characteristicssimilarto those representingweak mixing
           in
conditions Figure2.3. Although    the linearplumesbegan to breakup 2 or
3 h afterdumping,  concentratedpatchesof plume waterremained relatively
intactfor periodslongerthan 4 h. For example,   Figure2.4 presents minimum
          of
dilutions plumeDB-3,based upon field-measured    copperconcentrations and
                                      by
mean coppervaluesof sludgedescribed Santoroand Fikslin(1987).With
dilutions           on
          presented a linearaxis,it is evidentthat the rate of parcel
dilution                                         to
         from initialmixing(5 min afterdumping) 4 h was quiteconstant
(~go0per h).
    The dilutionestimatesgivenin Figures2.2 and 2.4 providea realistic
             of
representation the short-term        of
                             behavior plumeeventDB-3,but three
factorscontributeerrorsto theseminimumdilutionestimates: (I) spatial
samplingproblems;            in
                 uncertainties havingsampledthe maximumconcentration
                                                     errorsduring
withinthe plumeat a giventime,(2) laboratory/analytical
processing            of
          and analysis trace metalsamples,                    in
                                          and (3) uncertainties the
                         in
actualmetalsconcentration the sludgethat was dumped.Positioning
                            but
errorscannotbe quantified, missingthe maximumconcentration       will
resultin higherapparent  dilutions than actually existwithinthe core of
the plume.Laboratory                                            in
                      errorsare small (<104),but uncertainties sludge
constituent               are
            concentrations large.Constituent                    of
                                                  concentrations the
dumpedsludgewere not measured;  dilutions were calculatedfrom published
valuesof constituent                in
                      concentrations sludge.Santoroand Fikslin(1987)
estimate                                in
         that mean copperconcentrations Port Richmond   sludgeare 50.9
mg/L with a standard          of
                     deviation 364 of the mean. Thus, with .I standard
deviation aboutthe mean,copperconcentrations   couldrange from 32.6 to 69.2
mg/L for the Port Rich~ondfacility.                 in
                                    This variation copperconcentration
                                         in
may also resultin a *36 percentuncertainty the rate of dilutionafter
initialwake mixing(e.g.,900 .324 per hour).

                                   2-19
           20.000
                                                                        0   DB-3            1987
                                                                                    SEPTEMBER
                                                                        ¯   DB-21           1988
                                                                                    SEPTEMBER
                                                                        ¯   DB-23           1988
                                                                                    SEPTEMBER
           15,000
     Z
     0
     E--
     d

           I 0,000
     LLJ
     >
     QC
     LLJ
     O3
’~   o         -
            ms.ooo          ~¯~r-~-~"             I                         ¯/¯
                            m



                o           i       t      [      I       I         I       I       t     I
                            1      2      ,5     4        5         6       7       8     9        10

                                                     TIME (hours)



                    FIGURE2.4                           SLUDGE
                                  TIME HISTORYOF OBSERVED    DILUTION WITHIN THE COREOF
                                SLUDGE PLUMES        IN
                                             SURVEYED SEPTEI~ER1987 AND1988.     DILUTIONSARE
                                RASEDUPONCOPPER              WITHZNWATER
                                                 CONCENTRATIONS           SAMPLES.
     To reducetheseerrorsduringthe September   1988 survey,sludgesamples
were obtainedfrom the individualbargesthat transported sludgeto the site
                                       of
duringthe survey.Trace metalsanalyses (I) the barge (sludge)    samples
and (2) watersamplescollected from the core of the plumesduringthe
nearfield                            of                         of
         surveyyieldeddirectestimates the time rate of dilution the
sludgeplumes.
               to
    In addition the dilution resultsfrom September1987, Figure2.4
presentsdilution          from plumeeventsDB-21 and DB-23monitored
                information
during the September1988 nearfieldsurvey ( EPA , 1988b). As discussed
above,the 1988 resultswere derivedfrom the ratioof copperconcentrations
in plume watersamplesto thosedetermined               of
                                         from analyses I00~ sludge.
This figureillustrates that both the rangeand the rate of changeof
dilution were very similarfor plume eventsDB-3 and DB-21.Table 2.6
indicates that initialdilutions(~5 min afterdumping) were 1,018:1and
                                                dilutions
1,724~Ifor plumeeventsDB-3 and DB-21respectively;       for both were
near 4,000=I4h afterdumping.The resultsfrom plume event DB-21 also
illustratethat the rate of core dilutionremained         constant
                                                relatively       for
morethan 8h.
    The dilution                                      a
                resultsfrom plumeeventDB-23 exhibited similarrate of
dilutionduringthe periodfrom 1 to 4h afterdumping,but the extentof the
dilutionwas roughlytwicethat of plume eventsDB-3 and DB-21.We suspect
                                  in                       of
this offsetwas due to uncertainties the copperconcentration the
sludgethat was dumpedin the portionof the plumesurveyed(the barge
sampleswere collectedpriorto transitto the 106-MileSite and various
            of
compartments sludgecouldhave had different  chemicalcharacteristics).




                                 2-21
      TABLE2.6           DILUTZONS RATES D]LUTIONFORSLUDGE
                  OBSERVED       AND   OF                PLBNES      IN       1987 AND1988.
                                                              SURVEYED SEPTERBER


                                         Observed Dilutions               Rate of D~lution (l/h)
      P1u~
      Survey              Date   5ain      ]h          4h      7h       t=lh to 4h     t-Smtn to 4h


,~    DB-3                9-87   1,018      2,055      4,258        -     734              827
 r~
r~

      DB-21               9-88   1,724      2,629      3,717   5,303      363              508

      DB-23               9-88              5,200      6,664   10,887     488              610a




      aEstimated value.
                 3.            OF      RATE
                      DEVELOPHENTDUHP]NG   EQUATION

                                 of                     is
    One of the primaryobjectives this work assignment to use existing
           (in
information this case,field data ratherthan predictive     models)
determinethe rate at whichsludgeplumesare dilutedat the 106-Mile    Site.
                  of
Fieldmeasurements short-term   sludgedilution                in
                                               are necessary orderto
determinewhetherdumpingoperations  are in compliance with EPA water quality
criteria,but the resultscan also be used to developa conceptual  dilution
                               of
modelthat will allowprediction optimumsludgedumpingrateswhich,in
                             required the water qualitycriteria.
turn,will achievethe dilutions        by                          The
       of          a
process developing realistic  model of sludgedilutionentailsa number
of steps:

    I.              of
         Utilization the fieldresultsfrom the nearfield   studiesat the
         106-MileSite to determinethe rate of changeof sludge
         concentrationwithinthe plumes,and hence,the ratesof sludge
         dilution.

    2.                of
         Identification the majorphysical        responsible
                                         processes          for
         sludgeplumedilution,        by          of
                             followed formulation an empirical
                          of
         modelfor dilution sludgeparcelsbasedupon the existingfield
         observations.

    3.              of
         Application the empirical model of sludgedilutionfor
                   of
         prediction the rate at which sludgeshouldbe dumpedin order
                           that satisfyEPA water qualitycriteria.
         to achievedilutions

                     of
    4. Identification the major sourcesof variability  (e.g.,
       " oceanographic          barge dumpingcharacteristics, sludge
                      conditions,                            and
                         that
         characteristics) will affectsludgedilution   yet cannot,at
         the presenttime,be quantified,giventhe limitedset of field
         observations.

    5.                of
         Recommendation additional                 that will
                                   fieldmeasurements
         facilitate                 of
                   betterpredictions sludgedilution, and consequently,
                       ratesfor dumpingof sewagesludgeat the 106-Mile
         more defensible
         Site.

            discussion
The following                  the formulation the empirical
                       addresses               of            modelof
sludgedilutionand the assumptionsmade duringits development.
                                     PLUHE
                            3.1 SLUDGE    DILUTION

     The field   observations of sludge parcel dilution,   which were presented
in Subsection 2.3, indicate three phases of mixing during the first 8 h
after dumping: (1) an initial period (from 0 to m5 minutes after dumping)
turbulent, wake-induced mixing, (2) a gradual phase of relatively  slow
mixing primarily due to oceanographic processes, and (3) an accelerated
mixing phase when the sludge plume is broken up and sludge parcels from the
interior of the plume are actively mixed with clean receiving water.
Dilution, D, at any time, T, after dumping can therefore be estimated from an
         whichcontains
expression                            phasesof mixing:
                      the threeobserved


                 D     = Di + dDo x               +   dDb x                 (i)
                                              o


    where        D                  of
                      = the dilution sludgeparcelsat any time,T,
                                                mixing
                         afterinitialwake-induced

                 Di   = the dilutionachieved(at T~5 min) from initial,
                         wake-inducedmixing

                 dDo = the time rate of changeof sludgeparceldilution
                        duringthe tlme from dumping(T=O)to the time
                        at whichthe plumebreaksup (T=bu)

                 T    = time after dumping

                 dDb = the time rate of changeof sludgeparcel dilution
                         duringthe periodafterplumebreak-up(T-bu)


    The timeat whicha sludgeplumestartsto physicallybreakup is highly
dependent                 conditions,
         upon oceanographic                              barge
                                    sludgecharacteristics,
dumping               and
       characteristics, otherphysical, chemical,and engineering
factors.                      of
        Underextremeconditions high wavesand currentshear,plumes
may breakup withinI to 2 h afterdumping,but duringweak mixing
conditions,plumesmay remainrelativelyintactfor periodsof 4 h or
longer.


                                        3-2
                           of
     The fieldobservations plumesduringSeptember     1987 and 1988 were
made duringrelatively                                and
                      calm sea and mixingconditions, consequently,     the
                        on
effectof plumebreak-up parceldilution     was not substantial until many
hours (>> 4 h) after dumping.Additional surveysof sludgeplume behavior
                to
will be required developa statistical           of
                                       estimate the time at which
plumesbreakup, but basedupon the limitedfielddata, we can assumethat a
significantnumberof sludgeplumeswill remainrelatively  intactfor at
least4 h. This type of plume behaviorwould be appropriatefor development
of a modelthat predicts                   of
                       the minimumdilution sludgeparcelsat any time
afterdumping.
    If we are concerned                     behavior sludgeplumesand
                        aboutthe conservative       of
dilutiononly up to 4 h afterdumping,then Eq.(1)reduces


              D       Di + dDo x                                     (2)


This simplifiedexpressionrepresents            behavior sludgeparcel
                                   the two-phase       of
dilution priorto plumebreak-up:         at              by
                               dilution 4 h is achieved an initial
phase of rapiddilution                    DiS        by
                      (to achievedilution , followed a slowerphase
of oceanographicmixingand dilution.


                                     InitialMixing
                     3.1.1Wake-lnduced

     Mixingof sludgewithinthe wake of the barge is extensiveduringthe
first few minutesafter dumping.Much of this mixing(and sludgedilution)
              to              of
is attributed the turbulence the receiving    waterimmediately behindthe
barge,but within5 to I0 minutesafterdumping,              of
                                              the momentum the wake
diminishes and otherfactorsgovernplumemixingand dilution.
     Duringthe periodof initial(0 to ~5 min) mixing,wake momentum may
the most importantfactor,but thereare additional parameters/processes
                             Initial,
that affectmixingand dilution.                  dilutlon,
                                     wako-lndueed       DI, is
        to             of
expected be a function the following parameters:




                                   3-3
              Di     f { R, B, S, 7, Mw ]                             (3)


    where     R                    dumpingrate:the amountof
                       the effective
                       sludgedumpedper unit of track(plume)length,
                                in
                       expressed unitsof gal/ft

              B                                        (size,speed,
                       the effectof bargecharacteristics
                       draft,depthof dischargeport)and dumpingmethod
                       (bottomdump,pump,or eductor)

              S         sludgecharacteristics(specificgravity,solids
                        content,abilit~to flocculate,densityrelativeto
                        receivingwaterJ

              Z                  depth
                        pycnocllne

             Mw                         due
                       mixing(dispersion) to windsand waves

                  of
     Determination the relative                         on
                                effectsof theseparameters initial(0
to m5 min) sludgedilutionwouldrequirerapid,intensivefieldmeasurements
of plumemixingover a wide rangeof dumpingrates,bargetypes,dumping
methods,sludgetypes,stratification regimes,                m~xing
                                           and oceanographic
regimes.Becausethis research         is
                            activity well beyondthe scopeof the EPA
                    we
OceanDumpingprogram, will represent   initial(0 to ~5 min),wake-induced
        as
dilution a singleparameter,  Di, in the reducedequation for sludge
dilution(see Eq. 2). With the field resultsfrom the past nearfield
monitoring         it            to
          surveys, is possible estimate     initialdilution,  Oi, 5 min
afterdumping, but we cannotdetermine the relative           of
                                                 importance the
individual           in
          parameters Eq. (3).
    To facilitatefuturecomparisonsbetweeninitialdilutionratesfrom
othermonitoringsurveys,                     and
                       the variousengineering environmental
conditionsencounteredduringplumeevent DB-21(Septemberlg~) are
         below.
summarized

    R    effectivedumpingrate was 22.85gal/ft,basedupon an average
         dumpingrateof 10,855gal/minat a bargespeedof 4.7 kn.

    B                        was
         bargeconfiguration that of the Princess~,   which pumps
         sludgeout of its side;this bargehas a maxlmumdraft
         of 15 ft and a beam of go ft.
    S     the sludge within    the barge was from Passaic Valley; the
          specific gravity    of the sludge (~1.004) was less than that
          of the receiving    water (~1.023), which had water properties
          of ~22°C and =33    ppt.

    Z     the seasonal pycnocline at the I06-Mile Site was strong and
          shallow, situated between roughly 25 and 40 m.

    Mw    surface mixing conditions were mild, due to calm (<3 it)     seas
          and winds less than 15 kn.

As indicated in subsection 2.3, the initial  dilution of sludge parcels B min
after dumping for plume event DB-21 was estimated at 1,724:1 from analyses of
trace metals data. Because the relative effects of the various parameters in
the initial  dilution equation (Eq. 3) are unknown, we can only speculate
how the rate of initialdilution   wouldchangeunder different   dumpingand
            conditions:
environmental

    Mw                                 been more severe(i.e.,during
         Had the sea and wind conditions
         winterstormevents)initialdilution   mighthave been significantly
         greaterdue to increased dispersion.

    Z    The observedsludgeplumemight have settledsomewhat deeper,and
         dilutionsmighthave been greaterhad therebeen no seasonal
         pycnocline.Preliminaryresultsof the wintersurveyindicate,
         however,that sludgedumpedat ratesnear 15,000gal/mindoes not
         settledeeperthan about30 m in the first8 h followingdumping.

    S    Other than from laboratorystudies, littleis knownabout the
         settling                of
                  characteristics the varioussludgesdumpedat the
                             the
         site.Nevertheless, salinereceiving      waterwill, duringall
                  be
         seasons, much more densethan the sludgedumpedat the site,
         such that all plumeswill be relativelybuoyantand variationsin
         sludgesettling                 may
                         characteristics have a second-order  effectupon
         initial dilution.

    B    The Princess_B,whichpumpssludgeout of one side of the vessel,
         may ~ somewhatdifferentinitial mixing characteristics  than
         bargeswhich are bottomdumpers,but the availablefield results
         from bargesof differentconfigurationssuggestthat initial
         dilutionmay be relatively           to
                                  insensitive dumpingmethod.

     In sun~nary,                conditions
                 the environmental                         ) uring
                                          (parameters and Z d
                                                     w
plume eventDB-21represent               for sludgedilutions
                          mild conditions                  (conditions
that producelow dilutions).Becausethe objectof the presentanalysisis

                                        3-5
                             of
to derivea modelfor prediction worst-case
                                        (lowest)         the field
                                                dilutions,
                                     for           of
data from eventDB-21are appropriate development the model.
                                  a
     For the purposeof developing conservative  model,we will assumethat
(I) all sludgeswill behavesimilarly  duringthe firstfew minutesafter
dumping, and (2) the rate of initialmixingis generallythe same for all
bargeconfigurations.                         the
                      With these assumptions, only parameter   remaining
that will appreciably affectthe wake-induceddilution,Di, is the effective
                                      is
dumpingrate,R. We expectthat dilution inversely              to
                                                  proportional
effectivedumpingrate,such that we obtainthe following         for
                                                     expression
initialdilution:
                       Di         f (I/R)

                              of
    The recentfieldobservations plumewidthwithinthe wake of barges
indicate                                          mixing,the sludge
        that,duringthe initialperiodof wake-induced
plumeis confined                  mixingvolumecreatedby the barge
                withinthe turbulent
wake. For the New York barges,the initialplumeis as wide as the barge
                                              B,
wake,but for otherbargessuch as the Princess the plumeis a fraction   of
                          we
the wake width.Therefore, may assumethat the initial(t=0) mixing
volumebehinda bargehas an upperlimitequalto the volumeof the barge
wake (roughly the bargewidthtimesthe draft),and to a first-order
               the
approximation, averagedilution     wouldbe inversely            to
                                                    proportional the
volumeof material  dumpedin the wake (the effectivedumpingrate, R).
            of           (0
the absence short-term to 5-min)measurements     behindthe various
       we
barges, will considerthe initialmixingregimeas a linearsystemsuch
that
                  Di        A/R



         where    A         a constantrelatlngdilution
                            to effectivedumpingrate

                     can                             dumpingrates
This linearexpression then be used to predicteffective
from observeddilutionsand knowndumpingrates:




                                     3-6
               [ R x Di ]obs = A = [ R x Di ] req


         or            R req = [ R x Di ]obs                          (4)

                                 [ Di ] req


         where         R req = the effectivedumping rate that will be
                                        to
                                required achievea specific   dilution

                       Di req = the required initialdilution(at
                                                             with water
                                 tm5 min) basedupon compliance
                                                 at
                                 qualitycriteria 4 h

         and           ’obs’     refersto observed               and
                                                  initialdilutions
                                 average ef~dumping rates from plume
                                 eventDB-21

              will be used later,in conjunction
This expression                                with Eq. (2), to obtain
empiricalequationfor determiningdumpingrateswhichare basedupon (I)
dilutions        to
         required preventselected   sludgeconstituents from exceeding
                     at                     of
waterqualitycriteria 4 h, (2) observations initialdilution,      and (3)
observedratesof oceanicmixingand sludgedilution.


                          3.1.2 OceanicMixing

                                                      turbulent
    Afterthe initial(O to ~5 min) periodof wake-induced       mixing,
sludgeplumesare dilutedat slowerratesas a resultof buoyancyeffects,
                   and
sludgeflocculation settling,    and oceanicdispersionprocesses.Under
extreme                        near-surface
       wind and wave conditions,           plumesmay be dispersedat
ratesthat approachthe ratesachieved                  but
                                   duringwake-mixing, most of the
                       is
time,oceanicdispersion relatively  slow. For the periodfollowingwake-
induced                           to
        mixing,the factorsexpected controlthe rate of sludgedilution,
dDo, are givenbelow:



               dDo    f [ Di, S, Z, Hw, Mc ]                    (5)




                                   3-7
    where    Di        the extentof wake-induced initialdilution

              S        sludgecharacteristicse.g.,
                                          (                    and
                                                    flocculation
                       settling)

              Z        pycnoclinedepth

              Mw =    dispersiondue to winds and waves

              Mc =    dispersiondue to current shear

                             5                      is
     Di, the initialdilution minutesafterdumping, an important
                         (5
factorin the longer.term min to 4 h) dilution                if
                                                phasebecause, the
effective                                     is
          dumpingrate is high and the dilution low, the core of the plume
                         and            of
will be more concentrated achievement a specified     (high)dilution will
       a
require longerperiodof time.
    Sludgecharacteristics, pycnoclinedepth,and surfacemixingdue to
                                        as
windsand waveswill affectsludgedilution described    duringthe phaseof
initialmixing.Dispersion                                      to
                         due to currentshear was not expected have a
majoreffectupon dilution duringthe firstfew minutesafterdumping,
becausethe turbulencedue to bargemomentu~ much greaterthan the
                                         is
effectivemixingdue to currentshear.However,  after the wake has lost its
momentum, currentshear,if present,can effectivelyincreasedilution by
lateral             of        of
        displacement portions the plume.
     DuringplumeeventDB-3 (September 1987),strungcurrentshearat the
base of the surfacemixedlayereffectively increasedthe rate of dilution
withinthe plume.Had the currentshear been weak or nonexistent (whichmay
be the typicalcase exceptduringthe passageof warm-core eddies),the rate
of plumedilution mighthave been less. Duringthe September1988 survey
(plumeeventsOB-21and DB-23),therewas no significant  currentshearat the
                                    in
base of the mixed layer.As indicated Table 2.6, the rate of dilution
                                                less than observed
from O to 4 h for DB-21and DB-23was significantly                 for
DB-3,but we cannotbe sure this difference                    to
                                         was mainlyattributed the lack
of current shear.
     To summarize,         we
                   although can identify the physicalfactors/processes
that affectthe rate of sludgeplumedilution, dDo. afterthe periodof



                                   3-8
initial, wake-induced mixing, we do not have sufficient field data to
quantify the effects of each process in Eq. (5). Wewill therefore estimate
the rate of dilution, dDo, from specific field data of representative

sludge plumes. As discussed in subsection 2.3, the results    from plume event
DB-21 provide the most conservative (lowest) rate of dilution during the
first 4 h following dumping: ~ SO0:l/h. This rate will he used in the
following section.


                                    RATEEQUATION
                          3.2 DUMPING


     Derivation of an empirical equation for prediction    of optimum dumping
rates requires combination of Eqs. (2) and (4):




               D wqc

                                                     IZ
                              Di req + dDo x T                             (2)
                                         BE


    or         Di req         D wqc         ~dDo x T t=4                   ~)
                                                                           (2
                                                     t=O


    and        Di req         Robs x Di obs                                (4’)
                                      R req


        Eqs. (2’) and (4’) yields
Combining



               R req           Robs x Di obs


             I               D wqc
                                    _ _ _
                                      dDo x T
                                              t=4


                                                    t 0
                                                                           (6)




                                      3-9
    where     R req         the requiredeffectivedumpingrateto
                                               4           D
                            achievea specified h dilution, wqc,
                            that is basedupon waterqualitycriteria

              D wqc                     at
                            the dilution 4 h thatis requiredby
                            the waterqualitycriteria


         Robs, Di obs                       of
                            fieldobservations plumeeventDB-21during
                                    1988
                            September


                  concepts
     The underlying       and assumptions         in
                                          inherent thisempirical
dumpingrate equation                       in
                    (Eq. 6) are illustrated Figure3.1. This figure
schematically         the observed
             represents            time seriesof sludgeparceldilution
from plumeeventDB-21(lowerline),as well as the required dilution(upper
                           to                        D
line)that wouldbe necessary achievea 4 h dilution, wqc,of 20,000:1.
                       of       is
Note that this dilution 20,000:1 merelyan example;  actualdilution
             for
requirements each permitapplicant                       4.1.
                                   are givenin subsection
              dilution
This conceptual      model(Eq. 6) is basedon two assumptions:


    ¯    The rate of oceanicdilutionfrom 0 to 4 b, dDo,

                     for
         is equivalent the observedand requireddilutioncases.


    ¯ The requiredinitialdilution(at lm5 min), Di req, can
                 by                in
       - achieved a linearreduction the effective  dumping rate,R.


                                      by
Thus,if D wqc (at 4 h) can be specified waterqualitycriteria,  then Eq.
                                      dumping
(6) can be used to predictthe effective      rate,R req, that would
achieve the required         at                       is
                     dilution 4 h. A samplecalculation provided
below.


Usingthe resultsof plumeeventDB-21:


              Robs      ~   22.8 gal/ft(10,855gal/min÷ 4.7 kn ÷ 101.3
                            ft-h/min-nmi)



                                  3-10
           25,000


                                                                                       J        Di wqc
           20.000                                            Required   Dilution           jf


                                             "~’Slope = dDo
     Z
           15,000 -                                     dt
     F--
     ./
           10.000
GJ
I



                            -Woke Dilution
           5,000 III                           Observed Dilution
                        I      D
                    / /=-i uu~                            ~ Slope = dDo
                     I / i obs
                                               I                 I                 I
                    0                    1     2                 3                 4

                                              TIME (hours)


                    3.1           HODEL
               FIGURE CONCEPTUAL OFSLUDGE     PLUHEDILUTION  FROM OBSERVATIONS
                        (LOWER          PLUME
                              LINE)DURING    EVENTDD-2I.                OF
                                                            IF A DILUTION 20,000
                                   BY
                        IS REQUIRED HATER       CRITERIA 4 h+ THEN
                                          QUALITY        AT          THEREQUIRED
                                IS          BYTHE
                        DILUTION REPRESENTED UPPER      LINE.
                 Di obs       ~    1,724
                 dDo          ~ 500 per      hour

                              t=4
                 dDo x     T t=O = 500 x 4 b            2,000


and, if   the water quality   criteria    (e.g.,    for copper), require a dilution

20,000:1 at 4 b:
                 D wqc             20,000
then, using Eqo (6) we obtain

                 R req             22.8 x lf724
                                   20,000 - 2,000
                 R req        ~ 2.2 gal/ft

for the effective                                 to
                 dumpingrate that wouldbe required meet waterquality
criteria, baseduponthe fieldobservations from plumeeventDB-21.
    To determinethe voTumedumpingrate,in unitsof gallonsper minute,
requires              of
        multiplication the effectivedumpingrate by the averagebarge
speedduringthe dumping operation:


                          VDR = R req x K x 101.3 ft-h                          (7)


     where       VDR          the volumedumpingrate(gal/min)
                 R req        the required        dumpingrate(gal/ft)
                                          effective
                 K            bargespeed(kn)


                                         B          at
DuringplumeeventDB-21,the bargePrincess was traveling 4.7 kn such
that the volumedumpingrate shouldhave been


                          VDR = 2.2 gal/ftx 4.7 kn x 101.3


                                         1,047gal/min


                                            3-12
to achieve a dilution of 20,000:1 at 4 h after dumping. Note that if the
barge speed had been 3 kn, the volume dumping rate would have to be lowered
to 668 gal/min (3/4.7 x 1,047).
     Combination of Eqs. (6) and (7) yields the complete expression
determination of volume dumping rates from field observations of event DB-21
in September1988.


                          VDR= 101.3 x K x R obs x Oi obs
                                 D wqc- dDo x T     t=4

                                                    t=O


     and since      V obs = Robs x K x 10].3
    then




                         VDR =    V obs x D
                                  iobs
                                  D wqc - dDo x T         t=4             (8)

                                            dt
                                                          t=O




           of
Substitution resultsfrom plumeeventDB-21 yields

                 VDR =    I0i855x 1,724           1.8714x 107
                                                                  (gal/min)
                          D wqc - 500 x 4         O wqc - 2,000


Section4 presents sludgedumpingratesthat are basedupon variousvaluesof
                             Note that this equation
O wqs in the above expression.                      assumesa barge speed
                    to
of 4.7 kn (equivalent that duringplumeevent DB-21).To determine     the
volumedumpingrate, VDRS at any barge speed,S, the rate for 4.7 kn (for
                           by
VDR) can simplybe multiplied the ratio of speeds:



                                       3-13
                        =
                    VDRS VDRx

The following subsection demonstrates the importance of barge speed to the
volume dumping rate (in gai/min)o


                               SPEED
                       3.3 BARGE   CONSIDERATIONS

     Whenconsidering sludge dumping rates, the most important point to
         is
remember that plumedilution    and compliance with waterqualitycriteria
are more dependent upon the effectivedumpingrate (in gal/ft)than the
volumedumpingrate (in gal/min).  For a given volumedumpingrate,barges
that travelrelatively fast (5 tO 8 kn) effectively dump much less sludge
per unit tracklengththando bargesthat travelslower.
     Present               for
            ErA regulations dumpingof sewagesludgeat the IO6-Mile
Site specify(I) a maximumvolumedumpingrate,VDR, of 15,500gal/min,and
(2) a minimumbarge speedof 3 kn. Compliance with these regulations
           by
represented the shadedregionin Figure3.2.
     Underspecific                  of
                   dumpingconditions 15,500gal/minand 3 kn, the
effectivedumpingrate, R, is 51 gal/ft.Also shown in Figure3.2 is a line
indicatingthe set of bargespeedsand volumedumpingrates(in gal/min)
that satisfythe case of R = 51 gal/ft.The shadedregionillustrates that
compliance                           (whichare basedupon volumedumping
           with ERA dumpingregulations
ratesand bargespeeds)w|ll normally resultin effectivedumpingratesthat
are well belowthe impliedmaximumrate of 51 gal/ft.For instance,if
                                          at
bargesdump at 15,500gal/minwhiletraveling speeds>3 kn, the following
        dumping
effective      rates,R, result:


         At 6 kn and 15,500gal/min,R = 25.5 gal/ft
         At g kn and 15,500 gal/min,R = 17.0 gal/ft


                      wereto achievean effective
Thus,if the requirement                        dumpingrateof 51
gal/ft,the volumedumping                         as
                        rates,V, couldbe increased follows:




                                    3-14
      20,000

                     R= 51 gal/ft
                                                      15,500 gal/min
¯
 ~ 15,000-


V

LLI
      10,000-

o
Z
                                                         R= lo gal/ft
       5,000
E3




             0
                 0                  3           6                  9     12

                                        BARGESPEED(knots)

          FIGURE
               3.2    PLOT VOLUME
                          OF     DUHP][NG (GAL/NIH)
                                        RATE       VERSUS   SPEED,THE
                                                        BARGE
                      SHADED
                           REGION        EPA
                                REPRESENTS BUI4P]NG         SOLID
                                                  REGULAT[OHS,   LINES
                              TWO    OF
                      REPRESENT VALUES THEEFFECTIVE      RATE
                                                   DUHP]NG IN UNITS OF
                      GAL/FT.
          To achieve R = S1 gal/ft   at 6 kn, V= 31,000 gal/min
          To achieve R = 51 gal/ft   at 9 kn, V = 46,500 gal/min


     If EPAcontinues to regulate ocean dumping by specifying an upper limit
on the volume dumping rate, regardless of barge speed (so long as it exceeds
3 knots), the effective dumping rate should at least be considered when
setting criteria  for ocean dumping violations.  For instances, Figure 3.3
illustrates  the volume dumping rates and barge speeds for the barges surveyed
during the September 1987 and 1988 surveys at the lO6-Nile Site. Barges
(events) DZ-1, DB-2, DB-3, OB-4, DB-21 and DB-23 were all dumping at rates
below 15,500 gal/mtn, and at barge speeds greater than 3 kn, in accordance
with permit requirements. Their effective dumping rates differed greatly,
however, on account of large differences in barge speed. Event DB-3 had the
lowest effective dumping rate (R m 15 gal/ft) because it had the highest
barge speed; event DB-2 had the highest effective dumping rate (R ~ 29
gal/ft) of the four events, with volume dumping rates less than 15,500
gal/min. Nevertheless, the volume dumping rates for all of these barge
eventscouldhave been increased    substantially  beyond15,500gal/minwhile
             an
maintaining effective     dumpingrate less than 51 gal/ft(the EPA
requirement  basedupon 15,500gal/min   and 3 kn).
       Figure3.3 also illustrates that although  plumeeventDB-I had a volume
dumping   rate in excessof 15,500gal/min,  its effective dumpingrate (R~33
gal/ft)was still ]ess than the impliedEPA rate of 51 gal/ft.These
examplesillustratethat,if sludgedumpingratesare to be basedupon water
qualitycriteria,then dumpingratesshouldbe basedupon the effective
dumpingrate;volumedumpingratescouldthen be specified    for a givenbarge
speed,or rangeof speeds(e.g.,4-6 kn).




                                      3-16
       20,000-
                     R--75 gal/ft       R-SO                                    R--20
                                                      DB-I


                                                                                15,500   gol/min
                                               ....     DB-2     3   -
.-~ 15,000 -                                           DB-2
E                                                            De-~
                                                                     DB-3                R-IO
                                                DB-21                 ¯

 I--   10,000 ¯
.<
 0::

7

        5,000,                      I
E3
                                    I                                                    R-2




                                    3                        6              9                      12

                                                   SPEED
                                               BARGE    (knots)

              FIGURE 3.3 PLOT OF VOLUME   DUMPINGRATE(gal/mfn) VERSUS  BARGE SPEED.
                          VARIOUS   CASESAREGIVEN FOR THE EFFECT]VEDIJHPING RATE,R,,
                          (gaT/ft).     BARGE DUMPINGCHARACTER[STZCSF’RONSEPTEMBER  1987 AND
                                               BY
                          1988 ARE REPRESEMTEO INDIVIDUAL POINTS.
                                   DUHPING
                        4. RECOHHENDED   RATES

    The previous section presented an empirical   equation (Eq. 8) for
          the
estimating rate at whichsewagesludgeshouldbe dumpedin orderto meet
toxicity            and
        requirements waterquality           at
                                   criteria the IO6-Mile   Site.
Althoughadditional                will be necessary validate
                  fieldmeasurements                to          this
formulaundera varietyof oceanographicconditions,dumpingrates,and barge
              EPA
configurations, is currently                           for
                             facedwith time constraints sludge
dumpingpermits,                this preliminary
               and consequently,               formulawill be used to
set initialsludgedumpingratesfor the lOG-Mile Site.As additional field
data becomeavailable               monitoring
                     from subsequent        studiesat the IO6-Mile
                   to                      in
Site,modifications the variouscoefficients the dumpingrate equation
shouldbe considered.
     In the following           we               dumpingrate equation
                     subsections use the empirical
to develop
    ¯    Specificdumpingratesfor each permitapplicant.
    ¯   A nomograph            of                      to
                   for selection dumpingratesaccording specific
        dilutionrequirements                    at
                            that may be specified a laterdate.



                                          PERMITAPPLICANTS
             4.1 DUMPINGRATESFOR INDIVIDUAL


     EPA RegionII has received            for
                              applications permitsto dump municipal
sewagesludgeat the 106-Mile                         treatment
                            Site from nine wastewater       authorities
in New York and New Jersey=

             PermitApplicants                                  Abbreviation

    PassaicValleySewerage Commissioners                           PVSC
    MiddlesexCountyUtilities Authority                            MCUA
    BergenCountyUtilities Authority                               BCUA
    L]nden-RoselleSewerageAuthority                               LRSA
    RahwayValleySewerage Authority                                RVSA
    JointMeetingof Essexand UnionCounties                         JMEUC
                           of
    New YorkCity Department EnvironmentalProtection               NYCDEP
                           of
    NassauCountyDepartment PublicWorks                            NCDPW
    Westchester                 of
               CountyDepartment Environment Facilities            WCDEF



                                    4-I
Eachpermit   application  includes            on
                                  information (1) the concentrations
chemical constituents  within the whole          and
                                        sludge, {2) results wholeof
sludge toxicity  tests.                     of
                         Withthe exception the NYCDEP,      eachpermit
application  provides             on
                      information the sludge     froma single  treatment
           In
facility. the case of NYCDEP,               the
                                   however, pemitapplication        provides
dataon the maximum   chemical               or
                              concentration mosttoxic      toxicity test
results obtained  fromany one of twelve   treatment  facilities. Thus,high
chemical                 from
         concentrations a single       New YorkCityplant    applyto all plants
           in
designated the NYCDEP      permitapplication.
     Tables  4.1 and 4.2 present metal and toxicity  characterization data,
               from
respectively, analyses                            on
                             thatwereconducted whole       sludge samples
         in
obtained August     1988fromthe ninesewerage                 in
                                                authorities New Yorkand
New Jersey.  Analytical          and               of
                        methods a comparison results          withdata
         in
provided the permit                  are           in
                        applications provided a separate         report
(Battelle,          The
            Ig88f). two tables      alsopresent             of
                                                 estimates the dilution
           be           to
thatwould required meetthe applicable                       or
                                               metal-based toxicity-based
water quality  criteria.
                   in
     As indicated Table4.1,the highest       metal-based  dilutions are
         by         for
governed copper eightof the ninesewerage            authorities; mercury-based
dilutions exceed        of
                  those copper    onlyfor the Bergen   County Utilities
Authority          The
          (BCUA). metal-based       dilutionsrangefrom4,140     for Nassau
       to
County 80,000     for BCUA.The toxicity-based   dilutions  alsohavea wide
      of
range values:     from4,740for Middlesex           to         for
                                           County 166,700 Linden-
Roselle.             of
         Comparison Tables                               that
                               4.1 and 4.2 illustrates metal-based
dilutions exceed  toxicity-based           for
                                 dilutions fiveof the ninesewage
authorities studied.
     To relate  the required dilutions           in
                                       presented Tables     4.1 and 4.2 to
actual sludge  dumping        we
                       rates, haveusedthe empirical       dumping rateequation
(Eq.8) givenin the previous            to            the
                               section calculate volume         dumping rate
(in gal/min)             be          to         the
              thatwould required achieve specified             dilutions 4
after          and
      dumping thusmeetwater        quality criteria.
     Table 4.3 presents  volume dumping rates for eachsewerage   authority
based uponthe required   dilutions       in         4.1
                                   given Tables and 4.2;dumping          rates
                              of                      3,
are alsogivenas a function bargespeed(e.g., 6, and 9 kn).These


                                    4-2
TABLE4.1 WHOLESLUDGE gETALCHARACTERIZATION      FRON
                                          RESULTS   THE NINE NEW
         YORK-NEWJERSEY SEWERAGE           APPLYING PERMITS
                                 AUTHORITIES      FOR        TO
                  SEWAGE
          DISCHARGE            AT
                         SLUDGE THE106-MILE SITE. SAMPLES)/ERE
                  IN
         COLLECTED AUGUST  1988.


                getal (mg/Lwhole sludge)
                                           Required
Authority        Cu                Hg      Diluttona   14eta1

PVSC             42.0                      14,500      Cu
HCUA             68.0                      23,450      Cu
BCUA                              2.00     80,DUO      Hg
LRSA             BO.O                      27,5g0      Cu
RVSA             16.0                       5,520      Cu
JMEUC            36                        12,410      Cu
NYCDEP           38.0                      13,100      Cu
NCDPW             12.0                      4,140      Cu
WCDEF            56.0                      19,310      Cu


PVSC =  PassaicValleySewerage Commissioners.
MCUA =  MiddlesexCountyUtilities Authority.
BCUA =  BergenCountyUtilities Authority.
LRSA =  Linden-RoselleSewerageAuthority.
RVSA =  RahwayValleySewerage Authority.
JMEUC = JointMeetingof Essexand UnionCounties.
NYCDEP=          of                          of
        Composite the New York City Department Environmental
        Protectionfacilities.
                               of
NCDPW = NassauCountyDepartment PublicWorks.
WCDEF = Westchester                 of
                   CountyDepartment EnvironmentalFacilities.



        basedon the metalrequiring
aDilution                        the greatestamountof dilutionto
 meetwaterquality.




                                  4-3
’TABLE4.2 WHOLE SLUDGE’TOXICITY RESULTSFROMTHEKIRE NEWYORK-REWJERSEY
          SEWERAGE AUTHORITIESAPPLYING           TO
                                       FORPERNITS DISCHARGE  SEWAGE
                 AT
          SLUDGE THE106-RILE SITE. SANPLES   WERE         IN
                                                  COLLECTED AUGUST
                                     BASED
          1988. THEP, AXII@.JNTOXICITY          DILUTION
                                           SLUDGE              FOR
                                                        REQUIRED EACH
                      ARE
          MUNICIPALITY LISTED.



                           LCSO(~whole sludge)         Toxicity
                                                       Based
                          le~nidia       Nvsl"dopsis   Required
       Authoritye        ~               -~            Di|ui:loeb

         PVSC               0.49           0.17         58,800
         MCUA               5.95           2,11          4,740
         BCUA               1.55           2,10          6,450
         LRSA               0.53           0.06        166,700
         RVSA               1.49           0.88         II,360
         JMEUC              1.92          1.68           5,950
         NYCDEP             1.59          2.25           6,290
         NCDPW              2.33          0.92          10,870
         WCDEFW             0.91          1.17          10,990


             are
aAbbreviations definedin Table4,1.

bThe species                                     factorof 0.01 were used
            with the lowestLC50 and an application
 to determinethe requireddilution.




                                   4-4
                   OF
TABLE4.3 COMPARISON SLUDGE    DUMPING RATES     ON
                                           BASED TOXICITYANDTRACE
          NETALRESULTS. REQUIRED  DILUTIONDATAWERE       FROM
                                                   DERIVED     THE
          AUGUST1988 SLUDGE                 STUDY.DUI4PZNG
                             CHARACTERIZATION             RATES WERE
               ON
          BASED OBSERVED    DILUTION RATESFRON            1988
                                              THESEPTENBER SURVEY    AT
          THE106-NILE SITE.


                  Required                 Oump~n~nRate
                                   Recommended      (gal/mfn)9
       ¯
Authority a       Dilution         3 kn


                             Toxicity    Basis
PVSC              58,800           210             420       630

MCUA               4,740        4,359            8,719    13,078
BCUA               6,450        2,684            5,368     8,052
LRSA             166,700           85              171       256

RVSA              11,360         1,276           2,552     3,828

JHEUC              5,950        3,024            6,048     9,072

NYCDEP             6,290        2,784            5,568     8,352

NCDPW             10,870         1,347           2,694     4,041
WCDEF             10.990         1.329           2.658     3.987

                              MetalBasis

PVSC              14,500           955           1,911     2,866

McuA              23,450           556           1,113     1,669

BCUA              80.000           153             306       459

LRSA              27,590           466             933     1,399
RVSA               5,520         3,393           6,786    10,179

OMEUC             12,410         1,147           2,295     3,442

NYCDEP            13,100         1,076           2,162     3,228

NCDPW              4,140         5,582           11,164   16,746

WCDEF             19,310           690           1,380     2,070

            are       in
aAbbrev~atlons defined Table4.1.


                                   4-5
results indicate that sludge dumping rates must be reduced greatly from the
court-mandated rate of 15,500 gat/min in order that sludge concentrations 4 h
after dumping are sufficiently low to meet EPAwater quality criteria.    At a
barge speed of 6 kn, recommended  dumping rates for the nine permit
applicants vary from 171 to 8,719gal/minbased upon toxicity    requirements;
306 to 11,164gal/minbasedupon metals.
     The recommended dumpingrate for each permitapplicantis, therefore,
dependent upon the speed of the barge (Table4.3).As demonstrated
Section3, dilution  requirementsdictatean effectivedumpingrate,but
volumedumpingratesare basedupon the effective   dumpingrate and the barge
speed.Accordingly,                                              to
                   volumedumpingrates are directlyproportional barge
                                at
speed,such that bargestraveling 3 kn must dump at one-half  the rate of a
                                      the rate of a barge with a speed of
bargewith a speedof 6 kn, and one-third
9 kn. Thus,bargesthat travelrelatively  fast (7 to 9 kn) could dump at
to 3 timesthe dumpingrate of slow (3 kn) barges,and meet water quality
        The effectof barge speed on dumpingrate is, however, lesser
criteria.                                                    a
issuethan the actualrangeof recommendeddumpingrates that are givenin
                            in
Table 4.3. A major reduction dumpingrates from 15,500gal/minto near
1,OO0gal/minwouldrepresent                              in
                             more than a 1S-folddecrease rates,and
consequently,                           in
             more than a 15-foldincrease the time for a barge to dump
its load at the 106-Mile                   repercussions this long
                        Site. The logistical            of
dumping                 in
       time are discussed Section5.


                  OF
     4.2 NOMOGRAPN DUMPINGRATES FOR SPECIFICDILUTIONREQUIREMENTS


     The previoussubsectionpresented specific dumpingratesfor each of the
nine permitapplicants. These rates were based upon whole sludgedata that
were determinedfrom the characterization               in
                                        study conducted August1988
( EPA    1992d). We anticipatethat additional  chemicalconstituent  and
toxicitydata will be acquired over the next few yearsfor the various
sludgesdumpedat the IO6-Mile  Site,and for this reason,a simplified
         or
algorithm nomograph   will be neededto determine  optimumdumpingrates as a
        of
function the required   dilution. For this purpose, Figure4.1 illustrates
               betweenthe required
the relationship                  dilution and the sludgedumpingrate,
         in
expressed units of gal/mln.                        on
                            The data are presented logarithmic  scales

                                    4-6
1,000,000




    1,000          l     I I 111   I~ I     ; : : ; $ I II I      I   l : ~ t;~:li      I I I I I I II
            10                      1 O0                  1,000                10,000              100.000

                                               DUMPING
                                          SLUDGE     RATE(gal/min)



            FIGURE 4.1                OF
                             NOHOGRAPH SLUDGE   DUMPINGRATES(in gai/Bin) VERSUS  REQUIRED
                             SLUDGEDILUTIONS4-h AFTERDUMPIflG AT THE I06-NILE SITE.
                             SEPARATECURVESARE GIVER FOR BARGE        OF
                                                               SPEEDS 3, 6, AND9 kn.
                             CALCULATIONSBASED                        OF
                                               UPONFIELD OBSERVATIONS SLUDGE    DILUTION
                             DURINGSEPTEHBER1988.
              the
to accommodate wide rangesof dilution   and dumpingratesthat may be
            In
encountered. accordance  with Eq. (8), dumpingratesare inversely
            to
proportional required  dilution,              in
                                and increases bargespeed can
effectivelyraisethe permissibledumpingrate for a givendilution
requirement.                       to
            Becauseit is difficult extractvaluesfrom this graphic
             the                       in
presentation, same data are presented Table4.4 for dilutions    ranging
from 5,000to 150,000,and bargespeedsof 3, 6 and g kn.




                                  4-8
TABLE4.4                     DUMPING
             RECOiqMENDEDSLUDGE RATES     VERSUS REQUIREDDILUTION.
             VOLUME       RATES
                   DUI4PING    (ga|Jm|n) AREfiIVEN FORTHREEBARGE
             SPEEOS.


              Effective
 Required    Dumping   Rate                  Volume DumpingRate (gal/min)
 Dilution     (gal/ft)        Barge Speed:       3 kn     6 kn     9 kn


     5,000       11.4                          3,982     7,g53     11,g45
    10,000        2.5                          1,493     2,985      4,47g
    15,000        1.4                            91g     1,838      2,757
    20,000        0.98                           664     1,328      1,992
    25,000        0.75                           520     1,039      1,559

    30,000        0.61                           426       853      1,279
    40,000        0.44                           314       628        942
    50,000        0.34                           249       498        747
    75,000        0.22                           163       327        490
   I00,000        0.17                           122       244        366

   125,000        0.13                            97       194        291
   150,000        0.11                            80       161        241




                  dumpingrate (gal/ft) achievethe required
Note: The effective                   to                  dilution
              of
is independent bargespeed.




                                  4-9
                                 FOR      DUHPING
                     5. STRATEGIES HULTIPLE

     The previoussections        the initial(4-h)dilution discrete
                         addressed                       of
parcelsof sewagesludgedumpedat the IO6-Mile   Site. Dilution calculations
and, therefore, dumpingrate formulaswere basedupon discrete parcels,
ratherthan plume-average sludgeconcentrations, becausethe EPA regulations
for ocean dumpingof municipal                    at
                              wastesare directed waste parcelsrather
                                                          of
than spatialaveragesof entirewaste plumes.Consideration dumping
strategies and wasteloadingat the site does, however,requireanalyses of
                             on
wholeplumesand calculations spatialscalesthat includethe entire
dumpsite.
                     we                       issuesand
     In this section, raisea numberof practical
             concerning
considerations         the presentand futuredumpingof sludgeat the
IO6-MileSite.The followingsubsectionsaddressthe topicslistedbelow:

    ¯    Bulk loadingof sludgeat the IO6-MileSite
    ¯    Strategiesfor dumpingat presentratesof 15,500gpm
    ¯                  for
         Considerations dumpingat greatlyreducedrates.


                     5.1 BULK LOADINGCONSIDERATIONS

     The volume(load)of sludgedumpedat the IO6-MileSite is estimated
be roughly7.2 millionwet metrictons (1.7 billiongallons)annually,
                                                   of
20,000m3 per day (Walkeret al.. 1987).The magnitude this dumping
activity, coupledwith the presumed ecologicaleffectsof sludgeon the
marinelife of the U.S. east coast,has fueledgreatconcernfor sludge
dumpingat the IO6-Mile Site. To determine the true fate and effectsof
sludgedumpingat the IO6-Mile  Site will requirean extensive monitoring
activityas outlinedin the IO6-MileSite monitoring    plan ( EPA , Ig88a).
This monitoring         is                           on
                activity underway, but information the farfield     fate
and long-term effectsof sludgedumpingwill not be available  for another
year or two.
                            of
     Prior to implementation the IO6-Mile  Site monitoring plan,Walkeret
                    a
al. (1987)developed modelof the farfield   transport and fate of sewage
sludgedumpedat the lO6-Mile  Site. Theirtransport model was based upon (I)

                                   5-I
            of
observations mean southwestward         at
                               currents the site,and (2) estimates
sludgeloadingat the site,ratesof turbulent mixingwithinthe bargewake,
and sludgediffusionratesover time scalesof days to months.This model
provides         of                  of
         estimates the mean transport sludge-derived         dumped
                                                    pollutants
at the 106-MileSite.In addition,                 to        the two-
                                maps are provided illustrate
dimensional             of
            distribution sludgeconcentration   (dilution) alongthe U.S.
east coast.These steady-state model results, whichwere basedupon a
dumping rate of 20,000m3 of sludgeper day, indicate that minimumdilutions
(highest sludgeconcentrations) withinS0 km of the site wouldbe on the
order of 1,000,000:1.Clearly, thesedilutions  are 2 or 3 ordersof
magnitude                        that were observed
         greaterthan the dilutions                  duringthe nearfield
surveysof sludgeplumeswithinthe 106-Mile Site.Although  the Walkeret
al. modelmay representthe farfield,long-termfate of sludgedumpedat the
106-Mile                          actualnearfieid
         Site,it does not represent             dilutions.
                                  of
     As a firststep towardanalyses sludgeloadingwithinthe 106-Mile
                                              (hoursto days),Table
Site and on timesscalesof the dumpingoperations
5.1 presents                 of
            basiccalculations the site receiving  volumeand the amount
of sludgethat is now beingdumpedat the site. If the depthof the
        volumeduringsummeris takenas the depthof the seasonal
receiving
          (20                   of
pycnocline m), and the dimensions the site are 7.2 km by 37.0 km, then
the receivingvolumein summeris approximatelyI0.7 x 109 m3. Thus,one
NYCDEPbarge load of sludge(12,500m3) mixedevenlythroughout the dumpsite
                                                of
in summerwouldresultin an averagesludgedilution ~426,000:I.
         if
Likewise, 10 bargesdumpedsludgeat the site duringa week-longperiod
without          (zeronet current),
       circulation                the resultingsite-averageddilution
                in
wouldbe ~42,600:I summer.Thesedilution estimates will certainlyvary
                                       of
with the numberand size (sludgecapacity) the bargesthat would
dumping                                but                    leads
        duringa periodof no circulation, this simplecalculation
to the followingconclusion:

    ¯    If no circulation were to persistfor a week or so duringsummer
         months,and dumpingactivities             of
                                        consisted at leastI bargeper
         day, then site-averaged sludgedilutions  may be as low as
         50,000:1. This condition represents the worst-case  for sludge
         I~ because these site-averaged   dilutionsare less than the
         mlnlmumrequired  dilutlons for some of the sludgesbeingdumpedat
         the 106-Mile Site(see Tables4.1 and 4.2).

                                  5-2
     The nearfieldresultsfrom the winter1988 surveyat the 106-Mile  Site
( EPA    1988a) indicatedthat, on time scales of less than one day, sludge
may not settlein significantquantitiesbeyonda depthof roughly30 m.
Althoughsludgemay penetratedeeperduringperiodsof activemixing(e.g.,
stormevents),                                              pycnocline
             the data suggestthat the depth of the permanent
                         of
(~I00m) is an overestimate the actualdepthof the mixing(receiving)
                                      dumping.
volumeduringthe firstfew days following                  on
                                               Therefore, time
scalesof a few days,the receiving volumein wintermay not be significantly
greater                                 to
        than duringsummer(thuscontrary earliertheories     basedsimply
upon pycnocline depth).
    We suspectthat,due to significant  currents that flushthe site on
timesscalesof 2 to 20 hours,site-averaged  sludgeloadingat the 106-Mile
Site is not a problemfor most days of the year. Additionalsite-speciflc
fielddata are neededfor meaningful            on              of
                                   statistics the frequency week-long
stagnant flow periods,but we estimatethat such eventswouldnot occurmore
than one or two timesduringthe S-month"summer"season.


                            AT            RATE OF 151500 qpm
        5.2 DUMPINGSTRATEGIES COURT-ORDERED

                                                sludgeat the 106-Mile
     The presentcourtorderfor dumpingof municipal
Site contains            specifications:
             the following

    ¯    Dumpingratesmust not exceed15,500gpm.
    ¯    Bargesmust maintainspeedsof at least3 kn.
    ¯    Sludgemust be dumpedwithinthe 106-MileSite boundaries.
    ¯    An individualplumemust not crossnor come withinI/2 mile of
         itselfat any point.

             to
Modifications the dumpingratesare beingconsidered   (e.g.,this report),
and the effectsof bargespeed on sludgedilutionmay also be the topicof
futurestudiesrelatedto oceandumping.  One of the most basic questions,
"Alongwhat trackshouldsludgebe dumpedwithinthe site?",has, however,
received littleattentioncomparedwith other issues.In this subsection we



                                  5-3
propose a few strategies that may help to ensure that sludge dumping at the
I06-Mile Site will meet EPA waterquality  criteria.
     In Section3, an empirical equation  (Eq. 8) was developed for prediction
of sludgedumpingrates that will ensurethat waterqualitycriteriaare met
4 h after dumping.If, however,sludgeplumescross the site boundariesin
                       will be less thanthosepredicted ( h and,
less than 4 h, dilutions                              at
therefore,                                             if
           the dumplngrateswill be too high. Therefore, the dumping
ratesderivedfrom £q. (8) are to be used,then (I) plumesmust not cross
site boundaries within4 h afterdumping,and (2) a plumemust not cross
another plumenor overlapitselfwithin4 h afterdumping.
    Ensuringthat sludgeplumesremainwithinthe site for at least4 h is a
        task,considering
difficult                                currents
                         that near-surface       oftenattainspeedsof
I kn or more duringperiodswhen eddiespass throughthe site.Present
dumping regulationspermitdumpinganywhere withinthe site or alongits
            and
boundaries, consequently,                           out
                            sludgemay be transported of the site
withinminutesor a few hoursafterdumping,  dependingupon the positionof
dumping                 and speedof the currents.
        and the direction
     Below,we presentcandidate           for sludgedumpingduringthree
                                strategies
hypothetical flow regimes:weak flow,havingcurrentspeeds<0.25kn;
moderate flow,with speedsbetween0.25and 1.5 kn; and strongflow,with
speeds>1.5 kn. In reality, this rangeof currentspeedscan be obtained
                            but
from all currentdirections, we have basedthe presentanalyses   upon the
worst-case flow condition:east-westflow,directedacrossthe narrow(4.5
nmi; 7.4 km) widthof the dumpsite.

WeakFlow (<0.25kn)
     ¯   Dumpingmust be prohibitedwithinI nmi of all site boundariesto
         ensurethat sludgedoes not crosssite boundaries before4 h after
         dumping.
     ¯   The trackof a bargemust not crossthe trackof a previousbarge
         withinthe site unlessat least4 h has elapsedbetweenthe two
                            If
         dumpingoperations. the startof dumpingfor individual   barges
                           by
         couldbe separated 4 h, then bargescouldfollowthe same track
         withinthe site.
     ¯    If simultaneous                   then dumpingshouldbe
                         dumpingis permitted,
          conductedalongparallel,           lanesto ensurethat plumes
                                  north-south
          do not cross within4 h afterdumping.Three lanescould be
                                    5-4
                     one
         established: alongthe centerof the site (along72°02.5’W);
                         I                                         of
         and two situated nmi from both the east and west boundaries
         the site (along72°01’Wand 72°04’W).


        Flow (0.25to 1.5 kn)
 Moderate
    ¯                        or
         If flow is easterly westerly,    then dumpingmust be directed
         alonga north-south  trackthat coincides with the site boundaryon
         the upstream s!de of the site (e.g.,east boundary for westward
         flow).Thls w11l ensurethat plumesdo not leave the site within
         h of dumping.
    ¯                        or
         If flow is northerly southerly,   then dumpingshouldbe confined
         to the upstreamha]f of the slte (e.g.,south of 38°50’Nfor
         northerly flow)to ensurethat plumesdo not leavethe site within
         4 h of dumping.
    ¯                                          for
         If a singledumpingtrackis established periodsof moderate
         flow,then dumpingoperations                by
                                    must be separated at least4 h.


StrongFlow(>1.5kn)
    ¯    Duringperiodsof strongeast-west  flow, dumpingshouldbe
         prohibited                                                 in
                    becausesludgeplumeswill cross the site boundaries
                                                  is
         less than 3 h no matterwherethe material originally  dumped.
    ¯    Duringperiodsof strongnorth-south  flow, dumpingis permissible
                                          to
         but all dumpingshouldbe confined the upstream   half of the site
         (e.g.,southof 38°50’Nfor northerly  flow)to ensurethat plumes
         do not leavethe site within4 h of dumping.

     The" dumpingstrategies presentedabovewouldensurepropermanagement of
                         at
sludgedumpingoperations the IO6-Mile    Site,but they will require(I)
near-reel-time          of                 at
               knowledge surfacecurrents the site, and (2) close
coordination betweenEPA and the transportcompaniesthat tow sludgebarges
to the 106-Mile Site. EPA currentlyplansto deploya surfacecurrent
                                               of
mooringat the site in January1989 for telemetry near-real-time  current
data to EPA RegionII. This mooringwill providecontinuous   informationon
                       of
the speedand direction the currents,   whichcan be used to determine the
optimum dumpingstrategy                     or
                        (see weak,moderate, strongflow strategies    given
above).EPA could then post a radio bulletin, via the U.S. Coast Guard,that
directs                 to               to
        the transporters dump according a precoded              or
                                                       strategy lane
designation.

                                   5-5
                    to                            a
     It is important note that failureto implement dumpingstrategy
                                      resultin sludgeplumescrossing
such as that givenabove will definitely                            the
           of
boundaries the site within4 h of a dumpingoperation.
    The abovestrategiesare well suitedfor dumpingoperations roughly
                                                          at
                                                   I.
15,500gal/minand for all bargesexceptthe Seatrader To dump its load
           g                                     [
of roughly milliongallonsof sludge,the Seatrader requires about12 h,
                        of
and an in-sitetrackline ~50 nmi at a towingspeedof 4 kn. A special
dumping                     for this exceptionally
        plan wouldbe required                    largebarge.


                                     AT
                 5.3 DUMPINGSTRATEGIES REDUCEDRATES


    The previoussubsectionpresentedcandidate dumpingstrategiesthat
                  for
wouldbe appropriate sludgedumpingratesof roughly15,500gpm (e.g.,
presentrates).At this dumpingrate, the New York bargestake roughly4 to
5 h to dump their entireload of 3.3 milliongallonsof sludge.At towing
speedsof 5 kn, sludgeplumesof New York bargesare roughlythe lengthof
the dumpsite (20 nmi from 38°40’Nto 3g°OO’N).Only the Seatrader
         a                                       lengthof the site.
generates plumethat is 2 to 3 timesthe north-south
                      standpoint,
    From an operational          majorproblems ariseif dumpingrates
                                                in
are reducedby factorsof 15 or more,as discussed Section4. For
         if                                             it
instance, a New Yorkbargewere to dump at 1,000gal/min, wouldrequire
                                                  I
about60 h to dump its entireload. If the Seatrader were to dump at
              it
1,0DOgal/min, wouldrequire6 days to dump its load of 9 million
gallons.These long dumpingtimes are a problemfor severalreasons:

    ¯    Transport                                        high due to
                  costsfor each bargeload wouldbe extremely
                     time awayfrom port.
         the extensive
    ¯    The contractedtugs may not have the fuel or watercapacityto
                                 of
         remainat sea for periods weeks.
    ¯    If the bargeshad to remainat the dumpsitefor long periods,then
         additional barges(maybe10 timesas many as currently used)would
                     by
         be required the New York and New Jerseysewerage authorities to
         dump the amountof sludgegenerated.
    ¯    Low dumpingrateswouldresultin vesseltrafficproblems  within
         the site because10 or morebargeswouldbe dumpingsimultaneously;
         this numberof vessels steamlng                   small
                                       insidethe relatively
         dumpsite                  a
                  wouldbe represent navigational safetyproblem.

                                  5-6
     The issues presented above illustrate   that sludge dumping at
significantly reduced rates (say, 1,go0 gal/min) may be environmentally
acceptable, but they could be operationally unfeasible for the 106-Mile Site.




                                       5-7
                              ANO
                     6. SUN4ARY RECOI4HENOM[ONS

     This reportbrieflyreviewsour knowledge the nearfield,
                                             of                short-term
         of
behavior plumesof sewagesludgedumpedat the 106-Mile      Site. Field
             of
observations plumebehavior   and dilution duringEPA surveysto the 106-
                     1987 and 1988 have been used to develop empirical
Mile Site in September                                      an
equation              the optimumratesof sludgedumpingthat satisfyEPA
         for predicting
water qualitycriteria.Althoughdata from a singleplume eventhave been
used to developthe dumpingrate formula, the observed conditionsand plume
behavior may represent          conditions
                       worst-case          for plumedilution (minimum
dilution due to weak mixingconditionsduringa summerperiodwith a shallow
seasonal              As
         pycnocline). data becomeavailable   from additional nearfield
monitoring surveys,                in
                   the coefficients the proposed   dumpingrate equation
can be modified.
     From the limitedamountof plumeobservations  acquiredduringthe recent
monitoring         we
           surveys, can predictthe following   nearfield         of
                                                        behavior sludge
dumpedat the 106-Mile  Site:

    ¯    Duringsummer,sludgeis primarily        to
                                        confined the surfacemixed
         layer(upper20 m) abovethe seasonal         duringthe first
                                           pycnocline
         h afterdumping.
    ¯    Parcelsof concentratedsludgewithinthe centerof a plumeare
         dilutedat much slowerratesthan the averagedilutionfor the
         entireplume.
    ¯    The rate of sludgedilutionduringthe first5 min afterdumping
         withinthe bargewake is much greaterthan the rate of dilution
         from oceanographicmixingprocessesafterwake mixinghas ceased.
    ¯                   4
         Sludgedilutions h afterdumpingmay be as low as 5000:1for
         individual             plume-averaged
                   sludgeparcels;                       at
                                              dilutions 4 h may be
                  or
         100,000=I greater.
    ¯    Plumebreak-up,whichinitiates              of
                                     rapiddilution parcels,can
         occurbeforeor after4 h dependingupon initialplume
                      and
         concentrations oceanographic mixingconditions.


                                 assessment sludgeplumebehavior
    The resultsof this preliminary         of
indicatethat sludgedumpingratesof 15,500gal/minare too high to achieve
                necessary meet water qualitycriteria.
the 4 h dilutions       to                          Dumpingrates

                                   6-I
should be less than 15,500 gal/min for all the permit applicants, based upon
(1) sludge characteristics data and (2) observed mixing conditions at
106-Mile Site. The results have also left a number of unanswered questions
that require further considerations before we fully understand the nearfield
fate of sludge dumpedat the 106-Mile Site:

    ¯    How does the rate of sludgedilution vary with oceanographic
         mixingconditions,  pycnoclinedepth,initialplumeconcentrations
         (dumping rate),and sludgecharacteristics?   Were the environmental
         conditions encountered duringthe September 1987 and 1988 surveys
                        for
         representative the site?

    ¯    Is wake-induced        a               of
                        dilution linearfunction the effective
         dumpingrate (the amountof sludgedumpedper unit tracklength)?
    ¯                                of
         Do the sludgeconcentrations parcelswithinplumes4 h after
         dumpinghave a Gaussian distributionsuch that statistical
         techniquescan be used to estimate               of
                                          the percentage a plume that
         may violatewaterqualitycriteria?
    ¯                      be
         Can plume break-up achieved earliersuch that the rate of sludge
                 is
         dilution increased?  If, after initialwake-induced mixing,a
         plumeis broaderand/ormore dilute,oceanicturbulent  mixingwill
         disperse              parcelsof sludgemore quickly.
                 the concentrate
    ¯                         and       methodshave a significant
         Do bargeconfigurations discharge
         effecton initialdilution?
    ¯    Are instantaneous                              to
                          dumpingratesroughlyequivalent average
         dumpingrates over the lengthof the plume?If not, water quality
         criteriamay be greatlyexceeded              of
                                       alongportions the plume.
    ¯    Does sludgesettling and/orflocculationwithinthe bargeduring
         transitcreatesignificant           in
                                  variations sludgecharacteristics
                                                            If
         betweenthe top and bottomof the sludgecompartments? so,
                         in
         largevariations sludgecharacteristics   alongthe plumewould
         result.

    These questions                       for
                    lead to recon~endations additionalanalyses of
existingdata and additional            duringfuturesurveysto the 106-
                            measurements
MileSite:

    ¯                  valid studyof toxicity
         A statistically                       testsand laboratory
                 of
         analyses chemical  constituent concentrationsshouldbe conducted
         on sludgesamplesfrom each of the sewagetreatment          to
                                                          facilities
         determinewhetherdata from the permitapplications and/orSantoro
                                             of
         and Fikslin(1987)are representative mean sludge
                       and
         characteristics rangesof variability.
                                    6-2
¯   Addi¢ional plume monitoring surveys should be conducted behind
    bargesdumping.at 151500 gal/mih to develop statistically
    defenstb|e estimates of the rates of sludge d]]utton during the
    first 4 h after dumping. The effects of barge configuration,
    dumping rate, sludge Gharacteristics,  wcnocline depth, and
    oceanographic mixing conditions have yet to he quantified.
¯   If EPAis considering reductions in sludge dumping.rates to ensure
    compliance with water quality criteria,  then nearfleld plume
    monitoring studies should be conducted behind barges dumping at
    reduced rated (e.g., 5,000 and 1,000 gal/min)o Analyses will
    indicate whether rates of plume dilution are highly dependent upon
    dumping rates, such that 4-h dilutions,  and hence permissible
    dumping rates, may be higher than those predicted from nearfield
    studies at dumping rates of 15,500 gal/min.
¯   Pretreatment of sludge and modifications to barge dumping
    procedures should he considered as alternatives to major reductions
    in dumping rates, especially as greatly reduced dumping rates
    would pose major operational problems to barge operators and permit
    applicants.




                               6-3
                                7. REFERENCES

Brandsma, M.G. and T.C. Sauer, Jr. 1983. Proceedings of Workshop on an
      Evaluation of Effluent Dispersion and Fate Models for OCS
      Platformm. Minerals ManagementService under Contract No. 14-12-
      0001-29122.

Brandsma, M.fi., and D.3. Divoky. 1976. Development of Models for
      Prediction of Short-Term Fate of Dredged flaterial Discharged in
      the Estuarine Environment. Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of
      Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station under Contract No. DACg39-
      74-0075.

Brandsma, N.G., T.C. SaueP, Jr., and R.C. Ayers. 1983. Mud Discharge
      Model. Report and User’s Guide Model Version 1.0. A Model for
      Predicting the Fate of Drilling Fluid Discharges in the Marine
      Environment. Exxon Product Research Company.

Christdoulou, S.C., W.F. Leimkihler, and A.T. Ippen. 1974.
       Mathematical Models of the Massachusetts Bay, Part III; A
       Mathematical Model for Dispersion of SuspendedSediment in Coastal
       Waters. PJ4P Lab Report No. 179. Massachusetts Institute  of
       Technology, Cambridge, MA.

Economic Analysis and ASA. 1986. Measuring Damagesto Coastal and
     Marine Natura] Resources: Concepts and Data Relevant for CERCLA
     Type A DamageAssessments.  Draft Report.

                                              Nearfield
EPA. 1986. Reviewof the PresentState-of-the-Art
     Mathematical                                    Wastes,
                 Modelsof InitialMixingof Ocean-dumped
     EnvironmentalProtectionAgencyOceansand CoastalProtection
     Division{formerlyOMEP),Washington,DC.

EPA. 19BOa.Nearfield               at
                     Pate Monitoring the 100-Milebeepwater
     Municipal                                   Survey.Draft
              SludgeSite: Winter1988 Oceanographic
     Final Report.Environmental         AgencyOceansand Coastal
                               Protection
     ProtectionDivision{formerly                DC.
                                OMEP),Washington,

EPA. 1988b.InitialSurveyReporton Summer1988 Oceanographic Survey
     to the 106-Mile             10
                    Site September to 20, 1988.Environmental
     ProtectionAgencyOceansand CoastalProtectionDivision(formerly
     OMEP),Washington,DC.
                                Plan for the 106-Nile
EPA. 1992a.Final Draft Monitoring                    Doepwater
             Sludge Site.Environmental
     Municipal                         ProtectionAgency.EPA 842-
     S-92-oog.

                                    Plan for the 106-Mile
EPA. 1992b.Final Draft Implementation                    Deepwater
     MunicipalSludgeSite MonitoringProgram.Environmental
     ProtectionAgency.EPA 842-S-92-010.

                                     7-I
EPA. lgg2c. Final Report for Nearfield Monitoring of Sludge Plumes at
      the 106-Rile Deepwater Municipal Sludge Site: Results of a Survey
      Conducted August 31 through September 5, 1987. Environmental
      Protection Agency. EPA842-S-92-004.

EPA. 1992d. Characteristics of SewageSludge from the Northern New
     Jersey-Hew York City Area, August 1988. Environmental Protection
     Agency. EPA 842-s-92-008.

Goldenblatt, M.K. and G.W. Bowers. 1978. Calibration of Predictive
      Model for Instantaneously Discharged Dredged Material. U.S.
      Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research
      Laboratory, Corvallis, OR.

Koh, R.C.Y., and Y.C. Chang. 1973. Mathematical Model for Barged Ocean
      Disposal of Wastes. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
      Washington, DC. EPA660-2-73-029.

Krishnappan, B.8. 1983. Dispersion of Dredged Spoil WhenDumpedas a
      Slug in Deep Water; The Krishnappan Model. In: An Evaluation of
      Effluenc Dispersion and Fate Models for OCSPlatforms Proceedings
      Workshop, Volume II: Papers presented. Minerals Management
                                                  pp.
      Services Report No. MMS-YN-TE-83-O05-29122, 127-155. (NTIS
      P884-156453.)
Lavelle, J.W., E. Ozturgut, S.A. Swift, and B.H. Erickson. 1981.
       Dispersal and Resedimentation of the Benthic Plume from Deep-Sea
       Mining Operation: A Model with Calibration.  Marine Mining 3(I-2):
       59-93.

O’Retlly. J.E., T.C. Sauer, Or., R.C. Ayers, R.P. Beck, and R.G.
       8randsma. 1988. OOCMud discharge Model - Field Verification
       Study. Proceedings of the 1988 International Conference on
       DrillingWastes,Calgary,   Alberta, Canada,April5-8, 1988.

Santoro,E.O. and J.J. Fikslin.1987. Chemicaland Toxicological
                    of
     Characteristics SewageSludgeOceanDumpedin New York Bight.
     MarinePollution Bulletin.18(7):354-395.

Walker,H.A., J.F.Pauland V.J. Bierman,Jr. 1987. Methodsfor Waste
                     of
     Load Allocation Municipal  SewageSludgeat the lOB-MileOcean
     Dispose]                   Toxicology
              Site. Environmental                      6:
                                          and Chemistry 475~485.

Wu, F. and T. Leung. 1983. ModifiedKoh-Chengmodel. In: An of
      EffluentDispersionand Fate Modelsfor OCS Platforms, 107-126.
                                                        pp
      MBC AppliedEnvironmentalReportNo. MMS-YN-TE-83~O05-29122.
      (NTISP584-156453).




                                       7-2

								
To top