619 



(a) The magnitude (flow and pollutant mass emission rates) 

 of the discharge as compared to : 



(1) The available dilution and quality requirements of the 

 receiving waters ; 



(2) The relative magnitude of the discharge as compared 

 to other discharges in the general area ; and 



(3) The defined or undefined character of the effect of the 

 waste on the receiving water and beneficial uses. 



(b) The relative cost of conducting the minimum "core" char- 

 acterization program as compared to : 



( 1 ) The cost of at least secondary treatment for the waste 

 discharge ; 



(2) The cost of alternative and possible inferior methods 

 of disposal ; and 



( 3 ) The potential damage of the discharge. 

 Specifications for the "significant discharge" category must be suiR- 



ciently general so as not to exclude some specific and significant dis- 

 charges of potential ecological damage. 



Monitoring receiving water 



To make a basic assessment of the condition of receiving w^aters and 

 and the effect thereon of the discharge of treated effluents, the follow- 

 ing tests are recommended for a minimum core monitoring program 

 for the water column and sediments (table VL3.1) . It should he noted 

 that the core monitoring program is not intended to be applied in its 

 entirety to all marine waters but only to those bodies of water that 

 receive "significant waste discharges." 



Table VL3.2 presents a summary listing of the recommended core 

 program analyses of the waters and sediments and indicates their 

 recommended application to either restricted waters or the open ocean, 

 or both. 



TABLE Vl.3.1.— RECOMMENDED TESTS 



Water column: 



1. Physical: 



(a) Quantification of floatable material and films with analysis for determination of probable origin of material 



(require method development). 



(b) Water clarity by photometric or other methods (methods adequate). 



(c) Temperature— continuous recording with depth or at least three points in vertical column (method 



adequate). 



2. Biological: 



(a) Coliform determination (method needs evaluation). 



(b) Biostimulatory characteristics (method to be developed). 



(c) Assessment of biomass including standing stock and community structure to determine long-term effect 



of waste discharges (techniques to be developed). 



3. Chemical: 



(a) Dissolved oxygen (method adequate). 



(b) Chlorosity (method adequate). 



(c) pH (method adequate). 



(d) Nitrates (method needs periodic evaluation). 



(e) Phosphates (method needs periodic evaluation). 

 Sediments: 



1. Physical: 



(a) Particle size distribution (methods adequate). 



(b) Temperature (methods adequate). 



(c) Other observations may also be needed for particle density, in-place density, and thickness of waste de- 



posits to permit an estimate of the volume and mass of wastes accumulated (techniques need evaluation). 



2. Biological: 



(a) Quantitative description of the standing crop of benthic organisms (quantitative technique needs de- 



velopment). 



(b) Other tests including an index of bottom respiration may be useful to indicate the amount of readily bio- 



degradable organic matter in the deposit (technique needs development). 



3. Chemical : 



(a) Concentration of organic matter by concentration of organic carbon or organic nitrogen (technique needs 



evaluation). 



(b) Presence or absence of H2S (quantitative technique needs evaluation). 



(c) pH (technique adequate). 



(d) Other measurements should be made for suspected toxicants when appropriate including specific trace 



metals (technique needs evaluation). 



