I
GROVETON SURVEY
Upper Ammonoosuc River & Connecticut River
Near Lancaster and Groveton,
New Hampshire
September 1973

-------
Table of Contents
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
Introduction .
Approach..
Station Location..
Flow Data
Time of Travel....
Analytical Data...
Physical Data
Conclusions.
.................l
• .... . . . . • .1
• S.... 2
3
.3
.4
• . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . .4
. . . . . . 5
Title
List of Tables
Table No
Location of Sampling Stations
Flow Data .
7 d—lOy Low Flow
TimeofTravelSummary
Analysis of Samples from
StationOlthruO8 .....•...•.. VIthruXIII
Cross Section Data......,..........................XIV
Map Showing General Location . “A”
High Flow Time of Travel • • . • . . . . • • . . . “B”
Low Flow Time of Travel . • . . tt fl
Sediment Composition . .
Benthic c xygen Demand. —
Report on Mathematical Model from Systems Analysis. “F”
.SSSS..SS.
S. •SSS S.S

• S •SSS4 S ••
S S
55SSSSS S
SSSSSSSS••
•5•5 S S
• •S
S
• 555•5SSS
5S5•SSSS S

I
II
III
IV
Append ic ies

-------
CR0 VETON SURVEY
During the period September 8 through September 14, 1973,
Region I, United States Environmental Protection Agency personnel
conducted a survey on the Upper M monoosuc River. and Connecticut
River in the State of New Hampshire near Lancaster and Groveton.
The purpose of the survey was to verify a mathematical model of
the Upper Arm on.oosuc River and Connecticut River below Groveton
Paper Company. The model was established to develop discharge
limitations for Groveton Paper Company.
This report is not intended to be an interpretation of the
results, but rather a swnmary of the data collected during the
study period.
I. Approach
The concept of sampling was to evaluate the changes in a slug
of water as it traveled downstream. This allows the evaluation of
the effects of a specific mill loading on the mixing and natural
purification of the river.
To accomplish this type of evaluation, the sampling at each
station was based on the time of travel between stations.
Pursuant of the objectives of this survey, several types of
data were collected:
1.) Time of Travel and Flow Data — Two time of travel studies
were completed, one at high flow done during June 1973 and at a lower
flow done during the study period. Flow data was also compiled
during the time of travel studies.

-------
—2—
2) Analytical Data — At each sampling station, six (6) grab
samples were taken at four (4) hour intervals. Section V expands
on the method and types of samples collected and composited.
3) Physical Data — During and after the study period, cross—
sections of the river were measured and dredge samples taken to
determine the type of material forming the river bed.
II. Station Location
The following is a description of the station locations
followed by a Table shoving river miles from Groveton Paper Company
and latitude and longitude. The locations are also pinpointed in
the maps in Appendix A.
GAOl — Upper Ammonoosuc River, upstream of the intake dam
at Groveton Paper Co.
GAO2 — Upper Ammonoosuc River, at the railroad bridge
downstream of the darn below Groveton Paper Co.
GAO3 — Upper Ainmonoosuc River, 300m upstream of the confluence
with the Connecticut River.
GAO4 — Connecticut River, 300xn upstream of he confluence.
GCO5 — Connecticut River, approximately 600 tn downstream of
the confluence.
GCO6 — Connecticut River, approximately 10,000 m downstream
of Groveton Paper Co. at the Northumberland Dam.
GCO7 — Connecticut River, at the Rt. 2 bridge between Lancaster,
New Hampshire and Guild Hall, Vermont.
ccO8 — Connecticut River at the covered bridge approximately
32,500 m downstream of Groveton Paper Company.

-------
Table I
Location of Sampling Stations
Kilometers
Station
#
downstream of
Groveton Paper Co.
Latitude
Longitude
GAOl
.32
(upstream)
(miles
0.2
440 36’ 05”
.
710 30’ 20”
GAO2
.80
0.5
44° 35’ 31”
710 31’ 01”
GAO3
4.0
2.5
44° 35’ 26”
710 32’ 03”
GCO4
4.3
(+.32 mi.upstream
in Conn. River)
2.7
44° 35’ 17”
710 32’ 23”
•
GCO5
5 6
3.5
440 34’ 55”
710 32’ 23”
GCO6
10.5
6 5
440 33’ 53”
71° 33’ 31”
GCO7
23 3
14 5
440 29’ 44”
71° 35’ 3 ”
GCO8
32.2
20.0
44° 27’ 35”
710 39’ 10”

-------
—3-.
III. Flow Data
Table II lists the flow data for the Connecticut and Upper
Aionoosuc Rivers during the time of travel and study periods.
The data was compiled from readings taken at the United States
Geological Survey Gaging Stations.*
From a report entitled “Seven—Day Low Flow Analysis — New
England Stream Caging Stations” prepared by Systems Analysis Branch,
E.P.A., Region I dated April 12, 1973, the 7—day, 10—year flow for
the gaging stations in the study area were extracted.and are listed
in Table III.
IV. Time of Travel
For the study, two time of travel surveys were completed, one
at high flow in June and another during the water quality survey
at a lower flow. The time of travel surveys are divided into five
main reaches. The data is summarized in Table IV, and the reaches
are described below arid are located in the maps in Appendix A.
Reach #1 — The Upper Animonoosuc River from the railroad bridge
below Groveton Paper Company to the confluence with
the Connecticut River.
Reach #2 — The Connecticut River from the confluence with the
Upper Axnrnonoosuc River to the Dam in Northumberland, N.H.
Reach #3 — The Connecticut River from the Dam in Northumberland,
to the Rt. 2 Bridge between Lancaster, N.H. and
Guildha].1, Vt.
*The readings at the gaging stations were made by the people at
New England Electric Company and made available to us by the same.

-------
Table II
Flow Data
Time & Date
of Reading
North Stratford, N.H.
Connecticut River
Dalton, N.H.
Connecticut River
Stark, N.H.
Upper Aimnonoosuc
River
cms
(cfs)
cms
(cfs)
cms
(cfs)
6—12—73 8am 24.8 876 63.0 2223 12.3 434
4pm 34.3 1212 — — 19.8 699
6—13—73 8am 64.1 2265 86.1 3040 45.7 1615
4pm 80.8 2852 122.1 4310 47.2 1667
6—14—73 8am 73.5 2596 165.6 5848 57.2 2020
4pm 59.1 2088 — 5658 50.9 1797
6—15—73 8am 56.8 2004 147.1 5194 39.2 1384
4pm 51.2 1808 134.8 4760 33.7 1190
6—16—73 8am 40.9 1444 114.6 4048 26.8 946
4pm 88.5 3124 126.8 4478 48.7 1719
9—9—73 8am 33.2 1173 70.1 2476 7.3 258
4pm 24.2 854 70.1 2476 6.8 241
9—10—73 8am 18.9 665 44.3 1565 6.5 229
4pm 13.7 482 42.8 1510 6.3 222
9—11—73 8am 10.6 375 38.4 1355 6.0 213
4pm 10.1 355 34.4 1214 5.9 210
9—12—73 8am 9.9 351 20.4 720 6.0 213
4pm 9.7 342 22.4 790 5.9 210
9—13—73 8am 9.4 333 24.1 850 5.9 207
4pm 9.2 324 24.1 850 5.8 204
9—14—73 8am 9.3 328 24.1 850 5.6 198
4pm 9.2 324 20.4 720 5.5 195
9—15—73 8am 21.4 755 20.4 720 5.9 210
4pm 27.8 980 20.2 715 6.1 216
9—16—73 8am 28.8 1016 26.9 950 6.2 219
4pm 28.4 1004 44.0 1555 6.2 216

-------
Table III
7—day, 10—year Low Flow Data
Station Low Flow
North Stratford, New Hampshire
Connecticut River 4.6 s (164 cfs)
Dalton, New Hampshire 10.1 cms (355 cfs)
Connecticut River
Stark, New Hampshire 1.4 c s ( 48 cfs)
Upper Ammonoosuc River

-------
Table i
Time of Travel Su i*ry
Run #1 Run 02 Run #3
Reach 01 3.9 km (2.4 iiii.)
Flow cms (cf s) 34.0 (1200) 6.7 (235) 5.8 (205)
Time (hrs.) 1.25 7.04 7.33
Vel. rn/s (fps) .85 (2.8) .15 (0.5) .15 (0.48)
Reach #2 5.5 km (3.4 ml.)
Flow cms (cfs) 159 (5600) 68.0 (2400) 48.1 (1700)
Time (hre.) 2.75 6.8 7.33
Vel. rn/s (fps) .55 (1.8) .22 (0.73) .21 (0.68)
Reach #3 13.0 kin (8.]. mi,)
Flow cms “(cf a) 99.1 (3500) 42.5 (1500) 28.3 (1000)
Time (hrs.) 10.9 15.6 11.64
Vel. rn/s (fps) .33 (1.1) .23 (0.76) .31 (1.02)
Reach #4 9.3 km (5.8 ml.)
Flow cms (cfs) 63.7 (2250) 41.1 (1450) 41.1 (1450)
Time (hrs.) 10 10.76 13.5
Vel. rn/s (fps) .26 (0.85) .24 (0.79) .19 (0.63)
Reach 05 5.0 km (3.1 mi.)
Flow cms (cf a) 63.7 (2250) 38.2 (1350) 36.8 (1300)
(hrs.) 7.7 10.1 9.3
rn/s (fps) .18 (0.59) .14 (0.45) .15 (0.49)

-------
—4—
Reach #4 — The Connecticut River from the Route 2 Bridge to
the Covered Bridge near Lunenberg, Vt.
Reach #5 — The Connecticut River from the Covered Bridge to
the Railroad Bridge approximately 5 kilometers
downs tr earn.
Detailed sunmiaries of each time of travel survey are included
as Appendicies B & C.
V. Analytical Data
Samples were collected at four (4) hour Intervals as grab
samples for a 20 hr. period, or six (6) grab samples. A portion
of the samples were composited in the following manner equal
portions of the first and second, third and fourth, and fifth
and sixth samples were combined to make three (3) composite
samples to reduce the analytical work load. Grab samples were
analyzed for temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen and coliform
bacteria. In addition, three (3) grab samples at each station
were analyzed for chlorophyll—a. The composited samples were
analyzed for total suspended solids, total dissolved solids,
total phosphorus and biochemical oxygen demand.
In Tables VI through XIII the data from stations one through
eight is summarized.
VI. Physical Data
In addition to the water quality sampling that was done on
the river, we recorded river cross—sections which are summarized
in Table XIV.

-------
—5—
Bottom samples were looked at and it was determined that
the river bed was basically hardpan and rock with very few sludge
deposits. It was determined in the laboratory that this type of
bed had a benthic oxygen demand of approxImately 0.9 gm/dIm 2 of
oxygen in the Upper Aminonoosuc River and approximately 0.6 gm/d/m 2
of oxygen in the Connecticut River. Reports relative to sediment
composition and benthic oxygen demand are included as Appendicies
D and E.
VII. Conclusions
The analysis of the data presented in this report was done
by our Systems Analysis Branch within the framework of a mathematical
model of the study area. Their report of the interpretations of
the data is included as Appendix F.
A conclusion drawn from this work was that with the installa-
tion of Best Practical Treatment only, Water Quality Limits would
be violated in the Upper Ammonoosuc River.

-------
Table VI
Analysis of Samples from Station GAOl
Total Dissolved Solids
(—‘c /1 ‘•)
Total Phosphorus
(nz/1)_________
7daL
O_d y_ -
!2_d y_ -
-
18 d y
2d j
0
— — — —
1
_ — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — - —
• a — — — a a — a — —
3
• — — — — — a a — a a ,
- a — a — — — — — — a .
— — — — — — c• — — — —.
- — — — — — η. — — — — — _.
— — a — — — — — S — — — Sl
9/11 2330 J 9/12 0530
1
— a — .

:::::: ::::::
3
— — — — — — — —
4
— — — — S
— — — —
— — — — — — — — S — S —
— — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — —
Date/tine
9/11 0900
9/11 1300
9/11 1700
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/i)
Temperature (C°)
14
14
14
13
(su)
7.5
7.0
6.4
6.2
6.1
9/11 2035
9.3
12
7.5
9.0
Total Coliforin/l00 ml
1,700
1,100
2,400
800
600 — 230
18 30
Fecal Coliform/100 ml
34
20
25
4
Chlorophyll —a (ugh)
1.54
—
1.31
— 0.84
-
Total Suspended Solids
( — n I)
44
25
25
a’
35
BOD
(mg/i)
0.04
19
0.04
27
K 0.02
0
- — — — — — — — — — — — — —
1
- — — — a — — — a — — — —
- — — — — — — — — — a — —
- — — — — — —
- a — — — — — — — — — — —
13d!y 3
- — — — — — — a a — — —
16d y 3
- - a — a — a as — —
19d y 4
— — — — — — a — a a S —
23d y 5
— — — — _f _ a S — — — —
a sasasa 5 5
K — Less than

-------
Total Phosphorus
(t t /1
Table VII
Analysis of Samples from Station GAO2
3 da
5 da
7 da
-
12_d y_ -
15_d. y_ -
18 d y
22d y -
-
- — — — — — ..lZeflflfl.. -
12
- — — — -
— 14 —
13d!y 25
16d y
l9dav
— — — — — — — — — — — a —
23 d y 34
— — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — __l 1 _s. a — — — —
— — — — — _J r; — — — — —
.2 L — — — — — —
32
— — — — — — — — — — — — —
46
- — — — — n.
— — — —
56
-
— — — — — — — a — — — — a,
66
- — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — _.
.1_i — — — — — — -
46 —
6.4 -
— — — — — — — L — — — — — — -

87
101
— a — — —
105
— a — — — — fl e -
Date/time
9/11 0800
9/11 1230
9/11 1630
9/11 2115
9/12 0035
9/12 0630
Temperature (C°)
14
16
17
14
14
12.5
pH (su)
6.5
7.1
7.7
6.5
7.4
7.0
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/i)
8.8
5.9
—
8.4
Total Coliforin/100 ml
3,100
29,000
39,000
20,000
25 000
27,000
Fecal Coliform/100 ml
820
880
- 820
380
570
520
Chlorophyll —a (ugh)
1.9
—
6.2
—
2.4
Total Suspended Solids
— (—gil) 241 302
25.1
Total Dissolved Solids
(ng/1) a’ 173 234
.
208
BOD
(mg/i)
0.12 0.10
0.08

-------
Table V I
y isof Samples from Station CAO3
Date Itine
Temnerature (C°
H (su)
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/i )
Total Coliform/100 ml
Fecal Coliform/100 ml
Chlorophyll —a (ugh )
Total Suspended Solids
-
Total Dissolved Solids
(ric/fl
Total Phosphorus
(T’ Q /1 )
1
3da
7da
-
-
-
-
250
9
— a — — — — — — — — — — —
12
::::: :::::::
— — — — — S ? 1 — — — — — —
• — — a — — — a
43
- — — — — — — — — — — — —
45
a — a — — — — — — — —
47
• — — — — — — — a — — — —
5Q
8
— — — a a — a a a — a a a a
27
— — — a a — — — — — — a a
67
- — — —
— — — — — —
86
ii
101
107
— — a — — J L4
— — — — a J 2 .9 — — _ _ — a
16 17
9/11 1430 9/11 1800 9/11 2330 9/12 0240
9/12 0740
9/12 1030
6.7
1.700
34
14
12.5
12.5
6.2
7.3
6.9
7.6
6.7
7.0
2,400
800
600
6.2
1
100
20
8.1
17
7.1
5.1
230
25 4
292
18
—
9.9____
—
7.9
BOD
(mg/i)
292
249
0 • 08
0.08
284
200
0.08
11
• a a a a a a a a —
37
• — — — — — - — — a — — — -
59
- — a — — —
- 781 — — — —
— a — a — — — a a — — a
13 d y 79
— - — — — — —
16 day 88
— a a a a a
19 d y 94
— — a — —
95
a a a a a a — — — a

-------
Table xx
Analysis of Samples from Station CCO4
1 daL
3 da
7da
!0_d y_ -
2_d y_ -
-
-
-
1
- — — — a — — — — — — — -
C — — — — — — — — — — —
- — — — — — — — a — — — -
— — — — — — — — — — — a —
— — — — — a — — — — — —
13d!y
- — — — — — — — — — —
16d y
l 9 d c
23d y

— — a — — — — — — a a — —
9/12 0800 q 12 103fl
12.5 16
6.9 6.8
8.8 8.1
9 •)nn
- — — — — — — — — — — a —
— 1
2
-
• — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
a — a — — — _2_ — — _ — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — a — — _4_ — a — — —
5
— — — — — —
6
— — — — — — — — — — — — —
Date/time
9/11 1500 9/11 1830
pH (su)
Temperature (C°)
14
.15
14
6.9 6.2
9/i.1 2400 9/12 0300
___________ 13
6.4 6.3
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/i)
8.9
-
8.6
Total Colifortn/100 ml
1,700
260
2.900
2 .700
—
Fecal Coliform/100 ml
40
44
- 100
120
Chlorophyll —a (ugh)
— —
•
-- 2.2
—
1.70
.
Total Suspended Solids
( -.‘/1 •1
390
63
Total Dissolved Solids
(rp/1)
3
Total Phosphorus
(tigll)
0.04
‘A
BOD
(mg/i)
64
9fl
O.85
60
0,04
44
32
0,04
1
— — — — — — a — a — — — —
1

— — — — —
2
a — — — — — — — — — — — —
• — — — a — — — — — — — —
3
- — — — — — a — — — — — —
4
- a — — — a a — a — a
5
— — — — a — — — — a a a
5
7
— a a a

-------
Total Suspended Solids
(.rr, /1
Table X
Analysis of Samples from Station GCO5
3 da
5 da
-
-
-
-
-
-
5
— — — — — — — — — — — — —
8
S — — — — fj — — — — — — —
— — — — —
— — — S W — — — — — — — —
- — — — — 1 1 L —
15

-1 — — — — — —
— — — — — _I ;_. — — S — — —
- — — — — 2 r
— — — — a — — — — — — —
Date/tirte
9/11 1650
9/11 1845
9/12 0405
9/12 0015
9/12 0800
9/12 1130
Temperature (C°)
15
15
- 13
14
13
15
pH (su)
6.2
6.2
6.4
6.3
7.0
7.3
Dissolved 0xy en (mg/i)
7.9
7.6
7.8
7.8
Total Coliforrn/l00 ml
5,700
10,000
20,000
23,000
30,000
41,000
Fecal Coliform/100 ml
66
70
300
690
610
840
Chlorophyll —a (ugh)
—
3.31
1.76
3.08
—
—
Total Dissolved Solids
I ’
(nc’/l)
Total Phosphorus
96 106
BOD
(ing/1)
88
102
—.
60
0.05 0.05
86
0.04
2
— a — — — — — — — — — — — —
- — — — — — — — — — a a —
- — — — — — —
— -a — — — — — —
12
13d y
16d j T4 ”
l9d y Ts
— — — — — — — — — a —
23 d y T6
— — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — —
6
- — — — — — — — — — — — — — -
5
- 1 o-
— — — — — — — — _.
11
— a — — — — — — — — — a — — -
15
• Th — — — — — — —
14
• — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — a — — — S — — — a —
14
:::: :::L

-------
Table X I
Analysis of SamDles from Station GCO6
lda 3
— — — - — — — — — — — — — — — — -
3da!. 6
5 da - 8 — — — — —
— — — - — — — a — — — — — — — — —
7da 9
— - — - — — — a — -
10 d y 11
12d y 13:d :::1 ::::::
15 d y 16 d y 13
— - — - — — — — —
18 d y 19 d y 15
- - — - — — — — — —
2_d y_ - 3_d y_ — J L
28 day 18
— — — — - — — — — a — — — — — — — —
6
— — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — —
13
a — — — — — — — a — — — —
14

—
1. .
— — — — i•i
• — — — — — — — — — — — —
18
— — —
- — — — — _ .2. — — — — — —
7
- — a — — — — - — — — — — —
- — — — — — — — — — — — — —
13
— — — — — — — — a a — — — —
24
- — — — — — —

24
•
— — — — —
21
22
— — — a —
Date! time
Temperature (C°)
9/11_2215 9/12 0150
D l i (su)
14 14
9/120710 9/12 0930
6,2 6.2
Total Coliform/100 ml
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/i)
7.9
7.7 7.3
12.5 15
—
6.5 6.8
11,000 22,000
Chlorophyll —a (ugh)
Fecal Coliform/100 ml
620
950
L 150
9/12 1230 9/12 1530
16 15
6.9 6.9
6.7 6.0
Total Suspended Solids
(r , /1
21,000 28,000
4.11
L 5,000
61
45,000 49,000
4.32 3.18
BOD
(mg/i)
Total Dissolved Solids
( ipJ1)
37
60
Total Phosphorus
L i ’ I’)
0.06
—--——
0.04
1,300
3.35
80
109
69
0.06
L — Greater than

-------
T b Iθ’ X I !
Mta1 ,rsiτ of 1 Samples from Station CCO7
Fecal_Colifortn/l00 ml
Total Phosphorus
(trc /l)
3 da
5 da
7 da
Od y_ -
-
-
l8d y -
-
2
::::::: ::::::
5
— — — — — — c — — — — — —
a — — — — — — — — — — — -
— — — — — — — — — — —
• - — — — a — — — — —
7
- — — — — — — — a — a — —
7
— — — — — — — — — — — — a
— — — — —
— — — — — a — — — — — a —
2
— a a — — — — — — —
a —————7—— a — — —
— — — — — —
1- — — — —
— — a — — — — — — a.
• — a — — — — — — — — a —
I 10
- — — — — — — — — — — — —
11
- a — — — — fl — — — — — —
- — — — — — r3
- — — — — — — — a — — — —
1 800
670
2.02
3
— — — — — — — _5__ — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — a — — — a .
— — — — —
— — S
• — —————-i
— — — — — — — — — — — — a
10
— — — — — — — — — — — — —
11
— — — — — — — — — — —
1. .
— — a a — — — —
Date/time
Temnerature (C° )
-iR su
Dissolved Oxygen (mgil)
Q/1 fl7 (1 Q119 iAnn
14
6.7
7.3
g/I, lfflfl 9/1 ’ 20C
—
•15
14
:
6.7
6.1
13
6.1
Total Coliform/l0O ml 17,000 30,000 30,000 12,000 12,000
13 13.5
6.5
Total Suspended Solids
fr..., /1 \
Chlorophyll —a (ugh) 1.33 1.88 3.09
1,000 410 490 360 910
S.
83
Total Dissolved Solids
(r /l)
?
BOD
(mg/i)
85
0,04
L 0.02
91
86
L 0.02
L — Greater than

-------
Table X i i i
Analysis of Samples from Station GCO8
Date/time
Temnerature (C° )
pH (su)
Dissolved Oxygen_(mg/i)
Total Coliform/lO0 ml
Fecal Coliform/lOO ml
Total Dissolved Solids
(i c/fl
Total Phosphorus
(r Ifl
1 da
3da
7da
-
2_d y_ -
-
i8d y
2_d y_ -
-
9/13 0100 9/13 0500
9/12 2045 9/13 0930
1
— — — — — — — — — —
— — a — —

- — — — — — T — — — — — —.
—
• — — — a — a — — — — —
• — — T — — —
- — — —
— — — — — a — — — — a — —
9/13 1315 9 13 1700
1
— — — — — — — — a — — — — a
3
-
- — — — — — —
- — — —
Th — —
17 δ
21 —
— — — — — — a — — — a — —
::::::: :::L
13
.13
6.1 62
13
7.4
6.0
4,500
14 15 15
4,100
Chlorophyll — (ugh)
610
4,900
420
6.5
5.8
—
6.6
—
8,500
—
6,100
8,000
680
2 • 22
350
250
Total Suspended Solids
______________________________ 90 82 — 71
1.88
80
BOD
(ing/1)
170
— 2.62
L 0.02
80
L0.. 02
fl-n,
1
— — — — — — — — — — — a — —
2
• — — a — — — — — — — — — —
3
-
- —
- — - — — —
— — — — — —
— — — — — —
— — — - — a
7
— — — — — — — — a — — — —
8
— — a — a a a
L — Greater than

-------
Table XIV
Cross—Section Data
Connecticut River — Croveton Survey
River kilometers
downstream from
the Confluence
(miles)
•
River
Width
rn (ft)
113
off
m
river
west
Depth Measurements
Cross Section
Area
m 2 ft 2
width I
bank I
(ft)
mid
m
point
(ft)
113
off
m
river
east
width
bank
(ft)
.97 upstr.
.32 upstr.
.32
.40
1.20
1.77
2.49
3.38
3.86
4.02
5.15
5.30
5.79
6.68
7.72
8.69
9.33
11.42
13.76
15.12
15.92
16.57
17.46
19.15
(0.6)
(0.2)
(0.2)
(0.25)
(0.75)
(1.1)
(1.55)
(2.10)
(2.4)
(2.5)
(3.2)
(3.3)
(3.6)
(4.15)
(4.8)
(54)
(5.8)
(7.1)
(8.55)
(9.40)
(9.9)
(10.3)
(10.85
(11.90
30.5 (100’)
36.6 (120’)
61.0 (200’)
61.0 (200’)
83.8 (275’)
36.6 (120’)
45.7 (150’)
61.0 (200’)
39.6 (130’)
61.’O (200’)
68.6 (225’)
56.4 (185’)
53.3 (175’)
61.0 (200’)
48.8 (160’)
53.3 (175’)
45.7 (150’)
61.0 (200’)
68.6 (225’)
51.2 (170’)
48.8 (160’)
68.6 (225’)
53.3 (175’)
48.8 (160’)
.49
3.3
3.0
.40
1.5
1.1
3.9
3.7
1.9
1.8
2.4
1.1
1.3
1.0
2.0
1.3
4.1
0.6
1.5
1.8
7.5
2.3
1.2
3.7
(1.6)
(10.8)
(9.8)
(1.3)
(4.8)
(3.6)
(12.8).
(12.3)
(6.3)
(5.9)
(8.0)
(3.6)
(4.4)
(3.4)
(6.6)
(4.3)
(13.4)
(2.0)
(4.9)
(5.9)
(24.5)
(7.6)
(4.0)
(12.2)
11.1 ( 3 ,5)1 .52
14.0 (13.0 Ii.ψ
1.9 ( 6.2) I .8
11.6 ( 5.3) 13,0
11.6 ( Ij 5
p 2 . 9 97) l5 9
152 (17.0) 12.0
p2,5 ( 8.2) 12,0
I 3.8 (12.4) 14,7
I 2.3 ( 7.6) 12.1
I 2.6 ( 8.5) 11.9
I 2.9 ( 9.5) 11.8
11.9 ( 6.3) 11.7
11.6 ( 5.3) 12.4
11.4 ( 4.6) I .7
11.3 ( 4.4) 11.6
14.6 (15.2) 13.7
I .8 ( 2.6) I .9
11.5 ( 4.8) 11.5
I 2.7 ( 8.8) I .9
I 7.9 (25.8) 13.4
I 1.4 ( 4.6) 11.3
I 37 (12.0) 15.4
I 4.5 (14.7) 13.1
( 1.7)
C 3.3)
( 2.6)
(10.0)
( 5.0)
(193)
( 6.7)
( 6.6)
(15.4)
( 6.8)
( 6.2)
( 5.8)
( 5.5)
( 8.0)
( 2.2)
( 5.4)
(12.3)
( 3.0)
( 4.9)
( 3.0)
(11.1)
( 4.4)
(17.8)
(10.3)
15.8
75.5
86.4
77.1
97.1
90.9
127.2
125.9
102.9
94.3
118.6
81.2
65.9
77.6
49.8
57.3
142.5
35.3
80.0
69.9
228.2
86.8
137.4
138.2
( 170)
( 813)
( 930)
( 830)
(1045)
( 978)
(1369)
(1355)
(1108)
(1015)
(1277)
( 874)
( 709)
( 835)
( 536)
( 617)
(1534)
( 380)
( 821)
( 752)
(2456)
( 934)
(1479)
(1488)

-------
• ‘• ‘- - —‘ (5, 5• —‘
/ •.‘
_S)S • -
. ,f’ j —’ I
‘— r’ ‘ l”’
A: ‘
I t’f • H dho
/ • / ) Mtn -’
_ /: \\\\ \\ —
η: ) ‘ / \ - -: : ‘
) ., \\ BatdMtfl\ L
‘ — -— . •• . •) ,‘ -
•\‘S ’ ‘ ‘
—5 \ S ••__ (•_
- — ‘ - 1
‘ = -
/N. - e ’ooi -
—: / - (
- I )
‘ /S_S• — ,- )
- ,
H N
-
r


•
.5= ’- ,I•• - _ -
‘ -
5__f
/ T . •\
-
‘5-- -
F . ‘I ,_-
‘ ‘ Sc // I t
‘ 7 1 ,1
O
—S
I ’ .
4
- • --I
-5 ( ‘
-- .5. . S • S - - 5 S •
= -- - -
- 5— - ( —- “ 5--I’ “<‘ F C c. -‘1.3 — -
-‘ ‘1 0 _ I -
- S . ‘. ‘ “ / ‘ t, - - • ‘- • - r - — • r
‘ I I. ‘ui U i iI+ — S I tL.1 )ILU — —
— C - ‘ p
- \ \ ___S• — t iL l i L4UZ* _
1’ — —— - \ ‘ —— .
\ ? j_ Ktz SLI // - — ‘\ /
- v . 5 _ i — I 4 1 M - — - J
/ - SI1’— ‘ I ‘I 5s ?? ,‘
s_s.- S ’ • ‘‘ ,.- S -- S’\’ / ‘\-
U ‘\ I L ‘ - C (I
6 itt 1 ‘5 / . -.z’%_ — B e h Hi i \\ (/t
‘ 5 i v H — z
s M f fl ‘ — ) \ ‘ 1J / T’ “ \
- 5u re ( \ j / ij / /
1 I
‘cnMtr . . • .- / - . , . )-- ‘S --
. 1 ’ - S —J \ ii j \— — 5-;- . . • ‘‘- η - 7 •.. .
r\ I . / e ’J -‘
-S \ - S ‘- - -- ‘ . I - . _ ‘• ••
\tP e6GJ ‘\ - c’ ’ —. • -
— . 5 . ’ - S - — -. -\ •.. ( c ’--
( - ‘ .- ‘ 1 - _ 5 t
- -‘ -- \η • ,\
- St ’ 5- ‘ ‘ I I
/ 1 \ V&ir ra ’ory
-- ‘ F ‘-- ( ‘ -% .. I . .‘ PA 5 1’ - • 4 - / S
‘ / I \ X C \ S ‘ F’ E
Mt r “ __. / / —
5t / I b ) j__ I
I ii - Ici t ti.ni
-5% — I — I • “
• I -‘ fl I ,-t’ • 5- r S • i -v -i’ I n ••I ‘ . • • -
L_L_S__._\_. _ _ ‘. • I I ) G 0 t J I * AS Il I 6 10 7 1 54
( IA P Ft s a, 2 9 2’3 -
-— V t L4P - ASr4 4’ I Wi.
SCALE
ROAD CLASSIFICATION
32
•‘Z-
01
I-
: - r )
440
/ 54•
‘I
/ 1
5’-
- 5
493$
4937
‘36
4935
4934
4933

-------
______ 72

( , / i ‘ - - %
I ‘ a / * 9
- - - ‘ . -
c:
‘I
- ‘ — - - V


4 i i 1 ii
_____ ) / / Or e Mount,
I ( I - I ‘
) - I 1 I 1= 0 -
- , - ..S, I . - - -. 5, I — - - Q —1 -.. - - : ; —
I -

- ‘ - I - / .. .. /,,,, r
-_ J i I i til ILl ‘ ‘ /
75 G
w’ W(. ,Q5 4 ’ - ,, - , — J V ) -
‘ I p 1 η-ffe 4 ’
- J - L
/ - r
___ I - - - /
--.. -r ---- - - - - — .
— / 7 ‘ — - ——
/y __ _______ - ____
tJL 5 - , _ - ‘ I - J) J 4 5 — — — — S. . - .. ••> ‘\ η / , — __t C-
. . --st - - - ‘t - - ,— .. - -
- l . 5 j_ . . -. B .•\’\ -
I - - -
/ / : C / ,
I Ii I / I \ \ — — —
I I \ —,-/ ___S\
( [ . 1T T- -”. *-Hr ”-
.‘ I; v ...
. : / Wiih e iI)/ (‘ 5• . 5 - .
\ I U I -
I - J ( -
L I’ / — — __ _, •/S - —‘ -
T- 1 ,
) ,/ ‘ .-Ci /‘
— — ;1 -,
— - — - ,
T. C - - Ό —.
c ; > —i’ P • I
tII -.
) W (LI I, .
/
‘ i L t tja;li . ‘ - s; •‘

‘; r

-------
APPENDIX B
HIGH-FLOW TIME OF TRAVEL STUDY
CONNECTICUT AND UPPER AIIMONOOSUC RIVERS
June 12 — 15, 1973
A time of travel study was conducted on the Upper Anunonoosuc River
from the lower dam in Groveton, New Hampshire to the confluence with the
Connecticut River and from the confluence with the Connecticut River
22.6 miles downstream to the dam at Gilman, Vermont.
The study was conducted to provide preliminary time of travel data
for a future water quality study and mathematical modeling purposes.
The study area was broken into four primary reaches on the Connecti-
cut River and one on the Upper Ammonoosuc River. The reaches used were
as follow:
Reach 1: Gilman, Vermont dam to a covered bridge 5.3 miles upstream.
- Reach 2: Covered bridge 5.8 milee upstream to a steel bridge
between Lancaster, New Hampshire and Guildhall, Vermont.
(This steel bridge will henceforth be referred to as the
Guildhall Bridge.)
Reach 3: Guildhall Bridge 8.2 miles upstream to the dam at North-
umberland, New Hampshire. This reach was split into two
sub—reaches, 4.0 miles long and 4.2 miles long. However,
the data for the reach is reported for the full length of
8.2 miles.
Reach 4: Dam at Northumberland, New Hampshire 3.4 miles upstream to
the confluence of the Connecticut and Upper Ammonoosuc
Rivers.
Reach 5: From the confluence of the Connecticut and Upper Anunonoosuc
Rivers 2.4 miles upstream to the first dam on the Upper
Amnionoosuc River.
Flow data for the Connecticut River was obtained from the U. S.
Geological Survey gaging station at Dalton, New Hampshire. Flows for the
Upper Ammonoosuc River were obtained at the gaging station on that river

-------
2
near Groveton, New Hampshire. Flows at the gage on the Upper Animonoosuc
River may not be representative of flows in Reach 5. This is due to
Groveton Paper’s controlling the flows in the river at three dams between
Reach 5 and the gage.
Weather conditions during the study period varied from generally
overcast skies to seveze thunder storms. Due to these heavy rains, the
flow in the Connecticut River increased by 2667 c.f.s. during the study
period.
Attachment 1 provides the reaches, their lengths, the time of travel
for each reach, the average velocities in feet per seond and flow data at
the two gages for the study period.

-------
REACH DISTANCE/KILOMETERS TIME OF TRAVEL VELOCITY rn/sec (f tie)
(Miles)
Covered Bridge 6/12 8.5 (5.3) *13 hours .18 ( .59)
To Gilman Dam
Guild Hall Bridge 6/12 9.3 (5.8) 10 hours .26 ( .85)
to Covered Bridge
Northumberland Dam 6/13 13.2 (8.2) 10.9 hours .34 (1.10)
to Guild Hall Bridge
Confluence Conn. and Upper 5.5 (3.4) 2.75 hours .55 (1.8)
Ammonoosuc Rivers to
Northumberland Dam 6/14
RR Bridge in Groveton 6/15 3.86 (2.4) 1.25 hours .85 (2.80)
to Confluence
FLOWS AT DALTON GAGE FLOWS AT U. ANMONOOSUC GAGE
Date Reading Time Flow Date Reading Time Flow
m 3 /s m 3 /s
6/12 9.17 @ 0810 4.2 (2267 cfs) 6/14 4.54 @ 1010 50.63 (1788 cfs)
6/13 10.07 @ 0950 94.1 (3321 cfs) 6/15 4.04 in A.M. 35.9 (1266 efe)
6/14 11.87 @ 0920 170.5 (6022 cfs)
6/15 11.29 @ 0830 139.7 (4934 cfs)
* This is an approximate value.

-------
APPENDIX C
Low Flow Time of Travel Study
Connecticut and Upper Ammonoosuc Rivers
Sept. 9—13, 1973
A second Time of Travel Study was conducted on the Upper
Ammonoosuc and Connecticut Rivers. The study area was the same
as that during the low flow study,that is, from Groveton Paper Co.
on the Upper Ammonoosuc River to a dam at Gilman, Vt. approximately
23 miles downstream in the Connecticut River.
Because the Time of Travel Study immediately preceded the
water quality sampling, the dye was injected at Groveton Paper
Co. and reinjected as needed on the way downstream. During the
survey, two dye patches were followed, the second having a 12—15
hour lag time from the first. Table 1 describes major points of
interest, the miles downstream from Groveton Paper Co., and the
locations for each run when the dye was located; therefore forming
the sub—reaches for which is reported the date, the length of reach,
and the time it took the dye peak to travel between those points.
The si.mixnary also includes the high flow time of travel.
Flow data for the low flow time of travel survey is summarized
in Table 2.

-------
Table 1
Stmtm ry of Low Flow
Time of Travel Study
Groveton Survey
ription of
Location
Miles From
G.P.C.
High Flow
Low
Flow
Run //1
Run
/12
Run //3
Date: 6/15
L= 3.9 km.
T= 1.3 hrs.
DaIi
L= 1.3 km.
T= 3.0 hrs .
Date: 9110...
L= 5.8 km. -
T— 10.6 hrs.
Date: 9/13
L= 4.5 km.
T= 8.7 hrs.
010
.5
.8 --
4.0 2
- 4.7__.13
61
4
9.0 9
10.1
12
18
15 9
10
18 I
Date: 6/14
L= 5.5 km.
T= 2.7 hrs.
)ate: 9/9
..= 5.5 km.
T= 6.8hrs.
Date: 9/13
L= 50 kin.
T= 9.]. hrs.
*
Date: 9/13
eL 10.3 kit.
T= 7.2 hrs.
)ate: 9/10
:.= 10.8 km.
T= 13.5 hrs.
Date: 6/13
L= 13.0 km.
T= 10.8 hrs.
foot bridge
R.R. Bridge
Conf luence
Northumberland
Dam
112
-
- . .
- 21_I.13
Guildhall or__—.
Lancaster Bridge
14
:: ::.
.——--——..-
29.6 i 18
30,
‘19
Covered Bridge
32.5 20
21
-- -
r Bridge
ilman Dam -
36 I 22
36.5
i 23
37.8 124

41.0 I
Date: 9/10
L=15.6 kin.
T=13.9 hrs.
23.2
23.8
Date: 6/12
L= 9.3 km.
T10.0 hrs.
)ate: 9/11
L= 8.7 km.
T=12.8 hrs.
)ate: 9/10
= 8.7 km.
r= 8.7 hrs.
Date: 9/il
L= 6.9 km.
T=14.0 hrs.
Date: 6/12
L= 8.5 km. -
T=13.2 hrs.
Date: 9/11
L= 5.3 km.
T= 9.9 hrs.

-------
Table 2
Low Flow Time of Pr ve1
Flow Data
—
Time & Date
of Reading
North Stratford, N.H.
Connecticut River
Dalton, N.H.
Connecticut River
Stark, N.H.
Upper Azmnonoosuc
River
cms
(cfs)
cms
(cfs)
cms
(cfs)
9—9—73 8am 33.2 1173 70.1 2476 7.3 258
4pm 24.1 854 70.1 2476 6.8 241
9—10—73 8ai 18.8 665 44.3’ 1565 6.5 229
4p 13.7 482 42.8 1510 6.3 222
9—11—73 8ai 10.6 375 38.4 1355 6.0 213
4pt 10.1 355 34.4 1214 5.9 210
9—12—73 8a 9.9 351 20.4 720 6.0 213
4p 9.7 342 22.4 -790 5.9 210
9—13—73 8ar 9.4 333 24.1 850 5.9 207
9.2 324 24.1 850 5.8 204

-------
APPENDIX D
Sediment Composition of
Upper Aimnonoosuc and Connecticut Rivers
From Groveton to Gilman, N.H.
Sept. 19—20, 1973
Bottom samples were taken with a Petersen Dredge on the Upper
Mimonoosuc and Connecticut Rivers between Groveton and Gi].man,
New Hampshire, approximately 48 river kilometers, to determine depth
and area of any paper waste sludge deposits downstream of Groveton
Paper Mills.
Sediment samples for COD and volatile solid analysis were
obtained at the following stations:
GAOl — Upper Ammonoosuc River control station, Groveton, N.H.
GAO3 — Upper Aimnonoosuc River, Groveton, N.H.
GCO6 — Conn. River, upstream Northumberland Dam, Guildhall, Vt.
GC6.3 — Conn. River, between Guildhall and Lancaster Bridge
GC6.5 — Conn. River, between Guildhall and Lancaster Bridge
GC7.5 — Conn. River, between Lancaster Bridge and Covered Bridge
GCO9 — Conn. River, upstream Gilman-- Power Station Dam
Four bottom samples were collected for studies of oxygen uptake
rates at the Needham Laboratory from the following stations:
GAOl — Upper Ammonoosuc River control station, impoundment
upstream of Groveton, N.H.
CAO3 — Upper Ammonoosuc River, north side, Groveton, N.H.
GAO3 — Upper Anmionoosuc River, south side, Groveton, N.H.
GCO6 — Conn. River, west side, Guildhall, Vt.
On Sept. 19, 1973, the Upper Ammonoosuc River was full bank to
bank, averaged 30.5 m wide and 2—4 in deep. Approximately 30 sediment

-------
—2-
samples for field analysis were dredged between the mouth of the Upper
zzunonoosuc River to 450 meters downstreRm nf th R f1yni.rI #Io ci i
Groveton where fast shallow water prevented further progress upstream.
Small to large stones covered the bottom in this area that was scoured
by fast water.
Throughout its length, except for small back-eddy areas and areas
of heavy vegetation along the banks, the bottom was composed of clean
mud sand, sand and gravel, and small and large stones.
Foul paper waste sludge filled the Petersen Dredge in a few small
back—eddy areas and under heavy vegetation growing along the river banks.
These areas, however comprised only a small percent of the total bottom
area.
A transect of three sediment samples at Station GAO3 in the Upper
Munonoosuc River contained fine sand on the south side and middle of the
River, but paper waste sludge was present in the fine sand from the north
side that had vegetation along the bank.
On the Connecticut River, from the mouth of the Upper Ammonoosuc River,
Groveton, N. H. to the Gilman Power Station Dam, 28 bottom samples were
dredged for field analysis of sediment composition.
The river ranged from 75 — 90 meters wide and 2.5—3 meters deep. Bottom
sediment consisted mostly of fine sand with a few small areas of paper
waste in back-eddies and subinergent vegetation along the banks.

-------
Sediment Composition
(Jield Analysis)
Upper inmonoosuc and Connecticut Rivers
Sept. 19—20, 1973
Stations North Middle South
Upper Ainmonoosuc River
GAO]. (Control) Mud, Sand
Transect 1 Stone Stone Stone
2 Stone Stone Stone
3 Stone Sand Stone
4 Sand Gravel Sand
5 Gravel, Sand Sand Sand
6 Sand Hard Mud Sand
7 Sand Sand Gravel, Sand
8 Sand Hard Mud Sand
9 Sand Sand Sand
GAO3 Sand, Sludge, Paper Sand Sand
Connecticut River Vermont Side Middle N. H. Side
Transect 1 Sand Sand Sand
2 Sand Sand Sand
3 Sand Sand Sand
4 Rock, Sand Sand Paper, Sludge
GCO6 Silty, Sand Sand Silty Sand
GC6.3 Sand Sand Sand
GC6.5 Sand Sand Sand
GC7.5 Sand Sand Sand
Transect 5 Sand Stone Boulders
GCO9 Silty Sand

-------
APPENDIX E
Benthic Oxygen Demand
Groveton, N. H.
Benthic Oxygen Demand determinations were performed on four
sediment samples collected from the Upper Ammonoosuc River and the
Connecticut River.
The SOD results listed in Table I are calculated from the
following equation:
(Oj—Of) (v)
SOD (g 0 2 /d/1n2)=
Ct) (SA)
Oj D.O. initial (mg/i)
O D.O. final (mg/i)
V= Volume confined H 2 0 m 3 (.05192)
t= Time in days
SA Surface area of confined sediment m 2 (.1858)
- Figure I gives the linear description for the change in dissolved
oxygen for a specified period of time for each of the four sample stations.

-------
Table I
Sediment Oxygen Demand (SOD)
SOD
Station Number Lab Number Substrate Type 2
O Id/rn
CA—Ol 36861 Muddy Sand 0.5
Control
GA—03 36866 Fine Sand 0.9
S. Bank
GA—03 36867 Sludge Mixed 2.6
N. Bank with Sand
GC—06 36860 Silty Sand 0.6
Conn. R.

-------
Figure 7
D.O. Change Per Period Time •
,
I
I
Time Hours
8——
:
2 4 6 8 3.0
12 14 16 18 20 22 24
LEGtNO
)t—K GA-03 N. BANK
—Ψ GA-03 S. BANK
GC-06 CONN. R.
• S GA-Ol CONTROL
4—
3——
1—
END
I
I
2
I i
U)
4 1
U)
$4
0’
‘ -I
0
U)
- ‘I
6
8
10
12
I
18

-------
APPENDIX F
GROVETON PAPER COMPANY
CONNECTICUT RIVER

-------
I Intrcxluction
In Scpt ’1x r of 1973 a ‘. atcr cjuality survey of the Upper
im noosuc ir.d Connecticut !‘ivers was carried out in the vicinity
of Groveton, :ow F!ampshire in support of the process of the pennits
branch for g-ranting a discharge permit to Groveton Paper Co. A re-
port cxvering the details and results of the sampling proqram is being
written by the Technical studies Section, Surveillance and 2.nalysis
Division. This report centers on the i atheniatical rrcdel which was
developed uUliz g the data from the survey, in a Streeter-Pheips
BW/D.O. analysis.
II thcation data
River mile Point of Interest
325.4 Groveton Paper Co.
322.8 Confluence of U. 1 irnonoosuc &
Connecticut River
319.4 Dam at N. Umberland
311 • 3 Bridge at Oiildhall
305.5 Covered Bridge
300.2 Gilman Dam
III Tine of travel esti! tes -
‘ i\ dye studies were conducted, one at flows ranging from
2200—6000 cfs at Dalton in July, 1973, and one at flo zs ranging from
720—1500 cfs at Dalton in September, 1973.
—]_ —

-------
Velocity was assumed to be related to flow rate by the following
equation: V = ACP
there: V = velocity, miles per day (mpd)
A = Constant
B = Constant
Q = Flow cubic feet per second (cfs)
Necessary conversion factors are used in determining
“A to change units from ft/sec to miles/day
A & B were determined by substituting the survey values for V and
Q and solving simultanecusly. Table I contains the calculated constants.
Reaeration Coeficients -
K 2 ( D U ) 1/2 = diffusivity
H /2 = .81*104 ft/hr
U = velocity (ft/hr)
H = depth (ft)
Cross-sections provided depths which were ass d constant at the
low flow regirre due to dam backwaters Table 1 contains low flow co-
efficients. Dam reaeration u ed short reaches and high rates to provide
a specified D .0. uptake.
V Decay coefficients
Long term 13CD samples were used to determine the deoxygenation
coefficients. rtho as has proposed a sii le approximation for the con-
stants of the ECO curve based on the similarity of t o functions
and kt(l + ) which are the sane for their expansion through
6
the first 3 terms (See Water Supply and Waste-water Disposal, Fair &
Geyer, pg. 524). Therefore the ECO equation y = L (l_e t)
‘V
—2—

-------
approxiniat& by Y = I kt (1 + which takes the straight line form
( ) = (FL) + (K 6 ,/6L ”3 )t.
We can r w use the classical regression line of I on X of
Y=a+bx
where Yi
y)i = 1 th observation
in N observations
xi=ti
so that e can calculate fran Laboratory data
b=N X.Y. - ZX. ZY.
113. 1111
-
a = Y _-
N
Nzw again fran the E300 equation
a= (KE
b= (K, )
6L’ 3
can solve for K (still to the base “e”) so that
K=6b
a
and the ultisr’ate BOD
L=l
i a 3
Table 1 cxrntains a list of decay rates use 1 at low flow.
—3—

-------
VI Loads and Flows
(a) Groveton Paper Co., Flow = 12.5 MGD, BOD 5 = 1000 I //day —
8000 0/day in increments of 1000 f//day,
D.0. 5.0 mg/i
(b) Georgia Pacific Paper Co., Flow 2.5 MCD, BOD 5 1100 fl/day,
D.0. = 5.0 mg/i
(c) Background Water:
(1) Upper Ammonoosuc above Croveton Paper Co., 7—day — 10—yr
Low Flow = 41 cfs, D.0. = 8.65 mg/i
(2) Connecticut River above the Upper Ammonoosuc River,
7—day, 10-yr Low Flow = 243 cfs, D.0. = 8.05 rng/l
(3) Connecticut River tributary waters,
Q 24. cfs, BOD 5 = 1324 If/day, D.0. = 8.0
24. cfs added at mile points 319.4, 311.3, 305.5, and 300.2
(4) Connecticut River at Dalton,
Q 7—day, 10-yr Low Flow = 370 cfs, BOD, and D.0.
determined by the model.
EPA biologists found little or no sludge deposits, so the analysis
thus far uses no sludge demand.
—4—

-------
VII Results
‘r x, alternative discharge locations were studied, one at the
present 1oc ition, river rile 325.4, and the second at the confluence
of the Connecticut River and the Upper Nnixnoosuc River, river mile
322.8. Decause of a higher arrount of dilution water available, the
confluence discharge had a xra.ich lower local fripact on dissolved oxy-
gen, and the important points of consideration became the N. Uirberland
dam and the Gilraan darn. Figure 3- sho •is predicted dissolved oxygen
profiles for three different loads (2000, 4000, and 6 000 it/day) dis-
charged at mile 325.4, . at the present discharge point. Figure 1 shows
a plot of D.O. vs load at the three critical points for D.O., conflu-
ence, N. Un berland darn, and the Gilii an darn. The load at the point where
the plot crosses the 75% D.0. saturation line, is the predicted allow-
able load. A lo d greater than 1000 a/day would violate D .0. criteria
at the confluence. A load greater than 4400 /day would violate D.0. criteria
at the N. Umberlazxl darn. A load of nore thin 5000 p/day ould violate
D.0. criteria at the Gilnian.dam.
Figure 2 shows the D.0. profile for a discharge at the confluence,
river mile 322.8, with figure 4 showing plots of load vs D.0. for the
N. Unterland &un and the Gilr n darn. A load greater than 5800 #/day would
violate D.0. criteria at Gilir. n darn, while a load greater than 9000 /day
would violate D.0. criteria at both N. Urterland dam arxi GiThan dam.
—5—

-------
The allowable load for a discharge at Grove on required to meet
stream standards at the North Uniberland Daxn is 4400 U/day, BOD 5 , while
if the discharge was located at the confluence, the allowable load would
be 9000 i //day BOD 5 . The reason for this large difference is that stream
standards require a minimum D.0. of 6.75 mg/i at 20°C and saturation is
9.02 mg/i. This allows the utilization of 2.27 mg/i D.0. for assimi—
lation of wastes. By the time a discharge from Groveton reaches the
confluence, and mixes, 1.69 mg/i of the usable D.0. deficit has been
utilized, allowing only 0.58 mg/i additional deficit for decay. If the
discharge is located at the confluence, after mixing, the D.0. deficit
is only 1.11 mg/i, leaving 1.16 mg/i deficit for additional assimilation
above N. Umberland Dam. The key to meeting standards at the N. Umberland
Dam is the amount of D.0.. deficit available between the confluence and
the dam. For a discharge at Groveton, only 0.58 mg/i deficit is avail-
able, while for a discharge at the confluence, 1.16 mg/i deficit is
available, exactly twice as much as for the Groveton discharge. Thus,
the allowable load is almost exactly double for the confluence discharge.
—6—

-------
Mile
Basic River Parameters Used at Low Flow
Table 1
Veolcity Coef.
A(mpd) B
D ay Rate
Ki(e)
Re-oxygenation
1 <2(e)
np
c
F1a
cfs
340
.0473
.96
.110
.10
20.
41.
325.4
.0473
.96
.110
.85
20.
41.
322.8
.0336
.873
.150
.30
20.
284.
319.4
1.26
.323
.160
69.
20.
308.
319.3
1.26
.323
.160
.46
20.
308.
311.3
.0745
.678
.150
.38
20.
332.
305.5
.394
.414
.120
.20
20.
356.
300.2
.785
.460
.25
20.
370.
300.1
.785
.460
.25
.30
20.
370.

-------
g
7
6
-S
S
£ThNcJ /.rJ
4
0’
/000
1-
eooc’
3ooo
. Bo — /D /
4ooo
t,000
7aoo
Iu A( C gIII.. 001 lIt (•
11000% 1 1101 tIC P
C 01 11.0 (.0 CC i’
ooo

-------
Le& Fioe 4 )
vt e 0 . R.
1
g
—; ‘ oco
7
• — :
I— ---.
3/c 3°3_
RIilPr ,7,)i’e
linAbic cilI..c ccc nit
isynoic IHI40c 11 T I
i..nonc I&II IcO, ci

-------
N .
iT------- L —Jiji::
I ! 1000 q4,
r’uer mile
— —
F yure
30
Iivflo I Iiil.1 OIL lit C
O iI S i lIt L I
IOWA3 L Ii)I.. tO ii Li
‘ I
‘ I.
0
Is
it
It
3
32o

-------
rn Con P 4 , 7 c e
I.
:
99

I
I
eo
j’oad
/ ,

-------