Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />9,0 <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />A <br /> <br />8.5 I- <br /> <br />8.0 ~ <br /> <br />7.5 r <br /> <br />x <br />XSX~ <br />'~~~~ <br />~X <br /> <br />x <br />X <br />X xX <br />X * X <br />XX ~ <br />~ <br /> <br />XX <br />>x% <br />X <br /> <br />7,0 ~ <br /> <br />(J) <br />t:: <br />z <br />:::> <br />Cl <br />c:: <br /><( <br />Cl <br />Z <br />~ <br />(J) <br />z <br />:i <br />0. <br /> <br />x <br /> <br />6.5 <br />8/1/92 9/1/92 <br /> <br />, <br />10/1/92 <br /> <br />9.0 <br /> <br />B <br /> <br />8.5 <br /> <br />. <br />X <br /> <br />8.0 <br /> <br />X <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />.. I <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />7,5 <br /> <br />7.0 <br /> <br />X <br /> <br />6.5 <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />, <br />____ Surface water <br />X ___oX Ground water <br /> <br />X <br />X <br /> <br />X <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />X <br /> <br />X <br />~X <br /> <br />~ XX <br />X ~ X X <br />X X:x <br />XX X XX' <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />X <br /> <br />, <br />11/1/92 <br />DATE <br /> <br />12/1/92 <br /> <br />1/1/93 <br /> <br />2/1/93 <br /> <br />X <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />10 <br /> <br />20 <br /> <br />25 <br /> <br />15 <br /> <br />DISTANCE DOWNSTREAM FROM THE METRO WASTEWATER <br />RECLAMATION DISTRICT EFFLUENT OUTFALLS, IN MILES <br />Figure 12. Values of pH in (A) ground water 1 foot below the sedimentlwater interface with lime, and <br />(6) surface water and ground water 1 foot below the sediment/water interface with distance downstream from <br />the Metro Wastewater Reolamation District effluent outfalls. Solid and dashed lines in (6) show median values <br />of pH for samples 0 to 5, 5to 10, 10 to 15, 15 to 20, and greater than 20 miles downstream from the effluent <br />outfalls. <br /> <br />large-area flow system, then DO concentrations in the <br />river would be lowered from 8,5 to 6.3 mg/L under <br />conservative mixing conditions. <br /> <br />Concentrations of DO in the river could have <br />been lowered further due to the daily movement of sur. <br />face water in and out of the bed sediments, Data indi- <br />cate that DO was removed from surface water when <br />it entered the small-area flow system in the bed sedi- <br />ments (fig. 15); therefore, if that water later discharged <br />back into the river, it would lower DO concentrations <br /> <br />in the river even though there was no net addition <br />of water to the river, Based on the hourly measure- <br />ments of incremental ground-water discharge at <br />Road 8 (fig. 5), the net amount of surface water that <br />moved into the bed sediments and then came back <br />out was about 0.26 (Mft3/d)/mi over 24 hours. This <br />amount was about 54 percent of the net amount <br />[0.48 (Mfrl /d)/mi] of ground water that discharged <br />from the large-area flow system to that reach of river <br />on November 30, 1992 (table 4). <br /> <br />26 Quanllty and Quality of Ground.Walar Dlacharga 10 Iha South Plalla River, Denvar 10 Fort Lupton, Colorado, <br />Augual1992 Through July 1993 <br />