VAMOS Contrib. Nd. OD Monitoring Cruise at the Central Long Island Sound RET Disposal Site July 1986 Disposal Area Monitoring System DAMOS DOCUMENT LIBRARY Woods Hote Oceanographic Institution Contribution 63 April 1990 US Army Corps of Engineers New England Division (Se Wee nya, (2) REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 2 o708.0188 Cue ESFERS Gur conection (AVGFRONGA 9 EMM SIED (6 averse | "Cus CET (RIOOME CiuUGING (AE (IMO (G7 revrqareng 1AUITUCUONME wwercheng @CtRUAS Gals wurens. FCRGRAQ Se nc cars Socoee lane cece BFE ( FUrSIHRG (PE CONGTTGN AT AVGTRBTION ERE COMMENT [EGRTHANG (Ars GuUGSR SUMAIO OF oFw CtRET MOT Of Treg 3 Secan oninsernatan \ROUDAG WEGRRUOM (OF EGUONG IAM OULSEA. (0 WeNwRATON PeESaUETERN berveren, Dir ecterEte [or IATOFMeNOA USSTeUOM ene Resort. 1215 .erteRoA pasa mamas tree 1208 Qrungtan. v4 122024302. ane (0 (Re Ufhice of Mansqement Ene dudoT. Pseerwore AeGuUTUGN Prarect (0704-0 168). Waenrenaten. OC 2039). 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave ovank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE ANNO OATES COVERED 4 TITLE ANO SUSTITLE Monitoring Cruise at the Central Long Island Sound Disposal Site, July 1986 6. AUTHOR(S) R @. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) ANO AOORESS(ES) REPORT NUMBER Science Applications International Corporation 221 Third Street SAIC-87/7514 & C63 Newport, RI 02840 9. SPONSORING: MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) ANO AOORESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING, MONITORING AGENCY REPORT NUMBER U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - New England Division 424 Trapelo Road DAMOS Contribution No. 63 Waltham, MA 02254-9149 11, SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES { Available from DAMOS Program Manager, Regulatory Division | Woods Hole Oceanogra| / USACOE-NED, 424 Trapelo Road, Waltham, MA 02254-9149 \ ie 12a. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12B. OfSTRIBU a Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. 13. ABSTRACT (Masimum «00 wores) Field operations were conducted at CLIS from 15 July to 7 August 1986 to provide information related to the effects of recent dredged material disposal operations and assess the effectiveness of management controls. The only significant addition to the bathymetric features at CLIS was the development of the new CLIS-86 disposal mound, which had a maximum thickness of 2 meters and a radius of about 250 meters as detected with acoustic methods. The REMOTS® results showed that recently- deposited dredged material covered an area with a north-south radius of about 350 to 400 meters and an east-west radius in excess of 600 meters. An estimated 131,920 m” of disposed material was detected on the bottom using precision bathymetry and REMOTS® photography, compared to a scow log volume estimate of 164,045 m”. No evidence of significant changes in topography at other mounds was detected. None of the sediment chemistry results exceeded NERBC ‘Moderate’ upper limits except for Hg in the Norwalk Center sample, which was at 'High' levels. Notably, the mounds that have been capped (CS-1, CS-2, STNH-S and STNH-N) almost all showed relatively low (i.e., ‘Low’) contaminant concentrations. The levels of most of the parameters measured were either not different or significantly Jower than reference levels. This Suggests that the caps have been effective in isolating or at least "diluting" contaminants which might have been elevated in the capped dredged material.Sediment contamination levels for several parameters were significantly elevated compared to reference levels at the FVP, MOR, CLIS-86, NH-74 and Norwalk disposal mounds. This reflects the fact that contaminants were elevated in the dredged material deposited at these mounds. The results of the benthic community analysis generally confirmed the REMOTS® infaunal successional designations and OSI rankings of the various mounds. The new CLIS reference station, STNH-N mound, and FVP mound were essentially similar in terms of mean OSI rank and species richness, while the MQR mound had a significantly lower mean OSI and species richness. = 1S. NUMBER OF PAGES 14. SUBUECT TERMS Dredged material mounds _ Sediment chemical analysis 218 | _Central Long Island Sound disposal site Benthic recolonization stages Body burden analysis REMOTS Precision bathymetric surveys Benthic community analysis 16. PRICE COOE Sediment profile photography RPD depths Side-scan surveys 17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION | 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION | 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION | 20. UMUTANION OF ABSTRACT OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT Unclassified jtanaara Form 298 (Rev 2-39) NSN 7540-01-280-3500 By anew Sea LIE I8 ownnese 23e-102 pth achat alee At ea A tl ee Nie ae ee | — ¥ _& ~ , MP : pie bd Tia - * Wy ere bn ices lb = ye ' Ausih ris ha ives daha 3 : ee m ips aii . Med é abe . on sen soy tart tees ia" ay 202 ‘tp J wits = ire ra aa Bhar yiiens ? pe merry nila tile i Seated enema hate ieinanin) naa cae 4 sone ' 5 1 { 14 i ¥ ® 4 — et ae Aas | :. io res ee bead yy 7 7 a Vl f I j 3 2 ; . | ra met caer % : di vA ] ve = . 7 = . t 2 Pep BA + extagen gh = sit - Aa ed leemeacetene 8 te. 1 A Tet ( rae : : 7 BP = 7 b i j = ; (yl = alien abel seta tielal a4 e ” ¥ oe ha i Nea mart dl ell = ¥ ‘ 7 i. = ; 34 i | i i %& i ae is tes i es he ed " : he . sg js . a . a 3 1% Rind) Tn) GURL) O00 a i i v = 4 & VW Ate : + a at: tes ~ eo, > iene ee pS. \tepte ay « : . : ne ’ é ; : Be ie ria en ee Via Fe Te er. Ta 7. ui . i. ally ae ts eee WtG Seo heae pean) Spyiterensy) | '@ Re J Wore el Le Ra gE RE) SAAN TERNS | fel ; 6 : } ; at otaggean a mrs ¥ oe Sle gta ety it alt 7 parice ac) (heey Bia = A LLY Peay Oke w LS DERI Me COM OTE ic eae em ma ety. : » dyehummeely bie eet SV To SNe eat bom ARP het a ene a ie Vell ee aud BE RAL oh, Soa et ietbaly a ae 4 sore +d ive ihAssi Pee il Line tRS Pk vi.) 1 Won WEE shoe 5 ’ A J \ i e. Leh Sree aes j Qvrcede SO? WO ie aE ATU ag gr lal “Been Wes dil sang Shoe CMe cing iedal oN Yat poe fe Aa age E ell’ raat Siw tt je cee ee MONITORING CRUISE AT THE CENTRAL LONG ISLAND SOUND DISPOSAL SITE JULY 1986 CONTRIBUTION #63 April 1990 Report No. SAIC- 87/7514&C63 Submitted to: Regulatory Branch New England Division U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 424 Trapelo Road Waltham, MA 02254-9149 Submitted by: Science Applications International Corporation Admiral's Gate 221 Third Street Newport, RI 02840 (401) 847-4210 US Army Corps of Engineers New England Division 26 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ....- + © © © © © © e@ METHODS ay cs een ted ve) Pellets ceeyeitie)) chile Ql NavAlgatcOni) jslen sil toratal etre Muvoht folinets Sediment Chemical Analysis .. . Benthic Community Analysis ... Body Burden Analysis ..... . NNNNN AF WN Bathymetric and side Scan Sonar Surveys. Remots Sediment-Profile Photographic Surveys RESULTS .. 5 ° : 6 6 0 e . . 3 oil Bathymetric Surveys at the CLIS Disposal Mound 3.2 Bathymetry and Side Scan Surveys at Ghost Sites 1 and2 .. C 0 : 3.3 REMOTS® Sediment- =Profile Surveys at the CLIS Dpleyoyoyeyeull Job}, 56 55 6 0 Sb 66.66 6 6 6 6 Sosa dl FVP Mound .. . 6.6 60 0 610 : 30808 Stamford-New Haven North (STNH-N) Mound . Bodo8 Stamford-New Haven South (STNH-S) Mound. 3.3.4 Cap Sites One (CS-1) and Two (CS-2). Bodo Mill-Quinnipiac River (MQR) Mound. 3.3.6 Norwalk (NOR) Mound ...... - 3307 New Haven 74 (NH-74) Mound... . 3.3.8 New Haven 83 (NH-83) Mound... . 3.3.9 CLIS-86 Mound ..... .- : ° 3.4 REMOTS® Sediment-Profile Surveys at Ghost Soles Md amel BA ooo 6 0 6 6 6 Ol Gee Dapae tO, Le 3.4.1 Ghost Site-1 (GHOST- 1) 5 0010 6, 0 3.4.2 Ghost Site-2 (GHOST-2) ..... . 3.5 Sediment Chemical Analysis ......-.. - 3.6 Benthic Community Analysis ........ - 3h7 Body, BuEdenwANnalySisS jo foes «rs 9 «le DISCUSSION .. . ° ° ° 6 0 Ree A LBA 4.1 Topographic Changes and Disposal Mound SteAloslitshay Bhs CINK 5 G6 6 6 o 6 0 6 Ghost Site 1 and 2 Investigations. . . 6 Benthic Habitat Quality at the CLIS Disposal Mounds and the New Reference Sediment Chemical Analysis bie Benthic Community Analysis 538 Body Burden Analysis Go ee CONCLUSIONS .... =. + «© © «© «© «© e« e REFERENCES .... + © «© «© © © © @ »@ Station . ONIHPWNN 0 0 HI} : i. | / i ot ; ron Les | | AVAte PTAA’ ap 5 ey eS Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table LIST OF TABLES Summary of REMOTS® Surveys in the CLIS Disposal Site Replicate Analysis Of Pitar Samples And NRC Lobster Hepatopancreas Tissue Determine Analytical Precision Chemical Analysis Of Sediment FvP-Center, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment MQR-Center, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment CLIS-86-Center, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment STNH-S-Center, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment CS-1-Center, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment CS-2-Center, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment NH74-Center, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment NH83-Center, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment NORWALK-Center, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment STNH-N-Center, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment STNH-N-400W, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment STNH-N-150W, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment STNH-N-200E, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment STNH-N-400E, July 1986 Collected Collected Collected Collected Collected Collected Collected Collected Collected Collected Collected Collected Collected Collected To At At At At at At At At At At At At At At Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table 3-15 3-16 3-17 3-18 3-19 3-20 3-21 3-22 3-24 3-25a 3-25b 3-26 LIST OF TABLES (Continued) Chemical Analysis Of Sediment Collected At STNH-N-200N, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment Collected At STNH-N-100N, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment Collected At STNH-N-100S, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment Collected At STNH-N-250S, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment Collected At CLIS-Reference, July 1986 Results Of Statistical Testing For Significant Differences Between Core Sections From The CLIS Mounds, July 1986 Results Of Statistical Testing For Significant Differences Between The Reference Station And CLIS Mounds, July 1986 (0-2 cm Core Sections) Results Of Statistical Testing For Significant Differences Between The Reference Station And CLIS Mounds, July 1986 (2-10 cm Core Sections) Results Of Statistical Testing For Significant Differences Between Core Sections From STNH-N Stations And The Center Station, July 1986 Results Of Statistical Testing For Significant ‘Differences Between Core Sections From The STNH-N Mound, July 1986 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment Collected At CLIS, January 1982 Chemical Analysis Of Sediment Collected At STNH-N, September 1984 Results Of Statistical Testing For Significant Differences Between Core Sections From The STNH-N Mound In July 1986 With Grabs From January 1982 and September 1984 Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table 3-27 3-28 3-29 3-30 3-31 LIST OF TABLES (Continued) Visual Descriptions Of Biological Sediment Samples Collected At CLIS, July 1986 Benthic Community Analysis For Samples Collected At Central Long Island Sound Disposal Site, July 1986 Trace Metals (Dry Weight) In Body Tissues Of Nephtys Collected At CLIS, August 1986 Trace Metals (Wet Weight) In Body Tissues Of Nephtys Collected At CLIS, August 1986 PCB's In Body Tissues Of Nephtys Collected At CLIS, August 1986 Results Of Statistical Testing For Significant Differences In Chemical Concentrations In Nephtys incisa Collected At CLIS Summary Organism-Sediment Index Ranking, CLIS Disposal Mounds, 1986 Comparison of Sediment Chemical Concentrations from the Central Long Island Disposal Site with Other Reported Values in Long Island Sound Comparison Of REMOTS® And Benthic Summary Parameters 4 = | AR ae Rae ern f ed ese ‘a ake Ss Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 3-9. 3-10. 3-11. 3-12. 3-13. 3-14. 3-15 ° 3-16. LIST OF FIGURES Survey lanes at the Central Long Island Sound (CLIS) Disposal Site. Bathymetric contour chart of CLIS, July 1986. Bathymetric contour chart of CLIS, July 1985. Bathymetric contour chart of the new CLIS-86 disposal mound, July 1986. Depth difference contour chart of the new CLIS-86 disposal mound, based on comparison of the August 1985 and July 1986 precision bathymetric surveys. Bathymetric contour chart of FVP, July 1986. Bathymetric contour chart of STNH-N, July 1986. Bathymetric contour chart of STNH-S, July 1986. Bathymetric contour chart of Cap Site-1, July 1986. Bathymetric contour chart of Cap Site-2, July 1986. Bathymetric contour chart of MQR, July 1986. Bathymetric contour chart of NORWALK, July 1986. Bathymetric contour chart of NHAV-83, July 1986. Bathymetric contour chart of NHAV-74, July 1986. Bathymetric contour chart of GHOST-1, August 1986. Bathymetric contour chart of GHOST-2, August 1986. Results of GHOST-1 side scan survey, August 1986. Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 3-17. 3-18. 3-19. 3-20. 3-21. 3-22. 3-23a. 3-23b. 3-24. 3-25. 3-26. LIST OF FIGURES, Continued. Results of GHOST-2 side scan survey, August 1986. Benthic "process" map indicating the distribution and thickness (cm) of apparent dredged material at the FVP disposal mound in July 1986. REMOTS® image from station Center at FVP showing a sand component in the near surface sediment. Frequency distributions of small-scale boundary roughness for all replicates at the FVP mound stations, FVP edge and ambient stations and the new CLIS reference station. The mapped distribution of mean apparent RPD depths at the FVP disposal mound, July 1986. Frequency distributions of apparent RPD depths for all replicates at the FVP mound stations, FVP edge and ambient stations and the new CLIS reference station. REMOTS® image from station 150E at FVP illustrating the trend toward deeper RPD depths between October 1985 and July 1986. REMOTS® images from station 150E at FVP illustrating the trend toward deeper RPD depths between October 1985 and July 1986. The mapped distribution of infaunal successional stages for all replicates at the FVP disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of REMOTS® Organism- Sediment Indices (OSI) for all replicates at the FVP disposal mound, July 1986. Frequency distributions of REMOTS® Organism- Sediment Indices for all replicates at the FVP mound stations, FVP edge and ambient stations and the new CLIS reference station. Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 3-27 ° 3-28. 3-29 e 3-30. 3-31. 3-32. 3-33. 3-34. 3-35 e 3-36. 3-37a. 3-37b. LIST OF FIGURES, Continued A post-hurricane Gloria benthic "process" map showing the distribution of erosional and depositional features at the STNH-N disposal mound in November 1985. REMOTS® image from station Center at STNH-N showing intact sand cap. Benthic "process" map indicating the distribution and thickness (cm) of apparent dredged material at the STNH-N site in July 1986. Frequency distributions of small-scale boundary roughness, mean apparent RPD depths and OSI values at the STNH-S disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of mean apparent RPD depths at the STNH-N disposal mound, July 1986. REMOTS® image from station 200SW showing well- developed Stage III feeding voids which characterize most stations at the STNH-N mound. REMOTS® image from station 200W showing an apparent absence of head-down deposit feeders. The mapped distribution of infaunal successional stages at the STNH-N disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of REMOTS® Organism- Sediment Indices (OSI's) at the STNH-N disposal mound, July 1986. Benthic "process" map which indicates the distribution and thickness (cm) of apparent dredged material at the STNH-S disposal mound in July 1986. REMOTS® image from station 200W showing similar stratigraphy to 200NW. REMOTS® image from station 200NW showing similar stratigraphy to 200N. Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 3-38. 3-39. 3-40. 3-41. 3-42. 3-43. 3-44. 3-45. 3-46a. 3-46b. 3-47a. 3-47b. 3-48a. LIST OF FIGURES, Continued Frequency distributions of small-scale boundary roughness, mean apparent RPD depths and OSI values at the STNH-S disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of mean apparent RPD depths at the STNH-S disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of infaunal successional stages at the STNH-S disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of REMOTS® Organism- Sediment Indices (OSI's) at the STNH-S disposal mound, July 1986. REMOTS® image from station 600N at CS-1 showing an intact sand cap. A sand over mud stratigraphy characterizes this station. Two benthic "process" maps (A and B) which indicate the distribution and thickness (cm) of apparent dredged material at the CS-1 (A) and CS-2 (B) disposal mounds in July 1986. Frequency distributions of small-scale boundary roughness values at CS-1 and CS-2 in July 1986. Frequency distributions of mean apparent RPD depths at CS-1 and CS-2 in July 1986. The mapped distribution of mean apparent RPD depths at the CS-1 disposal mound in July 1986. The mapped distribution of mean apparent RPD depths at the CS-2 disposal mound in July 1986. REMOTS® image from station Center at CS-1. REMOTS® image from station Center at CS-2. The mapped distribution of successional stages for July 1986 at the CS-1 disposal mound. Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 3-48b. 3-49. 3-50a. 3-50b. 3-51. 3-52a. 3-52b. 3-53. 3-54. 3-55. 3-56. 3-57. LIST OF FIGURES, Continued The mapped distribution of successional stages for July 1986 at the CS-2 disposal mound. Frequency distributions of REMOTS® Organism- Sediment Indices (OSI's) at the CS-1 and CS-2 disposal mounds, July 1986. The mapped distribution of REMOTS® Organism- Sediment Indices (OSI's) at the CS-1 disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of REMOTS® Organism- Sediment Indices (OSI's) at the CS-2 disposal mound, July 1986. Benthic "process" map which indicates the distribution and thickness (cm) of apparent dredged material at the MQR disposal mound in July 1986. REMOTS® image from station 200E showing methane gas bubbles (arrows) in the sediment. REMOTS® image from station 200N showing methane gas bubbles (arrows) in the sediment. Frequency distributions of small-scale boundary roughness, mean apparent RPD depths and OSI values at the MQR disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of mean apparent RPD depths at the MOR disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of infaunal successional stages at the MQR disposal mound, July 1986. REMOTS® image from station 200N showing well- developed feeding voids (evidence of Stage III taxa) near the apparent RPD boundary. The mapped distribution of REMOTS® Organism- Sediment Indices (OSI's) for all replicates at the MQR disposal mound, July 1986. Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 3-58. 3-59. 3-60. 3-61. 3-62. 3-63. 3-64. 3-65. 3-66. 3-67. LIST OF FIGURES, Continued REMOTS® image from station 600N showing low apparent dissolved oxygen levels and a shallow RPD, possibly attributed to local surface erosion at this station. Benthic "process" map which indicates the distribution and thickness (cm) of apparent dredged material at the Norwalk disposal mound in July 1986. REMOTS® image from station 200W showing low reflectance sediment at the surface. This reduced sediment was probably derived from excavation of a nearby burrow. Frequency distributions of small-scale boundary roughness, mean apparent RPD depths and OSI values at the Norwalk disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of mean apparent RPD depths at the Norwalk disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of infaunal successional stages at the Norwalk disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of REMOTS® Organism- Sediment Indices (OSI's) at the Norwalk disposal mound, July 1986. REMOTS® image from station Center at NH-74 showing a very thin surface sand layer and shallow RPD depth, suggesting recent erosion of aerated surface sediments which once comprised the sand cap at this mound. Benthic "process" map which indicates the distribution and thickness (cm) of apparent dredged material at the NH-74 disposal mound in July 1986. Frequency distributions of small-scale boundary roughness, mean apparent RPD depths and OSI values at the NH-74 disposal mound, July 1986. Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 3-68 e 3-69. 3-70 e 3-71. 3-72 e 3-73. 3-74. 3-75. 3-76. 3-77. 3-78. 3-79. LIST OF FIGURES, Continued The mapped distribution of mean apparent RPD depths at the NH-74 disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of infaunal successional stages at the NH-74 disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of REMOTS® Organism- Sediment Indices (OSI's) at the NH-74 disposal mound, July 1986. Benthic "process" map which indicates the distribution and thickness (cm) of apparent dredged material at the NH-83 disposal mound in July 1986. Frequency distributions of small-scale boundary roughness, mean apparent RPD depths and OSI values at the NH-83 disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of mean apparent RPD depths at the NH-83 disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of infaunal successional stages at the NH-83 disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of REMOTS® Organism- Sediment Indices (OSI's) at the NH-83 disposal mound, July 1986. Benthic "process" map which indicates the distribution and thickness (cm) of apparent dredged material at the new CLIS-86 disposal mound in July 1986. Frequency distributions of small-scale boundary roughness, mean apparent RPD depths and OSI values at the CLIS-86 disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of mean apparent RPD depths at the CLIS-86 disposal mound, July 1986. REMOTS® image from station 200SE showing a thin layer of low reflectance sediment overlying high reflectance sediment. Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 3-80. 3-81. 3-82. 3-83 e 3-84. 3-85. 3-86. 3-87 e 3-88 e 3-89. LIST OF FIGURES, Continued The mapped. distribution of infaunal successional stages at the CLIS-86 disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of REMOTS® Organism- Sediment Indices (OSI's) at the CLIS-86 disposal mound, July 1986. The mapped distribution of mean apparent RPD depths at the GHOST-1 site, July 1986. Frequency distributions of small-scale boundary roughness, mean apparent RPD depths and OSI values at the GHOST-1 site, July 1986. The mapped distribution of infaunal successional stages at the GHOST-1 site, July 1986. The mapped distribution of REMOTS® Organism- Sediment Indices (OSI's) at the GHOST-1 site, July 1986. The mapped distribution of mean apparent RPD depths at the GHOST-2 site, July 1986. Frequency distributions of small-scale boundary roughness, mean apparent RPD depths and OSI values at the GHOST-2 site, July 1986. The mapped distribution of infaunal successional stages at the GHOST-2 site, July 1986. The mapped distribution of REMOTS® Organism- Sediment Indices (OSI's) at the GHOST-2 site, July 1986. Mean species richness value versus mean OSI values for the STNH-N, FVP, and MQR disposal mounds and the CLIS-Reference station. MONITORING CRUISE AT THE CENTRAL LONG ISLAND DISPOSAL SITE JULY 1986 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Central Long Island Sound (CLIS) Disposal Site has been under study by the New England Division (NED), Corps of Engineers since 1974. Several investigations have been conducted at CLIS to assess the impact of dredged material disposal on the surrounding environment and to study the effectiveness of capping contaminated dredged material to eliminate or limit the release of chemical components of environmental concern. These studies have been performed at a number of different disposal points within the CLIS Disposal Site boundary (Figure 1-1). Field operations were conducted at CLIS during the period 15 July to 7 August 1986 to provide information related to the fates and effects of past and recent dredged material disposal operations and determine if management controls initiated by the New England Division had resulted in minimal dredged material dispersion and environmental impacts. Specifically, the first objectives of the field operations were to delineate the extent and topography of the dredged material deposit resulting from disposal during the 1985-86 season and assess the stability of past disposal mounds at the site to determine if changes in topography or dredged material distribution had occurred. To meet these objectives, precision bathymetric and REMOTS® sediment-profile photographic surveys were performed at the following disposal mounds: MQR, STNH- S, STNH-N, NOR, NH-74, NH-83, CS-1, CS-2, FVP and CLIS-86. Particular attention was paid to CLIS-86, the new mound created at the buoy in the northwest corner of the disposal site during the 1985-86 disposal season (Figure 1-1). Another purpose of the REMOTS® surveys at the various mounds was to assess benthic recolonization and overall habitat quality through comparisons with past surveys. In addition, REMOTS® photography was used to help establish a new reference site outside the CLIS disposal site. Results from both past REMOTS® surveys and the Environmental Protection Agency's research program indicated that the formerly-used CLIS reference station was adversely affected by intensive sampling during the three year Field Verification Program (FVP). A REMOTS® survey was performed at a site approximately 2000 meters east and 500 meters south of the disposal site to assess its potential as the new CLIS reference station. Another objective of the 1986 field operations was to examine two areas outside the disposal site boundaries for the presence of dredged material. Prior to the field operations, examination of disposal logs revealed the possibility that approximately sixteen barge loads of dredged material (approximately 50,000 m’) may have been deposited in each of the two areas. These two areas, referred to as Ghost Site 1 and Ghost Site 2, were surveyed using precision bathymetry, side scan sonar, and REMOTS® photography to determine whether dredged material was present and therefore verify if errant disposal had occurred. Ghost Site 1 was located on the eastern margin of the CLIS disposal site; Ghost Site 2 was located on the northern edge of the site (Figure 1-1). Sampling was also performed during the 1986 survey to determine the concentrations of selected chemical constituents in sediments from each of the ten disposal mounds and the new reference station. Grab samples were obtained at the center of each mound, and additional samples were taken at the STNH-N mound at previously determined transect stations for comparision with earlier chemical data. All samples were divided into Top (0-2cm) and Bottom (2-10cm) samples in order to assess any contaminant concentration variations that might occur with depth. Another objective of the survey was to collect grab samples at each disposal mound and the new reference station for analysis of benthic community structure. Only the samples from the FVP, MOR, STNH-N mounds and the reference station were analyzed; the rest were preserved and archived. These mounds were chosen because STNH-N was found to have a different grain-size than the surrounding bottom, MQR was the only mound not affected by Hurricane Gloria, and FVP had long-term benthic data for comparision. A final objective was to assess whether bioaccumulation of chemical contaminants had occurred at the FVP, MQR, STNH-N and CLIS-86 mounds based on comparison of contaminant body burden concentrations in organisms collected at the mounds versus those collected at the new CLIS reference station. Body burden levels at the FVP mound were compared with past data. Organisms were collected at MQR because this mound had shown anomalous benthic recolonization rates and different benthic community type compared with all the other CLIS mounds. The STNH-N mound was sampled to provide baseline data to assess the effectiveness of a sand cap for long term isolation of chemical contaminants from colonizing benthos. 2.0 METHODS 2.1 Navigation The precise navigation required for all field operations was provided by the SAIC Integrated Navigation and Data Acquisition 2 System (INDAS). This system uses a Hewlett-Packard 9920 Series computer to collect position, depth, and time data as well as to provide real-time navigation. During a bathymetric survey, a display is provided to the helmsman of the research vessel with the survey lanes and the real-time position of the vessel indicated. The positional information is recorded on magnetic disk every second along with depth and time. The computer system calculates accurate positions from the range data provided by the positioning system and is capable of converting from state plane coordinates in the Transverse Mercator system to Lambert or Mercator coordinates. Positions were determined to an accuracy of +3 meters from ranges provided by a Del Norte Trisponder System. Shore stations were established in Connecticut over known benchmarks at Stratford Point and Lighthouse Point. These shore stations were same ones used in previous years to allow accurate comparisons of seasonal surveys. . 2.2 Bathymetric and Side Scan Sonar Surveys Depths were determined to a resolution of 0.3 meters (0.1 ft) using a Raytheon DE-719 Precision Survey Fathometer with a 208 kHz transducer. The fathometer was calibrated with a bar check at fixed depths below the transducer before the survey began. A Raytheon SSD-100 Digitizer was used to transmit the depth values to the SAIC computer system. Analysis of the bathymetric data corrects the raw depth values to Mean Low Water by adjusting for ship draft and for tidal changes for the duration of the survey. Noise generated in the data from fluctuating environmental conditions can result in errors such as spurious shallow depths. All data points in terms of depth and position were checked for such unreasonable values so that the final contour plots would not contain errors. For the 1986 field operations, survey lanes were run east and west at 50 meter lane spacing over the entire CLIS disposal area. Surveys also were conducted over the ten individual disposal mounds (MQR, STNH-N, STNH-S, Norwalk, NH-74, NH-83, CS-1, CS-2, FVP and the new CLIS-86 mound) at 25 meter lane spacing. The closer lane spacing at these mounds provided good resolution for subsequent data analysis and the production of detailed depth contour charts. The bathymetric surveys conducted at Ghost Sites 1 and 2 were run at 25 meter lane spacing over 600 by 600 meter areas centered at 41°8.96'N, 72°51.36'W (Ghost 1) and 41°9.64'N, 72°52.64'W (GHOST-2, Figure 1-1). A Klein Side Scan Sonar System also was used to survey these two sites. The side scan survey lanes were run at 150 meter spacing over a 900 by 900 meter area centered around the same points as the bathymetric surveys. The side scan system was set to a 100 meter sweep on both sides of the towed sensor array to provide complete coverage of the bottom in the two areas of interest. 2.3 REMOTS® Sediment-Profile Photographic Surveys To better delineate the distribution of dredged material and assess benthic recolonization at each mound, the results of the July 1986 REMOTS® surveys were compared to previous surveys at the various mounds. All of the ten mounds within the CLIS disposal site have been surveyed in the past with REMOTS® photography, although the length of these histories as well as the survey format used and number of stations sampled varied (summarized in Table 2- lS) ire The 1986 results at the disposal mounds were also compared with those at the new CLIS reference station, where twenty replicate REMOTS® photographs were obtained in a random pattern. A brief history and a summary of the methods employed at the individual disposal mounds follow. At the FVP mound, numerous REMOTS® surveys were conducted prior to and following disposal in 1983. The results from the most recent surveys in June and October 1985 (Table 2-1) were compared to the present results. The July 1986 survey was conducted 31 months after disposal of contaminated Black Rock Harbor sediment at FVP and 10 months after the passage of Hurricane Gloria over Long Island Sound (September 27, 1985). As documented in DAMOS Contribution #57, Hurricane Gloria was an extremely high energy event which caused physical disturbance of the top few centimeters of the seafloor at the FVP mound (SAIC, 1989a). However, even prior to the hurricane there were indications that the region was experiencing stress factors during much of 1985. Chief among these stress indicators was a relatively shallow apparent RPD depth at stations throughout the FVP mound and exisiting CLIS reference station and the dominance of low-order successional infauna. In the July 1986 survey at the FVP mound, twelve central stations were considered to be located on the main dredged material mound or mound flanks based on REMOTS® and bathymetric surveys conducted immediately after the FVP disposal operation (Figure 3- 18). The remaining nine stations located off the dredged material mound were classified as edge and ambient. An attempt was made to obtain three replicate REMOTS® photographs at each station. The 1986 surveys of STNH-N and STNH-S intersect at the approximate topographic centers of each disposal mound (station Center). Stations were located at 200 meters in each quadrant of these sampling grids. Both the STNH-N and STNH-S mounds originally 4 were created from dredged material from Stamford Harbor, CT. In June 1979, the STNH-N mound was capped with sand and the STNH-S mound was capped with silt from New Haven Harbor, CT. Cap Sites 1 and 2 (CS-1 and CS-2), located on the western edge of the CLIS site, also were formed as capping experiments. A baseline REMOTS® survey was made of these areas in April 1983. Immediately following this baseline survey, Black Rock Harbor sediment at CS- 1 was capped with silt from the upper portion of New Haven Harbor, and the same sediment at CS-2 was capped with sand from outer New Haven Harbor. A post-disposal reconnaissance REMOTS® survey was conducted in June 1983 to map the distribution of the dredged material and the thickness of the capping materials, and then several additional REMOTS® surveys were subsequently conducted (Table 2-1). In the present survey, three replicate photographs were obtained at each station, but only one replicate per station was analyzed for this report. The most recent survey of July 1986 at the MQR mound occurred 38 months after disposal of Black Rock Harbor dredged materials followed by capping with New Haven Harbor muds. Stations in the grid were occupied at 200, 400, and 600 meters from station Center. Four stations were also located in the quadrants at the 200 meter positions. Attempts were made to obtain three replicate sediment-profile photographs at each station, and all pictures were analyzed for this report. The 1986 sampling grid was different than that in the August 1985 MQR REMOTS® survey. In 1985, a 6 x 6 orthogonal sampling matrix was occupied with stations located 100, 300, and 500 meters north, south, east and west of station Center. One REMOTS® photograph was obtained from each station. The 29 October 1985 post-hurricane survey involved sampling 10 stations (3 replicates each) located on a cross-shaped grid at station Center, 50 and 200 meters on the N-S transect and 50, 200, and 1000 meter positions on the E-W transect. No quadrant stations were sampled. The 1986 survey at the Norwalk (NOR) disposal mound involved the same sample grid used in August 1985. Three replicate sediment profile photographs were taken at each station, but only one photograph per station was analyzed for this report. This was the case for all the other CLIS mounds, except for FVP and MOQR, where three replicates were analyzed. The New Haven 74 (NH-74) disposal mound has the longest monitoring history of all the disposal mounds at CLIS, having been studied on an irregular basis since the original baseline study conducted in 1972. The NH-74 project involved the disposal of New Haven Harbor channel muds which were capped with clean sand, with the first REMOTS® survey conducted in September 1984. The 1986 survey was conducted at the same stations sampled in 1985 (Table 2-1). REMOTS® monitoring at the New Haven 83 (NH-83) disposal mound began with a baseline survey in October 1984. The 1986 survey was conducted at the same stations sampled in August 1985. The 1986 REMOTS® survey of the CLIS-86 disposal point was the first to be conducted at this site. This point was established east of the Cap Sites One and Two in October 1985; disposal has taken place since that time. The present survey was done on a cross-shaped grid at 17 stations, located at 200 meter intervals from station Center out to 600 meters. Quadrant stations were also located at 200 meter positions. The REMOTS® surveys at the Ghost Site 1 and Ghost Site 2 areas each consisted of a 7 x 7 orthogonal grid with stations located 100 meters apart. Only One photograph was taken at each station. REMOTS® photographs were taken with a Benthos Model 3731 Sediment-Profile Camera (Benthos, Inc. North Falmouth, MA). The REMOTS® camera is designed to obtain in-situ profile photographs of the top 15-20 cm of sediment. A detailed description of the REMOTS® camera operation and photograph analysis is presented in Damos Contribution #60 (SAIC, 1989p). 2.4 Sediment Chemical Analysis Sediment samples were collected from the centers of the ten disposal mounds in the CLIS disposal area and at the reference station. In addition, eight stations around the STNH-N mound were sampled. For all of these stations, triplicate samples were collected using a 0.1 m Smith-McIntyre grab sampler. Four polycarbonate plastic core liners (6.5 cm ID) were pushed into each sediment grab sample and extracted. These core samples were then separated into the Top (0-2 cm) section and the Bottom or remainder (about 2-10 cm depth) section and bagged separately for subsequent chemical analysis by the NED laboratory. The cores were separated to determine whether the surface sediment was relatively more or less contaminated than the deeper sediment. The samples were kept cold and returned to the NED laboratory where they were stored at 4°C until analyzed. The parameters measured included a suite of trace metals, and several organic constituents. Sediment analyses were conducted using methods described by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Plumb, 1981). Mercury (Hg) analysis was performed using acid digestion and cold vapor atomic absorption spectrophotometry; arsenic (As) analysis was accomplished using acid digestion and gaseous anhydride atomic absorption spectrophotometry. The other inorganic compounds (lead (Pb), zinc (Zn), chromium (Cr), copper (Cu), cadmium (Cd), nickel (Ni), and iron (Fe)) were analyzed using acid digestion and flame atomic absorption spectrophotometry. 6 Carbon, hydrogen, and nitrogen analyses were conducted with an autoanalyzer using a combustion technique. Oil and grease measurements were made by extracting the sediment with freon and then analyzing the freon by infrared spectrophotometry. PCBS were extracted with hexane and also analyzed by electron capture gas chromatography. 2.5 Benthic Community Analysis Sediment samples for quantitative benthic analyses were obtained at the center of each of the ten disposal mounds as well as at the new CLIS reference station using a 0.1 m° Smith-MacIntyre grab sampler. At each station, five replicate grab samples were collected and sieved onboard the research vessel through nested 2 mm and 0.5 mm mesh screens. A visual description of each sediment grab was recorded prior to sieving. The material retained on the sieves was preserved with buffered formalin either for later sorting and identification in the laboratory or for archiving. Three of the replicate samples from the FVP, MQR, STNH-N Center stations and the reference station were analyzed, while the remaining two replicates from these areas were archived along with all the samples from the other disposal mounds. In the laboratory, samples were stained with 0.2% rose bengal and sieved on 1.0 and 0.1 mm screens immersed in water. Light material was separated from each sieve fraction by repeated suspension and decantation. This fraction included most organisms other than molluscs and a few polychaetes in tubes. Sand, gravel, and shells made up the heavy fraction. Heavy fractions were sorted in glass trays with a white background. All other fractions were examined with binocular microscopes. All samples were analyzed under the supervision of Mr. Sheldon Pratt at the University of Rhode Island's Graduate School of Oceanography. Organisms were identified to species in most cases. Individuals from all fractions were combined during counting. All individuals were stored in 70% alcohol. Sieve residues were described in laboratory notes and discarded. A combined reference collection of all species found in the 1986 Central and Western Long Island Sound Disposal Site samples was archived at the University of Rhode Island Graduate School of Oceanography under the direction of Mr. Sheldon Pratt. The STNH-N samples contained a large number of Polydora polychaetes and their tubes. The coarse fraction of STNH-N-2 took over 20 hours to sort and yielded 2,200 Polydora. To assure the timely completion of all samples, the remaining coarse and fine material from STNH-N were split into 1/2 and 1/4 fractions. 2.6 Body Burden Analysis Test organisms for body burden analysis were collected from four of the disposal mounds (STNH-N, FVP, MQR, and CLIS-86) and at the new reference station using a Smith-McIntyre grab. Sediment was sieved through a 2 mm mesh and the deposit-feeding organisms (the polychaete, Nephtys incisa) were isolated and placed in seawater at ambient temperature. Sufficient biomass was collected for triplicate analyses at all of the stations except CLIS-86, where only enough biomass could be collected for a single sample. The animals were allowed to purge any sediment from their guts for 24 hours before they were frozen for transport to the laboratory for chemical analysis. The polychaetes were analyzed for eight trace metals and PCBs at the SAIC laboratory in La Jolla, California. A detailed description of the methods used for the analysis of the polychaete tissue can be found in DAMOS Contribution #60 (SAIC, 1989b). The quality of the tissue trace metal data was assured in several ways. These included the analysis of blank samples and measurements of the precision and accuracy of the results. Blank concentrations were all well below the element concentrations for these samples. Measurements of the precision of the inorganic analyses were made by doing replicate analysis of a sample of Pitar morrhuana (collected at the New London Disposal Site) and NRC Lobster Hepatopancreas Tissue (Table 2-2). The relative standard deviations of replicate analyses of the Pitar morrhuana were less than 20% for all elements. Results from the analyses of certified NRC Lobster Hepatopancreas Tissue showed excellent accuracy for the inorganic analysis methods. The concentrations reported for all eight elements in the NRC tissue were very similar (91-108% agreement) to the NRC values, indicating good accuracy (Table 2-2). Samples for organic analysis were first sonicated with methanol and then three additional times with hexane. The methanol/hexane mixture was partitioned in a separatory funnel and the aqueous methanol was extracted with additional hexane. The combined hexane extracts were decanted through Na,SO, and concentrated to 1.0 ml using standard Kuderna-Danish (K-D) equipment and techniques. Next, 0.5 ml aliquots of the concentrated samples were adjusted to 1.0 ml with acetone and eluted with hexane over neutral alumina columns. Samples were analyzed for their PCB content according to EPA Federal Register Method 608, using a Hewlett Packard 5840A gas chromatograph equipped with an electron capture detector and a 30 m DB-5 fused silica capillary column. The column oven temperature was programmed from an initial temperature of 45°C to 290°C using a three-step program. The program rate was 7°C/min to 164°C, then 2°/min to 214°C, and finally 10°C/min to 290°C. Quantification was by the external standard calibration method. 8 Tissue samples were screened for the presence of several different PCB formulations. These included Aroclors 1016, 1221, 1232, 1242, 1248, 1254 and 1260. Aroclor 1254 is the most prevalent mixture in the marine environment of the Northeast region. Because each formulation contains different amounts of chlorine, the response factors can vary between mixtures. The detection limits for Aroclors 1016, 1242 and 1260 were the same as that achieved for 1254. The detection limits were higher for the other mixtures by factors of 4.0, 2.0 and 1.6 for Aroclors 1221, 1232 and 1248, respectively. In order to report a total PCB concentration one would have to add the concentrations of all the different mixtures. The PCB analyses were quality assured by measuring the recovery of a surrogate compound (dibutylchlorendate) in each sample. The recovery of this compound was 69% +16 for the Central Long Island Sound disposal site samples. 3.0 RESULTS Soak Bathymetric Surveys at the CLIS Disposal Mounds The disposal mounds were evident as rapid changes in topography (Figure 3-1). Comparison with the results of the identical survey in 1985 (Figure 3-2) revealed the only significant addition to be the accumulation of new dredged material at the buoy (designated as the CLIS-86 mound). Modifications in the analysis software enabled the production of higher resolution contour plots for the 1986 surveys. The minimum depth at the peak of the CLIS-86 mound was 16.6 meters; this mound apex was located approximately 60 meters east of the disposal buoy location (Figure 3-3). A detailed comparison of this area was made with the survey conducted in August 1985 to determine where depth differences occurred (Figure 3-4) and to estimate the volume of material deposited since that time. This volume difference calculation resulted in an estimate of approximately 79,200 m of dredged material deposited during the 1985-86 disposal season. Tabulation of scow logs indicated that approximately 164,045 m of dredged material was deposited at CLIS-86 during the period 11 October 1985 to 5 May 1986. The standard error of the depth difference volume calculation for the 650 x 700 meter survey area at CLIS-86 was determined to be 4,246 wm, resulting in 95% confidence limits of 74,954 to 83,446 m of dredged material detected on the bottom by precision bathymetry. A detailed description of the calculations required to determine this error and the 95% confidence limits around 9 it can be found in DAMOS Contribution #60 (SAIC, 1989b). This calculation simply implies that the actual (and unknown) volume difference will occur within the lower and upper confidence limits with a probability of 0.95. Figures 3-5 through 3-13 present enlargements of each individual disposal mound using the same data that produced Figure 3-1 for the mounds: FVP, STNH-N, STNH-S, CS-1, CS-2, MOR, Norwalk, NHAV-83, and NHAV-74 (Figure 1-1), respectively. Because of the areas defined by the chart boundaries, sections of neighboring mounds can be seen in the figures. Direct comparison of the results of the 1985 and 1986 surveys did not reveal any significant changes in topography that could be attributed to erosion. 3.2 Bathymetry and Side Scan Surveys at Ghost Sites 1 and 2 Examination of the results of the bathymetric surveys at the GHOST-1 and GHOST-2 sites (Figures 3-14 and 3-15) revealed the lack of any significant accumulation of sediment at any particular location. Because these areas were outside the CLIS area normally surveyed, a comparison with earlier results was not possible. At GHOST-1, the only noticeable variations in depth were on the order of 20 cm. At GHOST-2, these variations were only as much as 10-15 cm. Analysis of the side scan records for the GHOST-1 and GHOST- 2 areas did not identify any large accumulation of dredged material. Figure 3-16 presents the survey lanes and the areas of high reflectance that were evident on the side scan records at GHOST-1. Only one site revealed any distinct reflection and could not account for the 50,000 cubic yards of dredged material suspected of being deposited there. The remainder of the bottom was fairly smooth and uniform. Several areas of high reflectance were scattered throughout the GHOST-2 survey area (Figure 3-17). Although no distinct areas could be identified as scow loads of dredged material, the difficulty in distinguishing the dredged material from the ambient bottom increases with time. The one identifiable feature at GHOST-2 is a sunken "pocket scow" (Figure 3-17). 3.3 REMOTS® Sediment-Profile Surveys at the CLIS Disposal Mounds 3.3.1 FVP Mound The distribution and thickness (cm) of apparent dredged material at the FVP mound (Figure 3-18) was similar to those mapped in earlier surveys. Some stations that were previously shown to be located on the mound and flank perimeter showed no apparent dredged material layer to be present. This may have been caused by either complete mixing of the Black Rock material into the ambient bottom or the loss of high reflectance sediment (ferric hydroxide-coated particles) of the buried pre-disposal surface (datum of reference). 10 All stations showed an apparent grain size major mode of > 4 phi (silt-clay) with subordinate sand modes ranging from very coarse to very fine sands (-1 to 3 phi). Since the January 1984 survey, fine sand (3-2 phi) has dominated the surface texture of station Center. This sand layer has been interpreted to represent a lag deposit resulting from washing of fines from the apex of the mound. In the October 1985 survey, fine sand layers were also found to be developing at stations 150E and 100W. It was suggested that this was caused by Hurricane Gloria. These stations have continued to show sandy surfaces and, in addition, all other FVP stations showed a sand component in the near surface sediment (Figure 3-19). Some of the sand-sized particles were apparently biogenic (foraminiferal tests and molluscan shells) and may represent the gradual accumulation of skeletal material as successive populations contribute their hard parts to the sedimentary matrix. The sand fraction in other cases consisted of mineral grains. It is possible that the sand fraction of the near-surface sediment increased due to the onshore to offshore transport of sand related to Hurricane Gloria. This inference is based on the presence of a 9 cm thick, fine sand (3-2 phi) layer overlying silt clay at a station located in 50 feet of water approximately 4000 m north-west of the FVP area (SAIC, 1989a). In June 1985, approximately 80% of the FVP photographs showed the widespread presence of reduced mud at the sediment surface including the mound, flanks, and ambient bottom. Reduced sediment at the surface was not seen at the CLIS reference station. The origin of this reduced sediment was attributed to surface erosion of the FVP mound and the local redistribution of Black Rock Harbor muds. In October 1985 (post-Hurricane Gloria), about 50% of the photographs showed reduced sediment at the surface. Two of the 20 CLIS reference photographs in October also showed reduced sediment at the sediment- water interface. In the 1985 case, the effects of Hurricane Gloria were suggested to be the agent eroding the top 2-3 cm of oxidized, biogenicaily-reworked upper sediment.In this survey, only one replicate at station 500W showed reduced mud clasts at the sediment surface; it is possible that this was an artifact introduced by the REMOTS® prism window wiper. Reduced sediment was not seen at the sediment-water interface in any of the photographs from the new CLIS reference station. In this survey, there was little or no evidence of exposure of the reduced Black Rock Harbor muds to the water column. The frequency distributions of boundary roughness values for the dredged material mound, edge and ambient stations, and the new CLIS reference station were all similar, with the major mode for small-scale topographic relief at the 0.8 cm class interval (Figure 3-20). These boundary roughness values were not significantly different from those measured in October 1985. However, both the October 1985 and July 1986 boundary roughness values were 11 significantly greater than those measured in the June 1985 survey (p < 0.05, Mann-Whitney U-test). Seasonal changes in the rates of biogenic reworking as well as physically-induced surface erosional and depositional events can result in changes in boundary roughness. At the FVP area, the increase in boundary roughness values in October 1985 was physically- induced, attributable to the influence of Hurricane Gloria. In the present survey, the boundary roughness was attributed to increased biological activity in the area; a higher rate of biogenic reworking of surface sediments is normally expected during the warmer months of the year. A layer of floccular material, interpreted to represent a depositional layer of detritus associated with a decaying spring plankton bloom was described in the March 1985 report. This layer was not observed in any REMOTS® photographs from the present survey. Average RPD depths were 3.67 + 0.90 cm at mound stations and 4.06 + 1.22 at the edge and ambient stations (Figures 3-21 and 3-22). The new CLIS reference station had a mean RPD depth of 3.39 + 0.77 cm. The RPD depths at the edge and ambient stations were significantly deeper than those at the mound stations and the new CLIS reference station (p < 0.05, Mann-Whitney U-test). There was no significant difference in RPD depths between the mound stations and the new CLIS reference station (p = 0.0618, Mann-Whitney U-test). The trend toward shallower RPD depths, which began in March 1985 and was later exaggerated by the passage of Hurricane Gloria, apparently has been reversed at the FVP mound. The average RPD depths for the mound, edge and ambient and new CLIS reference stations were significantly deeper than those recorded at these stations in both the June and October 1985 REMOTS® surveys (p < 0.001, Mann-Whitney U- test). Following the hurricane, the October 1985 survey revealed that stations near the center of the mound totally lacked oxidized surface layers as a result of scouring; highly-reduced dredged material that was formerly underlying aerated sediment was visible at the sediment- water interface. Since that time, the average RPD depth has returned to a level comparable to what it was before June 1985, when "stress" or disturbance factors were first indicated (Figures 3-23a and b). Relative to both the June and October 1985 surveys, the number of stations from the FVP disposal area that showed Stage III seres has increased dramatically (Figure 3-24). For example, in October 1985 only 28% of the photographs from the mound stations, 35% of edge and ambient station photographs and 30% of the photographs from the CLIS reference station exhibited Stage III assemblages. At that time, these values represented a low point in a trend of progressively decreasing presence of Stage III assemblages at these stations during 1985. In the present survey, 66% of the mound station replicates exhibited Stage III seres compared with 73% for the edge and ambient stations and 90% for the new CLIS reference station. 12 These results suggest that the "retrograde" successional status of the FVP mound has been reversed, which is consistent with the observed deepening of the RPD depths. The successional status of the new CLIS reference station is comparable to that found in surveys prior to 1985, when over 80% of the station replicates consistently showed Stage III seres to be present. The mapped distribution of REMOTS® Organism-Sediment Index (OSI) values showed no significant difference in OSI values among mound, edge and ambient, and new CLIS reference stations (Figure 3- 25). The frequency distributions of OSI values (Figure 3-26) at the mound and edge and ambient stations both were left skewed, with major modes at +11 and minor modes at +7. Likewise, the distribution of OSI values at the new CLIS reference station was left skewed with a major mode at +10. The Organism-Sediment Index values have increased significantly since the October 1985 survey (p < 0.001, Mann-Whitney U-test), when the area exhibited a broad range of OSI values indicative of extreme patchiness in benthic conditions. The increase in OSI values obviously reflects the deepening of the RPD and the increase in the number of Stage III seres since October 1985. There appears to have been a convergence in the OSI values at the FVP mound and the new CLIS reference station. Soeac Stamford-New Haven North (STNH-N) Mound The STNH-N disposal mound was capped with a layer of sand from New Haven Harbor in June 1979. Bathymetric surveys performed immediately following capping showed that the sand cap had a maximum thickness of 3.5 meters at the mound apex (SAIC, 1980). Cap thickness varied in different places on the mound, but most of the sand appeared to be concentrated within a 100 to 150 meter radius to the north, west and south of the mound apex. Sand cap layers on the order of 1 meter thick extended as far as 200 meters east of the mound apex. Beyond the 100 to 200 meter radius, cap thickness decreased considerably and was probably less than 20 centimeters in most surrounding areas. In the August 1985 survey, 37 of 43 REMOTS® photographs showed a major modal grain-size of > 4 phi (silt-clay), with the exception of station Center and 200 S which showed very fine sand and station 200 E, which showed a mud/sand/mud stratigraphy in the upper 20 cm of the sediment. Those stations away from the mound which did not show the original surface sand cap were interpreted to represent biogenically mixed sediments. Bioturbation apparently had mixed the relatively thin (i.e., less than 20 cm thick) surface sandy sediment with both underlying mud and newly settled mud from the water column derived from ambient resuspension. The post-hurricane survey in November 1985 showed evidence of surface scour and erosion at most stations (Figure 3-27), and post-storm boundary roughness was significantly increased relative to the pre-storm (August 1985) survey (SAIC, 1989a). 13 In the present survey, only station Center was found to have a major mode in the sand fraction (3-2 phi or fine sand). The upper 10 to 12 cm of the sand cap at this station appeared to remain relatively free of mixing with mud (Figure 3-28). This probably resulted from the cap being thicker than the particle bioturbation depth at this station, as well as from recently settled fines being washed from the surface by bottom currents which are accelerated as they flow up and over the mound apex. Although the silt-clay fraction dominated at other stations (> 4 phi), the upper few centimeters of most stations contained a significant quantity of sand. In most cases, the depth of disposed material was greater than the prism penetration depth into the bottom (Figure 3-29). The only stations which did not show evidence of a surface sand fraction were 200N and 400N. The boundary roughness frequency distribution for July 1986 had a major mode at 0.8 cm (Figure 3-30). The boundary roughness values were not significantly different than those measured in August 1985 (p = 0.63; Mann-Whitney U test) nor were they different from those at the new CLIS reference station (p = 0.68). The frequency distribution of RPD values at this mound (Figure 3-30) and the mapped values (Figure 3-31) showed no significant difference from the new CLIS reference station (p = 0.53, Mann-Whitney U-test). They did not show any statistical difference from those measured in August 1985 as well (p = 0.55). All stations except 200W showed the presence of head-down feeders (Stage III successional seres) (Figures 3-32 and 3-33). These deposit-feeders are very efficient in particle bioturbation, and their widespread distribution on the disposal mound (Figure 3-34) may account for mixing of the original sand cap with the underlying mud at stations away from the mound center. The STNH-N mound historically has had a high successional status relative to other CLIS disposal points. For example, seventy-nine percent of the station replicates were in a Stage III condition in August 1985. The frequency distribution of OSI values (Figure 3-30), and their spatial distribution (Figure 3-35) showed relatively high indices for all stations with the exception of station 200W. In past REMOTS® monitoring in Long Island Sound, we have found that OSI values greater than +6 represent benthic habitats that have not experienced physical or chemical (e.g., low oxygen) disturbance in the recent past. The July 1986 OSI values for mound stations (stations on dredged material) were not significantly different from those measured at the new CLIS reference station (sample mean = 9.5; p = 0.56, Mann- Whitney U-test) nor were they significantly different from those measured in August 1985 (p = 0.66). The STNH-N mound had the highest benthic habitat quality relative to other CLIS disposal mounds and was indistinguishable in its REMOTS® values from those measured at the new CLIS reference 14 station. The effect of Hurricane Gloria on this disposal mound apparently was minor and transient, because the present survey showed results comparable to the pre-hurricane survey of August 1985. 3.3.3 Stamford-New Haven South (STNH-S) Mound No change in the major modal sediment grain-size has been detected in this survey relative to earlier surveys. All stations had a major mode in the > 4 phi (silt-clay) size class with many stations having a minor sand mode. For those stations at the STNH-S mound where dredged material was identified, its thickness appeared to be deeper than the penetration of the camera's prism (distribution shown Figure 3-36). Stations 400S, 600S and 600E showed no evidence of dredged material, and the presence of dredged material at stations 400E and 200SW was questionable. This distribution of dredged material is comparable to that mapped in August 1985, which showed the presence of reduced sediment at or near the sediment surface in almost half the station replicates. No station showed evidence of this condition in the present survey. Stations 200W and 200NW showed similar disposal stratigraphy (Figure 3-27); the same superposition of materials with different grey scales or optical reflectance (low over high over low) was seen at both stations. The low reflectance surface layer, which was 3 to 4 cm thick, did not appear to be associated with many macrofauna, and the sharp contacts of these units suggest that bioturbational mixing rates were slow or nonexistent. The post-Hurricane Gloria REMOTS® survey (November 1985) showed this area to be affected by the storn. The photographs revealed shell-lag deposits, mud clasts, exposed worm tubes, and reduced sediment patches near the surface. Surface erosion, based on the lengths of exposed worm tubes, was estimated to range from 0.3 to 0.4 cm. Station CTR appeared to be most affected; the mean apparent RPD depth decreased 3 cm in thickness after the storm. This was attributed to physical removal of the surface sediment by near- bottom turbulence. No remaining evidence of such storm-related phenomena was indicated in the present survey. The frequency distribution of small scale boundary roughness had the major mode at 0.8 cm (Figure 3-38). With a sample mean of 1.1 cm, the distribution of values was significantly greater than both the new CLIS reference station (mean = 0.70; p = 0.03, Mann-Whitney U- test) and the values measured in August 1985 (p = 0.008). The increase in boundary roughness may be attributable to the increased disturbance or sediment redistribution experienced as a result of Hurricane Gloria. The frequency distribution of mean apparent RPD depths at STNH-S was bimodal, with a major mode at 4.0 cm and a minor mode at 2.0 cm (Figure 3-38). Mean RPD values for stations 200W and 200NW 15 have not been included in this frequency distribution because of their anomalous stratigraphy (Figure 3-37a and b). At these two stations, the surface consisted of 3 to 4 cm of intermediate-reflectance sediment overlying a high reflectance layer 5 to 8 cm thick. Because it is not possible to determine if the surface layer consisted of oxidized or reduced sediment relative to the underlying unit, RPD and OSI values could not be assigned to these two stations. However, these two stations may have very low OSI values if the surface sediment was sulphidic. The 5 to 8 cm thick high reflectance unit, in turn, covered a low reflectance unit of unknown thickness which extended below the limit of penetration of the optical prism. Station 200NW showed horizontal fractures in this low reflectance unit (Figure 3=-37b). This deformation was caused by brittle fracture of the sediment as it was sheared by the descending optical prism. Such brittle fracture takes place in fine-grained sediments when the water content is less than 50%. Low water content is typical of overconsolidated sediment. Although the stratigraphy at stations 200W and 200NW had not been observed in previous surveys, a layer of cohesive dredged material may occupy this quadrant of the disposal area. The above interpretation is supported by diver observations made on August 13, 1985: "The substrate consisted of fine silt (1 to 2 cm deep) over a cohesive clay base.....Eroded clay clump material was present" (SAIC, 1989a). The two distributional modes (Figure 3-38) described above appear to have been spatially separated according to station location (Figure 3-39). Values less than 3 cm deep were located at stations 400W and 600W. Shallow values were also located in the SE quadrant (200E, 200SE, 400S, and 600S). The RPD values measured in this survey were not significantly different from those measured in August 1985 (p = 0.38, Mann-Whitney U-test). However, in a direct one-to-one comparison, 4 stations appeared to have much shallower RPD values than measured in August 1985: 400W, 200E, 200SE, and 600S. The shallower RPD values at these stations may be related to the lingering effects of Hurricane Gloria, which caused surface erosion at this mound. Post-storm RFD values are available for station CTR, 200 meter stations, and 600E (Figure 3-39). Most stations (10 out of 17 or 59%) were in a Stage I successional sere (Figure 3-40). Five of these stations have not progressed beyond this sere since August 1985 (CTR, 200W, 400W, 200NW, and 200SW). Five stations apparently experienced retrograde succession since August 1985 (200N, 400N, 600N, 600S, and 600E), while only one station (200NE) apparently changed in successional status (I to I-III) since August 1985. These apparent changes in successional status must be interpreted with caution. In August 1985, three replicates were taken at each station; these data showed that within- station patchiness was high with respect to successional status. The present survey was based on analysis of only one replicate per station, so the issue of within-station variance of benthic community structure cannot be addressed. 16 The absence of Stage III seres from some stations may be related to the presence of relic overconsolidated sediment at depth (Figure 3-37). This sediment may: 1) inhibit burrowing by Stage III taxa and 2) be low in nutrients for detritivores. The aggregate successional status of the STNH-S mound was much lower than that at the new CLIS reference station, where 18 replicates out of 20 (90%) showed Stage III seres to be present. The frequency distribution of OSI values ranged from +4 to +11 with a major mode at +7 (Figure 3-38). Stations 200W and 200NW have again been deleted from this distribution due to their anomalous stratigraphy. These OSI values were not significantly different from the August 1985 data set (p = 0.84, Mann-Whitney U-test); however, they were significantly lower than those calculated for the new CLIS reference station (p = 0.0209). Areas of the STNH-S disposal mound where OSI values were less than 6 were stations 400W, 200SW, and 600S (Figure 3-41). This was generally the area of low OSI values mapped in August 1985. The low OSI values on the west side of the STNH-S mound may be related to the presence of relic, overconsolidated sediment which may impede burrowing by infauna. This sediment may also be devoid of labile organic matter, which would sustain deposit feeders. Alternatively, this sediment may contain toxic compounds which has kept this area in an anomalously low successional status. In order to determine the probable cause for this low OSI condition, further study would be necessary. 3.3.4 Cap Sites One (CS-1) and Two (CS8S=-2) The Black Rock Harbor sediment at Cap Site 1 was covered with silt from the upper portion of New Haven Harbor in May 1983. REMOTS® surveys performed immediately following capping found that the cap material was visually indistinguishable from the underlying sediment, precluding an accurate estimate of cap thickness (SAIC, 1984). The REMOTS® surveys did show that the entire deposit (Black Rock Harbor sediment plus cap material) had a thickness in excess of 10 cm in a 150 to 200 meter radius around the mound center. The thickness decreased from 10 cm to 0 cm within about a 400 meter radius of the mound center. In the July 1986 survey, the CS-1 stations had a grain- size major mode of > 4 phi (silt-clay) with the exception of station 600N, which had a major mode of 3-2 phi (fine sand) (Figure 3-42). Station 600N is located on the flank of CS-2; this sand apparently represented capping material deposited at CS-2. This extension of the sand cap at station 600N was also noted in the August 1985 survey. Minor modes of medium, fine, and very fine sand were present near the surface of several stations. The origin of this sand may be related to the winnowing of fines or to the broad dispersal of sand from nearshore erosion during Hurricane Gloria in September 1985. The post-hurricane REMOTS® survey conducted on October 28, 1985 showed the 17 widespread appearance of sand at the sediment surface for the first time at CS-1. The cap deposited at CS-2 in May 1983 predominantly consisted to very fine sand (4-3 phi). Post-capping bathymetric and REMOTS® surveys showed the cap had a maximum thickness of 1.4 meters at the mound apex, with most of the sand concentrated within a radius of 100 to 200 meters. Beyond this, cap thickness decreased from 4 cm to 0 cm within a 400 meter radius of the mound apex (SAIC, 1984). As early as September 1984, the sand cap was becoming less recognizable due to the addition of silt-clay. This was attributed primarily to bioturbation resulting in mixing of the sand cap with underlying fine- grained sediments, similar to what was observed at the STNH-N mound. Some sedimentation of silt-clay into the area from tidal resuspension of the ambient seafloor may also have contributed. In the August 1985 survey, a distinct sand cap could not be seen, and the major textural mode for most station replicates was > 4 phi. At the same time, 5 stations located on the western side of the mound were found to have a layer of silt-clay overlying the original sand cap. This was attributed to enhanced sedimentation on the "lee-side" of the mound. The present survey revealed that all stations (except 600N) had a major textural mode of silt-clay (> 4 phi). The silt-clay over sand stratigraphy described in 1985 apparently has been lost through bioturbation. The only station which resembles the original sand- over-mud stratigraphy is CS-1 station 600N (Figure 3-42). A minor sand component can be seen at other stations. This sand may represent the remnants of the original sand cap or may be related to the post- Hurricane Gloria distribution of sand from nearshore (as described for CS-1 above). Disposed dredged materials were present at all stations except 400N at CS-1; at, CS-2, no apparent dredged material was detected at stations 400E, 600E, 400W, 600W, 400N, 600N, 400S and 600S (Figure 3-43). The optical "signature" of disposed materials apparently has been "erased" from the flanks of CS-2. The fact that disposed material was detected at more stations at CS-1 than CS-2 is probably related to the more recent disposal activities that have taken place immediately adjacent to CS-1 (between 1984 and 1985). The frequency distributions of small-scale boundary roughness for both CS-1 and CS-2 showed a major mode at the 0.8 cm class interval (Figure 3-44). The mean values for each mound were 0.86 + 0.28 cm and 0.91 + 0.30 cm, respectively. These values did not differ significantly from those obtained in August 1985. The post-Hurricane Gloria REMOTS® survey of October 18, 1985 showed that the mean apparent RPD depths were significantly less than those measured in August 1985. Storm-associated erosion reduced the apparent RPD depths to less than 3 cm below the sediment-water interface. Since October 1985, the mean apparent RPD depths have increased at both mounds, but at unequal rates. Most apparent RPD depths at CS-1 fell within the 3.0 cm class interval (mean = 3.53 cm 18 + 0.81 cm.), while most values at CS-2 fell within the 4.0 cm class interval (mean = 4.10 + 0.68 cm.; Figure 3-45). The RPD values at CS-2 were significantly greater than those at both CS-1 and the new CLIS reference station (p < 0.05, Mann-Whitney U-test). These deeper RPD's may be attributed in part to greater sediment porosities resulting from the increased grain-size associated with the sand cap at CS-2. For both mounds however, the RPD values did not differ significantly from those measured in August 1985 (p = 0.35 at CS-1; p = 0.46 at CS-2). The mean RPD values at Center and 200M stations at CS-1 were relatively deep (Figure 3-46), which suggests that bioturbation was actively occurring at stations located on the thickest part of the disposal mound. All stations at CS-2 except 600N had relatively deep mean apparent RPD depths. Half of the CS-1 stations had Stage III taxa present, including station Center (Figures 3-47 and 3-48). In August 1985, stations 200N, 400W, 200NW, 200NE, and 200SE had only Stage I assemblages present; the remaining 12 stations had either a Stage II or III assemblage present. Because only one replicate per station was analyzed in this survey, small-scale (i.e., within-station) patchiness in the distribution of Stage III organisms was not assessed. The apparent change in successional status is difficult to interpret because Stage III organisms could have been missed. In the August 1985 survey (based on three replicates per station), CS-2 had only four stations dominated by a Stage I sere: 400W, 200E, 200SW, and 400S. Other stations consisted of a mixture of Stage I and Stage III seres. In the present survey, seven stations appeared to be ina Stage I condition: 200N, 200W, 400W, 600W, 200SW, 400S, and 6008S (Figure 3-48). Station Center was populated by Stage III taxa and shows evidence of deep bioturbation (Figure 3-47). The major difference between the Organism-Sediment Index frequency distributions for CS-1 and CS-2 is that CS-2 had more values in the +10 and +11 class intervals and fewer values in the +5 and +6 class intervals (Figure 3-49). The mean OSI value at CS-2 was very high (9.24 + 1.92), but not significantly different from CS-1 (p = 0.067) or the new CLIS reference station (p = 0.60, Mann-Whitney U- test). In addition, the OSI values at both mounds did not differ significantly from those measured in August 1985. The mapped distribution of OSI values at CS-1 showed a mixture of high and low values over the mound, with no clear spatial trends relative to the mound center (Figure 3-50). The spatial distribution of OSI values at CS-2 showed that the benthic habitat quality was uniformly high. Only station 200N and 4008S had values of +6, the threshold value for detecting disturbed habitats with this parameter. These two stations apparently lag the rest of the locations sampled on the mounds in terms of bioturbation depth and successional status. The reason for this lag cannot be assessed from the photographs. 19 3.3.5 Mill-Quinnipiac River (MQR) Mound In the present survey, the major modal grain-size continued to be > 4 phi (silt-clay) for all stations. As in the August 1985 survey, the near-surface sediment at most stations consisted of a subordinate mode falling within the 3-2 to 2-1 phi size classes (fine to medium sand). Disposed material was present at all stations except 600S (Figure 3-51). The thickness of dredged material exceeded the penetration of the camera prism at all stations except station 600W. Methanogenic sediments were detected at station 200N (two out of three replicates) and in one replicate at station 200E (Figure 3-52). Methane was detected previously at station Center and 200N in the post-hurricane survey of October 1985. The small-scale boundary roughness frequency distribution (Figure 3-53) showed a major mode at the 0.4 cm class interval (sample meanies=) iOkw/ Cm). Surface boundary roughness did not changed Significantly from values measured in August 1985 nor were they Significantly different than those measured at the new CLIS reference station. The mean apparent RPD depth frequency distribution showed a major mode at the 3.0 cm class interval (Figure 3-53). Mean RPD depths at MQR were significantly shallower than those measured at both the new CLIS reference station (p < 0.001, Mann-Whitney U-test) and the MOR mound in August 1985 (p < 0.001). The mapped distribution of mean apparent RPD depths (Figure 3-54) showed no clear spatial pattern; the transect segment from Center to 600E consists of uniformly low values, and two replicates of station 600N had very thin RPD depths, possibly associated with local surface disturbance. Thirty-one percent of the REMOTS® photographs from MQR showed the presence of well-developed subsurface feeding voids (Figures 3-55 and 3-56). This indicates that Stage III head-down feeders have successfully populated the MQR disposal mound for the first time since our initial survey in January 1983. However, it is not clear if this colonization was primarily the result of larval recruitment or immigration of adults. It is possible that turbulence associated with the passage of Hurricane Gloria in September 1985 may have caused the passive redistribution of benthic invertebrates. The August and October 1985 REMOTS® survey showed Stage III seres at only two stations in each survey. Future REMOTS® surveys at the MQR mound will be important for documenting the progressive colonization of the area by Stage III taxa. The frequency distribution of Organism-Sediment Indices for the MQR disposal mound had a major mode at the +5 class interval (Figure 3-53). These values were significantly less than the new CLIS reference station (Mann-Whitney U test; p < 0.001) and from those measured in the August 1985 survey (p = 0.004). In fact, the mean OSI value for the MQR mound was the lowest of any of the 11 disposal mounds surveyed in 1986 (5.58 + 2.59). This largely reflects the 20 relatively thin RPD values and the presence of methane at three station replicates. In addition, despite the apparent increase in colonization by Stage III taxa, the majority of photographs (69%) showed Stage I seres as predominant. The two low indices at station 600N (-1 and -3; Figure 3-57) are apparently related to local surface disturbance (Figure 3-58). The major change in the MQR mound in 1986 relative to 1985 was the appearance of Stage III seres at most stations (13 out of 17). This was significant because the MQR disposal mound has historically experienced the slowest rate of colonization compared with other CLIS disposal mounds. It is unclear if the appearance of Stage III taxa represents larval colonization or passive transport of adults from the surrounding seafloor related to the passage of Hurricane Gloria in September 1985. Because well-developed feeding voids take several weeks to months to be produced by head-down deposit feeders, the post- hurricane survey of the MQR mound in October may have missed the evidence of their presence. The mean apparent RPD depth appears to be significantly shallower in 1986 than in 1985. This may be related to developing hypoxia in Central Long Island Sound. In August 1986, a dissolved oxygen survey of the central Sound was conducted for EPA Region I by SAIC (SAIC, 1987). As part of this study, five polarigraphic electrode (YSI) measurements were made of dissolved oxygen at station Center at the MOR mound at a distance of one centimeter above the bottom. These values were 3.38, 2.42, 2.60, 2.60, and 2.56 mg/l. Five measurements were also obtained from the CLIS reference station on the same day (3.28, 2.60, 2.54, 2.46, 2.46 mg/l). All these values were within the hypoxic range and represent concentrations of less than half saturation. These data strongly suggest that dissolved oxygen concentrations should be measured routinely in all Long Island Sound DAMOS monitoring efforts in order to understand the year-to- year changes which are mapped with the REMOTS® system. The MQR mound still continues to lag behind the other disposal mounds in terms of infaunal colonization and sediment irrigation. 3.3.6 Norwalk (NOR) Mound The major grain-size mode of silt-clay (> 4 phi) remained unchanged at all stations from previous surveys. Most stations showed the presence of very fine, fine, and medium sand (in the 4-1 phi range) overlying disposed muds (Figure 3-59). Several stations also showed the presence of shell-lag deposits, and methane gas was present at station Center (Figure 3-59). Disposed material was apparent at stations near the center of the grid (Figure 3-59). In the August 1985 survey, over half of the station replicates showed evidence of reduced sediment at the surface; this was attributed to biogenic activity. The present survey did not reveal extensive surface deposits of reduced sediment. An exception to this was station 200W (Figure 3-60), where low reflectance sediment had filled-in a 21 depression on the bottom. It is likely that this low reflectance sediment was derived from macrofaunal burrow excavation activities. The frequency distribution of small-scale boundary roughness (Figure 3-61) showed that most values fall within the 0.4 to 0.8 cm classes, with a sample mean of 0.73 cm + 0.29 cm. These values were not significantly different from those measured in August 1985 (p = 0.68). The frequency distribution of mean apparent RPD depths showed major modes shared between the 3 and 4 cm class intervals (Figure 3-61), with a sample mean of 3.15 cm + 0.94 cm. These values were significantly shallower than those measured in August 1985 (p < 0.05, Mann-Whitney U-test). Low values were found at stations 200W, 400W, 200SW, 200E, 400E, and 600E (Figure 3-62). Stage III infaunal assemblages dominated the area, with only stations Center, 200S, and 200SE being dominated by Stage I seres (Figure 3-63). The generally high successional status has remained the same since the last survey in August 1985; stations 200S and 200SE were dominated by a Stage I assemblage during this earlier survey also. This apparent lack of colonization by Stage III taxa at these two stations may reflect either natural variability in their distribution or unfavorable physical/chemical sediment conditions which are localized and not readily inferred from the REMOTS® photographs. The Organism-Sediment Index values were predominately greater than +7 (overall mean of +8.3), which means that the overall area had a relatively high habitat quality as measured by this parameter (Figure 3-61). The 1986 OSI values were not significantly different from those obtained in either the August 1985 survey or at the new CLIS reference station. However, in comparison with the August 1985 survey, fewer stations were encountered with a + 11 OSI value. The mapped distribution of OSI values shows that values less than +7 were clustered around the center of the mound (Figure 3-64). In August 1986, SAIC made six measurements of dissolved oxygen at this disposal point with a polarigraphic electrode (YSI) at a height of 15 to 16 cm above the bottom (SAIC, 1987). These values were all within the hypoxic range (1.88, 1.90, 2.40, 1.84, 1.80, 1.76 mg/l) and indicated that oxygen stress may be occurring in this region of the Sound during the summer. Future measurements of dissolved oxygen are recommended to evaluate this potentially important ecological factor. 3.3.7 New Haven 74 (NH-74) Mound The major modal grain-size in this area remained unchanged (> 4 phi) since the September 1984 REMOTS® survey. A diffuse surface 22 sand component was detected at some stations, but it appeared to be highly diluted with the silt-clay fraction in most instances. Station Center had a very thin surface sand layer and showed indications of recent erosion (Figure 3-65). This mound was capped with sand in 1973, before routine monitoring which might have provided an estimate of the original cap thickness. It is possible that the sand cap may have been largely homogenized within the mound apex. This may be the long-term result of sedimentation of fines and mixing of the sand with underlying ambient sediment and dredged material as a result of bioturbation. It is also quite possible that a portion of the sand cap could have been removed by short-term sediment transport, particularly as a result of Hurricane Gloria. It should be noted that it at the time of the July 1986 survey, 13 years had elapsed since the original disposal and capping event. It might be expected that the "optical signature" of the cap as seen in the REMOTS® photographs would be lost over this time period due to the processes mentioned above. Apparent dredged material was observed at all stations except 600S (Figure 3-66). Disposed material may have been present at this station at one time, but it could no longer be distinguished. The frequency distribution of small-scale boundary roughness had a major mode at the 0.8 cm class interval (Figure 3-67; sample mean = 0.72 + 0.42). This compares with a major mode of 0.4 cm measured in the August 1985 survey, although statistically the two sets of values were not significantly different (p = 0.60). The slightly higher boundary roughness values found during the present survey were apparently produced by local physical or biogenic disturbance of the sediment surface. The major modal apparent RPD depth fell within the 4 cm class interval (Figure 3-67), with a sample mean of 3.41 cm + 0.95 cm. Station Center had an anomalously thin RPD (0.79 cm) apparently due to surface erosion at the mound apex as a result of Hurricane Gloria (Figure 3-68). In the August 1985 survey, station Center had a deep RPD (4.34 cm), but measurements from the adjacent station (200W) were very shallow (0.88 cm). RPD depths at NH-74 were not significantly different from those measured in August 1985. Half of the stations surveyed appeared to be in a Stage I sere and half in a Stage III sere (Figure 3-69). More stations appeared to be in a low-order successional stage than measured in August 1985. Results from the 1985 survey (based on an analysis of three replicates per station) showed four stations in a Stage I sere: 200E, 200W, 400W, and 200SE. The present results were based on the analysis of only one replicate per station, so within-station variability could not be evaluated. The distribution of OSI values was distinctly bimodal (Figure 3-67). Eight stations were in a high successional status with relatively deep RPD values (OSI= 10 to 11). The remaining 23 stations were clustered between +4 to +7. This bimodality was also present in the August 1985 survey, and the OSI values were not significantly different between these two surveys. Direct station comparisons show, however, that station Center in 1985 had an OSI of +11. This dropped to -1 in this survey (Figure 3-70) due to surface erosion at the mound apex (Figure 3-65). Surface erosion at NH74 station Center was estimated to have been approximately 3.55 cm from 1985 and 1986 by comparison of mean RPD's at the apex of the mound. 3.3.8 New Haven 83 (NH-83) Mound The major modal grain-size of the New Haven 83 mound fell within the silt-clay fraction (> 4 phi). Several stations showed the presence of a subordinate sand mode in the upper surface layers (very fine sand, fine sand and medium sand; Figure 3-71). Disposed material was found at all stations except 600N, 400S, and 600E; at most stations, it exceeded the camera prism penetration depth. In the August 1985 survey, 60% of the station replicates showed the presence of reduced sediment at the surface. This was attributed to the intensive foraging activity of large epifaunal organisms. Five stations in the present survey showed the presence of reduced sediment at or near the sediment-water interface (Figure 3-71). However, this reduced sediment occured on a much smaller scale compared with the August 1985 results and was probably related to infaunal bioturbation activity rather than epifaunal foraging. The major mode of small-scale boundary roughness fell within the 0.8 cm class interval (Figure 3-72; sample mean = 1.09 + 0.78 cm.). These values were significantly greater than those measured in August 1985 (p < 0.05, Mann-Whitney U-test). The increase in small- scale boundary roughness was potentially related to the physical disturbance of the area as a result of Hurricane Gloria. The mean apparent RPD depth frequency distribution (Figure 3-72) showed that most values fell within the 2 to 3 cm class intervals, with an overall mean value of 2.63 + 0.98 cm. These did not differ significantly from RPD measurements in August 1985 (p = 0.5512), but they were significantly lower than values at the new CLIS reference station (p < 0.01, Mann-Whitney U-test). Given the normally-expected sequence of infaunal colonization and increased bioturbation, it would seem likely that the RPD depth (which is comparatively shallow) should increase in this area. The lack of a Significant increase in RPD depth at the NH-83 mound between August 1985 and July 1986 may indicate that infaunal colonization is not proceeding at a normal rate. However, it should be noted that erosion of surface layers (approximately the top 2-3 cm) associated with Hurricane Gloria probably caused the RPD to become more shallow between the two surveys (SAIC, 1989a). This would also explain the observed results. The areal distribution of RPD values showed no clear spatial trends (Figure 3-73). Station Center had a 24 comparatively deep RPD and showed no evidence of erosion such as shell or sand lag deposits, suggesting that the mound apex is physically stable. The distribution of infaunal successional assemblages showed a patchy mosaic of Stage I, II, and III seres (Figure 3-74). Stage I seres dominated (11 of 17 stations), which could suggest an aberrant rate of colonization or simply reflect the lack of replication. Thepresence of Stage III seres at station Center, however, support the interpretation of the mound apex being stable. Tubicolous amphipods (probably Ampelisca sp.) were present in low abundance at station 400N. The frequency distribution of OSI values was skewed toward lower values, with the major mode in the +5 class interval (Figure 3- 72). The mean OSI value was 5.86 + 1.75. OSI values at this mound were significantly lower than the new CLIS reference station (p < 0.001), and only the MQR mound had a lower mean value. OSI values have not changed significantly at this mound since August 1985. The spatial distribution of values was somewhat patchy, with stations north and south of the mound center having higher OSI values than stations on the eastern and western flanks (Figure 3-75). 3.3.9 CLIS-86 Mound Recently-disposed dredged material was apparent at all stations except 400N, 600N, 200SW, and 600S (Figure 3-76). The boundary of the deposit could not be determined (i.e., contoured) accurately because dredged material extended in several directions beyond the area covered by the REMOTS® grid. Generally, the CLIS- 86 mound appeared to have an irregular, elliptical "footprint" with a north-south radius of 350 to 400 meters and an east-west radius greater than 600 meters (Figure 3-76). The major modal grain-size at the CLIS-86 mound fell within the silt-clay (> 4 phi) size class. Stations located within 200 to 400 meters of the center also had a very fine, fine, and medium sand subordinate mode in the near-surface layers (Figure 3-76). The centers (topographic high) of many of the CLIS disposal mounds have developed shell and sand "lag" deposits over time, related to the washing of fines from the sediment as the tidal stream moves over the mound. There was no evidence as yet of a lag deposit at the CLIS-86 station Center. The major mode for small-scale boundary roughness fell within the 0.8 cm class interval (Figure 3-77), with a mean value of 0.86 cm + 0.31 cm. The origin of this roughness appears to have been a combination of biogenic and physically-produced microtopography. The histogram of the mean apparent RPD depths at this mound showed the major mode shared between the 3 and 4 cm classes (Figure 25 3-77), with a mean value of 3.20 cm + 0.89 cm. These were not significantly different from the new CLIS reference station. The mapped distribution shows that biogenic mixing apparently has been successful in "ventilating" the sediment following disposal, with the exception of stations 600W and 200SE (Figure 3-78). The latter station had a thin layer of low reflectance sediment overlying high reflectance sediment (Figure 3-79). Half of the stations had Stage III seres present (Figure 3-80). Stations which were in a low-order stage of succession included station Center to 600E, station 200N, 200NW, and 200SW. This was roughly the area which showed the thinnest apparent RPD (i.e., biogenic mixing) depths (Figure 3-78). These results suggest that the CLIS 86 mound was being colonized successfully, with infaunal irrigation of the sediment helping to depress the mean apparent RPD to a depth of over 3 cm at most of the stations having Stage III organisms present. The data must be interpreted with care; however, as past experience has shown that the successional status of disposed materials during initial post- disposal monitoring surveys is typically highly variable within a station. These results are based on analysis of only one station replicate. The frequency distribution of OSI values showed a range of values from +4 to +11 with a major mode at +5 (Figure 3-77). This was not unexpected, given the recent disposal, early stages of colonization, and the fact that some of the stations were located on the ambient seafloor (Figure 3-81). Stations located on dredged material at this mound had a mean OSI value of 7.29 + 2.64. These values were significantly different from the new CLIS reference station (p = 0.0272, Mann-Whitney U-test). 3.4 REMOTS® Sediment-Profile Surveys at Ghost Sites 1 and 2 3.4.1 Ghost Site-1 (GHOST=-1) The major modal grain-size at all stations was silt-clay (> 4 phi). Sand-over-mud stratigraphy was present at 4 stations (Figure 3-82). Direct physical evidence of disposed material (e.g., a buried oxidized sedimentary horizon, chaotic sedimentary fabrics, methanogenic sediments) was not apparent in any of the photographs from this survey. The frequency distribution of small-scale boundary roughness showed a major mode at 0.8 cm, with a mean value of 0.89 cm + 0.51 cm (Figure 3-83). This topography was imparted by a smooth yet undulating bottom surface. Biogenic features such as tube structures, burrows, and fecal pellet layers dominated this surface. In general, high boundary roughness may reflect disposal surfaces which have been progressively smoothed by currents and bioturbation. However, these data alone are not sufficient to 26 identify dredged material, and as indicated above, there was no direct physical evidence of either recent or relict dredged material in the photographs from the site. The frequency distribution of mean apparent RPD depth showed a major mode at the 4 cm class interval (mean RPD depth = 3.86 cm + 0.72cm; Figure 3-83). These values were significantly greater than those from the new CLIS reference station (p < 0.05, Mann-Whitney U-test). The areal distribution of RPD values showed that mean apparent RPD depths were generally uniformly deep (Figure 3-82). Two small areas exist where RPD values were less than 3 cm.; stations Bl and Cl fell within this shallow redox area and also had high boundary roughness values. Station G1, which had a relatively thin RPD, also had sand-over-mud stratigraphy. Based on physical criteria alone, these stations are potential locations where "errant dumps" may have occurred during the original disposal operation of Black Rock Harbor materials at the FVP mound. The map of successional stage (Figure 3-84) showed a patchy mosaic of Stage I, Stage I-III and Stage III assemblages. The absence of replicate photographs did not allow an evaluation of within-station variation. However, if this map is an adequate characterization of successional status, than stations D1 and Gl (Stage I seres) also had thin RPD values, and station G1 showed sand-over-mnud stratigraphy. These REMOTS® parameters suggest that these stations might have experienced disturbance in the recent past, however, there was no evidence in the side-scan records to support this possiblity (see section 3.2). The Organism-Sediment Index frequency distribution was bimodal, with a major mode at +11 and a minor mode at +7 (Figure 3-83); the mean OSI value for this area was high (9.15 + 1.98). OSI values were not significantly different from those measured at the new CLIS reference station. In our past REMOTS® work associated with monitoring disposal mounds in central Long Island Sound, we found that OSI values of +6 or less indicated recently disturbed environments. This disturbance could be related to disposal activities or natural events such as bottom erosion or predation. The areal distribution of OSI values showed four locations with values equal to or less than +6 (Figure 3-85). 3.4.2 Ghost Site-2 (GHOST=-2) The sediment grain-size major mode at all the Ghost Site- 2 stations was silt-clay (> 4 phi). Fourteen stations showed a minor mode of sand within the surface layers (Figure 3-86). It is unclear if this sand component was related to past disposal events or, aS previously mentioned, to the onshore to offshore transport of sand related to Hurricane Gloria. No other clear evidence of exotic (i.e., disposed) materials was present (e.g., buried redox 27 layers, chaotic fabrics, highly reducing sediments at depth, methanogenic sediments). The small-scale boundary roughness frequency distribution showed a major mode in the 0.8 cm class interval (Figure 3-87), with a mean value of 1.04 + 0.49 cm. These values were comparatively high, but inspection of the photographs showed that this was related to both bioturbation and the presence of a smooth yet undulating surface which was probably natural for this area. The mean apparent RPD depth frequency distribution had a major mode at the 4 cm class interval (Figure 3-87); the mean value was 3.71 cm + 0.68 cm. The mapped distribution of RPD depths (Figure 3-86) showed the area to be generally characterized by values which were significantly higher than the new CLIS reference station (p < 0.05, Mann-Whitney U-test). However, an area where apparent RPD depths were less than 3 cm was identified (Figure 3- 86). Stations A2 and B3 fell within this area; both had sand- over-mud stratigraphy and small-scale boundary roughness that was greater than 1 centimeter. Station C4, which likewise had high boundary roughness, was also located within this area. These physical parameters could be indicative of the presence of relict dredged material, although the lack of direct evidence in the photographs and the absence of evidence of past disturbance in the side-scan records makes this unlikely. The map of successional seres (Figure 3-88) showed a large area containing only Stage I taxa extending from the northeast corner to the south side of the area surveyed. This may reflect natural patchiness in the distribution of Stage III organisms, but the scale of such variablity is difficult to assess. Obtaining several replicate photographs per station would have enabled an assessment of small-scale patchiness, but in the Ghost Site surveys such replication necessarily was sacrificed for greater spatial coverage. It is interesting to note that the area of shallow RPD values did not fall within the patch of Stage I seres. The Organism-Sediment Index frequency distribution (Figure 3-87) was bimodal, with a major mode at +11 and minor modes at +10 and +7. Past work indicats that areas with OSI values of +6 or less have undergone recent disturbance, due to either disposal operations or natural factors such as erosion or predation. The mean OSI value for this area (8.96 + 1.89) was relatively high; these values were not significantly different from those at the new CLIS reference station. Stations 5C, 7E and a cluster of four stations in the NE quadrant of the area surveyed had OSI values of +6 or less (Figure 3-89). Of these, stations F2 and E7 had sand-over-mud stratigraphy, and station G2 had high boundary roughness. 28 3.5 Sediment Chemical Analysis The results of the sediment chemical analyses of the Top and Bottom sections of the cores from the replicate grab samples were presented for each disposal mound and the reference station (Tables 3-1 through 3-19). In the case of PCBs, only one composite sample was analyzed from each station. With the exception of Hg at Norwalk Center (Table 3-9), mean concentrations were at 'Moderate' levels or lower for all mound and reference stations sampled, compared to the New England River Basin Commission's (NERBC) interim criteria (NERBC, 1980). At Norwalk Center, both Top and Bottom core section samples exceeded the 1.5 ppm upper limit for 'Moderate' levels of Hg, because of particularly high concentrations detected in one individual replicate (2.44 ppm in one Top replicate and 4.15 ppm in one Bottom replicate). However, both Top and Bottom samples at this station had at least one replicate with Hg results below the 'Moderate' upper limit. 'Low' levels or lower were detected for all parameters at CLIS reference, CS-1 Center, CS-2 Center, STNH-S Center, and most of the STNH-N stations. At STNH-N stations 100N, 200N, and 400E, 'Moderate' levels of Hg were detected in Top and/or Bottom samples, and 'Moderate' levels of Pb where detected in the Bottom sample of station 200E. At FVP Center, MQR Center, CLIS-86 Center, NH74 Center and Norwalk Center, levels of Hg, Pb, Zn, Cr, Cu and PCBs generally fell within the 'Moderate' category in both Top and Bottom samples. (The State of Connecticut doesn't have a Classification for PCBs; however Massachusetts has values of <0.5 for 'Low'; 0.5-1.0 for 'Moderate'; and >1.0 for 'High'). All the other metal and PCB concentrations at these stations were at 'Low' levels. Statistical comparisons revealed that for most parameters at most of the stations sampled there was no significant difference between levels detected in the Top and Bottom core sections (Table 3-20). The exceptions included MQR Center, STNH-S Center, and NH74 Center, which showed significantly greater elevations in the Bottom samples for some of the trace metals and percent total carbon. At STNH-N Center, concentrations of Pb, As, and Fe were significantly elevated in the Top of the core section (Table 3-20). In comparisons of the Top 2 cm samples, every parameter tested was significantly elevated at MQR compared to the reference station (Table 3-21). FVP, CLIS-86, NH74 and Norwalk showed levels elevated from reference for approximately half of the parameters tested, while the other mounds showed only a scattering of parameters with levels elevated from reference (Table 3-21). Statistics for the Bottom core section samples more clearly identified MOR, FVP, and NH74 to be mounds consistently elevated from reference in all or almost all parameters tested. NH-83, Norwalk, and CLIS-86 also showed Significantly greater concentrations than reference in many of the trace metals, total 29 carbon, and oil and grease. The rest of the mounds again showed only a few parameters with levels elevated from reference (Table 3-22). The % total organic carbon, % total nitrogen, and % total hydrogen data were not tested statistically because these parameters generally follow the % total carbon data. Unlike these other parameters, the % total carbon data showed the best replication and was consistently above the detection limits, therefore providing better information. The % total carbon levels in the Botttom core section samples were consistently elevated above reference levels for all the mounds except CS-2 and STNH-N, where levels were either not significantly different or were Significantly less than reference (Table 3-22). PCB concentrations could not be tested statistically because only single composite samples were analyzed at each station. However, as already indicated, none of the mounds exceeded the NERBC 'Moderate' upper limit for PCB's of 1.0 ppm. The highest PCB concentrations were detected at the FVP, MQR, CLIS- 86, NH74, and Norwalk mounds, where average concentrations ranged from 0.33 to 0.86 ppm. This compared to the 0.06 ppm PCB's detected at the reference station (Tables 3-1 through 3-19). The rest of the mounds ranged from 0.04 to 0.15 ppm PCB's, essentially within the range detected at the reference station, and well below the 0.5 ppm upper limit for NERBC 'Low'. Concentrations of most parameters at the eight stations sampled around the STNH-N disposal mound were not statistically different from the concentrations at station Center (Table 3-23). Stations 100S and 100N did show significantly lower concentrations compared to Center for most of the trace metals in the Top 2 cm samples. COD levels were consistently higher than at the Center station for both Top and Bottom samples from 400W, 150W, 200E, 400E, and 200N. Levels of Cr and Cu were consistently higher at these same stations in Bottom samples, and Pb was elevated in both Top and Bottom samples from 150W and 200E (Table 3-23). However, the magnitudes of the differences between the Center station and the outlying mound stations were not large. More importantly, there did not appear to be any consistent trends in chemical concentrations with distance from the STNH-N Center station. Statistical comparisons between the concentrations measured in the Top and Bottom core sections from the STNH-N stations also showed few significant differences (Table 3-24). At a few of the stations, the levels of one or two parameters were higher in the bottom sections, particularly at station 200E for Pb, Zn, Cu, and oil and grease. Cu at station 100S, and Pb, As, and Fe at the Center station had significantly lower levels in the Bottom core section samples. 30 Statistical comparisons were also made between the 1986 data set and the results of chemical analyses of samples collected from stations in the vicinity of the STNH-N disposal mound in 1982 and 1984 (Tables 3-25 and 3-26). These tests did show some apparent trends with time. For stations 400W, 400E and 1i100S, several of the trace metals showed significantly higher concentrations in 1982 compared to 1986. The Center station, 150W, 100N and 250S showed no change from 1982 to 1986, and stations 200E and 200N showed significantly higher concentrations in 1986 compared to 1982 (Table 3-26). Comparisons between the 1984 and 1986 results did not comfirm any of these patterns except in the case of station 200E, where the 1986 concentrations were still Significantly higher than the 1984 levels for several trace metals. 3.6 Benthic Community Analysis The visual descriptions of sediment samples collected for benthic community analysis indicated various grain sizes occurring at each disposal mound (Table 3-27). Fine sand was found at STNH-N and CS-2 as a result of the capping operations conducted there. The oily silt-gravel mixture found at CLIS-86 was the result of recent disposal operations. In the list of species found in each area sampled (Table 3-28), family names were included only when they provided information on included species. As an example, opisthobranch gastropods in three families were listed together rather than in three parts of the table. The sieve residues from the CLIS reference samples contained the shells of Mulinia and Nucula, fine organic detritus, and a small amount of yellow sand. FVP Center samples contained gray sand with mica, coarse terrestrial plant debris, and shells of estuarine species. Oil contaminated the FVP material. The MQR samples contained a small volume of fine plant debris. The STNH-N samples contained a large volume of sand and estuarine shells. The total number of species and individuals in major taxonomic groups in each sample was recorded (located at the end of Table 3-28). The average number of individuals per sample and the total number of species per station were: 100 and 20 for MQR Center, 487 and 37 for FVP Center, 2053 and 35 for CLIS reference, and 4268 and 42 for STNH-N Center. Although these four stations are at similar depths and within a few miles of each other, there were large differences in the grain size and contamination level of the sediment at each station. Detailed knowledge of station histories would be necessary to reach conclusions concerning the progress of faunal recolonization and the relative sensitivity of community components. 31 Samples from MQR Center contained the fewest species and individuals of any station. The dominant species, M. ambiseta, N. incisa, and M. cristata, are members of the normal CLIS silt/clay assemblage. The large numbers of the bivalves Mulinia and Nucula found at the CLIS reference station were conspicuously absent. In the absence of pollution-indicating species, some physical cause of low abundance must be hypothesized. 3.7 Body Burden Analysis Triplicate analyses were conducted on Nephtys incisa collected from the reference, STNH-N, FVP, and MQR stations. Only a single sample was available from the CLIS-86 mound. These samples were analyzed for eight inorganic elements and reported on a dry weight basis (Table 3-29), as well as on a wet weight basis (Table 3-30). Samples were also analyzed for several PCB formulations (Table 3-31). Statistical analyses (Kruskal-Wallis) were conducted on the results to test for concentration differences between organisms collected from the disposal mounds and those collected from the reference station (Table 3-32). PCB concentrations could not be tested statistically because all of the samples’ showed concentrations below the analytical detection limits. Also, the CLIS-86 data could not be tested because only a single sample was available from that location. The results from statistical analyses of the inorganic data showed that the concentrations of Cr, Cu, and Zn were significantly elevated (p<0.05) in Nephtys collected from the STNH-N station compared to levels in organisms collected from the reference station. The concentrations of As and Pb were Significantly lower in the STNH-N polychaetes compared to those from the reference station. The concentrations of Cr, Cu, and Pb were significantly higher in the Nephtys from FVP compared to levels in organisms collected from the reference station. The same three elements also showed significantly higher ‘concentrations in Nephtys collected from MOR. 4.0 DISCUSSION 4.1 Topographic Changes and Disposal Mound Stability at CLIS One objective of the 1986 field operations was to delineate the extent and topography of the dredged material deposit resulting from disposal during the 1985-86 season. The bathymetric survey showed a significant accumulation of dredged material at the buoy in the northwest corner of the site. The new CLIS-86 mound, 32 which had a maximum thickness of 2 meters, occurred slightly east of the buoy at a depth of approximately 16.4 meters. Based on changes in depth, the radius of the mound was determined to be about 250 meters. The exact boundary of the area covered by recently- deposited dredged material could not be determined based on the REMOTS® photographs because the coverage provided by the REMOTS® station grid was limited. The REMOTS® results did indicate that the new mound had a north-south radius of about 350 to 400 meters and an east-west radius greater than 600 meters, which is larger than the radius indicated by the bathymetry results (Figure 3-76). This is mainly because of the camera's ability to detect thin layers on the flanks of the deposit. Such layers were below the limits of detection by precision bathymetry and were therefore unaccounted for in the volume difference calculation. As a conservative estimate, it was calculated that the mound flank occupied an area of approximately 527,200 m°. Assuming an average dredged material thickness of 10 cm in this area, which is again a conservative estimate, results in a volume of 52,720 m of material on the mound flanks not accounted for in the bathymetric depth difference calculation. Adding this to the depth difference volume of 79,200 m’> results in a final total of 131,920 m of dredged material detected on the bottom using the combined techniques. The final total volume estimate of 131,920 more closely approaches, but remains less than, the scow log volume estimate of 164,045 m of disposed material. There are several reasons for the discrepancy. First, the volume estimate of material on the mound flank based on REMOTS® was very conservative, in terms of both the areal extent of the material and its thickness. It is likely that additional material which was not accounted for by either REMOTS® or bathymetry occurred beyond the area covered by the REMOTS® station grid. Second, the scow log estimate was derived from the drafts of the loaded scows, which typically hold a large volume of water collected with the dredged material. This leads to an overestimation of the total amount of material. In addition, the effects of the loss of interstitial water from the dredged material during descent and compaction of the material on the bottom will cause the depth difference to be less than the scow log volume estimate. Another objective of the bathymetric surveys at CLIS was to assess the stability of past disposal mounds. Direct comparison of the topography at each of the past disposal mounds surveyed did not detect any significant changes in depth that could he attributed to any particular process (erosion, consolidation, etc.). This was not unexpected since surveys conducted after Hurricane Gloria in October 1985 revealed only local redistribution of sediment, and no storms of the same magnitude occurred since the surveys. 33 4.2 Ghost Site 1 and 2 Investigations Another objective of the 1986 monitoring efforts was to examine the Ghost Site 1 and 2 areas, located outside the disposal site boundaries, for the presence of dredged material. Examination of the side scan records from GHOST-2 revealed small areas with high reflectance and the presence of a sunken scow, but did not detect an area large enough to indicate the quantity of material (50,000 m°) allegedly disposed. Likewise, analysis of the bathymetric data did not indicate any distinct changes in depth that could have been caused by dredged material disposal. Due to the location of GHOST-2, it is possible that some dredged material fell from scows on their way to or from another disposal location inside CLIS. There was indirect evidence in the Ghost-2 REMOTS® photographs that the area might have received dredged material at some time in the past. Examples of such evidence include sand- over-mud stratigraphy, high boundary roughness, thin RPD's, highly- reduced sediment at depth, chaotic sedimentary cross-sectional texture, Stage I seres, and OSI values less than +6. However, there was no consistent and unequivocal REMOTS® evidence indicating that disposed materials existed in this area. If disposed materials were present, they were deposited several years ago or, if more recent, the deposited materials were very thinly dispersed (i.e., much thinner than the present mean bioturbation depth). In either case, there was no optical "signature" to provide conclusive evidence of disposal as detectable by REMOTS® photography. The overall area appeared to have high benthic habitat quality not significantly different from the new CLIS reference station. Examination of both the bathymetric and side scan records from GHOST-1 also did not detect any features to indicate the presence of dredged material. Although gradients in certain REMOTS® parameters were seen at Ghost-1, direct physical evidence of disposed material (e.g., anomalous sediment type, chaotic fabrics, methanogenic sediments) likewise did not exist. The REMOTS® OSI parameters mapped at Ghost-1 suggested, but did not prove, that recent disturbances had affected stations Dl, El, Gl, and perhaps B2, B3, and Bé. However, there were no indications that this disturbance was caused by recent dredged material disposal. Since disposal during the 1985-86 season took place in the western portion of CLIS, it is unlikely that a scow would be so off course to have disposed of material at GHOST-1. Like Ghost Site 2, this area appeared to have a high benthic habitat quality as measured by various REMOTS® parameters, and it was comparable to the new CLIS reference station. 34 4.3 Benthic Habitat Quality at the CLIS Disposal Mounds and the New Reference Station The REMOTS® surveys also were conducted to provide an assessment of benthic recolonization and overall habitat conditions at each disposal mound, as well as determine the suitability of the new CLIS reference station. Summary statistics for the ten CLIS disposal mounds, the new CLIS reference station and the GHOST-1 and GHOST-2 sites surveyed in July 1986 (Table 4-1) showed that the new CLIS reference station had a higher mean OSI value (9.55) than any of the disposal mounds surveyed. Such a relatively high OSI value would be expected in areas of the seafloor which was not been affected by disturbance (e.g., dredged material disposal, erosion, predator foraging, near-bottom hypoxia, etc.). Because it did not appear to have been affected by dredged material disposal, the new reference area should serve as an adequate representative of the ambient seafloor and should therefore be a valid control station for future monitoring at the disposal site. The rank-order position of the highest-ranked disposal mound (STNH-N), based on the average OSI values at the REMOTS® stations having dredged material present (i.e., "mound" stations), remained the same between August 1985 and July 1986 (Table 4-1). The OSI values at the STNH-N, FVP, NH-74, Norwalk, and CS-2 disposal mounds, as well as those at the GHOST-1 and GHOST=-2 areas, were not significantly different from the OSI values at the new CLIS reference station for either the stations located on dredged material of for stations on the edge or flanks of these mounds. The OSI values for stations located on dredged material at the MOR, NH-83, CLIS-86, STNH-S and CS-1 mounds were significantly lower than those at the reference station. In addition, "edge and ambient" stations at STNH-S also had significantly lower OSI values than the reference station (Table 4-1). The three disposal mounds that consistently have had low mean OSI values (MQR, NH-83 and STNH-S) are located along the southern border of the CLIS Disposal Site in approximately 65 feet of water. In August 1986, SAIC measured dissolved oxygen from Throgs Neck Bridge to the area off New Haven, including MQR station Center, the old CLIS reference station, and a station in 126 feet of water just north of Port Jefferson (SAIC, 1987). All of these stations had hypoxic water (less than 3 mg/l dissolved oxygen); in fact, this hypoxic water extended all the way to Throgs Neck. Extension of this hypoxic water eastward of the CLIS Disposal Site remains undocumented. In addition, it is not known how far north of the MOR mound this hypoxic water spread. In any event, it is quite possible that this seasonal hypoxia, which had its greatest effect in the deepest part of the Sound, contributed to the low OSI values of the deeper mounds. Dissolved oxygen levels were also measured over the WLIS Disposal Site in August 1986. Values fell below 2 mg/l, and the mean OSI for the WLIS site (as measured in August 1986) was low (5.8), (SAIC, 1987). 35 The role of seasonal hypoxia in structuring the biology, biogenic mixing depths, depths of the mean apparent RPD, and Organism Sediment Indices is unknown. The recent discovery of regional hypoxia in the central Sound has cast a new light on the DAMOS monitoring protocol. It appears imperative to add near- bottom dissolved oxygen measurements to all REMOTS® measurements and to do hydrographic profiling (CTD/DO profiles) of the water column to relate water column stratification to hypoxic water thickness whenever possible. This would provide documentation of the spatial extent of hypoxic near-bottom water relative to REMOTS® benthic analyses at and near the disposal sites. The MQR mound continued to have one of the slowest rates of benthic ecosystem recovery among the mounds at the CLIS site; this phenomenon has been noted in past REMOTS® surveys. Results from the sediment chemistry analyses (Tables 3-21 and 3-22) showed this mound to be the only mound with significantly elevated levels of all contaminants measured as compared with the reference station. The relatively higher levels of chemical contamination combined with the potential hypoxia effects could both contribute to the slow rate of infaunal succession documented at this location. As previously indicated, there was no definitive evidence of disposed material in either Ghost Site 1 or 2. Both areas had average OSI values close to +9 and were not significantly different from the new CLIS reference station (Table 4-1). If material was disposed in these areas in the past, three possibilities exist: 1) REMOTS® sampling stations (spaced at 100 m intervals) were not located on this material; 2) the material was disposed a long time ago, and subsequent colonization and reworking has caused the material to converge in its biological and physical properties with the ambient seafloor; or 3) small volumes of material from any recent disposal activities were spread out in thin layers, so that the ambient infauna were able to rework the material into the bottom, erasing its "optical signature". After a period of 13 years, the sand cap on the New Haven-74 disposal mound could no longer be seen as a discrete sedimentary layer. The sand has been mixed with fine-grained sediment, leaving the sand fraction as only a minor textural component. It seems reasonable to assume that distinct features of sand or mud caps (e.g., irregular sediment fabrics, layers having distinct grain-size and/or optical reflectance, etc.) which are thin relative to the bioturbation depth of Stage III taxa would be short-lived, due to sediment reworking by these organisms. The upper 20 cm of the sand cap at CS-2, after only 3 years, has also been thoroughly mixed with fine-grained sediment. The only station to show clear evidence of the sand cap in the upper sedimentary layer was located at 600N (CS-1). 36 The July 1986 REMOTS® sample size at the CLIS mounds was reduced by one third from that taken in August 1985. Although three replicate photographs were obtained at each station, only one replicate was analyzed. This reduced data base has tended to compromise the statistical comparison of the different disposal mounds between years. In particular, it was difficult to evaluate within-station patchiness in the occurrence of Stage III taxa, so that apparent changes in successional stage between 1985 and 1986 could not be determined adequately. Analysis of only one replicate photograph allowed a greater number of stations to be sampled, thus increasing spatial coverage of the different disposal mounds while sacrificing the assessment of small-scale variability. In order to insure statistical integrity between surveys, it is recommended that all future REMOTS® monitoring at the CLIS site be based on an analysis of a minimum of three station replicates. 4.4 Sediment Chemical Analysis Another objective of the July 1986 field operations was to determine the concentrations of selected chemical constituents in sediments from each of the ten disposal mounds and the new reference station. It is instructive to compare the results of the chemical analyses with other studies which have reported the concentrations of metals and PCBs in Long Island Sound sediments (Table 4-2). Benninger et al. (1979) measured the concentrations of Zn, Cu, and Pb in a sediment core collected in Central Long Island Sound. The Zn and Cu concentrations detected in the top 10 cm of the sediment core were comparable, or slightly higher than the reference levels found in the present study (Table 4-2). However, the Pb concentrations reported by Benninger et al. (1979) were lower than those found at the reference station in the present study. Greig et al. (1977) measured the concentrations of a suite of trace metals in the top four cm of sediment at stations throughout Long Island Sound. In his study, sediments in the vicinity of the new CLIS reference station showed similar, or slightly higher concentrations of Zn, Cu, Cr, and Hg compared with the results of the present study (Table 4-2). As in comparisons with Benninger et al., Pb concentrations were lower than those found in the present study at the reference station. Cd levels were below the analytical detection limit in both Greig's and the present study; however, his detection limits were considerably lower. Similarly, the levels of Ni measured by Grieg were below the 28 ppm detection limit in the present study (Table 4-2). This above observations are consistent with data from Munns et al. (in press), who reported lower concentrations of Pb and higher concentrations of Zn, Cu, and Cr for CLIS reference station samples. The levels of Cd and Ni detected by Munns were lower than the detection limits of the present study, while percent 37 total carbon and PCBs were within the range measured in the present study (Table 4-2). At the FVP mound, Munns et al. reported concentration ranges in 1985 samples which overlapped with those in the present study for all parameters tested except PCBs, which appeared to be higher in July 1986 (Table 4-2). However, the PCB concentrations at the FVP Center station actually were quite variable in the Munns study and ranged as high as 1.8 ppm, above the mean value reported in the present study. For many of the other parameters measured in both studies, larger sample sizes in the Munns study could account in part for the wider range of concentrations reported. The FVP mound had the highest concentrations of Cu and Cr compared to all the other CLIS mounds sampled in the present study (Table 4-2). The highest contaminant concentrations measured in individual samples occurred at the CLIS-86 mound for Pb, Zn, Cu, and Ni. A comparison of the present results at this mound with those from August 1985 indicated that the levels of Pb, Zn, As, Cu and PCBs were higher in the 1986 samples. These results are most readily attributed to the ongoing disposal at this mound, involving sediment from a number of different sources. The former CLIS reference station was sampled during August 1985, September 1984, December 1983 and July 1983. Comparisons of these data with the July 1986 results from the new CLIS reference station did not reveal any large differences or temporal trends in the concentrations of any of the parameters measured. The FVP Center station was sampled during July and August 1983. Data for samples collected at this station were somewhat variable; however, for several parameters a trend of decreasing concentrations with time was evident. This was particularly true for Zn, As, Cd, Cr, Cu, % total carbon, chemical oxygen demand and oil and grease. This might reflect the increased oxidation of the disposed material with time, as well as some "dilution" of the material both from deposition and mixing with underlying sediments as a result of bioturbation. None of the parameters measured showed higher concentrations in the 1986 samples compared to the earlier results. Sampling was previously performed at the MOR mound during October 1985 and September 1984. Chemical concentrations measured during all three sampling periods were relatively high at this mound. However, there were no major concentration changes noted in the samples collected between 1984 and 1986. Comparisons of results from the STNH-N Center station from October 1985, September 1984 and August 1983 showed Hg concentrations were higher in the samples collected during August 1983. The samples collected on the other two dates and in the present study showed lower and relatively consistent Hg levels. None of the other parameters showed major changes in concentration over the period sampled. 38 As previously noted, none of the sediment chemistry results of the present study exceeded NERBC 'Moderate' upper limits, except for Hg in the Norwalk Center sample, which fell within the 'High' category of high contamination. Several of the mounds were in the 'Low' range for all parameters tested. Those that showed a predominance of 'Moderate'’ contaminant levels were mounds which have received relatively contaminated dredged material (FVP, CLIS-86, NH74, and, to a lesser extent, Norwalk). These mounds were not capped and thus they do not show any "dilution" effects in their sediment chemistry as a result of capping with cleaner material. In comparison, the four capped mounds (CS-1, CS- 2, STNH-N, and STNH-S) had levels within the 'Low' category for all parameters tested, suggesting that the caps have been effective in isolating or possibly "diluting" contaminated dredged material with cleaner sediment. For most of the mounds sampled, no statistically significant differences were found for contaminent concentrations between Top and Bottom core sections (Table 3-20). However, MOR, STNH-S and NH74 did show significantly greater concentrations in the Bottom samples for some of the trace metals and percent total carbon. In contrast, STNH-N Center showed a number of parameters (Pb, As and Fe) to be significantly greater in the Top core section sample. This was the only station that showed significantly less % total carbon than the reference station in the Bottom sample (Table 3-22). In addition, this station also had the highest mean RPD (4.64 cm) of all the disposal mounds sampled. In a natural depositional system, trace metal distributions with depth are controlled by the redox potential of the sediment, as well as the supply of Fe and carbon (Benninger et al., 19XX). Such variables can help explain the observed results; however, the geochemical system involved is complex and a study designed specifically with these processes in mind would be required in order to assess their role in controlling contaminent concentrations with depth at specific disposal mounds. The sediment chemistry results for the transect of stations sampled at STNH-N suggest that dredged material may have reached some of the outlying stations as part of the original disposal operation (Tables 3-10 through 3-18). However, statistical tests between the chemical results on these stations and the Center showed no indication of systematic transport in a specific direction (Table 3-23). If transport of contaminanted sediment from the Center to the outlying stations had occurred, a decreasing concentration gradient at stations along the axis of transport would be expected. This pattern was not observed in the present results. It is important to recall that STNH-N is a capped mound consisting of sand from New Haven Harbor overlying material from Stamford, CT. Previous profiles of this mound showed the cap layer with steep topography, ranging from a thickness of approximately 39 3.5 m at the center to layers less than about 20 centimeters thick beyond a radius of about 150 to 200 meters (SAIC, 1980). Cap thickness also varied in different places on the mound. This suggests that the original cap layer could have been relatively thin at some of the outlying stations which showed contaminant concentrations above levels detected at the Center station in the present study. Bioturbation in these areas could have resulted in mixing of underlying contaminated sediments with the cap material, thereby elevating contaminant concentrations in surface sediments above those measured at stations such as the , where cap material alone was sampled. The fact that STNH-N had the deepest RPDs and a relatively high percentage of Stage III organisms compared to the other CLIS mounds gives strength to this interpretation. Comparisons of data from samples collected at stations in the vicinity of the STNH-N disposal mound in 1982 and 1984 did show some apparent trends with time (Table 3-26). The most striking trend was the consistency in statistical results for Top and Bottom samples at individual stations: when 1982 or 1984 results were significantly different from the 1986 results, this was generally true for both the Top and Bottom samples. However, no systematic patterns beyond the individual station were apparent. It is therefore difficult to attribute the increases at station 200E from 1982 and 1984 to 1986 to transport of dredged material. Localized washing of the mound could account for some changes from year to year at individual stations. However, there were very few significant differences in concentrations at the mound apex (station Center), where such washing presumably occurs with greater frequency and/or intensity. 4.5 Benthic Community Analysis Another objective of the 1986 field operations was to analyze the benthic community structure at selected disposal mounds and the new CLIS reference station. The faunal assemblage recovered at the CLIS reference station was similar to that found at the same location in the EPA/COE Field Verification Program. That long-term study showed that many of the dominant species go through irregular cycles of abundance. Since Mulinia is one of the most variable species, it is likely that the mature specimens found in the July samples may be absent in future samples. Dominance was shared by a large number of polychaete and mollusc species, while crustaceans were relatively uncommon, presumably because of the negative effects of high water content, fine-grained sediment. Benthic community analyses were performed at the FVP mound because it had long-term data for comparison. Despite the presence of sand and shells in the FVP Center samples, most of the species recovered were ones adapted for soft bottoms. The number of species was similar to that found at the reference station (37 at FVP Center vs. 35 at the reference station), but numbers of 40 individuals were much less (average 487 vs. 2053). A number of species also present at other mounds are indicators of high organic content or pollution (Oligochaeta, Mediomastus, Cossura, Polydora). Some species may have been absent from FVP Center because of some undetected negative effect. The bivalves Mulinia and Nucula and the polychaetes Paraonis and Melinna were much less abundant at FVP Center than at the reference station. The polychaetes Pherusa and Sigambra were found in both sand at STNH-N and silt/clay at CLIS reference, but not in the mixed sediment at FVP Center. Benthic community analyses were conducted at the STNH-N mound because it had a different grain-size than the surrounding bottom. The STNH-N Center fauna was dominated by tube-dwelling polychaetes. These included suspension feeders such as Polydora and Spiophanes, and deposit feeding ampharetids, terebellids, and maldanids. Species which have a strong association with sandy bottoms included the polychaete Spiophanes, the bivalves Tellina and Ensis, and the amphipods Unciola and Leptocheirus. Species not seen in previous studies at the CLIS disposal site included the burrowing mud shrimp Callianassa atlantica and the polychaete Ancistrosyllis groenlandica. The results from the benthic infaunal community analyses confirmed the infaunal successional stage designations made independently during analysis of the REMOTS® photographs. Of the three disposal mounds sampled for detailed infaunal analyses, STNH- N station Center had the greatest infaunal numerical abundance and species richness. All the replicate REMOTS® photographs from STNH- N Center showed a particularly dense Stage III-I assemblage; taxonomic identification confirmed the presence of numerous surface suspension-feeders and grazers (Polydora, Spiophanes, Tellina, Ensis) as well as subsurface deposit-feeders (e.g., maldanid polychaetes). The new CLIS reference station (also given a Stage III-I designation in the REMOTS® analysis) also was dominated by deposit-feeders (Nucula, Yoldia, Euclymene, Asychis) with the suspension-feeding mactrid bivalve Mulinia lateralis present in fairly high abundance. Of the three replicate REMOTS® photographs from the FVP Center, two received a Stage I designation and one received a Stage III-I designation, indicating small-scale spatial heterogeneity with infaunal taxa. Results of the infaunal analyses showed the Stage I taxa Mediomastus, Cossura, and oligochaetes as dominants along with the Stage III taxon Nephtys. MQR, the most faunally depauperate mound of all CLIS areas surveyed with REMOTS® also had the lowest abundance and species richness from the grab analyses; all replicate REMOTS® photographs analyzed from the MQR Center showed a Stage I successional assemblage, and the presence of Stage III organisms on the MQR mound was documented for the first time. Results from the benthic infaunal analyses confirmed the presence of Stage I taxa as dominants (Mediomastus, Melinna) and also the presence of Stage III taxa (Nephtys, Euclymene). 41 The rank order of these four mounds based on REMOTS® OSI values was comparable to the species richness results from the infaunal community analyses (Table 4-3). The new CLIS reference station, STNH-N mound, and FVP mound were essentially similar in terms of mean OSI rank and species richness, showing no statistically significant difference among these three areas for these two parameters. However, MOR did stand out as having significantly lower mean OSI and species richness values (Figure 4-3). The combined results of the REMOTS® analysis, the benthic infaunal community analyses, and the sediment chemistry analysis all suggest that extremely stressed conditions still existed at the MOR mound in July 1986. 4.6 Body Burden Analysis A final objective of the 1986 field operations was to assess the relationship between sediment contaminant levels and bioaccumulation at the FVP, MQR, STNH-N, and CLIS-86 disposal mounds. At the MQR and FVP mounds (both uncapped), Cr and Cu levels were elevated both in the sediment and in the collected Nephtys. These results suggest some correlation between sediment contaminant levels and bioaccumulation. However, at the STNH-N mound the elevated concentrations of Cr, Cu, and Zn in Nephtys did not correspond with elevated sediment concentrations of these three metals. Concentrations in the sediment at this mound were generally the same or lower than those in the sediment collected at the reference station. Only Hg sediment concentrations were elevated at STNH-N; however, this contaminant was not elevated in Nephtys collected there. The sand cap at this mound could have resulted in either dilution or isolation of contaminants in the underlying disposed material to the extent that elevated concentrations were not: measured in the sediment grab samples obtained. However, the observed elevated levels of Cr, Cu, and Zn in the collected Nephtys imply that complete "biological isolation" may not have been achieved. The polychaetes which were sampled may possibly have been exposed to elevated contaminants in the underlying sediment in the process of vertical migration and head- down feeding. One possible explanation for the anomalous’ benthic recolonization rates and different benthic community types documented in the past at the MQR mound compared to all the other CLIS mounds is bioaccumulation of inorganic metal contaminants. However, Cr, Cu and Pb also_ showed significantly higher concentrations in Nephtys collected at FVP, a mound which has experienced relatively high rates of colonization by Stage III infauna. Therefore, bioaccumulation of these three elements cannot alone serve to explain the lack of infaunalization at MQR. It is possible that metal contamination in combination with potential hypoxia effects could have adversely affected the rate of 42 colonization at this mound, or that some other contaminant or combination of contaminants not analyzed for were responsible. It is instructive to compare the results of the body burden analyses in the present study with those from other studies. The Fe concentrations reported for the present study ranged between 340 and 820 ppm dry weight, except for the CLIS-86 sample which showed a concentration of 8,600 ppm. The levels reported by Munns et al. (in press) were all between 600 and 1,000 ppm. The extremely high Fe levels found in the CLIS-86 Nephtys samples was probably due to the presence of sediment in the gut of these organisms. The levels of most other elements were also elevated in the CLIS-86 sample, probably due to the same reason. Therefore, the contaminant levels measured in the organisms from this station will not be discussed. Lake et al. (1985) conducted a laboratory study on the bioaccumulation of several inorganic elements from Black Rock Harbor sediment, the material that was disposed at FVP. Their study measured the concentrations of Cr, Cu, Zn, Cd, and Fe in organisms exposed to sediment. The results showed that only Cr and Cu were significantly bioaccumulated from the sediments. Both of these elements as well as Pb showed elevated concentrations in the present study at FVP. Munns et al. (1988) reported that Cr concentrations in Nephtys collected at the CLIS reference station ranged from 1-2 ppm ary weight. This is higher than the concentrations (0.20-0.30 ppm) found in Nephtys collected from the reference station in the present study (Tables 3-29 and 3-30), and similar to the levels reported on the FVP and MQR disposal mounds. Munns et al. (1988) reported concentrations between 2 and 5 ppm for Cr in Nephtys collected on dredged material at FVP. For Cu, the range of concentrations reported here were 17-21 ppm for organisms from the reference station. Munns et al. (1988) reported levels of about 30 ppm from the reference station. Levels were highest in organisms from FVP in the present study, reaching about 50 ppm. Munns et al. (1988) also reported concentrations near 50 ppm on dredged material around FVP. The Pb levels that Munns et al. (1988) reported for the CLIS reference station were about 3-4 ppm. On dredged material, Munns et al. measured Pb concentrations in Nephtys of about 7 ppm. In this study, the reference levels were about 3-4 ppm and about 8-10 ppm on the FVP and MQR disposal mounds. Zn concentrations were about 180 ppm at the reference station and only slightly higher at 240 ppm in the mound samples. Munns et al. reported similar Zn concentrations ranging from 130-150 ppm dry weight at the reference station and about 200 ppm on dredged material. The Cd concentrations found at the reference 43 station in the present study (0.58-1.1 ppm) were similar to the 1 to 3 ppm concentrations reported by Munns et al. for the reference station. Cd concentrations on dredged material in the present study (0.85-1.2 ppm) were not significantly increased over reference levels. This is similar to what was reported for Cd by Munns et al. The PCB concentrations reported here for Nephtys were below the analytical detection limits for all samples (Table 3-31). These detection limits ranged from 270-770 ppb. The detection limits were generally higher than the concentrations previously measured by Munns et al. in Nephtys from the reference station (200-400 ppb). The measured wet weight concentrations for Hg (Table 3- 30) and PCBs (Table 3-31) were well below the FDA Alert Levels. These were the only compounds quantified for which Alert levels are presently being applied. The FDA Alert Levels are 0.2 ppm for Hg and 2 ppm for PCBs. 5.0 CONCLUSIONS The only significant addition to the bathymetric features at CLIS was the development of the new CLIS-86 disposal mound, which had a maximum thickness of 2 meters and a radius of about 250 meters as detected with acoustic methods. The REMOTS® results showed that recently-deposited dredged material covered an area with a north-south radius of about 350 to 400 meters and an east- west radius in excess of 600 meters. An estimated 131,920 m of disposed material was detected on the bottom using precision bathymetry and REMOTS®_photography, compared to a scow log volume estimate of 164,045 m. No evidence of significant changes in topography at other mounds was detected. The bathymetric and side scan surveys conducted at GHOST- 1 and GHOST-2 outside the CLIS boundaries did not detect large enough areas of high reflectance or distinct changes in depth to account for the approximately 50,000 ya? of dredged material allegedly deposited in each area. Likewise, there was no conclusive evidence of dredged material in the REMOTS® photographs obtained in these two areas. Based on REMOTS® parameters, the new CLIS reference station had higher mean OSI values than any of the disposal mounds which were surveyed. This new area appears to represent a valid reference station for future monitoring. Mean OSI values at the STNH-N, CS-2, FVP, NOR, and NH-74 disposal mounds, as well as those at Ghost Sites 1 and 2, were not significantly different from those measured at the new CLIS reference station. The three disposal mounds that consistently have exhibited relatively low mean OSI values (STNH-S, NH-83 and MQR) are located along the southern 44 border of the CLIS Disposal Area. It is possible that hypoxic conditions previously documented in Long Island Sound by SAIC have adversely affected the benthic ecosystem at these mounds. The MQR disposal mound continued to have one of the slowest rates of benthic ecosystem recovery among the mounds at CLIS, possibly the result of chemical contamination combined with hypoxic effects. After a period of 13 years, the sand cap at NH- 74 was no longer apparent as a discrete sedimentary layer in the upper 10-15 cm of sediment. At the FVP mound, there was a deepening of RPD depths and a notable increase in the number of Stage III organisms relative to the post-Hurricane Gloria REMOTS® survey of November 1985. In order to maintain the statistical integrity of the REMOTS® data base for the CLIS disposal site, it is recommended that all future REMOTS® monitoring be based an analysis of a minimum of three station replicates. Furthermore, in light of evidence which suggests that seasonal hypoxia in Long Island Sound may be affecting benthic conditions at the CLIS disposal site, it appears imperative to add near-bottom dissolved oxygen measurements to all future REMOTS® measurements and to perform hydrographic profiling (CTD/DO profiles) of the water column. None of the sediment chemistry results exceeded NERBC 'Moderate' upper limits except for Hg in the Norwalk Center sample, which was at 'High' levels. Notably, the mounds that have been capped (CS-1, CS-2, STNH-S and STNH-N) almost all showed relatively low (i.e., 'Low') contaminant concentrations. The levels of most of the parameters measured were either not different or significantly lower than reference levels. This was true for both the Top and Bottom core sections. The same was also true for the additional stations sampled around the STNH-N disposal mound. This suggests that the caps have been effective in isolating or at least "diluting" contaminants which might have been elevated in the capped dredged material. At the STNH-N mound, there was no evidence to suggest that transport of contaminants from the mound center to outlying stations had occurred. Also, only minor differences were noted between the concentrations measured at the STNH-N stations in 1986 and the results from samples collected in 1984 and 1982. Sediment contamination levels for several parameters were significantly elevated compared to reference levels at the FVP, MOR, CLIS-86, NH-74 and Norwalk disposal mounds. fThis reflects the fact that contaminants were elevated in the dredged material deposited at these mounds. At the new CLIS-86 mound, the concentrations of several metals and PCBs were higher in 1986 compared to 1985, reflecting the ongoing disposal at this mound involving sediment from a number of different sources. The FVP mound showed elevated concentrations for most parameters in the Bottom (2-10cm) sediment core sections. However, the Top sections 45 (0-2cm) contained lower concentrations for most contaminants; these concentrations also were significantly lower than those in core sections (0-10cm) collected at FVP in 1983. This might reflect increased dilution or oxidation of the disposed material as a result of bioturbation. As indicated, the MQR mound contained significantly elevated concentrations in both the Top and Bottom core sections for all of the parameters measured. Several other investigators have reported the concentrations of relevant elements or compounds in Central Long Island Sound sediment samples from areas away from dredged material. In general, the concentrations that have been reported are very similar to those measured at the reference station in the present study. Also, Munns et al. (in press) sampled sediment on the FVP disposal mound over a period of several years. The contaminant concentrations they reported were generally higher than the levels detected in the present study. The faunal assemblage at the CLIS reference station was similar to that found at the same location in the EPA/COE Field Verification Program. Most of the species recovered at the FVP Center station were ones adapted for soft bottoms. The STNH-N Center fauna was dominated by tube-dwelling polychaetes, and several species which have a strong association with sandy bottoms were also present at this mound. The results of the benthic community analysis generally confirmed the REMOTS® infaunal successional designations and OSI rankings of the various mounds. The new CLIS reference station, STNH-N mound, and FVP mound were essentially similar in terms of mean OSI rank and species richness, while the MQR mound had a significantly lower mean OSI and species richness. At the MOR and FVP mounds, Cr and Cu levels were elevated above reference both in surface sediments and in the tissue of the polychaete, Nephtys incisa. These results suggest some correlation between sediment contaminant levels and bioaccumulation. In contrast, elevated concentrations of Cr, Cu, and Zn in Nephtys at the STNH-N mound did not correspond with elevated sediment levels of these three metals. The sand cap at this mound might have been effective in isolating or diluting the metal concentrations in the surface sediments, but the polychaetes could have been exposed to the metals in the underlying capped material as a result of vertical migration or head-down feeding. Bioaccumulation of inorganic contaminants is a possible explanation for the anomalous recolonization rates at the MQR mound. The fact that several metals were also elevated in Nephtys at FVP, a mound with relatively high rates of colonization, suggests that other factors might have influenced recolonization at MQR. The concentrations of several elements in Nephtys at the various disposal mounds sampled in July 1986 were generally similar to or lower than those reported by Munns et al. (in press) for 46 organisms collected on FVP dredged material. Body burden levels reported by Munns et al. for the former CLIS reference station generally were either greater than or similar to those found in Nephtys both at the new CLIS reference station and the disposal mounds. Although PCBs could not be detected in any of the Nephtys samples analyzed in the present study, the detection limits were all well below the FDA Action Level of 2 ppm wet weight. Likewise, the measured Hg concentrations were all well below the FDA Hg Action Level of 0.2 ppm wet weight. 6.0 REFERENCES Benninger, L.K., R.C. Aller, J.K. Cochran and K.K. Turekian. 1979. Effects of biological sediment mixing on the NON 55 chronology and trace metal distribution in a Long Island Sound sediment core. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 43:241-259. Berner, R.A. 1982. Burial of organic carbon and pyrite sulfur in the modern ocean: Its geochemical and environmental significance. American Journal of Science 282: 451-473. Greig, R.A., R.N. Reid and D. R. Wenzloff. 1977. Trace metal concentrations in sediments from Long Island Sound. Marine Pollution Bulletin 8: 183-188. Lake, J., G.L. Hoffman and S. C. Schimmel. 1985. Bioaccumulation of contaminants from dredged material by mussels and polychaetes. Technical Report D-85-2, prepared by the US Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, Narragansett, R. I,., for the US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Munns, W.R., Jr., J.F. Paul, F.J. Bierman, Jr., W.R. Davis, W.B. Galloway, G.L. Hoffman, R.R. Payne, P.F. Rogerson and R.J. Pruell. 1988. Exposure assessment component of the Field Verification Program: Overview and data presentation. EPA Technical Report 600/6-89/003, Environmental Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Narragansett, R.I. New England River Basin Commission (NERBC). 1980. Interim Plan for the disposal of dredged material from Long Island Sound. NERBC, Boston, Ma. 55p. Plumb, R.H. 1981. Procedures for Handling and Chemical Analysis of Sediment and Water Samples. Technical Report EPA/Ce-81-1. SAIC, 1980. "Capping" procedures as an alternative technique to isolate contaminated dredged material in the marine 47 SAIC, SAIC, SAIC, SAIC, environment. US Army Corps of Engineers, New England Division, Waltham, MA. DAMOS Contribution #11. 1984. Results of monitoring studies at Cap Sites #1, #2 and the FVP site in central Long Island Sound and a classification scheme for the management of capping procedures. US Army Corps of Engineers, New England Division, Waltham, MA. DAMOS Contribution #38 (SAIC Report #SAI-84/7506&C38) . 1987. REMOTS® reconnaissance mapping of near-bottom dissolved oxygen: Central to western Long Island Sound, August 1986. SAIC Report #SAIC-87/7502&132. 1989a. 1985 monitoring surveys at the Central Long Island Sound Disposal Site: An assessment of impacts from disposal and Hurricane Gloria. US Army Corps of Engineers, New England Division, Waltham, MA. DAMOS Contribution #57 (SAIC Report #SAIC-86/7516&C57) . 1989b. Monitoring cruise at the New London Disposal Site, July 1986. US Army Corps of Engineers, New England Division, Waltham, MA. DAMOS Contribution #60 (SAIC Report #SAIC- 86/7540&C60) . 48 TABLE 2-1. SUMMARY OF REMOTS SURVEYS IN THE CLIS DISPOSAL SITE. MOUND MOST RECENT SURVEYS NUMBER OF STATIONS GRID USED IN SURVEY FVP Numerous times in 1983 and 1984. March 1985 21 June 1985 21 Oct. 1985 21 July 1986 21 Cross* STNH-N Jan. 1983 9 Cross Aug. 1983 9 Cross Sept. 1984 9 Cross Aug. 1984 17 Cross Nov. 1985 10 Cross July 1986 17 Cross STNH-S (same dates as STNH-N) 17 Cross CS-1 & April 1983 (baseline) 11 Cross CS-2 May 1983 11 Cross Aug. 1983 11 Cross Sept. 1984 11 Cross Aug. 1985 7) Cross Oct. 1985 10 Cross July 1986 17 Cross MOR Jan. 1983 13 Cross Aug. 1983 13 Cross Sept. 1984 13 Cross Aug. 1985 12 Orthogonal ** Oct. 1985 10 Cross July 1986 17 Cross NOR Jan. 1983 9 Cross Sept. 1984 9 Cross Aug. 1985 17 Cross July 1986 17 Cross NH-74 Sept. 1984 Aug. 1985 17 Cross July 1986 17 Cross NH-83 Jan. 1984 Sept. 1984 Aug. 1985 July 1986 17 Cross * cross indicates stations located along regular N-S E-W transects. Orthogonal indicates a regular 6 X 6 sampling matrix. * Uz *epeued JO [TOUNOD YOAPesSsYy TeuOTIeEN eYyA Aq peyjnqTAASTp TeTAejeU soUEeTEeJeA peTstqAAe9 "UOTIeTASG PAepueAS SATALTSEY = aSsY *UOTAETASG AUSDTeq SATAeTOY T6 cOT £6 90°0 TT (AG O€Ee°O 98T 6f7 G°9 6°? [L516 c0°O G°S bee OOE€°O O6T 807 62°0 88T CTV T82°0O 78ST 66€ TOE°*O T6T 907 9ZE°O L6T ST? -- 0 0 =—— Ord oT C°?v -—— Oh 4 8° —— Ove €°9T -- -- SS0°0 -- -- -- 090°0 -- —— TSO0°O SS 6H od no (qubtem Aap OOT L6 9°0O EG V°C £°92¢ GT f°? 9€°0O LS°O Cv’? 9°SZ WG aS f°9Z2 G6°2c 6°? 8T°Zc 8°SZ VE°CS £°SZ 9 (0) TL°O L6°0 91 EL°0 oT 69°0 Io Po 6/bn ut suotzerzqusduo|)) 80T c°? 9°72 v°? 8T°T L°92 9°92 9°L2 9°LZ T°S2d *eTqeottdde jon --- £ 2 L dda Aisaod9y & “Aed “Pp 3s SONTCA UN PeTFTIIED V- €=- c- T-ensstL ct ¢c ct (A SS € oe € UOTSTOSeAg TeoOTIATeUuY SUTUASeJZeEd OL senssTy, searDuedojedsy A2ASqoT OUN puW seTdues WeyTqd jo stsATeuy sqAeottdey °e-e STIUeL asa "aed *pas ueoW T93SqQOT OYUN dda ueoWn Wa uo AeIyTd Wa uo 2eAyTd Wa uo 2ST z0°> Z8°0 ECCFVEPL 97SGF6TTT 9T+0S T?#7S €0°OFE7°O Z0°0O#8T°O G0°0OFT9°0 GO0°0OF87°0 vV2°O+F86°Z E16 2Ozsi70) 22 80°0#88°0 TT °0#88°0 O876FO009ET O096TF00E0Z OTF69E E6TFOCE O€+F622 OLFVPT VE°OFEB’S 89°OFE9°S V2FOVTS VFOTT VIFVVLT OVFOTT v°OFEV’O 9T°OFLE°O Wo770g aon °Aed°p3as ueoNn 986T Atne ‘taeqUeD-dAT Ze peAoeTTOO AuUeUTpes jo stsATeue TeotTweyD 8c? 6c 0c°O SS°O VEC v8°O 00c0zd % LNUSY, cot % Q)L2E vTe 6€T vv°O woyyod aor woysod «86 aor woyyod 8 aor 6STT 8c (E1G~ @ vv°O Valen e (L(L* 0) OO9LT ¥ DLE 9ST * Gr cOS 66 9£°0O re) O€eT L9 SG @ S9°0 GiRse 86°0 OO86T * 8cS 627 0°? v°9 TSZ O£T 8E°O CULT 87 (eb 0) 97°0 80°C 86°0 OOTTZ2 ce GcS TE? * S) 8) IEG €9T LS°O @ °e105 Jo woz doq = doz *SUOTIOeS B9IOD peuTquos jo stsATeue eTbuts *puesnoyy aed sj2eg VVLT 9ST SS 08 Gc°O 02c°0 29 OF 2eSe70 GAS (i315 €8°O 88°0 00802 00222 9E *% 6cG c9 992 97 * * 8°S T’°’S CLS vOT COT 89 “Liv? ® BEEP O W *(stseq 3yubtem AATp e uo suUOTAZerTQUSDUOD) *eTqeottdde jon --- *soTdues oy JO YSOW AOJ AYIWTT UuoTADeAep MOTE * °e109 JO ASpuTewer = wo jWOg c 2020N c T udd LTddq TeIOL wdd gdd TeIOL wd4 eseoIy ¥ [TO add aoo ueboz3tN "101 uoqied °j01L ueboapAy °20L & ) S2)8K0) Cavojir, °T-€ STqeL a 7eoT [dew G9E+CLO?S 9772+0CST LT+¥L8 G6+¢8 TO°O+7E°O TO°O0+0€°O v0°0+S8°0 €0°0+8L°0 LO°OF99°E 70° O+672°E VT °OFL8°0 60°0+20°T OLVFOEEOE O00ST+00962 €L4902 €C+8T?S V+OST OT+9ET O°9+E°ET O°T+V°TT 6+ESE 6T+CTE 8+08T 8+SST OT°O+TL°O v0°0+87°0 Woy 70d aor (°Aed °p3s) uPeen LSGZ c8 €e°O 06°0 DOE £6°0 OOOOE * T92 8t7T % 9°T? LSE 6LT T9°0O 9SLT £6 O€*O SL°O TE°e LO°T 00c¢6Z2 * Tez SeT S 8°cT GCE O9T cS°O *etTqeottdde ON --- *soTdwes ey Jo SOW AOJ AIWTIT uot_ZOSe Rep MOTE x °a109 Jo ASepuTewerA = wo jz WOg "e109 Jo wo zg dod = doL :0390N *SUOT}OOS 81T0D peuTquos jo stsATeue eTbuts *puesnoyuy aod sqied 2 udd Lad Te3OL Cudd dod Teq0L v86T vzZ9T 9L9T TS8TT ud@ eseein 9 Ito OTT v8 OL OL add qoo SEO) OS°O EE°Q TEELO uebor3t Nh “jJoL & z8°O 08°0 78°O 08°O ueboapAH °30L & SOB (Le? Orig= Gia 4S uoqied *jOL % LO “6E°O REO LOE @) 128%) a\ohn & OOOTE OO9TE OOO00E 00082 udd oy TE * * * udd TN 6Gz LEZ BETZ GST wdd no GST 8vT Lvt vel wdd 29 % G % % udd po SOE B°OV Fon GO udd sw ZOE 9ZE TVE 982 udd uz O6T TOT EAE vit udd qd L9°0O 8v°0 78°O €v°0 udd 6H woyyod aor woyyom aor woyyod aor o qd W a7eot [dew *(stseq qubtem Aap e uo suoTt jerQUSedDUOD) 9g6t Aine ‘1e,UeD-YOW Ae PEeVOeTTOO YuseUTpes Jo stsATeue TeoTweyd °2-€ STqeL cO°> 0 €V+879 LTT+8LE VT+SS c+TS vO0°0+62°0 TO °0#82°O v0°0+89°0 v0°0+79°0 V6°O+FLT °C? vO°O+TL°2 vO°O+T8°0O OT°0+88°0 OSTOT+OSTOT O€ST+OEEVC L¥9E€ Sao 6CT+C7?S S6+7202 c+78 V+EL €°T+6°S €°C+7°9 TCCHOED CCTFTCS €€+98T T?2T+202 TO0°0#22°0 £0°0+92°0 WOFFOT aor (°aead’p3s) uUeeEN 986T A[ne ‘10}UaD-98-STID 2e peqROeTTOO AueUtTpes jo stsATeue TeotTweyoD *eTqeottdde ION --- *soTdues eyj Jo YSOW AOF AYTWIT UuOoTIOSeAEep MOTE ¥% *9109 JO ASpuTeWeA = wo j jog °9109 JO wo zg doqz = do, :330N *SuOT OES 2109 peuTquods jo stsATeue eTbuts *puesnoyuA aed sjieg g udd Lad TeIOL Cudd dod TeIOL 60ZL 882 Z19 ZOE vz9 vs wd eseety ¥ TTO VL ZS TS 60 Ov ---- add aoo ve°O 62°0 8Z°0 82°0 9Z°O 82°0 uebor3th SOM es ZL°O S9°0 S9°0 89°0 4£9°0 09°0 usborpAH °30L % ORES - BL SEIS Go? Z9°% «469G9°Z uoqied °j0L % 8L°O 86°0O T8°O 88°0 G8°O 8Z°O ®) 2280) CaOin & 00SrZ 00S92 OLTE OOEEZ O8L2 O0ZEZ udd o4 LE * vv Ez €€ * udd ™N v8t BET BLT OEE VIS ZET udd nd z8 Ee 98 6L v8 OL udd 25 a7] % % * * * udd po Gar, 9°S SO iD €°6 B°S B°E€ udd sw Ste Tre Lee O6T PUL Tez? udd uz 8Tz ELE 66T OTT OVT vet udd ad (SAZ°O) YOO ECO. BBO E20) Laa40 udd 6H WO FO aor WoyFog aor Wo FO aor 2 Fe) a YW a 7eoT [dey *(stseq qyubtem ATp e uo suoTyeAQUeDUOD) °e€-€ STqeL Z0°> €T°0O €FTVE ZCOTFCVE GOV OFTE T0°0F2Z2°0 Z0°O+7T°O T0°0O#L9°0 60°0#SP°0 89°OFEB°T 82° OF8L°T L0°0#T8°0 €T°0489°0 O€8FOOELZ OVEEFOOEET LOFUS LUF2v 8409 9T+¥82 6°OFL°S 9°OFL°S 6TFLUT TT¥96 vFL9 GIFEV €0°0+F8Z2°0 20°OFST°O Woytoq aoa (°Aed °p3s) uRBEW 9861 AIN¢ ‘103UeD-S-HNLS 3e peqoeT[Oo QueuTpes Jo stsATeue TeoTWEYD LEE Sv €c°O 89°0 LE°? SL°O OOSLZ * S8 v9 * L°9 99T T9 L£z°O WOFFOr eTqeottdde Jon --- *sotTdues ey} JO ZSOW AOJF YIWTT uoTIOSe_ep Mote x 022 CVE 8Ee vE ST°O TZ2°O 0s°O L9°0 90°2 9E°SC 6S°0 88°0 OOrsT 007292 87 % 9c OL 8E 60 * * v°9 9°? COT Ter 8S 69 vVT°O GZ2°0 *SUOTIDIS "9109 JO AepuTewer = woj jog "9105 Jo wo z dojz = do, :e30N aor woyyod aor wWoyyod = aor re) e105 peuTquos jo stsATeue eTbuts Z *puesnoyy ated sj1eg I gudd Idd TeI0L udd gdd TeIOL VE TLS wd4 eseetd ¥ TTO cv O€ add aoo €Z°O 9T°0 uebor4th "l0L 99°O0 0OS°0O ueboirpAH °30] & €S°? 88°T uoqie) °“30L 6L°O €9°0 D °*620 °30L OO¢C82 OOETZ wudd oW * * udd IN 96 TS udd no 99 Ov udd 29 * % udd po L°sS L°? udd sw VST SOT udd uz TL 8Y udd ad €€°O PT°O udd 6H W a7edT [dew *(stseq qybtem Arp e uo suoTAerQUeDUOD) °y-e ETqeL *oTqeottdde JON --- *sotdues oyj Jo YSOW AOF YIWTT uot OeWep MOTE * "9109 Jo ASepuTeuer °e109 JO wo z doq = doz *SUOT}OSS 910D peuTquoD jo stsATeue seTbuts = wo j 0g 2390N *puesnoyud aed s3ziaed g zZO°> gudd Lad TeI0L 60°0O udd gdd TeIOL V7FS87 GLIFSTY 8672 LES GOE T99 TSz 992 wd@ eseer5 9 Ito 6F0S VF8E T9 Tv Be cv ZS ZE add qos Z0°OFTZ°O T0°0FSZ2°0 S290) G20) O4Z2O 72910) EB°O, OKO) uebor3th "20L % Z0°O0F0L°0 90°0F0L°0 (B(L20) 4/520 89°O %9°0 69°0 GL°O ueborzpAy °30L % ZT8°OFTS°Z Oi O-Filsvwc C67c Gres CECE OBR O26 Lye uoqzed °0L % 60°0FS8°0 9Z°OFOT°T OBPO — OKF°% 06°O 6I°T VL°O O8°O 2) Of28(0) PSO'in & OS8TFOLTT2 O€ETFOEETZS OOSEZ OOTEZ O068T O066T OOTTZ 000TZ udd o4 --- --- TS * * * * * udd tN ST+8P €FLG LS 09 Lv €S oF 6S wdd nd OFTE GF9E 6€ OV 62 O€ G?¢> 6€ udd 29 --- --- *% % * * * * udd po 8°0F9°R L°OF8°E 0°S Chav, v°s 8°z Gue €°? udd sw TTFS8 GF8TT ZOT 6TT BL vet GL TIt udd uz GTF19 v+88 BL €6 v9 v8 Tv L8 udd qd TO°OF9T°O 20 °0F9T°O GT°O 9T°0 8T°O €T°0 GT°O 61°0 wdd 6y WoO aor Woy FOr aor WOoFFO aor WOFFOr aor (°Aed °p3s) ueeN re) a 4 a7eoT [dey *(stseq qubtem AAIp e uo suoTzeAQUSDUOD) 986 t Atne ‘ZeQUeD-T-Sd Je peJOeTTOO AuUeUTpes Jo sTSATeue TeOTUSEYD *sS-€ ETAL ZO0°> G0°0O ETTF277% ELF8T7S 6TFEE OTFEE GO0°0F9T°O 80°0F6T°O 92°0F07°0 L2°OFLV°O VL°OF6E°T 6L°OF8S°T 08°0FS0°T G9°0F76°0 OVEILFOTTET OVELFOSPST GTFEE 61T+F6E L¥O€E TT¥6E [Bo 6x) (2 Z°OF2°T 6S¥S8 €EFOOT OTFI?V LOFUS L0°OFLT°O TO°OFLT°O Wo JON aoa (°Aed °Pp3s) ueeN 986t Atne ‘1aQ4uUaeD-Z-SD 2e peZOeTTOO YuUeUTpes Jo stsATeue TeoTueYD *atTqeottdde jon --- *soTdues oy} JO WSOW AOJ YIWTT UOTAOSeQepP MOTO, x "9109 JO ASpuTeWeT = Wo Og °a100 Jo wo zg doqz = do, :a30N *SsuOT}OeS 2100 peuTquods jo stsATeue eTbuts *puesnoyy aed sj1ieg & udd Lad TeIOL Cudd dod TeIOL 9LZ 7672 G9 6IT 9ZE ZC ud& eseeity ¥ [TO OV 67 L Zt ZS 6€ add aod LT°O &S2°0 OT°> OT’> O°) B°O usbor3th “30L % 7S6°O0 99°0 OT°> 9T°0 LS°0 6S6°0 ueborzpAy °30L % BL°T 62°2 6T°O 8v°0 TO°2 86°T uoqied °30L % G9O°T --- oO Bi7°O GS we Oye Rm) 220) CBYenh & OOL8T OOSEZ OvVOE O9LS OO9LT OOTLT udd o4 * * * * % % udd TN LE 8S €T> €T> LE Lv wdd no OV ZS Ge> Get> Ge¢> OV udd 29 *% * *% % * * udd pd Z°c Gr O°T> O°T> T°sS Coal wudd sw 8ST O€T €T vS G8 STT udd uz OV L8 tc te2> 19 €S udd qd Abo) SES ARO) 216°) (D200) — i152) udd 6H Woyjoa aor wWoyzjoq for woqjoq aor ro) rf W aqeot [dew *(stseq qybtem Aap e uo suoTAerQUBDUCD) °9=-€ STACL ZO°> 98°0 ZTOFCLLT ZITVFEVG OTF6L vEFTO 90°0#62°0 LO°O+#E72°0 €T°0F08°0 €T°OFE9°O 00°T#7Z8°Z LL°OFE8°2 O£€°OF9E°0 O£°OF8E°0 OOOTFOO09Z OSTZF0L902 TLFT81 9GFLOT 9ZF0ST GEF9OT SyO(O)z5/h OS v°OF8°T GL¥6GE C6FLE7S T2FTLT VEFOET 60°0#87°0 €£°0F79°O Wo JO" ao. (°Aed °p3s) uvON CesT T6 £€°O T6°0 cB8°'e Tv°O 00cSZz * 6722 TST % 6°E OLE T8T 67°0 woysod «86 Oo. woyyod 8 aor woyyod aor W *(stseq AybtTem Aap e uo suOoT IeAQUSeDUOD) 9861T Aine ‘293U8D-7LHN 3e peqdeTTOO AusUTpes jo stsATeue TeoTuUeYD LLVT S8 oc°o 9L°0O 06°E vO°> OOLE? % Tf? 87T % 6°T c9E vVLT 87°0 re) 680 6L ce*o c8°0O SB°E v9°0 OvSd % 88c c8t % °c SUV 68T 6S°0 8L8 €T LT°O TS°O 9T°? 6S°0 OOO6T * 68T 80T % £°O ote ScT oc°o @ £66 L9 €2°O 99°0 B8L°? vO*> OOcE * TT2 8TT % ite £9¢ crt 9£°0O OO€6T * 06 £9 * e°T OVT c6 LO°T *oTqeottdde on --- *soTdues ayy JO YSOW AOF AYIWTT uot Os_ep MOTE x *9109 JO ASepuTewuer = wo j ROG °eI0D Jo wo Z doq = *SUOT}OES 9109 peuTquods jo stsATeue eTbuts *puesnoyA aed sqieg 4 dol :o20N c T udd Lad Te30L wdd @dd TeIOL wd& eseotiy ¥ [TO qydd aoo us6boizIN °30L % usboimpAy °30L & uogqie) °201 % D °6b20 °20L % °“4-€ STdeL wdd og udd tN wdd no wdd 239 wdd po udd sw udd uz udd qd wdd 6H a7eoT [dey ZO°> GT°O O9FTSE G9F802 VFLY LF¥GE v0°0+#SZ2°0 90°0F9T°O 80°0F99°0 ZT°OFEV'O TL°O+*06°T TE°OF98°T 9T°OFLL°O 70°OFE8°0O O€9TFOOOTZ OOZTFOE6FT L@FZ9 9FGS 6499 VIF6P --- 8° TFE°? ZCFOLT ZTF90T 9*S6 G¥29 G0°0F0Z2°0 82°0+6S°0 Wo ION aon (°aed °p3s) ueEeW 986t Aine ‘10eQUeD-E8HN 3e PeROeTTOO AusUTpes Jo stsATeue TeoTWAYD SCV £v 972°0 £9°0 S9°2 S6°0 OOEE? % 66 8L % 0°? 89T vOT 92°0 OO9ET % TS cS % 0° T> 6TT SS c6°0 *eTqeottdde ON --- *soTdues oyj Jo AsSoW AOJF YIWTT uoTWOSeAEp MOTeEg + OOS6T % 88 £9 % 0°T> 86T 76 6T°O "e109 JO AspuTewer = wo jz WOg *a109 Jo wo zg doqz = do] :590N *suOoTqOeS 91059 peuTquos jo stsATeue seTbuts *puesnoyy razed sq1ieg g wdd Lad Te3OL Cudd dod TeIOL Woyjoa aor Woqysoa aor Woysou aor re) 8972 662 6E2 wd eseely 8% ITO €v Lv 9€ add qoo €Z°0 S290 BRO ueborzzth “j0n & 9S°0 €L°O SE°O ueboipAy °30L 6T°2% G9°Z rT uogqiea “OL & 08°0 TL°O 28°0 fo) Olse{o) Cain & 00S9T 0066T OOLPT udd og % * * wdd ™N v9 z8 0S udd no S9 8S Te wdd 295 % *% % udd po O0°T O°T> 8°? wdd sw 60T SPT 06 udd uz 89 06 £9 wdd qd z79°0 EPO. BB°O udd 6H qd Af ajeot {dew (stseq jy6tTem Arp e uo suoTIeAQUSeDUOD) °B-€ STqeL c0°> £€£°O CL+ECV O6T+VCS €2+89 €T+0S S0°0+92°0 €0°0+L2°0 LT°O+EL°O cT°O+SL°0 cO°T+6L°C 82°O+TT°E ST°O+8T°T T2°OFTT'T O68C+O0E8SC OOET+HOEETC TV+OTT T2+O0CT CT+TL OT+69 S°T+8°8 €°€+6°E Vv+9TTS 674002 9EF6ET LT+SET TV°T+8T °C 8S°O+CL°T Woy sod aor (°Aed °p3s) UBEH 986t Aine ‘103UeD-WIVMYON 3e pe ROeTTOO AueWTpes Jo stsATeue TeotTueYD SEV LS c2°O vS*0 cv? 8T°T OOosTd % TOT 09 % L°9 est OTT T6°0 woyyod = aor woyyod aor woyyod aor 8TV ev 8c°0O 8L°0 LO‘Ee T6°0 OOLEZ? % ceut GL % 9°T 002 TV £0°T re) *aTqeottdd @ aor soo *soTdues ey} JO YSOW AOJ YIWTT uoTAOeAep MOTE +¥ LLE 9V TE°O 98°0 OL‘E ce°t OOELS *% OLT £8 * c°OT L8é O6T ST’? °9ef1090 JO AVpUTeWSA = *SUOTQRDIS E9E €Sv 8 OOT vc2°O 92°0 c9°O 6L°0O 6L°S VDE ce’, £0°T 00902 O00v8c ¥ * £6 cTtt SS S9 * * S°T S°6 v9OT Lo? TTT LTT 69°T Lv'T *(stseq qzyubtem AAIp e uo suoTZerAQUBDUOD) wo jz °9109 jo wo zg doy = d O6L cL oe°o 98°0 B87°E 80°T oosTtzd * vRT OL * 9°8 9ES cST vv °c? W 28105 peuTquios jo stsATeue eTbuts od OL :330N *puesnoyy zed sjieg g gudd Lad Te3OL wdd @dd TeIOL wd eseeIy ¥ [TO add aod ue6or31N Bien & ueboapAy °30L uoqied °j0L % D °b10 ‘°30L g wdd og wdd tN wdd no udd 29D wdd po udd sw udd uz udd qd wdd 6H aqeot Tdey °6-€ STqeL S6+L2T €+ST c0°O+LT°O 60°0+L9°0 v0°0+62°0 09¢+0669 69TF+CTT S°*0+0°¢ S9+LOT c+SC ST°O+SE°O WOT FOr v0*O QOL+ECT c+9T cZ°OFTE“O 99°OF8T°T V¢7°0O0+67°0O 0899+0707T cT+8C OT+S2 9°€+6°S €S+C6 6T+8V vO°0+T2°*O aor (°Aed °p3s) UREN 9861 AtTne ‘1e\UeD-N-HNLS 3& peROeTTOO juewTpes Jo stsATeue TeoTWEYD S9 6T OT*’> LT°O cL*O TE*O OTTL % ST 8T> * v°T £v 8c 92°0 OOvE? * SV Ov * O°TT Lot €L LT°O *aTqeottdde JON --- *soTdues oy JO AYSOW AOFJ YZIWTT uoTAOSIep MOTO +x SS eT OT’> 8T°O SL°O ce°O 0c99 * €T 8T> * 2G 96T cc €c°O "9109 JO AepuTewer = wo jWOoOg °9109 Jo wo zg doqz = do, :330N *SUOT}DES BION peuTquoS jo stsATeue seTbhuts *puesnoyy ited sqieg 4 udd ddd TeOL 69 Z9Z 69 ud& eseez5 § TTO VT €T 9T add qoo OT°> (ES (GOS uebor3th "1201 vT°O ST°O €2°0 usboiapAyH °30L LS°O vS°O 88°0 uoqied °*j0L 82°0 G2°O vt°0 D °6b20 °30L O0ccs O€cL OOSOT udd 34 % % * udd ™N ST LOE GZ wdd no 8T> 8T> 8T wdd 25D * * * wudd po O°e 9°? B°e udd sv GS £8 7S wudd uz 6c 92 TY? wudd qd 92°0 LS°O 0O2°O udd 6H Woyjoa aor woyjou aor Woqysod aor ro) W a 7eoT Tdey *(stseq qyubtem AATp e uo suoT erQUSsDUOD) °OT-€ SOTACeL VSF6C7% Z6FGES VFTE 9F6E €0°0F9T°O TO°O#TZ°0 GO°OF?T°0 TO°OFES°0 8£°OF68°T TO°OF0T°Z 60°0F2S°0 60°0+09°0 OSETFOEPVOT OO9TFOEZSET OTFES L¥2S GFEE VFSE Z°OFL°P v°OF8°? ZTFSOT 6FSI1T GFLS TT+¥89 90°0F62°0 Z0°OF8T°O Wostt0" aon (°Aed °p3s) uREeW 98s6t Aine ‘MOO?-N-HNLS 32 pe AdeTTOO Aueutpes jo stsATeue TeoTwWeYD ELT ve LT°O 97°0 vVo°? T9°O OO8LT % S9 Ov % c°s 9TT £9 8e°O LTT £Oe €e 8e T2°O 8T°O cS°O Lv°O OT’2 90°? 0s°*O TS°O OOv9T O0069T * * ev cS Of ce a * Cav. £°S LOT TTt LS 8S ST°O 92°0 CVE cd Lv 62 02°O €T°O 7S°0O 8e°O 60°2¢ 9E°T 89°0O €7°O OOE0Z OO9PTT * * 09 TV OV Le * * T°S T°? 8cT 68 £8 OS LT°O vc°O *aeTqeottdde ON --- *soTdues oy JO ZSOW AOJ YTWTT uoTAOejep MOTE x Woysoa aor Wossoa aor Wossoa aor re) "e109 JO ASpuTeWwer = wo jWOg °a109 Jo wo zg doq = doy, :a30N *SUOT}OD98S 89109 peuTquods jo stsATeue sTbuts *puesnoyy azed sjieg : gudd Lad TeIoL udd qdd TeIOL Lvz wd4 eseaIy ¥ TTO BE add doo TZ°0O usbor3th °20L % €S°0 ueboipAH °30L % ULES uoqize) °30L % £9°0 D °6b10 °30L % 0008T udd og * udd TN ZS wdd no 9€ wdd 19 * wdd po Z°G udd sw TIt wdd uz G9 udd qd EGLO udd 6H W a7eoT [dew *(stseq 3yubtem AAIp e uo suotzZerAQUeDUOD) °TT-€ S9TAVL B8OTTFP9ET v2v+079 T2#7S 9FS0 vO°OFE7°O TO°O#F8T°O OT °0¥99°0 €0°OFL7°O 96°OF7ZE°E VE°OF67°S TZ°0OF8L°0 GE°OFTEO O9LL¥060ST OLLF¥OLV9T GSFOPT 9€F78 €F6S 8F2P G°THE’?D G°0O+6°R 8ST TFL6Z2 LSGFOLT V8F6772 VS8F19OT 92° OFES°0 O0T°0492°0 Woi300 aoa (°aed °p3s) ueeN 986. Atnc ‘MOSGT-N-HNLS 3€ peROeTTOS Quewtpes jo stsATeue TeoTUSYo °e109 Jo AepuTewet = *eZ09 jo wo zg doq = *oTqeottdde ON --- *soTdues oyq JO 4SOW AOJ YIWTT UOTIOSASEpP MOTO +x wojz 70g dos 2320N *suoT}OesS e109 peuTquoos jo stsATeue eTbuts 2 9VL COE 0762 LEE 9cbv O22T 67 Gv 6L LE 82 cS 02°O 8sT°O Lz2°O LT°O c2°O 8T°O 8S°O0 Lv°O 8L°O v7°0O €9°O 0OS°O 88°C €0°? 99°y LO°? €v°? LL°2@ G9°O0 99°0 cO°T 90°0 89°0 --- OO68T OOPST O8cv OOCLT OoOoTZ? OO89T * *% * % % * VCeCT 6S T22 8S c6 GET 09 Ge T9 8E GS 0S % % * % * * v°?v 9° G°S 9°? T°? 9°S 8TE VET 6SV 9cT €st OSz 9E72 €TTt 8ZE 06 ect 6LZ2 LE°O 6T°O 68°0O0 6T°O cE°O OV°O Woyyou aor Woyjoa aor Woysod aor ro) | W *(stseq 3ubtem Amp e uo suoTjZerqQUeDUCD) *puesnoyj aed sqziedg Z wdd ueboz3tN T udd Lad Te30L udd @gdd Te3OL eseoirIy ¥ [TO add qoo “OL % usboipAH °30L uoqied "20L % > -b20 °30L ¢% °eéT-€ STL wdd wdd wdd wdd wdd wdd wdd udd wdd od ™ nod a5 po sv uz dd 6H aQeot [dew 6SC+8EL 9+LE CE °OFGE°?S O90T+OEVST ST+V6 L+0V L°T+6°E Oc+69T TV+69T 8T°O+0E°0O WOFFOr T2+002 V+OE OT°0+86°T OVL+0LSST V+L? CFSE T°OFL°V 6+60T L+78 9T°0+67°0O aor (°Aaed °p3s) uRreN 9SOT SY? 9T°O Lv°O 08°c £0°0 OOL9T * 9TT vS * L°? L6T 8T2 9S°0 WOT FOr *aTqeottdde jon --- *soTdues eyj JO 4YSOW AOJ YTWTT UOTAOSRZep MOTO, +x *9109 JO AepuTewer = wo jz WOg *9109 Jo wo Z doz = do, :a30N *SUOT}09S BIOS peuTquios jo stsATeue sTbhuts *puesnoyA azed sj1ieg g udd Lad TeIOL Cudd goa TeIOL 66T 9EL VLT ectv 972 ud@ eseez5 ¥ ITO ve O€ O€ 9€ GZ add qoo 8T°O vT°O 8T°O LEO) (O20 ue6o131 hh “OL % 97°0 Gv°O 8v°0 vv°O TS°0 ueboirpAH °20L % 98°T 6c TOs c LO°Z 86°T uoqzed °30L % LS°0 vv°O 2ZL°0 8v°O SS°0 D 620 *j0L ¢ OO6hT OOSST 00ZST OOTYT O0099T udd og * * * GE * wdd ™N vt? T8 eV 98 €S udd nd O€ BE BE OV 9€ udd 25 % * % % % udd po 8° Lae 9°% z°9 9°? udd sw GOT ZST OOT 8ST Ta CAle udd uz (Lf. ZLT z8 ATaG €6 udd qd Ge°0 9T°O 2L°0 6T°O Tv°O wdd 6H aor Wossod aor Wosson aor Fe) a W a 7eoT [dey *(stseq 2y6tem Aap e uo sUuOTAeAQUSeDUOD) 986 t AIne£ ‘FOOZ—N-HNLS 30 peQdeTTOO AYUSUTpes jo stsATeue TeoTWAEYD °eT—-€ STqeL TETFEOE ETFVTE Gt9V T+¥0S TO°OFTZ°0 TO°O+F7Z2Z°0 Z0°0+09°0 Z0°0#29°0 G0°0O+F02°Z 60°OF9E°Z 87°0+F8S°0 ET°OFCL°O OLEGFOZLIT OS9TFOEITZ LT¥29 ZT+09 ETFTE VFS? 0°2+6°S T°TFL°9 67FECT 6TF8IT GC+US €TFIL ZT°0O+F8S°0 €0°OFEV'O Wosts0d aon (°aed °p3s) uReN 9s6t Aine ‘HOO0v-N-HNLS 3& peqOeTTOO AueuTpes Jo stsATeue TeoTuUEYo OST G2 Tv°O *9109 JO AeputTeuselr = *el09 Jo wo z doj = doy *SUOT}OeS 9109 peuTquos jo stsA[Teue eTbuts TCe v6T SLE Lee Os LY 67 cS €2°O f2°O 8 ¥2°O TZ2°O c9°0 6S°O0 T9°0 09°0 cv? V2°S EDS €T°c 8S°0 S9°O 78°0O cO°T OOLEZ OOTZT OOE0Z O00E? * % * * S9 6€ cL 99 87 92 OV 87 % *% * *% c°8 9°L £°9 itn9 veT £8 6cT 9ET 6L TS T8 98 Lv°O T9°O €%°O TL°O *atTqeottdde JON --- *sorTdues oy JO YSOW AOJ YTWTT UOTIOSREp MOTE *¥ Woysod aor Woyqod aor Woysoa aor - (stseq re) @ qy6tem Arp e uo suot7ZerQUedDUOD) wo730g 2990N *puesnoyuy ated sqzied 2 gudd Lad TeIOL udd gdd TeIOL GEE wd eseeidy ¥ TTO TS add qoo 7z°0 uebo131N "OL % 79°0 ueboipAH °30L % v7°? uoqie) °30L % OL°O D °620 °30L % O06EZ udd o4 * udd tN VY wdd no LY wdd 239 % udd po G°S wudd sw To wdd uz Zs wdd qd 0v°0 udd 6H W aqeot [dew °PT-€ STqeL 8F6TE 084022 VFLE VF8E TO°0F22°0 v0°OFTZ°0O €0°OFLS°0 60°0FSS°0 €T°OFO7°Z 8T°0F072°Z 9Z°0FSS°0 G0 °0F8S°0 O9EFOOTES O68TFOESET VFL9 GFLS T+6V OF6E G°7#°S v°OFE'S TUFOVT TTF61T 6796 8FCL OT°OFT9°O 90°0F0S°0 Woy700 aon (°Aed °p3s) uReeN 008cz * 69 6? * v°6 cot 66 9S°0 *eTqeottdde jon --- *soTdues oyjy JO WSOW AOJ YIWIT uoTAOeAep Mote x T9Z2 OVE vv Le £€Z2°O €Z2°O LS°O 6S°0 82°C T2°? 09°0O Gv’°oO OOzcsT OO8Ez2 * * 9G TL 9€ TS * * 8°? B°L LOT CST £9 GOT Tv°o cS°O *e1059 JO ASputTewser = woj jog °9109 Jo wo zg doqz = do, :a30N *SUOT}D9S 81059 peuTquos jo stsATeue sTbuts *puesnoyuA aed sjieg g udd Ldqq TeIOL Cudd dod TeIOL woyyod aor woyyoR aor woyyod aor re) 60T 6SE T6z wd& eseei5 8 TTto ve Ze 9€ add qoo LEO ZZ°O z°0 ueboIzAIN °3OL % Gv°O vS°O 29°0 ueboipAH °20L L6°T vO°? Tr’? uoqied °230L T9°0 9€°O 72S°0 ©) 222fo) CSYenn & 00z8sT 00622 0072ZzZ udd og * * % udd IN cS co v9 wudd no €€ LY LY wdd 295 * * * udd po v°sS 2° L°S udd sw SIT G2eT €€T udd uz OL v8 78 udd ad 9S°0 vL°O 72S°0 udd 6y qd W a 7eoT [dey *(stseq qybtem Ap e uo suoT AerQUSeDUOD) 986T ATn£& ‘NOOZ-N-HNLS 3 peqdeTTOO AueUTpes jo stsATeue TeoTuEYD °“ST-€ 98T¢deL €02+002 L+8T €0°0+ST°O 02° 0+8L°0 90°0+72°0 O8ET+0L99 CT+EC L°O+L°T LT+SS VE+OP SZ°0+c26°0 WOFJOr c0°O+ET°O S0°0+0S°0 £0°0+S2°0 0S2+0989 T+ET Z°OFL*T 9+7V T+? f2° 04720 °O aor (°Aed °Pp3s) Uren 986 t Atnc ‘NOOT-N-HNLS 32 peqQoeTT[OO AUuseUTpses Jo stsATeue TeoTwsyo *atTqeottdde oN --- *soTdues oy JO YSOW AOJ FIWTIT uoT_AOS Rep MOTE x °e109 JO AspuTewer = wo jz WOg *9109 Jo wo Zz doq = do, :a30N *SUOT}OES 89109 peuTquods jo stsATeue eTbuts *puesnoyy aod s321ed & gudd Lad Te30L udd gdd TeIOL 69 ZL L8v 9G vv cv wdG eseeity ¥ ITO LT 6T LS 9T OT OT add qoo OT*’> OT’> OT°’> OT’> OT°> OT*’> uebor4tN “30L % LT°O ST°O El 418. 7(0) TT°O 72T°O ueboazpAy °30L % €8°0 9S°0 GOS SOGs0 97°0 vv°0 uoqie) °30L % LEI. CaO 8Z°O 82°0 8Z°O 72°0 =) oleeto) Caen & 0899 OSTL O9€8 0289 086% O0SS9 udd o4 * % * * * * udd IN GT vt OV Sit Gir TB1e udd no 8I> 8T> 8T> 8I> 8T> 8T> udd 149 * * % % * * udd po 8°T Taal BoE 6°T 6°T 1° % udd sw eV OS BL Tv vv GE udd uZ CC GZ 76 G2 Zet> Zc> udd qd G60 Zrs0 CA OS 09°O 79°0 udd 6H aqeot [dew *(stseq qybtem Aap e uo suoTZeAQUSDUOD) °9T-€ OTqeL *atTqeottTdde JON --- *soTdues oy JO JSOW AOFJ AYTWTT UuOTAOejep MOTE x °e109 JO AspuTewer = wojWOg °9l109 jo wo zg doqz = do, :e90N *SUOT}OES SAIOD peuTquos jo stsATeue sTbhuts *puesnoyuy zed s3zaed gf ----- gudd Lad Te 3OL ----- udd gdd TeI0L TCFSS 8TFSS 9S 9€ T8 6L 82 60 ud@ eseai5 8 TTO vFel ZFCU fae OT 1h? fh v1 rE TT add aos --- --- OPCS WES Ohi Ole OT°> OT°’> uaboz3tn Palen & 70°OFPT°O 70°OF9T°O 8T°O ST°O S1E°@) OG? OT°O €T°0 ueborzpAy °30L % 82 °0F68°0 OT°0F6S°0 96°0 LS°0 7S°O 22°0 6T°T 67°0 uoqie) °30L % €T°0F97°0 OT°OF6E°0O 6T°O O€°0 Ei2e® LEPO 8T°O 6¥7°0 2) “laeioy Savon & 08LF00S69 O9ZTFOLZL O8vL 09599 0S?9 O0£06 O8SS oOTz9 udd og --- --- * * * * * * udd TN --- GF9T OT> ST OT> Zz OT> ELE udd no --- --- 8T> 8T> 8T> 8T> 8T> 8T> wudd 149 — --- * % * * * * udd po 9°OFS°T BOSS LU EC@ OT €°Z 8°T (SOT OTE udd sw 8F9E 9FTP Cv 9€ 6€ 60 Gz BE udd uZ T¥E7 €Fve GZ Ze> ace 82 Zc> Ze> udd qq TO°OF0T°O TO°O+0T°O 60°0 60°0 ESO iro@ OT°O 60°0 udd 6y WOO aor Woz FO aor Woy FO aor WoO aor (°Aed °pq3s) uPeNW Fe) a W a37edT [dew *(stseq qzyubtem AAIp e uo suOTAerQUSeDUOD) 986t ATne ‘SOOT-N-HNLS 3 pe zOeTTOO Aueuwtpes jo stsATeue [TeoTweyd “°LT-€ EeTqeL 8TTFLSV €9FT722 Glenae GF9OE 70°O#ST°O GO°O#ST°O ZT°OFTV'O vT°0OF07°0O 82°OF79°T sae OSC GieaL: 70°0+6S°0 ET°OFLT°O OVVEFOLOOT OOGEFOLEFT 8F£9 9FGP CFEP LFTE 9°TFU°E 9°0+0°7 ETFEOT 8188 GT#99 TT+8S 7O°O#LT°O TE°OFGE°O WotJOg aon (°Aed °p3s) UREN 986t Atne ‘SOGZ-N-HNLS 328 peqOeTTOO AjUueUTpes jo stsATeue TeoTueYyD 8TS ve LT°O 0S*O Sib 7 15 SS*O oorst * €S 6€ % 0°S 60T cl TT°O VET T9S Cv cP 8T°O 8T°0O 0S°O 97°0O C8° c6°T 67°O £9°0O OO68T Ooog9sT * * €G cL 6€ oP * * G°? 0°S 90T 8cT OL T8 eT°O TZ2°0O °9f09 gO AgopuTewot = T62 £672 9€ TT 8T°O OT°O Lv°O 82°0O B8L°T 92°T 6S°0O 6S°0 OO9ST OOCcTT * * GV G9 ce UT * * 0°? 6°0 v6 el 09 GP €T°O 0z2°O *oTqeottTdde oN --- *soTdues oy} JO FSOW AOJ YTWTT UoTAOSeAep MOTE x °9I09 Jo wo zg doQq = woyyod 8 86aor woyyod aor woyyod aor ro) a *(stseq zyubtem AAp e uo suoTIeITAUSDUOD) wo 340g dol *SUOT}OE8S S105 peuTquods jo stsATeue sTbuts 2320N *puesnoyuy ated sqieg 3 gudd Lad Te3OL udd @dd TeIOL 6ET wd& eseeiIy ¥ [TO O€ add qos OT*> us6o13t Nh “JOS 72°0 uebhorpAH °30L % 76°0 uoqie) °30L % vE°O S) fast) °AGin & OOVOT udd og * wudd TN BE wdd no ZZ wdd 2d % udd po TG udd sw v9 wdd uz ev udd qd 6L°0 wdd 6H W a3eoT [dey °8T-€ SOTdUeL *aTqeottTdde jon --- *soTdues sy JO SOW AOJ YIWTT uotAOeAep MoTog + *9109 JO ASepuTewerT = wo jWOg °9109 jo wo z doqz = doL :e30N *SUOT}D8S 2105 peuTquiod jo stsATeue seTbuts *puesnoyy aed sj12eg g z0°> gudd Lad TeIOL 90°0O udd gdd TeIOL €GFT672 GOFCCE TE? ely O9€ G9z €8z 982 ud@ aseairy ¥ Ito OTFtP 9F2PV ve ve vs Lv --- vv add aoo TO°OFTZ°O 00°0FE7°0 VG) E2Z°O Ee°O BB°O U4Z°O S2°O usbo13th Pain & 70°0F9S°0 Z0°0F09°0 8S°O0 8S°0 TS°O 729°0 6S°O 6S°0 ueboapAy °30L % VO°OFLT°Z GO°OFTO°Z Boe Eee WO)? (SB °% O° Ferg uoqied °30L % --- OO BCONAE 06°0 S6°0 EBSO BOE vO°> 86°0 @) Slaete) Cain & OTV6FO0PET OTS#009PZ OTT9 OOPS 00SSZ O0ESZ 00992 OOTrZ udd og --- --- * *% * *% * ¥ udd TN GF0P TFOE ce LE cv cv VY LE udd no OTFVE TFLE 0z LE OV LS Tv 9€ wdd 25 --- --- * * * *% * * wdd po AG HOeLE Go a8 805 eOm9 v°S G°9 e°S 8°? 0°S 8°9 udd sy ZOFVIT VFOTT TOT vIt SIT lara ZOU SOT udd uz GFLL VFPL OL OL T8 ell. 08 08 udd qd Z0°OF0T°O COMO. O 60°O #T°0 ARP) OIE) 80°0 60°0 udd 6H Lohse Kod | aor Wosjod aor Woyyod aor wosjod aor A9q°p3s uevon Fe) a 4 a2 edT [dey *(stseq zyubtTemM Aap e uo suOTAeITQUeDUOD) 986t Aine ‘edueTeJOeY-SIID 3e pe_ZOeT[OO AueUtTpes Jo stsATeue TeoTWeYyd “*6T-E€ ETQRL Table 3-20. Results of Statistical Testing for Significant Differences Between Core Sections From The CLIS Mounds July 1986 Variable Ref FVP MOR CL-86 STS STN CS-1 CS-2 NH74 NH83 NOR Hg ns ns + ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns Pb ns ns + ns + - o ns ns + ns an ns + + ns + ns 2 ns ns + ns As ns ns ns ns ns 2 ns ns + ns ns cr ns ns ns + + ns ns ns ns ns ns Cu ns ns + ns + ns ns ns ns + ns Fe ns ns ns ns + - ns ns ns + ns FeeT OCC - + + ns + ns ns ns ns ns ns COD ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns 0il&Grease ns ns ns =f: ns ns ns ns ns + ns + = 2-10 cm core section is significantly greater than 0-2 cm section values, p < 0.05, Kruskal-Wallis, one-way analysis of variance. - = 2-10 cm core section is significantly less than 0-2 cm core section, p < 0.05. ns = no significant difference, p > 0.05. Table 3-21. Results of Statistical Testing for Significant Differences Between The Reference Station And CLIS Mounds, July 1986 0-2 cm Core Sections. Variable FVP MOR CL-86 STS CS-1 CS-2 NH74 NH83 NOR STN Hg + + + ns ns + + + + + Pb ns + + - + ns + - + ns zn ns + + ns ns ns + ns + ns As ns + ns ns - - - ns ns ns cr + + + ns ns ns = ns + ns Cu + + + ns + ns + + + ns Fe - + ns = = - - - - = % Tot. C ns + + - + ns ns ns + - COD ns + ns ns ns ns ns ns ns = 0il&Grease + + ns ns ns ns + ns ns - + = significantly greater than Reference values, p < 0.05, Kruskal-Wallis, one-way analysis of variance. - = significantly less than Reference, p < 0.05. ns = no Significant difference, p > 0.05. Table 3-22. Results of Statistical Testing for Significant Differences Between The Reference Station And CLIS Mounds, July 1986. 2-10 cm Core Sections Variable Hg + + + Pb + + + zn + + + As + + ns cr + + + Cu + + + Fe ns + ns % Tot. C + + + COD ns + ns Oil&Grease + + + + — ns significantly greater than Reference values, p Kruskal-Wallis, one-way analysis of variance. + + ns FVP MOR CL-86 STS CS=-1 CS=-2 NH74 +++ ++ 0+4++4 [em (ee) (a) =} oy &) ata tt i ttt 3 n significantly less than Reference, p < 0.05. no significant difference, p > 0.05. NOR STN + + + = + ns + — ns + ns ns ns + = ns ns + ns <10)059 Table 3-23. Results of Statistical Testing For Significant Differences Between Core Sections STNH-N Stations And The Center Station, July 1986 Variable 400W 150W 200EFE 400E 200N 100N 100S 250S Top Hg ns ns + + + ns 2 ns Pb ns + + ns ns - - ns Zan ns ns ns ns ns - = ns As ns ns ns ns ns - - ns Cr ns ns ns ns ns ns + ns Cu ns ns ns ns ns ns + ns Fe ns ns ns ns ns = ns ns % Tot. C ns ns ns + ns - ns ns COD + + + + + ns ns + 0il&Grease ns + ns + ns ns ns ns Bottom Hg ns ns ns ns ns + = = Pb + + + ns + ns ns + Zn ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns AS + + + + + ns ns ns cr + + + ns + bdl bd + Cu ns ns ns ns ns ns - ns Fe ns ns ns ns ns - ns ns trot. Cc ns ns ns + ns - ns ns CoD + + + + + ns ns + 0i1&Grease ns + ns + ns ns ns ns + = station value is significantly greater than center station, p < 0.05, Kruskal-Wallis, one-way analysis of variance. = significantly less than center station, p < 0.05. ns = no significant difference, p > 0.05. bdl= all samples below detection limit. Table 3-24. Results of Statistical Testing for Significant Differences Between Core Sections From the STNH-N Mound, July 1986 Variable CTR 400W 150W 200E 400E 200N 100N 100S 2505S Hg ns + ns ns ns ns ns ns ns Pb - ns ns + ns + ns ns ns gan ns ns ns + ns ns ns ns ns As - ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns Cr ns ns + ns ns ns bdl bdl ns Cu ns ns ns + ns ns ns = ns Fe = ns ns ns ns + ns ns ns % Tot. C ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns COD ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns 0il&Grease ns ns ns + ns ns ns ns + + = 2-10 cm core section is significantly greater than 0-2 cm section, p < 0.05, Kruskal-Wallis, one-way analysis of variance. significantly less than 0-2 cm section, p < 0.05. no significant difference, p > 0.05. all samples below detection limit. 3 Q tou tl GS v8 0S v8 OS 89 89 9S GL 8S cL 8S cE 972 8P 62 * + T? * 99 8S Cv Cv 90T 90T 09 vv €8 CL €6 el 6L OL wdd udd nod qo OST OvTt OVT OLT O9T O9T SL OLT £9 87 O9T OST 9EE OLT STE T62 86T wdd uZ udd dd "eTqeottddy ION --- *QIWIT uoTQOSeAep wNUTUTU MOTeEg % Sey 5) VLE d LU°v W-dau Ol’? 5) Oz°E dq OL°E W-H00% O° 5) OGar q --- W-4%00Z 0S°0 fe) 0v°0 dq 08°0 W-uLO 08°T 5) BBR q 06°T W-MOST QL°E 5) OLE d 86°E W-MOOP Gan UuoT}BD0T SPTTOS TOA % zg61 Atenuer ut punoW N-HNLS UR 3e pe_ZoeTTOD QUSeUTpes Jo sTsATeuy TeoTWeYyD -eGz—-c eTqeL wdd wdd OST OvVT Ort 96 OO€ 6€7¢ S9E 992 902 £9 87 O9T S9T Be OTT VOT 80€ cST wdd uZ 9S 89 87 ST v6 ve vv T8 BE wdd dd *aTqeottdde oN --- “QIUTT UOTIOSZSEp wWNUTUTU MOTEg ST°? VL°E LT°? 6S°c Oe*? LS°*Z 69°E 60°C cO°? os*o 07°o 08°O LO°T 0Ss*O 0Ss*O GSL°? vS°e cO*Ee dun SPTTOS TOA % % W-NOOZ uoT}eDOT *ponutqUuoD eGz-£ eTqeL *aTqeottdde Jon --- “3TWTT UOTIOSIEp MOTE * *puesnoyy aed sjz1eg T TTFOCT LTT OTT ZET udd eseery ¥ [TO G°€F6°ST Goon v°vt 6°6T add qoo --- --- --- --- uebor3th “2OL ¢ G0°0OFST°O Ee 0 €T°O ZiEa0 usboipAy *30L & TZ°0F99°0 06°0 TS°0 8S°0 uoqie) °j0L & O60TF0P8S OVOL 096S OT6?P udd a4 LFVE 62 O€ ZP wdd TN VFLT ue 9T vI udd no --- Zz * * udd 25 --- % fh % udd po Z°OF8°T O°z2 Aor SE udd sw 9EFLL LTT 87 99 udd uz VIFEV LE ve 6S udd ad --- Ie 2) * 6z2°0 udd 6H (*‘Aed *p3s) ueeW Fe) a W ajeottdey UaALNAO-N-HNLS (stseq jybtem Arp e uo suotjearQUeDUOD) 786T tequieqdes ‘N-HNLS 32e pe AdeTTOO QueUTpes jo stsATeue Teotweyd °qgz—€ eTqeL 8+0EE B°CHE°CE 70°0+2T°O c0°O+TE°O GE°O+FCL°T OTSE+OCECT L+8E vT+0? VT+8e €°O+0°E T2+S8T 90°0+ST°O (aed °py3s) ueeW a002-N-HNLS *aTqeottdde ON --- *3TWTT UOTIOSeREp MOTE + *puesnoyy zed sjied I udd eseei5y ¥ [TO add aod uebor3zth *30L % usborpAH °20L uoqied °30L % udd oW wdd tN wudd no wdd iD udd po udd sv udd uz wudd qd wudd 6H a3eoT [dey *penutquoo qsz-e€ STqeL CLF9CD 8°S+2°8S vc2°O c0°0+729°0 vU°O+0d°? 9COTFOLVETS c+0S 9+79 €+L9 €°O+E°V C9FCT?S SE+LL OT*°0+02°O (°Aed °p3s) ueeN 4000-N-HNLS *atqeottdde Ion --- “ATWTT UOTIOSIEP MOTO * *puesnoyy azed sqzieg I wdd eseeI5 ¥ [TO add qoo ue6boz3tN Daven h 6 ueboapAy °30] & uoqaed °30L % wudd og udd tN wdd no wdd 25 udd po udd sw udd uz udd qd udd 6H a3edoT [dey *poenutquos qsz-€ STqeL Table 3-26. Results of Statistical Testing for Significant Differences Between Core Sections From The STNH-N Mound In July 1986 And Grabs From January 1982 and September 1984. Variable CTR 400W 150W 200K 400E 200N 100N 1100S 2505S January 1982 Top Pb ns ns ns = ns - ns + ns zn ns + ns ns + + ns + ns cr ns + ns - + ns bdl bdl ns Cu ns + ns ns ns ns ns + ns Bottom Pb ns ns ns = ns - ns + ns zn ns + ns ns + ns ns + ns (Gig ns + ns - + ns bdl bdl ns Cu ns + ns - ns ns ns + ns September 1984 Top Hg ns - - Pb ns ns ns zn ns + + As = - - cr ns ns + Cu ns ns ns Fe - ns ns % Tot. C ns ns ns COD ns ns + 0il&Grease ns + ns Bottom Hg = ns - Pb + - ns zn ns ns + As ns ns - cr ns ns + Cu ns - ns Fe ns ns + % Tot. C ns ns 3 COD ns ns + 0il&Grease ns - ns + = value is significantly greater than 1986 core section, p < 0.05, Kruskal-Wallis, one-way analysis of variance. - = value is significantly less than 1986 core section, p < 0.05, Kruskal-Wallis, one-way analysis of variance. = no significant difference, p > 0.05. bdl= all samples below detection limit. Table 3-27. Station CLIS-86-1 CLIS-86-2 CLIS-86-3 CLIS-86-4 CLIS-86-5 FVP-1 FVP-2 FVP-3 FVP-4 FVP-5 STNH-N-1 STNH-N-2 STNH-N-3 STNH-N-4 STNH-N-5 MQR-1 MQR-2 MQR-3 MQR-4 MQR-5 NH-74-1 NH-74-2 NH-74-3 NH-74-4 NH-74-5 NH-83-1 NH-83-2 NH-83-3 NH-83-4 NH-83-5 Visual Descriptions Of Biological Sediment Samples Collected At CLIS, July 1986 Description 1-2 cm redox layer over black, oily, gelatinous silty-gravel with shell hash underneath Same as above Same as above Same as above Same as above 1-2 cm oxidized layer over black sandy silt with petroleum odor. Similar to above but more sandy and colonized by hermit crabs and tube worms. Same as FVP-2 Same as FVP-2 Same as FVP-1 Silt/clay with fine sand on top, dense worm tube assemblage, sand throughout Same as above Same as above Same as above Same as above Highly reduced silt/clay layer with strong H,S odor, high water content Same as above Same as above Same as above Same as above 5 cm layer of silty clay over medium sand, well developed redox, strong smell of H,S 6-7 cm layer of silty clay over black sand 1 cm redox over 4-5 cm black sandy silt over shell hash,numerous hydroids 1 cm oxidized layer over black gelatinous silt Same as NH-74-4 thin (1 cm) redox, over cohesive black silty sand, well colonized with worm tubes Same as above Same as above Same as above Same as above Table 3-27 NOR-1 NOR-2 NOR-3 NOR-4 NOR-5 STNH-S-1 STNH-S-2 STNH-S-3 STNH-S-4 STNH-S-5 CS-1-1 CS-1-2 CS-1-3 cS-1-4 CSSl—5 CS-2-1 CS-2-2 CS-2-3 CS-2-4 CS-2-5 Reference-1 continued. 1 cm oxidized layer over 5 cm black silty DM overlying gray clay 2 cm redox layer over 1 cm black silty DM over gray clay 1 cm oxidized layer over 3-4 cm black silty DM over gray clay Same as NOR-3 Less than 1 cm oxidized layer over gray shelly sandy clay 1 cm redox layer with shell hash over gray and black sandy cohesive silt, H,S odor 1-2 cm redox layer over 4-5 cm gray black sandy silt overlying silty shelly sand, H,S odor Same as STNH-S-1 Silty sand, high water content, no clumps, shell hash, some worm tubes 3 cm silty layer with shell hash over mix of gray clay, cohesive dry black silt, few worm tubes 2 cm redox over mix of gray/black silt with clay clasts, worm tubes, mild H,S odor Same as above Same as above Same as above Same as above except at 5-6 cm depth is shell hash layer 5 cm redox layer of watery sand over soft clayey silt, worm tubes, gastropods Same as above with numerous worm tubes Same as CS-2-1 but more sandy Same as CS-2-3 Same as CS-2-4 but more sandy 2 cm oxidized layer over gray cohesive silt, well colonized with worm tubes, shell hash Reference-2 Reference-3 Reference-4 Reference-5 Same Same Same Same as above as above as above as above NA tS ce eT T?2 €e€ € c TOT 02 T GFONGAT Ada ec 8c abo dAd £8 c YL ¢= (0) snueotiasue STsdadooyquertss) Bbhuo, Steareuo ,tagq eepTITeqeay ByeISTAo CUUTION eyeTNSO SeptTreqesv BotTqoAe Sjoreyduy Sept zerzaeyduy eqoeeyodATodg *dds ezSeyOoHT LO VOLTTAUNNWY Tquoiys WOT lTOoseud WINONNdIS TaoTTonm Stuoio0ud VdOINOWOHd "ds BTecooyoAud Snptontted snuertnqny -ds CANoTW SnezoeT SnTnyerqerzs) WIHOOOHONAHY °ds SHHLNAWITHALWId WIUVGINSD Sdlodds 9861 Arne ‘eqTS Tesodstq punos pueTs]I HuoT [TerzqueD AV PeReTTOD setdues zoq stsATeuy AQAtunuwod OTYQUEg °S8c-€ STAeL Z 02 TV VS TS v v 02 TV 8 Sc 8T 0c CSC BSE v t abo N-HNLS €T 6T cVT 97 LL TL T L TT e T e e T e e e T eT ST TT VE 0¢ 9 € c T FONDA AT Oh €LZ OV €TT S6T 802 09 ve S T 6€ LT (3 c aLo Yon SE SNje[Noo SnaojdoOjJoeyooTdsS STWAOJTSNJ CTUSMO SepTTUSMO BStout SAUCEN eeptAjyden St[euoz SuowApTong e}ebuOTS STUOASY SepTuepTeN Sedtabtu SouINn Stnuey Staourtaquny aepTtrAsuTAquNT Banosqo SyxaAepod eepTUuoTseH ePURDTASULS CASOATS SePTAZSDATD StuTjje CSnASUd septzehtTleqeta eyeAATOOHUOT SANSSOD Snqgnoe XATeCUL Sept [N_zerAATO aeptireqdoyeryp eZosTque snqzSeuwotpoW eeptTTeqtdes Sadlodds *penutTquoo ez-€ eTqeL . c T 98 TOT LOT c : s ce 8T OT cL 9E OL : % : v e 8 e e e e e e e P G x E T OSE 92ET SSCT 3 5 s 8c vt S ‘ z 5 Ocv 96% SLS e e e e e CZ 99 98 OV & 5 2 8 02 OT 2 . : v £ c (3 c T aLo FONAAAATa N-HNLS oT OT OT euenyarouw AeqTd seprtmzsuspn Bjueq Cuooen ST[rbe eCurTroL SePTUTTTIOL Sniqooatp Stsuq eeptuetos BuetTp[nob eiopued Sept rAopueg BjetTnuue CpLNonNn SePT TNONN BTNJeUTT STPLOA osepTtueTNonn Stleaoje, SruriTON SepTzAqoeH euTTeAY CTSUOAT SsepTTSuoAT PSaeAsSueAQ CAepeuy sepTtol1y WOSNTION SNTWIxS SnaatToOATOd Csnpew VTWroyT eepT IT TeqeszoeL Sadlodds *penutquod sc-€ 9TdeL OV 02 8T VT eT 6T cv TT I . ° c 8 E 5 t . T e e Te 92 6T FONDA Ada ec xAqUOg Soueydotds Tdnzjzsuee7;s OTdsouorid STTETOOS eAOpATOd TUBTT PAOpALOd septuotds eyNuUTW SO[OUd SeepTuoTTebTs BWpTeyjyyadototm eLloqes eeptiteqes StaeblnNA Btaelploqes eeprTaetteqes eBjyenue_Xe Soy AoureH eeptoudTog eeuede SDOpoOT [AUd eyesuTT Iq erTeinga eeptoopoT TAud POTpuel[USOIb STTTASOI4STOUY BqeTNoOe US eCaquiebts eepTbaettd TIptnob BTaAeutTjood SePTTAeUTIDeEd Stlttoeab Stuoeired TrsAeaszgol Coprotay eeptTuoeiegd Sadlodds *poenutqzuoo se-e€ STdeL O€ OT v VE €T €¢ 8 ST z S S ct € c abo N-HNLS NN € a c c S ‘ L - € € ° €T SC T T c T GFONGHH Aa 6T TUQ TUS ST [LAZSOANAXO eept TAqseta e90eUND Stnbutd snitoyoojdey eeptjoud BeyeACAAT eSTOtToOUun sept tydo109 -dds eosT Teduy SePTOST Teduy ePoptTzeuuey epodtyuduy eyqueoeADeM PT Totuosutuyoqny eptazeooTeydsas eooeqsnio VWd0d0OuH LY YW erwozSopo eydnazsequT eT Truoqany Sept TTeptwuerzAg SnNqeqqtATaAy SNTAesseN Sept TzAesseNn snjzetaqzsojound uos joy ByETHOTTeues BUPOOSAOW etTyoueraqoyystdo epodoiz3sey SdIodds *penutTquos sc2-€ eTdeL 87 Sc cL cS OV 6L 06 ev L6 B8LZE CVEV TVLY 9EVE OVI 6726P € 4 L £ c L L726 QL6T 886T Tec Bee OCE O9¢CT ELS 622 92 Le 92 T 8 9 £ c T HONG Aaa 02 L 9 eC L 8 ce 6T £€ O€T SS SBP GOC €c9 ¥E9 6c 02 T? . . Zz Zz ° . £ v T abo dAd *peqzeiedes useq eAey epodtyduy jeyj 230N + T 4 T 4 4 c OT TT L cect 89 87 LvT 68 v9 eT €T ST T e e € c T abo Yow epodtyduy % eooeqsnio eOSNT ION ejqeeyoATod STENPTATpUT AequNU TeIOL setoeds jo zequnu [eRIOL TIysMo[TeMOyY SNSSOTHODDeS eQZeprOYoOTUSEH °ds BxTUuUTd oepTtrAsyjoUuUTd Sndaeotbuo, snanbed oeptanbed Stutgge etqebodn BotTquetqje eSSeUPTTI[eD PepTUTSSeTeEUL earnuouy SadIodds *penutquos 8sz-€ eTqeL OST 92 760°0 0098 96 €T G°T 98°0 T 98-SII9 G Z°0 90°0 96 € z°0 L0°0 Z ais L8T G°6 TEE 20) OZL O€ O°T G6°0 8T ueon Ost (aon econo Occm oc Cieale G80 ST € Yon O6T L°6 LT°0 OSL TE S18 O°T 02 Z YON O6T Z°6 €T°O 06S ZE 69°0 (°F GT T YON Are v°0O 70°O BET € 08°0 G0°O G°O aLs¥t GLT v°8 8T°O GTS Lv 6r°T T6°0 6T ueon 09T 6°L cco 089° Sr OV'c 96°0 6L € dAd O8T L°s ST°O OS? TS 06°0 G8°O 8T @ dAd O6T 8°s Er0 OSE GY LS°0 98°0 8T T dAd 6T Zz°0 OT°O TST Zz 70°O IT°0 L0°0 aLst Lae v°T 0z°0 LvV x4 LS°O 80°T TL°O ueoW Orc oT CACO) 099 oc €S°0 ONZE 9L°0 € N-HNLS 002 Cea Ge°0 OVE ae GS°0 76°0 GL°0O @ N-HNLS Ore vt vT°O OVE Gz z9°0O OZ°T T9°0 T N-HNLS 6 €£°0 L0°0 8S @ v0°O Z2°O € ais LLT 9°€ 9T°0 €99 6T vz°0 L8°0 €Z ueoy OZT Cee Geo 009 ST. 0c°0 8S°0 6L € soUeTEeTOYy O6T B°Ee S80°0 OVL TZ O£°0 Eett €Z @ VoUerTSTFOY OLT B°E€ ST°O 0S9 (ye Zz2°0 Z6°0O 92 T sduerezoy uz qd DH oa iste) ap Po sv uoTzeAS qu6tem Arp 6/bn ut uotzerQUaduO0D 986T 3Ssnbny ‘SITIO IW peqoeTTOD SARZUGEN Jo senssty Apog uI sTeqeW eDeAL *6z-€ ETAeL *otTqeottdde ION = --- O€ aS Z0°O 069T 6T 9°? S°O LT°0 T 98-SII9 € T°O --- 9T 8°0 70°O Z0°O Onal aLs¥ Ze 9°T --- SIT T°S LT°0 LT°O 9°2 uesyl 6c Onl 800°> GTL Cy 6L’O VL-O oT € UOW ve Lee Z0°O GET 9°S z°0O 8T°O 9°€ Z YON SE 9°T Z0°O €OT 9°S 1s °(0) 8T°O 9°2 T Yon € £°O T0°0 GZ 6°0 vT°O OLO z°O aLSF¥ 92 (POT Z0°O VL Gals 61T°O Gia, Sine ues Sic Cre €0°0 66 O°L GeO VL°O ‘Sine: € dAd 62 7°18 Z0°O ZL z°8 EO vI°0 6°2 @ dAd EG COU Z0°O OS v°9 80°0 CEO 9° T dAd v S(0) 2.0) Z0°O 872 v°O EOL €0°0 TO°O aLsF¥ GE EZ SO) GOO L9 BOCs 60°0O LEO EEC O ueoW (ES vc-°O 70°O TOT O°? 80°0 [EEO BLO € N-HNLS O€ 8T°O GO°O TS SOE 80°0O vT°O EEO @ N-HNLS BE Gau0 ZO °O vs O°? iO 61T°O OoT°O T N-HNLS € LOO Z0°O LG G°0 O° S0°O 9°0 aLs¥ 82 9S°0 Z0°O GOT 6°? 70°O vL°O 9°€ ueoW 9c 6v°0 70°0O T6 Ew €0°0 60°0 6°c € soUerTSTOY CE €9°0 TO°O vet Gis SO0°O 8T°O B°e Z BousrSzoy 92 8S°0 Z0°O 66 9°Z €0°O vI°O 0) °4i7 T soueteyou uz qd BH oa nd Sie) jo) sv uUoTIeIS qubTem Qem H/bhbn ut uoTtzerAQUSsDUOD 9861 ysnbny ‘SITIO 3W peqOeTIOD SARZYGEN Jo SeNnsstL Kpog UI STeOW SOePAL “OE-E€ STAPL Table 3-31. PCB'S In Body Tissues Of Nephtys Collected At CLIS, August 1986 (Concentrations as ppb’) Dry Wet STATION We ight We ight Reference 1 <380 <58 Reference 2 <490 <82 Reference 3 <480 <73 STNH-N 1 <340 <54 STNH-N 2 <260 <39 STNH-N 3 <340 <52 FVP 1 <770 <109 FVP 2 <580 <93 FVP 3 <330 <48 MOR 1 <270 <47 MOR 2 <440 <79 MOR 3 <380 <61 CLIS-86 1 <290 <57 ' _ petection limits as Aroclor 1254. No other PCB mixtures were detected. Table 3-32. Results of Statistical Testing For Significant Differences In Chemical Concentrations In Nephtys incisa Collected At CLIS, July 1986 Variable STNH-N FVP MOR As = ns ns Cd ns ns ns Cr + + + Cu + + + Fe ns ns ns Hg ns ns ns Pb = + + zn + ns ns + = concentrations significantly higher than Reference animals, p < 0.05, Kruskal-Wallis, one-way analysis of variance. - = concentrations significantly less than Reference animals, p < 0.05. ns = no significant difference, p > 0.05. Table 4-1. Summary Organism - Sediment Index Ranking CLIS Disposal Mounds, 1986 Area Stations N XOSI St. Dev. Min. CLIS-REF Ambient 20 9.58 ike 7/at 3 STNH-N Mound 12 9.50 1.78 5 Edge and Ambient 5 9.40 0.89 8 GHOST=-1 Ambient 48 So dbs) 1.90 5 FVP Mound 34 9.00 2.28 4 Edge and Ambient 26 9.23 245 3 GHOST-2 Ambient 48 8.96 1.89 6 CAP-2 Mound 9 8.56 2.35 6 Edge and Ambient 8 9.50 1.69 i) STNH-S Mound” , ne 7.79 233 bat Edge and Ambient 3 7.00 2.00 5 CAP-1 Mound 16 7.75 2.08 5 Edge and Ambient 1 11.00 --- == NORWALK Mound 9 7.56 2.88 3 Edge and Ambient 8 8.63 2.39 4 NH7 4 Mound 16 7.38 3.50 4 Edge and Ambient a 11.00 --- == CLIS86 Mound™ 14 729 2.64 4 Edge and Ambient 3 8533} 2.08 7 NH83 Mound 14 5.86 67S 4 Edge and Ambient 2 9.50 ho Le 8 MQR Mound™ 45 5.58 2.59 -3 Edge and Ambient 3 7.67 2c Sal 3 Max. Significantly different from the CLIS Reference Station (Kruskal-Wallis Test P< 0.05). Not Applicable. *peqizodez enjtea suo ATuoO x *SUOTReEQS 9S0eUR 3e AOJ poeqjseq jou AsQjowezreq --- -udd ut peqrzodez suotjeaAA4UsoUOD TTY *uogqrze) TeIOL % *(wo7-0) ‘AHY-SIIO JO AQZTUTOTA 9YR UT SUOTRZeRS SeTYUR WOAJ Ssohuey “*(LL6ET) *Te We heTtay L *(WOZT-O0) woryJ ote SoTdwes [TW ‘“eIeP PSEGT-E86T WOAF usYeQ oAe SeNTeA D°I0L % Jejep 2 G86L WOAJ UsYeQR ore saebuelI uoTRAeAQUSeDUOD gdd pue Te jow zeUR S €G°E€-60°T 8f°?C-£0°C BSS 6T°€-68°T €2°C-v6°T G8°€-6T°O io +0L *¥Z°O Ree mS Seo LS°0-8T°O 7T°O-80°0 GT°?7-cT°O 6H LT-€T GE-?I VC-TC SSS 9€-8¢> 8c> TL-82> TN *¥€°T> T°8-GS°O Zf°O-T°O POD V-€> €> G-€> po ¥L7T OLE-€G 8S-07 SOS 997-97 Tv-02 c8T-8T> © 59) 98-79 9GL-26 c9-97 96-TE 62S-29 VV-EE VIG-E€T> no OVT-8TIT SG8E-88 O9T-VET O6T-90T cCLZ2-VOT ZTZT-TOT VVL-ET uz OS-?77 vOT-82d CSG-S7P CSG-TC €9T-89 T8-OL CLE-T? dd ddud=-SITO dAd ddd=-SITO ddad=-SITO dAd VoUusA9 FON spunoW SITIO ght e259 gsuunn gsuunn probuTuueg §ats tesodstq pueTsI HuoyT Tearzqusd *punos pue[Ts]I huoyT ut senteA peqrodey AeyAO0 YATM eATS Tesodstad pue[s]I buoy Ter4ueD eyA woAF suoTAZeAQUeDUOD TeOTWSEYD JUSUTpes Jo uosTAeduoD °7Z-F STqeL Table 4-3. Comparison Of REMOTS, And Benthic Summary Parameters Average Average Average OsI Species Log- AREA Value Richness Abundance CLIS Reference 9.55 35 33.5 Sal, Station STNH-N 9.50 42 3.63 FVP 9.00 37 2.68 MQR 5.58 20 2.00 + 4 ial ‘piamme oidnet bed STONaTs, eee a > > a oe éepcnee iss oe “Ses wrTy su qusalteg terey ier geyer = Sih aade ator 3 sea (net =3): SaESaee = egi~ = Lats sala Es i, € © eee are wye - .Seeareee BAS Soar, 4 “ - oat ty 24085 O74 > gv iny aoe stiovacf uses “suoT}eTABAQGGe ABYy_O JO uoTIeULeTdxe Toy 3X9 9eS “pzeny yseod sn Aq pezojtTuow Aonq sqdefoad [etoads jo uoT zeDOT = dS °93TS Tesodstp (SIID) punos pue{[s][ buoy [TerzqueD eyA Ae seueT AsAANS °T=-T eanbty 7 MOOS FS 220 MOOG eS cZ0 MOOS’ ¢S eZ0 nooo'te-2v0 NOOS 80 tr NO00°60 TP — fos 60 Wv la alll | , MOOS tS 220 Mo00°eS e240 MOOS eS ¢Z0 MOOO'ES ¢Z0 MOOS ES ¢Z0 M000°¥S ¢cZ0 | | | — | | | “9set Atne ‘SITIO Jo (w) AaeYD AnoQUOD oTazQeWAYReg *“T-€ eanbty M00S" +S 220 H000°¢eS e240 M000°ES 220 sua}aK OSL 00S N000°60 tr Sislob ok WP sl MOOS" 1S ¢Z0 M000°eS ¢Z0 HO0S"cS ¢Z0 M000°ES cZ20 MOOS "ES cZ0 *sset Atnge ‘SIId Jo (uw) Zaeys Anojuod oTAQeuAyWeg *Z-€ eanbty €8/8 YSLSVW SI lJ N@BS “eS 21 M@ZB ES ¢10 M@ZS ES 210 M@20 PS cZB is ei latent a Aa “peqeotput o27e SOOT pue NOO? “HOOZ ‘MOOT SuUOTIeIS eSLOWAUY JO SuOoT AeSOT SUL °9get ATne ‘punow Tesodstp 9g-SIID Meu ayy Jo (Ww) Arey AnoAUOD dTAZewAYAeYg °€-€ sanbhty MO0G"ES 20 M009°ES ¢0 MOOL*ES cL0 MOOB"ES cZ0 MO06°ES ¢Z0 H000°¥S 220 suajay | 00} 0s 0 SS Sie FER | = nooe:b0 Iv Noo8=o. W Nooe- fo W : | Nae Nove. Ww Bs Nooo W ef) + ee Aeon OS HOOS’ES 220 HO09"ES 2/0 MOOL"EG 220 Mooa'eS 220 NOOB “ES 220 | L i | | al | SENS as OTTZowAYAeq uoTsToOeIrd 9g6t Ane pue gg6t 3snbny 9yy JO uOSTAeduUOD uO peseq ‘punow [esodstp 9g-SIID meu syA jo (uw) 3areYo ANnoAUOD soUueAZTJIJTp yyAdeG °y-€ sANnbTy | | / KOOS ES 220 003" €S' 240 MOOL"ES el0 M008 ES ¢cZ0 M006°ES eZ0 H000°vS eZ0 5 (N° uv i ; §uajay | ; ° i} 00} 0S 0 — : = SS ee EEE) © Nooe-b0 W No0e=fio W NooE: 0 Wy Nook=bo W : ro Cpt Oxo), ae S110 MOOS "ES e220 M009°ES eZ0 MOOZ ES HOO8 "ES ¢e20 K006° cL0 *9set Atne ‘dAd JO (uw) AZaeYO AnoQuOD oTAaQeUkyAQeg °G-¢€ eanbtg [he ee ee MOOP "TS e240 MOOS "TS cZ0 MO09°TS cZ0 MOOL"T F M008 "TS 220 ee NOO= 40-17 -{_ ate | i Noor=#0-T |- -|-- ir Noos-4o-1p al. | x 966) AINE dAs 4 MOOL*TS ¢Z0 MOOB TS ¢Z0 °986T ATnec ‘N-HNLS JO (W) QaeYyd aAnoQUuOD oTzQeUXAYQeg °9-€ eAnbTy eee OOHRS 20 M006 eS cL0 MOOM’ ES eZ0 lit ae iL N0Q4-60 Tr JBH) AIA N-HNIES M006 °eS ¢Z6 MOOL°cS 220 cL0 °986T ATneC ‘S-HNLS JO (Ww) AaeyD AnoQUOD OTAZeuUAYAeYg *L-€ BAanbTtgy i | een, eae ene te MOOS "eS 2/0 M009°eS 20 MOOL"eS 220 MO0B"eS 220 M006 "eS 220 “~~ M009 eS ¢cZ0 MOOZ LS eZ0 ee *986t Atne ‘T aQts ded Jo (wm) AAeYD ANOQUOD oTAAZeUAYAeg *8-€ eanbtg oll Fee oe eee MOOT pS 220 NO02'bS eZ0 MOOE"PS e220 See MOO "ES eZ0 M000°bS cZ0 SS Pappa —— e 6} —— “| NOOT "60 tr + NO02'60 Tr "9se6t Aine ‘2 e4TS ded Jo (w) Qazeyo anoqQuOod oTAjZeuUAYQeEgG °6-€ sanbTgy ie is (gee Pesos ee a a a aE ee HOURS el ~ moe ts 2x0 veal b rane 20 Bs | 0 suajay ooz___osh___00r___—0g eile : | ah NOOE’60 TP -|- -1- NOOP’60 Th aE -1 NOOS’60 TP ee eee re ee a a a ————————————— "986T Atnc ‘YOW JO (Ww) QaeYyo ANnoQUOD oTAQeUAYAeg °OT-€ sanhty ap woorts ST me 2x0 worteen =n eu NOOS"80 Tr NOOS 80 tr oO NOO9'80 th -|- NOO9'80 tr ANG g NOOL'80 Tr a 00°02 MOOZ ES eZ0 M008’ ES 220 M006°ES e240 M000 PS e240 nh tn i cs teat lc °98et ATnc ‘WIVMYUON JO (W) JZaeYO AnoQUODS oTAQoUAYQeg *TI-€ eanbty PS pe | SSS a | [ od2'ES 20 HOE ES 220 NOOw-eS 20 HO0S"ES 220 HOUS-ES-220 MOOL’ES 220 00°02 002 St aL + -|- iS a -|- No08 80 SL 6h NOO6 "80 Tr 0S 6; lL Ge 6h - <= #6 Moor "ES 2/0 MOOS "ES 0 Moog 'eS 220 [ee eb NOOT 60 TY -|- Node "ES 220 MOOE£S 20 "986 T ATne ’€8-AVHN JO (Ww) RaeYD AnoQUOD oTzAeEUWAYRQLg °tT-€ eanbta = = a ae ares aes Ears SoS See ag is aan ee Sees Ty el es A | ] | I MOOT ES 220 M00e ES 220 MOOE ES e240 MOOb ES ¢cL0 MOOS ES ¢eZ0 M009 ES eL0 suaqay 00¢ OST 00} 0S 0 es oes EEEEEEEE pe w|- MOOS ES ¢Z0 0002 py W )08°80 Ty 006°80 Vy 00°02 Figure 3-45. Frequency distributions of mean apparent RPD depths at CS-1 and CS-2 in July 1986. "wd € ULPYQ SSeT AO 0A Tenbe syAdep ddu QuUeAedde uesw HuTAeY SUOTRIERIS OReOTPUT SOUTT poYysep Ao/pue pTToOsS "986 t Atne ut punow Tesodstp T[-sod ey 3e syuqdep addy AUuerAedde uesew Jo uoTAnqTAASTp poeddew sy “eOPp—E€ oANnhbty MOSL'ES 220 M00S PS e240 al -|- $009 +. S002 MS002 v Vv 09'h Os" -|- NCOG'60 Tb : Vedat oii) MOOS bS ¢eZ0 ce | ae |e MGSZ ES e240 HhuTAeyY SUOTRZERS SReOTpPUT SSUTT peYysep AO/pue pT Tos NOS/ 60 ef “wo € UBYUA SseT Ao of Tenbe syuaAdSeP dau AueaAedde uesu -986t ATnc ut punouw Tesodstp z-sd 9243 3e suqdep ddu WUueredde ueow Jo uot ANnQTAASTp peddew syL “q9P7-—€ oaNnbry MOSL'ES 220 3009 J00b SS" 89"¢ + MOSZ ES cL0 AS00z * 8"h 100z $8"¢ IN002 Vv Sh’ M00SbS e240 00b O0E 00e 00 0 +- -|- NOS2’60 Tb -- NOOS'60 tb + + Ga etal MCOS PS 220 Figure 3-47a. REMOTS® image from station Center at CS-1. The image shows deep RPD depths and feeding voids, which are evidence of Stage III taxa. This mound apex station shows no evidence of physical disturbance. Scale = 1X. Figure 3-47b. REMOTS® image from station Center at CS-2. The image shows deep RPD depths and feeding voids, which are evidence of Stage III taxa. This mound apex station shows no evidence of physical disturbance. Scale = 1X. °eres I ebeqs ATuo buTaAey suotjeqs AIWT[ep seuTT peusep 10/pue PTTOS “*punow Tesodstp T-SsO ey} 3e 986T AINE AOJ soheqys [euotsseosons jo uoT ANnqTaA4stp peddeu aUL “eSPp—-E€ sanbty MOSZ ES e0 MOOS PS /eZ0 -|- -|- Sp08 - SOOb MS002 v |. NOOO 60 Th MOOP M009 MNO00Z Vv Vv I -|- NOS2’60 Tb 2 shee ahd MCS/'ES 220 II Y 16 Ss, 2 Bae _-m___ GO 0.8 1.2) 9.6 2.6 2.0 2.8 3.2 BOUNDARY ROUGHNESS (CM) 5 MGR JULY 1966 = WMGON 4 a ae as = — a 3 a z “SS9T 10 9+ JO SeNnTeA TsO butaey SUOT}ERS ATWTTep SeUT[T ptTITos “986 Atnc ‘punouw Tesodstp Y%TeMION os3yQ 7e (S,ISO) SeoTpuI AUeUTpes-ustueb190 SLOWaY jo uotjznqtaqjstp peddew suzy “y9-€ olanbry KO00°ES 220 MOGe ES 220 MOSZES 220 M000°bS 220 Sua}ay C02 Moc/ 20 Tb NOS/“20 th—4 NO00°60 TP NC00'60 TP. | a ap ale + > IWMGON 4 MO00"ES 220 HOSES 220 MOSL“ES 220 Figure 3-65. REMOTS® image from station Center at NH-74 showing a very thin surface sand layer and shallow RPD depth, suggesting recent erosion of aerated surface sediments which once comprised the sand cap at this mound. Scale = 1X. Figure 3-66. Benthic "process" map which indicates the distribution and thickness (cm) of apparent dredged material at the NH-74 disposal mound in July 1986. Symbols are defined as follows: # = Apparent dredged material thickness (cm) #+ = Apparent dredged material thicker than REMOTS® window penetration g +c ll No apparent dredged material S/M Sand over mud stratigraphy -99-¢€ eamnbTtg MO0S*eS 220 MOSe ES 2Z0 a= +. S009 ob 00h _—OGe “062-09 0 WN W/S Soop +Gh'ST qs00z $002 MS002 +0£'ST T'hT +ST'ST NCSL"80 Tb -+- W/S W/S —}. Nose'e0 ty g009 a00v a00z 5) M00z Moov Moog +02*HT +89°ST +hZ"OT 46L°CT +24 9T +26°HT +5h°GT W/S W/S W/S FN00Z N00Z MN002 +26° HT +19° CT +16°ST W/S W/S W/$ NOOP +20°ZT N009 ELST VL NS SI Ve Mo0S'eS 220 Hos2"eS 220 NEW HAVEN 74 16 IULY 1986 F b 4 Me Az Ue E v H [& y ails . ee | r) 4 6 142 0.6 2.0 2.4 BOUNDARY ROUGHNESS (CM) 15 HEW HAVEH 74 JHULY 1986 N= 17 16 6 1 3 4 5 € 2 NEW HAUEN 74 Ie ee 4 m es) Oo S Zz S) > D < NO00'60 Th ungo-fc. 270 4002-}s- 270 wco-ts. 270 wcoa-ts. 220 J LstHts So Figure 3-83. ze F E Q 15 u fi ¢ 16 1 6 2G 25 F F 26 UY 4s H y 16 5 e 23 20 F E Ouaelo. U E W116 y fas] Frequency distributions of roughness, eee aoc! | a a | Gy ee 6 GHOST 1 JULY 19Ge. a) ot} Hoe oS Bo 2d 2.8 Soe BOUNDARY ROUGHNESS (CM) GHOST 1 JULY 1966 MEAN RPD DEPTH (CM) CHOST 1 JULY 1966 N = 48 3 G & a 8 2 ao ah GRG.-SEO. INDEX VALUE small-scale boundary mean apparent RPD depths and OSI values at the GHOST-1 site, July 1986. °exeq J obeys ATuo HhutaAey suotjeAs ATWTTep seaze payojey -oget Atne ‘83TS T-LSOHD 94} 3e Sebhejs [TeuoTssedons TeunejuT JO uoTAnqQTAASTp peddew suzy “p8-€ emnhbty M000’ tS 220 M002 "tS 220 MCOb "ES 220 M0C9'TS 220 Ode cSe_ 00c OSt OOF Ss 0 NoOg'80 Tr -|- v ° v v 7 ° v —fce-e0 1 I-III I-III I-III I-III I-III I-III I-III NOOO'60 Tr -|- —fcoo'60 tp } USI) ey M000-4S- 220 M002-46- 220 MCOk-+S- 220 MOC9-IS. 220 Son[Tea Be SO FY AL ENOUSDAS QIUTTep severe poyo ey oner eRe Saree SSoOT rPUT JUOUTPeg—USTULHIO sSLOWHY Jo uoTanatazastp poddeu ou, “Gg 6 e e es -€ ean Tae M000°FS e20 MO0e FS 220 MCOP TS 220 M0C9"TS 220 Ode CcSe 00¢ NOO8°80 Tb -{. NO00 60 TP *oTbuetaq peueyoetq e Aq pejeotput eze wo oc- ueyy te3ee16 sssuybnor ATepunoq eTeos-T{TTeus Hutaey suotjeqs pue ‘W/s He ee ayy Aq pezeotput eae Ayderbt3eazA4s pnu AsAO pues butaey suotjeqs Bilife) fe) Teta) Zo uey sseT syjdep ddu butaey suotjeqAs SREOTPUT SSUTT[ PTITOS °9g6ET ae 24TS C-LSOHD 944 We (Wo) syqdep qdy jyueredde ueeu jo uoTANqTAASTp peddew sauLz °98-€ eanhty ay ee Co eae era me ee et Vv Vv Vv . e v. e pay ane re e's 18'S n6'S 00'h WS WS WS 99 94 94 9d 22 ou ay Vv v v 6 Y. Vv ish S6'S Lorn BL'¢ 62'S Css mr's Ws so Sd oe sets co tf Heh Is‘h 66'S 9) bel ba v v/ v. 86'H 02'h L's £9 td ea Vv v \/ 69'S Th's zG"¢ z9 ta Bes gI's HG'S ths ws nove 60 tf 1 a e og*s q6'¢ Glas W/S MCOb eS 220 H0C9°eS e220 MGC8 eS eZ0 | | | vy AYVONNOS ALIS 1WSOdSId =- NCC9 60 tb a. & lbolehs ac GHOST @ MWULY 198 F FE E @ ll E NY rf ve BOUNDARY ROUGHNESS (CM) 36 GHOST 2 JULY 1966 F EF E Q ul E q C W MEAN RPD DEPTH (CM) 26 GHOST 2 JULY 1986 Feels) 5 ee N C Y | ee OR ett et at - | 2 8 et} §) Ne) ag ORG.-SED. INDEX VALUE Figure 3-87. Frequency distributions of small-scale boundary roughness, mean apparent RPD depths and OSI values at the GHOST-2 site, July 1986. "exeqy JT ebeqs ATuo HhutTaAey suotzeqIs ATUTTep severe peyojeH -ogget Atne ‘aqTs Z-JsoUuy ayy Ye sebhejs [euoTssaedons TeunejuTt JO uoTAnqTAASTp peddew sayy °g8-€ eAanbtg NOOPPS- 220 H009-#6- 220 N008-2S- 270 4000-45. 270 udlcW Ls Noca’60-4F— —NOCe 60 oh MGCP eS 20 M009°eS e240 Oce_ CSc cdc Cct oO OS 0 —— ——— a ———— GOS 5 55222 I-Tll I 9g 9V n6 IIT] sd sv I-11 I-Il! + NOG9 60 Tb ra Vv I-11] I-III eq Vv I-11 I-III 2a ZV ld Iv Il I-III Ar é Isla MGC8°eS eZ0 JO SenTeA Iso hutTAey suotjeAs ATUTTep seuTT pT Tos MOOb-¥5- 220 LD La Vv v IT OT 99 94 v Vv L IT it9) ld v v L IT MCOb eS 20 M009-¥5- 220 td ike) v v L l 94 9d 99 i i OT cd if bd 1:70) wi 6 ed £0 v Vv 6 OT 2a (40) v v IL OT 1d td if) Or or pop ou 009°2S 220 M008-#S- 220 MCC8 eS e0 Lv Nd IV or "O+ °"986T Aine ‘aqTS 7Z-LSOHD eu 3e (S,ISO) SeoTpul Queutpes-ustueb6z90 eSLOWAY JO uoTANQTAzASTp peddeu suz “68-€ eanbtTy M000-€- 220 u91eW Ode CSc 60e CSF OF 0s 0 a ————— a 2252252222 aL NOC9'60 Tb 4. & ILS “UOTRZeAS SOUusTEJSU-SITO ey} pue spunow Tesodstp yoW pue ‘dAd ‘N-HNLS ©4}3 2OJ onTeA Iso uve snsz9A onTeA SSOUuYSTAI sSatosds uray “I-p eanbty SSANHOIY SalodadS NVSW OV 0z 0 (eee [exe = m > a O ” < > dau = , sito 6 om | N-HNLS dAd ™ an 9861 ‘Ainr¢ - si1D NOSIYVdINOD SIHLN3Ag - SLOINSY Lb = ‘hM iage \ ty, Peat erie -a0 TAL] a