Anna Peterson*1, Brenton Gilbertson*2, Terri Jicha3 Examination of the data from the nutrient uptake assays found no significant difference in the initial nutrient concentrations between sites. Additionally, neither the differences in uptake rates between sites nor within each site were found to be significant. The regression slopes calculated for each nutrient at each sample location were also found not to be statistically significant. Pre-remediation Nutrient Cycling in the Pickle Pond AOC A comparison of the nutrient cycling between pre-remediation Pickle Pond and a nearby control site within the SLRE. Examine initial nutrient concentrations between sites as well as nutrient uptake rates between sites and within each site. Nutrient cycling is expected to be higher at the control site if contamination has had a negative impact on the functional indicators. 5L biotainer of water was collected from each site Water temperature and weather conditions noted Assay is done on all biotainers simultaneously Nutrients (KNO3, NH4H2PO4) were added to each biotainer at 10:00am Initial 200ml sample collected directly after nutrients were mixed in Biotainers are incubated in water (Fig 4A) for four hours with a sample point every hour Half of each sample is filtered with 60ml syringe and attachable 0.45µm acetate filter (figure 4B) Remaining portion is labeled as unfiltered Samples put on ice until frozen back at the lab. Study Sites Pickle Pond is a 9-acre pond separated from the bay by a railroad line with only two small openings connecting it to the bay. Historically, sewage outfalls were in Pickle Pond. Today, stormwater outfalls are present. Both have contributed to the accumulation of contaminates and gradual filling in of the pond. Loon's Foot Landing is located ~1.4 miles from Pickle Pond. The landing is near a retired taconite dock and now serves as a boat launch. Selected as the control site due to the proximity to Pickle Pond and natural connection to the estuary. Additionally, it does not have the direct contamination impacts that Pickle Pond has. Sites are displayed in Figure 3. The data presented here represents a small snapshot of how nutrients cycle through an aquatic ecosystem. Other data can be used in conjunction with the results from the nutrient uptake assays discussed. Sediment samples were collected from each site along with the water. The data from the 2020 sediment is currently being analyzed and could offer insight into how nutrients are processed at each location. Of particular interest is the enzyme activity and the role it plays in the nutrient cycle. The same suite of samples were collected from Pickle Pond and Loons Foot Landing in 2021. Upon completion of analysis, they will add another valuable year of pre-remediation data for a more robust comparison. The data collected pre-remediation will be used to compare to post-restoration values. This will allow us to determine if there were significant changes after the completion of the restoration at Pickle Pond. In addition to the samples collected and ran in the previous years, a new focus will be given to identifying Cyanobacteria through phytoplankton taxonomy, and phycocyanin fluorescence. The presence of Cyanobacteria could be useful in explaining the nitrogen fixation seen at some sites. Remediation is scheduled to begin in 2022 and sampling will continue. The proposed remediation (Fig 7) will feature the removal of contaminated sediment and invasive species, additional openings to the bay, as well as improving fish and wildlife habitat. Discussion  Filtered samples were analyzed for dissolved NO3-N, NH4-N, and PO4-P concentrations using flow-injected colorimetry (QuickChem 8000, Lachat Instruments, Loveland, CO, USA). NO3 -N and PO4-P were analyzed simultaneously by the cadmium reduction method (QuikChem Method 10-107-04-1-B 1996) and the ascorbic acid method (QuikChem Method 10-115-01-1-B 1996), respectively. NH4-N was analyzed using the sali