ECONOMIC IMPACT OF EXISTING AMMONIA NITROGEN WATER QUALITY STANDARD, IPCB CHAPTER 3, RULE 203 (F) DOCUMENT NO. 81/23 DEPCSlTORiyi DEC :^'i9Si UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT urbana-cham?a;gn Printed by Authority of the State of Illinois ^Ponsibif. r" ^^arg-in fh; FEB 1 3 Ll6I_ 0-1096 DOC. NO. 81/23 July, 1981 ECONOMIC IMPACT OF EXISTING AMMONIA NITROGEN WATER QUALITY STANDARD, IPCB CHAPTER 3 RULE 203(f) Dr. Charles B. Muchmore, P.E. Department of Thermal and Environmental Engineering Drs. William M. Lewis and Roy C. Heidinger Principal Investigators Michael H. Paller and Lawrence J. Wawronowicz Researchers Fisheries Research Laboratory Southern Illinois University Carbondale, Illinois 62901 Project. Nos. 80.137, 80.138 and 80.153 Frank Real, Director State of Illinois Institute of Natural Resources 309 West Washington Street Chicago, IL 60606 NOTE This report has been reviewed by the Institute of Natural Resources and approved for publication. With the exception of the Opinion of the Institute's Economic Technical Advisory Committee, views expressed are those of the contractor and do not necessarily reflect the position of the IINR. Printed by Authority of the State of Illinois Date Printed: July, 1981 Quantity Printed: 500 Illinois Institute of Natural Resources 309 West Washington Street Chicago, IL 60606 (312) 793-3870 11 Q2d.l- a/ Yy, ...^ I ^ (PiAckneyvt^l/j o.oe^ Ou Quoin (J ,^f7"^; "(*K.... V v;? 30 5-5960 •J'JO , \ . x \ y " "n '9 c; ^^u^ ■'.<-„ R— Ji A^,- N (■>'.;■ Chr istopher ^^l^fX 5-5965 ^X-M2 1^H ■ ^ftO.26 '^ ( s^ D ~V^j^0.62 y I Johnston City '^■.., /^ \ ORCHARD. ^Rfe^K ^^ . iittiagt«^ 1 L l"m A M S 0/ Marion jj/*' Ucrainville /( 1 .cVV ■ I U O' /'^x _ Corham ^^ V«>r^. i ■' -^ I .>°/ ^ 7" / 5-5975 1.4 ,^^s^. 0.8( Figure 2. Reaches of Crab Orchard Creek (Carbondale SE Plant, site 1), Beaucoup Creek (Pinckneyville, site 2), and Casey Fork Creek (Mt. Vernon, site 3) evaluated. All are in the Big Muddy River Basin. C H A V " f G N f^^X \(jChai«piiifln-Urbana W, B. .^i /■ ( =: • ir- ^r^ / n.2 '>^-..^^ / y ^--fv>» ^^-' /J3-338S ^■'^Ow I / JT^ < J .-'1 /V eVr M I L I o n' • J ytj Sidney/' f f ■ '\ " I Phi lo ^' / I \ ' '•e°'^9^ /0.7O*' ' rr»' 3.06 / ' "-\.. y '•' ■;.■ / c .; ^ \ \ o.M "^a v V^;.: ^'■"'^" ,' s '■ Villa Grove i^... ^ \ / • lo \' u ; g\ L A S j /^ , _A X / \ i 1 Newman, V> .-^-"C — > I ) [ '\ ' George >J...I -^ — ^^-- A]Ridg. \, (- ..»/ Figure 3. Reach of Saline Branch (Urbana-Champaign NE Plant, site 4) evaluated. Site is in the Wabash River Basin. 13 PHINNEY BRANCH (Chanpaign-Urbana S.W. Plant) Tolono PUMPING WELL WATER INTO RIVER BY U S,Ls!c HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN .J Figure 4. Reach of Phinney Branch (Urbana-Chan^aign SW Plant, site 5) evaluated. Site is in the Kaskaskia River Basin. 14 I 0.03 ^V 1^ \ / 0.09 yl^ S \ ) ) l^Wi lliamsvi I Figure 5. Reaches of Sugar Creek (Springfield SE Plant, site 6) and Sangamon River (Decatur, site 8) evaluated. Both are in the Sangamon River Basin. 15 / / \palin ) /a Figure 6. Reach of Mauvaise Terre Creek (Jacksonville, site 7) evaluated. Site is in the Illinois River Basin. 16 Lock and Dam CREEK "V" ) ) \^, ^ ir I 0.54miAoingdon'-^_ Figure 7. Reaches of Cedar Creek (Galesburg, site 9, and Monmouth, site 10) and Markham Creek (Monmouth) evaluated, Both are in the Mississippi North Central River Basin. 17 nitrogen (62) . The review of the EPA Red Book by the Water Quality Section of the American Fisheries Society interprets the 0.02 mg/1 un-ionized annnonia criteria to mean 0.016 mg/1 NHo-N (57); Flemal's work is also based on this assumption (24) . Figure 1 presents the site locations chosen on a statewide map. Areas of the state were chosen where there were high un-ionized ammonia concentrations, based on lEPA Water Quality data for the 1976-78 period, provided by Dr. R. Flemal. Flemal's summary of those water quality monitoring stations at which mean un-ionized ammonia values exceed 0.02 mg/1 is given in Appendix B (24). Figures 2 through 7 indicate the reach of streams studied, on appropriate sections of the Illinois State Water Survey 10-yr, 7-day low flow maps (48) . Table 1 gives the ten treatment plants chose for this evaluation, and summarizes their major design and performance characteristics. The sites selected were chosen based on the following criteria: 1. Violation of the 1.5 mg/1 ammonia nitrogen water quality standard was known, or was reasonably expected to exist in the receiving stream. 2. A range of treatment plant capacities was desired. 3. Several drainage basins should be represented. 4. No known major toxic water quality parameters were known to be present, other than ammonia nitrogen and chloramines. 5. The locations chosen should be representative of conditions on a statewide basis, and yet permit reasonable effi- ciency of on-site data collection and delivery of water samples to lEPA laboratories for chemical analysis. C c o s (A o « V( xu S-i o c o •H « 3 1-1 > o c (V tf) j: o u) •P c B tf) 6 ^ (0 o w ** 0) c >^ Q) (ti +* J= O (A »^ a (0 f-i Xi m o ? tf) Q O^ e z I r-t O 0» Z 6 Z I r-( z e ^ O Ov oQ e U) O r-4 «§' cS Ct r-l •H fc tf) • Q 0) ? o Q < 2 ♦* B 0) 0) O. H H Q) 0) e V4 B tf) •»-> •H -H o< 00 I o o o I ^ o o >0 r-l i-l f-< IS. ^ O o eg 00 en o CM I o fO + in § I o B 0^ O to E r-* a v 0) c u c •H Ou CVJ 00 I CM • t^ m CM t~- o I CO en B § O (0 o •H u +J Hh TO 0) 0) m en r-l 0) Ok •o 3 r-l U) •O D> B -O B (0 Q) •H +J r-l M ji^ 0) O -H •H r-l 4J W -H O •M Vh TO cn c o c > £ 00 r-l vO • . . . o CM O 0» r-l I cn Tt . in 00 cn in r-( CO CM -^ r-l ".^ r-» + 00 CM m r r-l r-4 1^ N o m cn 1 cn CM r-l cn N 1 a> r-l n r-* ^^ o O 00 cn -^ r-1 1 CO o in "^ o in •0 0) ♦» TO 0) ?> D^ •rl -D +^ 3 CJ r-l TO tf) m B B o> Cft 1 'H 1 -H (0 (0 z e z z a w ^ O 0> CQ B (A O r^ a to 0> r-t •H (I. w • Q SIS O O r-i r^ cr» o 0\ • • • • r-l O C) I r-l o in i-i o o ♦* -o c Q» w +* e (C Q) ■4J ? o» A) 0) •H -O 2!g: ■P 3 O f-i H H (D cn V4 •D JdO

•H -H 0. 3 Q (A (/) U) 00 O O r-l • • in CO r^ O '^ r-l CM >-' + • I CO r-l ^ • • • (^ o o CO p-l I vO m ■<* ^ \r\ ^ + O CM 0) •p ■> U\ •P 3 O r-l AS 0) i-l N iH •H C o (A O (0 •1 MOO m «n ^ m r^ ^ + I c>i • o vO CM I CM cn CO in ^ + in Tt vo in I o» I \0 rji i-i Tf CM CM ^^ + r-l >-» CO U 9 ♦* O « Q ^-» o o» • • CM 1 in r-l o 1 N w • • CO * • . cn r^ • CO CM in w + o *-^ + o o o o '^ m CM • • • . 1* 5t o I 00 00 • • N m CM I m O r-l CM -^ CM cn o h- • • o o -^ en slucjge agoon r-l •D 0^*0 --I o> (V + >> w c ■P X +' "0 •H (6 (V O (0 Q) r-4 M > o> 5> P ;^ V ♦H •o C3> •H "D ■P 3 O r-l Itl (A p Q> (t a W o u c Ifl Ot w ;c 3 ♦* .o 9 U) Q u Q I-I Q CO Q o s (V u 20 CHAPTER III BIOLOGICAL SURVEY Introduction In the near future, Illinois sewage treatment plants will have to be modified to include expensive advanced treatment facilities to satisfy stringent stream ammonia standards. Recent laws specify that stream total ammonia concentrations must remain below 1.5 mg/1 to protect aquatic life. The validity of these regulations is questionable since much of the information concerning ammonia toxicity is contradictory. The bulk of this information, moreover, is based on laboratory bioassays which some feel do not represent field conditions. Con- sequentially, there is a need for field studies to evaluate the impact of present sewage treatment practices (secondary treatment) on stream environments. In lieu of a complete ecological survey, which is both expensive and time consuming, the present analysis is restricted to fish communities. Fishes occupy the top of the aquatic food chain and thus represent the integration of all biotic and abiotic factors within the environment. Moreover, fishes probably provide a more meaningful measure of pollution to the layman than other organisms, since the occurrence of certain species is a criterion by which many citizens evaluate the pollutional status of streams. Ammonia is a constitutent of sewage which can be toxic to fishes under certain conditions. Concentrations are usually expressed in terms of ammonia nitrogen. Ammonia exists as an equilibrium between two species: NHo and NH/ . The proportion of molecular ammonia, NH^, in- creases with pH and temperature. Bioassays indicate that molecular 21 ammonia nitrogen is acutely toxic to fishes at concentrations varying between 0.4 and 0.7 mg/1 (45), and exerts sublethal effects at levels as low as 0.12 mg/1 (43). The ammonium ion is relatively harmless even at high concentrations. Based on bioassay data, Roseboom and Richey (45) contend that molecular ammonia nitrogen levels in Illinois streams should not exceed 0.04 mg/1 if sensitive species are to be protected. There is a lack of agreement among researchers who have studied ammonia toxicity in the field. Several authors (52,19) indicate that ammonia is detrimental to fishes even at relatively low concentrations. Ellis (19) found that desirable fish populations were not conmionly found in association with total ammonia nitrogen levels exceeding 2 mg/1. In contrast, Tsai (59) found that fish communities are not appreciably affected by total ammonia nitrogen levels as high as 10 mg/1. Some variations in the impact of sewage ammonia could be related to differences in the capacity of various streams to eliminate ammonia from the water column. Ammonia is a product of organic decomposition and is produced by the action of ammonifying bacteria on proteinaceous matter. Ammonia is further oxidized by nitrifying bacteria to nitrite and subsequently nitrate, a non-toxic plant nutrient. This process, termed nitrification, is oxygen consuming and generates hydrogen ions i Bacteria within the stream play an indispensable part in this cycle, although algae may also be important since they represent a final step in the recycling of inorganic nitrogen and may utilize ammonia directly. Therefore, ammonia is an intermediate in the naturally occurring biological cycle and occurs at low ambient levels in most streams. The high levels bound below sewage outfalls indicate an overloading of the 22 streams 's natural biological purification capacity. It is evident that any factors affecting the ability of streams to assimilate and convert ammonia could also affect the impact of sewage effluents on aquatic life. It should also be recognized that nitrate may cause eutrophlcation with potentially deleterious or beneficial effects depending upon a number of factors. Chloramines are another constituent of secondary sewage which are potentially toxic to fishes. Unlike ammonia, chloramines occur in natural waters only as a consequence of human activities. Most municipalities chlorinate treated sewage to achieve disinfection. Chlorine reacts with the ammonia in sewage to form chloramines which are more stable than free chlorine and hence potentially more detri- mental to aquatic life. Free chlorine is usually absent from sewage ef f leunts (1) . Bioassays have shown that chloramine concentrations as low as 43 v^/1 can have chronic effects on warm water fishes (3) . This preliminary study was designed to assess the effects of ammonia and chloramines in municipal secondary sewage on fishes in 12 Illinois streams (Table 2). The following were the principal objectives: 1. To obtain data on ammonia and chloramine levels and fish populations below sewage outfalls as a basis for comments on decrease in water quality, with particular reference to the environmental require- ments of indigenous species of fishes. 2. To estimate the segment of a receiving stream in which fishes are significantly affected by the discharge. 3. To consider the significance of excluding small streams and ditches from general water quality standards. 23 CV4 H G O (U CO CO 04 •H O •H c i >^ U to C o o (U CO ^ -H H M-l CO CO c O •H CO (U iH to CO vO m fO CNl CO 0) 4J CO 00 CO B to u C/3 I I I I I I CO CXD LO O (N CM O CD o o o o CM Csl CD O CO ^ o o 00 C30 CTi r^ iH O I r-i cn I >H 00 4-1 60 a. < CO CU >-l CJ T3 Vj CO 43 O U O JO CO ^^ U I I I I o o vD vO I I I I I I o o o o o o en m I 00 I I I I CM CN 00 00 o o o o I I I I I I I I ON I • CTi 00 CN CSJ o o CD O CN CNI O CD r-i O 00 cr> CO CO 10 CTi CO CO CM CM LO 10 I I I I CM CN vD vj- 00 O O 00 CM 00 00 r>. r^ cy> <7N iH pH cm iH I I 10 O CM iH 4-1 00 O- 3 (U < CO 00 00 r^ r^ CJN 0\ rH r-l •• 00 <}• CM >H I I r-. CO CM rH •P 00 &. 3 0) a-H to >% c 4-1 •13 CO 43 & -H u c • OJ to •H 4-t CO Pu s 00 ON 00 iH r^ cy\ - rH 00 rH " I <1- r^ I iH CO 00 4-1 3 a < o to bO •H to to 00 a\ 00 CTi CM - I vO CJN I iH LO 00 4-t 3 O < o CO c to 43 »^ 00 •H to to 42 (U (U a a 3 o o 3 to CU pq (U (U u u o CU CO to o 4= o c to u PQ (1) c to CO 42 O c CO U pq >^ c •H 4: P-. 00 CJN 00 tH f^ CM •> I vD C7N I tH 10 00 4-t 3 O -i I c 00 •H to CO 42 u 43 O 4J •H Q CO to CO CO 00 00 C3N ON iH r^ CO r-i I I O vO CO rH 00 4J 3 O c o CO 4«5 O to Id 3 4-1 to O (U p ri«S CU to I I I I o o CO CO CM CM LO 10 1^ r^ CM CM O CD O O O CD O O CO CO CD d 00 r^ ON rH 00 O rH CM I - ON CM ■H I CU > 13 •H 4»S Pi CU CU a U s to U 00 CO a -o to % u CO t-i • rt o o O s (3 CJ 4-1 -H B w to •H CO )-l C X CO 01 5 CU (U (U (U -o 4J CO CO u o o O x: (U C TJ -i E CO o o o B o u CO CO rH x: CJ o rep trea down tH -h r-i M-i 4-1 <-{ CO CM • • • c 3 >^ ,-\ u o o o 00 1 o •H 4J CO i o u CO 4-1 3 utfa the rthe -* c o (U r^ ^^ CO 3 rH ^ O -H O 4J . «\ CT^ CT\ 0) 4J X) rH CO u d *J bO iH rH r-i >-l -H CO x; O QJ -H d (N 4J CI •u o o E •H X rH •H 1 •« •^ CO CO CO 4-1 4-» -H rH O sf >* CO CO 0) e x: CO O O- (N 1 1 g •H r-i x: CO ^ 4J 73 CO e e^J CM o ^ 4J > CO x: x: -u s 4-t 3 -U -i ^ 4-) 4-t CO CO 4J (3 CO !Z s o CO o >4-l H -H QJ CO CO XI (U o •H 4-1 B Ui 4-t x: >+-< CO 4-t CN c B +J X C CO OJ (U o 4J J c 4J CU M-l C o H W CO l+H O 4J iH e X O rH 4J iH o (U C CO CU . -H CO c u (U X 0) X c CO CJ c ^ 3 -O 4J o S o iH O o c T-i -u 4J 4J 4J 4J 4-1 •H 14-1 3 CO 4J -H Q) CO 3 3 CO 3 4J 0) CO 13 C TS ao o O 4-1 ^ CO CO 13 QJ CO -CJ CO o H CO •H 4-1 c (u CU rH rH CO S rH C G •■—^ V4 CO CO S +J 9- D. QJ O O +J CO B C cn S S B (U T3 CD O CO (3 CO CO CO iH 4) CO O CO 'H (U (X > _ f-i 3 S >-i CO CO •H B CO S o 4J •H e 0) ^ CO CO U CD CO o CO 15 X y-i •o O- JC CU O ^ 4J ^ O QJ E OJ •H MH •H U CO 0) rH •H M 13 3 ■M ,;«! m x: CU CU 4-1 O O rH d T) (U (U o W 4J CO S M-( ^ (U O >. CO CJ CO 4-) E «+-! u -i -H X X A )-4 4J fl CO X CD 4^ 4J QJ CM u E CO •H (U X) O •H ^ ^ -^ B CO •H x: X3 OJ V-i X CO E w q) CO M x; Q Pk H CJ D. H S O iH 0) CO ^ cx t-i o X) M -o M CO XI CJ T) CO (U 14-1 14-1 4-1 (4 U -i O O 4-1 T3 (1) c •H e CO !-i O (0 I G o •T3 ■u •H CO r-s e -^ CO 00 (U B i-> -^ ■u CO C CO 0) (1) 4-1 CO I c o o •H X) *J 00 CO W O M Cfi CO >-i 4J >-i +J 4.) C T-l o "H a) u-< w fr-t G O CO CO bC oor^^d-cMinvo.HC300o>cy\— ICX3 CN cj\ ro m HiHOOOrHCO hJ vO i^ vO 0^ 1^ 00 M M M bO OO. vj Vj JZ x: Xi ^ (U CU 3 d 4-1 4-1 J2 JC CJ a )H u 43 rCl d 3 o O c G >-l (-1 CO CO o O d c CO CO CU 0) (U -i i-l >H PQ m CO CO o o CO O o CQ pq OJ (U o o s S •H d [X, l^ >. >^ CO CO '•w' ^ o OJ Q) CU (U •H •H CO 1= >% >^ C G c c CO CO >-l !-i >-l (-1 CO S (U (U •H •H G d > > CO CO CO CO ^ 00 CO CO rH rH •H •H 3 3 13 -d TJ -d CO d CO CO CO CO ^ x: i3 CO CU CU CU 0) CO CO O O CO C/3 PLI p-i S S o o C^ CJ fc^ C/5 TJ -d M i-t ^ ^ CO CO (U CU x: 42 H h >H 3 3 CJ C_) o O O O o CJ (H »-l 43 43 3 3 CO CO CO CO CO CO 00 00 ^1 M CU CU 3 3 u C_) PQ PQ C/3 C/2 (U tH ex, e CO CO 4= CO •H l+H O z CU 4-1 •H CO 4-1 d 0) •H 43 e CO d CO 4-) CO d CU ^ CO 4-1 4-1 o d CO CO :5 (U rH a e CO • CO 44H S CO CO 42 (U 4<5 CO U 3 cO CO g O q; +J 43 CO •d U CU O TJ 3 ^— V rH M O N—' d •H U QJ +J > o •H d Pi CO d •H o / — s c3 M 00 ^ d CO 42 CO O +J 4-1 •H CO o d CO > ct) CO 0) 0) dJ ^ CD l-i j-i e CU CO 4J 3 4J CO C •H X) CD 0) M-( 4J •u o c E 3 CU § rH C -H CU tH O JD ^ O • •H S 4-1 O, CO 4-1 CO CO fi •H CJ a. 3 CO (U «4-l 3 0) CO o C J3 4-1 •H 4J CO (U CO C •H > (U CU x: -H CU -H h 4-1 +J rH &■ CT3 CO CX g CU M-l 4J ctf O C § CO c 0) CD •H j c •rj I— 1 QJ x: CO •H CO U CO o C •H O o )-l O S V4 4-1 CO •H +j a •H U-( 0) a 0) c •H ^ o T3 CU 33 Fish coiranunities were designated as high variety when samples from unpolluted areas yielded 10 or more species (Table 3) ; the average number was 12.2 (standard deviation = 2.8). On the average, the carp comprised only 38% (standard deviation = 29) of each sample by weight, game fishes 18% (standard deviation = 26). Many other species were present including various cyprinids, catostomids, percicthyids, and occasionally percids and esocids. High variety communities inhabited streams of moderate to low flow with turbid to very clear water, oxygen levels above 6.0 mg/1, and sand, gravel and mud bottoms. High variety fish communities were found in eight streams — Phinney Branch, Saline Branch, Kaskaskia Ditch, Sangamon River, Mauvaise Terre Creek, Cedar Creek (Monmouth), Cedar Creek (Galesburg) , and Casey Fork Creek. Most streams having high variety fish communities offered reduction in species number below the outfall (Table 3). This occurred in six of the eight streams sampled — Casey Fork Creek, Mauvaise Terre Creek, Sangamon River, Cedar Creek (Galesburg), Phinney Branch, and Saline Branch. Reduced species number extended from 0.16 to 24.1 km downstream, the mean being 11.1 km (standard deviation = 9.5). (These distances are based only on those streams sampled downstream far enough to show a complete recovery of the fish population. Additionally, these distances should not be regarded as the greatest downstream distance at which reduced species number occurred, they only represent the point at which the last 34 sample showing reduced species number was taken. Actually, harmful effects extended somewhat further downstream. In total, 23 sample stations showed evidence of degradation based on a reduction in species number from upstream levels. Certain fish species were typically found in these degraded communities. The occurrence of these species was a result of both their widespread distribution in small Illinois streams and their pollution tolerance. The carp was found at 61% of the degraded sites and at 77% of the 22 upstream sites in the pollution damaged streams; the green sun- fish at 61% of the degraded sites and at 86% of the upstream sites; the white sucker ( Catostomus commersoni ) at 43% of the degraded sites and at 68% of the upstream sites; the bluegill ( Lepomis macrochirus ) at 39% of the degraded sites and at 59% of the upstream sites; the creekchub ( Semotllus atromaculatus ) at 22% of the degraded sites and at 41% of the upstream sites; and the gizzard shad at 22% of the degraded sites and at 50% of the upstream sites. Other species including the common shiner ( Notropis cornutus ) , golden shiner (Notemigonus crysoleucas ) , drum, buffaloes and carpsuckers ( Carpiodes spp.) were abundant at polluted sites in one or two streams, but lacked widespread distribution. Cedar Creek (Monmouth) and the Kaskaskia Ditch contained high variety fish communities, but species number was not reduced since the effluent was greatly diluted in both streams. 35 In the three streams containing low variety conmunities — Crab Orchard Creek, Sugar Creek and Beaucoup Creek — species number was not significantly decreased despite chloramine and molecular ammonia nitrogen levels which were damaging to high variety commu- nities in other streams. It is important to recognize that the low variety fish communities were quite similar, in terms of species composition, to the degraded fish communities present below the sewage outfall in streams which contained high variety communities above the outfall. Chloramine Toxicity A comparison between the two samples from each stream (Table 4) indicates that fewer species were consistently found at the first downstream site on the sampling date when the chloramine concen- trations were higher (Dependent t = 2.95, 1 tailed, significant at P = 0.05). In contrast, total ammonia concentration, if evaluated similarly, did not affect species number (Dependent t = 0.61); neither did the molecular ammonia concentration (Dependent t = 0.42). Additionally, the mean number of species found at first sites below the outfall with detectable chloramine concentrations was 5 (standard deviation = 4.1) (Table 5). On the average, this represented a 53% reduction from upstream species number. In contrast, species number averaged 11 (standard deviation = 7.4) at first downstream sites without chloramines, representing a 9% increase over upstream species number. Similarly, numbers of individuals were also reduced -i CO >-l 0) 3 V-i 4-» -4 iw 42 CO C •H 0) M-< ^ CO 14-1 4-1 CO U cu >cO J-i u • CO CO iH a,x) ^ B C CO "4-1 -u QJ 3 <: CO (0 (U •rl a 01 bO ex t-i CO QJ CO a QJ U •H 0) Q) a a. 3 CO c o -^B CO QJ >-i 4-1 CD C QJ W) C O O 3 C O QJ CO ■H 4-1 CO )-i 4J C C30| QJ S CJ ^^ C O O c QJ O O >-i -H ■U 4-1 •H a CO . 4J ■ q; e a ^-^ c o o c 0) •1-1 c +J 'ri CO ^—>. U r-H CO +J ~^ >-i C! bO QJ e iH ^^ 4:2 c U B CO 36 II 4J U c rH 0) 4J 00 e «o QJ ;.< CO 01 43 OJ 0) c . CO u 4-1 /-N /—^ QJ •0 3 iH rH Ta 43 14-1 tH rH CN c II 01 CO ^_x v.^ . 0) rH QJ CO -i CJ U CO C 01 01 to 01 B CO CO OJ CX3 CO m rH .H -H rH rH rH rH vO «* rH d II cx 4-1 CO l-i <4-l 4-1 4-) c Q) 13 C 0) c •H CO 4J 43 4J d QJ CO 4.1 CO E CO QJ Wi 4-1 to 4J c QJ CO q; u Cu 01 CJ) 4-1 CO QJ 4-1 •H CO S e made in th stations. vd- rH rO ,H o- CN rH r-{ en rH cx >-■ CO X. B .H <-^ • • 4-1 0) QJ 3 13 CO QJ QJ U CO •0 01 d CD CD CD CO a •H <4-l •H C bO •H CO 4-1 c CO a •H CO CO T3 QJ C •H B CO >-i •H M-l QJ 43 4-1 •H QJ o> CO >^ c ast downst mber (11). rlson coul two upstr >.-H CO 4-1 t-t 3 CO QJ rH c >-i CO QJ c B"^ t-i 00 43 q; B ■w CO •H rH QJ 4-1 43 CO 4: r-i 4-1 CO 14-I •H a 43 CO 0) CN LO r-< fO rH <3- m CM vO CN +J 4-1 CO CO B -H 01 00 C3> 00 • • in • CN 0 m vO CNJ in r-i 0^ CN CN CN 4-1 CO 4-1 CO CN 3 CO QJ to CO QJ B a. CO u 0. 4-1 03 CO 4-1 CO 4-1 U CO QJ 43 > . X) 13 14-1 C 4-1 CO QJ 4-1 QJ U CO •H QJ QJ II •H C * C X CO 4= ^ CO CO QJ CO QJ B •H CO 4-1 C V4 •H <-i >-i rH 4J CO QJ J3 CO Q) Cu U U-l •H CO 43 c 3 B QJ 4-1 »4-l B CO CO CO CO 13 in • C3> iH VO 4-1 CO C CN iH rH •H b0 43 -H •H iH CO QJ •H QJ ex CO (3 u CO .H 3 a QJ rH 43 4-1 C •H 13 QJ CO •H 4-1 CO c QJ C C •H CJ 43 CO u ture of t presentat B B CO U QJ QJ M 4-1 4-) QJ CO 13 c 3 CO CO M H M M M l-l M M M (H M IH 3 4-1 CO QJ 13 3 M M M M M ^— \ 00 V4 M CO QJ C •H rH U 14-1 ■u 4-1 C QJ T3 4-1 t3 QJ Vj QJ 15 QJ C •H rH a 0) t-t QJ QJ 4-1 3 13 •H C V-i rH QJ CO U •H HH QJ •H 43 4J at second es number 43 0) 3 43 (3 > CO 43 B >-l ?^ ■H u ^ QJ ^"s a 1 CO CO C CJ fi u in CX 4J c3 in S QJ QJ (0 OJ ^ CO C_) 0) 4-1 . l+H CJ QJ QJ QJ •H 00 /'^\ •H V4 QJ 13 4-1 ,-t rH QJ >. C c CO >-l V^ CO QJ in c QJ 43 QJ CX QJ B D. H B ^ CO E CO < 01 •H c > CO CO M 14H {?> 00 43 CO CO tH •H b 'O bO QJ 14H •H 4-) >-i CO 3 CO CO CO 43 1 W CN CO « Q to W pm W < CO 43 a QJ 14h LOJ 37 at sites where chloramines were measurable. The average number of fish found at first downstream sites without chloramines was 85, at sites with chloramines, 32 (Table 5). In several cases there was a complete or nearly complete absence of fish close to the out- fall. Although there was a strong inverse correlation between species number and chloramine concentration within the stream, there was only weak correlation between species number and chloramine concentration among the streams (Table 5). For example, in Sugar Creek species number was greater below the outfall than above the outfall despite the presence of 0.4 mg/1 of chloramines. In contrast, 0.5 and 0.6 mg/1 of chloramines were associated with the elimination of most fishes at Phinney Branch and Saline Branch respectively. These creeks contained high variety communities. In several cases fishes in apparently good health were found in the presence of surprisingly high chloramine concentrations. Carp were found in the presence of 11.0 mg/1 of chloramines in Mauvaise Terre Creek. In Casey Fork Creek bluegill ( Lepomis macrochirus ) and green sunf ish were found in a pool immediately below the outfall containing 2.7 mg/1 of chloramines. There was no factor consistently associated with chloramines in areas where chloramines were associated with the greatest re- duction in species number. There is a slight possibility that copper toxicity could have been implicated at Saline Branch and 38 •T3 o C o ca 0) m n (U ■a •H o O u D nj a c u-> SO O c -H U > V 1-t J3 « o 3 0) C u tu 01 ^ E 4J « u c h u en 0) lU c c •H •li^ 1 r-t l-l 10 t^ -H u j: 3 u u-t fc4 Xi a; -»r-lO0000tn-'^«#' N_<- ^w' v.^ rg in l-t o m f~i -T r^ CM r^ vC PM 00 Ov OO o p^ oocNin<— taNrsiCf^<>'f^ OCNOOO Or-IO'HOOO £. x OJ -u u I- 3 3 M O O T) fl to ji: j^ ^ 3 > 3 TJ ■o tn tn to to < to 01 OJ V ^ j<: H ^ pH OS 01 01 to to 01 to to 00 to to > 3 -O t3 c eo 00< to OJ 0) to 3 3 s o o t/3 cn CO XT. a, (D 3 ,,*^ c. tt — O f-H ~ •o »— 1 £ c ij 3 4J o; K u jj n o C rn ,_^ ^ a; O E x •o OJ D JJ (U .>- C • TJ 4J U-l Oi -J m O OC dl E OJ 1-. — tc •fj D n >, 0) CJ 39 ^ o c X iJ -w 0) O cu ^ K c -H ^J •w J3 •^ E 3 ^ ra o O o 1— * sz 1' u. (U 4J m O .c 3 K OJ E •H > Jii: r-< j: *H 0, j-i i.) 00 J= to « iM JJ o E c j<: OJ •o 0) V. -H a. u •— I m E c tU o 0) u ^^ tc TO 4J C m O 0/ ■u m •^ 0) ■D x: T3 H to 40 Phinney Branch, since copper concentrations were relatively high at the first dovmstream site in some cases (Saline (I) 0.06 mg/1 Cu; Saline (II) 0.2 mg/1 Cu; Phinney (I) 0.2 mg/1 Cu; Phinney (II) 0.02 mg/1 Cu) . Concentrations of 0.2 mg/1 could be detrimental to sensitive cyprinids at the hardness levels observed in these creeks (163-233 mg/1) (62). However, changes in variety did not appear to be related to changes in copper concentration. The greatest re- duction in variety observed at Phinney Branch occurred at chloramine levels of 0.4 mg/1 and copper levels of 0.02 mg/1; 0.02 mg/1 repre- sents a theoretically safe concentration for all warm water fishes (62). Therefore, reduction in variety in this instance was not associated with the occurrence of copper. Molecular Ammonia Toxicity Eight of twelve samples showing a significant reduction in variety below the outfall exhibited a quick recovery of species number as chloramines were eliminated. Such was the case at the Sangamon River (II), Phinney Branch (I, II), Saline Branch (I, II), Sugar Creek (II), and Cedar Creek (Galesburg) (I, II). This trend was best observed at Sugar Creek (II) (Figure 8) and Phinney Branch (I, II) (Figures 9 and 10), where samples were closely spaced and thus clearly indicated a progressive recovery. However, in Mauvaise Terre Creek (Figures 11 and 12) and Casey Fork Creek (Figures 13 and 14) species number remained depressed for many kilometers past the point of chloramine disappearance, indicating 41 WEIGHT OF FISH SAMPLE (Kg) O O O O O o o m "^ CO CN ^ l-H — I— H — H-4 :^ UJ LU U < O to HH — I — I — I — \ CS O 00 vO Tt CN yaawnN s3D3ds F-+— I — l-H — hH »o m •^ CO CN ■— |/6ui J«5 0) 0) H r-l 3 C c •^ o c g u <-N OS o • w 0] v^ 0) C 0) O rH JS •H iH *J 4J (0 C 0) «M 0) V4 4J (J 3 « o ex 0) C 60 -H (0 > c (U 0) « to > 0) to M W iH C C 0) (U o ^ to •H O 4J /-s >-l (4 4J M A •H 4J • C C 0) v^ nj o -H C5 m rt o w o C o cd bOjO V4 o m ^ C 3 •H (0 O C 0) (0 CO rH « 4J (0 O -H 00 CO 0) •H O 0) 0) 3 0) bO •H (14 O • 0^ u o ^ CO 3 c c o •H <1> u CO Ui 4J c 0) o c o o t CO M C 42 WEIGHT OF FISH SAMPLE (Kg) lo o in »n CO CO CN CN ^ ^ I— I — I — I — I — \ in --co X u z < CO z X GL to o \—\ — \ — \—\ — h— t in o CO CO in o CN CN tn o in I— I — I — I— I — hH — I r^ >o m -^ CO CN »— |/6uj ^x 0) w< c cu • a B u O ^ >^ OJ c — ' c to CO O >-< -H •H •H .H ^ CO «-> fO CO 1^ CO tM CO (U »-i 4J ^ a 4J 3 CO 3 C O CO C 0) Ui V 0) C c to s: CO O CO 4J 5 O 3 -H o cu 3 ei •> CO ,^ ^ q; CJ *J 0) C to CO > O CO u •H "i:3 60 c o c 0) (U -H -H U oo ^ CO O 0) tt T) C c 4J C -H 0) •H CO r^ 60 c o - T3 l-l CO ^^ cu 4J •H 4J •H o ■ O c i "O CO CO ,H •a CO CO o iH cu CJ p CO jC -H g 4J CO U CO O "H >J H «4-l « u > CO U-l *-^ rH o 3 M U . CO (U O. (U J2 (H •H CJ o O C B 0) 0) CO V4 (X Vt U4 3 CO CQ 00 43 2.0- - 20 1.8- - 18 -- 1.6- _ 16 \ AND S (mg 1.4- 0^ lU 14 00 1.2- - 5 12 <^ 3 z| 1.0- - Z 10 oS CO s o 0.8- LU u LU 8 and species of fishes ( ■ ) below the sewage outfall (— — — ) in Phinney Branch II (concentrations of molecular ammonia nitrogen are given in parenthesis; Roman numerals indicate sample number) . 44 SPECIES NUMBER a: U4 in < > < (l/6uJ) SNOIiVdlN3DNOD 3NIWVd01HD QNV VINOWWV IViOi I d • « c ^ (J v^ at 09 « V4 C to O -H O 01 0) H U •-• c u (« o 0) »-< a (4-1 o CO C CO c o > g 4-1 P3 O CO s: k: c CJ ^-v 0} C I 9) o ^ u I u ' c «0 to c mac COO) o > 4J 00 00 CO CO u ^ -" C O u oo u c O X) l-i CO •H C C ig O CO B •H ^x* CO c o to >-• 6 0) CO E £ O B ^ < d3gwnN S3D3dS I ' I I I I I I I o »n o in o »o o ^ CO CO CN CN r- .— in (l/^iAj) SNOIiVdlN3DNOD 3NIWVy01HD QNV VINOWWV IVIOI 0) C to CO C (U (Q u B O 0) jr u H (U to c o o (0 (d CO > -H •H 3 CO u a c O y^ o ' u I ^ •-I > 3 M O CO •HOC U bO (U D CO 60 vi :s o U s B J= CO CO M-t •H O (0 o CO • •♦^ c ^-> O O M •H (U CO U ^ U (0 B •H Vj 3 O iJ c • w c CM o. «) LU CO < I I I I I I I •<* C^ O CO vO Tt CN d39WnN S3D3dS hH— I — I— I 1 1 1 rs^ ^ in Tt CO CN •— (l/6uj) SNOIlVdiN3DNOD 3NIWVd01HD QNV VINOWWV IVlOi CO c o •H 4J • CO ^^ ki u 01 a O 3 C C O O V (0 0) c ex B rJ (Q ^ to t-i OJ o a; 0) f-t U< 4J o o O O C CO C >N 0) O 0) r-( T^ CO (0 CO O 0^ *j c: 3 c -H c a; (J /-> c o 0) ItH CO r3 (U C c o o > C o (U bO 0) (0 O Ji 00 «0 c 0) 00 o u c c CO i 0) CO 1 X -H (0 CO c: •H O :H >4-i a (0 a 4J <4-l CO o o CO (0 0) iH •H 3 U U • 0) 0) fO 0.r-» iH CO O a Wi C *« 3 CO O 60 47 CASEY FORK CREEK H LU O) E O SO< ^i j rg i rvi '1 '1 d o o o o d o •-1 — < c C d d -H --I d d d d <-< — < d d V •s> fn 1 rvj in 1 -: oc o ON CTv -0- in tN o tn fN On fn in vr -T m oocoooooooooooooooooc xi-ocoooooooooooocooooooo I I v^ ^^ x_ ^^ _. ^- ._- -^ ^^ ^^ .^ ^^ ^ ^. ._^ ^. ^^ v^ ^^ ^- v^ I I r^r^vo-^m^HGOCNOO'-HOOm, ^ooin^H^o^Tin f-^OaoOoor^vOa^oC^^r^cCNDOCfNjmr^ooooOO^ o ,^^ ,^^ ^-^ y-^ /•^ ^-^ y-V y-S P-t -H in ,_i CI CM -^ in CNJ rsi 00 00 o c o rsi o o Ov o> o O o o o o o O r^ r-» vD ^o in -a- m ^H 00 r-- ir» CN •^oorsirsiinincMCNj OOOOi-'.-iOC I mo-^Of^inrnOf-! OOOCvDOOf^vCCOOCC /-s a, -J- ,^-v ,.-«v ,-v y-V y-x y-V ,.-s y-V >.-s /—S ^**v y-S, :^— V (NJ y-^ ,^-v >-^ ^■s y-S y«V y-s < • < > -* ON o> ^ c c . , . >s m m s.^ Sw* ^ .:<: O 1- >-< (U 01 (U CI *H •H 0) tn F E O c >■. >s c c c c ra 0! Vj 1h u >-l ro to to to 01 0) ■H tH c c > > !0 10 cr CO ^ j>£ oc oc X .o m w r— H *— t •H •H 3 3 -o TJ Tl T3 tn m c C to to rc to r ra ^ j: CO !TJ 01 HI n; 0) to (0 CO CO u »- t_) (J to to 0- Du s: u u u U ^<^ :^ to to U <_) a. a. b L' 3 3 o o E o o to u t-J ^ u X 3 3 CO n o^ CO CO (^ 00 i-i m c c r o • I) rH •-^ ^ 3 14-1 4J 3 —i Uj i-l (0 i^ K u (U OJ tu X o a 41 ■u O E ^ ■kJ 18 re m i^ K c U 01 OJ tn U-i 0) OJ u ^^ a 0( f-H a> j-i ^H o •H rH 05 X c C > 3 •o . 05 X to u 01 C XJ 0) J3 c e ■U 4H c 18 V. U^^ aj 05 •rH U5 i- c u o X tH 0) 3 iJ B~ U 14H 00 3 O a c x: E V > 05 -r« u^ O X •r4 ^ C E U-f o 0( 4J C£. H C CO 0; o k4 ■H 05 o i-l E c oc u c rH 0) o O < 05 .U <4H 18 O c r c V/ 00 B 05 3 tJ 10 18 T3 c O X o a> w OJ 18 j-1 XI 00 o 3 JH to •o ki o X u 0/ TJ t- QJ GO •H OJ i-i rH 01 01 E o li rH o. u X XI 4H •H (4H E 3 JJ 3 c o 18 u Vh 0] 0> Oi « U 01 rH V. —I 3 m 3 0! OJ D- 05 o; (8 4J iH ^ E 18 C T3 3 0) c 10 3 O 55 X X E U5 O iJ rH o 18 .:>: IS rH c c 05 E 05 X o « a; 18 18 05 o o U-« ^ >-> E 05 U •H rH 4J « CQ 18 U O X 3 ij 05 4H 3 Sn O >> i^ K E 4H Oi OJ iJ c 18 • •H 4) rH c 0) 3 X XJ rH U o. c c ji: C -rH c E •H 0> k< 18 O •r^ a X X 18 rH IB to 3 03 01 a. •o H 00 xF ai*H 52 concentrations below the outfall (2.8 mg/1) which could have been limiting (Table 6). Community Structure Below the Sewage Discharge Despite considerable fluctuations, fish biomass (i.e., catch per unit effort) showed a general tendency to Increase below the sewage outfall (Table 7, Figure 15). Additionally, when samples were taken well into the recovery zone catch per unit effort eventually returned to ambient levels. Several streams did not show this phenomenon, but they were atypical in several respects. Cedar Creek (Monmouth) received an effluent which was to some extent altered and purified after passing through Markham Creek which was 4.3 km long. Additionally, the effluent was diluted by a factor of approximately 4.5:1 when Markham Creek joined Cedar Creek. This degree of dilution was not observed in any of the other streams examined in this study. Cedar Creek (Galesburg) was suffering from problems other than sewage pollution which reduced its ability to support fish life above and below the sewage discharge. Mauvaise Terre Creek received an extremely strong effluent (Table 3) which may have suppressed the development of a biomass increase or altered its form. Phinney Branch may simply have been too short (1.9 km) to permit both the elimination of sewage toxicants and the development of a region of increased biomass. The average fish biomass at upstream stations for all streams was 7.4 kg (standard deviation = 7.1). The mean sample weight at 53 r ooiiooiiiiiii^iii I I I I I I „.^ tvj Ov ,-, O o • • O • • -a- ro • m 00 (M t^ tn ^ ^- £) 00 CM 00 CM ( 00 r^ On CM \C I •-? -^OOOf-^-^00 Oco I 1 o>t^^ainooincMQCcMcoCvDo^rHCT\ > o > > > N-^ o o ^-^ o o c o c o o o c; o -a c ~; CT^ "^ c 1 1 CM o o p^ CM 00 CM CM in. m CM CM o c o ^ T— 1 o o 1 1 «a 00 in O vC m c-J r~- O iH en 00 ,~. ,— V ^— . y— , — . CM sr,-vr^vo^^^^---^'--cnoc^ /~ -.-N/— >/-^/— .^^^-^ • -^00^^00■-^'HC^^OO C^OO-^t-HrslCsl .a^-^'in--^^^^-->^p^-_'^- ^^01 ^-^^'^^^-^---' inmo-^O'— to^ino^cmoo looinr^o^r^o^mr-i cnxccncMOr^cn— lOO-ao I msc ooovOcnin^H j<: j«: (0 CO £ 11 0) U ki )■< JD J2 C kJ v^ (n IT. CQ dJ QJ CU CJ U H H -H ^ CC CO CO en (0 ^-' ^ 00 OO^-N ^^ O ,>sCC CCrJco (U(1J-H-HCC>> 3 3 O O E E c c O O CO COT) S E -H -w w ^^ ^ jj W C :«; ic: c/: cj cj ec cj o p u _ .. CO CO 00 00 U 3 3 CO t/; c/3 CO 13 r. 4J 01 CO 3 ij X u If. •H (U k4 P ^b4 U o CL CO o F tr. 0) rH c/; 4J •>- CO J>; X E v< en O CO 0) c C CO > F •H CO •H CO t^ E Bc: (U Cfl ca CO p o; « c 4-1 o >< I- o cn c 0; 4J B o. CO c m CO 3 j-t c c 00 C/j ■H 3 c CD •»-l x: o CO x: a Cb t3 CD H o •o 4J ^ flu rH •^ a E oj CO ■H 4J « O ^ u CO S ij so V 3 m c ^^ 01 41 00 41 ,—4 .:>! s i" vn o d d -H o o d -I -H CO o o .H o o o o o o o .-I I o sj- O d d o o o o CT\ M o o o^ O -J m o a\ CM ^ fi « to j: •H c o J£ o b (0 s O (0 <0 .1^ 00 ^ » c n (S IS u »^ CO o a 3 O o 3 tfl 41 pa LH c 41 •H OO 41 c f-* 41 to to a O 41 x: c l-i 00 u to 3 c (0 O to u to £ to E o 4J to 01 T-l 41 J= >> XI U u 1— ( to i^ c x to o a. iJ 41 3 U r-l 41 O to C to C tj to fH T) 41 o 41 (11 u iJ oc c >% a V4 •H u 41 CO to 41 r~i r-* > cw -o 41 to 41 to l-l to Tl to 3 3 r-l j: fH <-< a tl fH to 3 c ^ tu tn •H to XJ 04 3 cfl 4J J-) u o 3 c O 41 u X V CO 41 4.1 a to Oil M-« 3 CO :* 3 to J= eil ^H 3 o tn 41 u XI 41 •H 41 C Q s: u to u SI ^ to 00 u *H 41 •w X ^ to 41 41 in 3 3 to 10 ^ O 41 iJ CO 41 ^ to ^ 13. 41 1^ £ 3 T3 to ■n 41 41 tn ^ u 41 X U c 41 E 41 V4 ■H 00 CO CO j: 41 4) 3 ^ 3 00 41 V- u CO CO to to X 4^ rH ^ u 3 d 00 n 41 u M j^ 3 u >^ CO .a 1— ( U U en 3 •H 41 tn O " -H u to CO i-i Q. C u to CO tj tn CO Js rH 41 O M O. ^ fi V- a to l-i CO CO to 4J CO 41 u to TJ U 4J 41 4J E J= O to to to 41 -H C 41 41 ll tw CO J= x: u CO H i-i tn < 3 58 71% by weight of the average sample taken at polluted sites, but only 46% at unpolluted sites. Since carp were less abundant, mean size at unpolluted sites (0.28 kg, standard deviation = 0.21) was less than at polluted sites (0.44 kg, standard deviation = 0.25). Game fish were poorly represented at both polluted and unpolluted sites, comprising 2% and 2.2% of each community type, respectively. Species composition at unpolluted sites of peak biomass was fairly similar to that at upstream sites. Communities at both types of sites included pollution sensitive species which were eliminated at polluted sites. In fact, mean species number at unpolluted sites of peak biomass (11.1, standard deviation = 5.5) was higher than at upstream sites (9.8, standard deviation =4.3). In terms of species composition, the principal difference between upstream sites and polluted sites of peak fish biomass was that small minnow species and game fish were less abundant at unpolluted peak sites. Percentage wise, game fish were approximately 5 times more abundant at upstream sites; in terms of actual weight, about 2.5 times more abundant . The designation of sites of peak biomass as polluted or un- polluted based on chloramine and ammonia levels is artificial, but it helps explain the relationship between increased fish biomass and the presence of these substances. Below the outfall of most streams there was a zone of increased biomass which began close to the outfall when sewage toxicity was low and further from the 59 outfall when toxicity was high. This zone began in areas where chloramine and relatively high molecular ammonia levels were pre- sent, and extended into areas where these toxic materials were largely absent. Actually, the categories polluted sites of peak biomass and unpolluted sites of peak biomass represent extreme conditions in a continuous zone of increased biomass extending many kilometers in most streams. Although biomass remained high throughout this zone, species composition gradually changed from a few pollution tolerant species close to the outfall to a relatively diverse community containing sensitive species at greater distances. We saw direct evidence of this continuum at Sugar Creek (II) and Phinney Branch (I and II) where the sample sites were spaced rather closely. Further evidence was provided by comparing the two samples from the other streams. The phenomenon described above does not occur if the effluent is extremely toxic or if the stream is non- supportive of fish life for other reasons. In this case the biomass peak is comprised solely of carp or other rough fish (Mauvaise Terre I and II, Casey Fork I and II), thus resembling polluted sites of peak biomass, or if conditions are extreme, the increase in biomass may be completely suppressed (Galesburg I and II) . Stream Purification of Chloramines The chemical components of treated sewage were eliminated in the receiving streams at varying rates. The distance from the out- fall reached by sewage materials (Appendix C) appeared to depend on 60 the chemical and physical characteristics of both the sewage effluents and the streams. Chloramine concentrations in sewage plant effluents (Table 9) varied between 0.0 and 15.0 mg/1, averaging 1.8 mg/1 (standard deviation = 3.4). Concentrations as high as 11.0 mg/1 were measured at downstream stations. A comparison made between samples taken from the same stream indicated that chloramines persisted further downstream on days when initial chloramine concentrations were higher. This effect, however, was overshadowed by differences in the rate of chloramine elimination noted in different streams. There appeared to be two basic patterns of chloramine concentration re- duction with increasing distance from the outfall — curvilinear and linear. A curvilinear pattern was observed in the Sangamon River (I) and Cedar Creek (II) , where chloramines persisted much further downstream (20.5 km and 15.4 km, respectively) than in the other streams. Initial concentrations, which were not particularly high, dropped rapidly; but the rate of decline lessened as concentration became lower (Figure 16). Logarithmic regression (r = -0.99 and r = -0.99) defines this relationship better than linear regression (r = -0.90 and r = -0.87). In the remaining streams, chloramines were eliminated much closer to the outfall (maximum distance = 8.8 km). In three of these streams — Saline Branch, Phinney Branch, and Mauvaise Terre Creek — there were sufficient data (3 points) to regress chloramine 61 m o iH o >^ X B CO 0) rt X) w B 0) >-l 3 >-i }-i (U H 4-1 CO iH LTl o ■4-1 ^ ^-1 to X -l iH CO 0) (U O •H a w > 'O •H c» ^ CO vo C •H e CO o o c o •H 4-) CO i-> c CJ c o o to 4J o a E to en C o •H ■U to CJ o Pu to iJ C Ml a ^ c o o O CS cN in 00 CT> to c o c M >^ > CO CO • u o CO CJ to 0) cu H (U CO •H CO > CO (^ in CM 00 CM rH o in 1^ in CM 00 CM rH CO in o rH CN t^ CN CN O 00 u .^ 3 ^1 XI CO CO X) -< O »-i g to s to O ^— ' O ^-' o o o «* rH O CM r^ -sT O 00 3 00 •P c CO CO O CO Q CM ^d- m CM CN «d- in csi I in in -^ Csl vO r^ vo u to x; a u o X to u 00 CTi CN O -* 00 00 (Ti CM CM CN CM I in O T-i o in rH CM 00 m I rH M M M M o c •H a 3 O a 3 CO (U PQ rH QJ •H /-> IH >-l bO CO C 0C( •H 3 (-1 CO CO CO 0) X 4-1 G r>. CTi I CM cd cd cu (M c 4J g e lU X! {li 4J (U ^ (U cd o 4J c •H >> CO H d ^ 0) (U (1) h M CJ CU !5 ^ u CD o . *J fe 13 fl 0) td >~. CO iH ^ C +J 4J •H 3 cd O ^ •u 4-) ^ Q) 3 o 4: •U g 0) 3 rQ /-S ^j s C rH :s • 4J T3 r-t V CU 3 •>!> j:: 4J 5 U 01 iH Cd rH w on Z o < LU LU OC u < < LU I I I I I I I I I I I q oi CN o c o •o "S ^ 0) • M c ^ (0 OJ S c e ^ n fH (U 0) tH > iH > U CU Use U 0) (0 . 0) > I (0 CO , T3 60 IJ .H CO 3 iH tH CO 0) r-« (0 (1) M U U 0) > (l/6ui) SNOIiVaiN3DNOD 3NIWVy01HD B O ^ O 01 o 60 -H c u u CQ V 03 W C *-> •H CO B d u w to • o u xO iH -rt fH J3 »»-l CJ PCX 00 •rl f*4 64 concentration against distance from the outfall. Chloramlne con- centration was related to the distance from the outfall linearly (r = -0.99, standard deviation = 0.00) rather than logarithmically (mean r = -0.89, standard deviation 0.12). Examples of this linear relationship are graphically Illustrated In Figures 11 and 17. Such a relationship suggests that chloramlne concentration declined at a constant rate In these three streams. This trend was assumed In the remaining 7 streams where chloramlnes were also eliminated close to the outfall, but where sufficient data were not available to calculate regressions. Assuming a linear relationship, chloramlne concentration can be regressed against distance from the outfall to give a line with a characteristic slope. This slope is an Index of the rate at which chloramlne concentrations decline with increasing distance from the discharge. Slopes from each of the stream samples showing linear chloramlne reduction were regressed against various stream parameters, including pH, temperature, and flow rate, to determine whether these factors affected chloramlne persistence. Flow rate was found to be negatively correlated (r = -0.73) with the rate at which chloramlne concentrations decline with distance from the outfall. (Flow rates were moderate in the Sangamon River and Cedar Creek.) Temperature and pH showed insignificant correlations. The linear equations used to index the rate of chloramlne decline can also be used to determine the distance from the outfall 65 c ^ w 1-1 X X u t: u z < < m Ql CD >- ILI LU z z z .J < I CO GL < • o CM -- in --0 to UU h- LU O -Ltf, J«i I— HH — hH— I — HH — h 00 O CN • • • .- — o (|/6uj) SNOIiVMiN3DNOD 3NIWVy01HD 66 at which chloramine concentrations reach zero. Chloramlnes were completely eliminated 3.7 km (standard deviation = 2. A) downstream from the outfall, as indicated by the average stream sample showing a linear rate of chloramine concentration decrease. These calcula- tions could only be made in the 7 stream samples which contained 2 or more nonzero data points below the mixing zone. Additionally, in two very low gradient streams — Crab Orchard Creek and Beaucoup Creek — chloramines disappeared before reaching the first down- stream stations (0.15 and 1.2 km from the outfall respectively). These values can be contrasted with the distance reached by chlora- mines in the Sangamon River and Cedar Creek (Galesburg) (20.5 km and 15.4 km, respectively). Stream Purification of Ammonia Total ammonia nitrogen levels at upstream stations averaged 0.46 mg/1 (standard deviation = 0.96) and ranged from 0.0 to 3.40 mg/1 (Appendix C) . Total ammonia in secondary sewage plant effluents ranged from 0.62 to 31.0 mg/1, averaging 7.43 mg/1 (standard devia- tion = 7.09) (Table 9). In several cases ammonia concentrations increased downstream from the outfall. The highest total ammonia concentration measured at a downstream station was 36.2 mg/1, the highest molecular ammonia, 0.19 mg/1. Sewage ammonia persisted further downstream than chloramines, reaching a maximum distance of 33.9 km in Mauvaise Terre Creek. 67 Certain patterns of anunonia elimination were apparent in the thirteen cases where streams were sampled extensively enough to trace the return of ammonia concentration to normal or near normal levels. Nine of these samples indicated a longitudinal zone where ammonia concentrations declined curvilinearly with distance (Figures 18, 19, and 20). Regression analysis calculated with the data from this zone in each stream indicated that concentration decline with distance was logarithmic (mean r = -0.91, standard deviation = 0.13) rather than linear (mean r = -0.83, standard deviation = 0.12), although this relationship was partially obscured by a lack of data points. Only the Sangamon River lacked a zone of logarithmic decrease; however, the Sangamon River was atypical in respect to ammonia, as indicated by ambient levels which were 16 times higher than the average for the other streams. Additionally, the curvilinear phase of ammonia decline was not observed when effluent ammonia concentrations were low and approached normal levels after mixing in the stream (Cedar Creek (Monmouth) I, Cedar Creek (Galesburg) II) . Five samples showed that the logarithmic phase of ammonia decline began as soon as the effluent entered the stream (Figure 18) . In two others ammonia concentrations appeared to plateau first and then decline rapidly (Figure 19); in the two remaining samples ammonia concentrations increased within the receiving stream before the logarithmic phase of decrease began (Figure 20) . 8 - ^1 a E E CRAB ORCHARD s CREEK n o) 44.\^ \ \ \ I >- 2-- e 68 15-T BEAUCOUP CREEK I 10 5 10 20 30 40 KILOMETERS 4 3 2 + I BEAUCOUP ] CREEK H O) E 5 10 15 20 KILOMETERS 4-4 SALINE I BRANCH I 2-1 T r*i- 5 10 15 20 KILOMETERS 4-r 5 10 15 20 KILOMETERS E 3-. CEDAR CREEK D (MONMOUTH) 2-- 1-^ ^+^ +— I 5 10 15 20 KILOMETERS Figure 18. Streams showing a rapid curvilinear reduction of total ammonia nitrogen ( A ) immediately below the sewage outfall ( — ) Chloramines ( # ) were eliminated before the first downstream station except for Saline Branch I. In the case of Saline Branch and Cedar Creek the curves begin with the first station below the mixing zone. The curves begin with the effluent concentrations in the other streams where dilution was negligible. (Roman numerals indicate sample number.) 69 The plateau zone ended at roughly the same point at which chloramines disappeared in the two samples in which ammonia concen- trations plateaued before entering the curvilinear decrease phase (Figure 19) . This suggests that the presence of chloramines may retard the elimination of ammonia. Since the chloramine concen- tration discharged by each plant varied between sample dates, effluent chloramine samples taken on different dates from the same plant can be compared to the corresponding rate of ammonia decline on each date to determine the effect of chloramines on ammonia oxidation rate. The rate of ammonia decline was determined by expressing the ammonia concentration at a particular downstream station as a percentage of the initial ammonia concentration below the sewage outfall. In most cases the last downstream station was chosen for this comparison where the effects of differences in the rate of ammonia oxidation were most pronounced. However, the last downstream station was not used in streams where this station was well into the zone of complete stream recovery on both sample dates. Instead, the station which showed the greatest difference in rate of ammonia reduction between the two sample dates was chosen. There were eight streams with sufficient data to permit this type of analysis. However, Mauvaise Terre Creek was not used in this comparison due to the aberrant nature of the ammonia curve (Figure 20). In six of the seven remaining streams, ammonia 70 SALINE 5 15 25 KILOMETERS f— +— DlatLnL ?f i? I\"^ '""™'"*^ nitrogen concentrations ( A ) plateaued (Indicated by solid Una) before curvilinear redu«lo„ (indicated by broken line). The plateau zone roughly ends wh Lst ^'^''^"^v"=? °^ '^flora^lnes ( . ). Curves begin "ith the sample"!':" ^'°" '"^ "'''"" ''"''■ ^^™- --"^^ ^""^ « 71 Cf) Z O < 2 LU U Z o u MX < O u < < z o < .J < I— o MAUVAISE TERRE CREEK H 35 \ 25--" _- \ 15-- 5-- \ f 15 25 35 MAUVAISE TERRE CREEK I 15-- 15 KILOMETERS Figure 20. Streams showing an initial increase in total ammonia nitrogen ( A ) In the presence and absence of chloramines ( • ) Curves begin with the effluent concentrations since dilution was negligible. (Roman numerals indicate sample number.) 72 concentrations decreased at a lesser rate on the day when the effluent chloramine concentration was higher (Dependent t = 2.49, 1 tailed, significant at P = 0.025) (Table 10). Conclusions from this comparison are somewhat weakened since temperature was not the same on each sampling date. There were two streams — Crab Orchard Creek and Beaucoup Creek — which lacked chloramine data from the first sample; how- ever, as observed from the second sample, both streams showed rapid chloramine elimination and correspondingly rapid reduction of ammonia concentrations close to the outfall (Figure 18) . Additionally, with the exception of the second sample at Saline Branch, all streams showing rapid reduction of ammonia immediately below the outfall (Figure 18) also showed rapid elimination of chloramines before the first downstream station. Mauvaise Terre Creek (Figure 20) showed an increase in ammonia concentration below the outfall before the zone of rapid ammonia oxidation began. On the first sample date, ammonia levels in- creased over 600% (2.4 to 16.0 mg/1) within the first 0.6 km. An 11% increase (32 to 36 mg/1) was noted in the second sample. A slight increase was also noted in Markhara Creek, which conveyed sewage from the Monmouth treatment plant to Cedar Creek. The effluents entering Markham Creek and Mauvaise Terre Creek on the first sample date contained large amounts of suspended matter. Ammonia concentrations returned to ambient levels closer to >s X) T3 (U O U ^ CO 4J o •H C3 73 O C •H B CO CO (U « >-i u CO CO •H c (U o g 1 CO CO 4J U CO •H M c a c o o •H ■U CO O 4J 3 c -O 0) (U 3 M O .H rH IW CO 14-1 •H ^ )-l CO CO c X) o c •H o +J o CO (U »-i CO 4-1 c c di •H o c (U o c a •H )-i QJ o C iH •H x; B CJ CO )-4 iH O CO rH 3 J= XI o •H CO c (U cu }-l 0) . 3 CO M-l 4-1 (U O 0) 'U ^ CO CO 13 u c o o -u (1) CO C U-l •H OJ U-l >-• Vj (U CO 0) D.'+-i (U e <4-i x; O -H H a TD C CO ^^ o u-l C 2: •H 4-1 4-1 •H ^w-* 4J 3 c CO o -l O 00 •H 4-J (U U C c C x; 0) CO o CU 4-) &- x: o o ri c E CO o o o -( <4-l E W CO bO c e o C o o c >^ o c o o B CO G CO CU u 4-1 1/3 73 CM CN o in <7^ m in vO r^ 00 CN CN CN CO CM O CU o o 00 00 ^J V4 X x; 3 3 4-1 4J X X 3 3 CO CO o o 0) (U B B ^ ^ .H rH S c u u CO CO o o o o O CJ s s c fi Pm Pm cu (U CU cu V— ' v_^ N— ' Vw' o o >, >^ c c c c (-1 u M Vj c3 c3 >-i >-l cu cu •H •H c c CO CO CO CO 00 00 CO CO CO CO rH rH •H •H T3 XI X) X3 c c 00 00 CO to CO CO x: x: 01 0) dj 0) CO CO 3 3 u u en cn PM Ph O U O CJ CAl (/) CO w l4-( o iJ 0) CO 00 cu CO ■u 4-1 CO c cu cu M o 00 u 0) cu O-X! 4J CO X) CO -l CO 15 4J XI 4J c o cu CO CU o •H XI c X) 4J o o cu a 00 cu c CO QJ (U ^ 3 oo cu 4-1 o CO (U u X 4J cu •H XI c c 4-J o •H CO c 4J •H •H o c 3 o c 73 p o cu g •H U CO 4-1 CO CO CU U •H x: 4J a 4J c o cu 1 00 o c c CO •H o CO o <4-l CO o cu CO u •H cu cu c 4J >^ i fl X tH •H X3 CO (U cu •H a c 4J c •H •H cu E C ^ >-i •H cu cu M-l 4-) CU 14-1 CU XI •H Q ■u 73 CO 74 CO •u m •H M-l (U +J c o 0) c •H CO JJ O 6 CO CO C CO 0) O •H CO CU CO CO CO & C O •H 4J CO 4-1 CO J-l 4-1 CO C CO •H M-l H 75 the outfall in low flow rate streams. The correlation between flow rate and reduction in ammonia concentration (mg/1) per kilometer was -0.62. Additionally, the streams can be separated into two categories: low flow rate (less than 2.7 cm/sec, 3 streams) and high flow rate (mean flow rate = 32.8 cm/sec, standard deviation = 11.47 cm/sec, 8 streams). The mean reduction in ammonia concen- tration per kilometer in low flow rate streams was 2.09 mg/1 (standard deviation = 1.45) but only 0.17 mg/1 (standard deviation = 0.12 mg/1) in high flow rate streams. However, since the rate of ammonia concentration decrease is correlated with the initial ammonia concentration and is affected by the presence of chloramines, we conducted a second analysis after selecting data from chloramine free stream segments where initial ammonia concentrations were comparable. This analysis indicated that the average ammonia nitro- gen reduction per kilometer in low flow rate streams (n = 5) was 0.39 mg/1 (standard deviation = 0.18) but only 0.19 mg/1 (standard deviation = 0.11) in high flow rate streams (n = 4) (independent t = 1.94, 1 tailed, significant at P = 0.05). Factors Affecting Dissolved Oxygen Depletion There was typically a reduction in dissolved oxygen below the outfall and then a gradual return to upstream levels. On the average, oxygen levels below the outfall were 1.8 mg/1 (standard deviation = 1.9) lower than levels above the outfall. The range of change was 1.2 to -5.2 mg/1. The lowest dissolved oxygen levels 76 Table 11 A comparison between stream flow rate and reduction in ammonia nitrogen concentration per kilometer. Initial Initial Stream Sample Flow rate ammonia nitrogen chloramine Ammonia nitroj (cm/sec) concentration concentration reduction per (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) Slow flowii ig streams^ Mauvaise Terre I 2.74 3.26 0.0 0.41 Mauvaise Terre II 2.74 6.54 0.0 0.34 Crab Orchard II 2.74 6.64 0.5 0.28 Beaucoup I 2.74 3.36 0.0 0.22 Beaucoup II 2.74 5.25 0.5 0.68 Average 0.39 Rapidly flowing streams Saline I 51.82 4.79 0.3 0.34 Cedar (Galesburg) I 21.95 2.91 0.0 0.17 Cedar (Monmouth) II 21.03 1.18 0.0 0.09 Sangamon II 35.53 8.34 0.0 0.15 Average 0.19 Flow rate less than 2.7 cm/sec. Flow rate greater than 2 .7 cm/sec. 77 to a » c X "i IcN re (U o f— f •^ c c E o o i^ tn ^ 0! C U ce c •^ V c s —1 IM IM O >" 01 0) k- a> E IV 00 o ^ CO o E S u 3 0) ij Z 01 m I I I I I I I I -^ I I I I /-s 3- ro fo CO o o 1 00 1 1 CM r^ CM ts 1 1 1 1 (N (M 1 -^ 1 1 .-^ <^^^.^ 1 1 1 1 v^ <-' ^ vD in — \ y-s ^^ ..-^ ^-s ^-v /—^ /.*^ .^^ /^ rH c O -' -^ 00 vr vO vC rsl IN r^ m ro m !SI Csl J o o O o f— I iH CM CM eg ■a- in r^ rn 00 in vO CO 1 1 cr r^ m ~3- 00 o a^ Ln cc r^ -.1 ON m 00O^'^O'-^^^lI-HC^J .— i»- re re u u u eo CO re (0 o o tc re j: o a a 01 OJ C.5 !.5 ?; .w c c O o D. a. o u. >, >> 0) in — - ^ j<: o 1- u 3 ~ E (V Hi 4) ^ c c c c ra c u l-i u u ro re re re o u u P X O •«H t-4 c c > > n: « C3 13 J^ j^ 01, OC X x: ~ 3 re re j^ V> ^H ^^ •r^ 'H 3 3 •n -n T7 -O V. (/^ c c re re ro ro 30 oo u ro RJ ra .c X (« to a- 0) QJ 0) re ro re re i- lu 0/ 0) :; 3 ro u to c« Cj a. s T. o u U O :>i ^ Uj co o o 0= cc t/3 (/3 Z fl; re 1-1 E -< ;>^ X B u •" re 3 tH 4J O JJ 3 E -H J3 c -o •H O 73 b S re iJ 0' c 4» X ro j: • 4J iJ j: E o E CO j-i M ffl tJ k' 14-1 S D .^ ro ■u C 0) .H c 0) OJ JXi dj 3 1^ 0) 3 -H u re .H u- • .^ 14.J U-( F p m 14- 0) re re ro QJ o> j: i^ 0) tj .^ 01 X 4J Vj , c OJ li c u .H CO 4) -r^ re 41 u^ jj 00 ).4 OJ ■a — C 1- 01 j3 .H OJ 6C .H T) 1-1 fM >-l C U c re ro 3 OCX c u > ro .H u 01 CO a 41 >^ u 0> c CO c E -H re X 01 d. o c Oi E !-■ C O O O U 4! cj 0) ro >- -a ro 4) cj > X 3 00 c C T3 c o; • oo 13 41 41 lu O X 3 C 14^ 01 X -o -3 iJ 0) 01 U rH -a ro a 41 o E -1-1 o re 3 1-1 CO 4J CO 4-1 4J ro CO th 3 C -I O -H J<: o a 4) re 41 X I*- l4 o o -< iJ X c E 3 44 re E X 4J iJ j<: c re u re 41 re -H w T. a. u 78 were usually observed some distance downstream from the outfall as opposed to immediately below it. However, dissolved oxygen was lowest immediately below the outfall in streams receiving an effluent low in dissolved oxygen. Reduction in dissolved oxygen was not strongly correlated with any parameter measured in this study, but the best correlations were found with ammonia concen- tration below the mixing zone (r = 0.43) and dissolved oxygen concentration in the effluent expressed as a percentage of upstream dissolved oxygen levels (r = -0.41). Although reduction appeared to occur to the same extent in both quick and slow flowing streams, the lowest levels were found in slow flowing streams since normal oxygen concentrations were often low to begin with. Effects of the Sewage Discharge on Volume of Stream Flow Most of the late summer flow in the small streams examined in this study was due to the sewage discharge. The mean volume of flow upstream from the sewage outfall was 13,800,000 liters per day. Six streams had little or no flow upstream from the outfall. The mean volume of effluent discharged was 23,200,000 liters per day (Table 9). For the average stream, the addition of the sewage effluent represented a 170% increase in the downstream flow rate. Although not measured in all cases, flow rates above the outfall were usually negligible, while flow rates averaged 8.2 cm/sec downstream from the outfall. 79 Effects of the Sewage Discharge on Stream Phytoplankton Populations Analysis of water samples indicated that number of planktonic algae was not strongly correlated with any parameter measured in this study. There was only one consistent trend In algae number observed below sewage outfalls. Sewage plants employing lagoons as a final part of the treatment process discharged an effluent rich in algae; this phenomenon was observed at Casey Fork Creek (I and II), Cedar Creek (Monmouth) (I), Markham Creek (II), and Sugar Creek (I and II) (Table 12). As a result, algae number was very high below the outfall but gradually decreased further down- stream. (In these cases, when chloramine concentrations were low, large numbers of rough fish congregated immediately below the out- fall.) Number of algae did not appear to increase below the outfall in the majority of the remaining stream samples (11 of 16). A con- spicuous increase was observed in five stream samples — Mauvalse Terre (I and II) , Cedar Creek (Galesburg) (I) , Sangamon (I) , and Cedar Creek (Monmouth) (II). Discussion The occurrence of a particular fish species is a function of the suitability of the biotic and abiotic factors which comprise the environment in which it must survive. Tsal (59) stated: "In general, the absence of fish typical of the stream can be taken to indicate pollution." Moreover, since fishes are a valuable resource, providing food and recreation, it is reasonable, in some 80 cases, to define water pollution in terms of damage to fishes. In this sense fishes can be considered a measure of water pollution rather than simply an indicator, since damage to fish communities may constitute a principal effect of pollution. Chemical and invertebrate indicators, in contrast, are not so important in them- selves; rather, their importance lies in what they imply about the suitability of water for other uses. In this study, fish communities were used to evaluate the environmental effects caused by releasing secondary sewage effluents into 12 Illinois streams. Secondary sewage is a complex mixture of many components including ammonia, chlorides, phosphates, detergents, nitrates, sludge particles (sometimes), algae, bacteria, protozoans, and chloramines, to name a few. This study is concerned primarily with ammonia and chloramines. Total residual chlorine may be damaging to warm water fishes at concentrations as low as 0.002 mg/1 (8 ). Likewise, molecular ammonia is acutely toxic at concen- trations of 0.29 mg/1 (4, 26) and exerts chronic effects at con- centrations as low as 0.12 mg/1 (43). There are, however, important differences between these materials. Chloramines are a potent biocide and only occur in streams as a consequence of human activi- ties. Airanonia, in contrast, occurs naturally in streams and is biologically oxidized to nitrate, a plant nutrient. Thus, ammonia can act both as a toxic substance and as an agent of stream enrich- ment. Similarly, the other components of secondary sewage can be 81 categorized as either nutrients (nitrates, phosphates, algae) or toxic materials (phenols, heavy metals). Therefore, sewage can act as a toxicant, limiting the abundance of some species and precluding the appearance of others, and as a fertilizer, enhancing the production of fish food which may benefit some fishes. The predominant effect varies both longitudinally with a stream and between streams due to a complex of factors including: (1) the strength of the effluent; (2) interactions between effluent com- ponents; (3) the type of fish present in the stream (i.e., tolerant or not) ; and (4) physical and chemical factors within the stream which affect the rate of sewage purification. As a result, the effects of secondary sewage of a particular composition cannot be adequately predicted without some knowledge of the stream into which it will be released. The effluent from some treatment plants may contain high con- centrations of toxic materials even after dilution by the receiving stream. This can cause the virtual elimination of all fishes for miles below the outfall. This was observed in Mauvaise Terre Creek, where total ammonia levels as high as 36 mg/1 and chloramine levels as high as 11 mg/1 were detected downstream from the outfall. Dissolved oxygen levels were also low in some areas. In such cases the effluent acts primarily as a toxicant and enriching effects are comparatively unimportant. However, most streams in this study received an effluent of lesser strength and showed considerably 82 lower ammonia and chloramlne levels below the outfall. Excluding Mauvalse Terra Creek, ammonia levels at the first site below the outfall averaged 3.1 mg/1, chloramlne concentrations 0.5 mg/1. At such concentrations environmental factors within the receiving stream and the types of fishes present are just as important as effluent strength in determining the effects on pre-existing fish communities. Chloramlne Toxicity In most of the streams investigated in this study the damage to fish communities associated with secondary sewage is caused by chloramines. There is also considerable evidence in the literature that chloramines are highly toxic to fishes. After studying fish communities below the outfall of 149 secondary sewage treatment plants, Tsai (59) concluded that an inverse curvilinear relation- ship existed between chloramlne concentration and species diversity. At the chloramlne levels found in most streams in this study the expected damage to fish communities could not be adequately predicted from the chloramlne concentration alone. Environmental factors, including the composition of the fish community in the receiving stream, were as important as the chloramlne concentration in determining the reduction in species number. A fish community can be considered to have a certain community tolerance to chlora- mines derived from the individual tolerances of the species com- prising the community. Communities rich in species sensitive to 83 chloramine pollution are likely to suffer greater reduction in variety than connnunities composed of more tolerant fishes. More- over, communities with large numbers of species are more likely to include some species which are intolerant to chloramines. We found that chloramines (and molecular ammonia) had a greater impact on variety in streams containing high variety fish communities with many sensitive species. Sensitive species were lost. If habitat conditions within the stream were not suitable for pollution toler- ant varieties the end result was a virtual lack of fishes. However, the communities usually found below the outfall in high variety streams consisted of a relatively small number of tolerant species. These communities resembled the communities occurring naturally in low variety streams in areas upstream from the sewage outfall. Therefore, in low variety streams there was little difference in species composition between upstream areas and areas downstream from the outfall. It is likely that variations in the effect of chloramines on species variety were due to environmental factors influencing chloramine toxicity such as pH or temperature, although our data showed no clear evidence of this. However, when large amounts of chlorine are added to the effluent (as at Mauvaise Terre Creek, where the effluent chloramine concentration was 15 mg/1) stoichiometric ratios favor the formation of more highly substituted chlorine derivatives (67), rather than the monochloramines typically present 84 In sewage effluents (50, 67). Trlchloramines may differ in toxicity from monochloramines, although the literature is in dis- agreement on this question. A third explanation for seeming variations in chloramine toxicity pertains to the use of a small number of grab samples. Grab samples may not represent an equilibrium situation between varying chloramine concentrations and the presence or absence of fishes. This may explain some variance in the data, but higher chloramine concentrations were invariably associated with reduced variety within a stream. Inconsistencies were only found between streams due to the unique environmental characteristics of each stream. If grab samples were significantly inaccurate, one would expect to see inconsistencies between samples within a stream as well as between streams. Other factors within the stream environment affect the amount of damage caused by chloramines. Flow rate was positively correlated with the downstream persistence of chloramines. This results in a more extensive zone of reduced variety in high flow rate streams, especially if sensitive species are present. The relationship be- tween flow rate and chloramine persistence probably stems from the fact that chloramines are moved further downstream before being eliminated at higher flow rates. However, the fact that there were two basic patterns of chloramine reduction with distance — linear and curvilinear — suggests that other environmental factors 85 could be important in determining the rate of chloramine elimin- ation. It is also possible that chemical factors in the sewage effluent may affect chloramine elimination. Conversely, the curvilinear relationship noted above may have been an artifact caused by variations in the effluent chloramine concentration. In general, the data from this study indicate that fishes are considerably more resistant to chloramines than the literature suggests. Although there are many possible explanations, this discrepancy is probably related to the method chosen to measure chloramines. Snoeynik and Markus (50) used the DPD ferrous titri- metric technique to measure the chloramine concentration in the effluent of a number of Illinois treatment plants. Their figures were considerably higher than those of the plant operators, who employed the commonly used orthotoluidine technique. This was attributed to the inaccuracy of the orthotoluidine technique which consistently gave low results. We used an amperometric titration method (iodometric method II) ( 1), which also tended to generate higher values than those obtained by plant personnel, some of whom used the orthotoluidine technique . The method chosen to analyze chloramine concentrations in sewage effluents is of critical importance, due to the presence of numerous sources of potential interference. The American Public Health Association ( 1) reports that the iodometric method II is the best technique for evaluating chloramine concentrations in wastewater effluents con- taining abundant organic matter. 86 Aimnonla Toxicity Although chloramines are the principal toxicant in municipal secondary sewage, ammonia toxicity can be important under some circumstances. Several authors (l9, 52) have suggested that ammonia is one of the primary toxicants in sewage. In contrast, Tsai (59), who observed the effects of secondary sewage effluents without chloramines, concluded that diversity was not significantly reduced when chloramines were absent. Our study demonstrates that the impact of chloramines is predominant; however, it also suggests that molecular ammonia nitrogen levels above 0.03 to 0.05 mg/1 can preclude the appearance of certain species. Many fish — buffalo, carp, and some centrarchids — were found at comparable or higher levels, but other cyprinid species, good centrarchid populations, and percids were not. More importantly, fish communities containing a wide variety of species including pollution sensitive varieties were not found in association with molecular ammonia concentrations exceeding the aforementioned values. In contrast, total ammonia concentrations as high as 7 mg/1 were not limiting as long as molecular ammonia concentrations remained relatively low. The principal evidence of molecular ammonia toxicity comes from Mauvaise Terre Creek and Casey Fork Creek, in which variety continued to be depressed far past the point of complete chloramine elimination. Since variety quickly recovered as chloramines were eliminated in other streams, it was apparent that other factors 87 were reducing variety. Molecular ammonia appeared to be responsible, since concentrations were relatively high and since the elimination of sewage ammonia coincided with the recovery of species number in Mauvaise Terre Creek. However, Tsai (59, 60) states that turbidity caused by suspended sludge particles can reduce fish diversity in receiving streams. Turbidity was not measured in this study. Sludge deposits were found on the bottom immediately below the outfall in both streams in question. At least in Casey Fork Creek, which is relatively shallow, these deposits appeared to be restricted to an area close to the outfall. A similar determination could not be made in Mauvaise Terre Creek because of its depth. Since flow rate was too low to measure in Mauvaise Terre Creek (2.7 cm/sec), it is questionable if sludge could remain suspended 24 km downstream, as it would need to be to explain reduced diversity at downstream stations. Tsai's data appear to indicate that turbidity due to sludge peaks immediately below the outfall and is eliminated within 3 km. Reduced variety was observed at 10 km in Casey Fork Creek and 24 km in Mauvaise Terre Creek. However, the possible toxicity of suspended sludge should be investigated further. Molecular ammonia nitrogen concentrations above 0.03 to 0.05 mg/1, which we found associated with damage to high variety fish communities, appear to support the contention of Roseboom and Richey (45) that molecular airanonia nitrogen should not exceed 0.04 mg/1 in Illinois streams. However, we would qualify this by adding 88 that these standards need only apply to streams containing quality fish communities. Four-hundredths of a mg/1 is considerably lower than the 0.12 mg/1 at which Robinette (4 3) noted depressed growth and feeding in channel catfish. Channel catfish, however, are fairly hardy, as testified by their success as a cultured species. More importantly, it is possible that loss of sensitive species is not due to the direct toxic action of molecular ammonia but to an imperceptible shift in the ecological balance favoring fish tolerant of more polluted waters. Sensitive species may be capable of living and growing at the molecular ammonia concentrations in question, but cannot compete with more tolerant varieties under such conditions. This may be the most subtle type of sublethal effect caused primarily by ammonia toxicity but also involving the cumulative effects of dissolved oxygen reduction, ammonia toxicity to forage organisms, and general enrichment, to mention several factors. These ecological interactions may suggest an important synergism involving ammonia toxicity. Some stream environments may marginally support high quality fish communities. The discharge of sewage effluents containing relatively high molecular ammonia concentrations may represent an additional stress of sufficient magnitude to tip the balance in favor of undesirable species characteristic of poll- uted water. In contrast, environments highly supportive of high variety communities may be able to sustain the stress of a comparable 89 degree of ammonia toxicity without an appreciable species shift. Ellis (19) stated: "It must be noted that without exception those waters carrying 2 to 3 mg/1 ammonia and at the same time supporting the good fish fauna were high in dissolved oxygen; that is 5.5 to 7 mg/1; were of low turbidity, and were flowing over good bottoms. Toleration of dissolved ammonia above 2 mg/1 under field conditions was always associated with otherwise good to exceptionally favorable conditions." Mauvaise Terre Creek and Casey Fork Creek were quite turbid with mud bottoms and low flow in most areas. They bore the essential characteristics of streams containing low variety fish communities. It is possible that comparable levels of molecular ammonia would have less impact on high variety communities in streams with superior environmental characteristics. Ideally, molecular aimnonia rather than total ammonia should be emphasized in monitoring programs, since ionized ammonia is relatively harmless to fishes. One practical difficulty concerns the fact that molecular ammonia concentrations may change dramatic- ally with relatively slight pH changes, while total ammonia levels remain fairly constant. Twelve-hundredths of a mg/1 of molecular ammonia nitrogen was found in association with 3.77 mg/1 of total ammonia nitrogen in Mauvaise Terre Creek. The total ammonia nitro- gen concentration was 6.54 mg/1 on the second sample date, but the molecular ammonia nitrogen concentration was only 0.02 mg/1. This difference was due to a relatively slight change in pH (0.6). Short 90 term pH changes may necessitate more extensive monitoring to deter- mine the complete picture with respect to molecular ammonia, even though total ammonia levels remain within specified levels. Purification of Ammonia There is considerable evidence indicating that the nitrification of ammonia is retarded by the presence of chloramines. Thus, chloramines affect fish communities directly by their toxicity and indirectly by retarding the rate of elimination of ammonia. Chlora- mines, being bactericidal, probably retard ammonia oxidation by killing or inhibiting nitrifying bacteria. Chlorine added at the point of discharge may eliminate nitrifying bacteria already present in the sewage effluent. Within the receiving stream, chloramines may prevent the return of nitrifying bacteria to the water column, and, more importantly, inhibit the nitrifiers present on the bottom substrate. Attached nitrifying bacteria could be inhibited by chloramines without their destruction as a functional community since populations of substrate-attached nitrifiers in streams re- spond very rapidly to environmental changes (22) . This could partially account for relatively short-term changes in stream nitrification rates with changes in chloramine concentrations. Benthic nitrifiers may be very important in small, shallow streams since the ratio of bottom area to water volume is rela- tively large. The importance of attached nitrifiers in streams has been empirically shown by Finstein and Matuleivich (22). Streams 91 with a rock or gravel bottom offer a very extensive area for the attachment of nitrlfiers. Since there is often an extensive under- gravel flow, conditions may approximate those found in a trickling filter, especially in riffle streams where most of the flow is hyporheic and oxygen levels approach saturation. The abundant vegetable detritus (decomposing leaves, twigs, branches, etc.) found in some slow flowing, soft bottomed streams also provides attachment sites for nitrifiers. The importance of attached nitrl- fiers is emphasized by researchers investigating ammonia oxidation in recirculated fish culture systems employing submerged gravel bed filters. Kawai et al. (34) have demonstrated that 99% of the nitrifiers in such streams are attached. Furthermore, approx- imately 25% of these are attached to detritus particles (46). The presence of a stable substrate of some sort may be essential. In the Sangamon River, nitrification rates were very low. The sub- strate, in most areas, was composed of fine sand with riffle marks caused by the current, indicating the unstable nature of the bottom. Since nitrification is an aerobic process occurring primarily on the bottom surface, constant shifting of the substrate may preclude the buildup of good nitrifier populations. The situation may be reversed in large rivers where the bottom surface area to water volume ratio is relatively low. In this case, the contribution of nitrifying bacteria in the water column may be more important than that of attached nitrifiers. Planktonic algae may also contribute 92 to stream purification by utilizing ammonia directly, but our data showed no evidence of this in small streams. Biofilter research also indicates that nitrification rates are concentration dependent; that is, nitrification takes place more rapidly at high ammonia concentrations (37). Likewise, when stream nitrification proceeds uninterrupted by chloramines, a curvilinear relationship exists between declining ammonia concentrations and distance from the outfall. This indicates that nitrification rates are positively correlated with ammonia concentrations. It also suggests that, within limits, a stream's nitrification capacity is more efficient at higher ammonia concentrations. Moreover, if chlorination were eliminated ammonia concentrations would be reduced to ambient levels at a rapid, logarithmic rate. In fact, this was observed in streams where chloramines disappeared very rapidly. Pursuing this reasoning, a possible benefit of chlorination is the "spreading out" of the oxygen demand associated with nitrification. Low flow rate streams showed greater ammonia reduction per kilometer than high flow rate streams. This was partially because chloramines were found further from the outfall in rapidly flowing streams, and, as previously noted, chloramines retard nitrification. However, slow flowing streams appear to approximate the function of sewage lagoons by compressing stream purification processes into a relatively short distance. Since time is a factor in sewage puri- fication, the longer residence time in slow flowing streams means 93 that the effects of ammonia and other sewage materials do not extend downstream as far as in rapidly flowing streams. However, there is also greater enrichment per kilometer of stream in slow flowing streams with greater attendant potential for oxygen depletion. Oxygen It did not appear that secondary sewage reduces stream oxygen levels enough to critically affect fish variety, although the grab samples employed in this study do not give a complete picture with respect to minimum oxygen concentrations. There was generally a sag in dissolved oxygen levels below the outfall, but species we considered pollution sensitive occurred in streams which were turbulent enough to maintain dissolved oxygen at acceptable levels (greater than 6 mg/1). In some cases, dilution of the effluent with upstream flow also helped to maintain oxygen levels. In con- trast, lower oxygen levels (below 3 mg/1 in some cases) were found in very slow flowing streams where reaeration was comparatively slight. However, the fish communities in these streams were com- posed of tolerant species which appeared quite healthy at the prevailing oxygen levels. Additionally, ambient dissolved oxygen levels were often low in these streams. It is possible that oxygen levels may occasionally become limiting in sections of these streams, Additionally, relatively low dissolved oxygen concentrations, while not being directly lethal, could act together with other factors to exclude highly sensitive species from some areas. 94 There was a moderate positive correlation (r = 0.43) between dissolved oxygen reduction within the receiving stream and ammonia concentration, indicating that the oxygen demand associated with nitrification may be a significant component of total sewage oxy- gen demand. Additionally, oxygen levels below the outfall were related to effluent dissolved oxygen levels (r = -O.Al), suggesting that the amount of aeration received by the final effluent before release has an impact on stream oxygen levels. Sewage plants also influence stream oxygen levels in another way. Most of the midsum- mer flow in the small streams we investigated was due to the sewage discharge. Flow rates, and therefore turbulence, were considerably higher below the outfall. The aerating effects of increased tur- bulence may serve to partially mitigate the effects of the sewage oxygen demand. The greatest reduction in dissolved oxygen was observed in Mauvalse Terre Creek, which was also characterized by very high ammonia levels below the outfall. More importantly, ammonia con- centrations Increased at downstream stations. A somewhat similar, though less severe, situation was observed at Markham Creek. The sewage plants discharging into both creeks appeared to be over- loaded. It is possible that overloaded plants do not complete the biological treatment of sewage, as indicated by the release of particulate matter. This matter is deposited on the stream bed; therefore, ammonif ication of proteinaceous materials, which usually 95 occurs in the trickling filter or activated sludge bed, instead occurs in the stream, causing increasing ammonia concentrations and low dissolved oxygen at downstream sites. Biological treatment appeared to be more complete in other plants and the effluent less detrimental. Conversely, it is possible that the ammonia curves observed in these two streams were an artifact caused by the initial discharge of high ammonia concentrations followed by the subsequent discharge of much lower ammonia levels. This explanation is lent credence by the presence of an industrial plant which periodically discharged high ammonia concentrations into the Jacksonville sewage system. Relative Fish Biomass Enrichment was expressed as an increase in the catch per unit effort at sample sites downstream from the outfall. This was one of the most commonly observed effects of secondary sewage. The increase was due to a roughly threefold increase in the average size of individual fish. It appeared that endemic species, in- cluding fairly sensitive varieties, could benefit from sewage enrich- ment. At many sites, where chloramines were absent and ammonia levels low, increased sample weight was associated with a greater number of species than found at upstream sites. This could be caused by the creation of new niches due to an Increase in the variety and abundance of invertebrate forage, or to the temporary migration of fishes into enriched areas for feeding purposes, or to other factors. 96 Fish biomass as indicated by increased sample weight re- mained elevated for many miles below the outfall. Sampling was not thorough enough to delineate the actual distances involved in all cases. Fish biomass began to increase immediately below the outfall when chloramine concentrations were low and decreased rapidly. When chloramine concentrations were high, biomass did not increase until further downstream. In either case, biomass initially increased in areas where toxic materials were present and climbed only slightly higher further downstream with the elimination of sewage toxicity. As a result, there was a long zone of elevated biomass. Due to the progressive reduction of sewage toxicity, species composition within this zone changed radically with increasing distance from the outfall. Only a few species, predominantly carp, were found immediately below the out- fall. As toxic materials were eliminated, carp became less dom- inant and native species increasingly benefitted from sewage nutrients. At enriched sites where toxic substances were largely eliminated, species number was often higher than at upstream sites. Additionally, total weight of endemic fishes at these sites was several times higher than at upstream sites. The effect of sewage on low variety communities inhabiting low gradient streams was primarily beneficial, presumably due to enrich- ment. Biomass rose rapidly very close to the outfall and was often accompanied by an increase in species number. Variety was not 97 depressed except for perhaps in a very localized area immediately below the outfall. Additionally, in the slow flowing streams (Crab Orchard and Beaucoup Creeks) biomass peaked at higher levels than in the more rapidly flowing streams, perhaps because sewage materials were retained closer to the outfall, resulting in greater enrichment per unit area. Conversely, in moderate gradient streams sewage nutrients were carried further downstream and thus spread more thinly. Centrarchids — green sunfish, longears, bluegill, and small largemouth bass — were the dominant or only game fish in most of the streams included in this study. Although green sunfish and bluegill were among the most chloramine tolerant species observed, the centrarchids were less abundant in areas with measurable chloramines or high molecular ammonia concentrations. Additionally, they failed to increase in numbers or weight at sites where sewage toxicity was insignificant and many other species were clearly benefitting from sewage enrichment. Effects of Sewage Effluents on Stream Flow The addition of sewage effluents to small streams in midsummer causes a large increase in volume of flow which may be partially responsible for some of the changes in community structure des- cribed above. We observed that sewage effluents increased volume of flow by 170% in the average stream. As a result, cross-sectional area was also increased by variable amounts, depending upon the 98 size and shape of the channel, effluent volume, and stream flow rate. When stream size increased, new potential habitat was created for aquatic organisms. Additionally, increased flow pro- duced riffle areas in streams otherwise comprised only of sluggish pools. Increased habitat variety may have been responsible for the increase in species number observed in some streams. Thompson and Hunt (56) have indicated that a natural increase in number of fish species and size of individual fish occurs as streams increase in size. Increased stream size and flow rate may have contributed to the consistent increase in size of individual fish and frequent increase in species number observed below sewage outfall. However, increase in stream size does not, of itself, account for an in- crease in fish biomass per unit area (56). Algae Secondary sewage contains large amounts of nitrogen, phos- phorus, and potassium which are essential nutrients capable of stimulating primary production. These nutrients could enter the aquatic food chain in several ways. We found that planktonic algae may not be important in this respect except possibly in some deeper, slow flowing, turbid streams. In more rapidly flowing streams of higher quality, it appeared that nearly all production was benthic, consisting of attached algae and possibly bacteria. A bacteria- protozoa-arthropod food chain may be the most important trophic relationship in streams receiving secondary sewage, since some 99 streams showed a large increase in fish biomass yet little in- crease in planktonic or benthic plant life. Algae were locally important below the outfall of sewage plants which retained treated sewage within a lagoon before release. The effluents from these plants were rich in planktonic algae; but since the effluent was chlorinated and the algae were not stream varieties, most were rapidly eliminated within the receiving stream. However, when chloramine levels were not high, large aggregations of fish were found in these areas of "green water" presumably feeding on the smaller organisms nurtured by the algae or on the algae itself. Ammonia can be used directly by bacteria and by some plants. The fact that areas of increased biomass were always associated with ammonia concentrations at least slightly higher than ambient suggests that ammonia may have been an important nutrient stimu- lating basic productivity. However, ammonia is converted to nitrate, an important plant nutrient which was not measured. Nor were phosphates or potassium levels measured; both are essential nutrients found in sewage effluents. According to the "law of the minimum" (40) , the nutrient most important in stimulating product- ivity is the one present in the smallest quantity relative to the amount required. Therefore, any nutrient could cause enrichment at any particular time although phosphates are frequently the limiting factor in freshwater ecosystems (66). 100 Biological Models After making allowances for the unique characteristics of each stream and effluent and for the natural variability associated with different stream segments, it appeared that enriching effects, toxic effects, and factors associated with stream purification interacted to affect fishes in a fairly characteristic manner. The following generalizations, derived from our data, describe the phenomena which underlie these interactions: 1. Chloramines are usually the over-riding toxicant in municipal secondary sewage. Bioassay studies (21,64) support this contention. Field studies by Tsai (59) also show that chloramines are a major toxicant in secondary sewage . 2. There is a positive correlation between stream flow rate and the downstream persistence of chloramines and ammonia. 3. The relationship between chloramine concentration and distance from the outfall is essentially linear. 4. Although not as toxic as chloramines, sewage ammonia can have a significant Impact if molecular ammonia levels are high. Our study suggests that high quality fish communi- ties containing pollution sensitive species may be eliminated by unionized ammonia nitrogen concentrations in excess of approximately 0.05 mg/1. Similarly, Roseboom and Richey (45) determined from bioassay data that unionized 101 ammonia nitrogen levels exceeding 0.04 mg/1 are potentially inimical to desirable Illinois fish communities. We feel that more field work is needed to fully elucidate the effects of sewage ammonia on fishes. Seasonal effects and the possible influence of other toxicants need to be investigated. Additionally, environmental factors in- cluding oxygen concentration, turbidity and bottom sub- strate type may significantly moderate ammonia toxicity (19). 5. The rate of nitrification is directly related to the ammonia concentration, i.e., the higher the ammonia concentration, the higher the nitrification rate. The relationship is logarithmic. Biofilter research also Indicates that nitrification rates are coneentration dependent (37). 6. Nitrification of ammonia is retarded by the TRC in disinfected sewage effluents. The finding has also been reported by Young and McCallion (68). Similarly, TRC reduces the uptake of ammonia and nitrate by phytoplankton (58). Chlorination can also result in the conversion of formerly biodegradable materials into less biodegradable and sometimes toxic chlorinated compounds (12,51,68). 102 7. Fish connnunities having a large number of species including pollution sensitive types suffer greater loss of species to sewage toxicity than low quality populations composed of seven or eight pollution tolerant species. The concept of a net community tolerance to sewage tox- icity is lent credence by the well known fact that different fish species vary greatly in their sensitivity to chloramines ( 8, 9 ) and molecular ammonia (60). 8. Fish biomass increases to a peak below the outfall, while still further downstream it returns to upstream levels. On the average, peak downstream biomass is approximately twice as high as mean upstream biomass. This phenomenon may be caused by the enriching effects of sewage nutrients. Similarly, Brinley (7) stated that, "The fish population is increased in regions where stream fertilization by sewage occurs." Brinley (6) described a "fertile zone" followed by a "biologically poor" zone where fishes were scarce. Increases in fish biomass due to sewage nutrients have also been reported by Hubbs (29), Swingle (54) and Tebo (55), among others. 9. There is a long zone of increased fish biomass below the sewage outfall. Species composition within this zone changes radically due to the progressive elimination of toxic sewage materials. Close to the outfall only a few pollution tolerant species are found; carp predominate. 103 Further downstream, more sensitive species appear until a point is reached where species number is the same or greater than at upstream sites. We believe that this phenomenon is caused by the interaction of the nutrients and toxicants in chlorinated secondary sewage. However, it is also possible that some changes in community structure results from the large increase in volume of flow caused by the addition of sewage effluents to small streams which have little natural midsummer flow. Thompson and Hunt (56) indicated that a natural increase in number of fish species and size of individual fishes occurs as streams increase in size. 10. Peak biomass levels in slow flowing (less than 2.7 cm/sec) streams are higher than in relatively fast flowing (greater than 2.7 cm/sec, mean = 32.8 cm/sec) streams. This may be due to the fact that sewage materials are retained closer to the outfall in slow flowing streams, thus re- sulting in greater enrichment per unit volume of water, or to the fact that the slow flowing streams we studied con- tained a preponderance of relatively pollution tolerant fishes (i.e., carp, buffalo, shad) which feed rather low on the food chain. 11. Centrarchids, the principal game fish in the streams we studied, do not appear to benefit from sewage enrichment. 104 In terms of both numbers and biomass, centrarchlds are less abundant in all areas where sewage materials are present despite the fact that green sunfish are among the first fish to appear below sewage outfalls. Four conceptual models were constructed to illustrate the interaction of these variables. Model 1 (Figure 21) depicts, in a general way, the effects of chlorinated secondary sewage on the fish community in a small Illinois stream in mid and late summer. This model, like the others, was constructed by synthesizing and abstracting our findings and does not de- pict any particular stream. Stream flow rate above the out- fall is low, approximately 9 cm/sec. A 15-minute electrof ishing sample yields about 13 species. Below the outfall the ammonia concentration Is 5 mg/1 and the TRC concentration 0.5 mg/1. Addition of the effluent increases flow rate to 20 cm/sec. As the model shows, there are no fish immediately below the outfall, mainly because of the presence of chloramines. The carp and the green sunfish are the first fish to appear as chloramine concentrations drop. Next, the white sucker appears along with other relatively tolerant endemic forms such as the creek chub, common shiner and bluegill. Biomass begins to increase rapidly with the carp comprising the majority of the community by weight. Water in this area is still polluted by TRC and ammonia (which has dropped little in concentration from initial levels) . It should be re-emphasized that ammonia 105 O) CO to < g 00 I I I I I A I I A. Sewage outfall B. Ambient fish biomass C. Total ammonia-nitrogen D. Total residual chlorine E. Centrarchids F. Other species G. Carp FLOW 2 3 4 5 STREAM KILOMETERS Figure 21: Model 1: A stream with a relatively low initial total residual chlorine concentration (0.5 mg/l). Fifteen-minute electro- fishing samples above the outfall yield an average of 13 species of fish; initial total ammonia nitrogen concentration after mixing 5.0 mg/1/flow 20 cm/sec below the outfall, 9 cm/sec above the out- fall. 106 toxicity is only important where pH and temperature lead to the formation of high molecular ammonia levels. As chloramlnes are eliminated the rapid nitrification of ammonia begins. Sewage toxicity is reduced. As a result, the proportion of endemic species increases while carp comprise proportionally less of the population. Large aggregations of more sensitive species including the stoneroller ( Campostoma anomalum) , shiners ( Notropls spp.), chub ( Hybopsis biguttata ) , and suckers ( Erimyzon oblongus and Moxostoma spp.) are found further downstream where ammonia toxicity is negligible. Often more species are found in this area than at upstream sites. In fact, it is possible that this increased standing crop of endemic fishes compensates, in terms of weight and numbers, for those lost below the out- fall. Additionally, these fish are considerably larger Individuals of the same species found at upstream sites. There is, however, a net loss of centrarchlds both in terms of biomass and numbers. Biomass declines to upstream levels at greater distances from the outfall, sometimes in roughly the same area in which the ammonia concentration returns to ambient levels. If the chloramlne concentration In the effluent is in- creased to 1.5 mg/1 (Model 2, Figure 22), there is greater damage to the stream. Since chloramlnes extend approximately twice as far downstream, there is a much longer flshless zone. Concomitantly, nitrification is also reduced, causing the effects of sewage pollution to persist further downstream. The 107 jC O) to CO < O CQ I I I I A I I A. Sewage outfall B. Ambient fish biomass C. Total ammonia-nitrogenn D. Total residual chlorine E. Centrarchids F. Other species G. Carp FLOW 2 3 4 5 STREAM KILOMETERS Figure 22: Model 2: A stream with a relatively high initial total residual chlorine concentration (1,5 mg/l). Fif teen^minute electro- fishing samples above the outfall yield an average of 13 species of fish; initial total ammonia-nitrogen concentration after mixing 5.0 mg/l; flow 20 cm/ sec below the outfall, 9 cm/sec above the out-«- fall. 108 Increased toxic zone causes the entire blomass curve to be pushed further downstream, although it maintains essentially the same characteristics. However, the curve is flattened somewhat due to increased loss of nutrients by sedimentation or other processes in the fishless zone. The effects of sewage enrichment are largely negated if the toxicity zone is extensive enough. Model 3 (Figure23) describes an increase in flow rate presupposing the other conditions previously described for the original hypothetical stream. Chloramines and ammonia are carried further downstream creating a larger fishless zone; likewise, nitrification is retarded for a greater distance. Further downstream where nitrification is not af- fected by chloramines there is still less decrease in ammonia concentration per kilometer than in slow flowing streams. Since sewage nutrients are distributed over a greater area, there is proportionally less enrichment per unit area causing biomass to peak at a lower level. Model 4 (Figure 24) illustrates the effects of the hypo- thetical effluent on the fish population in a typical low quality stream. Flow rate above and below the outfall is negligible. A 15-minute electrof ishing sample above the out- fall yields seven or eight species, mainly pollution tolerant fish such as green sunfish, gizzard shad, carp and buffalo. Carp comprise about 60% of the population by weight. Variety 109 to to < O CO I A I A. Sewage outfall B. Ambient fish biomass C. Total ammonia-nitrogen D. Total residual chlorine E. Centrarchids F. Other species G. Carp PLOW 2 3 4 5 6 STREAM KILOMETERS Figure 23: Model 3: A stream with relatively fast flow and relatively high species variety. Initial total residual chlorine concentration 0.5 mg/l. Fifteen-minute electrof ishing samples above the outfall yelld an average of 13 species of fish; initial total ammonia-nitrogen concentration after mixing 5.0 mg/1; flow 30 cm/sec below the outfall, 18 cm/sec above the outfall. 110 -C o> 'o to < O CD A. Sewage outfall B. Ambient fish biomass C. Total ammonia-nitrogen Total residual chlorine Centrorchids Other species STREAM KILOMETERS Figure 24: Model 4: A stream with negligible flow and relatively low species variety. Initial total residual chlorine concentration 0.5 mg/1. Fifteen-minute electrofishing samples above the outfall yelld an average of 8 species of fish; initial total ammonia -nitrogen concentration after mixing 5.0 mg/1. Ill reduction below the outfall is slight or nonexistent due to the high tolerance of the species present and the rapid elimin- ation of chloramine and anunonia. Biomass climbs rapidly and peaks at a high level due to the concentration of sewage nu- trients and possibly to the predominance of fishes which are pollution tolerant and likely to benefit from sewage fertili- zation. Carp predominate in enriched areas as they do through- out the stream. A fifth model could have been constructed to illustrate the effects of secondary sewage effluents containing very high ammonia and/or chloramine concentrations. Such a model would simply depict a long fishless zone below the outfall. Biomass peaks would either be completely suppressed or consist solely of carp or other very tolerant fishes. This might also be a suitable model of streams which receive an effluent containing highly toxic components derived from industrial sources. Additionally, it might aptly describe winter con- ditions in streams which receive an effluent of moderate strength, since low temperatures would tend to reduce the rate of sewage purification. General Considerations Prior studies have emphasized the division of streams into pollutional zones to describe the effects of sewage upon fishes. Streams receiving untreated or primary treated sewage were divided into five zones: recent pollution, degradation. 112 septic, recovery, and clean water, each zone characterized by, among other things, certain types of fishes. As other authors (5,7 ) have indicated, the recent pollution, degrada- tion and septic zones are integrated into the secondary sew- age treatment plant. In terms of fishes, this study suggests that the recovery zone can be further divided into a "toxic zone" and an "enriched zone." However, although zones are conceptually appealing, they actually have limited biological significance. Reality is better represented by a continuum. Ecological studies can determine the effects of secondary sewage upon fishes. Considering the cost of advanced treat- ment facilities, this information is essential if fish com- munities are to be protected at minimal cost to the public. When such knowledge is available, it is possible to design rational management plans based on biological realities and thus avoid unnecessary expense. The information generated by this study suggests several ways to mitigate the effects of secondary sewage upon fishes. The environmental characteristics of the receiving stream play a very important role in determining the impact of sew- age effluents. In fact, the stream environment is just as important as the effluent chloramine and ammonia concentrations at the levels typically observed in this study. The stream environment encompasses factors affecting toxicity such as pH and temperature, factors affecting stream purification such 113 as flow rate, and also the nature of the fish community — that is, pollution tolerant or pollution sensitive. These factors are combined in some streams to produce an environ- ment which is damaged but very little by secondary sewage. Such streams contain low variety, rough fish communities and are often characterized by high turbidity and little or no flow into late summer. These characteristics prevail upstream from the sewage outfall, below the outfall where sewage ma- terials are present, and downstream past the point of complete disappearance of these materials. Poor environmental conditions in such streams are probably due to large-scale disturbances of the aquatic environment caused by land use practices en- couraging erosion and siltation (49). These problems are not amenable to easy correction. The effects of secondary sew- age in such streams are mainly beneficial in the summer, as reflected by a large downstream increase in fish biomass. Species number is not reduced (except immediately below the outfall) and may increase slightly. Fishes are larger and more numerous in sewage enriched areas. Although many people consider species such as carp and buffalo undesirable, they are recognized as having an economic value by commercial fish- einnen. Additionally, there is a growing number of people who enjoy angling for these fish. Most importantly, environmental conditions in these streams probably preclude the establish- ment of any other type of fishery even if effluent quality 114 was improved. Based on the response of the fish during the summer and fall, there is no need to institute advanced treat- ment to remove ammonia in such cases. Furthermore, this study suggests that low variety fish communities frequently inhabit low gradient streams where sewage materials are eliminated comparatively close to the outfall. Thus, due to the fish communities they contain and to environmental conditions which compress sewage purification processes into a relatively short distance, these streams appear to be capable of absorbing secondary sewage materials with minimal environmental damage during the warmer months. Additional research is needed to determine if this is also true during the winter. Three of the nine streams sampled in this study (Crab Orchard Creek, Beaucoup Creek, and Sugar Creek) fit into the category described above. It may be profitable to identify such streams if one accepts the proposition that they do not require tertiary treatment. Assuming that damage to fish communities is the principal effect of secondary sewage, any stream classification should be based on the predicted impact of secondary sewage on fishes. Additionally, to be of practical use, any system for classifying streams must employ character- istics which are reliable and easily measured. Unfortunately, there are no simple chemical or physical parameters which correlate well with the occurrence of particular fish communities, Exceptions to the previously described association between 115 flow rate and fish variety were observed even within this study. Particular fish communities appear in response to the integration of a wide variety of biotic and abiotic fac- tors. Additionally, the chemical and physical characteristics of streams vary greatly with the season. Therefore, it is probably easier to directly survey the fish community than to develop a system of abiotic indicators. A survey could be done quickly and easily if guidelines were established. A practical operating system would involve species composi- tion as well as species number. Data gathered in the present study could be used to initiate such a classification scheme, but more field work would be required to establish its pre- dictive power and account for other types of fish communities not yet examined. Unlike the low variety fish coiranunities described above, the high variety communities found in many streams were damaged by secondary sewage. Sampling was not thorough enough to determine the complete extent of this damage. The relationships described in the previously presented models could be delineated with actual data points if sampling were more complete. This would permit calculation of the areas beneath the various curves and provide an actual measure of the loss of fish in some areas and gain in others. Additionally, such information could per- mit the assignment of more precise economic values to changes in fish populations caused by sewage effluents. 116 Improvements in effluent quality will undoubtedly be required to protect the high variety communities inhabiting some streams. Both this and other studies have established that chloramines are the over-riding toxicant in municipal secondary sewage. Additionally, this study indicates that chloramines reduce nitrification rates, thus prolonging any detrimental effects caused by ammonia. Damage to fish com- munities in most streams would be significantly reduced if chloramines were eliminated from the effluent. Conversely, in many cases effluent ammonia levels could be reduced with- out producing noticeable improvements if current chlorination practices were continued. Any attempts to mitigate the im- pact of secondary sewage on fishes should address this problem. If disinfection of sewage effluents is essential to safeguard public health, there are alternatives to chlorination as presently practiced. Dechlorination with sulfur dioxide is expensive, but would protect aquatic life (50). If land is available, dechlorination can be achieved by constructing a lagoon to hold chlorinated sewage prior to discharge (59) . Chloramines would be naturally eliminated before release if the residence time were long enough. This could be accomplished in plants currently employing a lagoon if the effluent was chlorinated before entering the lagoon rather than after leaving it. A third option is to employ an alternative method of effluent disinfection. Ozone is desirable, since it is a 117 powerful germicide yet does not produce persistent toxic residues. Also, when used as a disinfectant ozone improves effluent quality by reducing oxygen demand, odor, color, and levels of detergents and other potentially toxic substances. Sewage ammonia appeared to be causing significant damage to fish communities in 2 of the 12 streams we sampled. High variety communities were replaced by low quality rough fish communities in areas of high molecular ammonia concentration. Additional treatment might be required to protect fish communi- ties in these two streams. However, based on the results of this study, it appeared that ammonia toxicity is either un- important or at least over-ridden by chloramine toxicity in most streams. This suggests that tertiary treatment is fre- quently not required to protect fish communities. It should be recognized, however, that ammonia toxicity may become the principal limiting factor in some streams if effluent chloramines are eliminated. Ammonia toxicity may also be important during the winter when stream purification rates are reduced due to low temperatures. This study indicates that streams have a natural capacity to purify sewage effluents. As a result, there are certain temporary streams which can be considered a natural filter to further improve effluent quality before discharge into the principal receiving stream. It may be reasonable to relax water quality standards in such streams, since they cannot 118 normally support permanent fish communities. This is biologi- cally sound, however, only if the stream is temporary in the sense that it exists naturally as a dry or nearly dry ravine in summer months. Such streams should be distinguished from streams of in- termittent summer flow which are composed of a series of large Isolated pools. These pools often support diverse and unique fish faunas. Caution is needed even with truly intermittent streams, since they may plan an important role in the life cycles of some fish. Toxicity Index Determination During the evaluation of fish populations at each of the ten sites, water samples were taken upstream of the effluent discharge point and at the first point downstream past the mixing zone. Chemical analyses were performed on these samples in the lEPA laboratories. These data, together with the ammonia, total residual chlorine, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and pH parameters that were evaluated onsite, were used by R.E. Sparks and K.S, Lubinski of the Illinois Natural History Survey to calculate a Bluegill Toxicity Index for each sample. The Bluegill Toxicity Index relates the environmental concentrations of 20 toxicants to their lethal effects on bluegills, Lepomis macrochirus (Raf.). Each toxicant is expressed as a fraction of its bluegill 96-hr LC50, adjusted when possible for varying conditions of temprature, pH, dissolved oxygen, and hardness. The sum of the individual component toxicities provide a total Bluegill Toxic Unit (BGTU) for a given sample. As a general rule, a value of 0.2 - 0.3 BGTU is considered a separation point above which it becomes difficult 119 to maintain a quality fishery resource. Table 13 summarizes the values of BGTU's obtained. In addition to the total for each upstream and downstream site, individual values for ammonia and total residual chlorine are given. Comparison of downstream average values to upstream average values clearly in- dicates that the total residual chlorine (TRC) accounts for the major portion (5.007 of 5.283) of the downstream BGTU average total. The relative contribution of NH3 and TRC toward the total for each sample is also given, expressed as a percent of each total. Averages of these percent contributions indicate that 11.42% of the total index is attributable to ammonia at the downstream sites, compared to 5.78% at the upstream sites. By comparison, there was no con- tribution by TRC at the upstream sites, but downstream an average contribution of 60.3% is indicated. If the TRC values are subtracted from the total, the average contribution of ammonia expressed as a per cent of this net toxicity was calculated to be 30.9%. Clearly, the presence of chlorine in streams resulting from dis- charge of chlorinated effluents is a major factor in presenting an in- hospitable aquatic environment in a stream reach immediately below the discharge point. Appendix H contains the BGTU data sheets provided by K. Lubinski, as well as numerical tabulation of the raw data and component BGTU's A log radial diagram of component toxicities presents at a glance those components contributing most to the total toxicity. The circular rings on these plots indicate 1.0 BGTU. A -9 on the data sheet indicates missing data. Figure 25 presents the log radial diagram for the down- stream sample taken at Casey Fork Creek in September, 1978. Inspection 120 CO 4-1 •H O ^s Pi H I CO CO CO m 4J m o CO CO u CO o 4-) a Pi 4-1 £H o CO CO 4-» CO O 4-i z o s^s to XI 4J o •H bO d I C/3 O •H +J CO O O e CO 0) 1-1 4-1 m r~ cr> cxD -* cxD in ^ ^ O 00 iH m H vD Csl ,H r^ 0^ 0> o \£> m i-H O CN o m 00 o o o o o o o o O csj O 00 O r~ O r^ 00 CT> O ON o o v£> o o CSI o o O CN o 4 o ^r O r>. O CO O 00 o (T> o o O r-l o CO o vD o m o in o m O CM o vD o o O CN O csl o o o S CO CO -u CO O ■u CO 32 '4-1 2 O 6^ CO n 00 ■u o •H CtS C H 3 a •H X CO o K 4-1 Z a 6 CO C/2 CO O •H 4-1 CO CJ O B CO (U 4-t rH O CO r^ a u > •H PS c o CO C CO CO CO O r^ O CN a^ ON o o o o CO o iH v£) CO r^ CO O CM o o rH o o o l-i 3 U 4-1 O 42 U 3 cu CO o CjO U 0) »^ e CO CO <-{ CO d IH tS CO -o o Q) o ^-^ Cl; ^w' +H CO o e <1> CO >-i E 0) CO »H rH d) •u CO U CD ■P 4-t p O CD a H O. o ^ o II II II tD o H CO 43 122 <■ cn X z ISI Z < O' Z CO O Z M Z u liJ M O Ui I < X <^ iJ es •H ^ y \^ •H o X o 1 u z < o H X o u a. z o }- M Z>-'- ZMH- ooo QuHCD zx oo c Ol CO O O O CO (O S> O ® 'T Q O CD CS> oo ® G3 CO O) {*^ O O CM CO Ifi Q O O CS GD it. COUXSO'i-CSCJCM CdCJG>6dOCSS(S I &0z_juj- * M i: OX* M UJ * X Q * O Z « h- M « ^^ iij bJ o: a ^ o u. >- UJ CO < O) - \ Z CO or- H H- • — h- II (D Z II err a— X A 00 • M II ti •► z:o •rl 00 0) 3 lO CM (U 00 123 of the radial diagram shows that the major toxic factor is total residual chlorine (TRC) . Of lesser significance are ammonia, iron, flouride, manganese and cyanide, in that order. 124 CHAPTER IV COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND PREDICTED OXYGEN DEPLETION One objective of this study was to compare the observed oxygen depletion below the wastewater treatment plant discharge at the ten study sites with predicted values, utilizing reaeration constants as given in the construction and/or operating permit applications available from the lEPA files. Figures 26 through 38 present these comparisons. Calculated values were performed utilizing the following relation, as given in lEPA document WPC-1 (31) and ISWS Circular 110 (11). K2-Kc K2-Kn Two dissolved oxygen curves are given on each figure. One is based on a nitrogenous decay constant, Kvi/onV value of 0.29 day"-^, the value currently utilized, and the second utilizes the value of Kjj calculated from the observed rate of decrease of NH3-N concentration below the outfall. Observed and calculated concentrations of NH3-N are also plotted. The general procedures used for determining the appropriate values for the other constants and independent variables, required for solution of the oxygen deficit equation, are summarized below. K„ (carbonaceous decay constant) =0.15 day at 20°C. This was used for all calculations, correcting for temperature according to the relation: Kc(T) = Kc X 1.047^'^"^°^ 12b (0 3 ■•-» h-l i*r c LU LU X a: U Q a: < X u a: O CD < U a: LU »- LU o ^ + + + + 10 •H O +J r-l ♦J (A C o •H •P (0 W *■> c D» QJ o •o -" d (0 O o X) rtJ I rtj o «3 3 0-^0 o 00 CD OJ O • C X) (U vO O QJ 0> •H rt Q> U ,~l h rtJ D ? e -I _ (l/6uj) SN0llVyiN30N00 VINOW/JV QNV N39AX0 QHAIOSSlQ 126 "^ (A C .2§ C M 0) Q O C -H o ^ o «0 C v* Q) C >. o X c o o o M (A •H CO LU LU Id ■ en ^_^ I TO <1> >-< TD ? (0 C V^ ■f O q; ^ tn •♦-» »-, j3 TOO'-* u c ^ o OJ I 0) - u •p -D ^ (U o TO V x: TO O o ^ TO (0 JO O ' "H O «i^ CM •H TO 5 ITJ 3 (fl a o S <-( 01 rtJ £ (l/6aj) SN0llVdlN30N00 VINOWWV QNV N39AX0 QBAIOSSlQ 127 -1- to — o -- lO o (l/6uj) SN0ilVyiN30N00 VINOWt^V QNV N39AX0 aSMOSSlQ CO LU h- LU u o TO u 00 CM » o X c o o o c (V o (V ? r-l o (A TJ C •H ■ o QJ r-l ? IT3 >-l 4-> (U O U) 4-* o -^ c ^ ^ :5:^ (V ? U Q> U) X) J3 q; O rtJ "D I-* c 3 (0 • O <-* r-l -f^ r-l O ' «H +-» Sh I 3 O -i' C TJ Q> O OJ Oi (/) 4-> (Tl •H rt »-l r-l (t 3 a. o e -< O nj j: U O -M 128 -^ LD c •H (0 u a (0 u> H c 0^ ^ q; 0> O CM o LL ri >- LLI o CO C^J < ^.^ u — o r I- o CO (jD ^ CM (|/6lu) SN0I1VH1N30N00 VINO^^^^JV QNW N39AX0 QBAIOSSIQ "0 « a CO LU -i- in h- LU o * ' Vl 4 0) I (A 4 ' ?^ (0 ^ ^^ •t-> •^ c Q> C (0 T I/) U C x: a (/) ^ rl (C U r* H (d :i. (J (J CVJ 3 129 / LO O h-iO o o C30 CD OJ (l/6uj) SN0liVaiN30N00 VINOW^^V QNV N39AX0 a3A10SSia I/) c o $ •H O c w o o C -H O +J o <0 C ^J (U c X o p r-t o (A (fl ■•-» •H -H T3 C -^ (T3 •H c o 2 c •H (i) (X u u o I s = D CO (H LU I— LU o o ^ o 73 U 0) (/) X3 O •a c to 03 1§ o CO Q) )-< 3 C7> C T) O (1) •H -i .-( (tJ 3 a o O nj u o (U IJO lO c o <0 (1 C II — O X u z < en en LU < CO O + I / LO I + CD CO Dl UJ h- LU o I CD CM (|/6lu) SN0llVdlN30N03 VINOWt^V QNV N39AX0 a3A10SSia 2 C •H a E (Z JZ U I 03 C (t J3 W D T3 (V M I > M I U JC V) c a> o U (t c (0 3 •H ro I J o ' r-4 O (U •H rt b 1^ 3 •H O «J 1:31 2-r < -p' o >. ^ . > ~ < CD h r ^ z: < CO ^^ o LU h- >- X o < rr f— \\\ u ( •) LU "> ::^ 1 o o CJ CO LO Q PHINNEY BRANCH I 8- = 4 2-r KILOMETERS PHINNEY BRANCH H ''n(20) = 0-29 8 — 4__ •Si = I KILOMETERS Figure 32. Phinney Branch I and II, Urbana-Champaign SW Comparison of calculated ( ) and observed { ■ ) dissolved oxygen concentrations; calculated (— — ) and observed ( ^ ) total ammonia nitrogen concentrations below the sewage outfall 2 132 -r- ID (l/6uj) SN0llVyiN30N00 VINOWtMV QNV N39AX0 QBAIOSSIQ CO ] 0) . VI 3 01 •H (A C 5 •H +J r-4 a Q) W XI •P C (fl 0) c O C -H *> o <0 V4 C -H 0) c 0^ 0) >v O X c o o T3 0) c P — « •H 0^ ?-< c (D •H -"-^ Vj -"^ a T3 c/) l r-l 'P (-» (0 I cQ O • S-l rts C7> 3 +J W V^ 1 3 0^0 • C T) O ^ dJ CT en 0) M i-i (U t-i (t3 3 (fl 3 a, o C7> e .-1 (u •H rt j: fc. O O -M (l/6uj) SNOIlVyiNBONOO VINOWWV ONV N39AX0 QHAIOSSia IJA (l/6uj) SN0ilVyiN30N00 VINOW/JV QNV N39AX0 a3A10SSia a: LU I— LU o s u x: C V. 0) c O C -H *- O -: c ^ . o c c X "O ;> r-< o (A in •D C ^^ (B •H ■ e ■^ e (t (D 1-1 1-1 *J OJ (/) ^ K '^ o m IT3 0) ? W — ' QJ 0) (fl •H Qi O C r-l E o TO r-l fr •o C (0 C o (0 o ^ i C "O O (V « +» U r-l (tJ 3 ? e -I Q r< o flj X 135 (0 u (0 c X o o O c O 5 •H o +* r-l fi Q) C Ifl Q) C o o C 'H o +* C (V >v O X o •o ^__._v_ O CD .O tf) c ■2 1 C 10 (U c. O 0' C -H o «> u « C ♦J 0) c > o X c o o u •a o (0 c o u •H -H T3 C o cvi C-O q:: LU I— UJ o 5" a o ^ i ^ u C m (V tf) X3 C I ' Sh +J i. 00 CO C\J CO a o Q) a tf) 4-> (Q H (t 5 W i-l Q) (t) 3 tf) 01 (l/6uj) SN0llVyiN30N00 VINOWWV QNV N39AX0 a3AlOSSia 'r* o (0 jc 137 O z o o CD CO LU .J < LU LU U < Q IJU U o in CO h I / ir O CM LLi O + ro (M O 00 'cm (l/Suj) SN0I1VH1N30N00 VINOW/JV ONV N39AX0 a3A10SSia 3 O e c o C (0 c ^ 0) c >» o X c o o o T3 (V p f-l o (/) v> •H c o u •H c ^* (ti •H " o •D p u V) J3 O '^ o C ^ •~- (U (A 0) O r-l C 3 <0 s si O J-' 00 fO (U 3 C TJ 0) 09 o CO 3 e >-i CO w M 13 OJ CU > n M rH Q) CO CO > ^ O Z CO CO en e CO u 4-1 CO (U CO >^ -a B CO !>> M rH 0) ^ 43 (30 B •H -H CTi '^ -i CO o (-1 o CO u CO u 43 B •H 4J •> C >^ CU 'a ^ x) c 3 3 B M B B o o o o CO u (U d 3 CO 43 00 •H 43 c o •H 4-1 CO 73 4J B (3 rH 43 O CU o 3 •H > •H CO 4-J CO 4-» CO Vj CO «t 4-1 C30 3 •T3 (U cr c too #\ CO CO Q) T3 CO > C 13 CO (U ■^ a CO 00 •H u CO 4-J #t (U ^ CO ^ B o 3 CJ 43 o cr o 3 >-l CO u CO CO ro . O CN in IX) CN rH 1 1 00 en - CN CN r-i r-i ro ro CO CO r^ CX) CX) a^ LO in CNJ CN CN Csl CO LO -3- r^ . CU (3 •H 43 I I I I 43 O 13 CO U PQ 4»i CO CO 4«! CO CO CO •rl 4J 13 (U § CO T3 3 B rH rH 43 43 ^ CO •rl (U 0) (3 >^ >. 13 13 CO CO (U 4J 4-J •H -H 00 00 (U •H -H 43 43 rH rH M 13 13 V4 }H CO CO 00 •H -H 43 43 3 3 •U 4-1 A #t ». U U t3 -o 13 13 13 13 3 3 >. >. •H •H •rl -H •H •H 4-1 4-1 >-l u n ^4 ,-i <-\ 43 43 43 43 43 43 CO CO CO to j:^ 43 U U yi u >-l U & 3 CU CU 4J 4J 4J 4J <-i rH 43 43 CX) -l u a. o o M M CO 0) t-i u dJ H (U cn •H CO > 3 CO O O u > •H Pi c o e CO CO CA) cd 3 cr* CO »l o en c ^ u #t o na >-i QJ X3 B CU c o >-( o CO X) •H •l-l »t B CO >, CO 4-J T3 (1) 0) X) Vj 00 3 +J (U e CO > in rCl Xi rH CX3 <^ r^ <}■ CO ro en ^o in O <-\ u •-t ti d) (U > CO CO 0) u )-l 00 a. ^ CO CO X) cu c i-i CO CO CO (U #t iH -^ ij-i (J U-l o •H u Vj ^ •H CO o •TJ u u •H 00 > rH 3 CO CO 4J OJ 00 JC r-t 15 CO O «. XI X) X3 ^ XI •H -H 3 u •H •iH ^ -Q (U CO ^ >. J3 >-i Vj 0) QJ V-( >-i )-i 3 3 ^J rH 3 cu 3 4-1 4J 00 O 4J > 4J CO in 1 CM 1 r^ 1 o 00 1 00 o 1 • « • • 1 • 1 rH o T-i CTi 1 • T-t -l cu CO rH XI CO (U Ci> CJ ^-^ m o (U ^^v (U 4:: 5-1 4-1 U 3 u B CO C TS QJ s CJ CNl cu u e CO U CO :J" CO 3 §• O o CO • u CO c )-l 5-1 •H (U 4-1 •H CU -3 00 d >-l CO CJ r-t 5 c •r-( rH C4H X3 CU s 4J r-{ rH 3 CO >-l CU CO M 0) 1 •rH .H 4J •H t^ CO CO 1 i* r^ a U 4J <4H 0) >. 3 X3 rH 3 14H 4-1 MH CO (U CO 00 •H 3 X •H 4J M-l CO > J= 4-1 CO c CO OJ CU 3 j-i 6 r-\ CO CO 0- u > 3 MH CU •rl X) 00 CU CO CU 4J V4 00 u CU 3 •rl > CO S io ,>6-< U 0) CO 4J ^3 CO C S CO ■u ■u CO CO CO r^ •H r^ c 1 o — 1 CO 00 60 3 r-l C o •H •H (U S-i yi .H 3 CO 43 T) > CO H -13 ^ •H >-i & d) 03 CO rCl 0) o J-l CO ^— s u iH •~^ a W) o a •H V— ' ■U CO CO iH fi O o •iH •H > •U CO O >-i 4= u j_) C OJ T3 u C c CO o u CO 0) CO •U ■H •H c CO o s >% p 13 CO 3 ■u ■H CO CO 3 e ■P o o v^ 4-1 ro • o H S '"' CO QJ 3 •O i—t QJ CO N > •H m C X (U O 13 bO •H CO c ^-1 tli QJ > CO rH Z rH CO 1 CO 4J CO 3 4J O ffi CJ < o •H 4-1 CO QJ 4J bO en U O CO m o o ro .-) O CO o o ro I— I O o o o o ro O O 00 1^ \0 o o o o o o o o CO Q) O QJ U Q Q) > •H CtJ >^ 13 13 3 O r- 00 v3- «3- CN 00 CM Csl 00 vo r~- r^ QJ C d •H Ah in CN CO o o o u o u 2 2: s c o c )-l QJ > 4-1 4ii QJ 0) Vj U O Q) W Z I CO c CO 43 5-1 I C 00 QJ •H C CO -H D-rH E CO CO cn 4: 42 CJ c CO ^-1 CO CQ -> f^ Oh P-l pq PQ pa 161 6~5 on in -j- O o o o in tH O -d- • O o • o CO CO o O rH • o o • o I— 1 :z m 1 in 4-) CO . O rc I— 1 H z cn 0) 3 13 T-{ 0) m N P> •H c^ 0) o g 00 •H 0) C Vj ^ CO i-H ■z <-\ CO 1 cC AJ fO 3 o ffi 4-1 H S < c o •H iJ cd QJ 4-1 bO CO 5-1 CO a CO Q CO 1— I fO CN r^ ctn iH o r^ r-^ in Cr> r-l rH CM o a^ o in CM iH ON o CN r^ O CO t-H CN 00 vO o — 1 CO CO CN CO O u o -) *-> iH Pm CL, 0-1 CO PQ CQ m cn CO vO CX3 • • • in ^ CM \0 CN CN CM O .H CN CM • • ■ ■ • • • ON vO v£) O CT> CO O CO CO CM r-~ I-H -vT O rH O o o o o o o O O CO CN CO M o o o 00 00 vO CO -^ CO i-l O iH ON r-s. 00 in CN ON CM tH iH O .H O O rH t^ O O O o o o o o o o o o u t> ^ •H (U •H 0) Cd QJ H Pi nd 0) .H M !-i c r-i 0) c OJ c_; o •H CD CO o •H E > •H Csl CO iH e CO CO 14-1 >-l CO 3 OOO o o C 00 c CD 3 Q Q Q 4-1 C •H 3 CO w w w ^ (0 P Q Q CO CO W w w >-l c/: cn CJ S a cn CX CO (U 162 4J C o o 00 e^ O O O O O •H (T 0) o g oo •H CO c u 13 QJ > CO I— 1 S M CO 1 CO 4-J a- 3 •u o H i a <3 o •H •U CO Q) J-) bO CO U CO e 4= CO CJ QJ en J-J •H 4-1 o CO 00 o o o o 00 CM o •H S ^ fKi CD ce) Q) CI J-i o bO U rH CO M o i-l CN rH 3 M OJ o o X^ CO o xs CO -Td o c Q Q . CO M-l 4J CU O •H >-l CO a. E Ui X CO CU CU CU > M •H CO 4-1 C •H CO ;=) c a o 3 CO •H 1 (U o CO >-• c CO •H X) I— 1 (U x: t-H N CJ 1— 1 •H •H c X c o 3 S-i •H CU n #1 x; D CO 4-J >-. Mj >^ o o XI 2 rH XI •• ^^ (U I— 1 60 4-1 CO e CO 6 o (1) (U •H rH >-l X) tl^ CO C •H • CO u •H CO • CO c p^ . 4J 4-) ,Q c CO CU 4-) XI S-I CO (U CO X3 CL 5-1 •H o > c M-( o •H V-i 4-1 a CO a 163 Benefit Categories The previous study by Huff (30) listed eleven potential uses of water that might be affected by changes in the quantity of aninionia discharged: aesthetics, agriculture, commercial fishing, domestic water use, human health, industrial water supply, municipal. water supply, navigation, power generation, recreation (water contact) and recreation (non-water contact). That study concluded that the only uses that would be benefitted significantly by reduced ammonia loadings from point sources were : 1) Water treatment plants for municipal and industrial uses, due to reduced chlorine demand. 2) Aesthetics, with respect to reduced dissolved oxygen in the stream resulting from the oxidation of ammonia to nitrate. 3) Recreation (non-water contact). The factor for con- sideration here is the potential reduction in fishing opportunity due to the toxic effect of un-ionized ammonia toward aquatic life. The information gained from this current study provides a data base for re-evaluation of the magnitude of benefits previously projected for these three areas of use. 1 . Water treatment plants for municipal and industrial use . The maximum potential benefits to be attained by enforcement of the current 1.5 rag/1 NH3-N standard was previously estimated at 4.1 to 5.2 million dollars annually. The calculation method employed assumed that all of the ammonia in effluent discharges would eventually be found in water supply intakes, adjusted by a factor representing relative volumes of withdrawal for industrial and municipal use compared to total surface water flows in the state (30). 16A In view of the rapid degradation of ammonia that was observed downstream of the ten dischargers studied, it is unlikely that actual increases in chlorine costs would appcoach the maximum estimated. In addition, most surface supplies in the state (except for the Illinois River, and communities utilizing the Mississippi and Ohio rivers for their water supply source) rely on surface impound- ments, rather than direct withdrawal from flowing streams. Thus it seems reasonable that point source contribution to ammonia concentrations observed in water supplies is minimal. A study by Flemel and Wilkin (25) of the water quality in the upper Sangamon Basin indicated the potential for non-point sources to be a major factor in contributing to ammonia nitrogen in Lake Decatur. Ammonia levels in stratified impoundments would be expected to be influ- enced greatly by factors peculiar to such water bodies, such as anaerobic processes characteristic of the bottom waters, which would be related to the organic content of the bottom sediments. Gne additional consideration relates to the growing concern over the presence of trace quantities of halogenated hydrocarbons that have been identified in many public water supplies. Much controversy exists over the dose-response relationship of these compounds with respect to human health; most direct evidence of increased cancer rates is based on laboratory animal studies (47). Regulations have been enacted, however, to monitor these materials and to require treatment for removal from some water supplies where trihalomethane ( THM ) levels are found to be excessive. Since much of the THM content of finished potable water may be 165 attributed to the chlorine added for disinfection purposes, with THM formation occurring in the distribution system, alternative disinfection methods should be considered (10) . In the past, chloramines (combined chlorine residual) have been used for disinfection of some water supplies. The justification for use of chloramines has generally been based on the need to avoid taste and odor problems resulting from chlorination of phenolic compounds and/ or the desire to provide a longer lasting chlorine residual than that obtained with free chlorine. When chloramine disinfection is practiced, ammonia may be added to the water, together with chlorine, for chloramine formation (14). The disadvantage of using chloramines for disinfection is their inferior disinfection properties when compared with a free chlorine residual, especially at neutral and low pH where the equilibrium favors formation of the more effective HOCL form of chlorine. The advantage of chloramines for disinfection, in addition to those noted above, is the fact that chloramines do not react with THM precursors to produce halogenated compounds. Thus, consideration might be given in the future to utilize chloramines for disinfection in place of uncombined chlorine, especially for high pH waters where the effectiveness of free chlorine as a disinfectant is reduced, but THM formation rates are greatly increased (53). Should chloramines be used in the futute for disinfection of water supplies, the presence of ammonia in the raw water would become an economic benefit, rather than a cost, for potable water production. 166 2. Aesthetics The concern that reduced dissolved oxygen results in streams due to the demand exerted by oxid^Ttion of ammonia to nitrate was discounted in the previous study due to inadequate documentation that this was a significant problem. In general, dissolved oxygen was not found to be a limiting factor for support of fish life at the ten sites evaluated in this current study, thus substantiating the previous conclusion. One consideration that bears mentioning with respect to dissolved oxygen in streams receiving nutrient loads is the result- ing larger algal populations that could produce diurnal dissolved oxyge fluctuations in the streams. Although beyond the scope of this current study, such fluctuations would be expected to occur where significant algal populations exist. It should also be noted, however, that a nitrified effluent would be expected to result in at least as great an effect on algal growth as one containing nitrogen primarily as ammonia. 3. Recreation (non-water contact) The maximum incremental annual recreational benefits that would result from enforcement of the current NH^-N standard of 1.5 mg/1 were estimated by Huff (30) to be 15.7 million dollars. The findings of the current study indicate that this estimate may be high. The 15.7 million value was estimated based onr-tlie fact that 35% of the water quality stations (190 of 540 stations) exhibited at least one wasfeer quality violation. The assumption was made that 167 if all stations were brought into compliance, the maximum increase in recreational fishing over existing conditions would be 35%. Based on an Illinois Department of Business and Economic Development document, the number of river fishing trips in Illinois, projected to 1980, are 3,517,000, valued at 46 million dollars. Thus, a maxi- mum of $46 X 10 X 35%, or about 16 million dollars annual recrea- tional benefit was estimated. An alternative procedure for estimation of recreational benefits of Illinois streams is based on estimation of water area adversely affected by ammonia, and utilizing that area to estimate the num- ber of recreational days on which to base the dollar value of the affected sport fishery. A detailed examination of the stream fishing potential of the regions selected for the ten study sites will be used as a basis for estimation of state-wide impacts. Since angling surveys had not been performed at the ten study sites, an estimation procedure must be used. Table 19 summarizes maximum depth, average width, stream lengths and areas, on a county basis, for the ten study site regions. Illinois Department of Conservation documents provided the infor- mation summarized in the table (35, 36). Examination of Tables 19 and 20 indicates the affected reaches of the streams ( i.e., regions where total ammenia nitrogen remains above 1.5 mg/1 ) receiving the discharges were less than 100 ft. in width. Util- izing the approach employed in a recent study by Hey (17), it may be estimated that a stream with a width in the range of 21-100 ft would be expected to annually support approximately 45 angling 168 Table 19 Characteristics of streams studiecJ, county basis (35,36). Approximate Discharge Maximum Average Stream area in Stream depth width miles county Boat County (ft) (ft) in county (acres ) fishing Carboncjale Crab Orchard Creek Jackson NL^ _-- Big Muddy River Jackson 10 121 (47)*^ 696 yes (76) Pinckneyville Beaucoup Creek Perry 9 28 22 (36) 74 (50) no Jackson 8 48 22 (22) 126 (14) no Mt . Vernon Casey Fork Creek Jefferson 14 29 (46) Champaign -Urban a -SW Phinney Branch Champaign NL Kaskaskia River 50 (34) lampaign-Urbana -NE Saline Branch Champaign NL Salt Fork Champaign 5 35 30 (24) 127 (34) Vermillion 8 53 24 (15) 165 (16) no yes Champaign 3 17 17 (14) 26 (7) no Douglas 4 42 20 (23) 103 (34) no Coles 7 49 15 (14) 89 (18) yes Moultrie 10 32 7 (25) 27 (35) no 169 Table 19 (continued ) Discharge Stream County Maximum Average depth width (ft ) (ft ) Springfield Sugar Creek Sangamon 4 Sangamon River Sangamon 12 19 115 Stream miles in county 23 (9) 50 (20) Approximate area in county (acres ) 54 (5) 694 (60) Boat fishing no yes Jacksonville Mauvaise Terre Morgan 3 27 22 (22) 71 (25) no Scott 3 38 18 (19) 82 (31) no Decatur Sangamon River Macon 12 62 33 (34) 243 (75) yes Galesburg & Monmouth Cedar Creek Knox 32 3 (1) 9 (2) ... Warren 7 48 33 (24) 189 (33) no Henderson 49 2 (2) 10 (2) Henderson Creek Warren 7 37 26 (19) 115 (20) yes Henderson 8 60 23 (24) 168 (40) no ^ Not listed in either of Illinois Department of Conservation document? . Number in parenthesis is % of county total. 170 days per acre. Using a value of $10 for an angling and/or recrea- tion day gives an annual dollar value of $450/acrc of stream area. Table 20 summarizes the estimated maximum annual recrea t i on;< 1 benefit for the stream segments affected by the ten dischargers studied; the total annual benefit for the ten study sites is $139,800. The assignment of ten dollars as the value of a recreation day is somewhat arbitrary; Dwyer e^ aJL discuss various approaches to estimation of a recreation day (17). In 1973 the Water Resources Council suggested a range of $0.50 - $6.00 per day, depending upon the relative degree of specialization and substitution for the recreation activities being valued (65). Walsh (63) presents arguments that the Water Resources Council suggested range is likely on the low side of reality for most situations, due to the inelas- ticity in the slope of the demand curve. In the 1970 National Survey of Fishing and Hunting conducted by the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife of the United States Department of Interior, a value of $6.30 spent on each recreation day for fresh-water fishing is reported (23). A value of $13.44 per day for expenditures by Illinois residents for warmwater fishing in 1975 is given by Dwyer (16); 71% of that activity took place in Illinois. Horvath (28) reports a value of $42.93 per day as an average monetary benefit, based on a 1971 survey representing 23,577 persons (9,322 actual interviews) in southeastern United States households. 171 Table 20 Maximum distance downstream from effluent discharge that ammonia nitrogen concentration exceeded 1.5 mg/1, and estimate of maximum economic recreational value of stream reach. Site Distance downstream that total NH3-N exceeds 1.5 mg/1 (km) (miles) Estimated maximum annual recreational value (3 $450/acre Carbondale 5.0 3.1 Pinckneyville 7.0 4.4 Mt . Vernon 11.7 7.2 Urbana-Champaign NE 5.0 3.1 Urbana-Champaign SW 6.0 3.8 Springfield Sugai r Creek 6.3 4.0 Jacksonville 30.0 18.6 Decatur 30.3 18.8 Galesburg 12.0 7.5 Monmouth (Cedar ( Dree k) 0.0 0.0 Total 113.3 70.5 $ 6,800 6,700 5,500 5,900 3,500 4,100 27,400 63,500 16,400 $139,800 172 Table 21 presents the total length of streams, by wirith category, potentially affected by the ten study site discharges. A comparison is made to the total stream lengths in the State of Illinois. If it is assumed the study sites chosen are representa- tive of the entire state, an estimate may be made of maximum state- wide recreational benefits to be gained by attainment of the 1.5 mg/1 ammonia nitrogen standard. Since most of the affected streams at the ten study sites are in the 21 to 100 ft width category, representing 5.2% of the state total length in that category, the estimated $139,800 annual recreational benefit for the ten study sites would scale to $139,800 divided by 0.052 or $2,688,000 on a statewide basis. This value is considerably less than the 15.7 million dollar original estimate, and reflects the rapid degrada- tion rate of ammonia nitrogen that was observed to occur in the small and medium size streams studied. As another point for comparison, the recent Illinois Department of Conservation sport fishing survey (44) provides a basis for estimation of recreational value of streams in Illinois. Based on the 1978 survey, stream fishing represented 9.77 million angling days of the 36.9 million total angling days within the state. Small stream (creek) fishing consisted of 2.17 million angling days, representing 22% of the total stream fishing activity. At ten dollars per angling day, the total monetary evaluation of small stream fishing in Illinois would be 20 million dollars. Projections of increased angling in all Illinois waters to 1995 forecast a 43% increase, compared to 1978 values. 173 Table 21 Comparison of streams included in study with respect to length, by width categories, to state totals. Total length Width categories in state (36) Total length in study sites (ft) (miles) (miles) (% of total) Not over 20 21 to 100 101 to 300 Over 300 4,915 09 1.4 5,806 300 5.2 807 98 12.1 387 00 11,915 467 3.9 174 The above analysis is likely to overestimate the increased direct value of streams receiving point source ammonia discharges that might accrue if the total ammonia nitrogen levels were to be reduced to the current 1.5 mg/1 ammonia nitrogen water quality standard. Factors that could contribute to an overestimate are: 1. The analysis assumes no sport fishery currently exists in the affected stream reaches. 2. If chlorination of all effluents continues to be required, the toxic effects of chloramines in the region below the effluent discharge may preclude development of significant fish populations. 3. This current biological study has demonstrated the positive effect of nutrients in sewage treatment plant effluents toward increasing fish weight and numbers in regions below the effluent outfall, and beyond the point of toxic levels of chlora- mines. Although the major increases are not in the major sport fish categories, some increased recreational benefits should be recognized; a recent Illinois Department of Conservation study provides some insight into this effect (44). Carp represented 9% of the total number of fish caught in Illinois streams in 1978, and statewide ranked l3th of 17 species in terms of preferred species to fish for. However, considerable variation in preference (6-14 of 17 species) existed between the seven regions of the state identified for the survey. The region indicating the "6 of 17" preference included the Springfield and Jacksonville study sites. 175 The most significant factor that could influence the above analysis such that the recreational benefits are underestimated relates to the value of intermittant streams. Only one of the ten dischargers studied (Decatur STW, on the Sangamon River) does not discharge to a watercourse classified by the Illinois State Water Survey (48) as an intermittant stream. The significance of the intermittant streams of Illinois with respect to support of downstream fisheries is, at this point in time, largely an un- answered question. 176 CHAPTER VI COSTS OF OBTAINING COMPLIANCE WITH 1.5 mg/1 NH3-N STANDARD The major costs associated with providing compliance with the 1.5 mg/1 NH3-N water quality standard fall on point source discharg- ers, both private and municipal. If discharge occurs to a water- course where the 7-day 10-year low flow is zero, the maximum total ammonia nitrogen allowed in the effluent during times of zero stream flow would be equal to the 1.5 mg/1 water quality standard. Where stream flows above zero exist, and background ammonia nitrogen levels are below the 1.5 mg/1 standard, proportionately greater ammonia levels are permitted. Prior to enactment of the current exemption to Rule 402 (which ends July 1, 1982), only dischargers to the Illinois River System whose population equivalent is greater than 50,000 have been required to meet specific effluent limitations on ammonia. That requirement, which became effective December 31, 1977 requires those dischargers to limit total NHo-N values in their effluents to 2.5 mg/1 from April through October, and 4.0 mg/1 November through March. Huff (30) identified 647 municipalities and 842 private dis- chargers who would be required to install ammonia removal facilities to meet the 1.5 mg/1 NH3-N standard. To provide a basis for eval- uating current and proposed regulatory changes with respect to the ammonia standard, it is helpful to examine current levels of ammonia nitrogen present in point source discharges throughout Illinois. 177 Statewide Ammonia Levels - Point Source Discharges Figure 42 presents the cumulative frequency of mean values of ammonia nitrogen and un-ionized ammonia (as NH^) CDncEfttrations observed in the point source discharges occurring in Illinois, based on all lEPA records through December 1976 . A total of 2168 point sources are represented by the NH^-N frequency distribution plot; 415 for the un-ionized ammonia. the lesser number for un-ion- ized ammonia reflects the lack of temperature and pH data reported at the time of sampling for the ammonia determination; these param- eters are necessary to permit calculation of un-ionized ammonia. The frequencies that several values of total NHo-N and un-ionized ammonia nitrogen were exceeded are given in Table 22. Note that the average value of 1.5 mg/1 NH^-N was exceeded by 72.8% of the dischargers; 67.9% exceeded 0.02 mg/1 un-ionized ammonia, as N. More recent lEPA data (1976-77) on point source discharger performance with respect to ammonia nitrogen is given in Table 23. The violation rate occurring with respect to several values of total NHo-N is presented by category of discharger, with the April- October period given separately from the November -March period. This data represents individual sample results, rather than average values for individual dischargers. ^Data provided by R.C. Flemal, Northern Illinois University 178 100 50 - 30 _ o c Qi 3 fT Q) M «H Q) •H 10 ■t-» (0 r-< 3 3 O Total NH3-N, mg/I 0.5 I 1.0 1.5 J |_ 10 J_ ^^' .^ A 50 i O Total NH -N '-' 3 % cumulative frequency = 21.9(NH3-N) A Un-ionized NH3 % cumulative frequency = 133.6(NH2) 0.536 0.383 0J005 0.01 ^1 0.05 I 0.1 Unr^ionized NH (as NH^), mg/1 -1 0.5 Figure 42. Frequency distribution of mean values of total NH3-N and un-ionized NH- in point source discharges in Illinois; lEPA data through 1976^. Data provided by R.C. Flemal, Northern Illinois University. 179 Table 22 Frequencies that several values of total NH^-N and un-ionized ammonia nitrogen were exceeded, based on average values of point source dischargers. lEPA data through December 1976^. Total NHo-N Frequency that Un-ionized ammonia, as N Krequency that Concentration value was exceeded Concentration value was exceeded (■g/1) (%) (mg/1) i%) 1.5 2.5 4.0 6.0 10. 72.8 64.2 54.0 42.8 24.8 0.02 67.9 0.04 58.1 0.05 54.4 0.057 52.0 0.10 40.5 0.20 22.4 Data provided by R.C. Flemal, Northern Illinois University. 180 Table 23 Per cent of analyses exceeding various concentrations of total ammonia nitrogen from point source discharges; lEPA data, 1976-1977^. i Category of d ischarger Number of Ammonia nitrogen, rag/1 analyses i. 5 2.5 3.0 7.5 12.5 15.0 April-October Minor industrial 683 Minor municipal 4,405 Major industrial 287 Major municipal 1,061 6,436 Overall % exceeding 31 25 23 16 12 11 65 57 54 33 21 18 39 34 30 19 12 11 85 78 76 51 33 27 64 56 53 33 22 18 November -March Minor industrial 426 Minor municipal 3,004 Major industrial 201 Major municipal Overall % exceeding 718 4,349 4.0 20.0 30 13 69 20 36 16 79 20 65 19 Data provided by D.J. Schaeffer, lEPA. 181 Performance of Nitrification Facilities The only economically viable process for removal of ammonia from most wastewater effluents is through biological nitrification. Although considerable data has been reported on laboratory and pilot scale processes, few full scale nitrification facilities have been in operation long enough to fully evaluate long term per- formance. A November 1979 review of five Illinois wastewater treatment plants that employed nitrification processes was per- formed by lEPA personnel . Three of the five were substan- tially meeting their ammonia effluent limits of 1.5 mg/1 total NH3-N; however loadings were reported at only 60-75% of design values . A detailed analysis was performed on operating data supplied by the Chicago Metropolitan Sanitary District on three of their plants where nitrification processes have been operative. Of the three (Egan, Southwest, and Hanover), the Hanover Park plant provided the most consistent removal of ammonia nitrogen during 1979. The MSDGC Hanover Park plant is a single stage activated sludge unit operated to achieve both secondary treatment and ni- trification in the same stage. Current average daily loading is about 75% of its design capacity of 8.5 mgd. The 1.5 mg/1 total NHo-N stream standard applies to the effluent from this plant. Table 24 summarizes the nitrification performance of the Hanover plant during 1979. For the period July through December, 1979, the number of days each month that several values of un-ionized ammonia nitrogen was exceeded are given; daily values of pH and temperature were available for that period. Data provided by W.H. Busch, lEPA . 182 Table 24 Nitrification performance of MSD Hanover Plant, January - December 1979. Number of days/month indicated values of ammonia concentra- tion were exceeded^. Total NH_-N Un- ionized ammonia as N 3 n»g/l 1.5 4.0 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.057 0.10 January 19 10 (2.88)^ February 3 2 (0.90) March (0.18) April (0.09) May (0.13) June (0.21) July (0.22) (0.009) August 4 (0.28) (0.009) September 1 8 3 2 2 (0.53) (0.013) October 2 4 2 110 (0.47) (0.013) November 2 4 3 (0.55) (0.012) December 2 2 2 2 10 (0.39) (0.007) ^ Data for calculation of un-ionized ammonia provided by C. Lue-Hing, Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago. The numbers in parenthesis are the average mg/1 of total NH_-N^ and un-ionized ammonia as N. 183 Nitrification Costs The previous study by Huff (30) identified 647 municipal dischargers and 842 private dischargers that would require nitri- fication facilities to roeet the current ammonia standard. Capital and annual operating costs for the municipal facilities were estimated at 180.9 million dollars and 12.2 million dollars, respectively. Private facility capital investment was estimated at 100.4 million dollars, with annual operating cost of 6 million. If the facilities under 2500 population equivalent are excluded, the capital investment required for the municipal dischargers is reduced to 126.3 million dollars; annual operating costs are re- duced to 8 million. Private dischargers would require 7.3 million dollars in capital investment and 0.4 million for annual opera- ting costs. Table 2-1 of the previous study, which summarizes the economic response of the current regulation, is reproduced in Appendix E(30). The economic impact of compliance for the smaller dischargers to meet the 1.5 mg/1 ammonia nitrogen standard will not be further addressed in this report, other than mention of an alternative treatment technology that could be utilized by some dischargers. Where suitable land is available near the treatment site, a high rate overland flow system of tertiary treatment could provide a reliable and economical method for ammonia reduction. An investi- gation by Muchmore, Asaturians, and Kumar (38) demonstrated the potential to consistently meet the 1.5 mg/1 ammonia nitrogen 18A standard during spring, summer and fall months. Lower removal efficiencies have been observed during winter operation. The system studied treats effluent from a single stage lagoon that treats domestic waste from a trailer park that serves a population of 135, and utilizes a 30' x 200' area of hillside. Clearly, the impact on municipalities, in terms of providing capital and operating expenses for nitrification facilities, is the major economic impact of the existing ammonia regulations. Table 25 presents the size distribution of affected municipal dischargers, as given in the previous study (30). The ten sites chosen for the current study are categorized accordingly. Cost estimates to provide nitrification were available for several of these facilities, and are summarized below. Urbana-Champaign SW Cost data supplied by the Urbana & Champaign Sanitary District estimates a capital expense for equipment and structures of 1.16 million, and annual operating costs of $49,000, of which 70% represents power costs for pumping to the planned nitrification tower system. Urbana-Champaign NE The estimates provided by the Urbana & Cham- paign Sanitary District for the nitrification tower system currently under construction indicates a 3.84 million dollar capital investment, and annual operating costs of $143,000, of which 84% represents power costs for pumping. Springfield SE Plant (Sugar Creek) A detailed cost analysis performed by Crawford, Murphy & Tilly, Inc. Consulting Engineers evaluated four alternative nitrification processes, and a fifth alternative of pumping the effluent directly to the Sangamon River 185 Table 25 Size distribution of ten affected municipal dischargers. Plant size Ten sites by design capacity in Number of listed by Design PE^ population equivalents municipalities category x 10^ Less than 1000 179 1,000 - 2,499 196 2,500 - 4,999 100 Pinckneyville 3 5,000 - 9,999 70 10,000 - 99,999 86 Monmouth 16.8 Carbondale SE 50 Mt. Vernon 38 Urbana- 59 Champaign SW Jacksonville 70 100,000 16 Urbana- 173 Champaign NE Springfield 100 Sugar Creek Decatur 400 Galesburg 107.3 Population equivalent. 186 rather than discharge to Sugar Creek. A summary of these costs is given in Table 26. It is of interest that the effluent pumping alternative would cost less than half as much as any of the other alternatives on an average annual equivalent cost basis. Galesburg Previous testimony stated an estimated 4.75 million dollar capital expense would be required (32). Table 27 summarises the estimated cost figures to provide nitrification at the sites given above, and compares the capital and annual operating expenses on a population equivalent (PE) basis. Although design of optimum nitrification facilities is, of course, site specific, the capital investments required at the four sites range between $22.50 to $48.94 per PE for the alternatives considered. Annual operating costs (excluding the effluent pumping alterna- tive for the Springfield SE plant) range between $0.80 to $2.09 per PE. These values are within the range utilized in the previous study. On a PE basis, EPA cost data utilized for that study (30) indicate capital requirements of $50 per PE for a 1 mgd plant, and $15 per PE for a 10 mgd facility. Annual operating costs for 1 mgd and 10 mgd plants were given as $3.30 per PE and $1.02 per PE, respectively. Additional verification of the validity of the costs utilized for the previous estimate was accomplished by examining the nutrient removal (nitrification) capital costs (projected 1977 costs) given in the 1978 MSDGC Annual Report of Operations^. These values calculated to be $23.68 per PE for the 1358 mgd West- Southwest Plant, $52.18 for the 354 mgd Calumet plant, and $21.62 ^ Personal communication, L.L. Huff. 187 Table 26 Summary of costs estimated for compliance with 1.5 mg/1 ammonia nitrogen water quality standard, for various processes at the Springfield Sugar Creek Plant. ^ Capital Salvage Average annual Alternate cost value O&M equivalent cost 1. Effluent pumping $2,528,500 $1,127,300 $ 35,200 $238,285 2. Packed towers 4,092,000 978,800 119,700 469,790 3. Rotating con- tactors 4,894,000 1,159,600 79,700 498,743 4. 1-stage nitri- fication 3,622,000 1,173,700 199,700 501,685 5. 2-stage nitri- fication 4,135,500 1,228,800 208,900 556,543 ^ From engineering report prepared by Crawford, Murphy and Tilly, Inc., Consulting Engineers. 188 m •H m 3 o O 0) •H 4-J •H O •H ■P o •H l4-( •H > O >-i p. CCI 4-1 CO O O 'O 0) 4J to E •H ■U CO u CO I 4-t CO O u o CO c c <: to o a CO 60 O •H 4J X CO U 4-J OJ CO CX O o u CO 4-1 0-) •H +J O CL CO rH CO O C 4-1 o c 4J iH CO cO CO 3 -H O O cr PL, W X CU iJ en c» O C3> 0^ O in o CN CN CN O cx) o o o CN CX5 CN CN o CN O CO o o CN CN CX) ro C7^ O CN m CT> CJ^ CJN 1 <» 1 m i-l r^ CTv O 1 .-H nH CN 00 CN -i )-< o o CO •• 3 tu o 4J 4-1 12 w CD CM 15 u •H •H c/:) 2 T3 0) -H > 4J o 00 a z C c 0) -H C d QJ tu 00 00 bO •rH 4J 0) TJ •r4 00 00 !-i 1 -H 1 •H U-i to 3 tu ■W CO CO 3 CO CO CO CO 00 C iH ^ CO 4-1 4-1 Xi c o. c a C M M-l o 4J CO CO CO CO 6 CO e •H tU m CO O 1 1 (1) ^ CO XI CO )-l 4J w P-i Pd rH CN .H >-i s: >-i ,c O-iH CO ^ o t3 a CO <3 O 03 >-i 0) c 1-t 60 60 C •H 3 (0 o u >. -i CO >: 4J JZ •H Q. c U CO 3 CO X c .. >> 00 TS CO •H ^ TD CO o Pu 14-1 r-( e ? CO CO CO 00 x: >-i u u o 1 O CO >^ t-H CO J3 II ^ 13 4-1 >-i lU W c ;=> J-i CU QJ CO rH 1-1 •* a CO c QJ «K > o >-l CD •H •H Cu •H 3 4-J CO cr CO 4-) CO Q) CJ S-i J3 •H o C c a- XI O 3 (U CO •H E !-i o 4J E iH CO o 00 rH CJ c O 3 •H •H a <-i u .— t o CO Q) 3 a c Q) CO o c u II CO •H T3 u 00 >> w (U c X eu o^ w T3 189 for the 333 mgd Northside Plant. The high value for the Calumet plant represents the heavy industrial load processed by the plant; flowrate rather than BCD was used to convert to population equiva- lent. Recently, detailed cost data was provided by Milano & Grunloh Engineers, Inc., on a Biodisc nitrification facility for the city of Effingham. This data indicates a construction cost of $27.34 per PE and annual O & M costs of $0.61 per PE for the 2.5 mgd plant. 190 CHAPTER VI T COMPA»^TSON OF BENEFITS AND COSTS Economic Impact on Local Government; Services The major cost of compliance with the existing total NH^-N standard of 1.5 mg/1 rests on municipalities throughout the state, and is borne by the population served either in terms of increased taxes or reduced public services. This study verifies the cost estimates given in the previous study by Huff ( 30) , where capital costs were estimated to be 180.9 million dollars; annual operating costs 12.2 million dollars. The previous study estimated benefits to accrue in two categories: (1) Reduced chlorine cost for munici- pal water supplies due to lowered ammonia content of the raw water and (2) Increased recreational benefits due to increased sport fishing opportunities. The maximum value of these benefits were estimated to be 5.2 million dollars and 15.7 million dollars, res- pectively. The findings of the current study indicate that the degradation rate of ammonia in the streams receiving effluents from the ten treatment plants studied is much greater than would be predicted, based on the widely accepted value of Kf^(20) ~ 0*29 day" for the nitrogen decay constant. This and other considerations indicate that benefits for the above mentioned categories would be much less (approach- ing an order of magnitude) than the maximum estimated values. If a statewide value of 0.5 million dollars is taken for increased annual chlorine cost, and 2.7 million for increased annual value of the sport fishery, a cost/benefit ratio of 3.8 is indicated, 191 based on annual operating costs, as estimated by Huff (30). Similar calculations for the ten study sites, whose total population equivalent is about 1 million, indicates a cost/bene- fit ratio of 5.7 . For this calculation, an approximate annual operating cost for nitrification facilities is taken at $0.80 per population equivalent. Note the above estimates are based only on annual operating costs, which must be borne entirely by the population in the region served. To the extent that grant monies would not be available to defray capital investment, these costA)enefit ratios would increase. Clearly, enforcement of the existing ammonia nitrogen standard cannot be Justified on strictly direct economic considerations. As is frequently the case, however, non-quantifiable consider- ations must be taken into account when weighing the merits of the current or alternative ammonia standards. The major additional factor to be considered is the potential value of intermittant streams in Illinois with respect to support of downstream fisher- ies. No clear answer to this question has been established. Although documentation does not exist at this time to support the position that wnter quality of some intermittant streams is a significant factor in support of downstream fisheries, it is reasonable to assume that this is the case. Similarly, one would 192 expect that many intermittant streams would play a negligible part in support of downstream fisheries. Given that the above statements reflect the true situation with respect to the inter- mittant streams of Illinois, a need is evident for standards to be established on a regional, or even stream segment basis. The basis for establishment of such a system has been presented to the Pollution Control Board by the lEPA (41). Although the methodology of this approach is still in the development and demonstration phase, the potential to maximize the effectiveness of pollution control dollars is great, particularly with respect to establishment of ammonia removal requirements. Economic Impact on Industry; Costs of Manufactured Goods Examination of Table 23 indicates high levels of total NH3-N for industrial effluents. It must be recognized, however, that many of these dischargers are located on larger streams, where dilution prevents violation of the 1.5 mg/1 NH^-N standard. The maximum impact on 130 industrial discharges was estimated previously to be $33.6 million dollars in capital investment, with 1.8 million annual operating costs (30). Economic Impact on Agriculture The major inputs of ammonia nitrogen to Illinois waters from agricultural activities are in the non-point source category, i.e., ammonia held by soil particles eroded from farmland. Another significant source with respect to local impact is runoff from 193 feedlot operations. Both of these sources exist only during high rainfall events, and thus dilution in the stream helps to mitigate the effects. The more significant inputs, particularly from the feedlot sources, will have to inplement control strategies or be forced to move or close operations, if there is strict enforcement of the 1.5 mg/1 water quality standard. Distributional Effects Inspection of Table 28, which summarizes population and fishing license sales in the counties included in the ten study site areas, indicates that costs incurred in improved treatment plant facilities and the segment of the population receiving the greatest benefit, in terms of improved sport fisheries, does not vary appreciably from one region of the state to another, with the exception of the Chicago metropolitan area. This suggests that local input should be recognized in determining appropriate control strategies. Alternative Control Strategies In determination of appropriate action to implement when the current exemption to Rule 402 terminates after July 1, 1982, several factors must be considered. This study has addressed, in- sofar as data was available, potential environmental benefits and economic burdens of strict enforcement of the 1.5 mg/1 total NH3-N water quality standard. Studies are currently in progress that should add significantly to the information base on which to 19A Table 28 Population and fishing license purchases in 1970 in counties included in study. Total Number % of county County population purchased population^ Jackson 55,008 9,081 16.5 Perry 19,757 3,596 18.2 Jefferson 31,446 4,684 14.8 Champaign 163,281 10,811 6.6 Vermillion 97,047 11,898 12.2 Douglas 18,997 3.156 16.6 Coles 47,815 7,694 16.0 Moultrie 13,263 1,987 14.9 Sangamon 161,335 19,512 12.0 Morgan 36,174 4,986 13.7 Scott 6,096 757 12.4 Knox 61,280 8,291 13.5 Warren 21,698 2,698 12.5 Henderson 8,451 1,551 18.3 741,545 90,702 12.2 Cook County 5,492,369 152,110 2.8 ^ Percent of total state population represented by study counties = 6.7; excluding Cook County 13.2 195 determine appropriate regulations for ammonia nitrogen. A biolo- gical evaluation of the relative effects of chlorine and ammonia on fish populations of the receiving streams at the two Champaign- Urbana treatment plants is in progress. Nitrification facilities are being constructed at these plants, and a variance has been granted to cease chlorination for a period during the study. Changes in fish populations are being monitored. The question of significance of intermittent streams with respect to downstream fisheries is being addressed by lEPA fishery biologists, and further refinement of the proposed stream classi- fication system would provide a mechanism for tailoring standards to regional or stream segment (41). Regulatory options available to the Board would include: 1. Maintain the existing 1.5 mg/1 NH„-N water quality standard. Costs of this are considerable; the probability of comparable benefits are slight. 2. Adopt the prevision of the current exemption, due to expire July 1, 1982, as a permanent regulation. This would provide for economic relief for the small discharger. In some locations in the state, significant environmental damage could result; i.e., the question of the importance of the intermittant stream. 3. Enact effluent limitations, such as was done for dis- chargers to the Illinois River system. In consideration of effluent limits, the method of evaluation must be addressed. There is currently before the Board a rule change that would interpret most parameters given in the Chapter 3 regulations on the basis of 196 30 day average values, rather than the current 24 hr composite sample basis (39). Inspection of Table 24 permits evaluation of the effect of alternative effluent limitations, and methods of evaluation, on one discharger that should be representative of the best state-of-the-art performance in biological nitrification. 4. Establishment of stream and/or effluent standards on a regional and/or stream segment basis. Recognizing the difficulty in implementation of such an approach, the benefits to the people of Illinois in terms of most effective application of pollution control dollars may be well worth the effort. . 197 REFERENCES 1. APHA (Ainetican Public Health Association) , American Water Works Association, and Water Pollution Control Federation. 1975. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 14th Edition. Amer. Public Health Assoc, New York. 1193 pp. 2. Arthur, J.W. , and D.I. Mount. 1973. Toxicity of a disinfected effluent to aquatic life, p. 772-778. In R.G. Rice and M.E. Browning (eds) Ozone for water and wastewater treatment. The International Ozone Institute, Waterbury, Connecticut. 3. Austin, J.H. and F.W. Sollo. 1969. Oxygen relationships in small streams. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana, 111. Sanitary Engineering Series No. 52. 192 pp. 4. Ball, Ian R. 1967. The relative susceptibilities of some species of freshwater fish poisons. I. Ammonia. Water Res. 1:767-775. 5. Bartsch, A.F. 1948. Biological aspects of stream pollution. Sew- age Works J. 20:292-302. 6. Brinley, F.J. 1942. Biological studies, Ohio River pollution survey, I. Biological zones in a polluted stream. Sewage Works J. 14(1) : 147-459. 7. . 1943. Sewage, algae and fish. Sewage Works J. 15: 78-83. 8. Brungs , W.A. 1973. Effects of residual chlorine on aquatic life. J. Water Poll. Control Fed. 45(10)2180-2193. 9. . 1976. Effects of wastewater and cooling water chlori- nation on aquatic life. EPA-600/3-76-098. 10. Bull, R.J. 1979. Health effects of alternate disinfectants and their reaction products. 99th Annual Conference of the American Water Works Association. San Francisco, Ca. 13 pp. 11. Butts, T.A. , V. Kothandaraman, and R.L. Evans. 1973. Practical considerations for assessing the waste assimilative capacity of Illinois streams. 111. State Water Surv. Urbana, 111. Circular 110. 49 pp. 12. Carlson, R.M. and R. Caple. 1978. Chemical/biological implications of using chlorine and ozone for disinfection. EPA-600/3-77-066. 13. Consulting Engineers Council of Illinois. 1972, 1978. Recommendations to IPCB to adopt ammonia standard based on molecular ammonia. R. 77: Ech. 3, 3, 10-15, 20, 22-26. 198 lA. Dolinar, J.F. and M.A. Isoe. 1979. Economic Impact of the chlori- nation of public water supplies, R78-8. Illinois Institute of Natural Resources, Chicago, 111. Project No. 20.126, ITNR Document No. 79/39. 134 pp. 15. Donaldson, J.D. 1978. Measurement and persistence of chlorine residuals in natural waters, p. 37-64. In R.L. Jolley (ed.). Water chlorination environmental impact and health effects. Vol. 1. Ann Arbor Science Publ. Inc., Ann Arbor, Mich. 16. Dwyer, J.F. and M.L. Hatmaker. 1978. Participation and expenditures by Illinois fishermen and hunters. Cooperative Extension Service, University of Illinois. Urbana. CRD-14. 15 pp. 17. Dwyer, J.F., J.R. Kelly, and M.D. Bowes. 1977. Improved procedures for valuation of the contribution of recreation to national economic development. University of Illinois Water Resources Center Research Report No. 128. Urbana, 111. 218 pp. 18. Edmonson, W.T. 1969. A simplified method of counting phytoplankton, p. 14-15. In R.A. Vollenweider (ed-). A manual on methods for mea- suring primary production in aquatic environments. IPB Handbook No. 12. Blackwell Sci. Publ., Oxford and Edinburgh. 19. Ellis, M.M. 1937. Detection and measurement of stream pollution. Bull. Bur. Fish. 48:365-437. 20. Emerson, K. , R.C. Russo, R.E. Lund, and R.V. Thurston. 1975. Aqueous ammonia equilibrium calculations: Effects of pH and temperature. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 32(12) : 2379-2383. 21. Finlayson, B.J., and R.V. Hansen. 1979. Comparison of acute toxicity of chlorinated effuents from optimized and existing facilities, p. 12-21. Ln A.D. Venosa (ed.). Progress in wastewater disinfection technology. EPA-600/ 9- 79-018. 22. Finstein, M.S., and V.A. Matuleivich. 1977. Nitrification potential of river environments. Rep. A-039-NY. Water Res. Res. Inst., Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. pp. 1-49. (NTIS PB-270-782) . 23. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1970. National survey of fishing and hunting. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. United States Department of the Interior. Washington, D.C. Resource Publi- cation 95. 108 pp. 24. Flemal, R.C. 1978. Evaluation of un-lonized ammonia levels in Illinois streams Part I: regional values. Illinois Water Information System Group, Department of Geology, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, 111. Report of Investigations No. 8. 8 pp. 199 25. Flemal, R.C., and D.C. Wilkin. 1980. Analysis of water quality- standards: upper Sangamon basin, Illinois. Illinois Water Infor- mation System Group, Department of Geology, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, 111. Report of Investigations No. 23. 26. Hemens , J. 1966. The toxicity of ammonia solutions to mosquito fish ( Gambusia affinis Baird and Girard) . J. Proc. Inst. Sewage Purif. 265-271. 27. Hey, D.L. and J.M. Pappas. 1980. An economic analysis of effluent standards BOD, ammonia, total suspended solids, and disinfection: case study of a modern treatment plant. Illinois Institute of Natural Resources, Chicago, 111. Project No. 80.160, IINR Document No. 80/25. 52 pp. 28. Horvath, J.C. 1974. Economic survey of southeastern wildlife and wildlife-oriented recreation. Trans. Thirty-Ninth North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference. Wildlife Management Institute. Washington, D.C. 8 pp. 29. Hubbs, C.L. 1933. Sewage treatment and fish life. Sewage Works J. 5:1033-1040. 30. Huff, L.L. 1977. Economic impact of a proposed change in the ammonia effluent standards, R77-6. 1977. Illinois Institute for Environmental Quality, Chicago, 111. Project No. 80.094, IIEQ Document No. 77/18. 31. Illinois Environmental Protection Agency Technical Policy WPC-1. 1974. 14 pp. 32. Illinois Pollution Control Board. June 22, 1978. Opinion and Order of the Board, Final Order, Amendment to Chapter 3, Water Pollution Regulations: Rule 402.1, an Exemption to Rule 402 for Certain Ammonia Nitrogen Sources, R77-6. 25 pp. 33. Illinois Pollution Control Board Rules and Regulations. 1972. Chapter 3: Water Pollution. 80 pp. 34. Kawai, A., Y. Yoshida, and M. Kiuata. 1965. Biochemical studies on the bacteria in aquariums with circulating systems. II. Nitrifying activity of the filter sand. Bull. Jap. Soc. Scl. Fish. 31:65-71. 35. Lopinot, A.C. (ed.). 1970. Illinois Fishing Guide. Illinois Department of Conservation Division of Fisheries. Springfield, 111. Fisheries Bulletin No. 1. 52 pp. 36. . 1973. 1972 Illinois Surface Water Inventory. Illinois Department of Conservation, Division of Fisheries. Springfield, 111. Special Fisheries Report No. 40. 200 37. Meade, T.L. 1974. The technology of closed system culture of salraonids. Mar. Tech. Rep. 30. Univ. Rhode Island. 30 pp. 38. Muchmore, C.B. 1976. Overland flow as a tertiary treatment pro- cedure applied to a secondary effluent. Proceedings, Illinois Work- shop on Land Application of Sewage Sludge and Wastewater, Champaign, 111. pp. 226-240. 39. Muchmore, C.B., M.S. Shekar, and K.G. Janardan. 1980. Economic impact of the proposed averaging rule, R76-21. Illinois Institute of Natural Resources, Chicago, 111. Project No. 80.162, IINR Document No. 80/04. 46 pp. 40. Odura, E.P. 1971. Fundamentals of ecology. 3rd Edition. W.B. Saunders Company. Philadelphia, London, Toronto. 574 pp. 41. Park, J.B. 1979. In the matter of water quality standards revisions, R79-6. Testimony before IPCB. 33 pp. 42. Peckham, H.M. 1978. Station locations and periods of record, lEPA ambient water quality monitoring network. Illinois Water Infor- mation System Group, Department of Geology, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, 111. Report of Investigations No. 16. 36 pp. 43. Robinette, H.R. 1976. Effects of selected sublethal levels of ammonia on the growth of channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) . Prog. Fish-Cult. 38(l):26-29. 44. Rogers, Richard A. 1980. FY 1978 Illinois sport fishing survey. Illinois Department of Conservation special fisheries report No. 50. Springfield, 111. 53 pp. 45. Roseboom, D.P., and D.L. Richey. 1977. Acute toxicity of residual chlorine and ammonia to some native Illinois fishes. 111. State Water Surv. Urbana, 111. Rep. Invest. 85. 42 pp. 46. Saeki, A. 1958. Studies on fish culture in filtered closed cir- culation aquaria. I. Fundamental theory and system design standards. Bull. Jap. Soc. Sci. Fish. 23:684-695. 47. Schneiderman, M.A., Chairman, 7 member subcommittee on Epidemiology. 1978. Epidemiological studies of cancer frequency and certain organic constituents of drinking water — a review of recent literature published and unpublished. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C. 29 pp. 48. Singh, K.P. and J.B. Stall. 1973. The 7-day 10-year low flows of Illinois streams. 111. State Water Surv., Urbana, 111. Bulletino 57. 201 49. Smith, P.W. 1971. Illinois streams: A classification based on their fishes and on analysis of factors responsible for dis- appearance of native species, 111. Nat. Hist. Surv. , Urbana, 111. Biol. Notes No. 76. 14 pp. 50. Snoeynik, V.L., and F.I. Markus . 1974. Chlorine residuals in treated effluents. Water and Sewage works 121(4) : 35-38. 51. Somiya, I. 1977. Quality changes of secondary effluent treated by ozone and chlorine, p. 402-421. ^I^ E.G. Fochtman, R.G. Rice, and M.E. Browning (Eds.), Disinfection with ozone. The International Ozone Institute, Syracuse, N.Y. 52. Spicer, J.I. 1952. Personal impressions of the river (prevention of pollution) Act, 1511. J. Inst. Sewage Purif. 3:181-194. 53. Stevens, A. A. and J.M. Symons. 1980. Formation and measurement of trihalomethanes in drinking water. Proceedings - Control of organic chemical contaminants in drinking water. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio. 29 pp. 54. Swingle, H.S. 1953. Fish populations in Alabama rivers and impound- ments. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 83:47-57. 55. Tebo, L.B., Jr. 1959. Comparison of fish populations in polluted and non-polluted arms of a warm water reservoir. Proc. 13th Annu. Conf . S.E. Assoc. Game Fish Comm. , Oct. 25-27, 1959. Baltimore, Maryland. 220 p. 56. Thompson, D.H. , and F.O. Hunt. 1930. The fishes of Champaign County: A study of the distribution and abundance of fishes in small streams. 111. Nat. Hist. Surv. Bull. 19(1):1-101. 57. Thurston, RLV. , R.C. Russo, CM. Fetterolf, Jr., T.A. Edsall, and Y.M. Barber, Jr. (Eds.). 1979. A review of the EPA red book: Quality criteria for water. Water Quality Sec, Am. Fish. Soc, Bethesda, Maryland. 313 pp. 58. Toetz, D., L. Varga, and M. Pierce. 1977. Effects of chlorine and chloramines on the uptake of inorganic nitrogen by phytoplankton. Water Res. 11:253-258. 59. Tsai, C.F. 1973. Water quality and fish life below sewage outfalls. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc 102 (2) ; 281-292 . 60. . 1975. Effects of sewage treatment plant effluents on fish: A review of literature. Contribution No. 637 (Chesapeake Research Consortium, Inc. Publ.' No. 36), Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, Univ. Maryland. 229 pp. 202 61. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1974. Manual of methods for chemical analysis of water and wastes. Methods Development and Quality Assurrance Research Laboratory, National Research Center, Cincinnati, Ohio. 298 p. 62. . 1976. Quality criteria for water. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 356 pp. 63. Walsh, R.G. 1977. Proceedings of a national symposium on outdoor recreation, advances in application of economics. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-2. Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 145-153 pp. 64. Ward, R.W., R.D. Griffin, G.M. DeGraeve, and R.A. Stone. 1976. Disinfection efficiency and residual toxicity of several wastewater disinfectants, EPA-600/2-76-156 . 65. Water Resources Council. 1973. Principles and standards for planning water and related land resources. Federal Register, Volume 38, No. 174, Part III, September 10. 66. Wetzel, R.G. 1975. Limnology. W.B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia, London, Toronto. 743 p. 67. White, G.C. 1972. Handbook of chlorination. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York, N.Y. 744 pp. 68. Young, J.C. and CD. McCallion. 1979. Investigation of the long term effects of chlorine on the oxygen demand of wastewater. Report PB- 292 161, Nat. Tech. Infor. Serv. , Springfield, Virginia. 129 pp. APPENDICES 203 APPENDIX A Illinois Pollution Control Board, Chapter 3 - Water Pollution (3 3) . The water quality standards in this Part shall apply at all times except during periods when flows are less than the average minimum seven day low flow which occurs once in ten years. 203 General Standards The General Standards listed below will protect the State's water for aquatic life, agricultural use, primary and secondary contact use, and most industrial uses, and ensure the aesthetic quality of the State's aquatic environment. Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, all waters of the State shall meet the following standards; (a) Freedom from unnatural sludge or bottom deposits, floating debris, visible oil, odor, unnatural plant or algal growth, unnatural color or turbidity, or matter in concentrations or combinations toxic or harmful to human, animal, plant or aquatic life of other than natural origin. (b) pH (STORET number - 00400) shall be within the range of 6.5 to 9.0 except for natural causes. (c) Phosphorus (STORET number - 00665) : Phosphorus as P shall not exceed 0.05 mg/1 in any reservoir or lake, or in any stream at the point where it enters any reservoir or lake. (d) Dissolved oxygen (STORET number - 00300) shall not be less than 6.0 mg/1 during at least 16 hours of any 24 hour period, nor less than 5.0 mg/1 at any time. (e) Radioactivity: (1) Gross beta (STORET number - 03501) concentration shall not exceed 100 pico curies per liter (pCi/1) . (2) Concentrations of radium 226 (STORET number - 09501) and strontium 90 (STORET number - 13501) shall not exceed 1 and 2 pico curies per liter respectively. 204 (f) The following levels of chemical constituents shall not be exceeded : Storet Concentration Constituent number (mg/l) Ammonia nitroger 1 (as N) 00610 1.5 Arsenic (total) 01000 1.0 Barium (total) 01005 5.0 Boron (total) 01020 1.0 Cadmium (total) - 01025 0.05 Chloride 00940 500.0 Chromium (total hexavalent) 01032 0.05 Chromium (total trivalent) 01033 1.0 Copper (total) 01040 0.02 Cyanide 00720 0.025 Fluoride 00950 1.4 Iron (total) 01045 1.0 Lead (total) 01049 0.1 Manganese (total) 01055 1.0 Mercury (total) 71900 0.0005 Nickel (total) 01065 1.0 Phenols 32730 0.1 Selenium (total) 01145 1.0 Silver (total) 01075 0.005 Sulfate 00945 500.0 Total dissolved solids 00515 1000.0 Zinc 01090 1.0 402 Violation of Water Quality Standards In addition to the other requirements of this Part, no effluent shall, alone or in combination with other sources, cause a violation of any applicable water quality standard. When the Agency finds that a discharge that would comply with effluent standards contained in this Chapter would cause or is causing a violation of water quality standards, the Agency shall take appropriate action under Section 31 or Section 39 of the Act to require the discharge to meet whatever effluent limits are necessary to ensure compliance with the water quality standards. When such a violation is caused by the cumulative effect of more than one source, several sources may be joined in an 205 enforcement or variance proceeding, and measures for necessary effluent reductions will be determined on the basis of technical feasibility, economic reasonableness, and fairness to all dischargers. 2U6 APPENDIX B Stations at which mean un-ionized ammonia exceeds 20 ug/1. Numbers in brackets are total number of samples and mean un-ionized ammonia respectively (24) . lEPA Basin name Station A B Ohio Wabash ATGX 01 (64/44) BEN 01 (45/28) BP 01 (45/44) BPJ 04 (41/35) BPJC 03 (50/50) BF 01 (61/76) BPG 07 (39/27) BPJ 05 (43/28) BPK 04 (41/24) BM 01 (40/33) BPJ 03 (41/20) BPJC 01 (43/41) C D Little Wabash CP 01 (61/41) Illinois D 05 (59/23) D 09 (50/22) D 14 (46/30) D 15 (15/50) D 18 (48/74) D 20 (48/48) D 27 (47/40) D 28 (55/22) DR 01 (47/43) DR 02 (47/26) DTG 01 (45/22) DTK 02 (49/39) DTZS 01 (49/47) Sangamon E 04 (62/21) E 05 (69/79) E 15 (63/21) EID 03 (37/33) D 10 (48/83) D 16 (52/32) D 26 (48/88) DGJ 01 (58/53) DT 09 (51/40) DTZR 02 (48/39) 08 (46/25) F Kankakee G&H DesPlaines I,J,K, Mississippi L,M N Big Muddy Kaskaskia Rock Lake Michigan (none) 118 out of 139 stations exceed 20 ug/1 II 01 (63/34) JN 02 (59/25) JOAA 01 (38/27) II 02 (62/57) JNA 01 (59/25) LDD 01 (58/26) JMAA 01 (50/73) JNF 01 (34/21) M 03 (55/184) ND NJ 03 07 (71/103) (70/35) NEB 01 (64/56) NH 05 (65/22) OB OK 01 01 (60/45) (67/27) 00 02 (54/44) OC 03 (54/40) P PL PQC 08 01 05 (50/67) (58/24) (53/28) P PL PZX 09 02 01 (49/27) (49/173) (46/21) P PQC 15 02 (56/27) (54/23) QA Ql 02 02 (6/30) (32/22) QA QZA 03 08 (6/1150) (6/25) QH 04 (78/49) 207 'O 0) u D CO CO (U s CO CO c o C •H •H 4J CO iH u iH i-i CO c M-l q; J-l o 3 c O o a CU (U 4-) c •H e M o o j-i rH 14-4 jr O S CO iH (U CO ^-1 3 4-J TJ CD •H p CO 3 0) O i-i X) tH TJ CO C 4-J CO o 4-J X) rH c CO CO 4-1 4J #« 3 c o (U 00 Oi o JZ S-i +J ■u •H C C •H CO #1 •H .— ! C ^H o CO CO 3 O u CO 01 1-1 M 3 CO CJ :3 0) CU I— 1 CO o 6 CU rt u C (U CU ClO > o o u ^ 4-1 CO •H • c CO CO CU CU CO *J H •H •H no C CO 3 o 4-1 1 CU r-H CO CO o- CO B B .-1 CO CO CO CO CU 4-1 U o 4-1 4-1 H CO CO rH C rH CO O ~v. 4-1 g W) o g e H CO CO ^w m CU o •H O CU o a z CD CU C /^^ •H rH iH >-4 •-~^ CO O ba 4-J rH e O -C H o ;-! CO ^ — rH CO ^— V 3 •H iH CJ C -~-^ CU O Of) iH s e O H CO &0 (U > CU O -C ^ 4-1 CO M s iH CU o CO O -H 4-4 ^-x c . CU CD CO u cx) CM I r-- CN U CU e CU 4J CU CU a B CO CO 3 bii 3 <: CU B CO en <}■ m I c>-i ,H en o o I cyi CN o . . I . . . O O CM O O O O o o o o •<)■ c^ o o O LT) LT) (U p- B CO -l CQ CU C •H /-^ iH 00 CO r^ C/^ CTn o o o o o o o o o o o o o^ in rH rH O o o o CO fO (» C30 ^D O O I CN vo r-^ . . I . . . o o in ^ CN C30 CO c/: cu o s: CO •H . c o ■ B Ml B B CO ^-' J3 CO d) o O rH C CU CO ^ -u CO en T3 o Q CO ^J o c (0 0) C C •H CU 1— I a B CO CO CO 3 r^ 00 I rn t— I vo O O C7^ LO ro rH O O O O O CD O O CN i-H rH tH O O O O O O O O O O O O o Ln o 1— I 1— I r-~ O O CTi O O i-H O O <-H iH ■— I ^ 00 r^ I I O vcf o o -l >-l cu H cu CO •H CO > 3 CO D. E CO CO I in >-i (U B cu •u o. I O O O O O O I c I o o o o o o o O O 0^ CN CN Csl o o o ^ o o o o o o o o o o m LO O O CN >3- o o o CN f^ m O O 1-1 vD 00 O o 00 f*^ I rH CN CO CN rH OOOO.HOOO OOuOrHOOOO ooiH--' CO ^-^ CO 3 O 0) I— I o CO •H /^ C -H O ■--. e t>ci E E CO ^^ 0) > CU o x: J3 •u CO rH & iH (U O CO o rH <4-l c 01 4-t ^— s CO ^ o J CO X) v^ •H c Q CO o CC u (U iH & E CO CNJ I o CNI )-l OJ E CM (U CO 0) a B CO i-H iH I rH 00 I O O CN O O O o o o o o o O O CN T-H O O o o o o o o o o o o o o cN \r> cx) 00 c7> 1^ iH rH C7^ rH •H Pi CO •H ,i^ CO CO ^ CO CO •H c o E CO CjO C CO en 00 CT> O CN CO 0) o 4-J o o a E CO en 00 00 I r^ ^-1 CU x^ B Q} 4-1 0) cn m vcr a CN in B • CO in o cn CN iH O O O O O O CM I C3^ I vO I rH O I CO iH O O O O o o o o o o CN m CO CM CN iH o o o o o o o o o o o o oo inr^.r^cT^vo cocNr^-invoinmcM cNoo (U o J2 XI •U CO 15 .H (U O r-\ o H CO c (U M-J ^-^ CO ^ 4-J e 4-J 3 ^ U) ta o •H c Q CO 13 U CD o o CO >-i U c» or C/3 I CX3 3 <3 a B CO o I m I in I I t^ m o o I m o I • . I . . I o o o o I o o I • • o o o o cTv O O r^ r^ rH r-H I I I I 00 rH rH CN rH CO O O O O 00 CO rH O 00 in O OJ CN O rH rH O rH 00 ^ a W CO CO I o CO 4J CO 3 ob| 3 <; CO en r^ cr> I -^ cc O O O r^ CO O O O rH O C O O O rH rH rH O o o o o o o o o o o o o O O vD CN Csl O O O rH v£) rH in O O -l iH u QJ 4-1 CO O ^~- (U 3 4J ^ 6C > .H o j= E (1) •H <4-4 4-t H o ^ Pi CO MH OJ rH rH ^— \ •H QJ CO C >-i Z • 4^ X HH QJ to --' 4*! CO W 4-t ^ I— 1 CO /-~s (U CO 3 CO 3 -H rH (U ^ CO 4-1 cj C ^ ;-i CO •U dJ O M U CO C OJ 4-) "^ 1 xS fc^ QJ x: u CO 4-1 c S CO CO OJ 0) • X) rC M CU CO 13 0) •u a. rH CO ,,^-*\ 00 14H w x; Z »-i iw > w Nw^ . rH •> •H ^ Xi >^ u CO E QJ rH C -H 3 u CO MH CO CO O ^^ CO CO •w 4-1 QJ E c 4-» E bO 4-1 3 3 >-i CO •H O 1 E CO 3 X 4-1 QJ CO H CO ^^ CO ^ •H CO u 5 •H i-i QJ 4-1 X) (-1 4-1 X OJ CO QJ rH 4-1 4-1 x: C 4J CO rH CO • 4-1 ^ CO 14-1 MH X) 3 U 0) 4-1 «s ^ CO CJ . (U 0) 3 ^ rO >-l <-i o a Vl O cu C CO 00 OJ CO Z CO CJ ^ 4-1 -H 14-1 •H >H ^ .-N . Vj C30 4: CO d -H 4-1 QJ 13 CO O 00 CO r^ c ^ c CO X QJ 3 4-J .-1 E S C7^ O 1 00 1 ^ •H !-i •H rH 4-1 o jr ^^ rH . 1 . 1 . CO CO CO -C rH +J QJ CO X) H O o o o X -H PM CO CO JS rH r. X) ^ UH )-i 4-1 3 •— N > iH CO '—^ CO -a -H T3 OJ 4-1 4J CO D -H iH t-l 4-J 0) 0) 01 x; 3 -H C a C --- 0) J3 ^-1 rH ^ ^ H -U rH •H -H •H rH E e e 1 1 1 1 1 CO CO CO 4-1 CJ ■U o E -^ (U 1 1 1 1 1 OJ CO ^H CO CO . CO CO CO S CO > x> (U 4-) cu 4-) QJ C MH >-l o E 3 E C ^^ -4 CO rH C •iH B 0. 4-1 :? (X c CO CO 0) CO CO •H (U CO •H 1-1 •H ^ C 4-1 > CO 4-1 CO u S -1 CO CO cu to 0) X CO (U O CO j:^ u CO E w 3 rH a rH u-i .-V to -u CO 0) CO 3 CO 3 C CD 4-1 E -d CD cu CO QJ ^ x: CO X3 3 ^ O rH O rH CO •H 3 3 -U ^ E E QJ 4J O ">-' . • • . • T3 rH r-t >-i C rH CO t3 OM O O O CM CO S CO UH CO >-- ?^ S V \y < > -l-J > s :s "^^ s Q CO 1 CO XI X3 QJ 212 •H C <3 a •H C o •H &. ^ X O u o -a 0) cu > o >, 4-J 03 T3 I 2: DO O 00 0) o IS ct) O T3 i-l ~^ fa 6 CI- e I ex 6 cd e CO M ■U 3- -i W ^ ^ X 43 u (1) > > > >-i >-i C d S3 C CO CO ^ ^ •H •H •H •H CO CO ^ M ,i fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa >-. >. U CJ o o cu cu (U (U CU 0) e S e e t^ >. >% f>. >, >. >^ >% C (3 !3 C3 C (3 M Vj CO CO CO CO rQ rQ QJ (U 0) cu OJ (U cu CU •H -H •H -H fi C CO CO 00 00 00 00 CO CO cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn iH rH rH rH •H 'H 60 00 c f3 c c U >-( CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO 43 XI 31 31 CO CO CO CO U O U CJ U u o u u u C/0 C/0 c/^ c/: fa Cm C/2 CO CA) c/1 CA) CO 213 o >. 4J CO 4-1 r— I to ^ CO Z H i-H •H I -U -^ +J CO C OO 2: H I CN CO cO-^ Q 00 o -^ PQ M E (U o 3 to o -o & e to e CO (U u 4-1 CT\ O CO C» r^ 00 LO r^ \0 t>i CN CO CO CO CN CT^ r^ CN O 00 CO CN CO CJ^ vo CN r^ CO o CO 00 m o o CN CO tT\ CN CTi iH iH t-H CN CO CO CN O o > > > CO •H •H •H •H ^ Di Oi OS Oi 0) 00 u x: C c c c >-l 3 4-1 XI 3 a e 6 6 tn CO CO CO to )-l (U e 00 00 00 00 to .H c C c c c T3 CO CO to to CO Q) s CO ty^ CO CO CJ ■>— ' o o ^ 00 00 CO in in in LTi i-H i-H C7N 00 c CO 00 r«. ^O in -i 3 4-1 u XI 3 w u Q) E CO iH C TJ to a) s u N— ' (U u a CO CJ CO 0) X) C -> Cfl x) OJ •H 3 00 TS 4-1 M en CO s X 00 a iH \£) CO (U a\ •A X .H X) (U c X 4J C 3 to XI 4-1 (U E CO CO d •H CO Q PQ S 214 APPENDIX E Summary of economic response to scenario A (30) Impacted group Number Total impact Schools & colleges Gasoline stations Trailer parks Recreational & restaurant facilities Motels Residential (apartments, homes developments) State highways & parks Campgrounds Nursing homes Commercial businesses 221 Loss of services or funds obtained through tuition or tax increase. Represents approximately $38 million in capital investment and $2 million operating cost. 11 Closure with a loss of $0.55 million in rental fees per year. 142 Closure of 138 parks with a loss of $4.2 million revenue per year. Possible closure of all facilities 101 with a loss of $19.5 dollars revenue. 19 Possible closure of some facilities with a loss of up to $3.3 million revenue. 58 Increase in fees charged to cover treatment. Capital investment of $11.1 million and operating cost of $0.6 million per year. 37 Funding from state budgets availa- able. Approximately $7.0 million in capital required. 44 Possible closure of 42 camps with loss of $2.3 million revenue. 34 Increase in fees charged to cover $5.9 million capital and $0.3 million operating expense per year. 45 Increase prices to cover capital and operating expenses or close facilities^ at a loss of $4.5 million. 215 APPENDIX E (cont) Municipal facilities (other than treatment plants) Miscellaneous 55 Funds taken from city revenues will result in loss of municipal services or increased taxes. Total capital investment and operating costs of $17.3 and $0.91 million, respectively. 71 Many of the miscellaneous dischargers will probably close due to the large capital investment of $170,000 each or $12.1 million and $0.65 million in operating expenses per year. Impact summary Municipal sewage treatment plants Private discharger impact 647 Loss of federal and state funding for the capital investment of $228 million. In addition, operating expenses of $13.2 million and capital costs of $25.2 million are paid yearly by municipality. Potential loss of 371 private facilities and $38.1 million revenue. 216 APPENDIX F Chemical parameters ac the ten study sites. Chemical parameters for Casey Fork Creek, Mt. Vernon, Illinois, in proximity Co secondary sewage discharge (Sample I taken 13 Aug 1973, Sample II taken 27 Sepc 1978).^ Parameter Upstream station Disc! iars;e Downstream station Sample I (0.A6)b (mg/DC Sample II (0.46) (mfi;/l) Sample I (O.O)b (ms?/l) Sample II (0.0) Sample I (0.005)'" (ni?/l) Sample II (0.005) ^2U?/1) Arsenic 0.0 0.002 0.0 0.002 0.0 0.005 Barium 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Boron 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.9 0.7 0.9 Cadmium 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Copper 0.0 0.01 0.01 0.0 0.01 0.0 Chromium (hex) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Iron (total) 1.75 0.2 0.14 1.75 Lead 0.01 0.012 0.0 0.004 0.01 0.012 Manganese 1.0 0.73 0.23 0.25 0.71 0.98 Mercury (\\/l) 40.01 <0.02 <:o.02 <0.02 0.01 4 0.02 Nickel 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.01 0.0 Selenium 0.0 < 0.001 0.0 40.001 0.0 40.001 Silver 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Zinc 0.0 0.02 0.0 0.06 0.0 0.02 0.0 0.05 9.0 8.6 7.5 6.7 Nitrate + Nitrite (N) 7.1 0.0 0.4 0.7 1.1 1.2 Phosphorous (?) 0.24 0.13 9.9 7.4 7.0 Fluoride 0.4 0.3 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.3 Cyanide 0.01 0.0 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 Phenol (u/1) 0.0 5.0 8.0 7.0 3.0 8.0 Hardness 120.0 130.1 160.0 150.0 170.0 150.0 * Analysis done by Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. b Distanca (km) upstream or downstream from the sewage discharge c Concentrations are expressed in mg/l unless ochervise noted. 217 Chemical paramecers for Crab Orchard Creek, Carbondale, Illinois, in proximity co secondary sewage discharge (Sample I taken 8 Aug 1978, Sample II taken 13 Sept 1978).^ Upstream Downstream Parameter station Disc harge station Sample I (0.25)^ (mg/1)^ Sample II (0.23) (mg/1) Sample I (0.0)'= (mg/1) Sample II (0.0) (mz/l) Sample I (0.01)'' (mg/1) Sample II (0.4) (mg/1) .Arsenic 0.0 0.001 0.0 0.002 0.0 .<0.001 Barium 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 3oron 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.4 Cadmium 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Copper 0.0 0.06 0.0 0.0 0.74 0.0 Chromium (hex) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Iron (total) 1.1 1.52 1.2 1.14 1.2 1.79 Lead 0.0 0.002 0.0 0.004 0.01 0.005 Manganese 1.5 2.5 0.25 0.24 0.28 0.75 Mercury (u/1) <0.01 <0.02 <:o.03 <0.02 <0.01 (mg/1) Sample II (0.1) (a«/l) 0.013 0.007 0.0 0.1 — 0.5 0.0 <0.005 0.01 CO. 005 0.0 <0.005 1.32 0.67 0.011 0.02 0.2 0.1 <0.02 CO. 02 0.0 CO. 05 0.002 0.001 0.0 CO. 005 0.03 0.06 3.0 1.0 3.3 1.0 0.0 5.0 210.0 * i^alysis done by Illinois Environmental Protection .\gency. ° Distance (km) upstream or downstream from the sewage discharge. ^ Concentrations are expressed in mg/l unless otherwise noted. 221 Chemical parameters for Beaucoup Creek, Plnckneyville , Illinois, in proximity to secondary sewage discharge (Sample I taken 10 Aug 1978, Sample II taken 25 Sept 1978).^ Parameter Upstream station Discharge Downstream station Sample I C0.46)b (m?/l)*= Sample II (1.8) (m«;/l) Sample I (O.O)b (ms?/l) Sample II (0.0) (mK/1) Sample I (1.2)'' (mg/1) Sample II (1.2) (mg/1) Arsenic 0.01 0.003 0.0 0.03 0.01 0.002 Barium 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 Boron 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.3 Cadmium 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Copper 0.03 0.01 0.0 0.02 0.23 0.0 Chromium (hex) 0.0 0.02 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Iron (total) 10.0 2.04 0.2 0.14 5.4 1.46 Lead 0.01 0.008 0.0 0.006 0.01 0.006 Manganese 1.5 . 1.24 0.25 0.16 0.59 0.62 Mercury (u/1) <0.01 <0.02 ^0.01 <0.02 <0.01 40.01 Nickel 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Selenium 0.0 <0.001 0.0 < 0.001 0.0 4 0.001 Silver 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.01 0.0 0.0 Zinc 0.0 0.02 0.0 0.01 0.0 0.01 Ammonia (N) 2.6 19.0 7.2 0.2 0.38 Nitrate + Nitrite (N) 0.6 1.3 1.25 0.6 0.95 Phosphorous (P) 0.28 ' 8.7 1.9 1.0 Fluoride 0.2 1.1 0.7 Cyanide 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0 Phenol (u/1) 5.0 10.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Hardness 98.0 280.0 230.0 170.0 135.0 ^ Analysis done by Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. '' Distance (km) upstream or downstream from the sewage discharge. ■^ Concentrations are expressed in mg/1 unless otherwise noted. 222 Chemical parameters for Cedar Creek, Galesburg, Illlaols, in proxlmltr to secondary sewage discharge (Sample I taken 19 Sept 1978, Sample II taken 1 Nov 1978).* Parameter Upstream station Discharge Downsi Stat: cream ion Sample I CO. a)'' Cmg/l)': Sample II (0.46) (mg/1) Sample I (O.O)b (mg/1) Samole II (0.0) (mg/l) Sample I (O.l)b (ag/1) Sample II (0.1) <'mg/l) Arsenic 0.003 ■CO. 01 0.002 ("O.OOl 0.003 0.008 Barium 0.2 <0.05 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 Boron 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.4 Cadmium 0.0 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.02 Copper 0.06 0.02 0.06 0.03 0.04 0.11 Chromium (hex) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.11 0.0 0.0 Iron (total) 1.56 0.76 0.22 0.22 0.5 1.22 Lead 0.0A4 0.0 0.021 0.0 0.021 0.1 Manganese 0.56 0.51 0.08 0.04 0.24 0,24 Mercury (VD <*0.02 <0.01 <0.02 0.05 <0.02 0.05 Nickel 0.0 40.05 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Selenium < 0.001 0.001 <.0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.001 Silver 0.0 <0.005 0.0 <0.005 0.0 ^0.005 Zinc 0.17 0.05 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.13 Ammonia (N) 0.6 0.35 3.1 1.6 2.7 3.6 Nitrate + Nitrite (N) 0.8 0.65 6.2 12.0 4.0 10.0 Phosphorous (?) 1.9 0.25 5.2 7.3 3.4 5.7 Fluoride 0.5 0.4 1.0 1.2 0.9 1.1 Cyanide 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.01 0.0 0.11 Phenol (iVl) 7.0 8.0 17.0 7.0 13.0 8.0 Hardness 260.0 305.0 260.0 255.0 270.0 280.0 * .Analysis done by Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. " Distance (s u V4 CO ^« t) *M c •H o Uj o .a •H 3 C 0) C Cfl to tu « ^ 0) Ul ^ w o. E T) (3 4 •r» 0) to o fN« J3 1 rf^^ O O CJ tn . o u •«— ' V Xi e (U 4J c ,^-v 0) u-> C/3 r^ c (0 o 0) E CO c c o a g O c U 00 r- ON 0) .-• o. E CO CS T I— < - m fHCT»«— ti— lfN'-<»-«fnir»CNICN rH 3 M 0) u B .i« OJ c u »H o 3 rH s en CO 6 >_x en o. cu u u 03 3 -C (0 t-l u u a; u 3 U ^ CO U3 l-l CO CO di c c j: •O (U •tH (U tj •a c •H U o c ^ (U <4-l .C j«: •H U jz a iJ ja 3 u Wi c iJ o Jbi! 0) X (U CO C CO 3 •o ^ (U CJ 3 3 3 O cn CO C •T-1 ^ CO o u (0 O (U CO CO o •»-( T3 .£: rH a «i CO u >% v^ J3 c C J= r-< « CO ^ w 3 to c 0) (U (U 0) f— 1 ^ tu (0 CO V^ ^ >% (U •o dj 60 .-< 20 4J r-H o ■o U -3 i.) "53 o. tu 0) Wl f-H 3 •»H •^ CO rH "O o r-4 a; rs en E .-• CO v •H (U -o eo CO ~ r- < to "^ 3 3 CO C •H CO o i-i CO u 3 4-1 O ■r^ U rH a 3 fl C 3 s iJ c > c >H — ^ E B (0 ti 3 r-\ « > o Q u «-l u ^ u ^ to LJ 3 r '-' CO CO o o o cn to ^ ^ u to C£ 4-1 CO :0 ^^ 3 •H T-* CO >< 3 r-t CO w CO ■-> v^ u a o o o c u a u th ■y-t u u ^ i-t LJ j-i i_( s E u J3 rH a Oi •r-( 4-1 ^ :d ^0 ^ o o o (0 u o >~ c. >^ ►J ZI CO to a u Ci z 2 z z o to 2 ~ < o 227 B a u n c o c o z o o CM CO ro rH en iH m iH n o\ m r-t iH CS CM CM rH en m c*> vj r^ m .H iJ 3 w< O a; 5 £ r-l o C i-l :j c o CO u o o c s: « kl OJ u c 5 ••-1 J v-» j: CO U (U c -i ^ o Q c J= U (U >l-4 J= ^ •H )«• X (U CO 4-1 •r-t u J3 -) 3 3 3 (0 c •H j: CD o CO j: o M o Cfl •H T3 J= ij fH o •o e 0) CJ s c X rH CO 3 to c to w« jz u c (U (U (U CO <0 O u iJ OJ 01 >s J^ <0 (U 00 iJ •u >^ T3 a 4J c j3 ^ C (U •o 0) >.• tH F-( ra i c t-l y 0) 3 C Oj CO oq-H c4 o u CO CO to CM o i-l o 2 a a P3 CO cU a cu c^ cu ^ CO 3 CO 228a u ^ '^. 00 n CI ■^ ^ a »T • ^^ N^ in»T cNtnin -.c4«?o\:n .a JL t- 3 3 a a ^ 3) o •^ a. i^ u c •-^ s flj D 1*4 i ^ CO ^^ u j: "• T 3 c -! O O Q iJ 3 3 C si g to c o a C u m ^1 »— t u f^ u'-. > 3 •w n ^-1 — fH <9 :3 ;j| u u i 3 JJ " 11 :~ C 3 31 — ai 3) u ^ 13 = VJI ca ffl w b s 5 s 3 ^-4 a 3 --. c. a 5 ^ e "e X p ^M E "a. en 31 2 ra c OJ u u u a ui u u -< w ^ a u X =H 57 5 u a 3 O -< 3 3 ^ a. Z K^ O z z z c C Z 228b ON CO >Tmmcn cm ao«-400fn n o o n 0) 1-1 a m V3 in CX3 CO vO o ro oo «n Csl I CM U (U J3 O u u O «n en •H D. CO XJ .H sz CO CO iJ CO V 0) ij &a U r-^ c fH O *J .H W Vi •o •o l4 ■o c ^4 a 3 O »-< 1-4 > 6 • cy OS w o bJ es cn 03 o o to e 3 CD •H u (0 (0 CO •H o O to •" c c •a a 3 •— 1 •H (0 3 CO 3 1^ Cfl cn o a u CO u 0) 3 o •H ^ •H c ■H CD •H CJ iH CO (0 a CO u CO CO g M CH M u u u a E J^ tJ •H o - CJ ii u CO O V a u c 3 CO •H 3 CO (U o >■ CO CO u J= 4J u c 0. u o 03 C cn t CO a C a o CJ a N C 3 CO CO 3 CO 1— ( CO CO u u E O (0 U JZ •H CO CO CO 3 cn CO CO CO C (U 01 o a 3 3 3 E 0) -i Ui o o u o. a E a u >^ iJ u U u v^ u X X u u ij 4J E u c. a; 0} o -J o o CJ CJ o <0 CO CO o o o o o •« o >■ •-] >-: cu S s s: t-J ►-« »-• u o CJ s s z 2 2 z (U a o E « 4 i-l —t 00 i-( rv O u-> m CM CN iH vO 00 00 *H •H O.JZ u J= ^ «j ij n o y rH j: js ■H 03 (U 4^ »-< 3 «J •o 3 •H (0 (A Wi u 3 JZ u o .o rH CO to w 4J -O CO O u e -• •H 3 •H a CO CO (U a 3 CO (0 CO c cn p o iJ >> 3 •H 3 3 c O o rH CO CO c u •H a ^H CO u u •T3 V4 rH XH x-» o CU rH CO c rH CO C a CO (U oc CO 1.1 c. >-< c 3 cnl 3 o CJ w ^1 c. \n a u CJ CO C CO > a CO o CO O OJ CO 3 >• CO CO >- C 3 1.1 CO CO 4) u 3 c u 3 ja y y a o a: u ^^ en 3 3 j^ c ^ ■ 0) CJ 3 u E iJ CO o CO CO O CO ■ ■ CO CO CO « 03 u u (U o CO f-( CSC 3 E c 3 3 3 •w^ T-l •H c- > 03 CO o o ~ a CJ CJ >. J -J (X. r 2: 1-H CU O .-3 2 2 fe c < >-l H-t a 229b cs vO o a en t-i -* 00 ON 01 "OB 01 -a -H 3 JS 4-i ex: tfl co»Hj«i«H > vjj=^ ctoiJoitOr-wajTi-iaioi •H M O O .a ^0) 3 Ol-H U"Hr-< aJ«Hr-t CO o 5 »J :z > ca CO 03 i-( 4J jS U3 to 73 4J Wi 3 to o O 05 t^ B ex r-t O ^ O U U -H -H to O 03 pL. U CQ U 0) CJ CO 03 03 •H r « 01 03 •h[ O , W I' c C 3 03 C . « 0) TO (U o 0) 3 0) E 3 3 •H •H 03 rH 1— t 1-t 3 i-H V^ 03 03 o a U o 3 r; C 1— * •H 3 •H E . c OJ 03 a c CO > a 2 1-t c o O r-t to to a 03 to i >-i 1-4 u •o •H iH o a; «H 03 o 03 >— t o U 03 oc V u a u c " 03 •H (U CJ : oj c )-i V CO c 03 >^ 03 B 03 03 03 (U >■ to (0 >^ c 3 u 03 01 3 JZ tH 03 3 C JC 4J 0) o E 3 E O 4J O to 03 03 0) U) 03 XJ u o C£ 03 c E 3 3 •H 1-t iH a < o o o ;-> o o to O 01 •H o o 1-4 U D. Cl. E o >-l >-l iJ u u U2 rH u 4-1 a V IJ T-< o o o to O to C c o >■ J hJ cu z z s ►-• U Z ^ < o H-t o e « u 4-1 01 c :s o a 2 30 «n en 00 r-i 04 CN .-» o^ ^ l «0 u 00 lU a E V5 00 0) to .c u CO n 00 0^ I ON 00 3 00 D < on m C) \r\ 00 0\ CN o o a e IT] to jr o CM rH 00 r-( •H f^ MD r*. CM o ro r^ ON CM »n CM CM o c (0 u .H i-« m rH CM m .-« »-^ t4 0) u >> ^ Q) i) u f-\ c S-i 3 fH o c (0 •T3 OJ CO M o E f-H ■H CO nj •o i-f ^ a (U )-• .n 3 . C2. <0 3 O - 00 N -• CO O 3 CJ 0*0 23 o u ^ ^ o b. o 03 u c u CO en a 3 r « CO •H 4J CO y 0) c r "3 c 3 en CO T3 o s i-H E y y 3 3 •H en r " , . 3 3 en 3 •H 1— 1 .-( u CO CO Q CO >-i eof 3 CO en r-t y 3 , C c .— I •H 3 •H s •H r N c o l-i u CO iU 3 V4 c. • oi w o CO C CO c E y J3 y O o CO oc c. OJ CO en >, CO CO >> c 3 ■H en o y "O CO •H CO y 3 3 y y B y CO kt CO en ki 3 en . E en ^ y ^ C 0) 3 3 (U fi c s O o o O 4-1 E •H M "O s O •H o 5 o Vd CO CO X o C u i-t c O C y o y •H l4 c. c. £ o w u o U •H u u u E a y u Wi t— < ij 4J a (U (U o •r^ o y en CO u CO O o n ' ►J .J (1. z H* >-i U u w CJ 2 2 O CO z cu Q < 2 HH u 231 m vO o lA 00 CM 03 n r^ CO r-( rH 0\ ^ 0) c c cu u c V — i o t/3 r^ vo fo en rH CM \0 m r-i »T rH CM en .H ON rH CM vO CM CM <• C3> O rH CM cn cn CM tH r-i 00^TCMrH rH <7\ cn <• V4 ^ (U o rH 3 Vj rH § o CO x: T5 CO 0) >j o S rH CO CO -< c ja 3 CO x: ^ O. n J= O (U (U u 60 C rH O CO *J rH di s T3 E XJ c CU C N CO E CI. 3 o o •H ^ 03 O 3: o-u o o CQ a ca O K iJ CJ tH cq O CO GO CO 3 00 •H CJ 4H en 0) C 3 CO c CO 0) •a C0 o ^ rH CO E CO -t c u c 3 3 CO (U CO CJ >^ rH S.I u CO c u 3 ;j a o4 !-i V CO C « <=M C B CJ o ^ o CO CO 0£ a 0) CO >> CO CO >^ C 3 •r^ CO o a 3 "O CO CO >H CO CJ 3 u U B a CO V4 CO CO CO !-i 3 CO c B lU CO ua u 4-1 0) 3 3 3 01 e OJ c CO o CO O rH 3 CO o CO CO a CO CO u i^ u u E o •o o •H cc •rt 4J CO ■— ( (0 CO a c 3 3 — 1 Ti^ •> o E o o a 4-1 s •H CO •o O iH O u CO CO CO X o a E u OJ u a a; O o a o o •H W e. c E a 4^ iJ u o iJ u •n <-• u iJ E £ E a u 1.1 .-H 4-1 a (U :u o ~^ O o CJ CO (0 CO W o o CO — ^ i> a 0) a c > ^ -J Ou S M l-t M W CJ u Cd 2 2 2 CJ p- W 2 cih c < l-H CJ 232 c 3 o a CM e^J CV4 1-1 in F^ F-4 •-< tM <*1 ^ c. s in o ■> . o C3 o CM I 00 J3 o o a • 5 4) •v^ •H « X e _0 s a 3 91 CO j: a CO -a m — b •m4 ^ ^ ^ 14 CO ocooijijraa a u jt 1) -^ J= U ^ a 4.^ 3J i-t aawua^ja ■-< 3 u u -< a c a 3 J3 4J -H M a :3 u y O & a c3 a ■-4 -3 *J .-0 -4 a 5J 2 3 3 o 3 c — C u J J soocviajjioioo S) ■ ■H 3 c 3 O o *-^ •Pi* CO E a a (0 e u -J •-^ 3 ■u u ^ ^> k. *H o 4J 1— « 1—1 M n ^J c (il >• a 3 u u i) CO i ea a. u *« C -4 3 u CO 13 a >5 k. b •J =J ^ b . " • a CO; !0 « S>l 3 C f-i 3 0) •P4 ■a 'J u *— t 3 ^ U 3 y 5 e o X a — u ^a 2 u — a CO ^ C 4-1 o. :z )-* bl U U 2: — 2 z 2 — >— >-' < u 233 o m e u iJ to c NO iH m en iH iH m u to c e to m CM cn CO ox O CM I u •i O. 3 A 0] (U fH « 0) u »i4 OJ u kl en O o CO u •o J= fl u (U 0) 0} ^ u c u «H c o u^ X 1-) A 4_) c u A 3 0] 3 3 CD ^ U) C u f-l CO c • i 1 pH CO 1.1 o O (U 03 a u c c 4-1 CO CO cn cn CO > 3 3 ctJl o M C cn E 0) o 2 O cn 4-1 C£ f— ( j-i T* a •?-• •»-( CO c o c iJ o 5 ;-i OJ O a C3. u iJ c e (U —1 o 3 :0 ^ 2 z C/3 U 234 ^a-^rmoNaovOf^-— ('^•'Arvi e (U n c NO fS «n »n m 09 0) >-« a E m CO 4) to u 0) CM o fn 00 ON evj U 0) e > o ^ u QJ CJ CO 3 CO C OJ o o E CO o a a CO CO E CLj CO o u o 2 CO (0 rH (U E O u CM en i CM m CO ON CO I 0) 3 CO 3 < e a 0) »-. (0 c 3 . a\ >I iH r-l m e CO c c o 0) £ CO u c CO u a 0) c -• 03 •«H CO V-i &0 (U (Q c 3 c: T3 CO CO T3 CO 3 J3 PQ _] OS O 3 O 6 3 rH M U OQ V3 U J2 U 3 3 CO e u (u j^ c U (U ^ u 3 U O CO to o n o 0) B CO c c 0) 11 u CO CO T-t OJ 0) (0 3 CO 1-1 c aj CO •H CJ 1— t > U J2 — CO c CJ 4J C u u £C a CO CO E c u J y O e .Ui 3 CO to col CO 0) ■H >^ 3 : >\ 7) o CJ 3 CO CO CO .£3 3 CO "^1 c E B U U CO CO cq 3 CO S (U f-l CO a 0) 2 3 E c OJ CO CO CO O ft CO ^ 3 c CO en CO 0) « 4_t u ;j CO O o -o T-( -r-( TH ui CO ja O (-H tJ 3 •H *^ •H T-« CI. 3 3 ^ i-i N o c p ^ CO _^ e CJ T-» to 2 E S E a o —( rH 1- CO > T-t o o o c >^ CO u o tH c C O u to CO CO o £ c J-< 1.1 t-l a (y CJ c C 0) u c. c C- a CJ ^ 1^ i-J J-l T-( ^ XJ ^ Ul E £ T-l a» £ JZ Q. aj a; u ^ •r-t u o ^ :o 'm CO o o o CO 1^ 1-1 ^ V ■u >■ J ►-* ^ ►J 2 »-' >-* z CJ w U 2 2 z CJ C^' u CU CO w CJ 236 ^H C 3 3 ^ to 3 C 3 a '-I V —I u a o >« en lu ^ -- o a 3) ■»• a 3 3 3 -^ E u S w u u 1) U Jd e > j< « 3 -^ O •!) tjj:u30• — '^j ml (s o G| o CI = *j| a] ^ u|o. a 3 3) iJ ns ^^ i-M •H 3 ^ » 3- M (U J= 01 cn TJ a; g 09 CO cn CO "^ ^ 3 <0 J= •H •a 0) CO 0) CO u u U Ui U 0} .! 3 -t -H 00 r-l a 4-1 (U •a Nl^ 0) N *« o. 3 0) c >-• .-( CO •H CU f-l T3 ^ CQ 2 CJ o as o O Cl4 CJ cn cn CO 3 01 •H o iJ 0) 0) c 3 CO c 09 TJ c (U tn r-1 E (U 3 •H cn »H •H 3 2 •-^ W w en en o cn u tn O r-l u C c cn •H 3 T^ •H s •H 0) tn U rH 1— ( tn E 5: >^ ^J £ •<-( 3 4-1 U .H o T-( 3 CO CO CO CO c r^ u CO O T3 V4 CO o o; 1— t t—t cn i—t CO 4-1 f-( O 5 o ',-1 V4 0) tc Ui u c CO •H o 3 cn 0) O <— 1 ua 4-1 C. ^ a CO QC e 1— t C tn E U3 cn E CO 01 cn CO CO >> 4) 5 3 C 3 tn O 3 3 u :; £ o E j: cc CO >- ■Ji cn 3 C tn .1.1 cn a> 3 3 H c O tn 2 3 o ^ CO 0} 01 CO tn cn ij i-i )-i o o 2j: ■»-• r-( c T-l >- £ c 4-1 M •o 73 O O O O O o )-< JO :0 o E a) u g o o CO c. a c. a a E o u 4-1 4-1 •H 4-1 4-1 £ u i-H u a 0) (U — < HH O LiJ z: CO c < u 238 o NO m •H ^ C V.4 o o c o O Of N -H >N E a 0) ■H 4J u o w z I 2 39 6 a 0) u c o o y£> CM vO M CM in iH CM i-t vO r^ ^ 00 m u a CO CN4 V m CO 00 as I O 3 to 3 «n vO ^ 3 ^ t-< f—t }-• c £C c E 3 1H OJ U o f-t CO CO •H c CO g Wi "^ CO o •H o - Xi E , "5 01 3 3 CO CO >> 3 C o c . CO CO 3 o v^ L. CJ B a u (0 ■ CO 2 > i-l a OJ 0) CO c E E 1— 1 O CO -3 4J CO 05 CO 4-1 CO 3 o O O CO c E M 3 •rj •H c. •H ,a N u 4-1 u T-) O •u /— B E X o >- 4-t CO -3 CO ■ .J < z cu H-t CzJ 2: a < < » < »M a 240 (9 (U u 0) c o vO fo lO rn fS fM m ao (0 rs» 03 (N rH iH 00 <<-» ^ & E CO iri cs e (0 I m CN t-l E a CM a 3 CO o a CQ •H rH fH rH rH •H rH «n n CO . 3 ^ X o jC J3 a o CO rH ca.T3 03 U (0 TD w •H CO (U 3 a (U c U3 c >- 3 ao c (U 60 O (U (U J= C o 0) u 0) CJ J^ ^ •H to O ^ •H >-< CO CO rH CO O -H ■H CO O 3 N CO 1^ rH V4 o u <0 jC CO rH jr 0) V' c r; o r-t J-I o •H •H CO 03 o J o 2 5 J (14 o >> o to 3 o 03 CO ca a 03 U iJ c: 01 •H U CO 0} •H CO to u U rH 03 c P P^ 3 CJ •r^ c O U r-l O •H 3 CO CO •H CI CO 3 CO g >^ iJ •H T3 1-1 •-4 o (U iH rH 03 rH 03 rH c 4.1 C rH O O CO 03 (U u c u c CO •H o 3 o 3 to CO OJ CJ u a a u u to 6C E tH C 03 a c (J E 03 O 0) . aj >^ CO CO >. V 3 3 C :; CO -H 03 3 c (U CO o O u a a E J= OC CO u 3 03 03 u CO 3 C f > « 4J 3 3 3) E E O 03 ^ tH CO 0) 05 03 03 03 03 03 03 4J CJ U u a QJ O 0£ 3 03 CO E 3 3 tH •H lH •H •H •H a •H 3 3 CO U j_i •H rH 0) o o ^ C B E E E E X o T3 rH r-t *-• 03 E 3 -o 03 O "H O o o O o >-i O CO CO X >- O (U T3 •H CO o •H ki a c a Jli. c. E w r^ 4^ u o C 4J 4^ G ^ — u ij r*. 4) d) U u 03 -r* CO o 3 vw 1 o CJ >- »J rJ J hJ Pu S CU M >— 1 tJ s o z Pu rJ Q (-1 o 2A1 NO m -^ r-i eo m oo iH m >T .H \0 C4 <0 0) m CM cs so u CO jC < o CO CO ON I 03 e Q 0) U a =3 < -l rH O «0 4) ^ O NO f^ U )-i o a -H 3 3iHT3M^C0HJ35pqO«OU4«C_) W3 CO m 3 CO CO s o CO 4) o 3 , c CO 0) "O u 4) o (U 3 3 •H CO CO rH CO 3 •H iH u CO CO O CO O 3 O •H 2 c <— t •H 3 •H E 3 tJ 0) O CO CO CO c ^ c •H 3 c o O »H CO CO tH 1— t CO c:i^ >-i -u ^3 ^^ ■H TH o (U oc >-• Ci u c 3 CO , : ^ u o. a v^ a CO C CO c CO CO CJ . CO 3 (U CO >^ CO CO >^ C 3 3 3 fl 3 »H u 3 u u e u CO >-l CO (U 0) CO > C 4-1 (1) 3 u i-t OJ f— 1 o CO SJ o CO CO CO CO CO u u CO CO "O to C£ •H E c 3 3 •H •»^ ~4 a. 3 o o o o — i C o •tH ^ C S E X o f— t CO CO T1 E o CO -o o •H o o o !_< CO 1-t •H c CO (U l-l o C •T-« U a a a CJ i-t a /-» u •H u u u f* 1.1 /* 0) V O ■H CJ v 57 CO £ o c c c. u >i ■-: -3 Cu 2: K-t >J hJ a < z 2 Q r-l cn SO fO 1 .-1 U3 <— ^ V4 O u • J3 o a v^ u ij a 0) to CM CM o o o c (J to 6 it u o ■o (0 u u o U3 0) u -< oo ^ C *< U -H O C flJ ►2 s ►J X X o :5 CO ►J N W r-« a. N (U a 60 ii •H a (23 U e o -H u e <, S O U. CO 4) C CQ >^ U £ o 6) (0 3 » e n U c M •o u e 0) 3 •r^ M w 3 •rl »H 00 3 «3 c c .-• •rH ••-t e iJ 0) u CO c CO (U U Vi f— I n « CO CO « •»-# 3 3 c CO « a >-* u V. ^ -3 U> •— < 1-» lM r-« r-i w a u (n >. (0 w C£ ■ CO a C 3 w 3 3 w U u 3 ^ . -i 04 S s -J -J < — Q < ►-< »-* C 2A3 a CO u •JJ c o a >T iH t-l ^ ^ O 0) o d oo ON I ON en 3 CO 3 <: o o Q. e CO CO JZ o c CO V4 aa M CO 0) •H ^ V- lU 3 J^ u :: •H D. (U o o (1) >.i c e j= O 3 U^ a^ JZ ^ •H ij Xt u J3 c CO o M o T3 JZ v 3 3 •a (U iH 3 u •H a c 3 CO CO (0 j: J= CO xj J= i-H W (J a CO u CO 0) o e o o OJ CO U ■H Xi (U J= c c u ^ 3 3 00 C (U tn r-( jr 0) u o u >^ O OJ J a a CO 0) T3 o a 03 C CO C o o (0 u cd 0) c c « 3 4J 3 C O (J CO C4 o )-l o z a< CO -H^O'^'-<— < « • o o (a c n iH 1-^ ta 4) 3 4) 4) ca 2 b J< u 3 #^ JS TJ V U o b e a -^ a •a J« 3 .s 4) c ^M b ^ JZ —I (U . 41 a V 4) ea « -4 O W 41 U M <4>l g ■o ■a £ c ^ M 41 2 c N a. 3 01 a O -H « ^ U u O 3 E •o e so 3 O c 41 u u M hi ^ u o u « F^ s u J= O 4J a ^4 vH 3 u u _o *^ a a o >J « >« 90 U z V3 a u o 3S «5 CS a CO o (J c u 41 C a >J 41 a 3 e j3 a o z{<|z „ a ■*i a a > 11 S u u ul 7) = 1 3 -^l . C C a « a e 41 b 4J u 2 z al^ e o u 41 E Q ,^ a :i _ 41 a| a ill a|-< o 1- t- a. c > J< a 9 c. , s 41 c ^ U e ^^ 4) • a 4J u 41 4J a a 1- a «N a 3 >H •a U -« a — a a a « a 3 3 a u 3 41 41 c u a 41 41 hi M4 a a a Cm u a s 41 41 a -< J3 e n O. = -a ^ a 41 u a a a 41 d *M i^ E a •J a Z z s ^ u* 245 o V c c Cl, ,_« tn u c u s ^^ 3 03 o ■»-( o o fl *J 5 u u O >. u^ nj u c o Ss B CJ -H - 1 OiU> — O ! — •© • < 1 — 00 00 r>- U_ 1 It tl li li CP 1 hJ 2 I a: H ! z> >- I t~ CO H 1 < CO z: I a: uj H 1 kJ 2 _l 1 C- Q 1 3: ai * I bJO < X X 1 J- OX Q. * 1 » 1 I (/> 1 o: 1 O 1 t- 1 O 1 < 1 1 O 1 M I X I O I h- 1 1 « 1 » 1 (M CvJ C\J 10 00 — (S CJ — '-0 S) LO • • C7) • • a> • • • • II U U 11 U 1! li II U II H 0^ n uj to CO o U2IZ)i:-<::^c>"jJ2 >— — a: (O UJ II II u 11 II I! I! i: II i: x> bJ X 20 UJ UJ Di cr> !—_!<: G rs M _1 C q: X ci: K u; I- UJ )— 3 o H X H X ^^ X < n UJ X N. f-- uj >-uj CO h- X ct: _J fZ < Q < ct: r- _J M < X o X X >• a: ujuj MH x t— X /-^ < • • • ^ • CS CD \ « • • / • . '^ < • * # 'S> M * • , c a , s * y 21 _i -1 • * ^ * « X < « *^ % • 0^ ' Hi 3 * * — I — en » OQ < * '. ^ [l ^ • * UJ z: ^ — ! CJ • bj LJ < CO /-s UJ t; W q: N X in II! h- !D 1 ''~ o^' «i 5; '^^ OCMCOCX^CO ©COS — C" -^ CO cc X cr "—^ :^ H I ©<:;• ^' ^ £: CD G; (SSCNJ cj — c:?cs<^c^r^o Cv' X 'J^ C\J CO _• H- c:, Vr 1 <^ s> ■j? ^ s IS) Gj S S/ S S S> ®C5CJ®CS?CSG^ (S X Ll! ^-^ ~ w c X — t— • •p s:- Oi~ 'w' X X X •• \ ^ u A »— X >- X ZL CC a; "2^ X h- X a r^ — . II < X M X M ^- or X X X t— •• n li + H X M UJ X < UJ X 00 OCO CO CO 0") ' X X Q X Uh- Sa ! X CO Z.Cx'uLU.OtL'Z) 2-jLjjj X H- M X _1 c. i- Ci 248 CO o r— O < Li. I I I I I I to ! 2 I H I H- I H 1 H I -J I I * I X 1 O) (s rr LO -00 • — 00 CJ r-^ II II II I! X I X i I CO I 0£. I O 1 h- I O I »— < •uJ Q. 2: UJ liJ O < X ^- ox a < o M X o 00 00 C3 (\J — -^ s> en C5 o CM — GJ -•— ■ 'O • -O) • • • OCO 1 O— I G5C5CD® 11 11 U II U II U II II II /-N H q: H- X ^.x /^'dj UJ 2: UJ V5 CO 2:3 aM:i:M_i2:_i_j M 1 21HXUJD::v-'- ^ cocc£:clzd— X < M c UJ h- •< -J =5 -J < 10 J— /^ CM — CM LO rv 00 "^ CO — CM — CS ® Cl '^ . • . • C5^ UJ ^ S>Si — G5CS» — S>QJ CS> CO UJ i: 11 I! II li 11 u It T 1: x> UJ UJ 2: CQ UJ ki Oi CD »— _J < -^ M ^ Ck Qi X Qi M UJ H- u.r H- 3 H X M 2 v^ 2 < n til 2: \ M < 2: rj UJ >- UJ < 2 M MM c a: r— a: Ci Ti Z Ci: X M 3 < U.I M oc;c:^an2CiC)Q:> CO h- :^ii:_ja::-CjiUJUJMM -1. 1— - LUi— o o 2:x o o Ol- V) C — s s> — s — O O S' G5 C5 S CP — O OJ O S> UJ u. ©COOCOLOK.— OO S' G> CO SXS? CS>S>CO C0SC?C5CJQ® o X c CO O CO (C CO C) _! u: o-> z a ciL a: ex: z:: zr. -i 'jj <, ai z Lo hH cj -Ji » 3H '■ ^ nz 5-i 1 if. — a: 1- — « « • • "^ .>- /\ X >- X •* X o » »— ii cj ;^ uo • !: X M X • •1 — 00 * O X IK - •• 1! !1 + J: MUJ 4: i • *-, ^ * X Ci X ' ^ t- • Sg * O 21 * _, < '.iJ • X K- M X _i C h- Ci 250 * 1 X 1 I CO 1 a: 1 O 1 t- ! cc (S> r^ O ! ^r . ■ CO • < 1 C\J -. (S <0 CO csi r^ Q CS LO LO c? — O) ■ -O) ■ • ©CO I K'® 1 OOOCOS) u 11 G ;: I! li II II II !i r\ H a: t- X •w' /^ LU UJ 21 LlJ CO CO Ci ^ o 2: 3 a Lu n o Ci. o c/> cjo :ki 21 CJ >- ^ c'.' c ai c^ ID < 2: cj UJ — ^ I— ^ c»i < o u (_■> u. n r: iz u^ r-; X h^ UJ 1 — < —1 oo UJ r— <: • < o a rr h- CCi •^ CC' ■^ CM 1£> r- CM LO c;- GT. 00 c. • • • • • • Li_' ;^ CJC5G?S'Cv — C^^'S' o Cv CO l_J u UJ CO O r^ ct: X t- UJ M X Z. *-' UJ :e: < z: 3 UJ M l-i M C n 2: q: 2: UJ i— M >-U) OeI h- a !::> < u; C3 o CD c:i z n Ci o rx: > z:a:_ict:-a:ujujM!-i < QD O '_> C) M _! 2: Z CO < 71 H CO i— M < HZ r- I- CO 251 < CO X 21. M CO < QQ' H q X o f— t:;; ^- ^ liJ h— ' • , Z ' p ■ a E ^^ C3 . !^ Cr: O 2: < q: CD < / i , •t a. < < o o • u CD CD 1— CO -z.>- UJ t— Z H r- C3 '^ ;-0 C M CG r:x o c^ c O r- Z"' 1 I < H X J5 -x c;- Ci- <» s> S S> S GJ O — 1 K> cr.' <:;■ — r-^ C? >!:> C5 -• '^ (S i^ & GJ G3 g: -s — cc C-! CD — c:- 0? c? rs Ci' o- I C ® CD G^ S- I ■ X O X X j:;* o s UJ C5 < ! C_> X ::: cc < LiJ o '< C-: u x _^ C < UJ z OJ Mr>MQi:M_j2:_i_i l-l 1 2mz:uj£j:v-' uj2roa.oc/:>cDi^2:o >- — COCQiQ-rXZOUJZ t— V. Ct: UJ >-UJ < Z Hi MHO Oil- a C, N-V 2: X a: X M 15 CO »— z:cii_iCK: < Q < a H- _J M < "T- QXX>-:i:UJLLJMM X J— o *''*^*^9.,^^^^^ a. ^'*'*''^»*,..^__^ * ^ « SL I ■'■*»-.,,,^ « O ^"'"^^-^...^^^^ * * o LD (S> (S> O CO — S5 S> ® CO CO CSiLO K)65C0CS?O3CDC?C3 C3®CDCS®C5®G3 00 l®QCO®CJ COSCSOQ CSCJ5®CCQ®C0CS t. a CO OCOCD CO C0_!* XC0ZOa:CjiQiZ)Z_IUJ<:2QZCDMOZCnZ * zi « O X MUJ XCi o z CO o z CD X z o o CO en CM < I a o) UJ — o Z X O r-» H h- •• < UJ O h- o < -J o 3 cr> C3 UJ _1 o a: H o UJ X CO < C3 v^ CD O X CO K U -J < o CO CM ^- II CD 00 X z or^ (S ■Qi II — X X A a. CM CD u n 0. • Z Q UJ • u 254 (D l/> CD 05® I OG5 1 --®Q© U II U U II II II U U U H UJCOW * 1 X 1 1 i q: I w O I a: h- 1 65 — o O 1 ■^ f^ • H- < t CJ CD i «— r^ O U. 1 1 II II II II < u. CD 1 UJ 21 1 o: o H 1 3 H >- 1 H- v> X H 1 < CO o z: : Qi UJ h- H ! UJ z -J 1 a. o « 1 2: q: » * 1 UJO UJ >- M M O Ck: cn-siM x> o o zzoo _i q: - q:ujuj ca o o o M _j UJ H- M a: H- M z UJ »- a: - I 1— \ M oo O -"^ M 00 X r>. o II h- UJ UJ 1— ^ < h- Ci UJ 3 O < o UJ UJ CO < Ck CO H X o < X o o < z M < I— CO 255 c C) C3 CC.- 00 Cf. C-/ IS s- o G> ! cr; s i cv Cv s a ii •: n "i !i ;; :; s; !i li /-\ M Oi rs !x' ^ Li_ 00 <■ ;■ (_"' H' ~"' -■" •<.' Li.' ''-'. ri ^-! i. r^ . J 2: _j _j 2:: ^H r. u; •x. ^ < '_l: t: U.-' H. wL. ::i c; c x; ;; c*:- c 11: :_ :;■ < 3 !■■ u: CL < z: _J JQ -i ■'->. ZL <. c ■■_. t( '~ ~ T" •" * : * : :■: i * ; r^^ ; CO : v^' :iL ! LO ""w ; ^^ ' G oc> (— ; < : .7/ f^ V.' '-^ '-■ i u_ : 'if i; Ii li < : ! ."j- •S * : i; : * ; LiJ < *^ c ■ i: : >- .^ u. r. './;■ — V .' o c. :^ — tr: -1. .^S IJ. ;- la.' |- i-i • J i- - *^■' Li ' VL .■""■ !• — — , . >- '-l' '•— f f— t— ! .'.. .'>' ;~- 1.; ^.'. :z. 'a.: 'z. \-:'. _ ''C t-i .^ ■■^ .^ -^ ---- — . t_^ '':/ l'. -'* IJ .jL ^J :x. -i ~ *-x ,1. r- . J ^" ;l1 Ll' 'i. h-; ; t •< i. ■-' '.: -> M _j 7.. 7-1 256 (/) UJ H J- H O H X o < CO 2 .12 • o o o o < O < H O O a-: < H O < C) u. J- c q C^ ^V W '^ w e :/: Q O C 3 Q G> C C '- ■-i '-. u •_■ i; c c> ^ :;- S' Q s c; q e c: i;- c s a^ a. s '.^ c c ■::; cr> U O'; X> <-', c: ,_| r: tr; 2: ci 2c: ct; j- z^ ex _i li < OQ ~: cj" ^-i '- :2: 'J' I z: < CD o (- c- c c o u_ 'u 1 r^ 2: i: n il: i_ • -c * r * r- * L' — >■ 257 3 '£> -r a ^ CD • • C; • so ; o C5? : & c- c rj !; i: V V, V. !: ;; •: :; !: f~\ H-! X Vx- i^\ ir m II' ',•% * i X i X C < 0"; * : i: : u. w < * i c CD -^ CI> (.> II i; 11 \: Ll. c X i-T Zr^ i-H Cil i— 1 I ^ 1 I —.''—•.■_ li.; :x. '-■' •<. ij_ r_ .'xj < i: c Ij £ < M z^ < w-j Liii.. z: z: vz :^ h". '■ C l' '.i.' .1 ' 258 •rv ^" 2 <• (/) , \xi z H li-. H- • H > O ^ H c • " X O'. " o ' , *^ H- , ' H- o , ' 2 a • - U »— ' • / ' 2 • . O . , ^ cu ' I , ' X. / • o 1 * • 1 ^ ^ - * o CO . . . . .... U- .X o v* ^ ' • z ' * < ^ QC * e * • < H O . » • -1 , • * < • *■ H -n ^ Ci o ^ < * a .' c> CD < t ; I- ft 2 > ■• 2 W>- OO 'S- 2X oo c Of- - Lo r.-- ts c C5: a, Q C. Cv G' Ci' G' O S "v S — r; .^ Q — ^ — G Cy c; c ^- ^_ ^- *. G G Sr G- G C; G t?:' 'J. :;■ G n cc 2: c: Ji: a; a: r ■ r: _i u : z: < a:; o •-■ o o c o Li_ Ll. X 259 ^ o a !i ■3; Cv n !. ii !i i: 1; !; u ii !; * I H X 2: -J to vO c:- r:. z- ■•:: < Ll- ::: I— ! ~> r—: Cii ►-; _| ~^ ._.i _j k »_ M 5Z Ll I'x. '-' •< '.i^ ~ Li' z. c" 0- Cv CO L": v: 11 c_' > ic a :i: ri. r> < k: _•■ u- 1: ^- Ct: < _ C _l iU < i-i Z. i- ! '- < o u o ll. M i_ z: 1. ^. c •—• I u. (V (V- C: C' ■ c r> r^ '^ :r. X ^- •- /-. rr. M _^ P"^ Hi 1. >- '^•u. ._j X <. ::■ < iii < £ C5 c3 l; i— . _j 2: 260 H h- S H X o en 2. 2 CD < Q 2 iLi z o a. n o o u. o < o < a o < H O < o z:>- C1.-H 1— 1 ro cs" g; o f» a w q o- ! CvJ S= C- C". o C: c g; — i Q 'S- Q C' Ci' Q Q Gi' & ■1* Cv ^' ■^' Cv c*- r "^^ w c s G Q G c- ■::: -^ G' Q G Q Q G a S G> Q G G G t: G Cv < c X o ; cc cj (^ 'c ^'o '^ -J I z: 07 z: c Qt: ai a: -•■; z .-J u • < .-c 3 a; J-: G n Ci- z: ; 2: < ai o h- o u o o u_ li.. _j CI. z: — z: ~: c^ < :< »: J >. ; ->- X ■ — 'j-. . ;*" ... •f- 3!. * ^*. * V- * >. 1 — ;«; *: i-i * * ^j* *^^ »: A •— J '.1 X X >c ^ A 4. .^ '„ ' X ». !— H * <. ..• 261 X . ■,j. u. lu' y- H O H X o 262 a a. u. o < a: < .-I < a < a: I- p u.: .- r a. H -ti. 2: >■ c: f- u: < X; c- H- ^-^ :. :; C" Ll. u. 263 g:- — 00 CJ Lu ZI Zl 21 Q- K" C; OC CV CO !^ O G O O S — i: :: :; i: i; :; X C Cv ^ iL z UJ (i> o r\ Qi. X ^- u.- ■■H z^. ^ -' iL' -— < ^ ~' H t-i '-! Z2: 0- n n M >-Ll; i: < iL.- _i ti 21 o n n >- :i: uj ll' r-; r-; < aa o cj^ c) ^. _i r: :>: (•, 26A r) ^" CO 2: <- CO ^ 2 - H- • M . O ^ H a • " X O'. •* Q * ', H- / • H- # • .^ rL • • UJ h-' ' , / " 2: ' < ■ ^ Ci. ■ . ' , . ' r: r Q i ' • • I , 2: , ' < * Oi , • • < • H ^ \ . -J •* < • •» H — , * __ Q ^ < • a .* rsi < i. I- «i LlII-3 2M H- oocr- CLHOQ 3:x 00 c O! H- < O K X o ■C & C3 CS G G> Ci S & (S Q C' G Q S" S 0^; S- Q IJU 0:; X. O Q CI GT c C- — C? 'S O G. C C' ci- c- Ci G' Cy c: e S' Q Q G Q Q ; .!. H- a" ;— «H r: i- -i. ■^-^' -- ii ' r_ < z. 1 '.._■ >- •.!- (-< r-i ^-i 1. .-iif- g ^ ij:: z: rj ^" -^ •■* ''^ ■1. .j« ^ al ^ i < Q < .U !- •r- r . >.- i u- Li," - - < £ U' :■- cj> i— : ..J I" *'' 266 CO X 2 CO UJ M »- H O H X c Z UJ 2 O c s: o o u_ o < a: CD < H OQ- < o c CO t-\ < H O < o 2 o UJ V. r\ K « 2>->. : >: iiji-r5 ; ^^ >: ZM(- CD C5 c;.- S> T O G C^J CvJ •.:; G 0-1 G G G G 'i "t' * ooo G Q G^ G> oo O G G G G G G G' G G G G G 'J ; X 2X * (S CJ G S' Cxi G G G G G G G G G G G G -.; ,-* • oo c — •^ A O! >. v-» X * K X >- « t i— .•»: < * H * O * ^^ '■-" * M ;•: VH L' X X CO U (C: tC ■y.' _l' X X ^ \ X Q X CO 2 o a: oi ii: z? 2 _j LiJ < xj 2 c£> f-i o 2 cr "Z X ;^ 2 * 2 < aa O H- O O D O !x. U_ .-1 a. 2 2 2 2 c_ < .-v; * P -_" f— 2 G '<: u.' 267 CO <0 X z. z <0 UJ H I- H O H X o Z UJ z o Q. 8 CO U. 01 o o < < H a < H < z 0Q\ < a. a M I •••• • ••#• • • * CD X O QO z o J- « OOCD O-HOCi XX oo c OJ- < o H X o »- 00 CSi Q CD GP S' &> O Q Q Q Q CSJ Q ® S> ® G? W ^ CO O CS> CM — (O G^ Q O CS} Q lU U- COOOCDS>GdS)SO SiCO®®<3?C5C5CS (5 Q O C& Q S Q Q Q ® G> G> S PO O CO CO <0 CO_l XC0 2Cia:QiCi:3 2-JUJ- X h- « H « ox X MliJ X XQ X a 2 X H-H « a a < X o a: G (S CQ — < I a:oo OS. 00 •• X 200 Ot^ M >- •• I! UJ -J < o CO — »- •J CD iO — CL 2 • Cli li — XX A a CsJCO It u a. ' xo UJ • 1-a n 268 ■^ 00 — II U U II U U U U U II * 1 « 1 1 CO 1 QC 1 O 1 h- 1 CM ® CM O 1 U> • CO • < I CM CO — r^ U. 1 1 II II II II CD 1 UJ Z 1 C^ H 1 z> 1- 1 h- CO H 1 < (0 x: 1 QL LU H 1 LJ 2 -I 1 O. O 1 x: Ck: X 1 UJO 1 (k: I o I SI < I U. I oi H o H 3: ujcoco (J XID Cii- i 00 I— \ l-i 00 O \ M CO X r^ i: ^" UJ u 1- X < >- o — O II II o> c&c\i® cor*» I ® (S — ® OCMO II II U Q II II I! II 2 UJ C£> o a: h- H 2 M 22 O O X o < CO UJ o _i UJ CO 3 UJ CD UJ h- -_1 r\ Hi _J X Ol M UJ H- :r X M ^ 2 < UJ X "\ I— 2r>uj >-uj < MHO QiH- Q: O q: X H z>< u oo22£::iOQi> CO -JQ:<0- Q: UJ LlJ M M X OOOM_JX2CO h- :^ o < X o o CD < o f-i J— < »— CO 269 CO CO X z CO UJ H »- H O M X o z UJ z o Q. u. o z < CD < H O < H < 0£. OQ' CD < a z a. • K CO o z CO O titt t t««< < «««• CD X 25 O CCt a. z o UJ^- Z) ZHH- O O CD Ci-H OQ zx go c CO CC CD S> CO ® o ® Gd CD S 09 CD CO r^ C7) (D -^ - * h- « M * CJX * MIU * XCk « 02 * I— M * O o < X o a: Q cs CQ — < I CC 00 CJ N. 00 •• V. Z 00 M h- " <: UJ Oh- o < CD oa UJ o QL H U UJ cJ) < (S \^ Q X CO II UJ _j < c. CO CO r3 — CMh- i: -CD CO r>» Qi Z II CiXCS ci: a.— X A CM Lo • n CM CO U II •»• a. • zo UJ • I- a 270 CO 1 l/> Ijj (O CO CO ^ O) (SCO o U) •— o 1 sj 1 CJCDOCD u u u n 11 u U D II U * 1 X 1 1 CO 1 a: 1 O I t- 1 O 00 O 1 LO LO • < 1 CM 00 1 — H- 1 h- (O H 1 < CO z: 1 Ck: UJ H 1 UJ z _1 1 a. o 1 s: QC « 1 UJO o X Z5 aCiQ:ci.rD— M 1 CO >- •— 1— X H 0> O \ M oo X >. o 11 1- UJ u 1— X ® ® "^ a c .... UJ Qi o ^ ^ o ^ — GJ CC ® ® CO < U U II It u U U U 11 11 r) O UJ q: z CD o UJ u CD t— -J OQ O rs M —1 < QL X q: H Qi H- UJ J- 3 O H X H z •-/ z < tl UJ X \ J— < zr>u >-UJ < Z H MMO QiH- a a o zza:xH ZiXUJ H OOOOZZOOCi::> CO H- xci:_iQ:-q:ujujmm X J— - - UJ»-r5 ZHI- O O CD O-HCCj zx 00c 01 — < o H X o • tit • o z o ! IjJ ® O 05 CD CO Q O CS> ® CD ® CO C5 ® C3 ® CO CD f^ 6?SS)CSC9C5C9 I J ! 1 I CD CD Q 9 CD S ® CD CD CD CS Q ® G9 CD ^ CD CD 1 I 1 *. X % * * a. CO O CO CO CO CO _1 XC0ZOCi:Qia:3Z-JIjJ yf G5 — t^ GD CS> a> -O) • — CD 1 GJ— I CDG5C5C3 u II n II u II u II u II » 1 % 1 CO 1 ck: I O i h- 1 C» CS> Cs/ O 1 CO •CO • < 1 CM 00 — t^ li- J t II II II II CD 1 LJ Z i QL H I 3 J- I H- CO M 1 < CO z: 1 Q£. LU H 1 UJ 2 -i 1 a. Q 1 2: q: X 1 UJO CDi- V- H- V. M a U \ M 00 X r^ u 1- UJ UJ H- X < t— Ci UJ 00 CO ^ LO \fi ® O) CM o o J- o o IDS'®®® — ®® — S> u u I! 11 1: u i: II u II z UJ CD o UJ X cx: f- UJ »— H X M Z v^ Z UJ Z X < Z3UJ >-UJ H M M a QLf-QL ZZQiZM XXUJ C3000ZZCiOCii> zci:_jai-QiUJUJMM CD o CO OQ o I- tt Z>-"^ ujt-r5 ZHi- O CJ CD SX 835 Z < o l-l X o C\J ® ® SJ C5 CO C5 Q s> ® — CC CC Si Q O CS3 — t/) ^ ® C& CM CNJ U) CD ® 03 G3 S : u- G30)®C3— — ®C0 S> — CS>G>®CSiSC\l escssssds:>s^ I I I I CO O CO CO CO CO _l XCOZCia:CilQ:3Z_JUJZ 2 — CMr- 1 C\i * QQ 1 II • 'X 1 • X < CO wt^ca 1 CO * a: — Z L" X o \ axs X 0) cm 0.— X X •• \ X A « >- X Z CO O) * i- X or^ CD • i: « M X M CM CO » OX X 1- •• 11 II + « MbJ X • -O) ■ CD® I CD® I — ®®® II II U U U B D n u H 0^ » 1 X i 1 CO 1 Of t O 1 1- I V O 1 CD 00 • < 1 oj CM 0) r^ li. 1 1 11 II II II CD 1 UJ 2 1 Ql H 1 z> »- 1 h- V) H 1 < (/i z: 1 OL UJ H 1 UJ z: ^ 1 Q- a 1 z: a: » 1 UJOt:z> ci ■m^ C0QCi:G.Z:><2OUJ2 1- \ Qi < X O _l CC < H I H H 00 . o 11 K UJ UJ 1- X < »- a UJ t- < _l z> a _i < O o \^ h- ^ (M — UJ C\3U> ® ® ® CD a UJ . -0) .® . . . UJ (X ®® I ®®"--®®®® CO o U 11 !I 11 11 Q C U D II z> a. UJ r> 2 CQ o UJ UJ o CD t- -1 3 O r\ H _1 < Q:: X q: H UJ I- UJ t- 3 CD H X H 2 >-/ 2 < U UJX X 1- < 23UJ >-UJ < 2 H MHO Qii- a a O 22Q1XH 3 CO J— XQ:_jai-a:ujujMH X H- < DQ O O O H -J X 2 CO H- CO 275 CO CO X z M v> Xil H »- M O H X o UJ z o CI. § o li_ o z: < < H O < H a < z < CD O'. • • • 3 O GQ 0. Z o • lL» z "~ a. n CO o H • • • • • H z t « # ?}5 < CD z ' CD O z -J z: # X CO n r\ u 3 -i <-* < ^ o UJ Vi z>-^ UJh-Z) ZHH- OO O CLHOi zx OQ C \^ H- Z < o H X o LO CD QQ CD » L/5 -c S> — (C G? ® ® GJ C? G? 00 - I I CS G^ Q C9 Q I 00 I zur, ; 2< 00(0 CO CO _J Z CkCt: Qi Ql=>Z_JliJ- X t- X H * ox X M UJ X xa X Q Z X l-H X o CL r) c — o — =3 I < 05 uiiunuDoouo H H X v^ <^IjJ u X UJWCO d ^ oriD aJ H 1 zh2:ujq:^ ^ CO iii a: a. 3 < z o uj z H- N. q:< XO_JQQ— «— UJ CO C\J CB "C (S® (C o Ul cx> liJ a: coo 1 O Q LO® O (S UJ >-UJ < z H HHCi a:»- a <2k o ZZCi:ZH I3 CO »- zck:_ia:-QiLiJliJHH X h- -N ujh-r? ZHt- 00 CD CLHOi zx 00 c OJ o> cs> s> c? (O ® s> — ® O Q © Q Q Q ® ® 00 CO '<■ ® © "C — CD O ® G> ® — • UJ : u. ®LO®C?CD®C5C5 ®®®®®®®® Q®®®® ®®®®®®®® CO O CO <0 CO C0_1 xcozaci:aiQir?z_iuj oc o H U) ' CO O 1 CO ■ • ^ . < 1 CM 'fl- 09r^ U- 1 1 u n u u O 1 UJ Z 1 0^ H 1 -D 1- 1 1- (0 H 1 < CO CO a ci: a. 15 < 2 o UJ 2 1- N. q: CD H- _l 3 O /-N H -1 < Q:: X Cil H UJ h- UJ h- 3 CO H X H 2 v^ Z < D UJ X '^ h- < 2Z>ljJ >-UJ < z H HHQ Qib-a a o 22q:xh 3 CO i- Xai_IQi<0-tt:UJUJHH X f- < OQ O O O H _J X Z CO »- co 279 CO X z. hJ <0 hJ H I- H O H X o z tiJ z o o < H o -I < z < 8- O CO " • • o h- • Z>^ ZHH- OOC£> CLHQQ ZX 8Pi »- Z < o H X o ••■/• • •*•« • «*•• CD X o OQ Q. (OSS ® ® CD CD ® CD ® ® O CD ® ® CD CD OS 1 s s o s s s s ,1 'I I I UJ (M s — ® s (O S CO s s s s s s s S S S S Q S 00 CD — OS ss CO 000(0 to CO_f X(ozaQ[:a:Q::=>z_juj<(nzcoMOZcr)2: Z<0QOKOOOOli_U._IQ.XXZZQ.^ CD O CO u UJ < o O) (MH- U 'CD cor-»cQ z :i axs a: Q.— X A LO CO ♦ D U II + ^ * XQ UJ • J- Q 280 CO U) CD CJ Q — (S CO (S (S O) a> O) • • • CD S I CD t I CSQdCD O II li U II U B I B B H 0£ v^ ^UJ UJ X UJCOCO a CO oro Q C\J coackici. 3 H CO < 1 * 1 X r* I * 1 o u S2 ' 1 J- ^ 1 (0 1 UJ O 1 q: I UJ »- t- 1 t/>w — O I X < O 1 CO 'CO • »- 1 t- a < 1 CNJCD — r^ O 1 U. 1 1 II II II 11 < 1 U- 1 UJ cr» 1 bJ 1 < 2 1 Qi O J -J H 1 h- 1 h- CO H 1 X I H I < v> O 1 -J z: 1 H 1 UJ 2 h- 1 1 < /^ _l 1 k § * I a 1 > 1 o v^ » 1 ujo-liJ < Z H ^Mc^ Qij-a: a o zzQir H Z> CO h- 2:ck:_jq: Q:UJbJH H X I— < OQ O O O H >J S Z CO »- CO 281 <0 z W 2 ****. UJ s M flO', 1- M # 1 O ,« M C^ ^ *. X o*. • o * , 1- ^ '. fcr u • • z q: • • u !-•• , / z * ^ • • • • o • • » * 0. * • ' » • z t • .. ' . o • • o CO < • • ■ I • • < • • (If! • / u. a: •/ o o * . ' / * z ft <• • * * Q£ CD < % H • • « O « -1 « * ft < s. ^ < 8 * ft % ft a ft* z CD < CD N , CO a. z o z *" a. tt • liJ CO d z H O a kj 1-1 z X to < a CD X * # . «M» # »^ CD O z J z • • X (0 « UJ /^ _i 3 < \-» o ^ c/> »- eo z>-^ UJH-3 ZMH- OOCD CLHOQ zx oo c Ol ■^ CD CO O C3 CS ^ Cd ^ CD CO CO C3 C3 G5 QS)CvJC» ® e& CO CO S O C3 O CSLOCSCO"^®®® C5C\lQC5QCSO® SC0SS>G>SiS>G9 I Z < o M X o I I I I I cseococossG^c? ! I I X * % CO OCOCO CO CO_IX XCOZCkQ:0::az:>Z_lljJ- X I- X M X ox X MkJ X xa X 02 X l-M X o q: a u. >- — UJ I 00 CO < — o \ 00 •• X 200 or-* M I— •• — CO t- a • CD (o r^ oa Z II ex o a: Q.— X A CVJ 1- 1 t- CO H 1 < CO z: 1 a: LiJ M 1 lij 2 >J 1 a. a 1 s; a * 1 liJO- «i- (oCk(i:a.z) t- O r\ M q: X a: »- UJ »- H X M Z ^ Z UJZ N. < 2Z5UJ >-UJ M MHO qii-q: ZZaiZM 3 2:ai_jci: a: UJ UJ M H OM_IXZ(0 UJ 3 o _l < o UJ c/> UJ < a CO M X O O U. >- UJ CO < z o M I— < I— CO 283 CO < «0 X z. hJ S3 Z • H « • H # O ^ H a # • X o*. ** * O • • H- , / # 1- # • Z C£. » • liJ »-•• , / • , z • *. . • • o ■ , * * • * a. 1 ' , z: 1 ^ 8 1 ' ' • . .'" * <0 • • f • • 1 • t • t • • • ' ' \ .' u. o: * o 1 . 2: . » t)/ \ * CD < • * * H • ' \ » -1 • * * < K S < =3 • - CL * < Z CO H Z • • « • • CD X CD 0. z o h- » Z>-^ UJH-Z) ZHI- O O CD Q-HOQ 00 c Oi (O S G? S O G? S> (S 6^ Q G^ Q C^ Gd G^ CD C9 C9 G? S G7 Q G^ CS} "C ^ Q tu li. IQG^OQG) Gi>QGd Q QSQG^QG^QS 1 Z < o H X o CO 000 CD (O CO^ xcozQQ:QiaiZJ2_juj-CD UJCJ 2 CC\ axes 0) a: a— •• \ X A 2 00 m or>. CO • Q H CM<0 H- •• i: II + - woQiCLrxzouz 1— \ Ci: ® — c:^ o ... .o> • . • UJ LOC^OQQ 1 S>® — O CO i<: II II [i II I! 1! i; i; n ii ID a: o UJ u. z CQ LJ kJ > y- _l UJ O /-^ M _l (n Qi X a: M < 1- UJ t- DC o H 3: M Z v^ z < R UJZ X h- < 2I5UJ >-UJ < z H MMO QTI-Cj: Ck Q zzaizM rxu M oooozzaocii> CO t- zq::_iq:-q:ujujmh X H ->- liJh-3 ZHt- OOCD Q.HOQ zx o o c "?• JS OJ SJ 00 ® Q Q O CM — CD ® Q — CO OvJOD CM oc:>CMco s <& s Q I I I ®OOCS>S>-^®OQ SSSCSOG3CSC9 G^S>QSCS>SOS < O M X o CO O CO CO CO CO CO CM OX XQ \w wy V'y \k./ V/ VW _^ -.- , , XC0ZaQ:QlQlZ:Z_ILJ- — Li.; I CO 00 < — o \ •• N. z 00 or^ n I— •• < UJ Oh- Q < _ICi — CM r- i: -co z J. ^ .k. s u: i.-- X A 00 CM • II CM CO II II + u. ■ zo UJ • 286 CD CO Cvi CS> 1 liJ Z 1 a H 1 z» h- 1 H- J_l M 1 2hxujq:n-'- V <0 a Qi 0. ZJ < 2 O UJ z 1- \ Qi H- «J H O /-^ H _J _l a: X a H < h- UJ h- 3 V) H X M 2 v^ 2 < U UJX X h- < 23UJ >-UJ < 2 H HHCi a:i- a o O 2ZCiiXH ZXUJ H 000022QOQ:> CO 1- XQi_IQi<0il-_l M < XOXX>-QiUJUJMH X H- 00 « G) • ♦ _J • * 2 •" . a. u ** » • ft ft • UJ * N CO -1 . .• § 0^ H \ , • * • a % • UJ , . , « , H Z X < l * * • . CD X CD / ' • • \J # * CD • CO z o I- « uji-r5 2 Ml- O OCT) Ci-HQQ 00 c OJ »- z < o H X o c? s> s s cs Q 6? G? O C? O Q Q ® Q ® — ® r-* — o s ^ es CM Q Q ® C& Q I I I CO 000 (O W CO_l XC02QQiQ:Q:32_JUJJ 05 CO (- H OX HUJ XCli O 2 I- H >«» X o z < CO UJOO 2 — H I < — CO \ 00 •• \ 200 or>. H h- •• CvJ •(— i; 00 CD CO II CQ 2X a ac? :i: — xco A CM — D CM — n II + Q. • xo u • 288 « 1 « 1 1 CO 1 'fM© O 1 r^ ■ •00 • < 1 C\J(D 1 —(o U. 1 1 II II U II CD 1 UJ Z 1 CtL H 1 D h- 1 J- (O H 1 < (0 s: 1 q: UJ H 1 kJ 2 J 1 Cl a 1 r Ck" » 1 UJO C>- ^- »- N. H 00 O \ H 00 X r>» o II h- UJ UJ H- < P a O 1 H > X 1 O 1 h- 1 1 1 « 1 * 1 a> r*» — —CO C3 (\J G3 CO CO •UJ HH Ck O O O UJ »- H t- H Z "s >UJ 3 Qi_JQi<0-q:ujujhh qcj o o o h .j z z co UJ 3 o _J < O o UJ CO UJ QQ 3 < I- < a (A H a v./ X o z < q: UJ z H _J < CO z o H < I— 289 CO I W 2 <-^ (f> • liJ M z CO-. • h- « M « O ^ H o # * X O'., ^ * o « • • h- , / « t o . ^ • Z a ' • lU H-' • , 1 ' ' z • # o » , « a. •--» # ^ * s: 1 ^-^iN.,,^ * 8 (0 . . 1 , , 9 , > U- o^ */ o o \ . /• s: * * 2 \ < % H • O . * s, « * -1 ^ • * < • •s , M a ~ < « » a « z N • • • * 0. z o u. Z>'- UJJ-Z5 ZH»- ooo C1.H0Q zx 8gi T 0? CO Q l/> (M ® CO ® C\J Q Q Q 6> (D CD — (»-S a. n lij CO i o H • * O a UJ M Z X CO < a X * • , »" 'w' Ci> o z _i z: « X €0 tl /-s U a -J V < o I CO ®®QQ^O G5<^®®C0 COOSGJ®®®® Z <. o H X o CO O 00 CO CO CO _J X(/?ZaCk:Q[CC^=:>Z_lliJ<0QZCDHOZC!>Z z -1 X MMmm7D- H r--«;o>o>;?3r-:^3 -\ 0) <;coozzoocr; M rn>c: hxxjzz O C ;o -173 M M H Z > n^ m cz > H "N xm n > z ^2 H X W (A sr -» m -J > H ;o X w n r H V/ c H I- H T^ m m m z CD XI c n n n n n n II a II n > w Qf\)C0O — CSQCOO® 2: m . cnoscocn w ro X ro— ' o) r\ -1 C v^ > r > H -I > X -I R m -1 n »vl X 00 H \ MTizx2-nooo> H H X H > CD r X > ::o 5 H z m z > c "Tj :s: 'T' CO \ -< OZT^OCOOTJOXm CO om>/-N:^n3HZ 1 H r-i-zr-H;oHCH A Z m>^ cxo (/> I o I o I 73 I 07 "0 XO -1 1 » x>om 1 « ;^j 2 I "D 1 f- z m 1 H m X3 I 3 CO > 1 H CO -H 1 -H c 1 H 7? 1 z rn 1 CD t nun II 1 1 -n ^ a)co t > CO- tn 1 oco 1 -1 1 I 73 1 CO 1 1 « 1 t n n D n n n II n II i: <9 O Ci> G9 I C9 S I S C9 • CO' <0 • C5 ro oi c r i 063 291 CO X CO z "*". <0 * 2 H OQ*. »- # H « o ^ H c^ * X o*. •* * o * • • • 1- •^ tr o • z a: » « m »-•• , / 2 • • *. , o . • 0. I t • s • 1 • , . 8 (0 • • I • • * • ' * • • • • • • U. Ck: « o C' J 2: < Of CD " % • < • * H , O ' \ -1 ' < t ^ . H a s ft Z ID l- • • CD < CO C9 • » _J • * z '" . a. H "• « • , UJ • N CO -J o H \ , O , ^ ft ' a t • lU J . z X CO < < • / ' • o X * ' • , cn « o CO o \- 0) z> <• UJI- z? ZM;- OOCD CLHOQ oc o — O CD Si ® S 05 ® S) ® ® Q ® Q Q o ® CO r^ r^ CD © Si S "T Q Q © ^ ^ ®{0®S> — SIS' — S!S!SiS>SiS>SGS I I I 1 < CO O CO (O XtOZOOiaiQlIDZ Z X - Z 00 CO « (- X Of^ LO • U X H X H — C7) « OX X 1- •• D 11 + * HUJ X Q - \ CO a ct: CL z>< z o lij z t— cs Ci:. U 1 U_ 1 1 11 II u u < 1 U. 1 UJ 1- CD I \l^ 1 < 2 1 a O 1 _l H 1 Z) H 1 ID h- 1 H- CO X 1 CJ H I < W O 1 _J 2: 1 Q:: UJ J- 1 < H 1 LJ Z 1 o -J I Q. Q X 1 J^ 1 •z. a: X 1 o d X 1 UJO CM® cor^ UJ o z coo* — QGJSSQCOS' CO < u u II II U U U z> UJ 2 QO UJ UJ UJ z CD f- _J H o r\ H _l _1 Qi: X Q^ H < 1- bJ 1- 3 CO H X H z LUX z < u < 23UJ >-liJ < 2 H HH a QfH- Qi Ci o zz(^z:h 3 CO }- 2:Qi_jQi-a:ujujHH X 1— < OQ O O O H _J X Z CO J- CO 293 CO CO CO z. <• : * 2 z N m « CD < CQ H Cd'. « f • • • # • • « • 1 * ' * • • * • o u. a: » yv • • ^ o o I , /'• ' # 1 z: . • » . * , CD X g / ' • •• <»> < % * * • ^ - V 1 X CO LlI»-Z> ((NJOCSSLO ®-«J- — COr^ ®C0®CS)(\J(S)C?LO 1 CM X UJ (C *"; 2H h- ir>JCS>cocs3'o(s>®®(S>®gj ! 00 X Z'C ^- ^ (— oocr> CLHOQ z:x ! G^G^^^LO ^QOQGD CDC505OC5CJC3GJ 1 ! ^ X X X H 1 < N. 11 -a? /A f^ /YS J 1 ®CJ®C&''J" 0(SCSSSD (SCSOS^CSSS ; -"T V/ 1 ^ Ui4 o o C 1 X C0C2 ax® Oi- 1 X •— ci: a— w ' X X •• N. X A 1- 1 » >- X zoo CO 2 1 * H X or-» CO • u < 1 X H X H CJ r^ o 1 » O X X h- •• 11 11 + H 1 * M.UJ X < bJ a. X 1 CO O CO to V) CO_J X X a X O H- ro o 1 XCOZOCkiQiai32_JljJ<0Q2tPHCZCr>2 X 02 X C < u • »- 1 zS>S)® 11 II U II U U U It U U #^ H 0^ 1- v^ *^LiJ r UJCOCO onz) a■ — 00 \ 00 1: H O H X o u UJ i- X < o . < a j- X » m— CJ CO 05 3? ® CJ> z . . . UJ < G50C©C2S'SO®0 CO a: U I! 11 11 U li U li U 'J 13 UJ >- z CD UJ U.! UJ z CD 1— _J -r- /". H _l H a: X Ci H a. H UJ f— r$ Li. M X H Z v-/ -^ < II UJX \ J— < ZI^UJ >-UJ < z H HHCi Qih-o: d zzctirn 3 < bJ H 00 z T' CiO Ql> (/J h- 2: Qi _lCii < < CiJ- _J M < XOXXJ-QiuJLJHM T* »— O G5 Q ® G5 Q G5 ® GJ Q ® — ® r^ r^ ® — ® CS CM Q Q Q O S S'LO®®® — C5C5 C3G5G5S>CS>(SCC® Q^C5C3GJO®Q [QStOOQ ®CS®Q® StCSJC^QCSS*®® CO a CO CO CO CO _i XC02QttiQlQir>Z_lliJ- hJ — Z CvJ Z I H a> a •• N. Z 00 Oi-^ H h- •• MCiiM_IZ_J_l H 1 ZM2:UJQi<^- m— V)OQia.:D 1 UJ o (^ 1 UJ 1- H 1 (MCO(D 1 X < O 1 LO -CO • h- 1 h- Ci < 1 C\iOOCNJJ>» 1 U_ I 1 II II II 1! < 1 U. 1 <£> I UJ 1 < Z 1 a 1 _J H 1 r> H 1 3 >- 1 h- w X 1 (J H 1 < to 1 _l 2: t a lU H- 1 < H 1 UJ z I r\ -J 1 a. Ck » 1 d 1 2: a: X 1 v^ t 1 uo■ z X UJ UJ U z CD 1- _l <^ rs H _J H Ql X a: H X 1- UJ 1- 3 0. H X H Z v-/ Z < u ujs: X 1- < Z3UJ >-UJ < z H HHCi CiiHa a ZZOiZH ZXUJ H OOOOZZC»OQi> CO h- 2:ai_itt:-C»iUJUJMH X »— < QQ H _J X Z CO »- CO 297 CO X <■ z <0 UJ H »- H O H X o z lU z o a. z: o < a: < H O -J < H < z CD < 3 00 G3 O'. N h- «5 Z>- «- LlIJ- ID ZHh- O OCD CLHOQ oo c Ol z < o H o =3 o ait 0. o 05 CO cs s ro CM & G © r>. — Q Q S> LO CO OO ® ^ ro © 00 G5 "- C? O S> CO ® UJ U. z •" Q- !l ** lU CO 9 O ^ H • O O UJ H .J- • • z < CD X * ' a Z -J s: « X CO II ^ UJ ■ LJ — Z CJ Z I H 0) x — oo zoo H h- •• LO — (33 II II II II U U D U D M 0^ 1- X v^ r^ LJ UJ 2: LJ COCO oz:=> a- ^ cooa^o-zxr oux t- 1 -1 s: I CH UJ h- j < H 1 UJ z r\ -i 1 a. a » 1 Z) 1 2: a: * 1 CO \y Z 1 UJO s> CJ ® — (S»® G> CO cn U II II u U S tl Q U ID UJ >- z .cn U.J lU UJ 2 CD 1- -J 2 /-s H -1 H Qi X (^ H X h- liJ h- rs a. H X M 2 UJX X < 1— u < ZIDUJ >-UJ < 2 H HHQ Qij- ai a 2:2Ci:z:H ZXUJ H 000022Ci0a> CO 1— z;cki-jci:- a:ujuji-i M X I— ^. UJt-Z> 2MH- CLHQQ 2:x 00 c 01 Z < o o \ 3 o OQ CL O -J u. • UJ z •" a. u 111 • ' s z -J a a: H UJ • • z I • I X CO < CD «-s . , "*" Q 2 -J z: ' X (0 u r\ LJ ZD _J V < X CO CS> O D Q S» ®®®Q® O O S) S> CS CSi S> Q j QJOC5®® OG^^^^ ^^CSC^^^SG^ CO O 00 CO CO CO _1 XCO2aa:QiCt:Z?2-JliJ<0QZCJDMO2CDZ 2• X I- X H X O X X M UJ X X O X O 2 X J- H X 2 < CQ >- U.) 2 CO 2 I HLO 2 00 CO h- II 00 C£> CO 1: CQ 2X a Q.® Qi — X 'T A U)- X v-/ r\hJ UJ X UJ coco Q 2115 Qmq:h_j2_i_j H ! ZH JIUJQi N^ - N. C0aQ:Q.3<2:OLJ2 h- cs Qi < X _j en < M I H H <000ll.xx2a.rsl N « 1 H oc « 1 1 JC 1 X 1 X 11 CO 1 I ^ J— q: I 1 kJ O 1 Ctl 1 UJ H- h- 1 (OO'^ 1 < O 1 CD • — . »- 1 p < 1 — O) (Mf>. 1 U- 1 I II U II U < 1 U. 1 UJ CiD 1 hi I < 21 1 CH 1 _l H 1 I- 1 3 H I X 1 Z) H 1 < (0 J _! £ 1 o: UJ h- 1 < H 1 -J 1 UJ z a. a 1 « 1 1 2: a X 1 Q >-' « 1 UJO - z CD UJ UJ UJ 2 CD H- -J 2 /\ H _J H q: X Qi: H X 1- UJ »- 3 a. H X H Z UJX 2 < u < 23UJ >-UJ < 2 H MHC^ a: J- Qi d 22 CilXH ID-q;ujujhh x t- * • ^, O o • < • Q£ « z CO < z a. V CO O z C£> X oa 0. z o ZHK OOCD a.HQQ zx oo c Ol z < o H X o — s> o ® oo f\J O CS? GJ CO CD Q C& Q l/> ® C 00 (O -^ CO OO — — ® CS^ Q Q Q CD UJ U. CO — S)S)COS>CJC\i C0C!l?O®C5®6?C5 ® C^ C? CD — Q CD G> Q CS G^ Q CD G^ ^ Q Q CS CO OOO CO CO CO _J XC02aCi:Q:iQiZ>Z_IUJ2; 2<0DOH-OOOOli.U._ja.ZXZZa.- « I- * H * ox * HUJ X X a X O Z X h-H X \^ X o z < a: 00 >- UJ zco Z 1 HLO x\ CL II II CL • zo UJ • j-a u 302 a> CO CD CO CD <\J GD i O I Gl < 1 o! H t XI O I l- X N^ /-\UJ u X UJCOCO c ^. o xz) a- CO cooq:q,z). o n J— LU LU «— X < »- d UJ h— < -J Z) o -J < o o LO h- ' ~ ® CM "3 LO 0> ® CD 0> O UJ i2 C5 — ®C>G5CB®®C0® CO UJ n II It II u u u u u ti Z5 UJ UJ o z OQ LU UJ en CD l- _J < O ^ M _J CD en X CXi M z? H- LU H- 3 CO M X M Z. ^ 2 < D LU X X 1— < 23UJ ?-lU < 2 M MHO c»:»-ci: O O XZQiXH i:> CO t— xa:_ja:-a:ijJUJMM X I— <0QOC_>OM_JX2CO H- CO 303. CO x: CO z "*'. CO • UJ 2 « H flO\ »- • ^ H • O ^ H a # ^ X O'. ** o # • • »- , / « h- o # * UJ ex: t • * z '. '. o • f • * • a. * • * * r: c r ' ' • .' .** o ■ CO t ( 1 t « 1 t fl 1 t * * • ' • u. a: » o o \ * * « z: « * ^ < % * * ai \ % ^ '1^ * «^ < « * H » « O * N * * • _i « • < %• *• H ZD » c::;^ - o « < ^ * c^ • N CD < CD • s • -i • :^ ~* Cl 11 ^ u ft CO d • o til M CD GO a. 2 o O C> C£. nx O Q w Ol S> — — C5 O o cj Q CO C5 CO ® C5 ® — CO o) r>- C^ CS» C5 CS CsJ O CO C3 CO G5 liJ CO'*'®COC0C5CD — CJCOCSC0CO®Q0J G:>scocs>a?^coG) I Q ^ QD Q 02 G^ Q CO G} Q O G> CO CO ® G} O G2 2 < o X o CO 0(0 <0 CO_l xcozott:aia:r'Z_iijj■ * »- * M « OX « MUJ * xa * o z * I— M * :^ Ld Ui Qi O a:co < : 00 •• \ 7r. 00 r j r-» -i '< U-i Oh- Q < H O < X CO li UJ < 115 CO CO r- OJOO t- II -ID CO r^ d. S ± s> q: a— X A CO CO • K CM CO U !l + ZQ Ld • 304 oo CO CO G^ CD I G^ I I COCO I CD II II n II i: II u n u u H * I I { q: I O I »- 1 coir)f>* O 1 h- 1 H- CO H I < CO 2= 1 QC 'oJ H I U X -J 1 a. a J z: Ck: « 1 uo amq:m_i2_j_j M I 2 H X LJ Q: v^ < UJ O ® LUXOCLOCOCDi^lZO >- CO COCiOiQ.ZXXOUJX t- \ Qi • o> • • • CD UJ ^ CJ I C? C& I — ® CD 1 O CO UJ U 11 U U U U U U II ID UJ UJ o z ca UJ UJ en cr> *- _i <. O ^ M -J (S> a: X QL H ^ 1- UJ f- 3 CO H X H 2 'w' 2 < Q UJX N. t- < 2:duj >-uj < 2 M H Ha QiH-Qi O O XXCtlXH I3 CO 1— xcK:_iQi-(i:UJUJMM X I— '■?:• ci' S- « s c^ CJ c^ Q c> U. 'j I a. z: cr ^-^ c -^ * _* ^- 0. *• »' ■*■- . •r « X ■ » /-w .^ S-U --V , .V. cr.'s* r ' J k Jfe *• > t >- * r. > :<: 1 — •• K ^-, *. -J V < Lu (■ X '^^ X ■1^ 1— CO 2: t a 7 * C < !5 a !i II t: i: ;i ;i ii i: u i: H *. X X C.' ^ (0 o 00 a: 1— • (o c- Cij :^ r- < n: o ■_ : :z: q: < z; Cv _j ru < ^-l ^ K < o o o iL. 1: rz :2: c ; -' o >. X I— a H ^— ""x M X- X :^ z: < c*- < 1.0 a» a> a S' Cj cj c^> c: cj s» Tv "Ti- — c:- I! :; i: :; :; li u i: 1; :; UJ a: UJ X liJ t— UJ r: < r: ri u; >- u: M M (-1 Ci :^ r— .:i: 2: z, Ci: n H r- < u: c c c c; 21 1:: o '_■> oi > 2IClI i Lil o t-i _j 2: r: c.^ __ < <: -<_ c- ..^ H C', h— r— i ^■f ■ ."""" t— C/ Ul H I— M O Hi X o < < Hi < 307 CO CO 2: CO cc aci' O * . ; Ul) J— ^'' r: ^\ j- w ^'' C'; -r:^ — Cv -K- tv -;■ T, t-;- :v !;• C^ Cv -^. tv li CX: — CD :v — c Cv Ci;i Q f^ -Zi r-j ^. r.- s ci :-j t,. ^ 'Ji '- -^ \ 7"' ^ " ' Cv ■^. C-." 1 ^-V wV -wir* ^ -V •:v :2 Q Q s> s G c^ G? g: ^.' sj ^ : i r— 2: _i u.; U. ^-1- ix. r: c^ M a * X % * m 'J. 2: X ;-^ < Ni « >- M '^ .V — * *v ^ — >» ^-'. •X IJ 308 S) S> '3 — Q S) CJ . .o> • o> • • • • II !! I! II II i: ii II i; II X 1 j CO 1 Qi ! c:; 1 •%• !— ; ■ ' ;:? CJ '.^ 1 3^ c;- — • < i c! r^ u. 1 r II n ;i :: (r> i ^. »-i : — . J- : ?^ o K : < li-" o < ~ < o f-: X '_"» 21 ZJ C» i^ n o 0'/ C» ul ^ U • 'i ^_ L5 bJ <_ o: < z: o _i a. < H-. n '-1 < o CJ L> L. r; z; z: ci. r^-; O b'; I-^ O bO : s> o — c^ i; ;: i: :: i! i; ii :; i: ;; X LiJ 1~- Pi C X c < C^ 00 \j UJ -i- f.f CO ___. "5 G /-% M —1 ij" Oi X M 21' r— u.'. • — • ^ '.'," H i: M z: «./ «Xll < i^ uj i; \ i— < :z3 u; >- hJ < — >- M MM <^ C^ r— /^j' _• N c^ "T* *'■* 1^^ ■^' M 2'.- < ■ : ! M zi rj o c- •T" ^^ v.^ ^'\ a: > f* 1 — ~ iu -J i^ < C. ,-< ;■"»' i— — ^ b < T" '~j T* T~ >- oi LiJ ■ . ? M M .A- r- < ili O O O M — i ^ CO h— (■n 309 H <0 M CD'. CD <^2 • > M X 2: Cu U.I G O tw < y 5-i o H-i a < ~I >- ^ ii: K ;^ '.■: r^ z. w" O^ \j^ Q C J s- — o 0-/ S) rs 00 tv ;; j — n — . , C) c:- '.V (-J ^.• n- o iv cv v:' :;; :•- •: s? G' Ji' *^ tc Cv tv> Ji- ci Tv 1; Cv :.- iS c^ Gi !:^ Q c? •'!^ cj •;• Cw c; 1: < al l: a: :ir c*: z- LiJ < OJ n a »-; Cw ■i J c 21 X mi It: X- * r- X •- > * f-i _l * X r^ '..'■■' II * -I, i^ — :: i: 4 310 S) S> (NJ (OW) • < CM CM Cr; !^ 1 II 11 1! 1! (T^ I ' — H S 3 i — t- fO H < c;) ^ :i: U.' H Ui ^ _J 0. ^ -I. * UJ o < z: X 1- Ci .1- h*. * I X ! I CO I q: I o I— u < o H X o /-\ H Q£ 3: UJ CO o (J z: ID iCi 55 S S> — -S 5?LC G; C^' II II II II II I! II 1! 1! U UJ •z. ca H UJ IJ < CD h- : ;> O r\ H _^ ■ ai X »'— H < 1- UJ , — :2 ■y- M X M 2 ^ ZH < i; U-' ST. \ 1— < z: r> UJ ■>- Ll! < ^ H HM a ail- ai c. a 2: z a: z: H ID < UJ (— . o c o o z 2 OO 2i > 0-; 1— 2:cii_iai-aiUJUJh-iM X r— o'; ©r^s^ — coG^ — t-- l: X H ■• • -\ r~- ~ 1— 1 . — — CDKSS CQ^CJ-T C5 CD T^ ^5 cr c r^ r:- co X < 1 ■*' t t— " r— v> u> S;iOCi& OQCDQO G: G.- Q G> Q S CJ * > ^ ',1 M" Cl h-1 Xi 2:x * X — ^ A ' / ' •->, X ^CGT-QO C2(S>®S'S' Q CJ ® S (£ Q G S g: < N if 1: OQ C * ^ c;- «j .... !^-N 01 1 X — — :r: ^ •«■ v-/ * X • • ^x ^ /^ l- « >- X 21 X X 2 « i— X t^ r- C-.i • I' < * Hi X H OJ CJ * X X t— •• i; 1; + H * M UJ X < L-i -L. • X r; C5 r. CO CO CO _1 :!; X X c »— T' ^ Zj ~ '.'- 2: Ci :r: oi :ti r: z _i LJ < cci :?: cr H z tr 2: » Q T. X C- < Llj t- i:LuLi__iCL2:xi:zcLrs> SCO oj-s-sq • • a; • • O) • • • • ci® I CD— I (sxssc;* II II II II u u U 11 II u t X l: 1 X 1 if; ui: CO 1 C/ ^ i h- 00 LO O I C* LO • ff/ r— 1 < r J OJ c^j r^ O 1 I II II !l ll < 1 Li_ ; C'' LjJ . Oi (J> I >-{ ■~\ H 1 r— P CO .V' 1 H < '.-/ O 1 T" :i: u f- 1 1-1 U-' "Z. , U. Ci * 1 "^" ^ * 1 * U.i o < \ X 1- Ci X 0. X hJ o X Z) a < u Mr^MCL:M_jx_i_i X M X Ul Qi 'w' < UI O U' X O u. O C/"; CO i^ X '-■' '/; .o ct: a_ Z) < X o ui x ai- "^ 1 — s H — C> N M a X .'■^ ll ^^ It * Ld • r h— X < ^_1 < OJ OJ — — -«- — • LO S Si OC C5 Q S ' ■ I 00 GJ Q cs C2 o s <^ c;' c; I! II i: 11 i: I! u i; :: I < .■ LlJ Cv z - Ll.' < X H y-i^Cu ■-^ I — OL -..J Zj X X a: X H ___ X < , ; ' I— 1 o o c- c ^. ^« /^ O Oi ^ ^' .— X ct: _j :ii < o < o:: J— 1 t-i < X -J X X >- L^i UJ 'jj \->. M '■ . — < aa D c O H_l X X V) 1 — CO 313 CO LiJ H H- H O H X o Ijj 2 O Q. x: o o 3: < < < H a < a: . 00 <0 < 2 m- CD < O (J- o 01 CO CJl o / / o CJ QQ -I CO o z CI" i: UJ -J < X cv o o o (II >■ " M !— O CI' H CD X o c I — — < o M X G S- O S S> ^ s> GD ec s -.; -s — ,-n h- — cjscijc? QOQQS og:qs>qg?«g r; O OO CO x CO -: c ui a: ,-ji z^ 2 _ :^ < Qj D (- O O C) O Li to CO _1 I UJ < QQ n 115 H a z: o r: ,LL._ia.^xi:2:Li_ V- ~ or Q I- H j_. .. < LU o < 0-; ;;^ .i, .' I. -! 314 OJ if) !^ OJ G) r, or; (S G S: © l' G' — ^' S -^ S G II :i ;i II i: v ii ii ii ii X ! 1 % 1 fr- 1 v.- 1 ^ '■ (^ : ^-/ 1 ^\ /^ ^ i t~ ' *■" ^. Ii ! * * '_0 . r; u^ 1 < ! CO OJ o b ; ! "if i: IJ i; < 1 j <-'" 1 LiJ *"*" 1 ■-^ 1 ^•v /_\ 1 r-t 1 1- 1 P- C" K : X 1 H ! < 1 ^■ O 1 — 1 ■^^ Lu' r— 1 *-i ! -' i a. 2: a: * i * 1 « i LJ o < 2^ * 1 J — Ci -^ u. r\ H \X. 1— X v^ .^ 'oJ * • * x- LJ CO CO LLi L^ r 5 £j <'-J T" ►-1 IT' l-i a: t-1 _i :; _• _i H c T~ >— j T~ 1 ■ • ly. ^ < u: o 1 LJ 2: o Ci. ::; CO 'j: :^ r: c >- I /• a; d, ai li. 13 < z: (J u_i r: .— \ cr: < i: _^ _' CD < M X H I—: r» < <■ ^ c> o L_ 2: z: :^ Ci. K oc c> tr^ s r: a, S' — r s> — cv 3? J- -^ i: i; Ii 1: ii 1: 'J i: i: ;: i: < 1. 1 <^ (H ^_^ "n 2ji X ^,' »—: < , — LlI 1 — r^ ..— • H-i X Uw — e- - U-' '<. X H H M -J a: 1 — -^ 1 ', '^ ~ IZl q; 5 H ^ *t Ixj H w X X /• '_> X' > fO t— 2: :^ _i ai <£ ^.^ < ai h- ,., ; t— , < z: X X >- C£UJ U_' H !-l ■"■ 1— < QQ U H _1 2: X 00 .►— 315 CO if) 2. <• <0 UJ 2 • H tn*. h- • • H < O ^ H a » • • X O'. ** * o * , *, ^ ' h- , / 4 i^ (J t ! kJ p^- .,^__^_^ 1 ' • •. Z ^'~~*~--»..^ ' '. - • o "^^>».,__^ » • . i a. ^"'"'-•h,,^^ ' • ' ' ! z: i * — "^•■^ ' 1 o f ^''*"-»-.^,__^ . ' * 1 o o . . . . " ' ^"^ u_ Ui ♦ /I o o 1 .♦'. '''! z: < « * * i!^ \ * ^ o \ « • < . H * 1 N ^ ft —t < « »»* » • H -^ * * ^ • a (J ^ < • o: « " 2 CD < 2 _1 li. \- V> 2>- ^ Irl h- ~ 2 t-i I- O O CD a. H QQ o c? c Ol < o M X o OJ S- S S' IT) CJ s; G, g: c; C-.' Q O O CO o -c cs? a> — G cr o i.\j CO Q Q G? C © " UJ : u. © o LO OOQCS" 05©®®®®®® ; (_> CO O (/> C^ _l xo':r:oaiciiaiZD2_juj- f— H (J X H UJ X o O 2 H- H CO • > o a ^- H • ' O H < ^ >jLj /-s • . a- ® ' 2 —I t 2: • , X * CO CD 0. 1! L! < o •• ^, 2 a < Ll) O < '£. '.: oj !fl± ® 1.0 "• ;; c-.i ?; C h- Ci 316 — OJ 00 LD © O) s '■J- CT) s ® o s> 1 o _ 1 .^- s> Ci < Lu' 2 l-i3MCliM_IZ_l _) M c ^ M i: bJ Qi v^ < UJ o I U ;r; O Ci. o V^j (S> ^Z '-J > 1 .^ ('•; .2) Qi clzx •^ o UJ 3 i— \ Cii < X o _J CD < M ~ H 1— 1 c < o o o li_ ^~ y "Z. ^ TnI >!J N X (-! a X * 1 » 1 X o !l c? 1 i— ct: to I liJ o en 1 UJ Y— (— ^ 10 Cj O 1 < o C\) • LO • h- 1 . — ^ < (\J CO CM CC O 1 u. II 11 11 i: < 1 U. 1 UJ 1- f_r, LJ 1 < T* ct: L> I _J H » H 1 3 i — P- CO X ! c> M < CO O 1 _J 2^ Cli LiJ 1- 1 < V~ U Z 1 o /^» _l » 1 X ! 3 I? -t LJ O < X 1— 1 , 1 K ^- cj r: Q. X LO — JTi ZjL — o — O CJ 0", U-l ■jL II II 1! II u i; II i: II I! CO .— 21 OQ H". UJ UJ < a H- ^ > D /-N M : '^ Oi X 01 H < H- IjU 1— li y H X H "Z. ^^ ■z < !; UJ r \ 1— < ■Z.'D UJ >-UJ < —^ H M M. ^ Oil- a O rv ~ 21 Cti 2: !— { r^ < UJ H o o o o T* 7^ .Cj c) a > CT; h- iZLii -ict: < O < ii: h- _J M < rr o r X >- ai Ll.1 UJ m m T 1 — <0QcooH_iz:2c/:i H- CO 317 CO liJ H H O H X o 2 UJ O a. 2: < Of CD < H oa-. (J- o CD a (0 CO • X z tsl < CD • * • G9 • . • _l • * 2 "" « ■* ** « . 0. il *^ ** , • *^ , * LJ • • • s , CO 2 (J H *, ^ \ , • • 1 ' « • • « , # ' • , , • a ••/ ,' ' •' J ; ' H UJ X CO < • * . / ' '' X < H O < o 2 o 'aJ Cl. LJ U! 2 U-' 2 O Cl 2: O O >- N 1-3 Hi I- H Cn X < o M X o (O Cv C? S- CC' C S> "S S' K O C) © O Si S" CO O OJ 10 s^ s cj CO a s s» ® o © s? r^ 6D QQGCJCSS'QC:' CO U (O CO xcoxoa::aiC£:r^2_j 2 < CD O i- L> O O O Ll. CO CO _J LU<0Q2CDMO2CD2 'j I a. 2 X 2 2 CL < TnI cs- >- t— M O X M UJ X O O 2 H H H < < 1.0 2 \ •• \ 2 00 o r-- H I — •• < hJ O t- O < :\) r.- .— 1! • (s- Vi c Ji — i> ."^ X s X A OJ • I! V 11 + a_ • 2 o 318 a • CT; • II II II i: II II II II I! II H I— H OC T cr> "^J• • c: . CJ a CO ^' 11 !•' 1! i; IJ ^ H- ro -"T S TT II II II u 1: li II II i: ll < ^\ KJ 1 — cc L-l c^ > LlJ l-i 'y; ^ ^^ ^~' ^i.^ hJ ao ^ LU CD LJ a: M M ui :^ X < 2: 3 U.' >- UJ H M M :1j Oi (- LE: 2i2:ais:i-i iD- ac LJ u-i M M < aj c o D M _j :5i n CT < t-l X M UJ H I— M O H X o UJ o JI'J CO M 2 DQ- CD < <_>• CO o 't, !l li-i a: < .X < D c_> LiJ CJ r\ V ^-m >- V * C TT t— ~J ?c-c:'G:e/C? cdoococj os'S'Scjcs- — L"; Z ^^ ^— ' — *— ! ?— — 'Scenes ©OG> C:— S^GCJSG 1 r- % < o> c: r- C^ cc cscioo c>Cv cg'scdcsg^G'G' - * z: oc' OC' T^ X 1 — * Cj I-- 'M .1! < * H * H OJ O: c.^ ;t C5 X » w_ .. I! 1: + 1 — : « M UJ * < Ul Ci. X o CO o cr CO _i « X Q « w" 1— T~ Ci ■ -/ z: '.o — o csi Hi ai ~: r: _i bj -< ccj i^ cc M o 2: cr. 2: * w » ZJ < LiJ • t— :z <: lQ *- c.' ll. Lj 1 ^i. s: x ::: 2 o. < ^J » t— M » _l .Ci 1— Ci 320 C o r: i; i; w i! II i; .^ ^ r; i: i:' ;: Hi »-! LJ <: 2: r' ll! >- uj < 1-1 M H-, c^ cii (— a: c- H H Q.' "^ !-; r^ < Li-' w ~j o z^ :c: n o w5 a:: >- <■'. zi :^ ^j C'J. - j:: Li_; u! M M x < oj l^ c* c> m _i :z: :=. co i- --t I — 321 CO < • ^J CD a^' o X o o o 'W !-■ < < M O Li: CO G Z >• - UJ •- i: 6 --: '/ ~ c- c r , - -t- c: CT' c :: O G CT; E , -■ ^' r-") -r-^ '-» — r' a> 0'. c- — rj cj c- G a- o r^ "^ C^' C '^ C "; c5 c <^ o C' c.. r: :: CI CD ci g: IS- c- f. r. Q. ^ -ia o o c Or- - 5 G. G C C' '-^ c c- ^ C (U, c^ Cv C' CO c:;^ c c: -:: X ; [o i S < LiU O •::r: -Jti (-' -• C^ O Li. Ll. ll.' <: ra zr. >• t— »-i <_' X M Li.' X Cu <_/ .t_ 'X •X I-- .-i .'_1 322 . . 0> • • CO • • It II II II II It !1 II II II QL CO Qi a I— o < Li- ! cr> I -z. 1 M i H- I M 1 2: i ■S O) c. I-- • — - *-. Cr, C^ijC-X. r^ < z: cj UJ .- t— C," q: < u: c- _i xt <: M X K-i H — < O U C5 u. i: 21 n ll. r--.' M 00 UJ Uj I— X < I- o u ■< u .— ai or L-: G G C\.' s ; G O G- ^' •:!. G' -S G- o i: i: :: i: ii i: ii i; u i: (/-/ bj o r> a: X f— 1 1 H X .ii. v^ UJ z; < X ~ u. 1-1 »-i M Cj Hi r— M iX (— 111 X -4: u.' Tv a Cv :j X X Cj c> L'r: > X ui —I ;j:: M _1 X X CO < I — '< 0/ < < '0 i: ■Cj -i t— c- M^ 'S < o Hi X Q i- UJ a u. o o 2: < CD < H < u. 2 >- - UJ ;- r^ o o cr £L >—< Oj 2: >: O .'" - -r? — t;. cC c 1'. rr^ r: 'S- Ci Ci- ■?■- CI r: < .'i. c- Zl _: '^! < jQ ^ T 1^ -j: r * ■ ~^ r- T * < — *: * ' »- '— T J T T •• .t .— X- '"' * t — » ' ^ * V-: * \-x * C * X * . — X f-; _ ' X- < X ^< I J X ^' X ■;_, ~' « ■x-i * 1 — H T. .-i < 324 (NJ LO '7; O CO -- CO LT/ CC' a • • C' • • c i; :: ii i: :: ii ii it w w 2: u: 0-; '.o '■j^nzj c < u; Hi ID l-l Oi >-! _i r. _i _ LJ r:: c, ::^ :- •'.'; '.'.' ^ 2: u '/' c a: c*. i: < in o uj 2: a:- 7~> •-1 : < ^ t " ^ ■ *•• t ,^ '^. f— .;J H ; »A.j /^ X '-' r'\ ~t J ^1^ a: X z^ V. X ; U-' C < m Ifj '(/ \ — :^ » ; i — 1- ^ «— (Z> OJ ^ • * - ' r. "T -- s CO Ci? G •^ '■. a.1 n. .^ •s Iv s* i! G.* i! i: \r z'- ,'/ < : . I X I — H c w c- _, :<; -i. Ci c^ .ji > :;: ci: -J L^ < o <: ci: f- _; ^ ^ o cj c> i^ _i r: b: c^ >-i ! — < 325 CO < <0 UJ M t- M O H X Q UJ O a. z: o o ll- o < < H < aa-. (_v <*) CJ .1-/ c ' • • • e- < H < o 2 V.-' t- « Z>-- UJf-ZD ZMi- O O CO CLM OJ zx 00 c 01 — < o X o CS3 O Q S^ LO L'; 'S- Q Q CO Ci S CO Ci. r; 1 Q 65 C G) (S 1 G5 — — OC — S) O CJ S' & Q G C' c? :~-- IS) — Cv -^ — Lo Cv G C^ G) G." C2 !^ C; Cv Ci Cy S> Si CJ O C' S>QCiiG)0 ^©^(^^^^(j;^ CO O CO CO Z- * f— * t-1 * O X * W-i L • CO 2 * Q 21 < M * t— 1-1 < : < • s :^ a Hi >-- .. < l: ^ <• X ;: + OfltLlNO.S-0BB»|N»^^ 3 0112 084231205