Validation and Sensitivity Analyses
of Stream and Estuary Models
Applied to Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
submitted to
Environmental Protection Agency
submitted by
Water Resources Engineers
-------
May I 1974
Validation and Sensitivity Analyses
of Stream and Estuary Models
Applied to Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
AN INTERMEDIATE TECHNICAL REPORT
CONTRACT No. 68-OI-I8OO
Environmental Protection Agency
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT BRANCH
WASHINGTON, D. C.
prepared by
S. MICHAEL PORVAZNIK
DONALD J. SMITH
MICHAEL B. SONNEN
Water Resources Engineers
710 SOUTH BROADWAY WALNUT CREEK, CA. 94596 . IISS3
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION 1
Background 1
Water Quality Model Descriptions 2
The Stream Model 2
The Estuary Model 3
Validation Approach 4
Sensitivity Analysis Approach 4
Summary of Findings 5
Stream Model 5
Estuary Model 6
II. STREAM MODEL VALIDATION 7
General Approach 7
Stream Inputs and Monitoring Stations 7
Stream Reaches and Elements 9
Validation Periods 10
Baseline Simulation 11
Validation Results 13
April 1972 Validation 13
September 1972 Validation 18
III. STREAM MODEL SENSITIVITY ANALYSES 20
General Approach 20
Sensitivity Analyses Results 20
IV. ESTUARY MODEL VALIDATION 23
General Approach 23
Estuary Inputs and Monitoring Stations 23
Estuary Model Network 26
Validation Periods 26
Baseline Simulation 29
Validation Results 33
Hydraulics 33
Quality 35
V. ESTUARY MODEL SENSITIVITY ANALYSES 43
General Approach 43
Sensitivity Analyses Results 43
Dissolved Oxygen 43
Temperature 47
Salinity 47
Phosphate Phosphorus 50
Chlorophyll a 50
Nitrate Nitrogen 53
Coliforms 55
Constituent Interactions 57
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Page
REFERENCES 6°
APPENDIX A - Stream Quality Model Results for April
APPENDIX B - Stream Quality Model Results for September
APPENDIX C - Estuary Model 30th Day Results for
April and September
APPENDIX D - Estuary Model Reaction Rates and
Other Model Constituents
APPENDIX E - Estuary Model Hydraulic Results for
April and September
APPENDIX F - Estuary Model Sensitivity Analyses
Results for the 30th Day
11
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
FIGURE 1 Waikele Stream Drainage Basin 8
FIGURE 2 Waikele Stream Profile and Model Reaches 10
FIGURE 3 Waikele Stream Quality Profiles for April 1972 15
FIGURE 4 Waikele Stream Quality Profiles for September 1972 16
FIGURE 5 Model Network and Simulated Point Dischargers 24
and Tributaries to Pearl Harbor
FIGURE 6 U.S. Navy Sampling Stations for Water Quality 27
in Pearl Harbor
FIGURE 7 Biological and Tributary Sampling Stations 28
in Pearl Harbor
FIGURE 8 Simulated Salinity and Dissolved Oxygen 30
Concentrations at Several Nodes for a 30-Day Period
FIGURE 9 Average Tides for April and September 1972 34
FIGURE 10 West Loch Validation Results for April 1972 36
FIGURE 11 Middle Loch Validation Results for April 1972 37
FIGURE 12 Upper East Loch Validation Results for April 1972 38
FIGURE 13 East and Southeast Validation Results for April 1972 39
111
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Page
TABLE 1 Input Quantities and Qualities for April 197Z 12
TABLE 2 Input Quantities and Qualities for September 1972 12
TABLE 3 Concentrations of Modeled Constituents in 14
Waikele Stream for April 1972
TABLE 4 Concentrations of Modeled Constituents in 14
Waikele Stream for September 1972
TABLE 5 Water Quality Data for Waikele Stream 17
TABLE 6 Percentage Effects on Modeled Constituents in 21
Waikele Stream Caused by Specified Percentage
Changes in Several Model Parameters
TABLE 7 April 1972 Flow and Quality Input Data for 25
Point Waste Discharges and Tributary Streams
TABLE 8 Estuary Model Runs 44
TABLE 9 Percentage Effects on Dissolved Oxygen in 45
Pearl Harbor Caused by Specified Changes in
Several Model Parameters
TABLE 10 Percentage Effects on Temperature in Pearl Harbor 48
Caused by Specified Changes in Several Model
Parameters
TABLE 11 Percentage Effects on Salinity in Pearl Harbor Caused 49
by Specified Changes in Several Model Parameters
TABLE 12 Percentage Effects on Phosphate Phosphorus in 51
Pearl Harbor Caused by Specified Changes in
Several Model Parameters
TABLE 13 Percentage Effects on Chlorophyll a. in Pearl Harbor 52
Caused by Specified Changes in Several Model
Parameters
TABLE 14 Percentage Effects on Nitrate Nitrogen in 54
Pearl Harbor Caused by Secified Changes in Several
Model Parameters
TABLE 15 Percentage Effects on Coliform Organisms in 56
Pearl Harbor Caused by Specified Changes in
Several Model Parameters
IV
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
On February ZO, 1973, a contract was signed between the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the United States of America
and Water Resources Engineers (WRE) of Walnut Creek, California,
under which WRE was to modify, document, and validate mathematical
models of both Pearl Harbor and one of its tributaries on the Island of
Oahu, State of Hawaii.
The work performed under that contract (No. 68-01-1800)
was divided into four phases. Phase I involved four tasks: 1) segmentation
of both Pearl Harbor and Waikele Stream into node-link networks to be
used for mathematical modeling purposes, Z) specification of available
hydrologic, water quality, and meteorologic data points, 3) assembly and
coordination of these data with the model networks, and 4) preparation
of a report enumerating types and quantity of data available on a point by
point basis for the entire network. Moreover, the contractor identified
data deficiencies by type and location throughout the network.
Phase II entailed the modification of existing mathematical
models (computer programs) to include consideration of more quality
constituents than the programs previously treated. The modification
of the models was followed in Phase III by their application to historical
periods of record to assure their correct functioning.
Phase III, the subject of this report, consisted of validating
the models and then performing sensitivity analyses to determine the
relative importance of individual model parameters to the accuracy of
model predictions. The findings of the sensitivity analyses are
summarized in this Sensitivity Analysis Report. The models, as modified
in Phase II, will be fully documented and explained in detail for the
benefit of future users in a Documentation Report.
Finally, Phase IV entails a training session for EPA, State,
U.S. Navy, and local personnel on the use of the models. Following this
seminar a final report will be prepared summarizing the three interim
reports and the training seminar.
This report is the second in a series and describes the Phase
III validation and sensitivity analyses results. Two models were applied
in this task, an estuary model for Pearl Harbor and a stream model for
Waikele Stream. Each model is described in the following section.
-------
WATER QUALITY MODEL DESCRIPTIONS
The Stream Model
The contract specified that a stream model known as DOSAG
would be modified and applied to Waikele Stream, a tributary of Pearl
Harbor. This model is a steady-state model used for predicting dissolved
oxygen levels in a stream under specified hydraulic and wasteload
conditions.
For a number of reasons WRE requested that another model
known as QUAL-II be substituted for DOSAG. This substitution of models
was approved on June 12, 1973 [5]*. Although both DOSAG and QUAL-II
are stream models, QUAL-II provides the following advantages over
DOSAG: 1) it can operate in a dynamic mode as well as a steady-state
mode, 2) it includes the ability to consider more constitutents than DOSAG,
and, 3) it has some technical operational advantages over DOSAG.
Although QUAL-II has the ability to treat numerous constituents [11],
it was to be applied in this project to model only dissolved oxygen,
biochemical oxygen demand, and coliform organisms. However, the full
model with all its other capabilities will be supplied at the end of the
project.
Simply stated, QUAL-H numerically solves mathematical
expressions for advection and dispersion, as well as individual constituent
changes such as decay or dieaway, for each of the physical computa-
tional elements into which the stream has been divided. These
computations can be repeated through a series of small time stsps (such
as one-half hour) to approximate the dynamic character of the stream.
Alternatively, the model can be operated to progress through a series
of numerical iterations to attain the integrated, final, steady-state
concentrations in each reach along the stream without conscious attention
given to, or need for, a specific time step or duration.
In either mode, however, it is worth noting that the model
uses constant values of tributary or waste discharge inflows with respect
to both water quantity and constituent concentrations. So even in the
dynamic mode, the model marches through time that is essentially
the same day simulated over and over again. The result is that the
model eventually attains a set of concentrations for each reach of the
stream thatwouldbe attained during a real-time periodwhen inflows from
tributaries and waste discharges were constant.
The parameters that can be changed to give the solution its
dynamic character are: 1) the sunlight energy for daylight and dark
periods, and 2) the reaction rates for various constituents that are
^Numbers in brackets indicate references listed at the end of this report.
-------
temperature dependent. To summarize, the solution in the dynamic mode
is the set of simulated conditions over a diurnal cycle in each reach of
the stream, which is presumed to be operating in real time in a steady-
state hydrologic condition.
QUAL-H was applied to Waikele Stream from the outfall of
the Schofield Barracks waste treatment plant to the stream's mouth at
Pearl Harbor. Chapters II and III describe the validation and sensitivity
analyses, respectively.
The Estuary Model
The contract for this project specified that two existing models
be modified and applied to Pearl Harbor. These were: 1) a Dynamic
Estuary Model (DEM), which is a quasi-two-dimensional mathematical
model that operates on a network of interconnected links to simulate the
tidally dynamic behavior of an estuary, and 2) a Tidal Temperature
Model (TTM), which performs necessary heat budget calculations to
predict water temperatures throughout the day and night and throughout
the network.
During the modification stage WRE transformed the TTM into
a subroutine of the DEM, therefore, the DEM now includes the TTM.
The DEM is operated in two stages, the hydraulics submodel folio-wed
by the quality submodel. Although the hydraulics submodel remains
essentially unchanged from the initial version, the quality submodel now
incorporates many additional features. Whereas, previously the quality
submodel only simulated dissolved oxygen, biochemical oxygen demand
and a conservative constituent, it now treats all of the following
parameters as a result of this project:
Temperature
Dissolved Oxygen
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chlo rophyll-a^
Ammonia
Nitrite
Nitrate
Phosphorus
Coliforms
Salinity (conservative)
Total nitrogen (conservative)
Two heavy metals
Two pesticides
The modifications and additions to the model will all be described in
the Documentation Report.
-------
The DEM can accept the 24.5-hour tide for Pearl Harbor (or
any other tidal period) and constant tributary and wasteflow inputs to
simulate a quasi-dynamic set of conditions in an estuary. In normal
operation the model solves advection, dispersion, and constituent
alteration equations for small time steps over a tidal cycle and then repeats
these solutions for the following cycle over and over until a "dynamic
equilibrium" is attained. Theoretically, this means that the concen-
trations at each point in the system become the same for the last cycle
as they were in the cycle before that. The solution is similar in concept,
then, though different in numerical technique, to the solution produced
by QUAL-II: it is an approximation of what would occur in an estuary
over a period of tidal cycles during which the estuary was receiving the
same tributary runoff and waste discharges day after day.
It should be noted that attainment of "dynamic equilibrium" is
a possibility only for the conservative constituents simulated by the model
when the tidal period is different from the 24. 0-hour solar day. Other
constituents are related to the heat budget and cannot attain equilibrium
unless the tidal period is 24.0 hours. The tide at Pearl Harbor, which
has a 24.5-hour period, caused the dynamic equilibrium aspects of the
contract to become rather academic for all but a few constituents;
therefore, all simulations were performed for the reasonable alternative
of 30 days of solar time.
VALIDATION APPROACH
The normal approach when applying mathematical models to
streams and estuarie s is to calibrate the models first through a comparison
process, checking the model results against historical data and, in turn,
adjusting model rate "constants" and similar parameters until the models
reasonably simulate the historical measurements. Having calibrated a
model successfully, one may then use it for projecting various possible
future impacts on water bodies, taking into account both quantity and
quality effects.
This validation approach was applied for both the stream model
and the estuary model. The models of Waikele Stream and Pearl Harbor
were validated against April and September 1972 conditions, which
allowed examination of both a dry and a rainy season. The validation
results for the stream and estuary models are described in Chapters
II and IV, respectively.
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS APPROACH
The validation procedure previously described resulted in a
defined set of parameter s and quality results representing the "base case."
-------
Sensitivity analyses were then performed to determine the relative
importance of individual model parameters to the accuracy of model
predictions. Eight sensitivity runs were made for the stream model
by independently varying either the deoxygenation rate constant, the
reaeration rate constant, the coliform dieaway rate constant, or the
tributary stream inflow quantities. The results demonstrate that rather
large changes in assumptions for rate constants and input flows have little
effect on the model results. These sensitivity analyses are described
further in Chapter III.
Fifteen sensitivity analyses were made for the estuary model,
wherein variations were made for either the deoxygenation rate constant,
the reaeration rate constant, the coliform dieaway rate constant, the time
step of computation, Manning's roughness coefficient, orthe stream inflow
quantities. The results of the sensitivity analyses for this model are
presented in Chapter V.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Stream Model
Validation
Although very few stream quality data were available for
validation purposes, the model has simulated the dissolved oxygen, BOD,
and coliform concentrations in a reasonable manner for periods of both low
and high flows. However, due to the characteristics of Waikele Stream,
the expressions for calculating the reaeration rate coefficient needed to be
reformulated. Evidently none of the expressions originally programmed
in the model are applicable to rapidly flowing, shallow streams.
Additionally, the model results demonstrated that the springs
near the mouth of the stream may in fact have higher levels of dissolved
oxygen than the values assumed for input to the model. These springs
contribute a substantial portion of the flow and may warrant further
investigation.
Sensitivity Analyses
The sensitivity analyses demonstrated that rather large
changes in rate coefficients and input flows have only slight effects on
the model results. Increasing the rates and flows by as much as 100
percent rarely altered the simulated results by more than 5 percent.
Decreasing the rates and flows by 50 percent had even less effect.
-------
Estuary Model
Validation
Several difficulties ensued from modeling Pearl Harbor with
a horizontally quasi-two-dimensional model since the harbor is partially
stratified in the vertical for much of the year. Even so, the simulated
values corresponded quite reasonably with values measured in the field,
falling midway between what was measured near the surface and at depth.
This averaged result indicates the model's utility for long-term, large
scale planning activities even for a pr.rtially stratified estuary.
The data were excellent for many parameters such as salinity,
temperature, and dissolved oxygen out scarce to nonexistent for others
such as BOD and chlorophyll a.. Occasionally, data for time periods
that did not coincide with the simulated time periods were needed for
comparative purposes, but on the whole the data were quite sufficient
for model validation.
Sensitivity Analyses
The sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the estuary model
for Pearl Harbor was very insensitive to the deoxygenation rate,
Manning's roughness coefficient, and the time step used in the quality
model. However, results were quite dependent on accurate selection of
the reaeration rate, coliform dieaway rate, and freshwater inflows.
The reaeration rate constant •was difficult to choose due to
the stratified nature of the harbor. It was possible to model dissolved
oxygen for either the surface zone, the middle zone, or at depth. We
elected to simulate the middle zone and the results may, therefore, be
taken as indicative of the overall average concentration of Dissolved
oxygen in the harbor.
The model results were sensitive to the coliform dieaway rate
constant primarily because the coefficient is a relatively large number
on the order of 25 to 75 percent dieaway per day. This problem was
compounded in this study by insufficient knowledge of contributions from
unknown point or nonpoint waste sources. Therefore, the coliform simu-
lation results remain suspect except in the vicinity of a large, point
discharger for which input data were available.
The estuary model illustrated the sensitive nature of the West
Loch to total stream inflow as well. Given the conditions of a relatively
large stream flow into a shallow loch with low velocity currents, it was
found that the specific quantity of inflow significantly affected the quality
response of the loch. Smaller streams flowing into larger lochs had
much smaller effects on the estuary's quality.
-------
I. STREAM MODEL VALIDATION
GENERAL APPROACH
The drainage basin for Waikele Stream is illustrated in Figure
1. The portion of Waikele Stream that was modeled extends from the
mouth to the point of discharge of the Schofield Barracks waste treatment
plant. As shown in Figure 1 this distance is almost ten miles.
The validation of QUAL-H, which was operated as a steady-
state water quality stream model, followed these six steps:
1) Major dischargers, tributaries, and monitoring
stations were identified.
Z) The stream was divided into reaches of similar
hydraulic and topographic characteristics.
3) Reaches were subdivided into "elements" of
equal length for further detail.
4) Validation periods were selected for two
different hydrologic seasons of the stream.
Unfortunately, no extensive data base existed for
these periods, but they were used because they
were the same periods used for the estuary
model.
5) Tributary stream and waste discharger quantity
and quality data were prepared from available
records. Additionally, reasonable values for
reaction rates were selected for simulation of
dissolved oxygen, biochemical oxygen demand
(BOD), and coliform organisms.
6) Simulations were made and compared against
historical measurements.
Each of the six steps are described in the following sections of this
chapter.
STREAM INPUTS AND MONITORING STATIONS
The Data Report for the Pearl Harbor System of Hawaii [1Z]
contains detailed descriptions of the available hydrologic and water
-------
oo
SCHOFIELD BARRACKS STP
J
N
r" ~^- —• V "^-^ STREflM MILES
4 5
FIGURE 1
WAIKELE STREAM DRAINAGE BASIN
-------
quality data to support this phase of the study. Therefore, a summary
of the major dischargers, tributaries, and monitoring stations and a
description of their relationships to the stream modeling task will suffice
for the purposes of this report.
Major stream inputs for the period of stream simulation were
identified to account volumetrically and spatially for increases or
decreases in flow, dissolved oxygen, BOD, and coliforms resulting
from such sources. The sources of inputs for which some data existed
are shown in Figure 2. This figure also illustrates the stream profile,
stream reaches and elements of reaches. The reaches and elements are
each described in a later section of this chapter. It should be noted that
data for the effluent from the waste treatment plant at Waipio Acres was
used in part to estimate the quality of Waikakalaua Stream, for which no
quality records exist. Further, data for the effluent at Mililani Town
were used in part to estimate the quality of Kipapa Stream, for which
quality records are sparse to nonexistent. These effluent quality data
were graciously supplied from unpublished records by the City and County
of Honolulu. Itmightalso be noted that Waihole Ditch transports irrigation
"water from eastern to central Oahu during the dryer months of the year,
drawing some supplemental water from Waikele Stream. It was assumed
in this work that it was not in use during April 1972, or at least that
the supplemental water was not being withdrawn.
Historical monitoring station data were used to validate the
modeled results and were useful for adjusting stream constants during the
calibration phase. Unfortunately, there were only two monitoring stations
on Waikele Stream, both near the mouth, A U.S. Geological Survey station
near Waipahu provided continuous records of flow and some quality data.
Additional quality data were recorded at a U.S. Navy Sampling Station near
the mouth for post-1971 periods. These were the only records available
for validating the stream model.
STREAM REACHES AND ELEMENTS
The ten miles of Waikele Stream from the outfall of the
Srhofield Barracks waste treament plant to the stream's mouth at Pearl
Harbor were divided into six reaches for modeling purposes. These model
reaches were chosen as hydraulically and topographically similar sections
of the stream.
The reaches were then subdivided into 39 one-quarter mile
long elements for further detail. These elements, which the model's
structure requires, serve primarily as points of input for waste discharges
and inflows from tributaries. Figure 2 illustrates the reaches, elements,
stream profile, major discharges and tributaries, and monitoring
-------
stations. Notice that each discharger, tributary, or monitoring
station has been assigned to the particular element that corresponds
most closely to its actual location along the stream profile.
800 r
600
I
5
400
200
54321 765432 I 54321
REACH NUMBER
5|4|3|2|l | ELEMENT NUMBER
456
RIVER MILE
I
9
I
10
FIGURE 2
WAIKELE STREAM PROFILE AND MODEL REACHES
VALIDATION PERIODS
Tvvo periods were selected for validating the stream model,
April and September 1972. Since the available data were sparse for all
months these two periods were selected merely to correspond to the
estuary model validation periods, which in turn were based on data
availability for Pearl Harbor. The calendar year 1972 was selected since
the majority of the useful estuary data was collected by the U.S. Navy
at that time. Two months were simulated as a means of checking both
a wet month (April) and a dry month (September).
10
-------
The quantities and qualities of inputs for these two periods
are listed in Tables 1 and 2. In April a headwater flow of 1. 5 cfs was
assumed with a high dissolved oxygen level and low BOD and coliforms.
Schofield Barracks produced an effluent of 2. 5 cfs that was high in BOD
and coliforms and with a dissolved oxygen content of 5.0 mg/1.
Waikakalaua and Kipapa Streams supplied a major portion of the flow.
Both of these were high in dissolved oxygen and relatively low in BOD
and coliforms. No withdrawals were assumed for Waihole Ditch but
substantial flow was included for underground springs in the vicinity
of reach 5. Although quality input values for these springs were unknown,
relatively low concentrations were assumed for dissolved oxygen, BOD,
and coliforms.
In September the influent stream flows were all decreased.
Headwater was assumed negligible, Waikakalaua Stream flow was halved,
Kipapa Stream flow was only a tenth of the April flow, and the springs
were decreased by 25 percent. The quality of the input generally
diminished as well. The Schofield Barracks flow was the same as in
April while the BOD and coliforms increased slightly. From the Waikele
Stream flow, 3. 5 cfs were diverted to Waihole Ditch for transportion to
central Oahu. The water was withdrawn at the simulated quality level
in element 5 of reach 2.
BASELINE SIMULATION
A baseline simulation was identified as the April 1972 set of
rate coefficients and results. All subsequent sensitivity analyses were
compared against this base case. The critical portion of this phase of
work was identifying the three stream constants required for the model
simulation of dissolved oxygen, BCD, and coliform organisms. These
three stream constants are:
1) The biological deoxygenation rate constant, K .
2) The reaeration rate constant,^. (Although values
were assigned in this simulation, a model option
allows this constant to be calculated from one
of five equations found in the environmental
engineering literature).
3) The dieaway rate constant for coliforms, called K,-.
After several trial simulations with the model, a value of 0. 2
per day was chosen for K^ for all reaches; K$ was assigned a value
of 0.5 per day; and #2 was assigned a value of 1. 0 per day for all reaches
except the most downstream reach where a value of 0.8 was
assigned.
11
-------
TABLE 1
Input Quantities and Qualities for April 197Z
Discharge
Identification
Headwater
Schofield Barracks
Waikakalaua Stream
Waihole Ditch
Kipapa Stream
Springs
Flow,
cfs
1. 5
2. 5
5. 2
-0
15. 5
15. 5
D. O. ,
mg/1
9.2
5.0
8. 2
8. 3
4.0
5-day
B.O.D,
mg/1
0. 5
26. 0
1. 6
1. 0
0. 5
Coliforms,
MPN/100 ml
1
155, 000
3, 300
126
1
TABLE 2
Input Quantities and Qualities for September 1972
Discharge
Indentification
Headwater
Schofield Barracks
Waikakalaua Stream
Waihole Ditch
Kipapa Stream
Springs
Flow,
cfs
0
2. 5
2. 6
-3.4*
1. 5
11. 6
D. 0. ,
mg/1
5. 0
8.0
5. 3
4. 0
5 -day
B.O.D. ,
mg/1
32. 1
2. 3
8.9
0. 5
Coliforms
MPN/100 ml
160, 000
366
1, 365
1
"'Removed at modeled quality of Waikele Stream at the point of withdrawal,
12
-------
It was originally intended that be calculated from the
Thackston and Krenkel expression:
K2 = 10.8 (1 + F°-5) |* X 2.31 (D
where F is the Froude Number,
F = ^D (2)
5.675 un
- X
u* is the shear velocity,
1.49 D ' D
D is the depth of flow, u is the average velocity in the stream, g is the
acceleration of gravity, S is the slope of the energy grade line, and
n is the Manning roughness coefficient. If one makes some reasonable
assumptions and does some substitution of equations 2 and 3 into equation
1, the reaeration coefficient approximates
un
D1.167
(4)
' '
In some reaches of Waikele Stream the velocity, u, approaches
2 feet per second, and the depth is as low as 0. 2 feet. If n is taken
as 0.04, #2 will be calculated to be as high as 70 per day, clearly an
unreasonable value. Therefore, this optional expression and others in
the model for calculating.^ 'were not deemed adequate for rapid, shallow
streams; and more reasonable values of Ky were assigned for these
conditions.
VALIDATION RESULTS
Tables 3 and 4 present the modeled concentrations at the ends
of each reach given the inputs in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. Figures
3 and 4 illustrate the results for April and September on an element by
element basis. Major tributaries and waste dischargers are identified
in their respective elements on the figures. Although complete computer
results are presented in Appendices A and B, the results are summarized
in the following sections.
April 1972 Validation
The quality profiles of Figure 3 demonstrate the effects of the
major stream inputs listed in Table 1. The simulation begins at river
mile number 10 where the quality is that of the headwaters. As the
13
-------
TABLE 3
Concentrations of Modeled Constituents in
Waikele Stream for April 1972*
Constituent
Dissolved Oxygen,
mg/1
Biochemical Oxygen
Demand, mg/1
Coliform Organisms,
MPN/100 ml
Lower
1 2
6.41 7.35
16. 20 7. 84
93,462 41,213
End of
3
7. 26
7. 73
39, 872
Reach
456
7. 17 6.40 6. 46
7.62 2.32 2.29
38,408 8,741 8,514
TABLE 4
Concentrations of Modeled Constituents in
Waikele Stream for September 1972*
Constituent 1
Dissolved Oxygen,
mg/1 4.27
Biochemical Oxygen
Demand, mg/1 31.40
Coliform Organisms,
MPN/100 ml 151,414
Lower
2
5.98
16.41
71,400
End of Reach
3
5. 68
16. 04
68, 302
4
5.39
16. 62
63, 963
5 6
4.35 4.51
3.10 3.05
7,490 7,178
*Deoxygenation Rate:
K-2 =0.2 per day (all reaches)
Reaeration Rate:
K-2 = 1. 0 per day (reaches 1-5); 0.8 per day (reach 6)
Coliform Dieaway Rate:
Kg = 0.5 per day (all reaches)
14
-------
o
?co
og S Q ?UO
\J/ ^
D.O.
_
_i^2
ocr
xcr
trtCD ~T 10
rrr
f
1
20--
^ 16 -
5^ 12-
^ 4
n -
B.O.D.
m
- 8
- 6
- 4
- 2
- 0
- 20
- 16
- 12
- 8
- 4
- 0
d-x 100000 -r
II '
K 5 50,000 -
<0
1
0
* 1 '
6 5
6 5®|3|2|l 5]4t3]2ill
1 1 1
1 2 3
COLI FORMS
4
3|7|6|5|4|3|2| 1 |7|6|5
1
4 5
3 2
1
4|3|2| 1 fS]4 3 2[M8 7 6|5]4|3|2| l"1
I 1 1 1
67891
- 100,000
- 50,000
- IO,OOO
REACH NUMBER
ELEMENT NUMBER
0
RIVER MILE
Recorded Measurement
Element Receiving Tributary or
Waste Effluent Discharge
Element Containing Monitoring
Stations
FIGURE 3
WAIKELE STREAM QUALITY PROFILES FOR APRIL 1972
-------
I
it
r
I
32
28
24
20
16
12
8
4
0
B.O.D.
-•32
--28
--24
20
16
12
8
4
0
K
18
200,000 -
150,000 -
100,000 -
50,000 -
10,000 -
0 -
COLIFORMS
6
6
b
4
6
2
1
1
5
5
4|3|2|J
4
8
7|6|5
4|3|2
1
3
7
6|5|4
3
?
1
2
5|4|3
2fl
r~*~~ ""
.—
-------
effluent from Schofield Barracks enters the stream the quality
deteriorates markedly. This effluent reduces the dissolved oxygen by
3 mg/1 and increases both the BOD and coliforms by 16 mg/1 and almost
100, 000 MPN/100 ml, respectively.
Beneficial effects are evident from Waikakalaua and Kipapa
Streams in reaches 2 and 5, Between the two streams dissolved oxygen
is increased by almost 1. 5 mg/1, BOD is decreased by about 12. 5 mg/1,
and the coliform concentration drops by almost 80,000 MPN/100 ml. The
springs near the lower end of the stream also decrease BOD and coliforms
but have the detrimental effect of decreasing dissolved oxygen by almost
1.5 mg/1 based on the assumed input DO concentration of 4. 0 mg/1. At
the mouth of Waikele Stream the simulated concentrations for dissolved
oxygen, BOD, and coliforms were 6. 5 mg/1, 2. 3 mg/1, and 8, 500
MPN/100 ml, respectively,
Unfortunately, these resulis may not be compared against
historical results since only one measurement was taken in April 1972.
However, there were several measurements for months other than April
at both the USGS gaging station and the U.S. Navy sampling station in
Element 4 of Reach 6. The complete record of these measurements is
presented in Table 5.
TABLE 5
Water Quality Data for Waikele Stream
Constituent
Date Samples
Concentration, mg/1 or MPN/100 ml
Minimum Maximum Average
Navy Sampling Station TT01
Dissolved Oxygen 1/72
Dissolved Oxygen 2/72
Dissolved Oxygen 3/72
Total Coliform 3/72
Total Coliform 4/72
U.S. G.S. Station 2130
Dissolved Oxygen 6/72
5
2
2
1
7.0
8.0
7. 7
, 700
8. 7
8.9
12,300
7. 6
8. 3
8. 3
10,500
19,000
8. 0
17
-------
The measurements presented in Table 5 allow several
conclusions to be drawn if they are accepted as indicative of the April
1972 input conditions. First, the model simulated coliforms reasonably
well from the known Schofield Barracks effluent concentration to the known
value at Element 4 of Reach 6. Second, the modeled dissolved oxygen
value at the mouth of the stream does not correspond to the measured
values for previous months. Upon examination of the data in Table 1,
it is evident that the assumed dissolved oxygen level for the springs (4.0
mg/1) may very well have been too low. Since no data are available for
this constituent perhaps further investigation should be made into this
very important source, especially given the fairly significant effect that
the model simulated. If the input quality is actually close to 8.0 mg/1,
or if the spring flow is substantially less than the long-term average
flow used herein, then the model results for dissolved oxygen would have
been muchmore accurate. The results are reasonable as it is. Finally, no
conclusions regarding validation may be drawn from the BOD results
since no measurements were recorded. However, the modeled BOD was
consumed in an appropriate fashion downstream, and the model appears
to have represented this phenomenon correctly.
September 1972 Validation
A second stream validation was made for the low flow period of
September 1972. The quality profiles of Figure 4 demonstrate the effects
of the major stream inputs listed in Table 2. Since no headwater flow
was assumed for this dry period the simulation begins with the Schofield
Barracks effluent. The dissolved oxygen, BOD, and coliform concen-
trations all decreased appropriately until Waikakalaua Stream joined
Waikele Stream. Having essentially the same flow as the Schofield
Barracks effluent and being substantially better in quality, the Waikakalaua
flow resulted in the beneficial effects of increasing dissolved oxygen by
1.9 mg/1 while decreasing BOD and coliforms by 14. 8 mg/1 and 77, 000
MPN/100 ml, respectively.
The Waihole Ditch diversion of approximately two-thirds of the
Waikele Stream flow for irrigation purposes had no effect on the constituent
concentrations in the stream. Following the diversion, the addition of
Kipapa Stream approximately doubled the total flow. In addition, it had
little effect on dissolved oxygen since it was added at about the
simulated level of 5.4 mg/1. However, both BOD and coliforms were
reduced to some extent.
The springs near the mouth of Waikele Stream reduced the
dissolved oxygen by 1.0 mg/1 and BOD and coliforms to about one-
fourth of their previous values. The resultant simulated concentrations
at the mouth of Waikele Stream for dissolved oxygen, BOD, and coliforms
were 4. 5 mg/1, 3. 1 mg/1, and 7, 200 MPN/100 ml, respectively. Although
no measurements were taken during September 1972, the model appears
to have simulated the concentrations in a reasonable manner.
-------
Comparing Figures 3 and 4 it is evident that the average
dissolved oxygen concentrations are almost 2. 0 mg/1 less in the low flow
month of September. BOD levels are generally double those of April
except at the mouth of the stream where they are about equal. Coliform
concentrations in September range from equal to double those of April.
It should be noted that QUAL II has been previously validated
for a number of streams on which more measurements have been taken
[8,9,10,13,15,16]. Those results demonstrated the model is a most
useful and satisfactorily accurate tool for stream simulations. A network
now exits for the Waikele Stream situation and the model is operational
for it. It would seem that the model could be used most effectively
to guide future planning and data collection efforts for this stream, as
well as for other Hawaiian streams.
19
-------
I. STREAM MODEL SENSITIVITY ANALYSES
GENERAL APPROACH
The purpose of the sensitivity analyses was to demonstrate the
effects of varying stream rate constants by significant amounts from
those used in the base case to determine the sensitivity of modeled results
to the use of specific constants. Eight sensitivity analyses were made
for the model by independently varying either the deoxygenation rate
constant, reaeration rate constant, coliform dieaway rate constant, or
inflow quantities. The baseline simulation values of these four constants
were increased by 100 percent or decreased by 50 percent one at a
time to produce the eight analyses.
SENSITIVITY ANALYSES RESULTS
Table 6 summarizes the results of the sensitivity analyses for
the stream model. The table first presents the April 1972 concentrations
for dissolved oxygen, BOD, and coliforms for the downstream element
in each of the six stream reaches. The effects on the constituent
concentrations of altering the biochemical deoxygenation rate, reaeration
rate, coliform dieaway rate, and stream flows are then shown as a positive
or negative percentage of the original value.
These results generally demonstrate that the model simulation
for Waikele Stream will not vary much with rather large changes in
assumptions related to rate constants and input flows. A description of the
results is provided below.
An increase in the biochemical deoxygenation rate, K«3 of 100
percent (from 0.2 to 0.4 per day) decreased the dissolved oxygen and
BOD concentations by 2.0 to 7-0 percent and 1.4 to 5.2 percent,
respectively. Conversely, a decrease of 50 percent in the rate (from
0. 2 to 0. 1 per day) resulted in 1.1 to 3. 6 percent increases in dissolved
oxygen and 0.7 to 3.1 percent increases in BOD. Coliforms were not
affected by the deoxygenation rate.
An increase in the reaeration rate, K^ of 100 percent (from
1.0 to 2, 0 per day for all but the most downstream reach where the value
was increased from 0.8 to 1.6 per day) increased the dissolved oxygen
by 1.5 to 2.9 percent. A 50 percent decrease in the rate reduced the
dissolved oxygen by 0.8 to 1.8 percent. BOD and coliforms were not
affected by the reaeration rate.
20
-------
TABLE 6
Percentage Effects on Modeled Constituents in Waikele Stream
Caused by Specified Percentage Changes in Several Model Parameters
Parameter Modified
Constituent
Reach Modeled
1 DO
BOD
Coliforms
2 DO
BOD
Coliforms
3 DO
BOD
Coliforms
4 DO
BOD
Coliforms
5 DO
BOD
Coliforms
6 DO
BOD
Coliforms
April
Base
Value
6.
16.
93,
7.
7.
41,
7.
7.
39,
7.
7.
38,
6.
2.
8,
6.
2.
3,
41
20
462
35
84
213
26
73
872
17
62
408
40
32
741
46
29
514
Deoxygenation
Kl
+ 100
-4. 99
-1.42
0
-3.40
-2. 30
0
-5. 10
-3.49
0
-6. 97
-4.99
0
-2. 03
-4. 74
0
-2. 01
-5. 24
0
-50
+ 2. 65
+ 0. 74
0
+ 1.77
+ 1. 15
0
+ 2. 62
+ 1. 94
0
+ 3. 63
+ 2. 62
0
+ 1.09
+ 2. 16
0
+ 1. 70
+ 3.06
0
Reaeration
K2
+ 100
+ 2. 65
0
0
+ 1. 50
0
0
+ 2. 20
0
0
+ 2. 93
0
0
+ 1. 25
0
0
+ 2. 63
0
0
-50
-1.40
0
0
-0. 82
0
0
-1. 24
0
0
-1. 81
0
0
-0. 78
0
0
-1.39
0
0
Coliform Decay
KS
+ 100
0
0
-3.49
0
0
-6. 12
0
0
-8.94
0
0
-12. 25
0
0
-13. 59
0
0
-15. 82
-50
0
0
+ 1. 80
0
0
+ 3. 10
0
0
+4. 81
0
0
+ 6. 78
0
0
+ 7. 62
0
0
+9. 04
Streamflow
Q
+ 100
+ 0. 62
+ 0. 31
+0. 74
+ 0.41
+ 0.51
+ 1. 23
+ 0. 55
+ 0. 78
+ 1. 96
+ 0. 84
+ 1. 05
+ 2. 73
+ 0. 15
+ 0. 86
+ 3. 09
0
+ 2. 18
+ 3. 69
-50
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-1.
-0.
-0.
-2.
-0.
-0.
-3.
-0.
-1.
-3.
+ 0.
-1.
-4.
60
37
94
54
64
58
69
91
42
98
31
34
16
29
75
15
31
46
-------
When the coliform dieaway rate constant, K^3 was increased
by 100 percent (from 0.5 to 1.0 per day) the coliform concentration
decreased by 3.5 to 15.8 percent. A 50 percent decrease in the rate
increased the coliform concentrations by 1.8 to 9.0 percent. The
percentage effects became more pronounced in both cases as the base
concentrations decreased. Dissolved oxygen and BOD were not affected
by the changes to the coliform dieaway rate constant.
An increase of all stream inflows by 100 percent resulted in
increases of less than one percent for dissolved oxygen and BOD and a
maximum of 3. 7 percent for coliforms, all essentially negligible changes.
A decrease of 50 percent in the flow had a similar negligible effect on
the three constituents. One may conclude that the model of Waikele
Stream is relatively insensitive to the selection of stream constants and
flows.
22
-------
IV. ESTUARY MODEL VALIDATION
GENERAL APPROACH
The validation of the estuary model followed these five steps:
(1) Major dischargers, tributaries, and monitoring
stations were identified.
(Z) A network of nodes and channels was developed
to represent Pearl Harbor.
(3) Validation periods were selected.
(4) Baseline simulation conditions were established
by selecting reaction rates and other model
constants.
(5) The baseline simulation was compared with
historical measurements and the reaction rates
were adjusted until a satisfactory simulation of
the prototype was obtained.
Each of these five steps are described in the following sections of this
chapter.
ESTUARY INPUTS AND MONITORING STATIONS
Since the Data Report for the Pearl Harbor System of Hawaii
[12] presents detailed descriptions of the data gathering phase of the
study, a data summary will suffice for the purposes of this report. Major
dischargers, tributaries, and monitoring station locations each influenced
the locations selected for nodes in the model network. Nodes were
required near the dischargers and tributaries for the model to accept
waste loads correctly, and they were also necessary near monitoring
stations to facilitate validation of the model.
Figure 5 shows the locations of point waste dischargers and
major tributaries included in the model simulation. Some stream inputs
were not included due to insufficient data. The model network, which
is described in the following section of this chapter, is also reproduced
in the figure to make evident the noder, at which the tributaries and waste
dischargers enter the network. Table 7 presents the inflow quantities
and qualities for each of these point waste dischargers for April 1972
conditions.
Water quality and biological samples have been collected by
the U.S. Navy's Environmental Protection Data Base Program since at
least Septembe r 1971. Some 90 to 100 stations have been monitored
23
-------
-HAWAIIAN ELECTRIC POWER PLANT
PEARL CITY STP-,
,—WAIMALU STREAM
KALAUAO STREAM
WAIKELE STREAM
HALAWA STREAM
FIGURE 5
MODEL NETWORK AND SIMULATED POINT DISCHARGERS AND TRIBUTARIES TO PEARL HARBOR
-------
TABLE 7
April 1972 Flow and Quality Input Data for
Point Waste Discharges and Tributary Streams
Inflow
Inflow Quality (r
Node (cfs) Temp (C) Oxy
22
55
54
44
33
32
32
56
tv
01 24
\J 1
2
2
38
39
40
42
43
45
50
51
Walkele £tream
77.80 24.2 8.
Waimalu Stream
7.30 26.0 8.
Kalauao Stream
2.60 26.2 9.
Halawa Stream
9.60 29.3 10.
Waiawa Stream
27.80 24.5 6.
Waipahu STP
2.39 25.7
Pearl City STP
5.00 25.1 2.
Hawaiian Electric Withdrawal
-570.80 .0
Hawaiian Electric
570.80 .0
Fort Kamehameha STP
6.10 26.0 2.
Iroquoie Point STP
.59 26.6 1.
Navy Ships (approximated)
.02 27.0 5.
Navy Ships (approximated)
.02 27.0 5.
Navy Shipa (approximated)
.02 27.0 5.
Navy Ships (approximated)
.02 27.0 5.
Navy Shipe (approximated)
.02 27.0 5.
Navy Ships (approximated)
.02 27.0 5.
Navy Ships (approximated)
.02 27.0 5.
Navy Ships (approximated)
.02 27.0 5.
3
3
9
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
BOD
93.
186.
15.
125.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
3
3
3
3
2
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
.0
0
0
.0
0
0
0
ng/1 except as noted)
Chlor A
.010
.010
.010
.010
. 010
.000
. 000
.000
. 000
. 000
. 000
. 000
.000
.000
.000
. 000
.000
.000
. 000
NH3
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
15.
15.
5.
15.
50.
50.
50.
50.
50.
50,
50.
50,
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
,00
00
,00
.00
,00
.00
NO2
.017
. 017
. Oil
.013
. 015
. 000
. 000
,000
. 000
. 000
. 000
.000
. 000
.000
. 000
. 000
. 000
. 000
. 000
NO3
1. 20 '
1. 20
.79
. 23
. 20
10. 00
10.00
.00
.00
20.00
10.00
. 00
.06
. 00
. 00
.00
.00
.00
. 00
PO4
28.
14.
15.
10.
20.
20.
20.
20.
20.
20,
20,
20
60
01
09
05
24
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
,00
,00
, 00
.00
.00
.00
.00
Colif (MPN) TDS
. 19+05
. 11+06
. 22+05
. 52+05
. 15+06
. 53+07
. 18+05
.00
.00
.50+03
. 50+04
. 30+09
. 30+09
. 30+09
. 30+09
. 30+09
. 30+09
. 30+09
. 30+09
300.
1100.
11800.
900.
2000.
830,
573.
0.
0.
500.
500.
350.
350.
350.
350.
350.
350.
350.
350.
TOT N
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
30.
33.
30.
30.
70.
70.
70.
70.
70.
70.
70.
70.
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
Heavy Metals 1
. 10-01
. 10-01
. 10-01
. 10-01
. 20+00
. 10-01
. 10-01
.CO
.00
. 10-01
. 10-01
. 10-01
. 10-01
. 10-01
. 10-01
. 10-01
. 10-01
. 10-01
. 10-01
Si 2
. 10-01
. 10-01
. 10-01
. 10-01
. 10+00
. 10-01
. 10
.00
.00
-01
. 10-01
. 10
. 10
. 10
. 10
. 10
. 10
. 10
. 10
. 10
-01
-01
-01
-01
-01
-01
-01
-01
-01
Pesticides 1 & 2
. 50-02
. 50-02
. 50-02
. 50-02
.50-02
. 10-01
. 10-01
.00
.00
. 10-01
. 10-01
. 00
. 00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
. 50-02
. 50-02
. 50-02
. 50-02
. 50-02
. 10-01
. 10-01
.00
.00
. 10-01
. 10-01
.00
.00
.00
. 00
.00
.00
.00
.00
-------
within Pearl Harbor in addition to stations near the mouths of major
tributaries. Figure 6 illustrates the water quality stations, and Figure
7 shows the biological and tributary stations. These stations provide
data for the estuary model validation process. The actual data available
at each station are referenced in the Data Report [12].
ESTUARY MODEL NETWORK
The network of nodes and channels for the Pearl Harbor
system, including the West, Middle, and East Lochs, was constructed
using the following guidelines:
(1) Nodes were located where:
(a) a major tributary or waste discharge
enters the harbor,
(b) a water quality monitoring station exists,
(c) a significant change in harbor geometry
occurs, or
(d) no particularly significant event occurs,
but a node is needed within a reasonable
travel time or distance from adjacent
nodes.
(2) Channels, or "links", were formed almost auto-
matically as interconnections between or among
node s.
The resulting model network consisting of 57 nodes and 92 channels
has been shown in Figure 5. The correspondence between nodes and point
dischargers is given in Table 7 while that between nodes and monitoring
stations has been presented in the Data Report.
The nodes are associated with a surface area, volume, and
depth of water at mean tide. Channels are defined by a length, width,
cross-sectional area, and depth at mean tide at their midpoints. During
a model execution, masses of water as well as quality and biological
constituents are mathematically moved along channels from node to node
until equilibrium occurs. The complete description of mathematical
computations is contained in the Documentation Report [14], a further
product of this study.
VALIDATION PERIODS
The calendar year 1972 was selected as the validation period
since the majority of useful data was collected by the U.S. Navy at that
time. Baseline simulations of Pearl Harbor were made for April and
26
-------
FIGURE 6
U. S. NAVY SAMPLING STATIONS FOR WATER QUALITY IN PEARL HARBOR
-------
1X1
00
/•TTOI
• BEOI // //,
FIGURE 7
BIOLOGICAL AND TRIBUTARY SAMPLING STATIONS IN PEARL HARBOR
-------
September 1972 conditions, permitting examination of the effects of wet
and dry months and varying meteorologic seasons. The April simulation
represents the average conditions for April 1972, a wet month with
relatively high winds. The September simulation corresponds to a dry
month with winds lower than those in April.
The complete results for the thirtieth day of each period are
presented in Appendix C. The results for April are described in some
detail in the remainder of this chapter.
BASELINE SIMULATION
The baseline simulation for the estuary model was taken as
the April 1972 validation case. All sensitivity analyses were compared
against the April simulation and are described in Chapter V. The results
for the following constituents are listed in Appendix C:
Temperature
Dissolved Oxygen
Carbonaceous BOD
Chlorophyll a.
Ammonia Nitrogen
Nitrite Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
Phosphate Phosphorus
Coliform Bacteria
Salinity
Total Nitrogen
Heavy Metal No. 1
Heavy Metal No. 2
Pesticide No. 1
Pesticide No. 2
All results in Appendix C represent the constituent levels at
the fourteenth hour of the thirtieth day. It should be noted that the dynamic
equilibrium conditions had not been attained at that time, and were not
to be, since a 24 hour solar cycle and a 24 1/2 hour tidal cycle operated
together cause inherent disequilibria that can never be overcome. Although
many results tend to be reproduced from the twenty-ninth day to the
thirtieth, the equilibrium condition was never quite obtained. Figure 8
illustrate s the simulation of salinity and dissolved oxygen at several nodes
over the 30-day period.
The reaction rates and other model constants used to obtain
the final results are presented in Appendix D. Several of these
coefficients were modified in the sensitivity analyses, as discussed in
Chapter V. Those coefficients modified included the biological
29
-------
40 T
\
X
13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 3O
NODE 23
12 T
10 --
8 -
! .
4 -•
2-
NODE 23
H h
* 1 1 1 1 1—I
3 5 7 9 II 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 2930
Days fat Midnight)
FIGURE 8
SIMULATED SALINITY AND DISSOLVED OXYGEN CONCENTRATIONS
AT SEVERAL NODES FOR A 30-DAY PERIOD
30
-------
deoxygenation rate, reaeration rate, coliform dieaway rate, quality time
step, Manning's roughness coefficient, and the tributary stream inflows.
A modeling problem resulted with the reaeration rate selection and is
discussed in the remainder of this section.
At one point it was believed that the estuary model was as
close to being validated as it was likely to get. There was a disturbing
problem, however, with very low dissolved oxygen levels (0-4 mg/1)
over much of the harbor and quite high values (up to 1 . 5 times saturation)
at several nodes.
This was a manifestation of the problems, once again, of
selecting a proper value for the reaeration rate, K%. In the estuary
model Kg was computed for each junction from the expression
X 86, 400
(5)
,
where
K
^/
D
V
D
86 j 400
reaeration coefficient, per day;
- 8
molecular diffusion coefficient (2. Z5 X 10 )
ft /sec;
velocity in the channel(s) entering each junction,
f t / s e c ;
depth of the junction, ft;
number of seconds per day.
Removing both constants leaves
= 13
(6)
The velocities and depths of the channels entering each junction
give values for -Kg that range roughly from 0.04 to 0. 1 per day. This
value is used in an expression for the change in oxygen concentration
during each time step:
(Cs - C)
(7)
31
-------
where
A£ = change in oxygen concentration due to reaeration,
mg/1;
At = time, days;
K = reaeration coefficient per day;
Ci
C - saturation concentration of oxygen
s (temperature and salinity dependent), mg/1;
C - concentration of oxygen at the last time step,
mg/1.
It can be seen that a low value of K2 will allow only a small
amount of oxygen to be added to a junction by reaeration during a time
step. When supersaturation occurs caused by algal photosynthesis, a low
value of K.2 will not allow much oxygen to escape to the atmosphere
(i.e., when CS-C is negative). Consequently, in the model, where BOD
is present in the water, the dissolved oxygen will get lower and lower,
because reaeration cannot keep up with bacterial deoxygenation. But at
the same time where algae are growing rapidly (particularly in shallow,
quiet areas of the harbor such as upper West Loch) the oxygen produced
by photosynthesis will build up to supersaturation conditions which cannot
be relieved by escape to the atmosphere. The result is low dissolved
oxygen where BOD persists and algae do not proliferate, and high
dissolved oxygen where conditions are ideal for algal growth.
The solution to this set of problems is not straightforward,
and indeed may not exist. The crux of this problem is not with the
algebraic expression for #3 ; it lies in the fact that we are attempting
to model a three-dimensional state of affairs with EL qua si-two-dimensional
model. Pearl Harbor is stratified much of the year in the vertical. Data
indicate that while all the harbor was not stratified in April 1972, much
of it was [l]. Data also show that the average dissolved oxygen level
in the water less than 5 feet from the surface was between 5 and 7 mg/1,
while water at depth averaged 1-4 mg/1.
The model assumes, regardless of the value of K? or how it
is estimated, that oxygen enters or leaves the entire water column in
each time step depending on the sign of Cs - C . Indeed it assumes
that the water is fully mixed in the vertical for all purposes with the
exception that algae "grow" only in the zone where significant light
penetrates, but then the algae so grown are mixed throughout the entire
junction volume.
32
-------
The only alternative worthy of consideration was to try other
values of K% arbitrarily to attempt to find a value that would yield oxygen
levels between those measured at the surface and those measured at
depth. The four values tried were: 1) a calculated Kg, 2) an assigned
value of 1.0 for all junctions, 3) 0.2, and 4) 0.1. The results indicate
that when K% was calculated (the lowest values used), the oxygen levels
approximated what has been found to occur in the lower layer of the harbor
(0-4 mg/1). When K% was set equal to 1.0, the harbor became very
nearly saturated throughout, regardless of algae, BOD, or other
influences. The value of K% = 0.1 yielded dissolved oxygen values about
midway between measured values at the surface and at depth, with the
exception of the upper West Loch junctions which become and remained
supersaturated. Therefore, the value of K? - 0. 1 was used in the baseline
simulation.
VALIDATION RESULTS
As stated in the contract's description of the Dynamic Estuary
Model, it is applicable "to any estuary wherein vertical stratification is
either absent or is limited to relatively small areas within the estuary.'1
Although conditions in Pearl Harbor do not fit this description, WRE
was able to obtain very reasonable results which demonstrated that even
in the stratified condition the model is capable of producing results that
maybe viewed as the average representation of quality factors between
the upper and lower layers (vhere they exist). Model results should prove
especially useful in identifying the total net effects of waste discharges
on the quality of Pearl Harbor. The model should also be directly
applicable to other, nonstratified estuaries.
Hydraulic s
Since the hydraulics subprogram of the estuary model has
previously been validated for San Francisco and San Diego Bays [3, 6, 7],
no attempt was made to validate the hydraulics, especially in light of
the lack of sufficient head and current data. However, all heads and
currents were checked for reasonableness against the data that were
available [1,4],
The hydraulic solution is driven by the tides imposed on the
system at the seaward node, the mouth of the harbor. For the model
simulations, average tides were applied for the months of April and
September 1972. That is, in each month the daily higher-high, lower-
high, higher-low and lower-low tides were averaged and fit statistically
to a six term sine-cosine function to represent an "average" condition for
the month. These tides are shown in Figure 9. The range of tidal
amplitudes in April was 1.7 feet with a mean of -0.055 feet. In
September the range was 1.8 feet with a mean of 0. 179 feet. Hydraulic
results for April and September 1972, are provided in Appendix E.
33
-------
9 12 15
Time of Day, hours
April 1972
24 5
9 12 15
Time of Day, hours
September 1972
18
21
24 5
FIGURE 9
AVERAGE TIDES FOR APRIL AND SEPTEMBER 1972
34
-------
Quality
Although certain features of the quality submodel have also
been previously validated for San Francisco and San Diego Bays and the
Columbia River [2, 3, 6, 7], significant additions have been made in this
project. The baseline simulation output correspondence to measured
Navy data are presented in this section. Direct comparisons should be
avoided due to the previous caveat concerning stratified estuaries.
Reasonableness should be expected, however.
Results for the April 1972 baseline simulation are presented
in Figures 10, 11, 12 and 13. Each figure illustrates the measured
and simulated quality levels for four constituents along one of five profiles,
one from the harbor mouth up each of the three main lochs, a fourth
north of Ford Island, and a fifth into the Southeast Loch. Figure 5 should
be used in conjunction with these figures to determine the paths plotted.
The four constituents shown on the figures are temperature, salinity,
dissolved oxygen, and phosphorus.
The Navy data were recorded in two groups for each month:
those measurements at less than five feet and those at greater than five
feet. Ranges of values are plotted for each group since measurements
were taken at different days, times, and depths. All values were obtained
in April 1972 except as noted on the figures. Exceptions were used
where a lack of data existed for April 1972. Values shown in these cases
generally represent measurements for March or May 1972.
As shown in Figures 10 to 13, simulated qualities are
generally bracketed by the measured ranges. Major discrepancies are
explained later in this section in a discussion of results for each loch.
Although some Navy data for coliforms exist, the data are
highly variable and seemingly related to coliform sources that were not
modeled in this study. The modeled results correlate well with measured
values near major dischargers, such as the Pearl City and Fort
Kamehameha sewage treatment plants, but are generally low elsewhere.
This may be attributed to any or all of three factors: 1) unidentified point
source discharges, 2) unidentified nonpoint source discharges, and
3) possible phenomena, such as regrowth of coliforms in the bottom muds,
that were not modeled.
The Navy sampling program was not very comprehensive for
constituents such as chlorophyll a. and the nitrogen forms, and therefore,
extensive comparisons were not possible. Complete model results for
all constituents are presented in Appendix C, however. The discussions
that follow relate to dissolved oxygen, salinity, temperature, and phos-
phorus in each loch.
35
-------
50
\0 T
\
I
40--
30 --
§
20-
\0 --
Modeled
Range °> <5'
Range at ) 5'
0 or x Not an April Value
H h
H h
H \-
H
24 5 7 8 \0 \2 \8 \9 22
Model Nodes
\
tr,
8 --
6 -r
4 •-
2 •-
H - \ - \
\ - \ - \ - h
\ 2 4 5 7 8 \0 \2 \e \9 22
Model Nodes
50 •
40-
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i
.25 T
\ 2 4 5 7 8 \0 \2 \8
Model Nodes
22
2 4
^
5 7 8 \0 \2 \8 \9 22
Model Nodes
FIGURE 10
WEST LOCH VALIDATION RESULTS FOR APRIL 1972
36
-------
50-r
40-
30-
, 20-
I'
\0--
0
Modeled
Range at (5'
Range at > 5'
0 or x Not an April Value
-\ \ h
\ \ \
4 25 26 27 28 29 30 32 34
Model Nodes
40 T
I
20 +
I
10--
H \ \ \ \ \ \ \
4 25 26 27 28 29 30 32 34
Model Nodes
0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
4 25 26 27 28 29 30 32 34
Model Nodes
0.94 0
0.4 T
4 25 26 27 28 29 30 32 34
Model Nodes
FIGURE 11
MIDDLE LOCH VALIDATION RESULTS FOR APRIL 1972
37
-------
50
|M04
10 T
§304
20 --
10 --
0
~~ . Modeled
,_^_ Range at <5'
" -'- Range at >5'
0 or X M?/ 0/7 xlp/v/ l
27 47 48 49
Model Nodes
50 T
40 --
I
Qj
I 2°
r^
10 -•
-4-
-4-
27 47 48 49
Model Nodes
\
I
6 --
-
4 --
2 --
0
-4-
-4-
-4-
27 47 48 49
Model Nodes
1.0 T
27 47 48 49
Model Nodes
FIGURE 12
UPPER EAST LOCH VALIDATION RESULTS FOR APRIL 1972
38
-------
5O •
40 •
\
"o 30 •
^">
§
Q)
""_ 20 •
.C
<0 10 ^
10 -
\ 8-
„-*"- >''~~^r IS"
BSffiSfiBteiiSaQ — „ ^k^^^SflBSSQgfl^rfi ~^~^$S3^T£.^~£z ~^- ^
t;
^\ - §, 6 -
^>
<3
"^
-^ 4 •
— ~. Modeled ^
^^Ran"^* ^
• 0 or K Not an April Value - 2 -
i i i i i i i i i i r\
,
\ -fif\J~
'o ^
1
1 1 1 1 1
37 38 43 44 52 54 55 39 40 41 42 37 38 43 44 52 54
Model Nodes Model
50 T - 1.0 ••
40 •
V 3° •
c;
3
•c;
1
|- 20 -
10 •
^
<> 0.08 •
5
to"
^
>^
0 - |_ 0.06 •
••' - c?
**°x^~&—~- ^JSi^§ J«— 0.
-i 0.04 -
d
^
Sr
o
-C; (
^ 0.02 •
<
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ^
o
:
r
/'
f"'
1
/',• "
\h
•f
1 :--
i-
ff
lh
jpf
IPP
j , X\ «•
* £f ^41
^' "-''i,
3
i i i i i
\ 1 1 1 1 1 1 T II *-/ I I I I I
37 38 43 44 52 54 55 39 40 41 42 37 38 43 44 52 54
1 ? *
rfisi 0 y(
**$ ffi'Q x
o \ ,v
?'
0
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
55 39 40 41 42
Nodes
-
V.
0 „
— "" *^'
i * M 1
f*y*^-o
V *
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
55 39 40 41 42
Model Nodes
Model Nodes
FIGURE 13
EAST AND SOUTHEAST LOCH VALIDATION RESULTS FOR APRIL 1972
39
-------
West Loch
Dissolved Oxygen. As shown in Figure 10 the model simu-
lation of dissolved oxygen corresponds to a value somewhere between the
measurements at 5 feet and the bottom except at node 22 near the mouth
of Waikele Stream. This area becomes supersaturated in the model due
to the existence of ideal conditions for algal growth in the upper loch.
These conditions include shallow, relatively stagnant water with an
abundant supply of nitrate nitrogen and phosphorus. The reader is referred
to the previous discussion of the model simulation of dissolved oxygen
under these same conditions in the Baseline Simulation section of this
chapter.
Salinity. Accurate results were again obtained for the salinity
simulation. However, at node 22 the results were suspect and,
unfortunately, no measurements had been taken in April. Upon exam-
ination of the input data it was apparent that the freshwater inflow
originally prepared for Waikele Stream (77.8 cfs) as an average of the
measured daily flows for April 1972 was biased on the high flow side,
since most of the flow had occurred on four days of extremely high
runoff. When a further simulation was made using a median of the daily
flows for Waikele Stream (40. 0 cfs) the modeled salinity at node 22
increased to the more realistic value of 17, 000 mg/1.
Tempe rature. As illustrated in Figure 10 the temperature
simulation is •well within the range of mesured values at all nodes.
Phosphorus. From Figure 10 it is apparent that the model
has simulated the phosphorus levels quite well. The peak value at the
mouth of Waikele Stream (node 22) appears high even though no
measurements were taken in April 1972. By reducing the stream inflow
to 40.0 cfs (as discussed in the salinity section) the phosphorus level
dropped to the more reasonable value of 0. 13 mg/1. This is within the
range indicated on the figure.
Middle Loch
In an attempt to understand the slightly anomalous behavior of
temperature at node 32, WRE discovered that different tributary inflows
at node 32 were used in the hydraulics and quality model runs. The
hydraulics modelused an inflow of 14.7 cfs rather than the more accurate
7. 39 cfs of inflow used in the quality model. This discrepancy affected
node 32 to the greatest extent and the adjacent nodes to a lesser degree.
Specific effects are noted in the following descriptions.
Dissolved Oxygen. All simulated values of dissolved oxygen
were contained within the range of measured values, as shown on
Figure 11. It might be observed that the simulated level of 2.0 mg/1
40
-------
at node 32, opposite the Pearl City and Waipahu sewage treatment plants,
was the lowest value at any node in the system. This value might have
been slightly higher without the inflow discrepancy.
Salinity. The correlation of simulated salinity "with measured
values was accurate except in the vicintiy of nodes 32 and 34. Although
no measurements were recorded in April 1972 for node 32 the simulated
level is low due to the discrepant 7.3 cfs of inflow added at node 32
with a concentration of 0 mg/1. The simulated salinity at node 34 was
also reduced by this error, as shown by Figure 11.
Temperature. All simulated values of temperature were
contained within the range of measured values for April 1972. Although
no April measurements were recorded at node 32, the anomalous decrease
in temperature at node 32 in the presence of relatively high temperature
inflows prompted the discovery of the additional inflow problem. In this
case, an additional 7.3 cfs of inflow with a temperature of 0 degrees
centigrade was essentially added at node 32, thereby reducingthe simulated
temperature by about 0. 5 degrees centigrade.
Phosphorus. Although few of the simulated phosphorus levels
for the Middle Loch were within the range of measurements, all are
relatively close and demonstrate the general trend toward the high peak
in the vicinity of nodes 32 and 34. The discrepant inflow problem at
node 32 had the effect of diluting the phosphorus inflow concentration by
half. Therefore, the simulated phosphorus levels shown on Figure 11
would tend to be higher without the additional 7. 3 cfs inflow at a concen-
tration of 0 mg/1 phosphorus.
East Loch
Figures 12 and 13 illustrate three major areas of the East
Loch: a path to the north of Ford Island, one to the south and east of
Ford Island, and a third into the Southeast Loch.
Dissolved Oxygen. The dissolved oxygen correspondence to
measured values is accurate in all cases except at node 42. Apparently
a greater waste load should have been included in the input data
approximation of waste load contributions.
Salinity. For the path from the mouth of the harbor up through
the channel north of Ford Island and into the East Loch all simulated
values of salinity were within the measured range. However, south of
Ford Island the model simulation tended to be lower than actual
measurements. Several factors were responsible for this condition.
First, the range of measurements at nodes 43, 44, and 52 is extremely
narrow compared to other locations. Second, the measurements are very
high relative to the exchange concentration at node 1. And third, since
41
-------
evaporation for the purpose of concentrating dissolved salts is not included
in the model, the maximum possible modeled value is the exchange
concentration at node 1; namely, 35. 6 g/1. Therefore, when the streams
are added as freshwater inflows to the lochs the salinity concentrations
naturally dropped below the maximum level.
Tempe rature. The temperature correlation was completely
within the range for the path north of Ford Island. However, the path
south of the island reflected an irregularity near Halawa Stream.
Whereas the measured values at the mouth of the stream were on the
order of 24 degrees centigrade, the modeled temperature remained high,
reflecting the relatively high stream input data temperature of 29.3
degrees centigrade. Values at all other nodes were within the desired
range.
Phosphorus. North of Ford Island the phosphorus corres-
pondence was excellent. South of the island the correlation appears
reasonable but comparisons are somewhat difficult due to insufficient
data measurement for April 1972.
42
-------
V. ESTUARY MODEL SENSITIVITY ANALYSES
GENERAL APPROACH
The purpose of the sensitivity analyses was to demonstrate the
effects of varying several model rate coefficients and fresh-water inflows
by significant amounts from those used in the baseline simulation. Fifteen
sensitivity analyses were made for the estuary model by varying one of the
following:
1) Deoxygenation
2) Reaeration rate, #
-------
TABLE 8
Estuary Model Runs
No.
Month/Year
Parameter(s) Varied
Parameter Value
Submodel
Validation Rums
1
2
April 1972
Sept. 1972
None Base Case
None
Kl = 0. 1
K2 = 0. 1
K5 = 0. 5
Time Step - 1/2 hr.
n = 0. 018 to 0. 030
Inflow = See Table 7
Same as April except
for Stream Inflow
H & Q*
H & Q
Sensitivity Runs
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
April 1972
April 1972
April 1972
April 1972
April 1972
April 1972
April 1972
April 1972
April 1972
April 1972
April 1972
April 1972
April 1972
April 1972
April 1972
Reae ration Rate
Reae ration Rate
Reae ration Rate
Deoxygenation and
Coliform dieaway rs.tes
Deoxygenation and
Coliform dieaway rates
Quality Time Step
Quality Time Step
Manning's 'n'
Manning's 'n'
Manning's 'n'
Manning's 'n'
Stream Flow
Stream Flow
Stream Flow
Stream Flow.
K2 = 0.2
K2 = 1.0
K2: See Eq. 5
Kl =0.2 and
K5 = 1.0
Kl - 0.05 and
K5 = 0. 25
T = 1/4 hr.
T = 1/4 hr.
n = 0. 8 x Base
n = 0. 8 x Base
n = 1 . 2 x Base
n = 1 . 2 x Base
Q = 2. 0 x Base
Q = 2. 0 x Base
Q = 0. 5 x Base
Q = 0. 5 x Base
Quality
Quality
Quality
Quality
Quality
Hydraulics
Quality
Hydraulics
Quality
Hydraulics
Quality
Hydraulics
Quality
Hydraulics
Quality
*H Hydraulics Model
Q Quality Model
44
-------
TABLE 9
Percentage Effects on Dissolved Oxygen in Pearl Harbor
Caused by Specified Changes in Several Model Parameters
Area Node
West Loch 7
12
15
17
22
23
Middle Loch 25
28
29
31
32
35
Southeast Loch 38
39
40
41
42
East Loch 24
27
43
44
47
49
50
51
53
56
Base
Value,
5.
6.
4.
6.
10.
11.
6.
5.
5.
4.
2.
4.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
4.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
DO
mg/1
9
1
1
6
5
7
0
5
4
9
0
4
9
8
7
8
8
9
8
8
7
7
3
1
5
4
0
Reae ration
(Base = 0. 1 d
10. 0*Base
+ 16.
+ 16.
+ 65.
+ 10.
-14.
-23.
+ 13.
+ 23.
+ 25.
+ 40.
+ 220.
+ 54.
+ 15.
+ 17.
+ 19.
+ 17.
+ 17.
+ 32.
+ 17.
+ 17.
+ 19.
+ 19.
+ 24.
+ 25.
+ 21.
+ 25.
+ 28.
9
4
8
6
3
9
3
6
9
8
0
5
2
2
3
2
2
6
2
2
3
3
5
5
8
9
0
, K2
2.0*Base Calc.a
+ 10.
+ 9.
+ 31.
+ 7.
-3.
-6.
+ 6.
+ 14.
+ 14.
+ 22.
+ 100.
+29.
+ 8.
+ 13.
+ 10.
+ 13.
+ 13.
+ 16.
+ 13.
+ 10.
+ 10.
+ 10.
+ 13.
+ 13.
+ 12.
+ 13.
2
8
7
6
8
8
7
5
8
4
0
5
5
8
5
8
8
3
8
3
5
5
2
7
7
0
+ 16. 0
-47.
-36.
-2.
-25.
-0.
+ 0.
-45.
-70.
-81.
-91.
-100.
-100.
-64.
-70.
-61.
-56.
-77.
-71.
-60.
-69.
-71.
-66.
-73.
-76.
-80.
-81.
-74.
4
1
4
8
1
1
0
1
5
8
0
0
4
7
4
9
6
4
3
0
9
7
6
5
0
5
0
Deoxygenation, Kx
(Base = 0. 1 day-i )
2.0*Base 0.5*Base
0
+ 1. 6
0
0
0
0
0
+ 1.8
0
0
-45. 0
+ 2. 3
0
+ 1.7
0
+ 1.7
0
+ 2.0
0
0
+ 1.8
+ 1.8
0
0
0
0
+ 2.0
0
0
-2.4
0
+ 0. 1
0
0
0
0
+ 2.0
+ 55. C
+ 2. 3
-1. 7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-1. 9
-2. 0
0
-1. 8
0
Stream Inflows,
Q
2. 0*Base
+ 6.
+ 32.
+ 63.
+42.
+ 2.
+ 5.
0
+ 1.
0
+ 4.
_ c
+ 6.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
+ 1.
+ 3.
0
-1.
0
+ 1.
0
0
8
8
4
4
9
1
8
1
0
8
7
5
9
, 8
0. 5*Base
-1.
-11.
-22.
-18.
-21.
-24.
0
+ 1.
0
-4.
-10.
+ 4.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
+ 1.
0
-1.
0
-1.
0
0
7
5
0
2
9
8
8
1
0
3
8
9
8
Quality Model
Manning1 s 'n' Time Step (1/2 hr. )
1. 20*Base
0
+ 1. 6
+ 2.4
+ 3.0
+0. 9
0
0
+ 1. 8
-1. 8
+ 2.0
-15.0
+ 4. 5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
+ 1.8
0
-1.9
0
0
0
0
0. 8*Base
0
0
+ 2.4
+ 1. 5
0
0
0
+ 1. 8
-1. 8
+ 2.0
-15. 0
+4. 5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
+ 1. 8
0
-1.9
0
0
0
0
0. 5*Base
0
0
+ 2.
+ 1.
0
0
0
+ 1.
-1.
+ 2.
-15.
+4.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
+ 1,
0
-1,
0
0
0
0
4
5
8
.9
, 0
.0
, 5
.8
. 9
; D = diffusion coefficient, V = velocity, D = depth
-------
order of 50 percent, occurred. This may be related to the extremely
low base value of 2,0 mg/1 at node 32, whereas all other dissolved
oxygen base values are greater than 4. 0 mg/1.
Reaeration Rate
The three alternative reae.ration rates described in Chapter IV
were each tested for effects on dissolved oxygen. The base reaeration
rate ( =0.1 per day) was increased by 100 percent, increased by
900 percent, and calculated by Equation 5. Increasing the rate by 100
percent increased the dissolved oxygen by 10 to 20 percent in most
cases, and in the case of node 32 it doubled the base value (due again
to the low original value). Multiplying the base reaeration rate by 10
effectively doubled the effects of the 100 percent rate increase on dissolved
oxygen for most nodes. Permitting the model to calculate the reaeration
rate according to Equation 5 resulted in a noticeable drop in the dissolved
oxygen level. In the West Loch the decrease ranged from 0 to almost
50 percent, in the Middle Loch from 45 to 100 percent, and in the East
and Southeast Lochs from about 55 to 80 percent. As previously described
in Chapter IV, the base reaeration rate was selected with these results
in mind since it provided the best overall representation of dissolved
oxygen in view of the stratified nature of Pearl Harbor.
Stream Flows
Sensitivity runs for stream flows included altering the stream
flows presented in Table 7 by plus 100 and minus 50 percent. Increases
in the flow had a significant effect on dissolved oxygen in the West Loch
due to the high level of dissolved oxygen in Waikele Stream and by
promoting the growth of algae through the addition of further nitrate
nitrogen. Only minor changes occurred throughout the other lochs. The
decrease in stream flow had the adverse effect of decreasing dissolved
oxygen levels in the West Loch by as much as 25 percent. Effects in
the other lochs were again minor by comparison.
Manning's Roughness Coefficient
Manning's coefficients for the baseline simulation were
increased and decreased by 20 percent in two sensitivity runs. The effects
on dissolved oxygen reported in Table 9 are very small except at node
32, in which case the level was decreased by 15 percent in each
alternative. Again, this may be attributed to the relatively low base
value of 2. 0 mg/1.
Quality Model Time Step
The decrease of the quality model time step from 1/2 hour
to 1/4 hour resulted in minor changes to the dissolved oxygen levels,
except again at node 32 where a decrease of 15 percent occurred.
46
-------
Temperature
Table 10 provides a summary of the percentage effects on
temperature caused by changes in the stream flows, Manning's n, and
the quality model time step. Temperatures were not affected by changes
in the deoxygenation rate, reaeration rate, or coliform dieaway rate.
Stream Flows
Temperature was essentially unaffected byboth the 100 percent
increase and 50 percent decrease in stream flows to the harbor. The
greatest change amounted to 0.4 degrees centigrade increase at node 49.
Manning's Roughness Coefficient
Changes in Manning's n of plus and minus 20 percent had
essentially no effect on the temperature simulations.
Quality Model Time Step
Reducing the quality model time step by one-half also had a
negligible effect on the temperature.
Salinity
A summary of the percentage effects on salinity caused by
changes in the stream flows, Manning's n, and the quality model time
step is given in Table 11. Salinity was not affected by changes in the
deoxygenation rate, reaeration rate, or coliform dieaway rate.
Stream Flows
Changes in stream flows can have a significant effect on
salinity in some of the lochs. With a 100 percent increase in flow for
Waikele Stream, the salinity in the upper west loch can drop by as much
as 75 percent. Conversely, halving the stream flow increased the upper
west loch salinity by as much as ICO percent, The lower and middle
sections of the west loch were not affected as dramatically.
In the middle loch only those nodes adjacent to the Waiawa
Stream outletwere significantly affected by stream flow changes, and then
only by 5 to 10 percent. Similarly the salinities at only those nodes
in the east loch that are adjacent to the mouths of Waimalu, Kalauao,
and Halawa Streams were changed by even as much as 3 to 5 percent.
Manning's Roughness Coefficient
Changes in Manning's n of plus and minus 20 percent resulted
in only minor salinity changes.
47
-------
TABLE 10
Percentage Effects on Temperature in Pearl Harbor
Caused by Specified Changes in Several Model Parameters
Area Node
West Loch 7
12
15
17
22
23
Middle Loch 25
28
29
31
32
35
00 Southeast Loch 38
39
40
41
42
East Loch 24
27
43
44
47
49
50
51
53
56
Base Temp.
Value, °C
24.
25.
25.
25.
25.
25.
25.
25.
25.
24.
24.
24.
25.
24.
24.
24.
24.
35.
25.
25.
25.
25.
26.
31.
25.
25.
29.
9
0
6
1
0
2
0
0
0
9
3
9
0
9
9
9
9
3
1
1
2
6
9
3
9
1
5
Stream Inflow
2. 0*Base
0
0
0
0
-0.
0
0
+ 0.
0
0
0
+ 0.
0
+ 0.
+ 0.
0
0
0
+0.
0
0
+0.
+ 1.
0
-1.
0
+0.
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
2
3
0. 5*Base
0
0
0
0
+0.
+ 0.
0
+ 0.
0
0
0
+0.
0
0
+ 0.
0
0
0
+0.
-0.
-0.
+0.
+ 1.
0
-1.
0
+ 0.
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
2
3
Manning
1. 2*Base
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
+ 0.4
0
0
0
+0.4
0
+ 0.4
+ 0.4
0
0
+ 0. 3
+ 0.4
-0.4
-0.4
+0.4
+ 1. 1
0
-1. 2
0
+ 0. 3
's n
Quality Model
Time Step
0. 8*Base
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
+ 0.
0
0
0
+0.
0
+0.
+ 0.
0
0
-0.
+0.
-0.
-0.
+0.
+ 1.
0
-1.
0
0
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
5
2
0. 5*Base
0
0
-0.
0
0
0
0
+ 0.
0
0
0
+0.
0
0
+ 0.
0
0
0
+ 0.
-0.
-0.
+ 0.
+ 1.
0
-1.
0
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
2
-------
TABLE 11
Percentage Effects on Salinity in Pearl Harbor
Caused by Specified Changes in Several Model Parameters
xO
Base Salinity Stream Inflows
Area
West Loch
Middle Loch
Southeast Loch
East Loch
Node
7
12
15
17
22
23
25
28
29
31
32
35
38
39
40
41
42
24
27
43
44
47
49
50
51
53
56
Value, g/1
- 31.
26.
28.
24.
8.
11.
33.
31.
31.
30.
28*
30.
32.
32.
32.
32.
32.
32.
32.
32.
31.
32.
32.
32.
32.
32.
32.
2
7
8
5
5
9
3
9
3
1
0
5
6
8
9
9
9
5
7
2
8
7
7
3
1
2
5
2.0*Base 0.5*Base
-10. 6
-25.8
-16.3
-33. 5
-77.6
-65.5
-1. 5
-2. 5
-3. 2
-6.0
-8.6
-3.0
-0.9
-0. 3
0
0
0
-0.6
-1. 5
-1.6
-4. 7
-1. 2
-0. 6
-0.9
-3.4
-1.9
-0.9
+4.
+ 13.
+ 8.
+ 17.
+ 100.
+ 68.
+0.
+ 2.
+ 2.
+ 4.
+ 0.
+ 3.
+ 1.
+0.
+0.
+0.
+ 0.
+ 1.
+ 1.
+ 1.
+ 1.
+ 0.
+ 0.
+ 1.
+ 1.
+ 1.
+ 0.
5
1
0
1
4
9
9
2
9
3
7
3
2
6
3
3
3
2
2
9
9
9
6
5
2
2
9
Manning' s n
1. 2*Base
+0. 6
+0.4
0
-1. 2
+ 1.2
+ 0. 8
+ 0. 3
+ 0. 6
+ 1. 0
+ 1.0
-2. 5
+ 1. 0
+ 0. 6
+0. 3
+ 0. 3
+ 0. 3
+ 0. 3
+ 0. 6
+ 0. 3
+0. 6
-0. 3
+0. 3
+ 0. 3
+ 0. 6
-0. 3
+ 0. 3
+0. 3
Quality Model
Time Step
0. 8*Base
+ 0.
+0.
+ 0.
-0.
+ 2.
+ 1.
+ 0.
+ 0.
+ 1.
+ 1.
-2.
+ 1.
+ 0.
+ 0.
+ 0.
+ 0.
+ 0.
+ 0.
+ 0.
+ 0.
-0.
+ 0.
+ 0.
+0.
-0.
+ 0.
+0.
3
4
3
8
4
7
3
6
0
0
5
0
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
6
3
3
3
6
3
3
3
0. 5*Base
+0.
+ 0.
+ 0.
-0.
+ 2.
+ 2.
+ 0.
+ 0.
+ 1.
+ 1.
-2.
+ 1.
+0.
+0.
+ 0.
+ 0.
+0.
+ 0.
+ 0.
+ 0.
-0.
+0.
+ 0.
+ 0.
-0.
+0.
+ 0.
6
4
3
8
4
5
3
6
0
0
5
0
6
3
3
3
3
6
6
6
3
3
3
6
3
3
3
-------
Quality Model Time Step
Reducing the quality model time step by one-half also had a
negligible effect on the salinity conditions.
Phosphate Phosphorus
A summary of the percentage effects on phosphate phosphorus
caused by changes in stream flows, Manning's n, and the quality model
time step is given in Table 1Z. Phosphorus levels were not affected
by changes in the deoxygenation rate, reaeration rate, or coliform
die away rate.
Stream Flows
When Waikele Stream flow was doubled, enough additional
phosphorus was added to the upper andmiddle sections of the West Loch to
result in a general concentration increase of 25 to 55 percent. Only the
upper West Loch was affected by the reduction in Waikele Stream inflow.
When the inflow was halved the upper loch phosphous levels were decreased
by 15 to 35 percent.
In the Middle Loch only node 29 was substantially affected by
the increased flow from Waiawa Strearr . This increase of 50 percent from
0.02 to 0.03 might be attributed to rounding of a number very close to
0.025. Similarly, round-off might account for the large percentage
differences (but small in concentration) at nodes 29 and 31 when the
stream flows were decreased.
Stream flows had no apparent effect on phosphorus levels in
the East Loch, as indicated in Table 12.
Manning's Roughness Coefficient
Changes in Manning's n of plus and minus 20 percent resulted
in only minor changes in the phosphorus concentrations.
Quality Model Time Step
Reducing the quality model time step by one-half also had a
negligible effect on phosphorus concentrations.
Chlorophyll a
A summary of the percentage effects on chlorophyll a caused
by changes in stream flows, Manning's n, and the quality model time step
is given in Table 13. Chlorophyll a. was not affected by changes in the
deoxygenation rate, reaeration rate, or coliform dieaway rate.
50
-------
TABLE 12
Percentage Effects on Phosphate Phosphorus in Pearl Harbor
Caused by Specified Changes in Several Model Parameters
Area
West Loch
Middle Loch
Southeast Loch
East Loch
Node
7
12
15
17
22
23
25
28
29
31
32
35
38
39
40
41
42
24
27
43
44
47
49
50
51
53
56
Base PC\
Value, mg/1
.02
. 04
. 10
.06
. 24
. 11
.02
.02
.02
. 04
. 38
. 04
. 02
. 02
.02
.02
.02
. 04
.02
. 02
.02
.02
. 03
. 03
. 02
. 03
.03
Stream
2. 0*Base
0
+ 25. 0
-10.0
+ 16. 7
+ 54. 2
+ 27. 3
0
0
+ 50. 0
0
+ 2.6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Inflows
0. 5*Base
0
0
0
-16.7
-33. 3
-18. 2
0
0
+ 50. 0
-25. 0
+ ?. 6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Quality Model
Manning's n Time Step
1. 2*Base
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
+ 50. 0
0
+ 2. 6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0. 8*Base
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
+ 50. 0
0
+ 2.6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0. 5*Base
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
+ 50. 0
0
+ 2. 6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-------
TABLE 13
Percentage Effects on Chlorophyll a. in Pearl Harbor
Caused by Specified Changes in Several Model Parameters
Base Chlor a Stream Flow
Area
West Loch
Middle Loch
Southeast Loch
East Loch
Node
7
12
15
17
22
23
25
28
29
31
32
35
38
39
40
41
42
24
27
43
44
47
49
50
51
53
56
Value, yg/1
7
19
15
27
60
84
4
3
3
4
9
5
3
3
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
2. 0*Base
+ 114.
+ 152.
+ 166.
+ 140.
-6.
+ 33.
+ 25.
+ 33.
+ 33.
+ 25.
+ 33.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
+ 33.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
6
7
7
7
3
0
3
3
0
3
3
0. 5*Base
-42.
-52.
-46.
-51.
-31.
-33.
0
+ 33.
+ 33.
+ 25.
+ 33.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
+ 33.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
6
7
9
7
3
3
3
0
3
3
Manning1 s n
1. 2*Base
0
0
+ 13. 3
+ 11. 1
+ 1. 7
+ 1. 2
0
0
0
0
+ 11. 1
-20. 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0. 8*Base
0
0
+ 6.7
+ 7.4
+ 1. 7
+ 1. 2
0
0
0
0
+ 11. 1
-20. 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Quality Mode
Time Step
0. 5*Base
0
0
+ 6.
+ 7.
0
0
+ 25.
0
0
0
+ 11.
-20.
0
0
0
0
0
0
+ 33.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
4
0
1
0
3
-------
Stream Flows
Chlorophyll _a concentrations more than doubled at all nodes
in the West Loch, except those adjacent to Waikele Stream, as a result
of doubling the stream flow. This result may be attributed to the
additional nutrients supplied by the stream. At node 22 the concentration
actually decreased. This may be attributed to the flushing action of
the stream. The increase at node 23 by only 33 percent will be explained
in the final section of this chapter under the heading Constituent Inter-
actions.
The concentration at most nodes in the Middle Loch increased
by 25 to 33 percent when the stream flows were doubled. The East Loch
was relatively unaffected.
Reducing the stream flows by 50 percent again affected the
West Loch the most, then the Middle Loch, and the East Loch
only negligibly. In the West Loch, chlorophyll a concentrations were
decreased by 32 to 53 percent while in the Middle Loch they were increased
by 25 to 33 percent.
Manning's Roughness Coefficient
Changes in Manning's roughness coefficient of plus and minus
20 percent had little effect on chlorophyll a except at nodes 15, 17, 32
and 35. These effects are given in Table 13.
Quality Model Time Step
Reducing the quality model time step by one-half had no effect
except at nodes 15, 17, 25, 32, 35, and 27. These changes were never
greater than 1 g/1.
Nitrate Nitrogen
Table 14 presents a summary of the percentage effects on
nitrate nitrogen caused by changes in stream flows, Manning's n, and the
quality model time step. Nitrate nitrogen was not affected by changes
in the deoxygenation rate, reaeration rate, or coliform dieaway rate.
Stream Flows
Changes in nitrate concentrations from doubling the stream
flows were greatest in the West Loch where values were altered by -24
to +39 percent, or -0.08 to +0.23 mg/1. Concentrations in the Middle
Loch and East Loch generally increased by 4 to 1 2 percent.
When the flows were decreased by half, the nitrate levels
usually decreased. Percentage changes were as follows: the West Loch
53
-------
TABLE 14
Percentage Effects on Nitrate Nitrogen in Pearl Harbor
Caused by Specified Changes in Several Model Parameters
Ul
Area
West Loch
Middle Loch
Southeast Loch
East Loch
Node
7
1Z
15
17
22
23
25
28
29
31
32
35
38
39
40
41
42
24
27
43
44
47
49
50
51
53
56
Base Nitrat
Value, rng/
. 25
. 34
. 33
. 35
.59
. 20
. 16
. 22
. 25
. 32
.7-6
.40
. 16
. 15
. 15
. 14
. 14
. 20
. 18
. 16
. 17
. 18
. 19
. 22
. 21
. 18
. 21
e Stream Flow
1 2.0*Base
+ 24.
+ 5.
-24.
0
+ 39.
-20.
+ 12.
+4.
+4.
0
+ 9.
-7.
0
0
0
0
0
+ 10.
+ 5.
+ 6.
+ 5.
+ 5.
+ 5.
+4.
+ 14.
+ 5.
+4.
0
9
2
0
0
5
5
0
2
5
0
6
3
9
6
3
5
3
6
8
0. 5*Base
-16.
-11.
0
-2.
-13.
+ 50.
0
-4.
-4.
-9.
+ 6.
-12.
-6.
-6.
0
0
0
0
-5.
-6.
-5.
-5.
0
-4.
-4.
0
-4.
0
8
9
6
0
5
0
4
6
5
3
7
6
3
9
6
5
8
8
Manning1 s n
1. 2*Base 0. 8*Base
-4.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-4. 5
0
-6.3
+ 7.9
-10. 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-4. 5
0
0
0
-4.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-6.3
+ 7.9
-10. 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-4. 5
0
0
0
Quality Model
Time Step
0. 5*Base
-4.
0
0
0
0
0
0
-4.
0
-6.
+ 7.
-10.
-6.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-4.
0
0
0
0
5
3
9
0
3
5
-------
varied from -14 to +50 percent, the Middle Loch by -13 to +7 percent,
and the East Loch by 0 to 6 percent.
Manning's Roughness Coefficient
Sensitivity analyses for alternative Manning's coefficients had
very little effect except in the Middle Loch where concentrations changed
by as much as 10 percent.
Quality Model Time Step
Reducing the quality mode) time step similarly had little effect
on the nitrate concentration except in the Middle Loch where values were
decreased by as much as 10 percent cr increased by as much 8 percent.
Coliforms
Table 15 presents a summary of the percentage effects on
coliforms caused by changes in stream flows, the coliform dieaway rate,
Manning's n, and the quality model time step. Coliform levels were not
affected by changes in the reaeration rate or deoxygenation rate.
Stream Flows
Although the greatest changes in coliform concentrations due
to stream flow changes occurred in the West Loch, significant changes
were also indicated in the Middle and East Lochs, The Southeast Loch
underwent only minor changes since no streams flow directly into this
loch. When the stream flows were doubled, the coliform concentrations
were modified in the West Loch by 75 to 190 percent, in the Middle
Loch by -8 to 60 percent and in the East Loch by -5 to 26 percent.
Conversely, when the stream flows were decreased by 50 percent,
coliform levels were altered in the West, Middle, and East Loch by
-43 to -60 percent, 0 to -47 percent, and -45 to 26 percent, respec-
tively. The greatest percentage changes normally occurred in areas
with relatively low base coliform levels.
Coliform Dieaway Rate
When the coliform dieaway rate, K^, was doubled the coliform
concentrations decreased quite significantly, by -23 to -93 percent. As
indicated in Table 15 the average decrease was somewhere between 70
and 80 percent. When the dieaway rate was halved, coliform values
increased by 43 to 1, 233 percent. Even the nodes with the largest base
values underwent changes on the order of 100 percent. Therefore, it
may be concluded that the model results are extremely sensitive to the
coliform dieaway rate.
55
-------
TABLE 15
Percentage Effects on Coliform Organisms in Pearl Harbor
Caused by Specified Changes in Several Model Parameters
Base Coliform
Stream Inflows
Area Node Value, MPN/lOOml 2. 10*Base
West Loch 7
12
15
17
22
23
Middle Loch 25
28
29
31
32
35
Southeast Loch 38
39
40
41
42
East Loch 24
27
43
44
47
49
50
51
53
56
2. 1
45
3. 1
150
4, 400
710
78
96
100
660
15,000
130
3,000
7, 200
21, 000
380
32,000
650
49
3,400
960
41
190
2, 600
3,900
84
1, 300
+ 138
+ 167
+ 190
+ 160
+ 75. 0
+ 83. 1
-7.7
+45. 8
+ 60.0
+ 51. 5
+6. 7
0
0
0
0
-2. 6
0
-4. 6
+ 8.2
+ 5.9
+ 14. 6
+24.4
+26. 3
+ 3.8
+2.6
-2.4
0
0. 5*Base
-42. 9
-60. 0
-54.8
-56.0
-47.7
-47. 9
-14. 1
-44.8
-23.0
-47.0
0
-36.9
-3. 3
0
0
-2. 6
0
-3. 1
-18.4
+ 2.94
-25.0
+ 12. 2
+ 26. 3
0
0
-44.8
0
Coliform Dieaway, K
(Base=0. 5 day )
2.0*Base 0.5*Base
-69. 3
-81.8
-92.9
-72.0
-38. 6
-69. 0
-80. 8
-82. 3
-83.0
-68. 2
45. 3
-85.4
-50. 0
-50.0
-52.4
-77.4
-50. 0
-80.0
-88.0
-47. 1
-63.5
-82.9
-71.6
-46. 2
-23. 1
-83. 3
-60.8
+1, 233
+ 322
+ 932
+ 187
+43. 2
+ 154
+ 336
+400
+430
+ 203
-L"73 . 3
+ 500
+ 86.7
+ 94.4
+ 90. 5
+ 295
+ 93.8
+ 192
+492
+ 79.4
+ 171
+461
+ ?21
+ 84. 6
+84.6
+424
+ 115
Manning' s n
0.2*Base 0. 8*Base
-9. 6
-4. 5
+ 6.4
0
0
0
-11. 6
-17.8
0
-15. 2
0
-26.2
-3.4
0
0
-2.7
0
-1. 6
-14. 3
+ 5.8
-10. 5
+ 14. 6
+ 26. 3
0
0
-22. 7
0
-4.8
-2. 3
+ 6.4
+ 6. 6
-2. 3
0
-11.6
-16.7
0
-13.7
0
-25.4
-3.4
0
0
-2. 7
0
-7. 7
-12. 3
+ ?. 9
-10.5
+ 14. 6
+ 26. 3
0
0
-2i.5
-7. 7
Quality Model
Time Step
0. 5*Base
+4.8
0
+ 12. 9
+ 6.7
0
0
-6.4
-14.6
+ 10. 0
-13. 6
n
-23.8
0
0
0
0
0
-3. 1
-10.2
+ 5.9
-10.4
+ 19. 5
+ 26. 3
+ 3.8
0
-20. 2
0
-------
This is not to say, however, that a great deal of time and money
should be spent identifying this rate since the coliform concentrations in
both the model and the prototype are very sensitive to several other
unknowns as well. These include unknown point andnonpoint waste sources
and the possibility of mechanisms that may stimulate regrowth of
coliforms. (It could be argued that it is probably better not to attempt
to model total coliforms at all unless one is modeling a very controlled
system, )
Manning's Roughness Coefficient
Altering the base values for Manning's roughness coefficient
changes some coliform concentrations by -26 to 26 percent. However,
nodes with relatively large original values were generally unchanged.
Quality Model Time Step
Decreasing the quality model time step by one-half generally
affected only the concentrations at nodes with relatively small base
coliform levels. For these nodes, the levels changed by anywhere
from -24 to 26 percent.
Constituent Interactions
It is fairly simple to explain why the concentrations of
individual constituents change from predicted values in the base case
to those in the sensitivity analyses where some input parameter was
purposely changed. It is more difficult to interpret why changes in several
constituents occurred in the directions and magnitudes that they did.
But if we can work our way through such an explanation, perhaps it will
become a bit more obvious that 1) the model provides an instructional
base for understanding at least part of the complex behavior of the
prototype and 2) that the model has considerable worth as a tool for
performing arithmetic calculations and keeping a large number of easily
forgettable interrelationships continually in "mind."
Let us consider some of the results for the West Loch where
most of the larger changes occurred. Letus also consider only the changes
that resulted from doubling the stream inflows. How, we ask ourselves
about node 22 at the mouth of Waikele Stream, could temperature drop
slightly, nitrate and phosphate increase significantly, dissolved oxygen
increase slightly and chlorophyll a. decrease, all as a result of merely
doubling the inflow? How could the nutrients and oxygen show increases
anywhere for any reason when the algae are dropping? As if that were
not strange enough, consider what happened just next door at node 23:
temperature remained unchanged, nitrate dropped, phosphate increased,
dissolved oxygen remained unchanged, but chlorophyll ji increased more
than 30 percent. How can one nutrient increase while the other decreases,
57
-------
and how can algae increase without increasing the oxygen produced?
Perhaps more poignantly stated, how can these seemingly anomalous
circumstances result and the model be "right"?
To settle that question, first the model is not "right" in the
absolute; it does not contain provision for dealing with some phenomena
that occur, such as use of CC>2 by algae and the production of CO^ by
biological oxidation. It has to "assume", because no other provision is
there, that sufficient CC>2 exists in the water from biological oxidation
of organic matter, or from any other source, not to limit the algae.
This is just one "assumption" it has to make about the prototype. It is
also not right in the absolute because it solves its many equations of
interrelationships in a certain order, rather than truly simultaneously.
They are solved simultaneously only in the sense that all of them are
solved in each time step (each 30 minutes in the Pearl Harbor case),
but they are solved in a certain order. Temperature is first, then
coliforms, nitrate, nitrite, ammonia, phosphorus, algae, heavy metals,
and pesticides. BOD and dissolved oxygen are last. Importantly, the
concentrations of the earlier constituents that are related to the later
constituents are calculated from the concentrations of the others that
occurred in the previous time step, not the current one. The current
value simply is not known yet since the model has not gotten there yet.
Now, using a value that is 30 minutes old out of 30 days is not a major
crime, but it is_ one source of possibly anomalous arithmetic. There are
others, equally insignificant, but they are there just the same to remind
us that the model is not the prototype. It is merely "what it purports
to be, a model of the prototype, an approximator, a facsimile, a
simplification, not a duplicate.
So what are the physical conditions from the prototype that
could explain the model's behavior at nodes 22 and 23? The input quality
data for Waikele Stream are shown in Table 7 for the base case and
for the increased stream flow condition.
Node 22 is right at the mouth of Waikele Stream. It is less
than 3 feet deep, and is at the upper end of the West Loch, about as far
removed from the harbor's mouth as it could be. Node 23 is about
8 feet deep, still further from the tidally influenced harbor mouth, and
sheltered from the inrushing influence of Waikele Stream. The flow of
Waikele Stream was increased from 77.8 cfs to 155.6 cfs, while it
continued to flow into the loch with 1.2 mg/1 of nitrate nitrogen, 0.6
mg/1 of phosphate, 0. 3 mg/1 of BOD, and 8. 3 mg/1 of oxygen, at a
temperature of 24.2°C. The rise in nitrogen, phosphate, and BOD at
node 22 can be explained merely by the hydraulic situation wherein the
increased Waikele Strem inflow brought in more water at higher concen-
trations than the background levels in the harbor water. The decrease
in chlorophyll a. can be explained by the same phenomenon. Waikele
Stream contained virtually no chlorophyll &, so the node was simply
diluted of algal cells; hence at the higher flow the chlorophyll a
58
-------
concentration at the node was lower than in the base case. An interesting
point is that the dissolved oxygen increased very slightly even though
BOD was higher and algae were lowsr. The answer is partly hydraulic
again. During this hour, water was entering node 22 from Waikele Stream
at 8.3 mg/1, but as much or more was entering the node from nodes
21 and 23 at concentrations of 12.2 and 12.3 mg/1, respectively. In
the base case moreover, the salinities had been much higher than in the
increased stream flow case. Oxygen is much less soluble at high
salinities than at low salinities. Consequently, in the base case dissolved
oxygen had been stopped at 1.5 times the solubility which yielded a DO
level of 11.7 mg/1. In the lower salinity case, this "trap" in the model
was never needed because the solubility was so much higher, andithadnot
been invoked even when the DO levels exceeded 12 mg/1. So this apparent
anomaly can be explained in part by quite plausible behavior in the
prototype and in part by a wrinkle in the model.
The most inexplicable anomaly occurred at node 23. Almost
all conditons were met for greater algal growth in the greater stream
flow case. Waikele Stream had brought more nutrients into the area,
both more nitrate and more phosphate. The algae did indeed grow to
a 30 percent greater biomass. But 1he resulting phosphate concentration
was higher, and the resulting nitrate concentration was lower. This is a
little difficult to understand. It appears, however, that the phosphate was
much higher than that required by the growing algae, while the nitrogen
became somewhat limiting (less than the half-saturation value) in both
cases. Consequently, the phosphate appears to have increased by the
influx from the stream alone; while the nitrate, even the additional
nitrate from the stream, was depleted by the algae to a lower concen-
tration than in the base case. The algae appear to have been limited
by this as well, since they reached their peak biomass several days prior
to the 30th day and were decreasing day by day at the end of the period.
If reading about these interrelationships has seemed tedious,
it is not altogether a fault of the language, though apologies are tendered
for that. But it does seem tedious because the data and the inter-
relationships are numerous and they fall on one another like dominoes,
rapidly and each affecting the next. While there is a tendency simply
to believe a model after a while, rather than to wade through what it
suggests about a prototype, that tendency has to be avoided, even after
considerable validation and testing has occurred. The anomalies
uncovered in this study have all been explained, but there will be more
in the next application; and the model user, the environmental planner
wanting to depend on the model, will have to sort through the mass of
modeled evidence to satisfy himself that either the model or the data
are not quite correct or that the prototype could indeed be behaving in
such a strange unexpected way. The insights gained about the prototype
are almost bound to be of greater significance than the insights gained
about modeling. This is the singular beauty of models; their compu-
tational efficiencies are merely advantages.
59
-------
REFERENCES
1. Bathen, Karl H. , Current Measurements in Pearl Harbor, Oahu,
Hawaii, James K. Look Laboratory of Oceanographic Engineering,
University of Hawaii, September 1972.
2. Callaway, R.J., et al. , Mathematical Model of the Columbia River
From the Pacific Ocean to the Bonneville Dam, Parts I and II,
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, Corvallis,
Oregon.
3. Feigner, K.D., and H. S. Harris, Documentation Report FWQA
Dynamic Estuary Model, Federal Water Quality Administration,
July 1970.
4. Laevastu, Taivo, Don E. Avery, and Doak C. Cox, Coastal
Currents and Sewage Disposal in the Hawaiian Islands, Final
Report, Prepared for the Department of Planning and Economic
Development, State of Hawaii.
5. Somers, William P., Project Officer, U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, Washington D.C., Private communication, June 12,
1973.
6. State of California Water Resources Control Board, San Francisco
Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Program, Final Report - Abridged
Preliminary Edition, March 1969.
7. Water Resources Engineers, Inc., A Hydraulic Water Quality Model
of Suisan and San Pablo Bays, Report to the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, Southwest Region, March 1966.
8. Water Resources Engineers, An Assessment of the Assimilative
Capacity erf Badfish Creek by Mathematical Simulation, Prepared
for the Department of Natural Resources, State of Wisconsin, April
1974.
9. Water Resources Engineers, Application of QUAL-II to the Dan-
Roanoke River Basin, Contract No. 68-01-0787 with the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, report not yet completed.
10. Water Resources Engineers, Application of QUAL-II to the Upper
Mississippi River Basin, Contract No. 68-01-0713 with the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, report not yet completed.
60
-------
11. Water Resources Engineers, Inc., Computer Program Docu-
mentation for the Stream Quality Model QUAL-II, Prepared for the
Environmental Protection Agency, Systems Development Branch,
Washington, D.C., May 1973.
12. Water Resources Engineers, Data Report for the Pearl Harbor
System _of Hawaii, Prepared for the Environmental Protection
Agency, Systems Development Branch, Washington, D.C., July 20,
1973.
13. Water Resources Engineers, Dissolved Oxygen Modeling Report for
the Chattahochee-Flint River Basin Mathematical Model Project,
Contract No. 68-01-0708 with the Environmental Protection
Agency.
14. Water Resources Engineers, Documentation Report for an Estuary
Model Applied to the Pearl Harbor System of Hawaii, in press.
15. Water Resources Engineers, QUAL-II Model Validation Runs and
Sensitivity Testing for the Iowa-Cedar River Basins, Contract
No. 68-01-0742 with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
May 1973.
16. Water Resources Engineers, Santee River Basin Model Project,
Draft Final Report, Contract No. 68-01-0739 with the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, August 1973.
61
-------
Appendix A
QUAL -II Input Data and Results
for Waikele Stream based on April 1972 Conditions
-------
? 0 C I 7 j
1 '<>$
CARL) TYPF
TITLE.U1
TITLE32
TITLEWJ NO
MO
NO
TITLEPfi ^0
TITLED; VFS
NO
TITLE1K NO
TITLEu
TITLE 12
TITLEU YES
TITLLH YES
TITLElb NU
ENDTITLC
$$$ OATA TYPE 1
UUAL-I PROGRAM TITLfc-S
TWPP/wRfc EXPAND KD VERSIOM OF UUAU-I -- KMHWN iS CJUAL
"AIKELE STREAM — QAHIJ AUGUST, 197?
b-DAY hi 0 CHEMICAL OXYRKN DCKAMO I kJ
li nxYGFf- I'-'
S A3 MPN
II
OATAl **$
CARD TYPE
LIST OATA INPUT
WHITE FINAL SUMMARY
Np CLP* AUGMENT ' T !PN
STEADY STATE
NUHBErt OF REAC'it"5 ' f-.
Mi.ii OF HE«nwA TE.RS « i .
TlilL Sl'EH (HOURS) r .
MAXIMUM KuUTt TIHK CHR31= Ji" .
. k>
END AT A ] A
$il nMA TYPL i> (''(-ACM
- N I IFIt.A f 1"N)
TYPF KEAC H OKUF R A •
-------
SUNNEN,f>J>6J0y, 1 ,50
2 OCT 73
14J&3I48
PAGE
CARD TYPE
ENOATA3
REACH
0.
AVAIL HDKS TARGET
«. .0
ORDER OF AVAIL SOURCES
0. 0. 0. a. a.
ISJ DATA TYPE 4 (COMPUTATIONAL REACH FLAG FIELD) i$$
CARD TYPE
FLAG FIELD
FLAG FIELD
FLAG FIELD
FLAG FIELD
FLAG FIELD
FLAG FIELD
ENDATA4
REACH EL
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
0.
EME.NT
8.
b.
7.
8.
5.
6.
«.
lACH COMPUTATIONAL FLAGS
1.6,2,2.2.2.2.2,************************
6.2.2,2.7.******************************
2.2.2,2.2.2,2.**************************
2.2.2,2.2.2,2.2.************************
6.2.6,2.2.******************************
2.2.2,2,2,5,****************************
****************************************
S$$ DATA TYPE 5 (HYDRAULIC COEFFICIENTS FOR DETERMINING VELOCITY AND DEPTH) Sii
CARD TYPE
HYDRAULICS
HYDRAULICS
HYDRAULICS
HYDRAULICS
HYDRAULICS
HYDRAULICS
ENDATA5
REACH
1 .
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
0.
COEFCJV
EXPOQV
COEFOH
EXPOQH
CHANN
.900
.770
.940
.940
.763
.470
.000
.345)
,330
,330
.330
.350
.360
,000
.093
,0fl7
.074
.074
.077
,095
.000
.580
.580
,580
.580
,590
.590
,000
,04b
,045
.045
.045
,04b
,030
,000
tt$ DATA TYPE 6 (REACTION COEFFICIENTS FOR DEOXYGENATION AND REAERATION) $$$
CARD TYPE
REACH
Kl
K3
K20PT
K2
C0EQK2
EXPtjK?
REACT COEF
REACT COEF
REACT COEF
REACT COEF
REACT cotf-
REACT COEF
ENDATAfi
1.
2.
3.
".
b.
6.
0.
,?0
,20
.20
.20
.20
.20
,00
.00
.00
.5)0
.00
.00
. 00
.00
1.00
. 1 .00
1,00
1.30
1.00
.80
a. ,00
.000
,000
,000
.000
,000
.030
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
. i)00
,000
$$$ DATA TYPE 6A (ALGAt, NITROGEN, AND PHOSPHOROUS CONSTANTS) $$$
CARD TYPE
ALGAE, N AND F COEF
ALGAE, N AND F CHEF
ALGAE, N AND F COEF
ALGAE, N AND P COEF
ALGAE, N
ALGAE, N
ENOATA6A
AND
f COEF
I- CHEF
EACH
i.
?.
3.
4.
5.
«>.
0.
ALPHAO
.n
.0
.M
.0
.0
.H
.0
ALGSE1
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
,00
.00
CKNH3
,00
.00
.00
,00
.00
.00
.00
CKN02
.00
.00
.00
.00
,00
,00
,00
SNH3
.0
.»J
.0
.0
.0
.0
.«
SH04
.0
.B
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
$51 DATA TYPt 68 (OTHER C"tFF 1C IENT3) S$S
CARD '
OTHER
OTHER
OTHER
OTHPR
OTHER
OTHER
\iPt REACH
COFFF
COEFF
ICICNTii
1 C I E N T S
COEFFICIENT S
COEFF
COEFF
COEFF
1CIENTS
1CIENTS
I C 1 1 N T -S
t NDATAftH
1
2
3
4
b
6
0
•
•
•
•
»
•
•
CK4
,
•
.
.
.
.
.
00
0f
00
00
00
00
110
CK5
•
•
.
•
*
•
•
b0
50
5'1
50
50
50
00
E.XCOEF
»
t
•
f
.
4
•
00
ay
00
00
00
00
00
CK6
.00
,00
,00
.00
,00
.00
,00
i$S> DATA TfPfc 7 (INT UAL CONDITIONS)
-------
SONNEN,526309,1,50
2 OC1 73
14I03H8
PAGE
CARD TYPE
INITIAL CONDITIONS
INITIAL CONDITIONS
INITIAL CONDITIONS
INITIAL CONDITIONS
INITIAL CONDITIONS
INITIAL CONDITIONS
ENDATA7
$SS DATA TYPE 7A
CARD TYPE
INITIAL COND-2
INITIAL COND-2
INITIAL COND-2
INITIAL CONO-2
INITIAL COND-2
INITIAL COND-2
ENDATA7A
REACH TEMP D.O.
1. 68.0 .0
2, 75.H .0
3. 75.0 .0
4. 75.0 .0
b. 75.0 .0
6. 70.0 .0
0. .0 .0
90D
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
(INIIIAL CONDITIONS FOP CHLOROPHYLL
COLIFORM AND RADIOMUCLIOE)
REACH CHLORA NH3
1. .0 .00
2, .0 .00
3. ,H ,00
4. .0 .00
6. .if ,m
6. .0 .00
0. .0 .00
$t$
N02
.0.1
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
CM. I
.0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
CM. II
A, NITROGEN,
N03
.00
.00
,00
,00
,00
,00
,00
P04
.00
,00
,00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
CM-III
,0
,0
,0
.0
» "
,0
.0
PHOSPHOROUS,
COLI
1.
1^00,
1000,
1000,
1CM0.
1000,
•
RADN
0 .00
0 .00
0 ,0k)
0 .00
0 ,00
0 .00
0 .00
$ss DATA TYPE e (RUNOFF CONDITIONS) is$
CARD TYPE
RUNOFF CONDITIONS
RUNOFF CONDITIONS
RUNOFF CONDITIONS
RUNUFF CONDITIONS
RUNOFF CONDITIONS
RUNOFF CONDITIONS,
ENOATAB
SS$ DATA TYPE PA
CARD TYPE
RUNOFF CONO-2
RUNOFF coND-2
RUNOFF COND-?
RUNOFF coND-2
RUNOFF cOND-a
RUNOFF COND-2
ENDATA8A
REACH Q TEMP D.O,
1. .0 .0 .0
3. .0 .0 .0
5. .0 .0 .0
6. .0 ,10 .0
0, ,0 .0 .0
(INCREMENTAL FLOW CONDITIONS
COLIFORM AND RADIONUCLIDE)
REACH CHLORA NH3
1. .0 .00
2. .0 ,00
3. .6 ,05)
4, .0 .00
5 , .0 ,0P
6. .0 ,0K
0 . .0 .00
BOD
.0
.0
!*)
0
FOR MI
JS$
N02
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
CM- 1
.0
.0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
TPOGEN,
N03
,00
.00
,00
,00
,00
,00
,00
CM-II
.0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
CM-III
.0
,0
.0
«0
.0
.0
.0
PHOSPHOROUS,
P04
.00
.00
.00
,00
.00
,00
.00
COLI
•
»
•
»
«
t
*
RADN
0 ,00
0 ,00
0 ,00
f) .00
U , (H)
0 ,0K)
-------
,526309,1,50
HEADWATER-2
ENDATA10A
$$$ DATA TYPE
1, .0 ,00 .
0. .0 .00
t 1 (WASTE LOADINGS) $$$
CARD TYPE WASTE LOAD ORDfcN AND IDENT EFF
WASTELOAD I.
WASTELOAD 2.
WASTELOAD J.
WASTELOAD 4,
WASTELOAD s.
ENDATAll 0.
IS$ DATA TYPE
CARD TYPE
WAS1ELQAD-2
WASTELOAD-2
WASTELOAO-2
WASTELOAD-2
WASTELOAD-2
ENDATA1 1A
WSL»SCHOF1ELU 8ARR. ,0K
WSL'HAIKAKALAUA STR .90
W3I.BWAIHOLE DITCH ,00
W3L«KIPAPA STREAM ,00
W3L«3PRING INFLOWS ,00
.00
11A (WASTE LOAD CHARACTERISTICS -
COLIFORMS AND RADIONUCLIDE8)
WASTE LOAD ORDER AND IDENT CHL
1. WSL»SCHOFIELD BARR.
2. WSL'WAIKAKALAUA STR
3. «SL»WAIHOLE DITCH
4. WSL»KIPAPA STREAM
s. HSL»SPRJNG INFLOWS
00
0(3
FLOW
2.5
5.2
.0
15.5
15.5
.0
.00
.00
TEMP 0,
78,0 5
75,3 8
.0
75.2 8
65,0 4
.0
•
•
0,
.0
,2
.0
.3
.0
.0
ALGAE, NITROGEN
$$$
. A
,00
.00
.00
.00
. 00
NH3
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
00 1,0
00 .0
BOD CH-I
26.0 .0
1,6 .0
,0 ,0
1,0 .0
.5 ,0
.0 .0
.PHOSPHOROUS,
N02
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
CM-II CM. Ill
.0 ,(i
,0 ,0
.0 .«
.0 ,0
,0 .0
.0 .«
N03 P04
,00 ,00
,00 ,00
,00 .00
,00 ,i,0
, 0 H . 0 H
COLI
155000,00
3300.00
10.00
126.00
1.00
RAPN
,00
.00
.00
,00
,00
-------
SOr-NEN,b?6309, t , 5 M
t! OCT 73 J4I03I48 PAGE
RCH/CL 1
DISSOLVED OXYGtN IN MG/L
3 4 b 6 7
1 9,19 6.5b 6.b3 6.5) 6.46 6.46 6.44 6.41
2 7,41 7,40 7.38 7.36 7.35
3 7,33 7.32 7.31 7.30 7.28 7.27 7.26
7,25 7.21 7.22 7.21 7.20 7.19 7.IB 7.17
7.87 7.87 6.39 6.39 6.40
6,41 6.42 6.43 6.44 6.45 6,46
RCH/CL 1
b-DAY BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND IN MQ/I.
IP)
1 .50 16.41 16.38 16.34 16,31 16.27 16.24 16.20
2 7,91 7.89 7.87 7.65 7.04
3 7.82 7.81 7.79 7.76 7.76 7,75 7.73
4 7,72 7.71 7.69 7.68 7,66 7,68 7.63 7.62
5 3,47 3.47 2.32 2.32 2.32
6 2,31 2.31 2.3P 2.30 2.30 2.29
RCH/CL 1
COLIFORMS AS Mf-Si
345
8
1 13,4B***********************************i ******
2******************************
3******************************************
4************************************************
It
11
11
12
ITERATION 1
13 14 15 16
17
ITERATION l
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
ITERATION 1
12 13 14 tb 16 17 18 19 20
fi***************t********************
-------
, 1 , 5t
Z OCT 73 )4»ei3l48 PAGE
FINAL REPORT * *
REACH NO. 1,0 RCH" SCHOFIELO AREA
RIVER MILES 10.0 TO 8,0
i. HYDRAULIC PARAMETER VALUES
PARAMETER
FLOW (CF3)
VELOCITY (FPS)
DEPTH (FT)
HEAP OF REACH
I .500
) .P33
.1 18
END OF REACH
4.000
1.442
,238
MAXIMUM
4,000
1.442
.208
MINIMUM
1.500
1.0J3
.118
AVERAGE
3.687
1.403
,196
2. *| A T E R QUALITY PARAMETER VALUES
FLEM 1
8
DO 9.19 6.S5 6.53 6,51 6.48 6.46 6.44 6.41
BOO .50 16.41 16.38 16.34 16.31 16.27 16.24 16,20
COLI 13 96483 95975 95469 94966 94466 93968 93462
* NOTEl
UNITS ARE MG/L, EXCEPI FOR
AND
COLIFORMS AS MPN
10
1 1
13
15
.16
17
18
19
3. AVERAGE VALUES OF REACH COEFFICIENTS
DECAY RATES (I/DAY)
.SETTLING RATES (I/DAY) BENTHOS SOURCE RATES CMG/FT/DAYJ
ION RATk CHLOR A/ALGAE
(I/DAY) RATIO (UG/MG)
KNH3 • .00
KN02 « ,00
KCOLI • .50
KRDN • ,00
BOP
ALGAE
.00
BOD
NH3
P04
,00
K2
1,000 RATIO »
-------
3UNNEN,b26Jd9,1,50
2 OCT 73 J4I03M8 PAGE 9
D R A U L I r
PARAMETER
FLOrt (CFS)
VELOCITY CFPS)
DEPTH (FT)
REACH NO, 2.0
RIVER MILES
PARAMETER VALUES *
HEAD OF REACH END OF REACH
» 9.240 9,240
* 1.604 1 , 634
« .316 ,316
RCH» WAIKAKA-HAIHOLE
b,0 TO 6,7
* *
MAXIMUM
9.240
1 ,604
.316
* *
MINIMUM
9.240
1. .604
.316
* *
AVERAGE
9,240
1.604
.316
2. WATER QUALITY PARAMETER VALUES
6LEM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
DO 7,41 7.40 7.J8 7.36 7.35
BOD 7.91 7.89 7.87 7.85 7.04
COLI 42160 41921 41684 41448 41213
* NOTE! UNITS ARE MG/L, EXCEPT FOR
AND CDLIFORMS AS MPN
14
16
t7
18
19
20
3, AVERAGE VALUES OF REACH COEFFICIENTS
DECAY RATES (I/DAY)
SETTLING RATES (I/DAY) BENTHOS SOURCE RATES (M6/FT/OAY) REAERATION RATt CHLOR A/ALbAE
Cl/DAY) RATIO CUG/MG)
KIBOD «
KN02 »
KCOLI *
KRDN «
.20
.0H
,00
.5^
.00
BOD s
ALGAE «
BOD « ,0H
NH3 s .00
P04 s ,00
K2 « 1.0B0
KATIO
-------
SONNEN,b26309,1,
2 OCT 76 14103148 PASE 10
FINAL REPORT * '
REACH NO, 3,0 RCH» BEIOK WAIHOLE
RIVER MILES 6.7 TO 5,0
i. HYDRAULIC PARAMETER VALUES
PARAMETER
(CF$)
VELOCITY CFPS)
DEPTH (FT)
HEAD OF REACH
9.240
1.95B
.?69
END OF REACH
9.240
t.958
.269
MAXIMUM
9.240
t.958
.269
MINIMUM
9.243
1.958
AVERAGE
9,240
1,958
.269
2, WATER QUALITY PARAMETER VALUES
ELEM t 2 J 4 5 6 7
00 7.33 7.32 7.3) 7.30 7.28 7.27 7.26
BOD 7.82 7.81 7.79 7.78 7.76 7.7S 7.73
COLI 41001 40810 40621 40432 40245 40058 39872
* NOTE!
UNITS ARE MG/L> EXCEPT FOR
AND
COLIFORM3 A3 MPN
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
3. AVERAGE VALUES Of HEACH COEFFICIENTS
0ECAY RATES (I/DAY)
SETTLING RATES Cl/OAY) BENTHOS SOURCE RATES CMS/FT/OAY) REAF.RATION SATE CHLOH A/ALGAE
(I/DAY) RATIO
KIBOO «
MH3 *
KN02 *
KCOLI •
KRDN »
.20
.00
,00
.50
.00
BOD e
ALGAE «
,00
,00
BOO »
NM3 «
PCU *
.00
,00
,00
K2
1.000
RATIO
.00
-------
SONNEN,526309,1,50
2 OCt 73 14J03I48 PAGE 1 1
HYDRAULIC PARAMETER v A
PARAMETER HEAD OF REACH
FLOW (CFS) • 9.24M
VELOCITY (FP3) « 1.9*8
DEPTH (FT) B .269
REACH NO. 4§l
RIVER MILES
LUES *
END OF REACH
9.240
1,958
.269
REPORT
3 RCH« HUCIWAI
5,0 TO 3,0
* * *
MAXIMUM
9.240
1.958
.269
- NAD S
*
MINIMUM
9.249
1.958
.269
+ *
AVERAGE
P. 240
1,956
.?69
2. WATER QUALITY PARAMETER VALUES
EL.EM 1
3
8
DO 7,25 7.24 7,22 7.21 7.20 7.19 7.18 7.17
BOO 7,72 7.71 7.69 7.68 7.66 7,6b 7.63 7.62
COLI 39686 395^2 39319 39136 38954 38774 38594 3U408
* NOTE:
UNITS ARE MG/U, EXCEPT FOR
ANp
COUIFORMS AS
I 0
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
20
3. AVERAGE VALUES Of REACH COEFFICIENTS
OECAY RATES (I/DAY)
SETTLING RATES CIXDAY) BENTHOS SOURCE RATES (MG/FT/DAY) REAERATION RATE CHLOH A/ALGAE
CJ/DAY) RATIO CUG/MG)
Kieoo •
K N H 3 *
KN02 »
KCOLI «
KRON »
.20
.00
.00
.50
.00
WOO
ALGAE
.00
son s ,00
NH3 s .00
P04 « ,00
RATIO «
-------
SOMNEN,526309,1,50
2 OCT 73 10103148 PAGE
1
HYDRA
REACH NO. 5, a RCH« KIPAPA STREAM
RIVER MILES 3.0 TO 1.7
ULICPARAMETERVALUES * * * * * * *
PARAMETER HEAD OF Rf-ACH END OF REACH MAXIMUM MINIMUM AVERAGE
FLOW (CFS) » 24.710 40,180 40,180 24.710 33.992
VELOCITY (FPS) • 2.335 2.768 2.768 2.335 2.611
DEPTH (FT) • ,511 .681 .681 .bll ,617
2
, rt A T E R
ELEM 1
QUALITYPARAMETERVALUES * * * * * *
2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
DO 7.87 ;,87 6.39 6.39 6.4tf
800 3,47 3.47 2.32 2.32 2,32
COLI 14404 14345 8799 8771 874!
*
3
NOTEl UNITS
A V E R A
ARE MG7L, EXCEPT FOR
AND COLIFORMS AS MPN
GE VALUES OF REACH COEFFICIENTS * * * *
DECAY RATES (l/OAYJ SETTLING RATES (I/DAY) BENTHOS SOURCE RATES CMG/M/DAY) KEAERATIOM RA
(I/DAY)
K1BOD
KNH3
KN02
KCOLI
KRDN
« ,20 BOD « .00 BOD = ,00 t\2 » l.tHi
a , d)H ALGAE • .00 NH3 « ,00
• ,50
» ,00
19
20
HAjJo (IJU/MG)
KATIU • ,0n
-------
SONNEN,5y6309,1,50
2 OCT 7.5
PAGE 13
1
2
REACH NO. 6.3 RCH« USGS GAGE
RIVER MILES 1,7 TO ,3
. HYDRAULIC PARA METER VALUES * * * * * * *
PARAMETER HEAD OF RMCH END OF REACH MAXIMUM MINIMUM AVERAG
FLOW (CFSJ * 40.180 40.180 40.180 40,180 40.180
VELOCITY (FPS) = 1.776 1,776 1.776 1.776 1.776
DEPTH (FT) « .840 .840 ,840 .840 ,840
, hATER QUALITY PARAMETER VALUES * * * * * *
ELEM 1 Z 3 4 b 6 7 8 9 ] 0 1 1 1 ? 1 3 1 4 1 5
> #
• •: 17 18 19 20
DO 6,41 6.42 6,43 6.44 6.45 6.46
BOO 2,31 2.31 2.30 2.30 2,30 2.29
COLI 8709 8670 8631 8592 8553 8514
«
3
NOTE! UNITS ARE MG/L, EXCEPT FOR
AND COLIFORMS AS MPN
, AVERAGE VALUES OF REACH COEFFICIENTS * * » *
DECAY RATES (I/DAY) SEITLING RATES (1/nAY) RENTHOS SOURCE RATFS (MG/F-T/DAY) 9E<
KIBOD « ,zi EU « ,M rrr >• ,rt \-
K K h i e , f! 6 t-lCfti, .ft M H ? r , 0 Li
KKC't * ,f'K Plus r , lit
'RATION RATE CHLOR A/ALGAE
J/OAY) hATJO (U&/MG)
-P * ,*^V. RATIO * .K
-------
Appendix B
QUAL-II Input Data and Results
for Waikele Stream based on September 1972 Conditions
-------
SONNEN,526339,1,50
TtXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD/WATER RESOURCES ENGINEERS, INC.
* * * DATA LIST FOR MODIFIED QUAL1 STREAM QUALITY ROUTING MODEL *
$$$ (PROBLEM TITLES) S$S
2 OCT 73
211 IRlbe
(•'AGE
LARD TYPE
TITLE0I
TITLE02
TITLE03
TITLE04
TITLEWb
TITLE06
TITLEU7
TITLE08
TITLE09
TITLE10
TITLE!!
TITLE12
TITUE1J
TITLED
TITLE15
ENDTITLE
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
Yes
YtS
NO
QUAL-I PROGRAM TITLES
TWDB/WRE EXPANDED VERSION OF QUAL-I. — KNOWN AS QUAL II
WA1KELE STREAM — OAHU SEPTEMBER , 1972
5-DAY BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND IN MG/L
DISSOLVED OXYGEN IN MG/L
COLIFQRMS AS MPN
$$$ DATA TYPE 1 (CONTROL DATA) $$$
CARD TYPE
LIST DATA INPUT ,00000
WRITE FINAL SUMMARY .00000
NO FLOW AUGMENTATION ,06000
STEADY STATE .00000
NUMBER OF REACHES « 6.00000
HUM OF HEADWATERS • t. 00000
TIME STEP (HOURS) « ,00000
MAXIMUM ROUTE TIME (HRS)« 30.00000
ENOATAl .00000
CARD TYPE
,00000
,00000
.00000
.00000
Or JUNCTIONS '
NO OF TRIHS AND WASTES '
LMTH. COMP, ELEMENT (hl)i
TIME INC. FOR HPT2 (HRS)<
b,
.25000
,00000
,001100
SSSDATA TYPE 1A (ALGAE PRODUCTION AND NITROGEN OXIDATION CONSTANTS)$$$
CARD TYPE
CARD TYPE
ENDAT Al A
.0000
,0000
,0000
,0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
, v. f f.1 p
. 0 0 i.i M
.0000
.0000
.0000
,tt0H0
.0(100
$ S * DATA TYPE ? (REACH IDENTIFICATION) * $ $
CARD TYPE
STREAM REACH
STREAM REACH
STREAM RtACH
STREAM REACH
STREAM REACH
STREAM REACH
ENDATA2
REACH ORDER AND IDENT
3 RCH= SCHOFIELU AREA
1 RCH» n AlKAKA-i
-------
SOMNEN,526309,1,50
? OCT 73 21118156
PAGE
CARD TYPE
ENDATA3
REACH
AVAIL HDWS TARGET
0. .0
ORDER OF AVAIL SOURCES
0, ». 0, 0. 0. H
$$4 DATA TYPE A (COMPUTATIONAL REACH FLAG FIELD) $$$
CARD TYPE
FLAG FIELD
FLAG FIELD
FLAG FIELD
FLAG FIELD
FLAG FIELD
ENDATA4
PFACH ELEMENTS/REACH
) . W.
2. 5.
3. 7.
4. 8.
5. b.
6. 6.
0. B.
COMPUTATIONAL FLAGS
1,6.2.2.2.2.2,2,************************
6.2.2.2.7.******************************
2,2.2,2,2.2,2,**************************
2.2.2.2.2 2 2 2 ********* ***************
6,2.6,2,2.******************************
2.2.2.2,2.5,****************************
A***************************************
*$$ DATA TYPE b (HYDRAULIC COEFFICIENTS FOR DETERMINING VELOCITY AND DEPTH) $J$
CARD TYPE
HYDRAULICS
HYDRAULICS
HYDRAULICS
HYDRAULICS
HYDRAULICS
HYDRAULICS
ENDATA5
REACH
1.
b.
6.
COEFQV
.94M
.760
.470
EXP03V
,340
.330
,330
,330
,350
,360
,000
COEFQH
.093
,0R7
,074
,074
.077
,095
,000
EXPOQH
.580
,580
,580
.590
,590
.000
CMANN
1045
,049
,045
.045
i*$ DATA TYPL 6 (REACTION COEFFICIENTS FOR DEOXYGfcN: AT ION AND REAEHAtIDM)
CARD TYPE
REACT COLF
REACT CUEF
RtACT COEF
REACT COEF
REACT COEF
REACT COEF
ENDATAb
REACH
1.
2.
3.
4,
s.
6.
?>.
Kl
.20
.20
-2M
.20
.20
.20
,00
KJ
,H0
.00
, M0
.00
.00
, 00
.00
K20PT
1.
1.
1.
1.
u
1.
0.
K2
1.00
1,00
1.00
1.00
1.00
.80
,00
C0EQK2
,000
.000
,000
,04)0
.000
,000
,000
EXPQK?.
Sii DATA TYPE fcA (ALGAE, NITROGEN, AND PHOSPHOROUS CONSTANTS)
CARD TYPE
ALGAE,
ALGAE,
N AND
N AND
P COtF
P COEF
ALGAE, N AND P COEF
ALGAE, N AMD P COEF
ALGAE. N AND P COEF
ALGAE, t AND P COEF
ENDATA6A
$$» DATA TYPE 6R COTHEH COEFFICIENTS) $$$
EACH
i,
2.
3.
4.
5,
6.
^'.
ALPHAO
.0
.0
.0
,f
D M
.0
.0
ALGSET
,00
.00
.00
,00
,00
,00
,00
CKNH3
, 00
,00
.00
.00
,00
,00
,00
CKN02
,00
.(10
,00
,00
,00
.00
,00
SNH3
.0
.0
.*
.0
.0
,a
SPOx)
.0
.0
I?
.0
.0
CARD TYPE
OTHER COCFFICIENTS
OTHER COEFFICIENTS
OTHER COEFFICIENTS
OTHER COEFFICIENTS
OTHtR COEFFICIENTS
OTHER COEFFICIENTS
ENDATA6S
REACH
i.
2.
3.
4.
b.
6.
H.
,00
.00
.00
CK5
. b0
.50
,50
,50
.50
.50
.a PI
EXCOEF
,00
,30
,00
,00
.0(1
.00
.00
CK6
, t?0
,H0
.00
,00
,00
,00
,0k)
S*J OATA
( IM t I»L (,ON(;I 1 IONS)
-------
SONNtN, 5263*19, 1 , OK!
2 OCT 73
21 I 18:56
PAG!.
CARD TYPE
INITIAL CONDITIONS
INITIAL CONDITIONS
CONDITIONS
CONDITIONS
CONDITIONS
CONDITIONS
INITIAL
INITIAL
INITIAL
INITIAL
ENDATA7
REACH
1.
2.
3.
4.
b.
6.
0,
TEMP
80.5
75.8
75.6
75.8
79.2
75.0
.0
D.O.
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
."
300
.0
.0
.0
.0
.«
, 0
.0
CM-I
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
CM-II
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
CM-III
10
*0
,0
'»
$$$ DATA TYPE 7A (INITIAL CONDITIONS FOR CHLOROPHYLL A, NITROGEN, PHOSPHOROUS,
COLIFORM AND RADIONUCLIDE) $H$
CARD TYPE
INITIAL COND-2
INITIAL COND-2
INITIAL COND-2
INITIAL COND-2
INITIAL CONO-2
INITIAL
ENDATA7A
$*S DATA TYPE 8 (RUNOFF- CONDITIONS) $$S
REACH
1.
2.
3.
4,
b.
6.
P.
CHLORA
.0
.0
.«
.1?
.0
.0
.0
NHJ
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
,09
,00
N02
,00
,00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
N03
.00
.00
.00
.00
,0H
,00
,00
P04
,00
.00
.00
,00
,00
,00
,0<3
COLI
1.0
1000,0
1000,0
1000.0
1000.0
1000.0
,«
RADN
.00
.00
.00
,03
,00
.00
.00
CARD TYPE
RUNOFF CONDITIONS
RUNOFF CONDITIONS
RUNOFF CONDITIONS
RUNOFF CONDITIONS
RUNOFF CONDITIONS
RUNOFF CONDITIONS
ENDATA8
PEACH 0 TEMP 0.0, 800 CM-I CM-II
1. .0 .0 .0 ,0 .0 ,0
2. .0 .0 .tf ,0 .0 .0
.1, .0 .0 .0 .0 ,0 .0
4. ,0 .0 ,0 .0 .0 .0
5. .0 ,0 .0 .0 .0 .0
6. ,0 .0 .B .0 ,0 .0
0. .0 .0 .0 ,0 .0 ,0
CM-III
!0
!»
.0
$$S DATA TYPE RA (INCREMENTAL. FLOW CONDITIONS FOR NITROGEN,PHOSPHOROUS,
COLIFOPM AND RADIONUCLIDH $«
CARD TYPE
RUNOFF CONO-2
RUNOFF CONO-2
RUNOFF coND-2
RUNOFF CUND-Z
RUNOFF- coNo-2
RUNOFF COND-2
ENDATA8A
$$$ DATA TYPE 9 (STREAM JUNCTIONS) $$S
REACH CHLORA
1. .0
2. .0
3. .H
4. .0
5. .0
6. .0
P. .0
NH3
,00
,0H
.00
.00
.00
.00
,0tf
N02
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.03
NO i
.00
,00
,laM
,00
.00
,00
,00
P04
,0H
. Ht)
,00
,00
.00
,00
,00
COLI
.a
.0
.v)
.0
RADN
!00
.00
.00
CARD TYPF.
ENDATA9
JI$ DATA 1YPF--
CARD TYP^
HE ADWATLF;
ENDATA1H
JUNCTION ORDFR AND IDENT
(HEADWATER SOURCES) S$S
HDrtATER UNDER AND 1DFM FLOk
I. HMD* ABOVE SCHOFIf.LD ,f,
P. .<*
U P S T R M
JUNCTION
ThIB
TEMP
0.0.
.0
.0
BOD CM-I
.0 .0
.a . 0
CH-IJI
.0
$$S PATA TYPt MA (HEADtvATf.R CONDITIONS FOR CHLOROPHYLL, NIT ROGF.N, PHOSPHOROUS,
COLIFORi" AND RADIONUCLIDE) tst
CARD TYPL
H0»lA Te R CHLORA
NH.t
N02
N03
P04
COLI
RADN
-------
SONNEN,b?6309, 1,50
? UCT 73
21118Jb6
I'AGt
HEADWATER-2
ENDATA1UA
$SS DATA TYPt
1. .0 ,00
0. .0 .00 .
H (WASTE LOADINGS) i$*
CARD TYPt WASTE LOAD ORDER AMD IDENT EFF
WASTELOAD 1.
WASTELOAD 2,
WASTELOAD 3,
WASTELOAD 4.
WASTELOAD b.
ENDATA1) 0.
$$$ OATA TYPE
CARD TYPt
WASTELOAD-2
WASTELOAD-2
WA3TELOAD-2
WA31ELOAD-2
WA3TELOAO-2
ENOATA1 1A
W3L«SCHOFIELD BARR. ,00
WSL«'.1AIHAKALAUA STR ,00
WSL=WAIHOLE DITCH ,00
WSL=KIPAPA STREAM ,00
WSL«SPRING INFLOWS .00
,00
11A (WASTE LOAD CHARACTERISTICS -
COLIFOHHS AND RAO I ONUCL I DE3 )
WASTE LOAD ORDER AMD IOENT CHL
1. WSL'SC-MOF IELD BAKR.
2. HSLsWAIKAKALAUA STR
3. WSL«wAIHOLE DITCH
4. WSL'rtlPAPA STREAM
5. wSL=SPRiNQ INFLOWS
00
00
FLOW
2.5
2.6
-3.4
1.5
11.6
.0
,00
,00
TEMP D
80,5
75,8
,0
79,2
65,0
.0
ff
9
.0,
5,0
8,0
.0
5,3
4.0
.0
ALGAE, NITROGEN
$$$
. A
,00
,00
.00
.00
,00
NH3
,00
.00
,00
,00
.00
00 ,0
00 ,0
BOD CM-I
32,1 .0
2.3 ,fc
.0 .»
8,9 .1?
,5 ,k)
,f ,0
, PHOSPHOROUS,
N02
,00
.00
,00
.00
.00
.00
.00
CM-II CM-III
.0 ,0
.0 ,0
• ^ , "
.0 ,0
,0 ,0
.« .0
N03 P04 COLt
,00 .ftfj I60e00, 0e
,00 .('10 366. 0e
,00 ,00 ,0P
,081 .00 1365, 0H
,00 .£(« l,0fe
RAON
,00
.00
,00
.00
.00
-------
30NNEN,526309,1 ,&P
2 OCT 73 211)8J56 PAGE 7
DISSOLVED
RCH/CL
I 7
2 6
3 5
4 5
5 b
6 4
1
.87
.13
.93
.64
.33
.37
4
6
5
5
5
4
2
.94
.09
.89
.60
.30
.40
4
6
5
5
4
4
3
.82
.05
.84
.57
.36
.43
4
6
5
5
4
"
4
.71
.01
.80
.53
.32
.46
OXYGtN
5
4.6&J
5,98
5.76
b,49
4.35
4,48
4
b
b
4
b-DAY BIOCHEMICAL
RCH/CL
1
2 16
3 16
4 15
5 12
6 3
1
.00
.59
.36
.98
.49
.10
32
16
16
15
12
3
2
.05
.54
.30
.93
.45
.09
31
16
16
15
3
3
3
.94
.50
.25
.88
.12
.08
31
16
16
15
3
3
COLIF
RCH/CL
1
3***
5***
6** *
1
,00*
**
******
* * * *
* ***
* *
2
***
* 4 *
* * *
** ***
***
** *
***
* * *
3
* * *
"
.83
.45
. 19
.83
.1 1
.07
ORNiS
4
*******
******
* **
***
* **
***
*** *
** **
****
6
31.7?
16,41
16,14
13.77
3,10
3.06
3)
16
Ib
3
IN MG/L
6
.49 4.
.72 5.
.46 5.
.51
OXYGEN
6
.61 31.
.09 16.
.72 15.
.05
789
38 4.27
68
42 5.39
DEMAND IN MS/L
789
51 31,40
04
67 lb.62
AS MPN
b
*****
*****
**** »
* * * * 4
***
* * *
* **
6
789
***************
*******
* * *
* *
1C
11
ITERATION 1
12 13 14 15 16 17 J6 19 2tl
Id
11
ITERATION 1
12 13 14 IS \b 17 18 19 20
11
ITERATION 1
12 13 14 ]5 16 17 18 19 20
-------
SONNtN,526^09, I, bit!
2 fJCT 73 21I18S56 PAGE
FINAL REPORT * *
REACH NO, 1,0 RCH= SCHOFIELD AREA
RIVER MILES 10.0 TO 8.0
1, HYDRAULIC PARAMETER VALUES
PARAMETER HEAD OF REACH
FLOW (CF3) » . f00
VELOCITY (FPS) « ,0(?0
DEPTH (FT) * .000
2. WATER QUALITY PAR*
END OF REACH MAXIMUM MINIMUM AVERAGE
2.540 2.540 .000 2,222
1.236 1.236 .000 1.181
,160 .160 ,000 .148
ETER VALUES
ELEM 1
8
12
DO 7,87 4.94 4,82 4.71 4.60 4.49 4.3R 4.27
BOD ,00 32, 05 31.94 31.83 31.72 31. M 31.51 31.40
COL I 01 59322J 5 79781 366451 55324 1 5«M i 4 1 b27 1 b 151 414
* NOTE» UNITS ARE MG/U EXCEPI FOR
AND COLIFOHI-'S AS MPN
3, AVERAGE VALUES OF REACH COEFFICIENTS
13
1 A
15
16
17
18
DECAY RATFS (I/DAY)
SE1TLING RATES Cl/DAY) 8ENTHOS SOURCE RATES (rtG/FT/DAY) REAERATION RATE CHLOR A/ALGAE
(I/DAY) RATIO (U6/MG)
KIBOD «
KNH3 »
KN02 «
KCOLI •
KRDN *
.20
,00
.00
,50
.00
BOD » ,00
ALGAE « .00
BOD • ,ldB
NH3 a ,0B
P04 * , 0(J
1.0H0 RATIO
-------
SONNEN,526309,1,50 2 OCT 73 2HJ8|56 PAGE
1
. -i Y U H A
REACH NO, 2,0 RCH» W'AIKAKA-WA IHOLE
RIVER MILES 8,0 TO 6,7
ULICFAKAM6TER VALUES * * * * * * *
PARAMETER HEAD Op REACH END OF REACH MAXIMUM MINIMUM AVERAGE.
FLOW (CFS) « 5.160 1,760 5.160 1,760 4,48?
VELOCITY (FP3) « 1,323 .928 1.323 ,928 1.263
DEPTH (FT) • .225 ,121 .226 .121 .208
2
, WATER
ELEM 1
QUALITY PARAMETER VALUES * * * * * *
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Jb 16 17
DO 6,13 6,09 6,05 6.01 5,9fi
BOD 16.69 16.54 16,50 16.45 16,41
COLI 74328 73808 73292 72779 72400
*
3
NOTEl UNITS
, A V E R A
ARE MG/L, EXCEPT FOR
ANU COLIFORMS AS MPN
G t VALUES Of REACH CO EFFICIENTS * * * *
DECAY RATES CI/DAY) SETTLING RATES (I/DAY) BENTHOS SOURCE RATES CMG/FT/DAY) REAEPATION R
(I/DAY)
K1BOD
KNH3
KN02
* ,20 BOD » ,0V) HOD » .02 K? » 1,01
« , an ALGAE » .00 NHJ » .00
« .00 P04 • ,00
18
RATIO
1,080 RATIO « ,00
KCOLI • .50
KRDN • ,00
-------
80NNEN, 526309, I, 50 2 OCT 73 21118156 PAGE 10
* * * * * * f-IMAL REPORT t * * * * »
REACH NO, 3. a RCHe BELOW WAIHOLE
HIVER MILES 6.7 TO 5,0
1. HYDRAULIC PARAMETER VALUES * * * * * * *
PARAMETER HEAD OF REACH END OF REACH MAXIMUM MINIMUM AVERAGE
FLOW (CF3) = 1.760 1,760 1.760 1.760 1.760
VELOCITY (FP3J = 1.133 1.133 1.133 t.133 1,133
DEPTH (FT) * ,103 ,103 .103 .103 .103
2, HATER QUALITY PA KAMETER VALUES * * * * * *
1 2 3 a 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 1 4 lb 16 1 7 J B 19 20
DO 5,93 5.89 5.84 5.00 5.76 5,72 5.68
BOD 16,36 16.30 16.26 16.19 16.14 16,09 16.04
COLI 71744 71159 70578 7040? 69430 68864 68302
* NOTE» UNITS ARE MG/L. EXCEPT FOR
AND COLIFORMS AS MPN
J, AVERAGE VALUES OF REACH COEFFICIENTS * * * *
DECAY RATES U/DAO SETTLING RATES U/OAY; BENTHOS SOURCE RATES (MG/FT/DAO REAERATIOiM RATE CHLOR A/ALSAE
U/OAY) HATIO (UG/MGJ
K1BOD « ,20 BOD * .00 800 « ,0fei K2 « 1,000 RATIO « ,00
KNH3 * .$$ ALGAE s ,0d NH3 » ,00
KN02 » ,00 P04 « ,03
KCOLI » ,b0
KRDN a .flO
-------
SONNEN,526309,1 ,5B
2 UCT 73 2)II8J56 PAGE 11
F I N A I REPORT * *
PEACH NO. 4,3 RCH« HULIWAI - NAD 3
RIVER MILES 5,0 10 3,0
I. HYDRAULIC PARAMETER VALUES
PARAMETER
FLOW CCF3)
VELOCITY (FPS)
DEPTH (FT)
HEAD OF REACH
I .760
1.133
.103
END OF REACH
1.760
1,133
.103
MAXIMUM
1,760
1.133
. 103
MINIMUM
1.760
1.133
.103
AVERAGE
1,760
1.133
,103
2. WATER QUALITY PARAMETER VALUES
ELEM 1
3
DO 5.64 5.6U 5,57 5.53 5.49 5,46 5.42 b.39
BOD 15,98 16.93 15.68 15.83 15,77 15.72 15.67 lb.62
COLI 67744 67191 66643 66099 65559 65024 64493 63963
* NOTEl UNITS ARE M&/L, EXCEPT FOR
AND COLT.FOHMS AS MpN
11
12
13
15
17
18 19
J, AVERAGE VALUES OF REACH COEFFICIENTS
* *
DECAY RATES (1/OAY)
K1BOD « .20
KNH3 * .00
KNU2 • .00
KCQLI • ,5t)
KRON » .Hid
SETTLING RATES (I/PAY) BENTHOS SOURCE RATES (MG/FT/DAY) REAERATION RATE CHLOR A/ALGAE
(I/PAY) RATIO (UG/MG)
BOD »
ALGAF. «
,00
SOD « .6)0
NH3 • .00
P04 « .00
1 ,
RATIO «
-------
30NNEN,526339, 1 , bf
7 OCT 73 21116156 PAGE 12
FINAL REPORT * '
REACH NO, b,0 RCH« KIPAPA STREAM
RIVER MILES 3,0 TO \ ,7
1, HYDRAULIC PARAMETER VALUES
PARAMETER
FLOW (CFS)
VELOCITY (FPS)
DEPTH (FT)
HEAD OF REACH
3.260
1 .149
.158
END OF REACH
14,860
1,954
.378
MAXIMUM
14,860
1,954
.378
MINIMUM
3.260
1.149
.155
AVERAGE
10.220
1.714
,303
2, HATER QUALITY PARAMETER VALUES
ELEM 12345
DO 5.33 5,30 4.30 4.32 4,35
BOD 12,49 12,45 3.12 3.11 3.111
COLI 34924 34613 7569 7529 7490
10
11
NOTE!
UNIT3 ARE MG/L, EXCEPT FOR
AND COLIFOHMS AS MPN
12
13
1 4
15 16
18
19
3. AVERAGE VALUES OF REACH COEFFICIENTS
OECAY RATES (I/DAY)
.20
.00
,t1H
,50
SETTLING RATES (I/DAY) BENTHOS SOURCE RATES (MG/FT/DAY) REAERATION RATE CHLOR A/ALGAE
(1/DAV) RATIO (IIG/MG)
KNH3 »
KN02 »
KCOLI «
KRDN »
BOD
ALGAE
800 s ,00
NH3 » ,00
1.0P0 RATIO • ,00
-------
? OCf 73 21J1BI56 PAGE
F" I N
REPORT
REACH NO, 6,0 RCH« USGS GAGE
RIVER MILES 1.7 10 .3
1, HYDRAULIC PARAMETER VALUES
PARAMETER
FLOW CCF3)
VELOCITY (FP3)
DEPTH (FT)
HEAD OF REACH
) .242
.467
END OF REACH
14,860
1.242
,467
MAXIMUM
14.865)
1 ,242
.467
MINIMUM
14,860
1,242
.467
AVERAGE
14.860
1.242
.467
2. HATER QUALITY PARAMETER VALUE3
ELEM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
00 4,37 4.40 4,43 4.46 4.48 4.51
BOD 3,10 3.U9 3.08 3.07 3.06 .3,05
COLI 7446 7391 7337 7284 7231 7178
* NOTEl UNITS ARE MG/L, EXCEPT FOR
AND COLIFORMS A3 MPN
11
12
14
15
16
17
16 \9
20
3, AVERAGE VALUES OF REACH COEFFICIENTS
DECAY RATES (1/OAY)
SETTLING RATES (I/DAY) 8EMTH03 SOURCE RATES CMG/FT/DAY) REAtRATION RATE CHLOR A/ALGAE
(I/DAY) RATIO (UG/MG)
KlbOD
KNH3
KN02
KCOLI
KRDN
,20
eoo
ALGAE
BOD • ,0k)
NH3 » ,00
P04 » .00
K2
RATIO
-------
Appendix C
Estuary Model Results on the 30th Day of Simulation
for April and September 1972
-------
REAERATION RATE CONS1ANT . 0.1k)
SYSTEM 3TATU3 AFTER QUALITY CYCLE 1420
23 OCT 73
10J3U13
HAGE
56
APRIL 1972
30 DAYS, 14.00 HOURS
JUNC
1
2
4
3
7
e
9
10
it
12
14
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
26
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
47
48
49
b0
bl
52
53
54
55
56
67
TEMP
C
29,0
24,9
24.9
24,9
24,9
24,9
2S.1
24,9
25,0
26,0
25,3
25,6
25.1
25,0
25.2
25,1
25.2
25, Id
25,2
35,3
25.0
25.0
9.5.).
25.0
25,0
24.9
24.9
24,3
24,7
24, b
24.9
25.0
25,0
24,9
24.9
24.9
24,9
25.1
25.2
25.6
26.6
26.9
31.3
2b,9
25. J
2b. 1
25.3
26,7
29.5
26.5
OXY
MG/L
6.5
6.3
6.0
6.0
5.9
5,9
5.1
6.0
6.4
6.1
4.7
4.1
6,6
7.5
8.3
9.1
10.2
10.5
It, 7
4.9
6.0
5.9
5,8
5.5
5,4
4.9
4.9
2.0
3.8
3.6
4.4
5.9
5.9
5.8
5.7
b.e
5.8
5.B
5.7
5.7
5.6
b,3
b.l
5.5
5.6
5.4
5.2
b.0
b.u
3.8
BOO
M6/L
,2
,1
.1
,0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.1
,1
.1
.1
.1
.0
,i
.a
, i
.1
.1
.4
,4
4.1
1.1
1.0
.4
,0
.0
.0
.1
.0
. t
,0
.0
.*)
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.U
.0
.0
.«
.0
CHLOR A
UG/L
8,
7,
5,
5,
7,
9.
5,
13,
21,
19,
16.
15.
27.
37.
47.
55.
71.
60.
84.
3,
4.
4.
3,
3.
3,
4,
4,
9.
5.
8,
5.
3.
3.
3.
2.
2.
3.
3.
3,
3.
3.
3,
J.
3,
?..
2.
3.
5.
3.
2.
NH3
MG/L
,13
.21
,27
,31
.42
.52
,67
,63
,76
.78
1.21
1.47
.94
.96
t,08
1.14
1,32
1.20
1.47
.56
.28
.30
,33
,30
,42
.51
.51
1 .09
.74
.76
.67
.30
,32
.32
.38
.32
.34
.36
,40
.34
.38
,47
.52
f 45
,42
,51
.63
.74
.5.3
.02
NO?.
MG/L
.026
,043
,066
.081
,116
,139
.155
.165
.190
.194
,263
,?95
.219
.220
.228
.233
,278
,176
,28b
. 125
.070
.077
.085
.100
.110
.129
,13?
.207
.171
.193
.174
.079
.084
.08?
.393
.081
,i385
.091
. % y y
,»90
.099
,1)5
. 127
.lib
.107
. 120
.135
. 150
.124
.147
N03
MG/L
.113
.15
,17
.19
.25
.28
.26
.32
,35
.34
.33
.33
,35
.36
.36
,38
,25
,59
.20
.20
.16
.17
.18
,22
,25
,30
.32
,76
.47
.51
.40
.16
.16
.15
.15
. 14
.1"
.16
. 17
, 19
.18
,19
,22
.31
.IB
.18
.23
.34
,21
, 19
P04
MG/L
.04
,05
903
.02
,02
,02
,134
.03
,04
.04
.07
.IB
,Kb
.06
.08
.10
,08
,24
.11
.04
,H2
.02
,02
."2
.02
.04
,04
.38
.10
,08
.04
,02
.02
,02
.02
,02
,0?
,,12
.02
.02
.02
.03
.03
.02
,f-)2
.03
.0-1
.04
,P3
,09
COLIF
MPN/100ML
.18+02
,12+02
,29+02
.62+01
,21+01
,49+0]
,52+00
.16+02
,59+02
.49+0?
,35+01
,31+01
,15+03
.26+03
.51+03
,90+03
,37+03
,44+04
,71+03
,65+03
.78+0?
.18+03
,49+0?
.96+02
,10+03
.63+03
,66+03
.15+05
.51. + 04
.96+03
.13+03
.92+03
.30+04
.72+04
.21+05
,38+03
,32+05
.34+04
.96+03
.41+02
.21+03
. 19 + 03
.26+04
,39+04
,6(3 + 03
.84 + 0?.
.39+03
.24+04
.13+04
. 10 + kM
T|)S
U/L
34.9
34,2
33,5
32, 6
31.2
30.0
31,3
28,4
25.9
26,7
28.6
28.8
24.5
21,7
19,5
16.8
16,0
8,b
11.9
32.5
33.3
33.0
32.7
31.9
31.3
30,6
30.1
28.0
27.0
30,4
30.5
32,9
32,6
32,8
32,9
3?, 9
32.9
32.2
31.8
32.7
32.7
32.7
32, J
32.1
32,4
32.?
31.4
?6.7
32.5
32.6
TOT N HFAVY
M6/L
,13 ,70-03
,20 ,63-03
.20 ,53-03
,22 .40-03
.31 .37-03
.40 .47-03
,26 .24-03
.53 .67-03
.73 .H-02
.66 .92-03
.47 .50-03
,44 ,46i03
.84 , 13-02
1.09 ,19-02
1.28 ,23-02
1.52 .30-02
1.58 .27-0?-
2.2b .57-02
1.95 .37-02
.15 ,22-nJ
.19 ,59-03
,19 ,70-03
.33 ,12-0?.
,35 ,30-0?
.44 .41-02
.61 .56-02
,69 .79-02
2.0to .42-02
1,30 ,20-01
1,06 ,18-02
.75 .37-0?
.17 ,37-03
.17 ,25-03
,15 .10-03
.17 ,51-04
,12 ,44-04
.21 .50-04
. !9 ,22-03
,22 .29-03
.19 .88-03
.16 ,46-03
.14 .26-03
,17 .24-03
.20 .25-03
.17 .14-03
.17 ,1.4-03
,3P ,47-03
.49 .98-03
.16 ,23-03
,14 .2U-03
MET 1 &
MG/L
,16-02
,13-02
.94-03
.79-03
,71-03
,84i-03
.46-03
,11-02
.16-02
,14-02
.86-03
.80-03
,19-02
,26-02
,31-02
.39-02
,38-02
,65-0?
,48-(12
,27-03
,89-03
,87-03
.12-0?
.24-02
.33-02
,42-02
,56-02
,35-k)2
,12-tll
,17-M2
,31-02
,53-03
,36-03
,16-03
.73-04
,64-04
.7fi-04
.32-03
.38-03
.88-03
.53-03
.30-03
.30-03
.34-03
.20-03
.21-03
.59-03
.12-U?
.29-03
.?4-H3
2 PEST
i & 2
MG/L
,41-03
. 16-03
.32-04
,14-04
,88*06
,11*05
.00
.41-05
,17-04
,13-04
.00
,00
,43-04
,77*04
,15*03
,26*03
,97-04
,12-02
.19-03
.00
.15-04
,51f05
,16-05
,25-05
,26-05
,11-04
,19-04
,99-04
,14*03
,57-05
,95-06
. 13-05
,13-05
,00
,00
.00
.00
.70-05
.32-04
.12-07
.00
.00
.23-05
,42-0b
.24-06
.24-05
.51-04
. 12-03
,75-06
.00
,28"03
,16-03
f50"k)4
.27-U4
,43*-k>8
,75-05
,00
,23»B4
,73-04
,54"04
,00
.00
,13-03
,23-03
,35-03
, 55-103
,29-03
,18-02
.90-03
,00
,29-04
,13-04
,S8-09
.10W04
.11-04
,31-04
,52-04
,19-03
,26-03
,20-04
,43-k>b
,44-05
,44-05
,00
,00
.00
,00
. 17-04
, 56i-04
.61-07
.00
,00
,59-0b
. 13-04
,70-06
,74-k>5
,99-04
,23-03
,23-05
,00
DISSOLVED OXYGtN CONCENTRATION WAS REDUCED TO 1.5 TIMES SATURATION AT JUNCTION ?3, CYCLfH??
-------
SYSTEM STATUS AFTER QUALITY CYCLE
SEPTEMBER 1972
29 DAYS, 14.00 HOURS
JUNC
1
2
A
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
IS
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
26
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
37
36
39
40
41
42
43
44
47
48
49
50
51
92
53
54
55
56
57
TEMP
C
27.1
26.. 3
25. 5
25,2
25.0
24.9
24,9
24,9
24,9
24,9
25,1
25,4
24,9
24,9
25,0
24,9
26,0
25.0
25,0
32,9
25,2
25.1
25.0
24,9
24,9
24.8
24,8
24,9
24,8
24,8
24.8
24,9
24,9
24,8
24,8
24,8
24.8
24,9
24,9
25.1
25,6
25,8
29,0
25.5
25.1
24.8
25.0
25.6
27.7
26,1
OXY
MG/L
4.9
4.1
3.2
2.8
2.4
2.3
2.1
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.6
3.3
2.3
2.1
2.9
3.0
3.4
4.0
4.4
1.4
2.7
2.4
1,9
1.3
.6
,4
.3
.0
.0
.0
.0
2.0
1.7
1.3
.9
! .1
.8
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.4
1.3
2.5
BOD
MG/L
.4
.3
.1
,1
,0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
,n
.0
.0
.1
.0
.0
.6
,1
.0
.1
3.0
.7
.5
.2
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.1?
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
CHLOR A
UG/L
5,
4,
3.
3,
3,
3.
4.
4,
6,
8.
8.
8.
7,
8,
11.
12,
17.
19.
26,
4.
3,
3.
3,
S,
6,
6,
8,
13,
14,
16.
17.
3,
3,
3,
3,
3.
3.
4.
4.
4.
-5,
4.
4,
4.
4,
4,
4,
6,
4,
3,
NH3
MG/L
.05
.H
.23
.27
.36
.43
.62
.51
.61
,62
1.08
1.32
.76
.76
.91
.95
1.15
i.n
1,32
.53
,26
.29
.33
.41
.51
.52
.61
1.61
1,03
1,P5
,97
.31
.33
,33
.38
.32
,34
.36
.39
,33
.37
.45
.49
.44
,42
.49
.60
.69
.50
.79
N02
MG/L
.^11
.328
,352
.1367
.096
.113
,140
.133
,153
.158
,23(5
.259
,183
.186
.208
,218
.257
,232
.282
.119
,064
,^73
,066
,110
,138
.144
.164
.270
,247
.266
.262
.081
,386
,384
,093
.982
,086
.093
,100
.,394
,098
.113
.120
,H2
,108
,117
.129
.143
,118
.132
N03
MG/L
.04
.07
.12
.16
.21
,24
.25
,26
829
.29
,32
.32
.31
,32
,34
.36
.36
,43
.37
.25
,15
.18
,21
,27
.34
.35
,40
,67
,59
.56
e5S
.20
,21
,21
.22
.21
.21
,23
,25
.23
,24
,24
.26
,26
,25
,25
.29
,36
.26
,24
P04
MG/L
.02
,05
.04
.03
.02
.02
,04
.02
.03
.33
.07
.89
,04
.04
.05
.06
.07
.09
.08
.03
.03
,02
.182
.03
,04
.02
,05
.67
.16
.15
.09
.02
,02
,02
.02
,02
,02
,02
.02
,02
.02
.03
,03
.02
,02
,03
.04
,04
.03
,07
COLIF
MPN/100ML
.27+02
,15+82
.15+02
.15+02
,22+01
,11+01
.22+00
.17+01
,60+01
.50+01
,95+00
,88+90
,11+02
.24+02
.60+02
,92+02
,69+02
,90+03
,22+03
,68+03
,40+02
,11+03
.74+02
,38+02
.38+02
.55+02
,12+03
.23+03
,11+04
,19+02
.20+02
,61+03
,27+04
,69+04
,20+05
.53+83
,32+05
,33+04
,11+04
.35+02
,14+03
,24+03
.26+04
,38+04
,93+03
,14+03
,53+03
,28+04
.15+04
.19+03
TDS
G/L
35,6
35.2
35,0
34.9
34.8
34,7
34,9
34,5
34.2
34,3
34,9
35,0
34.1
33.6
32,9
32,5
32,0
28,8
30,0
34.6
34,9
34,8
34.6
34,3
33,9
33,6
33,4
31,9
31.9
33,2
33,2
34,6
34,4
34,6
34,8
34,8
34,7
34,1
33.8
34.6
34.6
34,7
34.4
34,2
34,4
34,3
33.7
31,3
34.5
34.8
TOT N
M6/U
.07
.11
.18
,18
.20
.22
.22
.85
.29
.28
,27
.27
.31
,35
,42
.46
.51
.76
,68
.26
,18
.22
,28
.44
.64
.64
.84
2.41
1.63
1.51
1.39
.23
.24
.24
.27
.22
,30
.26
,28
,30
.27
,25
.27
,29
.26
.25
.36
,54
.26
.25
HEAVY
.69*01
,66*01
,40*01
,26-01
.12-01
.65*02
.44*02
,56*02
.39*02
.39*02
,17-02
.13*02
.26*02
,26*02
.21*02
.20*02
.14*62
.23*02
.15*02
.15*02
,27*01
.16*01
.11*01
,7B*02
,41*02
.26*02
,30-02
.20*02
,16*02
,59*03
,47*03
.94*02
.46*02
,17*62
.50*03
,44*03
,41*83
,21*02
,65*03
,63*02
,37*02
,20*02
,14*02
,12*02
,71*03
,34*03
,74-03
,13*02
,15-02
,16-02
MET 1 1 2 PEST
MO/t
,91*02
,73*02
.49*02
,35*02
,19*02
,15*02
,66*03
,11*02
,93*03
,92*03
.91*03
.43*03
.80*03
,89*03
,95*03
,10*02
,10*62
,19*02
,15*09
,40*03
,36*02
,26»02
.18*02
.135-02
,96*03
,78*03
e87*03
,11*02
.10*82
,46*03
,44*133
,15-02
,86*03
,39*03
,15*03
,14*03
.14*03
,55*03
,42*03
,11*02
,74*03
,46*03
,43*03
,42*03
,28*03
,24*03
,57*03
,11*02
,42*03
.39*03
1 I 2
M6/L
,74-02
,35*02
,68-03
,31*03
.34*04
.12*04
.15.05
.40*05
,29*05
,27*05
,59-06
.00
.34*05
,77*00
,16*04
,28»B4
,20*04
,26*03
,66*04
,49*07
,35*03
,14*03
,39*04
,12*04
.47*09
,97*06
,97*05
,16*03
.76*04
,12*04
,18*05
,31*04
,78*05
.38*06
.00
,00
,00
,92*05
,30*04
,77*05
,15*05
,77*07
,20*05
,27*05
,14-06
.30*05
,49*04
,11*03
,11*05
.00
,4t»»e
,26-82
,ia«B2
,49-03
,11*03
,86*04
.i2«0«
.29-84
.20-B4
,16*04
,43*07
.00
,17-04
,31*04
.SB-04
.88*04
,64»04
,41*03
,16*03
,31-09
,53»B3
,28-03
.12-03
,B4*04
,28*04
.13*04
,40-04
,89*03
,16-03
,34*04
,S9»05
,96*04
,3S»04
,2i»0B
,00
,00
,00
,25-04
, 46».4
,39-04
,11*84
,48*06
.64*05
,95«-8
,27-86
.73-05
.90*04
,21*03
,37»05
,00
-------
Appendix D
Estuary Model Input Quality Data
for April 1972
-------
STREAM FLOWS DECREASED 8 Y S 0 X
tb MOV 73 19106110 PAGE 8
PEARL hARdOR HYDRAULICS - - 24 H 1/2 HOUR TIDE
APRIL 197? -- SENSITIVITY ANALYSES
PEAHL HARBOR QUALITY-- APRIL, 1972
FEDERAL WATER QUALITY ADMINISTRATION
DYNAMIC WATtR QUALITY MODEL
******** FROM HYDRAULICS PROGRAM ********
START CYCLt STOP CYCLE HUE INHHVAL
294 d
60. SECONDS
STARTING CYCLE INITIAL QUALITY TOTAL QUALITY *** OUTPUT INTERVALS ***
ON HYD, EXTRACT TAPE CYCLE CYCLES CYCLES HOURS
2940
1440
TIME INTERVAL IN
QUALITY PROGRAM
.500 HOURS
CONSTANT FOR
DIFFUSION COEFFICIENTS
THE FOLLOWING TAPE ASSIGNMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE
INTERNAL SCRATCH FlLfc i i
HYDRAULIC FILE FROM HYDRAULIC PROGRAM 12
RESTART FILE FOR ADDITIONAL SIMULATIONS a
FILE CONTAINING RESTART DAT A 0
PRINTOUT 13 TO BEGIN AT" CYCLE 1
QUALITY TAPE nr< EXTRACTING is TO HEGU AT CYCLE 96
-------
STREAM FLOrtS DECREASED BY bvl 'ii
15 NOY 73
19t0b«10
PAGE
THL FOLLOWING CONSTITUENTS ARE BEING CONSIDERED IN THIS RUN
CONSTITUENT NO. CONSTITUENT
1
2
i
4
•j
5
/
8
9
Id
1 1
12
U
H
1 b
DISSOLVED OXfGEN
CARBONACEOUS ^00
CHLOROPHYLL A
AMMONIA NITROGEN
NITRITE NITROGEN
NITRATE NITROGEN
PHOSPHATE PHOSPHORUS
COL1FORM BACTERIA
SALINITY
TOTAL NITROGEN
HLAVY METAL NO 1
HEAVY METAL NO 2
PESTICIDE NO 1
PESTICIDE W'-1 2
-------
3 T K £ «••' F U 013 0 E C ft h A 3 E I) 8 1 bd \
DATA SUHA«Y FTi' ''F-VTHF-K ZO<\E 1, JUMCflUN 1 TO JUNCTION 57
UAlITUOii 21.3
LONGITUDE 158.,-!
AT10S TURBIDITY 2.0
DAY OF YEAR ios
CALCULATED Ntf KA9 YES
E V A P A . 0 il il
EVAP a .ib/i-^d
15 NOV 73 19«06:t0 HACiE
10
INCOMING
RAO UTION
(KCAL/M2/SE.C)
. 1826
.4826
.0950
.1927
.2499
, 1670
.,3863
.0854
.«3H26
ft 1ND
SPEED
C -1/SEC)
2. 1
2.1
2.2
3.5
3.5
3.6
2.8
2.6
2.6
CLOUO
CQVF.R TF
FRACTION
.7
.7
.8
.8
./
.8
.8
.8
.7
0 R Y 8 IJ L 6
MPFR'iTUKE
(C)
22,0
21.0
23.0
26.0
26.0
25. 0
23.0
22.0
22.0
(C)
19.51
19. a
19.0
20.0
21. a
21.0
20.0
19,5
19,0
ATMOSPHERIC SHORT HAVE
PRESSURE SQLARCCALC)
(MB) (KCAL/M2/SEC)
1010. ,0000
,0104
, 1064
.1638
.0789
.0000
,0000
,11000
1310.
I >i 1 0 .
1010.
1(310.
l a 1 0 .
LONG *AVE
SOLARCCALC)
(KCAL/MPVSEC)
.3826
.3826
.0845
.0863
,0860
.0881
.0863
,08b4
,082ft
-------
STRh Ai< FLOWS OECPt ASEO BY 50 %
15 NOv 73 19106(10 PAGE
1 I
SPATIALLY VARYINL, COEFFICIENTS
JUNCTION
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Id
11
12
13
14
15
! 6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
26
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
4/1
41
42
43
44
45
45
rl/
JH
4 -1
u x Y G i M r o i . r F o w M
REAERATION DECAY
t/i)\Y I/DAY
.10 . '.) 3
.Id .5d
.11.' .53
.IP .50
,1J . SH
. lu .50
, Id .50
.10 .50
.Id . 5 a
.Id . 5 d
.in . i> d
.Id .53
.10 .50
.10 .50
.10 .50
,10 ,50
. i y . s 0
. IL'I .50
.Id .50
,10 .50
.Id .50
, 1H .SO
.10 . 5 d
.Id .50
, 1 H .50
.10 ,5d
.10 .53
, Id ,5d
,10 .50
. Ui . 5 d
,11 .50
.Id .53
. 1 d .50
. 1 13 .50
.10 .33
.10 . 5 d
,1(1 .5d
.10 .59
.10 .50
. U1 .53
.Id .50
.Id .3d
. t J .3d
.Id .53
.10 .53
.Id . 5/J
. I 1 .51
.I'1 . 5/1
.M .53
. I / . 5 d
HDD
DECAY
1/OAY
.Id
. Id
. Id
.Id
.Id
.Id
. Id
.10
.Id
.10
. I'd
.10
.10
. 10
. in
.Id
.10
.Id
. 10
.Id
. Id
. Id
.10
, Id
.10
.Id
.Id
. 10
. i'i
.Id
. Id
.13
.10
.Id
. Id
. i'f
.10
.!?
. 1»
. 10
. M
. 1-J
.Id
. 1 •'•
, Id
.10
. 1 0
.M
. Id
. Id
A M M U H I A
DECAY
1 / 1) A Y
.'" J
.03
.03
.''3
.03
.43
.'13
.03
.03
.03
,W3
.03
.03
.d3
.03
.03
.'-13
,,13
.[13
.03
.03
.03
.d3
. U 3
.33
."3
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.'7)3
.03
. ''•" 3
.d3
,d3
.33
.d J
,.<3
.03
..1-'
,d3
.'33
.03
.03
. 33
.0 '
.'"•)3
.'-'3
NITRITE
DECAY
I/DAY
.09
.39
.09
.09
.09
.09
,09
.09
,09
,09
.09
.09
.09
.39
.09
.09
,09
.09
.09
,09
.09
.09
.09
,d9
,03
,09
.09
.09
.09
.09
.39
.09
.09
.09
.09
.09
.09
.39
.09
.09
.09
.09
.09
.09
.39
.09
.09
.09
.09
.09
PESTICIDE
NO 1
1/OAY
,k)l3
,0d
,00
.00
,0d
.05)
,0k)
.00
,(?0
.00
.00
.00
.00
,00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
,00
,00
.0d
,00
.00
,k)'4
.yd
.03
,00
.00
.30
,00
.03
,00
,00
.00
,00
,0'3
,00
.00
.00
.00
.00
,00
,00
.00
.0-1
,03
.00
.0(1
DECAY
NO 2
1/OAY
.00
,00
.00
.00
,00
,00
.00
,00
,00
,00
,00
.03
,00
.03
,00
.00
.00
,00
.d0
,00
.00
.00
.00
.00
,00
,00
,00
.03
.00
,03
,00
,00
,0d
,03
.03
,00
,d0
.03
,00
.03
,03
.00
.03
.03
.00
,02
.00
.00
,0-d
,C13
ALGAE
GROWTH
1/OAY
2.00
2.00
2.03
2.00
2.00
2.00
2,00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2,00
2.00
2,0d
2.00
2.00
2.0H
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.0U
2.00
2,3k>
2.00
2.00
2.30
2.0P
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.0fei
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.30
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.0H
2.00
2.00
2.013
2.0M
ALGAE
RESPIRATION
I/DAY
,01
.IH
.01
,01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
,01
.01
.01
.01
.dl
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.31
.01
.(51
.01
.01
.dl
.01
,31
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.dl
.01
.Hi
.01
ALGAE
SETTLING
FT/DAY
1 .00
1 .00
1.08
1 ,00
1 ,00
1.00
1,00
1 .00
1,00
1,00
1,00
1 ,00
1,00
1,00
1,00
1.00
1,00
1 ,00
1.00
1 ,00
1.00
1.00
1,00
1,00
1,00
1,00
1,00
1,00
1 .00
1,00
1 ,00
1.00
1 ,00
1,00
1,00
1,00
1,00
1.00
1.0kD
1,00
1 .00
1 ,00
1.00
1.30
1 ,00
1 .1%
l.nu
1 ,00
1 ,3(0
1 ,dk)
-------
FLCMS DECREASES HY 50
15
73
19J06110
PAGE
12
SPATIALLY VARYING COEFFICIENTS
JUNCTION
51
52
51*
54
55
56
5/
OXYGEN
REAERATION
I/ 'JAY
. tu
. 10
, li)
> 1«J
, 10
.10
.in
COLIFORM
QECAY
1/OAY
.50
.53
. 5«J
,50
.53
.52
.50
BOD
DEGAi1
1/OAY
.14
.13
.10
.14
. M
.10
. 10
AMMONIA
DECAY
1/OAY
.03
.33
.0.3
.'43
. aj
,3J
,0j
NITRITE
DECAY
1 /DAY
,09
.09
.09
.39
.09
.09
,09
PF.STICIDE
NO 1
I/DAY
.00
,00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
DECAY
NO 2
I/DAY
,00
,00
,00
,00
.00
,0
-------
STHEA.-I KLUiS OECKhASEO BY 50 X
15 MOV 73
19106: 12
PAGE
13
SPATIALLY VARYING COEFFICIENTS
JUNCTION
HEAVY MKTAL3
MO 1. NO 2
I/DAY I/DAY
SINK RATES *
PE31ICIOES
NO I MO 2
1/DAY I/DAY
PHOSPHATE
1/OAY
1
2
J
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
H
15
16
17
Id
19
24
?1
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
17
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
if>
47
48
49
IS?,
.500
.500
.500
.500
.500
.500
,50k)
.50(1
.500
.500
,500
.500
. b 0 vl
.500
.500
.500
.500
.500
,500
,500
,500
, b 3 'A
,b00
.50:-)
,500
,500
.500
.500
,500
,500
,500
.500
.500
,50v)
.500
.500
,b00
. 5 0 0
,500
.50.1
,5M
,500
.5HC1
,5i"'
-------
FLOWS
BY 5t?
15 N'CW 73
:10
PAGE
OTHER SPATIALLY VARYING COEFFICIENTS
JUNC1ION
SI
52
53
54
5b
56
57
HEAVY
NO 1
I/DAY
.501?
.500
.500
.500
.500
.500
.500
MtTALS
NO 2
1 / U A Y
.200
.200
.200
,200
,200
.200
,200
SINK HATES *
PESTICIDES
NO 1 NO 2
I/PAY I/DAY
.050
,050
.050
,050
,050
,050
,050
.020
.020
!020
.020
[020
PHOSPHATE
1 / 0 A Y
.200
.200
.200
,2150
.200
,200
8ENTHIC SOURCE RATES
PHOSPHATE AMMONIA
A3 P AS N
MO/FT? MG/FT?
.13
,10
.If)
. 10
.14)
.10
.10
.50
.30
.50
.50
.50
.50
,50
BENTHIC
UPTAKE OF
OXYGEN
MG/FT2
8.32
2,00
2.0KJ
2.045
2,00
2.0i?
2.00
SECHI
DISC
FT
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2,5
2.6
2,5
RATIO OF
CHLOROPHYLL A
TO ALGAE
.020
.020
.020
,020
,020
,020
,020
-------
STREAM F L CM 3 DtCREASED 13 Y b tf
Ib NOV 73 (9I06J10 PAGE
lb
NON SPATIALLY VARYING SYSTEM COEFF 1 C ] EN T 5
TEMPERATURE COEFf-1C Il>T S
COLIFORM Olfc Of-F
BOD DECAY
AMMONIA DECAY
N 1 TRITi. DECAY
ORGANIC SEDIMENT DECAY
PESTICIDE DECAY
ALGAE GROWTH AND RESPIRATION
1.047
1 .347
I . «20
1 .040
1 . 0 <17
STOICHJOME1R1C EQUIVALENCE BETWEEN 0*YGEN ANp
NITWITE DECAY 1.2M0
2.100
ALGAE RESPIRATION
ALGAE GROWTH
HALF-SATURATION CONSTANTS (-OR ALGAE
PHOSPHORUS,
NITROGEN,
LIGHT, KCAL/SQ
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF ALGAE
PHOSPHORUS
NITROGEN
PE.STICIDCS
HEAVY PETALS
.01b
.'^90
.001
,f 01
PESTICIDE AND HEAVY METAL TOXICITY
K AND H FOR FIRST HEAVY METAL
K AND H FUR SECOND hfrAVY METAL
K AND H FOR FIRST PESTICIDE
K AND H FOR SECOND PESTICIDE
1.000
.500
2.000
.020
, 100
. '? 1 0
RATIO OF CHLOROPHYLL A Tfl ALGAE
FOR ALL INFLOWS
FOR
.02
-------
STKEV1 FI-OwS OfcCRE-.ASED BY SB
15
7J
19ISI6I 10
PAOt
19
INITIAL CONDITIONS
JUNC TEMP, C OXV
L EXCEPT AS NOTED)
400 CHL.OR A NH
N03
P04 COUIF, MPN TOS TOT N HtAVY MET 1 & 2 PEST 1 & 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
e
9
10
1 1
12
13
1 4
! 5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2
24 . b
24. b
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
A .5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4 . b
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
1.5
4.5
1 . S
4 .5
4 .5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4,5
4.5
4 .5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.b
4.5
4.b
1.5
.5
.5
. o
.5
.5
, 5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
,S
.5
,b
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
. 5
. 3
.5
, 'o
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.b
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.b
.5
.5
.5
.5
,006
.006
.006
.006
.006
.006
.006
.006
.006
.006
.006
.006
.006
.nab
.IOB6
.006
.006
,006
.006
.06)6
.036
.006
.006
.006
.006
.006
.006
,30fc
.006
.006
.006
.006
.05)6
.006
.006
.006
.006
.006
.LI 06
.006
.006
.006
.006
.006
. k)06
.006
.006
.006
.006
.Mfi
.03
. 03
, 03
.03
,03
,03
,03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
,03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
,03
.03
,03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.(13
.03
.03
.03
.313
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.002
.dfc2
.'402
.002
,002
.002
.002
.002
.002
,002
.002
.002
.00?
.002
.002
,002
.002
.002
.002
.002
,002
.002
,002
,0K2
.002
.002
,002
,Wi
.00?
,002
,002
.002
.002
,H02
.002
,002
.002
,002
,002
,00?
.002
.002
.002
.002
.002
.002
.002
.002
.002
.00?
.03
.03
.03
.03
.513
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.83
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
,03
.03
.03
,23
.03
.01
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.J3
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.05
,05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.35
.05
.05
,H5
.05
.0b
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.'35
.05
.05
.05
.05
.V)5
."5
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.05
.db
.")b
.05
.Ub
.115
,20+05
.20+05
.20+05
,20+05
.20+05
,20+es
.20+05
.2K+05
,20+05
.20+05
.20+05
.20+05
.20+05
,20+65
,20+05
,20+05
,20+09
.20+05
.20+05
.20+05
,20+05
,20+0g
.20+05
.20+05
.23+05
.20+05
.20+08
,2'.3J-kJb'
,20+05
,20+05
.20+05
,20+05
,20+05
,23+05
.20+05
,20+05
.20+05
,20+05
,20+05
,20+05
,20+05
.20+05
.20+^5
,20+05
,20+05
,20+05
.20+05
,20+05
,20+05
,20+05
33300.
33000,
33000.
33000,
33000,
33000.
33000,
33030,
33000.
33fc>0B,
33000,
33000.
33003,
33300.
33000.
33000,
3300P,
33000,
33000,
33000.
33000,
33000.
33000,
33000,
33330.
33000.
33000.
33000.
33000.
335)30.
33000.
33i?00.
33000,
33000.
33000.
33000,
33000,
33000.
33M00,
33000.
33000.
33300.
33000,
33003.
33000.
33H00.
33000.
33000.
3 3 o 0 a ,
33000.
.10
.10
.10
,1")
.10
.10
.10
.10
.10
.10
.10
,1'0
.10
.10
.10
,10
.10
,10
.10
,10
,10
.10
.10
.Hi
.10
.10
,10
.10
.10
.10
.10
.10
,10
.10
.10
.10
.10
.10
,10
.10
.10
.10
.10
.10
.10
.10
.10
,10
.10
.It)
.20-03
,20-03
.20-33
.20-03
.20-03
,20-03
,20-03
.20-03
,20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
,20-03
,20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
,20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
,20-03
,20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
,20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
,20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
,10-03
,10-03
,10-03
,10-03
,13-03
,10-03
,10-03
,10-03
,10-03
.10-03
,10-03
.10-03
,10-03
,10-03
.10.-03
,1 H--03
,10-03
,10-03
,10-03
.10-03
.10-03
,10-03
,10-03
,10-03
.10-03
,10-03
,10-03
,10-03
.10-03
.10-03
,10-03
.10-03
.10-03
,10-03
,10-03
,10-03
.10-03
,10-03
,10-03
,10-03
,10-03
,10-03
.10-03
.10-03
.10-03
,10-03
,10-03
.10-03
,10-03
.10-03
,20-03
,20-03
,20-03
,20-03
.20-03
,20-03
,20-03
,20-03
,20-03
.20-03
,20*03
,20-03
.20-03
,20-03
.20-03
,20-03
,20-03
,20-03
.20-03
.,20-03
,20-03
.20-03
,20-03
.20-03
.20-03
,20-03
.20-03
,20-0?
.20-03
.20-03
.20.03
,20-03
,20-03
.20-03
.20-03
.20-03
,20-03
.20-03
.20-03
,20-03
.20-03
,20-03
,20-03
,20-03
,20-03
.20-03
,20-03
,20-03
.20-03
,20-03
,10-03
,10-03
.10-03
.10-03
,10-03
,10.03
.10-03
,10-03
,10-03
.10-03
.10-03
.10-03
,10-03
,10-03
,10-03
.10-03
,10-03
. 10-03
.10-03
,10-03
,10-03
, 10-03
.10-03
,10-03
.10-03
.10-03
.10-03
.10-03
,10-03
,10-03
.10-03
,10-03
,10-03
,10-03
.10-03
.10-03
.10-03
,10-03
. 10-03
,10-03
,10-03
,10-03
,10.03
,10-03
,10.03
,10-03
,10-03
,10-03
,10.03
,10-03
-------
S T n e A I', h L 3 H 3 I) t C K t A 31-. 0 13 Y H 0 X
1 b N U V 7.5
19:06110
PAGL
INITIAL CONDITIONS
JUNC TLMP, C QXY
bl
b2
53
54
55
b6
b7
24. b
24. b
24.5
24.5
24,5
24.5
24.5
4.5
l.b
4.5
4.5
l.b
4.5
4.5
.5
.5
.5
,b
,5
. b
, b
/L EX CUM as NOTED)
BOO THLOfA MH.1
. M 9 6
. '10 6
,0516
.006
N Q 3
.03
.03
.'/1 3
PL) 4
.fib
.US
.'15
.115
OlIF, MPN TD3
.21^ + 25
. 2 ia + 0 b
,20+eb
.20+03
,20+0b
,2H+05
.2.1 + 135
33,330.
3300M,
33H0H.
3 3 H 0 11 ,
3 3 0 0 0 ,
33000.
33000.
TOT N HtAVY MfcT 1 4 2
.10 .20-03
.10 .20-03
.10 ,20-03
.1H ,2(1-03
.10 .20-03
,10 .20-03
,|fl .20-03
.10-03
,10-03
.10-03
,10-03
,10-03
.10-03
.10-03
PEST
.20-03
,20-03
,20-03
,20-03
.20-03
,20-03
,20-03
1 & 2
. 10-03
. 10-03
.10-03
.10-03
. 10-03
,10-03
,10-03
-------
S T R fc A «i FLOrlS OfcCKtASED 3V b 4 3
15 MOV 7J
19106110
PACiE
21
EXCHANGE WATER
TEMPERATURE
DISSOLVtD OXYGEN
CARBONACEOUS tlOD
CMUORDPHYLL A
AMMONIA 'JirKOt£"J
NITRIIE NITROGEN
MITHAIE NITROGEN
PHOSP-lATt PhOSPhORUS
COUFORM BACTERIA
SALINITY
TOTAL NITROGEN
HEAVY METAL NO i
HEAVY MtTAL NO 2
PE3TICIDE NO I
PESTICIDE NO 2
24.80
7.000
.1000
.1000
.3000
H1
01
^2
02
02
.5000-03
.inao
.2W00
-------
Appendix E
Estuary Model Hydraulic Results
for April and September 1972
-------
REAERATION RATE CONSTANT » 0.10
i!J OCT 73
10131!13
PAGE
APRIL 1972
***** SUMMARY OF HfORAULIC INPUTS *****
** JUNCTION HEAP AND HYD, RADIUS AND X-SECTIONAL AREA OF CHANNELS ARE AT MEAN) TIDE **
CHAN,
t
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
LENGTH
3540.
2300.
2550,
2500.
3130.
2530.
3750.
2950.
2500,
2240,
1970.
2040,
2040.
1740.
1880.
1990.
2220,
2670,
1880,
2290.
1980,
1950.
2080.
1740.
1770.
1490.
1830.
2500,
1790,
2570,
2140,
2390,
2240,
2520,
2660,
1880,
2530,
3070,
3010,
2950.
3630,
2340.
2390,
2570,
2250.
2450.
2440,
2530.
r********
WIDTH
3330.
1460,
1250.
940.
1720,
830.
730,
1150,
1200,
630,
1260.
940.
1200.
890,
1160,
1140.
1130,
780,
730.
1130.
1110.
1040.
1100,
1150,
520.
620.
1040,
1040,
1040.
1250.
630.
1350.
1350.
1150.
1300.
1150.
1350.
1800.
1040,
1460.
Ilb0.
1250.
1250.
1350.
1770.
1350,
1460.
1460.
r* *****
4REA
79U6.
68120.
54332.
39248.
74706.
38755.
36460.
48037.
44234.
7665.
33732.
28449.
30435.
18151.
17437.
17737,
21138.
13357,
4160.
11238.
13639.
3443.
9839.
4637.
4672.
4672.
16143.
16143.
9343.
11232.
2966.
11125.
13426.
6537.
10329.
7637.
58626.
69296.
43542.
60920.
48037.
46H32.
46032.
56326.
30336.
51925.
25919,
49019.
CMANNt
MANNIf
.020
.020
,020
.220
.020
,020
.020
,020
.020
.025
,020
.025
.320
,025
.025
,020
.020
.022
.025
,k)20
,020
.025
.020
.025
.030
.030
.020
.020
.025
.020
.030
.025
,020
,025
,020
,030
,k520
,020
,1)20
.020
,020
.020
,020
.020
.020
,018
.025
.018
A r A *****************************
MANNING NET FLOW HYD. RADIUS JUNC. AT ENDS
************** JUNCTION DATA *************
JUNC, INFLOW HEAD CHANNELS hNTERlNG JUNCTION
-153.47
-146.29
-146.23
-79,82
•66.32
-79.75
1-79.67
-79.56
-79.35
-.07
-16.88
-62.32
-15.09
-47.16
10.67
21.63
-64.17
552.31
7.28
-7.37
10.87
.79
6.57
.87
.I/
-1.29
34,06
-91.99
14.83
19.61
-.69
-12. 18
-65.33
1,16
-13. 17
-1.26
-b6.2H
66, 25
-132.29
39.48
26.99
24,78
-68.22
83.08
250.00
-225.09
90.79
-31,95
2306
46,7
43,5
4! ,H
43.4
46.7
49,9
41.8
36.9
12,2
30,3
25.4
2M.4
15.2
15.6
18.7
5,7
9,9
12.3
3.3
8,9
4,0
9.0
9,0
15.5
15.5
9.0
9.0
4,7
8.2
9,9
5.7
7,9
ft . 6
U.4
36.9
16.7
41 .a
36.8
36.8
11.7
17.1
33.5
17.1
33.6
11
n
12
12
12
24
13
13
13
14
14
15
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
2t
21
22
a*)
26
26
27
27
28
28
28
2<5
29
30
30
2
3
A
5
25
6
7
8
10
9
12
11
12
18
13
17
18
50
14
16
17
15
16
16
17
20
18
20
19
20
22
21
22
23
22
23
96
27
37
28
47
29
3t
47
30
31
32
33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2H
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
43
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
,
7,
*
«
•
*
9
9
,
*
*
.
*
,
,
,
*
•
•
,
*
77,
,
570,
•
«
t
•
*
«
„
14,
27,
•
„
,
•
•
,
.
,
,
,
9.
•
,
.
•
0
1
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
^
a
a
^
0
0
0
8
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
8
0
0
f)
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
6
3
0
0
0
-«
— *
— 9
— ,
— .
** .
+ •
— .
— ,
- »
— •
— »
— •
— *
— ,
— ,
— ,
— •
— •
— ,
— #
— .
— »
— .
— ,
— ,
— .
— »
— .
— »
— t
— •
— .
-.
— .
— •
— .
— ,
— »
-,
— ,
— ,
— ,
— ,
— ,
— .
— ,
— ,
06
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
0b
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
BF>
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
U'j
05
U5
05
05
35
05
00
05
05
05
1
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
10
9
12
11
15
19
22
20
16
14
29
26
32
31
34
1 8
b
37
38
40
42
45
43
47
4B
51
55
52
39
be
60
61
62
63
59
65
64
69
41
73
0
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
0
11
13
15
19
22
24
23
21
17
30
32
34
33
36
91
37
38
40
42
45
47
46
51
53
55
57
56
58
59
61
0
0
0
64
66
69
72
44
76
0
U
0
5
0
0
0
10
0
12
'14
16
?0
23
0
24
25
27
31
33
35
35
0
0
a
39
41
43
46
48
49
52
54
56
0
57
0
60
62
0
0
19
65
67
70
73
76
77
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
17
21
0
0
25
26
28
0
30
0
36
a
0
0
0
0
44
0
49
50
63
50
0
a
54
a
0
63
0
0
3
0
68
71
74
72
78
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
0
0
0
0
27
29
0
28
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
if)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
66
75
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Id
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
W
0
-------
REAERATION RATE CONSTANT • 0,10
23 OCT 73
1 B J 3 1 J 1 3
PAGE
49
50
51
52
S3
54
5b
56
57
58
39
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
et
82
83
84
65
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
2640,
2390,
2640,
2460,
2650,
2290,
1700,
2080,
1520,
2640.
2520,
2350,
2160,
2400,
2380,
2330.
2680,
2400,
2190,
2990,
3170.
2660,
2350,
3400,
2980,
2980.
2590,
2730,
2360,
2590,
1630,
2550,
2960,
2670,
2330.
2990,
2500.
2550.
2770.
2180,
2140,
3230,
2900.
2000.
1350.
1.300.
1040.
1330.
1430.
1040.
1040.
1150,
940,
1460.
2190.
1150.
630,
S20.
570.
1560,
1150,
1410,
1340,
940.
1350,
1560.
1390.
1040,
1610.
1580.
1560.
1350,
940,
1520,
1250,
1300.
1560,
730,
1450.
1510,
1460,
1470.
1460,
890,
1250.
990.
830.
630.
47626.
41528.
22942.
31027.
33921.
23942.
24242.
26837.
16148.
681 19.
91379.
480J7.
19865.
18972.
23769.
34414.
48037.
56623.
49326.
19249.
27626.
57514.
55824.
41743.
67211.
65913.
57314.
56325.
34649.
58417,
4231.
9528.
57514,
13357.
24820.
55617.
25U19,
30020.
56119.
6551.
21431.
5546.
2254.
1466.
,018
.020
.025
.025
.025
.020
.025
.020
.020
.020
,020
.025
,025
.025
,025
,020
.020
.018
.020
.026
.020
,018
,018
.020
.018
.018
,018
,020
,020
,018
.025
,020
.,318
.022
.020
.018
.320
.020
.018
.025
,025
.025
,025
.025
191 .32
-101.84
15.93
16.97
72.75
-33.11
-25. 14
41,15
-25, 10
-132.15
-131.78
-.18
T.04
-.03
-.02
245.66
-377.26
-259,34
-135,01
26.85
-2.92
-38. 1«
27,59
-b7.67
10.59
-39,88
84, 26
52.60
79,65
-16, 3J
2,t>/
176.37
-99.17
391.7-1
-29.02
34.41
-3.13
-34,94
118.75
38.43
-26.98
6.19
18.54
-2.62
35.3
31.9
22. 1
23, J
23.7
23.0
23,3
23,3
17.2
46.7
41.7
41.8
31,b
36.5
41.7
23.1
41.8
-13.2
36, H
20, b
20,5
36.9
43.2
'44.1
41.7
•11.7
36.9
41,7
36.9
33.4
3.4
7.3
35.9
17.1
17.1
3ft. T
17.1
20,4
38.4
7.4
17.1
5,6
2.7
2.3
30
31
32
32
32
33
34
34
3b
37
38
38
39
39
39
43
43
44
44
44
4 H
45
45
46
46
46
46
47
48
43
49
49
49
50
50
5Pt
51
51
51
52
52
54
55
56
31
33
34
36
33
36
35
36
36
38
43
39
40
41
42
4b
44
45
52
•i3
46
51
b2
47
48
b0
bl
48
49
5 Li
57
b6
b0
56
56
bl
5b
b4
52
54
b3
bb
24
b7
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
b6
57
.0
,0
.0
,0
,0
2.6
7.3
3.3
.0
-.05
-,05
-,05
-.05
-.05
-,36
-.05
-,0b
-,05
77
74
70
67
68
86
83
80
79
79
78
75
71
89
90
91
92
92
80
81
84
B7
&
B8
90
82
0
81
82
85
88
0
0
85
0
0
0
83
86
89
a
0
0
0
0
0
84
87
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-------
SEPTEMBER 1972
***** SUMMARY OF HYDRAULIC INPUTS *****
** JUNCTION HEAD AND HYD, RADIUS AND X-SECTIONAL AREA OF CHANNELS ARE AT MEAN TIDE **
****************************
CHAN, LENGTH WIDTH
AREA
CHANNEL DATA *****************************
MANNING NET FLOW HYD. RADIUS JUNC. AT ENDS
************** JUNCTION DATA *************
JUNC, INFLOW HEAD CHANNELS ENTERING JUNCTION
1
2
3
A
8
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
J9
40
41
42
43
•14
45
46
47
48
3540.
2500.
2550,
2500.
3130.
2530.
3750,
2950.
2500,
2240.
1970.
2040,
2040,
1740.
1880.
1950.
2220.
2670.
1880.
2290.
1980.
1980.
2080,
1740.
1770.
1490.
1830.
2500,
1790.
2570.
2140.
2390,
2240,
2920.
2660.
1880.
2530.
3070.
3010,
2950,
3630.
2340.
2390.
2570.
2250.
2450.
2440,
2S30.
3330.
1460.
1250.
940,
1720.
830.
730f
lisa.
1200.
630.
1250,
940.
1200.
890.
1150.
1140.
1130.
780,
730,
1130,
1110.
1040.
1100,
1150.
520,
520.
1040.
1040.
1040.
1250.
630,
1350.
1350.
1150,
1300.
1150.
1350.
18B0.
1040,
1460.
1150.
1250.
1250.
1390,
1770,
1350.
1460.
1460.
78703.
67939.
54177,
39132.
74492,
38652.
36369,
47895.
44085.
7587.
33977.
28332.
30286.
18041.
17295.
17596.
20998.
13260.
4070.
1109R.
13502.
3314.
9703.
4494.
4607.
4607.
16014.
16014.
9214.
11077.
2988.
10958.
13259.
6395.
10168.
7495.
5845Q.
69064.
48413,
60739.
47894.
45877,
45877.
56159.
301 16.
51/58.
24839.
48838.
.020
.020
.020
.020
.020
.020
.020
.020
,020
,025
.020
.025
,020
.025
.025
.020
.020
.022
,025
,020
.020
,025
.020
.025
,030
.030
.020
,020
.025
.020
.030
,025
.020
.025
.020
.030
.020
.020
.020
,020
.020
,020
,02fo
.020
.020
.018
.025
.018
-35.95
-27.05
«27.3b
-8.01
-22.82
-5.33
-5.74
-6.33
-7.39
.38
44.19
-62.32
-27.85
-24,85
41.05
57.26
-82.64
627.23
10.07
-13.01
43.47
1.01
8.68
.60
-4,30
3,75
9?. 34
-55.51
39.83
41.37
-2.06
10.75
-21.96
1.48
8.38
-.99
-23.40
193. b2
-217.73
105.95
86.48
70.26
-90.12
125.01
496.98
-427.36
183.60
-53.48
23.6
46.5
43.3
41,6
43.3
46,6
49,8
41,6
36.7
12.0
26.9
30.1
25,2
20,3
15,0
15.4
18,6
17, B
5.6
9,8
12.2
3.?
8,8
3.9
8,9
8.9
15.4
15.4
8.9
8,9
4.6
8.1
9.8
5.6
7.8
6,5
43,3
36.7
46,6
41,6
41.6
36.7
36,7
41.6
17.0
38.3
17. a
-13.5
1
2
3
4
4
5
6
7
8
8
10
10
11
11
12
12
12
24
13
13
13
14
14
15
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
28
29
29
30
30
2
3
4
5
25
6
7
8
10
9
12
11
12
IB
13
17
18
50
14
16
17
15
16
16
17
20
18
20
1U
20
22
21
22
23
22
23
26
27
37
28
47
29
31
47
30
31
32
33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
3S
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
.0
9,2
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
15,3
.0
646,6
,0
.0
,0
,0
,0
.0
.0
12,5
12, 0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
9.8
.0
.0
.0
.0
»,18
-,18
.,18
-.18
»,ie
-.18
-,ie
-.18
»,18
«,te
.,18
"•,18
-,18
-.18
-,18
-.18
-,18
-,18
-,ie
.,18
-,18
-.18
-.16
-.18
-,18
-,18
-,18
-.18
-,16
-,18
-,18
-,18
-,18
",18
-.18
-.18
-,18
-.18
-.18
-,18
-,18
-.18
-.18
-.18
-,18
-.18
-.18
-.18
1
1
2
3
4
6
7
a
10
9
12
11
15
16
22
20
16
14
29
26
32
31
34
18
B
37
38
40
42
49
43
47
48
51
55
32
39
98
60
61
62
63
59
85
64
69
41
73
$
2
3
4
6
r
8
9
0
11
13
15
10
22
24
23
21
17
30
32
34
33
36
91
37
38
40
42
45
47
46
51
53
55
57
56
58
59
61
0
0
0
64
66
69
72
44
76
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
10
0
12
14
ie
20
23
0
24
25
27
31
33
35
36
0
0
0
39
41
43
40
48
49
52
54
36
0
57
0
60
62
0
0
0
60
87
70
73
76
77
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
17
21
0
0
26
26
28
0
30
0
36
0
0
0
0
0
44
0
49
60
93
90
0
0
94
0
0
63
e
0
0
0
68
71
74
72
78
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
0
0
0
0
27
29
0
28
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
e
e
0
e
0
0
0
0
0
0
66
75
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
e
0
0
0
0
0
e
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
e
0
-------
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
S7
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
2640.
2390.
2640.
2460.
2690.
2290.
1700,
2080.
1520.
2640.
2520.
2350.
2160.
2400.
2380.
2330,
2680.
2400.
2190,
2990,
3170,
266B.
2380.
3400,
2980.
2580.
2S90,
2730.
2360,
2590,
1630,
2550,
2960.
2670,
2330,
2990.
2800,
2550,
2770,
2180,
2140.
3230.
2900,
2000.
1350.
1300.
1040.
1330,
1430.
1040.
1040.
1180.
940,
1460.
21U0.
1130,
630,
920.
570.
1560,
1150.
1410.
1340,
940.
1350.
1560.
1390,
1040,
1610.
I860.
1560,
1350,
940.
1520.
1250,
1300.
1560.
780.
1450.
1510,
1460,
1470.
1460,
890,
1250.
990.
830,
630.
47458.
41367.
22814.
30862.
33744.
23814.
24114.
26695.
16031.
67939.
91108.
47894.
19787.
18907.
23698.
.J4221.
47894.
56448,
49160.
19132.
27458.
57321,
55652.
41614,
67012.
65717.
57321,
56J58.
34932.
58?28.
4076,
935;.
57321.
13269.
2464! .
55430.
24839.
29837.
55938,
6441.
21276.
5423.
2151.
1388.
.018
,020
,025
.025
,025
.020
.025
.020
.020
,H20
,020
,025
.025
,025
,025
,020
,1820
,018
.020
.1325
,020
,018
.018
.1)20
,01B
,018
.018
,020
,026)
.018
,026
.32E
,018
,022
.020
,018
,020
.020
.018
,025
.025
,02b
,025
,025
366.05
-152.15
20,72
41.18
133.44
-60.86
-58,42
78.72
-58,63
-218.43
-220.29
.92
.20
.14
.10
484.00
-705.17
-491.13
-255.21
50,18
34.20
-7V. 90
37,68
-117.93
34.25
-70.29
187.13
92.60
108.96
17.24
1.18
213.56
-106.41
432.44
-46,39
Bfl.73
9.78
-46.36
?23,56
55.00
-49, S6
10,88
19,12
-.95
35.2
31,8
21.9
23,2
23.6
22.9
23,2
23.2
17,1
46.5
41,6
41,6
31.4
36,4
41.6
21.9
41,6
40,0
36,7
20.4
20,3
38,7
40,0
43,0
41,6
41,6
36,7
41.6
36,7
38,3
3.3
'.2
36.7
17,0
17.0
36.7
17.0
23.3
38.3
7,2
17,0
5,5
2.6
2.2
30
31
32
32
32
33
34
34
35
37
38
38
39
39
39
43
43
44
44
44
45
45
45
46
46
46
46
47
46
48
49
19
49
50
50
50
51
51
51
52
52
54
55
56
31
33
34
36
33
36
38
36
36
38
43
39
40
41
42
45
44
45
52
53
46
51
52
47
48
50
51
48
49
50
67
56
50
56
55
51
55
54
52
54
53
55
24
57
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
S7
4
•
*
•
f
2.
7.
-646,
•
e
0
0
a
e
7
2
6
0
-,18
• ,18
-,18
-,18
«,18
»,18
-.18
-.18
«-,18
77
74
70
67
68
86
83
80
79
79
78
75
71
89
90
91
92
92
80
81
84
87
0
88
90
82
0
81
82
ae
88
0
0
as
0
0
0
83
86
89
0
0
0
0
0
0
84
87
0
0
e
0
0
e
0
18
e
0
0
0
0
0
a
-------
Appendix F
Estuary Model Sensitivity Analyses Results
1. Reaeration Rate Constant = 0.2
2. Reaeration Rate Constant =1.0
3. Reaeration Rate Constant = (D V) ' /D
M
4. BOD Decay =0.2 and Coliform Dieoff =1.0
5. BOD Decay = 0. 05 and Coliform Dieoff = 0. 25
6. Quality Model Time Step =1/4 hour
7. Manning's n = 0.8XBaseN
8. Manning's n = 1. 2 X Base N
9. Stream Flow = 2. 0 X Base Q
10. Stream Flow = 0. 5 X Base Q
-------
REAERATION RATE CONSTANT = 1.0
22 OC1 73 15109H4 PACE BJ
SYSTEM STATUS AFTER QUALITY CYCLE
1420
30 DAYS, 14.00 HOURS
JUNC
1
2
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
H
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
47
46
49
50
SI
52
53
54
53
56
57
TEMP
C
25.0
24.9
21.9
24.9
24,9
24.9
25.1
24.9
25,0
25.0
25,3
25.6
25,1
25.0
25.2
ZS.l
25.2
- 25-.-B
25.2
35.3
25.0
25. 0
25.1
25.0
25.0
24,9
24.9
24,3
24,7
24.8
24.9
25,0
25.0
24.9
24,9
24.9
24.9
25,1
25.2
25,6
26,6
2H.9
31.3
25.9
25,3
25,1
25.3
26.7
29,5
26.5
OXY
MG/L
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.9
6.9
6.8
7.0
7.2
7.1
6.9
6.8
7.J
7.5
7.9
8.1
8.4
9.0
6.9
6.3
6.8
6,8
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.9
6.4
6.8
6.7
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.7
6.6
6.4
6.7
6.8
6,8
6.8
6.7
6.4
6.2
BOO
MG/L
.2
.1
.1
.0
.0
.0
.0
,"
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.0
.1
.0
•
*
•
• '
» '
4,
1.
1.2
, 4
.0
.0
.0
.1
.«
.1
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.a
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
CHLOR A
UG/L
8.
7.
5,
5.
7,
9.
5.
13.
21.
19.
16.
15.
27.
37.
47.
55.
71,
60.
84.
3.
4.
4,
3.
3,
3,
4,
4.
9.
5.
8.
5.
3,
3,
3.
2.
2.
3.
3.
3.
3,
3.
3.
3,
3.
2.
2.
3.
5.
3.
2.
NH3
MG/L
.13
.21
.27
,31
.42
.52
.67
,63
,76
.78
1.21
1,47
.94
.96
1.08
1.14
1.32
1.20
U«7
,56
,28
,30
.33
,38
.42
.51
.51
1,09
.74
,76
.67
,30
.32
.32
.38
.32
.34
.36
.40
.34
,38
.47
.52
.45
.42
.51
,63
.74
.53
,92
N02
MG/L
.026
,043
,066
.081
.! 16
a!39
,155
.165
.190
,194
.263
.295
.219
.220
.228
.233
.27S
.176
.285
,125
.070
,077
.385
.103
.113
.129
.132
.207
.171
.193
.174
.079
.484
,082
,093
.381
.083
.391
.099
,0951
.099
.115
,127
.115
.107
.120
.135
,154
.124
.147
N03
MG/L.
.10
.15
.17
.19
.25
.28
.26
,32
.35
,34
.33
.33
,35
,36
,36
,38
,25
.59
,20
.20
.16
.17
.18
.22
.25
.30
,32
.76
.47
.51
.40
.16
.16
.15
,15
.14
.14
.16
.17
.18
.18
.19
,22
.21
.18
.16
.23
.34
.21
.19
P04
MG/L
.04
,05
.03
.02
,02
.02
.04
,03
.04
.04
,07
.10
,06
,06
.08
,10
,08
.24
.11
.04
,02
.02
,02
.05:
.02
,04
,04
.38
.10
,08
,04
,02
,02
.02
.02
.02
,02
,02
.02
.02
,02
.03
,03
.02
.02
,03
.04
,04
.03
,09
COLIF
MPN/ieiOML
,18+02
,12+02
.29+32
,62+01
.21+01
,49+01
,52+00
.16+02
,59+02
,45+02
,35+01
,31+01
,15+03
,26+03
,51*03
.90*03
,37+03
.44+04
,71+03
,65*03
,78+02
,18+03
,49+02
,96+62
,10+03
,63+03
,66+03
.15+35
,61+04
.96+03
,13+03
.92+33
,30+04
,72+04
.21+05
,38+03
,32+05
,34+04
,96+03
,41+02
,21+03
.19403
.26+04
,39+04
,66+03
,84+02
,39+03
,24+04
,13+04
,10+33
TOS
G/L
34,9
34,2
33,5
32,8
31,2
30,0
31.3
28,4
25,9
26,7
28,6
28. fl
24.5
21.7
19.5
16.8
16.0
8,5
11,9
32.5
33.3
33.0
32.7
31,9
31,3
30,6
30,1
28. 0
27. H
30.4
30.5
32,9
32,6
32.8
32,9
32.9
32.9
32.2
31.8
32,7
32.7
32.7
32.3
32.1
32,4
32,2
31,4
28.7
32,5
32.6
TOT N HEAVY MET 1 & 2 PF.ST
MG/L MG/L
,13 ,78-03
,20 ,63-03
,20 ,53-03
,22 ,40-03
,31 .37-03
,40 ,47-03
,26 ,24-03
,53 ,67-03
.73 ,11-02
,66 .92-03
,47 ,60-03
,44 .46-03
,84 ,13-02
1,09 ,19-02
1,28 ,23-02
1,52 ,311-1)2
1,58 ,27-02
2,26 ,57-02
1,95 ,37-02
.15 ,22-^3
,19 ,59-03
,19 ,70-03
.23 ,12-02
,35 ,33-82
,44 ,41-02
,61 .56-02
,69 ,79-02
2,00 ,42-02
1,30 ,20-01
1,06 .18-&2
,75 .37-02
,17 ,37-03
,17 ,25-03
,15 ,10-03
,17 ,51-04
,12 ,44-04
,21 ,bf)-f)4
,19 ,22-03
,?2 ,29-03
,19 ,68-03
,16 ,48-03
,14 ,26-03
,17 ,24-03
,20 .25-03
,17 ,14-03
,17 .14-03
.30 ,47-03
.49 .98-03
,16 .23-03
,14 .20-03
,16-02
,13-02
,94-03
,79-03
.71-03
,84-03
,46-03
,11-0?
,16-02
.14-02
.66-03
,80-03
,19-02
.26-02
.31-H2
,39-1)2
,38-02
,65-02
,48-02
,27-03
,89-03
,87-03
,12-02
,24-Kia
,33-H2
,42-02
.56-1)2
,35-02
,12-01
,17-02
,31-02
,53-MJ
,36-03
.16-03
,73-04
,64-104
,70-04
,32-03
,38-03
,88-03
,53-03
,30-03
,30-03
,34-03
,20-03
,81-03
,59-03
,12-02
,29-03
,24-03
1 & 2
MG/L
.41-03
,16-83
,32-04
.14-04
,83-06
.11-03
.00
.41-09
.17-04
.13-04
.00
,053
,43-04
,77-04
,15-03
,25-03
.97-04
.12-02
,19-03
,00
.15-04
.51-03
,16-05
, £. O — V -J
,26-09
,11-04
,19-04
.99-04
,14-03
,57-05
,95-06
,13-05
,13-05
,00
,00
,00
,00
,70-05
.32-04
.12-07
,00
.00
,23-05
.42-05
,24-06
,24-05
,51-04
,12-03
.75-06
.00
,28-03
,16"k)3
,50-84
.27-04
,43-09
,75-05
.00
.23-04
.73-U4
,54-04
,00
,00
.13-03
,23-03
,35-03
,55-03
.29-03
,18-02
,50-03
,00
,29-04
,13-04
,56-05
, I C ~ 4
,11-04
,31-04
,52-04
.19-03
.26-03
,20-04
,43-05
.44-05
,44»05
.30
,00
,00
.00
,17-04
,56-04
.61-07
.00
.00
.59-06
.13-04
.70-H6
,74-05
,99-K4
,23-03
,23-06
,ee
-------
REAERATION RATE CONSTANT •=
SYSTEM
JUNC
1
2
4
5
7
e
9
10
11
12
14
13
17
ie
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
37
36
39
40
41
42
43
44
47
48
49
50
81
92
63
64
55
66
87
(DHV)°-5/D
1.5
STATUS AFTER QUALITY CYCLE 1420
TEMP
C
28. a
24,9
24.9
24.9
24.9
24.9
25,1
24.9
25.0
28,0
25,3
2S.6
2S.1
29,0
25.2
25,1
25.2
25,0
2S.2
35.3
25,0
25,0
25.1
25.0
25,0
24,9
24,9
24.3
24,7
24,8
24.9
25,0
25,0
24.9
24.9
24.9
24.9
25,1
2b,2
25,6
26,6
26.9
31,3
25,9
25.3
25.1
25.3
26,7
29.5
26,5
OXY
MG/L
6.8
4.9
3.8
3.5
3.1
3.1
2.4
3.4
4.2
3.9
3.4
4.0
4.9
6.1
7.3
8.4
10.0
10.4
11.8
1.4
3.3
2.8
2.3
1.6
1.0
.4
.4
.0
.0
.0
.0
2.5
2.1
1.7
1.2
1.5
1.3
.8
.6
.9
.6
.4
.2
.1
.2
1.0
1.0
1.3
1.3
2.6
BOD
M6/L
.2
.1
.1
.0
.e
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.0
.1
.0
,1
.1
.1
.4
.4
4.1
1.1
1.0
.4
.0
.0
.0
.1
.0
.1
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
CHLOR A
UG/L
8.
7.
s.
5,
7,
9.
5.
13.
21.
19.
16,
15,
27.
37,
47,
53.
71.
60.
84,
3,
4,
4.
3,
3.
3.
4.
4.
9,
5.
8,
8.
3.
3.
3.
2.
2.
3,
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3,
3.
2.
2.
3.
9,
3.
2.
NH3
MG/L
.13
.21
.27
.31
.42
.52
.67
.63
.76
.78
1.21
1.47
.94
.96
1.08
1.14
1.32
1.20
1.47
,56
.28
.30
.33
.38
,42
.91
.81
1.09
.74
.76
.67
,30
,J2
.32
,38
.32
.34
,36
,40
,34
.38
.47
.82
,45
.42
.51
,63
.74
.53
.92
30
N02
MG/L
.029
,043
.066
.061
.116
,139
,159
,165
,190
.194
,263
,295
.219
,220
.228
.233
.278
,176
,285
,125
,073
.077
,085
,100
.110
,129
,132
,227
.171
,193
.174
,079
.084
.082
,093
,081
.085
.091
.099
,090
,099
,119
.127
.119
.107
,120
,135
,154
,124
,147
DAYS, 14
N03
MG/L
.10
.13
.17
.19
,23
,28
.28
.32
.33
.34
,33
,33
.35
,36
.36
.38
.25
.59
.20
.20
.19
.17
.18
.22
,29
,30
,32
.74
.47
.91
.40
.16
.18
.19
.19
.14
.14
.18
.17
.18
.18
.19
.22
.21
.18
.18
.23
.34
.21
.19
11
Ut> 1 / J
V9 | yv l ?o r
nw fc o
7
.00 HOURS
P04
MG/L
.04
.09
,03
.02
.02
,02
.04
.03
.04
.04
.0?
.10
.09
,06
.08
,10
,08
.24
.11
.04
.02
,02
.02
.32
,02
,04
.04
.38
.10
,08
.04
.02
,02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
,02
,02
.02
,03
,03
.02
.02
.03
.04
.04
.03
.09
COLIF
MPN/100ML
,18+02
.12+02
,29+02
,62+01
.21+01
,49+01
.52+00
.16+02
,59+02
,4b+02
,39+81
e31+01
,19+03
,26+03
,51+03
,90+03
.37+03
.44+04
.71+03
.65+03
,78+02
.18+03
.49+02
.96+03
,10+03
.63+03
.66+03
.15+05
.51+04
,96+03
.13+33
,92+03
.30+04
.72+04
,21+05
,38+03
,32+03
.34+04
.96+03
,41*02
,21+03
,19+03
.26+04
,39+04
,66+03
,64+02
.39+03
,24+04
.13+04
,10+03
TDS
G/L
34,9
34.2
33,9
32,8
31,2
30.0
31.3
28.4
25,9
26.7
28.6
28,8
24.9
21.7
19.3
16,8
16,0
8.9
11.9
32.5
33,3
33,0
32.7
31,9
31,3
30,6
3*).l
28.0
27.0
30.4
30.9
32.9
32.6
32.8
32.9
32.9
32,9
32.2
31.8
32.7
32.7
32,7
32.3
32.1
32,4
32,2
31,4
28.7
32.5
32.6
TOT N HEAVY
M8/L
.13 .78-03
,20 ,63-03
.20 ,53-03
,22 ,40-03
,31 ,37-03
,40 .47-133
,26 ,24-03
.53 ,67-03
,73 ,11-02
,66 ,92-03
,47 ,50-0,5
,44 ,46-03
,84 ,13-6)2
1,09 ,19-02
1,28 .23-02
1,52 .30-02
1,58 .27-02
2.26 .57-02
1,95 ,37-BZ
,15 .22-03
,19 ,59-03
,19 ,70-03
,23 .12-02
,35 ,3e-K2
,44 ,41-02
,61 ,5fi-02
,69 ,79-02
2.00 ,42-02
1.30 .2(1-01
1,06 .18-02
,75 .37-02
,17 ,37-M
.17 .25-03
.15 .10-03
.17 .51-04
,12 ,44-04
,2J ,50-04
.19 .22-0^3
,22 .29-03
,19 .88-03
,16 .48-03
.14 .26-03
.17 ,24-83
,20 .25-03
,17 ,14-03
,17 .M-03
,30 ,47-03
.49 ,98-03
,16 .23-03
,14 ,20-03
MET 1 »
MG/L
.16-02
.13-02
.94-03
.79*03
.71-03
,84-03
,46»03
,11-02
,16-1)2
,14-02
,86»f)J
,80-03
,19-U2
,26-02
,31-02
.39-B2
,38-02
,65-02
,48-02
,27-03
,69-03
,87-03
.12-B2
,24-02
,33-02
.42-02
,35-02
,35-02
,12-01
.17-02
,31-02
,53-03
.36-03
.16-03
,73-04
,64«t)4
,70-04
,32.03
,38-03
,88-03
.53-B3
. 30-03
,30-03
.34-03
.2W-03
,21.03
..59-03
.12-02
,29-03
,24-03
2 PEST
1 I 2
MG/L
,41-03
,18-03
.32-04
.14-04
,88-06
.11-03
.00
,41*09
,17-04
,13-04
.00
,00
.43-04
.77-04
.15-03
,26-03
,97-04
.12-02
,19-03
,00
,15-04
.91-05
.16-03
.25.B5
,26-05
.11-04
.19-04
.99-04
.14-03
.57-05
,95-k<6
.13-05
.13-03
.00
.00
.eia
.00
,72-05
.32-04
.12-07
.88 r
.88
.23-05
,42-03
.24-06
.24-05
.51-04
,i2-03
,75-06
,00
,26-03
.16*03
,90««4
.27*84
,43«09
,75*03
,80
.23*04
.73-04
,54-04
,00
,00
.13-B3
,23«03
,35-B3
,59-03
,29-03
,ie-e2
,30-B3
,00
,29-84
,13-04
,36-03
,10»B4
,11-04
,31-04
.52-04
.19-6)3
,26-03
,20-04
,43"03
,44-^5
,44»tt9
.00
,00
.00
.00
.17-04
.56-04
.61-ID7
,00
,00
,59-BS
.13-B4
,7e-B«
,74-03
.99-04
.23-03
,23f05
,00
OI3SOLVEO OXYGEN CONCENTRATION NA3 REDUCED TO 1,5 TIMES SATURATION AT JUNCTION 23, CYCLE1421
-------
BOO DECAY • 0.2 AND COLIFORM DIEOFF « 1,8
30 OCT 73 21U3J58 PARE 69
SYSTEM STATUS AFTER QUALITY CYCLE
1420
30 DAYS, 14,00 HOURS
INC
1
2
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
47
48
49
60
61
62
63
54
55
56
57
TEMP
C
25,0
24,9
24.9
24,9
24,9
24,9
25.1
24,9
25.0
2b,0
25.3
25.6
25,1
25.0
25,2
25,1
25,2
25,0
25,2
35,3
25.0
25,0
25,1
25,0
25,0
24,9
24,9
24,3
24,7
24,8
24,9
25.0
25,0
24,9
24,9
24,9
24,9
25,1
25.2
25,6
26.6
26,9
31.3
25,9
25,3
25,1
25.3
26.7
29.5
26,5
OXY
MG/L
6.S
6.2
6.0
6.0
5.9
5.9
5.2
6.0
6.4
6.2
4.8
4.1
6.6
7.5
6.3
9.1
10.2
10.5
11.7
5.0
6.0
6.9
5,8
S.6
5.4
5.0
4,9
1.1
3.7
3.6
4.5
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.7
6,9
3.8
5.8
5.8
6,8
5.6
5.3
5.1
6.5
6.6
B.4
5.2
5.1
5.1
3.8
BOD
MG/L
.1
.1
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,e
,0
.0
,0
.1
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.1
, i
2,7
.6
,4
.1
,4?
,0
.«
,0
.0
.1
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
CHLOR A
UG/L
8.
7.
5,
5,
7.
9.
5.
13.
21,
19.
16.
15.
27,
37.
47,
55.
71,
60,
84,
3.
4,
4,
3.
3.
3.
4,
4.
9,
5,
8,
5.
3,
3.
3.
2,
2,
3,
3,
3.
3.
3.
3,
3.
3.
2,
2.
3.
5,
3.
2,
NH3
MG/L
.13
.21
,27
.31
.42
.52
.67
.63
.76
.78
1.21
1.47
.94
.96
1.08
1.14
1.32
1,20
1.47
.56
.28
,30
.33
,38
,42
.51
,51
1.R9
,74
.76
.07
,30
.32
,32
.36
.32
.34
.36
.40
.34
..18
.47
.52
.45
.42
,bl
.63
.74
,53
.92
N02
MG/L
.026
,003
.066
,381
,116
,139
,)5b
.165
.190
.194
.263
.295
.219
,220
.228
.233
.278
,176
,285
.125
,070
,077
,085
.103
.110
,129
,132
,207
.171
,193
.174
,379
,384
,3H2
,093
.001
.085
,391
,099
,39H
,099
,115
.127
.lib
,107
.120
.135
,154
.124
.147
N03
MG/L
.10
.15
.17
,19
,25
,21
,26
,32
,3b
,34
,33
,33
.35
,36
.36
.38
.25
.59
.20
.20
.16
.17
,18
,22
.25
,30
.32
.76
.47
.51
,40
,16
,16
.15
,15
.14
.14
,16
.17
.18
,18
,19
.22
,21
, Ifl
.10
,23
.34
.21
.19
P04
MG/L
.04
,05
,03
,02
.02
.02
,04
,03
,04
.04
,07
, IB
,06
.06
,08
,10
.08
,24
.11
,04
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
,04
.04
.38
,10
.08
,04
,02
,02
,02
.02
,02
,02
.02
.02
,02
.02
.03
.03
.02
,d2
,03
.04
,04
,03
.09
COUIF
MPN/100ML
,11+02
,33+61
,42+01
, 45+00
.95-01
.37+00
,16-01
.19+01
,11+02
.H2+31
,22+00
.22+00
.42 + 4)2
.78+02
,21+03
,39+03
,10+03
,27+04
.22+03
.13+03
.15+02
,48+02
,59+01
.17+02
.17+02
.23+03
,21+03
.82+04
,25+04
,25+03
, 19 + 0?.
.35+03
.15+04
.36+04
,10+05
,86+02
.16+05
,18+04
.35+03
,70401
,72+02
,54+02
, 14+04
.241 + 04
,19+03
.14+02
,14+03
.12+04
,bl + f13
.21+02
TDS
G/L
34.9
34.2
33.5
32.8
31.2
30,0
31.3
?8,1
2b,9
26.7
28,6
28,8
24.5
21.7
19.6
16.6
16.0
8.5
11.9
32.5
33.3
33. f)
32,7
31.9
.11.3
JH.h
30.1
2B.0
27. B
30.4
3H.5
32.9
32.6
32.8
32,9
.12.9
32.9
32.2
31. 6
32.7
32. 7
32.7
32.3
32.1
32.4
32.2
31,4
26.7
3?. 5
32.6
TOT N
MU/L
.13
,?fl
.20
,22
.31
,d0
.26
,5J
.73
.66
.47
.44
,84
1 .119
1.28
1.5?
1.5B
2,?6
1.95
.15
.19
.19
.23
.35
.44
.61
.('9
2.t?H
1.30
1.4)6
.75
.17
.17
.1b
.17
,12
,?1
.19
.?2
.19
,lt
.14
.17
.2H
.17
,17
.30
.49
.16
.14
HEAVY MtT 1 » 2 PtST
1 I 2
MG/L MG/L
.78-03
.63-03
,53-03
,40-03
.37-H3
,<17-43J
.24-03
,67-03
.11-02
.92-HJ
, 5 « - 4? .) *
.46-433
.13-4??
,19-4)?
,23-4)2
.30-4-?
,?7-H?
.57-4)2
.37-0?
,22-03
.1)9-113
.70-453
,12-M2
, 3*1-02
,4 1 -U?
,56-B?
,79-4
,42-0?
.22-451
.16-0?
.37-412
.37-4)3
.25-03
,lH-03
,5.1-04
,44-114
,5l>--4)3
,84i-(3J
, 19-02
.26-132
.31-432
.39-4)2
,36-432
,65-432
,4H-412
,?7-t)3
,89-433
,87-li3
. 12-W?
,?4-k)?
, J3-U2
,42-4)?
.bb-U?
.3b-(1?
.12-01
,17-U?
,31-U?
.53-4)3
.36-4)3
.16-HJ
,73-4)4
,64-(f4
.7f-tia
. J2-433
.3B-433
.OB-HJ
,b3-4"7
. 3 h - 42 3
,34;-L'3
. J4-4J3
.24;-U3
,? 1-4)3
,59-03
.12-4)2
,2<3-B3
,21-03
,41-03
,16-03
.32-H4
,14-4)4
,88-416
.11-4)5
,00
,41-05
.17-4)4
, 13-H4
,00
,PB
,43-H4
,77-04
,15-03
.26-H3
,97-^4
.12-H2
.19-ti3
,00
,15-6)4
,51-415
,16-05
,2b-(i5
.26-455
, 1 1-4*4
,19-04
.99-01
.14-433
,57-05
,95-u6
.13-.35
.13-4)5
,045
,00
, pt)
,00
,7t;-05
,32-04
,12-07
.ec r.
,23-05
,42-05
,?4-k)6
,24-415
.51-04
,12-03
,75-436
,043
.28-03
.I6-U3
,b0-^4
,27-04
,43-ki5
.75-H5
,00
,23^04
,73-k!4
, 5 4 - 1' 4
,0k)
,04)
,13-03
,23-k)3
.35-03
,55-k)3
,29-03
,18-K2
.5H-K3
,00
,29-654
,13-M
,5B-k)5
, ID-fci
,11-04
.31-^4
,52-i>4
,19-f3
,?6-k)3
,20-l&4
,43-^S
.44-B5
.44-05
,H0
,00
,00
,00
.17-4)4
,56-c,4
.61-437
,H45
,00
,59-HS
.13-434
, 7t)-kS6
, 74-05
,99-tt4
,23-03
,23-fcb
.045
DISSOLVED OXYGEN CONCENTRATION WAS REDUCED TO 1.5 TIMES SATURATION AT JUNCTION 23, CYCLtl422
-------
BOD DECAY • 0,05 AND COLIfURM DIEOFF « 0.25
30 OCT 73
2U 13158
PAGE
SYSTEM STATUS tFTER QUALITY CYCLE
1420
30 DAYS, 14.80 HOURS
NC
1
2
4
5
7
S
9
10
11
12
14
15
17
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2B
29
30
31
32
J3
34
35
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
47
48
49
50
61
52
53
54
55
56
57
TEMP
C
25.0
24,9
24,9
24.9
24,9
24.9
25,1
24.9
25,0
25,0
25,3
25,6
26.1
25,0
29,2
25,1
25.2
25,0
25,2
35.3
25.0
25.0
25,1
2b,B
25,0
24,9
24,9
24,3
24,7
24,8
24, <5
25,0
25,0
24.9
24,9
24.9
24.9
25fl
25.2
?5.6
26.6
26.9
31.3
25.9
25.3
25,1
?b.3
26.7
29.5
26,5
CIXY
MG/L
6.5
6.3
6.0
6,0
5.9
8.8
5.1
6,0
6.4
6.1
4.7
4.0
6.6
7.6
8.3
9.1
10.2
10.6
11.7
4.9
6.0
5,9
5.8
5.3
5.4
5.0
5.0
3.1
4,2
4.0
4.5
5,9
5.8
5.8
5.7
5.8
5.8
5,8
b.7
5.7
b.b
5,?
5.0
5.5
5.6
b.J
5.1
5.0
5.0
3.7
BOD
MG/L
.2
.2
.2
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.2
.1
,1
.1
.1
.2
. J
.4
.8
.8
5.7
1.9
2.0
1.0
.1
.1
.»
.2
.1
.2
,1
. 1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
- .1
.1
.1
.1
,1
CHLOR A
UG/L
8,
7,
5.
5.
7,
9.
5.
13,
21.
19.
16.
15.
27,
37,
47.
55,
71,
60,
84.
3,
4.
4.
3.
3.
3,
4,
4.
1.
5.
8,
5,
3,
3,
3,
2.
2.
-1,
3,
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
2.
2.
3.
5,
3.
2.
NH3
MG/L
,13
.21
.27
.31
.42
,52
.67
.63
.76
.78
1.21
1.47
.94
.96
1.08
1,14
1.32
1.20
1,47
,56
,28
,30
.33
.3d
.42
.SI
,51
1 .09
.74
.76
.67
.31}
.32
,32
.38
.32
.34
.36
,4k)
.34
,38
,47
.b2
,4b
.42
.;>i
.63
.74
.53
,92
N02
MS/L
.026
,943
,066
,081
,116
.139
.155
.165
,190
.194
,263
.295
,219
,22(3
.228
,233
,278
,176
.285
.125
.070
.077
.005
.100
.110
.129
.132
.207
.171
,193
.174
,079
,Plfi4
.282
,093
,i>81
.5)85
.091
.tf&9
.390
.099
.115
.107
. 115
.107
.120
. 135
.154
.124
.14/
M03
MG/L
.10
.15
.17
.19
,25
.28
.26
,32
.35
.34
,33
.33
.35
,36
.36
,38
.25
.59
.20
,20
,16
.17
.18
.?.?.
.25
.30
.32
.76
.47
.51
.40
.16
.16
.15
.15
.14
.H
.16
.17
, ' 8
.18
.19
.22
.21
.!«
.18
.23
.34
.21
.iy
P04
MG/L
.34
.05
.03
.02
.02
.02
.04
.33
.04
,04
.37
,10
,06
.06
.08
.10
,08
.24
,11
.04
.02
.02
.02
,02
.02
.04
.04
,38
.10
,08
,34
.02
,02
.02
.02
,02
,i!2
.02
.02
.02
,02
.03
.03
.02
.02
.k)3
.H4
.04
.H3
.(39
COLIF
MPN/100ML
,45+02
.63*02
,16+03
,56+02
.28+02
,43+02
.11+02
,91+02
,24+03
,19+33
.36+02
,31+02
.43+03
.72+03
,11+04
.18 + M
.10+04
,63+04
,18+04
.19+04
.34+03
,63+03
.29+03
,^3+fl 3
.53+03
.18+04
,20+04
,?6+05
,99+04
.31+04
.78+03
.23+84
,56+04
. 14+05
,40+05
.15+04
,62+05
.61+04
.26+04
.23+03
.62+03
.61+03
.48+04
.72+04
.21+04
,44+03
. 12+04
.47 + 0<1
.28+04
.43+03
TD3
6/L
34,9
34,2
33,5
32. a
31.2
30,0
31.3
28,4
23,9
26,7
28,6
28,8
24.5
21.7
19,5
ifa.e
16,0
fl.b
11,9
32.5
33.3
33.0
32.7
31,9
31,3
30,6
30,1
28,0
27,0
30.4
30,5
32,9
32,6
32.8
32.9
32,9
32,9
32.2
31.8
32.7
32.7
o2.7
32.3
32.1
32,4
32.2
31.4
28.7
32. b
32.6
TOT N
M6/L
,13
,20
.20
.22
.31
.40
,26
,53
.73
.66
.47
.44
.84
1.09
1.28
1.52
1.58
2.26
1.95
.15
.19
.19
,23
.3S
.44
.61
.69
2.W0
1.30
1 ,k)6
.75
.17
.17
.15
.17
.12
.21
,19
.?2
.19
.16
.14
.17
.20
.17
.17
.30
.49
,16
.14
HEAVY
.78-03
,63-03
,53-03
,40-03
,37-03
,47-03
,24-03
.67-03
.11-02
,92-03
,50-03
.46-03
.13-02
,19-02
,23=02
.30-02
.27-02
.57-02
.37-02
.22-03
.59-03
.70-03
.12-02
.30-02
,41-02
.56-02
,79-02
,42-02
.20-01
,18-02
.37-02
,37-03
,25-03
,10-03
.51-04
.44-04
,50-04
.22-03
.29-03
.88-03
,48-03
.26-03
.24-03
.25-03
.14-03
.14-03
,47-03
.98-03
.23-03
.20-03
MET 1 &
MG/L
,16-02
,13-02
.94-03
,79-03
,71-03
.84-03
,46-03
.1 1-02
.16-02
.14-02
,86-03
,80-03
,19-02
.26-02
.31-02
.39-02
.38-02
,65-02
,48-02
.27-03
.89-03
.87-03
.12-02
.24--B2
,33-0?
,42-02
.56-02
.35-02
.12-01
,17-02
.31-02
.53-03
.36-03
, 16-03
.73-04
,64-04
,70-04
,32-03
,38-03
,88-03
.53-03
.30-03
.30-03
,34-03
.20-03
.21-03
.59-03
, 12-M2
.29-03
.24-03
2 PEST 1 & 2
,41-03
,16-33
,32-04
,14-04
.88-06
,11-05
.00
.41-05
,17-04
.13-04
,00
,&li»
,43-04
.77-04
,15-03
.26-H3
,97-04
.12-B2
,19-83
.00
.15-114
.5J-05
.16-05
.25-05
.26-05
.11-04
.19-04
.99-04
,14-03
.97-05
.95-06
,13-05
,13-05
.00
.00
,00
,00
,70-05
,32-04
.12-07
.00
.00
.23-05
.42-05
,24-06
,24-H5
.51-U4
. 12-03
.75-06
,00
MG/L
,28-03
,16* 03
,50-04
,27-04
.43*06
.75-05
.00
,23*04
,73-04
,54*04
,00
,00
,13-03
.23-03
,35-03
,55-03
.29-03
.16-02
.50-03
.00
,29-04
.13-04
.58-05
,10-3"
.11-04
,31-04
,52-04
.19-103
.26-03
.20-04
,43-05
.44-05
,44-05
,00
.00
.00
.00
,17-04
.56-04
,61-07
.00
.00
,59-05
,13-04
.70-06
.74-05
.99-04
,23-03
,23-05
.00
DISSOLVED OXYGEN CONCENTRATION WAS UEDUCF.n TO 1.5 TIMES SAlUPAflON AT JUNCTION 2.i, CYC1_E14?2
-------
«ASE QUALITY WITH 1/4 HOUR QUALITY TIME STEP
31 OC1 73 21113807 PAGE 103
SYSTEM STATUS AFTER QUALITY CYCLE
2840
30 DAYS, 14,00 HOURS
JNC
1
2
4
5
7
6
9
10
11
12
14
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
37
36
39
40
11
42
43
44
47
48
49
50
51
52
b3
54
55
56
57
TEMP
c;
25,0
24.9
25,0
24.9
24,9
25,0
25,1
25,0
25,0
29.0
25.3
25,5
25,1
25.1
25,2
25,1
25,2
25,0
25,2
33,3
25,0
25,0
25.2
25.1
25.0
24.9
24.9
24,3
24.8
24,8
25,13
25, 9
25,3
24,9
25, 0
24,9
24,9
25,0
25,1
25.7
26,8
27.2
31,3
25,6
25,1
25.1
25,3
27.0
29,5
26,6
OXY
MG/L
6.5
6.3
6.0
6. It
5,9
S.9
5.1
6.0
6.4
6.)
4.8
4,2
6./
7.5
H.3
9.0
10.2
10.5
11.7
4.9
e.n
5.9
5.8
5,6
5.3
4.5
5.0
1.7
4.1
3.7
4.6
5.9
5.9
5.8
5.7
5.8
5,8
5.6
5.8
b.7
15,6
b.2
S.I
5.5
5.6
5.4
5.2
b.W
5.0
3.7
HOI)
MG/L
.2
.1
.1
.1
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,3
.0
,1
.1
,1
.1
,1
,«
,1
«k>
,1
.1
.2
.7
.3
4.3
.9
.9
,3
,0
.0
.<*
.1
,0
.1
.0
.0
.«
.a
.0
.0
,M
.0
.K)
.0
.a
.*>
.?•
CHLOR A
UC/L
a.
7.
5.
5,
7.
9.
5.
13.
21.
19.
16.
16,
29,
37,
46,
b4.
70,
60,
84.
3.
5,
4,
4.
3.
3.
5,
4,
I Q.
s.
H.
4.
3.
3.
3.
2,
2.
3.
3,
->,
3,
3,
3.
3.
3.
3.
2.
3.
5.
3.
?.
NH3
MG/L
.13
.20
,26
.31
,42
.52
.67
.62
.75
.76
1.21
1.47
.94
.95
1.07
1.13
1.32
1,20
1.47
,66
.28
,3U
.32
.37
.43
,59
.49
l.lb
,70
.76
.64
,30
.31
,3?
.38
.32
,34
.35
.39
.3^
.38
.48
.62
.46
.41
.be
.65
.74
.53
.93
N02
MG/L
,025
,342
,064
,080
,115
.138
,154
,164
,1<38
,191
.264
.296
.220
,217
.226
,231
,276
,176
,285
.1.25
.068
.075
.084
,098
,110
,148
.127
,224
.163
,195
.166
,377
.081
.001
.092
,381
.084
,088
.395
,030
,101
,118
.127
.117
,104
.119
.139
.155
.125
.149
N03
MG/L
,09
.15
.16
,19
,24
.28
,26
.31
.34
,34
,33
.33
.35
,36
.36
.38
.26
,59
,20
.20
,16
,16
.18
»feJ
.25
,37
.30
.8?
,44
,52
.36
.16
.15
.15
.15
,14
.14
,16
.17
.18
.18
,19
.21
.21
.18
.18
.24
.34
.21
.20
PQ4
MC/L
,k)4
,05
.03
."2
.02
.02
.04
,03
.04
.04
.07
.10
,06
,06
,08
.10
.08
,24
.11
.04
.02
.02
.02
,02
.03
,06
,04
,39
,09
,08
,H4
.02
.02
.02
,02
.02
,02
.02
.02
.02
,02
.03
.03
.02
.0?
,03
,04
,t)4
,03
,uy
CGLIF
MPN/100ML
,18+02
,13+02
,28+02
.59+01
,22+01
.52+31
.55+00
.16+02
.59+82
,45+02
,39+01
,3b+01
.16+03
,26+03
,51+03
.89+03
.38+03
,44+04
.71+03
.63+03
.73+02
.17+03
.44+02
.82+02
.1 1+H3
,10+04
,57+03
,15+05
.48+H4
,82+33
,99+02
.B8+03
,30+04
,72+04
,21 + 115
.38+03
,32+05
,36+04
,86+03
,49+02
,23+03
,24+03
.27+04
. jy+04
,51+03
.67+02
,-15 + 03
.24 + 0'!
.13+04
.12+03
TD3
U/L
34,9
34,3
33.6
32,9
31 ,4
30,2
31.5
28,6
26.2
26, e
28.7
28, 9
24,3
22,1
19.8
17.1
16,2
8.7
!2e2
32,7
33.4
33.2
32.9
32,1
31.6
30.2
30,4
27,3
27,1
30,1
30,8
33,1
32,8
32,9
33,0
33,0
33,0
32.4
31,7
32,8
32. B
32, b
32. b
32,0
32.2
3^, J
31.2
28. b
32, b
32.7
T01 N HEAVY
M&/L
.12 .78-H3
,19 .64-03
.19 ,83-03
,22 ,41-03
,31 ,3B-03
.39 .48-03
,26 ,26-03
.52 ,67-03
.72 ,10-0?
,66 ,92-0.3
.48 .52-03
.46 .49-03
,88 ,14-0;'
1.06 ,18-02
1,28 ,23-02
1,52 .30-02
1,58 ,27-02
2,25 ,57-02
1.94 .36-02
.14 ,16-03
.18 .58-03
,19 ,66-03
.22 ,11-0?
,33 ,26-02
.42 ,33-02
.81 ,59-fl?
.63 ,72-02
2,19 .60-0?
1.21 ,20-01
1,09 ,29-02
,62 ,36-02
.17 ,37-W3
.17 ,25-03
,15 ,10-03
.17 ,51-04
.12 ,44-04
.20 ,50-04
.18 .22-03
.24 ,33-03
.16 ,66-PJ
.15 ,36-03
,14 ,19-03
.16 .19-03
.21 ,23-03
.18 ,16-03
.17 ,14-03
.33 .52-01
,49 ,96-03
,!b .18-03
.13 ,15-PJ
MET 1 8,
MCJ/L
.16-02
.13-02
,96-03
,82-03
,74-03
,86-03
.47-03
.1 1-02
.1H-02
. 14-02
.90-03
,84-03
,20-02
.26-02
,31-02
,38-02
,38-02
,65-02
.48-02
.21-03
,90-03
,87-03
.11-02
.21-02
.27-02
.45-0?
,52-02
.47-02
.13-01
,26-02
.31-02
.56-03
,39-03
.17-03
,75-04
,66-04
,72-04
,33-03
,44-03
,72-03
,42-03
.24-03
,25-03
,33-03
,24-03
.21-03
.66-03
. 12-02
.23-03
.2B-03
2 PEST
1 & 2
MG/U
,42-03
,17-03
,39-04
,17-04
,14-05
,13-05
.00
,42-05
,17-04
, 13-04
.00
,00
.46-04
,78-i04
.15-.03
,26-03
.10-03
,12-02
,19-03
.03
, 19-04
.68-05
,21-05
.22-05
,18-05
.13-04
,16-04
.10-03
.14-03
.49-05
,71-06
,18-09
,87-06
,00
,00
,00
,00
,49-05
,34-04
.23-07
.00
,08
.le-us
,46-05
.22-05
.19-05
,53-04
,12-03
,47-06
,00
,28-03
,16-03
,97-04
,31-04
.61-05
.86-05
.00
.24-04
.72-04
.55-04
,00
.00
,14-03
,23-03
,36-03
.59-03
,29-03
,18-02
,S0»03
,00
,33-04
,15-04
,66-05
,87-05
,78-05
,39-04
,46-04
.20-03
,25-03
,19-04
.31-05
.54-06
,29"05
,00
.00
,00
,00
,12-04
,63-04
.96-07
,00
,0B
,44-05
.15-04
.70-05
,60-05
.10-03
.23-03
,14-08
.00
-------
QUALITY MITH REDUCED MANNINGS 'N« (0.8 X BASE
-------
QUALITY WITH INCREASED MANNINGS IN' (1,8 X BASE INI)
25 OCT 73 2H17I02 PA6E 130
SYSTEM STATUS AFTER QUALITY CYCLE
1420
30 DAYS, 14,0(9 HOURS
JUNC
1
2
4
5
7
e
9
10
11
12
14
15
J7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
29
26
S7
2b
29
30
31
32
33
34
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
47
48
49
60
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
TEMP
C
25. e
24,9
25,0
24,9
24,9
25.0
26,1
29.0
25.0
26,0
25,3
26,6
25.1
25,1
25.2
B8«l
25.2
25,0
25,2
35,4
25. e
25,0
25,2
2t>, 1
25,0
24,9
24,9
24.3
24,8
24,8
25,0
25.0
25,0
25,0
25,0
24,9
24.9
25.0
25,1
25,7
26,8
27,2
31,3
25,6
25,1
25,1
25,3
27,0
29,6
26,6
OXY
MG/L
6,5
6,3
6,0
6.0
5.9
6.9
6.1
6.0
6.4
6,2
4.8
4.2
6,8
7.6
8.6
9.2
10.3
10.6
11.7
4.9
6.0
5.9
5,8
5.6
5.3
4.5
6,0
1.7
4.1
3.7
4.6
5.9
5.9
5.8
5,7
5.8
5.8
5,8
5,8
5.7
5.5
5.2
5.1
S.5
5,6
5.4
6.2
5,0
5.0
3.7
BOO
MG/L
.2
.1
.1
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
.0
.e
,0
,1
,1
.1
,1
.1
,0
,i
.0
,1
, i
.2
.7
.3
4,3
.6
,9
.3
.0
.0
,0
,1
.0
.1
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
CHLOR A
U6/L
8.
7,
5,
5,
7,
9,
6.
13,
21,
19,
IT*
17.
30,
38,
49,
86,
72,
61.
85e
3,
4,
4.
3.
3.
3.
5,
4.
10.
5,
8,
<*>
3,
3,
3.
2,
2.
3.
3.
3,
3,
3.
3,
3.
3.
3.
2.
3,
5.
3,
2.
NH3
MG/L
.13
.20
.27
.31
.42
,52
.67
,63
.75
,78
1,23
1949
,95
,95
1.08
1.14
1,33
1.20
1,48
,56
.28
.30
.33
,°43
.59
,49
1.15
,70
.75
.64
.30
.31
,32
.38
.32
.34
.35
,39
,35
,39
,48
.52
.46
.41
.51
,66
,74
.54
.93
N02
MG/L
,026
.043
.066
B081
,116
,139
,155
,165
,189
S196
,269
,299
,222
,219
,229
.233
,278
,176
,286
,126
,070
B076
,085
,3£3
,111
,147
,127
,225
,162
,195
,166
,077
,081
.081
,092
.081
.085
,088
,096
.091
,101
,118
,127
,117
,104
,120
.141
,156
.125
,150
N03
MG/L
.10
.is
.17
.19
,24
.28
.26
,31
.34
.34
.33
833
.35
.36
,35
.38
,25
,89
,20
,20
.16
.17
.18
at 6
9 *- *
.25
,38
,38
,82
.43
,52
.36
,1®
.16
,15
,15
,14
.14
.16
,17
.18
,18
,19
.21
.21
.18
.18
,24
.34
.21
,20
P04
MG/L
,04
,06
,03
,08
,02
,02
,04
,03
,04
,04
.07
.10
.06
,06
,08
,10
,08
,24
,11
,04
,02
,02
,02
,92
,03
,06
,04
,39
,09
,08
,04
,02
,02
,02
,02
,02
,82
.88
,02
,02
,02
,03
,03
,02
,02
,03
.04
.04
,03
.09
COLIF
MPN/100ML
,18+02
.11*02
,26+02
.55*01
,19*31
,46+01
.494-80
,154-82
,55+02
,43+82
,38+01
.33481
,19+93
,36+03
,52+83
,83+83
,39+03
,44+04
,71+03
,64+03
,69+32
,16*03
.42+02
,'9^02
,18+03
.11+04
.56+03
,15+88
,47+84
,81+03
,96+02
,87+83
,29+04
,72+84
,21+05
,37+03
.32+05
.36+04
,86+83
,47+02
,23+03
,24+83
,26+04
,39+04
,49+03
,69+02
,47+83
,24+84
,13+84
.12+83
TDS
G/L
34,9
34,3
33,5
32.9
31,4
30,2
31,6
28, 5
26.2
26,8
28,7
28,6
24,2
22,0
19,4
16,9
15,9
8,6
12,0
32,7
33,4
33,1
32,8
1?,!
31,6
30,1
38,4
27,3
27,1
30,1
30,8
33,0
32,8
32,9
33,0
33,8
33.8
32,4
31,7
32,8
32,8
32,8
32,8
32.8
32,2
32,3
31,2
28,8
32,6
32.7
TOT N HEAVY
MG/L
,12 .77-03
.19 ,62*03
,19 ,58*03
.22 ,39*03
,30 ,37*03
,39 ,46-33
,26 ,24*03
,62 ,66-03
,72 ,10»ea
,67 ,98*83
,48 ,52*03
,46 ,49*03
,89 ,14.02
1.09 ,18*02
1,31 ,24*02
1,53 ,30002
»,61 .28*02
2,27 ,58*08
1,96 ,37*0g
,14 e!6*03
,19 ,55*03
,19 ,64*03
,22 ,11*02
,33 ,95»a»
,42 ,32*82
,82 ,60-02
,63 ,72*02
B,20 ,61*02
1,28 ,20*0!
1,09 ,29*02
96% ,36*02
,17 .36*03
.17 ,24*03
,15 ,10*03
,17 .60*04
,12 ,43*04
,20 ,49*04
,}8 .22*03
,24 ,33*03
,J8 ,67*03
,15 ,35*03
.14 ,19*03
.16 .19*03
,21 ,23*83
,18 ,16*03
,17 ,14.03
,33 ,52*03
,49 ,96*03
,15 ,18*03
,13 ,15*03
MET 1 I
M6/L
.16*02
,13*0B
,92*03
,78*B3
,70f>03
,89*>03
. 45*03
,11-02
,ie*ee
,14*02
.90*03
,84*03
,20<-0e
,28=02
,32*02
,39*02
,38*02
-------
STREAM FLOHS INCRF.ASEJ BY 100 %
15 NDV 73
15152104
PAGE
SYSTEM STATUS AFTER QUALITY CYCLE 1420
DAY 30, HOUR 14,0
NC
1
2
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2b
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
47
4fl
49
b'/i
51
52
53
•v1
55
Ho
17
TEMP
C
25,0
24,9
25.0
24.9
24.9
24.9
25.1
25.0
25.0
25.0
25.3
25.6
25.1
25 , 14
25,2
25,0
25.2
24,9
25.2
35.3
25,0
25.0
25.2
25. 1
25.0
24,9
24.9
24.3
24.8
24.8
25.0
25.0
25.0
25.W
25. kl
24,9
24,9
25.1
25.2
25.7
26, b
27.3
31.3
25.6
25,2
25. 1
25.3
26.9
29.6
26, 1
OXY
MG/L
6.5
6.2
6.0
6.1
6.3
6.6
5.5
7.2
8.3
8.1
7.1
6.7
9.4
10.5
11, P
11.4
12.2
10.8
12.3
4 . y
6.0
b.9
b.b
5.6
5.4
4.6
5.1
1.9
4.4
3.8
4 .7
b.9
b.9
b.t
5.7
b.P
5.8
5.9
5.9
5.7
5.6
5.2
5. 1
5.C>
">. 7
3.4
b. 4
5 . 4
5.71
1. 7
600
MG/L
.2
,1
.1
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.1
.1
.1
,1
.1
,2
,1
.0
,1
,0
,1
.1
.2
.7
.3
4,3
.B
.9
.3
.0
. U
, 0
,1
,13
.1
.0
,?>
.0
.2
. ^i
,0
.0
.0
• M
.0
,0
. 0
.'1
C.HLOR A
UG/L
8,
7,
6.
8,
lb.
23,
12,
34,
51.
48.
42.
40.
6b,
78.
92.
91.
111.
56,
U?,
3.
b.
4,
4,
4,
4.
6.
p ,
12,
6,
9,
5,
3.
3.
3,
2,
2.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3,
3.
3.
2.
4.
7.
3.
?.
NH3
MG/L
.14
.22
.29
.36
.50
.61
.72
.74
.87
,
.54
.94
N02
MG/L
.329
.049
.074
.396
.139
.166
.173
.194
.214
.221
.292
,322
.236
.226
,228
.211
.262
.110
.257
.128
,076
.081
,089
,104
,118
.154
.134
.231
.165
.199
.171
.081
.084
,0R3
.093
.081
.085
.092
.099
.394
.103
.123
.129
.12'
. 1 <38
.123
. 144
.157
.127
. 1'Jl
N03
MG/L
.11
,17
.19
.24
.31
.35
.31
.37
.37
,36
.29
.25
,35
.35
.31
.40
.17
.82
.16
.22
.18
.18
.19
.23
.26
.39
.32
.83
,43
.52
.37
.17
,16
.15
. 1 5
. ' 4
. 14
.17
, 1 S
.19
.19
.20
.23
.24
.20
.19
.29
.45
.22
.2 si
P04
MG/L
.04
,0S
.03
,02
.02
.03
,04
,03
.05
.05
.06
.09
.07
,09
.11
,16
.11
.37
.14
,04
.02
.02
.02
.02
,03
.07
.04
.39
.10
.08
.04
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.0?
,02
.02
.02
.02
.03
.03
.02
.02
.03
.04
.04
.03
.i')y
COLIF
MPN/100ML
.18+02
,11+02
,27+02
,59+01
,50+01
,15+02
.16+01
,45+02
,16+03
.12+03
.11+02
.90+01
.39+03
,6b+03
, 10+04
,20+04
,89+03
.77+04
.13+04
.62+03
.72+02
,17+03
.53+02
.14+03
.16+03
.13+04
,10+04
. 16+06
,83+04
,83+03
.13+03
,88+03
,30+04
.72404
.21+05
.37+03
,32+Ofi
,36+04
.11+34
.51+02
.23+03
,24+03
,27+04
.40+04
.52+03
.82+02
,63+03
.43+04
. 13 + H4
,12+OJ
TDS
S/L
34,6
33,8
32,7
31.2
27,9
25,6
28.8
22.7
18,8
19,8
23.6
24.1
16.3
12,8
10,6
7.4
6.6
1.9
4.1
32.3
32.8
32. b
32.2
31.1
30.3
28,3
28.3
25.6
23.2
29,1
29.6
32, b
32.3
32,7
32.9
32,9
32.9
31.7
30,3
32.3
32,4
32, b
32.0
31,0
31.5
31,6
29.6
25.2
32.?.
32. b
TOT N HEAVY
MG/L
,15 ,40-03
.23 ,15-03
.26 ,32-04
,36 ,13-04
,59 ,42-05
.78 ,11-04
,49 ,84-06
1.03 ,32-04
1.37 ,11-03
1.28 .86-04
.93 .61-05
.88 ,45-03
1,59 ,26-03
1.89 ,43-03
2.09 ,64-03
2,37 ,12-02
2.44 .59-03
2.S6 .44-02
2.6b ,84-03
.18 ,00
.23 .19-04
.24 .16-04
.27 ,40-04
.42 .21-03
.64 .20-03
1.P0 ,66-03
.83 .15-02
2.3b ,72-03
1.53 ,11-01
1.18 ,89-04
.73 ,13-03
.21 ,46-0b
.21 .51-05
,17 ,34-06
.18 ,00
,12 .00
.21 ,00
,2b ,23-04
.36 ,14-03
.22 ,13-04
.19 .32-05
.17 ,ll-0b
,21 ,11-04
.31 .21-04
.26 ,11-04
.24 .95-P5
.53 .21-03
.93 ,48-03
,10 .47-05
.16 ,44-06
MET 1 »
MG/L
,11-02
,55-03
,20-03
,11-03
,57-04
.99-04
,15-04
,21-03
,46-03
,39-03
.62-04
,45-04
.82-03
,13-02
,16-02
,26-13.2
,17-02
,62-02
,23-02
,61-6)5
.14-03
.11-03
.18-03
.es-aa
,63-03
,16-02
.24-6)2
.15-02
, S0-01
.38-03
,50-03
,48-04
,34-04
.24-05
.00
.00
,00
,7(5-04
.27-03
.79-04
,28-04
,90-05
,36-04
.80-04
,4b-04
,40-04
.43-03
,92-03
.21-C4
.40-t)b
2 PEST
J & 2
MG/L
,70-03
,51-03
,30-03
.30-03
,37-03
,60-03
,26-03
,7(8-03
,11-02
,94-03
,54-03
.49-03
,13-02
,17-02
,20-02
.26-0?
.23-02
,40-02
,27-02
,75-04
.23-03
,18-133
,16-03
,21-03
,24-t)3
.40-U3
,43-03
,68-03
.10-02
,28-03
.24-03
,14-03
,12-03
,62-04
.37-04
,36-04
,35-04
,16-03
,31-03
,11-03
,83-04
.69-04
,1 1-03
.20-03
.15-03
,14-03
,49-03
,89-03
.90-04
.62-04
,42-03
,36-03
,28*03
,36-03
,57-03
,78-03
,44-03
,11-02
.15-02
, 14-02
,89-03
,83-03
,18-02
,23-02
,26-82
,31-k)2
.30-02
.43-02
.34-02
,11-03
,23-03
,20»03
,20-03
,29-03
.35-03
,58-03
.60-03
,91-k)3
,13-02
,43-03
,38-03
,17-k)3
.16-03
,82-04
,48-k)4
.46-04
,44-04
.21-03
.39-03
,14-03
.11-03
,98-04
.15-6)3
,28-^)3
,21-03
,20-03
.63-03
,11-02
, 13-03
,69-04
OXYGEN C 0 : l '' * I 1 ''N «Ad
TO 1 . '.•> TIMES S 4T 'IH A r T n,\ M JU !•-' I C 1 0 N 19, CYCLfcl421
-------
STREA'-t FI_CU3 Dtr^KASfcO BY
15 N 0 v 73 1910 611 u
PAGE
62
SY5TE.H 31AIU.3 AFTLr!
2 Li, 1
25.7
26. b
27.2
31.3
25. ;>
25.1
?5. 1
25.3
27.4
29.6
26. h
OK "I
H(,/l.
6,5
6.3
6.0
6.2
5 . 8
5.6
5.0
5.5
5.6
5.4
4.0
3.2
5.4
4.ri
6. 1
6.6
7 . 'I
6.2
8.0
4.9
6.C1
i . 9
5.8
5.6
5.4
4.6
5. 1
I , b
4.2
3.7
'l . W
•1. J
b . 3
5 . /
j.ti
0.1.1
a. fa
j.d
5.7
ri . 5
5.2
5 . 1
5.3
'1 . 6
5 . 1
•i. 1
4 , -•*
3. J
i. ?
f5(JD
Mlj/L
.2
. 1
. 1
, ).
,f.
. i^
. C1
.0
.1
.»
.0
. 15
. 0
. ^'
• V1
. tl
.0
. 1
. l'i
» 0
. I
. a
. 1
. 1
.2
.6
.3
4.3
.9
,9
. ^
B ^
0 ' J
, 1
, 1 1
. 1
. y
. 'f
.V
,1/1
. t1
. 3
_ p
.0
. 'J
. I
, ,1
.'•1
.-'1
C ' I L 0 f( A
UG/L
a.
7.
5.
b.
4.
5.
4.
6.
9.
9.
9.
8 .
13.
) 7,
22.
28.
37.
41 .
56.
3.
4.
4.
4 .
4.
4 ,
6.
5.
12.
7.
9.
5.
3.
3.
3.
2.
2.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
2.
2.
3.
4.
3.
2.
NM3
nG/L
. 1 2
.20
.26
.29
.39
,47
.65
.57
.66
.72
!.i a
1.45
.ha
, f<7
1 . P0
1.06
1.24
1.16
1.40
.56
.27
.29
.32
.36
.42
.57
.47
1.13
,66
.75
. 63
.29
.31
.32
.3*
.32
.34
.34
.37
.34
,38
,4fj
.51
. 45
. 4 '••)
, 50
,63
.72
.53
, 33
N02
MG/L
.024
.041
.062
.075
.1 "5
.126
.147
. 1 50
.173
.179
.254
.267
.208
.206
.220
.232
.272
.214
,?9 !
.125
.067
.'J74
.082
.095
.107
.142
.123
,221
. 163
.193
.164
.076
, JI8A
, ii 8 1
.092
. k"0 1
.OR4
.086
. e'94
.089
.100
. 117
, 1 26
.115
.1^2
.1)8
,13'J
.1hT
.124
. 1 40
N03
i^G/L
.09
.15
.16
.17
.21
.24
.23
.27
.31
.30
.32
.33
.34
.35
.37
.39
.34
.51
.30
.20
.16
.16
.17
.21
.24
.36
.29
.81
.43
.51
.35
.15
.15
.1.4
.15
,14
. 14
.15
.16
.17
. IB
.19
.21
,20
.17
.18
.21
.23
.20
.19
K'04
Mfi/U
.04
.05
.03
.02
.02
.02
,34
.03
.03
.04
,07
. 10
.05
.05
.07
.08
.07
. 16
.09
.04
.02
.02
.02
.02
.03
.06
.03
,39
.08
.08
.04
.02
..32
.02
.02
.02
.02
.32
.02
.02
.02
.03
.03
.02
.32
, J3
.34
.04
.03
.09
COUIF
MPN/10HML
, 18+02
,11+02
.25+02
.54+01
.12+01
,19+01
.21+00
,59+0]
,23+02
,18+02
.15+01
.14+31
.66+02
.11+03
,25+03
,41+03
.17+03
,23+04
,37+03
.63+03
,67+02
.16+03
.38+02
,53 H32
.77+02
.91+03
.35+03
,15+05
,29+04
.80+33
.62+02
.67+03
,29+04
,72+04
,21+05
,37+03
.32405
.35+04
,72+03
,46+02
,23*03
.24+03
,26+04
,39+04
. 50+03
.58+02
.36+03
.14404
. 13 + 04
. 12+03
103
G/L
35.0
34,5
33.8
33.5
32.6
32.0
32. b
31,1
29.9
30.2
31.0
31,1
28.7
27,4
25.7
24.1
23,6
17.3
20,1
32,9
33.6
33.4
33.1
32.6
32.2
31.1
31.4
28.2
29.2
30.6
31,5
33.2
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
32.8
32,4
33.0
32.9
32.9
32.8
32.5
32.6
32.6
32.1
30.8
32.8
32.9
TOT IN
MCi/U
.12
.18
.17
.17
.20
.24
.17
.30
.40
.37
.28
.27
.49
.60
.75
.89
.93
1 .49
1.24
.13
.17
.17
,19
.28
.36
.72
.54
2.12
t .03
1 .95
.57
.15
.15
.14
.17
.1 I
.20
.15
.17
.16
. 14
.13
.1 4
.16
.15
.14
.22
.31
. 1 3
.12
HtAVY
,42-03
,17-03
,36-04
,17-04
.20-05
.18-05
.77-07
,45-05
,17-04
.13-04
.83-06
,67-06
,45-04
.76-04
.16-03
,26-03
.11-03
, 14-02
.25-03
,00
,18-04
,86-05
,10-04
, 47~-0'1
.44-04
,20-03
,3fi-U3
,25-03
,29-02
,26-04
,32-04
.25-05
,14-05
,53-08
.00
.00
.00
,52-05
,34-04
.27-05
,43-06
, 06i
,20-05
,47-05
.22-05
,19-05
.53-04
,12-03
.56-06
.00
MLT I 8,
MG/L
,11-02
.60-03
.21-03
,12-03
,31-04
,24-04
,15-05
,36-04
,87-04
,68-04
.98-05
,73-05
.16-03
,26-03
,43-03
,63-61.3
,41-03
,22-02
,75-03
,00
,13-03
,74-04
,60-04
t ? 3-03
,14-03
,38-03
.57-03
.51-03
.28^02
.11-03
,13-03
,31-04
,12-04
,10-07
,00
.00
,00
,16-34
,64-04
,20-04
,36-05
,8fa
.49-05
.15-H4
,75-05
.63-05
.1 1-03
.23-03
,17-05
,0e
2 PtST
1 ft 2
MG/L.
,73-03
,53-03
,30-03
,24-03
.16-03
,16-03
,94-04
,19-03
.27-03
.24-03
,14-03
,14.03
,36-03
.48-03
.68-03
.82-03
,76-03
,18.02
,11-02
,43.04
,23-03
,17.03
.13.03
,12-03
,12-03
,19.03
.18-03
.49-03
,39-03
, 18.03
,12-03
,12-03
,86-04
,49-04
,33-04
,33.04
,32-04
.79-04
,11-03
.80-04
,56-04
.44-B4
.51-04
.73-04
,61-04
,58-04
,15-03
,26-03
.47-04
,41-04
,41-03
,34-03
,23-03
,20»03
.18-03
.21-03
,13-03
,27-03
,40-03
, 36"03
,23-03
,22-03
,51-03
,66*03
,87-03
,11-02
.11-02
,21-02
,15-02
,55»U4
.19-03
,15-03
,13-6)3
, 1 ^1503
,16-03
,26-03
,24-03
.62-03
,51-03
.27-03
,18-03
,12-03
,94-04
.57-04
,40-04
,40-04
,38-04
,95-04
,13-103
,90-04
,68.04
,56-04
,65-04
,99-04
,82-04
,78-04
,19-03
,32-03
,60-04
,52-04
------- |