Is More than Storm Water Draining into Barnegat Bay?

Georgie Grieb

Casey Hennessey

Kevin Lindert

Save Barnegat Bay Student Grant Program

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment

August 19, 2016

 Abstract

After the destruction of Hurricane Sandy in 2012 the implementation of a new storm

water drainage system was put into place along route 35 in Seaside Park, New Jersey to help

divert rain water directly into Barnegat Bay. The systems force water out into the Bay using high

speed pumps as it collects rainwater that infiltrates into the ground along the length of the

system. There is speculation that the system is leading to bacterial and other concentrated inputs

into the Bay. For eight weeks, the systems were tested by a team from the Barnegat Bay Student

Grant program. Six locations along the Seaside Park and South Seaside Park Bay shoreline

were tested for several parameters including fecal coliform bacteria, iron, nitrates, total

suspended solids, and pH. Samples were taken from inside (the booms of the outflow pipes) the

storm drain systems and outside. Our results indicated that the fecal coliform bacteria levels

exceeded acceptable swimming water standards (200 CFUs/100 mL) at two of the three

stormwater systems every testing session. These results indicate that there needs to be more

testing emphasis on the systems and that there needs to be remediation of these systems since

two of the systems are just north and south of a bathing beach area.

1
Introduction

Following post-tropical cyclone Sandy in 2012, a series of storm drains were installed

along the Route 35 corridor, including Seaside Park, which was to prevent flooding of roadways

in the surrounding areas. Operationally, the storm drains collect runoff from Seaside Park

rainwater and expel it using a series of high speed pumps out into Barnegat Bay. Following the

installation of the storm drainage system, problems emerged. As stated by Nelson Santiago of the

Ocean County Health Department, in 2015 there were three advisories (June 23, August 3 and

August 10). There was also a closure of the beaches on August 11th (Santiago, 2016). This year,

2016, there was a closure of the bay beach on June 7 as well as an advisory on July 5 (Santiago,

2016). We hypothesized that the storm drains were pumping out water on dry days without

precipitation were carrying groundwater and contaminants into Barnegat Bay. The importance of

testing water quality along Seaside Park was to determine input levels of possible nutrients and

bacteria into the Bay. The Ocean County Health Department conducts weekly testing; however,

it is limited to the swimming beach location and focuses on bacteria levels and does not test for

possible groundwater inputs that are infiltrating the systems. If the systems are receiving

groundwater, then they will run more often and may be a source of nutrient and iron inputs into

Barnegat Bay.

In the image below the Bayview storm drain was pumping out excessive amount of water

on the morning of July 25. However, the weather showed no rain in the forecast for the previous

24 hours and it was 90 F that day.

Figure 1: Storm drains pumping water with no recorded rainfall within the previous two hours of discharge.

This led us to conclude that the drains are not pumping out storm water runoff and

instead pulling freshwater from the water table. On July 11, the 2108 Bayview Avenue storm

drain system was pumping out water, possibly due to the rain the night prior.

Figure 2: Storm drain in front of 2108 Bavview Avenue. S. Seaside Park, NJ, pumping out water on July 11, 2016.

Part of New Jersey Governor Christies Barnegat Bay 10- Point Plan is to establish

greater water quality standards (Barnegat Bay, 2016). Barnegat Bay is an estuary which consists

3
of high nutrient inputs as it is considered a highly eutrophic estuary (Barnegat Bay, 2016) .

Our mission was trying to figure out how these storm drains work and how they are affecting the

water quality of the Barnegat Bay. Due to our results of high iron, fecal coliform bacteria and

high nitrates setting recommendations to change the storm drains could reduce health risks to the

Bay.

Our teams objective is to keep the public informed on these storm drains and ways to

help reduce contaminants from getting into the Bay. Throughout the course of our eight week

study we tested and monitored the newly constructed drainage systems, tested the bay water and

provide feedback on our results to the Seaside Park community. Contaminants such as pet waste,

oil, fertilizers, and debris can enter the water, endanger wildlife, limit recreational activities (i.e.,

swimming) and decrease our aesthetic view of Barnegat Bay.

Methodology

Study Site

Six sites were selected within the Island Beach State Park area. These sites were Island

Beach State Park Marina, 2108 Street at Bayview (Seaside Park), Bayview Pier, 8th Ave., Island

Ave., and Seaside Park Marina. Of these sites, three of them had the aforementioned drainage

system installed at these location and the remaining three were to serve as controls. These sites

were 2108 street in Bayview, 8th Ave, and Island Ave. As for the control sites, the first was at

Island Beach State Park Marina at the southern end of the testing area. Although it is considered

a marina, it has few boats and little human activity. Our central control area was at Bayview Pier

since it is along the Bay and is isolated from storm drains. To the north, we selected Seaside Park

4
Marina for comparison since it is located where residents dock their boats. The location of

Seaside Park and the sites are shown Table 1 (GPS points) and Figure 7.

Figure 1 : Location of sampling sites along Barnegat Bay as part of our Barnegat Bay Student Grant sampling project from June 13, 2016 to

August 1, 2016.

5
Table 1: Latitude and longitude of sampling sites along Barnegat Bay as part of the Student Grant Program water quality study.

Site # Site Name Description Latitude Longitude

1 Island beach State Gravel parking lot 3454 0.364 N 7405 0.023 W
Park Marina near marshes, some
docks are present

2 2108 Bayview Large deck on top 39 54 0.047 N 74 0 0.015 W

of storm drain.
Pavilion near storm
drain

3 Bayview Pier Large pier 39 54 0.833 N 14 0.051 0.131 N

outstretches from
the beach, parking
lot not too far from
beach

4 8th Ave Storm Large deck on top 39 54 0.472 N 74 0 0.15 W

Drain of storm drain.
Pavilion near storm
drain

5 Island Ave Storm Large deck on top 3955 0.423 N 744 0.776 W
Drain of storm drain.
Pavilion near storm
drain

6 Seaside Park Many boats, 3955 0.87 N 744 0.869 W

multiple docks

Sampling Methods

1) Water Quality Tests (Percent Oxygen, Dissolved Oxygen (ppm), Conductivity (mS),

Specific Conductance (mS/cm), Salinity (ppt), Air Temperature (C), Water Temperature

C).

At each site we collected water samples and used a YSI 85 multimeter to measure for

percentage dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, conductivity, salinity, and the water

temperature. In the lab we tested for nitrates, iron, turbidity, and fecal coliform bacteria. To

6
conduct these test we used a colorimeter, a turbidimeter and the Coliscan Easygel test. We

also tested the water for suspended solids and chlorophyll-a.

For eight weeks of testing, our team tested outside of the storm drains buoy system.

After the first four weeks, Governor Christie stopped all of the Department of Transportation

projects due to lack of funding. As a result, we were able to gain closer access the systems since

there was no construction on the storm drains. Our team was then able to sample and test water

inside the storm drain buoys system for the second four weeks allowing us to compare outside

the buoy-boom system to inside where the water was being directly pumped out of the drain

(Figure 2). To determine the water quality of the Bay, we used a YSI 85 multi-parameter meter .

For the sites that included storm drain systems, the test was performed twice. One reading was

conducted inside of the buoyed area and another reading was conducted outside of the buoyed

area.

2) Coliform Test

To determine if the storm drains were releasing Fecal Coliform bacteria into Barnegat

Bay, a Coliscan Easygel test was performed for each sampling site. For sampling locations

with the storm drainage pump, two samples were taken. One was from outside the containment

area, and the other sample was taken from inside the containment area (inside the booms, Figure

3). Upon collecting a water sample in a sterile 4 ml WhirlPak bag, 1 ml of the sample was

added to the Coliscan Easygel solution. After mixing, the solution was placed into a petri dish

and hardened and then was incubated for 24 hours at 37C and the results were recorded (number

of Fecal colonies). The results were compared to the state standard for swimming (200 CFU/

100 ml for Fecal Coliform).

Figure 3: Buoyed area around a stormwater system in Seaside Park Leading out to Barnegat Bay, NJ.

3) Nitrate-Nitrogen Level Test

To determine if the storm drains were releasing nitrates into the area around the drainage

pump, samples were taken from each site. Much like with the previous test, samples were taken

from outside and inside of buoyed area. Following this, 10 ml of sample water was added to a

colorimeter tube using the Zinc Reduction Method for the LaMotte SMART 3 colorimeter to

detect nitrate-nitrogen (ppm).

4) Iron Level Test

To determine if the storm drains were releasing iron into the bay, samples of water were

taken from each of the sampling sites. As with the previous two tests, two samples were taken.

One from outside the buoyed area and the other from the inside the buoyed area. Following this,

10 ml of sample water was added to a colorimeter tube. Using the Iron Phenanthroline Test

Method, the iron levels were found and recorded (ppm).

Figure 4: A positive test shows a darker coloration (second from the left) of the

iron test (ppm) from three of the six locations

5) pH Test

To determine the pH levels of water at the sampling sites, a standard pH meter was used

upon a sample of water taken from each of the sites. Much like with the previous tests, two

samples were taken for the areas that had storm drains installed. Following the pH reading, the

results were recorded.

6) Chlorophyll-a

To determine if diatoms as well as other cyanobacteria levels in the bay, chlorophyll-a

tests were performed. For the chlorophyll tests a small sample of water was taken from each of

the testing sites and using an Aquafluor Fluorometer for a relative chlorophyll level. It should be

noted that, the chlorophyll test could no longer be performed after week four as the device had

some technical difficulties.

9
 7) Total Dissolved Solids

For the last four samples, total suspended solids (TSS) tests were conducted.. Sampling

methods were the same as the other tests, including the procedure for areas with storm drains

installed. For each site a piece of quantitative filter paper was put into a drying oven for 15

minutes and weighed in grams prior to vacuum filtration. One hundred ml of sample was filtered

through a vacuum filtration system using a Buchner funnel. Filter paper was dried for 24 hours

and then heated in a drying oven for 15 minutes. It should be noted that two pieces of filter

paper were used for areas with storm drains installed with one meant for water from inside the

buoyed area, and the other with water from outside the buoyed area. Once the filter paper had

dried, filter paper was weighed again in grams and the initial weight was subtracted from the

final weight, and the result was recorded (ppm).

8) Turbidity

To determine if the storm drains were causing an increase in water turbidity, turbidity

tests were performed for each of the sampling sites. Much like with the aforementioned tests

water samples were taken from each site, and two were taken for the sites with storm drains. To

determine the turbidity, a LaMotte Turbidity Meter (2020 DE) was used and the results were

recorded (ppm).

Results

1) Fecal Coliform Bacteria

As the data showed, the water from inside the buoyed area of the drainage system had

higher levels of recorded fecal bacteria. We also noticed that we had higher levels of recorded

10
bacterial levels on days with warmer weather. The New Jersey Department of Health States The

recreational bathing standard for Enterococcus is 104 CFU/100ml. The recreational bathing

standard (fresh water) for Fecal Coliform is 200 CFU/100 ml (NJDEP, 2014). The allowable

200 CFU/100 ml is recorded in the following fecal coliform graph by the red horizontal line. All

recorded values that exceed the red line break the bathing standard code set forth by the NJDEP.

Figure 5: Shows CFUs at six different locations over an eight week period outside buoyed area. The horizontal line indicates the 200 CFU/100

ml level, which is the maximum allowable level for swimming.

Our two most problematic sites were Bayview and 8th Ave. storm drain and Bayview and

Island Ave storm drain. At both of these locations we recorded the highest levels of fecal

bacteria being released from the drainage pipe. Coincidentally both of these drain are situated

right outside the Bayview swimming beach. We paid special close attention to this area because

if bacterial levels were high in these areas they were also predicted to be high at the swimming

beach. As stated earlier swimming beach was closed twice this summer (so far) both within a

week and a half time from in July. The beach also closed numerous times last summer. However,

prior to the drainage system being implemented there were no beach closures reported.

11


Figure 6: CFUs at three different locations over an eight week period inside buoyed area. The red horizontal line indicates the

allowable 200 CFUs per 100 ml of water which is the maximum allowable level for swimming.

1) Nitrate - Nitrogen

Similar to the fecal bacteria results the highest recorded nitrate levels were found at the

Bayview and 8th and Bayview and Island Ave storm drains. nitrates present in the water could

be an indicator that fertilizers are getting into the water. We predicted the drain systems are

moving these organic materials into the Bay because our highest nitrate levels were always

recorded from inside the buoyed areas.

Figure 7: Nitrate levels (ppm) at the six sampling locations in Seaside Park, NJ over an eight week period.

12


Figure 8: Nitrate levels (ppm) with the stormwater systems containment area over a four week period from three different locations.

2) Iron

Another parameter we tested for in our project was the presence of iron in the water. It

was found that the levels of iron were higher inside of the buoyed area than outside of the

buoyed area. Iron can enter the water through seepage of rainwater into the water table. If the

soil where the water is seeping through contains iron it will travel through the layers of earth

along with the water and collect in the water table. Iron can also be entering the system from

faulty planning and the corrosion of the pipes themselves. The drainage system does contain iron

as part of their make up. Our highest iron results were always recorded inside the buoyed area.

13


Figure 9: Iron levels (ppm) at the six sampling locations in Seaside Park, NJ over an eight week period .

Figure 10: Iron levels measured inside the stormwater systems containment areas over a four week period from three different locations.

3) Chlorophyll

The first four weeks of our study we were able to test for chlorophyll levels in the Bay.

An increase in this organic substance can also lead to possible algae blooms in the water. The

14
more chlorophyll in the water the less oxygen is present for other living organisms.

Unfortunately after four weeks of testing the machine we were using to test for chlorophyll

broke. We then switched and began testing for suspended solids in the water.

4) Turbidity

The more turbid the water means the more free particles floating in the water. Turbidity is

the cloudiness or haziness of water. To calculate how turbid the water was we were sampling we

used a turbidimeter which measured the amount of particles in a column of water. Over our eight

week testing period we noticed that the water outside the buoyed area always read lower

turbidity levels. We concluded this to be because this body of water wasnt enclosed.

Figure 11: Turbidity levels (NTU) measured outside the stormwater system containment area over an eight week period at six different

locations.

We predicted that the water inside the stormwater drainage containment area would have

higher levels of turbidity. Inside this buoyed area there is no where for the water to travel,

contaminants just get dumped in from the pipe and have nowhere to go but sit inside the buoy.

15


Figure 12: Turbidity levels (NTU) measured inside the stormwater system containment area over a four week

period at three different locations.

5) Specific Conductance

Our specific conductance levels were relatively stable in Barnegat Bay however inside

the storm drains the levels were lower due to a possibly of freshwater from groundwater

pumping into the Bay.

Figure 13: Specific conductance levels (mS/cm) taken from outside the storm drain containment system from six different locations over an eight

week period.

16


Figure 14: Specific conductance levels (mS/cm) taken from inside the storm drain containment system from three different

locations over an eight week period.

6) pH

Our team also tested the pH of the water every week and did a comparison after the first

four weeks. The pH never exceeded 8.1 and never lower than 6.8. The pH was outside the storm

drain buoy was relatively stable throughout the eight week testing period. Inside the storm

drains buoy the pH was lower however not alarming shown in the second graph. The change in

pH could be influenced by the tides and the weather conditions.

Figure 15: pH levels was taken from outside the storm drain containment system from six different locations over an eight week period.

17


Figure 16: pH levels was taken from inside the storm drain containment system from three different locations over an eight week period.

7) Dissolved Oxygen

During the eight weeks our team took many notes and pictures of these storm drains. We

also tested for the amount of dissolved oxygen in the water. Dissolved oxygen is the amount of

oxygen (mg/L) in our samples. During the eight weeks the results were stable.

Figure 17: Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) was taken from outside the storm drain containment system from three different locations over an eight

week period.

18
Discussion

Our results indicated that the bacterial levels inside the storm drain containment area

were greater than the levels outside the buoyed area. This is because by constantly pumping out

water, it is taking any concentrated bacteria directly to the water without giving the bacteria time

to break down in the soil. The systems appears to also be pulling in groundwater as evidenced by

the continuous flow of water from some of the systems. Because of this, fecal bacteria

originating from animal waste products have entered the bay. As the bacteria were also expelled

with the ground the groundwater instead of breaking naturally in the soil over time. This

produces levels of fecal bacteria that exceed the 200 CFUs/100 mL standard that is the maximum

allowable for swimming.

Nitrates levels were found to be much higher inside the buoyed area than outside the

buoyed area. This was due to the expulsion of water groundwater from the storm drains as

nutrients in groundwater and runoff from fertilizers were also expelled into the bay. As there was

no time for the nitrates to break down naturally or be used by the local plant life. This can be

further supported by the results of the turbidity and total dissolved solids test; as the turbidity and

total dissolved solid levels were higher in the containment area than outside the containment

area. Because of the increased levels of nitrate, there is an increased risk of an algae bloom, to

occur. when there is an increased amount of nitrates (Fried et al, 2003). This could prove to be

greatly damaging to the bay as algae consumes vast amount of oxygen, which could, in turn, lead

to the death of various wildlife in the bay (Freid et al, 2003). Another issue that can occur do to

the increase of nitrates in the water is an increase of toxic forms of nitrogen entering the bay.

According to Apps Laboratories In poorly aerated water or water overloaded with organic

19
contamination, low oxygen levels can inhibit this process leaving most of the nitrogen as

ammonia or nitrite. Both of these are relatively toxic to organisms (Testing for nitrate and nitrite

in natural water, n.d).

It was also determined that the levels of iron inside the buoyed area were greater than the

iron levels outside of the buoyed area. This is because, the water being expelled from the storm

drains when it is not raining was found to be both groundwater and well water, which contains

large amounts of iron. It was determined that groundwater and well water were entering the bay

based on the specific conductance level results. For the specific conductance inside the buoyed

area was lower than the buoyed area. Another source of iron is the fill material used in the

construction of the storm drain systems could also be leaching iron into the systems. Because of

this, their is a risk of a bacteria bloom, as bacteria thrive in high levels of iron (Finkelstein and

Payne, 1978). Not only this but there is a risk of iron toxicity occurring as well should anyone

swim in the contaminated water for an extended period of time. For too much iron can lead to

hemochromatosis, which can lead to heart disease, liver failure, arthritis, and even diabetes

(Borges, 2013).

Besides a risk of a bacteria outbreak as well as an algae bloom, another risk that can

occur do to the high levels of iron and nitrate is a flocculation event. Flocculation occurs when

suspended solids and other materials come together and clump up in the water as shown in

Figure 13. This sort of event occurs as a result of a chemical reaction between the clay particles

and other substance in the water, such as nitrates and iron, combine to form a large mass. This

may compromise Barnegat Bay submerged aquatic habitats as flocculations can cause a total

blockage of all sunlight, which would deprive all underwater plant life of an energy source.

20


Figure 13: Flocculation even in the Barnegat Bay. (Image courtesy of NJ.com)

Conclusion and Recommendations

After our eight week study of collecting and testing water in the Seaside Park area we

conclude that the newly constructed storm drain systems are causing higher bacterial inputs into

Barnegat Bay. Without source point pollution monitoring it is hard to determine where exactly

these pollutants are originating from. To counteract this problem we believe a series of filters

must be installed in the drains to help trap pollutants from entering the Bay.

While the enclosures surrounding the drain may have seemed like a good idea for

suspended materials it doesnt seem that it is enough to keep harmful bacteria from entering the

Bay. With such high fecal bacterial colonies being found in and near storm drains we also

believe it pertinent to shut down the Bayview swimming beach area between 8th and Island

Avenue storm drains after rainfall events regardless of the water quality testing timeline by the

Ocean County Health Department.

21
 If the state wishes to keep these drainage systems functional and safe for the

environment, continued testing and monitoring should be required on all drains. Alterations

should be made to ensure that the systems are not pulling freshwater and depleting the water

table.

22
Works Cited

Barnegat Bay. (2016, July 8). Retrieved August 18, 2016, from

http://www.nj.gov/dep/barnegatbay/

Borges, M. (2013) Iron: Deficiency and toxicity. Intelligent Medicine. Retrieved from

http://drhoffman.com/article/iron-deficiency-and-toxicity-3/

Fried, S., Mackie, B., Northwehr, E., (2003). Nitrate and phosphate levels positively

affect the growth of algae species found in Perry Pond. Tillers, (4), 21-24.

NJDEP New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. (2014, May 20). Retrieved

August 16, 2016, from http://www.nj.gov/dep/hudson/

Payne, S.M., & Finkelstein, R.A., (1978). The critical role of iron in host-bacterial

interactions. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 61(6), 1428-1440.

Potto, MaryAnn [Author]. (2015) Brown Plume In Barnegat Bay Concerns Residents.

Retrieved from

http://www.nj.com/ocean/index.ssf/2015/08/brown_plume_in_barnegat_bay_concerns_re

sidents_law.html

Santiago, N. Informed us of Advisories and closures from the summer of 2014 to the

present day (Personal Communication, August 1, 2016)

Testing for nitrate and nitrite in natural waters. (n.d.). Retrieved August 18, 2016, from

http://appslabs.com.au/testing_for_nitrate_and_nitrite.htm

23